Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 177
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,373
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Stills2HDConvert View Post
    Somebody's got G.A.S and it's about to pass.
    Damn, I'm leaving this room then! ;-)
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    826
    Default
    Another point of view on the FX9, plus and minus points. Plus a bit of footage.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=88otJKaFkH0

    Chris Young


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,525
    Default
    There’s a lot of praise for the FX9 but it’s hard to imagine to go back to Sony again.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,373
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Clermond View Post
    There’s a lot of praise for the FX9 but it’s hard to imagine to go back to Sony again.
    I know what you mean, Sony does things the Sony way, which often isn't the way I'd like to have things function. I'll be using the FX9 this week on three interviews and will also take it out to shoot long lens b-roll
    of windsurfers, surfers and will just take a day to bop around town shooting misc. stuff that looks interesting. I've not generally been a fan of Sony cameras since we got rid of our DSR 500WS back in the day. I loved
    the F900, all of our Betacams but beginning with the EX1, I preferred Canon and Panasonic color science. As a Canon/RED/Arri/Fuji user, I occasionally rent the FS7/MKII but the FX9, based upon what I have seen so
    far in a full day of training and hanging with the product team, shares a lot more with the Venice than the FS7 MKII and I think the Venice is a pretty good camera.

    I'll reserve judgement until I actually do some real shoots with it starting Monday, but so far, the FX9 is pretty impressive to me. It does a lot of little things right that the Canons don't. Case in point, if I want a servo zoom lens for
    my C200 or C300 MKII, I have to pay $4k for the CN E 18-80 t/4.4, it has it's own powered handgrip control, that awkward power cable that I have to replace with a Zacuto cable. Fair enough, I like the CN E compact servos,
    they are good lenses. But the FX9, I can get the SELP 28-135 f/4 G OSS for $2,500.00 in a package deal with the FX9. It's FF. It can be controlled from the Sony grip, it looks good, has a manual/AF focusing clutch mechanism that is
    the same as my XF16mm f/1.4 for my Fuji X-T3, which I like, that way of switching back and forth works well.

    Of course, the CN E zooms are only S35 plus they are considerably more expensive, and ergonomically, more of a PITA to deal with with the cable, handgrip, etc. I like the lenses, but the overall integration is better
    on the Sony, in FF, at $1,500.00 - $2,000.00 cheaper.

    That's just one little thing that I've seen on the FX9 that impresses me, it's the little things that all add up. Yes, the menus suck compared to my Canons, but there are lots of nice, fine tune options in there that are either not on the
    Canons or is simply implemented better on the Sony. The button layout is more cluttered and less intuitive to me on the Sony. Being a Canon owner, the button layout and menus on the C200/300 MKII make far more sense.

    I'm very interested to shoot some Sony SLog3/S-Cinetone footage to compare against the RAW from the C200 and the XF-AVC from the C300 MKII. A lot of people are reporting that the Sony holds together pretty well when pushed
    and that the Sony footage is giving a run for its money against some other camera's RAW. We'll see about that.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    Senior Member James0b57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,453
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Clermond View Post
    Thereís a lot of praise for the FX9 but itís hard to imagine to go back to Sony again.
    All cameras are good enough that anyone can just get the
    cameras they like and go shoot good things.

    Typically Sony is technically the best, and Panasonic and Canon have cameras people prefer aesthetically.

    That is what is so weird about this choice, the Sonyís are actually looking aesthetically good now too.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Default
    You can tell a lot about a camera from the bad footage out there as much as the good. And I’m seeing a lot of very green footage from the FX9 being posted on Youtube and Vimeo. I’ve been super interested in the FX9, but I’m not a fan of the Sony green. While this new Sony looks light years better than their previous cameras, and is getting a lot of praise for their new color science, I don’t think they’ve entirely eradicated it just yet. You can see it in a lot of the home videos posted where little to no grading has taken place.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member James0b57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,453
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by robotfist View Post
    You can tell a lot about a camera from the bad footage out there as much as the good. And I’m seeing a lot of very green footage from the FX9 being posted on Youtube and Vimeo. I’ve been super interested in the FX9, but I’m not a fan of the Sony green. While this new Sony looks light years better than their previous cameras, and is getting a lot of praise for their new color science, I don’t think they’ve entirely eradicated it just yet. You can see it in a lot of the home videos posted where little to no grading has taken place.
    Pretty amazing times, where this is the criticism of cameras these days.

