PDA

View Full Version : Upcoming hands-on comparison of F3, FS100 and AF100 from Philip Bloom



brunerww
04-24-2011, 09:56 AM
http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/24/upcoming-f3-vs-fs100-vs-af100/

Really looking forward to this

JAWflyer3
04-24-2011, 10:45 AM
really excited as well, phillip does a great job covering all the aspects I want to see in a review

pulpfiction007
04-24-2011, 01:29 PM
Totally agree...because he comes at it from the perspective of what you can do with each and the final results, not the serious tech side, he's a "non tech head" kind of shooter.

metalalien
04-24-2011, 02:09 PM
I hope when he does the F3, FS100, and AF shoot out he compares brightness and noise levels at max gain!

JAWflyer3
04-24-2011, 02:14 PM
I hope when he does the F3, FS100, and AF shoot out he compares brightness and noise levels at max gain!

I'm sure that will be one of the main points he focuses on

metalalien
04-24-2011, 02:20 PM
I'm sure that will be one of the main points he focuses on


Basically the test I'm waiting for before deciding which camera to buy.

sean90291
04-25-2011, 05:27 AM
Yes, I need to see this test too. I was about to pull the trigger and get an AF100...but honestly the footage I'm seeing is giving me cause for concern. It's the AF100's handling of highlights that is scaring me right now. Meanwhile, the limited footage I'm seeing from the FS100 testers just looks better.

metalalien
04-27-2011, 05:23 PM
http://vimeo.com/22966139

1st F3
2nd FS100, milky skies, trees oversaturated.
3rd AF100, shadow detail lost.

sean90291
04-27-2011, 05:56 PM
Hm...my guess:

1st FS100 - delicate handling of colour and shadow
2nd AF101 - a bit smeary to me, which is what I believe I've been seeing from AF100 footage
3rd F3 - nice picture; I couldn't really decide whether I liked 1st or 3rd better, but know I didn't like the 2nd.

EDIT: Those were my guesses, and they were ALL wrong. The real answers turn out to be--

1st AF101
2nd F3
3rd FS100

I did feel that the 3rd and 1st were nearly the same. The second looked bad, so it's surprising it's the F3. In fact, a number of people on Vimeo commented that the 2nd one looks bad. I even thought it was a 5DmkII thrown in there to throw us off. But nope, it's the most expensive camera of the bunch. Maybe just too hard to tell much from a shot of that distance?

KyleProhaska
04-27-2011, 06:16 PM
I'm very sure the last shot is the AF100 given the shadow detail loss. But, none of them are exposed exactly the same (very close though). Also, the detail lost under the bridge would've likely been aided by choosing different gamma settings. The shadows on the third seem to be crushed a little bit by the camera and don't look as natural. Choosing something like Cine-D wouldn't have made such a contrasty image so either he's got a contrasty setting chosen on the AF100, or it's not the AF100 at all...

Kyle

Skilled
04-27-2011, 08:48 PM
#2 looses all the detail in the bricks.. I'm guessing that's the AF100

KyleProhaska
04-27-2011, 09:02 PM
It's the same all the shots aren't at the same distance FOV wise from the subject...because saying #2 has less detail in the bricks makes sense since you're farther away LOL. I think the details great for the distance, and if you moved in you'd see something much more similar to #1 and #3.

Boncrek
04-27-2011, 09:13 PM
Well from PBs blog site he's confirmed: "Well the first one is the AF101, then the F3 and then the FS100".

dcloud
04-27-2011, 09:31 PM
my conclusion was f3, af100, fs100
i thought 1 looked really good so it must be the F3.
2 had overexposed yellow green ..
while 3's colors look similar to the 1st but has crushed blacks maybe fs100

to my surprise, af100 is 1.

this doesnt really comclude much for me except the operator must really know each camera well.

Boncrek
04-27-2011, 09:46 PM
to my surprise, af100 is 1.

this doesnt really conclude much for me except the operator must really know each camera well.

What it concludes for me is that AF100 footage looks damn good and very close to the Sonys in this situation.
With price and ergonomics as they are I'd have picked the AF100 hands down.
I was reading the comments on the comparison video on Vimeo and im sure many people are also gonna be suprised by the AF100.
Its the underdog of the three but it sure looks better for some lol

dcloud
04-27-2011, 09:53 PM
What it concludes for me is that AF100 fotage looks damn good and very close to the Sonys in this situation.
With Price and ergonomics as they are I'd have picked the AF100 hands down.
I was reading the comments on the comparison video on Vimeo and im sure many people are also gonna be suprised by the AF100.
Its the underdog of the three but it sure looks better for some lol
Id say the same thing but ive also seen great f3 footages. could be an operator mistake :)
but the af100 owner inside me jumps with joy ;)

ASG
04-27-2011, 10:23 PM
Did you eat another Af100 owner?

I'm suprised how little difference there is between them in that test.

