Just got a new camera - Sony F35

I was the buyer on that ebay - and I got an IF box with it too for a bit over $5k all in by making an offer on the IF box he had for sale as well. It was definitely a moment of "I should buy this it's so cheap... once in a lifetime deal... blah blah blah" and I was surprised I won for so little as well. I knew I didn't need or want the viewfinder, still trying to sort out some other bits, like the missing top handle, but I knew the IF box was important. I'd be going to an O7Q for monitoring and recording. Like the rest of you, the image from this camera is a dream to me, and it really hasn't hit me yet that I'll have one in my hands soon haha, but either way I'm super excited to join these ranks.

I'll find out soon what sort of quality it's in, so knock on wood for me.
 
skatajkid said:
I was the buyer on that ebay - and I got an IF box with it too for a bit over $5k all in by making an offer on the IF box he had for sale as well. It was definitely a moment of "I should buy this it's so cheap... once in a lifetime deal... blah blah blah" and I was surprised I won for so little as well. I knew I didn't need or want the viewfinder, still trying to sort out some other bits, like the missing top handle, but I knew the IF box was important. I'd be going to an O7Q for monitoring and recording. Like the rest of you, the image from this camera is a dream to me, and it really hasn't hit me yet that I'll have one in my hands soon haha, but either way I'm super excited to join these ranks.

I'll find out soon what sort of quality it's in, so knock on wood for me.
Click to expand...

Congrats!

So you paid $5K instead of $3K for the same body with the IF box?
Not sure if it was worth it, hahaha. I mean, not that IF box is not needed. It's just that $3K for a Sony F35 is such an unveliable bargain that in comparison paying $2K more seems like a waste of money. :D
 
macgregor said:
Congrats!

So you paid $5K instead of $3K for the same body with the IF box?
Not sure if it was worth it, hahaha. I mean, not that IF box is not needed. It's just that $3K for a Sony F35 is such an unveliable bargain that in comparison paying $2K more seems like a waste of money. :D
Click to expand...

hahah the seller is also selling the viewfinder for $6,700 I think... makes that $3k for an F35 even seem more like a deal... it really is a weird time with cameras right now
 
Yeah it's the seller that is weird too. He's been trying to sell it for a while, and offered me $6k for the kit without the VF. I guess he just switched the prices up and almost got the same amount. There was no one else besides him on ebay that sold the interface box, safer to have it in the end, and of course 12bit 444 (when it comes... odyssey 7q)
 
skatakid, congrats! I think it was a good call to go for the box now if you are getting the 7Q, although 5k is less of a deal, still a good deal.

There was someone on ebay and also had advertised here a bottom spacer plate, I was planning on tracking it down if I won the camera. What is your plan for lens mount?

Check the IR filter for scratches, I had a few on my camera from AC-9 they are really faint and I honestly didn't notice them until owning the camera for 6 months. It still drives me crazy. This is one piece that can not be replaced I believe, Sony only lists the entire ccd block as one part on the service site. I am getting a 2nd CCD block with PL mount. I am finding easier access to PL mount lenses so I think I will keep the scratched block with nikon mount together for quick switching. I honestly can't find any sign of the scratch in the footage, it is just maddening to look at once I found it.
 
What is everyone using as matte box? Still putting together my f35 rig and read somewhere someone suggested using 19mm bridge plate for the camera. Anyone cares to elaborate?

Also what's the general consensus about the Arri MMB1/2? I've heard they weren't that good but never have seen one upclose/used one to really know. How is it compared to its Chroziel counterparts?
 
I use a cheap Chinese knock off of the Redrock Micro swing away kind- mainly because I believe matte boxes to be obscenely over priced relative to their function and material costs. I mean, nobody is innovating matte box design. R&D costs have been recouped long before I was even born, for crying out loud. Gah... don't get me started on matte box prices. I'll go on a holy rant...

Anyhow, because mine was originally made to work on lightweight 15mm rails, when I switched to 19mm studio rails I needed to upgrade how it fastened to the rails. So I got one of these replacement arms for it to fit the 19mm rails. Works just fine and I didn't spend stupid amounts of money for a glorified lens hood.
 
For a matte box I would only buy ARRI, maybe Bright Tangerine.

I agree ARRI stuff seems expensive, but I haven't really come across any competitor that is actually any cheaper with the same (or near the same) quality.

