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

Possibly the best thing is to test a FS100 camera when it comes out, looking at stuff on the internet, with all sorts of compression, isn't the same as doing your own tests.

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

Piotr how can you have considerable control over DoF Surely everythings going to be PRETTY much in focus at f16? Unless you have a really really long lens?

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

I have no time now to watch the video again, but I remember a fragment with a guy leaning over a balustrade... he was in focus, everything closer and further away - not. The aperture was certainly over F10; yes the lens was probably "long".

I guess this is the magic of the sensor size - and this is why I said this video is an eye opener!

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

I guess using a long lens at f16 is convenient if you had a lessor chip you'd have to put an ND filter on to achieve it. However if I had a shot like that I'd probably not worry to much about putting an ND filter on.

OR in the panny's case turning the ND button. Not really an eye opener or that important I wouldn't have thought? I would still prefer the Panny because I have the four stage ND filter giving me a lot more control for little extra work?

Mark

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

Mark, I'm afraid you still aren't getting my point.

If I say "eye opener" is because for somebody used to shoot with small sensor cameras like our EX1, shooting at F16 and still getting relatively shallow DOF has been unthinkable, hasn't it?

Piotr

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

Hi Piotr

Well yes but then thats cos the sensor is bigger and so expected on any big sensor camera! Sorry I may have been confused as I thought you were saying it as an advantage to just the FS100. When any camera even ours could put the background out of focus at f16 with a long enough lens!

Mark

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

I think the whole DSLR revolution has made us think about glass like photographers do.

I've spent too long using all the tricks to keep an EX lens in its sweet spot somewhere above f4 and below f8, wishing I could be more flexible.

The merest fraction of Juan's presentation provoked an 'aha' moment: with film, we've been filling the shadows so the silver halide doesn't run out. In digital video, we're absolutely OBSESSED with the way highlights are handled - knee or cinegamma? And I've seen too much spilled milk over sharpening (in-camera or post?) and picture profiles (flat or 'look'?).

We want the lens choice and latitude of photography married to audio and motion of cinema without the electronically induced 'budget plastic' of image processing done badly, preferably at pocket money prices. Charts help, but pretty pictures - the sizzle rather than the sausage - is what earns us money. Has anyone else got to the point that some of these numbers are rather close to train spotting? :-)

OTOH, AF101 highlights on foreheads have scared me every time I see one at a trade show. FS100 stuff looks gorgeous, but how much of that is lens and lighting? F3 stuff, when I played with it, was 'effortless' and frighteningly clean, but recent examples seem oversaturated.

Each one of us has to take each camera we desire, and then play with it. Examine the footage. Make no assumptions. Analyse one's workflow. Haven't we learned from EX picture profiles that colour matrixes should not be reported as our cameras are all different? What portion of our PPs are 'spectacles' and which parts are 'shades'?

Less of the numbers, more of the images - the moving ones, not selective screen grabs. Our paying clients don't buy lists of condiments, they don't even buy sausages, they're just attracted by the smell. That's how DSLRs got so popular.

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

1) David and I are good friends, but any shutter speed above 1/125th with rapid motion will strobe terribly on a VIDEO camera. In fact, the shutter speed often needs to be reduced to 1/40th second. (Broadcast Engineering is about to publish an eBook of mine that explains the difference between FILM and VIDEO shutter speeds. They are not the same!) Without this fundamental engineering understanding, all talk about shutter speeds is really not useful.

2) A 1/2" chip is good to f/8. A big chip can go to f/16. But, one is encountering diffraction before the aperture is fully closed or open. Use these tiny apertures at your own risk.

3) All this talk totally misses the point. Yes, you can run a VG10 or FS100 without an ND filter by using a way too high shutter-speed with a way too small aperture. But the whole point of a big chip camcorder is to get a shallow DOF! To do this you simply have to cut bright sunlight down so an f/2.8 or f/4 aperture.

A shallow DOF is not simply a "filmic" esthetic. It is crucial to minimize "background" strobing when panning with a moving subject which one does to prevent "foreground" strobing. This is Cinema 101. (And, way too many folks posting do not understand film photography and so they think if the camera dial can be set to something it must be going to look OK.)

