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

Mark,

It is great that we have so many choices and options today so everyone can choose the camera(s) that works best for them.

There is no doubt in my mind which cameras are better for ME, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince others to see it my way. It doesn't matter to me what someone else decides to invest in.

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

Doug

I'm only talking about my own opinions and needs and if answering questions asked of me is seen as me trying to convince others to buy this or that then I apologise. I seem to have been drawn into defending my point of view and its reasoning. I guess thats what forums are all about eh. One last point if people want to see a good comparison between the three cameras I recommend watching Phil Blooms second part and his comparison.

Large chip camcorder comparison: AF100 vs F3 vs FS100. Includes FS100 in Part 2 | Philip Bloom

Mark

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

Dear Mark,

Nobody is attacking you, or forcing to change your mind. Please forgive me, but it's yourself (and Steve) who are showing some inflexibility of your opinions and beliefs.

Yes, I did watch Phil's report Part 2 (just as pretty much everything that has been posted about the new large sensor cameras recently). And yes, I do agree with his opinions on everything the FS100 is lacking (in fact, I was the first person to post a petition to Sony on the ND filters missing, and how they're going to lose sales to Panasonic's AF 100 because of that)...

But nevertheless, with all the low light sensitivity and low noise that the FS100 shares (well, almost) with the $13,000 F3 marvel - may I ask you again: looking at my EX1/Letus setup below (yours certainly looking similar), do you still believe in any (and I do mean it - just ANY) advantages of handling a monster like this, as opposed to the compact. light-weight, full S35 sensor camera capable of using any lens in the universe?

You say: "once you set up your Letus, it's done". Do you really mean it? Mark, just moving such a monster around is going to ruin your setup - even if you tape your zoom and focus rings in place, it will be OFF after just bumping the camera! The Letus GG needs absolutely perfect alignment, and the camera must have it in THE very perfect focus - or your image will be unusable...

And the picture all this machinery can produce... Well, see for yourself (myself in mid-bright sunshine, and my wife lighting a cigarette. OK, I'll post another one of my wife with some more light, as the one with the lighter is rather pathetic). These are raw material grabs; now go and compare with the last one from the FS100 (courtesy: Phil Bloom); just for fun.

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

Mark,
Just to be clear, I wasn't saying anything negative about your comments or posts! It is always good to hear what you have to say. I just think that there is a lot of wasted man-power here (myself included) reading and writing a bunch of posts about camera choices that basically come down to personal choice. In some ways we've fallen below the level of the age old Mac vs. PC debates. Who cares? Peope just need to pick a camera, learn how to use it, and get out there in start making money with it!! Sometimes we lose sight of the real purpose these TOOLS provide. I strongly disagree with much of what has been posted on this thread, but I've got better things to do that nit pick the opinions of everyone else.

I skimmed through Phil's review and it is good for people who don't know much about those cameras yet, but I already own an F3 and have spent quality time shooting with an FS100, so I understand what they are all about. I will say he is right on the mark most of the time, but I disagree with some of the things he says and the way he uses the cameras in his demonstrations, but it's none of my business to comment on his review.

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

Not this one. That's the difference here.

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

I rather like Adam Wilt's conclusion when putting all these cameras in a beauty parade:

Otherwise it's either 'football teams' or 'statistics as lamp posts'.

Has anyone who's fiddled about with one checked out the picture profile settings? IIRC, the F3 is very well endowed, but from what I've heard the FS100 offers Z1 style 'CineStyles' 1 & 2.

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

Mark,

One more thing, at the risk of doing exactly what I said I wasn't going to do, if you're going to take Alan Roberts opion of the F3 as gospel and not question it, then make sure you also listen to what he says about the AF100:

QUOTE:

"This camera does not perform particularly well at HD. Clean resolution is limited to about 1210x680 by thepresence of high-amplitude spatial aliasing. This is a little disappointing from a camera with a large-format sensor, and indicates that optical low-pass filtering is either absent or inadequate, and that the scaling fromthe resolution of the sensor down to 1920x1080 has not been done in the best way.
Noise levels are rather high, even though the pixel size is that of a conventional 3 sensor ½” camera.
Sensitivity is also similar to that of a ½” camera. If this camera is to be used for HDTV shooting, then it should be clearly understood that it’s only advantage over smaller-format cameras is the smaller depth of field. However, to achieve a smaller depth of field in this camera, relative to, say, a ½” camera, then the lens must be opened by at least 1.5 stops; using an F/2.8 lens on this camera, wide open, will give the same depth of field as on a ½” camera with a lens opened to Figure 8 small part of interlaced pan, high speed 13 F/1.6. This camera will not necessarily always deliver short depth of field, large aperture lenses must be used to achieve that."

