Been a while since here, busy on new projects. I was leaning towards a DSLR like the 5D due to comments and footage seen. But. Then. I saw this, about the new Sony NEXFS100U (from NAB). And the footage using this camera. Anyone familiar with this camera? I keep holding out for the best bang for my buck -- I have yet to upgrade from my current DVcam cameras. And money is tight. Comments anyone?
New Sony HD camera changes my outlook...
- Thread starter don patterson
- Start date
^^ i dont think thats very clear, the 5D is not a rebel t2i. the t2i and t3i are cheaper and are the same except from a swivel screen on the t3i. but the 5d is much better just generally and the 7D is generally marked as the big daddy.
Sorry. Should of stated to drop down to bottom (where there is a presentation of the NEXFS1000U 35mm Camcorder) of the listed above site page.
Here it is again.
This was a pretty impressive discussion of DSLR cameras (especially the 5D) for video and the new low-priced 35mm lens based digital HD cameras. Listen to the 28 minute overview and watch the clips. I have seen footage of the 5D & 7D DSLRs. Read books with detailed explanations like DSLR Cinema by Kurt Lancaster. Trying to be well informed before spending the cash -- on a current trend in shallow DOF 'looking' camera(s). With the RED out of my price range. Trying to avoid over-heating with-in the DSLR (I shoot long days) and the aliasing that crops up in DSLRs (see the clips with explanations). I am concerned with more then just a passing interest, after all DSLRs are still image based (see clips) cameras.
I know what the DSLR footage looks like. Better then my DVcam... well, more of a film look, with multiple lens possibilities, shallow DOF and HD. But the NEXFS1000U seems to offer the best of all worlds and still within my price range. No over heating. Aliasing. High quality image. But I do not know it all. Still have many questions. Always seeking ideas and suggestions from others. Any comments? Thanks...
Here it is again.
This was a pretty impressive discussion of DSLR cameras (especially the 5D) for video and the new low-priced 35mm lens based digital HD cameras. Listen to the 28 minute overview and watch the clips. I have seen footage of the 5D & 7D DSLRs. Read books with detailed explanations like DSLR Cinema by Kurt Lancaster. Trying to be well informed before spending the cash -- on a current trend in shallow DOF 'looking' camera(s). With the RED out of my price range. Trying to avoid over-heating with-in the DSLR (I shoot long days) and the aliasing that crops up in DSLRs (see the clips with explanations). I am concerned with more then just a passing interest, after all DSLRs are still image based (see clips) cameras.
I know what the DSLR footage looks like. Better then my DVcam... well, more of a film look, with multiple lens possibilities, shallow DOF and HD. But the NEXFS1000U seems to offer the best of all worlds and still within my price range. No over heating. Aliasing. High quality image. But I do not know it all. Still have many questions. Always seeking ideas and suggestions from others. Any comments? Thanks...
A Sony NEXFS100U is better than any dslr. If you can afford it, if you can find one for sale, get it. The Canons aren't even true HD according to tests, they're more like a 480p camera and they're prone to aliasing and moire and have world's worst audio. the NEXFS is far superior. I don't even know why you're asking.
Your requirements and your goals and your choices between cameras are all up to you.
However, holding out for the best bang for your buck is a never ending scenario in this technology driven time. Something new and better will always be around the corner. What you do need to do is get something (or use what you already have) and start shooting.
What tests show that they don't have true hd? I've certainly never heard that before.
DSLRs definitely have their downsides, but they are far superior than any other camera in their price range.
The Sony looks like an excellent professional camera, not to mention an actual video camera.. If you choose dslr, go for the 60d, in my opinion.
GH-2 can resolve more than 720 lines of data.
No other DSLR that I know of can, which means they're mostly just uprezzed SD.
As far as the FS100 goes, I've had the chance to go out and shoot with a protoype about a month ago and if I had to buy a camera today that wasn't a DSLR, it would be the FS100.
Image is pretty nice for a SUB RED MX cam, and I wouldn't have any issues shooting serious material on it.
No other DSLR that I know of can, which means they're mostly just uprezzed SD.
