Sony F3 vs Canon 5D MkII

[TimurCivan]

I do think the S35 format is/will be the defacto format going forward, but sometimes I notice this overall tendency for that slightly compressed, telefocal look from APS-C/S35 users which I find just as tiring as some find shallow DOF....

This is a function of the operator. Noone forces you to use long lenses on a s35 camera.

 

[metalalien]

You can't really call it a current fad since film has (with few exceptions) always been that way. Its the convergence of film and video, and its nearly complete.

Yea but some shoot for that look and overdue it IMO. Another of my favorite films, Return of the living Dead, was shot with a deep DOF and I think it looks great.

 

[Duke M.]

With film you've always had the option of shooting deep (think Orsen Wells whispering "Rosebud"), but with video the option is finally available. I bet people can now start choosing when one option is artistically called for when they have a choice.

 

[yoclay]

This is a function of the operator. Noone forces you to use long lenses on a s35 camera.

No one forces me to do anything.
However, what I was commenting on was the prevalence of this slightly more telefocal, compressed look that I see as part of the choices of many who use the APS-C equivalent (or smaller) size sensor cameras and which I find just as hackneyed as some find shallow DOF here.

It cannot be denied that one of the reasons for this is not just aesthetic choice, but rather the "relative" lack of availability of fast wide angle primes for this format outside of expensive, tradtional PL mount lenses. Mostly, slower zooms in this range, which are not as sharp, have more barrel distortion and often vignette. (Though they have improved recently).

I see a helluva lot of 5D owners with 24/1.4 lenses on their cameras. Not so many 7D owners with a 16/1.4 though. In fact none. Because it doesn't exist outside of PL lenses. You are more likely to see that camera owner with a longer lens than a wider one. Don't ask me why, just seems to be that way.

 

[Steve Castle]

The major difference between the F3 sensor and the 5DII is that pixel area of the 5DII is around 6.4μ squared compared to 12μ squared that the F3 is suppose to be. While the F3 may have a smaller sensor it has near four times the photosite size than the 5DII due to the dramatically lower pixel density. This is significant.

However it seems that the current trend for CMOS sensors is that future sensors will move towards photosite summation techniques (pixel-binning) to scale sensor resolution to what is suitable for video versus the averaging/skipping techniques that are used now (as in the 5DII). So we'll likely see future sensors capture great low-light photographs even from a sensor with high pixel density.

 

[Robert Ruffo]

The F3 is a better camera. you know how i know? because i loathe using the 5d so much that i would honestly rather use a HVX and Adapter for every shoot right about now.....

my perscription for my glasses as changed in the last 2 years from eye strain looking at that tiny screen, no PL glass, jerry rigged EVERYHTING, and then once you get it working, you STILL get Moire and macro blocking.

IF the 5D werent the best Stills camera out there i would literally burn it, film it with the F3, AF100, and a RED, and then spit on the ashes.





EDIT:

Sorry just ranting. I still liek the 5D, but its just frustrating.

I agree with your rant.

 

[BobbyMurcerFan]

You got a free mug? How does it look? Does the paint rub off? How much does it hold? I heard the K-Mart mugs can hold a quarter of an ounce more... maybe I should just get that instead? What about bubbles? Someone said that Wal-Mart cups had a tendency to introduce bubbles into the drink. Do you find that you have bubbles in what you drink? Post some footage!!!

Look, anyone knows that water (H2O) is prone to thermal contraction and expansion. So any capacity advantage that K-Mart claims is dubious at best.

I suspect that if you controlled for temperature, or used a rather simple Fourier transform that integrates the natural log of the Nyquist limit of an ounce as it relates to temperature and relative humidity, you wouldn't be so quick to claim a K-Mart advantage.

Or to quote Charlie Babbitt, "K-Mart sucks!"

 

[Cosimo Bullo]

No one forces me to do anything.
However, what I was commenting on was the prevalence of this slightly more telefocal, compressed look that I see as part of the choices of many who use the APS-C equivalent (or smaller) size sensor cameras and which I find just as hackneyed as some find shallow DOF here.

It cannot be denied that one of the reasons for this is not just aesthetic choice, but rather the "relative" lack of availability of fast wide angle primes for this format outside of expensive, tradtional PL mount lenses. Mostly, slower zooms in this range, which are not as sharp, have more barrel distortion and often vignette. (Though they have improved recently).

I see a helluva lot of 5D owners with 24/1.4 lenses on their cameras. Not so many 7D owners with a 16/1.4 though. In fact none. Because it doesn't exist outside of PL lenses. You are more likely to see that camera owner with a longer lens than a wider one. Don't ask me why, just seems to be that way.

Great point about the fast 24mm. Also, we rave about the speed of the Voiglander 25 f.95 on a 4/3s chip, but remember, from a depth of field perspective, this is the same as a f1.7 on a 5d.