F5: Wanted Beautiful cinematic F5 4k footage.

M

Michelle Farrell

Member
Does anyone think that because the Sony f5 sensor is smaller than Red but has more pixels it makes it a bit too sharp thus being one of the reasons for the Sony videoish look? Ive recently seen an article comparing Red, Alexa and Sony which they call the Alexa the greatest camera in the world. LOL/probably. But also goes on to say that sometimes sharp can be too sharp.

http://wolfcrow.com/blog/the-best-video-camera-in-the-world/
Personal Opinion: The Arri Alexa has the best skin tones and textures. Too much resolution makes skin look ‘reptilian’. Sharpening makes it worse, and sometimes you’ll need ‘re-touching’ to diffuse the impact of 4K.​

Some on this list serve had said that they will be playing with it in post software and think they could get it a bit more toward an Alexa look. Has anyone made any success with this yet?
 
Too much resolution and resulting sharpness is rarely ever an issue, if you need a softer image, just scale down to 2K. Personally I'd be really hesitant to launch in to a feature length production with a new and untried camera Michelle - unless you get the chance to run some in-depth tests on the camera and workflow prior to production.
 
Sharp is never a problem, especially if you shoot out of focus a lot. (meant to be funny joke)

The "video look" as many of us thought for years was due to the lack of sensor dynamic range, but the more I learned to control my lighting on-set and work within limited contrast ratios it looked "better" but still didn't seem to shake that "video look".

I think the real cause behind the "video look" is just plain old poor highlight management. Sure higher and higher sensor dynamic range is going to help capture a little more information in your bright tones - but there is something else internally being processed in Alexa and maybe even the F35 that no one is talking about.

Watch this video comparing EPIC, F55, and Alexa with some shots +4 stops over exposed. The Alexa and F55 do an amazing job keeping those highlights under control, far better than the EPIC in this test:

raw-battle_zpseebb7de0.png


http://vimeo.com/59221541
 
Last edited:
I agree on DR being one mayor factor to get beautiful footage that doesn't look harsh. That's why I never like Red footage but love both the Alexa and F3.
 
Red highlights can look gorgeous too if they're handled right. It's just that the handling seems to be something of an art.
 
I was always under the impression that when RED moved from ISO 320 on the M sensor, to 800 on the MX, it wasn't actually a more sensitive sensor, they just wanted you to under-expose it to be able to get better highlights out of it.

I shot a feature with it and the RED and my lightmeter seemed to have rather different ideas of ISO 800, especially under tungsten light. I know it never was great under tungsten, but let's face it - if you're in a low-light situation, it's probably tungsten balanced.
 
Well, like the look or not, I have to agree that in general terms, the Alexa is the best camera out there at the moment. With exception of maybe the F65. But I honestly have not seen enough of the F65 to judge yet. The same when it comes to the F5/F55, but I doubt those two would really beat the Alexa. From what I have seen from them, they are more like a slightly improved F3 which do 4K than an Alexa killer. The Alexa also seems to be more practical than the F65, which counts a lot.
The Alexa XT is really a sign that Arri is here to do battle for their market share and is really listening. Not only because the internal recorder, while F35, Genesis, F5, F55 and F65 all need external recorders to deliver their best, but also the inclusion of such small things like the internal ND filter. This is something that I never got why the high end cameras never had. It's such a handy thing to have. The REDs don't have it, the F35 and Genesis don't have it and I'm surprised that the F5/55 don't seem to have it either. Specially that they are not really high end and seem to be more aimed at broadcasters. In the case of the F65 I can understand it may be more complicated because of the physical shutter. But the rest? It seems just lazyness or oversight.
Arri was also the first to see that people may need compressed recording at the high end too.
I think the reason the Alexa is the most used camera out there is because Arri gets it. They don't seem to be worried about winning the resolution or megapixel race. They seem to be worried about actually making an practical camera.
 
Last edited:
Adamsenoj said:
F35, Genesis, F5, F55 and F65 all need external recorders to deliver their best, but also the inclusion of such small things like the internal ND filter. This is something that I never got why the high end cameras never had. It's such a handy thing to have.
Click to expand...
??? The F5/55 with the R5 recorder is as close to internal as you'll get in a modular system.

??? Both the F5 and F55 do have internal ND filter wheels.

Have you actually compared the F55 to the look of the Alexa yet? You might get quite a surprise!
 
Let's not forget that Sony deciding to NOT put an internal recorder on the F35 means that five years down the line we no longer need enormous and bulky decks that force us to use tape...

Also, there are a lot of DoPs who seem to want to choose their own filtration. Sony put a filter wheel on the F23 because it was aimed at the market they previously had with the f900 etc... the F35 was a derivitave of the Panavision Genesis and therefore they were told not to put any internal filters in it.

ARRI do listen to their customers, the path being taken with the ALEXA seems no different to the one taken previously with the 435 (The XT sounds very much like the 435 Xtreme) - since the ALEXA came out ARRIRAW has become more doable and desirable, so they're just moving with the market.

Adam's comment is very true. The ALEXA won because it was a sensible design, you put a lens on the front, battery on the back, card in the side and you're good. It's got the blue logo on it and cinematographers know they can rely on it not to suddenly freeze/crash, or otherwise embarass them.
 
PaulReam said:
??? The F5/55 with the R5 recorder is as close to internal as you'll get in a modular system.

??? Both the F5 and F55 do have internal ND filter wheels.

Have you actually compared the F55 to the look of the Alexa yet? You might get quite a surprise!
Click to expand...

Well, we have to draw the line somewhere. As close is not the same as internal recording. But yes, way better than F65 or F35 for sure.

As I said I was not sure about internal ND with the F5/55. This is why I said "the F5/55 don't seem to have it". I couldn't see a filter wheel in the pictures.

The only video I know from the F55 is Dig and Alexa that ain't. I think you could have shot that on a S-log F3 and gotten pretty much the same results. Is there another F55 video out there that shows it to be on the same league as the Alexa?
 
JMtheDP said:
Also, there are a lot of DoPs who seem to want to choose their own filtration. Sony put a filter wheel on the F23 because it was aimed at the market they previously had with the f900 etc... the F35 was a derivitave of the Panavision Genesis and therefore they were told not to put any internal filters in it.
Click to expand...

Yes but this is why you have the no-filter position on the wheel. Just because it's there doesn't mean you have to use it. But it's still nice to have for those cases where you would need it.
 
I'm a big fan of internal NDs, when I gave up waiting for the BMC and jumped on an F3 instead, I'd just forked out the better part of $900 on a set of 4x5.6 Tiffen NDs, and at first I was mad because with the Sony's built-in NDs I figured I'd just wasted $900. But the F3's built-in NDs are pretty hefty, and since my Tiffen set runs 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2 (a four stop range) I can combine them with the heavy NDs on the camera to quickly fine tune my exposure - which is altogether more complicated when you're having to stack NDs in your mattebox.
 
Agreed...the internal ND's are a nice add for when you want to run lean. (not every gig needs a matte box). Arri's range of ND on their new camera is BRILLIANT!
 
I think the reason the Alexa is the most used camera out there is because Arri gets it. They don't seem to be worried about winning the resolution or megapixel race. They seem to be worried about actually making an practical camera.
Click to expand...

Amen to that!
 
Grug said:
I'm a big fan of internal NDs, when I gave up waiting for the BMC and jumped on an F3 instead, I'd just forked out the better part of $900 on a set of 4x5.6 Tiffen NDs, and at first I was mad because with the Sony's built-in NDs I figured I'd just wasted $900. But the F3's built-in NDs are pretty hefty, and since my Tiffen set runs 0.3, 0.6, 0.9, 1.2 (a four stop range) I can combine them with the heavy NDs on the camera to quickly fine tune my exposure - which is altogether more complicated when you're having to stack NDs in your mattebox.
Click to expand...


This is another advantage of built in NDs. Stacking filters in a mattebox is a recipe for double reflections. Since a pola is a very usual need, having the ND in the camera means stacking up filters happens much less often.
 
Hey Adam, Check out Mahout https://vimeo.com/54499106 and let me know your thoughts.

I have owned and been around Sonys for many years and with the exception of the F65 they all have that similar Sony look. Even on my own demo, the shots shot on Red pops out to me as CINEMATIC. I agree, Dig is no Alexa and I dont think Dig is even an Epic.

BUT I am waiting for the magic pill for the F5 to disguise it more toward the film like quality that I am hoping for.

Is there a drag and drop "Alexa" filter I can throw on it? LOL
 
Grug, the gain on the F3 is so clean you can use the gain in combination with the built in ND filters (2 and 6 stops) more often than not with only 1 filter on your lens. I stopped using my 4x5.65 unless it is for dog and pony show, then they come out, but otherwise I just use a screw-on ND filter. :cool:


Did anyone see the highlight handling on the F55 compared to the EPIC? I'd say the F55 is actually doing something to partially prevent the clipping. The EPIC looks horrible at +4 stops.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top