F3: Does buying a used F3 makes sense now that the FS700 is getting updated?

A toy? Really? I haven't held it in my paws yet... What's so toy-ish about it? Regarding this topic I was reffering only to IQ not the form factor.
And lasikdenver I wasn't trying to be judgemental towards duke purely out of stupidity - I just got pissed as the same answers were getting posted over and over again no matter what I wrote. Surely if somebody doesn't want to be a part of a speculative thread they don't need to post in it saying that "this is only speculation so no need talking about it" and " I looove my F3, it creates suuuch beautiful images"... I mean seriously!?? :):):)

And I don't care for any of the two cameras, really, I don't. I just wanted to get some opinions and all I got is that people looove theirs F3 and that theirs no point in speculating. I did like Dan's post however...
 
KINOKS said:
A toy? Really? I haven't held it in my paws yet... What's so toy-ish about it? Regarding this topic I was reffering only to IQ not the form factor.
And lasikdenver I wasn't trying to be judgemental towards duke purely out of stupidity - I just got pissed as the same answers were getting posted over and over again no matter what I wrote. Surely if somebody doesn't want to be a part of a speculative thread they don't need to post in it saying that "this is only speculation so no need talking about it" and " I looove my F3, it creates suuuch beautiful images"... I mean seriously!?? :):):)

And I don't care for any of the two cameras, really, I don't. I just wanted to get some opinions and all I got is that people looove theirs F3 and that theirs no point in speculating. I did like Dan's post however...
Click to expand...

No on cares whether you speculate on what the FS700 will have or not. But people do care if you assert any camera is dead when it doesn't match the facts. No one who askes a question should mind discussing facts.

We also generally try not to call each other names as that just starts flame wars which has killed many an otherwise good board. That's all I have to say about it.
 
Last edited:
Duke I really don't have time for this. I wasn't calling you or anybody else names. I don't mind discussing facts ass long as they are in the right direction okey? If for instance I ask
"is the FS700 going to surpass in some way the F3" I don't need an answer "I still love my F3, it crates beautiful images" or "no need to talk about this as it's purely speculation" okey? Get it? Look really I have better things to do. Your answer was again misleading, I wasn't calling anybody names and if you don't care if I speculate about this then don't write here! Jeezzz
If my posts are brief and sharp it's because you made me, don't make me the aggressor in this matter, please. This is also the last thing I'll write regarding this matter.

I am still open to a constructive discussion about my original question though...
 
Well said.


i might also add that there is more to this than just a comparison of specifications. The simple fact is that 4k is a serious resource hog. Diskspace, processing power etc are significantly higher than with 2k/HD and unless your production has money to burn this is something you really need to think through. Not to mention that outside of the living rooms of the 1%, some post facilities and a few theaters no one can show 4k at full res...

Oh, and then there are the actors for whom 4k is a nightmare, unless they have the skin of a 16 year old virgin. I find it ironic that everyone has a har*on for 4k and then they end up having to shoot with diffusion filters, vintage lenses or soften the image in post, because the producer and talent freak out when they can see every flaw on their aging faces.

So the term 'obsolete' is a loaded word when comparing the two camera. Yes, the F700 may have some more 'current' specs, but you really need to ask yourself if they benefit you and your production. And unless I am reading this incorrectly it appears to output 8bit in a 10 or 12 bit wrapper.




Duke M. said:
Because at this point it's all speculation. Your trying to compare what the F3 does now, bigger dynamic range, S-Log, low light, etc. with what the FS700 might do later. That and specs on paper don't necessarily mean image quality. The Red One has great specs on paper, but the Alexa (and the F3) blow it out of the water on image quality.

Some specs on paper don't make much difference in real life:

1) RAW: People have been doing beautiful color correcton on video without RAW for years. RAW gives you more latitude, but it isn't a requirement if you expose correctly. The owners of these cameras usually expose pretty well. (Admittedly there is always that one shot...)

