Back To Listings RSS Print

CAMERAS: Now It’s Rocket Science

It used to be so simple: pick a film stock, pick a lens, shoot images, process and print, repeat. It wasn't rocket science. Now, though... it's rocket science.

By Art Adams | March 28, 2012

Not so long ago the toughest choice we had to make was which film stock to use. It was possible to learn one or two stocks really, really well and use them predictably over the course of many years. Now a game-changing camera comes out every year, introducing us to new strengths and weakness. Not so long ago cinematography wasn't rocket science. Now... it is.

To illustrate this point I'm going to do a bit of a brain dump of details pertaining to the cameras that I use fairly regularly. This isn't a scientific article so much as it's an experiential article: I've learned the strengths and weaknesses of these cameras and I know when they are a great choice for a production and when they aren't. Here's a taste of what I think about when ramping up for a production:

Arri Alexa


Acceptable noise at ISO 800, especially for unlit night exteriors.
Much cleaner noise profile at ISO 400. Visual effects houses love this.
At ISO 800 I have roughly 7 stops over middle gray and 7 stops under. At ISO 400 I have 6 and 8, respectively.
For some reason flesh tone looks great at darker exposures. Whereas I might expose flesh tone at 60-65% on some other cameras skin tone on the Alexa looks great at 52-55%.
If I record LogC but monitor Rec 709 I'll almost always have more information to work with in post than I can see. Note: it is STILL possible to clip highlights with the Alexa, but I have to work a lot harder. Sometimes bright highlights will look clipped even though they aren't as the curve necessary to force those extra stops into the Rec 709 broadcast spec is so aggressive that highlights are severely compressed.
The white balance function is a little funky: white balances tend to come up a bit blue-green. I've had much better luck using presets, although preset comes up looking a bit green as well. I'll pull out some green out based on what I see on the monitor. This usually ends up being 5600K CC-3 for daylight and 3200K CC-2 for tungsten.
I can often get an Alexa on a job in place of a RED ONE or Epic if I shoot in Rec 709 mode, as the cost savings in transcoding and color grading make the Alexa, with its ProRes workflow, much more attractive and I can work a lot faster by not worrying much about highlights clipping.
IR filters: Tiffen IRNDs, Schneider Platinum IRNDs.


RED ONE/RED ONE MX


(I have no experience yet with Epic)

I don't like noise, so I rate the RED ONE at ISO 160 and the RED ONE MX at ISO 400 or 500. This eliminates a stop of overexposure latitude but I can live with that in most circumstances. At ISO 800 I can expect 4.5 stops over middle gray and probably 6.5 under. Tests with the Epic have shown at least two more stops of underexposure latitude.
This camera likes daylight. There's a leak in the blue dyes on the sensor such that they pass some green light as well. Under daylight this isn't an issue as the blue light in daylight overpowers the green, but under tungsten light the blue channel is starved and the green light starts making a difference. This results in blue being added to every color that contains green and makes them look dull. This was largely overcome through color science improvements starting with Build 30 but the camera still suffers some under tungsten light. Skin tones tend to be a bit pasty, possibly due to the red channel being overexposed.
Green screen likes to be shot in the bluest light possible for best separation between the green channel and the blue channel. Even the addition of an 80D filter brings the color a long way toward normal.
The bluer the light the better the color. I always use at least an 80D filter under tungsten light. It makes a huge difference.
IR filters: Schneider Tru-Cut 750, Tiffen Hot Mirror, Tiffen IR/Hot Mirror, Tiffen Hot Mirror 80D and 80C. IR contamination looks blueish red under daylight and reddish blue under tungsten, and usually requires ND .90 or more to see.
Blue filters: Tiffen 80A, 80B, 80C, Schneider 1/8 CTB, 1/4 CTB, 1/2 CTB


Phantom HD Gold/Phantom Flex


Noisy, noisy, noisy cameras. When possible, overfill and crush the blacks in post.
Native ISOs appear to be 160 and 320, respectively. The Phantom HD Gold should be shot as close to 160 as possible, ie. ISO 250. The Flex can be safely rated at ISO 800 and has no more noise than the HD Gold does at 250--but also has no less.
Recording the HD-SDI output to a KiPro in ProRes can save a lot of money as dealing with the raw files is quite expensive. Dynamic range and color control is VERY limited in this mode, so be careful.


