Description image

FS700 Video Roundup - 4 Videos That Will Make You Want to Buy or Wait

The FS700 has dominated much of the camera buzz in the couple of weeks heading into NAB, and with the early announcement comes early footage.  Last week we posted the official launch film that excerpted a number of test shorts shot by various DP’s with a pre-production FS700, and over the past week the full shorts have been coming on-line.  These tests by Peter Prevec, James Miller, and Den Lennie/James Tonkin, show off just what the camera can do with a variety of subjects — from dirt bike races, to samba dancers to birds flying against the sun’s light.  Throw in a balloon murdering test by Andy Shipsides and you’ve got plenty to compare and contrast:

This first short is from Peter Prevec.  I think it does a great job of showing off the camera’s potential for sporting events and other similar shoots.  For more information on the short, along with Prevec’s thoughts on the camera’s build and features, check out his post about it.

This second short is from DP Den Lennie of F-Stop Academy and Director James Tonkin of Hangman Studios.  It really demonstrates the kind of dream-like sequences you can create with the camera’s slow-mo capabilities.  You can find a behind the scenes video here.


In this third short James Miller (in collaboration with Tonkin and Lennie) really tries to push the camera’s dynamic range, often shooting against the sun.  As Lennie commented in a recent Q&A about the FS700, recent tests he conducted on the FS100 showed that camera to have roughly 11.5 stops of latitude, and he thought the FS700 probably had more.  Watch for the birds flying over the river, which Lennie noted they were able to pull out of highlight details:

I’m still waiting on that creepy candle-lit video by Gavin Elder, but in the meantime here’s Andy Shipsides’ test of the FS700′s slow mo capabilities:

All in all, every tester really tried to show off  the camera’s slow-mo features, but I think another important takeaway is just the variety of  ways in which you can use said features, and how well the camera operates in a range of situations.  It would have been great to see some more night shoots, to get a sense of how well it performs in low light conditions.  Hopefully we’ll get to see those tests, along with more great footage in the coming weeks and months.

So what’d you think?  Is the camera living up to the hype?  What other kind of camera tests are you hoping to see?

Related Posts

  1. World's First Sony FS700 Short Film Reveals Class-Leading Slow Motion Abilities
  2. A Roundup of Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon D800 Videos
  3. Removing the Front Optical Low-Pass Filter on the 5D Mark III for Sharper Video

COMMENT POLICY

We’re all here for the same reason: to better ourselves as writers, directors, cinematographers, producers, photographers... whatever our creative pursuit. Criticism is valuable as long as it is constructive, but personal attacks are grounds for deletion; you don't have to agree with us to learn something. We’re all here to help each other, so thank you for adding to the conversation!

Description image 29 COMMENTS

  • I’d like to see how it handles in a real short. Slow mo is a fun gimmick and all, but how bout just a normal scene of dialogue??

  • Take this camera to a carnival, I want to see come color.

  • So far it’s cheaper (for what it offers) than anything Canon is offering.

    • Until you add the 4k recorder. Theres a new Gemini Recorder that will take 4k Raw signals through 3g- hd sdi. The regular hd 4:4:4 recorder cost 6k, allowing 4k and Raw on top will probably be around 6-7K on top of the fs700 8kish price tag. Sonys 4:4:4 recorders cost 10k so if they market a 4k Raw recorder for cheaper, f65 and f3 people will be mad.

  • Never thought I’d be the guy to say something like this, but there’s something decidedly “video-like” about all this footage. It’s sharp as all hell but I’m not a huge fan of the image right off the bat.

    Might end up more as a speciality rental for me than something I’d purchase.

    • Haha! I was thinkn the same thing. Yeah, it would make the perfect (maybe not the price)camera for high end wedding videographers. . . Definitely conveys the same look and feel of that particular industry.

      • I’m glad the “video” quality (which, admittedly is a very broad and subjective term) is being discussed. Spec-wise, this camera is right along the lines of what I’ve been hoping for in this lovely time of camera one-upsmanship. However, as we all know, it’s not all about the specs- final image output is still king. It’s really early, so I’m not going to concern myself too much yet, but so far the footage itself does furrow my brow just a bit.

        Felix is right (“It looks a little videoish because they used a ~360 degree shutter most of the time. They used a shutter speed of 215 at 200 fps.”), but to this point, I’ve seen some telltale signs of an image that is not quite ready to join some of the current heroes we have out there- Any Red cam, C300, Alexa and, arguably, the top Nikon and Canons DSLRs. I am going to be very curious and eager to get my hands on more footage with varying settings and the like.

