Just posted a soon to happen news Q & A from Sony in the UK on their much anticipated 35mm sensored camera, now called the PMW-F3.

You can read the DVinfo post below and it will take you to Sony's related announcement and Facebook page where the Q & A will take place with Sony engineers etc at 10:00 am UTC Monday, November 9th, That's 2am for those in the Pacific time zone.

You want it. Fill your boots.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-...ml#post1585815

Thanks, Andrew. Very interesting info. But the links to the F3 aren't working right now.

True Glen, true. But there is still a decent read on the webpage itself. And there is the prospect of seeing this Sony chap baked to crisp on Facebook by the would be participants. Actually I don't think that is going to happen because only six people in the entire world know this is going to happen. Sony's gotta smarten up with their internet marketing. It really appears to be quite hamfisted.

...It looks like one of my predictions has proven accurate ( the $20K+ price ), according to a new post by Philip Bloom:

Sony announces the PMW F3K! | Philip Bloom

It looks like Sony is going after RED ( not Panasonic ) with this new camera. Wow things are changing fast!

Sony : PMW-F3K (PMWF3K) : Product Overview : United Kingdom

If it's listed it's going to be shipping in the reasonably near future.

Personally I'm surprised Sony is giving the entire under $10K market to Panasonic. Maybe they thinks it's a battle they can't win . . .
So they come out with a $20K+ camera using 35mbps MPEG2 4:2:0 Long GOP? Add cost of ConvergentDesigns or AJA attached recorder.

To me it looks like it should be an $8K camera. Does it really have any major serious advantages over the Panny AF1--?
Is this really a competitor to RED? It looks like the "stepped down" camera for those who want "Ease of Use" over RED but that's it.

I am NOT convinced by any of the specs that this camera is $15K better than Panny nor am I convinced this is a RED competitor.

Criag, I think you are hitting the nail on the head. After watching the AF-100 come to light and now seeing this new Sony camera I can not see the $10,000 price difference either.

When Canon puts out a $6,000 50mbps 4:2:2 camera it is a bit strange for Sony to stay with 35mbps 4:2:0 in a new $15,000 camera body that is basically an EX-1r with a large sensor.

As a non-cinema more video oriented shooter I like the idea of an EX-1 shallow DOF companion but not at this price. They have passed me up as a potential buyer.

Strange that Panasonic can find the way to offer basically the same style of camera for 1/3 the price.

I won't say too much other than, wait for the U.S. pricing. Once upon a time, (pre release EX-1) I was told
by a Sony rep that the EX-1 would be 'around 6 grand'. So I posted that on various internet forums
and was called 'crazy' because more expensive prices were being 'calculated' with exchange rates and
such. Until we actually find out the US 'street price' I am going to withhold judgement. Remember,
the 'official' MSRP of the EX-1 is $7790 or some such figure as well.....but you can get it from a
Sony dealer for the 'street price' of $6299 which is about $1500 less......

50/ 60p in 720p mode only. Just like my $800 Canon T2i. At least is can do 10bit 4:2:2 out of the SDi socket... but as mentioned, you'll need more equipment to make use of this mojo.

PL lens mount doesn't help the high pricing either,

For $6 K, it'd be a nice camera, but I don't think this will steal away any new potential DSLR buyers, AF100 buyers, or any RED buyers for $20K.

A strange product considering the current market.

The EX-3, which is interchangeable lens, might be a fair comparison. B&H has is for $8,320. Given the description of the new camera there is no feature or market justification for a price much above $10K. The prices people are claiming have to be WAY OFF or Sony has a DOA product IMHO.

OK here's word from what appears to be a reliable news source. If we all call up Sony at the same time and SCREAM into the phone maybe they'll get the message. Looks like I can justify buying a Canon D60 now unless the Panny camera grabs me.

