Sony FX30: an aps-c FX3

[JimGao]

Really depends on which years and type of system and price bracket and people you're speaking about...

Panasonic dominated the tape video cameras with their Varicams in those years, or Sony dominated with the FS7 way before the a7SIII - and the a7S I and II were also mega successful as well - or there was the RED and Blackmagic world where many from there wouldn't use a Japanese camera again after experience with those systems, or Canon is still today untouchable in the photography world (a lot of pros use other systems, but overall it's a Canon world for stills).

If we're just talking about Japan then I would agree that Sony has an edge over Canon and Panasonic right now.

In Hollywood, they would be option #3 for most.

hmmm, i don’t think it really depends.

I’m talking about video cameras. no other company has dominated in that industry as consistently as Sony. You could parse out a sub group where another company edged out a w. But for dedicated video cameras, Sony has been there the whole time. Canon held the hybrid stills sector for a little bit until Sony began making inroads with their Mirrorless bodies. And now with their lenses maturing, and improved color science, they are solidly taking the hybrid space for the more video conscious shooters. keyword video. Sony has been at the forefront of digital cinema as well, and has remained relevant. Arri and Red can claim selling more high end bodies, but they aren’t able to claim having the huge sales numbers in the consumer sector, prosumer sector, broadcast sector, and having a world class cinema cameras. So, as awesome as Arri is, they sell in a niche market. Toyota dominates, but Bugatti is the status symbol sort of thing. Nissan has the Skyline and the GTR, but Toyota still dominates. You can’t discuss video without Sony.

Panasonic, Canon, Ikegami, JVC, Grass Valley/Thomson, Arri, Red, Blackmagic, all made splashes, but Sony has been their competing with all of them in every sector all the way until the 5Dmkii, and Sony didn’t have a true counterpart for a few years, which allowed Canon to make big inroads with their EF lenses into the video space beyond broadcast zooms, and even the fs7 was most often seen with an EF attachment. But with the A7S3/FX3/FX6 era, it feels like the Canon reign on hybrid video (not hybrid still and video)has been quieted. We’re even seeing a lot of people beginning to use Sony lenses.

 

[JimGao]

I do like the idea that something like this is cheap enough, to simply leave mounted on a gimbal at all times - you could even have one rigged up permanently for autofocus work, and the other with a PL-mount and attachements, so you don't have to go through the pain of de-rigging and re-rigging every time you have a different style of job.

Yeah, if it has pretty much the same latitude as the FX3, it will be an incredible tool for so many industry sectors.

 

[NorBro]

hmmm, i don’t think it really depends.

I’m talking about video cameras. no other company has dominated in that industry as consistently as Sony. You could parse out a sub group where another company edged out a w. But for dedicated video cameras, Sony has been there the whole time. Canon held the hybrid stills sector for a little bit until Sony began making inroads with their Mirrorless bodies. And now with their lenses maturing, and improved color science, they are solidly taking the hybrid space for the more video conscious shooters. keyword video. Sony has been at the forefront of digital cinema as well, and has remained relevant. Arri and Red can claim selling more high end bodies, but they aren’t able to claim having the huge sales numbers in the consumer sector, prosumer sector, broadcast sector, and having a world class cinema cameras. So, as awesome as Arri is, they sell in a niche market. Toyota dominates, but Bugatti is the status symbol sort of thing. Nissan has the Skyline and the GTR, but Toyota still dominates. You can’t discuss video without Sony.

Panasonic, Canon, Ikegami, JVC, Grass Valley/Thomson, Arri, Red, Blackmagic, all made splashes, but Sony has been their competing with all of them in every sector all the way until the 5Dmkii, and Sony didn’t have a true counterpart for a few years, which allowed Canon to make big inroads with their EF lenses into the video space beyond broadcast zooms, and even the fs7 was most often seen with an EF attachment. But with the A7S3/FX3/FX6 era, it feels like the Canon reign on hybrid video (not hybrid still and video)has been quieted. We’re even seeing a lot of people beginning to use Sony lenses.

It sounds like you're remembering history a bit differently and drawing a conclusion based on someone having an overall bigger product catalogue, which in that case, yeah, Sony might - but they didn't "dominate" as consistently as you're remembering them to; they just made a lot of stuff.

