Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 75
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member Tom Roper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    1,297
    Default
    Conversations about sharpness and resolution are the weakest.

    Edit: I didn't mean that as a counter to Ted or DLD so a bit of explanation as relates to the folly. That people "see" improvements on laptop displays through the windows of resolution and sharpness and YouTube and multi-generational compressed copies, seeing more (apparent) resolution via down-sampling which is the destruction of recorded pixels, yet often don't spot differences between HD-4K-6K-8K when displayed at their native resolutions and native sizes on native displays.
    Last edited by Tom Roper; 03-03-2021 at 07:53 AM.


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

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    384
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by LennyLevy View Post
    Do you guys have a lot of clients asking for Raw? I've never had one. Seems to me anyone who needs to have a Raw workflow is going to want to shoot on a more upper tier camera than an FX6 anyway - but I don't know how everyone works so it must be important to some people. To be honest, I think a lot of people are way more concerned with Raw than just learning how to light and shoot good pictures in the first place.
    So I completely agree with your last sentence. WAY too many people get more concerned with shooting raw or with having a camera that can shoot good in lowlight than learning how to light to begin with. I'm on the same page with you here.

    To answer your question, I've never once had a client ask me for raw either. It's simply never come up in anything I've done. That being said, the reason why I am frustrated that the FX9 can't do raw direct to a recorder is because as a shooter I at least want the capability in the event I'm working on a project where raw could be beneficial.

    I'm a log guy through in through. I like the workflow and I like the images you can get with log when using proper LUTs. But, there's times where raw can be helpful just like there's times when a baked in image such as S-Cinetone can be helpful. It all just depends on the project. And the fact that the FX6 can have a raw option with a simple $1,000 recorder gives me that capability when I need it.

    Where the FX9 kills me is that you're paying a $5,000 premium to buy that camera over the FX6 and yet it still has the same limitations that the 2014 FS7 had. We should be further along with that model by now! The image quality, the color and the full frame sensor are all great on the FX9, but to be limited to the same resolutions, frame rates and the same dumb extension unit on a camera that's nearly 6 years newer than its predecessor and that is $5,000 more than the camera below which doesn't have those limitations is a problem. And I know people like to claim that the FX9 is a "broadcast" camera that's not meant for shooting raw or being used in a creative "cinema" environment (whatever that means anyway), but come on. The C300III, the FX6, and even the A7SIII, FX3 and A1 all have more raw and frame rate capabilities than the FX9. That's a bit ridiculous in my opinion.

    I will agree with everyone else here that the FX9's image does have a thickness about it, not to mention slightly more detail than the FX6 thanks to its sensor. But we're at a point now where for most things that doesn't matter as much today as it used to. If we're being honest, almost any customer who hires you isn't going to know the difference between FX9 or FX6 footage and virtually nobody outside of us really care about the "thickness" the image has. 99% of paying customers just want a nice looking image and a well put together production with good lighting, good audio and good storyboarding. Any camera you pickup today can get you there.

    So what's left now is ease of use, ergonomics and what features are available on a camera. That's really what matters anymore as all current camera models can produce nice images with nice color. So if a camera like the FX9 looks 10% better than a camera like the FX6, but costs almost twice as much and is missing things like 4K 120p and raw out, not to mention it's 50% heavier and bulkier, that starts to make the FX6 feel like a better buy. Especially since you can break the FX6 down to just the lightweight body for drone/gimbal/slider/small jib work or build it up with a few parts for shoulder work. It's highly flexible from that standpoint and having things like raw out and more frame rates only make it even more flexible.

    I know that some of you will disagree with this and would rather still buy the FX9 for its extra detail or "thicker" image. But honestly from a business standpoint, it's hard to argue that the FX6 isn't a better buy that offers more. That is unless you're working with people who are specifically requesting the FX9 of course. That would be one situation where I could get on board with it.
    Last edited by Joshua Milligan; 03-03-2021 at 08:01 AM.


    2 out of 4 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Central Texas
    Posts
    384
    Default
    Why do people downvote on this forum? Seriously guys? I literally wrote about my thoughts on the FX9 vs the FX6. You can write back and carry on a conversation with me and the rest of us about it, but to downvote it is just dumb. I'm sorry if me sharing my thoughts on the FX9 hurts some of your feelings!

