Which Camera Today for Indie Feature?

[dhessel]

The Sony F3 and F35 are older cameras and don't the same Sony look as the current cameras do, especially the F35.

[jax_rox]

9 hours ago, Hanriverprod said:

I'm actually a little surprised so many people are recommending Sony cameras. I'm not sure if it's skin tone is good for a narrative piece focusing on drama and a little comedy. I see people grading the sony raw images online and it looks either hazy or with a color cast like magenta or green. I'm thinking it must be hard to color correct sony slog2-3 and people end up with overall color issues. My DP has shot with the Fs7 and he liked it but even his film looked hazy and kind of lifeless to me, and this was with a proper color correction.

Depends what you call 'proper' colour correction  

Firstly, the F3 and F35 are very different beasts to the newer Sony cameras, with totally different sensors that behave differently.

Secondly, having shot extensively with both the F5 and F55, I'll say they're both different cameras to say an FS7. Perhaps the difference between an FS7 and F5 isn't as pronounced as say the FS7 to F55, but it's still different.

Realistically, an F55 kit should probably still sit within your budget, and the F55 is an great camera. As always, each has their quirks, but I'm very happy shooting with both the F5 and F55 if I can't rent anything else.

Keep in mind the F55 has the same CFA as the F65, so the picture is closer to an F65, the F5 has a picture closer to an FS7. Either way, if you think you're going to get A7s-looking stuff from any of these cameras simply because of SLog2/3 then you are mistaken. It's sad that Slog has had it's name somewhat tarnished by people using it in 8-bit 4:2:0.

I think more important is the glass you put on the front of it - it can transform the look of a camera.

You may also want to see if your local rental house has the new VaricamLT or an Alexa Mini - you might be able to fit them in your budget.

[IronFilm]

On 7/20/2016 at 0:00 AM, PannySVHS said:

Other than that, Sony F3 is a camera a lot of people are admiring. Ironfilm even owns one and has been giving me good

reasons to have it on my radar. I would really like to use one. Right now I´m still learning with my Lumix G6.

I have a Panasonic G6 too! :D Often times when a lightweight easy to use G6 is preferable. 

And for multicam shoots such as weddings using my G6 to roam around for sniper shots along with a few GH1 bodies locked off on tripods, makes for an effective and very low budget set up. 

On 7/20/2016 at 0:00 AM, PannySVHS said:

All of em have internal NDs. The Sony might cost around 2000-3000 USD, JVC 3000, C300 maybe 4000-5000.

You can now find the F3 at US$1500ish prices without too much trouble, I would never pay US$3000 for one!
Heck I paid just US$1.2K for mine, and that was over a year ago when prices were higher then on average than they are now. 

On 7/20/2016 at 0:00 AM, PannySVHS said:

Hey IronFilm,

Do you have some footage you shot with the F3, maybe internal 8bit and external 10bit?

cheers

https://www.maoritelevision.com/tv/shows/reset/S01E003/reset-series-1-episode-3

The entire water fountain scene at @1:23 was pick up shots I did using my F3 with ProRes HQ.

The rest of the episode I was DoP for & shot with a Sony FS7.

On 7/20/2016 at 2:59 AM, Geoff CB said:

I'd also say buy an F3 and rent the best glass you can afford. Or buy a KiniMINI 4K and again rent the best glass you can afford. 

Great deals on the battle test Kinefinity KiniMini 4K on their website! US$3K I think? 

Or get the Kinefinity Terra 5K for $5K.

I'm not such a big fan of renting even glass on extremely low budget productions. You can go far with a set of zooms: Tokina 11-20mm f2.8 + Tokina 28-70mm f2.8 + Tokina 80-200mm f2.8 (and throw in the Nikon 50mm F1.8D, too cheap to not include!). This entire set of lenses can be got for just over a thousand bucks (and half the cost is just for the 11-20mm UWA!).

Or get a set of Rokinon Cine DS lenses:
http://ironfilm.co.nz/rokinon-cine-lenses/
 

[IronFilm]

On 7/20/2016 at 2:13 AM, Hanriverprod said:

The PD said some of the wide shots were soft but overall it looked good. He thinks we should shoot in 4k for more options in post. I'm not the DP but the director so I have some knowledge on camera gear but not a lot. I was thinking of spending around $8000 for just camera and one zoom lens and rent the rest of the camera gear like tripod, monitor, follow focus, mattebox, filters.