John Caballero
04-27-2011, 10:32 PM
Philip Bloom is a riot! Playing with everybody's mind. Love it!

dcloud
04-27-2011, 10:32 PM
whats next id like to see is a 10 ft. drop test. which camera would survive? :P

KyleProhaska
04-27-2011, 10:35 PM
Bloom recently posted this: http://vimeo.com/22977540

AF100 gets blown away by the others low-light performance, but that was expected.

dcloud
04-27-2011, 10:46 PM
atleast now i know what i would use in really dark situations... fs100 seems a good option.

metalalien
04-27-2011, 10:48 PM
So the 30db of the FS100 is real. I was worried they just renamed 18db for some reason but at 30db it was much brighter than the F3 at 18db. Noisier too but there ya go.

Looks like he changed the link to his blog post... Original link no longer works.

http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/upcoming-f3-vs-fs100-vs-af100/

KyleProhaska
04-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Yea this just shows you how the needs of a person can effect your choices. To me the low light performance isn't really needed like it might be for some since my intended uses are on a movie set with controlled lighting and other various things. In that situation a ton of cameras can be a good option and it seeing in the dark doesn't matter much LOL.

maarek
04-28-2011, 01:04 AM
To me the low light performance isn't really needed like it might be for some since my intended uses are on a movie set with controlled lighting...

Having good low-light quality in a controlled lighting environment helps you make the lighting look natural, without the need to burn thousands of watts of light. A lot of fiction is shot deliberately in slightly lower lighting to achieve a certain mood. Even if it is controlled.

dcloud
04-28-2011, 01:38 AM
Having good low-light quality in a controlled lighting environment helps you make the lighting look natural, without the need to burn thousands of watts of light. A lot of fiction is shot deliberately in slightly lower lighting to achieve a certain mood. Even if it is controlled.
Id agree with you but not at 3200 iso
At that level your just dont have any lights at all
Although yes thatsa vety handy option.

At daylight, fs100 is a hassle to handle without nd filters.

Boncrek
04-28-2011, 02:15 AM
Did you eat another Af100 owner?

I'm suprised how little difference there is between them in that test.

That fact speaks the most for me. Sure the F3 has the obvious sharper sensor/lowlight/better signal processing but it is also 3 times the price.
The question is the resulting image and workflow three times better however?
I personally haven't seen any footage that justifies the price difference.
Maybe my standards of quality are just not at the F3 level
AF100 = win for me lol
F3/FS100 = win for others

KyleProhaska
04-28-2011, 09:14 AM
From Blooms Twitter: "af100 has so many more features than fs100. fs100 simply has a nicer chip."

Looking forward to Blooms tests :)

Boncrek
04-28-2011, 02:04 PM
Yea this just shows you how the needs of a person can effect your choices. To me the low light performance isn't really needed like it might be for some since my intended uses are on a movie set with controlled lighting and other various things. In that situation a ton of cameras can be a good option and it seeing in the dark doesn't matter much LOL.

+1

xenogears
04-28-2011, 04:50 PM
From Blooms Twitter: "af100 has so many more features than fs100. fs100 simply has a nicer chip."

Looking forward to Blooms tests :)

Also from Bloom Twitter today:
"Confirmed. My bloody shutter was on too high on af101. Retesting now low light"

Later:
"af101 still not as good. but its better!"

Babu
04-28-2011, 06:05 PM
Also from Bloom Twitter today:
"Confirmed. My bloody shutter was on too high on af101. Retesting now low light"

Later:
"af101 still not as good. but its better!"
Very interesting. That's exactly what I had figured could've happened. My AF100 does a better job than my T2i in lowlight once pp is tweaked. When Juan Martinez showed a clip at the EC Junior event the AF100 and 5D were neck and neck at up to 1600. Glad to hear it was a error and not a fault of the camera.

Boncrek
04-28-2011, 06:44 PM
Glad to know the AF100 was better than clip showed.

imag
04-28-2011, 09:08 PM
The thing I don't hear mentioned at all, but seemed obvious from the first time I saw the AF100 footage, was that the images from it look flat. The layers all look two dimensional, digital, squashed together.

Note that I own none of the cameras, I do not admire Sony as a company, and I really want to like the AF100. But it's the reality of the image that keeps drawing me to the Sony chip. It just looks so much more real, so much deeper. I don't know how else to put it.

Anyone else see this, or am I just imagining things?

Jmasta
04-28-2011, 10:06 PM
I'm still trying to figure out which camera to buy and this one video helps out a lot.

Like imag stated, I also think the FS had a deeper look. The blacks look deeper giving it more depth to me. But the footage from other cameras portray richer colors, or that's what I saw in the trees. I also like the field of view (assuming it was all shot on the same prime). So far I'm liking the FS more.

Boncrek
04-28-2011, 11:05 PM
The thing I don't hear mentioned at all, but seemed obvious from the first time I saw the AF100 footage, was that the images from it look flat. The layers all look two dimensional, digital, squashed together.

Note that I own none of the cameras, I do not admire Sony as a company, and I really want to like the AF100. But it's the reality of the image that keeps drawing me to the Sony chip. It just looks so much more real, so much deeper. I don't know how else to put it.

Anyone else see this, or am I just imagining things?

Well I personally haven't seen this deepness or 2D flatness you speak of for any of the cameras lol

John Caballero
04-28-2011, 11:24 PM
The layers all look two dimensional, digital, squashed together.


??????

maarek
04-29-2011, 04:20 AM
You mean you don't have enough dof?