Personally, I don't put much stock in what Alan Roberts thinks about any of the camera he reviews and the recommended settings he suggests for them. Yeah, there, I said it out loud. I disagree with the guru. I suspect he's an engineer and not a shooter. But if YOU don't want to question what he says about one camera, then you ought to believe what he says about another. In that case, the AF100 gets a D grade for HD.

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

That is true. the paint menu options are completely different and the FS100 has more in common with Sony's HDV and other NXCAM camcorders than it does with the F3.

In my opinion, having used both cameras, the FS100 is not even in the same league as the F3 for many, many reasons. The FS100 was designed as an SLR KILLER and it does a great job of achieving that goal. On the other hand, the F3 is really a baby F35 or 9000PL.

The only thing the two camera have in common is the sensor. Other than that, they are very different animals. If someone is considering one, I can't imagine why they would be considering the other. It's like going to a car dealership and not being able to make up your mind between a Chevy and Jaguar. They are so different, how is it hard to decide?? The choice should be obvious. For some people the perfect choice will be the FS100 and for other people the perfect choice will be the F3. As Adam says, different courses for different horses. But the decision as to which horse to saddle up should be obvious to anyone who spends an hour comparing the features . . . let alone looking at the performance.

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

Doug

Maybe who knows. Sony may listen and make some improvements on the FS100 before its released unless it's to late.

Piotr

Your camera APPEARS to be fully loaded with about everything you may want to use on an FS100 minus the Letus adapter! However you can use the EX1/Letus without an external monitor for head shots etc.

Chris

Cheers appreciate that!

I think one thing we can all agree on and that is the Sony F3 is a cracking camera!

Mark

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

Mark,

Yes - but my point has been to show what kind of image you can possibly get from this rig. Just compare it with the images (particularly those low-light ones) that can be produced by the FS100 - and suddenly, all the latter's shortcomings (the form factor, missing ND filters or SDI out) become a non-issue.

As I said - everybody tends to rationalize the investment they've made with their hard-earned money, but the facts are cruel and harsh for you and me, Mark.

That said, I'm going to use my monster for some time longer - but only because I simply cannot afford another investment at the moment...

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

Realize that Philip Bloom just invested in the F3 so it's fairly hard to review the FS-100 without being a little bias. From his review I feel that if the FS-100 had ND's and SDI no one would be considering the F3.

So are these two shortcomings worth $8,000?

For me there are two big pros that could tip the balance - the FS-100's small form and 1080p 60fps, which for my work is a big big plus.

However, both the Sony's have a far better image than the AF101 in my view. And is'nt that what we all really should be considering....even if one camera gets there more easily than the other.

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

I'd better nail my own colours to a mast PDQ before any more fur flies. I'm an EX1-R shooter with a DSLR as a 'wide' or 'b-roll'. I'm going to keep my EX1Rs and I am going to keep my DSLR for slow-shutter timelapse, stolen shots and stills. I'm thinking about having a backpack kit that's FS100/Birger and 550D bodies and a selection of lenses.

So the picture profiles I'm most interested in aren't the F3, it's the EX's - but quite frankly, I'd probably play with both cameras, find a look I like in the least flexible environment and try and pull the two systems together (I do a lot of fast turnaround stuff so can't spend too long in post).

OTOH, we all need flattish profiles with delicately rolled off highlights to avoid the 'tip-ex on the forehead' look, which is what the EX line bought to the table with their Cine3 and Cine4. My clients aren't going to pay me any more for an F3 over an FS100, so hoping to see some highlight compression in there somewhere.

