Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 52
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    321
    Default
    IMHO the AF100 is only capable of GHASTLY images.

    The F3, is rather good. In fact, I would bet money that almost no one could pick out the F3 over an FS7 or other mid-range cameras in the context of a finished piece. I am considering an F3 for web videos along with a few other options. I need a better than average dynamic range as a priority, other characteristics just need to be decent. So as long as HD resolution is good enough, the F3 is awesome.

    There are no moving parts like the old days, so operating hours are not all that critical. I would be looking to see if it was a studio camera or a world travelling documentary camera.
    Carlos Acosta
    bringing a little love to the camera department


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    122
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rx8pilot View Post
    IMHO the AF100 is only capable of GHASTLY images.

    The F3, is rather good. In fact, I would bet money that almost no one could pick out the F3 over an FS7 or other mid-range cameras in the context of a finished piece. I am considering an F3 for web videos along with a few other options. I need a better than average dynamic range as a priority, other characteristics just need to be decent. So as long as HD resolution is good enough, the F3 is awesome.

    There are no moving parts like the old days, so operating hours are not all that critical. I would be looking to see if it was a studio camera or a world travelling documentary camera.
    The Raid looked good at the cinema


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    413
    Default
    I think most people forget that the Sony F3 has a 14 bit DSP. Unlike the FS700 and Canon C100 which are both 8 bit DSPs. While the internal codec is 8 bit XDCAM EX, that 14 bit DSP makes a difference. There's something much more subtle about the F3's image vs the FS100 and FS700, both of which I have used in the past, being a previous owner of the FS100. It's definitely worth buying used or new (at $5K new). In the end you have to look at the image with your eyes and figure if you see a difference and if it is worth it, and vs the other cameras in its NEW price range I would say yes. Most indie features and shorts (my bread and butter) cannot handle the immense amount of data and storage that 4K raw compressed or uncompressed demands. I believe that acquisition wise, we all want 4K, but the post workflow is still a big bottle neck and everyone ends up finishing in 2K or HD.


    3 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,979
    Default
    Doctor Wu, that is an interesting point about the 14 bit DSP, so that means it preserves more of its colour depth (and less issues such as banding) along the way before it finally goes down to be recorded in 8 bit?




    I was doing a little bit of research of EX1R vs F3 (not because I have any wish at all to get a EX1R, *NOPE*!!! But because I have some experience with the size/handling of an EX1R because one of the people I work for a lot has this has her main camera, and I wanted to get a better idea of how they F3 might physically feel on a shoot), and stumbled across this old thread about the EX1 vs EX3:

    http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread...=1#post1305658

    Quote Originally Posted by MattDavis View Post
    I shoot the same kind of stuff with my EX1. Corporate interviews.

    As much as I hate to say this, the EX-3 may be a better choice if you can afford it, because whilst the image may be identical, the EX-3 will have 'presence'. Pimp it up with matte box, unnecessary stick mic with dead cat, heavy-set tripod. In corporates, it's what they want.

    I am flabbergasted that in this day and age, we still have to pimp cameras for corporate shoots. The EX-1 will deliver jaw-dropping expensive images, and the EX-3 will do the same - no better, no worse. But the EX-3 will get the better response from 'The Suits'. They will deliver better responses, take you more seriously, do more one-takers, and generally be happier. An EX-1 will do just as well, but the fresh meat will do more for an EX-3.

    I hate this fact (as an EX-1 owner). But that's how it goes.

    The EX-1 is a fantastic candid camera, it's invisible, you get moments that a shoulder-mounted camera could never get, and I love it to bits. But I buy a big French Flagged Matte Box not to protect my lens, but to put lipstick and eye-liner on my EX-1.

    I now know that the EX-3 looks like a modern cut-down DSR-570. Yes, the 570 is probably the better camera for SD thanks to bigger chips and better glass, but if you're shooting talking heads, it's a third of the cost of a tricked out 570 and the images look pretty good.

