Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Sony ILME-FX6V Owners Club

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by scorsesefan View Post

    I've had limited success with Catalyst Browse, probably owing to the fact that I like to keep my shutter speed at 1/48 and I almost always shoot at 24fps which creates a weird motion effect when stabilized in Catalyst. TBH I've only tried it with my a7siii. If you shoot at 180 on the FX6 can you avoid this?
    So I shoot to a 180 degree shutter at 24p primarily on the FX6 and I haven’t ran into any issues when using the gyro sensor data in Catalyst Browse. I just shoot like I normally would and if something feels a bit shaky for my taste, I pull that clip up in CB and am able to fix it right up. It’s been pretty great in my experience and doesn’t require me to crop much to get the footage to look nice. My only complaint is that I wish it was available directly in Premiere.

    Comment


      When I've tried gyro stabilisation before I've generally used a 90 degree shutter and I've still seen occasional ugly smearing that I assumed was motion blur weirdness. Maybe I need to play with the settings in Catalyst a bit more. I'll be testing it with 180 degree shutter tomorrow and if it doesn't work (16-35 GM walking shots) I'll have to use the a7Siii for a doc shoot instead of the FX6.

      Comment


        I shoot 50fps @ 360 degree shutter, and Catalyst stab results looks weird. I've borrowed a 16-35GM so will test it vs the OSS 16-35 Zeiss.

        Comment


          I guess no surprise after playing with both the GM 16-35 vs the Zeiss 16-35 OSS. I did three comparisons all hand held:

          Static:
          - Zeiss: Great out of camera
          - GM: OK but still moved around
          - Catalyst on GM: looked good
          - Resolve on GM: looked good (better than Catalyst)


          Panning:
          - Zeiss: Good out of camera
          - GM: Marginal but still useable
          - Catalyst on GM: looked good
          - Resolve on GM: looked good (better than Catalyst)- Zeiss: Great out of camera

          Walking: It all was pretty poor. Zeiss was the "best" of a band bunch. Trying to use Catalyst or Resolve to stabilise the video gave all sorts of weird jello bending of straight lines and weird blur in details. This is what a gimbal etc is for.

          Anyway, for video use I'm still disappointed that the latest lens releases from Sony (like the C and PZ 16-35) Sony don't have OSS. I'd like the "better glass" but not over shaky handled video. OSS works and works well on the FX6. I'll be sticking with the Zeiss 16-35, 28-135 OSS, and 100-400 OSS.

          Comment


            For me the gyro sensor data is a real treat on the FX6 and I get great results from it pretty much every time. But, I'm also not trying to smooth out walking shots with it. For me that's what a gimbal is for. I use the gyro sensor data for smoothing out handheld shots that get just a touch shakier than what I might be going for, but again, not for trying to fix anything extreme. I think that's largely why I get such good results as I'm not asking the software to do anything crazy.

            You did say in your post above that you used it for static shots in your test and that's more in line with what I would use it for. Static or maybe even me moving to the camera handheld to follow some action, but none of that is extreme.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
              For me the gyro sensor data is a real treat on the FX6 and I get great results from it pretty much every time. .
              Have you done any testing to compare the stabilization in CB to what can be done within Resolve?
              Doug Jensen, Sony camcorder instructor
              HOW TO MAKE MONEY SHOOTING STOCK
              http://www.dougjensen.com/

              Comment


                Originally posted by Doug Jensen View Post

                Have you done any testing to compare the stabilization in CB to what can be done within Resolve?
                No sir, I have not. I have been pretty happy with CB, so I haven't felt the need to test it against anything else. Plus, I recently purchase Catalyst Prepare (subscribed to rather) and am trying to use that program as part of my workflow moving forward.

                Comment


                  Let us know if you ever do some testing. I did, and have chosen to use Resolve for a number of reasons. I was curious if you had done any comparison yourself. You might like one, but you might like the other even better. Just saying.
                  Doug Jensen, Sony camcorder instructor
                  HOW TO MAKE MONEY SHOOTING STOCK
                  http://www.dougjensen.com/

                  Comment


                    FWIW, I think that Resolve is a Better choice for me than Catalyst as:
                    - The stabilisation produces (slightly) better results (and this was with stock settings)
                    - No need to pre-process creating a separate render (all in one package)
                    - Works on all footage including those without Gyro data and/or Lens with OSS turned on (eg I can future stabilise footage from OSS lens which you can not do with Catalyst)

                    Comment


                      Used the a7Siii as the A-cam on a doc shoot recently instead of the FX6. We did a lot of handheld tracking shots and the Sony GM 16-35 f2.8 was perfect for the look we wanted. No OSS on the lens though, so a combination of the a7Siii having IBIS and it being possible to hold it closer to the body made it the better choice.

                      I missed all the expected things about the FX6 (ND, side handle, viewfinder - I use the FX9 loupe). Surprisingly though, a few days into the shoot I realised I preferred plenty of things about the ergonomics of the smaller camera.

                      The a7Siii has 14 customisable buttons, aka "all of them". They are actually very cleverly differentiated in terms of size, position and feel. You'll never accidentally hit the button next to the one you want. And there is something about the smaller body - the front / top / right buttons might only be an inch away from the back / top / right buttons but clearly you are never going to get them mixed up. And your hands are always in the same position relative to the controls (while shooting handheld) as there is nowhere else for them to go.

                      So after a few hours of setup and a few hours of shooting, you can find everything instantly by touch alone. Given the current (excellent) state of AF this is a big deal. Predictably, I had six buttons dedicated to AF / MF. What I didn't expect was how quickly they all became second nature while filming.

