F55: Among all the camera spec "noise", real movies are being shot with F65's.

The F65 IMHO, is the current reference standard for digital cinema. It's not for everyone, but it is awesome. I have been working with this camera for we over a year now. It is easy, easy, and easy. Just don't expect to use your 2 year old Mac Book Pro with a pair of G-RAIDS on the set of a two camera feature. It generates enormous amounts of data. Not really a problem on a typical studio feature.

8k, HDR, 16bit recording, 120fps, ultrawide color gamut, SR Master, etc.....
 
Great article. Funny to read it being referred to as an 8k sensor. (not to spark debate on that all over again) :cool:

I wonder why the F3 didn't really take off for feature work? Was 4444 10-bit SLOG really seen as not good enough? I know ARRIRAW's 12-bit log was widely accepted, but man 16-bit SLOG just seems like overkill.
 
Personally, I think it is in large part that the Alexa looks like a big Hollywood movie camera and the F3 looks like a video camera OR a Frankencamera depending on how it is configured. Makes it hard for those doing a feature to get over. The cost of the camera body is a small percentage of the budget. Lenses, support, monitors, and crew all being the same.

They are both capable cameras.
 
Osslund said:
The only reason to choose the F3 over an Alexa is budget. They both offer about the same iq.
Click to expand...

I've own an F3 with Slog and shot 444 uncompressed, I've also DP'd with Alexa going out Arri Raw... There is a huge difference. 2 completely different animals when you're talking specs, color, feel, build quality, ergonomics, menu systems... so I dont see a real comparison. I do however think that the F3 was the only camera that came close to an Alexa image, but thats only because the next thing was just dramatically so different (RED Epic).

F3 didn't see a lot of feature work simply because of build quality and horrible body design. If it was the exact same features, sensor, output.. everything, but in the body of an Alexa.. you'd see a jump in people wanting to use it more for features i think. The body screams pro for Alexa, the body screams handcam on the F3.

Problem with F65 is its just a huge camera, not any bigger than Panavision setups (actually its smaller) but all in all the F65 just kinda got overshaddowed by Alexas explosion on the market. Also Sony's hype department sucks... but we all know that.
 
Found one for $71,000 USD in mint condition with vf and a few extras, not a bad freaking deal! But I hate to say it... if I had the cash, I'd buy Alexa anyway :-/ that camera would make its money back a lot faster than the F65

Poor F35's can't even be given away. I'm seeing F35 bodies going for cheaper than used F3 bodies.... now thats horrible to see!
 
FilmDude said:
Poor F35's can't even be given away. I'm seeing F35 bodies going for cheaper than used F3 bodies.... now thats horrible to see!
Click to expand...

It's ridiculous isn't it? But that's the digital age for you - newer tech always wins out. For me the choice came down to either a crazy cheap F35 or the F3. And as much as it pained me to do so, I went with the F3. Why? Well in the end it came down to the higher sensitivity of the F3 - its ability to work with smaller (read: cheaper) lighting packages, and down to the lighter weight of the camera, which has flow on effects for support gear and handheld shooting.

Basically, an F35 requires a large light and support package, and the cost of that additional gear pushed it beyond my means. Add to that the F3's ability to see in the dark, and a roughly 2-stop advantage in DR (though to be fair you notice it less with the F35 than most cameras due to the F35's highlight handling) and the F3 gets the job.
 
Now, if you owned both an F35 and an F3... well, then you'd have a likely A/B setup, with the ability to go low light on the F3 when necessary, and global shutter on the F35 when needed.

Also, as macgregor has pointed out, an F35 can be a lot lighter now than how they were originally kitted. Whether it's a hyperdeck shuttle, SR-R1, Samurai, or Aja unit, you can keep the weight lower than the original build with SRW-1 unit.
 
Viddovation said:
Now, if you owned both an F35 and an F3... well, then you'd have a likely A/B setup, with the ability to go low light on the F3 when necessary, and global shutter on the F35 when needed.

Also, as macgregor has pointed out, an F35 can be a lot lighter now than how they were originally kitted. Whether it's a hyperdeck shuttle, SR-R1, Samurai, or Aja unit, you can keep the weight lower than the original build with SRW-1 unit.
Click to expand...

This is very true. The F35 is far more managable today than with the SRW-1. I lugged those things all over the planet, running many thousands of tapes - and it always did the job. The downside is that they were very heavy and power hungry by today's standards. The F35 is a much better looking camera in my opinion than an F3. Specs aside, it produces a pleasing image in the worst of circumstances with very little effort. This is not a stab at F3, I just believe it is less work to get good pictures out of F35.
 
