F55: Buy decision : AMIRA vs F55

Cristian Mihai

Cristian Mihai

Well-known member
Hello guys.
First , you need you need to know that i have no experience in the cameras. As a photograher i am gonna start a small production business with talented people very soon. Beeing a lot of money involved please help me decide.

AMIRA or F55 ?
We want a versatile camera, good, portable , cheap ( sort of ) you know....what we all want :-) .
We want to be able to shoot music clips, advertising from medium to high end local market, food and beverage table shoots. I had been gathering equipment in the last 2 years ( lights, lenses, HD wireless transmitters, grips ) and i have left for the end the cameras and rigs, FF, gimbals etc. There was no purpose in buying a camera from the beginning.
In the last 10 days i've read all i could about these 2 cameras and i have some very specific concerns that will be highly apreciated if explained :

SONY F55 just seems at a first glance a more complicated decision : you need to buy a lot of other things to start the camera and another ones to get all from the camera like RAW recorder and high frame rate.

AMIRA on the other hand comes in a more complete package ( from my calculations very similar price to F55 after you add the viewfinder, the recorder, a monitor, media etc ) but it lack RAW. Both cameras are capable of 4K and both camera have nice imagine.

ABOUT THE IMAGE i kind of like both but would prefer an AMIRA ( dont ask me why, is just my photo background that is deciding ). Many ARRI supporters claim the very easy use of files coming from their cameras, very well accepted by the editing studios etc. The F55 has an issue here ? Is not accepted or people not so open to edit F55 files ? How important is to shot RAW for the work i have described above ? Would AMIRA have a big minus for not having RAW ? Working for commercial you control the lighting, compositing and you are not expecting to have perfect conditions so you should be able to have a already good image from beggining. The PRORES from ARRI is not best suited for commercials editing work ?

For me it comes to the fact that F55 files are said to be more complicated and not the best looking compared to ARRI, and AMIRA which has nice output image but lacks RAW. PLEASE HELP

PS. and another issue : GLOBAL SHUTTER vs ELECTRONIC SHUTTER of the AMIRA
 
Last edited:
Unless you have a pressing need for global shutter or raw recording I'd suggest you go for the Amira. The Arris are far more popular cameras for mid-high end production the world over. The image from the Arri has better mojo out of the box and the workflow is much simpler too (drag and drop ProRes files compared to the folder structures required by the Sony codecs).
 
At this level id go to a dealer and try em. (Both Sony and Red have been very accommodating to me)

It is worth remembering that the F55 is somewhat restricted on frame rate at 4k

Also worth a visit is the Panny Varicam which looks to be fantastic (for example doing sound and slomo and 4k and lutted proxies at the same time!)

Of course Red must be in the running too.

S
 
Red seems even more complicated and cost of bateeries scared me so i passed. I have no opportunity to demo any of the cameras.
 
Cristian Mihai said:
ABOUT THE IMAGE i kind of like both but would prefer an AMIRA ( dont ask me why, is just my photo background that is deciding ). Many ARRI supporters claim the very easy use of files coming from their cameras, very well accepted by the editing studios etc. The F55 has an issue here ? Is not accepted or people not so open to edit F55 files ? How important is to shot RAW for the work i have described above ? Would AMIRA have a big minus for not having RAW ? Working for commercial you control the lighting, compositing and you are not expecting to have perfect conditions so you should be able to have a already good image from beggining. The PRORES from ARRI is not best suited for commercials editing work ?

For me it comes to the fact that F55 files are said to be more complicated and not the best looking compared to ARRI, and AMIRA which has nice output image but lacks RAW. PLEASE HELP
Click to expand...

If you come from photos just using raw is easy. but a good non raw codec can still make pretty pictures if you learn a new post journey.

IMO if you see bad work from the F55 then that is because the operator is bad - the files are pretty sweet like 50% the flex of raw.

To me the weakness of the F55 is that 4k stops at 60p (? maybe check this)

To take XAVC from the F55 is one transcoding step to make them the same as the Amera - not so bad - also F55 may soon (or now) have a pro res option (at a cost)

To some extent you don't need F55 viewfinder and stuff.. you can use something like a SmallHD DP7 to keep the cost down.

Also weight - the F55 is lighter I think.. and that will count on a gimbal steadicam or crane.

Personally to me the Amera only really shines maybe for documentary tv shows (where a tight pack with a cabrio lens shines) - for more varied work I think it is not so special for the money and of course the codec is good.. but it is not raw.

F55 has odd media choices* which can cost so I think maybe an Epic is worth considering too.

*the raw recorder only records raw so you might need two sets of cards!

S
 
Cristian Mihai said:
@ Morgan

You are talking about this : http://www.digitalmedia-world.com/C...meras-expand-xavc-prores-dnxhd-workflows.html ?
Click to expand...

Apple ProRes & Avid DNxHD OnBoard Recording


yes it is an optional circuit board for the camera.. I think $1500USD or suchlike.

======

Red batteries - most of these cameras will need Vlock batteries which seems the same cost for all. Budget about $2000 for chargers and 4 batts.