As far as the FS100 goes, I've had the chance to go out and shoot with a protoype about a month ago and if I had to buy a camera today that wasn't a DSLR, it would be the FS100.
Image is pretty nice for a SUB RED MX cam, and I wouldn't have any issues shooting serious material on it.
That they key point. DSLR's are great, that's all I own now. But this guy apparently has the cash to spring for a dedicated 35mm Sony.
About res chart testing, it's fairly well documented that the Canons yield false detail because of the severe aliasing. The usable resolution is no where near 1080p, I don't even think it's 720p but you can still get a good images and make great content. But in a pixel peep off, and in a feature set comparison, it's a route.
Hey, a thanks to all the comments.
Background, to answer a couple comments above, I am polishing two scripts that I think will truly kick (I have mostly concentrated on writing and polishing the past few years -- it is my main weakness in all my past 'movie' projects). I am not in a major hurry to replace my DVcams (they are still great for day to day work and SD DVD replication). As far as new movie production, I hope to have everything in place for starting interior production this fall.
My concern is to get the best bang for buck in camera(s). Having worked for 12 years in high-end DVcam, I like the idea of the 35mm lens look with shallow DOF. I have never worked in DSLR format before -- I want to be as informed as possible. Comments on DSLR use on IndieTalk made me aware of the possibilities. I have more than enough to buy a 5D (and several quality lens) for I work and save weekly... and should have enough to buy the Sony 35mm video cam later this year... I know technology keeps moving forward, but I really want a final image quality to be as good as possible (my audio is almost always 'A' quality). I doubt that I will have many more more years of making movies, plus wife is getting impatient (married over 30 years) with my hobbies.
So comments in regard to this camera is important. I have talked to several IndieTalk.com members and admire their work, knowledge and honesty. I really learn from others. Indietalk is an A+ source of info for me, beyond talking to B&H, other camera sellers and doing Internet searches on products.
I have looked at so many cameras over the past year. Final decision and purchasing one is coming up soon. So any comments are welcomed. Once again, I am not a pro filmmaker, rich or famous, I just have a blast taking script to scream and making our movies the best I can.
Background, to answer a couple comments above, I am polishing two scripts that I think will truly kick (I have mostly concentrated on writing and polishing the past few years -- it is my main weakness in all my past 'movie' projects). I am not in a major hurry to replace my DVcams (they are still great for day to day work and SD DVD replication). As far as new movie production, I hope to have everything in place for starting interior production this fall.
My concern is to get the best bang for buck in camera(s). Having worked for 12 years in high-end DVcam, I like the idea of the 35mm lens look with shallow DOF. I have never worked in DSLR format before -- I want to be as informed as possible. Comments on DSLR use on IndieTalk made me aware of the possibilities. I have more than enough to buy a 5D (and several quality lens) for I work and save weekly... and should have enough to buy the Sony 35mm video cam later this year... I know technology keeps moving forward, but I really want a final image quality to be as good as possible (my audio is almost always 'A' quality). I doubt that I will have many more more years of making movies, plus wife is getting impatient (married over 30 years) with my hobbies.
So comments in regard to this camera is important. I have talked to several IndieTalk.com members and admire their work, knowledge and honesty. I really learn from others. Indietalk is an A+ source of info for me, beyond talking to B&H, other camera sellers and doing Internet searches on products.
I have looked at so many cameras over the past year. Final decision and purchasing one is coming up soon. So any comments are welcomed. Once again, I am not a pro filmmaker, rich or famous, I just have a blast taking script to scream and making our movies the best I can.
Oooooooooh baby what a camera. The DSLR killers... I wanna touch them...
Wanna put in my memory stick and shoot all night.
Low light sensitivity...
Wanna put in my memory stick and shoot all night.
Low light sensitivity...
Buying one myself.
Don, I just put my hard-earned money down on an FS00 myself yesterday. I am not rich, and I own a Nikon D2X and all Nikon glass. I also shoot 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras in studio and landscape. I know what it is to drop a lot on gear when every cent I earn is hard-fought for.
