Other: FX9 demo footage and testing

Test #4 is up. Some actual real-world indoor footage instead of charts.

https://vimeo.com/373595256

All clips were shot with natural light and/or a single Litepanels Astra 6X.
All clips were shot with S-LOG3.Cine in the camera's 800 ISO base mode.
All clips were graded in DaVinci Resolve using Sony's "Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200.cube" LUT as a starting point, which is said to provide a similar look to that of Sony's Venice camera.
 
I like the look just as I'm used to and like the look of FS7 and FS5. I think it will work great mixing cameras.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Test #4 is up. Some actual real-world indoor footage instead of charts.

https://vimeo.com/373595256

All clips were shot with natural light and/or a single Litepanels Astra 6X.
All clips were shot with S-LOG3.Cine in the camera's 800 ISO base mode.
All clips were graded in DaVinci Resolve using Sony's "Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200.cube" LUT as a starting point, which is said to provide a similar look to that of Sony's Venice camera.
Click to expand...

Thanks Doug, that's the most useful test yet.

IQ looks like a clear step up to me. The benefits of the larger format and the downsampling are pretty clear - the IQ just gets better.
 
Doug, have you seen any difference in the slow motion quality? I read that the FX9 still does the pixel binning and line skipping to achieve 120fps. Is it similar to the 7 where it gets a bit grainy and soft?
 
Doug ,
Love your TESTS - THANKS!
Since from your 1st test it looks like the basic colorimetry of the FX9 is different than the FS7 , I'm thinking it would be great in Resolve to make a LUT starting with "Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200.cube" that could make the FS7 a decent match for the FX9 . That could be loaded into the FS7 for multicam shoots that use Log, and of course used as a starting point in post. Unless its been changed I don't think the FX9 accepts USER LUTS yet so you couldn't go the other way.

Maybe you wouldn't have to do any color correction though - that would be nice.

Feel Free to play around. :)
 
Grug said:
... IQ looks like a clear step up to me. The benefits of the larger format and the downsampling are pretty clear - the IQ just gets better.
Click to expand...
There's also likely to be a whole lot more processing power vs. FS7, which was announced more than five years ago. Five years in the world of electronics is a loooong time.
 
DLD said:
There's also likely to be a whole lot more processing power vs. FS7, which was announced more than five years ago. Five years in the world of electronics is a loooong time.
Click to expand...
My hope is that it has a little power to spare and because it’s a brand new sensor they’ve been rather conservative in promising what it can do.
I sure hope that they manage to squeeze out 50p without crop eventually.
Should be some surprises coming at least if their other cameras are something to go by.
 
Interesting watch.

1.14 The bathroom lights jumped out at me as unpleasant. At least they don't have fluorescent green/magenta/yellow rings round them.

Im not really sure what the solution is as

Introduction of some sort of knee would render them grey.

Maybe a worse lens (or a filter) that gave them a glow?

Lighting the rest of that scene UP to close to their value or inserting low watt bulb (both 'cinematography' - which their is not time for on typical jobs)

Soft filter in post (qualified above 90 with a slow roll in)
 
morgan_moore said:
Interesting watch.

1.14 The bathroom lights jumped out at me as unpleasant. At least they don't have fluorescent green/magenta/yellow rings round them.

Im not really sure what the solution is as

Introduction of some sort of knee would render them grey.

Maybe a worse lens (or a filter) that gave them a glow?

Lighting the rest of that scene UP to close to their value or inserting low watt bulb (both 'cinematography' - which their is not time for on typical jobs)

Soft filter in post (qualified above 90 with a slow roll in)
Click to expand...

All great ideas! Not accepting stuff like that is what separates the pros from someone who just points a camera and pushes the button.
 
Newsguy said:
Doug, have you seen any difference in the slow motion quality? I read that the FX9 still does the pixel binning and line skipping to achieve 120fps. Is it similar to the 7 where it gets a bit grainy and soft?
Click to expand...

I didn't have time to compare the S&Q Motion mode head-to-head between the two cameras, which I think would be necessary to form any conclusions. But I had no complaints at all about what I saw from the FX9.
 
I've finished uploading all my test footage. I'm done.

Video #1: Custom Mode: S-Cinetone (Venice look) and HG 8
https://vimeo.com/373407419

Video #2: Custom Mode: High and Low Sensitivity w/ HG 8
https://vimeo.com/373411453

Video #3: Custom Mode: Gain/Noise comparisons part 1
https://vimeo.com/373429935

Video #4: S-LOG: Indoor Footage
https://vimeo.com/373595256

Video #5: S-LOG: Outdoor Footage
https://vimeo.com/373605035

Video #6: S-LOG: Veterans Day Parade
https://vimeo.com/373641704

Video #7: Custom Mode: Orlando Park
https://vimeo.com/373630701

Video #8: FF and S35 Field of View comparison
https://vimeo.com/373674993

Video #9: Gain/Noise comparisons part 2
https://vimeo.com/373679052

Video #10: S-LOG: Exposure level
https://vimeo.com/373685531
 
Just to be sure... is the Duclos 11-16 a FF lens or were you in S35 mode on the fx9? I know my normie 11-16 covers full frame at the tighter end, but it doesn’t look that sharp wide open
 
Last edited:
mcbob said:
Just to be sure... is the Duclos 11-16 a FF lens or were you in S35 mode on the fx9? I know my normie 11-16 covers full frame at the tighter end, but it doesn’t look that sharp wide open
Click to expand...

Good question. As I wrote in the description of the video . . . "The superwide Duclos 11-16mm f/2.8 PL lens only covers the FF sensor when zoomed to 16mm."
I used it wide open in FF 6K mode and you can see there is some softness and slight vignetting and distortion around the edges. I chose to embrace the look rather than fight it. It would not be appropriate for some subject matter.
 
LennyLevy said:
Doug ,
Love your TESTS - THANKS!
Since from your 1st test it looks like the basic colorimetry of the FX9 is different than the FS7 , I'm thinking it would be great in Resolve to make a LUT starting with "Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200.cube" that could make the FS7 a decent match for the FX9 .
Click to expand...

I asked Alister already on his blog page about availability of the s709 lut; no reply.
 
Thanks again for putting in your time to shoot and share Doug. I see the same artefacts on HFR as the other Sony cameras so to bad they haven't improved in that area yet.
 
morgan_moore said:
Interesting watch.

1.14 The bathroom lights jumped out at me as unpleasant. At least they don't have fluorescent green/magenta/yellow rings round them.

Im not really sure what the solution is as

Introduction of some sort of knee would render them grey.

Maybe a worse lens (or a filter) that gave them a glow?

Lighting the rest of that scene UP to close to their value or inserting low watt bulb (both 'cinematography' - which their is not time for on typical jobs)

Soft filter in post (qualified above 90 with a slow roll in)
Click to expand...

I don't think the other practicals look particularly outstanding either. This is not a criticism of Doug's exposure. He has made clear previously he "let's the highlights fend for themselves," which is what makes the scenes informative. But if the highlights had been given less exposure so as not clipped, what would have remained of the low key is one question. But the scene with the lamp fixture containing several clear incandescent bulbs, it should be possible to have similar looking overall scene exposure while retaining the detail of the filament itself, without "cinematography" manipulations.
 
So, on the indoor footage... tell the truth... is your house normally that clean, or did you spend a full day getting it "show ready?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top