PDA

View Full Version : Plastic quality



NeedCreative
06-07-2011, 07:08 PM
Now after using my FS100 for a couple of nights, I nearly broke the thing while rigging it. I started to rethink my assessment of build quality insofar as the physical body of the camera itself. At first just test shooting and carrying it around I felt "this isnt bad. Its light but sturdy enough. Then tonight the lens got stuck in the gears of my follow focus and while everything is fine, compared to the Zeiss lens on it and the rig it was on, the FS100 feels like it was made from the cheapest plastics Sony could possibly get. The panels sound hollow. I'm shocked at the low build quality for a $5,000 product. In fact the only solid parts seem to be the lens mount area, the grip, and the mount points.

Anyone else feel the same way? If this was a $200 camera I'd understand but for this kind of camera were they out of their minds? Apple builds tanks at the $500 range and Sony used rice paper thin plastic at the 5K range. Very surprising. It's certainly functional but should have been significantly better.

ectobuilder
06-07-2011, 07:28 PM
Now after using my FS100 for a couple of nights, I nearly broke the thing while rigging it. I started to rethink my assessment of build quality insofar as the physical body of the camera itself. At first just test shooting and carrying it around I felt "this isnt bad. Its light but sturdy enough. Then tonight the lens got stuck in the gears of my follow focus and while everything is fine, compared to the Zeiss lens on it and the rig it was on, the FS100 feels like it was made from the cheapest plastics Sony could possibly get. The panels sound hollow. I'm shocked at the low build quality for a $5,000 product. In fact the only solid parts seem to be the lens mount area, the grip, and the mount points.

Anyone else feel the same way? If this was a $200 camera I'd understand but for this kind of camera were they out of their minds? Apple builds tanks at the $500 range and Sony used rice paper thin plastic at the 5K range. Very surprising. It's certainly functional but should have been significantly better.

Typical Sony, always missing something. I don't think I've ever seen a complete Sony product. I guess it's called meeting your bottom line, it's all about profit. Skimp somewhere to fatten the purse.

What I notice is that Sony is all about marketing. "Build Quality" is something not marketable. But things like 'Super 35mm Sensor', 'Short Flange Distance', 'Slow & Quick Record' are. So they focused on the pre-launch marketable aspects. Having said that, did Sony know that the build quality would hurt ongoing sales? Probably, but they probably forecast their initial sales from their pre-launch campaign and probably made their money back already.

Exactly which part nearly broke? When you say "broke" do you mean break in half or do you mean "almost cracked".

NeedCreative
06-07-2011, 07:34 PM
Almost cracked. Like any more leverage (and there wasn't much) and it felt like the brittle plastic would just crack. And I agree Sony always seems to find a skimp point. But plastic quality? Geez.

cheezweezl
06-07-2011, 07:41 PM
how do you know it "almost" cracked. just curious.

NeedCreative
06-08-2011, 06:57 AM
The plastic was creaking.

Postmaster
06-08-2011, 07:51 AM
As far as I know, the FS 100 has a sturdy aluminum "skeleton" under the plastic panels.

I personally would prefer an aluminum housing, but I always hear folks complaining about the weight and size of cameras, and since a passionate DSLR shooter was involved in the design process - there you go.

Frank

ectobuilder
06-08-2011, 08:10 AM
Luckily I have the 3 year SageMax warranty. Sony just provided me with an easy upgrade in 3 years. LOL!

NeedCreative
06-08-2011, 08:41 AM
As far as I know, the FS 100 has a sturdy aluminum "skeleton" under the plastic panels.

I personally would prefer an aluminum housing, but I always hear folks complaining about the weight and size of cameras, and since a passionate DSLR shooter was involved in the design process - there you go.

Frank

I hear you and I understand but a few oz more wouldn't have hurt and would have made a difference. And I'm sure there's a metal cage inside but the main plastic is still crack and scratch prone.

Don't get me wrong I do love the camera so far but I do wish they'd have built the 5,000 dollar body a bit more sturdy than a take out food container. ;) that's a slight exaggeration bur you get my point.

vcfilms
06-08-2011, 09:16 AM
Yeah, my old ex1 felt cheap and was starting to break apart in places after a few years of regular use. They sure aren't making these bodies to last which is a shame, because it really kills the resale value when pieces start breaking. I actually feel like the build quality on my AF-100 is pretty solid. Seems like it will last a bit longer than some of the Sony gear.

Mark Williams
06-08-2011, 09:38 AM
The last solid built video camera I owned was a Panasonic DVC30. It was built like a tank with its magnesium alloy diecast chassis. It also felt good and solid when hand holding. I really miss this type of quality.

eheath
06-08-2011, 09:49 AM
The last solid built video camera I owned was a Panasonic DVC30. It was built like a tank with its magnesium alloy diecast chassis. It also felt good and solid when hand holding. I really miss this type of quality.

my hvx200 is a fucking tank too, its taken some bad spills and its truckin hard still

Postmaster
06-08-2011, 09:52 AM
I hear you and I understand but a few oz more wouldn't have hurt and would have made a difference. And I'm sure there's a metal cage inside but the main plastic is still crack and scratch prone.

Don't get me wrong I do love the camera so far but I do wish they'd have built the 5,000 dollar body a bit more sturdy than a take out food container. ;) that's a slight exaggeration bur you get my point.

I could not agree more. I come from a time and place where cameras where big and weight more than 30 lbs. And I love it that way - but they just donīt make em anymore (in that price league).

I think the weight and formfactor of a RED (not Epic) or F3 is the bare minimum.
And when you show up on set , you camera looks like a plastic toy and the camera of the clients mother in law is bigger and heavier - that is not pulling him on the confident side.

I really love the FS100, but I gonna put it in a solid cage with handles and all.

Frank

olindacat
06-08-2011, 12:18 PM
I really love the FS100, but I gonna put it in a solid cage with handles and all.

Frank

I went out and got a Gini rig as a starter kit for that very reason. I think they may be working on a FS100 cage over at Trusmt too. Or, are considering one. That's why I created the Rigging your FS100 thread. For this very reason after watching Bloom and Nigel....

ectobuilder
06-08-2011, 12:25 PM
So apparently Den Lennie from F-Stop Academy helped design this thing and he is a Director/Producer himself.

Did he not recommend that the chassis be made sturdy????

vcfilms
06-08-2011, 02:13 PM
So apparently Den Lennie from F-Stop Academy helped design this thing and he is a Director/Producer himself.

Did he not recommend that the chassis be made sturdy????

He probably did, and they probably didn't listen, as I'm sure he also said give us ND and SDI connections.

maranfilms
06-08-2011, 02:40 PM
I totally agree, I was messing around with my old pani (pvdv710) small mini dv camcorder, and it felt so good. It was solid, has weight. And the plastic was thick as can be. We live in a "throw away society" where manufacturers produce items to last about six monthes, it goes with the tech cycle as well. Have you ever seen some of the land fills with cell phones and old computers? It's overwhelming to see how much waste there is today. I own a laundromat, we have some old machines, they were originally built with steel cogs and sprockets, they would last for an avg. of about ten to twelve yrs with daily usage. They now make them out of plastic, and they last about two monthes. It really is disgusting that this is what the world has become. And they wonder why, the bees are dying, there's global warming, rainsw polluted, ect.... sorry for the rant.

Postmaster
06-08-2011, 02:47 PM
He probably did, and they probably didn't listen, as I'm sure he also said give us ND and SDI connections.

