Other: Is Your Sony FX6 Soft?

Joshua Milligan

Joshua Milligan

Well-known member
I've had my FX6 for a little over a month now and I love almost everything about it. That being said, in all of the interviews I've done with the FX6 alongside my A7SIII, the FX6 looks extremely soft. So much so that it feels like I'm back on my FS7 all over again.

I don't understand this because the A7SIII is incredibly sharp and detailed and both cameras share the same sensor. On some interview shots I've been able to sharpen the FX6 up, but on others the difference in sharpness between the A7SIII and FX6 are too much to overcome.

The only outlier is potentially the lenses. On all of the shoots I had my A7SIII equipped with a 70-200 2.8 GM and the FX6 was mounted with a 50 1.4 Zeiss Planar. I guess it's possible that the lenses are the issue, but I've never before found my 50 1.4 to be soft, especially this soft. In fact, that's a lens that's well known for its IQ, so I really don't think that's the issue.

I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed this, or perhaps if there's a setting in my camera, such as Detail, that is off on mine. Any thoughts?
 
Ditto on the 50 being soft when wide. Its the weakest of those lenses. Also what's the detail setting on your A7 , that's often very relevant. Default is probably quite a bit of detail though I need to research that question as I just got my A7siii.
 
LennyLevy said:
Ditto on the 50 being soft when wide. Its the weakest of those lenses. Also what's the detail setting on your A7 , that's often very relevant. Default is probably quite a bit of detail though I need to research that question as I just got my A7siii.
Click to expand...

Great question. The detail on my A7SIII is turned down to -5. I always dial that down. This isn't fake or digital sharpness. The A7SIII files are gorgeous.
 
Does the FX6 have an olpf? The A7SIII has none. And is "-5" sharpening on A7SIII actually OFF? Has anyone compared the RAW files for detail?
 
It's universally known to be pretty soft when comparing to its competition (until you stop down), but beauty is always in the eye of the beholder.

Both new Sony sensors appear pretty sharp, so IMO that softness will now prevail even more as you continue to gain experience with your new cameras and your old glass.

The GM is a photography lens...its main job is to be sharp. lol
 
The Sony Carl Zeiss Planar T* FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA has always been a very highly rated lens, many comparing it to the 55 Otus. If you look here at Dxomark's review of this lens, you'll see it's super sharp, even wide open:https://www.dxomark.com/sony-carl-zeiss-planar-t-fe-50mm-f-1-4-za-lens-review/

I have no idea where you're getting that this lens is soft at. I've shot photos with it for years on my A7RIII wide open and it's so bloody sharp it could cut my eyes open haha. I always reach for it over my GMs because of that.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
The Sony Carl Zeiss Planar T* FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA has always been a very highly rated lens, many comparing it to the 55 Otus. If you look here at Dxomark's review of this lens, you'll see it's super sharp, even wide open:https://www.dxomark.com/sony-carl-zeiss-planar-t-fe-50mm-f-1-4-za-lens-review/

I have no idea where you're getting that this lens is soft at. I've shot photos with it for years on my A7RIII wide open and it's so bloody sharp it could cut my eyes open haha. I always reach for it over my GMs because of that.
Click to expand...

haha...well, I was not talking about that one since you called it a Zeiss Planar in your original post, which is probably what post #3 below me thought as well when confirming softness.

Sony's P is a much better lens than the one I'm referring to.
 
docmoore said:
Do not think that the problem is with the FX6 ...

https://youtu.be/DoQsNvbmc1k

https://vimeo.com/518317962

Misfocus ... not enough DOF ... movement ... lots of culprits ...

Think you have a great camera ... all the other bits need to be at a high level
Click to expand...

There was no movement, eye AF was used (just like the A7SIII), there was plenty of DOF, more so even then my A7SIII which was super sharp, and I was stopped down a full stop which means I was not even shooting with the lens wide open. None of those are the issue. I shot with the FS7 for five years and with Sony's Alpha line for longer than that. I'm telling you, my FX6 is producing pretty soft images for me. I can't explain it and I'm not a pixel peeper, but it stands out. I'm not getting rid of it or anything, I'm just trying to make sure something's not off.
 
NorBro said:
haha...well, I was not talking about that one since you called it a Zeiss Planar in your original post, which is probably what the second person below me thought above as well when confirming softness.

Sony's ZP is a much better lens than the one I'm referring to.
Click to expand...

Ok haha. That's why I put those links above. I was wanting to make sure we were talking about the same lens because the one I'm referring to is universally known for its sharpmess. I was wondering why you guys were saying it's a soft lens haha.
 