Hidef1080
04-29-2011, 05:12 AM
....the first time I saw the AF100 footage, was that the images from it look flat. The layers all look two dimensional, digital, squashed together.

.....the image that keeps drawing me to the Sony chip. It just looks so much more real, so much deeper. I don't know how else to put it.

Anyone else see this, or am I just imagining things?


I don't want to speak for you but when you say flat and 2 dimensional versus deeper and real do you mean somewhat washed out colors and lack of a more natural contrast? More like video?

I have seen that if that is how I understand you but I think it may have more to do with the camera settings or in many cases how it was edited in post.
I think with these 3 cameras you can get a more real/natural look without much trouble once the right setting are plugged in.

I don't own anyone of them myself but I have seen some good images coming out of all 3 based on Vimeo downloads [I know... Not the best way to judge a camera but “you works wit what you gots”].

xenogears
04-29-2011, 08:04 AM
From my personal point of view;

For me the FS100 only win in the Super 35mm size sensor, the image is much cleaner and detailed than the AF100 at higher ISO that for sure, but has many disadvantages too, those little 80s tiny phone buttons, no SDI output, No ND Filter, ergonomics is a kind of weird (no ugly, just weird) monitor position is no useful; is you must take the camera higher over you in a tripod; is useless.

Cheers.

philip bloom
04-29-2011, 08:46 AM
Phew. I was really worried about going onto here and reading the threads. I will stick with this one. Not read any others. You lot are nice. Such a risk putting yourself out there doing a test like this as you just get hammered by some people.

Someone asked me on my blog to shoot just charts as the test would be irrelevant otherwise. As has been said earlier I am not a tech head. I don't want to judge my image on charts. They are often depressing. After all would anyone be shooting video on the 5DmkII if Vincent LaForet had put up video of some charts rather than Reverie? Of course not! The same person said I had to do it scientifically or not at all. Well my well is as close to scientific as I can get with my resources and time. A scientific test takes a lot of time, people and resources. Zacuto have done that with their Epic single chip shootout coming in June. It's SO thorough. I leave that to them . My test is about image but also what features the cameras offer and how they are to shoot with. Neither of which are touched on in the Zacuto test.

Just from my initial findings with the pre-production FS100 I am blown away by the chip. Just disappointed by things it lacks that the AF101 has. Some really basic stuff for me. But then again it still has a shit load more features than a DSLR and pretty much blows them away in image aspects...So it's going to be an interesting test. Epic for me. Biggest review I have done. But of course at the end of the day it will just be my opinion. Never buy a camera from one person's opinion. Especially one that costs thousands!! Try them out.

Yep. I made a mistake on my first low light test with the AF101. I was too tired and didn't check the shutter. Last night's test fixes that. It's better but still not in same league as the two sony cameras. http://vimeo.com/23022451

I used the Able Cine low noise profile for the AF on this test. I was more concerned about noise that latitude. I could have stretched the latitude with a different profile but then it would have been noisier. I had to chose! Perhaps I should have done both...sure. But there are so many variables. If you go down that route then you end up with hundreds of shots rather than a a couple of dozen and I don't have the time or resources to do this.

I am currently uploading both the low light test and the 3 daytime shots in pro res lt to my drop box. Check my blog for the link later. I am in Belgium and my hotel internet connection says 5 hours to upload. The low light test is over 2.3gb. The other clip around 250mb.

So thanks again for a really great thread. Gives me faith in DVXUser.com. Really intelligent comments. The way it should be.

Oh and are DSLRs dead as the owner of Cinema5D.com bizarrely said when referring to the FS100. Of course not. These are still way more money than DSLRs and we are still in the embryonic stages of DSLRs. I guess what Canon does next is the move we all want to see...

One last thought. I know this is pixel peepers dream but don't over analyse the images too much. I am no expert on any of these new camcorders. Just fumbling blindly in the dark like a teenager :) I am hoping to get them as close as possible. If not please take this into account. Oh yeah. Don't forget it's not the camera... :)

So keep and eye on both my FS100 blog: http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/minishootout/
and my comparison blog post: http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/minishootout/

I will update them periodically and have the final posts up on Wednesday hopefully!!

Richard Allen Crook
04-29-2011, 09:07 AM
Phew. I was really worried about going onto here and reading the threads. I will stick with this one. Not read any others. You lot are nice. Such a risk putting yourself out there doing a test like this as you just get hammered by some people.

Phew as well! That last run you did was brutal! This forum can turn threads into a meltdown! :Drogar-Mark-10(DBG)

Philip...way looking forward to your tests. I'm with you...I develop my decisions of trying out the cameras myself but I usually use real-world tests to do so. I think if I couldn't decide on two cameras that were almost exactly the same in terms of image, then I would throw in some charts to really see the difference. But for all intents and purposes...if you have to use charts to tell the difference that you can't tell in real-world images, then there really isn't much difference!

I'm really leaning toward the FS100 ever since extensively looking into it at NAB. Looking forward to your tests and eventually playing with one myself!

Cheers...
Richard

morgan_moore
04-29-2011, 09:25 AM
Phil I have not read all of this or any other threads.

