Kodak Vision3 vs Sigma Fp-L RAW Cinema DNG

[Andrew Reid]

This guy has talent...

This is shot on the Sony a1 and an RX100, and it's very nice.

But then a funny thing happened...

I discovered his Super 16mm stuff and liked it even better, although you have to appreciate it on a big screen for the texture, and not a phone.

Film, being film has an imperfect nature.

So more emotive.

Now in the current digital camera landscape, full frame is king. And for a good reason.

But what if you could have both Kodak Vision3 Super 16mm and full frame in one camera...

Now, I considered the OM-1 as a Super 16mm 4K camera, because I very much liked the E-M1 Mark II since forever. The OM-1's OM-LOG however has a bit of a thin tonality, and is it a bit tricky to get looking right. Lovely ergonomics and EVF though.

Now the Sony a1, has the resolution to do a 4K Super 16mm crop (close to, it's actually Micro Four Thirds at 2x-ish which is good enough for most c-mount lenses longer than 25mm like the Kern Switar 26mm F1.1, work of art that it is).

The a1 I had but ended up selling to somebody far richer, because I feared it would depreciate from 5 grand to something like £1. This hasn't happened yet, as the new one is 7 grand. Anyway, sod Sony and their pricing... Doesn't shoot internal RAW anyway.

Now N-RAW, BRAW, Canon RAW, I have tried them all, and to my eye at least they all look like H.265.

There is just something so smooth and perfect about the modern faux RAW that it kinda defies the point, RAW should be raw and not processed. Those codecs are heavily processed and the file sizes are ridiculous.

There's only one RAW format that has come close to FILM to me and that has always been Cinema DNG.

Starting way back with the original BMCC and Ikonoskop, uncompressed 2K Cinema DNG.

Following on from that the miracle of Magic Lantern RAW video, with the 5D II going from some very dodgy 1080p H264 to the best ever looking 1080p Cinema DNG RAW which still stands up today for tonality, grain, texture, micro contrast, motion cadence and colour... you know, all that stuff which gets chucked away in N-RAW!

Then the 5D Mark III upped the ante to 3.5K RAW eventually, at 24fps in 10bit. The drop to 10bit didn't hurt it much. A little noisier in the shadows, but worth it for the huge resolution bump from a 1:1 sensor readout, which did away with the moire or aliasing without the need for a Mosaic Engineering AA filter.

Then the Sigma Fp came along, but the first model has two drawbacks. The first is that it doesn't have the resolution for Super 16mm crop in 4K. The second is that the 4K RAW appears to be binned. It's a bit funky looking.

Now the Sigma Fp-L has a 9K sensor instead... a whopping 60 megapixel. But I have not used it much... the reason being, I haven't quite found a lens that really suits it...

Then I thought, well it has the best crop modes of any camera, and stays in those modes when you cycle the power or switch between stills and cine... Perfect for C-mount, Super 16mm stuff?

It has a nice oversampling in these modes, from 1.3x crop to 2x... Sampling upwards of 7K down to 4.8K, which makes for some very finely textured UHD Cinema DNG footage, superior indeed to that of the first model.

(It also adds into the mix phase-detect AF but it doesn't work very well)

Now the Fp-L I thought could work well with my C-mount stuff and indeed, it fucking does.

But I also think of adding a Panasonic OIS lens to the mix, for handheld run and gun Cinema DNG.

So the 28-200mm looks attractive and yes, slow aperture but it's absolutely tiny.

This tiny-ness is very important for the Fp-L, as it feels naff with big heavy lenses.

And the Fp-L is very good in low light, because the sensor is enormous - the high megapixel count doesn't really hurt it, same with the Sony a1.

The 28-200mm also adds OIS... the all-important missing stabilisation on a non-IBIS camera.

So I think I have found the best full frame proper RAW camera that is best able to emulate the look of proper Super 16mm film and work with c-mount lenses, and offers you a full-frame walk-round zoom camera as well... And that means best of both worlds in one small affordable tool. Pop a 28mm F1.4 on there and it will also do a very good Leica Q3 impression.

We may moan about the lack of IBIS and LOG, but then a Bolex doesn't have these either.

And just think about the absolute massive pain it is to shoot with a Bolex and the expense you save going with a trusty Fp-L!

Food for thought.

....

The 8bit Cinema DNG to SD card is actually really good BTW

[Clark Nikolai]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

This is shot on the Sony a1 and an RX100, and it's very nice.

Very nice. I remember being on that very train in Tokyo and seeing the train on the line just over and wishing I had been filming it.

His other one in New York is really nice too and of course has the colours and tonality that can really only come from real film (Although some digital cameras can be similar).

