Venice is 6K and full frame, so I guess it's a step up from F65 too ... but, when you think about it, F65 was "real" 4K when Alexa was 2.8K and the majority of productions still went with Alexa. It isn't that Alexa wasn't great but that Sony managed to screw up its own flagship model's workflow, whereas Alexa was "power up and shoot".
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Venice is 6K and full frame, so I guess it's a step up from F65 too ... but, when you think about it, F65 was "real" 4K when Alexa was 2.8K and the majority of productions still went with Alexa. It isn't that Alexa wasn't great but that Sony managed to screw up its own flagship model's workflow, whereas Alexa was "power up and shoot".
G
Guest
Guest
Venice is 6K and full frame, so I guess it's a step up from F65 too ... but, when you think about it, F65 was "real" 4K when Alexa was 2.8K and the majority of productions still went with Alexa. It isn't that Alexa wasn't great but that Sony managed to screw up its own flagship model's workflow, whereas Alexa was "power up and shoot".
Also, that, first things first. Arri went with bang for buck, In the sense that 15stops dynamic range and pushing a subtle complimentary colour scheme went farther than K’s.
2mp was already enough for the bare minimum illusion, but 12stops of clean digital always looked a bit off in the highlights or shadows.
4K and 8K are better, but not noticeably better at normal viewing distances. Arri just chose the wiser battles. Even talking to Arri people, i am not sure why no one else does the dual overlay tech to get that extended dynamic range.
Venice is 6K and full frame, so I guess it's a step up from F65 too ... but, when you think about it, F65 was "real" 4K when Alexa was 2.8K and the majority of productions still went with Alexa. It isn't that Alexa wasn't great but that Sony managed to screw up its own flagship model's workflow, whereas Alexa was "power up and shoot".
The F65 was an 8K camera. Downscaled to 4K.
By the way, the F3 had/has a 4K UHD sensor. Downscaled to FullHD.
It is a misconception that it only has a 2448 pixel sensor. Something I used to hear bandied about.
That was just an unimplemented resolution.
They were proud of that sensor at the time, because technically it was better than Arri's and has 1.5x as much pixel size.
The reason Sony never unlocked it or gave us RAW is because they knew the F5 and F55 were coming.
Even 2K would have increased it's lifespan considerably.
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
The F65 was an 8K camera. Downscaled to 4K.
By the way, the F3 had/has a 4K UHD sensor. Downscaled to FullHD.
It is a misconception that it only has a 2448 pixel sensor. Something I used to hear bandied about.
That was just an unimplemented resolution.
They were proud of that sensor at the time, because technically it was better than Arri's and has 1.5x as much pixel size.
The reason Sony never unlocked it or gave us RAW is because they knew the F5 and F55 were coming.
Even 2K would have increased it's lifespan considerably.
I feel, if canikony gave 2K 10bit or higher to the 1DC, F3, F35, and anything else, they could have prolonged the shelf life of many a camera, maybe even the 5Dmk3. But they didn’t. They didn’t even help the f65 along.
Ah, topic de jour.
F65 sensor had a "Fuji like" arrangement but, here's an excerpt from Adam Wilt's review of eight years ago.
https://www.provideocoalition.com/quick_look_sony_f65_4k_digital_cine_camera/
F65 sensor had a "Fuji like" arrangement but, here's an excerpt from Adam Wilt's review of eight years ago.
The sensor has 20 million photosites overall, of which 18.7 million are active, according to Jeff (compared to a “typical 4K Bayer-pattern sensor” with 8.8 million photosites). The extra photosites are used for dynamic correction of noise, black, output level; partly as a result, the camera has no need for a black balance button (there is an automatic “residual pixel noise” masking function in the camera’s maintenance menu, so any dead or stuck pixel can be fixed).
[Sony quotes the “effective resolution” of the sensor as 8192×2160 (true 8K horizontally, 2x HD vertically), which would be 17.7 million effective photosites, not 18.7 million; I don’t know if the difference is due to a typo sneaking in or due to differing interpretations of the “effective resolution” numbers, which have had a tendency to be somewhat slippery and hard to pin down on diagonally-arrayed sensors; I’ve seen different “effective resolution” numbers for the same ClearVid CMOS HD sensor from different folks at Sony.]
https://www.provideocoalition.com/quick_look_sony_f65_4k_digital_cine_camera/
G
Guest
Guest
Ah, topic de jour.
F65 sensor had a "Fuji like" arrangement but, here's an excerpt from Adam Wilt's review of eight years ago.
https://www.provideocoalition.com/quick_look_sony_f65_4k_digital_cine_camera/
In the HD days, i think the perfect downsample was more important. HD was kind if the minimum threshold, so, a good downsample made a big difference. Above 4K, and sampling or super sampling becomes less crucial. Espcially with streaming, we will never know what combo of setups someone will be viewing, as they could be watching 720p on an 8K tele.
I think Adam now works for Arri. The Mini LF has 4.5K. They just threw everything out the window and went with the market on that one. Haha. And it looks fantastic regardless.
Thanks DLD for that link.