I have a camera that looks great, the 5dmk2

Trouble is it goes funky sometimes

moiree and also gradiations in skies

I think pointing these cameras at a fiver and also some consisitently tonally graduated item (like a side lit roll of smooth paper)

would be helpful too see

also something that gradiates into blown, like that roll of paper outside on a sunny day

S

VIC
04-29-2011, 09:34 AM
OUT OF THE BOX!! GOT THE CAMERA AND WHEN SHOOTING.
HERE THE AF-100 IN ACTION.
http://vimeo.com/22987327

JUST GIVE A FEW MORE DAYS TO GET USE TO IT.
BTW >>> I TRY ALL THE CAMERAS IN A TEST AT NAB >> NOT EVEN 2 WEEKS AGO.
NOTHING AS SHARP AS THE AF-100 AND TEXTURE...

:)





Phew. I was really worried about going onto here and reading the threads. I will stick with this one. Not read any others. You lot are nice. Such a risk putting yourself out there doing a test like this as you just get hammered by some people.

Someone asked me on my blog to shoot just charts as the test would be irrelevant otherwise. As has been said earlier I am not a tech head. I don't want to judge my image on charts. They are often depressing. After all would anyone be shooting video on the 5DmkII if Vincent LaForet had put up video of some charts rather than Reverie? Of course not! The same person said I had to do it scientifically or not at all. Well my well is as close to scientific as I can get with my resources and time. A scientific test takes a lot of time, people and resources. Zacuto have done that with their Epic single chip shootout coming in June. It's SO thorough. I leave that to them . My test is about image but also what features the cameras offer and how they are to shoot with. Neither of which are touched on in the Zacuto test.

Just from my initial findings with the pre-production FS100 I am blown away by the chip. Just disappointed by things it lacks that the AF101 has. Some really basic stuff for me. But then again it still has a s**t load more features than a DSLR and pretty much blows them away in image aspects...So it's going to be an interesting test. Epic for me. Biggest review I have done. But of course at the end of the day it will just be my opinion. Never buy a camera from one person's opinion. Especially one that costs thousands!! Try them out.

Yep. I made a mistake on my first low light test with the AF101. I was too tired and didn't check the shutter. Last night's test fixes that. It's better but still not in same league as the two sony cameras. http://vimeo.com/23022451

I used the Able Cine low noise profile for the AF on this test. I was more concerned about noise that latitude. I could have stretched the latitude with a different profile but then it would have been noisier. I had to chose! Perhaps I should have done both...sure. But there are so many variables. If you go down that route then you end up with hundreds of shots rather than a a couple of dozen and I don't have the time or resources to do this.

I am currently uploading both the low light test and the 3 daytime shots in pro res lt to my drop box. Check my blog for the link later. I am in Belgium and my hotel internet connection says 5 hours to upload. The low light test is over 2.3gb. The other clip around 250mb.

So thanks again for a really great thread. Gives me faith in DVXUser.com. Really intelligent comments. The way it should be.

Oh and are DSLRs dead as the owner of Cinema5D.com bizarrely said when referring to the FS100. Of course not. These are still way more money than DSLRs and we are still in the embryonic stages of DSLRs. I guess what Canon does next is the move we all want to see...

One last thought. I know this is pixel peepers dream but don't over analyse the images too much. I am no expert on any of these new camcorders. Just fumbling blindly in the dark like a teenager :) I am hoping to get them as close as possible. If not please take this into account. Oh yeah. Don't forget it's not the camera... :)

So keep and eye on both my FS100 blog: http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/minishootout/
and my comparison blog post: http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/minishootout/

I will update them periodically and have the final posts up on Wednesday hopefully!!

KyleProhaska
04-29-2011, 09:53 AM
Thanks for the post Phillip, I'm glad the AF100 stuff got sorted out too. Looking forward to the official write-up! :)

philip bloom
04-29-2011, 09:57 AM
first bit of pro res LT is now up. the shot in daytime of the river: http://philipbloom.net/2011/04/27/minishootout/

xenogears
04-29-2011, 09:59 AM
Phew. I was really worried about going onto here and reading the threads. I will stick with this one. Not read any others. You lot are nice. Such a risk putting yourself out there doing a test like this as you just get hammered by some people.

Hi Mr. Bloom, nice to see you around here again.

Me and surely many of us, Filmmakers and frustrated Filmmakers as i am, can thank you for your time and efforts to make this little shootout. For me is very informative what do you do here, no many people have access and the encourage to bring this kind of test with this cameras.

Im a motion graphics guy, and lately have a little battle inside me, between the AF100 and the FS100 cause F3 is wayyy out of my pocket (but damn sure it looks gorgeous!) and this test help me a lot, 2 years ago through his work in "Joshua tree", i decided to buy the GH1 over the 7D(personal preference), and now thanks to your new work, contributes to my decision on which camera to purchase.

Thank you, Mr. Bloom, and all that as you contribute greatly to this great community.

Keep trying!

brunerww
04-29-2011, 11:04 AM
Phew. I was really worried about going onto here and reading the threads. I will stick with this one. Not read any others. You lot are nice. Such a risk putting yourself out there doing a test like this as you just get hammered by some people.