2) 2K: The difference between 2k and 1080p is rather miniscule. Most award winning digital moves (Avatar, Slum Dog Millionaire, Benjamin Button, Star Wars, etc.) were shot in 1080p and many more have 1080p inserts that you don't even notice.

3) 4K: A picture is a little sharper in 4k, but stories are not told in resolution. (Frankly I was disappointed that I could see the makeup in the closeups of The Hobbit.)

On the other hand for the F3:

a) Dynamic range: Increased DR lets you see more and is more like the human eye/brain combination. It lets the audience immerse themselves.

b) Low Light: If you can see more in low light you can tell more of the story with moods. (Dark and somber, scary, sad, etc.)

c) Roll off: Skin tones and highlight roll off are two of the really strong points of image quality on the F3 with S-Log. It's very Alexa like. It seems artistic and organic.

d) S-Log and 10bit: F3 has it, but Canon, FS700, etc don't. How it's implimented on data coming off that particular sensor makes a difference.

In addition, firmware has been anounced for both the F3 and FS700, but no one is sure what it will exactly be. Rumors have a habit of being wrong. As of right now, people call an F3 a "baby Alexa." They don't call the FS700 that. Why? Different sensor, different codec, different processor, who knows what else, but you're a bit premature claiming anything either way. But even if the FS700 becomes the great must have camera it won't make the F3 a bad camera. The F3 produces really nice images.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
This is now on Sonys page:

The NEX-FS700UK started as a 4K sensor Super 35mm camcorder capable of a vast array of high frame rate (HFR) and recording options to the superb on-board AVC-HD recording capability. The NEX-FS700U now features an upgrade that enables full 2K RAW up to 240fps or 4K RAW up to 60fps recording to Sony’s AXS-R5 RAW recorder. This “open architecture” update also enables 2K & 4K recordings onto compatible third party recorders.
Upgraded NEX-FS700UK camcorders now record Linear RAW with 12-bit precision to the HXR-IFR5 RAW interface plus AXS-R5 memory recorder (sold separately). This system enables continuous, FULL 2K resolution recordings at: 23.98, 25, 30, 50, 60, 100, 120, 200 & 240fps. It is also capable of continuous FULL 4K RAW recoding at: 23.98, 25, 30, 50 & 60fps. This system can also record 120fps at 4K resolution in 4 second “bursts” that result in 20 second at 24fps. It is possible to simultaneously record to the AVCHD format (except HFR mode).
Convergent Design’s Odyssey 7Q records 2K, uncompressed: Cinema DNG up to 240fps and 4K DPX up to 30fps when connected to the FS700U.
The upgrade also enhances other key creative controls; increasing the camera’s ISO range; from 320 ~ 20,000 to 320 ~ 64,000. It also adds S Log2 and 800% 709 gamma curves widely enhancing its exposure latitude HD capability.

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/ssr/product-NEXFS700UK/

This two things got my attention:
1. increasing the camera’s ISO range; from 320 ~ 20,000 to 320 ~ 64,000.
2. It also adds S Log2 and 800% 709 gamma curves widely enhancing its exposure latitude HD capability.
 
Last edited:
the one thing that holds my attention is the bit depth output. from what Dan is saying, it sounds like 8 bit is 8 bit, no matter what recorder you dump it into.
 
Well form factor is a big deal to me, and in that department the FS cameras are stunning in their bad design. Especially the 700 with that new recorder.
Somebody in Slovenia needs to back off on the coffee...jeesh.
 
MPB said:
the one thing that holds my attention is the bit depth output. from what Dan is saying, it sounds like 8 bit is 8 bit, no matter what recorder you dump it into.
Click to expand...

From what Dan is saying, with the 7Q they will take the 12bit raw output (I'm guessing from either the 4k or 2k stream?)) and down convert it to 10bit DNxHD. The 1080p output of the FS700 will still be 8bit, but as long as you have the Sony upgrade, the 7Q, their SSD cards and the FS700 7Q option, you can record a true 10bit HD image.

Or maybe I'm wrong, but that's how I understood it.

