F65: Why the F65 is better than the F35

Guys we are being trolled. If you don't believe only look to meesepiece post contradicting himself.

He say this:

MeesePiece said:
The F35 is not smooth. It has Anti-Aliasing, it has moire, it doesn't handle blown-out highlights well.
Click to expand...

But then say this:

MeesePiece said:
The F35 has excellent dynamic range handling as you see in this test and beautiful motion and very nice skin tones, but lacks in resolving power that in my opinion makes sense why the cinematography community has not reached back , and embraced the F35, now that with the odyssey, it is a highly functional camera to use on any film shoot.
Click to expand...

So now F35 have excellent dynamic range? No complain of blown high lights?

But in other post he say this:

MeesePiece said:
I wasn't getting there. I tried as hard as I could with the f35, but I would in the end be disappointed with certain resolution issues and highlight handling and skintone and lack of color diversity in the skintones.
Click to expand...

But he said F35 has very nice skin tones in other post. Again complain of high lights? But he said F35 has excelent DR.

Then finally he say:

MeesePiece said:
It's a forum for the F35/F65. And I'm merely trolling SJX.
I apologize for the dust.

Here's why the F35 is a wonderful camera.

-Beautiful CCD sensor does not subsample any red, green, or blue channels.
-Can record 12-bit uncompressed from it
-beautiful global shutter
-wonderful skintones and dynamic range - holds up the highlights incredibly well.
-it is cheap as heck right now- a 250k camera is now only around 6k on ebay!
-has incredible natural resolution for a 1080p image
-It can compete, head to head, with the Alexa.

It's an amazing camera, thanks in part to being co-developed with Panavision.
Members on this forum, most specifically MacGregor have gotten some truly stunning imagery with this camera.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately meesepiece you not trolling only me. You trolling and waste time of whole forum and all replying to your troll posts.

But most disappointing is when I found out who meesepiece really is. Not hard to discover. He has F35 for long time but only registered here Dec 2015? No. Meesepiece is here for long time. Who we know have F35 and F65 and Red 1 together? I think meesepiece is Ed David trolling us all. Yes I was very disappointed too because Ed was a guy I admired.

The framegrabs meesepiece post before in this thread are from Ed David short movie Chatterhead:

CaTlkbWVAAARqhq.jpg

CaI8doeUsAEUQyl.jpg


Ed David took his F65 to NYC metro to film Chatterhead. Meesepiece post this framegrabs in this thread saying is his work. But is from Ed David movie Chatterhead:

MeesePiece said:
Here's some stills from the F65 shoot I did and putting together as a short film.
Shot raw compressed.
then went into filmconvert, alexa profile, and tweaked from there.
I'm back to using filmconvert as a starting point.

View attachment 110486View attachment 110487View attachment 110489View attachment 110490View attachment 110492View attachment 110493View attachment 110494View attachment 110496View attachment 110497
attachment.php
attachment.php
attachment.php



Rewatching stuff I shot on the f35 - the motion is nicer still and it has really beautiful reds. But the f65 still has more of a colorspace to work in, and has more inherent resolution so everything feels smooth. I shot with digital diffusion 1/4 and actually in these stills took down on midtone detail for a creamier look.
Again I'm not bashing the f35 - I own one still. It's a damn fine camera.

I really at this point would love for people to stop bashing the f65.
It's a very incredible camera.
Click to expand...

If meesepiece is not Ed David why he post Ed David work and say is his work? Ed now made his Chatterhead movie on vimeo private. Now you can't watch without password. But I and many saw it before and also his thread in another forum about Chatterhead. So is meesepiece Ed David or meesepiece post work that is not his work saying is his work? I think he is Ed. But doesn't matter. Ignore meesepiece. This was all just waste of time for everybody. Aparently wasting people's time amuse him.
 
Yes, again, The F35 can not compete in my opinion in terms of perceived resolution with the Alexa, F65 or Red.

This is the only test I could find - blown up to 300% - it's not a sharpness test but the closest I could find
400_redone1.4.1.jpg400_d211.6.1.jpg400_f351.5.1.jpg_d21_300.jpg_f35_300.jpg_redm_300.jpg

I find there is a smoothness to the Red (M) image and more to the Arri D21 than to the F35.
Of course, the trade-off you see, is that it appears there is more dynamic range in the F35.

The test they did doesn't look perfect - it seems to be taken with a different background, but hey, it's a free test and free DPX files to play with.

http://www.cinematography.net/Hannover/Index.htm

This is the best comparison test I could find.

Listen all, I am not trolling this forum. I stated my opinion, why I think the f65 is better than the f35. The title of the thread should have said "why I think" - and I wish I could change that.
I have written several strengths of the F35, and there are several. In the original first post.

Yes I'm not innocent. This is more an examination of how I blindly listened to others that the F35 was delivered from the Gods down to earth, and that the Red camera was bad.
And this is so foolish.
The F35 has strengths. And weaknesses, same with the red cameras.

