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 PMW-F3 price drop.

D

David Peterson

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
1,109
Reaction score
3
Points
38
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
The current price for a new F3 is only US$3,995 now, a huge reduction from its original price:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/848144-REG/Sony_PMW_F3L_RGB_PMW_F3L_Super_35mm_Full_HD.html
I can tell it dropped from US$4,995 sometime in the last 48hrs based on Google's cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...r_35mm_Full_HD.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=nz
I was hoping Archive.org could give me insight into the price history over the past year. But sadly the most recent copy it shares at the moment is from October 2014 when it was $14,995:
https://web.archive.org/web/2014100...y_PMW_F3L_RGB_PMW_F3L_Super_35mm_Full_HD.html
Adorama sadly doesn't sell it currently, just a kit for $13,800:
http://www.adorama.com/SOPMWF3G444.html
But it does have three in used condition (V condition $2,100, E- condition $2,400, E condition $2,575):
http://www.adorama.com/catalog.tpl?op=recommend&sku=US_VDCSOPMWF3
And on eBay I can see sold listings for US$2K. I believe if people look around at their local private sales they'll find it even cheaper, I picked up one myself three weeks ago for US$1.2K via that.

Incredible price drop from 2011 when the Sony PMW-F3 first came out and it was nearly $20,000! ($16K for the body plus initially US$3,800 for the firmware upgrade)

It has had a far faster price drop than similar cameras of that era (give or take a year) which were priced similar (or even cheaper than the F3 was), such as: Canon C300, RED Scarlet, RED One, Sony FS700, BMCC. They've all seen big price drops, falling half in price, or even more. But none have seen the price fall to a tenth of the original cost! (or even less!)


I wonder why. I've got a few theories, it is was a rather popular enough camera in its niche (TV / documentaries / etc). Thus lots of F3 cameras were sold, which is causing mismatch in supply vs demand. As there is low demand because it never caught on amongst amateur/indie filmmakers (because they too quickly got distracted by the next shiny item, such as RED or BMD), who'd be the people who could soak up the supply of F3 cameras on the second hand market. As professional TV crews wouldn't be buying up F3 cameras in large numbers, they'd instead be moving on to an F5/F55.

So why are there not more indies picking up these cheap F3 bodies? I'd say there are a few reasons: its bulk, it is "only 1080", no raw, PL mount (too pricey for many indies), and SxS cards are pricey. (last two reasons are non issues, as under that PL mount you've got the FZ mount, and there are dirt cheap adapters for SxS to use standard SD cards. But many people won't realise this initially, and just be put off from getting an F3)


Makes you wonder what camera now which are priced way outside our reach will then be very affordable by 2019?


Alexa Mini? Doubt it, it will still hold onto its popularity and prestige for a long time.
Sony F5? Well... is the one directly after the F3, kinda makes it the obvious candidate to keep an eye on. The F5 after all is already feeling pricing pressure from Sony's own cheaper FS7, URSA Mini and other cameras will keep up the pressure.
KineFinity KineMAX 6K? Doubt it will sell enough to create a future large supply vs demand in balance.
Sony FS7? Perhaps this is the one to watch for 2019 deals, but it is already starting from a very affordable point. So it surely will fall to a similar price point by 2019 I guess, but it certainly won't fall to being a tenth of its original price.
AJA Cion? Eh, I suppose it might... but I doubt I'd pick it over my own F3!


Other candidates? Thoughts?
 
Just a personal bias here, but if they were giving them away with the stipulation I had to learn to shoot with it, I wouldn't accept it. I'm just too ingrained in the RED System and feel it is a waste of learning capacity to try to incorporate any camera outside of the brand that meets/exceeds all my needs. YMMV

Good points about how many other mainstream cameras are going to be shown to be over-priced.
 
Yeah sure, if you already have a a RED then I think it is very understandable indeed that you wouldn't want to shoot with an F3 in many circumstances!

