Just got a new camera - Sony F35

macgregor said:
While I'm not an expert on ACES, I don't see the advantage of using it with the kind of work we do. ACES sounds great when you want to postproduce a feature film with heavy grading, VFXs and multiple outputs, such as cinemas, bluray, web, TV, etc, so image quality is consistent.
I use Vegas for all my post work, and I export to Davinci for projects that require heavy grading and then back to vegas as Sony MXF.
I did try using ACES workflow in Vegas but found the performace so slow, filters behaving weird, most exporting options would not work, and the manual was too confusing for me to get the whole workflow to work.
So far with Davinci resolve and the custom made LUTs I'm happy. Finding a good colorist seems more important anyway than the benefits of a wider color space.

About PSF, that seems to be a post issue, definitely not the camera. THe choice of codec? compresion settings? Stupid prores? Output graphic card?
Click to expand...

I see your point about ACES, I'll stop that mission, Resolve is more than enough for what I do.


i know the PSF issue is not the camera, it's a post issue.
Shoot to CineDeck stupid prores 444 10bit, cineform 8bit 422 for 50P.
All worked in MacBook Pro retina, Premiere cs6, stupid prores 444, no fields sequence, NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M card. Export Stupid prores 444, no fields.
 
macgregor said:
m1.jpg


m2.jpg


Playing with the footage... acceptable? filmic? poo?
Click to expand...

Definitely not poo! looks really nice Mac. Filmic +1!
 
macgregor said:
While I'm not an expert on ACES, I don't see the advantage of using it with the kind of work we do. ACES sounds great when you want to postproduce a feature film with heavy grading, VFXs and multiple outputs, such as cinemas, bluray, web, TV, etc, so image quality is consistent.
I use Vegas for all my post work, and I export to Davinci for projects that require heavy grading and then back to vegas as Sony MXF.
I did try using ACES workflow in Vegas but found the performace so slow, filters behaving weird, most exporting options would not work, and the manual was too confusing for me to get the whole workflow to work.
So far with Davinci resolve and the custom made LUTs I'm happy. Finding a good colorist seems more important anyway than the benefits of a wider color space.

About PSF, that seems to be a post issue, definitely not the camera. THe choice of codec? compresion settings? Stupid prores? Output graphic card?
Click to expand...

Amazing work as ever Mac. I know you mentioned way back that you don't take PL mount lenses out on the road - but which lenses did you use on this shoot, sharpness across the frame look amazing. Best, Mark
 
We used the following lenses:
Nikon 10-24
nikon 24-70
nikon 70-200
nikon 300mm
nikon macro 105
walimex cine 24
walimex cine 35
walimex cine 85

Small crew of 4.
 
A word of warning to those looking at used F35, I've seen the last few no reserve auctions sell the black PL mount F35 which is missing the lens data port. Although this isn't a big issue in itself, could it imply that the cameras selling at these prices are the bottom end of the F35's, the ones which haven't been serviced by Sony in the longest time. Mine came with loose screws inside, which was an easy fix, but I would have to imagine they are selling off the oldest, most worn F35's. Although it's not easy, I think in any case a buyer should sit down with the tools to test the camera before they purchase. Think of buying a F35 like buying an old Arri 35mm camera, although they may include the same parts, the condition and maintenance of the camera is what gives it value.
 
Last edited:
@macgregor ............... Great work strong dynamics certainly a wakeup call to what these cameras can achieve. Reaffirms Sony's abilities in creating great pro cameras....at a huge price , but not now though ; )

A question these cameras aren't small, by modern standards. I'm assuming your shooting with the body & data pack ( or whatever the heck they call ) So how are you finding the beast out on location & by looks of it in remote ones at that ? I ask because they've been largely designed for feature film use with a whole camera department to baby it .....I imagine that isnt your experience.
 
Last edited:
Surf it Mike said:
@macgregor ............... Great work strong dynamics certainly a wakeup call to what these cameras can achieve. Reaffirms Sony's abilities in creating great pro cameras....at a huge price , but not now though ; )

A question these cameras aren't small, by modern standards. I'm assuming your shooting with the body & data pack ( or whatever the heck they call ) So how are you finding the beast out on location & by looks of it in remote ones at that ? I ask because they've been largely designed for feature film use with a whole camera department to baby it .....I imagine that isnt your experience.
Click to expand...