But the red camera is not the worst camera ever made, and the f35 is not the best camera ever made. Just because the F35 cost $250k when it came out and the red m cost $25k or so, doesn't mean the F35 is ten times better than the Red m(x). I think it's better in dynamic range but not in inherent resolution.

And the Alexa is not the best camera ever made.
It's the camera the best DPs use, so it has the best images.
There is a difference there, SJX.

My F65 camera I now have is not a good camera. Or a bad camera. It's a camera. It has more strengths than weaknesses in my eyes, but it may have more weaknesses than strengths in yours. You may not want a camera with more dynamic range and more sensitivity or a mechanical shutter. You may not want 16-bit raw or more inherent resolution or built-in nds. You may want a camera that has a CCD - and the finest CCD sensor ever made. You may want one that is lighter, consumes less batteries, and costs only $6k right not, compared to a camera that costs all in, about $30k. There is no one magical camera.

A blown out sky is a blown out sky. An overexposed face is an overexposed face. A poorly-lit diner scene is a poorly-lit diner scene. You can do that with any camera, even the most expensive camera ever made.
 
Last edited:
MeesePiece said:
Listen all, I am not trolling this forum.
Click to expand...


Ed David. I think you doing this wrong. Even after you got caught contradicting yourself. Even after you got caught trolling. Even after others call you out why you said F35 has bad high lights when you know is not true. You keep posting the same things and ignoring the real questions.
You doing this wrong. You want people to like F65. You want people to like F65 more than F35. You can’t do this with making useless troll posts. You can’t do this with telling us we are just stupid and drinking the koolaid. You can’t do this with telling us F65 is superior. You must show. You have to do awesome work with your F65 and post. F65 must conquer the spot in the sun like F35 did. F35 conquered with people posting awesome framegrabs and showing how good F35 is. Not with trolling and not with one guy trying to force people to change opinion. Just stop this and keep posting your work with F65. You don’t have to say why F35 is not as good or why F65 is better. You only have to post awesome F65 things and if people like they will see by themselves. F35 is not well liked because things I say or image I post from movies. F35 is well like because of many awesome work posted. It already conquered spot in sun. Just post your F65 work. If people like they will compliment. If people don’t compliment maybe they don’t like. You can’t make them like.You can’t force it. This thread is sad and useless. I'm finished here.
 
I'm not sure why the F35 has to be better than the F65 or vice versa, you guys should all be very happy you don't have the F55 lacking the mojo all together like I do. :happy:

Just look it here what this poor chappy DP had to do with his F55 for the Netflix show Vinyl. People want to tell me this is all very "normal" and par for the course. It only proves my point.

Preto said:
"After a battery of rigorous tests, Prieto chose the Panavised Sony F55 with the S-Gamut3.Cine/SLog3 color space and a film emulation LUT" "That combination gave us really pleasing richness of color,” says Prieto.
Click to expand...

Preto said:
"The right amount of grain structure was achieved by varying film stock, exposure and development on shots of a gray card. Using LiveGrain, a system designed by Suny Behar, Prieto could apply, for example, 16mm grain in the shadows and 35mm grain pushed one stop on the highlights – in the same shot if he desired. "
Click to expand...

Preto said:
"What I liked about all this was that I could create a formula that then could be reproduced in the rest of the series,”
Click to expand...

Preto said:
“What I found was that the Primos used with Soft FX filtration rendered a look very similar to the older glass."
Click to expand...

Preto said:
"Panavision also adapted the Primos, allowing Prieto to use the Soft FX behind the lens and avoiding the ghosting that sometimes comes with stacking filters in front of the lens. The filters themselves were custom-made with various combinations of neutral density, further simplifying the image path."
Click to expand...

http://www.panavision.com/vinyl-offers-rodrigo-prieto-rock-n-roll-canvas
 
It is now that I found my cup.

Just a little antsy..... My wife is headed out of town for the weekend, and I'm going shopping for a big ass steak and a gallon of ice cream.
 
Ed David I simply do not get your form of sarcasm. I really don't like getting involved in politics but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder ever since you had to start sneaking in to dvxuser using different handles.

Please do not kill our forum with misinformation, this is what will happen, and I don't think even you want that.

I have seen some great shorts and camera tests shot by you Ed, you really have a creative eye. But then you go and post a camera test where the F35 focus is "marginally" (a word I would never use to describe focus) off and you don't understand why this totally destroys the credibility of your test.

Damn, I could make my Sony Z1U have more resolution that my F35 if the focus was "marginally" off.

I always accepted your camera tests because they were full of creativity but clearly lacked any scientific method. It just makes me a little upset that you are posting this stuff and it will change the minds of people who really want information about this camera.

Seriously, no one really thinks the F35 is superior to the F65. WHY we are interested in it is the F35 costs 5k not 30k. I don't know where you get tens of thousands for collections of camera bodies, but to many of us, the cost is a huge factor in buying an F35 and the F65 isn't an option yet. As soon as there is a 10k F65, we will adopt it with the same love we did the F35.
 