Phil -- want you to know that you are appreciated for all that you do for this community. Given the resources and time that you are able to put into these reviews, they are terrific -- and every member of your family deserves a medal for allowing you to use them as test subjects!

I personally look forward to the full review -- I know that it will be practical, down-to-earth and readable. I'll make my final decision after I rent the cameras, but your opinion will weigh heavily.

Cheers,

Bill

imag
04-29-2011, 11:24 AM
Phillip: thank you so much for posting. Your anonymized test was fantastic for getting people (including me) to really look at the footage. Your reviews have a great mix of real-world common sense combined with brilliant style. Thanks also for posting as you go. This stuff is great fodder for some of us. I look forward to seeing the final results.

To others, on my proposal of image flatness: I figured it would be controversial. I'll take it onto a different thread sometime. It might be related to oversharpening.

Berk
04-29-2011, 11:31 AM
besides the low-light comparison (greatly appreciated!) the organic look of the sony's are amazing. some where in this community suggested that panasonic needs to change their stock scene settings. they are way over-saturated. personally loved the look of the flesh tones of the FS100.
will purchase whenever it will be available.
kudos to Mr. Bloom

KyleProhaska
04-29-2011, 11:56 AM
Berk that's easily fixed by simply knowing your camera and changing the scene file settings (properly lighting, white balance, etc. helps too LOL). I can assure you the skin tones on the AF100 aren't over-saturated and look very natural. The standard scene file settings on the camera look great as well, so I don't know what you mean.

Sorry to keep jumping in to defend the AF100 here but the things people say about cameras are irrational and misinformed (I'm guilty of it too!).

dcloud
04-29-2011, 12:11 PM
besides the low-light comparison (greatly appreciated!) the organic look of the sony's are amazing. some where in this community suggested that panasonic needs to change their stock scene settings. they are way over-saturated. personally loved the look of the flesh tones of the FS100.
will purchase whenever it will be available.
kudos to Mr. Bloom
footage?
based on the tests by philip which i thought was the f3 was actually the af100.

Mike Harvey
04-29-2011, 12:46 PM
I have a hard time seeing how any of these cameras in the hands of a competent shooter... who knows his/her camera... can not turn out gorgeous footage. The AF100 been available to the public for a while, and given it's price point, you are obviously going to have less competent people who are posting stuff on Vimeo. I fully expect the same when the FS100 has been out as long... right now only select pros have been able to play with it. The F3 is in it's own league in terms of who would use it, so you're not going to see less than stellar footage from it.

It really is going to come down to what you need to use it for, and what's important to you. Is the ridicules low-light of the FS that important? Are the extra features or ND filters of the AF? Is S35 vs m4/3 a big deal to you? Form factor? I really don't think one can make a case of one camera being superior to the other beyond what your own needs/wants/desires are.

It still blows my mind what you get for ~$5k USD. Thanks Philip for putting yourself out there and doing all this for the benefit of the community. I look forward to reading/watching the full review (and hopefully picking one of these beauties up before the end of the year).

KyleProhaska
04-29-2011, 12:49 PM
I have a hard time seeing how any of these cameras in the hands of a competent shooter... who knows his/her camera... can not turn out gorgeous footage.

+1

Bern Caughey
04-29-2011, 12:51 PM
I used the Able Cine low noise profile for the AF on this test.

Philip,

Didn't know AbelCine had created Scene Files so thanks for mentioning this. I'll give them a try.

"AF100 Scene Files Created by AbelCine"

http://blog.abelcine.com/2011/04/06/af100-scene-files-created-by-abelcine/

Best,
Bern

Rick Burnett
04-29-2011, 02:41 PM
Hey Phillip!

How did you feel about the size of the FS100? Coming from a DSLR background, the only complaint I have had with my AF100 is the physical size of the body. I really like a small camera because of my shooting styles and my support gear. I'm looking to try out the FS100 and see if I am happier with the size of the camera.

I generally ran my 7D on a Blackbird Stabilizer and recently on a shoulder rig that lets me undersling the 7D. I am 6'4" so having the camera at my head height is NOT needed :)

I never use the AF100 handheld, by itself, so that aspect of the AF100 has been lost on me. In addition, I don't really use the built in LCD either, I use a smallHD. With the LCD down on the FS100, how easy was it to use the controls that are still left revealed near it?

Lastly, has anyone talked to Sony about offering negative gains in the FS100?

In any case, thanks so much for your work and your reviews. Most appreciated!

Rick

-Sandro-
04-29-2011, 02:50 PM
Why does the F3 look A LOT sharper than the FS100? Don't they have the same sensor and the FS100 a "better" codec? Seems like they did it on purpose...the GH2 could be maybe as sharp as the f3 :)

Babu
04-29-2011, 02:58 PM
Nigel did measure the FS100 at around 780ish lines and Alister measured the F3 at around 950+ish lines. We know the F3 is sharper.

qazwsx
04-29-2011, 03:32 PM
Does anyone have a mirror for the prores downloads on Philip Bloom's blog? The dropbox seems to have reached capacity.

evilthought
04-29-2011, 03:43 PM
Nigel did measure the FS100 at around 780ish lines and Alister measured the F3 at around 950+ish lines. We know the F3 is sharper.