But I was coming from a BMPCC/DSLR/mirrorless background and looking at what next. Thus I'm comparing it not against a RED Epic, but against a RED One and similar priced cameras (or even cheaper). And vs a RED One? Well, depends on the person, but for me the F3 makes far more sense (especially at that price!).
 
David Peterson said:
Yeah sure, if you already have a a RED then I think it is very understandable indeed that you wouldn't want to shoot with an F3 in many circumstances!

But I was coming from a BMPCC/DSLR/mirrorless background and looking at what next. Thus I'm comparing it not against a RED Epic, but against a RED One and similar priced cameras (or even cheaper). And vs a RED One? Well, depends on the person, but for me the F3 makes far more sense (especially at that price!).
Click to expand...

I can see that argument, but on the other hand, Stephen Pruitt is the poster child for being an early adopter of the R-1 and is still shooting on it today. I would imagine he would argue the camera has gone through many upgrades via firmware and keeps fulfilling the promise of 4k all these years after it started the rush to 4k.
 
That's a good buy for $2000, even just for HD. Not a good buy at $16,000. There's probably two dozen reality shows now on television for whom an F3 would be an upgrade over their current cameras. It's a damn sight better than (say) a cheap DSLR or a GoPro.
 
Interesting concept for discussion. I've been super lucky twice, bought an EX3 in '10 for 10K AUD and sold it 15 months later with at least 100 working days use/hire on it for the same amount. Then 2.5 years ago I bought a second hand C100 with 12 hours use on it for 4K AUD and sold it for 4.5K AUD again probably went out 200 times.
I've lost more than half on canon dslr's though.
The times I've made money on cameras were during dormant stages in mainstream tech development. Where no major new formats or resolutions were being used for broadcast. Now that 4K is becoming mainstream for shooting (maybe not delivering, at least for the time being) it means anything that's still HD isn't worth the investment right now. SO I imagine it's end of line for the F3. The quick loss in DSLR's is due to a fairly quick turn around in tech specs.
I'd say if you purchase an FS7 second hand or off market now & use it for a year, you may get away with a very low loss and certainly after charging it for going out for a year make a good amount on it.
Since buying the scarlet dragon and now upgrading to the epic dragon, my thoughts are less about pricing structures for resale, but the longevity of use, quality of image and upgrade paths that Red offers. I'm not longer thinking solely of monetary return.
 
I'd take an F3 with log and prores recorder any day over a C-300
But... Hm... ehem... Dragon...

As to image vs R1, I'd take the RED ONE M any day
 
Gunleik Groven said:
I'd take an F3 with log and prores recorder any day over a C-300
But... Hm... ehem... Dragon...
Click to expand...
Ha! Nobody is going to be comparing it with a Dragon!
Those are two DRASTICALLY different price points.


Gunleik Groven said:
As to image vs R1, I'd take the RED ONE M any day
Click to expand...
I'm quite willing to agree the R1 MX has the edge in many areas of image quality (but not all, F3 for instance is better in low light).
However to say "I'd take it any day" over a F3 is a stretch from my perspective. As plenty of instances where I'd take other features of the F3 over the benefits from the R1, for instance in most all wedding filming or low end corporate scenarios. As it would be just painful to shoot with an R1 there relative to an F3.

Of course, a narrative short film with a complete lighting kit and decent shooting schedule, then for sure I'd pick an R1 MX instead too.
 
Yes, i think you're right.
I haven't done many weddings. None to be precise, and I can se the weight and prores option making a serious argument for those situations.
 
I'm really getting surprised by the perceptions regarding camera size and usability.
Handycams and DSLRs have truly helped screw up the expectations for a decent handheld camera.

Reality shows are commonly shot with shoulder cameras that weigh about 20lbs and they do some very long takes.
The last few years i have shot a lot of documentary handheld (up to 40 minute + takes) with the RED ONE MX and
(knock on wood) my back and well being is quite fine. Balance the camera and keep the ergonomics simple and for the most part
you will be fine shooting handheld on a RED ONE provided you're in decent shape.

