F5: F5 successor revealing (really a F65 successor)

[morgan_moore]

Don't quite understand the statement.
If you have the budget, everyone here (USA- NY in particular) would pick the Alexa mini over the C200 without question. Especially the producers and ac's.
.

The Alexas are a tool that broke down a wall - the ability to shoot film free episodic/actual cinema without the horror of something like an F35 and SR deck which was such a clunk as to yearn for a simple light little 35 film camera.

It was a good trick and gave them a few years.

I guess (because it is just paper) that the C200 can do that trick too. So that trick is gone.

So why use a $40g camera when you can pick a $10g camera that has AF if you want it and is less straining for the gimbal operator or any grip kit.

Because you like chatting in the bar? 'we used an alexa- why dont you come to my hotel room and Ill show it to you' or because of some other rationale (maybe as simple as a solid PL mount or driving your focus from power out of the body?)

(Im assuming a set like this has a DIT that can DIT)

Producers? they do the cash dont they? Why would they want not to quarter their cam rental budget?

 

[Harry Lime]

But now the big beasts bring the same thing (c200) for less than £10k

So Arri must get back into its hole of exotica doing what the big Beasts don't do.

It's not just about spec sheets. That is secondary to the actual image produced by the camera and I have yet to see anyone beat the color science in the Alexa, nor how it handles overexposure.

You can also throw in ergonomics and a UI that was designed for humans and is based on decades of production experience. That's probably why Arri is still selling them as fast as they can make them.

I don't think that a lot of people in the ASC etc stay up at night lamenting the fact that the Alexa is 'only' 2.8-3.2k. If anything that is probably one of the reasons why they choose it. Cinematographers are in the business of shooting people, not test charts and for the most part you want those people to look good.

I find it hilarious that we are locked in this ridiculous arms race for 6k, 8k and beyond, while sales of soft vintage glass and diffusion filters are booming. What's the point of shooting 6k/8k, when you're going to have to 'dumb it down' to something considerably less, so your movie doesn't look like a soap opera or the agent of your aging actor doesn't go ballistic on you because they suddenly look their age or worse?


When Arri finally does upgrade the Alexa it will probably be a gentle bump to 4k to keep people like Netflix or the technology obsessed happy. They will retain or improve upon the exposure latitude of the current sensor, with an OLPF tuned so skin doesn't look like a dermatologist's nightmare.

 

[morgan_moore]

Indeed - actual pixels beats paper

My point some posts back was that in stills Hasselblad got caught by canon and then fell over. I hope the same does not happen to Arri because if Canon make the motion raw anything like a CR2 from a $1000 canon stills camera the game is up.

 

[dmitrizigany]

a FF Sony with FZ mount- and full F- series ecosystem? yes that would be most interesting indeed.

What is the point of the FZ mount? As far as I know, there's no lenses that have FZ mount. And it's 19mm compared to the e-mount's 18mm (if I recall correctly). Wouldn't it make more sense for Sony to just have emount on the F-series as well? The sturdier version from the FS7mkII, that is.

 

[Andrew Stone]

I just received the press release (10:20 PM ET) and it would appear that embargo has passed. But it is ambiguous so I won't release anything until I can confirm. You are all wrong, by the way

Ned, can you now give us a clear indication about what the new camera is all about?

 

[Harry Lime]

What is the point of the FZ mount? As far as I know, there's no lenses that have FZ mount. And it's 19mm compared to the e-mount's 18mm (if I recall correctly). Wouldn't it make more sense for Sony to just have emount on the F-series as well? The sturdier version from the FS7mkII, that is.

FZ is a big beefy universal mount built to professional standards that is able to support the heaviest lenses (25-250 etc) and image formats bigger than s35. The lockable E-Mount from the FSII is nowhere as strong or adaptable as FZ. E-Mount is prosumer.

