Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29
  1. Collapse Details
    F35 in 20's vs modern cameras
    #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    33
    Default
    The F35 forum is the best i've ever seen. And F35's rendition is some kind of magic. I need a camera for my first fiction and F35 is no brainer in terms of color out of the box, global shutter, highlight roloff and noise pattern. Thinking to use it with the a7s3 as a b-cam for some cases where i need modern AF.

    But. The past year was a very rich on novelties, so many modern cameras have been released. I know that F35 cannot be used on most of my works like interviews, documentaries, corporate vids... so trying to invest with a cold head but with the soul in the mind

    I've owned few "all-arounders" like FS7 and FS5 but their images wasnt close to cinematic look. Sony's unfamous margenta, clipping in highlights.. Their weird line-skipped slow motion was a huge dissapointment for my needs too. It's no chance to test any camera in my country, so i've trusted specs and made lot of mistakes.

    Today i'm thinking about the C300mk3 as "all arounder" for everything i do. But image from it also looks like from dslr on every youtube test i've seen. It has true 12.8 stops by imatest and nicely recovers image from +3/-3 stops. But where this huge DR has gone in real world shots?

    So. For 10.2020 I'm thinking of F35+a7s3 vs C300mkiii. Wery interesting in opinion of F35 users and guys who sold them for a different reasons. Your expirience is very important for my desicion because F35 shold cost much more for me because of delivery to Ukraine and import taxes. So it's very risky if the unit with issues (dead pixels etc). Even returns would be acceptable, i'd pay for the taxes and delivery anyway. But I really love image from it because shot a lot on film with leitz m6, contax g2, hassel 500 and don't like cmos's way of rendering.

    Waiting for opinions, advices, discussion)
    Last edited by DM_R; 09-30-2020 at 03:50 AM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #2
    Senior Member DIRECTORDEVIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    122
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DM_R View Post
    The F35 forum is the best i've ever seen. And F35's rendition is some kind of magic. I need a camera for my first fiction and F35 is no brainer in terms of color out of the box, global shutter, highlight roloff and noise pattern. Thinking to use it with the a7s3 as a b-cam for some cases where i need modern AF.

    But. The past year was a very rich on novelties, so many modern cameras have been released. I know that F35 cannot be used on most of my works like interviews, documentaries, corporate vids... so trying to invest with a cold head but with the soul in the mind

    I've owned few "all-arounders" like FS7 and FS5 but their images wasnt close to cinematic look. Sony's unfamous margenta, clipping in highlights.. Their weird line-skipped slow motion was a huge dissapointment for my needs too. It's no chance to test any camera in my country, so i've trusted specs and made lot of mistakes.

    Today i'm thinking about the C300mk3 as "all arounder" for everything i do. But image from it also looks like from dslr on every youtube test i've seen. It has true 12.8 stops by imatest and nicely recovers image from +3/-3 stops. But where this huge DR has gone in real world shots?

    So. For 10.2020 I'm thinking of F35+a7s3 vs C300mkiii. Wery interesting in opinion of F35 users and guys who sold them for a different reasons. Your expirience is very important for my desicion because F35 shold cost much more for me because of delivery to Ukraine and import taxes. So it's very risky if the unit with issues (dead pixels etc). Even returns would be acceptable, i'd pay for the taxes and delivery anyway. But I really love image from it because shot a lot on film with leitz m6, contax g2, hassel 500 and don't like cmos's way of rendering.

    Waiting for opinions, advices, discussion)
    All I can say is that the f35 is a beautiful camera which you already know.

    Itís big and bulky but this doesnít have to be a downside, use the size of the camera to put you more in a spiritual es sense when shooting with it. The camera can really make you think as an artists, no more just putting cameras anywhere and hoping to stitch it together in post. It will make you think big and focus on your story.

    Imagine just picking any shot you want, and never having to worry weather what you shot is gonna look great or if the sensor moired or if the shot looked big enough. All of these problems vanish with the f35 and all thatís left is your imagination. Itís why I purchased this camera and will never sell it. My wife shots look like classic Oil paintings on the f35. You will see soon enough when you try to match the other cameras with it that they donít really stand a chance. Buy it, stay zen like and incorporate its bulky body into your creativity.

    Cheers
    Favorite Cameras I own
    Sony F35 & Sony F3

    Decent Cameras I own
    Arri Alexa Classic, Canon XH-A1 Dvx100b

    These Cameras I own that almost did it for me BUT NOPE
    BMCC.2.5K AND FUJI XH1

    These I own as a mad scientist and fanboy but will never shoot with again
    Red one MX, Red Epic, Ursa mini pro G2

    My ultimate advice " Find a camera you love that way your signature won't be like mine"


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

  3. Collapse Details
    #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    33
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRECTORDEVIN View Post
    All I can say is that the f35 is a beautiful camera which you already know.
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRECTORDEVIN View Post
    It’s big and bulky
    Quote Originally Posted by DIRECTORDEVIN View Post
    Buy it, stay zen like and incorporate its bulky body into your creativity.
    Cheers
    Thank you for a reply and your expirience with a camera. Yesterday I've watched "Once upon a time in Anatolia" and all the questions disappeared... before...

    ... I've watched "behind the scenes" stuff with a huge amounts of different light, camera crew from at least of 5 persons (DP, puller, assistants) etc. Such a best movie, I've seen for a long time in terms of atmosphere, storytelling, acting and, of course, image. Nevertheless, director, Nuri Ceylan, chosed an F-65 for his next movie "Kis Uykusu" and said: “We made a comparison test before we started, and as soon as I saw the results I decided on the F65 as there was a huge difference with this camera. [It] is the first time I’ve seen something better than 35mm”.

    Of course, it's not a reason to buy the F-65 tomorrow, but something interesting opinion from a person, who shot one of the best-looking movies on the F-35 cam. As for me, I'm not a huge fan of this noise in shadows, which everyone loves on this forum: for my eye it's not like a film grain. F-65 is much cleaner in shadows, but how it holds the highlights in comparison to the F-35? My project shouldn't have a lot of low-light stuff, just intersting for myself: Alexa: +6.8 stops, F35: +6.3, F65?

    Would be pleasant to see your works, shot on F35, even personal (if you can show them, of course).
    I'll go with the F35 just because of it's film-feeling (except noise) and nostalgic rendering for anyone who shot on film.
    Some of my film photos from 2008-2010:







    Last edited by DM_R; 10-01-2020 at 01:34 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Las Vegas NV
    Posts
    102
    Default
    From my experience with the F35, it needs a lot of light. It does not produce appealing images underexposed. And I agree with you, the noise pattern is not like film grain at all. But that is subjective. If you expose well though, you will not see any noise at all. I rate the camera at 250 ISO.


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

  5. Collapse Details
    #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    33
    Default
    interesting.. because i've read, that F35 holds well till 800 without significant noise
    https://vimeo.com/336945104 - looks very nice even with the NR
    Is it enough for a strong overcast, cloudy sky with no visible sun, from your expirience?


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Las Vegas NV
    Posts
    102
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DM_R View Post
    interesting.. because i've read, that F35 holds well till 800 without significant noise
    https://vimeo.com/336945104 - looks very nice even with the NR
    Is it enough for a strong overcast, cloudy sky with no visible sun, from your expirience?
    I wouldn't agree with that. This camera is light hungry. It was made when sets were typically lit with big Fresnels and not little LED panels. A cloudy sky is plenty of light normally. I think if you keep everything above 100 ire you'll have no noise. But once you go below that, things go downhill quickly.
    Seach Rick Birnbaum's posts for some tests he made. Again in my view 100 to 128 ire is the magic number. You can't really go below that.

    Man, this scene from Once Upon a Time in Anatolia says it all. Who would dare light a scene like this for digital? Yet the F35 rendered the images as close as any digital camera could ever come to film.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeC8SweG_bQ


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

  7. Collapse Details
    #7
    Senior Member Grug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    4,186
    Default
    I'd push the F35 to 800 ISO on occasion (when I desperately needed the extra highlight latitude), but you were really riding the limit at 800.

    In 2020, unless the global shutter was absolutely paramount to what you were shooting, I'd find it really hard to recommend the F35 over the C300iii. The Canon gives you better dynamic range, internal raw 4k recording, up to 120fps, internal NDs, and it's cleaner at 1600 ISO than the F35 is at 800. It's also super-light by comparison, and just much faster and simpler to work with overall.

    It also seems just as easy to grade into a really nice space as the big Sony is.

    The fact that Alexa classics (well, the high-hours ones at least) have also fallen in cost to be within grasp of people looking at an F35... I'd say you need some really specific reasons to opt for the big Sony these days.

    You'd have to really twist my arm to get me to shoot on the F35 today if the alternative was the C300iii. Because doing so would be making my job notably harder by comparison. Assuming the pictures are equally as pleasant to look at, then I'm always going to prefer the camera that gets out of my way more.


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

  8. Collapse Details
    #8
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DM_R View Post
    Thank you for a reply and your expirience with a camera. Yesterday I've watched "Once upon a time in Anatolia" and all the questions disappeared... before...