I donīt know, if you listen to him at about 3:00 and 4:20 it more sounds to me he, just wanted a better DSLR mouse trap. Small and lightwight as possible so he can "steal" shots without permission at bus stops.


http://vimeo.com/21372344

They should have asked me and we would have a better body, formfactor, 10bit, detachable monitor and SDI :happy:


Frank

olindacat
06-08-2011, 02:59 PM
They should have asked me and we would have a better body, formfactor, 10bit, detachable monitor and SDI :happy:


Frank

You've got my vote.

ectobuilder
06-08-2011, 03:02 PM
Hey we all got film making ability, lets all make a documentary about Sony and how they always make an imperfect product to screw us over. Would be ironic using the FS100 to film that, Michael Moore style. lol

olindacat
06-08-2011, 03:05 PM
I totally agree, I was messing around with my old pani (pvdv710) small mini dv camcorder, and it felt so good. It was solid, has weight. And the plastic was thick as can be. We live in a "throw away society" where manufacturers produce items to last about six monthes, it goes with the tech cycle as well. Have you ever seen some of the land fills with cell phones and old computers? It's overwhelming to see how much waste there is today. I own a laundromat, we have some old machines, they were originally built with steel cogs and sprockets, they would last for an avg. of about ten to twelve yrs with daily usage. They now make them out of plastic, and they last about two monthes. It really is disgusting that this is what the world has become. And they wonder why, the bees are dying, there's global warming, rainsw polluted, ect.... sorry for the rant.

I will say I like the build of most of my Apple gear, even if it is being assembled an made in Asia. My Dad is a PC user and I also have a freak PC from HP. I was a PC user for ages along with Apple but when Apple got out of the Plastic biz and started building aluminum and glass machines, I never looked back. My Nikon D2X, Sinar 8x10, and even my Toyo 8x10 and Linhoff 4x5s are all solid as rocks. I've never bought Sony before except for their TVs and while great performers, always cheesy plastic. The Sony cam I've used from the past couple of years is so cheap I always figured that was a reflection of cost.

But $5K for a body is a lot and I'm bummed about the plastic. Once you make the bloody form, casting it in aluminum or magnesium isn't going to break their bank and for sure, they'd blow away the market if they delivered something like that. But, it seems like the one common thread I get is 'that's Sony.'

ectobuilder
06-08-2011, 03:09 PM
If you look at 1:16 from the F-Stop Academy clip, take a look at the brain storming whiteboard, no where does it indicate 'sturdy frame'! They were merely brainstorming the function against the competition! lol

jetswing
06-08-2011, 03:21 PM
As much I would FS100 to be built like a tank, it's merely a bridge to something bigger and better. It will most likely will become outdated in just 3-5 years or even sooner. Most of us on this forum (early adopters) won't be shooting with FS100 in couple of years for sure. Sony probably rushed this out the door too. Things like build quality will improve as this new ear of large sensor camera takes off (and other manufactures jump in the game).

Now, I opinion might change if B&H can get off their butt, stop taking vacations and ship my FS100 so I can play with it in person!

Postmaster
06-08-2011, 03:30 PM
As much I would FS100 to be built like a tank, it's merely a bridge to something bigger and better. It will most likely will become outdated in just 3-5 years or even sooner. Most of us on this forum (early adopters) won't be shooting with FS100 in couple of years for sure.

So true. Itīs becoming hard to make enough money with one camera to afford the next one when it comes out.

Frank

Danielvilliers
06-08-2011, 03:42 PM
On another thread I made some criticism about the DR of the camera and I was met with a lot of hostility. I did not say that I expected a 4k 15 stop dr camera for $ 5000, but as they had the same sensor (they, sony, communicated a lot about it) that it was not unreasonable to expect about the same as the f3. They already had crippled it without 10 bit and hdsdi at least I thought. My conclusion was that it was the video world community in part that were responsible of that. The fact of seeing people defend so much a product against any criticism is beyond my understanding. If the customers are not critical who will be. If you see the level of criticism the photo camera manufacturers face compared to the video world you would understand why the large sensor camera revolution came from another market.

If you said to someone 3 years ago that you could get a 35mm size sensor camera shooting HD video for less than $ 1000 he would send you to an asylum. Not having a 10 bit output in a $ 5000 camera in 2011 for me is too much. As I always do, I will vote with my wallet with a gh2, I have seen a DR test (not scientific) that I don't think the image quality difference warrant for my need the expense. I am not going to shoot everytime at night and lighting is the essence of my work (photographer and hoping filmmaker). I do understand that others have other need. I really wanted this camera (supposed was to be baby f3) because I though even if I have to invest a bit more (Nikon shooter, invested in Canon 7d) and don't need to worry anymore about image quality for the foreseeable future. But for me... in terms of image quality it is not a real step up except low light. Now with the report about build quality surfacing, I am glad I did not take the plunge. It is as if Sony has reluctantly produce a camera to get into the $ 5000 but in doing so they did cut everything they could in the way.

Rick Burnett
06-08-2011, 04:09 PM
I've not had a problem with the build quality yet, but I shoot with it this weekend, so I'll have to defer to next week to respond. I took the handle off after trying it, do not like.

For me, I DO NOT want a heavier body so I am fine with the plastic. That was one of the reasons I bought the FS100. Lighter than the AF100 and smaller so it fits in a lot of my gear. We all have different needs.

NeedCreative
06-08-2011, 04:23 PM
This is a good thread. I'm happy to see I'm not the only one. IQ is lovely and build quality is OK but they could have done better. It's still FIVE THOUSAND dollars. If I pay 5K for an Apple computer for example, I get a tank. It's borderline insulting to the customer. Lol

Stephen Mick
06-08-2011, 04:28 PM
I'm with Rick. I have no complaints about the build quality yet.

olindacat
06-08-2011, 06:01 PM
The build quality isn't what people will see when they watch what we shoot but @5K I do think a decent body is a reasonable request. I don't beat the daylights out of my gear but it sometimes takes a licking and needs to keep ticking (sorry for the cliche ;-)!

ectobuilder
06-08-2011, 06:41 PM
Is it the case the metal materials in professional audio/video have a significant markup even from ODM resellers?

If that is the case, perhaps this is why Sony had to leave the sturdy chassis off the list.

Rick Burnett
06-08-2011, 06:46 PM
Until I see a broken FS100, it's a lot of guessing at this point. When I compare it to my AF100, I just don't see a night and day difference myself. If I dropped any of them I'd be afraid of them breaking, and add the 7D to that list as well. I've been more afraid of breaking the LCD off of the AF100 than on the FS100 as well. It hangs out like a flag on the side, feel like I should put a tennis ball on it :)

Maybe if they offered multiple cases like Red is supposed to do, could have been an idea. But like I said, I needed light, and this is perfect.

mico
06-08-2011, 07:09 PM
I don't see any difference between my fs100 and my recently sold ex1r in build quality. And I sold my EX1R for alot more than what the fs100 cost and i never had any problems with the build of the Ex1R. Its plastic, no mystery there about how you should treat it. This camera isn't brittle like its gonna snap at any minute. If you're worried buy insurance. In the meantime you got a clean, any lens adaptable, solid 1080p S35 image camera that weighs sonly 2.5 lbs. If you want a 8lb, sans lens, tank with 10 bit and 12 stops DR theres cameras that have that and they cost 3 times the price or more. If you accuse the fs100 of not being worth the money then you should also accuse the 3 times the price or more tanks like RED Epic or F3 for not costing 5K because it seems thats what some here want: a red epic or F3 for $5k. It doesn't exist.

ectobuilder
06-08-2011, 08:07 PM
I don't see any difference between my fs100 and my recently sold ex1r in build quality. And I sold my EX1R for alot more than what the fs100 cost and i never had any problems with the build of the Ex1R. Its plastic, no mystery there about how you should treat it. This camera isn't brittle like its gonna snap at any minute. If you're worried buy insurance. In the meantime you got a clean, any lens adaptable, solid 1080p S35 image camera that weighs sonly 2.5 lbs. If you want a 8lb, sans lens, tank with 10 bit and 12 stops DR theres cameras that have that and they cost 3 times the price or more. If you accuse the fs100 of not being worth the money then you should also accuse the 3 times the price or more tanks like RED Epic or F3 for not costing 5K because it seems thats what some here want: a red epic or F3 for $5k. It doesn't exist.

I think insurance companies are going to lose lots of money on the FS100 by the looks of it early on.

If it is as fragile as people say then this is a camera that is providing an easy way out for many people towards the end of their insurance agreement (i.e. 'Accidental Damage Handling').

Therefore for those of you who didn't already, buy the insurance for the FS100 as it is at a great discount. Obviously these insurance companies don't do risk assessments for each and every electronic product. They simply use a generic 'price band' to determine the corresponding insurance price.

