Administrators Andrew Reid Posted September 8, 2017 Administrators Share Posted September 8, 2017 I really like the satirical style of the test... something different and filmic, yet still useful and a conversation starter. Well done dude. Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 Just added a 5d mark iii raw and sony f35 into the test. Results soon Liam 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 2 hours ago, Ed_David said: Just added a 5d mark iii raw and sony f35 into the test. Results soon Why stop there? GH5, 1DXII, C200, C300II next? Expect a call from Zacuto soon ? Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 9, 2017 Author Share Posted September 9, 2017 6 hours ago, jcs said: Why stop there? GH5, 1DXII, C200, C300II next? Expect a call from Zacuto soon ? I was curious to test the f35 - because I am getting tired of bayer-pattern CMOS and how it renders skintones vs CCD, and Ricardo brought his 5d mark iii, so boom, added that in. F35 vs F65 below. Shooting at 400 ISO on both cameras. F35 was 12-bit DPX files 1080p, sony f65 was 4k 3:1 compressed raw jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tupp Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 On 9/7/2017 at 5:23 AM, Ed_David said: It shows me that the f65's mechanical shutter is beautiful - but not really that noticeably better and definitely does not make the extra weight and bulk and size of the f65 worth it. I think that the mechanical shutter makes a more noticeable difference with significant movement and with handheld shots. The mechanical shutter probably also reduces noise. By the way, Panavision modified a few F65s by removing the mechanical shutter. They called the modified version the "F65 Mini," and they usually live in France: http://panavision.fr/produits/sony-f65-mini/ www.vimeo.com/197192795 jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 1 hour ago, Ed_David said: I was curious to test the f35 - because I am getting tired of bayer-pattern CMOS and how it renders skintones vs CCD, and Ricardo brought his 5d mark iii, so boom, added that in. F35 vs F65 below. Shooting at 400 ISO on both cameras. F35 was 12-bit DPX files 1080p, sony f65 was 4k 3:1 compressed raw The F65 frame has a lot more detail, and I like the color better vs. the F35. Did you put a FilmConvert emulation on them? The F35 looks like a film emulation (black is not black, even so detail goes away much faster vs. the F65 as light drops: much less sensitive). The F35 frame looks like a "look" which could also be applied to the F65 frame, which looks more neutral. I've been a fan of the F65 since Oblivion and Lucy: At the end of the thread I pushed saturation on an example F65 frame: while it turned a bit orange, it didn't go magenta (maybe a hair) or green, which I though was pretty good for a Sony at the time See the EOSHD thread in this post, last page. The F65 EXR frames are still there for grading. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squig Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 14 minutes ago, jcs said: Did you put a FilmConvert emulation on them?The F35 looks like a film emulation (black is not black, even so detail goes away much faster vs. the F65 as light drops: much less sensitive). The F35 frame looks like a "look" which could also be applied to the F65 frame, which looks more neutral. Looks like FC velvia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 9, 2017 Author Share Posted September 9, 2017 Here's f65 vs Alexa vs F35. F35 just has less room to play with in the shadows - and a ton more noise. So what I would do for another test, is bring in a fill light or bounce board Also learned: I am not a fan of slog3 or sgamut3. It's orangey. Sgamut is much more pleasing skintones. Yea, f35 gets pretty noisy quickly. this test doesn't show it, but it still handles mixed color so beautifully. i just go back and forth whether i like it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squig Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 10 minutes ago, Ed_David said: Here's f65 vs Alexa vs F35. F35 just has less room to play with - and a ton more noise. Also learned: I am not a fan of slog3 or sgamut3. It's orangey. Sgamut is much more pleasing skintones. Yea, f35 gets pretty noisy quickly. this test doesn't show it, but it still handles mixed color so beautifully. i just go back and forth whether i like it or not. I've always thought the F35 has the most filmic (35mm) look out of all the digital cameras straight out of the box; same goes with the D16. CMOS just looks too real without post processing. There's just something about the way CCD sensors capture light compared to CMOS I suppose; it's just too bad they suck in low light and there aren't many to choose from. Fujifilm have come the closest to making CMOS look like film out of the box, I wish they'd make a proper digital cinema camera. I'm a bit surprised with your Alexa tests, the Dragon did more for me (never been a Red fanboy), which was the opposite of what I expected, but there's tonnes of great looking Alexa stuff so like the 5D Mk3 it's just a matter of good post work I suppose. I can see the color noise in the shadows, crushing the blacks a bit hides it. For projects without much of a post budget and minimal low light shooting the F35 fits the bill; the