                      The FX6 looks like it should be way ahead in this regard, with proper video-specific controls. The AF / MF toggle is a sliding switch, for example - This is nice design and it seems churlish to complain about it. Unfortunately, this means that it can't be remapped. Having AF / MF toggle directly under the natural position of my thumb on the a7Siii works so much better! I'd like the option of having it somewhere similar on the FX6 (button 5).

                      I'm not sure what the solution is apart from allowing ALL of the buttons on the FX6 to be remapped. Why is this a feature of the more consumer-oriented camera rather than the pro version?

                      In other news - the external monitor / EVF situation with the a7Siii is an absolute ****%##w.

                      No touch tracking through an external monitor? ok, no surprise there. Send camera info to external monitor so I can at least monitor what's being tracked? Image shrinks to the size of a stamp and the camera's LCD turns off so now I can't use touch tracking at all. I wish this was because Sony were ripping us off with some proprietary solution, I really do. Sell me something that works, Sony.


                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Andy9 View Post
                        The FX6 looks like it should be way ahead in this regard, with proper video-specific controls. The AF / MF toggle is a sliding switch, for example - This is nice design and it seems churlish to complain about it. Unfortunately, this means that it can't be remapped. Having AF / MF toggle directly under the natural position of my thumb on the a7Siii works so much better! I'd like the option of having it somewhere similar on the FX6 (button 5)
                        The FX6 IS way ahead in this regard. So far ahead, in fact, that the AF/MF toggle switch isn't really even needed on the FX6 if you have firmware 2.0 loaded. The switch on my camera is always set for MF even though I'm using some form of AF most of the time these days. With the switch in the MF position I can still use touch-tracking and face/eye detect, as well as always having access to push-auto and full manual -- all at the same time. If you slide the switch to AF you will be giving too much control to the camera and it will **** you too often. The other focusing modes are damn near perfect with the right settings and techniques. As far as I'm concerned the AF/MF switch is completely unnecessary.

                        Last edited by Doug Jensen; 06-14-2022, 03:43 PM.
                        Doug Jensen, Sony camcorder instructor
                        HOW TO MAKE MONEY SHOOTING STOCK
                        http://www.dougjensen.com/

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Doug Jensen View Post

                          The FX6 IS way ahead in this regard. So far ahead, in fact, that the AF/MF toggle switch isn't really even needed on the FX6 if you have firmware 2.0 loaded. The switch on my camera is always set for MF even though I'm using some form of AF most of the time these days. With the switch in the MF position I can still use touch-tracking and face/eye detect, as well as always having access to push-auto and full manual -- all at the same time. If you slide the switch to AF you will be giving too much control to the camera and it will **** you too often. The other focusing modes are damn near perfect with the right settings and techniques. As far as I'm concerned the AF/MF switch is completely unnecessary.

                          Right, but you can do all of those things with the a7Siii and you can also assign a button to AF / MF toggle.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by Doug Jensen View Post

                            Have you done any testing to compare the stabilization in CB to what can be done within Resolve?
                            I've done many stabilization tests comparing Catalyst on FX6 material to optical and post stabilization in FCP (see below). I haven't compared those to Resolve's stabilizer.

                            The problem with Sony's gyro stabilization is you must decide up front to use that and turn off lens OIS or (for mirrorless cameras) IBIS. In general at 60 fps it works very well, but my documentary team usually shoots at 23.98 at 180 degrees, and due to frame blurring Catalyst works less well for that.

                            I shoot a lot of shoulder-mount material with the FX6 using the Sony 70-200 2.8 GM II, and for that I prefer the lens OIS combined with NLE stabilization. The reason is that works at both 23.98 and 59.94 and I don't have to think about switching methods. Resolve Studio has a more comprehensive stabilizer so I've used that but not in a back-to-back comparison vs the gyro/Catalyst method.

                            Here are some early FX6 tests I did, mostly at 200 and 280mm hand held, but one at 28mm using the Sony 28-135 PZ lens. BTW thanks Doug for your great master class on the FX6 -- that has helped a lot!!

                            FX6 Catalyst stabilization at 280mm, 23.98 vs 59.94 fps (shows frame blurring at 23.98): https://vimeo.com/598896853/2bde2933ac

                            FX6 unstabilized vs Catalyst vs Catalyst+FCP stabilization at 28mm: https://vimeo.com/617097074/aa54cef30c

                            Numerous FX6 stabilization tests at 200mm, various combinations of Catalyst vs OIS vs FCP: https://youtu.be/u81AGWEqEog

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Andy9 View Post

                              Right, but you can do all of those things with the a7Siii and you can also assign a button to AF / MF toggle.
                              The point I was making is that the AF/MF switch is completely unnecessary on the FX6.
                              Doug Jensen, Sony camcorder instructor
                              HOW TO MAKE MONEY SHOOTING STOCK
                              http://www.dougjensen.com/

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by joema View Post
                                Here are some early FX6 tests I did, mostly at 200 and 280mm hand held, but one at 28mm using the Sony 28-135 PZ lens. BTW thanks Doug for your great master class on the FX6 -- that has helped a lot!!
                                l]
                                Thanks for posting the tests. I think the Catalyst results look better than Premiere, but ultimately I still think the workflow to use CB is not worth the huge hassle. It would be interesting to see some comparisons between CB and Resolve. The stabilization in Resolve is super easy to use and produces excellent results with several parameters that can be modified. All my footage goes through Resolve for grading before I edit in Premiere, so adding some stabilization is not big deal.
                                Doug Jensen, Sony camcorder instructor
                                HOW TO MAKE MONEY SHOOTING STOCK
                                http://www.dougjensen.com/

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X