|
|
|
|
Why I bought a Sony F35 cinematography camera
Dan Mulligan of Rogue Element Films explains the role of the F35 in a sea of RED
|
|
|
It is maybe as a result of the slickness of the RED camera marketing that Sony’s launch of their significant F35 digital cinematography camera has slipped by almost unnoticed even with the combined marketing skills of Band Pro and Rogue Element Films. In fact Dan Mulligan of Rogue Element, buyers of the first F35 in Europe, has found himself somewhat defending himself: “People have been asking ‘Why did you buy that, why didn’t you buy a RED?’”.
SO DAN, WHY DID YOU BUY THE F35?
“We looked at REDs but we buy kit like Vipers and F35s for the longevity of the products and the company back up and for us the ultimate in quality regardless of price. The RED is obviously an exciting product but potentially flawed for all sorts of reasons. If you’re prepared to put up with it you will get some lovely results but nothing more than a F900R/F23 that’s set up properly.
“I buy kit that tends to be the right product for the right job and the clients come to me because we offer almost a niche service. We treat it in a mature fashion, we look at real results using a hardware based delivery. The Viper is a 4k camera delivering a 2k deliverable on-set, for real, to SR tape or Stwo DFRs as DPX data. Yet most people shooting with a RED recently are saying ‘The best way to shoot with RED is to get the 4k images, de-bayer them and dump them on to SR for 2k mastering’. I was shooting Vipers to SR four or five years ago.
“There’s still a lack of awareness of what digital is out there and not many fully understand it really. The loss leader price of a RED at $17,000 is such a massive red herring because by the time you spec it properly you’re looking at the same sort of rental costs as a decent F23 system. The F23 and F35 image quality and delivery is much better but nobody will believe you.
“The democratising that the RED brings is actually in danger of splitting digital apart and I find myself almost defending my purchase of the F35, a much superior camera system in many ways. Most users recognise the F35’s build and quality and the camera wipes the floor with RED on any test on any workflow option, except that bottom line marquee price point. It’s got 14 stops, the RED’s only got 10-11. What’s damaging about the RED is that there will come a time in two or three years when people will be saying lovely images but what a difficult beast too use and post.
5K TO 2K
“Our talent is making it simple with these cameras, stripping away the mystery of digital. We tell people not to get bogged down with the technology. Think of the lens, think of the chip, think of it as film, think log, think digital negative. Treat it like a film camera, the only difference is you’re capturing a digital negative not a film neg. Once you get your head around that, it becomes so easy. Things like the RED are just over complicating the issue.
“The F35 is a 5k chip sub-sampling down to 2k to give you a usable delivery format. You’ve got 14 stops, 14 bit dynamic range, the same as film. We hook up the F35 to the STwo DFRs to capture that DPX frame at source so we’re treating it as a digital negative.
“You know when you buy from companies like Band Pro that your partnering with a support structure that will help when anything goes wrong. You know that Sony are continually working on making the camera better and you’re buying a camera body that will last at least five or six years before it is superseded.
“Focus pullers are struggling for work on some REDs, they’re being self operated like an ENG camera, so the actual craft of making a film is being lost or diluted. We’re approaching our digital shoots as if it was a film shoot with the difference being a digital camera. So its digital neg, DPX frames as film neg, we offline, we telecine, we colour time the images, and we archive as you would do with film by duping the neg. When we talk to producers we are saying this is exactly how you would have shot a film with the disciplines and the people in place and with a tried and tested workflow. The difference is that your telecine machine is a now a machine you can have in your hotel, the archive can happen close to the location and we can also process on-set. Which means we can bring someone from editorial on-set, not a data guy but an editor who can log shots and the people driving the DFR machines are camera assistants. We’re taking a very film centric approach to shooting digitally.”
|
|
|
1st December 2008 - 'Nonsense'
|
3rd December 2008 - 'Rubbish'
|
4th December 2008 - "I used the Genesis, which is a similar camera. Congratulations on buying F35. You don't really need 4K. Adam Wilt tested Red against F35 or F23 and EX1, the Red as far as I remember was the worst, with the worst resolution. The test is on ProVideoCoalition.com. If you want to know what real DPs think of Red, get on the Red forum of Cinematography.com, although it is now trolled heavily by Red users. The cinematographers keep on making fun of Red and Jim's used-car-marketing techniques all the time. I can't see any real pro buying Red, unless some were giving these as a promotion almost for free.
"All I heard were bad things from pros about the Red camera, but the kind of person who buys it, who has no real experience with real cinematography, he has no idea how terrible thing he's got in his hands and RedUser forum is a total joke, all propaganda.
"Even Sony EX1, when needed with 35 mm adapter, is better than Red.
"EX1 has better low light performance than Red; it shows you the difference between Sony sensor and one of which Red is ashamed to state where it come from. EX1 has also better resolution.
"Red takes cheap Japanese Sigmas etc. and creates from them Red lenses.
"F35 is the right pro filmmaking tool.
"Sony wanted Genesis to be a 4K camera, but Panavision talked them out of it. With today's projection systems there is no need to go 4K, although Sony makes true 4K projectors and in Japan has out a beta 4K camera based on F35.
"My recommendation is as follows:
"Lowest sost filmmaking - EX1, although EX3 is a better camera.
"Next is Sony XDCAM 700 - new firmware for additional speeds is in a beta stage now,
"Next is F35 or rent Genesis
"With Sony you get reliability, quality, tradition. performance.
"With Red you get Jim and RedUser, all they need to do is open UsedRedCarUser.com super Cho Li Min car dealership in Hanoi, and they will really feel like stars."
|
5th December 2008 – "Dinosaurs probably also had a really hard time believing they were going to go extinct. Everything has its ups and downs. I have seen SGI in its heyday with its Onyx's and people swearing fervently by them (just as the gentleman above does), but time will tell.
"This is not about Red vs Sony. This is about innovation vs complacency. Hopefully, the dinosaurs continue to be complacent, because as an indie filmmaker, I prefer the direction companies like Red are taking. Very, very much."
|
7th December 2008 – Maybe an indie filmmaker is not a cinematographer so and indie filmmaker can´t evaluate resolution, dynamic range, color space of a shoot. Red camera is really bad in shadows, with a lot noise and bayer artifacts, low sensitivity and poor dynamic range. It's far away from Genesis, F23, Viper or F35. But! It is the best 'MiniDV' camera I have ever seen. Congratulations to Dan Mulligan for buying a F35 camera.
|
9th December 2008 – Awesome! Sounds like complacency is certainly in vogue with this bunch... hope it continues to be that way while today turns into tomorrow, tomorrow into next year, and next year into the next decade.
Congratulations indeed.
|
10th December 2008 – The rumor in japan is that SONY is doing whatever it can to stop RED.
Especially, they refuse to rent Panavision lenses to RED owners.
Also, they don't seem to want a 4K workflow in VEGAS. Sad because SONY VEGAS is my editor of choice.
....idsco legend zeke
|
|
|
|
|
13th December 2008 - @the person who made the 'best miniDV comment above'
Its not the size of the tool, its how you use it. In your hands, I suspect even a Viper would become a really, really good miniDV camera.
|
18th December 2008 - When will RED digital Cinemas be built all over the world to establish their "RED Digital Films " businesses? Sony Pictures is over RED, in the past and now, and where will be RED Digital Pictures ?
|
25th December 2008 - Quite a contraption you bought. I'm not saying that design is everything but it is something and I would really wonder about the engineering quality of the bits inside just looking at the exterior of that 250k monstrosity.
Speaking of 250k... I don't understand your math of a 17.5k Red One even coming close to that in ANY config. (Especially if you go the Scarlet route)
|
|
3rd January 2009 - Ah yeah.. Scarlet... I almost forgot it was lagging the launch for a few years now...
|
|
12th February 2009 - the worst on RED are the RED Fans!
|
|
|
20th February 2009 - We all know the quality of the RED ONE... Alex Proyas movie KNOWING is a fantastic demo reel...
First of all, I want say RED ONE, F35, GENESIS are fantastic tools and I love them !
You said F35 has 14 STOPS when Genesis (same technology) claims 10 STOPS... Have you seen sample picture of that ? If yes, please, could you post one ?
A 14bit A/D does not mean they manipulate a 14bit picture... What is the internal path bit depth, what is the algorythm used to shrink the data to 10bit log... 16384 values to 1024 values in a log form... for me it is like... you know, when you try to put an elephant in a bottle ! A big compression... and no CHOICE in Post to manipulate the 14bit data !
