Sony EX3 or NO ??

G

George D.

Well-known member
While waiting for the Scarlet's release, we wanted to use the Sony EX3 in the meantime.

I just got our brand new Sony EX3 yesterday, and some of the accessories. This AM I've been setting it up.

It's a beautiful little camera, but I have to say I'm rather disappointed. With the camera and all the accessories I want with it, it has cost us a "lot" of money. I am SERIOUSLY thinking of returning it all.

I can't believe how much of this camera is "plastic". It's ALL plastic. Jeeeeeeeeez, what happened to aluminum? It does fit right in with the modern age when everything is going to plastic, but it doesn't fit in with what I would call "durability" and "long lastability". We put our equipment through a lot of stresses and environmental abuse, and I just don't see how this Sony can hold up to it. I have a feeling that if we ever dropped it, it would shatter into a million pieces. And, then the repairs would be financially out of control.

I've shot with pro film and still equipment all my life, and everything I've used has been made of metal and known for it's durability, such as Arri's and Nikons, even including our modern Nikon D2X DSLR which has a metal body.

I'll sleep on it for a few days and check the camera out further, but I am not hopeful. I think it might just be better to wait for the Scarlet, no matter how long it takes. The entire Scarlet package will cost more, that's true, but why waste money ahead of time. I'll also bet that this Sony EX3 does NOT hold it's resale value worth a damn.

Oh well, life goes on.
 
George, I share your view. But it seems everything new under $20,000 in this space is plastic.

The manufacturers seems to be selling lightweight image quality only.

The EX series does produce great images after proper tweaking and setup. I think the cameras are fairly priced given they are full raster 1080p HD cameras.

Resale for any of the cameras over the last four years is questionable as the market is just moving at breakneck speeds. I feel sorry for the folks that purchased the 1/2" Sony shoulder mount PDW-350's for $25,000. I see them on Ebay for $7,000.
 
Hey George.

What do you want to shoot with your EX3? Or Scarlet? Maybe someone else has experience shooting the same thing and may know if the EX3 can hack it.
 
You didn't even look at any of the cameras you were considering?!?! I can't believe you didn't pick any up or hold them in a store.

Basically video cameras are all plastic over a magnesium or aluminum frame to avoid weighing 20 lbs.
 
Duke M. said:
You didn't even look at any of the cameras you were considering?!?! I can't believe you didn't pick any up or hold them in a store.

Basically they are all plastic over a magnesium or aluminum frame. Besides, do you think you're little insects are going to attack your camera because they don't like closeups?
Click to expand...


That's a good one. Hey, some of the insects I work with are HUGE.

Unfortunately, where I live there are NO professional "video" stores within about 350 miles, and I don't have the time to drive that far. So, no, I was not able to "hold" one. Shipping expenses to return these things are no big deal.

I suppose I could have tied about 10 trillion bees together and they could have flown me there................ha, ha, ha!!
 
Sorry I didn't check where you were at. Here, I have access to many pro camera stores and try before I buy.

Hey, when I was living in Central America there were these roaches about 3" long, and the army ants, awesome! In the jungle we found some insects we couldn't identify in the books. Especially around the Mayan cemeteries.

The nice thing about when the army ants left there weren't any pests left. They ate everything. Rats, bugs, everything. LOL
 
I have to agree with Bassman... You gotta keep it in price prespective. What you're looking for George is a $40,000 camera for $8,000... Not gonna get it. BUT what you do get for $8,500 is the "picture" of a $40,000 camera! It's a trade-off, as most things in life.
I, in fact have dropped my EX1 onto concrete. I say it's built like a tank. The only thing that happened is a cable disconnected inside... That's all. All the optics and chips remained in calibration. What else are you going to get for $8k that's proven better than this camera? A Panasonic, A Canon, A JVC... no way! This is the latest and greatest for this moment.
 
Duke M. said:
Sorry I didn't check where you were at. Here, I have access to many pro camera stores and try before I buy.

Hey, when I was living in Central America there were these roaches about 3" long, and the army ants, awesome! In the jungle we found some insects we couldn't identify in the books. Especially around the Mayan cemeteries.

The nice thing about when the army ants left there weren't any pests left. They ate everything. Rats, bugs, everything. LOL
Click to expand...


Hey Duke. It must have been great actually "living" in Central America. I've been to Panama many times.