This reminds me of the first Xbox that hit the market, with the Red Ring of Death after the fact, insurance companies raised their rates and excluded the 'RRD' defect from their list of covered defects.

Also it's not really 'insurance' per se as there is NO deductible!

mico
06-08-2011, 08:54 PM
Here I'll put to to you simply ecto, the build quality isn't any different from Sonys other cameras. Tons were sold and no one has complained about their build quality. If you don't have an FS100 don't prognosticate on how insurance companies are going to lose money and maybe you should use the camera before making such statements because one person had an issue. You're making more of an issue of it than it should be causing the the issue to spread and never die.
Use the camera, abuse the camera then come back and state your case , until then you should use some discretion.

David G. Smith
06-08-2011, 09:18 PM
I just got my FS-100 and in fiddling with it for the past few hours, I have to say that I am not that disappointed at all with the plastic body. I don't believe that Sony cheaped out on it, considering the capabilities they have delivered in a rather affordable little camera. Now, the side handle and the "Viewfinder", that is another story. Those add ons really do feel rather cheap. If we are talking druthers..... What I want is a large sensor camcorder with the fit finish and form factor of the PD-150. I think that magnesium body is a wonderful example of industrial design. Oh well, Sony didn't ask me.

ectobuilder
06-09-2011, 12:28 AM
Here I'll put to to you simply ecto, the build quality isn't any different from Sonys other cameras. Tons were sold and no one has complained about their build quality. If you don't have an FS100 don't prognosticate on how insurance companies are going to lose money and maybe you should use the camera before making such statements because one person had an issue. You're making more of an issue of it than it should be causing the the issue to spread and never die.
Use the camera, abuse the camera then come back and state your case , until then you should use some discretion.

My camera is coming this Friday. And Paul Antico is well respected here so I am taking his first hand account seriously.

Also did you read Nigel Cooper's review?
http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=268

Phillip Bloom's?
http://www.vimeo.com/23344796

Among others, they all say the same thing, the chassis is flimsy. I'm sorry that I don't work for Sony, but everything points to a flimsy physical design.

When the chassis nearly cracks, there is some concern there.

I will be testing the FS100 myself shortly and will conduct my own conclusion.

However if a Product is that fragile, and if it does have an associated extended warranty that covers physical damage, then that is very risky for the insurance company.

ectobuilder
06-09-2011, 12:47 AM
Here I'll put to to you simply ecto, the build quality isn't any different from Sonys other cameras.

PMW-F3? 'Built like a tank' I'm told.



Tons were sold and no one has complained about their build quality. .
'...no one...', refuted immediately right there, just read this thread again. '...no one...'?

mico
06-09-2011, 04:32 AM
When I said tons were sold I meant EX1's and EX3's which I have stated as a former owner are of similar build quality to the Fs100 . Theres actually a video on here from a year ago of an EX1 that falls over on its tripod while rolling and it still kept working, nothing broken. i was looking for it but can't find it.

I meant cameras in the same price range. The F3 tank is 3 times the price. Really, do I have to be so specific ?

Nigel Coopers review has been widely dismissed by most people who also got a pre production camera. His criticism of several things turned out to be mistaken and I just felt his whole review was a slap at Sony for not asking him to be part of the design team of the camera when others like Den Lennie were asked. It seemed personal.

Philip Who? Isn't he the guy that takes still video images and also makes money training DSLR use ?

I've got the camera in front of me. I've attached a dozen lenses on and off it. Took adaptors on and off.. Mounted it on several different rigs. Mounted it upside down. Used the top handle it came with whipped it around upside down and I've had no problem. The flip up lcd actually feels sturdier and stronger than the EX1 . My only complaint is the side grip handle which could have been so much better but i wont use it anyway.

No matter what the reality is I feel you have such a firm belief in its sub standard quality, when you don't even have one, that the camera is now too tainted for you. When you receive yours you will only find fault. Save up for the F3

cheezweezl
06-09-2011, 04:54 AM
a bunch of FUD happening here to people to haven't had the camera in hand but are worried that they are gonna blow $5k on a plastic toy. it's NOT THAT BAD. yes, it's plastic. so is the bumper on my BMW. but underneath is some metal structure of some kind. same with the camera. the ex1 has at least some exterior parts that are metal, but still i treat my ex1 with kid gloves, like i treat ALL cameras. these are not power tools meant to be tossed around the workshop. if you are as careful as you should be with ANY pro camera, you'll be fine. i've been shooting with mine for a week now and i'm really digging the size and weight. it can be stealthy like a dslr, but has the proper exposure and focus tools of a REAL video camera. and the image is superior to ANYTHING this size/price. it really is stellar. i just got done drooling over a big panoramic wide shot taken with my tokina 11-16. my 7D (in video mode) would never resolve what this lens delivered, but this camera does it. it really shines when given small details.

ectobuilder
06-09-2011, 04:58 AM
When I said tons were sold I meant EX1's and EX3's which I have stated as a former owner are of similar build quality to the Fs100 . Theres actually a video on here from a year ago of an EX1 that falls over on its tripod while rolling and it still kept working, nothing broken. i was looking for it but can't find it.

I meant cameras in the same price range. The F3 tank is 3 times the price. Really, do I have to be so specific ?

Nigel Coopers review has been widely dismissed by most people who also got a pre production camera. His criticism of several things turned out to be mistaken and I just felt his whole review was a slap at Sony for not asking him to be part of the design team of the camera when others like Den Lennie were asked. It seemed personal.

I've got the camera in front of me. I've attached a dozen lenses on and off it. Took adaptors on and off.. Mounted it on several different rigs. Mounted it upside down. Used the top handle it came with whipped it around upside down and I've had no problem. The flip up lcd actually feels sturdier and stronger than the EX1 . My only complaint is the side grip handle which could have been so much better but i wont use it anyway.

No matter what the reality is I feel you have such a firm belief in its sub standard quality, when you don't even have one, that the camera is now too tainted for you. When you receive yours you will only find fault. Save up for the F3

I'm sorry but I don't live my life in suspension of disbelief. Even though I dropped $6K for this thing, I don't want to have to pretend to like it.

I can live with a crappy design. But in the end I probably will like the FS100 for it's small form factor and great low light ability.

I can't dismiss the fact that someone on this forum nearly had the chassis cracked. Even if it is only one person, it takes only one piece of evidence to render the product unreliable.

NeedCreative
06-09-2011, 07:06 AM
If one is careful with it you'll be ok. It will get scratched up fairly easily around the mount points but unless you drop it or have an accident like I did it should last.

All Sony camcorders aren't built like this. I've used the F3. Its plastic too but far better quality (and heavier and a lot more expensive.). My Sony HDV camcorder from years ago was better built. The 5D and 7D are stills cameras and shouldn't really be compared but as they're used for video I'll at least point out they're made of magnesium.

If you don't toss the camera about like a 5D can be handled it should be fine. But it must be cared for or it will either break or look battle scarred quickly diminishing resale value (if you care about that; I do.)

The same can't be said for the EVF attachment. It's a piece of crap albeit vaguely functional. Some would argue the handle is too lousy. I'm ok with it so far as a mic holder goes. I attached a Zacuto EVF which is light to it via an accessory arm and the handle started to lean/twist a tad.

If the camera was made out of the same plastic as the grip I'd be happier. But it's hardly a deal breaker. The image is amazing for the cost and has much less compromise in operation than a DSLR. I just hope in the next version they think things though a bit better. We should get better plastic for 5K, that's all.

morgan_moore
06-09-2011, 08:26 AM
FYI my magnesium 7d has a chunk cracked out of it like a boiled egg

Its actually quite brittle

Some years ago I saw a cheapo plastic DSLR kicked down some concrete steps

no damage (to the body)

Flexi palstic can be good because it absorbs shock (like the bumper)

cant comment on this specific cam though

Anyway

S35 chip with onboard sound in a box for this price - thats awesome - the choice of spending another $10k to get a few more things is there for those who want to take it..

S

NeedCreative
06-09-2011, 11:23 AM
The price is awesome compared to the F3 that's for sure for in many cases nearly the same picture quality.

