F55: Buy decision : AMIRA vs F55

starcentral said:
Regarding investment, is there really such a thing anymore?
Click to expand...

Sure there is.. these cameras are very good. I know someone shooting at a high level on a Red One - maybe its only worth a few thousand now but his intelligence was just to stick with it for years and years.

To me an 8bit cam is not an investment but anything with a 'route to raw' can really go to any level of shoot for a very long time.

S
 
cuervo said:
I hope you're right, Sam. I hear rumblings about 6K....gives me the shivers...
Click to expand...

Yep. I think 4k is good enough for any projection.. but as I have started shooting some 4k for HD delivery some options open - I frame well but for example an explosion (!) you dont know how wide to frame, so with oversampling one can allow a load of headroom - had another job (HD) with a dancer on a greenscreen - was trying to frame tight for quality but the dancer kept swinging his arms out of frame - in a 4k-HD environment I would have had space to frame wide.. so I can see the value of 6k for 4k delivery

But a 4k image non SFX will look great for ever.. I mean 2.5k Skyfall was good enough for me to enjoy.

S
 
The Amira is a fantastic camera, no argument there, but if you want the most versatile camera on the market, nothing touches the 5/55. If you think for a second you might need RAW, the Amira is out of the running already.

As far as Sony looking like video, judge for yourself:



Not sure if you have any budget restrictions but here is a huge F55 package with RAW recorder and lots of memory for $37K, retail would be $50k. I cant vouch for the seller but here is the link:
http://community.sony.com/t5/F5-F55/Sony-F55-R5-for-Sale-Los-Angeles/m-p/481077#U481077
 
Last edited:
Late to the game on this one.

Consult with your Pro dealer. Shoot both cameras. Take both through a typical post routine. Look at the finished images.

I think it has already been pointed out that while the Amira shoots ProRes, the F5/55 has a ProRes board option. But native XAVC is understood by PremierePro, FCP X and Avid. So no big deal. I like working with Raw. I also love the Arri images. And I appreciate the depth of control offered by the F55. And the codec options.

But you should experience both cameras to see what works best for you.
 
I had an F55 for almost 2 years, and just sold it and tossed another $28K into the mix to get an Amira because I was tired of Sony not having their act together. Make whatever conclusions you like from that.

To many "can't use this feature when this feature is activated", slow menus, etc etc.

The real pros and cons about 55 vs Amira is not about image quality or ProRes vs raw. It's about usability, speed, and ergos. That said, the Amira is second to nothing in image quality. It still wins. And high end clients will want Arri.

Arri has their act together MUCH better in this regard. Arri is not perfect, but I feel and really know they understand the DPs job better. Arri also has no problem going onto their own forums and being transparent about the abilities and limitations of the camera, in addition to providing answers quickly. I think that is a benefit of having all the people that sell and work on the camera being in one facility with one goal, as opposed to the split Sony organization with R&D and engineering in Japan, and sales and marketing being in New Jersey USA.

The 55 makes a really nice image, and the raw is required to get the most out of it, but the images from the Amira will be on par WITHOUT raw. I.E., You miss a tiny bit of latitude going to XAVC or SR codec on the 55, but you can do outrageous things with the Amira like have a hot light in the frame firing down the barrel and have it roll off perfectly without the attention to detail that making the same look it's best on the 55 would take.

It's really much about where you're coming from. If you're coming from a C100 or 300, the F5/55 will seem like magic. If you routinely work with high end cameras though, the 5/55 might get under your skin.

If you can swing it, get the Amira.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Nate

How is the Arri's electronic shutter compares with the Sony's glogal shutter ? Did you feel any difference, in what occasions have you noticed ? What features from F55 you miss on Amira and please tell me what camera and lenses did you use for the Acura Flight ?
 
To many "can't use this feature when this feature is activated"

I feel your pain about that Nate - more so since I own an FS7. I don't know how many of those gotcha's are unique to the FS7 but it sound like the 5 and 55 have a lot of them also. Its a bit of a drag.

