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 :)

Sony F23 VS Red

The RED has got to be considerably cheaper to rent than the F23, unless RED owners are really sticking it to their rental customers due to high demand and limited access right now.

A $180,000 camera system like the F23 + SRW1 is going to rent for a couple thousand per day minimum (maybe $3000/day), whereas a $17,500 camera like the RED should be renting for less than $1000/day, not including lenses and accessories.
 
Compare under extreme stretch and correction?

Compare under extreme stretch and correction?

gunleik said:
To compare the two, we'd need to see paralell uncorrected shots of the same subject. Blablabla... -;)
Gunleik
Click to expand...

While I understand the need to compare images from various Digital Cinema camera, and film, shots as the manufacture intended, a true test of the camera's usefulness is found when the images are processed to improve on the bulk result. The prime reason for shooting RAW Bayer data is to be able to gave the full dynamic range in post to pull out all the shadow and highlight detail you can get if you want it, or to keep it at lower contrast by using the curves and gamma to rase the contrast of the mid-tones.

Many digital images fall apart when you strech the shadows, especially in the blue separation. Many on here may be looking for ENG type shooting, but I am sure others will want to pull all the visual value they can out of the RAW Bayer data by shooting at 4.5K and down-rezing in post to average the sensor data to get higher S/N.

From what I was able to do with Haakon's 2K image in my Grading command,

http://www.reduser.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2106&d=1197105572

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?p=118575&posted=1#post118575

I think the RED (tm) has already gone past what can be done with pure film in many cases. Digitially processed film is not realy "film" any longer, and in the near future you will never see raw film to film printed film anymore.

You cannot get exactly the same effect on DOF with a smaller sensor for close camera to subject distances since the relation of the lens focal length to the camera to subject distance cannot be exactly matched in the way the background goes out of focus by opening up the lens on the smaller sensor, yes it is not too far off for a sensor half size at six feet, but there will be some differences, just as there would be in shooting the same shot on 16mm at f/2, 35mm at f4, and 70mm at f/8 for a subject at one foot.

As to making the RED (tm) camera the best Digital Cinema camera, I would like to see an option to change the sensor so that you have three options,

1) Monochrome sensor to get maximum sharpness and more speed for shooting monochrome.

2) Bayer sensor with just a IR filter for maximum color speed.

3) New sensor cover with incorporation of XB29 like Digital Imaging Filter on Schott S8817A on Sensor cover glass to get the best color possible at a lower EI.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=6530

Adding a blue cover glass or filter and the option to reduse the sensor gain may help with the noise reduction in the blue. Tones are relative, to get dark shots that look like night with quiet shadows may be better captured by using higher light levels on the set and lower gain on the sensor. A lower speed sensor may be a good idea since for daylight EI 16 is fine...

The default output of a Canon XTi (tm) and some other non cinema digital cameras and sample images I have been experimenting with all fall apart when you stretch the shadows, and in a very different way than adjusting the printing lights for film printing. Just having JPG sample frames does not help much with comparison because of the compression artifacts.

Since filmmakers will be adjusting each shot to bring out the most artistic result by using both lighting and post production correction up to the limits of what the RAW Bayer data can take, having the best RAW data to work with may be of more value, and so to make a comparison the RAW data from the sample shoots should be able to be inspected and adjusted.

The DSP in the camera may be introducing artifacts not in the RAW Bayer data, so having RAW uncompressed Bayer data and doing all the image processing in post may give the best idea of what each camera can give the filmmaker to work with?

On another point, comparison of film images to digital images is getting more difficult now since the scanned film images are run through all kinds of de-grain and un-dust software, as well as codes that remove color noise between adjacent pixels, so to some extent what one thinks of as the "film look" is more the look of the particular software that the raw film images have been processed with. I have been more that a little disillusioned as the the superiority of film in working directly with the "RAW" data from the 35mm scanner I am working on since the digital images have wide dynamic range and probably greater resolution. Film has uneven density that makes for a constant flicker when viewed at 24 frames per second. When film is turned into MPG2 or other compressed formats the frame images are run through various digital filters to remove grain and uneven density from frame to frame, and so make the film look better in some ways than it looks on projection of a 35mm film print that was printed film to film. Since many "films" are processed through Digital Intermedate now, it is less and less common to actualy see "film images" that have not been processed through software of many types.