And, just to make things more complicated, as Larry Thorpe (of CineAlta fame) lectured me (nicely), visible strobing is a function of VIEWING brightness. So all this talk about cameras is still missing ANY discussion of of the viewing situation. That is why THX is not a marketing gimmick. If your viewing situation doesn't meet either SMPTE or THX requirements -- you simply are posting almost nothing of value.

<< Apple just hired the founder of THX. >>

That is why these damned internet posts of video are a waste of time. Very few of us have calibrated 709 spec laptops or monitors. Those who view via their home HDTV not only have likely not had it ISF calibrated, but the monitor is likely too small to meet either SMPTE or THX viewing angle requirements.

Size, as spelled-out in the SMPTE and THX specs is crucial because unless the screen size is REALLY big, at typical viewing angles, you likely can NOT see differences in resolution.

Worse, for interlace video, the deinterlacer in your monitor itself determines whether your flat-panel monitor shows 330 or 650 or 1080 lines of VERTICAL resolution. I'd bet none of the posters has actually measured vertical resolution using a test DVD.

That's why when I lived in NYC, camera comparisons were made in screening rooms. We went TO DuArt. Nobody in their right mind would make visual comparisons based upon home or even post-house viewing. (It's amazing how many post houses fail to calibrate their monitors using instruments.)

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

please do not over analyse everything. of course that is what is going to happen i am not naive but my test when it is finished editing later tonight is much more about the cameras themselves than pixel peeping.

2 similar cameras and two very different cameras. Hard to do them all justice

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

Looking forward to the tests Phil. Your impressions of the FS-100 particularly.

Hopefully you can post soon! Cheers.

Part 1 Up
 

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

Yes, those buttons on the FS100... like the Z1, there are too many stuck all over it, JVC do much neater job in this regard.

In the end, people on a very low budget will still purchase the DSLRs, otherwise (unless totally obsessed by extremes of shallow DOF) these new cameras give more sensible options for large sensor video production.

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

Usability is so important its all very well having a fantastic picture but if you miss the chance not much use is it. According to Phil the Panny and F3 were pretty equal. Problem is the panny may have less than 680 lines of resolution.

An EX1 with Letus has 1000 lines 10 bit out built in ND filters and a full frame and once set up is as usable as the Panny.

If the big chip cameras were made to compete with the DSLR's they do that BUT the EX1 with film adapter still beat the pants of them and you also get the best of all worlds.

Until someone makes a large chip camera with 10 bit out decent resolution and try to include ND filters it will remain that way.

Mark

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

It's called the Sony F3 I believe

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

True but then the F3 is over £12000

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

I'd be surprised if you're actually getting those 1000 lines with an adapter fitted to a EX1. There are other aspects such as noise, sensitivity and dynamic range. For 10 bits the F3 would be the camera in this bunch.

None of these new cameras are perfect, so it'll a matter of selecting those features that are important to you and then accessorising the camera that ticks most boxes.

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

First gut impressions:

F3 - superb images as expected but the FS-100 matched this image almost every shot and displayed incredible low-light capability.
AF-101 barely held up against the above but did better than I expected. Horrible low light.
Canon 5D - Good bokeh as expected and low light but overall softer image and lacked punch compared to Sonys.

My gut feeling is that we all buy with a budget - except for James Cameron. So best bang for buck is the FS-100. As far as useability this does present a problem with no ND's and the stupid LCD position - both easily overcome though.

I go for the FS-100 so far....

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

Mark,

Please take no offense, but your opinions are beginning to sound a bit like Steve's:) . I mean, what's the point in repeating again and again that something is better than a product which - like it or not - is important enough to deserve its own forum on DVinfo?

Don't get me wrong - it's nothing personal. What's more - as have been said, we're in the same boat, you and me! I love my EX1 just as you love yours, but I hate my Letus, and would be very happy if some FS100 supplier took my complete Letus Elite bundle as a trade-in...

Yes, you can get the elusive "35mm look" with Letus (or any other adapter of this kind) - but the hassle is not worth it. And as to the picture quality... Well, with the vibrating GG, forget about the 1000 lines! Not to mention further deterioration of the EX1 sensitivity and S/N.

Actually, after downloading the original file with Philip Bloom's low light comparison (starring his Dad and the cigar :)), I arranged a similar lighting scenario and shot myself lighting up a cigarette, with just a sole 40W home bulb placed to the left back of where I was sitting. I recorded the scene with my EX1/Letus combo, using my Canon FD 85mm F1.8 lens. Results?

Well, very "filmic"; nice shallow DOF. But the picture was so dark and noisy, it was practically unusable.

Yes - I could actually make it usable by rendering with the NeatVideo plugin, but this only adds even more hassle to the workflow. Try and do your own tests, and you will get convinced the FS100 is quite another league (I'm not mentioning the F3 as it's above my financial capabilities at the moment).

All in all, I know very well that everyone is prone to rationalize his investment - but let's get real: with the advent of large sensor camcorders, our 35mm adapters have become obsolete.

But Mark, here is the funniest part: what I have said above would only be valid if I actually could afford keeping my EX1 and buying the FS100 as the B-camera. Since - as I mentioned - I cannot afford that at the moment, I'm going to keep and use the EX1 with Letus for a while, just like yourself!

Only, I don't see a reason to try convince others than this is a "better solution" - no, it is NOT.

Piotr

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

Hi Piotr

I'd much rather have a nice large sensor camera in fact I've even got the loan If I do sound negative its only disapointment re the AF101 and the FS100 I so wanted one of them to be my next camera.

I do agree the large sensors are great at seeing in the dark and for that reason may seek to purchase the up coming Canon 5D markIII Or if there is a hack/way to get 25p on the Panny GH2 This may be a low cost solution to at least getting into the large sensor game.

I have to strongly disagree the Letus loses resolution by a large degree, so far all the tests I've done with setting up siemen stars etc have all been very good, although I couldn't tell you the exact resolution I'm confident it's better than 900 lines.

I'm a film maker and want the best quality I can get. 10 bit recording works well for me in post. I need to work quickly from setup to setup as lots to get through I can't afford to stand around and its bad enough without the camera holding us up. The letus once set up STAYS set up and so no messing about with ND filters or misplaced LCD screens. The Panny would work well but its low resolution and 8 bit out. The FS100 is 780 lines possibly 8bit processing and 8bit out with no ND filters and an LCD placed on top where you'd need a stepladder for tripod shots and err another monitor for shoulder mounted and although I would normally use another monitor anyway its not always possible in tight spaces or when in a hurry.

The bottom line is I'm being asked to explain my position My position is clear I want a tool I can use and am a little let down by the fact neither the Panny or the FS100 will be able to replace my awkward workaround. Bear in mind this is from perspective only Yours and others obviously differ and I would be the last person to talk you out of it. Good luck with your purchase I look forward to hearing more and will keep an open mind to any future testing like Phil Blooms up n coming second part.

Mark

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

Try doing an Imatest MTF50 run with your Letus. You can download a free fully functioning demo of the software and all the instructions are there on how to do a basic test, including a chart that you can print at home. 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.

When you buy high end lenses one of the key things that you are paying for is high contrast. Real contrast as opposed to in-camera black crushing etc. It is contrast that makes an image look sharp, that's how detail correction works, it increases edge contrast, it does not increase resolution.

I assume you have compared your letus setup side by side with say a DSLR? using the same lenses etc. If you have I'd love to see the evidence that shows the letus to have higher resolution or better sharpness (and contrast, less noise etc). When I compared the Letus extreme with a 5D MkII I didn't need charts or anything else to tell me why so many Letus owners were keen to buy DSLR's.

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

Hi Alister

I turn the sharpness/detail off always. How much resolution do you lose through the Letus? I don't know. Just what I see on the siemens chart which looks damn good. Some lenses are better than others and often have there best optimised stop. I can tell you I use the GG for the EX1 and take care in calibrating everything. I don't shoot everything with the letus I also configure for just the camera alone. I have never heard of anyone talking about the letus adapter losing that much resolution until now. I have seen my film on a 40' screen and couldn't see any difference in resolution to 35mm. Monsters was released in many countries and I never heard anyone complain about the film being soft. I'm sure if it was Vertigo would never have released it. That said I dont discount the possibility of a resolution drop of a higher magnitude than I may have thought. If that is the case it makes the Panny AF101 a better proposition as a second camera to the EX1