        I remember the wide rage of footage quality one could get from the Panasonic HVX200. You could really stretch the image in so many directions and that was lovely. My initial reaction to that camera was the same as it is to this one. Over time, though, I learned that one could really shape the image quality of the HXV and there’s no reason to think the same can’t be done with this camera. Here’s to hoping!

        - Andy

    • E.M. Taboada on 04.12.12 @ 7:31PM

      Part of it may be that, at least in the first two videos, they were shot at 200fps rather than 240fps. So I assume they brought it back to 25fps, rather than 24 (although the third short was done in 240fps). But, more importantly, something to keep in mind is that these were shot with a pre-production model, so the image out of the shipped units may be slightly different. There’s a pretty lively debate amongst some FS100 owners about this “issue” (i put that in quotation marks simply because some don’t see a difference, but others clearly do), and it seems to come down to what settings you use, picture style, lenses, lighting, etc. etc. In other words, as far as the FS100 goes, it’s not going to have a filmic look right out of the box, but you can get there once you tweak the settings and shooting conditions. I wouldn’t be surprised if the FS700 needs similar adjusting to match a given shooter’s tastes (something that requires time and shooting hours, which these guys didn’t really have).

      • E.M. Taboada on 04.12.12 @ 7:33PM

        Personally, i think the footage looks great!

        • It does look great! I really mean it as more of a personal taste thing about footage at this stage of the game than anything else. I’m certain that flat profiles and the right lenses can take you where you want to go with this cam.

          On a forum recently I heard someone say they were going to treat their various cameras like digital film stock, each with its own unique way of rendering an image.

  • It still looks very much like “video”. Bummer.

    • Most of you guys are much too young to remember — spoken like a true old fart! — but this kind of talk accompanies every technical “advance” — starting with hi8 or, for the real older-timers, 16mm. Every one of these technical developments was supposed to make filmmaking available to the masses and “level of the playing field”. Utter nonsense.

      Forgive the anecdote, but I saw a print of a famous film of 1970s, recently, projected on film. If there were 700 lines of resolution up there, that would a lot. But guess what? It didn’t look like video. It didn’t look over-sharpened. It didn’t have high frequency ringing. It didn’t look like real life or a version of real life. In short, it looked like a work of the imagination. Abstract, painterly, and unsharp, like the imagery in your head. And the imagery which can get *into* your head.

      Yeah, one could apply film-look plug-ins to FS700 footage and blur it. But you see where we’re going here? Is there any evidence — any at all — that higher resolution involves viewers in the fiction of the movie, if you’re not making “2001″? Or it just that all the folks who love these “innovations”, with apologies to James Cameron, aren’t really interested in works of the imagination?

  • Of Course it looks like video!, I don’t understand people who complain about that. The video market is 10x bigger than the micro niche film market. If Sony focused on cinema cameras they wouldn’t have an imaging division. It would lose all its money. Most people are interesting in VIDEO. Little are interested in cinema. So that would be an option. Thats why cinema cameras cost so much more. The companies have to charge more to make profit from such a small group. Thats why Matteboxes are expensive. Only a handful need them. Yall should be glad it looks like video…thats why its cheaper.

  • Seems very very cool if you want super slow mo. Personally, I’d rather have new cameras introduce to me like this: photos of camera, list of all specs of camera, Technical test footage (charts, dynamic range, gradability, low light etc…) done by people and NOT the company that made the camera, then real life random videos such as what’s above.

  • If you don’t have a drop of “creative juice” in your body, you can always fake it by using out-of-focus shots and gratuitous slow-motion, no ? No is right, hell no is even better, no effing way describes it better still.

    I really loved the Slo-Mo musicians — the bongo drummer wailing away on unseen bongo was great, but the Slo-Mo trumpet player was sublime. Meh !

    Sure, there are uses for Slo-Mo in features. Sam Peckinpah used Slo-Mo for some rodeo shots in Junior Bonner (1972). But most of the time you can’t see the effect, i.e. slowing down slightly an explosion, for more dramatic impact.

    A DP I know, who shall remain nameless (to protect the guilty),said while discussing low budget films: “The best movies have a lot of gratuitous-sex-and-violence … and the women all die naked. Notice he didn’t mention anything about Slo-Mo trumpet players.

  • It looks a little videoish because they used a ~360 degree shutter most of the time. They used a shutter speed of 215 at 200 fps.

  • For a continuously updated round-up of sorts, visit/join the NEX-FS700 User Group (like the thousands-large community for the FS100) at:

    http://vimeo.com/groups/fs700
    http://facebook.com/fs700
    http://twitter.com/nexfs700