Different people. Different charts. Different tests. Doesn't mean anything.

imag
05-04-2011, 06:37 PM
Comparison is up!

http://philipbloom.net/2011/05/05/bloomshootout/

HD Version here: http://vimeo.com/23294197

Thanks for getting Pt. 1 up tonight Philip!

metalalien
05-04-2011, 07:12 PM
The F3 video just pops every time I see. Hard to put my finger on it but I just like it the best.

philip bloom
05-04-2011, 07:22 PM
Comparison is up!

http://philipbloom.net/2011/05/05/bloomshootout/

HD Version here: http://vimeo.com/23294197

Thanks for getting Pt. 1 up tonight Philip!

thanks! been a struggle to get it done in time. New version with a few fixes is being converted as is part 2. I will upload them tomorrow as going to bed now. Am lucky enough to score a set visit to Ridley Scott's Prometheus tomorrow so will leave it uploading then!

Enjoy and remember...nothing is definitive!

imag
05-04-2011, 07:24 PM
Get some sleep! Looking forward to hearing your thoughts tomorrow.

Cheers...

metalalien
05-04-2011, 07:28 PM
thanks! been a struggle to get it done in time. New version with a few fixes is being converted as is part 2. I will upload them tomorrow as going to bed now. Am lucky enough to score a set visit to Ridley Scott's Prometheus tomorrow so will leave it uploading then!

Enjoy and remember...nothing is definitive!


I hear Aliens have been spotted on the set even though the idea of it being an Alien prequel was dropped. Sneaky Scott!

Noel Evans
05-04-2011, 08:11 PM
As usual Philip has done an exceptional job.

Also, congrats to all on a damn fine thread. Its been level headed with people talking about what matters to them without any mudslinging.

Someone wrote a few posts back they found it difficult to see a huge difference when the cameras were in the hands of a talented operator. Quite frankly thats the ball game right there. And its why we try to encourage people to get out and shoot rather than debate. The more you shoot the better you get. We already have people like Philip who can provide great information.

Rick Burnett
05-04-2011, 10:01 PM
I have to agree, the differences weren't massively huge on every level. I will however say I could really see the resolution of the F3 popping through and it was very pleasing.

For most of the day shots, the AF100/FS100 were pretty simular to me.

For the night shots, I really liked the F3/FS100 shots.

Looks like I better order some ND before my FS100 gets here!! :)

LoganMackay
05-05-2011, 01:12 AM
Great job Philip. I always love your comparisons and your style in general. I much prefer seeing real world results like this as opposed to charts and whatnot.

I would buy the fs100 in a second if it didn't like a couple things I find crucial :(

Osslund
05-05-2011, 08:52 AM
These are three great cameras and there are only small things that separates them.

If the F3 had 1080p 50/60fps slowmotion it would be the perfect of them all. If the FS100 had built in ND and HD SDI out it would have been the best overall and if the AF100 had Sonys sensor and 10-bit output it would be on top.

Cory Braun
05-05-2011, 08:59 AM
Nice work Philip, I really enjoyed the comparison. I absolutely love the colors that the F3 produces. It's really evident in the slow motion section with the kid and the T2i. I think we are going to have to pick one up this summer. I'm still going to wait until the FS100 comes out so that I can rent it and try it out on my own, but in everything that I have seen the F3 is truly a step up (as it should be for the price).

Max Smith
05-05-2011, 10:44 AM
These are three great cameras and there are only small things that separates them.

If the F3 had 1080p 50/60fps slowmotion it would be the perfect of them all. If the FS100 had built in ND and HD SDI out it would have been the best overall and if the AF100 had Sonys sensor and 10-bit output it would be on top.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the F3 did 1080p 60fps through S-Log just not onto SxS cards.

Bassman2003
05-05-2011, 02:19 PM
Thanks for this effort Philip. You do a lot for this community.

I really see the F3 dealing with highlights in a much more graceful manner. All of the cameras are a great value for your dollar and produce very nice images but the F3 just grabs my attention in this bunch. Throw in the S-Log footage I have seen posted here on this site and the F3 looks like a force to be reckoned with.

henryolonga
05-05-2011, 05:03 PM
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the F3 did 1080p 60fps through S-Log just not onto SxS cards.

Correcto - but it can also do it without S-log of course to a capable recorder.

Lliam Worthington
05-05-2011, 05:22 PM
thanks! been a struggle to get it done in time. New version with a few fixes is being converted as is part 2. I will upload them tomorrow as going to bed now. Am lucky enough to score a set visit to Ridley Scott's Prometheus tomorrow so will leave it uploading then!

Enjoy and remember...nothing is definitive!

Thank you Phillip.

Wonderwul work, so valuable, and so appreciated. I read and watch a lot of reviews. Your ability and value to the HDV/Film community cannot be stated enough. But it's your manner, honesty, practicality and warmth thats sets you apart!
So again, thank you. BUT ... Please. please make Suresh SPEAK at some point! lol.