 

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

There's only one RAW format that has come close to FILM to me and that has always been Cinema DNG.

I totally agree. It's cumbersome compared to other workflows but if image quality matters then it's totally worth it. (It's still way less work than shooting film though.) Takes up a lot of space and time to convert it and ingest into your system. The rewards are an amazing image and the ability to go back to the raw files later if you decide you need to re-ingest differently. I had a shot that was underexposed in the darks. Since it was a scenic shot I decided to go back and reshoot it. I was waiting for the right day cloud-wise, then decided to re-ingest from the original raw files and suddenly all this detail was in the darks and I didn't need to reshoot. A year had gone by since I first brought that shot in and since then I was using different software to convert from raw. I love how I'm able to do that.

 

 

[MrSMW]

5 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The 28-200mm also adds OIS... the all-important missing stabilisation on a non-IBIS camera.

It’s bigger and heavier and shorter, but wider and constant f4 also with OIS, the 24-105?

[mercer]

Cool topic! I look forward to seeing what you come up with. As you probably know, I have both the 5D Mark iii and the FP. In a lot of ways, they're redundant. I even use the same process and settings to render the 4K cDNG files to ProRes for editing/color in FCPX. The 4K helps with the FP. Some vintage lenses, most of what I own, are just too soft on the 5D.

But I agree that there's some kind of funkiness with the FP's image. I think it's processed a little in camera with NR and/or sharpness. No way to know that for sure, though. I tried using the 800 ISO trick, but I really didn't notice that much of a difference... I guess a stop or so in the highlights. I think the main benefit of the FP over the 5D3, for me, are the two ISOs for night/indoor shoots and due to the 4K it's sharper, so it has a more "modern cinematic" video look compared to the 5D3 which has more of a filmic look. 

I heard the s35 crop is actually better on the FP, but I didn't really notice much of a difference there either. I've been tempted to pick up a Canon 24mm 2.8 IS and the Sigma adapter and put it in s35 for a better handheld solution, but I haven't gotten around to it.

I completely agree about the 8bit 4K in camera raw!!! There's actually something so unique about the image.

Anyway, I look forward to some of your tests with the FP-L and c-mounts. I just sold my BMMCC, so I need to find a new camera for my c-mount lenses. I don't have anything too fancy like you do, but I do like them very much.

[Andrew Reid]

6 hours ago, MrSMW said:

It’s bigger and heavier and shorter, but wider and constant f4 also with OIS, the 24-105?

I have tried the larger Pana lenses on the Fp and even Canon EF stuff with the MC-21 adapter and didn't really feel the mojo, handling wise. I think it has to work best with very small lenses like a Micro Four Thirds camera or a Leica Q.

I have a grip on it, it helps but I still much prefer it with small primes.

However I think the new Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 L-mount could be very interesting on it, the attraction being you can put that in Super 35mm oversampling 4K Cinema DNG mode, and use it like a vastly upgraded OG Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera. If it also had OIS that would be icing on the cake.

I am also interested in the Sigma 24 F2, 35 F2 and 50mm F2 small full frame primes for it, these are A) affordable around the 500 euro mark second hand and B) about as small as the Leica Q3's 43mm

This means you get a Q3 (same 60 megapixel sensor), in same small form factor, that just happens to shoot internal Cinema DNG like it's 2014 and Magic Lantern hacked.

It may not be a typical 'work camera' but that combo of Q3 + Digital Bolex is what lights my fire when it comes to the Fp-L.

And the image is splendid. Much better than a GH6 or OM1.

If we had been offered this combo in the GH1 days...

I dare say we'd pick the 60 megapixel full frame camera with internal "proper" RAW video.

It is frankly unbelievable that it is only a tad bigger than the venerable GF1.

The technology to make this happen is astonishing and I don't know why it doesn't get more hype.

Especially on these forums where we have a focus on the artistic filmmaking side and RAW video.

Sigma are really flying under the radar with the Fp-L, it's even more underrated than the S9!

[Django]

I saw this video posted the other day and it got me GASing hard for an FP-L. Love the modularity, compactness and even quirkiness of the Sigmas. The crop modes seem really awesome as the color science and RAW DNG. Me wants!!

 

[MrSMW]

7 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

However I think the new Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 L-mount could be very interesting on it, the attraction being you can put that in Super 35mm oversampling 4K Cinema DNG mode, and use it like a vastly upgraded OG Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera. If it also had OIS that would be icing on the cake.