Next step would be to post some images if you can/are comfortable with it...could collectively evaluate although I know it's not always doable.
 
I don't mind posting some raw TIFFs to demonstrate what I'm talking about. I am not sure how to do that here though without the forum degrading the images which will defeat the purpose of me trying to give examples of it being soft in comparison.
 
docmoore said:
Something may be off ... you need to do a number of pixel peeping tests to ensure that AF ... and backfocus of the mount is not askew ...

It should smoke the FS7 ... and match or exceed the A7SIII ...
Click to expand...

Your last sentence is exactly why I started this thread. Half the reason I moved on from the FS7 was because I was ready for a jump in IQ and I had already purchased and was using the A7SIII. The A7SIII was so much better in IQ than my FS7 that I found myself not grabbing my FS7 anymore. That's when I knew it was time to make the jump.

But ever since then I have loved everything about the FX6 except for how soft it is. It's just, ....weird. And it bothers me because it should be much better than my FS7 and should absolutely be able to match my A7SIII.

If I can find a way to upload TIFFs without degrading them too much, I'll happily do that as I'm wanting to narrow down what is going on here.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
If I can find a way to upload TIFFs without degrading them too much, I'll happily do that as I'm wanting to narrow down what is going on here.
Click to expand...

I use Imgur (there are many other free services).

You can link to the images or embed them here (full-quality reference would come from there).
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Great question. The detail on my A7SIII is turned down to -5. I always dial that down. This isn't fake or digital sharpness. The A7SIII files are gorgeous.
Click to expand...

I disagree. A7sIII has some sharpening even at -7 Detail setting. This was actually the main reason why I didn't like it. To me it looks extremely "square", camera emphasizes horizontal and vertical lines. FX6 is much softer, yes, but for me personally it's a positive thing. You can always sharpen the footage in post if that's your preference. So in essence, this is not surprising that you find A7sIII much sharper, especially that it's not even at the lowest sharpening setting.

Isn't sharpening in a digital camera always "fake or digital sharpness" ? How do you understand what the Detail setting is doing?
 
Last edited:
broughtonfilm said:
I disagree. A7sIII has some sharpening even at -7 Detail setting. This was actually the main reason why I didn't like it. To me it looks extremely "square", camera emphasizes horizontal and vertical lines. FX6 is much softer, yes, but for me personally it's a positive thing. You can always sharpen the footage in post if that's your preference. So in essence, this is not surprising that you find A7sIII much sharper, especially that it's not even at the lowest sharpening setting.

Isn't sharpening in a digital camera always "fake or digital sharpness" ? How do you understand what the Detail setting is doing?
Click to expand...

I was saying that the sharpness I was viewing on screen wasn’t the fake looking sharpness you get from a camera like a GoPro. I don’t like that look either. I was saying that the detail I was referring to on my A7SIII was a natural detail, not the fake looking kind from over-sharpening.

I think we can all agree that when you, for example, review 6K footage downscaled to 4K (such as the FX9), that the footage will appear with more detail and sharpness than say a native 4K file from a camera like the A7SIII. That’s a pretty acknowledged thought. That detail isn’t fake or digital looking. It just looks detailed.

What I’m seeing from my A7SIII files are shots that look like that. Just a lot of great looking detail which isn’t a bad thing. That’s a great thing. Even though the A7SIII isn’t shooting 6K or 8K or anything like that and downscaling it, it still just looks detailed. But my FX6 for whatever reason does not. It looks soft almost as if I was shooting in HD and upscaling it to 4K. It’s lacking detail in my images and I can’t seem to pinpoint why. It’s not that my A7SIII has detail dialed way up and what I’m seeing is a fake sharpness that’s being baked in. It’s literally just that one camera looks sharp and detailed and the other does not. Period.

I love my FX6 and I’m not here to bash it or make anyone offended over their camera. I’m just simply pointing out that for whatever reason mine looks really soft and I’m wanting to know if others are experiencing the same thing or if mine is an anomaly that needs to be looked at.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
It’s not that my A7SIII has detail dialed way up and what I’m seeing is a fake sharpness that’s being baked in.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying the difference is just that, I'm actually not sure if FX6 has OLPF or not. I'd assume yes so that definitely makes a difference. But to see how much of "fake sharpness that’s being baked in" actually is on A7sIII you have to compare the RAW recording to the internal one. It will become clear.

EDIT: I'm realizing that comparing RAW with internal recording will not give a clear answer here, that's because of the noise reduction lacking in RAW recording and present in internal recording, it has a a slight softening effect.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top