For me,
As others have said. It's FS for me image wise (from the little we've seen). The low light was also very impressive - which has relevance for my next project. Mercifully though, I'm no longer really too bothered by my final selection... clear pros and cons all ways, making even the 5D still a genuine player imo... But the most important thing is that they can all clearly produce great images, so it's just about what best suits my artistic/logistical requirements as opposed to worrying so much whether one camera is "Worth it" or "Good" All pretty bloody great really...

But in talking ideals, we still just need those last few critical features combined with sensible ergonomics and the low end democratisation of the film world will be truly complete.
We're so close... Certainly way closer than ever before... which is exciting :grin:

Best
LW

metalalien
05-05-2011, 07:07 PM
I'm ready to watch part two. :)

Doctor Wu
05-05-2011, 10:35 PM
The F3 clearly has more dynamic range than the FS/AF.
The FS seems to have a tad more latitude than the AF, but not certain. FS is certainly more sensitive.
I hope Phil's 2nd or 3rd part has some comparison in this regards. Thanks!

Hidef1080
05-06-2011, 06:41 AM
Part two is up on Vimeo.

zeke
05-06-2011, 08:33 AM
Because I have a lot of Canon Glass, a FS100 + Birger mount seems the way for me. But not totally sold yet.

JAWflyer3
05-06-2011, 10:23 AM
Part two is up on Vimeo.

link?

Hidef1080
05-06-2011, 10:45 AM
link?

http://vimeo.com/23344796

JAWflyer3
05-06-2011, 10:57 AM
http://vimeo.com/23344796

Thank you sir

brunerww
05-06-2011, 11:03 AM
This is what every side-by-side review should be. Go out and shoot with the cameras, and then come back and discuss the relative merits in a studio setting (or your kitchen ;-)).

A real public service, Philip. Thank you.

Bill

imag
05-06-2011, 12:12 PM
Fantastic review. Way to keep the tone positive, the comments realistic, and the appreciation for choice in mind. It gets at the fact that we are truly lucky to have each of these options available to us right now.

I know which one I want and can afford (hint: it's why I'm on this forum), but I certainly don't begrudge anyone else a different choice.

Thank you Philip! BTW, that F3 Christmas tree footage was f_ing sweet - nice bonus!

John Caballero
05-06-2011, 03:08 PM
Great review! Thank you Philip Bloom for your great work. I want the FS100!

Lee Saxon
05-06-2011, 04:07 PM
am I crazy for thinking the Af100 came in last on the dynamic range test? Don't know if it blew out sooner than the 5D but it definitely blew out uglier

Rick Burnett
05-06-2011, 04:17 PM
Wow, I have to say, that was an EXCELLENT review of the cameras. Owning the AF100 and my feelings on it, I think Philip was very fair in his pointing out the pluses and the minuses. I'm also glad he spent so much time with the FS100 because there was a lot I wanted to see on it and I thought it was helpful. I also find it amusing that he see's the design shape as an epic lite like I had. Of course, I am 6'4" so for me, the LCD on the top is VERY NICE. Though, given how much lower I typically need to get the camera due to my height, my smallHD DP6 really will be used a lot.

One thing I'd like to add is that with the FS100 in 'EVF' mode if you will, it's just as bad as both the AF100 and the F3. I don't use the AF100 EVF ever, it's just not in a good spot for me. I kind of wish the next generation of cameras will make a removable EVF that can be positioned where-ever you want. At least there are solutions out now to give you that functionality if you need it.

Thanks again Philip, very appreciated.

metalalien
05-06-2011, 08:00 PM
Very nice. Since I care nothing for shallow DOF so far my thought is to stick with my EX3 for most of my shooting and get either the FS100 for low light only, or wait and see how the 5d mkIII looks in low light. Pretty much all I want is the option to shoot some really clean video in as little light as possible.

Yes I do have a few situations where I need that ability.

tom.wong
05-06-2011, 08:22 PM
roughly, it looks like the f3 processing is better overall compared to the fs100, resolving the sensor information better for better highlight retention, even in the same 8 bit stream. they both look to be very good options though. fs100 would b cam for an f3 very easily. and a a stand alone would be a great choice overall coupled with a ninja.

maranfilms
05-06-2011, 08:25 PM
Very nice. Since I care nothing for shallow DOF so far my thought is to stick with my EX3 for most of my shooting and get either the FS100 for low light only, or wait and see how the 5d mkIII looks in low light. Pretty much all I want is the option to shoot some really clean video in as little light as possible.

Yes I do have a few situations where I need that ability.

Really? It's hard to imagine not having the ability to direct the audience where I want them to go. For many of us, Dof is as much a tool as a tripod is.

I can see where you can be turned off by it the way so many shoot today, Especially with focus going in and out, and feeling like you need to get a presciption pair of bifocals.

But when it's used properly, shallow dof can make the shot and story work in ways that would otherwise be impossible.

metalalien
05-06-2011, 08:46 PM
Maran when I do need that I have found the EX cameras can give me "enough" shallow DOF for my taste, which admittedly is more for the deep end of the field. :)

edit: I suppose I should supply an example but be warned I am so far below you guys in my ability it's not even funny. All the shallow shots in this 2 minute short were in camera only, no adapters. Shot with my EX3. Phil if you want me to remove this link from your thread no problem!
http://www.vimeo.com/17552009

kostas
05-07-2011, 01:13 AM
An interesting aspect would be to stress out which one of these camcorders intercuts better with the footage from a Canon DSLR like the 5dmkII (I am thinking about event shooting for instance).

philip bloom
05-07-2011, 04:43 AM
Correcto - but it can also do it without S-log of course to a capable recorder.

that's interesting. i did not know that. so what is a capable recorder? i know the Ninja won't do it or my nanoflash. Getting a kipro loaner soon. Will that?

