On another list, a DP from AU reported that his knowledgeable client thought the F3 has a very similar look to the EX3, this even though he had a Cooke S2 on the F3.

I am using EX3s daily and find them to be an excellent camera, so
I am hoping for thoughtful comments and replies gained from those with actual experience with both cams.

TIA!

Jacques

I'd say by default it does, especially in highlight handling.

The tools are there though to make it very Alexa or F35 like, which is my intention when I get mine.

When S-Log comes about, it will be a new ball game all together, as it will take the standard Sony color matrices out of the mix, along with the gamma we're all used to seeing and the detail (S-Log dispenses with detail circuit)

So if you like the EX3 look, then you'll be happy. I myself don't care for it, and plan on doing some extensive matrix tweaking.

Yes, the F3 looks very much like an EX1. That's because they share very similar matrix and colourimetry settings. I know I've had then side by side. If you wanted to mix and match on a shoot you would not have any big problems. The default F3 is more highly saturated than the EX and looks slightly richer, but it's not a big difference. It's hard to say whether the F3 has greater lattitude with the built in gammas, it hints that it does, but the stock gammas are limiting the lattitude, we will have to wait for S-Log to see how much better the F3 is.

The big differences are the lack of noise and ability to easily get a very shallow DoF with the F3. The ultra clean images from the F3 will make grading easier and the shallow DoF... thats what separates a 35mm sensor sized cameras from the everything else.

Alister once again knocks the ball out the park ;).

What is the Dynamic Range of each camera?

The Cinegammas limit the recorded range to around 11 stops.

Standard Rec709 Gamma (similar to EX1 Std 3) with no knee will give about a 7 stop range irrespective of the DR of the sensor. It is limited to this to ensure compatibility across transmission systems and monitors. If you were to record a greater range and then squash it into a REC709 signal then the pictures would look flat and washed out. The knee, helps you gain a few extra stops as it only operates in the highlights.

Cinegammas work by recording an increased dynamic range (460%) in the standard 0 - 109 IRE range. Given that 1 stop = a doubling of the input, you can see than 460% x 7 stops give something close to 11 stops. The sensor might be capable of more, but at the moment the gamma is restricting the range that can be passed through the system. Perhaps S-Log will show a greater dynamic range, I am expecting that it will.

Obviously, one of the big advantages of S-Log is its ability to extend the recorded dynamic range of the camera. The curves from Peter Crithary's posted presentation seemed to indicate S-log dynamic range around 800%, of course these curves are already a couple of months old and done with 'preproduction' models. We'll have to see where it all lands when the official version of the S-Log upgrade becomes available.

I, for one, like the idea that the F3 natively has a similar 'look' to the other Sony cameras both below and above it on the price/pecking order. It means that not only can the F3 act as a nice B-cam (or lightweight steadicam body) on an F-35 or 9000PL shoot, but that on a lower budget production where the F3 is the 'A' camera, an EX1r or EX3 can be used for additional footage without looking totally out of place!

Wonderful discussion everyone. Yes, there are many reasons why the F3 should look like an EX coming out of the box. I get that strategy. That is where it starts and then come the cool extra features that make it stand out. Being able to output and capture to higher bandwidth formats beyond 4:2:2 is fabulous.
Quick question, how does the F3 compare to the EX in low light? I hear that it is cleaner, but how would it do in say a small room lighted with candles? Think seance or palm reading.

The look of the EX3 would presumably trail the F3 by a fairly wide margin in super-low light / candle-lit situations.
Going on the assumption that you are mounting some really fast glass on the F3. Perhaps a T/1.2 or lower lens. (Yes, fast glass can also be adapted onto EX3, but may be harder to find appropriate focal lengths because of the chip size factor.)
F3 large sensor is an inherently faster chip, so '0 db' ISO rating for F3 is higher .
F3 S/N noise level is low enough to allow you to add significant amount of gain to image without becoming a 'field of grain'

Candlelight is a huge challenge, but the F3 does the best I've ever personally seen, and it absolutely blows away the EX1/EX3. Not only does it gather more light, but the gain can be boosted with very little noise.