Nigel-Cooper
06-10-2011, 07:22 AM
Postmaster, I think aluminium is a pretty light metal, which is why they use it for sports car engines. Having an aluminium housing would not add any noticeable weight to a camera.

Is there such a things as "A Professional DSLR Shooter" ??

ectobuilder, Sony's warrantee doesn't cover accidental damage, and you breaking something off the feebly built camcorder is not there concern.

NeedCreative, I sympathise totally. Look at JVC's 750, built from metal though-and-though and solid as a rock, yet cheaper than the plastic fantastic Sony FS100.

If you haven't read my review already, read it here:

http://www.dvuser.co.uk/content.php?CID=268

vcfilms, my friend has an EX1, he recently busted the mic holder, even handing lt with kid gloves (at my recommendation), and it has killed it's re-sell value.

I used to think the DVX100 was a bit lacking in build quality, but it is way better than the recent FS100. DVX100b's have been on the independent film circuit and in the hands of students for years and years now, with no issue. Pretty much all EX1's sold during the first year, have now broken to some degree or had paint rub off etc.

Sony's F3 is heavy, but still plastic. It is only heavy due to what is inside it. To me, it is still poorly built compared to the RED, and even the AF100, which is a budget camera in comparison.

Postmaster, perhaps somebody should make an aftermarket metal housing for the FS100, so you can take the plastic body parts off, and replace them with what Sony should have built to start with :) It is sad when you have to spend five grand on a camera built in a flaky manner, then spend more money on a suit of armour for it to protect it from any passing butterfly that might land on it.

If you gave a five year old pair of twins two cameras, the FS100 to one, and an AF100 to the other and said "go kids, see how many parts you can break those into with your bare hands". I suspect the Sony would be in 25 pieces before the AF100 kid could even get any piece off. Hey, perhaps I'll ask Sony and Panasonic UK if they will lend me cameras to do this test??

Honest, I know two little boys who would be very excited about breaking expensive cameras into little pieces. There would be strict rules of course, like not bouncing it off the floor or bashing it against anything, bare hands only!!

vcfilms, De Lennie says the build quality of the FS100 "is really tough and very well build and I don't know why Nigel Cooper of DVuser doesn't think it is".

maranfilms, we do live in a throw away society, but JVC and Panasonic and even Canon (up to a point) still manage ok.

Postmaster, I told Sony UK that in future they should email me the blue-prints for any possible future camcorders, and I will tell them what is wrong with it before they even start to think about actually putting it into production. I said to Bill Drummond of Sony UK that if they had done this with the FS100 I would have said stick that in the bin and allow me to start over for you. To me, it is simple and obvious what to produce, but why the hell should I tell Sony what it takes to have the best selling camcorder on the planet. They don't speak to real cameramen that's the problem. Speaking to DSLR users will only produce a Frankenstein that is unusable with bugger all form-factor.

As I've already posted elsewhere comparing DSLR's to the FS100. It is like comparing a 1970's Space Hopper to a supermarket shopping trolly. If you are used to using the Space Hopper as your main form of transport, if somebody then brings out a supermarket shopping trolly, of course the shopping trolly will be superior, but that doesn't make the shopping trolly a BMW 7 series now does it.

No ND filters, what where they thinking. All that stuff about E-mount being too short is rubbish. The difference between E mount and MTF can hardly be measured, yet Panasonic managed just fine. Sony just didn't want to take sales from the F3.

olindacat, man after my own heart. I owned and used a Sinar P2 mounted on a Cambo stand with great glass, and Hasselblad 500cm and Nikon F3; they where the days ;) Fact is, each new Sony camera is even more flakier than the last.

The manufacturing cost of the FS100 can't be that much more than a DAB radio from RadioShack (or Maplin if you are in sunny England), how much is a DAB again?

jesting, I think the FS100 is dated NOW! compared to the AF100.

NeedCreative, in parts of the USA you can almost buy a really cheap car brand new for that price ;)

Rick you are right, there is not night and day between AF100 and FS100, but it is there and it is pretty clear when using the kit which feels most reassuring.

mico, yes, the FS100 is the same build quality (slightly worse in my opinion) than EX1/3 etc, but they break too. Also, people are reluctant to complain these days. Example. 20 odd years ago I worked for Jessops Photographic in England, UK, in the days when Jessops sold real photographic equipment and not fax machines and coffee makers like they do today. Back then if I sold a Nikon 300mm F2.8 to a customer and it broke 4 years later, the customer would come back and shout blue murder and to mad. Today, a customer will buy a modern plastic AF Nikon 300mm F2.8 for thousands of dollars and if it breaks 14 months later just out of warrantee period, they will simply say "Ah well, better buy another one" and accept it; WTF!

ectobuilder, the F3 is no tank, just a heavy FS100. I agree ectobuilder, mico saying "no one" is so wrong.

When companies say that it is a "special" type of plastic that is designed to bend and bounce etc, it is total rubbish. I remember years ago the first time a manufacture (Canon I think) said it was Polycarbonate Plastic, as Used by NASA; well what did NASA use it for, toilet chain handles in the staff toilets at their offices? Certainly not on space rockets. Polycarbonate is plastic and it is cheap, even if it is a tad tougher than regular plastic.

Postmaster
06-10-2011, 08:06 AM
Postmaster, perhaps somebody should make an aftermarket metal housing for the FS100, so you can take the plastic body parts off, and replace them with what Sony should have built to start with :) It is sad when you have to spend five grand on a camera built in a flaky manner, then spend more money on a suit of armour for it to protect it from any passing butterfly that might land on it.

Actually I gonna do something like that.

I already tossed that pathetic handle and grip, and start from there.

1. Make a nice top plate like they did for the F3
2. Use the "exo sceletton" aka Easom cage that I already had or my HVX200 - love that thing
3. I have an old tripod plate of my Digibeta. I gonna adapt this to the cage with a proper shoulder mount under the camera (not somewhere way back).



Postmaster, I told Sony UK that in future they should email me the blue-prints for any possible future camcorders, and I will tell them what is wrong with it before they even start to think about actually putting it into production. I said to Bill Drummond of Sony UK that if they had done this with the FS100 I would have said stick that in the bin and allow me to start over for you. To me, it is simple and obvious what to produce, but why the hell should I tell Sony what it takes to have the best selling camcorder on the planet. They don't speak to real cameramen that's the problem. Speaking to DSLR users will only produce a Frankenstein that is unusable with bugger all form-factor.

Yeah, good move Nigel. As I already said, I have the feeling that Dan Lenny wanted a better DSLR mousetrap, than a real video camera.
Give me call when they send you the next blue prints - Iīm a former industrial designer. :beer:

best, Frank

NeedCreative
06-10-2011, 08:38 AM
Good post Nigel. Now I do think the insides of the camera are fantastic, and many of the feautures and of course the images are lovely and far better than a DSLR in many respects (hence I will keep it an shoot with it), but for the price of as you mention a small (used) car they could have done better with some aspects. There are ways to make a camera light without having to worry if one will crack a side panel setting it down with anything more than a light thud. We are shooting sometimes in fluid situations. Gear can and does break. A professional camera would account for this and offer a bit more protection.

And don't get me started on that viewfinder/EVF location... :) What we need here is a combo of the AF100's build and the FS100's sensor and electronics. -sigh-

All of that said, I think we have all well covered this point now. It is what it is, it's an artifical build limitation and hopefully Sony will do better next time. I do have to give them credit on the image and the rest of the camera. Just don't drop it or try to shoot with the camera above you and expect not to need a separate EVF or monitor and you'll be fine. Again - don't drop it....

ectobuilder
06-10-2011, 09:13 AM
ectobuilder, Sony's warrantee doesn't cover accidental damage, and you breaking something off the feebly built camcorder is not there concern.


I was referring to third party warranties like the one offered on BHPhoto.com by SageMax. Their coverage has a feature called "Accidental Damage Handling".

ectobuilder
06-10-2011, 09:20 AM
I think Sony knew what they were doing here. They knew what was going to sell. They knew what people would selectively look at (Super 35mm Sensor/XLR Inputs/Low Light Performance) and they knew what people would overlook (built quality).