"The F3 is scheduled to ship in February 2011 at $16,000 for the body only or at $23,000 for a kit that includes three Sony-branded T2.0 PL-mount prime lenses at 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm. Sony is formally introducing it with film-school-oriented launch events this month at USC in Los Angeles and next month at NYU in New York City."

So that would probably mean around $14K "street" for the body. We'll know when it pops up at B&H.

Studio daily says it's $16K body only, 23K with lens:
Sony's PMW-F3 Targets Indie Filmmakers | Studio Daily

Still too much though... but perhaps after the promised firm-ware (in a year), but by then who knows what will be out?

I was just at a small press briefing with Sony on the F3 and got to fondle the prototype (StudioDaily was present and that's the source of Craig's info).

I think we have to keep in mind that Sony is looking for a higher end solution than the AF-100 encroaching on Red territory.

One of the things that we discussed today with Sony, in fact, is the positioning of the device.

Sony sees this as an ideal second unit camera for F-35 shoots, for example. And once the optional S-Log software upgrade is released, it will be possible to apply identical LUTs to footage from both cameras to enable scene matching.

Another factor here is the Super35 sensor. While Sony declined to provide us specifics about the sensor, it is a new sensor and they claim among other things that it siginificantly reduces "jello-cam."

Another position for this camera is indie filmmakers. Note that while it is recording XDCAM EX 4:2:0 to cards, it outputs 10-bit 4:2:2 via SDI. Makes the nanoFlash or KiPro an ideal companion.

Much more portable than a Red.

Those who might purchase an AF-100 for indie feature might considering forgoing the purchase but rent the F3.

But I think we have to await actual footage from the camera before we make any final judgments.

Ned Soltz

The only advantage I see is your "much more portable" than RED. I'm not sure what portion of the RED market, given its feature set, really is going to go for "much more portable." It looks like it's stuck right in the middle of two market niches, not really satisfying either. Sony might see a void to fill between the two markets but they may just find . . . a void.

Sorry to be critical but if it were a "killer" $20K camera it could be a challenge to RED for less money and faster setup. If it included the Dual Link feature NOW, that might be a claim for example. If it included 50mbps 4:2:2: for those who don't want to start attaching things to it, that would be convenience with a usable 4:2:2 codec. It looks like it's not quite enough to compete against RED and way too much more without too many advantages to cause someone to consider renting over buying an AF100 . . . or renting a RED. It just seems like too many compromises from all sides. What do I know though, maybe the reality TV shows will buy it like hotcakes.

Thanks for your input Ned. (hope all is well)

I just don't get it. The Panasonic AF-100 has everything the F3 is offering outside of dual-link SDI and S-log for work with the high end F-35. And will retail for $4990 (with 1080p60 to boot).

If the F3 is going to be along side the RED offerings or F-35 the 35mbps EX codec stands out like a sore thumb. So this camera really costs a decent amount over $20,000 to get up to the "B-cam" for the upper end cameras with the needed add-ons. Essentially leaving a lot of people in the dust.

It seems they should offer a lower end model at an EX-1/3 pricepoint with the 35mbps codec and SDI output just like the EX series and also offer the higher end camera to interface with their F-35 gear.

As Craig put it, it is in the middle serving no market completely. I want to think there is another model but I do not see what they could take off to lower the price sigificantly.

I will wait and watch but am a little surprised at the price.

I see everyone's point.

Sensor size differentiates the AF-100 and F3. Micro 43 vs Super35 is a big difference.

The true test, though, will be real world tests of both AF-100 and F3.

We live in interesting times.

I am only surprised in the price, now that I am clear on how they are positioning it, in that the dual-link HD-SDI is an add on cost. This is what puts it within shooting distance of Red. Apparently you can't even do overcrank without the software upgrade (depending on which bit of Sony marketing material you read). At 16 grand USD for the box with dual-link and S-log it would be a RED contender otherwise it is neither appealing to the people who want to go upscale from an AF100 or to the indie cinema crowd that now largely use RED.

