AmplidZero experience with the FS100, but the lowlight capability of the A7S is unbelievable. It's very possible to shoot at ISO >50,000 with minimal noise. Plus it's almost pocketsize. Bang for buck it's unbeatable.
eheath... for low light.
I would say an fs100 (or 700 if you can afford it) is much better for actually shooting outside of skiing.
Aidin954Really trying to stay under $2k. I can get an a7s with battery grip, adapter, and a cage for $1700 or a new fs100 for $1600. An fs700 is a little out of reach.
eheathI mean, its up to you man. If you're serious about this shit, it's very worthwhile to invest in your gear. The A7s is a great camera but it lacks a few professional qualities of other cameras, thing that might bite you in the ass in the future.
Aidin954Nah man, i get where you're coming from, just a hard decision haha. I kinda hate that the fs100 doesnt have built in ND filters, and it is nice that the a7s has lowlight and 4k. It's a hard choice haha.
nutz.I guess what I'm saying is how often do you see yourself needing the a7s's lowlight capabilities?
Aidin954If I keep shooting weddings, pretty freaking often unfortunately. I wish someone just made a direct low light test between the fs100 and a7s lol.
eheathThe 100 is pretty clean up to 5000iso maybe even 6400 with the right picture profile. The a7s is something like 52,000 ISO.
Aidin954God damn it man, you're really selling me on the fs100. I really don't need these expenses right now haha! Tbh I don't really use anything above 6400iso so this is annoying.
eheath6400 is definitely pushing it. 3200 is very clean and if I remember correctly 5000 was clean too. It also depends on your picture profile.
Aidin954How well would it clean up with some denoiser (neatvideo)? Any specific picture profiles you'd recommend?