Well it is not RAW otherwise it would be called a RAW format, but it does some things that is like a RAW format.


Then why did YOU call it RAW, when clearly it's not?

But you are wrong sir, it does offer "RAW" in its own. It will shoot 4:4:4 Slog which is its RAW.


Also, I must be as blind as Dean, since I can only see 10bit 4:2:2 mentioned - not 4:4:4.

Anyway, that aside, does anyone know what the "upgrade" to dual link HD-SDI will encompass? Cost? Hassle?

Middle next year or summer probably. Cost ... humm ... I don't think it will be as cheap as some would like. I wouldn't even be able to take a shot in the dark on that. My guess is that you will have to take it to Sony for the upgrade and they will add an element inside the camera ... just my guess. Oh, heck ... stab in the dark $500 to $700 or there abouts ... could even be $1,000.

Anybody else want to take a guess?

Dual link usually carries 4.2.2 in one link and 0.2.2. in the other so I don't understand the value if it doesn't work that way?

Then why did YOU call it RAW, when clearly it's not?



Also, I must be as blind as Dean, since I can only see 10bit 4:2:2 mentioned - not 4:4:4.

Anyway, that aside, does anyone know what the "upgrade" to dual link HD-SDI will encompass? Cost? Hassle?

I said "its RAW" meaning its own version of RAW, sure its not RAW files that are 1's and 0's but its something of a negative. If you're that worried about having to have a RAW signal then you're not in the same range of wanting this camera anyway.

As for the 4:4:4 please use google and read the tons of reviews from credible sources all saying the same exact thing it supports 10bit 4:4:4 raw, including I believe sony members talking about this on video. Just because its not in the white papers you have doesn't mean it wasnt announced after the white papers came out.

I'll do some digging to get you the answer directly from a sony source if I have to.

This is a quote from Film & Digital Times post HOSTED on the Sony Pro site

"At the rear of the F3, there are 2 Sony SxS ExpressCard slots.
The F3 records natively onto SxS Cards at 35 Mbps in 4:2:0 8-bit
XDCAM EX format. The SxS Cards are formatted in standard
FAT file format; a 32 GB Card will record 100 minutes in highest
quality. Many users will be happy with this. But, like Oliver Twist,
many will want more. And they can have more–with the ability
to use the onboard SxS Cards as immediately editable proxies,
while simultaneously recording to a higher standard. That might
include 4:4:4 10-bit S-Log HD-SDI dual link to an SRW-1 /SRPC-
1 SRW tape recorder at visually lossless 440 and 880 Mbps or
(next year) 1 TB Solid State Memory Cards at 220 and 440 Mbps.
There are HD-SDI dual-link outputs at the rear of the F3 for
external recording (4:2:2 1080 50/59.94P normal; and RGB 1080
23.98/25/29.97PsF as an option)."

The RGB upgrade is a full 4:4:4 stream, you just have to wait for it to be available for the upgrade. There would be no point for the dual link unless it supported 4:4:4 the HD-SDI output already does 10bit 4:2:2 out standard. the Dual link is for shooting in S-Log RGB at 4:4:4 theres no other reason to have it.


Also answer to the whole RAW ordeal, pretty much what I said before, this is its "RAW":

"You’ll be able to select S-Log and
Hyper Gamma to seriously increase the dynamic range. S-Log is
Sony’s take on RAW “Digital Negatives.” The image, uncorrected,
looks pale and washed out (like a negative), but when a Look-Up
Table (LUT) is applied, shows the full dynamic range of the image,
giving you greater flexibility for color and contrast correction in
post"

I found a confirmation from Sony stating once upgraded it will support 10bit 4:4:4 out .

HD Warrior Blog Archiv SONY F3 Press Launch in London (http://www.hdwarrior.co.uk/2010/11/19/sony-f3-press-launch-footage-friday-morning/)

go to the video and skip to 11mins and listen to the questions and answers.

He said it will support 4:4:4 as long as you had the upgrade, otherwise its 10bit 4:2:2 standard.

I found it odd that it wasn't in the tech specs. 4:4:4 is a big deal, you'd think they'd flag that up! Maybe they just assumed we'd know it would be 4:4:4 due to the dual link - since that's what it's for...

The S-Log gamma curve, as it's name suggests is a logarithmic "S" shaped gamma curve. The Hypergammas and Cinegammas used in the EX and XDCAM camcorders are also logarithmic, but only in the highlights. S-log compresses both highlights and shadow areas leaving the mid range flat and linear. It is still important that you get your exposure correct as you want to use the linear part of the curve as much as possible. The linear area will grade better as more bits of data are used per luma/chroma change than in the compressed Hi and Low areas. The big advantage S-Log brings is the ability to record 12 stops using standard video recorders. This gives you more headroom in the edit for overall exposure tweaks, inn effect you can extract the 8 to 9 stops normally used for natural video display from the 12 stop range. If you do start using the compressed ends of the curve you will see issues as in the extreme low lights and highlights the luma/chroma is very compressed. Trying to stretch these back out to a linear (natural) looking image will introduce stair stepping if taken too far.