My reasons for buying the FS100 are varied but hopefully they might help you iron out some things:
1. Waiting for Scarlet over two years. I am unable to wait for fall, winter, spring, summer, and fall again for Red Scarlet to appear. This has been, and will probably be, my first choice in my budget range. However, I have work to do now, and this form factor is similar to the Red so everything I buy: base plate, cage, rails, matte box, filters, etc., will be useable with an eventual Red, if this camera isn't doing the job, which I think it will. In essence, this is like a baby Red Scarlet that you can buy today, sans the sensor and monitor and, and, and....
2. Big screen considerations. I was concerned about the 10-bit (lack of) color grading issue and th fact that this sensors is sub-APS-C in size. However, I think an external recorder and 4:2:2 will get the job done, especially given the fact that the extra $s for the F3 I can use elsewhere and I just don't think you're losing THAT much, although I know others will kill me for saying that. The file size (that's just my print brain talking) between APS-C and FF is huge for me in terms of interpolation, etc., but look at how long SD has sufficed on-screen. I think it is the content you've been polishing, and not the fractional difference in sensor size (as this one is huge compared to a 1/3", 1/2", etc.), that people will 'see' when the watch your movie. You can use your millions to buy and EPIC when you do your sequel.
3. If you have had the chance to really study the differences in test footage comparisons between dSLRs and this camera, you will see moire is almost non-existent (almost) with this camera vs. the dSLR tested (5D MII), and rolling shutter is also far less apparent.
4. I am buying a D7000 because it is cheap, and I will use it with an Atomos Samurai (whenever that ships) a a "B" camera, until Nikon rolls out a D800. I think that'll give me more time to get used to the dSLR form factor and at only $1100 it is a relatively small investment given the sensor kicks the lights out of my D2X now. (Do you need a B camera is I suppose my point?)
5. Sony reliability. I think Sony is a reliable manufacturer even though I also think they are inflexible and a bit meglo for me. Stil, if and when the Red comes out, and it proves to be all it is hyped up to be, then I know I'll hold more 'gross' if I decide to sell in a year or two. (no matter how you look at it, this and everything else depreciates very rapidly).
6. Modular-ness. Like I said in point one, I like the Red box concept. I seriously considered the AF100 because of all of the features, but the smaller sensor now puts you that much further from a full-frame file, and Im so used to using Lee NDs anyway, I'm not that freaked out about the lack of them in the Sony. Nor do I care about the handle, or the proximity of the XLRs.... This isn't a camcorder, it's a box, so you have to buy all the stuff you'd buy for a dSLR, but that (IMHO) in somewhat good as I don't want to be stuck with a plastic mold of a camcorder with things on it I don't like, want, or need. I don't even want the monitor they are using, to be honest, and will rarely use it....
I could go on, but hopefully this is a little help to you.
Don, I just put my hard-earned money down on an FS00 myself yesterday. I am not rich, and I own a Nikon D2X and all Nikon glass. I also shoot 4x5 and 8x10 view cameras in studio and landscape. I know what it is to drop a lot on gear when every cent I earn is hard-fought for.
My reasons for buying the FS100 are varied but hopefully they might help you iron out some things:
1. Waiting for Scarlet over two years. I am unable to wait for fall, winter, spring, summer, and fall again for Red Scarlet to appear. This has been, and will probably be, my first choice in my budget range. However, I have work to do now, and this form factor is similar to the Red so everything I buy: base plate, cage, rails, matte box, filters, etc., will be useable with an eventual Red, if this camera isn't doing the job, which I think it will. In essence, this is like a baby Red Scarlet that you can buy today, sans the sensor and monitor and, and, and....
2. Big screen considerations. I was concerned about the 10-bit (lack of) color grading issue and th fact that this sensors is sub-APS-C in size. However, I think an external recorder and 4:2:2 will get the job done, especially given the fact that the extra $s for the F3 I can use elsewhere and I just don't think you're losing THAT much, although I know others will kill me for saying that. The file size (that's just my print brain talking) between APS-C and FF is huge for me in terms of interpolation, etc., but look at how long SD has sufficed on-screen. I think it is the content you've been polishing, and not the fractional difference in sensor size (as this one is huge compared to a 1/3", 1/2", etc.), that people will 'see' when the watch your movie. You can use your millions to buy and EPIC when you do your sequel.