Ahhhhhhh, yes, the Mayan cemeteries. Fascinating and interesting areas of ancient people. Love it.

And, Army Ants. One of the most fascinating of all ants, and the soldiers are really menacing looking. Talk about an organized colony. Some of the largest insects in the world live in the tropical jungles of South and Central America.

FrankC. Thanks for your input. You obviously know what you're talking about with that kind of experience using the Sony. Even dropped it too, eh. Very important info. I'll keep that in mind while I try and decide what's best for us to do, and with the kind of shooting we do.

Thanks to everyone for your help and advise.
 
If you want some extra protection you can get silicone rubber 'armor' for most cameras. I haven't looked for the EX1 but there's probably some out there somewhere.

However, most people are just careful not to drop the camera and don't bother with it.

What is helpful and protective though is rain gear and a UV lens. Rain gear can keep out some dust and mosture. (cameras hate both)

The front of the lens is more likely to be a problem if its scratched and very expensive so many/most people put a UV lens on to protect it and never take it off again.
 
Duke M. said:
If you want some extra protection you can get silicone rubber 'armor' for most cameras. I haven't looked for the EX1 but there's probably some out there somewhere.

However, most people are just careful not to drop the camera and don't bother with it.

What is helpful and protective though is rain gear and a UV lens. Rain gear can keep out some dust and mosture. (cameras hate both)

The front of the lens is more likely to be a problem if its scratched and very expensive so many/most people put a UV lens on to protect it and never take it off again.
Click to expand...

Thanks Duke, for you kindness and advise. I appreciate it.

Considering EVERYTHING, we have decided to return the Sony EX3 and get a Canon 5D Mark II DSLR. Both have their problems, and neither are perfect, but for now, we feel that's our best choice while waiting for the Scarlet.

Take care.
 
Hey George

If I may ask, what aspect of the 5D was "better" than the EX3?

We like to get the full story because this is a place for everyone to learn. People use the search engines to gain info, and the DSLR issue is a hot topic. Are they as good as a camera designed for video? Can one chip hang with 3? Is shallow DOF the best reason to get a DSLR? Stuff like that.
 
Last edited:
Chadfish said:
Hey George

If I may ask, what aspect of the 5D was "better" than the EX3?

We like to get the full story because this is a place for everyone to learn. People use the search engines to gain info, and the DSLR issue is a hot topic. Are they as good as a camera designed for video? Can one chip hang with 3? Is shallow DOF the best reason to get a DSLR? Stuff like that.
Click to expand...

Well, I'll tell ya Chad, it has been my experience since I've been frequenting several of these forums for about a year now, that too many people are quick to ostracize, criticize, make wise cracks, and snide remarks, than they are to help or learn or give good advise. So why should I open myself up to that kind of abuse? There are just too many over inflated egos out there to deal with. I'm old enough now to realize I don't want to deal with that kind of crap anymore.

I am happy, more than happy to help anyone or give my opinions to anyone who cares. But, these are JUST my opinions, and not really important to anyone but me. So, I doubt that they will really be of any value to 99% of the people on this forum.

Some of the reasons we've made this decision to go with the Canon 5D Mark II rather than the Sony EX3 are personal, and others are just gut feelings, and I've learned to go with my gut feelings. These are nobody's business but ours. But, since you've asked so nicely and are one of those who are really interested, here goes.

1 - Canon has much larger sensor and therefore captures more information. To me, it is like the difference in shooting film with a Super 8 compared to shooting in 35mm.

2 - Sony's all plastic construction does not appeal to me or fill me with confidence in it's durability.

3 - Sony's cost will all the accessories we need to do OUR work is over $14,000.oo. The cost of the Canon WITH "all" the accessories is less than the cost of the Sony Camera alone.

4 - Much better chance of recouping money from Canon purchase than Sony when we switch to the Scarlet.

5 - We think the footage from the Canon will marry with footage from the Scarlet much better than from the Sony.

6 - DOF is not one of the reasons because it is actually a detriment to us to have a shallow DOF with the Canon. That is something we will have to fight for.

7 - *A very successful and respected producer for many of the television companies we shoot for, told us that there's no contest and " it's a no brainer, go with the Canon."

8 - For our work, sound is not as big a consideration for us, so the poor audio of the Canon is not that important. We can rent a recorder when it's needed.

9 - Our "specialty" lenses will adapt to the Canon MUCH easier than they do to the Sony.

