Corporate Shoot - Gear Advice

[richg101]

Interesting idea about the C100. I really, really like the look folks have got from the FS7 but the C100 could be an interesting option. I've used the first one once in a shoot and not had great results though.

To give you guys an example, Google did a developer story at our office. This was the result which, although not great to watch, is pretty beautiful. They used an Arri:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Iw7Tg_afKk

This was my behind the scenes video for an Apple Watch game we put together pretty last minute. My second ever corporate shoot, shot last minute with the A7S. Again, not great to watch, and it looks 'alright' but nowhere near the first video.  Looking to shoot the second video more handheld which should give it a little more energy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w4Gf97q2oU

And I know, in hindsight the interviewees were speaking way too fast.

TBH, I think your corporate video looks great.  well lit, perfectly suited to the company.  clean, tech, etc  your interview shots are really nicely lit,  if anything i felt the only thing that was missing was camera movement-  tripod use throughout I think might be keeping the energy down.  and also exciting b-roll shots.  b roll clips seem a bit long and slow the pace.  A corporate video is only as good as the client/brand and i think you are limited with how interesting you can make something like this look - geeks on computers making kids apps are not as interesting as a flamboyant fashion designer or artist.  If you did exactly the same for Harley Davidson you'd have more visually interesting stuff to fill the b-roll with.  There's nothing on that video that makes me feel like the a7s is at fault, nor the canon zoom, but I think if you went in with just a 50mm/2 summicron and used the ff/aps-c crop for getting wider or tighter framing you'd work differently, you'd have to move around more, and it would express the feeling of multiple camera ops running around.  your zoom is allowing you to set the tripod up then frame which I think is reducing some of the wow due to lack of movement.

 

 

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

I think it's quite possible to comment on the "look" of a lens after using them both for a bit. It doesn't necessarily require a controlled side-by-side test in scientific conditions. That helps, but it's not strictly necessary. I'd rather have Zeiss or Leica glass on a shoot than any Canon L Lens. They render more 3-dimensionally, have nicer color, and a generally more cinematic look. But that's just my taste, and YMMV. 

I also disagree that the difference in look between different lenses is too subtle to see. Take this test by Shane Hurlbut. I see huge, dramatic differences between these lenses with no trouble whatsoever. https://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2015/04/film-school-online-micro-43-lenses-3/

[Gregormannschaft]

TBH, I think your corporate video looks great.  well lit, perfectly suited to the company.  clean, tech, etc  your interview shots are really nicely lit,  if anything i felt the only thing that was missing was camera movement-  tripod use throughout I think might be keeping the energy down.  and also exciting b-roll shots.  b roll clips seem a bit long and slow the pace.  A corporate video is only as good as the client/brand and i think you are limited with how interesting you can make something like this look - geeks on computers making kids apps are not as interesting as a flamboyant fashion designer or artist.  If you did exactly the same for Harley Davidson you'd have more visually interesting stuff to fill the b-roll with.  There's nothing on that video that makes me feel like the a7s is at fault, nor the canon zoom, but I think if you went in with just a 50mm/2 summicron and used the ff/aps-c crop for getting wider or tighter framing you'd work differently, you'd have to move around more, and it would express the feeling of multiple camera ops running around.  your zoom is allowing you to set the tripod up then frame which I think is reducing some of the wow due to lack of movement.

Thanks for taking the time to watch, this is really fantastic feedback. The next corporate shoot will almost entirely roaming handheld shots for b-roll which I'm hoping will add a little more dynamism to the footage. I'm also going to do a few test sessions, swapping out the Zeiss with the Canon L lens and see which looks works best.

[Aragonnarun]

Hey folks.

I'm flying to LA next month to do a corporate BTS shoot. It will be the 3rd one I've done for this company and now I have a pretty open budget. I shot the first two with the Sony A7s, and I was relatively happy with the results but you can still tell it's shot on a lower tier camera. I'd like to give this newer film a more professional aesthetic. 

We had folks visit our offices a few months back and shoot on Arri Amira. I can't stretch that far, but was thinking about the Sony FS7. I'd like to shoot in 4K and downscale it to 1080p delivery. Only problem is, I've never used the camera before and am a little nervous about shooting a project with a camera I've never used before. Does anyone have any advice about this?

I've looked at a few video walkthroughs and reviews to get a better idea of how to set it up. I'm a little bit more concerned about equipment.

I'd like to handheld shots, does anyone know if it's useable out of the box?
I guess we'd need to buy XQD cards. Would 128GB be sufficient for about an hour of 4k footage?
Would I be able to lock it down on my Manfrotto tripod? Would I need a new baseplate? Can I screw in my shitty cheap one?

The other option was hiring an Atomos Shogun, but I think we'd also still need to buy media for that. And a rig or cage, I guess, to secure it to the camera. And quality wise, would the FS7 still blow it outta the water?

Any tips/advice would be greatly appreciated. 

FS7 is pretty good. I've just done a shooting with it last week. The menu is very complicated, but once you set it up, you don't need to change much. The new handle attaching to the camera is amazing. It helps stabilise the camera a lot. I think it's good enough to film with it. 

You would probably prefer 64GB*2 cards rather that 1 single 128GB since you can transfer and check the footage when you got time. I don't suggest you to use a shitting little tripod. It's much heavier than the A7S, especially if you want to attach a external monitor. I think you'll like FS7. The s-log3.cine with CineEI mode produces pretty good results if you know how to expose with the system. The built-in ND filters are amazing. Just don't forget to put on the monitor lut and the waveform display.

[Policar]

But Summilux's and S4's are aimed at exactly the same user base.  Comparing the Summilux's or s4's to the canon and you will see a difference.  Lighting, camera technique, etc are obviously going to have an impact.  But that's something as forum members we have no control over on this project.  Let's assume the thread starter knows how to light, compose and expose, as well as direct.  it then becomes important to talk about details relating to gear choice.  

 

 

Even then it's not about user base, it's about style. Super speeds look like less S4s than a lot of Canon lenses do. But sure, it makes a difference. It's just not the biggest factor 9 times out of ten. If you can afford to rent at that level and hire a DP at that level it does make a difference, sure.

Anyhow, in my experience nothing touches the Amira for high end corporate. The A7S is a weird camera and spectacular in low light, but if you can light for its more limited dynamic range I recommend the C300 over the rest as the skin tones are nice and I find the Canon CX00 series excel as Alexa b cams, despite the somewhat different color. The rolloff and skintones are compatible and arguably Canon has nicer skintones.

 

I haven't used the FS7 but I believe it has a similar sensor and colorspace to the F5, and I find the F5 to have a pretty bad look but it does have a stop more detail in the highlights.

The Amira is hardest to screw up.