KyleProhaska
05-07-2011, 09:35 AM
An interesting aspect would be to stress out which one of these camcorders intercuts better with the footage from a Canon DSLR like the 5dmkII (I am thinking about event shooting for instance).

They both would intercut just fine. I think you could cut together all of these cameras and nobody would be the wiser for the most part. I've done my own tests and the 5D looks extremely similar to my AF100.

tom.wong
05-07-2011, 10:46 AM
that's interesting. i did not know that. so what is a capable recorder? i know the Ninja won't do it or my nanoflash. Getting a kipro loaner soon. Will that?

you'll need a dual link recorder to accomplish that, 60fps at 1080 has to come out via dual link or 3g sdi. and I'm not sure if you can do it on f3 with it's current build, might have to wait for the firmware upgrade as only one of the sdi's are activated at the moment on the dual link area. so options for the 1080p/60p would be

gemini
cinedeck
sr recorder
decklink or aja i/o card that hooks into laptop or desktop. ones that come to mind are the new thunderbolt black magic studio, aja i/o express (i think) decklink card, kona card.

what's nice too is that i believe it's going to be 60p played back at that FR, so you can slow down in post as you wish, but can still retain it with audio if you want to.

Hidef1080
05-07-2011, 11:42 AM
I've been thinking about that for the FS100.
Shoot in 1080 60p at 28Mbits and then drop it in a 60i timeline and either 60i out or maybe 30p out.

I wonder if the extra 4Mbits would add anything that can be seen on screen.

nyvz
05-07-2011, 05:02 PM
I've been thinking about that for the FS100.
Shoot in 1080 60p at 28Mbits and then drop it in a 60i timeline and either 60i out or maybe 30p out.

I wonder if the extra 4Mbits would add anything that can be seen on screen.

I'd be concerned about that 1080p60 28Mbps mode, since it is compressing 2-2.5 as much original image information as the 24Mbps modes. So technically it's compressing each frame ~2x as much as the 1080p24@24Mbps, so if you converted it to 60i/30p (throwing away half of the image information) or slowed it down to 1080p24 it would look a lot more like 1080p24@12Mbps or 1080i@14Mbps would look...

Of course it is not that simple since 60p compared to 24/30p or 60i result in additional image information that is easier to compress because it is not likely to be very unique data, but even if that is the case, I doubt an extra 4Mbps (16% higher bitrate) is enough to effectively handle compression of 2-2.5x as much pixel data.

philip bloom
05-08-2011, 03:35 AM
you'll need a dual link recorder to accomplish that, 60fps at 1080 has to come out via dual link or 3g sdi. and I'm not sure if you can do it on f3 with it's current build, might have to wait for the firmware upgrade as only one of the sdi's are activated at the moment on the dual link area. so options for the 1080p/60p would be

gemini
cinedeck
sr recorder
decklink or aja i/o card that hooks into laptop or desktop. ones that come to mind are the new thunderbolt black magic studio, aja i/o express (i think) decklink card, kona card.

what's nice too is that i believe it's going to be 60p played back at that FR, so you can slow down in post as you wish, but can still retain it with audio if you want to.

ok, so it's theoretical. It may be possible. Thought I had missed something there! What confuses me is what setting in camera would it be at the send out 1080p 60p via the dual link..

Rick Burnett
05-08-2011, 10:36 AM
So Philip, did you play with the GPS in the FS100? Does it tag the videos of where you took them and is there some way to view that info? :)

tom.wong
05-08-2011, 10:53 AM
ok, so it's theoretical. It may be possible. Thought I had missed something there! What confuses me is what setting in camera would it be at the send out 1080p 60p via the dual link..

when and if you get the firmware upgrade, under your sdi output options, there is a dual link option that is currently greyed out. I'm sure when the firmware is installed you can turn those on, and there will probably be the option in your framrate/resolution settings. and probably locks you out of recording to sxs card in that fashion.

squig
05-08-2011, 08:04 PM
1080p 60p, uncompressed HDMI out, and new sub 5k benchmarks for low light performance and dynamic range are all FS100 selling points for me but I expect the 5D MKIII will have a similar spec. I'd prefer to stick with the DSLR form factor for it's stealth abilities and low weight but some decent mounting points would be nice. It's interesting Philip that you still prefer the 5D image, can you elaborate a bit? are you talking about the super shallow DOF, filmic look, colours? Personally I've always thought the Nikons (Sony sensors) had more filmic looking colours and grain.

kprince
05-08-2011, 08:19 PM
I'd prefer to stick with the DSLR form factor for it's stealth abilities and low weight but some decent mounting points would be nice.

The bodies are just about the same weight with the 5D2 only being a few oz lighter if you are interested...