Upcoming hands-on comparison of F3, FS100 and AF100 from Philip Bloom

[Steve Mullen]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

From my time with the FS100 the 18-200mm Sony lens is really not a good lens.

When Alister and I agree 100% on something for the same set of reasons you can bet its true!

I very much liked the feel of the 1855 zoom, but it is an indoor lens only. Meaning it is just too short.

But, as an indoor lens it is really too slow. Although, if you buy the FS100 the 2-stops extra sensitivity really will help!

But if you listen to Alister and Doug who have shot with the FS100 and those of us who have shot with the VG10 -- the real fun begins when you buy an adaptor and go to your local camera shop and start buying $75 legacy lenses.

Remember, the difference is the VG10 has no Focus Assist while the FS100 does. And, the FS100 doesn't force you to buy an 18200 E-mount.

PS: My focus on price/performance comes from the fact in the USA today when one is at retirement age -- and, for example, where a good friend still not out of hospital owes $500,000 in medical bills (and she's younger than I am) -- it is hard to grasp there are so many folks who own multiple really expensive cameras. And, can afford do buy gadgets to make them work.

What's odd, is that in the Avid list, the mood is so different. Many are approaching retirement age and trying hard to not spend an extra dime because the market is driving post houses out of business. Editors are still using G4s to keep costs to a minimum. If they can get to retirement without buying anything, they are happy. In fact, given the political situation, we NEED to get to retirement without buying anything we don't need. :)

So Chris, there is a story here: the economic worlds of shooting and post.

Of course, there is another difference. Folks don't buy a Media Composer to show off a new toy. Cameras are status symbols -- and big boys love to dress them up the way little girls dress up their dolls. Media Composer owners are using them to make a living. That's not necessarily true of those buying new cameras -- and Sony understands this well.

Last, editors, have learned "good enough" really is all producers want. And, with over 80% -- in the USA -- getting video via highly compressed pipes, producers know quality will be compromised anyway. Public TV stations, for example, cram a 1080i channel and 3-4 SD "school" channels into 19.4Mbps. So this desire for the best image rather than a camcorder that one can work with VERY rapidly and is CHEAP, seems not to match the economic reality of TV production. And, this reality is where both Panasonic and JVC thrive. (And, the sellers of DSLRs.) They understand that shooter skill can overcome the lack of absolute maximum camera image quality and that many/most profit-driven shooters are far more interested in "bang for the buck."

[Liam Hall]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

For the $500 the lens adds to the kit I would rather get a Nikon adapter and buy a couple of decent, used Nikon fit lenses like the 50mm f1.8 AiS or the Tokina 28mm f2.8.

I'd rethink both of those if I were you.

The Nikon f/1.4 AIS is far superior to the f/1.8. Can't speak for the Tokina, but it is more than a little slow for my liking.

Also, you'll spot the difference cutting between the Nikon and Tokina as the lens coatings are very different.

[Steve Kalle]

The best sites I have found for comparing lenses are photozone.de and slrgear.com.

In another thread, some are arguing about vignetting and the above sites will show how much more APS-C lenses (EF-S, DX, etc) vignette on an APS-C sensor compared to a full-frame lens on an APS-C sensor.

Another common theme I have found from the lens testing is that all Tokina lenses suffer from CA much more than competitors. Although, be wary of full-frame Nikon tests shot on the D3 because this camera has built-in CA removal.

Something else to consider is that older lenses also tend to have more CA due to the different coatings for film versus newer coatings for digital. This is very apparent in Minolta lenses and a few Sony Alpha lenses that were carried over after the acquisition.

[Brian Drysdale]

I'm not sure how lens coatings affect CA, more likely they're newer designs which offer better CA correction than the older optics. Having said that, quite a few people like using older optics on digital cameras because of how they look.

[Liam Hall]

Modern lens coatings are designed to prevent internal reflections, coming from the sensor, causing flares and ghosting.

Chromatic aberration is caused by a failure of the lens to focus all the wavelengths of colour - known as refraction. Modern lenses use low dispersion glass or ultra low dispersion glass to combat this:

Canon BCTV Lenses: What is Chromatic Aberration?