One of the reasons for an out of focus background is to highlight something in frame If that something is a person then a little bit of softening can be a good thing and with the letus you get a nice film look including a full frame. Of course you get the full rastor and I use multicoated lenses as well as a proper Mattebox. I like to think I get good contrast when I set up shots. HD can make people look older especially with the sharpening/detail and the awful black line around everything Also compression can make people look terribel and a lot worse than they actually are so attention to lighting is important. I have seen many examples of footage from other cameras and even your uncompressed pics from the FS100 and in my opinion I was not impressed with what I saw compared to what I already get.

The tests I do to set up my lenses are I feel adequate. One thing I can tell you with certainty and that is when I don't want an out of focus background which is maybe half the time then the EX1 delivers 1000 lines of resolution and a lot more crucial when doing wide shots. I also use the 10 bit HDSDI out to a Ki Pro.

Areas I'd like to improve is the ability to shoot in lower light and the convenience of just putting on the lens I want onto the front end of the camera Purely because I love the idea of having a camera do this.

My conclusions are the FS100 or the AF101 would actually be a step backwards to my current set up

Mark

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

Sorry Mark, we are going to have to agree to disagree. One minute you tell me that nothing compares to 35mm film, then you tell me that you can't see any resolution difference between your letus setup and 35mm film. My Letus experiences have been very different to yours.

Clearly we have different standards and different opinions, but then the world would be a dull place if we all just agreed with everybody and everything. :-)

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

One minute you tell me that nothing compares to 35mm film, then you tell me that you can't see any resolution difference between your letus setup and 35mm film

There is a huge difference to the look of film. Resolution is only a part of the equation.

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

Agreed, resolution is only part of the equation, but it' is a major part of the equation non the less.

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

One advantage that film has is dynamic range and the F3 and FS100 are an improvement over the EX1 in that regard,

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

Alister
resolution is not a major part of the film look If it was then your saying digital would have more of a film look than 8mm. Film is a chemical process that ultimately creates an image with dyes. This leads to the film look. I watched my film on a 40' screen and felt the resolution looked as good as film but that doesn't mean it was if we want to look at the screen and do resolution tests I'm sure film would easily win. I also do not want to buy expensive charts and learn how to do tests. All I offer is my own personal opinion.


Brian
As for dynamic range I don't believe you're right.

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

The EX1 has been measured as 10 stops, the F3 has been measured as 11 to 12 stops allowing for a couple of tests I've seen.

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

I have had an EX3 (recently sold) and have an F3. The F3 kills the EX3 everywhere except measured resolution. More than twice as sensitive, far FAR less noise, and at least two stops wider range.

Even the lower measured res is not apparent visually. The F3 looks sharp as a tack on a 52" plasma from a metre away. I've watch a DCI on a 50' cinema screen, and it still looked sharp as a tack.

I've used my EX with a Letus Ultimate regularly in the past. The F3 image and usability leaves it in a ditch. Seriously.

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

Thanks, David, for the comparison ( What's a DCI?)

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

DCI is shorthand for digital cinema projection, like Xerox is to photocopying. It's actually a group of companies that have formed some agreed standards.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikiped...ma_Initiatives

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

David

Would you have swapped your EX1 letus combo for an FS100 or AF101?

Brian

Although with the F3 all I see is a beautiful picture Some are saying it has issues in the highlights. Alan Roberts measured the noise level at -48.5db giving it an effective 8 stops. Sony rated it as -63db in their specs. He also rates the EX1 as -46db which would be close to the F3. Undoubtably Alan is right. As for the FS100 I disagree it delivers 12 stops and would love to see Alan Roberts test that.

Just to be clear the F3 has a beautiful picture and I would definately want it over an EX1

Mark

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

Here's the latitude test for 11 stops on the F3.

Camera Log by Adam Wilt

Mitch Gross of Abel Cine found 12 stops. I expect Geoff Boyle will have a test up on CML at some stage.

Alan Roberts test results seem to run counter to everyone else is finding regarding to the noise on the F3, that's unusual, because he normally does match with what you find in practise. I don't think you'd use 30 db gain and have low visibility noise on a 48 db camera.

