Sony F3 Super 35mm First Impressisons

I got a chance to sit in on a seminar at Samy’s DV on the new Sony F3 Camera (Sony PMW-F3 Model). You can find out more about the camera here.  I’m going to give you my first impressions on the unit but I want to caution that this is not a full review. A full review would guarantee that I’ve had time with the unit & taken it out in the field & can either fully recommend it or warn you against wasting your time should your needs be similar to mine.

A little background, I’m a filmmaker. An indie filmmaker. Meaning I belong to that small generation of guys (& girls) who bought a digital camera (Canon xl1) years ago & started making films because we didn’t need $50k to buy & process film. I’ve noticed we have a few things in common but our view points & how we describe ourselves always varies. Some want to be Spielberg’s love child & other recoil at being pigeonholed. One of the things we all have in common is you’ll eventually meet who’s left out in the field making films or at these kinds of things which brings me to my first point:

a. First things first? The camera is expensive. I understand Sony thinks $13k (just the camera body) & $18k (for the camera & 3 lense ‘kit’) is ‘affordable’ but theirs is an aging way of seeing the world that is slowly working against them. I’m sure Wall Street Journal thinks their content is so special online that they should have a pay wall. I don’t & they don’t exist for many people. It’s a sign of the times that price can not be an afterthought.  Selling a ‘prosumer’ (meaning ‘indie filmmaker’ lifestyle) camera around the $15k price point but requiring other premium purchases (like a lens?) to make it work like any other camera in this category (not price range) just keeps many away. I’ve always said the RED camera failed (contrary to what others believe) because it didn’t make sense to its core audience because it was half developed (too expensive to acquire & too expensive to hand in post) & never made its money back (unless you rented your own gear). I’m not saying it’s bad or a ripoff but your pricing strategy says a lot about your relevance in the marketplace & how developed the product is. I kept thinking ‘Someone at Sony needs to remember that we’re making low budget films on their cameras that wouldn’t otherwise get made. The wrong price point just crosses your camera off that list & we won’t come back till the next model or pick it up on craigslist in 2 years.’

b. Picture?  The images are amazing. Low light is no longer a dirty phrase.  We looked at footage in available light & it looked wonderful. I’m not mixing words here. The video that we looked at was the right kind of temperature & the right kind of blacks & just looked great. There’s a ton of marketing speak (that obviously needs to be recouped in this price point) that will tell you that it has a bigger chip & better processor but ultimately, it means nothing if the image doesn’t look brilliant. This does. Compared to this category of cameras this year, by far the F3 has the best looking footage. Great depth of field, too. It shoots 4:2:0 but it can shoot 4:4:4 with some unreleased (for pay) firmware update that is supported by another add-on which didn’t make sense. It’s 4:2:0 but the images look great so I don’t care. In my mind if I want a perfect film look, I’d put this money into film & processing. Obviously, I’m considering this camera because I want to make the film at a lower budget (see a. for the obstacle).

c. Form factor? It’s heavy & clunky. Just camera body alone it weighs in around 6lbs. With a lens it’ll start going over 20lbs. Keep adding stuff & you get into the 40lbs range. The body with a lens alone makes it impossible to shoot. It’s not well designed on its own. Bad sony, bad. So you’re left to add a shoulder mount & counter weights & it becomes kind of silly looking (see above). I’m looking for something that’s fast & easy to pull out & shoot & move on. I realize not everyone is but this is my first impression so keep that in mind.

d. All around camera? Not for most folks. If you’re shooting a doc or freeform project (the Sony guys called it ‘unscripted’ because I guess guerilla is finally the dirty word) don’t use it. All 3 lenses in the Kit (signified by the K in F3k model ($18k street price) are fixed length. This is fine for what I want to do but not for my friend who wants to shoot a doc. There’ll be a zoom lens at some point but once again this kind of afterthought just sounds like ‘we don’t want you to buy this camera because…’ I would probably be happy with it on a couple of my projects but I kept asking myself (a few others) why BUY it VS renting it? I can’t come up with a good answer. 

e. Post? Workflow is great & established. Everyone has a thing (fears & turnoffs) when you make films at this level & mine are third party plugins & unstable/undeveloped post workflow. That doesn’t exist here & I believe them. 

f. Media? It uses a Sony proprietary card which is confusing (there’s a B version that expires after 5 years of daily use) & a premium A version that expires after 50 years. I don’t expect to have this camera more than 5 years but this felt like a negative not a positive. The Sony guy’s description of using the SD card adapter as being unstable didn’t help. I’m a p2 guy meaning I’ve used Panasonic’s platform & cards but there’s a devaluing metaphor here that I don’t like. 

g. Overall Impression? At $18k for the kit version (because I wouldn’t pick up the stand alone body at this point), it gives me mixed feelings. $20k is enough to make a great looking feature.  It won’t be enough to finish it for most folks & won’t be enough to promise an audience in these funky Indie Film times but it’s a nice chunk of change. As for how much work I’d get shooting on it for others, I see that as being limited as well. I know it’s easy to exchange horror stories about shooting on DSLR camera with external sound but you can a similar looking picture (I’m sure the F3 would be much nicer) for under $3k & lenses are super cheap. There just seems to be too many options & since the F3 make so many concessions already, it feels devalued right off the bat. It’s not at the top of my list at this point but maybe I’d have a different conclusion if I had time to use it for a proper review. 