The big deal with S-Log is the use of 10 bits and RGB to record it. Buy using 10 bits you gain more discreet steps in the compressed areas so you can push 10 bit S-Log or even 10 bit Hypergammas much harder before introducing artefacts, provided the cameras noise level is low enough. The F3's noise floor is plenty low enough to really make use of 10 bit recording. By keeping the sensors R G and B outputs discreet and recording 4:4:4 you eliminate cross colour and other interactions, again further improving the image and it's adjustability.

While S-Log is not the same as raw, recorded at 4:4:4 RGB 10 bit it will be extremely flexible, but it's not going to cover up badly shot footage. S-Log onto SxS at 35Mb/s is not something I would do for mastering as you are forced to grade the footage (or apply a LUT) to make the image look half decent. 8 Bit 35Mb/s is not going to be good enough for S-Log, you absolutely want 10 bit. However by the time the F3 becomes available there should be plenty of 10 bit recorder choice, may be even some affordable uncompressed recorders or maybe even a Ninja recording ProRes for $1000 US.

The cameras are officially listed at B&H. Price: $16,000 base, $23,000 w/ primes. Available in February.

Sony PMW-F3L Super 35mm Full-HD Compact Camcorder PMW-F3L B&H

Sony PMW-F3K Super 35mm Full-HD Compact Camcorder PMW-F3K B&H

Somebody please give me 16,000 dollars.

thanks for the info on S-Log. It seems that dual HD/SDI out of the F3 will allow for 4.4.4 ... if I'm wrong about that please inform.

thanks for the info on S-Log. It seems that dual HD/SDI out of the F3 will allow for 4.4.4 ... if I'm wrong about that please inform.

You are correct, from all the sony reps talking there are multiple videos with sony confirming 4:4:4 out of the dual HD-SDI. It just not in the specs pdf's yet.

You are correct, from all the sony reps talking there are multiple videos with sony confirming 4:4:4 out of the dual HD-SDI. It just not in the specs pdf's yet.

This is good news and certainly makes this camera very enticing!!!

Alister - what do you think of S log or Hypergammas at the 4:2:2 10 bit setting. I'm no tech but guessing that 10 bit is the real gift here more important than the 4:2:2 over 4:2:0.

By the way I finally saw your review on the web which answered lots of questions I've been asking.

As I understand it you won't have the option of S-Log or Hypergammas unless you get the 4:4:4 option. Certainly on the cameras doing the rounds at the moment you only have Cinegammas.

S-Log over 10 bit 4:2:2 could still be useful but the extreme compression at the ends of the gamma curve will give banding issues in colours when it's sub sampled to 4:2:2 and then pushed hard in the grade. It's correct that with the low noise of this camera that 10 bit is key but if you have shelled out on the 4:4:4 option then I would want to use a 4:4:4 recorder as well. I'm sure that by next April there will be some interesting 4:4:4 recorders available at sensible prices.

The cameras are officially listed at B&H. Price: $16,000 base, $23,000 w/ primes. Available in February.

Sony PMW-F3L Super 35mm Full-HD Compact Camcorder PMW-F3L B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/743863-REG/Sony_PMW_F3L_PMW_F3L_Super_35mm_Full_HD.html)

Sony PMW-F3K Super 35mm Full-HD Compact Camcorder PMW-F3K B&H (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/743866-REG/Sony_PMW_F3K_PMW_F3K_Super_35mm_Full_HD.html)

When I click on the links I see prices of $13,300 and $18,950. Talk about drooling over something that is just outside of my reach. I need to find some grant money for my documentary so I can justify getting one of these. Anybody have any test footage of one of these with the Sony Primes paired with a nanoFlash yet? I'd love to see how that looks.

-Garrett

Looks like 24 minutes from the Australian conference. Maybe something interesting in this...


Sony PMW-F3 Camera Launch on Vimeo

I was at the Melbourne showing, and one question I made sure to put to Nick was the sensor type. He confirmed it's a standard Bayer pattern, not the new Q67 pattern.

Also asked about the 4:4:4 S-Log upgrade. He couldn't give a price or if it was hardware or firmware. Same with the SR solid state deck and media, no firm price other than affordable and less than SxS per gig.

He did give one indication of an overall price target Sony were thinking of for a fully kitted F3 with S-Log and the SR deck, and that was around $40K AU. Not firm, but a rough estimate.

It tried the thing with 18db gain, and on the SmallHD monitor I could see zero noise. Very impressive, that's 6400ASA.

We saw Jason Wingrove's short projected on a cinema screen. It held up pretty well considering it was mostly shot in 720, graded in Baselight, compressed to a mov and played back from a Macbook.

Did you get any more details about the sensor specs, David? The general hope and expectation seems to be 4 megapixel, but did you get that confirmed?

I didn't ask as I'd already read else where it's a 3.5K chip. Can't remember where or who said it, but it was a Sony source. It matches the Alexa basically, so Sony's math came to the same conclusion I guess.

Thanks, David. Yes, somewhere around the 4 megapixel mark is optimal for normal 1080 HD from a single chip - it gives roughly the same number of green sensors as max recorded luminance pixels. A good balance between resolution and S/N and sensitivity, and keeping the processing relatively easy.

Are we talking about the number of pixels on the sensor or the width of the sensor in pixels as used by RED and the Alexa?

I was at the Melbourne showing... asked about the 4:4:4 S-Log upgrade. He couldn't give a price...He did give one indication of an overall price target Sony were thinking of for a fully kitted F3 with S-Log and the SR deck, and that was around $40K AU. Not firm, but a rough estimate.

That is interesting. I can see the thinking but I am going to wager it will end up being lower. A RED rig now costs about $35 grand once you put all the bits in place to make it a usable package. I can't see Sony putting out the F3 package with the recorder for any more than that. You also have products like the Cinedeck recorder (for 12ish grand) that when paired with a similar camera will yield the kind of material the Sony recorder will put out. Sony has to be mindful of this and this is with existing product.

We are in the early days of shooters and production companies finding out about this product so once the pricing hits then people start to do the comparative analysis and then other options that weren't even on the table now become viable, if Sony's pricing is off. The other big question is other unannounced product. We are still 5 months away from NAB. Announcements generally start coming out in January, then a bit more in March and then a lot of surprises in April.

I was initially talking about the total number in megapixels, but I do now note David says "3.5k" which would presumably refer to 3,500 horizontally. Sorry, misread it the first time.

Hence for 1080 video, total number of recorded pixels is 1920x1080 - or just over 2 megapixels. Because of the Bayer patterning, you need more to get anywhere near that luminance resolution, and 2x is taken as a good approximation, so 4 megapixel total is normally seen as the minimum necessary.

3.5k corresponds to a bit less than 7 megapixel, and that amount is necessary if you're hoping for true 4:4:4 from a Bayer sensor.

I didn't ask as I'd already read else where it's a 3.5K chip. Can't remember where or who said it, but it was a Sony source. It matches the Alexa basically, so Sony's math came to the same conclusion I guess.
I've just been looking at the Alexa spec and I now see it's not 3.5k horizontally - it's actually 2880x1620 ( see Camera Specs | ARRI Digital (http://www.arridigital.com/technical/cameraspecs) ).

Doing the maths, that's 4,665,600, or about 4.5 megapixels. That ties in much better with other things I'd heard - that around 4 megapixels hits a sweet spot for 1080 output of resolution v sensitivity. It's not possible you heard "3.5 megapixel" instead of 3.5K, is it?

That would tie in far better with what's been heard about photosite sizes?

The Alexa is actually 3392 x 2200, but that includes the look around, the recorded area is as you say. It's called 3.5K by ARRI themselves.

Perhaps the quote I read was meant the Sony is analogous to the Alexa 3.5K, but is 2.8K, and really meant it uses the same math, but with no look around area on the sensor.

I went to a Sony event at Visual Impact in London yesterday. Got hands on with the F3.

One of the Sony reps admitted that the F3 can't produce a true 4:4:4 image due to the Bayer filtered sensor, although he said recording 4:4:4 should still yield an advantage as that is what is produced by the DSP.

In short I though the images from the F3 were great but the ergonomics shocking. Sony promised me that the NXCAM S35 camera would share the F3's sensor and have 10bit 4:2:2 output so I'm waiting to see what happens with that at NAB. In the meantime, I'm loving my PMW350. The images I got from it today are incredible. I also got to see a few other goodies like the new HDCAM-SR solid state recorder. I've put up info, pictures and video on my blog: Mike Marriage - Blog (http://mikemarriage.lunarfilm.co.uk/Blog/Blog.html)

You can't get a true 4:4:4 signal directly from any bayer pattern sensor, that includes the Alexa and RED. It's simply because there are twice as many green photosites as there are red and blue. Two green, one red and one blue per pixel.

Once it's been through the de-bayer it becomes a 4:4:4 interpretation of the original bayer pattern. How accurate it might be depends on the algorithms used.

