Just got a new camera - Sony F35

[macgregor]

Miguel, I remember you said you tried the Gemini and mentioned a loss in quality? Because it seems thats the way to go for 50P (albeit 10bit max, and huge uncompressed DPX files to boot) , but maybe Pix 240 12bit 444 in 50i for slowmo as youve recently discovered is not half bad?
The Pix is much more economic, 12bit 444, but no 50P in 1080.
Seems old school interlaced 50i into slow mo, and twixtor for further over crank is back! (letting my FS700 go, along with 240FPS, but that party trick is getting boring now)

The PIx 240i looks like a great product, but the price is really high compared to what you get compared to the hyperdeck. I'd love to get my hands on one of them asap, because I'm considering buying one.
If you need an external monitor and sound recorder, then the pix becomes the right tool. Otherwise I think the hyperdeck is so inexpensive that you can use that extra money towards a better tripod head or lenses.
Also the 12bit 444 on the pix is so far not an option for this camera until someone does a real test using a dual link-3G converter and we make sure it works.
With the pix240i, we should be able to record 720p50 also, whether that's better than deinterlaced 1080i50 we still need to see.

The footage I shot with the Gemini not only looks muddy but also noisier. I used their BNC cables, but I can't really understand why the lower quality of the footage. If this was fixed (in my end or their end, it does not matter) the problem of recording only uncompressed DPXs remain. Not only the SSDs fill up really quickly, but the files are also split in 2 drives, which takes an extra process before you can start working with the files. And then again, you'll probably need to make an offline version of the DPXs since not all editing applications can work with DPXs. So in the end, it's a bit of a mess if they don't include the option of going to QT prores or dnxhd. Yes, they announced they would have DNxHD recording by the end of 2012, and now they expect to have it ready by mid year, but the reality is that right now it's not available.

The Aja Quad sounds like the best option if it finally includes 1080p50. BUt the launch of this recorder has been delayed several months already... so who knows.

Then the Sr-R1, is really really nice and offers amazing quality. But it has a few downsides: the Sony cards are pricey, the recorder is bulky compared to some of the others and the card reader costs almost as much as a pix240...

So no clear winner here.

 

[Grug]

For the sake of getting the most out of the camera, I think the PIX (for 12-bit 4:4:4 recording) coupled with a dual-link to 3G-SDI splitter (so that you can actually get the 12-bit into the PIX) is the way to go. Then rent something like the SR-R1 or Gemini (or FS700) when you need 1080p slowmotion.

 

[eddavid]

The PIx 240i looks like a great product, but the price is really high compared to what you get compared to the hyperdeck. I'd love to get my hands on one of them asap, because I'm considering buying one.
If you need an external monitor and sound recorder, then the pix becomes the right tool. Otherwise I think the hyperdeck is so inexpensive that you can use that extra money towards a better tripod head or lenses.
Also the 12bit 444 on the pix is so far not an option for this camera until someone does a real test using a dual link-3G converter and we make sure it works.
With the pix240i, we should be able to record 720p50 also, whether that's better than deinterlaced 1080i50 we still need to see.

The footage I shot with the Gemini not only looks muddy but also noisier. I used their BNC cables, but I can't really understand why the lower quality of the footage. If this was fixed (in my end or their end, it does not matter) the problem of recording only uncompressed DPXs remain. Not only the SSDs fill up really quickly, but the files are also split in 2 drives, which takes an extra process before you can start working with the files. And then again, you'll probably need to make an offline version of the DPXs since not all editing applications can work with DPXs. So in the end, it's a bit of a mess if they don't include the option of going to QT prores or dnxhd. Yes, they announced they would have DNxHD recording by the end of 2012, and now they expect to have it ready by mid year, but the reality is that right now it's not available.

The Aja Quad sounds like the best option if it finally includes 1080p50. BUt the launch of this recorder has been delayed several months already... so who knows.

Then the Sr-R1, is really really nice and offers amazing quality. But it has a few downsides: the Sony cards are pricey, the recorder is bulky compared to some of the others and the card reader costs almost as much as a pix240...

So no clear winner here.

On my two quick tests with the samurai out of the interface port its been looking muddy and noisy.

what port do you send your hd-sdi to from your f35?

maybe that's the issue there. I might grab a hyperdeck for a shoot I'm doing next week
ed

 

[Adamsenoj]

The PIx 240i looks like a great product, but the price is really high compared to what you get compared to the hyperdeck. I'd love to get my hands on one of them asap, because I'm considering buying one.
If you need an external monitor and sound recorder, then the pix becomes the right tool. Otherwise I think the hyperdeck is so inexpensive that you can use that extra money towards a better tripod head or lenses.
Also the 12bit 444 on the pix is so far not an option for this camera until someone does a real test using a dual link-3G converter and we make sure it works.
With the pix240i, we should be able to record 720p50 also, whether that's better than deinterlaced 1080i50 we still need to see.

The footage I shot with the Gemini not only looks muddy but also noisier. I used their BNC cables, but I can't really understand why the lower quality of the footage. If this was fixed (in my end or their end, it does not matter) the problem of recording only uncompressed DPXs remain. Not only the SSDs fill up really quickly, but the files are also split in 2 drives, which takes an extra process before you can start working with the files. And then again, you'll probably need to make an offline version of the DPXs since not all editing applications can work with DPXs. So in the end, it's a bit of a mess if they don't include the option of going to QT prores or dnxhd. Yes, they announced they would have DNxHD recording by the end of 2012, and now they expect to have it ready by mid year, but the reality is that right now it's not available.

The Aja Quad sounds like the best option if it finally includes 1080p50. BUt the launch of this recorder has been delayed several months already... so who knows.

Then the Sr-R1, is really really nice and offers amazing quality. But it has a few downsides: the Sony cards are pricey, the recorder is bulky compared to some of the others and the card reader costs almost as much as a pix240...

So no clear winner here.

Hence why I think HDCAM SR tape is still somewhat a good option. You can record everything the camera was made to record. Yes, bulky, but since no other option seems to let you get all the camera is capable of, HDCAM SR still sounds like a great option.

 

[macgregor]

Sure, but how do you capture the hdcam tapes?

 

[Adamsenoj]

Sure, but how do you capture the hdcam tapes?

Well, the old fashioned way. With a workstation which has the proper capturing card. It's tape.

 

[leteeci]

Whatabout Terradeck Cube transmitting 1080p50 and capture away to the PC with capturing card.. my 0.02$

 

[Kholi]

I almost dont care, I just want one. everyone I work with is telling I'm mad. They say things like "Buy a BMCC" . I cant believe how short sighted they are. I keep reminding them that the workflow of RAW is not as easy as they think, and frankly a huge outlay of man hours and fuss with RAW processing to do a job the F35 would do internally for you anyway, and i cant deal with rolling shutter anymore, nor the way most digital cams deal with highlights and anyway, the F35 with an external recorder is in another league. If its good enough for Michael Bay, its good enough for me.

There's a reason why they're saying that. Can you afford 12-14K to get a working camera? ARe you going to stay PL mount or shell out for a Nikon interchangeable solution?

It sounds short-sighted to me to assume these things without having used either of these cameras. Coming from experience with both (sitting on set with Blackmagic and F35 right now) I can tell you that most of the people posting in this thread couldn't pick them out of a lineup with both shooting ProRes. In fact, that's all we've been shooting on Blackmagic and the workflow's NO different than the F35 workflow. And, you have the option of RAW or PRoRes (DNxHD) without spending any extra money on hardware.

Legitimate concerns are: Rolling Shutter (if it bothers you), motion differences (I like both, the F35 has overall more pleasant motion), moire and aliasing (blackmagic produces far more), color reproduction (Blackmagic has an issue with super reds, F35 seems to have an issue with stark black and stark blues -- this might be a settings thing but we've been in Cine EI the entire time), sensor size (obvious one here), Dynamic Range and Highlights (Pure DR, Blackmagic in ProRes clearly has a greater range, highlight roll off is subjective but out of camera we've constantly observed Blackmagic handling highlights in a more pleasing way, a good LUT on F35 also helps here and generally just nailing exposure).

They're both equally cumbersome, both need to be rigged, etc.

Blackmagic compliments an F35 A-cam in an amazing way, and in the end I like them both equally, and it's downright insane how things are today. A 250K camera and a 3K camera that match, both with a workflow that makes things very easy to deliver on a time budget.

 

[eddavid]

I really appreciate your post Kholl - I think a lot of people assume a lot of things about cameras without using them (including me This happened in the past when I attacked the Red One before I really used it and you said just that.)

I knew that the BMC would be damn near close to the F35 on some factors and I still have my pre order for a m4/3rds version.

My biggest thing though that I love about the F35 is that it's a native 450ISO camera. This is what Roger Deakins asked for Arri to make with an Alexa. How it sees the world is more like 35mm film. I'm not going to be fighting fill light as much.

I just did a shoot yesterday with the Canon C300 and I have used the camera before and I have bashed it before but I'm really impressed with its colormitry - it was perfect for the project and how beautifully the 8 bit 50 mpbs was able to grade. I was shocked. I was talking so much crap about it. It has a definite nice look - I am so shocked. But anyway the point is that I think it's a native 800 ASA camera so the whole time I'm fighting fill light more than I want to . It's all about controlling the spill - and its a different way of lighting a scene. Just like the Alexa. As someone who loves rich contrast and dark blacks of most film stocks, I am super pumped on the F35.

Maybe that's what I don't like about the Alexa and why films look cartoony - too much fill light everywhere. And its hard to cut the fill light without affecting the key light.

And in the end I have learned to reserve all judgements on all cameras till I have really, really used them. Not once or twice but at least 10 times in different environments.

 

[eddavid]

As a sidenote, after doing my tests I can see that you need a really top-notch hd-bnc cable to make sure with the F35 you are not creating noise and all that.

 

[Kholi]

I really appreciate your post Kholl - I think a lot of people assume a lot of things about cameras without using them (including me This happened in the past when I attacked the Red One before I really used it and you said just that.)

I knew that the BMC would be damn near close to the F35 on some factors and I still have my pre order for a m4/3rds version.

Yeah no problem, it kind of sucks because I feel like I'm being a fanboy of both cameras these days, but I like great images. Had a lot of reservations about the F35 because I am not a fan of Sony, but the image is absolutely amazing and I would only classify it with the F65 as of now, it seems the other Sony cameras are just completely different and I really do not know why.

I'm waiting on my MFT mount camera. =[ I think that is also a major concern that I forgot to list.

My biggest thing though that I love about the F35 is that it's a native 450ISO camera. This is what Roger Deakins asked for Arri to make with an Alexa. How it sees the world is more like 35mm film. I'm not going to be fighting fill light as much.

I like this as well. It's sort of annoying to have a range of cameras that are or exceed 800ASA ratings when I love to shoot daylight... the amount of ND you have to use at times is mildly depressing. I will say, though, as our DR ratings are increasing this becomes less of an issue. Having yet to see a definitive test on Blackmagic's usable DR, I have a strong feeling that they're conservatively rating the camera, or at least right on the nose. F35 is also no slouch of course.

It's all about controlling the spill - and its a different way of lighting a scene. Just like the Alexa. As someone who loves rich contrast and dark blacks of most film stocks, I am super pumped on the F35.

Definitely. It's more like exposing film from what I've been told by John Brawley and other film shooters than say a C300 or similar. Side by side with both cameras we never have to tune for one or the other camera, they're both just taking what we dish out, and what nature throws at the windows. I wish I could show footage, I'm going to have to do my own shooting with both soon just so that I can share the results.

And in the end I have learned to reserve all judgements on all cameras till I have really, really used them. Not once or twice but at least 10 times in different environments.

Same here... I'm usually just very very skeptical until I put my hands on one. Funny thing is as much as I really can't get into a lot of cameras out, I recognize that just about all of 'em are plenty enough to do work with. At this point it's more about being comfortable with the tool you put money into.

Also, I kind of promised myself I would never spend more than say 1500 to own another camera, which meant a DSLR to just shoot C-Roll on or random stuff... as broke as I am right now I'm bending over backward to take order of and outfit the MFT when it gets here. I'm happy that it lines up with the F35... =P B-camera rental money helps.

 

[Adamsenoj]

There's a reason why they're saying that. Can you afford 12-14K to get a working camera? ARe you going to stay PL mount or shell out for a Nikon interchangeable solution?

It sounds short-sighted to me to assume these things without having used either of these cameras. Coming from experience with both (sitting on set with Blackmagic and F35 right now) I can tell you that most of the people posting in this thread couldn't pick them out of a lineup with both shooting ProRes.

Go ahead and test us. Film 2 wide shots with the same FOV and T-stop on both cameras and post it. Then film an action scene handheld with both and post it. Then while you are at it, film a head and shoulders with somebody wearing a fine pattern tweed coat. You have both cameras on set right? Make it happen.

In fact, that's all we've been shooting on Blackmagic and the workflow's NO different than the F35 workflow. And, you have the option of RAW or PRoRes (DNxHD) without spending any extra money on hardware.

How do you expose to Prores or DNxHD with the BMCC? Does it have a waveform, zebras? Or do you need an add on onboard monitor with these features? If so, how much does that add to the "cheap" cost?
What battery solution are you using? How much does that add to the "cheap" cost?
How do you move it around on set? Cage? Top handle? Rig? How much does that add to the "cheap" cost?
How do you record sound? Added recorder? How much does that add to the "cheap" cost?

Legitimate concerns are: Rolling Shutter (if it bothers you),

Who wouldn't be bothered by an image defect?

motion differences (I like both, the F35 has overall more pleasant motion), moire and aliasing (blackmagic produces far more), color reproduction (Blackmagic has an issue with super reds, F35 seems to have an issue with stark black and stark blues -- this might be a settings thing but we've been in Cine EI the entire time), sensor size (obvious one here),

More than enough problems and reasons to pass on it for me. No need to say more really.

Dynamic Range and Highlights (Pure DR, Blackmagic in ProRes clearly has a greater range, highlight roll off is subjective but out of camera we've constantly observed Blackmagic handling highlights in a more pleasing way, a good LUT on F35 also helps here and generally just nailing exposure).

Honestly think the F35 looks more natural here. But like you said yourself, it can be subjective.

They're both equally cumbersome, both need to be rigged, etc.

Difference is the F35 is a system made to work that way and comes with most of it (top handle, breakout box etc) while the BMCC needs workarounds.

Blackmagic compliments an F35 A-cam in an amazing way,

That I can kind of agree on.

and in the end I like them both equally, and it's downright insane how things are today. A 250K camera and a 3K camera that match,

No they don't. Remember:

Rolling Shutter (if it bothers you), motion differences (I like both, the F35 has overall more pleasant motion), moire and aliasing (blackmagic produces far more), color reproduction (Blackmagic has an issue with super reds, F35 seems to have an issue with stark black and stark blues -- this might be a settings thing but we've been in Cine EI the entire time), sensor size (obvious one here),

both with a workflow that makes things very easy to deliver on a time budget.

If you don't shoot RAW on the BMCC, which is it's whole claim to fame.

 

[Sparky874]

Here is an update on the epic saga of my F35 making its way over from the states:

Payment of charges - GREAT BRITAIN 02/14/13 11:34am
Item being held, addressee being notified

No idea what this means!

 

[eddavid]

Not to chime in here, but I highly value the opinion of Kholl.
He has been using them side-by-side on a project.

He doesn't need to do a comparison video. His first-hand knowledge of both cameras is quite useful.

At the end of the day, once you add everything up, the BMC will cost you around 6k-10k tricked out to get it in the same condition as the F35. The F35 with the nikon add on mount and the recorder and all that stuff will probably be 15k-20k about.

So it's probably like 10k cheaper of a camera.

For me, I already own monitors, recorders, power supplies, all that stuff - so for me it's not really much of a difference price-wise.

And I'm beginning to see owning a rod system, monitor, recorder - all these things will probably last longer than the camera

 

[Kholi]

Go ahead and test us. Film 2 wide shots with the same FOV and T-stop on both cameras and post it. Then film an action scene handheld with both and post it. Then while you are at it, film a head and shoulders with somebody wearing a fine pattern tweed coat. You have both cameras on set right? Make it happen.

Actually they're working (read: ROI) right now, so that's important. And, I have little real interest in doing tests for other people. In reality, you couldn't even tell the difference between GH2 and AF100 when you first started asking about them (I remember responding to you when you were asking about the GH2). You comment a lot about cameras, doesn't seem like you actually work with them, though.

Claiming that the F35 is "bad" in lowlight, I know one or two people here that also wonder where you get your information from, and they have the cameras.

How do you expose to Prores or DNxHD with the BMCC? Does it have a waveform, zebras? Or do you need an add on onboard monitor with these features? If so, how much does that add to the "cheap" cost?
What battery solution are you using? How much does that add to the "cheap" cost?
How do you move it around on set? Cage? Top handle? Rig? How much does that add to the "cheap" cost?
How do you record sound? Added recorder? How much does that add to the "cheap" cost?

Entire camera rigged out is about 6K (that was supposed to be a 6 not a 5) including the cost of the camera (which comes with Resolve).

I know where you're going, I've invested time in exploring just about every build option on the camera, it's still less than C100 priced when specifically outfitted -- not talking about interchangeable items like a TVLogic, batteries, etc. which most people with any working knowledge either rents or owns anyway.

In the end, don' tbother bringing up price unless you've spent time researching. Every time someone does, yet hasn't put in the work, they're wrong.

Who wouldn't be bothered by an image defect?

I'm not, and I don't care about rolling shutter. It's NEVER cost me a shot, EVER, and it certainly hasnt' stopped me from paying off any camera that I've owned.

More than enough problems and reasons to pass on it for me. No need to say more really.

Then why are you posting? IN fact, your presence in this thread has been pretty non-beneficial as a whole as far as I've been following it.

Honestly think the F35 looks more natural here. But like you said yourself, it can be subjective.

OF course it's subjective, it's a tool. Whatever gets the job done and the camera paid off.

Difference is the F35 is a system made to work that way and comes with most of it (top handle, breakout box etc) while the BMCC needs workarounds.

If you don't shoot RAW on the BMCC, which is it's whole claim to fame.

Again, it's almost like you've never actually used either camera before. Makes a lot of sense.

 

[Kholi]

Not to chime in here, but I highly value the opinion of Kholl.
He has been using them side-by-side on a project.

He doesn't need to do a comparison video. His first-hand knowledge of both cameras is quite useful.

At the end of the day, once you add everything up, the BMC will cost you around 6k-10k tricked out to get it in the same condition as the F35. The F35 with the nikon add on mount and the recorder and all that stuff will probably be 15k-20k about.

So it's probably like 10k cheaper of a camera.

For me, I already own monitors, recorders, power supplies, all that stuff - so for me it's not really much of a difference price-wise.

And I'm beginning to see owning a rod system, monitor, recorder - all these things will probably last longer than the camera

You basically just said everything I did, haha. Might as well delete my post.

 

[eddavid]

Speaking of Adamsenoj - Adam, can you post some of your work? I am so curious to see your stuff.

You can see my stuff here at http://www.kittyguerrilla.com

 

[GaryinCalifornia]

I was talking to to someone about rentals of an Alexa for an upcoming project... we got talking about the F35... he said if you get the right cable the Gemini will work great with the F35... so if you call Convergent Design they should be able to tell you which cable to get...

 

[Barry_Green]

how exactly do you plan to get a super 35mm look out of the BMC given the sensor size format is around 2x crop.

Use the m43 version with a SpeedBooster.

You would be shooting through a small center of any PL or DSLR lens and will have lost the FOV and DOF you would of had on a 35mm based sensor format with 35mm lenses and the same aperture setting.

SpeedBooster fixes all that.

Can't be used on the EF-mount BMC of course, which is why that product is dead to me. :thumbsup:

 

[Kholi]

Adam was not so much asking for a practical test as I think he was asking (and I am asking too since we have the experts here) how exactly do you plan to get a super 35mm look out of the BMC given the sensor size format is around 2x crop.

I don't plan on it. It looks like what it looks like, the days of trying to shoe horn something to look like what it's not, for me, are over. If I need a look, I need to go and rent that camera. ACtually, outside of another GH camera (which would be a 1500 owner's expense) I had never planned on buying another camera. Renting is the easiest way to get by, you get EVERYTHING you need and you don't have to worry about making money back. Production takes care of that.

So, the camera's look works for me, and I really only have an issue with the EF mount, and that's because I'd rather use Cinema Glass.

Dont' care about DOF, loved shooting with S16's GH2 ETC mode so much that I was going to shoot a project on it, but could never get that project started. Could've chosen Epic at no charge whatsoever.

As Barry mentioned, you could use the Speed Booster, but after seeing examples and realizing that it too has drawbacks in the IQ department, unless it performs better on M4/3, I won't be buying that.

Open up your iris and now you've introduced chromatic aberrations along with other types of lens distortions common with shooting wide open on most DSLR lenses. And if you can manage to rent expensive wide-angle high speed PL glass (because you won't be able to afford owning any) then how difficult will it become to pull focus?

It's easy to pull focus on the camera wide open. Never have an issue, again, my only issue is not having the ability to use Ultra Primes or similar right now.

In the end the two cameras might have their individual pros and cons, but to me comparing apples to oranges is simply bananas.

They're both tagged as cinema tools, but if you would say you can't compare S16 to S35 (film) then yeah, apples to oranges.

Edit: Anyway, it's an F35 thread, so I'll leave it at that. The two cameras are pretty great together, F35's solid.