F35: As good as the original Sony F35 but this cam shoots in 4K

Does anyone here have access to a Teranex Express and can try an upscale on it? Would be awesome to share the same clips so we can compare software upscalers vs hardware variants!
 
Quite a testament to the F35 that people would rather upscale it to 4K than going with one of the several "native 4K" options current being sold.
 
AAveum, I come with great shame and disgust with myself this week after the Easter holiday.

Last week I had negotiated a deal on an F35 and over the weekend after playing with various URSA mini 4.6k test footage and clips in post decided to jump ship.

Sure there is no global shutter that I wish it did have, but it's 4K'ish, the color science really impresses me (especially compared to my F55 which costs 7 times more) and it's around the size of a FS7 and shoots internally (stupidly to CF cards).

The F35 is the best filmic camera out there for the money no doubt, but each must look at the pro/cons all around which is never easy and can be difficult.


Grade 1


Grade 2


BMD film


Original frames can be downloaded here: http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?16780-Grade-My-DNG-4-6K-Mini









https://vimeo.com/160377817







 
Last edited:
starcentral said:
How often is rolling shutter interfering with commercial, or feature film work that a camera like Alexa absolutely can't be used? it's really not end of world ... but everyone likes to pretend it is.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any pretending. Rolling shutter is a real problem, which puts a real limitation in your work. It's just a matter of standards. Because somebody may be willing to tolerate it doesn't diminish the problem. It comes down to the old concept of good enough, which is not something I like to impose on myself as any sort of standard.

An often defense for rolling shutter is the ARRI Alexa. I always see it brought up in rolling shutter conversations. It goes from it "doesn't matter" it is a rolling shutter camera to how one can't see rolling shutter artifacts in it's footage. It has a faster rolling shutter. But the fact is you definitely can see rolling shutter artifacts in Alexa footage. It ranges from the type which can go unnoticed if you are not looking for it to the type that jumps on your face. But it is there. Just to use a readily at hand example:

rsn_rollingshutter_terminator_1.png
rsn_rollingshutter_terminator_2.png



Another factor that gets ignored when using the Alexa as an example of rolling shutter not being a problem is how often the Alexa Studio is used. How often it's used for shots where rolling shutter is more evident. Skyfall is often mentioned as a good example of rolling shutter behavior by the Alexa. But that film used the Alexa Studio extensively. Cars shots, action, quite heavy use of the studio version of the camera, which as we know has a mechanical shutter. If the rolling shutter wouldn't be objectionable the much heavier and cumbersome studio version wouldn't come out of the case. You do have those who don't care and will do all with the rolling shutter version, like the examples above. But that again is a matter of standards rather than any indication of the severity of the problem.

I would rather work with a 12-stops camera with a global shutter than a 14-stops camera with a rolling shutter. I can always add a fixture, reflector or flag to get around dynamic range. Anything over 10-stops is plenty for feature work. If one can't make do with that he can't make do with anything. But in a shot like the above I'm at a loss with a rolling shutter camera. Cars, trains, planes, guns, flashes, police lights, just too many things that often pop into a feature film. Why make your life harder?

So I think it's only fair to speak for yourself, rather than implying people are just pretending rolling shutter is a real problem. It is.
 
Good insight about the Alexa Studio. I wasn't aware of its predominant use in high action feature film work. Makes sense.

Yes speaking for myself, even with the F55 I can say I like to have it but wouldn't go around telling people that "man it makes such a big difference that I just have to have it". By pretending I just think there may be a lot of people on DVX who overstate it's importance when in reality they are shooting talking head interviews or music videos - not fast action race cars, explosions or Jackie Chan style martial arts.

There are also downsides to global shutter like less light on photosites, hence noise. And from shooting my F55 a few times there were flashes that were completely missed because they happened in-between frames (imagine that) because the flashes were not long enough. Not the camera's fault but just saying GS isn't a catch all solution to every problem.

Anyway sorry that my post may have generalized it and called people pretenders.
 
Last edited:
starcentral said:
Good insight about the Alexa Studio. I wasn't aware of its predominant use in high action feature film work. Makes sense.

Yes speaking for myself, even with the F55 I can say I like to have it but wouldn't go around telling people that "man it makes such a big difference that I just have to have it". By pretending I just think there may be a lot of people on DVX who overstate it's importance when in reality they are shooting talking head interviews or music videos - not fast action race cars, explosions or Jackie Chan style martial arts.

There are also downsides to global shutter like less light on photosites, hence noise. And from shooting my F55 a few times there were flashes that were completely missed because they happened in-between frames (imagine that) because the flashes were not long enough. Not the camera's fault but just saying GS isn't a catch all solution to every problem.

Anyway sorry that my post may have generalized it and called people pretenders.
Click to expand...


Well, I definitely "go around telling people that "man it makes such a big difference that I just have to have it". Because it does. This is even before speaking of the impact it has in the general motion of the image. I'm speaking only about artifacts. If we get into rendering of motion in general it gets even more involved. Many comment about the F35 nice "motion cadence". The shutter has everything to do with that. It all depends on "how low you want to cut it."

For me I gotta have a global shutter. Specially if we are talking about a production camera. Meaning a artistic/feature/narrative/drama/commercial tool. For interviews, like you said it matters way less, if at all. In scenarios where image quality and fidelity take a second seat to immediacy of capture, such as documentary and news, it also matters little. Although I don't agree it doesn't matter for music videos. I think it does. There are a lot of common scenarios in a music video where a global shutter would be a life saver, if you really care about how your image is rendered. Music video fall in the field of "production".

There are obvious compromises with global shutter as there are with anything. Industrial design is always about compromise. But I think it's easier to live with the global shutter compromises and they are also easier to nullify. I don't want to be a smart Alec here, but complains of noise? Just add more light. Less dynamic range? Just better control your light. Less sensitivity? I know I sound like a broken record, but, light. You won't even know these "compromises" were there when you watch your footage. But with a rolling shutter and the above shot for example, short of faking the gun muzzle flash, which always looks fake, there is not much else you can do. So that compromise impacts the final result way more than if you just "add light" to your global shutter.

Missing the flash is very different than rendering a half frame. There is a reason slow burning blanks have been used for decades in film production when doing gun shots. Even if film cameras have a mechanical shutter.

Of course, in essence or in many ways a mechanical shutter is a type of rolling shutter. More like a sliding shutter really. But that's off topic. It still "works" for our purposes.

I think what bothers me the most about the whole "good enough" culture is that you live long enough with it and it becomes the standard. It makes people lazy, lowers the standards and drags everything down. I know I'm not the first to bring this up or even in these terms and won't be the last. But are there enough bringing it up? The frames above are from Terminator Genisys, a $155 million movie that couldn't be bothered to use an Alexa Studio for that shot. And this is not an isolated case. There are so many high budget movies shot on the Alexa or RED with rolling shutter artifacts all over. I guess this is acceptable. But Netflix wants only 4K cameras, even though they can barely sustain a real HD stream at times. Things are just skewed.

As to the Ursa Mini 4.6K, what can I say? It's not even in the same league. Totally different concept and market placement. I understand that every time a new camera is announced people get excited and start going overboard. At least till that camera becomes old news and reality sinks in. But we still need to keep things in perspective.

But if I would be considering that I would first go with a Varicam LT. At least it has better sensitivity, the dual ISO feature and is a way better camera. Not to mention better support. I know it costs more but it is still affordable and you get what you pay for.

But I don't see the point of comparing an Ursa to cameras on the level of the F35, Varicam 35, F65 or Alexa. It's like getting any two cars off the street and comparing them on the sole ground that both have four wheels.
 
I still have problems with Ursa color when we are talking about a comparison to the mighty CCD. It still has that weirdness that screams video. Maybe some samples dont show this as much, but its like the F55 in some ways. It looks kinda cinema-ish at times but most or many other times it is just "off" somehow. The F35 seems to capture that look under a much higher variety of conditions, and this isn't even going into the shutter issue.
 
I agree nothing renders quite nicely like the almighty F35.

