Who is going to be the king of the low light footage, I have one more day with both cameras then the F3 needs to go back down south. So far my conclusions are that the F3 glass helps keep flaring to a minimum but you would expect this as the lens is made specially for the camera.
This is where I take issue with Sony they have dedicated their prime lenses to fit on this camera only, so you can’t use them on any other camera, this may be for technical reasons but as we know Sony don’t make lenses, a third party has made these lenses but to Sony’s specifications.
I think it’s a poor decision by Sony not to make this a universal “PL” mount taking the edge off a rather nice set of prime lenses. The mount on the camera is identical to the EX mount but for one pin…why the exclusivity…only Sony can answer that.
The camera performed very well in Edinburgh city centre and as my good pal and fellow DP, John commented “it’s very filmic” “the pictures are unreal”. We watched the footage from both Edinburgh and Glasgow and John who is not easily impressed was stunned by the quality of the 12dB footage.
Although I have taken footage side by side with both cameras I have deliberately not seen the footage yet as I want to savour the moment that I put Sony’s Goliath against Panasonic’s David.
The one thing I can divulge is the difference between using £2.6K glass against £830 glass. The Sony 35mm was the closest in angle of view to my Voigtlander NOKTON 25mm lens, although the NOKTON has a very fast aperture of f0.95 I decided to keep it fair and stop down to f2 the same as the Sony lens. It was clear to me that the Sony had flare but not as noticeable as the NOKTON lens, as the Sony is three times dearer I would expect the optics to be superior to the Voigtlander lens, so no surprise there then.
I am about to hit a busy spell so you will have to wait for my final conclusions i’m afraid.