Here's a test that was done: Sony PMW-F3 Candlelight Test on Vimeo

And keep in mind, that was done at T2.8. Get some Superspeeds and you'll really be cooking.

Certainly, for the money, the lowlight capability is stunning.

Seeing as the NXCam35 will have the same sensor, this advantage may very well pass on to that even lower pricepoint.

"Seeing as the NXCam35 will have the same sensor, this advantage may very well pass on to that even lower pricepoint."

I tend to agree, I think the NXCAM35 may end up as the B camera to my F3 on some lower light projects.
Truly a bonus that you'll be able to mix and match the F3 with EX1/3. as well as with the F35 and 9000PL.

Nice to not have the older cameras become totally obsolete for a change.

I went to Vimeo and found some F3 footage.
I am VERY impressed. Yes, it does blow away the EX3 and really can achieve a look that's cinematic.
Right now, the F3 is on the top of my 'almost able to afford it' - next camera to buy.

Some of the responses deride the viewfinder and 35mbps on board recorder.

Well, on a controlled shoot, i would want a big monitor anyway and have a HDSDI nebtek.

What would be great feature, something similar to AJA's Ki Pro that could record S-log to SSD drives
and for a reasonable price. I think it is time for the Ki Pro to take a price drop.

What would be great feature, something similar to AJA's Ki Pro that could record S-log to SSD drives and for a reasonable price.

Upcoming Sony Products: PMW-F3 & SR-R1 Deck - Negative Spaces - Ben Cain (http://www.negativespaces.com/blog/2011/1/28/upcoming-sony-products-pmw-f3-sr-r1-deck.html)

although the price may not be "reasonable" it will record S-Log 4:4:4 to flash media.

What would be great feature, something similar to AJA's Ki Pro that could record S-log to SSD drives
and for a reasonable price. I think it is time for the Ki Pro to take a price drop.

We will see devices just like that at NAB and the price will be very attractive, of that I'm pretty sure.

The F3 is amazing in low light. I too love the fact that it is such a close match the the EX1/3. This means I can use the most appropriate camera for each shot.

Candlelight is a huge challenge, but the F3 does the best I've ever personally seen, and it absolutely blows away the EX1/EX3. Not only does it gather more light, but the gain can be boosted with very little noise.

Here's a test that was done: Sony PMW-F3 Candlelight Test on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/20576871)

And keep in mind, that was done at T2.8. Get some Superspeeds and you'll really be cooking.

Certainly, for the money, the lowlight capability is stunning.

Seeing as the NXCam35 will have the same sensor, this advantage may very well pass on to that even lower pricepoint.

James, thanks for this real world test. Sure beats the pixel counting chart testing. Really nice images !!

Yeah, there was a report listing Sony's 1TB recorder at a cost of - get this - $40,000.00.

That is stupid. We're talking O's and 1's. Lacie is rumored to have a 500 gig SSD drive for $300.

I keep thinking that Canon will respond and give us what we want.

35mm imager that is as good as Sony F3.
True 24P, 30 P and at least 60P @ 1920x1080
XLR audio input w/ phantom.
HDSDI
Camera's computer controlled Log output (or RAW) via Apple's THUNDERBOLT (IOW, plug and play).
Choice of view finders.

Not my work, mind you, but I'm happy to link you to the goods. Now if only I could find a model like that for my camera tests...

Yeah, there was a report listing Sony's 1TB recorder at a cost of - get this - $40,000.00.

That is stupid. We're talking O's and 1's. Lacie is rumored to have a 500 gig SSD drive for $300.

I keep thinking that Canon will respond and give us what we want.

35mm imager that is as good as Sony F3.
True 24P, 30 P and at least 60P @ 1920x1080
XLR audio input w/ phantom.
HDSDI
Camera's computer controlled Log output (or RAW) via Apple's THUNDERBOLT (IOW, plug and play).
Choice of view finders.

Jacques, wouldn't Sony's recorder allow recording to a better color space and codec? That's what you are paying for. $30-60k is pretty standard for 4:4:4 recorder.

I don't think a LaCie 500GB drive will improve the images you record, since it would still be recording 4:2:2 XDCAM @ 35Mb/s.

Regarding 24p, 30p and 60p @ 1920x1080, the F3 does all of those.

Maybe what I want is impossible or I just have it wrong, but from what I think I understand:

a) ALL of these signals are comprised of Zeros and Ones -
so, 4:4:4 is just another string of them - RAW same thing.

b) The imager is producing electronic signal made up of 0&1s and passing that along a digital pipeline where it can be further processed (compressed or turned into HDSDI or whatever CODE/SIGNAL.

c) With enough ON-Board processing, different signals can be generated for output.

d) IF the camera were able to 'talk' to a hard drive (via its own on-board computer) giving directions to an external hard drive (via thunderbolt) to record when the record button is pushed,

e) it would appear that as long as the drive had sufficient bandwidth, it should be possible for an inexpensive Lacie type drive to record 4:4:4.

Computers used to cost millions. Now Smartphones have super computer capability, so why not?

If you can't grok the difference between 4:4:4 and 4:2:2 or the merits of uncompressed (or lightly compressed) vs highly compressed, then you're probably right. The $500 option will work fine for you.

Forgive me, but your response does not address what I stated.

Maybe what I want is impossible or I just have it wrong, but from what I think I understand:

a) ALL of these signals are comprised of Zeros and Ones -
so, 4:4:4 is just another string of them - RAW same thing.


Yes Data is Data but data must be conformed for its purpose. This is why you just can't take a raw stream of video data from the sensor and simply write it to a hard drive. Thinking that you should be able to, tells me that you have a bit to learn about how all this stuff works.



b) The imager is producing electronic signal made up of 0&1s and passing that along a digital pipeline where it can be further processed (compressed or turned into HDSDI or whatever CODE/SIGNAL.


Yes, and that signal must be packaged into something usable by components further down the signal line.


c) With enough ON-Board processing, different signals can be generated for output.


True, but irrelevant to the LaCie Drive discussion. Anything short of an 6/Gb e-sata port and additional processors IN THE CAMERA, you won't be able to record anything other than the camera's built in XDCAM codec to a $500 drive.


d) IF the camera were able to 'talk' to a hard drive (via its own on-board computer) giving directions to an external hard drive (via thunderbolt) to record when the record button is pushed,


That's a nice thought. Very futuristic. No cameras have Thunderbolt ports.


e) it would appear that as long as the drive had sufficient bandwidth, it should be possible for an inexpensive Lacie type drive to record 4:4:4.


Yes you are correct. I have SSD drives that I record 4:4:4 to. But you're forgetting one important part, the recorder that takes an SDI signal and turns it into a file that can be written to a hard drive. A $500 LaCie drives does not and will not have the capability to turn an SDI signal into a recordable file. Even though it's all just ones and zeros as you say.


Computers used to cost millions. Now Smartphones have super computer capability, so why not?

True but irrelevant. Why not? Because I'm working with what's possible, today.

Even so, there's a difference between hardware and software driven operations. Even on a workstation computer today you add dedicated hardware to provide reliable real time processing for high resolution video - take the RED Rocket for instance.

Software implementations may be cheap when possible - write the code once, then distribute it.

Regarding just feeding the SDI data stream into a hard drive... yes, it's 1s and 0s. But for 10bit 4.2.2 it's 1.5GB/s, and for Dual Link it's 2.970GB/s.

Sony's upcoming recorder can handle up to 5GB/s data stream - so technically this might be possible, but those cards will be super expensive.

By comparison, consumer SSD drives have a read/write speed much closer to 230MB/s

Now, if you were able to record the whole SDI data stream to a 1TB hard drive of some sort, you'd only have space for about 12 minutes of 4:2:2 10bit footage, or 6 minutes of 4:4:4 footage.

Using the HDCamSR codec on Sony's upcoming recorder, a 1TB card could hold about 40minutes at 440MB/s.

Please correct my math if it's wrong.

The next thing is, how would you get the NLE to interpret the container file?