Red do not need propriety batts the cam has 12volt input like the other cams- but Red solution may be neater.

-----------

BTW - I come from stills (so probably we speak the same workflow language!) but have only minimally used these cameras (alexa red f5) - I own an FS7 which is also a very good camera at 50% of the cost - the file management is similar to the F5

------

I think it is very important to meet the cameras in person!
Working alone I did not buy
Red.. too heavy too slow ISO (before dragon sensor) raw only eats cards (no good for low end work)
F5.. ergonomics a bit crappy and too many card configurations/costs
Personally I also would not want Amera as it is too heavy to work alone.

I have FS7 because it is tidy and small and light - budget did not push me to the cheaper camera - but my style of work did.

--
Also the canon C500 and Odessey7q is a very very very good camera getting cheap fast.

S
 
Last edited:
Agree with Sam, if you're really contemplating these two cameras try both first.

Go see in person the ergonomics, weight, workflow on set you would be dealing with. Also get some footage from each camera and see in post how it works with Sony Look Profiles (Sony LUTS) or other 3rd party LUTs, or just grading the files from scratch. A little while ago Sony released two pieces of software called Catalyst Browse and Catalyst Prepare. Think of these as "developing" software similar to Adobe Lightroom. These are not "full grading suites" but instead an easy way to look through your footage on hard disk or still on media cards and create proxy files or new versions of your files in perhaps a different codec like ProRes. It also allows you to apply a Sony Look Profile and also do some color adjustments; gain, gamma, lift, exposure, tint, color temperature, etc.. I wrote a review last month on it here on DVX if you want more information. DVXUSER.com Sony Catalyst Browse & Catalyst Prepare review comparison and write up

There is also Sony RAW viewer software which can be used similarly to control the images and output to different files. Debayering happens here from the RAW footage and you can if you wish still output to different video formats as well as apply LUTs, select color space, etc.. It's pretty good actually and its free.


With the F55 on-set you are can enable monitoring LUTs if desired and there are not too many issues around this. In custom mode right now (where you can adjust actual camera ISO, and other camera settings) you can not use LUTs if for example you selected slog gamma. It's only in CineEI mode where you can select a monitoring LUT and in this mode the camera is LOCKED to the native ISO of 1250 ISO (for the F55). Any gain, etc.. has to be done in post. Again you are stuck shooting 1250 ISO no matter what.


On the post side of things, more software is supporting the F55's 4K XAVC MXF files and 4K RAW files. You can check a thread I started on the with the latest status on XAVC & Sony RAW software compatibil​ity (except i haven't updated it in a while but still may help): XAVC & Sony RAW software compatibility. But your friends are right, the format from AMIRA (ProRes) works in practically all software. With Sony you may have to transcode footage first for convenience sake depending on who's getting the footage. One nice thing with the F55 is that it can record proxy files at the same time as recording internal 4K XAVC or on the R5 RAW 16-bit recorder. I believe the proxy file format is mpg when recording 4K internally so if you are counting on round-trip workflow process in post using Davinci Resolve you don't have to worry as much about Sony file compatibility as much because most NLE's work with the mpg format - you would edit the proxy files and later just link up the edit with the originals files in Davinci Resolve. Davinci Resolve has supported Sony XAVC and RAW files for several versions now. If you record 4K RAW, I'll have to check but I think the proxy file format then becomes HD XAVC, so you get back into potential compatibility issues and you'd likely have to resort to transcoding.

By the way this month the ProRes & DnxHD codec board should be coming out for the F5/F55 camera so may be an option to consider if you are really worried about file compatibility. Note that it's going to likely be limited to HD resolution only, but I've heard that 4444 will be one of the options.


Regarding color science. I'm the guy with the Sony F55 on the forums who says other cameras better color science and look nicer out of the box. I've spent a lot of time learning how to get better images from the F55 mainly because of slog and how to detangle it to a good enough base to work from. I am not working at any major color laboratory like Techincolor so I don't have the training, knowledge, or skills that these companies have spent years honing and can share with each other. In many ways the newer Sony Look Profiles (LUTS) have helped put some new blood into the color of Sony cameras, and also the fact that last year slog3 was introduced which is pretty well identical to the cineon gamma curve which is also similar to Canon's C-Log and ARRI's Log-C. This makes it easy for Sony footage in slog3 gamma to fit into existing workflows many are already familiar with. Many agree that slog3 is easier to grade and looks better than slog2.


As for what you need on the F55 to get going? At the very basic level you'll need the body, a viewfinder, R5 RAW recorder if you want 16-bit RAW and 240fps. This excludes v-mount battery and SXS media. You can shoot just like that, just add your glass.


By the way this thread might help you as well:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?332572-F5-VS-F55-VS-F65-what-should-i-get
 
Last edited:
My apologies if this post is drifting slightly off topic. I won't pursue this any further in this thread. Regarding your compatibility list, Dennis, Avid just released version 8.3 for Media Composer. v8.3 can injest 4K footage as HD, or work in a native 4k format. v8.3 can also AMA link to XAVC or Sony RAW footage quite easily. Also new in this version is the ability to select a proxy format for the timeline, allowing real time playback, much like Resolve can do. Certainly, one's NLE workflow is a small part of the equation, at least for myself, in picking a camera.