It does not take much to get an F3 in RED ONE weight territory once you add
a baseplate, external recorder (to get around the XDCAM codec) and a good viewfinder.

A place I freelance with just purchased FS7s to replace their EX1/3s and the producers actually think
the FS7 is a huge camera once it's rigged. I keep telling them that this is medium size and not nearly as big as other rigs.

I do agree with Gunleik that the RED ONE M was a really great sensor. I still get amazed looking at footage shot with the original
RED ONE and image HAS improved with the various RED COLOR SCIENCE and GAMMA updates. Still prefer the MX though.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA
 
As you can guess, I own a F3, and I've shot with a R1 MX this year and last as a DoP on a feature. Yeah the F3 once rigged up can get pretty "heavy" too relative to DSLRs and such, but still is substantially lighter than a R1. Ideally I'd wish it was half its size and weight, more in the realms of the C300 or EPIC in size. Guess you could say that is basically what the FS7 is (it is surprisingly light in the hand, I've been 1st AC with a FS7. Be nice if the FS7 is my next camera after the F3! Maybe in a couple of years, once they're common on the second hand market and work takes off for me).

I feel the argument of "but other cameras are even BIGGER" is poor reasoning. Especially as I read so often horror stories from camera ops who have been doing this for decades, with the physical toll this job has taken oin their bodies. I certainly don't want this to be me, extra keen not to as I already suffer from arthritis (for years since my early twenties, "ankylosing spondolitis").

Anyway, size is not the main reason why I like the F3 more. Is just one of many, as it is all the several other little reasons that all add up in the end to making it a better choice for such low budget / fast turn around jobs (likely why the F3 was a big hit in the TV/doco/corporate world, but never made it in feature film use). Such as built in ND filters and superior low light capabilities.
 
Last edited:
David Peterson said:
As you can guess, I own a F3, and I've shot with a R1 MX this year and last as a DoP on a feature. Yeah the F3 once rigged up can get pretty "heavy" too relative to DSLRs and such, but still is substantially lighter than a R1. Ideally I'd wish it was half its size and weight, more in the realms of the C300 or EPIC in size. Guess you could say that is basically what the FS7 is (it is surprisingly light in the hand, I've been 1st AC with a FS7. Be nice if the FS7 is my next camera after the F3! Maybe in a couple of years, once they're common on the second hand market and work takes off for me).

I feel the argument if "but other cameras are even BIGGER" is poor reasoning. Especially as I read so often horror stories from camera ops who have been doing this for decades, with the physical toll this job has taken oin their bodies. I certainly don't want this to be me, extra keen not to as I already suffer from arthritis (for years since my early twenties, "ankylosing spondolitis").

Anyway, size is not the main reason why I like the F3 more. Is just one of many, as it is all the several other little reasons that all add up in the end to making it a better choice for such low budget / fast turn around jobs (likely why the F3 was a big hit in the TV/doco/corporate world, but never made it in feature film use). Such as built in ND filters and superior low light capabilities.
Click to expand...

The "other cameras are bigger" statement was in reference to a smaller camera like the FS7 being considered "big" to producers used to seeing EX1s and the like. It's actually more comfortable performing handheld on a FS7 than an EX1or3.
Understood about the toll on the body. Hope your back condition improves.
In the end you work with what you feel most comfortable working with.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA
 
Ah yes, I've handled an EX1R a bit and the F3 certainly seems to dwarf it. With the FS7 some in between, but closer to F3.

I find if I'm very careful and strict with my diet (a strict form of "LCHF" diet, thus lots of meat, plus some leafy veges, but absolutely no starchy carbs. Ditto sugar) then my health is drastically better. Don't need any medication at all, aside from occasional painkillers and hopefully not even that.

But even so, I'd like to be cautious with the toll on my body as I would hope I've got many many years ahead of me as cam op / DP.

I'm just glad I didn't enter this a decade or two earlier! (though a couple of decades ago I was but a young child) As I for one am very welcoming of this trend towards lighter cameras :-D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top