The net result is that in the end result now, it is not so much about the camera model, digital or film origin but about the software chain that is used to process the frame images and what happens to the frame images along the way to the final projection before the audience, i.e. total systemic influence in the subjective result may be sensitive to initial conditions, the butterfly effect, so if you look at the original Sony (tm) or RED (tm) images you may not see the problems or advantages with the frames until AFTER they have been run through ALL the various hardware and software manipulations, transcoding, decoding, and so on. Because some skill and finesse can be required in the processing of the frames, taking the wrokflow out of the film LAB and onto the desktop puts the decisions into the hands of persons that may not be the most skilled in obtaining the best result (if anyone could ever agree as to what that should be, as anyone who has gotten something back from a LAB and wondered WTF happend to their film). I would urge the RED (tm) to try extreme manipulations to their DSP processed images while working on the firmware to look for artifacts that resurface, since the users will probably also be able to bring out ugly artifacts also.

Because the processing of the frames introduce unwanted artifacts, one would want to get the cleanest RAW data in the camera, and keep it clean along the chain of post production.

The sad part of the current trends, is that all avenues of distribution are going to have heavy compression, and so no matter how beautiful the final edit looks in its uncompressed form, it will probably only be viewed mucked up in compressed versions (i.e. digital broadcast)... This has already happend to large extent with the audio recording shifting from audiophile recordings (direct to disk) to MP3 shadows of the original waveform...

I hope the RED (tm) team will keep the option for RAW Bayer recording at full resolution (as promised?), no matter what the other brands of Digital Cinema cameras spit out...
 
Very Funny thread. Let's get the Red out of Beta......

Then we can compare it to anything you like.
 
Everything looks in focus............LIKE A 2/3" CHIP!

Thus the beauty of 35mm lenses!

I do have to give the F23 this - the dynamic range and gamma detail look very nice!

Cheers,
Rich
 
Cloudchaser said:
Clairmont's list is $3200 for F23 + SRW1.

http://www.clairmont.com/catalog/pages/digital/digital_camera_acc.html

David
Click to expand...

David Mullen ASC said:
Then my guess was pretty close...
Click to expand...

As it would be most of the time David :wink: .

It's actually quite simple. As far as I know you should always rent out to maximum around 2.5% to purchase price, so that would be around $3000 for a F23 and $1000 for a RED with some accessories.
Now remember that's of course list price (with 50% discount it's 1.25% = about 100 days of rental to pay of gear, not included service)

fred
 
Barend Onneweer said:
Did you actually read this thread? Considering the extreme wide-angle look of these shots, you'd be having difficulties trying to get a short DoF look on a 35mm chip.

Bar3nd
Click to expand...

Hi Barend,

Actually, shooting with a 18mm Zeiss f1.4 wide open gives you an surprinsingly shallow DOF (not saying that with a 12mm Zeiss any shallow DOF is possible to achieve).

Kind regards,

Hans
 
As has been discussed before, rental of video kit in UK historically is based on 1% of value per day.

If a camera is rare or new and in demand it can be higher, but this does not last long!

Owner operators (who include lots of extras) tend to charge less than the rental houses rate card and those rate cards are a starting point for negotiating down.



Mike Brennan
 
Jay A. Kelley said:
David,

I am renting for around $1,600.00 - $1,800 per day. This include RED and accessories and an operator. Not lenses
Jay
Click to expand...

Based on some of my prior experiences, I would strongly recommend that you at least consider separating your dayrate as cameraman from your camera rental rate. For those producers that are aggressive negotiators, it will place you in a better position.
 
1% of the value for rental in the UK - that sounds great ! It would mean the camera paying for itself within 1-3 years depending on the amount of days it goes out. Thats great !

For me the F23 does look fantastic, but the question I ask myself is when there's a camera for less than a quarter of the price of that, thats smaller, more modular and can deliver 4k compared to 1080P why would I go for the Sony?

I appreciate that it isn't just as clear cut as that, but companies like Sony need to see what's on the horizon. If you take what Sony did with the 'Playstation for example, the way it jumped into the market, they already know how to shake things up. But they haven't been doing that in the camera world. Everyone is doing HD. What will set these cameras apart from each other - slight differences in quality in the same delivery format? Whearas RED jumps into another league. It goes right up against film and HD in one go.

Look how slow companies are to respond to cameras like the HVX200. Its taken Sony two years to get their Card version out the door into a market already split between HDV and P2. I know that there are long development cycles and that's what takes time.

Their SxS camera may be better than the HVX and the specs may say so, but its taken a while for it to come out.

Importantly, where is their 'in between' camera. By this I mean the Red is an 'inbetween' on price [HVX & HDV pricing on one end of the scale and CINEALTA at the other]. But that inbetween isn't an inbetween on quality and format as RED jumps ahead.

Take Final cut pro. See how Avid have been slow to react to that. Have they recovered from it? Maybe, maybe not. But they aren't the clear leaders in the field anymore.

Sorry this has gotten too long a post and it is probably a rant, I'm just trying to see it simply. Red for me is a quantum leap. Like the HVX200 was to me 2 years ago coming from DV.

I gotta look at it that the F23 isn't aimed at a guy like me. But then what has Sony got that's going to stop me when I go to purchase a RED in a year or two?

Exciting times ahead whatever happens!

Enjoy!
Richard
 
Well, Sony's reasons for not yet coming out with something like the RED is basically their interest is primarily in making broadcast video equipment -- they aren't interested in competing head-to-head with Panavision, Arri, Aaton, and the other camera manufacturers (and now RED) who cater to cinema makers. Maybe a little, they don't want to be left-out either. But to them, those film camera companies have traditionally catered to a whole different type of consumer.

They may change their mind over time if they see a real moneymaking market, but traditionally, there have been a lot fewer people buying cameras for moviemaking compared to people buying cameras for broadcast video work. So to them, it's a niche market, filmmaking. They may want to eventually dominate that area too... but so far, a market normally that sells a thousand cameras at the most (a few hundred normally) is nothing compared to the market that sells tens of thousands of cameras.

And since broadcast is limited to HD, they don't see a reason to mass produce a camera that has more resolution than that. Although as the market changes, they will change too. For example, this upcoming F35 at least suggests that Sony understands that some people want 35mm depth of field. But 4K resolution really suggests cinema applications.

Now the odd thing in all of this is that Sony did make a 4K projector, odd in that they don't have a way of creating 4K content for it with one of their cameras.

So the question is considering how big Sony's overall market is in terms of camera and post equipment, from consumer to pro, do they really want the RED market too or are they willing to concede some of that to others? Or will RED end up drawing marketshare away from Sony's HD cameras, due to the price and features, and thus force them to create something similar? I don't know and I'm sure Sony is watching carefully.
 
I think Sony just realize the demand for a 4k projector in terms of the cinema market. Mostly for films shot on 35 mm film.... even though most of those are 2k.

It's pretty big though maybe it upscales really well?
 
Good thoughts David, as usual.
If the RED reservation numbers are about right. Then Sony will indeed be watching realy closly what is happening with the RED.
4000 Cams are a lot of missed HDCAM, XDCAM HD sales.

Sony could easily bring out a RED killer but they would also shoot them in their own foot at the same time.
RED is free in this regard. They just have one model yet. So they dont have to think about their High End models they might hurt with such a product.

The next 12 month are going to be very interesting for us cinematographers to watch the industry adapting to RED.
We might get surprised by some of the players what all of the sudden will be possible.

Tim
 
sander kamp said:
Sorry? Are you really saying all photography (still/moving) shot with Nikon or Canon lenses looks like this video?
Click to expand...

Hi Sandar,

this is Stewart from HKG, and I like using better optics than Canon or Fujinon or even rare exposure Angen... from France in just making HD Content.

Digiprime are good enough for F23 or any 2/3" CCD Camcorders though.

DID they use DigiPrime for that MV ? I bet NOT.

I know a company based in BBK who got 3 full set of DigitPrime Lenses for their 3 x SONY 's camcorders 900R + Arri Matte Boxes.

I can tell you the decision maker lwho likes/knows RED one camera because of me from HKG and BKK is my 2nd House, and HKG in CHINA is the 1st.

We can use our RED ones both in BKK and HKG to make the difference.

Meet you soon in BKK.

Cheers,

Stewart
 
YOU DONT HAVE TO WAIT TO LONG!!!

Sony has built an "F35" camera only for sale in japan ....right now...will probalby be shown at NAB 2008....for sale soon States-side. Super 35 Chips size. Almost two years ago Sony had told me that the body of the F23 was sized to support a 35 size imager. Panasonic will show soon the new Varicam..with a surper 35 Chip as well.( not sure what they will call it....) They presented it to a select few at last years NAB. Not sure what format they will record..but probably 4k. Don't forget ....Sony, for NHK several years ago ( about 3 ) tested An UHD 32 meg Chip camera.

The great thing is that Red is stepping up the sale and marketing for these types of cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top