    You're up against big bruiser macho cameras that deliver lesser images than the EX line. The EX-1 is an Ugly Betty, the EX-3 is an Agent Starling. Even the analogy gets me red mist.

    My clients seem to be settled on "EX1 shoots professionally whilst not looking too expensive" whilst I bet if I did an EX3 shoot the 'expensive' poke would disappear, and for my clients, I'd lose out to DSR-570 teams. Hmmm. I'll stick with EX-1, others can/should go EX3.

    Discuss?



    PS: Invest in SxS cards. I mean it. You need 4 x 16 GB. I LOVE this workflow, but you really need to shoot with gay abandon all day, then on-line to hard disk each evening. You DO NOT want to be finding your laptop during the day. I would spend more on SxS cards with the EX-1 rather than get an EX-3 if my budget was tight.

    PPS: I own an 8 and a 16. I rent 1-2 16s on event jobs, and will buy 2x 16s when the price moves. No kidding. Get more SxS than you think you'll need.

    PPPS: At any point, should you think it's not worth it, look at good EX1 footage. It's all worth it. All my clients have noticed it. My day rate has increased for it. But right now, I'm working out if my Second Camera should be an EX-1 or EX-3. However good my footage looks, it's how the talent performs. Sometimes they need to be in front of a big pimped camera. So right now (at my price bracket) I'd go for an EX-3 over a DSR-570 whilst agonising over an F-355. I'd shove a Matte Box in front of an EX-3 quite frankly.

    Damn, that logic is still making a lot of sense many years later I reckon. I'm not considering the F3 because of its image (which is very nice too!) but because of a perception issue.
    Last edited by IronFilm; 06-28-2015 at 09:26 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,328
    Default
    Well i've never bought into that personally. i get hired for me, but what I'm not sure what perception issue you're talking about . What are you comparing it to. Something in its price range? The only comparison camera is C300 or an FS700 both of which are twice the price and don't look as good.
    Who said F3 has a lower perception quotient? i would think higher.
    . Re EX-1 > I did a 2 camera shoot with EX-1 a year or 2 ago outdoors with bright highlights. Cameras had exactly the same settings and it was interesting to compare. They matched well enough to cut but theres no question the F3 was a superior picture with better highlights.with the same settings and the cameras set to match .
    Oh well make your own decision.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,979
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenilenapi View Post
    Who said F3 has a lower perception quotient? i would think higher.
    I'm meaning relative to what I have now that I own (BMPCC and mirrorless cameras).


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Poland/UK/Europe
    Posts
    1,310
    Default
    F3 still staying strong in low budget indie features and film schools. For a reason. If they'll drop in price slightly more I might get one or two as a b and c camera for fs7.
    FS7 & other


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,979
    Default
    Alohype, how much lower do you think they could drop??? They're already going for under US$2k for the body!! :-o


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    2,022
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by IronFilm View Post
    Damn, that logic is still making a lot of sense many years later I reckon. I'm not considering the F3 because of its image (which is very nice too!) but because of a perception issue.
    The "perception issue" is what around here some would call the "dog and pony show," but there absolutely are clients who will judge you positively or negatively on how expensive and awesome they think your camera gear is, and, not being actually versed in your industry, many of them will see larger cameras as better, regardless of make or model. I've used this to my benefit plenty.
    James Houk
    Nashville, TN


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Poland/UK/Europe
    Posts
    1,310
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Viddovation View Post
    The "perception issue" is what around here some would call the "dog and pony show," but there absolutely are clients who will judge you positively or negatively on how expensive and awesome they think your camera gear is, and, not being actually versed in your industry, many of them will see larger cameras as better, regardless of make or model. I've used this to my benefit plenty.
    +1
    It takes a few years time to get into consciousness of end customers that are out of industry. Recently I actually had to explain that FS7 is far superior then DSLR (so their understanding was somewhere around 2010).

    Quote Originally Posted by IronFilm View Post
    Alohype, how much lower do you think they could drop??? They're already going for under US$2k for the body!! :-o
    And that is a great deal price, but in my country they're still going between 3 and 4.5k $.
    FS7 & other


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •