FilmMan Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 FS100: [url=http://produktdbimages3.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_testbild_iso_klein_204.jpg]http://produktdbimages3.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_testbild_iso_klein_204.jpg[/url] Canon C300: [url=http://produktdbimages0.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_testbild_iso_klein_260.jpg]http://produktdbimages0.slashcam.de/camcorder-testergebnisse_testbilder_testbild_iso_klein_260.jpg[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFisher Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 FS100 to FS700 such a big jump in numbers. May be they are going to differentiate it like their SLR range ? ;) FS100 FS300 FS500 FS700 FS900 just kidding of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Fantastic news if true. Note to Canon: you can't turn the clock back to summer 2008. Even if your cameras weren't crippled, your competition would be trouncing you. Yet you still persist in crippling them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moebius22 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=FilmMan link=topic=494.msg3207#msg3207 date=1333076634] The post was positive towards the FS700 saying it will have true 1080p. On the other hand, the [b]FS100[/b] isn't true 1080p. [/quote] That's the first I have heard of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chulx1001 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 What we need is 10-bit color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Mand Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=chulx1001 link=topic=494.msg3212#msg3212 date=1333082131] What we need is 10-bit color. [/quote] We'll have to see what sony will bring on NAB. Just made a few tests of my FS100 and I'm amazed by its quality when attached to my ninja recorder. It's 8 bit but really is more than enough for me. Just bought it used for $4000 and sold my MKIII yesterday since I've got MKII and will order a mosaic filter. I'm going to spend the extra money on some new lenses and a fisheye for the FS100. Since I've got also a GH2 and the MKIII is fresh I did a great selling. I really don't miss the FF look and now I'm going to use MKII mostly for timelapses. And since it is done in RAW, don't need the MKIII. Hope to see a drop in FS100 prices after NAB and buy another unit for multi cam. It's good to be back to a proper camera, I really missed my old EX1. What a great cam. The only thing I really miss on FS100 is the built in ND but I've got filters so it's not a problem at all. Now the FS700... Sony is really bringing some competition! A lot actually! Great move! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_tee_vee Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Sony's innovation is the best thing to happen to Canon and Panasonic. Both Canon and Panasonic have a nasty habit of rehashing old technology with only incremental improvements. The AF100 only has a GH1 sensor, while the TM700/900 and X900 camcorders all use the same 1/4" chip 3+ years running. Competition is great. In the 60's and 70's, Avis Rent a Car's corporate motto was "We're #2, so we try harder." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Santucci Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=moebius22 link=topic=494.msg3205#msg3205 date=1333074470] [quote author=Chris Santucci link=topic=494.msg3204#msg3204 date=1333073103] "the FS700 does 4K via 3G HD-SDI to an external recorder." My Red One does 4K and doesn't need an external recorder. [/quote] Totally different price range. [url=http://www.red.com/store/red-one/product/red-one-s35-mysterium-x]http://www.red.com/store/red-one/product/red-one-s35-mysterium-x[/url] [/quote] I know what they cost, chief. I own one. Depending on what external recorder you buy, you might end up being really close to the same cost to buy a used Red One. That's what I'm saying for what it's worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwhitz Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 April FEWLS!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradleyg5 Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Why would Canon be urged to compete with this? super 35mm is still way smaller than full 35mm. This will potentially threaten the C300 but threaten a full frame 4k from Canon? I doubt it, lots will take depth and low light over sharpness. 5dIII still going to look better on youtube or dvd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raphwoody Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 But won't such a camera, for all intents and purposes, make the Sony F3 obsolete? jonpais 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Reminds me of the title song of [i]Watchmen[/i] "The times they are a-changing ..." [quote author=FilmMan link=topic=494.msg3197#msg3197 date=1333068842][i]The point is 1080p and REAL 1080p[/quote] Well, [i]real[/i] 1080p would be from a sensor with 1920 x 1080 pixels (more actually, because of the bayer-mask, see C300). The megapixel-trap is eating people again. Let us for once be strict with the terms. The JVC and this new Sony will not be 4k (as FullHD is not 2k), it will be, I believe it was planned to be named UHD (UltraHighDef), this means four times 1080. It is a nice thought that you can downconvert it easily to 1080. Four pixels (as far away from trueUHD as the first "HD"-consumer-cam, the JVC G-something, was away from FullHD) need to be interpolated into one. A good thing? What is more, the whole image is colour-compressed spacially, in 4:2:0, which is as awkward a ratio for resizing to a quarter as possible, if you do the maths (explanation: every kind of artificial pattern becomes visible, when there is an [i]almost[/i] perfect match). I know you don't need to [i]see[/i] bad artifacts by downsampling, but you can't ignore that every goddam pixel is an interpolation, a fantasy. By no way [i]real[/i]. And why do we seldom see downsampling artifacts with 1080 to 720 or SD (aside from the main reason that they do not divide by integer numbers)? Easy answer: They only show up under critical conditions. Take the moire discussions as an example. But there is a second problem. See FullHD as an image size that allows us to get closer to the display (the tv, the cinema screen). We can see more. That's the whole point of better resolution, to have a bigger image. But the closer we get and the more we see, we will no longer be satisfied with the "Red" of a tomato or the "Blue" of a sky. With SD, you recognized something out of a distance, always within the bright, almost square 4:3. Now you start getting the borders of the frame out of your field of vision. You try to be in it. And a simple representation of an object will not always be enough. If you had any chance to compare your images directly with others with better colour compression and better colour depth, you wouldn't rave about ever higher resolutions (which in retrospect always turn out to be false, in this downsampling-plan of course from the beginning), you'd demand better [b]quality[/b] instead. [quote author=chulx1001 link=topic=494.msg3212#msg3212 date=1333082131] What we need is 10-bit color.[/quote] You got it. Let me add TRUE 1080, without any interpolation tricks. [quote author=raphwoody link=topic=494.msg3218#msg3218 date=1333092160] But won't such a camera, for all intents and purposes, make the Sony F3 obsolete?[/quote] I don't think so. Does a Hummer make other cars obsolete because it has a bigger fuel tank? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameraboy Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 because is NEX its probaly 8 bit 444 HD-SDI ... and if records 4K internaly thats going to be 80-100 mbit 420 h264... gamma curves same as fs100 ... no slog .... that is enough to protect f3... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dit0r Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 If the specs are indeed accurate, and this is still a super-35mm sensor of equal or better quality than the FS-100, I just got real happy I followed my gut and didn't go for a 5Dmkiii straight away. We'll see what the camera holds, but I could see me keeping my 5Dmkii for stills and getting one of these. 4K could be revolutionary at this price point for indie film-makers such as myself, shooting first features, trying for a theatrical release or even theatrical festival showings. IMO Canon dropped the ball big time with the 5Dmkiii and 1Dx video-wise- over the basic ISO improvements, most of the other incremental changes can be achieved, or bettered, on the 5Dmkii with ML and a cheap Mosaic Engineering AA filter. If the NEX-FS700 is great, it fully deserves to put the new Canons to bed in the video market. As others have posted, 4K is revolutionary at this price (built-in ND filters are really welcome) but I'd be more concerned with better dynamic range, some kind of S-Log, or similar PP, and highlights which don't blow out horribly like the FS-100, broadcast quality 10 bit 4:2:2 internally would be wonderful. What an amazing time to be a film-maker! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giovanni Bertani Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=FilmMan link=topic=494.msg3189#msg3189 date=1333063551] . I'm in the market for a worthy camera. This may be it. [/quote] This is just great. Sony will push me to postpone my car change. :) Even only downscaling 4k to real 1080p would be a dream and then you have a camera that will make sense for at least 3/4 years not like the C300 that will be already outdated next week. [b]My question is: can you playback 4K 422 or 444 Prores on a Mac in realtime? What kind of system you will need?[/b] I am working on projects that will be actually projected on a cinema sized screen. So I really look forward to have at least a real 1080p from 4k. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted March 30, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=Chris Santucci link=topic=494.msg3204#msg3204 date=1333073103] "the FS700 does 4K via 3G HD-SDI to an external recorder." My Red One does 4K and doesn't need an external recorder. [/quote] Does your RED one do clean low light and cost $8000? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted March 30, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=raphwoody link=topic=494.msg3218#msg3218 date=1333092160] But won't such a camera, for all intents and purposes, make the Sony F3 obsolete? [/quote] Apparently they have 2 other cams coming at NAB, one between the F3 and F35 :o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted March 30, 2012 Author Administrators Share Posted March 30, 2012 [quote author=cameraboy link=topic=494.msg3221#msg3221 date=1333099643] because is NEX its probaly 8 bit 444 HD-SDI ... and if records 4K internaly thats going to be 80-100 mbit 420 h264... gamma curves same as fs100 ... no slog .... that is enough to protect f3... [/quote] Gamma curves on the FS700 are as the F3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tzedekh Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 If the FS700 records 4K but only at 8-bit, that would be really stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybirch Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I don't really understand the talk of an F3 Killer.... even if it is 4K (btw - shouldn't it be an F65 killer?) I assume most every F3 has been purchased to make beautiful 1080p images for broadcast... The minority that purchased to make films will know the quality of it's 1080p is good enough to hold up on most big screens. [b]F3 - Perfect 1080p, 14 stops DR, s-log, incredible low light, NDs, 4:4:4, 60p, 10 bit[/b] [b]FS700 - 4K (not perfect), 10 stops DR, Great low light, NDs, 4:2:0, 30p, 8bit, 1080/60p (purely my guess work)[/b] That is quite alot of lower spec just to gain 4K. Why would an F3 owner care? Sure, they could downscale and get the perfect 1080p... It may even do it in camera.... But if the DR, s-log, 10 bit and 4:4:4 aren't there... then I can't see F3 owners crying or broadcast shooters being put off from buying an F3 (4K is not on the broadcast radar, yet). The FS100 didn't cannibalize the F3, because of what was missing.... adding 4K wont change that. Speculation, on my part, sure.... But that is how I see it going down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.