Sony should be giving them a no-fuss box with the goodies in for one price (save the lens option), then it is a clear sale to all the markets, otherwise it pisses off all except the SRW-9000 shooters who Sony say should own this camera. That market is teenie-tiny to all the others.

Sony have two clear wins on this camera if they follow what I have said above. A 16 grand camera that has a much more cost efficient workflow than RED. Anything else and the value proposition isn't clearly there and the ease of decision becomes much more difficult to swallow.

My biggest gripe? The ridiculous screw mount that Sony say is the same as on the EX1R. A camera with a PL mount HAS to have 3/8" threads! ...and the price is a little high.

I meant to post this earlier but my server has been playing up:

Sony PMW-F3 Announced

Here's a graphic comparing the AF-100 sensor size to the Sony PMW-F3 sensor ( made with the AbelCine FOV Calculator )

AbelCineTech - Field of View Calculator

If I were RED I'd thank Sony for making the Scarlet worth producing again without worrying that it'll cost a bit more than they originally thought.

Ned and Guy, what you describe is exactly why Sony could have had an $8K camera that people might buy instead of a $5K Panny AF100.

The should have made a better camera or a lower price point for this.

All this talk about Sony missing their target market...

I'm guessing with the lens kit it's going to be somewhere in the low $20,000s. Let's say you add a Nanoflash or Aja-mini - another $2,000-2,500. That puts it firmly in the professional broadcast/filmmaker market, and now you have a 10-bit 4:2:2 codec. For that same price, you can maybe assemble an HPX500 kit, or a low-end Sony XDCAM HD or a PMW-350 with SxS cards. That price still won't get you the latest Varicams or medium to higher-end XDCAM HD cameras.

I dunno, the F3 sound like a pretty good deal. If the S35 sensor gives us the images we think it can, then it's a great choice for a professional. Add a power zoom (as the zoom rocker indicates) then it definitely opens its options as a professional tool. Plus, it can be upgraded to a true digital cinema camera that can be matched with an F35 and give you 4:4:4 color. Wow.

So: in its basic form, it's a large sensor EX camera with great low light performance and shallow DoF. Add an aftermarket media drive and it's a broadcast-quality video/cinema camera. Use the dual HD/SDI to an as-yet revealed media drive, and it's a big-time PL-mount digital cinema camera, working side by side with the really expensive cameras, ready for the big screen. All this from one camera. Think of the rental possibilities!

For indie filmmakers and lower budget professionals, the AF100 looks like a better deal - or at least a more affordable one. What will it take to make the AF100 give you 10-bit 4:4:4 color? Answer - you can't, but most of us will never need that feature. Yet, someone will. So, pick the camera that best fits your needs.

Ahh - but there's a lot more to it than simply physical sensor size.

The AF100 appears to be using an available 12 megapixel sensor - as in all the other Panny 4/3 cameras. Quite sensible as a way of keeping costs down, and using an OLPF does mean it won't have the worst of the aliasing problems of DSLRs. BUT, it is almost certain to still have to use pixel skipping readouts, and that's likely to impact on sensitivity. Sony do say that the F3 has a sensor specifically designed for digital cinematography - I read that as indicating one with less than 12 megapixels, and hence able to not need pixel skipping - whilst being fully adequate for HD video. It's likely to mean some considerable advantages over the AF101, not least sensitivity.

Secondly, you have to think about the way it seems to have been designed around a lens system - the AF101 seems to be thought of as a body to make use of various lenses that are available. The trouble is that such lenses (at least zooms) are likely to be about f4. Compare that to a 2/3" camera with an f2 lens and you can expect exactly the same depths of field! What the 4x bigger sensor gets you, the two stops smaller lens takes away.

As video DSLR replacements without aliasing problems, remember that 4/3, even super 35mm, sizes are much smaller than full frame 35mm. Combined with aperture issues, some people may find the AF100 dof disappointing compared to the DSLrs they are used to.

There are many other differences as well, s-log obviously being a big plus for the F3. But I'm also surprised that the native codec is 35Mbs - I'd have expected 50Mbs, I agree. All I can say is that at least 35Mbs XDCAM is much better than AVC-HD. And since it's a more expensive camera, then maybe the use of an external recorder (to ProRes, HDCAM SR, or whatever) may be less of an issue.

The big question now will be whether the AF100 is seen as a sweet price point - or falling between stools. I suspect it may be seen as not good enough to satisfy more discerning users - but too expensive for those on limited budgets, bearing in mind that lens issues don't make it very good as a "general purpose" video camera.

A 10 bit 4:4:4 output is only any use if the sensor is able to deliver a quality of output that 10bit 4:4:4 recording will enable you to see any difference.

The AF101 is supposed to be using adapted still camera 12 megapixel chips, so is extremely unlikely to give a raw sensor performance equivalent to the F3. Record it to 8bit AVC-HD and that's totally irrelevant. If you have the ability to get at a 10 bit signal, it becomes highly significant.

Its kind of amazing to me that from the strictly amateur point of view, that various DSLR starting at $900, with some work arounds and software enhancements, will be able to still cover about 98% of what the Sony line is going to do at a fraction of the price. Again, this is a strictly amateur point of view, and I recognize a lot of pro shooters will pay for that extra 2%. But it seems like the Sony, at that price point, should offer a bit more.

I am still hoping Sony also flys a pro version of the NEX-VG10 and that might be the right step for them in this market to compete with the new Panny...

Dear Friends,

I have heard that the PMW-F3 sensor produces extremely high quality images.

I would not discount this camera at all until I saw the actual images from this camera.

Ned, did Sony USA actually say $16K? I assumed Studio Daily interpolated that info from Sony UK's blurb.

I have a feeling this camera is going to come in quite a bit under $16K. Closer to $10K, is my bet. Making guesses on US pricing using "tentative" Euro pricing I think is a bad idea.

I don't think many folks will bite at over 12 or 13 USD.

Guys, this camera has a PL mount, its not AF101 competitor at all. Probably it will cost around 25K with the 444 out and the SR recording option, so is a budget cinema camera and more a RED competitor.

BUT I AM AMAZED THAT NOBODY HAS NOTICED, THERE 2 CAMERAS UNDER THE RED CLOTH!!!

Sony 35mm Mystery Camera Film and Digital Times: Blog

I guess the second one will be a more formidable AF101 competitor, price/spec wise.

If you also consider the rumor for a CANON APS-C camera with a June release, we definitely living in very interesting times. I just feel sorry about RED. Epic looks more and more like the V2 rocket*.


* For those unfamiliar, Hitler put extraordinary amount of money and resources in order to produce a groundbreaking weapon like the V2 rocket. By the time it was finished, he had essentially lost the war.

Maybe - but I'd sort of assumed it was the prime lenses they talk about for the "K" package?

The size and the shape (too many angles) does not correspond to a lens form factor. More likely a pro NEX 10. Anyway its only 10 days...

This is the same thing I keep saying! Trying to know for sure what USA pricing is based on
tentative Euro pricing is not a good idea. Now I'm not saying it WON'T be 16 grand, but it
sure would not surprise me if it wasn't either.

I also think that Sony didn't go the 50Mbit route mainly due to power consumption reasons, along with size and weight benefits as well. If you read the FDT article, this camera doesn't employ a fan at all. Anyway the difference between 35Mbit and 50Mbit is solely in the colorspace. Sony assumed - IMO correctly - that those who need the extra color info, they will use a separate recorder. We all know that for mainstream work, this extra information is rarely appreciated.

Absolutely, which is why we really won't know how these cameras compare until somebody is able to test them side by side.

