Jump to content


Photo

Anybody used the F3?


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 24 February 2011 - 06:13 PM

We have a pilot that's considering the F3. Has anybody used it? Any issues to consider, other than the inconvenient viewfinder? Anybody know about the chip, what pattern, how many photosites, etc?



Thanks --





-- J.S.
  • 0

#2 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 25 February 2011 - 12:15 PM

I'm a reseller on the camera so I don't think it would be appropriate to give opinions outside of tech facts. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised with the camera's performance. The chip is a Bayer-pattern CMOS with a native resolution "a lot higher" than the 1920x1080 the camera outputs. Native ISO is 800 and is very clean with low noise.
  • 0

#3 James Martin

James Martin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 227 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 25 February 2011 - 04:56 PM

Is it "a lot" higher than 1920x1080?

I read that the resolution of the chip was only about 2.07 megapixels. Surely that's basically EXACTLY full HD resolution, but translates to lower than HD when the losses of bayer patterning are taken into account? I believe the picture's nice, but I don't like Sony being cryptic about it!

James
  • 0

#4 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 25 February 2011 - 07:59 PM

I read that the resolution of the chip was only about 2.07 megapixels.


I twisted the arm of one of the Sony guys last night, and got an approximate horizontal count of "about 2500". It's a straight up Bayer pattern, not a Q67. Given how well the Alexa does with 2880 horizontal, it might not be all that bad for HDTV. Dividing my number into yours yields 828, which is less than 1080, so they can't both be right, but they can both be wrong. I advised them to be forthcoming with the numbers, to forestall unfavorable speculation. The other significant tidbit is that the camera is linear only for now. They expect to have S-log enabled this April.



-- J.S.
  • 0

#5 Vincent Sweeney

Vincent Sweeney
  • Sustaining Members
  • 686 posts
  • Director
  • LA at the moment.

Posted 25 February 2011 - 08:39 PM

It certainly held up on a 30ft. screen well.
  • 0

#6 Michael Kubaszak

Michael Kubaszak
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 206 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Chicago

Posted 25 February 2011 - 09:50 PM

http://patrickdp.wor...w-hdslr-killer/
  • 0

#7 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11938 posts
  • Other

Posted 26 February 2011 - 05:03 AM

hdslr-killer/




Not at that price, it isn't.


P
  • 0

#8 David Sellers

David Sellers
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 March 2011 - 10:50 AM

I just bought one. Waiting on Delivery the week of March 14th. F3, Brand New Cooke Panchros (18-100mm Primes), New Arri F3 Mattebox/ Follow Focus Kit, etc... Gonna use the AJA Mini for now as Stations are generally taking DVCProHD for delivery on Local and Regional Spots. Once they get their act together we'll be running Cineform on a Cinedeck. Looking forward to THAT!

Edited by David Sellers, 04 March 2011 - 10:51 AM.

  • 0

#9 Timur Civan

Timur Civan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 04 March 2011 - 04:10 PM

I took delivery on one 2 weeks ago w/ cooke lenses as well.

Its absolutely amazing. read here:

initial impressions

preliminary Technical Specs
  • 0

#10 Oliver Christoph Kochs

Oliver Christoph Kochs
  • Sustaining Members
  • 323 posts
  • Film Loader
  • Germany

Posted 04 March 2011 - 04:40 PM

Yes, i have used it. The pre-production model still had problems but the image quality and handling was excellent. It outperforms the Panasonic in many ways.
AFAIK the sensor has just the amount of pixels it needs for HD just like the Alexa. In comparison to smaller photosites sensors this means it performs better in low light, has no problems with moire patterns and does no pixel binning or line skipping.
  • 0

#11 David Sellers

David Sellers
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 March 2011 - 05:55 PM

I was just told to expect delivery next week! :)


Great write up Tim!

Edited by David Sellers, 04 March 2011 - 05:57 PM.

  • 0

#12 Vincent Sweeney

Vincent Sweeney
  • Sustaining Members
  • 686 posts
  • Director
  • LA at the moment.

Posted 09 March 2011 - 05:02 AM

Going into (short/rushed) prepro on a feature now. Guess what camera was decided on after considering almost everything?

Hopefully I will be able to write up some sort of basic production report. I'll post it in the "in production" section and share what I can over the next two months.

Initially all I can say is that this may very well outperform everything else practically available right now, in terms of low-light ability/price/ease of use.
  • 0

#13 J. Lamar King

J. Lamar King
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 764 posts
  • Gaffer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 10 March 2011 - 11:42 PM

I'm on a show with one that prepped out of Panavision Woodland Hills. There have been a couple of strange things that have happened with the camera but I won't go into it because I don't know enough about them. The DP is shooting at 800iso but metering for 640 because tests suggested that the camera wasn't quite 800. We've been setting keys around a 2/2.8 split and fill around a 1.4. I tend to agree with him, the camera maybe doesn't dig as well into the low lights as you would think. It's just a general impression on set and maybe we're splitting hairs but it's informative to try to nail things down as exact as possible with a new camera.

