Sony announces FX9 4K camcorder with 6K fullframe sensor

So who is thinking about buying?

I am going to resist GAS and wait. Several things I like about it and if buying an FS7mii would be tempting to go ahead and spend the extra on the FX9. Having variable ND, FF and a baked in good color option (better than traditional Sony) are some of the desireable pluses to me. I don't have a shoulder mount camera anymore (except my NEX EA50 which is sort of one) so it would be nice to have that type camera. But overall my FS700Rs are doing just fine for the forseable future. Even if I were going to buy the FX9 soon I would wait until all those things listed as "future updates" actually happen. Seems this camera was a bit rushed out with a lot left unfinished. I wouldn't want to spend all the possible time dealing with all that. I will likely buy an FX9 in future years when the price drops.

Speaking of price drops, the FS7 has dropped today. I expect it will drop more in the future. That is what I did with the FS700...wait until they dropped nearly half of original $8000 price. Took a few years...
 
I'm planning to buy it. I purchased the FS7 when it came out Oct 2014. Have been very happy and am excited to get the FX9 now.
 
Tamerlin said:
Jeromy did say that the Shogun Infreno would get support for the FX9, but limited to 12-bit due to the data rates required. The new module for the Neon has different media as well as a higher data rate and probably also a bigger processor so that it can handle 16-bit raw.
Click to expand...

Thanks Tamerlin! I appreciate you asking about that.
 
Gary T said:
Thanks Tamerlin! I appreciate you asking about that.
Click to expand...

I can't take credit for asking, because I wasn't able to make it to IBC (I was hoping...). I watched an interview with Cinema5D, and Jeromy brought that up.

Honestly though, with log encoding 12-bits is plenty. 16-bits is really only a big deal if you're using linear encoding. That's part of why basically everyone but Sony and Red record in 12-bit, and Sony generally only with higher end cameras.
 
firehawk said:
So who is thinking about buying?
Click to expand...
I’m almost sure I’m gonna get it.
I’m sick of having to deal with the Odyssey7Q connected to my FS700. And for all my paying jobs the internal XAVC of the FX9 will be good enough. If I would want better codec I could use my Ninja V to get ProRes.
Would I need raw in the future I’ll deal with that then.
 
Tamerlin said:
I have a feeling that the higher data rate will be the big new feature for an updated version of the Inferno before too long. Since it's not possible to swap the recording module on those, there will probably be a higher priced one that requires newer media that can record 16-bit, but Jermoy did say that the Inferno would be able to record 12-bit raw from the FX9. Of course, so will the Neon, with either module so that even if you have the new module, you can still choose to record in 12-bit raw to save space.

I suspect that most people will be satisfied with the 12-bit raw, though I'm looking forward to seeing the inevitable joke pics with people trying to mount Neons on their cameras for laughs ;)
Click to expand...


Hopefully the Shogun 7 will be fast enough to handle the 16-bit RAW but I guess it's possible that even it will have to be updated to deal with the increased data and computational requirements. I'm not optimistic about the Shogun 7 working though since Sony seems to be talking about a new recorder coming out that will support the FX9.

Many will likely be pretty happy with the 12-bit RAW but it might not improve things much from the internal codec since it might be 12-bit linear RAW. Hopefully Atomos will be able to do a linear to log transform to capture the original 16-bit linear signal as 12-bit log encoded ProRes RAW. I'm afraid that if they have to truncate the 16-bit linear to 12-bit linear the FX9 RAW won't be any better than that the FS7. Of course this will change when the new portable recorders comes out.

This is probably most a moot point since Sony obviously didn't design the FX9 with RAW as a priority. My curiosity is mostly from the perspective of a renter who already owns Atomos gear.
 
Gary T said:
Hopefully the Shogun 7 will be fast enough to handle the 16-bit RAW but I guess it's possible that even it will have to be updated to deal with the increased data and computational requirements. I'm not optimistic about the Shogun 7 working though since Sony seems to be talking about a new recorder coming out that will support the FX9.
Click to expand...

Jeromy said that the current Shogun models cannot handle the data rate of 16-bit raw.

Many will likely be pretty happy with the 12-bit RAW but it might not improve things much from the internal codec since it might be 12-bit linear RAW.
Click to expand...

I know of only one camera ever that used 12-bit linear, and it didn't go over all that well. In Sony's existing cameras, you get either 12-bit log raw in a 14-bit payload or you get 16-bit linear -- in the higher end models.

AFAIK the internal codec is XAVC, which while a great codec isn't as flexible as raw, so I'm pretty sure that 12-bit raw will be an improvement.

Hopefully Atomos will be able to do a linear to log transform to capture the original 16-bit linear signal as 12-bit log encoded ProRes RAW. I'm afraid that if they have to truncate the 16-bit linear to 12-bit linear the FX9 RAW won't be any better than that the FS7. Of course this will change when the new portable recorders comes out.
Click to expand...

This one I can't say for sure, but it sounded like Jeromy was describing the choice of 12-bit vs 16-bit raw as a camera feature, which made sense to me since the camera is the logical place to implement the log encoding if you're using it -- you'll need to apply log encoding even when recording raw to provide a preview image, so the hardware to implement that processing is built into the camera anyway, as is the software.