3. If you have had the chance to really study the differences in test footage comparisons between dSLRs and this camera, you will see moire is almost non-existent (almost) with this camera vs. the dSLR tested (5D MII), and rolling shutter is also far less apparent.
4. I am buying a D7000 because it is cheap, and I will use it with an Atomos Samurai (whenever that ships) a a "B" camera, until Nikon rolls out a D800. I think that'll give me more time to get used to the dSLR form factor and at only $1100 it is a relatively small investment given the sensor kicks the lights out of my D2X now. (Do you need a B camera is I suppose my point?)
5. Sony reliability. I think Sony is a reliable manufacturer even though I also think they are inflexible and a bit meglo for me. Stil, if and when the Red comes out, and it proves to be all it is hyped up to be, then I know I'll hold more 'gross' if I decide to sell in a year or two. (no matter how you look at it, this and everything else depreciates very rapidly).
6. Modular-ness. Like I said in point one, I like the Red box concept. I seriously considered the AF100 because of all of the features, but the smaller sensor now puts you that much further from a full-frame file, and Im so used to using Lee NDs anyway, I'm not that freaked out about the lack of them in the Sony. Nor do I care about the handle, or the proximity of the XLRs.... This isn't a camcorder, it's a box, so you have to buy all the stuff you'd buy for a dSLR, but that (IMHO) in somewhat good as I don't want to be stuck with a plastic mold of a camcorder with things on it I don't like, want, or need. I don't even want the monitor they are using, to be honest, and will rarely use it....
I could go on, but hopefully this is a little help to you.
One of my favorite movies, Inland Empire was shot on DV. Just give me a good picture and Im happy. all this craziness bout what's best drives me nuts. It's a fact you need HD to sell a movie even if only going to DVD w/o any Bluray thoughts, but heck does anyone really care if you used bleeding edge cams or not ? Gimme a good movie well done, well lit, well shot, well acted and well edited and Im happy. Ive looked at stuff shot w/ a RED cam and some stuff shot w/ a 5D and im not totally convinced the RED is all that much better. I undeerstand 4K and all that. A pleasing image is just that, something that can be captured w/ a HV20 or CineAlta IMO...
aliasing is what keeps my t2i in the case. My GH2 is meeting 90% of my desires\skills.
From what I've heard and read about this FS100, it seems like the super rig has arrived. I have no money to throw down for it, but if I did, this would probably be the one.
That said, I would much rather work with a DP who knows how to use it than trying to get by with what little camera skills I have. I do enjoy framing up a shot and getting into it with production (mostly out of necessity) but if I had any choice in the matter I would happily take my hands off that wheel.
That said, I would much rather work with a DP who knows how to use it than trying to get by with what little camera skills I have. I do enjoy framing up a shot and getting into it with production (mostly out of necessity) but if I had any choice in the matter I would happily take my hands off that wheel.
yikes, wrong info
No no no no no. Misinformation here.
The Canon 5D mark II is the "big daddy". It has the full size sensor and the better camera body, etc.
The 7D is very good, but has a smaller CMOS sensor and less shallow depth of field. The T2i and T3i are identical when shooting video to the 7D, as in they use the exact same pixels and it's the same sensor for video. The 7D is better for still photography and has a more durable, larger camera body.
As for the OP, the Sony F3 is DSLR buster camera, although it's closer to $10,000
No no no no no. Misinformation here.
The Canon 5D mark II is the "big daddy". It has the full size sensor and the better camera body, etc.
The 7D is very good, but has a smaller CMOS sensor and less shallow depth of field. The T2i and T3i are identical when shooting video to the 7D, as in they use the exact same pixels and it's the same sensor for video. The 7D is better for still photography and has a more durable, larger camera body.
As for the OP, the Sony F3 is DSLR buster camera, although it's closer to $10,000
And for that reason it's not a DSLR buster. My first GH2 cost $630 from Panasonic Direct. That F3 is better in every way than any DSLR, but for 10k? Hell I could make 3 features with that.
And if you're getting a whiff of envy from this post, I deny it!