That is what has always put me off, the lack of anything much; small, fast with OIS with AF…

[Andrew Reid]

The AF and stabilisation are lacking areas on an Aaton and Arriflex too though 🙂

[MrSMW]

Reality for me...and I guess many folks is yes, FP-L trumps it for outright image quality, but S9 beats it pretty much everywhere else from having IBIS plus tilt screen, battery life and a few other areas.

But then for me, S5II beats S9 everywhere except some features specific to S9 that may come in firmware.

Conclusion = LUMIX is for me, still the mainstream hybrid brand for pure video needs and has the least number of compromises over everyone else.

What is their compromise? Outright image quality possibly...but actually, struggling really to find one...

Another conclusion and that is LUMIX should work more closely with Sigma to create the ultimate real world hybrid!

[Andrew Reid]

I think the usual gear rationale applies more to the Sony, Canon, Panasonic stuff. The Sigma Fp-L stands apart as a different thing. Cinema DNG is proper raw and has been removed from Blackmagic's line, and is a non-manufacturer addition on the Canon DSLRs which leads to some usability issues shall we say. Not for one moment a criticism of Magic Lantern RAW, but the Fp-L does Cinema DNG officially, reliably, in 4K and without the flappy mirror.

Had the Fp-L tried to be a Sony replacement for work, of course it would fail. It lacks the best in class autofocus, IBIS, mech shutter, the screen is fixed and the EVF is a clunky add-on.

But in my opinion it ain't trying, it's an art-cam.

S9 is undoubtedly a bit more convenient - flippy screen and IBIS, but it doesn't have the resolution, proper internal RAW or 60 megapixel sensor that the Fp-L gives us.

I remember shooting with the Digital Bolex and preferred to move it handheld because of the motion cadence, global shutter, something about the CCD, it looked great without any stabilisation.

It is similar with the Fp-L as long as you dial in the 180 deg shutter.

Overall I preferred that Bolex handheld look to a smooth modern H265 codec with IBIS handheld.

I haven't quite decided what factor the global shutter played in that, but there was something so cinematic about it that you didn't need the usual IBIS / AF crutches with it... Very strange, and hard to describe why.

The aim is to do the same with the Fp-L... Super 16mm with a pistol grip and no stabilisation.

Add some halation in post with Film Convert and you basically have a film camera that uses SD cards.

I also realised something else with the Fp-L, I don't really like LOG. I don't like shooting it with a crappy gamma assist and don't like grading it much. With Cinema DNG the grading is much more enjoyable, it pops from the offset and saves you hours of fiddling about.

With it being proper RAW and completely debayered off-camera, the colour is so good... 8bit doesn't hurt it, it only means you have to get your exposure right first time out. Then again, if you have to lift your shadows 5ev in post one did something very wrong in the first place, lighting and exposure wise, and a high dynamic range final cut is always at the expense of colour, contrast tonality.

The only drawback really is the slightly high rolling shutter, rather than the lack of IBIS or class leading AF (it's phase-detect, same sensor as a7r V but the autofocus processor is more simple).

[mercer]

If you like the 8bit 4K cDNG files, turn them to B&W in post and the raw textures shine and you get a little more latitude overall.

[Andrew Reid]

1.0x crop full frame 4K Cinema DNG frame:

1.3x crop (oversampled from 7K to 4K)

Further crop-mode 4K frames all the way to 2.5x crop:

Still a native 4K resolution RAW video file at the end...

As you can see there is a slight bump in detail between 1.0x full frame and 1.3x crop mode when the oversampling kicks in but given the pixel binned full frame, it ain't bad is it?

And this is why the Fp-L beats the OG Fp for me... that juicy 60 megapixel sensor.

[MrSMW]

 

[Ninpo33]

Also at $1,300 USD now, the FP-L has to be the cheapest way to get that 61mp Sony Sensor. 

[MrSMW]

So my question is, having an A7RV, how close can that camera get to the FP-L other than not having CDNG, because it kicks it’s arse everywhere else except perhaps modularity, design and possibly build?

I am not that techy but to me it always seems the most ‘cinematic’ capable cameras are the least useable for my use case.

And it’s usually just by a whisker.

Or in the FP-L’s case, by a few whiskers.

Which is a shame as I love the idea of the FP-L but every time I have considered it, I came back to the same conclusion and that is the compromises are too many.

Unless I kept it on a monopod full-time and the AF is good enough to track a subject…??

Or could I get around the latter by simply mounting a DJI OSMO Pocket 3 on top of one for those latter occasions…

Thinking…

[Ninpo33]

56 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

So my question is, having an A7RV, how close can that camera get to the FP-L other than not having CDNG, because it kicks it’s arse everywhere else except perhaps modularity, design and possibly build?

 

I thought the same thing but with the A7CR. Despite its compromises, it’s smaller and more compact like the FP L. It does raw out to the Ninja but the main conversation here seems to be the chunky and filmic CDNG files. That’s the mojo.

A7CR is now $2,000  and would make a nice little high mp travel companion for my other video spec’d bodies. But I don’t think we would come anywhere close to that filmic image of the Sigma FP/L.

[MrSMW]

49 minutes ago, Ninpo33 said:

A7CR is now $2,000  and would make a nice little high mp travel companion for my other video spec’d bodies. But I don’t think we would come anywhere close to that filmic image of the Sigma FP/L.

I considered it and am still considering it, or rather a pair of them, but for stills only as in 1x A7RV with zoom vs 2x A7CR with primes...

Based on my preferences and use case, the A7RV smashes (better ergos, EVF, LCD, card slots) the A7CR except in one single regard and that is that the A7CR has the pano crops in camera that it's slightly bigger bro does not have and probably because Sony are notoriously terrible with firmware, will never have.

The Q is, can I compromise in various other areas to have that in camera crop option...

When it comes to the FP/L and that CDNG option, would my clients care or even notice? 

Nope, but I would and that is my consideration.

Plus/but, at what point do I need to say, "STOP! Enough is enough, - use what you have and stop tinkering!"

Goes back to making custom crop mode stick on screen protector for A7RV...

[Ninpo33]

8 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

I considered it and am still considering it, or rather a pair of them, but for stills only as in 1x A7RV with zoom vs 2x A7CR with primes...

Based on my preferences and use case, the A7RV smashes (better ergos, EVF, LCD, card slots) the A7CR except in one single regard and that is that the A7CR has the pano crops in camera that it's slightly bigger bro does not have and probably because Sony are notoriously terrible with firmware, will never have.

The Q is, can I compromise in various other areas to have that in camera crop option...

When it comes to the FP/L and that CDNG option, would my clients care or even notice? 

Nope, but I would and that is my consideration.

Plus/but, at what point do I need to say, "STOP! Enough is enough, - use what you have and stop tinkering!"

Goes back to making custom crop mode stick on screen protector for A7RV...

Agreed. A7CR has a few other bells and whistles that came with the most recent AI upgrade but A1 and A7Rv are still lagging behind a bit (which is always a bit odd with Sony) Newer and cheaper cameras get the new stuff and the older flagships get left behind a bit. Not like those two are falling short in specs however….

You sound like me, in that the practical will always outweigh the quirky and fiddly bodies. For me the Sigma FP/L would have to be in addition to my solid workhorses. I really, really love the image those cameras put out but I’m cheap and waiting for anything that’s not crucial for work to fall under $1,000. Good news is that my little Fuji X-m5 was already under $1,000 new and is on its way here from Tokyo as we speak. 
 

If I see a FP/L on sale at some point I will probably grab one. For now I’m saving up for the GFX 100s or the Leica SL2 to meet my high res photo hybrid needs. 

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, Ninpo33 said:

You sound like me, in that the practical will always outweigh the quirky and fiddly bodies

Real world no-brainer for my needs: FP/L vs S5II?

Duh! 

Would I rather have the FP/L sensor?

Of course, but not at the expense/compromise of ‘everything else’.

There still isn’t any ‘perfect’ option IMO, just where/what your compromises are.

[eatstoomuchjam]

To each their own, I think.  A lot of these things are really subjective.  I bought both the FP and FP-l and while I felt some level of happiness using them and the 12-bit CinemaDNG looked really nice SOOC, I'd often be a bit disappointed when I started to grade them because while the SOOC colors were nice, the dynamic range was ho-hum and the rolling shutter seemed really terrible sometimes on the FP-l (in APS-C mode, it actually got worse and was noticeable even when panning slowly).

I ended up selling mine because I was getting to have too many cameras (there again!) and if I pushed myself on it, I needed to agree that aside from a positive emotional response to a lot of things about the camera, there was nothing that it really did "better" than any of my other cameras, including "be small" since the EOS R5 is effectively smaller if you want to shoot in anything other than an 8-bit codec or have a screen that you can see without holding the camera at eye level (the DPL mod helps with that, at least, but I never bought it).  Heck, even adding the EVF made it pretty close to the same size as the R5.

I'd really love to see a next generation FP with a better/faster sensor, the ability to record 10-bit internally, and either/both of an integrated tiny EVF (small enough to make YouTubers cry in rage is fine) and a screen that can at least tilt up a bit.  Add those things, keep the body the same size, and keep uncompressed raw internal recording and it'll instantly be my favorite travel/carry-around camera.