Just listen to the noise ACs make if you say "Red Rock"....

Chrosziel do seem to have some nice matte boxes, but not much of a discount on the real deal...

Only you know if the MMB1/2 will suit your needs.
 
keithlango said:
I use a cheap Chinese knock off of the Redrock Micro swing away kind- mainly because I believe matte boxes to be obscenely over priced relative to their function and material costs. I mean, nobody is innovating matte box design. R&D costs have been recouped long before I was even born, for crying out loud. Gah... don't get me started on matte box prices. I'll go on a holy rant...
.
Click to expand...

I have gone through a painful range of career moves to gain some wisdom on obscenely overpriced accessories for cameras. For 20 years I worked in video and film, shooting everything from ENG 2-man band on BetaSP to 200 person crew film jobs so I have used everything the industry has to offer. I owned a rental house and had to pay for all the gear. Finally, I decided to be a manufacturer. During my time on set, I always demanded the BEST of whatever I was using because I hate to fuss with things. I did not care what it costs. As a rental house owner, I was always in a state of shock looking at the price of "simple" pieces with only a few dollars worth of materials. So I went into the manufacturing business convinced that I would soon be swimming in Olympic sized pools of CASH.

Reality.

So I started with a small 3-axis CNC for about $60k. Then I realized I had to get a shop. Then I had to build out the shop. The CNC was ineffective until I spent $15k on software and a $5k dedicated PC. Then i need a saw, a bigger air compressor, finishing equipment. etc, etc. After all that, I had $150k in the effort and had not yet delivered anything. I designed a few small pieces and started selling. This is when I realized that my $60k CNC was far too slow to be anything but a prototyping machine. I am also designing, engineering, programming, operating, assembling, testing by myself. So now I need an employee and a much faster machine.....skip a few years down the road and its all the same. At the end of the day, making accessories is a very hard way get rich.

Matteboxes are something we have never made because the only way to make money is to charge a lot for a quality product or make a crappy product and sell it cheaper. There are a LOT of tiny -thin parts that have to fit and move perfectly while being very durable. R&D aside, I could hardly copy an ARRI or Bright Tangerine mattebox and expect to sell it any cheaper assuming it was the same quality of construction. I own one of the smaller accessory businesses and we have about $1 million in equipment just to be the small guy. Think about that. We don't sell you materials - we sell products. The cost of the materials is maybe 1-5% of our cost to build something. The rest of the operating expenses are ruthlessly painful and have to be put into the parts we sell - this is just business. To make it all even more expensive, this is a VERY low volume business. Even the most common parts are low volume compared to consumer devices. If iPhones were sold in quantity similar to matte boxes, they would be $50k each.

This experience was a very hard life lesson. I spent years feeling ripped off, but now it all makes sense. I would be happy to sell someone a 3 pound cube of aluminum, but it has no function. There are a thousand steps to making it useful. As a final note, CNC machines never make the same part twice. They are always deviating. Controlling that and making all the parts fit in the end with multiple technicians is something that is very hard to understand until your paycheck is depending on it. 20 years of set life and rental is a cake walk compared to what I have gotten myself into.
 
Carlos,In turn, your hard work, investment and diligence allows the big camera manufacturers to put out cameras that are incomplete, designed by someone who has NO idea how we work (read: ergonomics? What's that?), meanwhile pigeon-holing you into making things their way, with their endorsements, so that they can "allow" you in the game, then walk away any time it suites them to go chasing the next consumer rainbow while you're left holding worthless pieces to a puzzle no one is wanting to play any more.

In spite of all of that, your stuff is damn nice, really works, and I think it's worth every penny invested. Your stuff isn't beaten by any manufacturer that I've seen. (there's a couple of other really good ones too, to be fair.)DISCLAIMER: Nothing to do with Solid Camera except a satisfied user.
 
rx8pilot said:
I have gone through a painful range of career moves to gain some wisdom on obscenely overpriced accessories for cameras. For 20 years I worked in video and film, shooting everything from ENG 2-man band on BetaSP to 200 person crew film jobs so I have used everything the industry has to offer. I owned a rental house and had to pay for all the gear. Finally, I decided to be a manufacturer. During my time on set, I always demanded the BEST of whatever I was using because I hate to fuss with things. I did not care what it costs. As a rental house owner, I was always in a state of shock looking at the price of "simple" pieces with only a few dollars worth of materials. So I went into the manufacturing business convinced that I would soon be swimming in Olympic sized pools of CASH.