David W. Jones said:
It is now that I found my cup.

Just a little antsy..... My wife is headed out of town for the weekend, and I'm going shopping for a big ass steak and a gallon of ice cream.
Click to expand...

When my wife is not around, I find I do similar things. For me it's hitting a drive-thru somewhere or eating in the living room watching movies.
 
Yachachahcha -
I use different accounts because I keep getting banned. Well the 2nd time I was banned was because they figured out it was me. The first time I was banned because I posted how I thought reduser.net was off on their "who's viewing" count based on analytics I took from a Alexa.com - the anayltics site. I don't think they liked that.

My camera tests are horrible. They aren't tests. They were pathetic.

Slightly off focus? I'm not talking about focus. I'm talking about the smoothness of the image. The meatiness of the image. Its focus is off by a smidge. At 400% enlargement you can't notice it. Only at 600% enlargement. Come on y'all. Use your noggins.

And yes SJX was going off on how the F35 looks better than the F65, as were others on this forum earlier. As were others going off on how the F35 is better than the Red. A ton of people had. "The F35 is cinematic, they lost it with the f65" - that's been a long chant here on this subforum. One doctrine I would adhere to.

Yet, of course, this is a "all hail the F35 forum" - so once I discovered I was just drinking the kool aid, I felt pretty dumb, and used my anonymous identity to talk about this. Or as Jones puts it, "my coffee issue" -
anyway the ruse is up. The sleuth SJX found my true identity and soon Meesepiece will have a "bronze member" status - which means I was banned.

And that's okay. I get the punishment I deserve.

And in closing,
I would like to say,
the F35 is a wonderful camera.
It has beautiful image and skintones.
It is a 250k camera with the most gorgeous motion,
it cost a ton of money,
cause it was cutting-edge,
and the red one came in,
and everyone laughed,
except for red,
who now have arri beating them.

But I also think the blackmagic pocket cinema camera has a beautiful look to it
maybe as beautiful if not more than the f35.

So take everything I think or say,
or anyone else, whether it's Shane Hurlbut or a big shot DP in American Cinematographer,
with a grain of salt.

Because this isn't a science, it's just opinions.
And everyone has one. Even though it seems
like specs are all that matters.
They don't.
They don't.

[take me away, moderators. I'm ready now]

MODERATOR enters room. Grabs MEESEPIECE.

The Sound of clinking and clacking as MEESEPIECE is carried into his cell. It's a cell with one overhead light, one flouerscent 4300k bulb flickering overhead. He sits down and eats a Turkey TV dinner, drool coming down the side of his mouth.

The MODERATOR deletes the thread. All is returned to normal. Wedding photographers celebrate! Timelaspe shot, night to day. Crowds outside the cell cheer!
FREEZEFRAME ON SJX as he jumps up into the air!

The END
 
Last edited:
Ed your F35 work is your best stuff. It all looks great. Better than the last one with the F65 and better than the Red One shorts. You're getting hung up on the camera's grain but consider that it might be a forest for the trees thing.
 
fun solution to, or perhaps rather a way to embrace, camera noise. I frequently use filmconvert's plugin in DI for 35mm grain (only using the grain, not their LUTs) and digital camera noise tends to mix into the grain. It gives you that extra kick for a more natural "filmic" picture. Works great with the red MX sensor, gonna experiment next week with the new F35.
 
starcentral said:
I'm not sure why the F35 has to be better than the F65 or vice versa, you guys should all be very happy you don't have the F55 lacking the mojo all together like I do. :happy:

Just look it here what this poor chappy DP had to do with his F55 for the Netflix show Vinyl. People want to tell me this is all very "normal" and par for the course. It only proves my point.

http://www.panavision.com/vinyl-offers-rodrigo-prieto-rock-n-roll-canvas
Click to expand...

Thanks for linking to this article. The LiveGrain plugin looks great- on the cheap however I really want to play with pulling luma keys and applying different grains to shadows, mids and highlights. My pixel peeping has taught me that grain of various strengths exist in different luma levels of an image and isn't carelessly smattered over the whole image like we see so often. Really enthused about trying this technique.
 
Last edited:
MikalZ said:
Ed your F35 work is your best stuff. It all looks great. Better than the last one with the F65 and better than the Red One shorts. You're getting hung up on the camera's grain but consider that it might be a forest for the trees thing.
Click to expand...

The camera is just one small variable on whether my work or anyone's work is good. It's also the director, gaffer, colorist, editor, lenses choice, bla bla bla bla, etc etc.

Interesting about Prieto and the F55 on Vinyl. I know he used the f55 for night scenes on that film he shot for Tommy Lee Jones. Didn't catch that one.
 
Last edited:
That's par for the course though, Dennis.
I've used filtration and grain on pretty much every shoot I have done in the past 5 years, and before that I shot with the letus adapter that added its own weird grain.
Every serious show or film should already have this as part of their workflow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top