10 - We can shoot in places where we could not otherwise, because people will think we're shooting stills instead of video, and as a result, permits will be less of a consideration.

11 - An entire episode of HOUSE was shot with the Canon 5D Mark II, and the producers loved it.

Those are just OUR basic reasons. There are many other reasons, but like I said, those are our own. If this has helped you or anyone else, I'm glad, but I am NOT an expert in video. Film yes, but not video. So, take it for what it's worth.

Peace.
 
George,

A camera is always a personal decision since no camera is perfect and one must weigh which features and draw backs are most important with you.

The only point you make that I'd disagree with is point 1) that because the 5D has a bigger sensor it has more data. Size of the sensor doesn't directly relate to data gathered, it affects DOF, light gathering and other issues.

The 5D tests out as resolving about 650 line pairs. The EX1/3 resolves about 1000 line pairs (the full nyquist limit). The 5D, even though it is saving the images as 1920x1080 is actually recording at about the level of standard definition. You can find testing on this forum and others. Everyone has found the same thing.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=186334&highlight=resolution+test

If that level of detail isn't important for you, great. But simply put the 5D doesn't gather a third the data of an EX1/3. More like 1/4 (1/2 vertically and 1/2 horizontally).

It uses a technology called pixel bin-ing to get that high definition still camera sensor down to 1080 size, which mashes a lot of data together, then uses aliasing (an artifact producing false data) to fill in the detail that its lost.

Think of your DVD player upscaling to play on an HD TV. It looks pretty good, especially for talking heads programs (like house). However, put in a blu-ray and it does look better. On a drama I'll buy a DVD, on Sci-fi when I want to see the details I buy a blu-ray.

Plus you asked previously about moire in a close up of a bug's eyes. The 5D and other DSLRs are known for producing moire. Again, Barry Green has a fine article on alising in the articles section to go with the moire shown in the trumpet charts above.

http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20

The other issues may be more important to you, and its your decision. I just wanted you to have your facts right since you don't have a pro camera store nearby and I have both a 7D and EX1.
 
Last edited:
Duke M. said:
George,

A camera is always a personal decision since no camera is perfect and one must weigh which features and draw backs are most important with you.

The only point you make that I'd disagree with is point 1) that because the 5D has a bigger sensor it has more data. Size of the sensor doesn't directly relate to data gathered, it affects DOF, light gathering and other issues.

The 5D tests out as resolving about 650 line pairs. The EX1/3 resolves about 1000 line pairs (the full nyquist limit). The 5D, even though it is saving the images as 1920x1080 is actually recording at about the level of standard definition. You can find testing on this forum and others. Everyone has found the same thing.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=186334&highlight=resolution+test

If that level of detail isn't important for you, great. But simply put the 5D doesn't gather a third the data of an EX1/3. More like 1/4 (1/2 vertically and 1/2 horizontally).

It uses a technology called pixel bin-ing to get that high definition still camera sensor down to 1080 size, which mashes a lot of data together, then uses aliasing (an artifact producing false data) to fill in the detail that its lost.

Think of your DVD player upscaling to play on an HD TV. It looks pretty good, especially for talking heads programs (like house). However, put in a blu-ray and it does look better. On a drama I'll buy a DVD, on Sci-fi when I want to see the details I buy a blu-ray.

Plus you asked previously about moire in a close up of a bug's eyes. The 5D and other DSLRs are known for producing moire. Again, Barry Green has a fine article on alising in the articles section to go with the moire shown in the trumpet charts above.

http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20

The other issues may be more important to you, and its your decision. I just wanted you to have your facts right since you don't have a pro camera store nearby and I have both a 7D and EX1.
Click to expand...


Thanks Duke, but unfortunately I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place. The camera we REALLY want is the Scarlet, and nothing short of that is really going to satisfy our needs I'm afraid.

I realize what you say about the sensor size and resolution of these two cameras is true. In the long run it would probably be better to go with the Sony rather than the Canon. But, the turn around cost is too prohibitive and risky for us. We are not rich and don't have money to throw around like some big production company. We are independent and freelance, and therefore every penny counts. We may regret this choice, but I'd rather regret $7,000.oo than $14,000.oo.

Money aside, probably the two most important reasons for us are the marrying of the footage with the Scarlet and the opinion of a producer who we respect and KNOWS what he's talking about when he recommends the Canon over the Sony. He also has a Sony EX3.

Also, one of my biggest concerns is that video from the Sony EX3 is NOT acceptable to most companies WE deal with, and just "barely" acceptable to a few. If it's barely acceptable today, what about tomorrow and the new technology it will bring. This is where the Scarlet blows all others right out of the water, except maybe for the RED-One.

Speaking of House: Correct if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that there's NEVER been a television program shot entirely with a Sony EX1 or EX3.

You were very kind to supply those details and your opinion, and I'm thankful. All this would be mute if they'd only release the damn Scarlet... ;)
 
George D. Very nice post.The over inflated egos line was right on. Your list had valid reasoning.

I agree with Duke M. about #1 on your list for the reasons he stated perfectly, and I would add that any wide shots with alot of detail won't come off well with the 5D. I don't know the kind of work you do but if you're shooting large vistas , something House did not shoot, the Ex1 would serve you better. The 5d is a good medium to close up cam.

Duke since I have and Ex1 and a 7D and 5d, have you found a good or close pp on the Ex1 to match the canonss without doing any post correction?
 
George D. said:
Also, one of my biggest concerns is that video from the Sony EX3 is NOT acceptable to most companies WE deal with, and just "barely" acceptable to a few. If it's barely acceptable today, what about tomorrow and the new technology it will bring. This is where the Scarlet blows all others right out of the water, except maybe for the RED-One.

Speaking of House: Correct if I'm wrong, but it is my understanding that there's NEVER been a television program shot entirely with a Sony EX1 or EX3.

You were very kind to supply those details and your opinion, and I'm thankful. All this would be mute if they'd only release the damn Scarlet... ;)
Click to expand...

I understand someone not accepting a GOP format, but Canon is also GOP and it has lower resolution and alias artifacts on top. Who do you deliver material to? EX3 is considered far more acceptable than 5DII practically anywhere. Alan Roberts didn't even get through with testing when he noticed the dSLR alias.

If you want something more acceptable than an EX1, it will have to be a camera with an intraframe format. The major HD channels have tested and evaluated most cameras, and they list their requirements for every program quality category they have. The 5DII is at best, considered SD. The EX1 is also considered SD for any top quality program and limited to the same % of runtime. The most strict requirements demand Intraframe + 2/3" + 1080p sensor + 1080p format. The 5dII has no advantage IMHO, quite the contrary.

The last episode of a series is sometimes used for experimenting with new things, especially if it will bring down the cost. The EX3 was used in the final episode of some scifi series (Dollhouse I think) but the new season was shot with HPX3700s. A single episode means nothing. If you want to check what they accept for a project, simply ask them. If you are interested in the future broadcast acceptance of your video, check the specs they have today. Nothing is totally futureproof.

You shouldn't base your decisions on rumours. Rent a dSLR and compare, you will see what works better for your style of shooting. How do you know a Scarlet will be better than everything else? It's not even out.
 
George, this is more or less a serious forum. When you start a thread entitled "EX3 or NO?" we assume you want to discuss the camera you just got and listen to the opinions of others on the subject. And possibly provide some feedback on how the cameras compare if you have actually had some time with them. Some of the reasons you give make no sense, and that would be obvious to anyone that has used EX3 and 5DII. Your reasons list information you already had before even ordering the camera.

Many on this forum use the EX3 with very good results, it's a fine prosumer camcorder, I'm sorry it's not good enough for you. I do hope your Scarlet arrives soon. But people are wasting their time to post on the thread, if you started it to say how bad the EX3 is and how dSLRs and non existing cameras are better, you just picked the wrong title for the thread, possibly the wrong section on the forum.
 
Interesting discussion. George, it is a personal decision. The folks here are just trying to interject facts to help with your decisions as you said you can not test these cameras.

My only view after reading this thread is the references to Scarlet. At this point, nothing concrete is known about Scarlet and the images it may produce. I have to ask, if you do not want shallow DOF, then why is Scarlet at the top of your list?

The vDSLR has stealth, light gathering and price on its side. I watch the House episode and it looked great. If it was shot with en EX-1, it would have looked great as well although with a lot more DOF.

Also, the 5DMKII will hold some of its resale, but when the 5DMKIII comes out, it will lose its shine in the marketplace. Your lens investments will carry on though.

Both cameras you mentioned are capable of great images, so there is really no debate here. Shooting style and preference is really the guide.

Good luck with your decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top