Well, considering that many EX3s will never have their lens removed, the price differential between EX1 & EX3 for a big blue S&Q button and a borescope viewfinder seemed pretty huge. To misquote Douglas Adams: if it's a choice between hanging on for an FS300 with SDI and ND or taking the FS100 and running, I could do with the exercise.

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

I don't know why people continue to focus only on those two things? Yes, they are important, but that is just the tip of the iceberg of the differences between the two cameras. They are nothing alike. Chevy vs. Jaguar. You give up tons of features and workflow advantages if you go with an FS100. That doesn't mean the FS100 is not the right choice for someone, but people need to be aware of the differences before making a choice. The lack of SDI and ND filters would not stop me from choosing an FS100 over and F3, but there are other things that would.

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

I would like to think there was zero bias in it! I made it very fair. Don't forget I am an AF101 owner and that faired the worst.

Also the FS100 has a lot more than those two shortcomings but it is a great camera. If that doesn't come across in the review I am confused as I was pretty strong on that.

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

You don't need to be confused Phil - I for one saw no bias in your review. Thanks for that, and please keep the information coming!

For somebody like myself, in this marketplace where you cannot put your hands on any camera you fancy, your work is invaluable...

Piotr

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

The real star of the show though was Percy the sealpoint!

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

Phil, I didn't find your review biased either, but on the other hand, it didn't touch on tons of differences between the cameras that I think are even more important for people to know about than the obvious physcial characteristics and format settings.

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

Doug,

I think that for anyone familiar with things like the CineAlta badge, 10-bit 4:4:4,/ S-log out, etc. - Phil really didn't have to use any more excuses for the F3 vs. FS100 price tag difference. Plus, if I remember correctly, at least 3 times he stressed that he was not the person to tell anybody whether or not it's worth it to them!

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

Selection will depend on what you plan to use the cameras for, but this comparison does make an extremely useful starting point for making a decision.

Like with the RED and DSLRs, the third party manufacturers will find new business.

Perhaps it would be good if the designers tried operating their cameras on a cold day, wearing gloves.

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

I hope you're not implying that is something that I have done. I go out of my way to point out the differences between cameras, but will very rarely ever recommend a particular camera to someone else even if they contact me directly and explain their needs. There are too many factors to consider.

But I'm not talking about 4:4:4 and S-LOG differences either. I'm talking about things like the ability to control clip naming, having the XDCAM workflow at your fingertips, the ability to move PP files from one camera to another, last clip delete, Hypergamma choices, and other functions that are vitally important to some people -- and even that list is still just the tip of the iceberg.

I did a two hour presentation at NAB on the FS100 and F3 for Sony. Eventually they will post it online so I won't bother repeating it here. I'm just giving people a heads up to compare ALL the features of these cameras before they make a choice. They are certaily not just the same camera at two different price points. You give up some things and gain some things no matter which one you choose. That's all I'm saying.

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

ABSOLUTELY not. Doug!

You were the first on this forum to give us all this exciting information, and your video made with the FS100 has been the most beautiful one on the web so far - no kidding :)

Piotr

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

What I liked about Phil's review was the real world look at each of the cameras. It gave me insight into what could be done to shoot around the short comings on the cameras. As with the 5D, which I have been shooting, you need to know your camera and know how you can fix the shortcomings.

The recent addition of the Technicolor picture style, and post treatment, is adding some legs to the 5D, and while I have been lusting daily the FS-100 / AF-100 form factor (more than once I have almost pushed the preorder button) , I am thinking my 5D and T2i coupled with Cineform, Dual Eyes and my Marshall monitor will have to remain my rigs for the near future, while things settle out, given my shooting is limited to local no and low budget productions. I am beginning to think that Canon is going to compete in this market with an improved 5D late in the year, or early next year, rather than go the way Sony and Panny have gone.

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

Hi Doug

I didn't point out all of them things which are so much better in the F3 simply because there are too many to list. I do say if you want all the features of the F3 in the FS100 then you would have an F3 so don't expect them.

It is a stripped down version of it with one additional feature.