    Sony when shot by amateurs looks crap.

    Canon can only do 13stops DR, and it only does proxies when recording in raw.

    I will say, cine cameras have a lot of pressure coming from the consumer sector. Consumer tech is so advanced, makes even the latest dedicated video cameras look like clunky bricks.

    If they don’t out do the Alexa in the next round, or if the AlevIV doesn’t outdo itself, there will be no point to upgrade. Already, there is no reason to buy an Fx9 or a C500ii unless you want auto focus in a midtier pro video body.

    It must be very difficult to make a 15+ stops usable dr sensor.

    To be fair, anyone who knows how to properly compose, light, and grade, can reduce or even mitigate the “video” look. But that is far easier said than done, and i certainly can’t hide the video foot print majority of the time. Even my Alexa footage looks rather videoy.

    Despite having little to complain about, it still does not bode well for the cinema camera long term. With shrinking budgets for them and us. And the mad sweeping momentum of RnD money infused into the cellphone sector.

    If i shot a lot of interviews, and got paid well, i’d swap over to the Fx9 or C500ii likely. But otherwise, i tend to agree. We have some highly polished looking video cameras that won’t be competing with true cinema cameras in a true head to head race.

    I used to complain about cameras a lot, and that was because 8bit 50Mbps was being called a “cinema” camera just a few years ago. These recent additions are more exciting because of auto focus than purely based on image quality. And as i don’t particularly care for auto focus at this time, i don’t particularly care about these cameras one way or another. But i can’t really complain either. They did it. They made a nice camera for under $20K.

    Haven’t felt this optimistic about cameras since the HPX500.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    275
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by robotfist View Post
    You can tell a lot about a camera from the bad footage out there as much as the good. And I’m seeing a lot of very green footage from the FX9 being posted on Youtube and Vimeo. I’ve been super interested in the FX9, but I’m not a fan of the Sony green. While this new Sony looks light years better than their previous cameras, and is getting a lot of praise for their new color science, I don’t think they’ve entirely eradicated it just yet. You can see it in a lot of the home videos posted where little to no grading has taken place.
    While I've seen plenty of balanced footage from the FX9, you are right that there is a lot of yellow (green) coming down the pipeline from this camera. In some ways it's attractive, but to me it feels like a "look" has been applied. More baked in looking, and I've been curious if it's the camera, or the user. I personally think this camera has improved a lot from the FS7 in terms of color science, but I really haven't loved most of what I've seen from it, mostly due to that color bias. I just shot a music video with my GFX100, which has a Sony sensor in it, and the yellows are the same...in this case it was under NYC street lighting and looks really great (gritty, rich colors)...but I'm not sure I'd want it for my day job, you know.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    10,373
    Default
    I read somewhere that Alister Chapman has developed a LUT that he is giving away or selling really inexpensively that mitigates that green overload. I'll be checking this out when I shoot some SLog3.Cine this week, I can compare the Sony LUT with the Alister LUT.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member James0b57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,453
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by puredrifting View Post
    I read somewhere that Alister Chapman has developed a LUT that he is giving away or selling really inexpensively that mitigates that green overload. I'll be checking this out when I shoot some SLog3.Cine this week, I can compare the Sony LUT with the Alister LUT.
    It was camera #6 in the recent Reduser FF camera comparison. Slog3+Alister Chapmanís lut.

    Post 24:
    http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthr...=1#post1884729

    But would be more interested in your hands on perspective.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 11 of 18 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •