Sony PMW-F3L vs. RED-One ???

[Graeme Nattress]

According to Nyquist sampling theory, the most you can sample without ever risking moire is half the resolution.

Not quite.... For any frequency f, Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem says you need a sampling rate of at least fs = 2*f.

So, translating to images, if you want 500 line pairs across an image, you need at least 500 *2 = 1000 samples. Or in other words, for 1000 lines across an image you need at least 1000 samples. The confusion comes in that sampling theory in it's stated form refers to frequency, ie line pairs, whereas we generally talk about lines.

The moire comes from too weak a low pass filter or sensor sampling or design that is not suited to low moire. We properly optically low pass filter and take care with our sensor design.

Sony obviously don't see the artifacts the F35 camera generates as an issue, but I've seen the artifacts from it on broadcast TV shot on it. To me, the right way to get great resolution and MTF is to aim much higher than is necessary - and it works.

Graeme

 

[Matt W.]

The theorem states that if a function contains no frequencies greater than B hertz, it is completely determined by a series of points spaced 1/(2B) seconds apart. If the visual equivalent of that holds true, it should mean each line pair completely determines one line (without aliasing). Maybe I am mistaken, but a 4000 line grid should determine 2000 line pairs if everything is lined up right, or 1000 line pairs with no potential for sampling inaccuracy. I am probably totally wrong and aliasing can occur at any frequency.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Red is pushing the "4k is the future" thing because once producers start asking for 4k they stop asking for other cameras. This isn't something the company is doing out of the kindness of its heart to give us superior image quality. It's something it's doing to gain traction in the market.

Give Jim some credit. Red is a labor of love for him. Manufactures like Sony and Panasonic would not build a decent digital film-replacement camera, so Jim set out to build one himself. Jim is an aggressive and highly successful business man, and ultimately he will probably get richer due to all the time, care, capital, thought and effort he is putting into Red now. But anyone who has been watching Jim carefully knows it's not all about the bucks. He wants to build better cameras. The whole "4K" thing is not just a marketing ploy by Jim; he really believes it. As many of us do.

[Sony] saw what was coming with Red M-X and Alexa and I think they knew the high-end was getting threatened. So now they make a camera that will cost $13,000 sans lenses and will get the job more effectively for long-form television, dramatic, and corporate work than the Red.

Yep, this is what they did. They spent 5 years protecting cameras like the F23 and F35, then waited until the last possible second before throwing all their F35 and F23 customers under the bus. Meanwhile, they spent those same 5 years screwing over their prosumer customers by withholding large-sensor technology from their prosumer Ex1-style "HD" cameras.

 

[M Most]

Yep, this is what they did. They spent 5 years protecting cameras like the F23 and F35, then waited until the last possible second before throwing all their F35 and F23 customers under the bus. Meanwhile, they spent those same 5 years screwing over their prosumer customers by withholding large-sensor technology from their prosumer Ex1-style "HD" cameras.

Ok, Tom. Companies exist to screw their customers. All companies before Red only existed as evil entities that want to squeeze every last bit of life from those who buy their products. Success only came as a result of their horrific plan.

Red often talks about not wanting to deal with those with bad attitudes. I think you might want to think about that and get past this whole "everyone other than Jim is evil" nonsense already. You're an intelligent guy. You need to let go of it.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Mike, I see Sony as basically the old way of doing things, and Jim as the new way. Sony serves as a perfect anti-Red, an example of what many of us are hoping is now a defunct way of making cameras (ie, withholding technology and screwing over the little guy). Jim has made this point himself many times here, cursing these "other guys" for trickling out technology and slowly fleecing their customers.

Anyway, I don't hold a grudge about Sony. To me, it's more about pointing out the old ways vs the new ways, so it doesn't happen again. If I have gone too far in making this point, I apologize. Sometimes I get a little obsessive about things. Like many "little guys", I spent years unable to shoot the type of footage I really wanted to be shooting, until Red came along. I literally had to postpone the start of my first film for a couple of years, because I could not get a decent HD prosumer camera worth shooting on. And obviously, I was not able to shoot my type of footage on chemical film, either, due to cost and other factors. I was forced to spend a couple of years shooting nothing but timelapse on DSLR RAW cameras, because it was the only digital camera system that could match 35mm film at any kind of affordable price.