I am currently uploading a tweaked version of part 1 as there is def a touch more moire on the fs100 than the other two camcorders, hard to spot but it's there...nothing like DSLRs but it's certainly there.

You get what you pay for and the features of the F3 and superb, just wish it could overcrank in full HD and it had a better quality onboard recorder.

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

Actually Phil I should have worded this better "so it's fairly hard to review the FS-100 without being a little bias", meaning that as a new F3 owner it's hard not to be biased, because I know for myself I would be inclined to be!
I thought it was a great review ... I was leaning toward the FS-100 and now you nudged me closer to the F3 camp - and rightly so!

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

The view that image is all is indeed behind the adulation for the F3 and FS100. That's why Doug wanted folks to come see his demo footage. But image isn't all! I had no need to see video in the Sony booth because as soon as I went to the RED booth I'd see even better video.

Image is not even that high on the list of what makes a great camera. Having used the VG10 I would simply never buy a camera for more than $1000 that did not have ND filters. I'm not going to buy gizmos to provide what a camera must provide -- and indeed what the F3 provides. And, the higher sensitivity makes the lack of ND an even more serious issue.

Price performance is another critical metric. It is THE most important metric. Alister's own posted video shows the VG10 looks as good as the F3. And, I know the VH10 looks no better than the $800 NEX-5. And, the NEX-5 has focus assist the VG10 does not.

Now before the screaming starts, of course the F3 must look slightly better than a NEX-5. But, the question is does it look over 15X better? The answer is, NO IT DOES NOT. So what to do?

Obviously, if one wants to spend the money buy the F3 and rig it to the hilt. (But, I'm convinced anyone who is really such a great shooter they actually earn money from their camera, should certainly able to afford a RED. Why stop at an F3.)

But, for the vast majority of folks money is an issue. So where to compromise? The simple fact is that NEX-5, VG10, and FS100 lack ND filters and are not ergonomic well designed. (And, I would put ergonomics way above absolute image quality.) And let me shock Piotr by saying the EX1 is a nightmare to handhold and I wouldn't take one if Sony gave it to me. But, the image is wonderful!)

The solution so simple -- just don't buy any of the Sony's. This year Panasonic makes the best OVERALL camcorder, the AF100. It's got wonderful color, very nice contrast, more than enough resolution, and a huge selection of lenses. And, it's price falls nicely between the NEX-5 and the F3.

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

Dear Steve,

Sorry, but this is a wrong logic; does a car that can go 300 kmh cost just twice more than a one only capable of 150? The price always goes up exponentially, not proportionally, with increased performance!

You haven't shocked me at all, Steve - the EX1 is a nightmare to hand-hold, even more so than most non-shoulder mount cameras are! But, there are work-arounds, believe me :)

Steve, with all due respect - you seem to be the only one here to give this kind of "absolutely best" kind of recommendations, etc. This makes me wonder what your true agenda is - you are writing books on Sony products, aren't you?

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

My F3 is doing exactly what Sony designed it to do. It's shooting a TV series for Movie Network Channels. Oddly enough, I doubt they'd pay such a nice rental I only had an NEX-5, and I certainly wouldn't be earning enough as I am :)

The thing with cameras, is that they are only there to create an image. That is their sole function. Everything else is just talk. Some people just talk, some shoot nice images.

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

WAIT! I've been recommending the best COMPROMISE. I seem to be the only one NOT trying to push the absolute best. As Philp said, I want the "best bang for the buck."

As far as agenda -- I don't review products any longer. I write books on cameras that are going to be big sellers OR are cameras that represent the future of video. I thought the VG10 would be exactly such a camera, but it was not. It turns-out that that NEX-5 was the REALLY BIG sales hit in 2010. So, mid-stream I changed my book.

I expect the FS100 will be a big seller too, but I will not waste my time writing a book on a camera I would not buy. That would be dishonest. I would write a book on the AF100, but Barry Green has a tight relation with Panasonic so that makes that a futile effort.

But, I'm convinced that none of these cameras are going to be important 6 months from now -- and that is how long it takes to write a book. The re-spin of NEX-5 may well deliver FS100 quality at a fraction of the price. The next VG10 is likely to be better. But, these are not ground breaking products. An edition 2 of my NEX FAMILY book nicely handles these.

What really interests me is the step past HD. Frankly, I doubt I'll write any book on a camera that can't deliver 4K2K. And, this decision -- and I'm speaking frankly -- comes from decades of marketing and sales experience. Japan has two options to grow their business: 3D and 4K2K. Sony seems to be betting big on 3D. My bet is their bet is wrong.

The real money maker for Japan is shooting much higher resolution images because it requires a complete replacement of one's equipment. And, I'm convinced that higher resolution on significantly larger screens is what the promise of HD is all about. All of these cameras look great on the internet -- although I'm amazed that only Phillip's videos look good!

So there is my agenda out in the open The bleeding edge. And, as good as the F3 is -- it is not on this edge. Oddly, DSLRs because they are so cheap and deliver so much image quality actually remain on this edge. Plus, of course, the first cheap 4K2K camcorder which will arrive by IBC from JVC.

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

I wouldn't panic too much about 4K2K in the short term, any broadcasters I know are trying to get up to speed and put the infrastructures in place for 1080 HD, anything else is way off into the future. Also, many people just watch SD on their HD capable televisions.

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

If you honestly believe that the VG10 looks as good as the F3 in my side by side clips, why on earth are you bothering with 4k when you can't see a very clear difference between two HD cameras. Please look at the original files and frame grabs and not the smoothed out vimeo clip. The difference is plain to see. Moire on the bricks, aliasing on the roof tops, blue and pink splotches on the concrete outside the garages (moire), jagged horizontal and vertical lines, lower resolution.

My customers pay for image quality, they want the best images they can get. Yes budget is important, but it's not about most bang for the buck, but most bang for the budget. If it was all about most bang for the buck then I'd probably be using a go-pro.

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

I suspect you are basing the last comment on the belief that the two cameras share the same sensor - so should have fundamentally the same resolution.

I DO believe they share the same sensor - but do not believe they read the data out in anything like the same way, and hence the difference. The F3 does it "properly" - hence the expense and power consumption - whilst the FS100 does it in a much simplified manner, which does give cost/power advantages, albeit at the cost of performance. Pay your money and take your choice.

Very approximately, I think the sensor is somewhere around 2,560x1,440 photosites (which would be 3,686,400 in total), and in a Bayer form. The F3 does a full de-Bayer every frame, downconverts (quite well) to 1080, and hence can achieve a resolution figure around the 1000 TVL mark. You'd expect a certain degree of coloured aliasing, centred out of band and on the diagonal - and this is exactly what can be seen in Alan Roberts report, figure 2. (The b-w zone plate, top centre.)

I believe the FS100 doesn't de-Bayer as such, but simply takes the photosites four at a time, in the form:
RG
GB
and from each quartet simply outputs R,G,B values. Hence you'd expect a fundamental and symmetrical resolution around 1,280x720 (half of 2,560x1,440), which then gets upconverted to a 1080 signal. IF that is what's happening, you'd expect it to be much cheaper and use less power than the F3. It's an explanation which fits well with all the observed facts.

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

Sorry, which observed facts are you saying this theory fits? Only that it is cheaper and draws less power? Seems there are quite a large number of things that could account for those differences.

The storage media alone, for example, could easily account for 2w, and then the use of older XDCAM chipsets instead of newer and more available chips for AVCHD encoding could account for a big difference, as could the presence of multiple HD-SDI outputs and various other ports (genlock, tc, etc) that are probably always powered to some extent and require various hardware. Again just a guess, but is your theory about the FS100 debayering in this unusual way also a guess?

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

I think calling it a guess is a bit harsh. Hypothesis. It fits the facts, same as your idea. Now go forth and test, see who's right!

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

There is a far simpler solution, encode and post your video on Utube just like Phillip where the differences -- if any -- will be visible.

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

David you ars pointing to a "mis-direction" of Sony marketing in saying the "FS100 has the same chip as the F3." It makes one think the picture should be the same.

It is the reverse of Panasonic's "the AF100 does not use the SAME chip as the GH2." Of course not, while both are Micro 4/3 in form, one must capture both photos and video and the other only video.

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

What? Total non-sequitur. I was referring to Noah calling David's hypothesis a guess. That is all.

And, the F3 and FS100 have the same chip. And, neither the AF100 nor the GH2 are S35 or APS-C, both are Micro 4/3".

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

The differing signal to noise ratios quoted by Sony would indicate that something different is going on regarding how the cameras are handling the outputs from the sensors. They may look very similar, but given Phil's observation about very slightly more moire, there seems to be a difference in how finer details seem to be processed.

I recall the Sony BVP 7 and the M7 supposedly having the same CCD chips, one was a broadcast camera and the other a non broadcast camera. The images did look similar, but the BVP 7 had a smoother quality than the M7.

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

Not so sure David. It's an interesting hypothesis, but I think the MTF50 numbers are too high for a camera effectively using only 1280x720 samples. MTF50 of 772 LW/PH Horizontal and 756 LW/PH Vertical are too high, MTF30 is out at around 850/840 LW/PH which should not be possible from just 1280x720 samples.

I think it's probably just down to a less sophisticated de-bayer algorithm or possibly even a different OLPF on the FS100.

While the Sony noise figures for the F3 and FS100 are quite different the visual noise appearance from both cameras is remarkably similar.

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

Hi Alister thanks for THE frame grabs. Both needed white balancing and overblown skys, Streetlights were on, Are highlights a problem with these big sensors. I colour corrected the VG10 and canon pics a little.

Zooming in and looking at fine detail I saw some banding on the brickwork. The worst part of the VG10 picture was the trees and sky showed purple colouring. I wonder if thats because the VG10 doesn't use a full sensor? Maybe the lens used? I couldn't see splotches of colour on the ground? The canon 2ti was surprisingly good compared to the F3 and way better than the VG10.

CONCLUSION
I think this is an extreme test for a large sensor as you buy this kind of camera to put the BG out of focus whereas this is concentrating on fine detail in the distance. The VG10 does quite a good job although not as good as the canon which seemingly in this VERY limited test doesn't seem that far behind the F3? I can only imagine the Nex 5 would be similar or worse The F3 seems to paint colours especially greens in very natural colours that can probably be closely aproximated in post.

SORRY I deleted the pictures If you would like to see the pics that Alister currently offers as a download You will need to visit his website. I inadvertantly tried to colour match his pics with the F3 not realising he didn't wish them to be used for this purpose. The reason I thought this was acceptable was because they were offered from him as a download and so could be used in that context. Apologies to Alister.

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

You don't need to zoom in to see the aliasing on the brickwork or roofs. Just look full size on any reasonable monitor. There are splotches of colour on the concrete caused by moire the same as the purple and pink colours around the trees, its moire, there certainly is no blue or pink on the F3 concrete. The T2i does do better than the VG10 in terms of highlight handling, but it lacks resolution.

I really get fed up with people that say a test on a large sensor camera that includes in-focus textures is not a realistic test, there is nothing extreme about the scene. This scene is the same one that I use for all my camera tests, so I'm able to go back and look at how all the different cameras I look at behave with the same subject matter. Sure you may use shallow DoF to blur your backgrounds, but what about the in focus parts of the shot. What about textures in clothes or hair. What if your not just shooting faces. Aliasing and moire can potentially occur on anything that has texture or detail, say stubble on a mans face, the frame of a pair of glasses, the pattern on a shirt or dress, eyebrows, eyelashes, grass, trees, wood, carpet. Fine detail can occur in any part of a shot, not just the distance. The edges of the car that comes into the foreground at the end of the pan is hardly fine detail, but the alias terribly on the VG10.

As soon as anyone shows a test that show aliasing and moire people shout "unfair". It's not unfair, its real. If we all went around saying unfair and irrelevant every time an issue was found in a cameras performance then we all may as well just use the cheapest rubbish we can and put down the flaws to unfair scenes.

And please Mark, next time you download copyright material from my web site and re-post it else where please ask for permission first. Link to it by all means but It's not yours to copy as you please.