Sorry, I prefer the RAW 12(real)bit linear of the RED ONE and it's wavelet compression on the Bayer picture !
|
|
22nd February 2009 - We compared F35 and RED ONE last week. First of all, F35 IS NOT 14 STOPS... Dynamic range is about the same... But it is a great camera for HD/FILM productions. RED ONE RAW post-production is something new and (IMHO) the future...
|
|
7th April 2009 - Thank you for this informative and thoughtful viewpoint. It's really amazing how people get so wrapped up in marketing and flashy "new stuff" that they forget that the right tool for one job is not necessarily the right tool for another. Many cameras are versatile, but RED isn't necessarily the answer for everyone. No camera is. Pretty much every shoot I've ever been on (as an AD and Producer on over 80 productions) has had the camera package dictated by budget. Usually that means budget in the service of how it best serves the director's vision of the story, but sometimes it really just comes down to money, and what the production can afford for the money they have for the camera, and how expensive that camera's footage will be to post.
|
|
3rd July 2009 - One thing I find very interesting is all these indie filmmakers out there saying how much they like the RED because it gives them a new tool in filmmaking. Well hold on a sec, lets back up, there is an assuming mistake in that sentence, and that is, that RED camera is designed for filmmakers. Film, when referring to movies, and filmmaking when referred to making those movies, is, in this humble poster's opinion, a style. Yes, its a style started by actual 16mm and 35mm film cameras, but ultimately as so well stated by Dan Mulligan, film's spirit is continued in digital cameras that actually try to emulate the film process. How? Lets use the EX1 as an example, it uses a 3-chip 1920 x1080 cmos sensor. The 3 chips capture 3 individual 1920 x 1080 images, one red, one green, and one blue, just like a film stock. No it certainly isn't as big, but by all means it is as close as a digital sensor could be to a film stock within reason. In my humble opinion this is worthy of being called a "digital film camera". Now, lets take a look at the RED. We have a 1 chip 4096 x 2048 cmos sensor. But wait, how can it capture the necessary red, green and blue images???? It uses a process called a de-bayer, in which a third of the one 4096 x 2048 sensor is used for red, a third for blue, and a third for green. But wait!! That means, that full, 3 color image that the RED is capturing is not a 12MP image, no no, its a 4MP image, because 4MP of the sensor are being used for green, 4MP of the sensor are being used for red, and 4MP are being used for blue. But how then does the RED camera obtain a 12MP or 4k image??? Pixel shifting, uprezing, the exact thing they proclaim that is not spoken at the RED website. Now, does this process sound like film to you? There is only one answer, no. My dear fellow filmmakers, this camera was not designed with you in mind, it was designed with your money in mind. What new product can we can we sell to filmmakers?? The answer, RED, a technological publicity stunt that is over priced, over rated, and over hyped, dare I say it, videoish camera that is deigned for one purpose, to make you believe your going to make a better film or if your using the RED, a better video because of some numbers on a piece of paper........think about it.
Don't believe me? A real filmmaker can tell his story using 8mm, black and white, poor resolution, grainy film. Case in point: Pi by Darren Aronofsky. If you shoot corporate videos or are a news crew, by all means the RED just may be the camera for you, because these applications require a camera that has a videoish look instead of a filmish look.
Yeah, but you say what does it matter of the technical mumbo jumbo if it creates great images? I say, who ever said the RED created great images? I saw some stills from the RED compared with the F35, and the RED looked very fuzzy compared to the sharp crisp, normal looking F35, despite both using the same lenses, at the same tests, right next to each other. The RED also looked distorted, and frankly when compared directly to the Sony, there was something wrong with the image, couldn't put my finger on, but it was unnatural, very subtle but it was there. Reason? Because the Sony captures the images the film does, which in turn film captures images the way the human eye does, hence it looks natural. The RED captures a 4MP image that gets uprezed into a 12MP image, the result is the fuzziness. Don't believe me? Take any 2MP video and uprez it to 6MP, looks about the same as the look that the RED does. The distortion, unnatural feel comes form the de-bayer. You can't have side by side pixels that capture 3 versions of the same image and then move them on top of each other and get a normal looking image, uprezzing and pixel shifting. However subtle, there is something wrong about it, it isn't right. Its just a little off.
