Zacuto Shootout 2012 pt. 3 released

Well, here we really see the DR limits of the cheaper cameras. The big boys handled the challenging lighting set up much, much better right off the bat. This test had a more clear cut price/performance scale.
 
I was surprised at just how awful the 7D looked. I didn't expect it to contend with the higher-end cameras, but it even looked worse than previous Zacuto shootouts.

This test really drove the point home that while various aspects of camera technology are important in the sense that they make your job "easier" or "harder", you really can accomplish fantastic images with just about anything.
 
I would be interesting to make "common" people watch these tests... Not telling them what to look for, and see if they notice. I'm a gearwhore myself, but that's mainly because like you guys say, I want to it work appropriately from the start. Not something that you need to fix or enhance in post.
IMO the three last cameras are really in their own league and I'd work with those anytime if the money would allow it. Nice to see the F65 kicking ass. I was impressed by the Alexa, but I think now I'd go for the Sony before the Arri if I had that amount of cash.

Funny thing about image quality. Hunger Games was shot on film right? Some of those low light shots had terrible rendition in the low end, but who notices? The story was great so noone cares...
But still while the test serves to show that you can make finer imagery with all ends of tech, it still reminds me why I'm not filming with a DSLR anymore...
 
I was very pleased by the overall look of the F3. Considering its price, I thought its performance was really up there with the big boys.
 
Thanks to everyone who were involved in this project. It was a very inspirational work for a newbie like me.

I'd just like to share my thoughts on a few things tho' (i have little knowledge, so don't bash me if you think i'm wrong :))

-Those people controlling the 7d and c300 seemed like they aimed too much for that window. I think they should have exposed/CCed with interior in mind. The action was going inside, not outside. They could have pushed the brightness further up. That darkness inside put many people off imho. Especially that dark corner right in the middle of the screen. For a comparison, Sony F65's window looked way more washed out comparing to 7d.

-There was a distinct saturation difference between 7d and c300 with 7d way over saturated.

-Iphone 4s could have used more brightness in post aswell.

-In general, i think the main reason why some cameras looked 'bad' was because the DPs behind them aimed for that window too much. Interiors were so dark in some cameras. That can't be 'just' a latitude problem. They could have helped that with more exposure and a better grading in post.

-And finally, i'd like to know what cameras were used during some of those interviews. Some footage had more noise than my ex1r :)

Overall it was a VERY subjective test but again in my opinion some cameras could have been presented much better than this.

I would like to see scientific tests as well, like comparing lenses on same bodies under same lighting. Or maybe lighting difference with same lens/camera combos etc.

Anyway. Thank you once again for the amazing work :)

Edit: Forgot to add: Wish there had been an ex1r style camera with a 35mm adapter in the test. In the next one hopefully :P
 
Last edited:
I think they were also handcuffed by trying to produce the same long depth of field in every shot, and preserve the highlights etc. I might have liked something shallow concentrating on the actors in front, and blowing out the window so we couldn't see the house across the street. I know it was a camera test so that would have defeated the entire purpose of what they were doing, but it might have been a much more interesting shot.

Look at Inland Empire by David Lynch shot on a PD150. There's blown out windows everywhere in that movie, but who cares?

I"m just saying by staying within the technical aspects of the cameras, you kinda killed the artistic potential that was still there.

You could have just shot charts to show what we already know, the 7d and other less expensive cams don't have the DR of the Alexa and more expensive cams.
 
Just learned again how much dynamic range makes work with available light easier. The test showed again the principle shortcoming of the GH2 (limited DR), the C300 somehow dind't came completely up to my expectations, considering its supposed dynamic range while the F3 performed really impressive. The 7D - someone mentioned it above - was exposed too much on the window but it showed some potential IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top