All of the companies had their runs and stretches in different ways, which is why I think it depends. IMO, you can't just generalize ambiguously that they dominated consistently.

Dominated what? Prosumer video in the 2000s? So did the DVX100, HVX200.

Cinema cameras in the 2010s? F5 and F55 were great, but Canon's first C300 was in every production building on the planet.

As hybrid options for those on a budget? I'd say 99% were more interested in the GH line...GH2-GH4 at that time, extremely successful cameras.

___

There are other examples, but the only time I think Sony accurately dominated was with the FS7. And this happened, IMO, either because of a corporate agreement or a massive blunder (and we've seen many of those over the years from everyone) because there was nothing* back then as appealing as that system for that price.

*Personally, I was debating between the URSA and FS7 and went with Blackmagic, but the company was too young to be trusted with cameras (which had a lot of issues then). And Canon's C300 Mark II was too expensive with no 4K/60p, so by default the FS7 was an icon overnight...at least until the C200 came out.

Fast forward to today, I definitely think they are leading the pack overall. Great cinema cameras - great stills cameras - so many great lenses, native and others - action cameras - drones - point and shoots - whatever. They are crushing it, no doubt, but they aren't "dominating" anything with cameras also like the Canon R5 being made (which has twice as many B&H reviews as the a7SIII, ~600 vs ~300).

Now that's just one example and a good chunk of those reviews are likely from photographers but then...once again...that's why it depends. But along with our own recollections of history those are the kind of pieces of information that we have to include when this kind of conversation is being had (at least without being privy to internal metrics), but I do think it's safe to say that you can't compare volume with RED and ARRI when most of their cameras cost 3x-5x more (besides Komodo).

 

[JimGao]

…the only time I think Sony accurately dominated was with the FS7.

If that is you opinion, then i have no discussion with you on the matter. And if you want to open up the debate to who dominated in stills and video, then yes, you open up a lot of “depends” situations. I appreciate the lengthy reply.

 

[DLD]

ARRI dominated the high end/big budget TV/feature corner since releasing Alexa in 2010. Netflix temporarily gave them a bit of a hard time and was very friendly to Red due to Alexa's lack of 4K (it was upsampled after a few versions) but that went away too.

C300 was the most popular choice for big budget reality/doc/news for about three years after its release in January 2012.

At the end of 2014, Sony blew everyone away with a $8,000 4K FS-7. A previous FS-700 needed a digital interface an an external recorder - until Convergent Design's Odyssey external recorder/monitor - that ran up its price to about $20,000.

The low end saw GH-4 for $1,700 at the end of 2014, with Panasonic needing to open another assembly line to keep up with the demand.

Canon released a cripple hammer afflicted C200 in the fall of 2017. It recorded Cinema Raw Light to then very expensive C-Fast 2 cards but lacked the intermediary 10-bit codec. Its 8-bit looked good enough and the camera was a huge hit, something an overpriced C300 MKII was not.

Sony's A7S of 2013/2014 needed an external recorder for 4K but was a top low light performer.

Nikon mostly stayed away from the video" world, while JVC came out with an interesting variable geometry sensor camera and then promptly dropped out.

Samsung did their toe-in-the-water trick with NX-1 and then decided not to bother.

Then the floodgates opened up.

 

[JimGao]

ARRI dominated the high end/big budget TV/feature corner since releasing Alexa in 2010. Netflix temporarily gave them a bit of a hard time and was very friendly to Red due to Alexa's lack of 4K (it was upsampled after a few versions) but that went away too.

C300 was the most popular choice for big budget reality/doc/news for about three years after its release in January 2012.

At the end of 2014, Sony blew everyone away with a $8,000 4K FS-7. A previous FS-700 needed a digital interface an an external recorder - until Convergent Design's Odyssey external recorder/monitor - that ran up its price to about $20,000.

The low end saw GH-4 for $1,700 at the end of 2014, with Panasonic needing to open another assembly line to keep up with the demand.

Canon released a cripple hammer afflicted C200 in the fall of 2017. It recorded Cinema Raw Light to then very expensive C-Fast 2 cards but lacked the intermediary 10-bit codec. Its 8-bit looked good enough and the camera was a huge hit, something an overpriced C300 MKII was not.