I shot my first film on the original Red. It looks okay. It was released theatrically here and lives on in cable and internet downloads. I'm assuming there are better and now cheaper options than that.

Maybe you missed focus on the wide shots as it wasn't properly calibrated for infinity focus??? Seems strange for RED 4K wide shots to be thought of as too soft?!

And shooting 4K for 2K delivery to give "more options in post" doesn't come with pitfalls, you'll need to be spot on with your focus, and the crop will mean deeper DoF than if you'd shot it originally with a longer lens without cropping. Plus 4K means heavier demands on data storage during production and in post. 

All of these can of course be overcome, but shouldn't be ignored casually. 

Even just 1080 10bit 422 will chew up a lot of space over a feature! Is what I'll be doing on my next feature. 

Maybe for my feature after that we'll have the budget to use 4K 10bit 422 cameras for the whole thing. (as would like to use a Sony FS700 with FSraw down converted to 4K ProRes HQ on the fly with an Atomos Shogun, but that would stretch our budget too far So Sony F3 it is! If we do get any spare budget at all, it will be to buy a second Sony F3 so we can shoot with two at once)

On 7/20/2016 at 5:04 AM, dhessel said:

I would recommend that unless there is a specific thing you absolutely need on a newer camera is to pick up a used older one like the F3 that IronFilm pointed out. There where great cameras years ago that are still great, you can pick them up at bargin prices and they are completed. Firmware updates have fixed all the issues and they have been around long enough to know if they are truely reliable or not. You don't need the latest and greatest. 

 

Yeah the director Colin Trevorrow shot his first narrative feature film on an F3: "Safety Not Guaranteed".
Note however, I believe this was shot with a pre-S-log camera and all internal. Or in other words, you now in 2016 using the F3's S-log and 10bit external would be getting a much much better camera than the version of F3 which shot "Safety Not Guaranteed"!

Colin Trevorrow went on to make Jurassic Park (4th highest grossing film of all time!) and will next be making Star Wars: Episode IX.

 

 

On 7/20/2016 at 5:04 AM, dhessel said:

I would say an F3 if you don't need 4K wtih external recorder and a Cooke 20-100mm T3.1(lenses are a better investment than cameras). This lens is a great lens, very vercitile, you can shoot an entire feature with it, and can be found for around $4000 but might take some patience. You can have a package that will deliever fantastic images for around $6000-$7000 leaving some budget left for other things. If you go the F3 route make sure it has the paid slog upgrade as it enabled 3G out the sdi giving you more recorder options. 

 

Oh wow, a Cooke 20-100mm T3.1, that sounds like a handy and great zoom range with a fast enough T-stop, all this with the Cooke name for $4K? Can't afford it now, or even probably next year, but sounds like something I could aspire to own in the medium term future!

But then I looked up what the lenses looks like on an F3.....

WHOA!! That seriously pushes the limits for me for an "everyday" lens to shoot a feature on. Hmmm....

[IronFilm]

On 7/20/2016 at 5:04 AM, dhessel said:

If you go the F3 route make sure it has the paid slog upgrade as it enabled 3G out the sdi giving you more recorder options. 

Not 100% essential, but important to look out for anyway.
However there was a free s-log upgrade available which you can get if you don't have the paid version, and that allows you to have s-log 10bit 422. Just you miss out on 444, but the gain there is marginal in most use cases.

On 7/20/2016 at 5:04 AM, dhessel said:

This setup is large and heavy though so not a run and gun solution.

I used to have a big bulky set up (using V mount batteries even!). But my set up now with the Samauri Blade and a 24-70mm f2.8 is quite a nice compact set up, can even be usable for run and gun shooting with my Sony F3. 

On 7/21/2016 at 0:55 PM, aldolega said:

Another thing to consider is how you'll be lighting and shooting- would you be better off getting two or three cheaper cams, lighting/blocking differently, and shooting multi-cam? There's a member here named Andy Lee who's shooting a feature with a fleet of Panasonic G6s, each rigged with Nikon glass. Usually using 2-3 cams per scene. There's a thread here somewhere with some BTS pics to illustrate what I'm talking about.

Yes! Shows even $500 cameras now can do amazing work. 

This thread:

 

[dhessel]

25 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Maybe you missed focus on the wide shots as it wasn't properly calibrated for infinity focus??? Seems strange for RED 4K wide shots to be thought of as too soft?!

And shooting 4K for 2K delivery to give "more options in post" doesn't come with pitfalls, you'll need to be spot on with your focus, and the crop will mean deeper DoF than if you'd shot it originally with a longer lens without cropping. Plus 4K means heavier demands on data storage during production and in post. 

All of these can of course be overcome, but shouldn't be ignored casually. 

Even just 1080 10bit 422 will chew up a lot of space over a feature! Is what I'll be doing on my next feature. 

Maybe for my feature after that we'll have the budget to use 4K 10bit 422 cameras for the whole thing. (as would like to use a Sony FS700 with FSraw down converted to 4K ProRes HQ on the fly with an Atomos Shogun, but that would stretch our budget too far So Sony F3 it is! If we do get any spare budget at all, it will be to buy a second Sony F3 so we can shoot with two at once)

Yeah the director Colin Trevorrow shot his first narrative feature film on an F3: "Safety Not Guaranteed".
Note however, I believe this was shot with a pre-S-log camera and all internal. Or in other words, you now in 2016 using the F3's S-log and 10bit external would be getting a much much better camera than the version of F3 which shot "Safety Not Guaranteed"!

Colin Trevorrow went on to make Jurassic Park (4th highest grossing film of all time!) and will next be making Star Wars: Episode IX.

 

 

Oh wow, a Cooke 20-100mm T3.1, that sounds like a handy and great zoom range with a fast enough T-stop, all this with the Cooke name for $4K? Can't afford it now, or even probably next year, but sounds like something I could aspire to own in the medium term future!

But then I looked up what the lenses looks like on an F3.....

WHOA!! That seriously pushes the limits for me for an "everyday" lens to shoot a feature on. Hmmm....

Yes it is big and fairly heavy but not as heavy as I thought it was going to be. I own one that I use with my F35, beautiful lens but definately not run and gunning with it. It also has a interchangeable mount design so it can be easily changed from PL to EF, etc... 

[IronFilm]

On 7/21/2016 at 1:16 AM, Hanriverprod said:

I'm actually a little surprised so many people are recommending Sony cameras.

Take a deep look into what people are doing with the FS7 and LC709a, such as over on dvxuser and other places. Give great images from it, Arri like. 

 

Also, this:

On 7/21/2016 at 2:55 AM, dhessel said:

The Sony F3 and F35 are older cameras and don't the same Sony look as the current cameras do, especially the F35.

 

On 7/21/2016 at 11:05 AM, jax_rox said:

Firstly, the F3 and F35 are very different beasts to the newer Sony cameras, with totally different sensors that behave differently.

 

 

[dhessel]

6 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Not 100% essential, but important to look out for anyway.
However there was a free s-log upgrade available which you can get if you don't have the paid version, and that allows you to have s-log 10bit 422. Just you miss out on 444, but the gain there is marginal in most use cases.

True but the difference in price is marginal and doesn't it also allow for 60P 10bit 422 over a single SDI as well where it would require dual link without?

[IronFilm]

3 minutes ago, dhessel said:

Yes it is big and fairly heavy but not as heavy as I thought it was going to be. I own one that I use with my F35 beautiful lens but definately not run and gunning with it. It also has a interchangeable mount design so it can be easily changed from PL to EF, etc... 

Oops, just realised I put a pic of a Cooke Varotal 18-100 T3, but it seems the one you're referring to is a similar size anyway?

[dhessel]

11 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Oops, just realised I put a pic of a Cooke Varotal 18-100 T3, but it seems the one you're referring to is a similar size anyway?

Yes they are basically the same size, the 18-100 is the newer design of the same lens. It is a little bit sharper, so I am told, and considered a better lens but it goes for around $9000-$10000. I believe the 20-100 is about 14" long, has a 144mm front and weighs about 10.5 lbs. It has a min focus of a little over 2 feet so it can be used for closups on the long end. It is decently fast and has a slot for rear filters if you find one that still has the filter holder. It is a fantastic lens, if you can handle the size.

[jax_rox]

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

WHOA!! That seriously pushes the limits for me for an "everyday" lens to shoot a feature on. Hmmm....

I'd be more inclined to rent Angie DP Rouge's - I freaking love those lenses!