I don't think Sony ever intended for FZ to be a native mount in the sense that we should expect to see FZ mount lenses.
It was intended as a heavy duty pro grade universal mount that can be adopted to nearly anything due to it's shallow FFD and build in electronic contacts. The throat diameter is also big enough to support formats beyond s35.

 

[Harry Lime]

Indeed - actual pixels beats paper

My point some posts back was that in stills Hasselblad got caught by canon and then fell over. I hope the same does not happen to Arri because if Canon make the motion raw anything like a CR2 from a $1000 canon stills camera the game is up.

We have had cameras from RED, Sony, Canon and BM for several years that out-resolve and out spec the Alexa in terms of fps, size, etc for years and yet Arri continues to dominate the medium and high end market. How many camera reviews have you read that muse on the 'Alexa like quality' of the image produced by camera X? It's not just about specs.

I also don't fully agree with the Hasselblad / Canon argument. There is some truth to that, but the reasons for the decline of MF is a lot more complex than simply the appearance of the 5d2

 

[morgan_moore]

We have had cameras from RED, Sony, Canon and BM for several years that out-resolve and out spec the Alexa in terms of fps, size, etc for years and yet Arri continues to dominate the medium and high end market. How many camera reviews have you read that muse on the 'Alexa like quality' of the image produced by camera X? It's not just about specs.

I also don't fully agree with the Hasselblad / Canon argument. There is some truth to that, but the reasons for the decline of MF is a lot more complex than simply the appearance of the 5d2

Of course many other cameras are a mile away from being production tools. Personaly I think the vari, C500 and others did not lack for image quality, they just missed the alex boat by being late.

I just think if C200 raw is any good it will be a winner on productions with DITs, even if it is a fail for the solo op who rolls long.

-
Blad Canon? Well Im not a dentist or someone who wears a label - I was just someone who wanted to deliver decent files and the 5d2 gave me that, with live view and off centre AF and 90% of the file fidelity of the blad at 1/4 of the cost.. so off it went.

 

[dmitrizigany]

FZ is a big beefy universal mount built to professional standards... [snip]

Thanks for explanation!
Was thinking it was possible to make emount even sturdier, but I guess not. You explanation makes sense.

 

[Clermond]

My point some posts back was that in stills Hasselblad got caught by canon and then fell over. .

it's not quite that simple. Hassi's system of medium format film wasn't adaptable to a digital sensor. A sensor at the size of 6x6cm film could technically be not produced for a reasonable price. The waste and therefore the cost of producing a big wafer raises exponentially with the size. Canon had the 24x36mm hardware in the shelf and all the medium format manufacturers had nothing. Neither a large sensor nor hardware for smaller sensors. With the rapid success and fast improving quality of 24x36mm DSLRs it was almost impossible to get a market share again for Hassi. It was not a question of a brand who got caught. It was the end of the analog age and the beginning of the digital with new tools.

 

[morgan_moore]

it's not quite that simple. Hassi's system of medium format film wasn't adaptable to a digital sensor. A sensor at the size of 6x6cm film could technically be not produced for a reasonable price. The waste and therefore the cost of producing a big wafer raises exponentially with the size. Canon had the 24x36mm hardware in the shelf and all the medium format manufacturers had nothing. Neither a large sensor nor hardware for smaller sensors. With the rapid success and fast improving quality of 24x36mm DSLRs it was almost impossible to get a market share again for Hassi. It was not a question of a brand who got caught. It was the end of the analog age and the beginning of the digital with new tools.

Sorry for Thread jack. Im talking about the H1 system which when paired with a Phase or Sinar back (which I owned and used daily for five years) was the first portable digital camera system to be accepted by glossy magazines and pulled people away from shooting 645 or 66 tranny. This system broke down a wall in the same manner that I believe the Alexa did with motion pictures.. in that it made digital cinema more practical than film (F35 and Red having failed there for some reasons).. both Hassy and Arri got the prize, but Hassy got swept up by Canon.. imo a distinct risk for Arri unless they refocus on exotica that pushes boundaries. Ill stop now

 

[Sttratos]

The Alexas are a tool that broke down a wall - the ability to shoot film free episodic/actual cinema without the horror of something like an F35 and SR deck which was such a clunk as to yearn for a simple light little 35 film camera.

It was a good trick and gave them a few years.

I guess (because it is just paper) that the C200 can do that trick too. So that trick is gone.

So why use a $40g camera when you can pick a $10g camera that has AF if you want it and is less straining for the gimbal operator or any grip kit.

Because you like chatting in the bar? 'we used an alexa- why dont you come to my hotel room and Ill show it to you' or because of some other rationale (maybe as simple as a solid PL mount or driving your focus from power out of the body?)

(Im assuming a set like this has a DIT that can DIT)

Producers? they do the cash dont they? Why would they want not to quarter their cam rental budget?

None of the above. The short answer is because the Arri image looks better. C300MKII or FS7 image look low end across the board next to Arri. You can fancy grade all you want. I'm a former FS7 owner and I have always seen that and said that. Reason I always rented an Arri for higher jobs and left my FS7 in the case. The only thing new cameras have more than the Arris and the F35 for that matter, since you brought it up, but the only thing new cameras have more than these two cameras are pixels.

Image is king. The better Arri workflow, support, accessories compatibility, reliability, industry standard peace of mind and all is just icing on the cake.

 

[klk]

The Alexas are a tool that broke down a wall - the ability to shoot film free episodic/actual cinema without the horror of something like an F35 and SR deck which was such a clunk as to yearn for a simple light little 35 film camera.

It was a good trick and gave them a few years.

I guess (because it is just paper) that the C200 can do that trick too. So that trick is gone.

So why use a $40g camera when you can pick a $10g camera that has AF if you want it and is less straining for the gimbal operator or any grip kit.

Because you like chatting in the bar? 'we used an alexa- why dont you come to my hotel room and Ill show it to you' or because of some other rationale (maybe as simple as a solid PL mount or driving your focus from power out of the body?)

(Im assuming a set like this has a DIT that can DIT)

Producers? they do the cash dont they? Why would they want not to quarter their cam rental budget?

Did they announce the new Sony yet?

Sam- the Alexa's sleep in the camera truck not in the hotel room. There is nothing exciting about shooting with an Alexa- it's just a tool- the most common acquisition tool on larger productions.

Producers live in FEAR. They are not going to pay less rental for an $8K Canon when they are spending that much on catering. They don't want to risk their reputation and the investors money on a vastly less expensive prosumer camera from Canon- even if it has a great image. They live in a different world.

Also production insurance here often doesn't cover producer "owned" equipment. (I've seen insurance policies specifically EXCLUDE owned equipment.) The producer would need a separate inland marine policy if they owned gear, so that's one more incentive NOT to own gear if you are a producer.

 

[Grug]

I think the big decider is actually pretty simple. The camera needs to offer full ProRes recording. That's everything up to 12-bit 4:4:4 ProResXQ, and every framerate the camera is capable of 1-240fps (or whatever it happens to do). Doing 422 and only 24/25/30/50/60p isn't enough - they need to have ProRes for every framerate and recording size.

The industry will not accept another standard en masse, until someone comes up with a ProRes-equivalent drag-and-drop codec. Until that happens, post houses will grumble and groan. Simple workflows are key, and that requires a drag-and-drop file structure.

If Sony are smart, they'll build that full and unrestricted support into the camera (including PreRes Proxies to record alongside the raw options), and use it to provide a gateway for people to understand and appreciate their own homebrewed recording options.

Good codecs aren't enough, the overall workflow has to win people over, and we're not past ProRes yet.

 

[Harry Lime]

The Alexas are a tool that broke down a wall - the ability to shoot film free episodic/actual cinema without the horror of something like an F35 and SR deck which was such a clunk as to yearn for a simple light little 35 film camera.

It was a good trick and gave them a few years.

I guess (because it is just paper) that the C200 can do that trick too. So that trick is gone.

So why use a $40g camera when you can pick a $10g camera that has AF if you want it and is less straining for the gimbal operator or any grip kit.

Because you like chatting in the bar? 'we used an alexa- why dont you come to my hotel room and Ill show it to you' or because of some other rationale (maybe as simple as a solid PL mount or driving your focus from power out of the body?)

(Im assuming a set like this has a DIT that can DIT)

Producers? they do the cash dont they? Why would they want not to quarter their cam rental budget?

Because producers are extremely risk adverse and not really technically versed aside from a few buzzwords they know. It's like the old moto from the golden age of computers. "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."

The Alexa is the gold standard in mid / high end productions. It's bulletproof, the IQ is still the one to beat, the workflow is idiot proof and it's what everyone is familiar with.

When the Alexa fails on set it's an act of god. When the off brand cheaper camera fails it's you're fault for not hiring an Alexa.

Good or bad, that's just the way it works.

That's aside from it being highly unlikely that the IQ out of the C200 is going to be superior to the Alexa. The ergonomics certainly aren't and neither is the support for everything for remote focus to taps for the video village etc.

 

[Donny 123]

It has to be at least 4k just within the S35 crop circle. You can do the math. The full sensor has to be more. Which also raises the question of what lens/adapter is going to give the FF circle.

haha yes Im sure its at least 4K.. I was referring to down sampling to 4K.. which doesn't have to be 8K to achieve ..

 

[klk]

That's aside from it being highly unlikely that the IQ out of the C200 is going to be superior to the Alexa.

No- but the IQ from an all new full frame F5/F55 derived camera has the potential to be very interesting. Shall we steer the thread back to the original, Sony centric post?

 

[Donny 123]

No- but the IQ from an all new full frame F5/F55 derived camera has the potential to be very interesting. Shall we steer the thread back to the original, Sony centric post?

trouble is its a very short conversation.. as basically is wasn't a release .. and even what they gave was very lacking in detail.. in a nut shell.. next year a FF sensor camera will be released .. its new and doesn't replace any other model... and ... well thats about it..

 

[Harry Lime]

No- but the IQ from an all new full frame F5/F55 derived camera has the potential to be very interesting. Shall we steer the thread back to the original, Sony centric post?

It does. If Sony has implemented any of the feedback they have gotten since the release of the F5/F55 they have the potential to turn out a stellar camera. That's the frustrating thing about Sony. They are the king of sensor design with enormous engineering resources and expertise, but the Cinealta division has to get a serious divorce from the broadcast heritage of the company. If they ever manage that they could without a doubt knock it out of the park. Panasonic seems to have been listening to a lot of people lately.

I've had an F3 (with something non-Sony on the way next week...) for the past few years with the slog upgrade and once I got it working with ACES the IQ is quite spectacular. But for the previous 3-4 years I was lost in the wilderness with Sony's post workflow that was poorly documented and never seemed to extract the maximum performance out of the camera.

So, yes I am hoping that this new camera is more than just new hardware, but a change of heart in the aesthetics of their IQ (along with a better menu system)

 

[Sttratos]

No- but the IQ from an all new full frame F5/F55 derived camera has the potential to be very interesting. Shall we steer the thread back to the original, Sony centric post?

Here is hoping Sony will get the F35 mojo back with this new sensor. It was the only time they got it right with a cinema camera. The F65 never did anything for me. It always looked just like really really sharp FS7 images. And the FS7 image never had any mojo. You could grade it all you want. I bought one because the unbeatable versatility. But after a while that got old in the face of never achieving the images I wanted. So I sold it.

The F65 just always left something to be desired any time I watched something shot on it. It was just missing something in its image.

This new sensor sounds good so far and it seems Sony is coming at it from the right angle. Let`s hope they get it right.