This just doesn't seem feasible to me...

Thanks Aaron. Yes, I am not well versed in digital processing and engineering technology. I'll admit I am not expert as most of my time is working on the front lines of production, and I truly understand it when people say things like, "But can't you just ...". NO, WE CAN JUST OR WE WOULD !!!

We all want the best for pennies, and honestly, with what we can to with the cost of todays tools like the F3 is beyond amazing. I get it and appreciate how far and fast things have come.

Best,

jacques

And, what I am looking for is something closer to RAW 'visually lossless' (ala red) than true uncompressed.
A codec that can hold up for green screen and similar post production loads like decent color correction capability, but closer to what a Lacie SSD could handle.

Then what you want Jacques, is the S-log option (upgrade) for the F3 and record the dual-link output of the F3. We all wish would could simply route the SDI signal to a hard drive but alas you need a recorder to do that task for you. Recorders are expensive.

Using this kind of workflow will get you as close as possible to recording exactly what the sensor sees and without "baking in" any compromises to the recorded data, similar to what you say "like RED", raw.

However, the F3 dual SDI out will allow you to record the data "uncompressed", something you can't do on RED until the EPIC starts shipping.

And, what I am looking for is something closer to RAW 'visually lossless' (ala red) than true uncompressed.
A codec that can hold up for green screen and similar post production loads like decent color correction capability, but closer to what a Lacie SSD could handle.

But see, now you're asking for a codec. Now you do want the camera to do some form of processing, to reduce the data stream and put it in a container file. That requires additional dedicated hardware. Next you need the hardware to drive the interface with the recording drive - whether that be an SxS card, P2 card, SDXC, a consumer SSD hard drive, or Sony SR Memory.

These aren't purely software implementations where an ingenious coder can unlock the potential of the camera. The hardware used to encode the EXCAM-EX format video files can't magically be given a firmware update to encode in the 50Mbps 4:2:2 pro XDCAM format.

This is one reason why we have the high quality industry standard SDI and Dual Link outputs, that allow us to attach external recording modules. But those recorders have specific hardware components to decode the incoming video signal, then compress and encode it to a selected and supported codec, and then hardware to interface with the recording drive to feed it the data.

On the bottom you've got SxS XDCAM-EX, at the top you've got some recorders and codec for 4:4:4 at a much higher expense, and in the middle there are a few 4:2:2 options like the Nanoflash and the Ki Pro. That's the market, that's what's an option for this camera.

Any idea when Sony plans to release the S-log option?

What kind of bandwidth are we talking with S-Log

What's needed to accomplish this task in terms of hardware and money?
(Codex digital recorder or some other out of my price range recorder?)

S-Log comes out April, and is apparently $3,500 license fee, additional to the camera cost. That fee also unlocks 4:4:4.

S-Log is a gamma curve - at minimum 10bit 4:2:2 is advised to have enough data for post. But it's not automatically necessary to work in 4:4:4 to take advantage of the S-Log gamma curve.

That means the Ki Pro and Ki Pro Mini ought to be an option. The Cindeck Extreme is about $10k and can record 4:2:2 or 4:4:4, and like the Ki Pro options, it's portable.

Tethered, you could do 4:4:4 recording to a $1k Blackmagic card by recording direct to a Mac Pro tower. That's the cheapest 4:4:4 option, but the the tether is a significant caveat.

James said it all. I record to either Cinedeck SSD 4:4:4 and 4:2:2, or to my Convergent Designs Flash XDR with 8bit 4:2:2.

I don't actually own any SxS cards to use the F3 internal recorder, but eventually I'll have to get some. Having small proxy / backup files is just too good to pass up.

S-Log comes out April, and is apparently $3,500 license fee, additional to the camera cost. That fee also unlocks 4:4:4.

S-Log is a gamma curve - at minimum 10bit 4:2:2 is advised to have enough data for post. But it's not automatically necessary to work in 4:4:4 to take advantage of the S-Log gamma curve.