    ... I've watched "behind the scenes" stuff with a huge amounts of different light, camera crew from at least of 5 persons (DP, puller, assistants) etc. Such a best movie, I've seen for a long time in terms of atmosphere, storytelling, acting and, of course, image. Nevertheless, director, Nuri Ceylan, chosed an F-65 for his next movie "Kis Uykusu" and said: “We made a comparison test before we started, and as soon as I saw the results I decided on the F65 as there was a huge difference with this camera. [It] is the first time I’ve seen something better than 35mm”.

    Of course, it's not a reason to buy the F-65 tomorrow, but something interesting opinion from a person, who shot one of the best-looking movies on the F-35 cam. As for me, I'm not a huge fan of this noise in shadows, which everyone loves on this forum: for my eye it's not like a film grain. F-65 is much cleaner in shadows, but how it holds the highlights in comparison to the F-35? My project shouldn't have a lot of low-light stuff, just intersting for myself: Alexa: +6.8 stops, F35: +6.3, F65?

    Would be pleasant to see your works, shot on F35, even personal (if you can show them, of course).
    I'll go with the F35 just because of it's film-feeling (except noise) and nostalgic rendering for anyone who shot on film.
    Some of my film photos from 2008-2010:







    from what you're going for and from my experience find a super 16mm film camera use (kodak b&w) for unforgetable art and cinema


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

  9. Collapse Details
    #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Las Vegas NV
    Posts
    102
    Default
    No doubt. But super 16 cameras are getting more and more expensive now. Plus film, processing and scanning.
    The biggest irony: With all the hoopla surrounding all the new 6K, 8K, 12K digital cameras, many have concluded that cmos digital is just a dead-end aesthetically (though not commercially), no matter what the resolution is and the prices of 16 and s16mm cameras continue to rise. For good reason.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Posts
    33
    Default
    Thank to all for your time and helpful advices.


    Quote Originally Posted by RayZan View Post
    Man, this scene from Once Upon a Time in Anatolia says it all. Who would dare light a scene like this for digital? Yet the F35 rendered the images as close as any digital camera could ever come to film.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeC8SweG_bQ
    Yes, this scene is unforgettable and I watched it with a open mouth, but there was no magic, just enough of light:



    Same for the night shots:


    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    I'd push the F35 to 800 ISO on occasion (when I desperately needed the extra highlight latitude), but you were really riding the limit at 800.
    Yep, saw this solution from your and Macgregor's old posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    In 2020, unless the global shutter was absolutely paramount to what you were shooting, I'd find it really hard to recommend the F35 over the C300iii. The Canon gives you better dynamic range, internal raw 4k recording, up to 120fps, internal NDs, and it's cleaner at 1600 ISO than the F35 is at 800. It's also super-light by comparison, and just much faster and simpler to work with overall.
    It also seems just as easy to grade into a really nice space as the big Sony is.
    The global shutter (or mechanical like alexa's 2ms), highlight roloff, reach color space and minimal amount of aliasing/moire are the most important camera functions for shooting auteur cinema, in my opinion. My movie will mainly consist of hard daylight scenes, fast camera movenings will be also present. I agree, that C300iii is a dream camera in terms of specs, but to be honest... I was fooled several times by Canon and Sony and don't believe in their marketing numbers without real-world tests. I haven't seen ANY beautiful footage from C300iii yet. In this test you can see it vs Alexa 2K, Weapon and C200. Grading is poore, but you can download original files and see that arri has much vider halftones and color palette.

    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    The fact that Alexa classics (well, the high-hours ones at least) have also fallen in cost to be within grasp of people looking at an F35... I'd say you need some really specific reasons to opt for the big Sony these days.
    Yep, I cannot imagine it out of crew and staged production. So looking to add Sony a7s3 in my kit which have most of modern C300's features (same DR, 120 fps, lowlight, AF).

    Quote Originally Posted by Grug View Post
    You'd have to really twist my arm to get me to shoot on the F35 today if the alternative was the C300iii. Because doing so would be making my job notably harder by comparison. Assuming the pictures are equally as pleasant to look at, then I'm always going to prefer the camera that gets out of my way more.
    Agree with everything, but need to see even the one great filmic footage from the C300. All i've seen was too dslr'ish and with the very weak roll off before clipping.

    Quote Originally Posted by niki View Post
    from what you're going for and from my experience find a super 16mm film camera use (kodak b&w) for unforgetable art and cinema
    I think, it's impossible for me now: too many troubles with film in any aspect of process. At least, not for my first serious projects.
    Last edited by DM_R; 10-04-2020 at 11:37 AM.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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