F3: Why is everyone selling off their Sony F3?

If it fits your business and your projects who cares why people re selling it.

It is a great camera that produces sweet images.
 
There's a whole slew of folks who think that having the latest and greatest is their personal key to success. Who cares? The good side of it all is that prices really drop on gear that is still better than any new fad on the market. It's that simple. I'm more impressed by footage from the F3, than anything I've seen, yet, on the FS7. I think that speaks more to WHO is still shooting F3's. Sony depends on these sort of folks for their profit. When, in the end, it's about the quality of the footage, not what you shoot it with.
 
I have an FS7 but still hanging onto and loving my F3. It's still a totally useful tool. In my opinion the finest 1080p image out there especially at the prices I've seen recently. For HD delivery you can't go wrong with the F3.

Surinder.
 
In my humble opinion the f3 produces far better images and color than most cameras in its price range. I think I even like the images better than the 1dc in which i'm fond of. For some reason it seems sony got the color science perfect on this cam and missed it on its other sub 10k cams. Its a good size, not to big, not to small, and the stock images has such an organic look to them. very pleasing to the eye. I'ts just a shame that in order to seem and stay relevant you have to sometimes play latest and greatest equipment game that some of us can't afford, and hence why we sale to get the latest. At the end of the day I will probably not utilize the 4k functions on these cameras for a few years to come.

On a side note I just acquired this cam for a great deal with the coveted 444 rgb option, and low hrs hovering around 200 and son some change. This package new was $16,000 new not to long ago. This is how the equipment game goes.
 
Some clients demand the latest and greatest, some demand '4k' or 'Slow motion' or 'raw', often with no understanding of what these things actually mean to and for production.

And these unfounded demands constantly push things further in terms of camera replacement cycles.

I never wanted to upgrade my F3 to an F5, it seemed too small of a jump IQ-wise. And for the vast majority of my shoots, having done so has made no difference. I only upgraded because of client demand for HFR, and the fact that (due to a promotional special) I could move to the F5 for $10,000 or add an Oddysey7Q and 4:4:4 upgrade to get 60fps) for $5,000.

For just $5,000 extra, it made financial sense to move to the newer and more feature-laden camera.

But the F3 is hands-down, the best deal going at the moment. I'm sorely tempted to pick up another so that I can offer a decent B-camera option to producers for two-camera shoots.

I think that if you work for the kinds of clients who don't know about camera 'names' it makes a tonne of sense to use something like the F3. It's a small investment for a whole lot of camera.
 
Well i'm selling mine because the FS7 fit my needs better and is 4K which some of my clients want now. I don't have need for a second camera otherwise I would keep it . It absolutely takes beautiful pictures and is way underpriced on the market right now Head & shoulders above any camera its price range. $2999 takes it if you're interested.
 
reem12 said:
In my humble opinion the f3 produces far better images and color than most cameras in its price range. I think I even like the images better than the 1dc in which i'm fond of. For some reason it seems sony got the color science perfect on this cam and missed it on its other sub 10k cams. Its a good size, not to big, not to small, and the stock images has such an organic look to them. very pleasing to the eye. I'ts just a shame that in order to seem and stay relevant you have to sometimes play latest and greatest equipment game that some of us can't afford, and hence why we sale to get the latest. At the end of the day I will probably not utilize the 4k functions on these cameras for a few years to come.
Click to expand...

Could not agree more. The quality of the images and the skin tones still look better to me than its higher res cousins, and having just used 3 Red Dragons on a shoot recently, I can say that I still prefer the F3!
it may also be that film has less resolving power than most of the newer cameras and thus the F3 often looks closer for that reason, dont know. But at $3k these days, an aspiring filmmaker would be crazy not to get one.
 
Back when it was launched, I was literally one ferry boat away from a purchase of this camera. Also discussed a lot here about the pros and cons of purchasing. Then Red announced the new Specked Scarlet (at the same time, I believe, as the C300), and it just didn't make much sense to me to go for it. The reason was not the picture- I literally loved every single frame coming out of the F3 on the tests posted here by some great dvxusers. The Vegas natural light test was absolutely stunning. Have seen lots of content done with this camera and I see no fault whatsoever with it. Also, its an "F" series camera, not FS, which means its higher end. I think that is the reason its image is much more comparable to the high end Sony's then the FS series of cameras.

I ended up taking the early adopter Epic deal (phase 4), not even going to Scarlet, for the resolution, high speed, Raw and yes, the indie friendly native EF and Nikon Mounts. The EF mount of the Reds is actually better than the Canon ones on their own C lines of cameras, which is kind of funny. I remember back when I was deciding to go F3, adapters for Canon lenses were still far away or where "dumb" (no aperture or IS control.). For someone that had invested more than 10K in Canon glass (during the 5D revolution), it was essential to be able to keep using that glass. I don't know how things are right now, but probably most of these issues are a thing from the past.

All in all, in terms of picture quality, the Sony F3 is probably the only Sony camera whose look I love. They nailed it with that cam.
 
Hey,

having upgraded to a f55 from an f3 i'm seriously considering to buy an f3 again as second cam.
Same mount, same adapters...
it's just so easy to work with. out of the bag, flip out the screen, shoot... lightweight beauty...
gr8 images, "softer and more natural" feel than the F5/55s...
slap on the tiny atomos or a 7Q...
did amazing work for us on the GARMIN productions we did
 
Im an indie filmmaker and just bought an used F3 for a bargain price. Im just blown away how easy it is to work with and how great the images look. Even the 720 50p looks really good and im using it with confidence on everything thats going web and not big screen. Last friday I was chasing a rap artist in the middle of the night with a nikon 14-24 and 720 50p att ISO 9100 and I was really scared that it would look awful but the camera held great color and tone and the blacks got nice and clean. This was all shot internal even though I did record in 10bit prores aswell Im not sure I need to use it. I can post a quick draft later.
 
I never had a problem with the image from an F3 if you had a recorder.

But the bad EVF placement, need for a recorder means you end up with a big rig.. the Fs7 is smaller !

S
 
For me, it was "either sell it now, or keep it forever" because with those new cheap next-gen cameras, nobodys going to pay anything for an F3 in a few years. And to give it away for 500 bucks in a couple of years, wouldnt be an option for me. The F3 is still kicking, only thing missing for me was the 1080p60. I took the 5000 bucks I got from selling my F3 and put it in an FS7.

My last shoot with the F3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiraQLoh8Co
 
Everyone seems so busy saying what a great camera the F3 is that no one seems too be answering the Original poster's question.

The F3 is a good camera but the internal codec has limitations. At 8 bit you can get banding with heavy grading. With 4.2.0 color you can have green screen edge issues. Also, that codec isn't accepted by Discovery channel, BBC, etc. It's EVF it's poorly positioned and the ergonomics are off for professional use. The F3 has a few less pixels than it should have.

The FS7 fixed most of those things plus it shoots 4k. Depending on how you shot you may not need the FS7. If you're just starting get the f3. Many accessories and lenses are transferable to a new camera.
 
Duke M. said:
Everyone seems so busy saying what a great camera the F3 is that no one seems too be answering the Original poster's question.

The F3 is a good camera but the internal codec has limitations. At 8 bit you can get banding with heavy grading. With 4.2.0 color you can have green screen edge issues. Also, that codec isn't accepted by Discovery channel, BBC, etc. It's EVF it's poorly positioned and the ergonomics are off for professional use. The F3 has a few less pixels than it should have.

The FS7 fixed most of those things plus it shoots 4k. Depending on how you shot you may not need the FS7. If you're just starting get the f3. Many accessories and lenses are transferable to a new camera.
Click to expand...

Good summery!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top