Well, it's lighter and smaller than the Alexa afterall. XD
I guess your question depends on how you shoot feature films. I don't think you can shoot a feature film with a single person right? You're always going to have ACs around to change lenses and filters. NO matter what camera you're using. Of course if the question is addressed from the perspective of someone that comes from the DSLR or fixed ENG camera worlds, then of course the F35 is way more complicated. But no more than any other digital film camera, and certainly easier to manage than the old red one, for example.
 
Might be putting mine up for sale--have a long-term doc gig coming up which can't use it, so it will just collect dust.
Low-hours unit, extras, case, and Cinedeck. If interested, ping me.
Thx.
 
yachacha said:
A word of warning to those looking at used F35, I've seen the last few no reserve auctions sell the black PL mount F35 which is missing the lens data port. Although this isn't a big issue in itself, could it imply that the cameras selling at these prices are the bottom end of the F35's, the ones which haven't been serviced by Sony in the longest time. Mine came with loose screws inside, which was an easy fix, but I would have to imagine they are selling off the oldest, most worn F35's. Although it's not easy, I think in any case a buyer should sit down with the tools to test the camera before they purchase. Think of buying a F35 like buying an old Arri 35mm camera, although they may include the same parts, the condition and maintenance of the camera is what gives it value.
Click to expand...

My camera's serial number is 6 - I doubt anyone on here has an earlier camera. It's fine. It doesn't have the LDS ports but most of us are not working on the sort of budgets which have the ability to make us of LDS data anyway, so for me it's a non-issue.
 
stats79 said:
Bit more concerned today. Looked back at the footage from yesterday and the noise seems excessive. Won't have any lenses or batteries for testing until the end of the week.

Here is a still. Dark room and only lights from the switcher. I've also posted the footage on vimeo. Would be curious to know if I've got an issue or is this par for the course. View attachment 72795 Here is the vimeo link: https://vimeo.com/68732630
Click to expand...

If that frame grab I can see, those screens in it are the only source of light (more or less) and if that's from a grading suite or similar low-light environment, then yes - expect noise. That's a ridiculously dark place by the looks of it and we should probably be thankful we get a picture at all! I will post some frame grabs up from a recent project to demonstrate.
 
To hopefully shed some light (pun not intended) on the issue of the F35 in low light, here is a screen grab from a shoot at 4am in the morning, last week. Yes, it was the longest day of the year but the sun had not quite risen.

The only lights were the ones in shot, or street light. The footage looks brighter than it felt being there. T2.1 on my standard speeds. CINE-EI mode.

Apologies for the large pic, it's the only way to be fair.

JJMV_1_002.jpg
 
James

are you using Cineform exclusively? I've been using it lately on "keying" and found it keeps the 104% highlights, and seems much better overal than prores 444.
 
But strangely enough I'm finding the 50p footage is a lot more contrasty than 25p footage.
could this be due to the dip to 8bit 422 in 50p on the Cinedeck?
 
Footage shouldn't be any contrastier in 8-bit than in 10-bit, but the change from 25p to 50p may be noticeable if you're not correctly compensating for the exposure (not implying you aren't, it's just possible).

I do use CineForm nearly exclusively, usually in FS1 setting. I haven't found a need for anything higher, but I found high leaves unacceptable artifacts for big screen work. And my pickyness!

Personally the choice of Cineform was a natural one for me. I work in a windows environment so I avoid ProRes because I'd have to recode anything from that into something else. I quite like DNxHD and use AVID, but I am not happy with their 444 support as of yet. Cineform gives me a free codec, looks good, is cross-platform and I love their first-light program. It's a lifesaver in some dailies. Well worth the price IMHO. I've used cineform since the dark days of Z1 ownership when HDV was too much for PCs to handle, so it feels like coming home to use them again!

Glad y'all like the shot
 
Thanks for sharing James.

the 50p footage in 8bit 422 definitely is more contrasty. I say this because its footage in broad daylight with plenty stop to spare, so not a case of lighting to match the 25p stuff. No doubt. It's not as flat as the 25p 10bit 444 footage. Hmmm...

Btw that night shot looks amazing.

i just had a night shoot and used all tungsten lighting, and it seems the F35 just luuvs tungsten.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top