Sony F3


Not my favorite camera. It's basically an EX1/EX3 with a bigger sensor. I love the shallow depth of field but I hate that it white balances so poorly and that bright highlights look very crushed and electronic and not soft and "film like."
White balance preset is unusable. White balancing normally results in a green image. I typically white balance through 1/4 CTB and 1/8 Plus Green gel to add some warmth (CTB) and then swing the warmth from yellow (which is often green in disguise) to magenta, adding a little red to the warmth.
Whenever I white balance I do both "A" and "B" settings in case the switch gets bumped. I then put the switch at "B" so if it does get bumped it will go to "A" instead of preset.
I would love to see a software update that adds a green/magenta white balance offset so that I can pull the green out by the numbers instead of white balancing through gels, which takes time.
My favorite color matrix is F35-like. I don't like really saturated colors so I sometimes mute them by taking the matrix level to -5 or -10. (Less sophisticated eyes tend to like very bright, saturated and simple colors. More sophisticated eyes like colors that are subtler, less saturated and more complex.)
My go-to gamma is Cine4. It seems to do the nicest job of holding highlights.
The sweet spot for gamma level is 0. Going to negative numbers deepens the shadows but crushes highlights. Going to positive numbers just pulls white clip down below 109%. You'll still clip highlights but they'll cap out at a lower IRE value.
I usually run detail at -5 to -10 overall.
The camera records to 8-bit long-GOP XDcam, so not good for green screen when recording internally. (See Sony EX1/EX3, below.)
Single sensor cameras tend to see the green in fluorescent lights a lot more strongly than prism cameras do. I shot two weeks in a hospital with an F3 and we had to gel our tungsten lights with 1/2 Plus Green and white balance to match the background fixtures. Single sensor cameras see the world very differently from prism cameras, and comparing the F3 to EX1 and EX3 cameras is a great demonstration of this.
IR filters: Tiffen IRNDs, Schneider Platinum IRNDs.


Panasonic AF-100


Possibly my least favorite camera. This is Panasonic's first try at a single sensor camera so I'll cut them a little slack, but they did not get this one right. It's very, very contrasty and the highlight handling is horrible. Bright saturated clipped colors just turn a flat, bright color, often with a little 8-bit color halo around the outside of the highlight.
Other Panasonic cameras offer great flesh tone rendition in CineLike V gamma, but not in this camera. Something changed. I think I used CineLike D gamma and Norm B color matrix to get a look that I liked, and then dialed the saturation down some to make blown-out highlights look less like neon tubes in the background.
This camera is 8-bit through and through. Not only does it record 8-bit AVC, the DSP is 8-bit and the SDI output is 8-bit. Banding is rampant. The last thing you want to shoot with this camera is a very subtle transition from one shade to another. Flatly lit walls will show a lot of crazy banding artifacts. (Not so good for green screen, I suspect.)
Under very, very, very controlled lighting this camera can look great. Sadly I can say that about ANY camera. The cameras I want to work with are the ones that look great all the time, as I can never predict what I'll run into in the field.


Sony EX1/EX3
Good, solid workhorse doc cameras. The extra depth of field makes them great for running-and-gunning.
I tend to use STD color matrix and Cine 4 gamma, both at level 0.
White balancing isn't as temperamental as the F3.
The internal 8-bit long-GOP XDCAM files are AWFUL for green screen. Edges are sharp, jagged blocks instead of smooth. (This is only visible when keying green screen.) Having said that…
This camera is GREAT for green screen if you record the HD-SDI output, which is 10-bit, with a KiPro. If you do that and record in ProRes422HQ and you've got yourself a very economical and very good green screen camera. The deep depth of field keeps everything sharp, which is good for compositing.
It's great for white limbo as well as depth of field doesn't matter: a sharp white background looks much the same as a soft white background.
I run detail at -5 to -10 overall.
IMPORTANT: The only kind of polarizer that can be used with this camera is a circular polarizer. The bandwidth cuts on the red, green and blue dichroic filters in the prism block are apparently so narrow that they introduce a polarizing effect, so stacking another polarizer on top of that creates some really odd color shifts. A circular polarizer polarizes light on its front surface and then depolarizes it on its back surface. The polarized "look" of the filter is maintained, but the light going through the prism blocked is not polarized.
IR filters: Tiffen IRNDs, Schneider Platinum IRNDs.

Panasonic Varicams


I haven't used one of these in a long time, but they are good cameras--great for run-and-gun doc work as none of the high-end single sensor cameras are light enough for handheld work, especially with a 35mm zoom. They require two hands just to control the weight of the camera while the camcorder form factor can be supported with one hand, leaving the other hand free to focus, zoom and control the aperture. 2/3" is still a great format for doc work.
Panasonic excels at rendering beautiful flesh tones. If you need people to look good without much worry then Alexa and Varicam are the tools to use. The Varicam's dynamic range is nowhere near that of an Alexa, though.
VideoRec gamma is awful. Never, ever, ever use it. Always use FilmRec. It may disable the knee control but knee is awful anyway: it has a habit of making highlights look green and metallic. Instead use the percentage control--I can't remember what it's called exactly, it's in the gamma menu-- and adjust the FilmRec curve that way. 200% is just like video: it's very contrasty and is great for interiors and green screen where you need some extra contrast. 300% is nice for interviews. 400% is great for contrasty exteriors. 500% and 600% are really extreme, so be careful.
There's a tool in there called DLC (dynamic level control) that uses local contrast to make the image pop. Use this sparingly. It draws dark outlines around bright objects, and while this is great for static shots it doesn't work so well for moving shots. (The AF-100 has this as well.)
The 2700 and 3700 are natively 720p and 1080p, respectively. The 3000 just uprez's a 720p image, and I hate doing that in camera. It can be done much better in post, if it needs to happen at all.
The 2700 is very light sensitive, more so than the 3700.
Varicams tend to be a little bit noisy, as do most Panasonic cameras, but none of the recent cameras are as noisy as the original Varicam 27F.


Panasonic HDX-900


I used this camera a couple of weeks ago for the first time in years and it was a bit of a shock. It's a decent camera, kind of a Varicam Jr., but it is a bit limited in its dynamic range.
The one mistake I see more than any other is that people frequently set the gamma curve to "HD". Maybe it's a preset that the camera defaults to. It's a horrible, horrible curve that offers very little overexposure latitude and makes flesh tones appear clipped without much effort. The Filmlike gammas are vastly better: FilmLike1 is a good start, with FilmLike 2 and FilmLike 3 helpful for environments with extreme highlight contrast.
This camera is natively 720p so it's probably not a good idea to run it at 1080p as you're just uprez'ing in-camera.


Panasonic HVX-200, HPX-170 and HPX-500


These three cameras are nice little tools that make fairly nice pictures. They're legacy cameras but they aren't bad to use. I have several clients who own one or the other.
The trick with these is that they use standard definition chips and uprez the image to HD resolution. Under most circumstances you'll never notice edge artifacts but you most certainly will if you shoot green screen with any of them. The edges will be noticeably jagged. It's not pretty. Recording the HD-SDI output doesn't make any difference.
CineLike V gamma looks very nice on the 200 and the 170.


Canon 5D/7D


These cameras look a lot better than they should, but I'm looking forward to my first shoot with the C-300.
The 5D and 7D are notorious for moire artifacts, probably due to the optical low pass filter being optimized for super high resolution stills and not comparatively low resolution HD video. Canon also seems to be skipping lines or photosites in order to get a 1920x1080 image out of a massively high resolution chip.
The 5D sensor size is bigger than 35mm film, so the depth of field is actually less than 35mm film. The sensor has large photosites, though, which makes for extreme low light sensitivity and reduced noise. It's a very quiet camera.
The 7D, on the other hand, has a Super 35-sized sensor with smaller photosites packed more tightly, which makes it lower in ISO and noisier.
The Canon 5D can't record HD and output it at the same time. While rolling the HDMI output drops to standard def. This is bad for focusing.
The 7D has two image processors, where the 5D has only one, so it can output full HD while rolling. It does have a tendency to overheat, however, so if you decide to shoot long interviews with it bring a backup body as I've heard of it shutting down after 45 minutes of straight recording and staying off for up to 90 minutes to cool down.
I think you're supposed to use the camera in ISO steps of 200. I was told long ago that steps of 200 were made in the preamp, and the steps in between were made in the DSP. As I understand this, gain in the preamp is analog and makes full use of the signal coming off the sensor whereas gain in the DSP just boosts or lowers the ISO digitally. In theory, for example, ISO 200 is the cleanest ISO there is that offers a good compromise between speed and noise. ISO 160 takes that signal and pushes it down digitally, resulting in a quieter signal but 1/3 less stop of overexposure latitude. ISO 250 goes the other way, adding 1/3 stop of noise. The same relationship supposedly exists between ISO 400, 320 and 500.
I've never tested this but apparently others have. I tend to like round numbers so I rate it at ISO 400 or 800, depending on my needs.
It's easy to bump the aperture or shutter controls while shooting, so check them often.
You can't see focus in motion on the rear LCD screen. Best to use an external monitor and an HDMI-to-SDI converter box.
The weakest part of the camera is the HDMI output connector. It gets loose over time, and if the connector is bumped you can loose the signal. The problem is that the most common HDMI-to-SDI converter box (by Blackmagic) takes a couple of seconds to sync up once it detects a signal. If you bump the connector and the image goes away you have to jiggle the connector and then wait to see if the picture comes back. If it doesn't, jiggle it some more. Eventually it should come back, but there's a two second delay after every attempt. (This is very frustrating.)
The USB connector can be damaged as well. This makes it impossible to load in custom gamma curves, such as the exceptional ones distributed by Light Illusion.


Art Adams is both a director of photography and a consummate geek. His website is at www.artadamsdp.com.

Share This

Back To Listings RSS Print

Get articles like this in your inbox: Sign Up

Comments

Adam Wilt: | March, 28, 2012

Nice summary. A couple of points…

1) You’ll want circular polarizers for any prism camera. It’s not the bandpasses on the dichroics, it’s the bouncy reflections off the angled faces in the prism—just like the polarization that happens when shooting window glass at an angle.

2) The Canon 5D Mk III has the aliasing and especially the chroma moir

Art Adams: | March, 28, 2012

(1) Really? I’ve tested other prism cameras, mostly camcorders, and there’s no difference between a linear and circular polarizer. I think I did this test at Videofax years ago and until they got the EX1 they didn’t own anything but linear polarizers.

Same thing with Chater. They sent out linear polarizers with their F900s years ago and had no complaints.

(2) I probably won’t rewrite this any time soon but I’ll certainly add to it. I’m dying to shoot something with the C-300. I’ve done the tests, but I really want to use it to make pretty pictures…

What are the other latest/greatest cameras to see at NAB?

Steven Bradford: | March, 28, 2012

Thanks, I reallly appreciate these sorts of personal overviews. I’m looking at what to use for a multiweek doc project with travel, and am frustrated by the choices. Clunky big sensor cameras or sleek small sensor shoulder cameras.

Have you had a chance to try out the panasonic 250 yet? It seems like it should be a big improvement. Although once again, a non shoulder camera that really isn’t small enough to be a hold in front of your face all day camcorder.

stephen v2: | March, 28, 2012

Nice article - very helpful to see tips and trick for all the cams.

One small note - the Canon 7D ISO is reversed, it’s the 160 increments (this applies to video mode not stills). Also seems to apply to 60D, T2i/T3i and 5D from numerous tests posted online.

Art Adams: | March, 28, 2012

Hi Steven- I haven’t used the 250 yet. I’m told it has 1/3” sensors and I can’t sell that to any of my current clients. I’m not sure I’d want to, either—I’m sure the color is great (it being Panasonic) but all my clients want big sensor depth of field.

And Stephen- Thanks for that information. Interesting that they tweaked the 7D that way. It’s a noisier camera so I wonder if they just cheated 1/3 stop to quiet it down a bit.

stephen v2: | March, 28, 2012

Art - That’s the theory I’ve heard, a 1/3 stop cheat. But for video (not RAW stills) it does give better results.

Chris Marino: | March, 29, 2012

Great post Art,

I was wondering why you did not mention the benefits of S-Log when working with the Sony F3? Completely transformed the opinion I had on the camera that were in line with your very critique on very hot crunchy highlights in standard xdcam ex mode to SxS. Anyway, love the blog and the constant great info.

Cheers!

stevecrye: | March, 29, 2012

Thanks for this kind of article Art; beginners like me find this stuff very helpful.

I’m one of those people who don’t want the shallow DoF or interchangeable lenses of a larger sensor cam, for various reasons I won’t bore you with.

I’m frustrated by my choices in the $5K range. I recently purchased, tested and then rejected and returned a Sony NX70 and then an NX5 for different reasons. Now looking at the Panny AC160, but would really, really like to stick with Sony…

Two questions:
1.] Any opinions about the color, WB and other performance props of the Panny AC160, and
2.] Any hope that Sony NXCAM might come out with a successor to the NX5 with better resolution and that uses the AVCHD 2.0 spec at NAB 2012?

Thanks in advance from a greenhorn,

Steve

Art Adams: | March, 29, 2012

Hi Chris- I saw my first F3 with S-Log the other day, and I didn’t use it. Typically if I’m shooting with an F3 the client isn’t planning on a color grade. It’s too bad, I hear good things about it, but if they’re going that far we usually have an Alexa or a Red.

Art Adams: | March, 29, 2012

Hi Steve- I can guess what your reasons are, and they are perfectly valid. You can’t imagine how many times I’ve had to talk people out of using a 5D for a verite´ or doc-style project. It’s all about picking the proper tool for the job.

I feel your pain about the lower-end Sony cameras, but I remember a time when a $5000 camera wasn’t expected to do anything much. A brand new Beta SP camcorder used to cost $60,000 and there were lots of them around. Now we all seem to expect the world for $5000 to $10,000, and while cameras are becoming more affordable they aren’t at consumer prices yet. I think you still have to pay a decent amount of money for decent cameras. (I find it funny when people ask how much an Alexa body costs to buy, and they gasp when I say $70K. That camera is the film killer, and it’s the price of what a new digiBeta camcorder cost 12 years ago.)

I don’t know the Panasonic AC160. I do know that Panasonic color definitely has its fans over Sony color, and they do flesh tones really, really well. There was a time when Panasonic’s color was responsible for them nearly taking over the industry.

As for a Sony successor to the NX5… I’m not privy to those secrets, sadly. Do any of those lower-end cameras record to AVCHD? I thought Sony was tied fairly strongly to XDCAM.

Greenhorns are always, always welcome. I’m still learning stuff all the time. It seems that the more I know the more there is to know. We all started somewhere.

Adam Wilt: | March, 29, 2012

Hmm, I seem to remember being asked to use a circ pol on a 3-chip or 3-tube broadcast cam in the ‘80s, and any time there’s an angled reflection from glass there’s an opportunity for polarization… but a bit of snuffling turns up this quote from Mitch Gross (who I would tend to trust in this matter) on reduser from August 2009:

“Circular polas are for cameras that have beam-splitters. Prisms do not involve polarizing light, so linear polarizers work perfectly with 3CCD cameras.

“Actually, the latest generation of Sony cameras, including all of the XDCAM cameras (EX1 & 3, PMW-F700 & F800 as well as other current 3-chip models) use particular coatings on their beamsplitters that improve color fidelity and reduce fringing, but do in fact require the use of circular polarizers.”

So, p’raps a circ pol isn’t always necessary on prism cams, but why take the chance?

As to the handheld Panasonics, I humbly direct enquiries to my most excellent review (he said shamelessly, grin) of the AC160 and HPX250. In short: very natural colorimetry, full 1080-line resolution, much nicer lens than I was expecting for the price, and surprisingly good handheld ergonomics. Biggest letdown is a too-small EVF image, but that’s a genetic defect of small Panny video cams, it seems (they need to crossbreed with the GH2 still cam to cure that).

And yes, Art, you were told correctly: 1/3” sensors.

In terms of white-balance tweaking, they have a warmer-cooler adjustment, but not a green/magenta adjustment.

Sonys? It’s interesting to note that at least some of the 1/3”  Sonys aren’t quite full-res; the NX5 uses “ClearVid” diagonal-array sensors that give very good resolution, but it’s not quite full HD. You may have to move up to the 1/2” EX1/EX3 line before you get an honest 1920x1080 photosites behind the lens.

And yes, all the NXCAM line (the NX5, the NX70, the FS100, etc.) record AVCHD. If the product number starts with “HXR” or “NEX”, it’s AVCHD; if it starts with “PMW”, it’s XDCAM and XDCAM EX.

As to new stuff at NAB, well, there’s always hope…  (grin). As AVCHD 2.0 is already in play on the NX70 and FS100 (at the very least), I wouldn’t be surprised if that becomes a standard feature for future cameras. I am expecting New Stuff Of Interest from Sony, Panasonic, and Canon (at least) at NAB this year. It’s only three weeks away; if you can hold out until then, you might have more options… to make your choices all that much harder, of course!

Art Adams: | March, 29, 2012

So it’s beam splitter coatings, eh? Interesting. That makes sense. It once again proves the point that nearly every camera that comes out now is its own thing, with oddities both good and bad.

I tend to always ask for circular polas, just out of habit. Why take the chance?

If you haven’t been reading Adam’s reviews I STRONGLY recommend that you do so. He drills into these things to a level I can only dream of.

I played briefly with one of those new Sony cameras—might have been the FS100—and was appalled at its primitive nature. As I recall the only option for highlight control was a knee circuit, which is hopelessly outdated at this point. When I see a knee circuit I cringe.

I’ll be working the DSC Labs booth and we’re adjacent to Sony so I should be able to wander over fairly early in the show and take a look. I’ll also be taking a look at Canon and Panasonic. I’m hoping Panasonic has something good to show this year: they took the market by storm for a few years but lately they’ve been languishing. They tend to market from the bottom up so maybe they’re just taking their time getting a new decent mid-range or high-end camera to the market. The Varicam was such a success that one has to wonder why we haven’t seen a single-sensor Varicam yet.

