Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Anyone seen footage from sony F65?

Domenic Barbero said:
man paulo i hate internet compression. I bet the footage looks pretty good. I noticed a bit of rolling shutter in that piece. interesting. I wonder how funtional the camera is to work with.
Click to expand...

Hey Domenic I know what you are talking about but compression or not the highlights are clipping. I think the camera's DR bias the darks not the highlights.
Maybe it happened in post, that is why I asked on the Vimeo comments of that link, but I never got an answer.

They have stills there. Download and check it out. I thought they look noisy and blurry. Just like my first test with my scarlet.
Now that I know how to expose for Scarlet I'm getting pretty sharp and noise free images.
 
Tom Lowe said:
A DP friend of mine did tell me that the DR on the F65 was surprisingly disappointing. I might be shooting on one later this month, so I will report back about it if that happens.

One potentially interesting thing about the F65 is that the full 8K sensor info will probably be available with new software down the road. This could be of interest to IMAX shooters.

Hopefully Red is getting ready to up the sperm count on their new sensor as well, to make Epic more IMAX friendly in terms of resolution. When you have to crop for 3:2, you lose a lot of data!!
Click to expand...
T
Thats most likely operator error. The Raw files are very deep. If you dont post it correctly, and only use the 10bit log output, it will probably feel like an F3. There is alot more info in the raw that you can imagine.
 
Sony are releasing a smalll camera this year sub 10k.
4 k Raw and flash card @150fps- with 8sec -600 fps bursts at in HD.
Scarlet has some serious competion this year.
The F65 Sony's pictures are really good.. Only problem is slow frame rates and the camera is huge!!!.
After using the Epic. There is no competion... Don't expect to shoot quick with a F65.. But the Sony has a better rolling shutter.. But that never becomes a problem for me unless I pan to fast. But I can fix it in seconds so not a problem anyway.... Thats about it.
Red does not need to worry about the F65. But the little hand held 4k unit coming out will shakeup the scarlet sales... Unless red give the scarlet boys faster frame rates...

Dragon sensor should pull RED into the future even further.
 
i saw the release video for the fs700. Im actually really impressed. was considering a 5dm3 for b cam. but now that ive seen that, seems like a really nice friend for the scarlet. the high fps bursts are pretty great.
 
If anybody knows me in person, everybody knows i'm not a fan boy. I work with every camera system, and everything has its pros and cons. and honestly the f65 is not a slouch, and is a top contender in this 4k age. RED started it, RED forced it to happen, and now they have legitimate competition. Which is a good thing because RED WAS the competition to begin with and they drove technology to the bleeding edge and prices way way down.

People complaining about the f65 DR right now, are most likely talking about what they see out of the hd sdi on the camera. I am friends with f65 owners, and know people who have worked on After Earth, M. Knight's film. Ironically, the biggest issue people are having with this camera is that our current technology compared to what the camera can put out is way too lacking.

the 10 bit hd sdi you see on set, even in s log doesn't accurately represent what's in the raw file itself. I've heard from many f65 owners and users that they see clipping of highlights on really high DR stressful shots, and they look at the RAW and all the information is there. the 10 hdsdi can't hold all the information the RAW is carrying. The DR is there, but it's all about trying to get to it, right now, from what I heard from m. knight's shoot the only thing they found that saw everything the raw files had to offer was a full baselight system (edit: at the time nothing else could read it). They had 2 on set just to be able to see what they were really getting.

Everybody else is playing catch up right now. and there is a confirmed 120 fps mode coming out soon, just not activated yet. It will be doing a horizontal crop on the top and bottom of the frame sort of like RED's 2:1 aspect, but they decided not to doing any kind of windowing on the sensor itself so you always maintain a 4k image.

I don't want this to turn to a vs debate, I'm not the person that dives into that. But I also don't like misinformation. the camera is 3x the price of an epic, and 4x the size. But it has qualities that are years ahead of its time, just like an Epic. It's def gonna have a effect on camera decision on a lot of shoots in the years to come, and the battle is only gonna make the end user successful cause it's only gonna force the companies to make a better product as a whole.
 
Last edited:
Tom.Wong said:
But I also don't like misinformation. the camera is 4x the price of an epic, and 4x the size. .
Click to expand...

That is not the case, as I posted previously. The price is between $65K and $85K depending on whether you get the mechanical shutter/transfer deck/media package. That is hardly "4 times the price" of an Epic - even an Epic X - which costs $35K for the bare body. Your size estimate, however, is probably about right, which is why I also mentioned that different cameras have different purposes, audiences, and levels of appropriateness for different projects with different requirements and creative needs.

I would also point out that while I like and run a Baselight Four (less than half the price of the Baselight Eight you were referring to as a "half million dollar system"), I also like and run DaVinci Resolve and both are quite capable of displaying "everything the raw files have to offer," at least based on the test footage that I loaded and played with on both. Of course, if the picture you're referring to is already in the can, it's very possible that their statements were based on the situation back when only the prototype cameras were available, and not the current situation.

As you can tell, I don't like misinformation either.....:001_rolleyes:
 
Tom.Wong said:
and there is a confirmed 120 fps mode coming out soon, just not activated yet. It will be doing a horizontal crop on the top and bottom of the frame sort of like RED's 2:1 aspect, but they decided not to doing any kind of windowing on the sensor itself so you always maintain a 4k image.
Click to expand...

Can you be more specific about this? I thought 120fps was only 2K? Is there any line skipping? Any other tricks to achieve this 120fps? Are you saying only widescreen 120fps? What speeds can the full sensor achieve?

For 120fps is the entire sensor pattern being recorded, or is some information being discarded?
 
Tom Lowe said:
Can you be more specific about this? I thought 120fps was only 2K? Is there any line skipping? Any other tricks to achieve this 120fps? Are you saying only widescreen 120fps? What speeds can the full sensor achieve?

For 120fps is the entire sensor pattern being recorded, or is some information being discarded?
Click to expand...

I had a look on Sony's site and they are extremely vague about about how it works, they just say that it's recorded at 4k x 1k instead of 4k x 2k and that it's not a crop.
 
M Most said:
That is not the case, as I posted previously. The price is between $65K and $85K depending on whether you get the mechanical shutter/transfer deck/media package. That is hardly "4 times the price" of an Epic - even an Epic X - which costs $35K for the bare body. Your size estimate, however, is probably about right, which is why I also mentioned that different cameras have different purposes, audiences, and levels of appropriateness for different projects with different requirements and creative needs.

I would also point out that while I like and run a Baselight Four (less than half the price of the Baselight Eight you were referring to as a "half million dollar system"), I also like and run DaVinci Resolve and both are quite capable of displaying "everything the raw files have to offer," at least based on the test footage that I loaded and played with on both. Of course, if the picture you're referring to is already in the can, it's very possible that their statements were based on the situation back when only the prototype cameras were available, and not the current situation.

As you can tell, I don't like misinformation either.....:001_rolleyes:
Click to expand...


mistype! fixed! i deserve it since i never proof read :)

a lesson i never learned in high school. woops

and the bias with baselight was from the team from After Earth. My friend worked second unit on it and relayed the info. I guess baselight users are gonna try to say what they can about it to make it more appealing. and at the time yes, baselight was the only one seeing f65 footage, and resolve didn't come out with their update yet. I'm trying to get some test footage myself and seeing what's in there. But the issue of the raw having more than the output of the camera can give is a serious and real one. it changes the plane of how you have to work on set. what you are seeing isn't what you are getting, and even traditional way of luting on set means nothing cause it won't transform with the RAW correctly at all.
 
Tom Lowe said:
Can you be more specific about this? I thought 120fps was only 2K? Is there any line skipping? Any other tricks to achieve this 120fps? Are you saying only widescreen 120fps? What speeds can the full sensor achieve?

For 120fps is the entire sensor pattern being recorded, or is some information being discarded?
Click to expand...


at the f65 workshop i was at, a sony engineer claimed, and claimed very strong. 120 fps, in 4k. which just a loss in horizontal resolution, top and bottom. but it will still be 4k worth of resolution, with just an adjusted aspect. they will not be doing any windowing at all, or add any additional compression to achieve it.

and there is a 1080p mode just activated recently that records to SR codec, that is a full scale down. not sure about the FPS you can get on that, but there is no line skipping, windowing of the sensor of any kind. i'm sure it sacrifices a lot of higher framerates, but it's a complete down sample into 1080.


the way the sensor reads out is that it reads out from 4 quadrants independently reading that reading out the whole sensor, at once or one line at a time. so each quadrant literally has it's own set processing to get that info off fast, and all 4 pieces get re assembled when it hits the card. again, the camera really is no slouch. it's a fat camera, but it does produce a competitive image and quality. again, competition is a good thing, i'm sure Dragon is gonna be insane too. I hear Arri is coming out with a 4k cam soon, those are just rumors though but it's a inevitable thing. It's gonna be a very competitive era in digital acquisition.
 
