Viddovation
Veteran
Just worked a shoot yesterday as the A-Cam Operator on a shoot using an F3 and an FS100. The DP focused primarily on lighting and framing, so I was handling a lot of the technical camera details. I was on the F3, but got a few glances over at the FS100.
The short version: The FS100 picture is incredibly impressive for cost, but doesn't quite reach the range of the F3, and the lack of HD-SDI, timecode, and filenaming options was frustrating.
We started the day at the rental house, and charted the cameras. I have a Sony LMD-2450W 24" production monitor, and we plugged both cameras up. The monitor doesn't have HDMI but has DVI. HDMI over DVI from the FS100 did not work properly, bad colorspace. So we switched to component. The component worked great, but the connector is flimsy (same as on the EX1, and I once had a PA break the component port on my EX1 by stepping on the cable).
Both cameras had been loaded with the Abel Cinetech picture profile settings. DP wanted us to use AB_Range as the default picture profile. It's not a direct match. It took us a few minutes to figure out what was going on, as picking those settings and matching other camera settings (Gain, Iris, Shutter) made the FS100 look brighter. The F3 also visually appeared to be more saturated. The histogram sorted it out. The FS100 wasn't rolling off highlights as well as the F3. The F3 looked darker, because it was set to Cinegamma1 (which preserves highlights). Switching to Cine4, while otherwise keeping the AB_Range settings for both camera, made them a very close visual match. Colors seemed close as well, and saturation seemed similar, as the cameras were now exposing in the same range.
In effect, the F3 had to be dumbed down slightly to match the FS100. But a close match is definitely possible.
The FS100 is very lightweight, and feels of plastic. I'm scared if I dropped it, there wouldn't be anything worth repairing.
The ACs lost our component cable, so I had to run a BNC video out cable for video village, and the video out only works if nothing is plugged in on HDMI. The B-Cam Op couldn't use his DP-4 if the Producer/Director wanted to see his camera in the village.
The FS100 has settings for timecode over HDMI, but we had no way to interact with that, so I had to button mash sync the cameras. A clock sync (which is what I use for matching the F3 to EX1s and EX3s, wasn't an option, so I had to match a PRESET timecode across the camera. I even tried using the F3 IR remote (which works on Ex1 and EX3 cameras) and the FS100 doesn't see it (I frequently use the IR remote to jam sync an EX1 to an EX3).
The FS100, also, at least as far as I can tell - doesn't permit you to do any custom filenaming. I was able to set the User Bit to declared "A" and "B" cameras, but no file naming. Which also meant, I couldn't reset a clip number to 0001.
We were in controlled indoor concert lighting. ND filters were never an issue.
Personally, I dislike the fact that the FS100 LCD can't be viewed from below.
My thoughts... i'm glad I got the PMW-F3. But the FS100 picture is amazing for the price, and if the F3 is not in your price range, or your workflow doesn't require timecode, filenaming, S-Log, 444, etc... the FS100 could be very compelling.
For me... the FS100 would make a great travel or vacation camera. Or guerilla work camera. The FS100 has a very prosumer look. Particularly if you don't kit it. I bet there are places you can shoot with it that you'd get shut down holding an F3.
Just some thoughts.
The short version: The FS100 picture is incredibly impressive for cost, but doesn't quite reach the range of the F3, and the lack of HD-SDI, timecode, and filenaming options was frustrating.
We started the day at the rental house, and charted the cameras. I have a Sony LMD-2450W 24" production monitor, and we plugged both cameras up. The monitor doesn't have HDMI but has DVI. HDMI over DVI from the FS100 did not work properly, bad colorspace. So we switched to component. The component worked great, but the connector is flimsy (same as on the EX1, and I once had a PA break the component port on my EX1 by stepping on the cable).
Both cameras had been loaded with the Abel Cinetech picture profile settings. DP wanted us to use AB_Range as the default picture profile. It's not a direct match. It took us a few minutes to figure out what was going on, as picking those settings and matching other camera settings (Gain, Iris, Shutter) made the FS100 look brighter. The F3 also visually appeared to be more saturated. The histogram sorted it out. The FS100 wasn't rolling off highlights as well as the F3. The F3 looked darker, because it was set to Cinegamma1 (which preserves highlights). Switching to Cine4, while otherwise keeping the AB_Range settings for both camera, made them a very close visual match. Colors seemed close as well, and saturation seemed similar, as the cameras were now exposing in the same range.
In effect, the F3 had to be dumbed down slightly to match the FS100. But a close match is definitely possible.
The FS100 is very lightweight, and feels of plastic. I'm scared if I dropped it, there wouldn't be anything worth repairing.
The ACs lost our component cable, so I had to run a BNC video out cable for video village, and the video out only works if nothing is plugged in on HDMI. The B-Cam Op couldn't use his DP-4 if the Producer/Director wanted to see his camera in the village.
The FS100 has settings for timecode over HDMI, but we had no way to interact with that, so I had to button mash sync the cameras. A clock sync (which is what I use for matching the F3 to EX1s and EX3s, wasn't an option, so I had to match a PRESET timecode across the camera. I even tried using the F3 IR remote (which works on Ex1 and EX3 cameras) and the FS100 doesn't see it (I frequently use the IR remote to jam sync an EX1 to an EX3).
The FS100, also, at least as far as I can tell - doesn't permit you to do any custom filenaming. I was able to set the User Bit to declared "A" and "B" cameras, but no file naming. Which also meant, I couldn't reset a clip number to 0001.
We were in controlled indoor concert lighting. ND filters were never an issue.
Personally, I dislike the fact that the FS100 LCD can't be viewed from below.
My thoughts... i'm glad I got the PMW-F3. But the FS100 picture is amazing for the price, and if the F3 is not in your price range, or your workflow doesn't require timecode, filenaming, S-Log, 444, etc... the FS100 could be very compelling.
For me... the FS100 would make a great travel or vacation camera. Or guerilla work camera. The FS100 has a very prosumer look. Particularly if you don't kit it. I bet there are places you can shoot with it that you'd get shut down holding an F3.
Just some thoughts.
.. there was a discussion on other forum, and someone there say that RESOLUTION of F3 is BETTER than on FS-100... I don't think so, even I prefectly understand the differense in DR, deepnes of color and hundreeds other otpions this cameras have.. I found this about FS-100 - "The Sony FS100 managed to resolve approximately 780 lines resolution with a little bit of visible aliasing; but overall a nice clean image." here: