FS7: New Sony PXW-FX9 with venice features and 6k full frame

J.Brown said:
On the FS7 you can set one SDI to show log and the other with Lut so I guess this will become true for the FX9 if it isn't at the moment?
Click to expand...
No that'a the problem, you won't be able to do that. Alister lamented that in his presentation. Maybe the only negative as
I recall.
 
LennyLevy said:
One thing I found confusing was that of the 2 SDI outputs, that the 12G was only useable for 4K 560 and 60P , and correspondingly the 3G was not good for that output . Did I get that correct? That would mean that functionally there is only 1 SDI output which would be a considerable disappointment to me.
Click to expand...

In the presentation it says the 12G SDI can be changed to 3G.. so you can have 2 x 3G..
 
I haven't watched it all yet... man it's long, but that is good news. To have only one port available as 3G would be a backward step over the FS7 for sure.

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
I haven't watched it all yet... man it's long, but that is good news. To have only one port available as 3G would be a backward step over the FS7 for sure.

Chris Young
Click to expand...

For me the only down sides seem to be the LUT limitations and keeping the fs7 loupe design... otherwise looks like a very good camera at a very good price..
 
Very interested here too but have to justify it. At the moment it is more of a want as opposed to a need. In reality I could make more money by buying a second FS7 for mult-icam work for a much smaller outlay than the cost of an FX9. Whether it's two FS7s or one FS7 and and FX9 I'll still have to bill on a basic two camera cost so can't charge much more because one camera is an FX9. Then there is the lens issue. I don't have much in the way of FF glass and the real benefit of this FX9 is that many of its advantages are based around its AF capabilities and performance. To get the best results out of the FX9's AF means investing in Sony FE lenses. The total cost would now be climbing. A much longer ROI to look at. Hmm! Many things to weigh up. Am tempted though! :)

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
Very interested here too but have to justify it. At the moment it is more of a want as opposed to a need. In reality I could make more money by buying a second FS7 for mult-icam work for a much smaller outlay than the cost of an FX9. Whether it's two FS7s or one FS7 and and FX9 I'll still have to bill on a basic two camera cost so can't charge much more because one camera is an FX9. Then there is the lens issue. I don't have much in the way of FF glass and the real benefit of this FX9 is that many of its advantages are based around its AF capabilities and performance. To get the best results out of the FX9's AF means investing in Sony FE lenses. The total cost would now be climbing. A much longer ROI to look at. Hmm! Many things to weigh up. Am tempted though! :)

Yes see what you mean.. for me its trading in or keeping my f5.. a great work horse that has made its money back many times.. the fx9 does seem to be worth the change.. Im endlessly doing interviews and the FF with even Sony stills glass (that I have with an A7III) is going to make the process easier and alot lighter in weight .. hand held and more general stuff.. yes I dont really need FF.. and Im using manual focus .. but what I only realized recently is I can shoot the "normal" stuff in s35 with manual cine zooms.. and just change too 6k mode for interviews .. or some more controlled shots.. a bit of convincing myself but f5 to fx9 is quite a logical path I think.. if I had an Fs7II already.. might be a harder sell..
Click to expand...
 
Yes the jump from an FS5 to the FX9 is a much bigger jump than FS7 either model to FX9. If I were in that FS5 position and if the funds were available I would more than likely make the jump for sure. Re the FF look thing I'm getting close to that look using a Speed Booster Ultra which helps as it gives you that extra stop of light. Most of my interview shoots are reasonably well lit interviews. Even if they are lower light mood shots so noise has never been a really big issue on the FS7 with a Speed Booster using reasonably quick glass. Hell an 85mm F1.4 with a SB gives you a very shallow, too shallow a DOF for many situations unless you really like chasing focus. Maybe this is where the FX9 with its AF could be a big plus. I did a whole doco series with parfocal F2.8 glass and a Speed Booster and the clients loved it. The boosted F2.0 is plenty quick enough for most of my 24-70 and 80-200 interviews.

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
Yes the jump from an FS5 to the FX9 is a much bigger jump than FS7 either model to FX9. If I were in that FS5 position and if the funds were available I would more than likely make the jump for sure. Re the FF look thing I'm getting close to that look using a Speed Booster Ultra which helps as it gives you that extra stop of light. Most of my interview shoots are reasonably well lit interviews. Even if they are lower light mood shots so noise has never been a really big issue on the FS7 with a Speed Booster using reasonably quick glass. Hell an 85mm F1.4 with a SB gives you a very shallow, too shallow a DOF for many situations unless you really like chasing focus. Maybe this is where the FX9 with its AF could be a big plus. I did a whole doco series with parfocal F2.8 glass and a Speed Booster and the clients loved it. The boosted F2.0 is plenty quick enough for most of my 24-70 and 80-200 interviews.

Chris Young
Click to expand...

I have an F5 not fs5.. but funny you should think that.. because its a real problem now.. I tell production companies I have an f5.. and quite a few times now .. I guess young production managers think its an fs5.. !.. another reason to change !
 
morgan_moore said:
Ive had a look.

Still £10000 for neck ache or cable/battery hell

ps does AF work in S+Q?
Click to expand...

haha ! dont think so over 60p.. but in the EVF at all frame rates there is a REC709 /800 LUT .. get a monitor with LUT,s .. no problem.. the battery on the C500II looks alot more oddly / precariously placed to me though ..
 
Thats why one needs (but should not) a 3 hours video. To help spot major gotchas.

The ability to AF someone flying down the wing in HFR could be a make or break to some.

I have a certain expectation of 'pro' tools that they do everything - like the Alexa with no quality drop in HFR or every stills camera having AF in all modes (not to mention LUTs with a proper though post lut management)

The sony thing of 'this not doing that when that is set for this' is completely foreign to me.

I agree about the C500 batt, Id probably get a plate for the back.. at which point Id mount a non canon battery!

No elegance in design either of these 'tools' - Ive put up with the FS7. Above 10k I would not do 'putting up'.
 
This has been known pretty much since it was announced, but the fact that you don’t need to use exposure compensation anymore is a welcome thing. Having to deal with ettr all the time was a huge pain. Now with the difference in noise it should be far more straightforward to hand off a properly exposed Slog image to an editor without walking them through the reasons why you overexposed everything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top