Sony's A7S of 2013/2014 needed an external recorder for 4K but was a top low light performer.

Nikon mostly stayed away from the video" world, while JVC came out with an interesting variable geometry sensor camera and then promptly dropped out.

Samsung did their toe-in-the-water trick with NX-1 and then decided not to bother.

Then the floodgates opened up.

Very cool breakdown, DLD!

If your cartel theories are correct, it should come as no surprise that Sony is regaining the lead in the video space.

 

[JimGao]

A low cost professional s35 camera is long overdue. the Komodo and C70 are really great, but can still cost up there. Will be interesting to see what Sony did with the FX30, or if they just shove an FX body onto an A6000 series and call it a day. never know with Sony. i feel on their lower end they can be surprisingly bad.

What could make the FX30 additionally interesting, is adding a 4K M43 crop. The 26MP sensor could do it. could through some s16 glass on there too.

 

[DLD]

If your cartel theories are correct, it should come as no surprise that Sony is regaining the lead in the video space.

It's a chess board thing where each model is allowed certain functions/features but not others. I think it was NorBro - or maybe it was I - who wrote here many years ago that, if a given price range has five common features, then no single camera has more than three of them. One camera has a throbbing auto focus, another has an outdated codec, the third has a crop, the fourth has line-skip/pixel bin. We were all surprised at Canon's temerity to fake the overheating scare in what was otherwise a revolutionary R5. Which was stupid of us, having gone though the menu-disabled 4K in F5 and the Dumb & Dumber Depth-from-Defocus before that. And many cripple hammers via a firmware update, such as on XT-3.

But that's how the industry rolls.

 

[NorBro]

We can say we both did...I always joked they pulled little papers with features written on them out of a hat.

You should have seen the look on Panasonic's face when they got "IBIS".

As far as the R5, I was so loud and proud in 2020 shouting on the streets of DVXuser that it was the end of organized [legal] crime and everyone will now make great cameras...never could I have imagined overheating being programmed into it to stop it from being too good, too great.

It was one for the books...it was one of Canon's best moves ever, pure brilliance. Sony does it more subtly like with color science or limiting MPs.

Canon just shuts the camera off (or did) after you've had a taste.

 

[DLD]

... Canon just shuts the camera off (or did) after you've had a taste.

No soup for you!

 

[JimGao]

No soup for you!

No specs for you! lol

 

[JimGao]

It's a chess board thing where each model is allowed certain functions/features but not others. I think it was NorBro - or maybe it was I - who wrote here many years ago that, if a given price range has five common features, then no single camera has more than three of them. One camera has a throbbing auto focus, another has an outdated codec, the third has a crop, the fourth has line-skip/pixel bin. We were all surprised at Canon's temerity to fake the overheating scare in what was otherwise a revolutionary R5. Which was stupid of us, having gone though the menu-disabled 4K in F5 and the Dumb & Dumber Depth-from-Defocus before that. And many cripple hammers via a firmware update, such as on XT-3.

But that's how the industry rolls.

One thing is certain, and that is Sony wasn’t about to let some dslr revolution dethrone their place in the video world. While Canon was flagshipping an XL-H1, Sony was out there with a $200K camera. While Panasonic was enjoying a good reputation with their 720p Varicam(2001), it was a more affordable option to Sony’s 1080 F900 (1999) and F800 cameras. While Panasonic was making waves with the DVX100, Sony was already established with the VX1000 and PD150 cameras, both of which defined the genre of those cameras. When Panasonic had the 720p light hog Hvx200, it was after Sony’s 1080i FX1 and had less staying power to Sony’s EX1/EX3 followups. Sony goes pretty far back into the pro and consumer video world with tube based pro tv cameras and all. Wasn’t the V-lock battery and VCT14 a Sony thing? Not that they invented the wedge lock, but because of their prominent place in video camera history they were able to introduce a couple standards.

Fast forward to more recent times and any time Canon made something, Sony had a camera above and below it that was better. The F55 was better than the C300ii and the FS7 was cheaper with more specs. Plus Sony had the F65 as a viable high end cinema camera before making the Venice, a truly successful cinema camera. Canon has yet to get out of their ENG/docu/indie groove.

