Just got a new camera - Sony F35

There is some kind of trigger in the F35's HD-SDI, because it triggers the Sony recorders, right? Or does it only do that through the interface that the IF connects to?

Vladislav_k said:
Do you think that all problem with firmware of Atomos Samurai? I think that also problem with our Sony F35, they haven't signal for recorders by HD SDI.
Click to expand...
 
I always use the dual SDI outputs into the Cinedeck and will continue with the Odyssey 7Q when that arrives, I do my tests with ProRes 4444, or Cineform. Here is the Lut in Avid, still nice and low contrasty.
 
Steep price increase from the photo version, but still very interesting when compared with cine glass...
 
Sad to say it folks, but i'm putting my F35 up for sale. I'll eventually list it in the appropriate section of DVX, but I thought I'd let anybody on this list have the first shot if there's interest. I worked on reducing weight wherever possible; to that end it comes with a v-mount plate that attaches to the back and allows the camera to be powered via the main rear plug. But I also have the interface box & accessories if you'd rather go that route. Will ship in a heavy duty wheeled metal case. PM me if you'd like more info...
 
bob gilles said:
Hunter, what camera system are you moving to?
Click to expand...

Bob, the majority of what we do is ethnodocumentary film, with a crew of one to two, shooting sometimes 8 hrs of footage a day. This last time, we went out with a BMCC instead of the F35 and it saved our backs. The image is not F35 quality, but the tradeoff makes sense for our needs.

Really sorry to see it go, because it is a gorgeous, well-built camera.
 
Hi Hunter. I am torn between getting the F35 or the BMCC. What differences in the image do you see between the F35 and the BMCC? What is positive and negative in the image quality in each one? Which camera has better color, skin tones and dynamic range? Which footage is easier to grade? Thanks in advance for your or anyone's response.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, too much stuff going on for me.
I'm finishing this short so I don't have time to shoot much

But as soon as I'm done I'll be out shooting more projects.
 
rizibo said:
Hi Hunter. I am torn between getting the F35 or the BMCC. What differences in the image do you see between the F35 and the BMCC? What is positive and negative in the image quality in each one? Which camera has better color, skin tones and dynamic range? Which footage is easier to grade? Thanks in advance for your or anyone's response.
Click to expand...

- The F35 wins the sharpness measure by a fair margin (it has a much larger sensor, that oversamples by a considerably larger margin.

- F35 has a global shutter versus the BMCC's rolling shutter (which does roll quite a bit)

- Dynamic range? The BMCC has more - by a fair margin too - but both cameras have a fairly similar distribution of latitude in the highlights above middle grey, so they'll appear pretty comparable in most situations (but the BMCC can see a fair bit deeper into the shadows).

- Color? Tough one. The F35 has lovely colors, but the BMC does too - the BMC also offers 12-bit raw, which gives you considerably more control over those colours. Both cameras really shine on the colour front, so I think we can call this one a draw.

- Grading? Raw on the BMC will go further obviously, but if you record 12-bit from the F35, you can go as far as anyone ever really needs to in video without getting 'experimentally' extreme.

You're comparing a very expensive old camera, with a very affordable new camera - so the two match up alarmingly closely all things considered. If you can afford the support gear, I'd certainly prefer the F35 for most things. The sheer compactness of the BMC obviously recommends it for certain things over the F35, but the rolling shutter does make the image considerably less 'stable' than the F35 in my experience (that said I've only shot on the F35 once, and the BMC a handful of times).
 
Thanks Grug! The rolling shutter artifacts in the BMCC does give the edge to the F35. The small size of the BMCC gives some advantage as some have used the blackbird stabilizer for tracking shots. Cost does give the edge to the BMCC. Which camera do you usually shoot with if you don't use either one that much?
 
Last edited:
Similio was with red one pre-mx right - that looks so amazing Mac. BMC - I only played with once - but having to mess with a 4/3 sensor is annonying also the color fidelity not as strong as f35 - plus the color and the grain - it's so organic with the f35.
 
Comparing the BMCC to the F35 is like comparing a really nice Toyota with a 2009 Ferrari 599... I mean, there's not comparison possible from a pro point of view.


Ed, Similo is s35mm and a bit of red one.
 
rizibo said:
Thanks Grug! The rolling shutter artifacts in the BMCC does give the edge to the F35. The small size of the BMCC gives some advantage as some have used the blackbird stabilizer for tracking shots. Cost does give the edge to the BMCC. Which camera do you usually shoot with if you don't use either one that much?
Click to expand...

To be honest, beyond the fact that they both make really nice 1080p images, I'm not sure there's much of a direct comparison between the two rizibo. You can compare the image quality, and it's remarkable how close the BMC comes to F35 (all things considered) but using a camera the size of the F35 requires a level of support (both in terms of manpower, camera support gear and lighting equipment) that isn't as necessary with the BMC.

But that's to be expected given who and what the two cameras have been designed for.

For my money? I'd want the F35, hands down, every time.

But you have to remember that even buying a tripod that will support the F35 is going to cost you at least as much as the BMC retails for (and that's buying a used tripod!).

I think a good rule of thumb would be that unless you generally have both a 1st and 2nd Camera Assistant on the majority of your shoots, you'd probably prefer a BMC for the scale of productions you're working on.

I'm a bit of a camera whore, so I shoot on a fair mix of cameras (last shoot was the F3 and Blackmagic Pocket Camera, shoot before that was Arri Alexa, shoot before that was Red Scarlet, and the shoot before that was the Sony F55), but I probably use the Sony F3 the most at the moment (probably because I own it :p ).

macgregor said:
Comparing the BMCC to the F35 is like comparing a really nice Toyota with a 2009 Ferrari 599... I mean, there's not comparison possible from a pro point of view.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's quite the right analogy Mac, because these are digital cameras they're at the mercy of Moore's Law. I'd say it's more like comparing a 2013 model Toyota sedan with a 2000 model Mercedes sedan (and all that that comparison entails).
 
" it's remarkable how close the BMC comes to F35"
Well, if you think they look anything similar (specs aside, forget numbers for a second) I'm only judging pure visuals, then there's not much more to say.
To me, they look nothing alike. BMCC can be intercut with Red quite decent, but it doesn't look at all like F35.

Is current digital technology better than 35mm film? DOes it offer more resolution? yes. Does it offer more dynamic range? Probably. Higher iso? yep. Cleaner images? For sure. Wider color gamut? Also.
And still, gimme all the film you don't want, I'll happily take it, you can keep your Epics and Alexas. That's the sort of comparison when you put something like the BMCC and the F35 together. They both might record 1080p and 12bit. But they couldn't deliver more different images. Colorimetry and tone curve cannot be measured by specs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top