Pricing: Don't believe me when I say the RED is way over priced, check out Canon's new D5 Mark II, that has a 21MP de-bayered cmos sensor. Shoots 1080P video for right around $2700. Sure it doesn't shoot full 4k and has many video limitations, but the sensor, albeit a de-bayered, is almost twice as large as the RED's sensor. Do you really think it would be that hard to create a video camera around that 21MP sensor and market that way less than the RED?
One final note. I'm not saying that we filmmakers should have to go grovel to Panavision or sell our souls to buy an F35. Believe me, I want the idea of the RED to be real too. Just as much as you do, I really wish it was true. On the surface its everything it claims to be, but when you dig deeper, when you get to see the soul of the RED ONE camera, if you see it for what it is, you will see an ugly soul with a pretty mask. Its sad but true, and I pray everyday for a company that will deliver Indie filmmakers with cameras designed to be "digital film cameras" from the sensor up in a reasonable price range. Till then, I'll happily use my EX1 with tons of add ons to get it as close as I can to that dream. Don't lose hope, but don't settle for less with the RED, dream on filmmakers!!!
|
|
14th July 2009 - Well Sony F35 is nice and I guess RED is OK also, when the Scarllet finally arrives.....But I'll take an ARRI D21 anytime against any of them!
|
|
14th July 2009 - He just buy the Canon Mark 5
|
|
2nd Sept 2009 - I just saw District 9 and Public Enemies. I personally and many others prefer the look of the Red that was used for District 9 vs. the Sony for Public Enemies. And if you don't think there are any big time film makers using and loving the Red than your mistaken. Talk to Peter Jackson or many others.
I don't understand the hate on a company that has amazing things in such a short duration.
|
|
28th Sept 2009 – During this year I had the chance to work with Sony F35, Arri D21 and Red One. (RENTED). And I understand Red detractors and their visceral arguments. If I were someone who spent 150,000 or 300,000 in a camera, I would be trying as well, to squash violently by all means, another camera (Red) that gives you the same or better results at lower price. :))
|
|
1st Nov 2009 – I think people get a little too passionate about it all. In my experience (shooting film and Red and looking at a F 23 and F35 footage) I would rather say that each recording method has its own visual personality.
Shooting super 16: Lovely film colorimetry but a find the grain a little annoying. It can also be a problem when digitizing.
Shooting Red: A very unique look. A little flat, and a feeling a softness but at the same time the softness can be a real instrument. I like what it does to faces. With a good lens I find the colorimetry pretty interesting and quite pleasing. It will never be film naturally. But with a tool like the RED I don't think you should always compare it to film and just take it as a new style of picture look.
F-23 and F-35 . I didn't shoot but watched several demos and films using it. The pictures of these 2 cameras is stunning. Again don't always compare it to film, cause it look kindda unique. Colorimetry is still the main area where film is more pleasing than these cameras, it's clear to me.
As you can see in my comparison i didn't mention resolution, cause all the above cameras have totally acceptable resolution and the actual resolution would be low in my priority list if i was to buy a camera like that. Resolution is one of the thing i look at when i'm acquiring a lens! All i'm concerned about is that i get the look i'm looking for when shooting a film.
|
|
12 Nov 2009 – The article does not give enough technical information for me. This is like a MAC vs PC argument. When I'm doing post I get much better results out of RED raw images than HD RGB. It's just much more elastic and creative. From a post position it's a much better format (RAW). I don't like articles that criticize on how people use cameras (i.e. I love what they are doing in Crank 2) because it is not used how they would use it. How do you fit a F35 into a splash bag? How do you rig it to rally cars?
I still have to see the 14bits (I can only get 10bits at post) and the 14 stops out of the F35.
You get better results out of color correcting RAW vs RGB.
This is the POV from a former A.C. and a colorist now.
BTW last two corrections were with these cameras shooting white limbos (same DP) one took triple the amount of hours to correct. And it was the more expensive camera.
All I am saying is that with digital you cannot split production from post for evaluating formats.
|
|
25 January 2010 – The fact that that so many "cinematographers" with over 200k cameras respond so passionately against a 20k camera, makes me wonder. Certainly going to check out this Red more closely. Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, repeat after me..
Does the word "snob" mean anything around here? ;) It kept popping into my head several times while reading this thread. "F35 cinematography camera", feels like someone needs confirmation, don't you think? "Cinematographers" seem to have great respect for 8/16mm artists, that can tell a story with next to nothing, while 2 seconds later smashing everything not up to their own expensive standards.