Last edited:
Tom.Wong said:
at the f65 workshop i was at, a sony engineer claimed, and claimed very strong. 120 fps, in 4k. which just a loss in horizontal resolution, top and bottom. but it will still be 4k worth of resolution, with just an adjusted aspect. they will not be doing any windowing at all, or add any additional compression to achieve it.

and there is a 1080p mode just activated recently that records to SR codec, that is a full scale down. not sure about the FPS you can get on that, but there is no line skipping, windowing of the sensor of any kind. i'm sure it sacrifices a lot of higher framerates, but it's a complete down sample into 1080.


the way the sensor reads out is that it reads out from 4 quadrants independently reading that reading out the whole sensor, at once or one line at a time. so each quadrant literally has it's own set processing to get that info off fast, and all 4 pieces get re assembled when it hits the card. again, the camera really is no slouch. it's a fat camera, but it does produce a competitive image and quality. again, competition is a good thing, i'm sure Dragon is gonna be insane too. I hear Arri is coming out with a 4k cam soon, those are just rumors though but it's a inevitable thing. It's gonna be a very competitive era in digital acquisition.
Click to expand...

You are preaching to choir with the statements about the camera being no slouch, competition being a good thing, etc. Hope you did not get the impression that I am down the camera. I am not.

Now in terms of 4K 120fps, my questions would be: 1) what aspect ratio 2) will any information be discarded, and if so, will this prevent the footage from some day being demosaiced to 8K, like the standard F65 4K footage will be some day?
 
i forgot what the aspect ratio would be, that's something that will be confirmed when the feature is actually activated. it is still under a lot of testing and this could change.

from what I understand. the RAW is already "8k" but when you access and look at the footage the demosaic is only showing you the image in 4k. it's another slated to be activated feature to view it at its full resolution. so if you can shoot 120 fps, it stands to reason that if it's an 8k sensor, and they claim no windowing on the sensor itself, there will be no drop in resolution other than the horizontal crop. and thus you are really recording 8k at 120 fps.

not trying to preach, I just don't want this thread to get flamed up, since topics like this in the past, have derailed so fast, it's hard to have any interesting convos on these boards sometimes.
 
Has anyone had to match sony and RED footage together in the past? like epic and f3 or anything like that. Are they noticeably different in a 1080 export or is the color matching fairly easy? I always enjoy sony footage. Well im never unsatisfied with it i should say. I wonder what big productions would be using as a b cam if the f65 was A cam
 
Tom.Wong said:
from what I understand. the RAW is already "8k" but when you access and look at the footage the demosaic is only showing you the image in 4k. it's another slated to be activated feature to view it at its full resolution. so if you can shoot 120 fps, it stands to reason that if it's an 8k sensor, and they claim no windowing on the sensor itself, there will be no drop in resolution other than the horizontal crop. and thus you are really recording 8k at 120 fps.
Click to expand...

Assuming that no pixels are skipped and that no information is being discarded. Something about this seems strange to me. If you can crop the sensor by some percentage and get 120 fps, why could you not get 80fps or 90fps with the full height of the sensor? Are the number of pixels literally being cut in half when recording 120fps? If so, how is that not a huge loss in resolution down from 8K? The sensor is already fairly wide aspect ratio to begin with. Is there some kind of pixel-shifting going on? What am I missing here?
 
If I am not mistaken, the F65 pixel array is 8K x 2K, i.e. only the horizontal pixels are doubled. For true 8K you would need 8K x 4K. They would probably have some demosaic / interpolation algorithm which would resolve images to well over 4K though.
 
We think the Sony F65 is great. Really. It finally validates everything we have said for 6 years. 1080P is not enough.

Jim
 
One of the Vimeo videos of F65 footage has posted TIFF stills. Unfortunately, I saw some nasty compression in one or two shots even though I was assured the footage was shot RAW and not in SR.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top