My entire life is consumed at this point with filming. I spend 95% of my time out in the field with cameras rolling, so issues like these actually matter to me. The other 5% I spend reading about, talking about and thinking about cameras and filming. Without Red, I could not be doing what I'm doing. See what I mean? I'm a little obsessive. But so are many people here.

 

[M Most]

Mike, I see Sony as basically the old way of doing things, and Jim as the new way. Sony serves as a perfect anti-Red, an example of what many of us are hoping is now a defunct way of making cameras (ie, withholding technology and screwing over the little guy). Jim has made this point himself many times here, cursing these "other guys" for trickling out technology and slowly fleecing their customers.

I don't recall ever hearing Jim "cursing" anyone, nor have I ever heard him accuse companies of "fleecing their customers." What Jim has said is that he felt that they weren't seeing the future as he was, and that they weren't pushing technology hard enough to make leaps that he considered major and necessary. So he decided to do it himself, and while he was at it, to present the company differently as well. That's positive, not negative, and it came from frustration, not vitriol.

Anyway, point made, understood, and forgotten.

 

[Tom Lowe]

Hehe, that's because most of Jim's most epic anti-establishment tirades only a last a few hours, usually during the hours most people are still asleep. :wink:

 

[Graeme Nattress]

The theorem states that if a function contains no frequencies greater than B hertz, it is completely determined by a series of points spaced 1/(2B) seconds apart. If the visual equivalent of that holds true, it should mean each line pair completely determines one line (without aliasing). Maybe I am mistaken, but a 4000 line grid should determine 2000 line pairs if everything is lined up right, or 1000 line pairs with no potential for sampling inaccuracy. I am probably totally wrong and aliasing can occur at any frequency.

A greater than ("at least") 4000 line grid will indeed be able to hold 2000 line pairs without aliasing, if and only if those lines are sinusoidal, and not square waves. As long as there's more than double the number of samples as line pairs you're good, and as long as the input signal is bandwidth limited, so in the case of our lines pairs, they must be a sine pattern, not actual hard-edged (square wave) lines.

When I print out zone plates for testing, I always use sine wave zone plates.

Graeme

 

[Stuart English]

F3 and MX

F3 and MX

...their prosumer Ex1-style "HD" cameras.

And the F3 is clearly an EX-1 with a larger sensor and HD-SDI out, a quick look at the two spec sheets shows that.

Interesting marketing choice that you add an S35 size sensor and Dual HD-SDI output, but stay with 8-bit 35Mbps 4:2:0 codec and 16-bit audio. The SxS media is plenty fast enough to record at 50Mbps 4:2:2 and 24-bit audio...

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

I guess sony's message to the customer is "Look just buy some friggin SRW-1 decks OK?!"

 

[Ed David]

they're going to sell over 200,000 of these? wow.

i don't know what to say about your post here... i would delete it if i were you, it makes you seem a little uninformed.

Censor my post? Delete it? What exactly did I say that was so uninformed?

Okay you're right, maybe they won't sell 200,000 of these but they will sell much more of them then the F23 and F35.

Also Sony is soon to introduce a SR Sxs component so you can record HDCAM-SR onto 1tb SxS cards which should be exciting.

 

[paulherrin]

lol, that's closer to realistic. i was speaking more of your comments about the RED weighing 30+ pounds, and the workflow being unintuitive...

also, you're comparing a camera that isn't out yet to a camera that was released 3 years ago (and still kicks its butt, really)... how bout comparing it to the cameras that will be available (and kind of already are) around the same time. because those are probably better, lighter, and cheaper, or at least in the same price range.

and that's fine if you or anybody else wants to buy it... to me, however, i'd call it fiscally irresponsible.

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

There is roughly just over 308 million people living in the United states alone, For a world wide product of this nature 200 thousand units (not even close to even 1/10th of 1% of population) isn't an unrealistic sales estimate in my book.

 

[paulherrin]

this isn't a prosumer camera (well, it is... but not according to the price). there is no way. i'm sorry. actually, i'm not. if any of the big companies showed any concern for something besides their stock shares, i might. but i don't. but i am sorry that you think this might be a good purchase.

 

[shashbugu]

it is kind of sad that people come onto these forums posting fake stats about camera companies as opposed to arguing product quality, picture quality, product build and efficiency.

The title of this forum topic is F3 vs Red one, not sony's mass market business model vs Red's. 99% of you have no clue how both companies operate. You talk like you read the daily internal memos of both companies. Its one thing to be sarcastic or satirical about what you believe their secret goals are and its another thing to pretend like you have hard baked in stone facts.