Hopefully the next Sony rep will agree with yours (mike) on the sensor of the NX cam. :)

You can't get a true 4:4:4 signal directly from any bayer pattern sensor, that includes the Alexa and RED.
Not quite sure I fully agree with that, David, at least not without qualifications. But I suppose you do say "directly"....... :-)

4:4:4 implies full resolution for R,G and B, to the specs of the final output signal. Hence, if we're talking about 1080, that implies AT LEAST 2 million photosites for each of R,G, and B (or more). In the case of a Bayer, that effectively means an 8 megapixel chip (4 million green, and 2 million each red and blue) which (theoretically) should be capable of true 4:4:4 1080 after processing.

It's luminance resolution should also be inherently much better than 1080 - which will obviously be lost in giving the 1080 output. And that's the case with Red in 1080 mode.

It seems as though the F3 is about 4 megapixel (similar to the Alexa), but that shouldn't necessarily be seen as a bad thing. It will mean the photosites are larger than a similar sized 8 megapixel chip, so whilst it won't give "true" 4:4:4, it will give substantially better S/N and/or sensitivity. I suspect that for the vast majority of the time, that's the best compromise.

Mike - I also went to one of those showings, and fully agree with you about ergonomics, at least if you're talking handheld. Why didn't they at least base form factor on an EX3 rather than an EX1? It was promoted as a B camera to such as an F35, so might be expected to be used in difficult to get to and running around situations. That said, what's the alternative? The AF101 seems OK, if not up to the F3 standard in quite a few ways - but it's even WORSE for ergonomics!

Not quite sure I fully agree with that, David, at least not without qualifications. But I suppose you do say "directly"....... :-)

4:4:4 implies full resolution for R,G and B, to the specs of the final output signal. Hence, if we're talking about 1080, that implies AT LEAST 2 million photosites for each of R,G, and B (or more). In the case of a Bayer, that effectively means an 8 megapixel chip (4 million green, and 2 million each red and blue) which (theoretically) should be capable of true 4:4:4 1080 after processing.

It's luminance resolution should also be inherently much better than 1080 - which will obviously be lost in giving the 1080 output. And that's the case with Red in 1080 mode.

It seems as though the F3 is about 4 megapixel (similar to the Alexa), but that shouldn't necessarily be seen as a bad thing. It will mean the photosites are larger than a similar sized 8 megapixel chip, so whilst it won't give "true" 4:4:4, it will give substantially better S/N and/or sensitivity. I suspect that for the vast majority of the time, that's the best compromise.

Mike - I also went to one of those showings, and fully agree with you about ergonomics, at least if you're talking handheld. Why didn't they at least base form factor on an EX3 rather than an EX1? It was promoted as a B camera to such as an F35, so might be expected to be used in difficult to get to and running around situations. That said, what's the alternative? The AF101 seems OK, if not up to the F3 standard in quite a few ways - but it's even WORSE for ergonomics!

I have the EX3 and find the ergonomics reasonable but not perfect. I wonder why the JVC ergonomics for their 700 have not been adapted for these small cameras? That seems a very good camera style for light and small cameras!

Hey if we get to vote, I'd vote EX3 any day. I LOVE the compromise between full shoulder and handheld. I'm 6'4" and find the EX3 to be nearly ideal for me.

Hey if we get to vote, I'd vote EX3 any day. I LOVE the compromise between full shoulder and handheld. I'm 6'4" and find the EX3 to be nearly ideal for me.

I would add that the viewfinder on the EX3 is excellent and wonder why Sony didn't incorporate this in their design or design the camera around it. The one flaw that's apparent on the F3 is that the viewfinder on the back is probably going to be useless!

Not quite sure I fully agree with that, David, at least not without qualifications. But I suppose you do say "directly"....... :-)

Go argue with Sony. I was just explaining what the rep meant to Mike.

One of the Sony reps admitted that the F3 can't produce a true 4:4:4 image due to the Bayer filtered sensor, although he said recording 4:4:4 should still yield an advantage as that is what is produced by the DSP.


It seems as though the F3 is about 4 megapixel (similar to the Alexa), but that shouldn't necessarily be seen as a bad thing. It will mean the photosites are larger than a similar sized 8 megapixel chip, so whilst it won't give "true" 4:4:4, it will give substantially better S/N and/or sensitivity. I suspect that for the vast majority of the time, that's the best compromise.

It's has 8294400 recorded photosites if the Sony figures quoted are accurate. 23.6mm wide sensor, 12 micron pixels, bayer sensor. 23.6mm/12um is 1966. A few rounding errors there obviously, so each photosite is @ 6um give or take.

That said, what's the alternative?

David, the rep I spoke to said that I could quote him that the NXCAM would definitely have the same sensor as the F3. I'm waiting to see what that is like. From the concept model it looks to be more modular and so I could possibly build it to suit my own needs. The £5K price difference would buy a Ki Pro Mini, additional VF and all the bolt on rails and supports I would need with a little left over for the "PL glass fund."

interesting look at the camera

Sony F-3 lens trials at Panavision on Vimeo