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

cyvideo said:
Really! Tell me more about this S16 crop. Where did you confirm this? If this is correct then it changes the flexibility and usefulness of this camera quite significantly from my point of view. Means I can still use B4 lenses where jobs call for that sort of reach. I know it has been confirmed re white balance in Cine EI. That's another good jump forward.

Chris Young
Click to expand...

I read it in some article by Mr Chapman .. who has shot with the camera.. maybe he was referring to a firmware up date or the menu's are not the real ones yet as the cameras are pre production..? it would be nuts if they didn't have it .. doesn't the sales blurb mention using B4 lenses with it.. I thought it did ..
 
Last edited:
An innovative thing for Sony to do would be to have a way for people to see and scroll through the entire Fx9 menu online. That would allow people to see what features are or are not available and also get a feel for how the Fx9 menu is set up. Similar to what ARRI did with their app that allowed you to test-drive the camera menu.

I suppose one reason a company would not do such a thing is that they'd rather you test the camera and camera menus out in person, at a retailer, where a salesperson can pitch to you.

Theoretically, there could be a website were you are given remote access to a camera whereupon you can go through the camera menus, choose settings, and record video that you then download for examination. The camera on a tripod head that you are able to operate remotely along with remotely operating the zoom, focus, and iris of the camera. You'd get to test-drive the camera online, from your easy chair. Or from the middle of the desert. The practice of going into a store to try out a camera is a tired model that needs innovating. The technology is there to make remote demo-ing possible. There are already web-cams that allow you to remotely operate the camera.
 
Still can't quite get over how they stuck with that stupid extension unit.
If the extension unit recorded some kind of better codec then it makes sense. Just to have an additional SDI out to record whatever flavour of raw is disappointing especially when the camera has a 12G SDI out built in. I.e. probably just a software limitation on purpose from the main camera body.
Some type of codec upgrade would have made this camera a no brainer. Everything else about it is pretty great.
 
The extension box looks really bad. The sleek design of the FX9 just goes out of the window and it doesn't even record anything. One would wish that Sony did something similar to the F5/F55 recorder that integrates really well. Or just put a raw output connector as on the FS5. Why o why Sony do you still make these odd things. I bet the FX6 will have raw output straight from the body.
 
DendriteStudios said:
Still can't quite get over how they stuck with that stupid extension unit.
Click to expand...
I agree.
It seems to have some usueful functions for broadcast and networking. But for me the only need I have for it is the raw out.

I asked one of the Japanese Sony guys (not sure if he was one of the developers of the camera or not though) today if it wouldn’t be possible to route the raw signal to the on body SDI port. But he either didn’t understand my question or just avoided it by saying it wasn’t possible.

If the extension had also been a raw recorder tailored for the FX9 it would also have made sense.

I’m starting to come to terms with the idea of not having raw though. XAVC will be enough for 99% of my paying customers and for other projects if I want a slightly better codec I can record ProRes via my Ninja V. Can’t really see myself needing better than that.
With my FS700 I have to use the raw signal because internal codecs are crap and it’s the only way to get 4K. That issue will be gone with the FX9.
 
Sony wont make a home run with the FX9 as they did with the FS7. So my take is FS7 will still be the go to choice for most productions. Especially as the price is double that of the FS7 and in real use might offer little extra to clients.
 
J.Brown said:
The extension box looks really bad. The sleek design of the FX9 just goes out of the window and it doesn't even record anything. One would wish that Sony did something similar to the F5/F55 recorder that integrates really well. Or just put a raw output connector as on the FS5. Why o why Sony do you still make these odd things. I bet the FX6 will have raw output straight from the body.
Click to expand...

Sony could have made the extension unit smaller had they done without the slot-receiver. The slot-receiver isn't something in high demand. More of an ENG-news thing.

I wonder if Sony could have made the Fx9 so that the existing extension unit worked with it as well.

Sony could have added something else to the extension unit to make it more worth it. Have the slot receiver toast bagels or something.
 
J.Brown said:
The extension box looks really bad. The sleek design of the FX9 just goes out of the window and it doesn't even record anything. One would wish that Sony did something similar to the F5/F55 recorder that integrates really well. Or just put a raw output connector as on the FS5. Why o why Sony do you still make these odd things. I bet the FX6 will have raw output straight from the body.
Click to expand...

Or even better... I would hope that Sony would facilitate other manufacturers to make their own extension/recorder custom fitted to the FX9. It would be nice to record BRAW or Prores Raw on sleek integrated recorders that custom fit the camera.
 
J.Brown said:
The greatest feature might be the S-tone setting. In my opinion it looks really nice straight out of the camera and no fuss with LUTs. Just like how I set up my FS5.
Click to expand...

Very curious how you have your FS5 looking good out of camera? I never did figure out how to get good images out of that camera. FS7 has always been easier for me: shoot with the LC709A MLUT in Slog3, apply the LUT in post, and the footage looks gorgeous. The Arri C-Log LUT looks good too. But with the FS5, it’s always felt like a crap shoot. Thoughts?
 
Colin Nusbaum said:
Or even better... I would hope that Sony would facilitate other manufacturers to make their own extension/recorder custom fitted to the FX9. It would be nice to record BRAW or Prores Raw on sleek integrated recorders that custom fit the camera.
Click to expand...
+10000 to that!

I could deal with the extension back for raw if it also recorded the raw files. It’s the combination of having to add the extension back AND a recorder that just makes it a mess.
 
dipstik said:
Very curious how you have your FS5 looking good out of camera? I never did figure out how to get good images out of that camera. FS7 has always been easier for me: shoot with the LC709A MLUT in Slog3, apply the LUT in post, and the footage looks gorgeous. The Arri C-Log LUT looks good too. But with the FS5, it’s always felt like a crap shoot. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

When I first got my FS5 I used it just as my FS7 with Slog3 and LUT and yes it didn't look as good as the FS7. Then I did some testing and comparison between the two cameras and concluded that to get the best out of my FS5 I set it to Cine4 gamma instead of Slog3 and used Pro as color mode and I lowered detail to -7. This gave me a nice image straight out of the camera with good high light roll off and low noise and with a good color rendition. So ever since I changed settings it has worked great delivering fine images to clients. And it matches FS7 when doing two camera shoots with just a touch of tweak.

FS5 haven't got the superiour video processing compared to the FS7 so I thought it be better to set the camera to get the best out of what it can do.

Another limiting factor is that 4k internally only records to 8-bit 4:2:0 so 4k images although looking fine lacks the last step of detail compared to FS7. But I prefer my FS5 with Cine4/Pro to a C200 and WideDR as it gives me a better image even in 4k.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top