I think you should test the camera yourself if you're considering buying one of these cameras. The FS100 seems to be a love it or hate it camera

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

QUOTE
Alan Roberts test results seem to run counter to everyone else is finding regarding to the noise on the F3, that's unusual, because he normally does match with what you find in practise.

Sorry Brian

Have to disagree Alan Roberts has access to the best equipment and is the best there is for this sort of stuff. If he says the F3 has -48.5db and the EX1 has -46db then that is right. I'm happy to accept my EX1 only has 8stops even though others claim it has much more. In this world of differing measurements that suit the facts there has to be a benchmark somewhere and for me Alan Roberts is as good as it gets. If others are getting different measurements its time to look at why.. Not they're right and Alan is wrong.

QUOTE
I don't think you'd use 30 db gain and have low visibility noise on a 48 db camera.

As Alan says the camera uses SIGNIFICANT noise reduction. At the expense of what? Resolution?

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

As I said, you should test the camera yourself and see if it produces the results you want. You can test the resolution at 30 db gain, if this is the important factor for you. Everyone has differing priorities, so you should push the camera into those dark corners, discover if it does what you want and where it falls apart.

Resolution figures aren't everything, which is why the Alexa is doing well against the RED One MX.

I don't know about Alan's noise figures, but even the best equipment can give false readings for various reasons, however, I expect Alan does calibrate it religiously. It could also be a sub standard camera.

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

Was his test of the EX1 also wrong?

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

One off questions about a particular camera doesn't mean everything is suspect. Alan Roberts is hugely respected, however, usually other people's tests and experiences confirm his findings. With this noise question, they don't seem to, so it's more wondering why there should be this perceived difference, rather than questioning every camera test.

As I said, test the camera yourself, you're limited watching hugely compressed on line videos shot with other people's set ups.

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

Adam Wilt said

“Wow, numbers!”, I hear some folks thinking, “now we can find out which camera is best!” And it’s true that some folks will use these charts the way a drunk uses a lamppost—for support, rather than illumination. But I caution you to avoid reading more into these charts than they convey: while they provide a useful means of comparing and contrasting the relative performance of specific aspects of various cameras, they do not—and cannot—state the One True Number for any of these performance metrics. The methods used for coming up with these numbers haven’t been published, and actual numbers are very dependent on methodology.

Alan Roberts doesn't give a caution. However the provideo coalition test was done I think it may be an idea to a) Heed the above warnings and b) Seek to find WHY the F3 when properly tested only gives a little over 8 stops or be happy with 8 stops and all the jiggery pokery the camera performs to get such a great picture. However I doubt much of the jiggery pokery is applied to the FS100 at least not from what I have seen so far.

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

As I said, test the camera yourself and compare it to your EX1 with the adapter and see which suits your visual and working style.

Numbers can vary depending on how the camera is set up and which lenses you're using. I suspect Robert Primes ASC was using pretty standard industry methods that would allow you to compare both film and video images. It works if you're using the same test on each camera or film stock.

It's not the same as Alan Roberts method, but here is Geoff Boyle's and it could be similar to that used by Robert Primes. It's a pretty standard method that working DPs use.

Alexa-Canon 7D-RED MX latitude comparison

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

There are enough obvious factual mistakes in his F3 report that it calls into question the accuracy of everything in it -- especially those comments that are markedly different than what other people have observed.

You may be interested in this thread if you have not seen it before.
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdc...bc-report.html

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

Hi Doug

I just watched Phil Blooms second part and think he gave a very good description and well presented argument and agreed with him. I liked his footage from the FS100 more so than what I've seen so far. The FS100 is 8bit processing a single 8bit HDMI out One card slot No ND filters Not able to shoulder mount without an additional screen or tripod mount and shoot head height etc etc. It does have a nice sensor but the whole camera involves much working around and the workaround is no different to DSLR's but as Phil said lets not concentrate on the negatives as it has a nice sensor etc although Phil still prefers the image from the Canon 5dII. If I had to buy either the FS100 or the Panny It would be the Panny simply for easier faster setups if I didnt have to buy them then neither and wait for the canon 5d III Or who knows the scarlet..

Maybe Panny could update the sensor?.