The images look good so far but I really want to see graded material on a large monitor before making a call. Certainly the camera has out grown it's physical format. That handi-cam setup is lame, truthfully.
  • 0

#14 DJ Kast

DJ Kast
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Green Bay, WI

Posted 17 March 2011 - 06:23 PM

I had a chance to get my hands on the F3 last Friday when a rental company in my area got one. Currently we shoot on the 5D and 7D, so that was our bar that we wanted it to beat.

When we walked in it was set up with an Angenieux 10:1 and it had a distinctive video look. Colors were a little too vibrant, but when DOF fell off it got somewhat muddy. (It was in the "Cine-like" mode and S-Log wasn't inabled because that firmware update isn't out yet) I was much more impressed when we put a Zeiss 35mm Super speed on. Color was much nicer and I was more able to appreciate the look of the video.

At one point we opened the window and shot the Milwaukee skyline at night, and the sky still had detail! We did some under cranking, and with a flashlight next to the camera we lit an overpass about 75yds away. I noticed it was actually pretty decent on the rolling shutter issues, and was incredible with low light. We pumped the gain all the way up, and it still was pretty noiseless.

Build wise it's basically a suped up ex-3 and the eye piece is annoying. (standard def, and in the way) If I had to make a conclusion, I'd say I'd love to have it on a shoot to put it through some practical riggers, but I was kinda thrilled to have my hands on an actual video camera again! :D
  • 0

#15 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 17 March 2011 - 07:25 PM

The thing to test on the F3 against the 5D and 7D (sounds like a bingo game...) is Moire and resolution on fine horizontal lines. I'd expect the F3 to blow the DSLR's away on that one.




-- J.S.
  • 0

#16 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 March 2011 - 10:51 PM

I tested one today for a show as a small riggable camera along side an F35, an F9000, and an alexa and nobody at the test was really impressed, especially with it's lack of dynamic range.
  • 0

#17 Mitch Gross

Mitch Gross
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2873 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 18 March 2011 - 12:15 PM

Interesting. I measure the Dynamic Range at 12+ stops.
  • 0

#18 Stephen Murphy

Stephen Murphy
  • Guests

Posted 18 March 2011 - 04:49 PM

Interesting. I measure the Dynamic Range at 12+ stops.


I've just finished shooting a 3 camera F3 shoot and Im impressed with the camera. I'd certainly consider it over a RED for certain drama productions.
  • 0

#19 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2660 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Los Angeles

Posted 18 March 2011 - 08:36 PM

I just shot with it last weekend. I haven't seen anything on a large screen yet, but it looked great on a small monitor.
My main complaint is the absolutely horrible eyepiece and viewfinder. I shot a night scene with very minimal lighting and it was dead black in both, but when I looked at the HD onboard there was plenty of information there. Unfortunately, the camera is pretty heavy, so mounting a decent onboard to operate off of makes it pretty unusable except for very short takes. Ergonomically, it's very bad as well. The majority of my shots were handheld (some pretty lengthy) and it would have been very nice to have been able to put the thing on my shoulder. How do the camera manufacturers still not get this?
I was impressed with the dynamic range (at least based on what I saw on the computer after downloading). There was much more detail in the highlights and shadows than I could seen in the onboard monitor. We did some car work on a very sunny day in Los Angeles shooting inside the car and the sky was holding. I even tried to blow out the background for a couple of cheats we did and it was tough! I was blown away.
We wanted Super Speeds but ended up shooting on CP2's and I was worried about the loss of a stop, but it ended up not effecting me much at all. The camera performed pretty well in low light.
Overall I was pretty happy with the camera. I wouldn't want to use it on a feature or TV show both because of the VF and monitor, and because of the ergonomic issues, but for small projects I can see it having it's place.
  • 0

#20 David Williams

David Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Melbourne, Australia

Posted 19 March 2011 - 01:58 AM

I wouldn't want to use it on a feature or TV show both because of the VF and monitor, and because of the ergonomic issues, but for small projects I can see it having it's place.


You don't think those problems are easily addressed with accessories? Much like almost every other digital camera? You can put an Alexa on your shoulder out of the box and shoot all day, but most others have the same problem. Not saying that's OK, just it's very simply addressable in the grand scheme. Then you have the advantage of small size, you won't be hold a RED for long with one hand in a tight space. And Steadicam?
  • 0


Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Visual Products

CineLab

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Opal

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC