Photongraph (from www.sonyuserforum.de) found and sent me an interesting Sony PWM-F3 CineAlta Film camera vs. Canon EOS 5D Mark II D-SLR comparison. Click the following to see the move file: http://www.fxguide.com/qt/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/5DvsF3_H264s31.mov
FXguide made the test: “As part of our Red Centre Podcast coverage we want to share this clip with you that compares the Canon 5D Mk II and the new Sony F3. In this test, both cameras were attached to the same tripod locked together – and then panned over the same technical background. The results show the F3 recording a considerably better rolling shutter and the benefit of the F3 not line skipping. The 5D – while having a very high resolution sensor – reduces this image to 1920×1080 in a very abrupt way. So while the larger sensor gives the cinematographer a shallower depth of field, – the poorer technical down res-ing produces some really unwelcome artifacts.
Of course, the 5D does manage to produce good shots every day around the world. Our intend here is is to highlight the technical issues and allow the cinematographer to shoot knowing the issues and the risks. ”
Note: Also if that news is not related to an Alpha or NEX camera we want to focus your attention on Sony’s video technology development because they will certainly find some “congruences” with the future Alpha and NEX cameras.
7 Responses
Sony F3 vs Canon 5D @@”, totally can not compare, F3 too strong,
different levels and different categories type product.
I would like to see noise test :]
Not so different category I think.
The Moiré on the Canon was horrible on the second set of shots. You wouldn’t expect to see that on a still photo. I wonder if it’s just an unfortunate coincidence of the combination of the sensor pitch and the subject and the Sony might be exposed with a different subject or just due to poor processing in the Canon.
Personally I think that DSLRs don’t generally make good video cameras as, even if the image quality is OK, they are too compromised in many other areas of handling and lack smooth power zoom lenses and the like.
DSLR could be much better if companies wanted it.
Look at GH2 – if someone hack it again it can do 1080/60p easily at 50mbps and no moire.
Visually it can match cameras ten times GH2 price.
We are constantly fooled. All those technologies are CHEAP and can be implemented to any consumer camera.
No, the problem is that DSLRS are 16 MP and more. The HD video is only 2 MP. That means DSLR pixels are unnecessarily small for video, and you have to do line skipping to reduce it to 2 MP. That means worse quality (artifacts) video than a proper camcorder where sensor is made for video.
Comparing apples to clock-radios again.
And then they implant clock-radios in apples 😀