[Dave Elston]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

There will be lots of ND options for the FS100. There will be Nikon adapters with built in ND's

Hi Alister,

Are you able to provide any more hints/details on when and where these Nikon adapters with built in NDs might become available? Are there any confirmed ETAs or have you only heard rumours that they are in development.
I hunted around the MTF site but couldn't find any upcoming adapter details or announcements.

Lack of built-in NDs is the biggest drawback of the FS100 IMHO, so a 3 or 4 step ND e-mount adapter would seem to be the must-have accessory for anyone serious about controlling exposure without compromising on either DOF or shutter speed.

[Mark David Williams]

This is a resolution test for my EX1 with the Letus adapter and without. Specifically for Alister and Piotr The chart was downloaded so this is unscientific but at least you can compare the two and get an idea how much resolution is lost by using the letus. Both pics are as they came off the camera with sharpness turned off. Sorry forgot to white balance the EX1 pic

[Brian Drysdale]

There seems to be a drop off in sharpness towards the edge with the Letus, plus a reduction in contrast.

[Mark David Williams]

Brian

You mean the left top corner? Could be a slight misalignment in how I tightened the letus on. The contrast could be down to the letus image being overexposed.

Anyway the loss of resolution is neglible.

Mark

[Brian Drysdale]

It doesn't look over exposed, although the clean EX is darker exposure wide. I'd expect the contrast to be lower, it's part of what gives the adapters a more film look.

The resolution does looks pretty good in the centre, however, compared to the clean shot on the EX1 the edges do look softer.

Needing a critical alignment is a potential issue when shooting on a tight schedule.

[Mark David Williams]

Sorry should have said the EX1 was less exposed Not over exposed a slip of the tongue. Re the contrast I think I may have used a different gamma curve accidently.

Alister- You said
The best I've ever seen from a Letus type device was approx 600 LW/PH. The problem is that a GG will reduce the contrast and contrast, resolution, perceived and actual sharpness go hand in hand.

[Mark David Williams]

Needing a critical alignment is a potential issue when shooting on a tight schedule.

Once the letus is set up there is no need to take it off all you do is change lenses.

Mark

[Chris Barcellos]

The other issue with the Letus is pure reliability. In vibrating models I've used, I've had the motors suddenly stop as connnections to the vibrating motor just gives out due to connection from wire. Also in hot situations, the vibrating motor would just stop. I haven't heard much mention of these issues from other users, which makes me wonder if out of all the adapters that were sold, that any of them were ever used for extended periods.

[Mark David Williams]

Hi Chris

I've not had an issue with my adapter yet. My last film was shot over 4 consecutive FULL days and two half days. I've used the adapter for extensive testing of lenses but that's about it. Do you think all letus adapters are prone to breakdown?

The EX1 offers a thousand lines of resolution 10 bit HDSDI out ND filters 2 card slots. Using a letus you will undoubtably get more resolution than the FS100 and the AF100

The FS100 offers 780 lines of resolution 8bit signal processing.8 bit out. No ND filters. The FS100 is touted as the F3's smaller brother because it shares the same sensor but are the manufacturers really just crippling the cameras to dilineate the markets into consumer and pro? Even the F3 has 35mbs rather than 50 mbs keeping it separate from more expensive cameras.

The AF100 offers 680 lines of resolution which is closer to 720p than 1080 with 8bit HDSDI out with ND filters but it's a smaller sensor.

I'm concerned the marketing implies one thing but is really another. I don't think there is anyway you could call the FS100 the baby brother to the F3. Maybe really it should be the replacement for the VG10?

Mark

[Doug Jensen]

QUOTE: "I don't think there is anyway you could call the FS100 the baby brother to the F3."

Exactly!!!
This is what I have been trying to tell people since I had the opportunity to shoot with an FS100 before NAB. The cameras are totally different. They share the same image sensor, and that is just about all they have in common. I don't know why Sony and everyone else lumps them together, because they have nothing in common at all.