If you have something against the appreciative pride that we Red users have, go ahead say it...call us fanboys, coolaide drinkers, brainwashed, bamboozled, or what have you, just don't come on here arguing for another product you wish could compete against the Red.

The F3 as sold right this second is equivalent to an Af100 period. except that the Af100 is a third of the price.

The red one has 4 times the resolution, 10 times the build quality, 100 times the customer service and support, and 10 times the intrinsic cinema exhibition and distribution value for only double the price.

Those condescending individuals that keep posting that they are different cameras for different situations are really starting to sound repetitively annoying. We are not idiots, we get that. We also get that the workflows are different, because the f3 uses a consumer codec that is readily accessible. Those of you that keep bringing up the sr 10 bit slog 444 raw, try editing that out of camera and tell us how accessible that workflow was for you.

All I am saying is the camera should not be compared to a Red. You can own both and make youtube comparison videos.

I saw the film Monsters that was shot on the EX3 because I am a fan of the filmmakers use of Adobe products. Everyone including the filmmaker claims the picture quality looks good in the theater. What a joke? Trailer for fair game played before the Monsters. When the movie started for the firs 5 mins I thought i was watching an infomercial.

Now I'm not saying you cant go out and make a movie with your iphone, just dont go on the record saying it looked like 35mm film.

 

[Ed David]

it is kind of sad that people come onto these forums posting fake stats about camera companies as opposed to arguing product quality, picture quality, product build and efficiency.

The title of this forum topic is F3 vs Red one, not sony's mass market business model vs Red's. 99% of you have no clue how both companies operate. You talk like you read the daily internal memos of both companies. Its one thing to be sarcastic or satirical about what you believe their secret goals are and its another thing to pretend like you have hard baked in stone facts.

If you have something against the appreciative pride that we Red users have, go ahead say it...call us fanboys, coolaide drinkers, brainwashed, bamboozled, or what have you, just don't come on here arguing for another product you wish could compete against the Red.

The F3 as sold right this second is equivalent to an Af100 period. except that the Af100 is a third of the price.

The red one has 4 times the resolution, 10 times the build quality, 100 times the customer service and support, and 10 times the intrinsic cinema exhibition and distribution value for only double the price.

Those condescending individuals that keep posting that they are different cameras for different situations are really starting to sound repetitively annoying. We are not idiots, we get that. We also get that the workflows are different, because the f3 uses a consumer codec that is readily accessible. Those of you that keep bringing up the sr 10 bit slog 444 raw, try editing that out of camera and tell us how accessible that workflow was for you.

All I am saying is the camera should not be compared to a Red. You can own both and make youtube comparison videos.

I saw the film Monsters that was shot on the EX3 because I am a fan of the filmmakers use of Adobe products. Everyone including the filmmaker claims the picture quality looks good in the theater. What a joke? Trailer for fair game played before the Monsters. When the movie started for the firs 5 mins I thought i was watching an infomercial.

Now I'm not saying you cant go out and make a movie with your iphone, just dont go on the record saying it looked like 35mm film.

Actually the F3 is not in the same league as the AF100. It's signal to noise ratio is excellent - ISO 800 - and you can when it comes out go 10-bit 4:2:2 out of it onto a recorder - you are not limited to the sXs codec.

Please don't bring your negativity into viewing this new camera - accept it as a tool just like any other - a different paint brush for work that would require it.

I think it would be much better suited to shooting documentary, television, and industrial work than the workflow and weight of a Red One. And it's due out in February.

Don't fear the new guy - embrace him.

Just as we all embraced the Red One a few years back.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

The formfactor alone is one very good reason to leave thisone alone.

S35 for doco... I'd rather take a Scarlet 2/3" any day (I know there are mixed views on 2/3" for doco...)
No RAW.
Please. It's soon to be 2011.


Either a wildly compressed codec, or external deck...

Gee, again. It is again soon to be 2011. SxS handles prores 444 or equivalent DNx codec. It's just silly.

I really think this cam is a move in the right direction, but it is still for the most a silly cam comming far too late.

I don't doubt that it will sell wildly, though.

The RED distribution-model is a two-edged sword.
Any and all resellers have all the reason in the world to badmouth RED, as they cannot sell the cameras. And they do...

That is understandable. It's called fighting for survival.
And I wouldn't really like to see all the service that follows with them locally go away.

It doesn't make for very objective opinions on equipment, though.