The overlooked attribute just becomes the sequel's featured selling point ("oh look at that sturdy build quality on the FS200!").

Also, the fact that Sony is the only kid on the block that has a Super 35mm Sensor means they are in a position to skimp on whatever they want because in a capitalist society Market Competition combined with consumer choice pushes innovation and forces the industry to meet consumer demand. Therefore until someone else comes out with a Super 35mm with great low light performance, it won't force Sony's hand.

Assumption being that people (consumers) want their Super 35mm Sensor. Note that in this case, based on this assumption it may force Panasonic (and others) to create a Super 35mm Sensor as well to meet this assumed market demand, thus creating a domino effect that will force Sony to move to their next step as well.

I think Sony (and that includes any manufacturer) knows that if they needed to respond to competition that they could release a FS101 in an instant. So the risk is minimized by knowing their time-to-market.

This reminds me of the CPU race, prior to AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) Intel was releasing CPU chips at a snails pace. But when AMD came on strong, it forced Intel to accelerate their road map and to give what consumers wanted (i.e. like something as basic as performance!).

Rick Burnett
06-10-2011, 11:02 AM
Well I own both the AF100 and the FS100, like I said. I DO NOT find the buttons on the AF100 superior AT ALL. In fact, I really dislike the recording buttons, and the placement of the controls under the LCD means I have to open the LCD even when I don't want too for access to the controls. With the AF100, I still have to look at the buttons to figure out which ones I am going to hit. And while the FS100 buttons are no better, I have NO problem hitting any of them with my finger. Do you have abnormally large fingers? :) I find it takes me just as much time on either camera to do anything OTHER than hit record. Neither wins in that category.

As far as construction goes, I just don't see this huge difference between them. If I dropped either the AF100 or the FS100 I would be worried about either one of them breaking. I'd actually even be a little more worried since the AF100 is heavier. Neither one is a tank, but then again, I don't want all this weight. I am *happy* Sony offered the FS100 in a light body. I wish for those that want a heavier body they offered a stronger body, but for me, I cannot complain.

The one true criticism I have on the FS100 is just the ND filters. I agree that they are a huge omission. You will go no argument about that. However, or *my* needs when I weight the pros with the cons, the FS100 in *my* circumstance has been working out better so far. Since I have both, I can evaluate both (when my AF100 gets back to me).

People have different needs, and for that reason, it is very interesting to see what one person hates or cannot live with, and another person finds it as an advantage. At least we have choices! :)

And I'll repeat, all this discussion about the plastic body, I've not seen one broken yet or heard the circumstances of the breakage. This goes for either the AF100 or the FS100. Until we've seen proof that the body has failed, then it's just people guessing.

olindacat
06-10-2011, 12:35 PM
I've got to hand it to you Rick: I've been reading everything you've said about these as I think you are among the few rare birds who has both. You've been steadfast in hyour objectivity and haven't once sniped at me for asking too many questions. Thanks.

I have a preorder with EC Pro and money in store credit at BH that just need to be refunded and was on fence about this cam because I am clumsy and now pushing 50 which seems to exacerbate things and I worry I'll destroy the the little bugger. I'm apt to fall on the poor thing, and I weigh a lot! I can also see myself snapping off that viewfinder in the first three hours. Given I could buy a copy of the AF100 for $3850 and that, along with ND and waveform (which I don't even know how to use yet) I wanted to hear from the AF owner's camp about their purchases. In some respects, I rightfully got my face torn off over there but I did learn a thing or two in the process.

But my gut tells me (and I think it was Frank's heart/head analogy) make me feel my first instinct was right: despite the build or plastic this is the cam for now if image quality is primo and that has always been key for me (Frank: I sure hope you show us how you kit yours out, in detail!)

I have only used a small handful of camcorders (all Sony) in a mere few years, but I have never seen a Sony that wasn't cheap plastic, and I haven't broken them yet—but had to be very careful. I still think Nikon and Canon jam a lot of mechanicals and electronics into their machines and their builds are so much more durable.

While I know this camera will depreciate quickly as soon as the version or a competitor has something comparable out, but I tend to hold on to my cameras once I marry them and they become a part of me. I have some I've owned for 25+ years.

I guess I'll be buying that special insurance, to cover the end-result of what I am sure will be a laughable posting (of my first mishap) for all to enjoy :-)

vcfilms
06-10-2011, 12:46 PM
I dont thing Nigel is necessarily Sony bashing, I think he's just stating his opinions and being harsh on them for things that deserve it. Sony needs to address the built quality of their cameras. My ex1 when I sold it was worn, cracked and just felt like it's days were numbered. it was well used but only a few years old. This is a great cam, I would own one already if Sony had addressed the build quality and ND issues. I am a long time Sony guy, and would love nothing more than to own this camera (and I may very well soon). The thing is, I guarantee there's a lot of people out there that would have bought this that wont now because of the design of the cam. Even the f3 has a ex1 like build and it costs $13k. What do we have to pay to get Sony to build something that will last for years to come? Maybe I'll mold mine in aluminum :)

Barry_Green
06-10-2011, 12:50 PM
Also, the fact that Sony is the only kid on the block that has a Super 35mm Sensor
? All the Canon DSLRs are Super35 sized (7D, t2i, 60D, 600D, 550D, all the APS-C units). And all the Nikon APS-C, and, well, any APS-C, are all that same size (or extremely close).


Note that in this case, based on this assumption it may force Panasonic (and others) to create a Super 35mm Sensor as well to meet this assumed market demand
There's not much difference between Super 35 and the 4/3 sensor that Panasonic is already using. There's a difference, yes, but not much of one. The Super35 sensor is about 25% wider, so it's bigger, but when you're talking about "large cinema-sized sensors", they're both in the same ballpark. Both are massively bigger than Super16 or 16mm or 2/3", and both are about half as big as "full frame" 35mm. And Sony's sensor isn't really full Super35 anyway, it's 23.6mm, whereas Super35 is 24.9mm.


This reminds me of the CPU race, prior to AMD (Advanced Micro Devices) Intel was releasing CPU chips at a snails pace. But when AMD came on strong, it forced Intel to accelerate their road map and to give what consumers wanted (i.e. like something as basic as performance!).
Many times on this board you will hear statements along the line of "competition is good" since it inspires the manufacturers to compete for our attention.

DM_rider
06-10-2011, 01:12 PM
I really don't think the camera feels that cheap. When you strip it down to just the body without the cheap accessories (yes, they are a bit cheap) and build your own rigging, it's pretty solid.

Rick Burnett
06-10-2011, 01:16 PM
We're all entitled to our opinions :) I can only give mine as an owner, and definitely think that Nigel is just giving his observations as well. While I may not agree, mine or no more or no less valid than his. I am sure we have different requirements. The only way to know for sure is to get your hands on one, you can rent from afar, and see if it will meet your needs. I know people who absolutely LOVE the form factor of the AF100, and I know people who hate it. There are people on this board that want 30 and 40 pound sturdy well built cameras because that's what they like. I want the smallest camera I can get with a great image. Again, different needs.

I would be more afraid of breaking off the AF100 LCD than the FS100. The FS100 LCD is REALLY sturdy as well, no more or less to me than how the AF100 feels, but the AF100 LCD hangs out the side, and I've brushed it on the tripod more than once when maneuvering.

I'll also say that I can tell you, the 4/3 sensor of the AF100 is NOT a problem. Coming from the 7D I was initially worried too, like many without experience at that sensor size, but after shooting with it, you hardly notice ever. You just frame normally as you would and I use a slightly wider lens and same results basically. Sure, the background might be a little different, but once I was actually filming for a client, I realized it really wasn't an issue at all. Even now with my FS100, I don't feel like I am having to make huge changes in the way I shoot after shooting with the AF100, because once you frame for what you are doing, on both cameras it looks really nice.

the idea of someone building a fitted cage for the FS100 sounds cool. I wouldn't use it because I DO NOT want the weight, but, it might help for those that need more protection. Given the simplicity of the body, it shouldn't be that hard.