    Geez, we've got a bunch of Nancy's in this group.


    3 out of 4 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    99
    Default
    I think its hard to give camera advice (or any equipment advice) on a message board because its not a "one size fits all" scenario...to many unknown variables at play. That being said, i jumped on the 9 because i assumed the 6 would be the same scenario (or relationship) to the 9 that the 7 had to the 5. However, once the specs of the 6 were announced...i was a bit miffed, but i got over it...quickly. I'm not going to get caught up in all that. I made a decision on the 9 and i don't regret it. Its bought. Its paid for. Its not perfect, but it was perfect at the time. Also, RAW isn't a factor w/ me either. It would be great if you could pull RAW out of the 9 like you can the 6...but it wasn't a deal breaker. So honestly, i have ZERO plans on getting rid of the 9 in favor of the 6...BUT, i am toying with the idea of adding the 6 (or maybe even the 3) and possibly ditching my 7...as there would be benefits to a move like that.


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

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Roper View Post
    .... I didn't mean that as a counter to Ted or DLD so a bit of explanation as relates to the folly. That people "see" improvements on laptop displays through the windows of resolution and sharpness and YouTube and multi-generational compressed copies, seeing more (apparent) resolution via down-sampling which is the destruction of recorded pixels, yet often don't spot differences between HD-4K-6K-8K when displayed at their native resolutions and native sizes on native displays.
    Ted Williams could see seams on a baseball traveling at him at 100 miles an hour.

    He could also spot the difference between a 46" 4K Vizio and a 60" 8K Samsung from the home plate.

    Them are facts I read on the internet.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    385
    Default
    Funny how much this reminds me of the F5/F55 release...especially after the 4K hack.
    ___________________________________________

    J.Cummings-Lighting Cameraman
    http://www.ohfilmworks.com
    IMDb


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    9,367
    Default
    It's happened a decent amount to some degree over the years...most notable complaints:

    BMCC --> BMPC

    a7RII --> a7SII

    GH5 --> GH5S

    Pocket 4K --> Pocket 6K

    C500 Mark II --> C300 Mark III

    Various REDs --> RED Raven (with its initial $5995 tag which was nuts in 2015)

    There are some more.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Default
    For the OP ..

    Fx9 much better for handheld/ shoulder , more room to mount accessories, 2 x SDI , 6K down sample , 4k s35 (fx6 is only HD) , XLR on the camera body, a loupe , interval recording (fx6 doesn't have it ).. interlaced if you ever need it .. XQD cards more robust than SD / CF fast ..alot of advantages to the fx9 still .. who, working as a freelancer is ever being asked to shoot RAW with an fx9 , or an fx6.. answer no one .. As a jobbing A camera, fx9 still has it over the fx6 in every regard pretty much.. plus you wont have any clients wondering why you are charging $1,800 a day turning up with what looks like a handy cam ..


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

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Donny 123 View Post
    For the OP ..

    Fx9 much better for handheld/ shoulder , more room to mount accessories, 2 x SDI , 6K down sample , 4k s35 (fx6 is only HD) , XLR on the camera body, a loupe , interval recording (fx6 doesn't have it ).. interlaced if you ever need it .. XQD cards more robust than SD / CF fast ..alot of advantages to the fx9 still .. who, working as a freelancer is ever being asked to shoot RAW with an fx9 , or an fx6.. answer no one .. As a jobbing A camera, fx9 still has it over the fx6 in every regard pretty much.. plus you wont have any clients wondering why you are charging $1,800 a day turning up with what looks like a handy cam ..
    Well one thing in this list is wrong. As an FX6 owner I can tell you that FX6 certainly
    does have interval recording. It's literally one of the menu items.


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by alaskacameradude View Post
    Well one thing in this list is wrong. As an FX6 owner I can tell you that FX6 certainly
    does have interval recording. It's literally one of the menu items.
    Ah sorry not interval .. cache recording .. ! yet they still push it as good for wild life ..


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... 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
  •