That means the Ki Pro and Ki Pro Mini ought to be an option. The Cindeck Extreme is about $10k and can record 4:2:2 or 4:4:4, and like the Ki Pro options, it's portable.

Tethered, you could do 4:4:4 recording to a $1k Blackmagic card by recording direct to a Mac Pro tower. That's the cheapest 4:4:4 option, but the the tether is a significant caveat.

I guess the Ninja recorder people are also making plans for an HD-SDI version. If that happens, and works solidly, then that will be a great option.

I was unaware of Cinedeck. Wow, that is exactly what I was think about when I mentioned thunderbolt.
A recorder and monitor in one small package - on-camera package. I must have walked right by it at NAB and didn't notice. That's one problem when attending alone, you miss a lot of the cool stuff.

I guess the Ninja recorder people are also making plans for an HD-SDI version. If that happens, and works solidly, then that will be a great option.

Especially if it will do 1080p/60p. Correct me if I'm wrong but neither than Nanoflash nor the Ki Pro Mini will do 60p in 10bit, right?

Especially if it will do 1080p/60p. Correct me if I'm wrong but neither than Nanoflash nor the Ki Pro Mini will do 60p in 10bit, right?

I sincerely doubt that it will, since by definition that would need to be a Dual Link recorder. Single link HD-SDI is 1.5Gb/s - which can carry 1080 30p. You need twice the bandwidth to carry 1080 60p - hence, dual link. As both the Ki Pro and Nanoflash are single link, they cannot support 1080 60p.

Regarding just feeding the SDI data stream into a hard drive... yes, it's 1s and 0s. But for 10bit 4.2.2 it's 1.5GB/s, and for Dual Link it's 2.970GB/s.
...
By comparison, consumer SSD drives have a read/write speed much closer to 230MB/s
...
Using the HDCamSR codec on Sony's upcoming recorder, a 1TB card could hold about 40minutes at 440MB/s.
...
Please correct my math if it's wrong.


Ok, yeah that math is wrong. Watch out for those b's and B's... bits and Bytes. You made all the bits into Bytes.

You mean 1.5Gbps / 3Gbps for SDI/3g-SDI. The only number you were correct about in the comparison is ~230MBps (aka 1.8Gbps) which is close to the common maximum speed for some SSDs that use a Sata-2 bus.

A 1TB card would hold ~5hrs of 440Mbps (HDCAM SR compressed) footage.

That is stupid. We're talking O's and 1's. Lacie is rumored to have a 500 gig SSD drive for $300.


Even if simple storage devices were the same thing as video processing/recording devices, which they are not, the rumor you are thinking of is that Lacie's new thunderbolt little big disk will cost about $300 when outfitted with HDDs (NOT SSDs). The 500GB SSD version you are talking about is supposed to use 2x250GB Intel 510 SSDs which cost $600 each as bare drives, so more likely it will cost about $1500 considering the thunderbolt and raid hardware and markup also involved.

As for 0s and 1s, you could just use a random bit generator on a 500GB SSD and fill it with data. You can call that 8k raw 16bit uncompressed data but good luck viewing it or making a movie out of it. Building hardware and software that does high quality video data processing in limited spaces with real environmental and technical imitations and does so in a standards-compliant way for a limited marketplace and selling it at prices that will turn a profit is another story.

That said, yes specialized industry-specific proprietary solid state storage media will always be overpriced when compared to consumer-level commodity standardized solid state storage media, even if the same nand chips are inside. Hopefully manufacturers of proprietary media will be able to add some value added to their media in the form of higher performance or stability or features or it will not last in the market.

Random bit generator - that's good, but I understand the points made. I just do not see plunking down $40K for a 1TB recorder - no matter what it does. Others may find it to be a worthy investment.
In my situation, I would rather invest the $40K into filling out the F3 kit, and if I had to run a couple of cables to the camera, I would accept that minor annoyance.

All of $30k is not out of line. All the recorders that can do this (except Cinedeck), are priced in that range. All of them. I researched it heavily before I got the Cinedeck.

Watch NAB though. There will be some other players.

I, too, had delusions of grandeur about the SR1's price.

