steve phillipps
Veteran
http://www.digibroadcast.com/used-e...-cmos-sensor-srmaster-camera-289-hours-p16902
Full package for £18,000!!!
Full package for £18,000!!!
F65: F65 for sale in UK
- Thread starter steve phillipps
- Start date
Surf it Mike
Well-known member
To bad this is in Europe.
Cannot figure what's going on with these cameras & prices . Camera size seems to be inverse proportion to pricing & imaging output.
Cannot figure what's going on with these cameras & prices . Camera size seems to be inverse proportion to pricing & imaging output.
Last edited:
steve phillipps
Veteran
Yeah tha price seems incredible to me - I saw it and assumed body only but it's fully loaded! And yet it's been there for a while and nobody seems to want it!
Steve
Steve
Its 29,300£ with VAT, doesnt seem like such an incredible price to me. Thats about $45K. I have seen them go for $26K fully loaded in the US.
paulcurtis
Veteran
Plus a £1 off special Facebook discount...
Who'd buy it? It would take an enthusiast more than a busy full working DP because you're kind of own your own with it. And 18k+VAT is a lot to drop on what is basically an experiment. I would if i could, as i'm sure would most others on this site, just by the very nature of the type of user.
Give it a couple of years maybe it will come down to F35 prices..
cheers
Paul
steve phillipps
Veteran
Actually £21,600 with VAT, it's 20% here. Sorry to have bothered you, just flagging it up in case anyone was looking for one. I'm obviously out of touch with the market as I thought it was pretty cheap for that kit, my mistake!
Steve
DPStewart
Veteran
That makes this $32,733 at today's exchange rate.
I still think that's a great price for the image the F65 puts out.
JMtheDP
Veteran
In case anyone is curious how valid the F65 is in today's market, ARRI UK are currently renting mine off me, there are several DoP s here who always ask for it. Only two or three rental houses have them and they are very busy.
A couple of rental houses bought them and sold them and tried to buy them back.
A couple of rental houses bought them and sold them and tried to buy them back.
abreu-canedo
Well-known member
In the Northeast corridor (US), large productions and big budgets are going Alexa and Weapon. Smaller indies and corporates are going Amira and Epic (huge generalization, of course).
A lot lot of producers I've talked to are afraid of the F65 because when it first came out it only did RAW and they haven't kept up with the fact that it now does HD 10-12bit 444. So they go for what they know: Alexa ProRes or Red. Plus, everyone complains about the size of the F65, but I rarely hear anyone complain about the Alexa...which with codex is huge!
Still, there is still a decent owner-op market that is still getting jobs based on reels and references, in which case, it matters slightly less what camera you have as long as producers like the work and you can deliver the specs.
As as far as that package is concerned, not a bad price. But media for the f65 (specially new) can raise that price significantly. 1TB S55 (black) card is US$10k at B&H. That 256GB card is super nice, but may not be a usable media solution if you have to offload every 15-30 minutes.
considering all this, the fact that it is going for the price of an Epic, or God forbid, a fully built Scarlet, I'd say good deal
A lot lot of producers I've talked to are afraid of the F65 because when it first came out it only did RAW and they haven't kept up with the fact that it now does HD 10-12bit 444. So they go for what they know: Alexa ProRes or Red. Plus, everyone complains about the size of the F65, but I rarely hear anyone complain about the Alexa...which with codex is huge!
Still, there is still a decent owner-op market that is still getting jobs based on reels and references, in which case, it matters slightly less what camera you have as long as producers like the work and you can deliver the specs.
As as far as that package is concerned, not a bad price. But media for the f65 (specially new) can raise that price significantly. 1TB S55 (black) card is US$10k at B&H. That 256GB card is super nice, but may not be a usable media solution if you have to offload every 15-30 minutes.
considering all this, the fact that it is going for the price of an Epic, or God forbid, a fully built Scarlet, I'd say good deal
What is a daily rate for them in UK? Are you London based?
starcentral
Veteran
I'm definitely picking one up eventually.
JMtheDP
Veteran
I am just outside of London. The rate is similar to an ALEXA or Epic.
Just like the F35, the F65 is the victim of a lot of Sony-bashing, misinformation, ignorance and outright lies.
The low end crowd over here is as stupid as anywhere else... "We want RED because it does 5K!", "Well this has an 8/6k sensor..." "Why would I want files that big? That is crazy!". "Well shoot 1080P then", "no but I need the dynamic range of 4k!".... You get the idea.
Or people who don't shoot F65 because the raw files are too big, but then shoot ALEXA open gate raw. Or prores 4k 444.
Just like the F35, the F65 is the victim of a lot of Sony-bashing, misinformation, ignorance and outright lies.
The low end crowd over here is as stupid as anywhere else... "We want RED because it does 5K!", "Well this has an 8/6k sensor..." "Why would I want files that big? That is crazy!". "Well shoot 1080P then", "no but I need the dynamic range of 4k!".... You get the idea.
Or people who don't shoot F65 because the raw files are too big, but then shoot ALEXA open gate raw. Or prores 4k 444.
Viddovation
Veteran
I've been posting F23 RGB 4:4:4 shots upscaled 200% to 3840x2160 (UHD) in the FS7 forum discussion of the "Sony Look" as a "mystery camera." While Dennis (starcentral) did not similarities to F35, no one called the footage out as not being 4k. It goes to show that what Sony has really failed at with it's flagship cameras is not the picture quality or resolution - but the perception and marketing. Additionally - no one seems to have perceived that the "mystery camera" had a smaller sensor. In this way, 2/3" is also a victim of perception - we perceive that 2/3" is the realm of news and "video" and aren't prepared to acknowledge the reality of a camera with a 2/3" sensor but cine style gamma and color science.
It's baffling.
EDIT: Further, when given an ungraded shot, and not told whether the source is Sony or not, no one was able to assess it as having the "Sony Look". Again, perception is the key. People have a predetermined notion that Sony doesn't do digital cinema like Red or Arri.
It's baffling.
EDIT: Further, when given an ungraded shot, and not told whether the source is Sony or not, no one was able to assess it as having the "Sony Look". Again, perception is the key. People have a predetermined notion that Sony doesn't do digital cinema like Red or Arri.
starcentral
Veteran
First things first, the thread I started on the "sony look" was very specifically aimed at the custom mode hypergammas found on F3 (cinegammas) F5/F55 & FS7. I think a lot of people missed that when they started defending Sony and showing clips or graded frames shot in slog3/s.gamut.cine, or saying "its all in the DP" or "in the grading". Sure of course to a point it is, but all things being equal there is something very different about the image from an Alexa/F35 and these newer Sony cameras. I do tend to like the images shot with slog3/sgamut.cine better over the old color science on those cameras, but again they are still no where close to the Alexa or F35.
I think you're wrong that people perceive 2/3" as ENG, news, etc.. maybe "general people" but I know I've watched a lot of films shot on the 2/3" format and you'd never be able to really tell. It's like asking someone to pick out footage shot on 16mm over super 35mm. It can be difficult to spot.
Anyway the only conclusion I have now is the same as before: the image from the F3/F5/F55/FS7 doesn't compare to the F35. The only new conclusion is that maybe all along it's been a characteristic of CCD vs CMOS that has some unique properties that has many of us pixel peepers liking better in terms of quality, rendition, color and tone.
Last edited:
Oh dear... :/ The worst part is that even a lot of people working in this industry have very little knowledge. When I tell them that 6K from Red is not actually 6K and 4K in F5/55/7 is true 4K that comes probably from 5K (not confirmed by Sony, but looking at a pixel count of sensor it is VERY possible) they all make BIG eyes. In this business it's still a lot about branding (yourself by your gear) even if want to believe that it's not. Let's say you turn up on your job with full fledged Varicam 35 instead of Alexa. What would they say? Even though this new Varicam is far superior to Alexa they would see you setup as "exotic" and "not as good".
Viddovation
Veteran
Dennis,
Nothing was done with malice, and I'll freely admit that my test veered in a different direction. I'm not claiming that you specifically had any particular impressions about 2/3" or the F23. And I knew in advance that you liked the F35's look, so you might well approve of the F23.
Part of the test for me though was actually resolution. Presented with a 3840x2160 frame, no one concluded the source was 1080p. But had I presented the F23 as itself, I suspect many would have the impression that it wouldn't resolve as highly as a camera with 4k in it's marketing materials.
starcentral
Veteran
I understand, no hard feelings and no worries. I'm glad you did post them. I always thought to myself these images might be a Sony, but they are extra-ordinary and at least I was right about that. :beer:
For me "Sony look" doesn't apply to Sony cameras outside of F5/F5/FS7 as silly as that sounds.
I was looking at a used F900's the other day and wondering about my theory that it's Sony's "old" color science that is bad, but really that's not even it because I'm quite certain F23/F35/F900 were all just plain old s-gamut back then. So one key difference has to be CCD vs CMOS.
Thoughts?
For me "Sony look" doesn't apply to Sony cameras outside of F5/F5/FS7 as silly as that sounds.
I was looking at a used F900's the other day and wondering about my theory that it's Sony's "old" color science that is bad, but really that's not even it because I'm quite certain F23/F35/F900 were all just plain old s-gamut back then. So one key difference has to be CCD vs CMOS.
Thoughts?
How about raw from FS700? Because internal recording is so awful that I couldn't stand it. That's probably top on the list in "sony look" (in my eyes). Wondering about your opinion about raw, maybe it's due some internal "sony look chip" that spills this on your footage (half joking half serious). Have to agree with you Dennis that there is something in it. I can spot f5/55/fs7 in videos/shorts straight away. And as you said: in slog3/s.gamut.cine you can achieve beautiful results but definitely it's not on par with Alexa/Varicam/F35.
Viddovation
Veteran
I don't know much about how the F23 and F35 changed with firmware. I do know that the F23/F35 have both a "F900(conventional)" and "WIDE" color space setting. Check page 27 of this:
http://www.cinematography.net/Files/F23 ops.pdf
So the F23 definitely is a step beyond the F900.
I don't know that I would mess with the F900 at this stage. Maybe the F900R, but I'm now spoiled with the F23.
One point for either the F23 or F900/R is the price of top quality glass is bonkers. Alan Gordon will sell you a set of 8 DigiPrimes for $9,500. That's under $1200 a lens, not counting the included hardcase and collimation tool. And if true 4k 2/3" cameras ever become seriously popular, that price might rebound. We're talking glass that was $30k a single new, made to the quality of Arri Master Primes.
I do think there's some magic to CCD that simply doesn't exist in CMOS. We say magic, but maybe it's electrical - just in how the photons are translated to voltage.
PS - Weather in Nashville is crap right now. I will try and get a bright sunny day picture as soon as I can.