Also, in my eyes, the FS700 is no more or less a toy then the F3. The design of the FS700 is pretty bad, but the F3 design is nothing to write home about either. I use both on rigs, with external monitors, so there is really no difference in usability for me. The F3 feels just as plastic like to me as the FS700. However, in it's current (or previous, as it seems like upgrades our happening) the FS700 image did not compare to the F3's. So let's see what happens after the upgrade. If it has the F3 image with all of it's included feature, I will most likely never rent an F3 again.
 
Cory Braun said:
From what Dan is saying, with the 7Q they will take the 12bit raw output (I'm guessing from either the 4k or 2k stream?)) and down convert it to 10bit DNxHD. The 1080p output of the FS700 will still be 8bit, but as long as you have the Sony upgrade, the 7Q, their SSD cards and the FS700 7Q option, you can record a true 10bit HD image.

Or maybe I'm wrong, but that's how I understood it.
Click to expand...

That's how I understand it to, but if this is true than that means that the path to 10bit video is going to be rather expensive. And it means that it won't be even close to a used F3s price range.

Cory Braun said:
If it has the F3 image with all of it's included feature, I will most likely never rent an F3 again.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I was thinking. BUT if the rental price for such a setup (FS700 + 7Q with FS700 option) is going to be let's say 2x much as for an F3 package I don't think I'd want to rent it either. Sure I'd rent it for the high frame rates but for the 25p 10bit 1080p, no, I will probably be able to rent a cheaper F3 for that. Probably, will see.
 
Osslund said:
I think you can't compare FS cameras to F series cameras. They are aimed at different users.
Click to expand...

So, that's it? End of discussion? Hahaha:) Don't be so dogmatic, I don't see a reason why we wouldn't compare the two if IQ is comparable.
If IQ from FS700 is going to be in the same ballpark as F3s, that makes them more or less usable for the same projects which in end makes them comparable. Yes?

Were Sony aimed these products in the end really doesn't matter that much. I personally - with these new upgrades in mind - see the FS700 as the baby F5 not the F3.
 
F3 is not a baby F5 it's a baby F35 or as many refers to it a mini Alexa. If the FS700 would be equal to the F3 in IQ surely it also would have been considered a mini Alexia, but it's not.
I'm sure the FS700 with Slog and raw recording will look very much alike the F5, just like F3 and F5 are very similar in achieved IQ. They all are Sony cameras with the Sony look.
 
So we agree then? We can compare them? Good, so the Sony upgrade is already happening. I'm anxious to see a comparison between the 700 and F3.
But again if the 7Q with it's FS700 module will be the only way to record 10bit video than I answered my own question: to get quality 10bit video it's still cheaper to buy a used F3 (if you don't need super-slow, 4k and raw). And not only cheaper it's also a more compact package (not everyone wants a huge monitor in front of their rig - me included).
 
KINOKS said:
So, that's it? End of discussion?
Click to expand...

no, that constitutes discussion. you seem to be having a hard time with the idea that people who contradict you are actively engaging in the subject you asked about.
 
No, it was a blunt statement that did not invite further discourse and as such I reacted to it.
 
The thing with the F3 it looks excellent even by just using the internal recording and sure better than what the FS700 does in camera. If you want to get 95% of the quality within the F3 you just have to add a Hyperdeck Shuttle 2. With the FS700 this is a much more complicated and costly add on to achieve something in line with the output of the F3. I also find S-log to provide me with pretty much as good footage as raw recording but with the advantage of how fast you work with S-log in post compared to a raw workflow.

Maybe S-log on the FS700 will work as good with internal recording as the F3. Who knows.

Raw is certainly the most flexible option but in most cases S-log works just as good. I'm amazed of how far you can push S-log footage as long as you expose for S-log.
 
Isn't slog essentially uncompressed debayered raw?

I can say this much, I just watched a friend spend DAYS transcoding raw out of an Epic in to something he could actually work on and I did not envy him.


I did vfx on a few summer popcorn movies that were shot on the F35 in slog and had no reason to complain about the footage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top