Likewise:

"I feel and really know they understand the DPs job better."

​I often feel like Sony engineers just never bother to talk to DPs and they totally misunderstand how we want to work. Maybe Japanese DP's are different. The whole Cine EI without color balance is a big one. When I tell clients about this they just stare at me and say - "What?" .
I've heard all the arguments about it being just like working with film etc, but ultimately I don't buy it.

I'll stay out of the which cameras to buy though because the Sony's have a lot to recommend them. It would just be nice if Sony had their act together before they release the camera.

 
The thing is these sony cameras have 'a smaller engine' than the more costly cameras which is why they seem to struggle doing everything all at once (luts, HFR, sound, 4k)

They are cheaper and more limited.

My dislike of the Amera is that it is too heavy (and no route to raw) - totally personal or related to the shooting situations.


As for the WB being fixed to three values in cineEI I feel that the OP will be subjecting his work to deep post and he will not be concerned in any way shape or form. If you are used to raw stills there is a possibility that you never touch the WB control on the camera. Although shooting non raw you do of course need to get the temp in the ballpark becuase of the comparitive lack of flex in post.

S
 
Cristian Mihai said:
Thanks Nate

How is the Arri's electronic shutter compares with the Sony's glogal shutter ? Did you feel any difference, in what occasions have you noticed ? What features from F55 you miss on Amira and please tell me what camera and lenses did you use for the Acura Flight ?
Click to expand...

The global shutter is nice to have, but I'm not really missing it either. It was definitely a nice bragging right to shoot a concert and go "look, the flashes are not stripes through the frame!". Now that I'm on the other side of the fence, I have much more important things to be thankful for, I feel?

That Acura spec on my site was shot with F3. Disney Hall portion was even before I paid $3900 for the SLog upgrade, and the boy/field stuff was shot with SLog AFTER I paid $3900, but before they made SLog free (about a 2 month window, for myself). Lens was Red 18-50.
 
morgan_moore said:
The thing is these sony cameras have 'a smaller engine' than the more costly cameras which is why they seem to struggle doing everything all at once (luts, HFR, sound, 4k)

They are cheaper and more limited.
Click to expand...

Agreed very much so.

I think my beef with Sony was, it was presented in Oct 2012 as having so and so features, but then it was admitted that not even all of them would be there upon shipping. It was a good 2 or 3 months AFTER the "debut" that they finally said "oh, no SR codec at shipment" "no 180fps".

Then when they did come, each one had a "but". SR but no over cranking. LUTs but no overcranking. Over cranking but aliasing over 60fps. Completely half-assed.

Then the F5 fustercluck. I paid $12K specifically for internal, fast 4K, thinking it would be needed come 2-3 years time. I harbor no ill will to Paul Ream or F5 owners in the slightest. But it's just another artifact of Sony's actions to max-out money at users expense. I was already still sore from the F3 SLog baloney.

The way I see it, Sony has extracted $16K out of me for functionality that they later (and soon, at that) decided should be free or very close to it.

Not once has there ever been a happy surprise with them. All groaners.
 
I didnt buy the F5 because it had no 4k at the time.. so sony double fusterclucked themselves from the top and the bottom - sony cams are compromises.

BUT

For 0-60FPS I dont think you amera is much better than my FS7 at 4X the cost.

My camera also has focus check at my finger accepts a speed booster and is easier to haul around.. and I can go raw for $5k more

S
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
For 0-60FPS I dont think you amera is much better than my FS7 at 4X the cost.
Click to expand...

At a certain point, it's not about the money. I'd pay $120K if it has what I need, my clients expect, I can bill for it, and I can make money off it.

Amira and FS7 are VERY different cameras. The discussion was originally about 2 cams that are an awful lot closer in price, btw.
 
Last edited:
It may or may not be about the money.

