Alister Chapman just confirmed that the FX9 will have a Legacy mode in Custom that will help make matching to FS7 very close although the sensors will be different. However he also said that currently you can't upload User LUT's which I think will be a substantial loss for us. Can't understand why they would do . Very irritating to me.
FS7: New Sony PXW-FX9 with venice features and 6k full frame
- Thread starter J.Brown
- Start date
Grug
Veteran
And the F5(5), and the Venice.
I can't wait to see what Top Gun II will look like in four years.
In a way I think the choice of only internal 4k recording from the 6k sensor is a good choice. File sizes is the same as the FS7 but with greater true resolution. On the other hand with the limitations of full frame mode one might end up using s35 mode more often with or without speedbooster but then the added advantage of the 6k sensor to get greater resolution is lost. Then again he mentions a near 5k mode with 60p recording coming in the future. The question is if this is within the present XAVC spec or if it will be limited to external raw recording?
I do hope Sony puts a 6k S35 sensor in the FX6 as that would be the best thing. Then again it will probably have more limitations than the FX9.
Mr Chapman guesses Sony will discontinue the FS7 to make room for a price decrease on the FS7 mk2 which I also think is a good move as the Sony line up from FS5 mk2 to FX9 is so dense.
I do hope Sony puts a 6k S35 sensor in the FX6 as that would be the best thing. Then again it will probably have more limitations than the FX9.
Mr Chapman guesses Sony will discontinue the FS7 to make room for a price decrease on the FS7 mk2 which I also think is a good move as the Sony line up from FS5 mk2 to FX9 is so dense.
cyvideo
Veteran
AFAIK all the frame rates and frame sizes that Sony have mentioned so far apart from the external RAW with the CA back will all be capable of being recorded internally to the XAVC format to UHD/4K. The 6K, 6008 x 3168 to UHD/4K internally is at this point is limited to 24/25/30p whereas the Full Frame 5K crop will be 5008 x 2649 and allow a maximum recording rate of 60fps. Regardless of whether it is FF 6K or FF crop 5K both if recording to XAVC will be limited by the XAVC maximum video profile of 4096 x 2160. That's how I read the released info to date... could be wrong but I don't think so:undecided.
Chris Young
Chris Young
dmitrizigany
Veteran
It's 5K (near full frame) that is downsampled to 4K. So basically a crop mode to get 50/60p.
A bit of a bummer, but hope with time they can make it do the FF/6K scan to 4K in 50/60p.
Yes, I think it's a bit disingenuous for Sony to call this a full frame crop and to list the 50p/60p frame rates under full frame. Many who don't look closer will think the FX9 uses the full 6K sensor when shooting 50p/60p when in fact it only uses 83% of the sensor.
I think it would be more accurate and informative for Sony to call it an APC-H crop of the full frame sensor making it clear that the 50P/60P crops will not have to same field of view as footage shot at the 24p/25p/30p frame rates.
I think Sony is unnecessarily muddying the waters when many potential FX9 buyers won't care that the camera isn't a true full frame camera when shooting at frame rates above 30p. It's a huge upgrade from the FS7 and will likely be a massive hit for Sony.
*** Supported in the future firmware update. Scanning area is cropped around 83% of full-frame and 122% larger than S35. (diagonal)
I'm not that convinced FX9 will be a hit. It looks to be a great camera but with a few things missing and it's almost twice the price of an FS7. I would never justify to get one as it's to expensive and clients doesn't care to get the extra features. It also has to compete with C500mkII and others so not a sure bet.
It's not clear to me whether S35 crop will still be making use of the 6K or 5K downconvert to create a picture with higher resolution than the current FS7. Hope it does as S35 will be fine for many if not most shoots especially w/use of a speed booster . However if you lose the downconvert for S35 then FF will be much more advantageous way to use this camera
Of course that means you need full frame lenses which for many invested in cine glass will be a drag . That means many more advanced shooters with good cine glass won't get the full advantage of the camera's higher resolution downconvert. I use a lot of still glass so it won't matter that much to me but what if say I want to intercut between still glass footage shot in high res FF and S35 crop shot with say the 18-110? Will that make my 18-110 footage suffer? Now you'll want an adapter that expands the S35 glass to FF but i don't see that happening + you'll lose a stop.
Of course that means you need full frame lenses which for many invested in cine glass will be a drag . That means many more advanced shooters with good cine glass won't get the full advantage of the camera's higher resolution downconvert. I use a lot of still glass so it won't matter that much to me but what if say I want to intercut between still glass footage shot in high res FF and S35 crop shot with say the 18-110? Will that make my 18-110 footage suffer? Now you'll want an adapter that expands the S35 glass to FF but i don't see that happening + you'll lose a stop.
Grug
Veteran
For a given sensor size, you can only downsample from the number of photosites you have available in that sensor mode. The FX9 uses 6k in full-frame mode and downsamples that to 4k, but once you crop in to the camera’s S35mm mode, you’ll only have 4k to work with in total - so there is no additional resolution to oversample with for 4k (so it’ll be the same as the FS7’s 4k output).
You can downsample that 4k image into a perfect 2k image. But that’s all.
Grug
Veteran
How so?
You can either adapt your previously-speedboosted lenses directly to the FX9 (for the same field of view, and DoF that they gave you when speedboosted), or you can speedboost them on to the S35mm mode to match your full-frame FoV when shooting 50-60fps.
They'll work exactly the same way as they always did, but with the added option of being able to adapt those same lenses cleanly to the full-frame sensor, for superior downsampled image quality when you want it.
I understand that. What I meant was if I want the advantage of downconverted resolution mob trusty speed booster will go into the closet and I'll kiss it goodbye. I'll just use the lenses directly on FF. Not a problem at all really. I assume that it will not make any difference in post (other than resolution) if you shoot one scene in FF and another in S35 as it all ends up on 4K . The bigger issue will be whether the 18-110 and other S35 lenses look poorer by comparison. That could be a drag for many users though clearly a boon to new FF cine lens sales.
I'll want to see comparisons between 18-110 S35 and 28-135 FF on the FX9. There must be reasons for why the 28-135 is $1000 cheaper. Maybe time for a version II Sony?
I'll want to see comparisons between 18-110 S35 and 28-135 FF on the FX9. There must be reasons for why the 28-135 is $1000 cheaper. Maybe time for a version II Sony?
cyvideo
Veteran
In as much as the resolution pixel wise will be the same but what you are not taking into consideration is that you now have an eight year newer sensor, Exmor R as opposed to Exmor.
Exmor R is back side illuminated and now has the photo-diode substrate layer directly behind the sensor micro lenses and the color filter. A vastly improved layout from the POV of light loss efficiency. Bringing the substrate layer to the top brings the photosites much closer to the light. Also the metal conductive layer on the Exmor R sensor is now made from copper not alloy. This more expensive use of copper has improved on sensor heat dissipation and improved conductivity. Both of which contribute to much lower noise. To the best of my knowledge Sony is the only one using copper in this application of sensor building. Copper is vastly more efficient in most area of signal processing and is the preferred metal. Apart from the actual pixel count of 4096 every other aspect of the Exmor R sensor is eight years and streets ahead of the FS7 sensor. I wouldn't mind betting, yet to be seen, that the crop 5K 60p from this new Exmor R will probably produce as good if not a better image than that produced by a 6K sensor that does not have the big advantages that Sony have incorporated into the Exmor R. I would much rather have a 1K lower image that has a very clean signal that requires much less noise reduction and processing over the extra 1K with from a sensor that is going to require more processing and noise reduction. If as rumored it happens and Olympus & Panasonic get the Sony's new Emor R 47MP, 8K sensor that alone goes to show other manufacturers are tipping their hats to Sony's leading sensor technology breakthroughs. Too many of us get lost in the numbers, bigger is better! Not necessarily so in signal processing.
Chris Young
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/...t-sony-a7r-resolution-with-new-47mp-8k-sensor
Last edited:
Grug
Veteran
Obviously the noise performance is noticeably improved (the 12,800 ISO samples shot by Phil Bloom show that quite clearly), but an improved signal/noise ratio isn't going to change the nature of a bayer pattern sensor (and the interpolation it has to do to create a 4k image from a 4k sensor). So 4k S35mm from both cameras should remain very comparable.
It's the larger sensor and the oversampling it offers, that are going to be primarily responsible for the noticeably improved image quality from the FX9. Where the lower signal/noise ratio will help is in improving latitude, and performance in underexposed situations.