For the GH-1 ( and for the new GH-2 ) Panasonic used pixel-binning techniques to reduce the true res of the sensor, which is the main reason why the GH-1 does not suffer the same degree of moire and aliasing artifacts as the Canon DSLRs do. I've heard that the native ISO of the AF-100 sensor is in the 400-640 range, which means that it should compare fairly well against the F3. ( I expect the F3 to have better image latitude at high ISO, but the proof will be in the pudding )

I am curious how the AF-100 will compare with the F3's image sharpness, as having a dedicated cine sensor might give the Sony some advantage here.

Actually it appears to have been designed ideally for Panasonic 4/3 lenses, but is completely adaptable to almost any lens on the market. I am curious to see how the Birger adapter for Canon EF mount lenses performs, because having a wireless focus puller that can control both focus and aperture with Canon L glass looks very interesting. ( I am a big fan of Canon still cameras, so being able to use my lenses for both stills and video work would be a big bonus for me )

Starting with the 4/3 format, we have top-notch Olympus f 2.0 zooms at: 14-35mm and 35-100mm, along with a 150mm f 2.0 prime and a 90-250mm f 2.8 zoom. Panasonic plans some new faster lenses, though for now you have to settle with 14mm f 2.5, 20mm f 1.7, 25mm f 1.4. With the Birger adapter, we can then add all of the Canon DSLR L glass, with a wide range of focal lengths between f 1.2 - f 2.0. ( 24mm - 200mm ). And being DSLR glass it will likely cost a fraction of the equivalent cine lenses would cost.

I think the big deal with cameras like the AF-100 is going to be electronic lens control for both f-stop and focus. ( the Birger demo video for their RED adapter looks very impressive, so I hope the AF-100 adapter is just as good )

I personally think that FF sensors are too big, in that the DOF is so shallow it becomes a bit of a gimmick. ( you also have to close down 2 f-stops to get the same DOF as the 4/3 or S35 formats )

I actually think it's going to be quite the opposite, in that a fully rigged camera with fast f 1.4 - f 2.0 glass with remote wireless focus and f-stop control, 1080P variable slow-motion overcrank ,simultaneous uncompressed 4:2:2 output both HDMI and HD-SDI ports, and uncompressed audio is going to totally rock in the $10K and under price range. ( Yes, you could easily push $15-20K with lots of lenses and toys, but I think that you could definitely put together a great package for $10K )

From my perspective it looks like Sony is trying to protect it's digital cine line, so they had to hamper the F3 in some way.

...And if you want to slag the Panasonic implementation of the AVCHD CODEC please show us the proof David, because I've seen nothing from you to back up this silly claim. I've posted both the Crews.TV and Barry Green's tests that prove the opposite of what you are saying, that the Panasonic AVCHD CODEC at 21 MBits is superior to the Sony XDCAM-EX CODEC at 35 Mbits, and that the AVCHD CODEC compares favorably to the AVC-Intra CODEC for general video shoots. ( I've also got a quote from Adam Wilt, where he states that he considers these two CODECs at these rates to be essentially equivalent, and there's also Mr. Philip Bloom who posted that he found essentially no difference between the AVC-Intra 100 MBit and AVCHD 24 Mbit CODECs when he was shooting with the AF-100 pre-production camera.

David I think we both need to wait until a professional comparison of the finished products can be done. You seem to be bent on slagging the AF-100 camera, but I don't see you backing this up with any statements from the people who have used the current pre-production camera. So I think you need to wait for technical reviews of the finished production camera which should be very soon. ( Philip Bloom and Barry Green are in Japan right now, and it sounds like they will get to play with a finished production camera this Wednesday. )

Adam Wilt, who's been involved DVInfo ShootOuts I believe, has a first look (from afar?) at the AF100. I don't like pointing to offset articles but I'm assuming Adam Wilt is a "friend" of this site.

