Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Sony CineAlta F65 / Sony F65 vs...

James B.

James B.

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
167
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Just saw my first film of TIFF this year and, without going into too much detail have to say I wasn't overly impressed by the 'look' of the image.
Although the dynamic range was ok, the brightest highlites seemed very harsh, no soft rolloff, and deepest blacks were crushed. As well the overall feel felt very 'video-like' to me, perhaps a tad too much sharpening. Hard to say how much of this can be attributed to work in post or even the digital projection system.
Checking my imdb pro account I see it was shot with the Sony CineAlta F65 and Sony F65. I was very curious, how do these cameras compare in their image capture quality, with the RED Epic, or even the Arri Alexa? Googling Sony CineAlta F65, all I can find are articles on its suitability for 4K capture.
 
Last edited:
The image quality is pretty amazing. Personally I think it's the best camera out there for certain applications.

Definitely above the Alexa and the Dragon for many things.

Last SIGGRAPH I was at VFX talk about Oblivion (shot on the F65). They devoted quite a lot of the talk to how much they had to boost their render quality settings because otherwise their V-Ray renders were coming out noticeably grainier than what the camera was seeing.

But in the wrong hands, I'm sure you can make it look awful, of course.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
I just graded a commercial campaign shot on F65 and I was very impressed with the image quality and how easy it was to get the desired image. Great highlight roll off and very clean image. If I didn't know better, i could confuse the image for Alexa, but for 4K image:)
 
i have been in tests with the Dragon, F65 and F55. They all produce exceptional images. My humble opinion.... I think the F65 nicks it. But I monitored the F65 footage in 4K and have only seen Dragon footage in 2.5K. Honestly, with cameras like these, other aesthetic factors come into play (lighting , performance, locations etc). However the very nature of the 65 makes it extremely difficult for low budget independent feature producers to choose it as an option, the Dragon on the other hand was born for independents (from price to form factor configurations).

By the way, what film did you see?
 
The only drawback I've heard about the F65 (and there's only one, not two versions of the F65) is that the file sizes are horrendously big. The figure I was given was 1TB per hour, which is pretty rough to deal with. I don't know how much the SR-compressed files affect these numbers. Color wise, I've heard zero complaints, and I've also been told the camera runs pretty cool. But it's huge, bigger than the Alexa, especially with the SR-R4 brick recorder on the back.

I know of somebody on a show where they did some side-by-side tests with the F65 and F55, and they came to the conclusion that the visual differences are neglible. There is zero crushing or clipping in the camera if it's exposed correctly; if the o.p. saw this at the Toronto festival, then I'd say it's either a problem with the projector or deliberate creative decisions by the cinematographer.

I believe Showtime's Masters of Sex is shot on F65, and that's one of the best-looking shows on television, in my opinion.
 
Marc Wielage said:
The only drawback I've heard about the F65 (and there's only one, not two versions of the F65) is that the file sizes are horrendously big. The figure I was given was 1TB per hour, which is pretty rough to deal with. I don't know how much the SR-compressed files affect these numbers. Color wise, I've heard zero complaints, and I've also been told the camera runs pretty cool. But it's huge, bigger than the Alexa, especially with the SR-R4 brick recorder on the back.

I know of somebody on a show where they did some side-by-side tests with the F65 and F55, and they came to the conclusion that the visual differences are neglible. There is zero crushing or clipping in the camera if it's exposed correctly; if the o.p. saw this at the Toronto festival, then I'd say it's either a problem with the projector or deliberate creative decisions by the cinematographer.
Click to expand...


Agree completely... the file sizes on the 65 were HUGE. But monitoring in 4K, there was some visible difference though. I thought the colours on the 65 were just much richer and the image cleaner and sharper.
 
jake blackstone said:
I just graded a commercial campaign shot on F65 and I was very impressed with the image quality and how easy it was to get the desired image. Great highlight roll off and very clean image. If I didn't know better, i could confuse the image for Alexa, but for 4K image:)
Click to expand...

And a beautiful grade it is too!!!!!

(Our DP on this campaign, Flor Collins is a master of light and composition..so that doesn't hurt either)

BRAVO, Jake!