Reality.

So I started with a small 3-axis CNC for about $60k. Then I realized I had to get a shop. Then I had to build out the shop. The CNC was ineffective until I spent $15k on software and a $5k dedicated PC. Then i need a saw, a bigger air compressor, finishing equipment. etc, etc. After all that, I had $150k in the effort and had not yet delivered anything. I designed a few small pieces and started selling. This is when I realized that my $60k CNC was far too slow to be anything but a prototyping machine. I am also designing, engineering, programming, operating, assembling, testing by myself. So now I need an employee and a much faster machine.....skip a few years down the road and its all the same. At the end of the day, making accessories is a very hard way get rich.

Matteboxes are something we have never made because the only way to make money is to charge a lot for a quality product or make a crappy product and sell it cheaper. There are a LOT of tiny -thin parts that have to fit and move perfectly while being very durable. R&D aside, I could hardly copy an ARRI or Bright Tangerine mattebox and expect to sell it any cheaper assuming it was the same quality of construction. I own one of the smaller accessory businesses and we have about $1 million in equipment just to be the small guy. Think about that. We don't sell you materials - we sell products. The cost of the materials is maybe 1-5% of our cost to build something. The rest of the operating expenses are ruthlessly painful and have to be put into the parts we sell - this is just business. To make it all even more expensive, this is a VERY low volume business. Even the most common parts are low volume compared to consumer devices. If iPhones were sold in quantity similar to matte boxes, they would be $50k each.

This experience was a very hard life lesson. I spent years feeling ripped off, but now it all makes sense. I would be happy to sell someone a 3 pound cube of aluminum, but it has no function. There are a thousand steps to making it useful. As a final note, CNC machines never make the same part twice. They are always deviating. Controlling that and making all the parts fit in the end with multiple technicians is something that is very hard to understand until your paycheck is depending on it. 20 years of set life and rental is a cake walk compared to what I have gotten myself into.
Click to expand...


Hi.
I understand the process behind manufacturing. But an Arri matte box that sells for 6K seem to me much easier to R&D and to manufacture than, lets say a car. And while cars a bit more expensive than $6K these days, they are way more complex, and they have many more moving pieces, and just in raw materials they are not comparable. However they don't cost that much in comparison to an Arri matte box or follow focus...

So what's going on here? Just units sold? If you were selling 100,000 matteboxes could you bring the price down from $6K to something like $200?
 
Thank you - and you are correct. $250k spent on R&D for F65 - wasted. We have recycled enormous amounts of perfectly good parts for the reason you pointed out. We are not alone either, every manufacturer has the same issue. Each camera needs special treatment, but there is no way to know how well it will sell or how long the manufacturer will support it. Alexa, and now the Amira are the only large sensor cameras that are ready to shoot with only batteries and a lens. All the others are boxes, that require some sort of external support. This is good and bad I guess. GOOD: The users have choices BAD: The users have choices. If I had to go back into production (which would be much easier), I would pick the camera that gives me the shortest path to pushing the record button in as many situations as possible. That would likely be among the more expensive choices up front, but much less expensive than fussing with some crazy, partially thought out erector set for the few years I own that camera. In the end I have ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS made more money buying the best available. I have usually regretted "saving" money by accepting less than great gear. It always felt like I was stepping over a dollar on my way to pick up a nickel.

You still have to place your investment properly with the type of work you do or would like to do. An F65 for shooting weddings probably wont end well. An F3 outfitted clean and reliable would more likely fit the bill.

If the camera is done right, it will promote good cinematography and do that efficiently. A crazy rigged up, DIY camera is a distraction, it takes time and focus away from the goals of what is being shot. Clients can see this even if they are completely unaware of the details. If an operator is uncomfortable it will show. If your camera is front heavy during hand held, it will always shake. If it takes a bunch of time to go from a tripod to handheld, you are missing the shot. I have seen and experienced these scenarios so many times. I have also seen what happens when things are done really well. Stress goes down, focus goes up, pictures get better, and we get more pictures. That is a wrap. No OT. Movin on everyone..... ;-)
 
macgregor said:
So what's going on here? Just units sold? If you were selling 100,000 matteboxes could you bring the price down from $6K to something like $200?
Click to expand...