The elephant in the room which no one seems to be discussing, is the downscaling algorithm used by a particular NLE. Given that cameras are now capable of acquiring in 4K, but, the delivery format dujour is HD, what downscaling algorithms are NLE's using; and, which algorithm yields the best quality. I would assume Lancos is the right choice, but, not all NLE's make it known what they're using.
 
Thanks Cuervo, I will gladly update that page.. was hoping someone would chime up on any changes with it. I can't possibly keep up with a dozen software packages :cool:

[Edited]

And speaking of scaling 4K to HD, the Amira although it uprezzes to 4K only achieves this by using a larger area of the sensor which will increase your angle of view and hence produce a slightly shallower depth of field. It's not a bad thing to get near 4K but point is there is some crop factor going on. If you don't use ARRI's Open gate mode to accomplish "4K" then your effective pixel count is 2880 x 1620.
 
Last edited:
Good point that I had not thought about, Dennis. Since real 4K is more like a 6K sensor, exactly WHAT upscaling algorithm is being used in each camera? I suspect it's largely a function of the camera's processor capability; and, what's the native sensor size? Before I bought my F5, I briefly looked at the Ursa and Cion. But, understanding what the native sensor used in each of these was, I looked elsewhere. GIGO, so, the final output quality starts at the acquisition point, i.e. the sensor.
 
Last edited:
PRO for SONY : S16 K2 crop ( i have the Ziess Cine Zoom 10-100mm 2.4 ).

Many people claim Sony has a video look, and Arri is film like. OK, that seems to be well accepted by everybody. BUT, my concern is : i see many of TV commercial that have nothing to do with film look, all sharp video. As a photographer i was able to make from a sharp but balanced image , an image after my wish, be it film look like or not. We will work on nice projects i hope and will have a colorist at hand. My photo camera a digital Mamiya did not had the best glass or the best looking image but post production was always done in such a way to compensate for. Isn't true for F55 also ? I imagine that the Arri look is wanted because od easy workflow for those who really are very busy all day long, shooting and shooting. Will not be my case ! It happend when i was the photographer also : Hasselblad vs Mamiya. I bought the Mamiya, invested the rest of the money in lights and gobos, grip etc. Whit those i was able to make better photos than a local competitor that had the Hassy, and more contracts also. Other concern is that Arri seems to be an investment ( also for resale ), meanwhile Sony has a bad reputation protecting their customers and launchid new and new products every year.
 
Well in open gate mode you get 3414 purely across. They aim for UHD so the final result is 3840 across.

It looks like a small multiplying factor. But I wonder about such math.. lots of decimal places.
 
Cristian Mihai said:
PRO for SONY : S16 K2 crop ( i have the Ziess Cine Zoom 10-100mm 2.4 ).
Whit those i was able to make better photos than a local competitor that had the Hassy, and more contracts also. Other concern is that Arri seems to be an investment ( also for resale ), meanwhile Sony has a bad reputation protecting their customers and launchid new and new products every year.
Click to expand...

You make a good point. It's difficult to swallow a >$30k investment that gets superceded a year after its release. And it's definitely worth considering how much value there is in telling a prospective client that you're shooting an Arri vs. a Sony. In some circles, there is a benefit to saying "Arri". I really hope Sony is reading this thread and realizing the value in developing a product, rather than dumping it for a new model every year.
 
Since neither camera will get you 'real' 4k (AKA distinct Red, Green and Blue information for each pixel) due to the Bayer pattern natural of the sensor, I don't think it matters all that much ultimately, the bigger deal about 4k on the F55 and upscaled UHD on the Amira (IMO) is that clients can get '4k' when they demand it.
 
"Many people claim Sony has a video look, and Arri is film like."

I just feel that is simply a question of the LUT used in post - Slog3 is very flexible - really you can make it look any how you want!


 
Regarding investment, is there really such a thing anymore?

This March the F55 will be 2 years old, new models probably in the works, and ARRI behind the scenes is probably working on a dragon slayer 6K or 8K camera.

I can tell you that when I did my ROI on the F55 I certainly fudged the numbers by at least $10k I knew I'd be hard pressed to make up. I just wanted the damn camera.
 
morgan_moore said:
"Many people claim Sony has a video look, and Arri is film like."

I just feel that is simply a question of the LUT used in post - Slog3 is very flexible - really you can make it look any how you want!
Click to expand...


I disagree. ARRI Alexa / Amira has something like 1/8 or 1/4 low con on the sensor and on top of that I almost guarantee they are doing a double read of the sensor to get a better rendition of the dynamic range particularly the highlights.

No LUT can do this.

Ask Nate about the electronics, color science, and other mojo advantages of ARRI and I'm sure he'll agree. Same as F35 was a $250k camera, there was a lot going on in the electronics processing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top