First I cancelled decision on F35, but after this latest discovery happening with the new URSA mini shipments, I am holding off on it too and going to look at F35 again. Lucky there are a few F35's that have popped up for sale in the last little while.


starcentral said:
So I'm going to hold off on acquiring a mini ursa 4.6K until this magenta corner cast sorts itself out...

Below is white piece of paper over lens mount test.

More details here: http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/v...id=2dec6d729cfc3df6dc893de465bd1495&start=300

file.php
Click to expand...
 
starcentral said:
I agree nothing renders quite nicely like the almighty F35.

First I cancelled decision on F35, but after this latest discovery happening with the new URSA mini shipments, I am holding off on it too and going to look at F35 again. Lucky there are a few F35's that have popped up for sale in the last little while.
Click to expand...

Haha you can't decide what you want. Cameras come and cameras go and F35 still king. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
Dennis you are torturing yourself, I can tell by your presence here you are really in tune with what the F35 can offer and you are ready to get your own. If you don't buy one now you will in 6 months.
 
so a plug in that can basically turn my F3 in to a 4k camera with some post magic that will actually look good? And yeah its only 8 bit but if I record in 10 bit and color grade then up scale at the end of my workflow that should fix problems for my use I would imagine. If this works out well I don't see my F3 going anywhere any time soon.....again because it's already an awesome camera.
 
macgregor said:
The F35 is capable of more than 12 stops. I know the early brochures said that but the camera is capable of 14 stops.
Click to expand...

Yes I know that. It's capable of more than 12-stops. I wasn't talking about the F35. I just picked 12 and 14 at random as a example to say I would exchange some dynamic range for a solid global shutter. If we are talking 12-stops and on, it's more than enough.

Sony has been very conservative about many things concerning the F35 in their marketing material.

Technically it's a HD camera because they dump the info from the "6K" sensor into a 1080p container. But if you point it at a chart you will find it resolves around 2.5K actually. So it could have easily been a true 2K camera, in a world where most HD cameras weren't real HD and pretty much all but a couple of cameras today are not real 4K. The proposed 2K mode for the F35 wouldn't even be just a marketing gimmick, had they ever released that firmware update. They could have added a custom recording mode, a sort of "open gate" mode that would record to a 2.5K format and it would still be legit. Although Sony would never do that since there is no such standard and they are Sony, a broadcast company. But it would have prolonged the commercial life of the camera and would be a great starting point for a 4K up scale.
 
steve phillipps said:
A 4x price difference is a pretty big gap! And still no global shutter.

Steve
Click to expand...

Sure it costs way more. Like I said you get what you pay for. I feel like I'm repeating myself. But just the higher build quality, better support and way better quality control is already worth as much for any professional. The better ergonomics and controls and the dual ISO only sweetens the deal. If I was looking for a "4k" 35mm camera and willing to live with a rolling shutter, at the moment my choice would be the Varicam.

Blackmagic cameras are OK. But they always come with a catch. I doubt the Ursa 4.6K will be any different. Look at the price. As a matter of fact, it's barely out and people are already starting to find problems with it. You can't cut corners to lower price without compromising quality at some end.

The problem with Blackmagic is that they have locked themselves up in this ultra low budget box. It would be very interesting to see a Blackmagic camera in the $15K bracket. But unfortunately we will probably never see it. People expect Blackmagic to be cheap. Their current customers will most likely not pay for that and with the reputation they have built they will most likely not attract the people who are willing to pay more. It would be a SVX scenario all over again.

Real pity.
 
VinceinLA said:
I still have problems with Ursa color when we are talking about a comparison to the mighty CCD. It still has that weirdness that screams video. Maybe some samples dont show this as much, but its like the F55 in some ways. It looks kinda cinema-ish at times but most or many other times it is just "off" somehow. The F35 seems to capture that look under a much higher variety of conditions, and this isn't even going into the shutter issue.
Click to expand...

Not particularly talking in comparison to the Ursa 4.6K. But this right there sums up really well the advantages of shooting with a F35, and Alexa for that matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top