Filmer, videographer or whatever I don't give a ... as long as people enjoy and want my product as much as I enjoy making it. If a 20/30 k Red system works, that's fine with me and my clients. My main interest is the film, not the camera! Now I've got a lot of money left for post production. If the Red is half the camera I think it is, with that kind of money I can make the final product pretty much look any way I want!
Btw. I had quite a good time reading this funny thread.... ;)
|
|
10 February 2010 – This facutally incorrect:
"... Now, lets take a look at the RED. We have a 1 chip 4096 x 2048 cmos sensor. But wait, how can it capture the necessary red, green and blue images???? It uses a process called a de-bayer, in which a third of the one 4096 x 2048 sensor is used for red, a third for blue, and a third for green. But wait!! That means, that full, 3 color image that the RED is capturing is not a 12MP image, no no, its a 4MP image, because 4MP of the sensor are being used for green, 4MP of the sensor are being used for red, and 4MP are being used for blue. ..."
The Bayer mask separates the sensor into fourths, not thirds. A horixontal line alternates between green and red filters. The line below it altlernates between green and blue filters. The net effect is 1/2 of the sensor devoted to green light, 1/4 devoted to red light and 1/4 devoted to blue light. You have full 4K resolution, but you don't have full 4K color resolution.
Red's admission that the resolution is really 3.2K has more to do with the OLPF than a loss of resolution due to de-Bayering.
Red's marketing is a little on the edge. But to compare them to used car salesman is innacurate and uncalled for.
|
|
|
12 February 2010 – I saw this and it made me laugh! This article seems like an exercise in self-convincing, so self-loathing. For those of you who are sooooo hung up on technology (and clearly on Sony), try to understand that what separates true professionals from the wannabes is how to work around limitations. Every new technology has bugs, including that of the almighty Sony. I wish I could find an article I read about perceived quality based on price. It is the oldest trick in the book. When people were asked about Sony on a survey, over 80% associated it with "pricy" or "overrated". Now let’s do some math: If the F35 is say $250K vs. a full Red One, which priced from their website with everything (-lenses) comes to around $40K, then by the same logic we should be able to say that the Sony should be about 6 times better than the Red. Now which of your clients can tell this difference? And please don’t talk about workflow problems. Every major piece of DI software and hardware out there is bragging about their Red support in big bold letters. I don’t see the same kind of response for the F35 or F-nothing from Sony. Time always tells the truth though, and by now everyone knows that this article about the F35 is just a futile exercise in self-justification for falling pray of the Sony marketing hype. 90% of your clients could not tell the difference between a Sony, a Red, a Viper, etc., and 99.9 % of their viewing audience couldn't tell anything about it either. So who were you trying to snow with this article? Matter of fact, one of the FILMS nominated for an academy award this year was shot with the Red One. Content is, and will always be king! Nuff said.
|
|
http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=41220&page=3
22 February 2010 – Yup clearly $200 grands worth of quality in that comparison. I know this is comparing the new Red MX sensor but I would still be be interested to know now how the author feels about his 'investment in longevity' now...;-)
Also if he had bought a Red - he would now have the option of upgrading to this new superior technology at a MASSIVE discount - please tell me when Sony have EVER provided anything even close to this level of user focused customization and customer service?
With Sony all I see is a $200k 'investment' in overprices, outdated and ultimately un-upgradable technology. |
23 February 2010 – Red has done something that we would have thought impossible 5 years ago: To make high end technology accessible to literally anyone. With an initial investment of $65K we have developed a powerful production house. So far we have produced seven feature films, all shot on Red for under $50K, all sold for over $250K. We shoot these horror knock-offs which are complete garbage and rip off the unsuspecting actors and crew, and they never get paid a cent. That's how we get ahead in the game baby! We finish all the post on a single Mac in our basement with FCP, Color and Logic for the music/DFX/SFX. The last project we worked on cost us $35K total! We sold for $250K and made a killing. We recycle our crew for every project for obvious reasons, no need for disgruntal, unpaid people on set. Chicago is such a big city that there is always some new sucker that will work for free, or even better that will pay us to be in one of our so called "movies" LOL! Win/Win for us! Thank you Red for making us so rich so quickly!
|
|
|
  |
|
RELEVANT MEDIA
|
|
|
|
|