Personally Id pick an FS7 8/10 of my jobs over an Amera, and I would pick a fs7-CanonCn17-135 over Amera-primes 9/10 jobs.

(the 'spare' money could go on a decent zoom which also may not depreciate so much)

The reason is size and mass.

Trust me I also get and appreciate the detailing that Arri deliver.

And that is why IMO the OP needs to physically test them out.

S
 
morgan_moore said:
And that is why IMO the OP needs to physically test them out.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Smart move. Maybe I'm just making sure the "hidden gotchas" are known?

I'm sure there's a bright point in all my sour grapes? :-)

BTW, just so nobody thinks I'm a TOTAL snob, I'd take an FS7 and Alpha 24-70 on my next doc gig in a heartbeat. Would be my first choice by a mile, I think.
 
In the higher end market to me the camera purchase choice (over rental) all depends on what your clients want and shoot on most in order to pay that sucker off. If the clients demand RED get a RED if the clients use Arri then get an Amira.

That is the biggest issue for Sony is that they are rarely demanded so owners have had to do their own sales pitch on them which is just one more thing to add for users. Despite being excellent image wise Sony hasn't worked on their Cache like Canon/Red has to make their cams a house hold name. Jobs where people would rather rent the camera you don't own means lost $$ towards return on investment.

It all depends on the client base. I am on the lower end of things in a C300 world and decided to go with an FS7 which might be a little uphill fight against the establishment but most of the stuff I work on I am making the camera choices so I went with the camera that covered more types of work.

In the end purchasing anything for work is all about the work you can get and ROI. If my work was based on shooting for others and collaborative shoots in a big market I would most certainly go with the Amira. It opens many more hire possibilities and that is what pays the bills. Of course I am not anywhere near that level of work so my opinion counts for little.
 
Our OP is a stills photog - where the culture is to own and usually do ones post or at least oversee with great detail. In that environment stuff changes compared to dealing with a director who wants to shoot Red, Arri or whatever - the stills guy often is the director

So the 'I want an Arri' thing might hold less client value - but also as one moves between stills clients and vid clients the 'cache' of the camera sort of swings - my F3 lost jobs over the C300

Stills clients just don't care, maybe they want MFDB which our op has but no-one ever asked "canon or nikon?"!

S
 
Nate Weaver said:
Agreed very much so.

I think my beef with Sony was, it was presented in Oct 2012 as having so and so features, but then it was admitted that not even all of them would be there upon shipping. It was a good 2 or 3 months AFTER the "debut" that they finally said "oh, no SR codec at shipment" "no 180fps".

Then when they did come, each one had a "but". SR but no over cranking. LUTs but no overcranking. Over cranking but aliasing over 60fps. Completely half-assed.

Then the F5 fustercluck. I paid $12K specifically for internal, fast 4K, thinking it would be needed come 2-3 years time. I harbor no ill will to Paul Ream or F5 owners in the slightest. But it's just another artifact of Sony's actions to max-out money at users expense. I was already still sore from the F3 SLog baloney.

The way I see it, Sony has extracted $16K out of me for functionality that they later (and soon, at that) decided should be free or very close to it.

Not once has there ever been a happy surprise with them. All groaners.
Click to expand...

I think i will say pass to Sony because of these 16K you paid. If it happend to you and others it must happen to me also just at a different time. That's something that i dont like and i hope projec like Axiom Gamma to become reality in the nearby future and only the best and customer orientated to stay alive. Never had anything Sony to last for years. Sony was is and will be about the LATEST STUFF. Not bad but latest. Next year another LATEST and so on. While i still trying to recover after spending the money i could get an Nissan GTR second hand. F__K. Wait, what did i just said ? Nissan GTR vs new camera ? What would you choose ?
 
I wouldn't touch a Nissan with a ten ft pole. You can get a screaming deal on a porsche, used. And it's ten times the car....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top