FS7: New Sony PXW-FX9 with venice features and 6k full frame
- Thread starter J.Brown
- Start date
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Remember FF has bigger or more pixels to catch photons. Performance should be better just like a 3litre engine tends to be higher powered than a 1l engine of the same design.
Focus? Shooting at 4/5.6 even 8 is not illegal!
I think (sony) AF will be brilliant in the correct circumstances - single subject no racks to a second character or dirty foreground.
AF is major pull away from the fs7 (ha ha) for me.
It will still in reality be an unpleasant beast for RnG work once you add a few gizmos.
The canon looks like it will outlive it and maybe cost less £perYear.
Last edited:
Good point about IBIS. Has anyone else tried the full lock IBIS on the GH5? It's stunning - I literally don't need a tripod at all, except for long interviews. And then a quick button press puts you back into regular dual IBIS, allowing panning and movement.
It will be nice if the next gen Sony mirrorless can achieve something similar with an 18-110.
Ben.
Vik Kamenicky
Active member
IMHO Sony blew it. They managed to get quite the market from FS7 and FS5. Now with the C500mk2 people in the market for a new camera will go with the C500 mk2. FX-9 is a nice camera, sure it has it's market but with another giant extension unit which hasn't a built-in recorder was a mistake. Timecode built in is a nice feature thou.
Liam Hall
Veteran
And dual ISO is a good move.
If the 4k looks like 6k then I can see the advantage of recording to an already used codec. But the buzz looks like being for 5.7-6k these days so it might work as an disadvantage for Sony. Regardless I think the FX9 will work great for most kind of works except when you need something small and then we have to wait until spring next year for the FX6.
Anyone see the extreme moire introduced when shooting in 1080p in the Cinema5D video? They say it won’t make it into the production model, and I hope that’s the case, because despite all of this talk of 6K/raw/anamorphic, no one is broadcasting beyond 1080 on television.
I saw that horrible moiré also. It reminds me of what happens on the C200 sometimes.
My take on the full frame thing in the FX9 it isn't for me for now. I like using speedbooster on the FS7/FS5 and well that gives me most benefits of full frame. Certainly one could shoot S35 on the FX9 but the advantage of full frame is lost. Still there's a lot of features and improvements from the FS7. Somehow the body looks more solid in the Venice like grey.
My take on the full frame thing in the FX9 it isn't for me for now. I like using speedbooster on the FS7/FS5 and well that gives me most benefits of full frame. Certainly one could shoot S35 on the FX9 but the advantage of full frame is lost. Still there's a lot of features and improvements from the FS7. Somehow the body looks more solid in the Venice like grey.
broughtonfilm
Well-known member
It does not have bigger pixels than FS7 because it puts more of them into the sensor. 4K vs 6K. Pixels are roughly the same size.
cyvideo
Veteran
It's got a lot to like but missing one thing I need. I still have a fair amount of HD work requiring long servo B4 glass which works well enough for me with an MTF S16 adapter and the S16 center crop on the existing FS7. Like a few have said if needing that FF look I can still use Speed Booster with FF glass. Or the A7III if required. Same codecs as existing FS7 plus RAW not a big consideration so here it looks like old faithful stays for a while longer.
Chris Young
Chris Young
On this point only, I disagree a little bit. GH5 IBIS is amazing until it causes warping distortion at the corners, which can be any time the camera is moving, and has on occasion such as when mounted on a stationary tripod and left on, embarked on its own a severe flutter like rolling shutter. Okay, that was my fault for leaving it on, and it may be that wind or vibrations on the tripod set it in motion. Either way, it has both saved, and wrecked some of my footage. It's worse at wide angles. It has been best when I am actively moving around. I'm scared of it happening on important footage, even the distorted corners to me are not acceptable for professional work, so I either don't use it or go to the GH5s which doesn't have IBIS, and just mount the camera on monopod. It's the same for me with AF. I am a full manual cameraman. IBIS seems to work great when IS Lock is on, shooting handheld, it is amazing and tripod like, and works for whip pans but not slow pans.
Joshua Milligan
Well-known member
That's the thing for me. Autofocus is great for gimbal work, sliders, jibs, multi-cam interviews, mounting cameras to hard to reach places like inside a car on a mount, etc., but outside of that, I'm running manual focus pretty much all the time. Plus, all of those situations I just mentioned I use mirrorless cameras for since they are small. I just don't see myself using AF much on any cinema camera, whether that be the FS7, FX9 or C500II. It's a great feature to have and can be helpful for those times where you can benefit from it, but I just like feeling one with the camera, pulling focus in the moment, making sure I'm focus on what I want to focus on and shifting focus to something else when I want to, in my timing and at my own speed. I can't see how using the joystick on the FX9's handgrip to move your autofocus point during a run & gun shoot would ever work well. I feel like I would miss things and would be more worried about that than capturing what's going on. Maybe that's just me, but I only see AF as a tool for certain situations. For everything else, I want to be one with the camera and that includes me pulling the focus.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
The next step with AF is a decent way of controlling it. Todays systems canon and sony.. we how actually are they supposed to work without knocking the shot or with an eye in an evf.
Poke poke poke. its useless.
Poke poke poke. its useless.
dmitrizigany
Veteran
They’ve said that they hope other software will implement it as well. So only time will tell if they will.
JPNola
Veteran
Is this what happened?
Sony Venice is a huge success and as a result the Fx9 is handcuffed in order to protect that success.
Canon's cinema camera, the C700, has been a total flop and as a result Canon did not worry about protecting it. The C500MkII isn't handcuffed to protect any camera above it.
____________
I've never owned anything but Sony cameras but, price aside, I'd probably go for the C500MkII over the Sony Fx9. It will be interesting to see how much the market starts demanding full-frame. I don't see it being demanded as much as s35 was demanded. That is, I don't see there being the same move from s35 to FF that there was from 2/3" to s35. When the s35 cameras came out you knew you had to get a s35 camera to remain competitive. But it doesn't feel like you need to move to FF in order to remain competitive. I don't think s35 will be abandoned to the extent that 2/3" was abandoned. Stepping up to s35 was a must. Stepping up to FF more seems elective option.
Sony Venice is a huge success and as a result the Fx9 is handcuffed in order to protect that success.
Canon's cinema camera, the C700, has been a total flop and as a result Canon did not worry about protecting it. The C500MkII isn't handcuffed to protect any camera above it.
____________
I've never owned anything but Sony cameras but, price aside, I'd probably go for the C500MkII over the Sony Fx9. It will be interesting to see how much the market starts demanding full-frame. I don't see it being demanded as much as s35 was demanded. That is, I don't see there being the same move from s35 to FF that there was from 2/3" to s35. When the s35 cameras came out you knew you had to get a s35 camera to remain competitive. But it doesn't feel like you need to move to FF in order to remain competitive. I don't think s35 will be abandoned to the extent that 2/3" was abandoned. Stepping up to s35 was a must. Stepping up to FF more seems elective option.
alaskacameradude
Veteran
I kind of agree. It seems to me (opinion only) that FF is more for those who 'started'
as still photogs where APSC is seen as 'hobbyist' and FF is for the 'pros'. They have
an investment in FF lenses and 'see' things in the FF field of view (which is why
there is all the talk of 'a 35mm lens really is a 50mm when it is on a crop camera')
But for those of us who never were still photogs and only worked in the motion world,
there is no built up 'need' to 'see everything' in the FF field of view or huge investment
in FF lenses. I've worked as an AC on a couple of decent sized shoots and the DP
NEVER asked me for the 'lens that is equivalent to what a 50mm would be on a full
frame camera.' He'd just ask me to put on the 35mm. Or the 50mm, or 85mm. He
didn't 'see' things in a full frame world and need to have it 'converted'
Obviously, there is a large group of people who moved from say the
5D into motion shooting so there is definitely some appeal to FF for them.
And obviously things are changing a bit. More full frame motion cameras
are popping up. But I see it more as 'another tool' to use as opposed to
'a must have feature' for your camera. My thinking being that super 35 and
FF cameras will exist alongside each other. Personally I have a pretty big
investment in lenses which are NOT FF lenses, so not really that interested in
FF personally.
JPNola
Veteran
Fx9 allows application of a LUT while in S&Q.
No word on whether the Fx9 tally remains in the display when de-activating the rest of the display.
Same loupe as Fs7, disappointing. Also disappointing that the Fx9 does not shoot on CF Express. I suppose the good news there is that your XQ cards are still good if you migrate from Fs7 to Fx7. And it makes things easier if using an Fx9 as the A-cam, Fs7 as a B-cam.
This Fx9-related news, via Phil Holland over on Reduser:
"Atomos has just announced that 16-bit Linear RAW recording support will come to their Neon Class Displays."
Funny, but the users over on the RED forum seem more positive about the Fx9 than the users here. Maybe that's because they are more observers in regard to the Fx9 and didn't have any wants or expectations for it.
No word on whether the Fx9 tally remains in the display when de-activating the rest of the display.
Same loupe as Fs7, disappointing. Also disappointing that the Fx9 does not shoot on CF Express. I suppose the good news there is that your XQ cards are still good if you migrate from Fs7 to Fx7. And it makes things easier if using an Fx9 as the A-cam, Fs7 as a B-cam.
This Fx9-related news, via Phil Holland over on Reduser:
"Atomos has just announced that 16-bit Linear RAW recording support will come to their Neon Class Displays."
Funny, but the users over on the RED forum seem more positive about the Fx9 than the users here. Maybe that's because they are more observers in regard to the Fx9 and didn't have any wants or expectations for it.