Steven Bradford: | March, 29, 2012

IIRC, they took a long time to get to making a P2 Varicam?

I hope that the AF100 was an example of the japanese model of getting a product out there very quick, to establish a beach head, and also get customer field research, and then come out with the much improved model next.

Art Adams: | March, 29, 2012

Single sensor technology is a very different beast. I suspect they have yet to tame it. Hopefully they figure it out soon. They’ll have to in order to stay relevant.

Mike N: | March, 29, 2012

Hello Art,

It’s good to hear some honest opinions from somebody who uses and has worked with these vast arrays of tools.
One question though, you said that with the Red/Red MX you lose one stop overexposure if you go to Iso 500.
Do you lose this as in the overall latitude of the camera lowers by one stop or just that you have one stop less in the highlights but gain one in the shadows.
I’ve always thought that you have a fixed latitude with these cameras and changing the ISO means shifting the grey midpoint only thus changing the ratio of highlight to shadow stops, like you said for the Alexa, if you rate it one stop lower you lose one overexposure stop but gain another shadow stop.
Isn’t it the same for the Red cameras ?
thanks.

Art Adams: | March, 29, 2012

Hi Mike-

You are exactly right. I’m generally more concerned with overexposure latitude than under because HD cameras can typically see in the dark, so I neglected to mention that a stop of latitude taken off the top is added to the bottom. It’s the highlights that kill you so that’s what I pay most attention to.

You’re exactly right, all the Red cameras function just like the Alexa in regard to ISO.

stevecrye: | March, 29, 2012

@ Art: Thanks for the kind, gentle words to a greenhorn!

@Adam Wilt, who said: “...Sonys? It’s interesting to note that at least some of the 1/3”  Sonys aren’t quite full-res; the NX5 uses “ClearVid” diagonal-array sensors that give very good resolution, but it’s not quite full HD.”

This is fascinating, because I, without any foreknowledge of this, learned it the hard way (by buying an NX5 and being disappointed and then sending it back). I had noticed that the various NX5 vids on the ‘net looked soft and less detailed than my trusty CX550V (aka the HXR-MC50), but I could not fathom that a $5K “pro” camera would have less detail than my little consumer cam, so I ignored my instincts and bought one anyway. What I have learned since is that the 1/2.88” single-chip sensor on the MC50, albeit tiny, has waaaay more than 1920x1080 sensor sites, and even though the electronics has to down-size the image with the resulting danger of artifacts, the result is sharper video than the NX5.

Lack of sharpness really bugs me. As an old amateur astronomer with 20-20 vision, I’m the kind of guy who will still get out of my seat and bang on the projection booth door at a movie if it is not in focus!

Also interesting is that the samples I’ve seen on the ‘net from the Panny AC160 have detail/sharpness that surpasses the NX5, and seem to be the equivalent of the MC50, or the EX1, etc.

I’m going to wait for NAB, and if the next-gen NX5 is not out from Sony by then, I’ll probably hold my breath and order the Panny AC160, monster though it is!

Steve

sanchorules: | April, 01, 2012

Hi Art
Great roundup
Does the Non-S Log F3 have the same range of controls as the EX3?
Kind of think if you are a tech savvy producer/editor and can master S-Log that you could save a lot of money going with the F3 versus the Red or Alexa.

What about the F65?

On the Panasonic side, you mentioned 1/3” sensors up-rezing, Have you tried the 370 or the 250, both 1080 native and AVC Intra 100?

The mini Betacam form factor on the 370 is so much easier to use than the EX3 for hand held work and the i frame 10 bit codex, has to be superior—no external recorder needed—but not sure if the picture is as good, you have the 1/2” versus 1/3” chip issue.
Hope to see you at NAB

Art Adams: | April, 01, 2012

I don’t have any experience with the S-Log F3, unfortunately. Nor have I gotten my hands on an F65. We only have one in my area and as its only set up for raw mode at the moment, and the raw files are HUGE, I haven’t had any clients want to try it out yet.

As for the newer Panasonic cameras, I haven’t used either of those either. Not all of Panasonic’s sensors uprez but they’ve been known for that in the past.

The 1/2” vs. 1/3” issue is probably one of diffraction, right? You’ll have a little less with a 1/2” sensor, so probably more resolution at deeper stops.

I’ll be at NAB in the DSC Labs booth with a C300 and a bunch of charts. Come on by!

LennyLevy: | April, 22, 2012

Art,
First -  disclosure that I am an F3 and EX-1 owner, but I was still somewhat surprised by a couple of your comments on the F3. First it has always had Green/Magenta offset adjustment in the menus as does the EX-1/3.

As for the question of it white balancing poorly and giving a green image, that may be so with the default matrix which I don’t think is so great, but once you get a good matrix setting there is never a need for CTB and Green gels for color balancing. I used to use them all the time with other cameras until i adjusted matrix in both my EX-1 and F3’s.  Never pull them out anymore.
First glimpses of C300 seem to be a nicer matrix out of the box but I don’t know that its any better than a well adjusted F3. I’d like to see those comparisons.

Also running the detail at -5 or -10 is generally considered high for the F3. I run them at -17 to -25 and lots of people shoot with it off. Less electric.

Re green screen. Yes 4:2:0 is not ideal but because the EX-1 and F3 have such high resolution, I’ve been told they provide better green screen than quite a few older 4:2:2 cameras including the F900 which at one time was the go-to camera for green screen around town. That’s all hearsay to me though because I never cut the mattes myself.

Also you left out discussion of low-light sensitivity in all these cameras which is often the most critical of all features in choosing a camera. Here the F3 and now the C300 shine and supposedly the new 5D Mark III.  A constantly moving target.

LennyLevy: | April, 22, 2012

Another issue that may be important is moire. F3 has more than its baby brother the Ex-1 from what I’ve seen, but it only very rarely rears its head on a suit jacket or a computer/device screen. I’ve been told the Alexa is cleaner and don’t know anything about the RED’s. I briefly compared the C300 with an F3 looking at a Macbook Pro screen and was surprised at how much more moire was on the C300. (I’d like to retest to make sure I was right.) Of course the DSLR’s have horrible moire.

Art Adams: | April, 22, 2012

Lenny-

Early on I used an F3 on a two week job and for the first two days my DIT and I scoured the picture profile menus for a green/magenta offset. We found none.

I’ve since been told it has always been an option on the S-Log version of the camera.

At the time I didn’t know how to reliably and predictably manipulate the matrix to solve that problem. I don’t believe knowledge of how the matrix works should be required to get a camera to white balance properly.

I wrote recently about the C300 white balancing green right out of the box but found an easy fix for that. I demo’d a C300 at the DSC Labs booth at NAB and that one white balanced perfectly with no offset, so I don’t know if the camera I tested was an anomaly or if there was a firmware upgrade.

Detail is a matter of taste.

I’ve sat next to compositors while they did on-set comps using 4:2:0 XDCAM material. It’s really bad. The edges take on some sort of weird jagged motion blur, apparently related to the long-GOP codec interpolating between frames. Recording to an external recorder eliminates this problem.

I suspect the F900 would be a better camera for green screen if recording internally. Even though the true resolution is 1440x1080 and HDCAM is 8-bit it at least sampled at 4:2:2, and was considerably less compressed.

Yes, the fact that the F3 and the C300 are very good a EI 800 is a huge plus, but all cameras seem to be going that direction. It’s interesting how all the manufacturers seem to be able to make that leap within a year of each other.

Alexa and Red are very clean when it comes to moire, probably because they oversample like crazy if you’re shooting for HD resolution. The Alexa is phenomenal for shooting screens.

The C300 does seem to have a bit of moire.

LennyLevy: | April, 22, 2012

Art,
The matrix menu for both F3 and EX has always had a phase control which I use as a green magenta offset. Perhaps you are talking about something else though and if so please educate me. It certainly has that effect on the general picture.  How do you determine that that the white balance is green? Is it by the general picture or are you perhaps seeing the white point offset on a vectorscope. To be honest I haven’t looked at the latter very carefully. I’ll be playing with my F3 and a DSC chart in the next few days and look more closely.  In fact I’ll be trying to take some magenta out of the matrix (thanks to your explanation) I’ve been using because I’ve switched from a Panasonic to a Flanders monitor which is sup[posed to be more accurate. I do know that I haven’t used a jungle book in a long time and it used to be step one for every previous camera.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some white balance issues are also individual camera or shop set-up differences. Its rare that I’ve seen 2 identical cameras white balance exactly the same.

Slog F3’s have a red blue offset that is a bit confusing to me. Everything I’ve read and all the talk I see on the boards says “use it like film.. Only tungstun or daylight balance”. But those offsets work exactly like the pots on paint box. +400/-400B seems to be about a CTO correction and vise versa. Why not get as close as you can in Slog? After all it seems to matter a great deal on the Red. Apparently Sony has thought of that though and the next software will allow all the same color adjustment that the standard gammas have.

Re: green screen. I’ll bow to your experience here as mine is all heresay. I do recall though that when the EX-1 came out a guy in Texas who was an astute tech and who’s bread and butter was green screen replaced his F900 with the EX because the keys were cleaner. I have a client this week who shoots a regular green screen corporate CEO report. We shot tests with the F3 comparing the Ki Pro and the SxS card. She decided that the Ki Pro - though marginally cleaner wasn’t worth the extra change.  He’s an easy key though with “easy” hair. I’m sure if he had frizzy hair she would have gone with the Ki Pro. (Any chance that detail was not off on the green screen examples you saw?)

By the way - when you showed me how to use the matrix at NAB, I had just gotten the same information from Alistair Chapman a dozen yards away at the sony booth. I didn’t realize until reading your article that you got it from Alistair as well. Great that you pointed people to his blog. He’s a great resource and has the best explanations of crispening and detail adjustments i’ve ever read.

Keep up the great posts!

Art Adams: | April, 22, 2012

Hi Lenny-

The phase offset changes the hue of every color the camera makes and that makes me nervous, but if it works for you it’s worth looking at.

The color temp controls change color on the warm/cool axis, but there’s generally another control that shifts the green/magenta axis. On Alexas it’s called CC.

I’ve seen the green on a vectorscope and parade waveform.

Using only tungsten or daylight balance in S-Log makes sense as you’re recording a tremendous amount of information in a format that’s not meant to be viewed, so it’s hard to see what you’re doing. Fine adjustments are meant to be done in post, where you can really see what you’re doing. As for the Red and “getting it close” it doesn’t really matter as you’re shooting raw, so nothing is set in stone. I suspect that the red/blue setting on the F3 actually changes the gains, the way they do on Alexa, which shouldn’t be necessary in a log mode.

As for keys, if you ask any of the techs in town they’ll tell you that the thought of recording green screen to internal cards on an EX1 or EX3 horrifies them. Then again… there are some clients that don’t notice. I’ve had clients who wanted to shoot green screen on an HPX500, which is one of the very worst cameras to shoot green screen with (standard def chip up-rez’d to HD, horrible stepped edges) and they can’t see the difference.

At the time it might have been true that the EX1 recorded better keys than the F900, but it’s interesting to look back at those cameras now and see what we had to work with. Yikes! smile

I didn’t connect the two until you mentioned that. The XDCAM-User.com website doesn’t mention his last name, and he’s pictured in a woolen cap, but yes—that’s the guy. I saw a demo lecture he gave on S-Log and the F3 at Sony’s booth the day before NAB opened and it was one of the best I’ve seen.

LennyLevy: | April, 22, 2012

OK when I set up my camera next time I’ll check the difference between a jungle book white balance and the phase adjustment.

I always tell people that if their green screen is very simple with no “frizzies” and they are not extremely exacting, they will probably be fine to the SxS cards, but that a 4:2:2 recorder is always better.

LennyLevy: | April, 24, 2012

Art,
Chris Coughlin and I worked with an F3 today . White balanced perfectly. Vectorscope in the center and the parade was spot on the same across all 3 colors.
I wonder about individual differences in all these cameras. In cameras with full menu structures ( pricier?)  I was used to circuits that allowed you to adjust your white balance and presets to taste. You don’t have that in the F3’s,  Ex-1’s and I’m guessing the C300’s of the world. (Don’t know the C300 that well). That stuff might only be in deeper menus that are only engineer accessible if at all. Now you have some offsets for white balance but not neccessarily separate ones for presets.  A few years ago I sent an EX-1 in to Sony and it came back with slightly magenta presets but good white balance. I sent it back and talked to the tech and he went into deeper menus and set it right for me.
Today I plan to look at the matrix and I’ll check out what the phase offset does. ( with a borrowed DSC chart no less)

Art Adams: | April, 24, 2012

The C300 does have a white balance gain offset that allows access to red, green and blue, which is a real treat as most prosumer cameras don’t offer that level of detail.

I envy your white balance experience with the F3. I’ve always had it pull towards green a bit.

LennyLevy: | April, 25, 2012

This afternoon I white balanced with Eli’s F3 and this evening with mine and both were spot on - Weird that yours are always green. Do you always use the same camera?

You are right about the F3 phase control though it spins the matrix but doesn’t affect the center where I guess that offset would be.

Later i’ll check out what the Red Blue SLog offset does but there’s all new firmware coming out that will make it moot.

Please login or register to comment