Yes. That is exactly correct. If that was the qty, that is where the price would be headed. It would make sense to invest in automation at that level. Automation reduces human variations and allows QC to be programmed into the line. This keeps products consistent and reduces scrap. The cost per unit would plummet like a polished bowling ball. The capital investment and setup time for heavy automation can be huge which is why it is only seen in high-volume environments. The lower the volume, the more skilled labor is required per unit to make it work.

For short run specialty products, the cost is almost all in the setup and the setup must fit into a generic manufacturing environment that is capable of making anything at any time. For automotive, the manufactures invest in a more dedicated line per car model and run it more or less 24 hrs a day for a few years with only a few updates here and there.

Manufacturing costs aside, each individual business decides on their own what kind of margins are appropriate to them. No one wants to break even, profit is the sole business motivator. Some more than others, but in the end we all want to live a little. I would say the cost of sales is almost always the biggest expense, even beyond the cost of the actual manufacturing. Dealers get a discount, the rep that services the dealer gets a piece, trade shows, web sites, etc. Cost of sales (in our business) can easily be 40% of the final cost of the product when it is all tallied up. The higher sales costs are with unique and innovative products that require discussions and demos before a sale can happen. Iris rods would have a comparatively low cost of sales when compared to some camera specific fiber optic transmission system.
 
macgregor said:
Hi.
I understand the process behind manufacturing. But an Arri matte box that sells for 6K seem to me much easier to R&D and to manufacture than, lets say a car. And while cars a bit more expensive than $6K these days, they are way more complex, and they have many more moving pieces, and just in raw materials they are not comparable. However they don't cost that much in comparison to an Arri matte box or follow focus...

So what's going on here? Just units sold? If you were selling 100,000 matteboxes could you bring the price down from $6K to something like $200?
Click to expand...

The amount of units which get produced plays a huge role. I'm (yet) working as an engineer in mechanical design as my day job. When testing a new product, we are mostly ordering single, custom made parts from CNC shops. When i asked for a comparison of 1pc vs 300 pcs of a (very easy to manufacture) part some time ago it was 170 vs. 6 bucks. This is because the time spent, to get a CNC machine to actually produce on a specific product, on a prototype you just have this time once, and on a series of the same part too.

So you could maybe bring down the price of an ARRI Mattebox to around 200 bucks, but this would require millions of units to be produced, assembled by robots or some kind of automatization devices. Quality control would have to be automated too. Probably they would have to outsource their production facilities to china too.
I guess ARRI would have the money to invest in such manufacturing processes, but i also think they want their brand to be "unique" and not available to everyone.

my estimate would be the first iphone prototype cost around 10K, way more most likely.
 
Hello all. Just putting this out there if you are at all interested in getting involved in the F35 club. I need to make some money and am clearing out some of our equipment. I am looking at moving on our Sony F35 to a new home with a careful owner. We are based just outside London. Here are some pics of the camera - with a baseplate/shoulder pad we have added to it can attach to a VCT-14 tripod plate - plus you'll see we have attached a Hawkswood V-LOK battery plate onto the back on the unit - so you can power it with your v-lok batteries. Also the interface box is included as well of course. If you are interested and want to propose a serious offer please let me know. It is of course in full working order and produces some of the best images around. Thanks, Sparky
F35 pic 1.jpgF35 pic 2.jpgF35 pic 3.jpgF35 pic 4.jpg
 
Several people getting rid of their F35 lately. Has the mojo worn off? Has the need for a more technically modern camera set? Or has the reality of shooting with a large bulky and old design (wanted to say outdated but probably not fair) camera caught up?
I have the impression this is the 3rd or 4th F35 sell here in a short while.

I think the F35 makes a much better image than any RED camera or the F3, F5 and F55 and any Canon. Against Alexa and Blackmagic the jury is still out. But I guess this is not enough to hold users and some will buy it and see it's not all glamor.
 
rx8pilot said:
$250k spent on R&D for F65 - wasted.
Click to expand...

Is the F65 officially discontinued? Or you mean it's just not selling because everybody goes for the cheaper F5 and F55? For the record I really dislike the F5 and F55. I think the image looks like a 4K cleaner version of the EX1 and F3 with more dynamic range. In other words it looks like HD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top