Barry_Green
06-10-2011, 01:20 PM
I dont thing Nigel is necessarily Sony bashing, I think he's just stating his opinions and being harsh on them for things that deserve it.
I would agree. Nigel has given some very glowing reviews to Sony products over the years. But today's Sony is not the same as the Sony that built BetaSP. Read Akio Morita's book "Made in Japan" to read about the Sony that we all remember. Then read this fascinating article (http://www.canada.com/technology/Sony+lost/4831643/story.html)by Reuters on Sony today; I saw it in a Canadian newspaper when I was up there a couple of weeks ago.

I dug into it because Sony had just rocked the markets, announcing (http://www.gmanews.tv/story/221438/business/earnings-sony-to-post-32-b-annual-loss-on-tax-write-offs)that while they had projected to make a $870 million dollar profit, they instead revised their numbers to show a $3.2 billion dollar loss. It was crazy. You just don't do that to Wall Street, and people were going nuts trying to figure out how it had all happened, and whatever happened to the glory days and all that.


EDIT: Hmmm... that article seems shorter than the one I read. Wait, looks like this is the full article (http://www.canada.com/topics/technology/news/gizmos/story.html?id=18c138ed-1206-47a0-ae34-bb2c2f55b2a7).

David G. Smith
06-10-2011, 01:31 PM
I have a FS-100 and I don't have any issues with the build quality of the body. If you don't like the way it is built, then don't buy one.

Postmaster
06-10-2011, 02:08 PM
Okay, mine arrived today and I just took it for a spin down town.

After seeing what it does, I donīt give a flying ratīs a....s if the body would be made of card board an plywood.

OMG - that babyīs inner values are insane.

...nuff said!

Frank

mico
06-10-2011, 02:25 PM
Oh boy what a post. The Ex1 mic holder broke and that KiLLED its resale value. Please. Ex1 has a similar build quality as FS100 you say? Its been what 3-4 years since the EX came out and theres been how many posts about build quality? That says alot about the FS100's build I would say. DM accessories has been selling a very very affordable after market mic holder that will bring that baby back form the dead by the way.

On another note for some strange reason I must have gotten a very special one of a kind Fs100 where I can actually use the buttons because mine aren't ridiculously small.

Disclosure: My Sony camera purchases: EX1 for a year, then EX1R for a year and a half, now Fs100. No paint rub off or damage taking it all over Europe and the US in a backpack in the sun, rain, sleet, and snow. And I'm far removed from being precious with my cams. EX1 sold on ebay for almost what I paid. In the EX1R's case I sold it for more because of the $500 rebate sony offered at the time of my purchase. Put them on for 7 days and both only took a day to sell. What crappy cameras.

QUOTE=David G. Smith;2359521]I have a FS-100 and I don't have any issues with the build quality of the body. If you don't like the way it is built, then don't buy one.[/QUOTE]

Hallelujah. Or according to someone you're just one of those people today, reluctant to complain.

vcfilms
06-10-2011, 02:37 PM
I have a FS-100 and I don't have any issues with the build quality of the body. If you don't like the way it is built, then don't buy one.

I'll probably still buy one for the IQ. The point is, I hope that in addressing the issue of build quality Sony may listen and their future cameras implement a little more. It's not as easy as saying if you dont like it dont buy it. How about if you dont like it, address it so maybe it can be fixed?

Rick Burnett
06-10-2011, 03:07 PM
But there are people like me who don't want the body to change if it means a heavier camera. I'm careful with my gear myself, so maybe less of a concern, but I don't want to break a lens either, and they are MUCH more fragile to me.

mico
06-10-2011, 03:31 PM
When I had my early REd camera I had to buy an after market input output connecter plate from Element Technica because of smaller connectors getting broken. I also had to buy a spare Compact flash module because the pins were getting bent. MY pl mount needed adjustment. Battery plate didn't lock well. I had to wait for a modified xlr cable. The EVF was so huge I had to put another add on to support it. Their first accessories were badly thought out. Some of their first zoom lenses were downright troubling. Did it make a great image? Yes it did but it was a monster. Did I let them know. You bet I did by calling them up. It took them years to create a smaller lighter weight model I'm sure will also have some issues. And when the scarlet appears i will still consider it.

If you look around every camera from ALexa on down has some build quality issues. Where you might have to modify by purchasing some extras or sending it in. No camera is immune. If you want it to change write or call the company. But it would be nice if you really used the camera and put it through some shooting first instead of listening to FUD by people who had the camera for a one day review or never used it alt all. That one fs100 review in question is so far removed from my experience that i find it laughable and I hope Sony never calls that "reviewer" for any design advice.

cheezweezl
06-10-2011, 04:13 PM
Okay, mine arrived today and I just took it for a spin down town.

After seeing what it does, I donīt give a flying ratīs a....s if the body would be made of card board an plywood.

OMG - that babyīs inner values are insane.

...nuff said!

Frank

exactly. i know what i'm dealing with plastic-wise. i can deal with it. just like i dealt with all the BS of using a dslr for the past two years. at least the fs100 has the features and tools to properly expose your image. i'd be just as careful with an F3 i assure you. just as i am when shooting with the red or even en ENG cam that is made to take abuse. it's really not that big of a deal.

Rick Burnett
06-10-2011, 06:43 PM
I just spent two hours attaching my FS100 to all my rigs, using all the bolts, and using it outdoors testing it, I have ZERO worry about the body. Everything was locked in tight, nothing felt like it was going to break and I CRANKED down the bolts.

I've never even met anyone that broke their GH1, GH2, 5D, 1D, 7D, T2I, 60D, D90 and I don't find their construction all that amazing. I don't know what it is you feel you are going to deal with. The body feels sturdy to me. Yes, I know what creaking sound now people were talking about, it's when gripping the circular part of the camera, but I never once thought it was going to break AT ALL. The give is SO minor. The top shoe is VERY solid.

I really think a lot of people are making a big deal about something that has no precedence yet. When I see something fail prematurely on the FS100, then I'll recognize an issue.

And let me tell you, floating the camera on my Blackbird stabilizer was AWESOME. Balance not fully worked out, but weight wise it is EXACTLY what I was hoping for.

NeedCreative
06-10-2011, 08:14 PM
I'm the one that started this interesting thread and I dropped the thing today about a foot (imagine my reaction) and it didn't break. So there's that. I honestly didn't think such a discussion would emerge here about the plastic. People are coming from all sides of the matter - it's a great camera, compromises have to be made, and so on. We're getting into chip size arguments now and that has nothing to do with the plastic. Fun stuff.

Someone above said that when rigged it feels more sturdy and I agree because everything is balanced better and the mount points on the camera are indeed sturdy.

Someone else said Sony of today isn't the Sony of lore... aint that the truth. Apple has become what Sony was in the 80's and early 90's. And Sony still makes some great stuff but as a company seem to have generally lost their way. But that's not the subject of this thread or forum... more for Fortune magazine. :)

I am most annoyed about the FS100 with a) lack of NDs and b) a minor thing really but that plastic scratches easily. And it feels very chintzy, though so far in practice it has held up ok. I suppose that's what matters in the end.

My bottom line - the camera is awesome. It could be better built, but so can anything. The Sony of lore would have built it better, and I think they went a wee bit too far with "light" in the materials for the price. I value things holding up, resale value, not having to worry if I drop it or if it gets hit on a shoot. However, does that make it a bad camera? No. And I hope people didn't think that's where I was coming from. The image still rocks, the functionality is still (mostly) there, and Sony has given us a S35 cinema camera with a clean picture at insane light levels for $5k. There is still something to be said for that; I just hope in the FS-200 that they clean up some of the small issues like the viewfinder location, ND filters, lack of HDSDI and, oh yes, the plastic :)

cheezweezl
06-10-2011, 08:17 PM
i just rigged mine on the zacuto plate with mattebox and mounted it on the steadicam i just rented for tomorrow's shoot. everything went together with no issues and when mounted on rods, it feels as solid as any camera.

btw, i just found the advantage of the top mount lcd. makes steadicam operating awesome!!!! if i need to swing the cam backwards into the don juan, the flip around lcd makes it easy. if it were a side mount, it would be on the side of the camera away from me and wouldn't do me any good.