BTW: We shoot most stuff in F65RAW-Lite which is VERY manageable, SR files in HQ or SQ are really easy to work with too.

IMPO: We use many cameras from the 5D Mark III to the RED Dragon, from the Alexa to the F65 ...and each produce their own special magic for different deliverables. THe choice of glass and the artistry of the DP are actually far more important than the camera body at this point in time.

(We have a national spot running now that was 50% shot on a GoPro Black edition and 50% shot on a RED MX and once graded, they cut together just fine.)

For the ProRes 422 lite 1080p deliverables that are standard for broadcast, so many digital cinema cameras and DSLRs produce very, very similar results.....VERY. :)
 
BRANDON JAMESON said:
And a beautiful grade it is too!!!!!

(Our DP on this campaign, Flor Collins is a master of light and composition..so that doesn't hurt either)

BRAVO, Jake!

BTW: We shoot most stuff in F65RAW-Lite which is VERY manageable, SR files in HQ or SQ are really easy to work with too.

IMPO: We use many cameras from the 5D Mark III to the RED Dragon, from the Alexa to the F65 ...and each produce their own special magic for different deliverables. THe choice of glass and the artistry of the DP are actually far more important than the camera body at this point in time.

(We have a national spot running now that was 50% shot on a GoPro Black edition and 50% shot on a RED MX and once graded, they cut together just fine.)

For the ProRes 422 lite 1080p deliverables that are standard for broadcast, so many digital cinema cameras and DSLRs produce very, very similar results.....VERY. :)
Click to expand...

Flor Collins is madly talented cinematographer and the most unassuming person I ever worked with. Because of the beautifully exposed images and his classic approach to the lighting, composition and framing (hardly any windows were needed, with pretty much everything done in camera), we were able to grade 8 national spots in less than 6 hours, which, at least for me, is a standing record.
Yes, the file sizes weren't an issue, other than I needed to copy the files to my fast drives for the real time playback. Single USB3 drive just wouldn't cut it. Once that was done, I was able to grade and play it back in full resolution in real time. All Sony RAW debayering is fully GPU accelerated without the need for specialized hardware. In my opinion, F65 is very underrated camera.
 
Marc Wielage said:
The only drawback I've heard about the F65 (and there's only one, not two versions of the F65) is that the file sizes are horrendously big. The figure I was given was 1TB per hour, which is pretty rough to deal with. I don't know how much the SR-compressed files affect these numbers. Color wise, I've heard zero complaints, and I've also been told the camera runs pretty cool. But it's huge, bigger than the Alexa, especially with the SR-R4 brick recorder on the back.

I know of somebody on a show where they did some side-by-side tests with the F65 and F55, and they came to the conclusion that the visual differences are neglible. There is zero crushing or clipping in the camera if it's exposed correctly; if the o.p. saw this at the Toronto festival, then I'd say it's either a problem with the projector or deliberate creative decisions by the cinematographer.

I believe Showtime's Masters of Sex is shot on F65, and that's one of the best-looking shows on television, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Hello Marc,

But you wouldn't record sound when the optical shutter is enabled...

Pat
 
James B. said:
Just saw my first film of TIFF this year and, without going into too much detail have to say I wasn't overly impressed by the 'look' of the image.
Although the dynamic range was ok, the brightest highlites seemed very harsh, no soft rolloff, and deepest blacks were crushed.
Click to expand...

With F65 that sounds as a human factor.
 
BRANDON JAMESON said:
When engaged, the F65 mechanical shutter is completely silent
...what are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Noise,

Tests I've done in a sound recording studio comparing, Alexa, Epic, Aaton Penelope and the F65 wich came out to be the king of noise (sound) when using the optical shutter.

Pat
 
Patrick Tresch said:
Noise,

Tests I've done in a sound recording studio comparing, Alexa, Epic, Aaton Penelope and the F65 wich came out to be the king of noise (sound) when using the optical shutter.

Pat
Click to expand...

Ours is silent..perhaps yours was not operating properly.

Are you seriously saying that in a comparative test on a typical shoot day that the shutter on the F65 is louder than the cooling fan on the Epic which has been compared to a hairdryer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top