So, lets take a look at 'Pro' flash and military-grade flash. Pro is SxS and a 64GB card is ~$850. It takes 15 of these to equal 1TB which would cost $12750. The flash is MLC which is why it has a shorter life span. MLC has roughly 10,000 writes and SLC has 100,000 write cycles before the flash cannot be written to anymore (but it still can be read).

For military-grade flash, you need SLC because its lower error rate, higher data throughput and lack of 'MLC stuttering'. Surprisingly, SLC SSDs cost a bit less per GB than the SxS cards. The Intel Extreme 64GB is only $750.

Or you can look at Red and their 256GB SSD at $3200. 4 of those equals $12800.

Either way you look at it, those 1TB SR drives will cost several thousand dollars - probably near $10k each.

I wonder, is it possible to use the S-log output in the F3 and use a Cinedeck to record the 444 S-log. And is it possible to use an I/O card with 3G SDI like the Kona 3 to record S-log.

The Cinedeck looks mighty appealing right now.

As Aaron says, wait for NAB, or maybe sooner ;-) There will be new players with some very impressive devices for a lot less money than current offerings.

Absolutely. I'm attending NAB for the first time this year. Very Excited.

I'm doing some stuff for Sony, so you'll find me on the Sony booth most of the time.

Any resolution tests/comparisons between the F3/EX1 and maybe the AF100? I've heard both the F3 and the AF100 top out at about 800 lines/vertical. Been considering the F3 as a replacement for my EX1- until I heard about the lower resolution. Is this something Sony can firmware fix? (my guess would be no - but have to ask, because I like this camera, otherwise.)

Fortunately, I'm not planning on making any movies of test charts.

Coming soon - "Test Charts - the Movie" LOL! Was just expecting a little more resolution from a camera which is roughly 3x the price of my current camera - don't think that's too much to ask for.

The proof is in the pudding. Test charts are great for getting specs, but IMHO, what does the image look like projected 20 ft tall and 35 ft wide?
I haven't seen the F3 this way, but the EX3 looks pretty darn good for what it costs.
The vimeo F3 content also looks very good despite the compression.
Right now, the F3 is a real contender in its class.
RED may answer and deliver a camera at this price point that is even better, but we've all been waiting for a long time (no offense intended).
RED Scarlet vs SONY F3 is much like DAVID vs GOLIATH without David at this point.
It would be great to see what happens in April.
SI is also out there working away I am sure.

I agree. The EX series cameras are excellent - in their class. Don't think much out there beats them for resolution.

Thing is - I've got clients who can see the difference in resolution between what I used to shoot (HVX200 & HPX500) and what I shoot with, now (EX1.) I'd hate to spend all that money - to go backward in what I consider a major component to any image.

Any resolution tests/comparisons between the F3/EX1 and maybe the AF100? I've heard both the F3 and the AF100 top out at about 800 lines/vertical. Been considering the F3 as a replacement for my EX1- until I heard about the lower resolution. Is this something Sony can firmware fix? (my guess would be no - but have to ask, because I like this camera, otherwise.)

Yes, Alister did some tests and yes, the F3 is a bit lower than an EX1/3. HOWEVER, the amount of noise in the EX1/3 is exponentially greater than the F3, which is why the F3 is the only camera on my list to buy. Look at it this way - use a noise removal program (Neat Video) on the EX1 video and you will end up with reduced resolution and less noise.

Agreed Kenn. I think there are a lot of buyers out there who, with their next camera purchase, want to move beyond the 'acceptable to very good' stratosphere and into the orbit of REAL PRO.
THE RED ONE has made it into ORBIT. Yes, yes yes, most of us know all the pluses and minuses,
yet the FACT is REAL MOVIE MAKERS are winning OSCARS with it. RED ONE IS THERE.
So the question is who will deliver similar capability/hardware for a lower price point?

Did I forget to mention Canon? Well, talk about waiting. We've been waiting for Canon for years and years.
The 5D doesn't count. That was, for Canon corporate HQ, a mistake imho - but ONE THEY SHOULD NOW EMBRACE.