Again, don't underestimate the importance of glass - say what you will about Sony, but shooting F5 or F3 with Angie's or Ultra Primes is magic.

2 hours ago, dhessel said:

True but the difference in price is marginal and doesn't it also allow for 60P 10bit 422 over a single SDI as well where it would require dual link without?

Mine has the full upgrade, and I can confirm that you can do 50/60p 10-bit 422 over single HD-SDI. Can't attest to whether it would need dual-link without. 

[BenEricson]

On July 20, 2016 at 8:23 AM, ricardo_sousa11 said:

These would be the ones I'd go to, by priority order :

FS5 + good glass 

FS700+Odissey 

URSA 4.6k

BMCC

IMHO these are future proof and can get you pretty stunning results, specially if you pair them with anamorphics!

 

Personally, I would not mess with the FS700. I shot with that a lot and the colors and skin tones are just off. Not too sure about the FS5, but I think an F3 is like 1/3 the price and the savings could be spent on glass rental...

I bought an F3 a month ago, maybe my favorite camera I have owned. The color you can pull from the camera is just so nice. Excited to be working with it. It reminds of the BMCC or the pocket, with NDs, really nice battery life, and the reliability you expect from a camera in that class. 

Attached a couple stills. There's tons of F3 footage online, but just wanted to give that camera an up vote. I would get the F3 and a the 7Q recorder used. The whole package should be under 3 grand.

 

[IronFilm]

On 7/26/2016 at 11:22 AM, BenEricson said:

I would get the F3 and a the 7Q recorder used.

7Q seems a bit overkill when there are cheaper recorders? Only good reason for it is it can maybe do 444 I guess?

[PannySVHS]

44 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

7Q seems a bit overkill when there are cheaper recorders? Only good reason for it is it can maybe do 444 I guess?

 

SDI and HFR up to 240fps. Atomos Shogun has HFR up to 60fps plus SDI plus 12bit 444 RAW with its newest free! update.

[jax_rox]

9 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

 

SDI and HFR up to 240fps. Atomos Shogun has HFR up to 60fps plus SDI plus 12bit 444 RAW with its newest free! update.

F3 doesn't do HFR, and only outputs at max. res of 1080p. As an all-round (regardless of camera), a 7Q(+) or Shogun makes more sense, but if buying specifically for the camera (and on a budget), then it makes no sense to spend more on a recorder that has features you won't use.

[IronFilm]

10 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

 

SDI and HFR up to 240fps. Atomos Shogun has HFR up to 60fps plus SDI plus 12bit 444 RAW with its newest free! update.

But you were saying the Odyssey with the F3? & in that combo it is overkill.

As BMD VA & Samurai Blade already have SDI.

And F3 can't do raw or 240fps.

[PannySVHS]

9 hours ago, jax_rox said:

F3 doesn't do HFR, and only outputs at max. res of 1080p. As an all-round (regardless of camera), a 7Q(+) or Shogun makes more sense, but if buying specifically for the camera (and on a budget), then it makes no sense to spend more on a recorder that has features you won't use.

With HFR I meant from 60p up to HFR heaven:) You´re right, for a specific F3 solution Odyssey sounds overkill, except from the 444 as Ironfilm stated.

Shogun and F3 for 444 is a combination to be tested by camera tech experts, if the 444 makes it into the F3.

Other than that Blade or BMD sound good, if I had to estimate by my internet infos:)

7 hours ago, IronFilm said:

But you were saying the Odyssey with the F3? & in that combo it is overkill.

As BMD VA & Samurai Blade already have SDI.

And F3 can't do raw or 240fps.

Absolutely. Would be interesting to know if Shogun gives a 444 out to the F3. So far with its newest update it is 12bit Raw for fs700, fs7, c500 and such.

Thanks for pointing BMD and Blade out for having SDI. Some knowledge I already took a chance of sharing in my reply to Jax_rox

[IronFilm]

F3 is not getting any new updates, F3 has been able with its upgrade to do 444 for many many years now

[PannySVHS]

48 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

F3 is not getting any new updates, F3 has been able with its upgrade to do 444 for many many years now

 

I meant the newest Shogun update, enabling the Atomos Shogun to take a 12 bit 444 signal and record it:)

 

[IronFilm]

Ah! I see what you mean. But even ProRes HQ 10bit 422 is plenty I reckon for most cases I'm happy with my Atomos Samurai Blade!