ProVideo Coalition.com: Camera Log by Adam Wilt | Founder | Pro Cameras, HDV Camera, HD Camera, Sony, Panasonic, JVC, RED, Video Camera Reviews

Well, the more I see of it, the more the AF100 looks to be an amazing camera for the price. Seems to be the dream wedding cam, and a pretty good indie cam to boot. Don't love the 4/3's dealio, but I don't hate it either.

Either the Sony is just that much better, or we have the makings - potentially - of some real tough marketing times ahead for them. 'Cause this AF100 is looking like Godzillia right now.

Reading the specs for this camera, I would have thought that it would be the least suitable camera for shooting live events like weddings - until I read about the face tracking feature, for exposure as well as focus....

Yes. Sony US actually quoted $16K camera alone; $23K with lens package.

Studio Daily report was absolutely accurate and the same thing I heard.

That would be sound reasoning in an $8K camera but not for a $16K camera IMHO.

People looking to push things in color correction would want at least 4:2:2 color space. In fact the need to add an external recorder drives up the prices and notches down the "ease of use" advantage the camera might have vs RED for example (although it certainly has other "ease of use" advantages).

Sorry for posting so much but I have to articulate why I and others are disappointed.

EX1 and the EX series is a leader for us because:
Sony brought larger sensors in at a lower price. 1/2" for just over $6K (EX1)
We got interchangeable lenses for just over $8K (EX3)
We got full shoulder camera for about $12K (PMW-320)
We got 2/3" for $19K (PMW-350)
We got 2/3" CCD with 50mbps 4:2:2 to card rather than disc for $25K (PMW-500)
We got 35mbps VBR to card when others were 25mbps CBR tape or difficult to use 24mbps AVCHD or large file size AVC Intra.

Sony has been leading price performance throughout the EX series.

Canon offers large sensor HDSLR (albeit compromised) used by video pros in about $1K-$3K
Panasonic offers large sensor camera with video body for $5K
Sony, the price performance leader offers NOTHING in the range. Not even an announced future product.

Instead Sony offers an EX1 style camera with basically the same codec and related features in large sensor format with the addition of PL Mount, LUT, not yet implemented Dual Link (sure to increase the cost), otherwise the need to add on an external recorder to improve the codec (increasing the cost) to compete against the RED when it does not match the feature set of RED and once using the add on needed, it's ease of use factor begins to decline . . . for $16K.

It's market seems basically for those who prefer ease of use vs RED's additional features. It's beaten in price performance on the low end and it's beaten in features (IMHO) in the market it's trying to compete it. That gives is a very narrow niche (IMHO). Maybe it'll be the F35 for reality TV shows where ease of use is critical but in a world of declining budgets I have a hunch the AF100 (even with its compromises), at 1/3 the cost, will win there too.

Totally agree Craig....

Feeling the same as Craig. I'm currently in line for an Epic at $19.5k, but for various reasons really don't want to invest that much when Red rentals in LA are ridiculously low, and there's an insane amount of Canon shoots.

If Sony could fix all the problems Canon brings to a job, then that's awesome, but if it costs almost the same as a Red, then why bother? I'm calculating a $13K street price for the F3 based on EX1R pricing, but even 13K isn't really enough. Needs to be 11K at most, and that's pushing it, considering I'd need to spend another 2500 for an external recorder to get the good stuff. At the end of the day its still a plastic box that wears worse than a pro camera, but it's definitely got pro pricing. $16K for a body with that useless, fragile rear finder? You're kidding me.

One thing that COULD save it is if it truly is as quiet as a church mouse, and gets that 13 stops they're saying. Nobody is getting anything like that without spending a $25K for a Red with MX at the moment.

I hope Sony revisits this pricing. I suspect this camera will truly be great for what they desigined it to be (built in ND filters with PL glass?! Purpose built zoom for run & gun? You crazy!), but it will be for naught if AF100s and Epics are on the other ends of the spectrum.

I want one, and can afford, but very much doubting it's smart money.