You may have noted that I have been rather diplomatical about this cam and what it has to offer. I really think this is a good step up from what Sony and Panny previously have offered. And I am sure I'lll handle a ton of footy from it and that it will look quite ok.

But it is in no way comparable with even the R1, judging from the specs.
I might be wrong, and I am sure I'll be dragging this through its paces.

But relax a bit.

For Television???
Really? Generally?

For a lot of work, it will probably work fine.
But for the work we - at least - use the REDs, it's not a viable option.
For stuff we use the DSLRs for, it might be, depending on the deliverydates on the Scarlet S35.
It is an attempded combined stab at Alexa and DSLRs, but I cannot see how it threatens the current RED use.

For cinematic release? Nope
For TV? Not how we use the REDs...

And: Yup, I do work with TV and features...

I know this is not in sync with Jims 4k vision, but R1 is actually the nicest 2k/1080 deliverd cam I have used. Yet... (When shot 4k to a format that takes less space than prores 444 @ 1080...)

As for sub 20k S35 cams, I'd suggest an executed R1 or R1MX.
You get quite nice packages at that pricepoint these days, and they've proven rock solid...
I ca't start to tell you all the "silly" stuff the Reds I have handled have survived...

RED users have rightfully been accused for being silly fanboys.
But that doesn't mean they have a monopoly on silly fanboyist behaviour...

Cheers!
And a happy new year!

G

 

[David Mullen ASC]

If you have something against the appreciative pride that we Red users have, go ahead say it...call us fanboys, coolaide drinkers, brainwashed, bamboozled, or what have you, just don't come on here arguing for another product you wish could compete against the Red.

The F3 as sold right this second is equivalent to an Af100 period. except that the Af100 is a third of the price.

The red one has 4 times the resolution, 10 times the build quality, 100 times the customer service and support, and 10 times the intrinsic cinema exhibition and distribution value for only double the price.

Those condescending individuals that keep posting that they are different cameras for different situations are really starting to sound repetitively annoying. We are not idiots, we get that. We also get that the workflows are different, because the f3 uses a consumer codec that is readily accessible. Those of you that keep bringing up the sr 10 bit slog 444 raw, try editing that out of camera and tell us how accessible that workflow was for you.

All I am saying is the camera should not be compared to a Red. You can own both and make youtube comparison videos.

I saw the film Monsters that was shot on the EX3 because I am a fan of the filmmakers use of Adobe products. Everyone including the filmmaker claims the picture quality looks good in the theater. What a joke? Trailer for fair game played before the Monsters. When the movie started for the firs 5 mins I thought i was watching an infomercial.

Now I'm not saying you cant go out and make a movie with your iphone, just dont go on the record saying it looked like 35mm film.

You know, not everyone is shooting for theatrical distribution, there are types of projects (beyond You Tube) where some people will find the F3 useful.

I agree that it gets a bit silly when someone posts "Canon 7D versus Red One?", which is a pretty extreme difference, but you can't on the one hand say that the F3 "competes" with the AF100 even though it is 3X the price when the Red One is at least 2X the price of the F3, so from a cost standpoint, the camera sits between the two others, and from a performance standpoint, it also seems to fit between the two. I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that the F3 matches the Red One's performance, it's more of a question of whether the F3 serves a particular need and whether you are getting value for money.

Like I posted, I don't have a problem with the product, it seems like a natural evolution beyond DSLR video, I just think it's priced too high. It "feels" like it should be a $9000 camera.

 

[paulherrin]

i agree, david. thanks for your input.

 

[Matt W.]

A greater than ("at least") 4000 line grid will indeed be able to hold 2000 line pairs without aliasing, if and only if those lines are sinusoidal, and not square waves. As long as there's more than double the number of samples as line pairs you're good, and as long as the input signal is bandwidth limited, so in the case of our lines pairs, they must be a sine pattern, not actual hard-edged (square wave) lines.

When I print out zone plates for testing, I always use sine wave zone plates.

Graeme

What is the frequency with which you have to sample a square wave (series of line pairs) in order to run no risk of aliasing (no matter how the grids are aligned)? Is it 2:1 or something else entirely or is there no concrete answer?

As for the 7d, well, it can look as good as anything. If you're shooting an out of focus scene at 200 ISO on a tripod. Otherwise.... We still don't know about Sony's camera, though. No one has tried it. All we have is "1080p," which is a matter of corporate politics more than image quality. It does seem kind of expensive.