best bang for buck too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronChicago Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 Great test Ed. Of course I love the UM46K, but I'm surprised at how good the Helium looked as I normally don't find it appealing with skin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 9, 2017 Author Share Posted September 9, 2017 6 hours ago, squig said: I've always thought the F35 has the most filmic (35mm) look out of all the digital cameras straight out of the box; same goes with the D16. CMOS just looks too real without post processing. There's just something about the way CCD sensors capture light compared to CMOS I suppose; it's just too bad they suck in low light and there aren't many to choose from. Fujifilm have come the closest to making CMOS look like film out of the box, I wish they'd make a proper digital cinema camera. I'm a bit surprised with your Alexa tests, the Dragon did more for me (never been a Red fanboy), which was the opposite of what I expected, but there's tonnes of great looking Alexa stuff so like the 5D Mk3 it's just a matter of good post work I suppose. I can see the color noise in the shadows, crushing the blacks a bit hides it. For projects without much of a post budget and minimal low light shooting the F35 fits the bill; the best bang for buck too. Yes, F35 gets you there pretty quickly. But it's highlight roll off is not smooth at all and its highlight clipping is ugly as well. That's where the alexa is king. But yes, you need time to make cmos look at good. Here's more f35 vs f65 . More to play with f65, f35 the image already falls apart just by merely touching it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 9 hours ago, Ed_David said: I was curious to test the f35 - because I am getting tired of bayer-pattern CMOS and how it renders skintones vs CCD, and Ricardo brought his 5d mark iii, so boom, added that in. F35 vs F65 below. Shooting at 400 ISO on both cameras. F35 was 12-bit DPX files 1080p, sony f65 was 4k 3:1 compressed raw Ed, for my own selfish reference, any custom paint settings on the f35 or straight cine ei? Light source? Will the prodigal ccd disciple from the east ever see the gloriously rolled off light and repent of his lust for ever more pixels or has the digital demise blinded him forever into the cmos abyss? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sam Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 51 minutes ago, Ed_David said: f35 the image already falls apart just by merely touching it Spreading false prophecies amongst the gh5 sheep, dooming them to digital darkness forvever. Just wait till the return of the one true film. Ed_David 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 9, 2017 Author Share Posted September 9, 2017 2 hours ago, sam said: Spreading false prophecies amongst the gh5 sheep, dooming them to digital darkness forvever. Just wait till the return of the one true film. Right now me and some DPs in New York are trying to make processing film more affordable. Lighting was 2 1x1 astra lights at 5600k into a bead board, soft side. Book light. Then double diffused with 2 silks stacked. F35 is an interesting beast. I can upload raw footage so people can play with or if you send me a harddrive or sd card I can put stuff on it. I recommend to everyone if you can rent it, or just try everything. And the GH5 - very nice camera. Not for me, but I am just one opinion and trust your own instincts. My opinions change daily. deezid, sam and Cinegain 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted September 9, 2017 Share Posted September 9, 2017 Bro, like... from time to time I keep on checking out that one vid you did and it blows me away every single time. You worked wonders with that F35. To me, it honestly doesn't get much better than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 9, 2017 Author Share Posted September 9, 2017 1 minute ago, Cinegain said: Bro, like... from time to time I keep on checking out that one vid you did and it blows me away every single time. You worked wonders with that F35. To me, it honestly doesn't get much better than that. Thanks - yea - was just comparing it with something my friend just shot on 35mm and it looked really similar! Going to try to regrade it. Cinegain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squig Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 16 hours ago, Ed_David said: Thanks - yea - was just comparing it with something my friend just shot on 35mm and it looked really similar! Going to try to regrade it. Why bother. looks cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted September 10, 2017 Author Share Posted September 10, 2017 5 hours ago, squig said: Why bother. looks cool. Can make it better color wise and edit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcel Zyskind Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 3 hours ago, Ed_David said: Can make it better color wise and edit This shot is gorgeous Ed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Yeah, wouldn't change a bit either, for me that was already purdy dang purfect! This one you did with the F35 I really liked as well: F35 defo has some special mojo and you a gift to make it sing! Ed_David and dbp 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.