Best super 35mm camera?

[HockeyFan12]

29 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

The tripod and RED 18-85mm PL lens are a couple of things that came with the R1 MX sale which really makes it a good deal!

Probably right about the C300 image vs C100 image, however do remember the "pros" on reduser are also a hell of a lot of amateurs too....

The tripod is what I had eyes on.

Canon claims publicly it's the same image pathway, which makes sense given that they use the same processors. But apparently that's not the case and it's actually very much dumbed down. I have shot the two side-by-side but not with the same focal length so I couldn't A/B it exactly. I couldn't see any difference. But what else would account for how tiny the C100 is?

Anyone who's getting that kind of damning inside information from tight-lipped Canon must be pretty high up. I know of other people who got technical information early or directly from Canon about unreleased cameras and chromasticities or developments with matrices or gammas etc. They didn't leak any information to me or break NDA (frustrating for me), but after the fact they mentioned to me that they were privy to it ahead of time or that controversies online were going on behind the scenes for the camera manufacturers as well during development. They got surprisingly little info, even given their inside status. The one constant is that all of them are top brass at top post companies or are working for the ACEs board or Dolby or similar. 

So if someone is getting that kind of inside info from Canon, especially anything that contradicts the party line, they must be pretty top of the line pros. Customer service reps know next to nothing and those who know something rarely talk publicly. 

That said, from what I've seen the image is just as good as the C300's. But it's an interesting factoid nonetheless. 

[Dogtown]

I never actually used one but i read a lot about the Canon 1DC having a very good looking 1080p 422 output through the HDMI. I'm sure there are few people that have them on this forum that can comment on this.

[redimp]

Gonna be testing F3 in a couple of weeks from now to see what fuss is about. I'm also looking at cameras with 4k sensors that shoot HD internally (which must look sharp, since it's oversampled from 4k, right?) and record 4k only via external recorder. This way I can have a nice sharp HD and rent an Odyssey when I need 4k, or even buy one in a year or so.

So far I've only found Canon C500 that does this, does anyone know of other cams that work the same way?

Thanks!

[Anaconda_]

From what I've found on a number of cameras, you can only output 4K to a recorder if you're also shooting 4K internally. If you are shooting 4K internal, you can also send a 1080 signal to the recorder, but sadly 1080 internal and 4K output doesn't seem to be an option. Of course, maybe there are cameras out there that can do it, but I've not come across any.

[CineAlta]

If you correctly expose while using the PMW-F3 in Cine EI mode (native 800iso out of the 3G SDI into a 4:4:4 recorder) with good lenses it will be the closest thing to an Alexa for under 1500Eur.  To use Cine-EI mode you just operate the camera as if it was a 35mm film camera loaded with 800iso film stock.  You expose for your skintones and let the s-log roll off the highlights.  Very filmic rolloff indeed.  The 4:4:4 files will allow you to push or pull by as much as 2 stops.  F3 footage shot in cine-ei 800iso in 10bit 4:4:4 and pushed to 3200 iso with a +2stop boost in post will look better than A7Sii 4k footage shot at 3200iso via 8bit 4:2:2 external recording. 

Also the sensor readout is very good meaning your motion has less of the skew you'll be used to seeing from most 4k sensors.  Good motion response and 4:4:4 at 1080p is better than 4K with skew to your motion.  You can shoot with very flat 4:4:4 s-log profile into an external recorder while recording a nice lutted 35mbs internal file to the sxs card.  The internal recording is very very good and holds up to quite a bit of pulling around in post.  

[Liam]

1 hour ago, Anaconda_ said:

From what I've found on a number of cameras, you can only output 4K to a recorder if you're also shooting 4K internally. If you are shooting 4K internal, you can also send a 1080 signal to the recorder, but sadly 1080 internal and 4K output doesn't seem to be an option. Of course, maybe there are cameras out there that can do it, but I've not come across any.

I think he just meant like what the a7si can do. Not recording both at once, just an internal option and a better option externally

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, redimp said:

I'm also looking at cameras with 4k sensors that shoot HD internally (which must look sharp, since it's oversampled from 4k, right?) and record 4k only via external recorder. This way I can have a nice sharp HD and rent an Odyssey when I need 4k, or even buy one in a year or so.

So far I've only found Canon C500 that does this, does anyone know of other cams that work the same way?

You just described the Sony FS700

Available for around US$2.5K secondhand. 

[Dogtown]

The choice between the Sony FS700 and the Canon C500, I think you will find the FS700 used for about $1900 to $2200 thats with the 4K option, and the Canon C500 I have seen go from $3400 to $5000 used. These were eBay prices.

The Sony is much more pro consumer, the Canon is loaded with pro options TC in out SDI out, the Canon records 8bit 422 in a MXF wrapper internal, the Sony records 8bit 420 MPEG-4 AVCHD, the Sony has higher frame rate options that look very good, I have not used the C500's frame rates above 30p but it can do up to 60p with the Odyssey 7Q+ in Canon RAW or converted to ProRes 444 12bit (very juicy) and up to 120fps half RAW in Canon rmf, Ive been meaning to test these frame rates with the Canon and Odyssey, when I do I'll post some of the footage. The FS700 looks very good with the 4K option and the Odyssey recording Sony RAW option, there are quite few good examples of this on Vimeo. The added plus with using the external recorder with these cameras is the proxy recording from the camera, it's nice to hand the client both the full 4K files and a 422 MXF files for offline editing ( I've had the TC and file names match both recordings with the C500) Bellow are the Canon and the Sony after they aired on youtube The Ansys B Roll was Blackmagic URSA, and the Interviews were Canon C500 4K to ProRes, the Freedom from quitting was all Sony FS700 AVCHD internal.

The still frame grabs are from top to bottom from internal camera codec

1, & 2, Sony f3, picture profile internal codec

3, Canon C100, WDR internal codec

4, 5, 6, Canon C500, C Log to rough grade internal codec 

 

 

 

 

[redimp]

21 hours ago, Liam said:

I think he just meant like what the a7si can do. Not recording both at once, just an internal option and a better option externally

Yes, exactly this.

I was thinking to maybe get a cam that does nice and sharp HD internally, but can also output 4k externally. That way I can learn the cam and shoot cat/girlfriend videos, but when I will do some more serious work, I'd be able to just rent/buy a Covergent or any other recorder and get the proper quality video.

So you guys are saying only C500 and FS700 fall into this category?

 

14 hours ago, Dogtown said:

it can do up to 60p with the Odyssey 7Q+ in Canon RAW or converted to ProRes 444 12bit (very juicy)

I really love the form factor of the C500 (by the looks of it). Will have to watch even more footage with both HD and 4k outputs. Also 12bit prores sounds amazing.

[IronFilm]

25 minutes ago, redimp said:

I really love the form factor of the C500 (by the looks of it).

I like the form factor of the C100 (don't like the specs! Or the price).

But I don't like using the C300, it pushed the size and got "too big" for that form factor. (and it seems the C500 is even worse!)

I'd rather use a FS5/FS7

[Rob6]

I have the FS700 and when using it in HD internally it is NOT sharp. I never use it. Definitely not 4k Downsampled to HD. The original c100 destroys this camera in sharpness because it downsamples the 4k sensor. 

I am sure you have heard it before, but I will say that the FS700 is amazing with used with Odyssey 7Q. Raw is awesome. And the 4ktoHD and 4kto2k prores modes are awesome because they are downsampled in the recorder when writing to the SSDs. Totally sharp. But this is with the recorder only.

[tonysss]

On 2. 10. 2017 at 3:05 PM, IronFilm said:

You just described the Sony FS700

Available for around US$2.5K secondhand. 

No, FS700 has internal 1080p bad !! low detail and sharpness.  FS700 I'm still available. I sometimes use.

 GH5 and 1080 internal is far far far better :-)

[redimp]

I have so far set my heart on four cameras. 

Absolute stretch of the budget and probably a stupid purchase – UMP or Scarlet X. Any of these two would set me back 7 grand for a ready to shoot package, but good news is that I might be able to rent them out and make some money back.

A very sober decision would be to get an F3, which I estimate would set me back 3 grand for a ready to shoot package with a Convergent recorder (probably the 7Q is a more viable option, as it can record 4k and is future proof, while Gemini can only do HD). I would not get a video assist, as I would want that 4:4:4.

And a middle ground option, a C500, that with an Odyssey 7Q would set me back around 5 grand if I manage to find a decent deal on it (and that's possible, judging by ebay history of sales).

I'm going to be testing all of these options, the DP I'm working with was able to find them available from rentals a day away from where I live.

Real question here is – would the image get that much better as the price grows. I mean C500+odyssey should be twice as good as the F3, and Ursa or Scarlet – three times as good. It's stupid to measure things like this, I know.
 

Anyone has opinions about this plan?

[SigurdW]

Personally, would be a happy camper with any of them (except the Scarlet) ... (and maybe even the UMP if low-light performance was a key factor). But then I have pre-ordered a Kinefinity Terra 4K  

[CineAlta]

3 hours ago, redimp said:

A very sober decision would be to get an F3, which I estimate would set me back 3 grand for a ready to shoot package with a Convergent recorder (probably the 7Q is a more viable option, as it can record 4k and is future proof, while Gemini can only do HD). I would not get a video assist, as I would want that 4:4:4.

 

I think you're vastly over thinking things.  the 10bit 4:2:2 into a 300eur video assist is more than adequate and will write to cheap SD cards.  By the time you upgrade to another camera and need the convergent 7q will no longer be future proof and the devaluation will have set in.  

[Dogtown]

It cost a lot more than what you think to get a camera package together that will cover all your shooting needs, start of with something manageable that will make you happy, but don't over do it on the spending. If you don't need 4K, start with the best 1080p camera package you can afford, but remember there are a lot extras that go with any camera so budget those in! 

Here in the US (west coast) you can find young owner operators practically giving away fully loaded camera packages with full support and themselves for very cheap rates, I see these ads all the time on Craigslist, they range from URSA PRO's to RED DRAGONS even ALEXA's, sometimes you're better off renting only what you need for the project.

The  items that will deprecate the quickest are todays digital cameras, be aware you may never make your money back on these very costly tools. 

Just log onto any Craigslist site in the US and go to Photo and Video for sale, you will see the nutty prices for owners with their cameras for rent.

https://losangeles.craigslist.org/d/photo-video/search/pha

[agachart]

where is panasonic varicam?

you don't want gh's about ss size,dof and brah,brah brah but i know you like something about it(gh series).

why no varicam!!!

[IronFilm]

15 hours ago, redimp said:

Absolute stretch of the budget and probably a stupid purchase – UMP or Scarlet X. Any of these two would set me back 7 grand for a ready to shoot package, but good news is that I might be able to rent them out and make some money back.

Good news? No, don't count on it at all.

Do dry hire hire gear has a lot of overhead/expenses, such that you hardly will be profiting from it if it is not on the regular. 

And if you're not already established in the film industry, then you won't be getting regular rentals. 

15 hours ago, redimp said:

A very sober decision would be to get an F3, which I estimate would set me back 3 grand for a ready to shoot package with a Convergent recorder (probably the 7Q is a more viable option, as it can record 4k and is future proof, while Gemini can only do HD). I would not get a video assist, as I would want that 4:4:4.

I'd go with Video Assist instead (or even an Atomos Samurai, which is what I use), as one of the big benefits of the F3 is its low cost in today's market, while the 7Q torpedoes that.... don't think the extra high cost of a 444 is worth it. 

If I was buying a 7Q, then it would be a no brainer for me to instead buy the FS700 over the F3. As now in 2017 (vs two years ago when I made my F3 purchase) the price difference between an F3 and a FS700 is only a few hundreds or so more. 

15 hours ago, redimp said:

And a middle ground option, a C500, that with an Odyssey 7Q would set me back around 5 grand if I manage to find a decent deal on it (and that's possible, judging by ebay history of sales).

I wouldn't regard this as your "middle" ground option, but rather your highest end option. Would help provide better context for your other choices to compare with. 

12 hours ago, CineAlta said:

I think you're vastly over thinking things.  the 10bit 4:2:2 into a 300eur video assist is more than adequate and will write to cheap SD cards.  By the time you upgrade to another camera and need the convergent 7q will no longer be future proof and the devaluation will have set in.  

This. 

x10,00 this.

Although with a username like "CineAlta" you are probably biased! ;-) hehe

 

15 hours ago, redimp said:

Real question here is – would the image get that much better as the price grows. I mean C500+odyssey should be twice as good as the F3, and Ursa or Scarlet – three times as good. It's stupid to measure things like this, I know.

Is it twice as "good"? (however on earth "good" is measured!! So many meanings of that word...) Or three times as good???

No. NOPE! No. 

Look instead at where the low hang fruit is (rather than spending even more on diminishing returns). 

Better lighting/sound/acting/set-design/pre-production/grading/etc etc.... will have a greater overall impact on the quality of the final product than tripling the amount you spend on a camera.

[IronFilm]

 

11 hours ago, Dogtown said:

It cost a lot more than what you think to get a camera package together that will cover all your shooting needs, start of with something manageable that will make you happy, but don't over do it on the spending.

YUP!!!!

By the time you have purchased lenses, batteries, media, cables, shoulder mount, quick release plate, slider, tripod, rails, mattebox, 4x4 filters, follow focus, and much much more.... you'll look back and laugh at how little your camera body cost in comparison to your total budget you have now spent!

And we haven't even started discussing audio or lighting gear yet. Except to potentially spend on each a comparable amount as on the camera!

 

11 hours ago, Dogtown said:

Here in the US (west coast) you can find young owner operators practically giving away fully loaded camera packages with full support and themselves for very cheap rates, I see these ads all the time on Craigslist, they range from URSA PRO's to RED DRAGONS even ALEXA's, sometimes you're better off renting only what you need for the project.

The  items that will deprecate the quickest are todays digital cameras, be aware you may never make your money back on these very costly tools. 

Just log onto any Craigslist site in the US and go to Photo and Video for sale, you will see the nutty prices for owners with their cameras for rent.

https://losangeles.craigslist.org/d/photo-video/search/pha

And this is exactly why you should not be expecting any rental income from a camera you purchase. 

Because too many people have thought the exact same thing! Only to discover the market is flooded, and they have to drop their rates very low to get anything at all back to service their expensive loans. 

[CineAlta]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

If I was buying a 7Q, then it would be a no brainer for me to instead buy the FS700 over the F3. As now in 2017 (vs two years ago when I made my F3 purchase) the price difference between an F3 and a FS700 is only a few hundreds or so more. 

I disagree.  4k capability of the fs700 is great and all that.  But I'd take the image processing and infrastructure of the f3 over the increased resolution of the fs700.

The F3 performs as if Sony looked at everything that made the original Alexa the success it was (and still is) and tried to replicate it.  The low light capability and highlight handling of the f3 still stands up today.  They created a camera that would seamlessly intercut with their F35, which at the time was in direct competition with the Alexa for upper level production.  I think their efforts to match these cameras (matching the f3 to the f35 with its CCD chip was a step in the right direction when getting the image processing so right on the f3)

The fs700 was developed by a completely different team (the consumer division) and it is as if after the f3, f35 and f65 the team behind the fs100, 700 and fs7 poisoned the whole outfit and since then Sony have lost their way to the point where you have to shoot raw in order to bypass the work of the engineers responsible for the image processing within Sony cameras.

The Venice looks to be a departure from their F series - probably because they know that they need to move away from the image processing stigma they've attracted from their products developed over the last 4-5 years