Duke,

I might be able to speak more candidly... *next* week. Until then, I'll just say that it's a matter of supply and demand, and right now, as F35 units are seeing a decline in rentals, the rental houses are dumping them to make more room for the next generation.
 
I wonder how much closer the F5/F55 will come to Alexa in terms of quality, color, image... any thoughts or is it still too early to say from the limited amount of footage we've seen so far?
 
I think it is too early to be definitive. My confidence is high that these new cameras will hit the mark. From what I have seen so far in person and the demos, it appears to be a very flexible system that will run the gamut from 1-man band docco style to big features. This says alot - I don't know of any other camera that is small and simple enough for docs while being sophisticated (resolution, color, DR, shutter, etc) enough for the big features.

The Alexa is my personal reference standard for a camera the looks "pretty" even when the on set reality is less than ideal. It is also VERY easy to use. The downside is that it is not cheap, small, or lightweight. It is a genuine movie camera. If the F55 achieves a competitive look - it's the right price, size and weight and will be a great value for those that are looking for a money making system.
 
I think it mostly comes down to image, rather than spec. Alexa generally looks like cinema, or what you might expect from a feature. F3 just looks like HD video- and that may not be the kind of look that DP's or Directors are going for depending on the project. I mean, there are still to this day those who seek out the 5D for some kinds of work / shots, just because of the type of image it produces. Specs in general at this point are a bit over rated; DPs just use what looks "right" in their eyes, and not necessarily what the bleeding edge of camera technology can offer them.
 
My hopes are that the F55 can produce a look similar to what they did with Oblivion and After Earth. if it does/can I think my mind will be at rest.
 
starcentral said:
Great article. Funny to read it being referred to as an 8k sensor. (not to spark debate on that all over again) :cool:

I wonder why the F3 didn't really take off for feature work? Was 4444 10-bit SLOG really seen as not good enough? I know ARRIRAW's 12-bit log was widely accepted, but man 16-bit SLOG just seems like overkill.
Click to expand...

As already said, the F3 is basically a toy in the context of Hollywood studio features. It reeks of palmcam prosumer camcoder. Build quality, form factor, is basically the same of any prosumer camera out there. The chances that a F3 would not survive the rigors of a full Hollywood production is high too. Just not built like a thank. On top of that there's also the problem with perception. You hire an actor for $15 million and point a little toy at him? The 1AC says, "hey, my friend has the same camera and films weddings with it". How do you think Tom Cruise, Will Smith and the like would feel hearing that? What about the producers with people saying their film was shot on the same camera people use to film weddings? They would definitely not like to see it on the press that their $100 million film was shot on a cheap camera, unless this was part of the gimmick. People, specially in the prosumer market, sometimes overlook how important such things are. I remember reading a quote by Kiefer Sutherland in reaction to when Rodney Charters brought a prosumer camera to the set of 24 to test them alongside the film cameras, and Kiefer said he just couldn't take the little camera seriously or give it his best as he would the big camera (I'm paraphrasing here). Those things count, as much as anybody at the bottom of the food chain wants to just dismiss it as just snobbery.

On top of that, to say the F3 IQ comes close to the Alexa is not true at all. The F35 makes better images than it too, even if it's a bit older. It's still a high end camera where the F3 is low-end. The F3 images look basically like what the camera is. A late 2000's early 2010's very good prosumer/low-end HD camera. F3 images look largely video-ish close to Alexa, Genesis, F35 and naturally also F65.
 
starcentral said:
I wonder how much closer the F5/F55 will come to Alexa in terms of quality, color, image... any thoughts or is it still too early to say from the limited amount of footage we've seen so far?
Click to expand...

I'm also wondering. Another question is if it will be accepted for high budget feature films as the Genesis, F35 and now the F65 have been. Technically it is still under the F65. I would think that for Sony to be able to keep the F65 running along, there must be something it can do that the F55 can't and it needs to be above the yet not needed 8K feature. If that's the case and with cameras not being a major expense in high budget production, I see the F65 being used more and the F55 maybe only as a B camera or when a smaller size is needed. I just somehow don't see either F5 or F55 being used with any sort of frequency in a Hollywood feature the way the Genesis still is. I don't know why I have this impression, but time will tell.

For the record, the F65 was released just a few months ago and there are already at least 9 movies shot or being shot on it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top