NeedCreative
06-10-2011, 08:20 PM
i just rigged mine on the zacuto plate with mattebox and mounted it on the steadicam i just rented for tomorrow's shoot. everything went together with no issues and when mounted on rods, it feels as solid as any camera.

btw, i just found the advantage of the top mount lcd. makes steadicam operating awesome!!!! if i need to swing the cam backwards into the don juan, the flip around lcd makes it easy. if it were a side mount, it would be on the side of the camera away from me and wouldn't do me any good.

Yes good point about steadicam, hadn't thought of that!

Rick Burnett
06-10-2011, 09:35 PM
I ran around the yard earlier with my Blackbird rig and indeed found the same thing. the LCD placement is PERFECT for that use for me.

ectobuilder
06-11-2011, 12:14 AM
Yes good point about steadicam, hadn't thought of that!

Just shot a wedding with it on my Steadicam Pilot and indeed the top mounted LCD is great.

Although I think I still want to upgrade to a larger one such as the Manhattan 8.9" LCD.

ectobuilder
06-11-2011, 12:16 AM
So used the FS100 the WHOLE day today. And my first impression is that Sony really went with a compact design. Which would explain the ergonomics.

Love all the 1/4-20 threads we get.

And the plastic? I call it a hard plastic. It feels and looks quite sexy.

Nigel-Cooper
06-11-2011, 03:58 AM
As Barry Green stated (thanks Barry) I've always been a huge fan of Sony products. When the PDW-350 came out, I went out and bought one after Sony UK where kind enough to loan me a unit for a few weeks; I thought that camera was superb. I did a recent review of the PMW-350 and that review glows 100%. In fact I say that if I could only own one camera, the PMW-350 would be it. I felt the EX1 (I personally wrote and produced the Sony Europe 30 minute informercial on this camera 3 months before it was available to buy) was the first real sign of flakey build quality for Sony; some say it dates back to before the VX1000.

Postmaster, the FS100 does produce good images, but professionals won't use them as they are just too finicky to use and they WILL break in the hands of a Pro.

mico, I feel the FS100 is or worse build quality than the EX1, and the EX1 is bad enough.

Can any FS100 owner actually press the White Balance button without the aid of a fine ball-point pen ;)

Gan Eden Australia
06-11-2011, 04:34 AM
Cutting corners is Sony's trade mark isn't it? Bloody joke. No wonder the Japs are having problems......

LowDown
06-11-2011, 06:28 AM
Postmaster, the FS100 does produce good images, but professionals won't use them as they are just too finicky to use and they WILL break in the hands of a Pro.
Can any FS100 owner actually press the White Balance button without the aid of a fine ball-point pen ;)

Really? That's a pretty strong statement. What would you say about professionals using dslr's? The fact is that they use dslr's and they'll use this camera. I include myself in this by the way. I'll accept the build quality issues in order to have a $5000 super35 cam. Anything to not have to shoot on dslr's again.
I also have no problem with the wb button and I have big hands.

Nigel-Cooper
06-11-2011, 08:05 AM
LowDown, professionals don't use DSLRs, they Use Panavisions and Arri for Hollywood movies. TV commercials are also 35mm film, or Varicam or HDCAM, and soaps and the like are also Varicam, HDCAM or Digibeta or D9 type equipment for SD.
There is a difference between a Professional using something, and something being used for Professional applications.

I agree LowDown, it is a bit of a strong statement. Not sure how it is in the USA, but in the UK if you asked the GTC (Guild of TV Cameramen) to do a survey and ask all it's members if a 5D MK2 was a professional camera used by professionals I can almost certainly say close to 100% of them would say "No Way".

I can't understand people who try and justify their purchases by trying to convince themselves that what they own is used by professionals and is professional kit.

One of the most well known Professionals, Steven Spielberg, doesn't bang on like this, in fact, he doesn't even own any kit to envy yours. I very much doubt Mr Spielberg grabs a Panavision from his broom cupboard each time he wants to make a new movie, guess what, he doesn't even shoot his own movies ;) Just kidding around with you LowDown; trying to make a point.

If an agent in the UK asked me to shoot a TV commercial in England for Volvo cars, guess what, I certainly wouldn't reach for my AF101. I'd hire a crew with cine kit; that's what professionals do.

DM_rider
06-11-2011, 08:21 AM
LowDown, professionals don't use DSLRs, they Use Panavisions and Arri for Hollywood movies. TV commercials are also 35mm film, or Varicam or HDCAM, and soaps and the like are also Varicam, HDCAM or Digibeta or D9 type equipment for SD.
There is a difference between a Professional using something, and something being used for Professional applications.

I agree LowDown, it is a bit of a strong statement. Not sure how it is in the USA, but in the UK if you asked the GTC (Guild of TV Cameramen) to do a survey and ask all it's members if a 5D MK2 was a professional camera used by professionals I can almost certainly say close to 100% of them would say "No Way".

I can't understand people who try and justify their purchases by trying to convince themselves that what they own is used by professionals and is professional kit.

One of the most well known Professionals, Steven Spielberg, doesn't bang on like this, in fact, he doesn't even own any kit to envy yours. I very much doubt Mr Spielberg grabs a Panavision from his broom cupboard each time he wants to make a new movie, guess what, he doesn't even shoot his own movies ;) Just kidding around with you LowDown; trying to make a point.

If an agent in the UK asked me to shoot a TV commercial in England for Volvo cars, guess what, I certainly wouldn't reach for my AF101. I'd hire a crew with cine kit; that's what professionals do.

Now that's some old school thinking.

mico
06-11-2011, 08:48 AM
oh man it keeps getting better and better.

http://www.photographybay.com/2010/04/26/bmw-commercial-shot-with-dslr-cameras/

http://www.alexandrosmaragos.com/2010/12/black-swan-canon-7d.html

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?202017-Hollywood-Celebrity-Canon-DSLR-Users

LowDown
06-11-2011, 08:59 AM
LowDown, professionals don't use DSLRs, they Use Panavisions and Arri for Hollywood movies. TV commercials are also 35mm film, or Varicam or HDCAM, and soaps and the like are also Varicam, HDCAM or Digibeta or D9 type equipment for SD.
There is a difference between a Professional using something, and something being used for Professional applications.

I agree LowDown, it is a bit of a strong statement. Not sure how it is in the USA, but in the UK if you asked the GTC (Guild of TV Cameramen) to do a survey and ask all it's members if a 5D MK2 was a professional camera used by professionals I can almost certainly say close to 100% of them would say "No Way".

I can't understand people who try and justify their purchases by trying to convince themselves that what they own is used by professionals and is professional kit.

One of the most well known Professionals, Steven Spielberg, doesn't bang on like this, in fact, he doesn't even own any kit to envy yours. I very much doubt Mr Spielberg grabs a Panavision from his broom cupboard each time he wants to make a new movie, guess what, he doesn't even shoot his own movies ;) Just kidding around with you LowDown; trying to make a point.

If an agent in the UK asked me to shoot a TV commercial in England for Volvo cars, guess what, I certainly wouldn't reach for my AF101. I'd hire a crew with cine kit; that's what professionals do.

Nigel, I'm afraid they do. I don't care for shooting on dslrs but in the last year I've shot on a number of jobs that requested them. Off the top of my head, there was million dollar campaigns for Dodge ram trucks and recently one for chevy ( although this eventually went to the F3 ). Also, I just shot the new video for "the Kings of Leon" on 5d's. I don't even own a 5d but if the producer requests it, I'll shoot on it and it worked well for this job. In the last three months I've shot on 35mm, 16mm, red, F3, fs100, 5d, 7d, whatever the budget allows or the shoot demands.
I'd love to shoot every job on my Red but it's not always the right camera for the job. I bought the fs100 to not have to shoot on dslrs and deal with moire, skew, no xlrs etc. I've shot 2 jobs with it already and think that it's a great interim camera, not perfect ,but a great little camera.
I think that I see where you are coming from though when you say there is a difference between professional kit and kit used by professionals. This makes sense if you are talking about build quality but a professional should be able to make any camera shine and work around it's limitations. It all comes down to the right tool for the job. I wouldn't expect a TV cameraman to choose anything other than a shoulder mounted camera but I'm not a TV cameraman. I've been doing this for 20 years and would consider myself a professional (at least the people who hire me would like to think so). I'm not trying to justify a purchase, just taking issue with your "no professionals will use this camera" statement. They will.
What has Spielberg got to do with this argument? He's a director and producer, not a cinematographer.