Today we have the FX3/FX6/FX9 below Canon’s R5C/C70/C300mk3/C500mk2, while still out specing Canon with frame rates, dual iso, and variable ND, but all of those Canon cameras are below Sony’s Venice. So again, Canon is undercut and out performed. But this time, i’d say Canon has a lot more established feel in the pro video landscape. And if they can get a DGO cinema camera into that 15+ stops usable latitude, we could see another 5dmkii type scandal, as Canon could break away again from its established place holding.


The FX30 pulls in an even lower price bracket into the cienalta lineup, and will be a GoPro for some, and a democratizing A cam for others. If Sony can give the FX30 a 4:3 sensor, like a stills camera, there is no reason why they can’t also do anamorphic modes with proper dimensions, making it perhaps the single most exciting camera in the low budget cinema scene.

 

[NorBro]

Fast forward to more recent times and any time Canon made something, Sony had a camera above and below it that was better.

lol

 

[DLD]

Canon never made much of an impression in the high budget TV/feature niche, whereas Sony did have F900, F-35, F-55 and F-65 and Venice I & II. On the other hand, Canon had a 40% market share of the consumer side. Which is a far larger slice of the pie. The high end consumer and the lower end pro sort of intersected with the C-300 vs. FS-7 rivalry. The problem now for everyone involved is that the video technology is already at "beyond retina". Stills can be blown up and chopped up on an 8K display but R5/A1/Z9 specs are already for pixel peepers only and anything above that is barely incremental.

And then it becomes a commodity business. Gimme whatever costs the least because the performance is identical or nearly identical otherwise. That's one of the reasons for the cripple hammer - if all the features are the same and performances are nearly similar, then there's no reason to pick X over Y. It's the same camera, albeit with a different mount, and it should cost the same. And it doesn't really matter what brand it is. It's all a store brand.

 

[Doug Jensen]

The problem now for everyone involved is that the video technology is already at "beyond retina". Stills can be blown up and chopped up on an 8K display but R5/A1/Z9 specs are already for pixel peepers only and anything above that is barely incremental.

I've been saying basically the same thing for several years. If picture quality is all you care about, there are dozens of cameras at all price points that will exceed your needs. Pick one and move on. But what's more important to me is features, functions, ergonomics, codecs, utility software from the manufacturer, ND filters, HFR, compatible audio devices, and now auto-focus modes and tracking performance.

These are the things that separate the workhorse cameras, built for professionals who have work to get done, from the wannabe cameras that can make pretty pictures but lack a lot of features.

 

[JimGao]

I've been saying basically the same thing for several years. If picture quality is all you care about, there are dozens of cameras at all price points that will exceed your needs. Pick one and move on.

I more or less agree here. Although, obviously video still has a little ways to go before it is a fully mature technology. Arri may have it close enough, but perhaps they still need another iteration or two before it really arrives. And then everything else has to catch up, and by then we will likely be moving towards tech that is beyond CMOS and typical 2D sensors, maybe even beyond pixels at that point.

But what's more important to me is features, functions, ergonomics, codecs, utility software from the manufacturer, ND filters, HFR, compatible audio devices, and now auto-focus modes and tracking performance.

These are the things that separate the workhorse cameras, built for professionals who have work to get done, from the wannabe cameras that can make pretty pictures but lack a lot of features.

100% emphatically agree with you

 

[JimGao]

Canon never made much of an impression in the high budget TV/feature niche, whereas Sony did have F900, F-35, F-55 and F-65 and Venice I & II.

Yeah, Nikon and Canon made a few 8mm cameras, but as far as having a real strong presence in video, i think it started around the miniDV era and then on into the solid state era until being eclipse by cell phones. Did Canon get into VHS or Hi8 or anything before digital? Sony video dates back to at least the early 1980’s and they introduced the first DV camcorder, i believe. whereas i feel Canon jumped into the consumer market around the turn of the century during the digital transition chaos and massive profits and short product cycles. It may have been the cellphone that pushed Canon into the cine-sphere, but i think they always wanted to sell more glass, so that might’ve happened regardless.

On the other hand, Canon had a 40% market share of the consumer side. Which is a far larger slice of the pie.

Is this world market? and what year or years is this percentage from?

The high end consumer and the lower end pro sort of intersected with the C-300 vs. FS-7 rivalry.

Idk why i never really saw these as rivals. not saying they were never compared, but i guess i always saw the C300 as a bit of a rogue product that shook up the industry. The form factor and the emphasis on color science was unprecedented, not to mention there weren’t a ton of s35 cameras with an EF mount and Timecode and BNC…. ok, this thing was a literal game changer. Even if i never bought one, we all had to shoot on them at some point in our lives.

The problem now for everyone involved is that the video technology is already at "beyond retina". Stills can be blown up and chopped up on an 8K display but R5/A1/Z9 specs are already for pixel peepers only and anything above that is barely incremental.

This is only a problem for unimaginative sales clerks that have been taking easy profits for the last 2 decades as digital matures.

How long do you think it will take the industry to get these specs as entry level?:
- 16+ “usable” DR (similar to the Arri Alexa35 or better)
- 120fps full readout
- global shutter
- up to iso12,800 clean
- 8K or higher resolution
- raw or equivalent 12bit or more codecs
- media cheap enough yet reliable enough for this fantasy camera
- 3+ hr battery video record time, but 6+ would be prefered
- logical and organic ergonomics
- universal and reliable i/o

These specs are the minimum for reducing fomo. These are the specs that if any one of them is lacking then there is the urge to upgrade. In my mind, i can see them prolonging these specs another 10years if ever making all of them standard. in 10years, we may also be on to better tech that leaves CMOS behind. So i’m not so sure these companies are going to be hurting for sales. That said, when will we see the next paradigm shift like we saw around the 2000’s? That huge feast of massive sales? That, likely won’t happen for a long while.

And then it becomes a commodity business. Gimme whatever costs the least because the performance is identical or nearly identical otherwise. That's one of the reasons for the cripple hammer - if all the features are the same and performances are nearly similar, then there's no reason to pick X over Y. It's the same camera, albeit with a different mount, and it should cost the same. And it doesn't really matter what brand it is. It's all a store brand.

Crippling products and witholding features is nothing new or specific to the camera industry. It is frustrating though. haha. It would have totally backfired on Canon if blackmagic or Red or Zcam or Kinfinity or any of those companies ever got their act together or manufactured for a wider audience. For all we know, Red made a deal with them to scratch the 3K for $3K camera long ago. Canon says “we’ll do 8bit, but you leave the $3K price bracket alone!”. Jannard was like “lmfao, you crayzay Canon, you hilarious!”

 

[DLD]

Canon was a major Hi8/8mm camcorder manufacturer (along with Sony, JVC, Panasonic and ... RCA/GE with full frame VHS up until a certain point). In 1991, Canon came out with a Hi8 model (their top unit at ~ $2,500) that accepted Canon photo lenses. I was working retail in LA then.

A well known XXX actor/director stops by the store, buys both the camera and a telephoto. We stand next to each other while he is waiting for his stuff to be carried out to his car. This was our conversation.

--------------------------------------

So, John, if I get the same camera with the same big lens, I can become as big a star as you?

Uh, you need more than a big ... lens.

--------------------------------------

The camera is listed on Canon's site. I looked it up once, too lazy now.

 

[cyvideo]

But what's more important to me is features, functions, ergonomics, codecs, utility software from the manufacturer, ND filters, HFR, compatible audio devices, and now auto-focus modes and tracking performance.

On the subject of ND filters, I see Sony's new FR7 PTZ Camera has an inbuilt variable ND in that small body. If that's the case, why do we not see a variable ND capability in the FX3 and A7 series? It can obviously be done. It's a FF E-Mount camera with a flange back of 18mm like the other bodies in the FF family. Likewise, it appears that there is no technical reason why Sony couldn't offer their variable ND across all their FX/A7 series FF cameras. Wonder why not? Hmm!

Chris Young

 

[JimGao]

…with full frame VHS up until a certain point).

i’ll get to the other things, but wait, full frame VHS? very intrigued! What was this? full sized 35mm format VHS camcorder?


I do now recall the Canon interchangeable lens Hi-8 camera called the LX1, which appears to be the precursor to the XL1. Interesting to note that the EF adapter for the XL1 didn’t get quite the traction that metabones or dof adapters did.