Panasonic AG-AF100 First Impressions

I’m working on a few projects in 2011 & the gear lust has started. I’m a proud parent of a HVX200 with the Cinevate 35mm lens option but obviously, we’ve come a long way since those few years ago when I made that investment. I’ve seen great looking features & shorts shot on DSLR cameras & the dream of film married to digital workflows still calls to me like everyone else in my class.I’m an indie filmmaker which means I’ve sold off & begged & borrowed & started making films long ago on DV cameras. I’ve never stopped. It’s something that once you get the bug for you’ll find there is no cure.

I was lucky enough to attend a seminar on the new Panasonic AG-AF100 video camera at Samy’s DV in Culver City. I wanted to share some first impressions on the new camera but I warn that this is not a full review. I haven’t had private time with the camera to see how it handles & shoots nor have I had a chance to shoot & look at footage that I’ve shot myself. That said, the majority of information on the camera is sales or marketing material literally ripped from the press releases on the camera. 

Here are my notes on the camera from what I observed & saw:

a. Size matters. It’s small. Very small. The camera itself can be easily put away in a standard backpack. So if you’re looking for a camera that is uber portable & has a small form factor, then the AF100 is a good option. The AF100 seemed fairly light but once you start adding larger more expensive lenses, you ‘have to’ put it on some kind of rails so as not to stress the ring the lens uses to attach to the body.

b. Incomplete. The sub $5k price point doesn’t include a lens. Panasonic is hoping to attract DSLR filmmakers/videographers by not including a standard lens with the unit. Whether this is to offer premium up sells or to justify a lower price point, it does bring up the first fault of the camera. It doesn’t feel complete. The list of available lens which Panasonic hoped would seem vast & wide ends up painting a difficult decision. I doubt it makes sense to buy a $5k camera & spend $30k on lenses. Maybe I’m wrong but this is my immediate impression. I like that the camera can take other lenses but why not package one with the unit?

c. Price. Cost may be relative but value is fixed. I am using this untrue statement to introduce a point that a prosumer (i.e. indie filmmaker) camera MUST be affordable & ultimately upgradable (meaning you can upgrade to the new tech from film to film without being stuck with something that may not make sense on your next project). I’m looking at you RED. Why spend $20k on a camera that will be worth a fraction in a year when your project is over? The distribution models will be different then as well. All this tells me Panasonic gets it & has price the AF100 correctly.

d. Retro. The camera body & lenses look very 70s 16mm camera. It may be a personal preference but I think it looks very nice & modern. 

e. Media. More pluses. The camera records in a new codec due to its 4:3 CCD onto SD cards. The same cards that you have in your point & shoot Canon camera can work with this camera. I wouldn’t use a standard SD card & probably use the recommended higher end professional cards but in a pinch, I like the option. Once again I feel that Panasonic is directly going after the DSLR filmmaker. Keeping everything familiar & not mixing more upgrades or premiums other than lenses. The codec is Panasonic’s alone so you have to download a plugin & ‘unpack’ the footage. You then have to find some kind of intermediate because the files themselves (4:2:0 8 bit) are too large & non-native to Final Cut Pro. It all works but it works through a few extra steps. This may prove to be the stuff of message board complaints. Because if you’re remote, the more steps you have to jump through, the more problems you will have. 

f. Picture. The images are wonderful. I mainly saw footage shot with their standard ($800 to add on) lens & considering it’s a zoom lens & has lots of depth of field, I was blown away. I think the standard lens makes a great utility lens. Once again, why not package it? It didn’t do great in low light but it wasn’t bad either. I think all around the advantage of a larger CCD is more depth of field & great images. The AF100 succeeds here very well. Just on image alone, I know I want to work with this camera. I hope it’s on my next project but I need to see more on how well these pictures make it through post to finished product. There’s also tons of assignable buttons so you can trigger different speeds & presets without going into the menu. 

g. Overall First Impression. At a sub $5k price point even without including the standard zoom lens, the AF100 seems like a good solid buy. It’s images are not as pristine nor does it handled low light as well as the F3, but for the extra $10k you save, it makes more than enough sense that if I’m deciding between the two cameras, that I’ll most likely choose the Panasonic this year. Everyone’s needs are different & everyone will react to the marketing on both camera’s uniquely, but I think there’s a sweet spot that’s hit with offering this much camera for the price with this kind of depth of field & picture. That said, I could get the camera & put it through its paces in a true review & have a very different conclusion but maybe I’ve offered some opinion that helps you decide what’s right for you if you’re looking at purchasing a new camera.

I’m back, again, on my Romanian film kick to see as many Romanian films as possible in 2011.  I just finished watching Radu Muntean’s first film, Furia. Furia felt like a lot of young films in the 90s (reminds me of the same cheap tricks in Pulp Fiction) but showed HUGE promise. Reminiscent of GO in its smart characters. Dragos Bucur is phenomenal as usual.

Today onto Paper Will Be Blue (above) which is set during the Romanian Revolution.