Regards,
Shane.

Nigel-Cooper
06-11-2011, 09:02 AM
Have you asked yourself why they where shot on a 5D. Ford cars shot a TV commercial for Ford in India on a 5D also. This doesn't make it a professional camera, just research a little and figure out why they where shot on a 5D. Again, you are simply trying to convince yourself that because a few TV commercials where shot on a cheap DSLR, then YOU too must be a professional. It's truly laughable.

I was down at Pinewood studios a few weeks ago standing a few feet from a 35mm motion picture film camera, but that doesn’t make me a professional DOP.

Most things shot in any professional capacity on a 5D MK2 or similar is simply because of size restraints, no budget, or marketing spin from Canon i.e. Canon pay for the entire shoot, crew etc to sell more SLRs to the masses.

To be honest, folk get too caught up in equipment. You should just get out there and make a movie, shoot a TV commercial or do that corporate on whatever kit you have, it is the user, not the equipment.

Crafters of Light
06-11-2011, 10:05 AM
As for Pros not using DSLRs, I thought Lucasfilms use them for several scenes in their new movie "Red Tails"?

http://vimeo.com/11695817

morgan_moore
06-11-2011, 10:06 AM
I am very much looking forward to owning an FS100 because onboard sound and long roll times seem to meet what my clients need it to do

but DSLR will always be essential in my kit..

they are just so light for rigging

and I can afford more than one

the only thing IMO that would stop me using DSLRs is an affordable modular chip in a box camera absolutely minimal

cheezweezl
06-11-2011, 10:35 AM
Nigel,

I agree 100% that the 5D is not a pro camera. However, to say that dslrs aren't used in a professional capacity is wrong. How I wish that were true. I hate using them for the same reasons everyone else does. But here in America, there are big things being shot with dslrs. I'm not just talking about low budget music videos. I'm talking about projects where just about any camera could be chosen. Big primetime network tv shows have used them. ASC cinematographers use them. Huge directors use them.

I agree that there are a lot of noobs that bought dslrs calling themselves dp's, but that doesn't mean if you use a dslr, you become one of them.

avro
06-11-2011, 10:43 AM
Out of his depth as always poor Nigel. Not good enough years ago regarding xdcam hd and not good enough now. Just closje your .website Mate and go in peace!

ectobuilder
06-11-2011, 10:48 AM
I find that in this industry, DP's (this definition may need expanding, so I apologize ahead of time) tend to be fascinated with novelty equipment. But then later on sober up (through time and experience with the novelty equipment) and finally uncover the faults.

Case and point the Zacuto 2010 Camera Shootout. In that documentary, all the DP's were like (paraphrasing) "WOW, DSLR's are amazing. Does a really good job for the price. Getting close to film". None of them knew about the moire artifacts at that point in time.

But today, through time and experience DP's now know that major artifacting occurs in DSLR's. And thus the majority of DP's are now seeking DSLR replacements like the AG-AF100 or the NEX-FS100.

Soon we will find rolling shutters and blown highlights unacceptable. We may even find that a fixed imaged sensor is unacceptable as I'm pretty sure that is becoming modular pretty soon (i.e. like Red MX).

ectobuilder
06-11-2011, 10:53 AM
LowDown, professionals don't use DSLRs, they Use Panavisions and Arri for Hollywood movies. TV commercials are also 35mm film, or Varicam or HDCAM, and soaps and the like are also Varicam, HDCAM or Digibeta or D9 type equipment for SD.
There is a difference between a Professional using something, and something being used for Professional applications.

I agree LowDown, it is a bit of a strong statement. Not sure how it is in the USA, but in the UK if you asked the GTC (Guild of TV Cameramen) to do a survey and ask all it's members if a 5D MK2 was a professional camera used by professionals I can almost certainly say close to 100% of them would say "No Way".

I can't understand people who try and justify their purchases by trying to convince themselves that what they own is used by professionals and is professional kit.

One of the most well known Professionals, Steven Spielberg, doesn't bang on like this, in fact, he doesn't even own any kit to envy yours. I very much doubt Mr Spielberg grabs a Panavision from his broom cupboard each time he wants to make a new movie, guess what, he doesn't even shoot his own movies ;) Just kidding around with you LowDown; trying to make a point.

If an agent in the UK asked me to shoot a TV commercial in England for Volvo cars, guess what, I certainly wouldn't reach for my AF101. I'd hire a crew with cine kit; that's what professionals do.

Blame that on two-fold marketing. The need for manufacturers to play up their lower product lines by positioning them as a DERIVATIVE of their flagship camera. This is modern day marketing, make the best and greatest flagship product and then make a low-cost mass produced DERIVATIVE and state that this is the case in your sales pitch. People eat that up all the time.

Secondly, as indie-filmmakers we tend to want to overextend OUR own associations too. "Oh this camcorder is similar to the one used in big cinema" to get the client interested.

Just the way the world works today. Sad but true.

Rick Burnett
06-11-2011, 10:55 AM
I still don't get this "can't press the white balance button". Do I need to make a video of pressing it? I'm 6'4" and my hands have NO issue using any of the controls. Period. I have no issue using the buttons on the FS100 anymore than I do pressing wise than the AF100. And personally, I like the layout more as well. No essential buttons for me under the LCD that I cannot get at. And, the directional pad is easier for me to use. Given the directional pad is typically 90 degrees out on the AF100 when using it, I constantly would be pushing in the wrong direction. Or how about the power button that is so hard to flip to on or off with the way it is designed on the AF100. Or how about the buttons under the LCD. I can barely tell if my finger actually pressed the EVF DTL button or not. Again, not that I think the FS100 buttons are any better per-say, but to claim one as superior baffles me, because they BOTH have pluses and minuses.

I see no reason the AF100 or FS100 couldn't be used in a professional capacity in most instances. Sure, the AF100 will always have the leg up with SDI, but to me, not even ND makes it NOT professional. For a video camera application, maybe, but like has been mentioned many times, there are PLENTY of film cameras that have no ND built in, and they are still used professionally. Unless you are telling me that matte boxes are unprofessional, which I HIGHLY doubt. I believe they've been built for the *cinema* world if I am not mistaken.

If I were doing something big enough to warrant say screen time at a theatre, I wouldn't use the FS100 or the AF100, I'd rent, period. Obviously if the shoot was at that level, then I'd want a camera that would have MUCH more freedom for the final format. I'd go so far as to say Alexa first, followed by F3 with SLog second. (Since Epic is not available and the Red One MX might be my 3rd choice).

The body is compact and solid. I've not seen ANYONE break their FS100 yet, or their AF100, so it doesn't look like an issue (yet) on either camera.

Why do people feel like they have to constantly classify if a tool is professional or not? If a professional uses ANY tool to get a job done, then that tool was used professionally. There is no STANDARD for what professional tools are. Anyone can claim that their tool is for professional or consumer use, but really, that doesn't guarantee you ANYTHING. What matters is your results, or the expectations placed on you for whomever or whatever it is you are working on. If all you do is get hung up on if the tools you are using are professional or not, you REALLY have your focus wrong. The focus should be on the results, and in many cases, the effort/complexity/risk of getting there.

I'm SURE that I'm not going to lose ANY work from people because they see the body is plastic on my FS100 (or my AF100). In fact, when they see it on my shoulder rig, or my modified hand held system, with my smallHD monitor, they are going to be impressed, because honestly, it does look very nice. Although that doesn't matter, because it *working* nice is what is important to me.

So can we get back on the topic of the FS100, and let's drop the DSLR discussion. This is NOT the post for that. Thanks.

LowDown
06-11-2011, 11:02 AM
Well said Rick.

Stephen Mick
06-11-2011, 11:58 AM
Let's keep things on-topic and away from the personal stuff.

Nigel-Cooper
06-11-2011, 12:03 PM
Agreed Stephen.