Join Sony for a Cinematographer's Webchat Discussing the F5 and F55 Cameras

You may have already seen some of the first films shot on Sony's new cameras, but now you can have the chance to discuss the cameras with the filmmakers themselves. Sony is hosting another #TheNewF webchat (similar to the last one) on December 4th at 1PM Eastern/10AM Pacific, where product experts from Sony as well as some cinematographers who've worked with both the F5 and the F55 will answer your questions. Check below for all of the details.

Thanks to Notes On Video for the tip, here is what Sony Europe posted recently on their Facebook page:

Don't forget to sign up for a reminder to join our #TheNewF Cinematographer's Webchat on Tuesday.

We'll have cinematographers and product experts who have worked with both cameras answering questions on December 4th. Get your questions ready and register for a reminder here:

“Dig”, was written and directed by Martin Scalan and shot in 4K using the PMW-F55 by cinematographer Steve Lawes on location in Wales. 

“Images”, was directed by Lucile Hadzihalilovic and was shot in XAVC HD using the PMW-F5, by Dominique Colin on location in France.

If you haven't seen either of the two films available online, they are conveniently embedded below. First up is Mahout, followed by Dig:

If you want to be a part of the webchat, be sure to sign up for a reminder on the Sony Facebook page.


[via Notes On Video]

You Might Also Like

Your Comment


Man, Sony is going all out nowadays.

December 2, 2012 at 2:14PM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM

Soosan Khanoom

Don't know about everyone else but the images seem a bit too digital for me
On big issue about digital cinema is trying to mimic the movement and organic feel of film ... Alexa and RED have accomplished it to quite a large extent , not sure if the F55 has ........ Fantastic images but from what I've seen thus far a bit too digital for my liking

I'll keep looking as more videos come out

December 2, 2012 at 2:19PM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM

Nigel Thompson

Agreed. Sonyseems to love the video look. Even in their pro-sumer cameras.
Many looks can be achieved with a single camera, though.
OneRiver medias presentation of "Texting is Dangerous," made the blackmagic seem like video, after more filmic footae was released.
Maybe the next study in digital imaging should focus on a camera that is indistinguishable from film as it's only reason for existing.

December 2, 2012 at 2:45PM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM


I think it looks great, keeping in mind that the filmic look is something that you have to add in post. There's no point in adding grain, tinted shadows etc. in the first footage a company releases of their camera. You don't see it in stills cameras samples, although I think any camera with a kind of "hipstamatic" option would sell like hell (do that instead of making a pink version if you want to sell it to girls, sony...). Besides high quality, color corrected film scans can feel like video as well. That said I can also notice the infamous sony motion smear in some shots. Maybe 360 degree shutter (by accident?) maybe the codec.
In F3 footage for example the motion smear is gone as soon as you record externally over sdi.

December 3, 2012 at 4:11AM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM


There are going to be two schools of thought on this issue moving forward. The first school will be the old school, those pining for a gilded era of yore, where the process of capture did irreversible damage but the damage made it art in their minds. The second school will instead prize a perfect, clean, undamaged capture that provides the maximum latitude in post to then damage or not accordingly.

I am firmly in the second school to the extent post makes it feasible...some things are still best done optically or mechanically (such as motion blur from frame rate/shutter angle) and those are things that have to be decided and done on set. When we can do an adequate simulation of those things then I will vote to leave them to post.

Proponents of the first school will first insist that post will never provide such an adequate simulation, and that everything must be baked in on set. Some will dig their heels in and even given double-blind A/B tests that they can't pass they will insist on some supernatural essence missing or whatever. Others will invoke concepts like "option overload" where if you leave yourself too many options in post you will be overwhelmed and unable to do something creative and wonderful. I dismiss that concern, I think a director's view of a production may evolve as it unfolds and they shouldn't have their hands tied or feel a desire to recut anything just because of how the camera was set. I think a lot of people just want to feel heroic about how they commit to decisions made in the moment...but there are enough of those being made in front of the camera rather than inside it that should be focused on instead.

So I dismiss a lot of these critiques of camera models as "looking video." If the camera can do 24fps then it can be made to look cinematic and filmic as long as the capture is less damaged rather than more damaged. Bad codecs and NR and DR and resolution and downsampling are the sources of digital damage, and the newer cameras are replacing those with better ones. Digital damage was never appealing I don't think, though there may be a retro fad for it periodically. Sometimes you see e.g. bad deinterlacing used as a retro effect in post. Fair enough, but let's applaud the efforts of the manufacturers to eliminate all damage in capture and enable new opportunities such as HFR.

December 3, 2012 at 8:24AM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM


Excellent post!

December 3, 2012 at 10:24AM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM

Ben Corwin

The footage seems to be very video-like…When Philip Bloom will test it we will have a better overview on the camera, to see if it’s a real cinema camera we need to see the footage at a 2,35:1 ratio (with real anamorphic lenses if possible) but in 1,77 (16/9) it’s definitely not cinema.. and a better color grade of course.

December 3, 2012 at 6:29AM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM


The comment about 1.77:1 not being "cinematic" doesn't make sense. 16:9 is actually 1.78:1 but that's not as important as the fact that the aspect ratio doesn't "make" films cinematic. All classic film of the silent era and many later sound films were shot pretty much until the 50's in 4:3 (hence the name "Academy" aspect ratio). Many other classic films were filmed in a variety of aspect ratios from 1.66 to CinemaScope (2.66:1). I agree that the wider aspects are more aesthetically pleasing but that alone doesn't make them "cinematic" :)

December 7, 2012 at 12:10AM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM


To each his own guys ...... Some have no probs with the 'seeming' video look that we are seeing because you can put that film look in in post.

I personally prefer to have that look (filmic) out of the gate so it's one less thing I have to think about.
I friend of mine put very correctly ... The images look very clinical, which is a trait of Sony.

I think the DR on this camera is absolutely insane. They say 14 stops but it looks like more. Can't wait to see chart tests etc.

If you prefer these images and prefer to place the the filmic look in post /grading etc etc then go for it.

I think the time for one camera being better than this or that has long since past and its a matter of what best suits the way you work and what you look for as a director / DOP/ producer or whatever you do ...and what you want your film to look like .....

December 3, 2012 at 9:51PM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM

Nigel Thompson

That night footage in the lightning storm looks delicious!

December 4, 2012 at 2:37AM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM


That video look is embedded into Sony's very DNA; it's a visual aesthetic they just cannot
depart from. Although Panasonic is effectively MIA as we speak, I
prefer their look much better - it's richer and more organic. I think Sony is getting
closer in each product release, but not quite enough to warm the cockles of my heart.
"Dig" came very close, but at a cost of greater specs and resource demands, namely RAW (those Cookes
didn't hurt either).
We've got to see more footage under different conditions to make a
proper judgement of the F-5/55's true cinematic potential.

December 6, 2012 at 8:43PM, Edited September 4, 7:54AM