This is probably most a moot point since Sony obviously didn't design the FX9 with RAW as a priority. My curiosity is mostly from the perspective of a renter who already owns Atomos gear.
Click to expand...

Black Magic and Red are the only camera manufacturers that DO make raw a priority across their line, so that's not surprising.

Raw isn't all that useful in documentary for example, mainly due to the data rate... especially if the alternative is XAVC, which is significantly more efficient than ProRes, though it's also significantly more compute heavy -- not surprising since it's based on the h.264 toolkit.
 
Tamerlin said:
Jeromy said that the current Shogun models cannot handle the data rate of 16-bit raw.



I know of only one camera ever that used 12-bit linear, and it didn't go over all that well. In Sony's existing cameras, you get either 12-bit log raw in a 14-bit payload or you get 16-bit linear -- in the higher end models.

AFAIK the internal codec is XAVC, which while a great codec isn't as flexible as raw, so I'm pretty sure that 12-bit raw will be an improvement.



This one I can't say for sure, but it sounded like Jeromy was describing the choice of 12-bit vs 16-bit raw as a camera feature, which made sense to me since the camera is the logical place to implement the log encoding if you're using it -- you'll need to apply log encoding even when recording raw to provide a preview image, so the hardware to implement that processing is built into the camera anyway, as is the software.



Black Magic and Red are the only camera manufacturers that DO make raw a priority across their line, so that's not surprising.

Raw isn't all that useful in documentary for example, mainly due to the data rate... especially if the alternative is XAVC, which is significantly more efficient than ProRes, though it's also significantly more compute heavy -- not surprising since it's based on the h.264 toolkit.
Click to expand...


That's why Sony developed X-OCN. Less data than ProRes and it's 16-bit. I hardly shoot XAVC anymore since getting the R7. With any luck Sony will allow X-OCN external recording with the FX9.
 
Gizmosgadget said:
That's why Sony developed X-OCN. Less data than ProRes and it's 16-bit. I hardly shoot XAVC anymore since getting the R7. With any luck Sony will allow X-OCN external recording with the FX9.
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on whether or not Sony plans to make an external recorder for it. I suppose it's possible that Atomos might license X-OCN also, but ProResRaw seems more likely.
 
I'll definitely buy the Fx9. I own a Fs7Mk1 and was already considering getting a Fs7Mk2 so that I have two cameras that match. Spending a bit more to get the Fx9 is a no-brainer.

There has been some knocking of the Fx9 in comparison to the C500MkII. But consider the Fx9 on its own: For only a few grand more than the Fs7MkII you get everything the Fs7Mk2 has plus you get FF, better 4k, Fast Hybrid AF, dual ISO, upgraded color science, an upgraded LCD, external volume control, and 4 audio channels with 4 external audio pots. And you also get a cool-looking ARRI-like textured grey finish that differentiates the Fx9 from all the Canon "C" cameras and looks more "high end" / more "cinema camera".

The C500MkII may be the "winner" in some tech-spec areas, but if you are a production company or corporate division looking to purchase a mid-range camera what does the C500MkII bring to the table that is worth spending 32% more? Internal raw? Okay. But in spending 32% more to get internal raw you give up the electronic ND. And you'll have to come up with a loupe-solution if you want the camera to be able to be used shoulder-mounted. Either the $6000 Canon loupe that is an add-on option or some third party solution that may or may not work well, eats up a D-tap, adds cabling, and also adds to the total price tag. The C500MkII costs considerably more and isn't a complete package out of the box. It costs more than the Fx9 yet in stock form the C500MkII is missing an important, if not crucial, element that comes standard on the Fx9. For those reasons, I think the Fx9 will out-sell the C500MkII. The Fx9 hits a sweeter price point than the C500MkII and the features gained by spending more for the C500MkII aren't features that most need or are even wanting much. If you already own some model of Sony alpha mirrorless, and a lot of people do, that's another reason to go with the Fx9 and keep it all in the family, an Fx9 matching an a7s better than the C500MkII and any e-mount glass you bought for the alpha mirrorless working on the Fx9 as well but not on the C500MkII.
 
Interesting availability date as I thought I read December.

It could change, but B&H have always been very accurate with the Sony mirrorless cameras (to the exact day).

FX9 Availability.jpg
 
Tamerlin said:
Jeromy said that the current Shogun models cannot handle the data rate of 16-bit raw.
Click to expand...

That’s good to know. In your original post you specifically mentioned to Shogun Inferno so I wasn’t sure if that also applied to the Shogun 7.

Tamerlin said:
I know of only one camera ever that used 12-bit linear, and it didn't go over all that well. In Sony's existing cameras, you get either 12-bit log raw in a 14-bit payload or you get 16-bit linear -- in the higher end models.
Click to expand...

Actually the FS7, FS5, and FS700 all start off with an 12-bit linear signal that the various recorders encode and capture as they will. Some of the details are on the page linked below.

Sony’s RAW recorders capture "linear light as 16-bit RAW with a 12-bit payload, resulting in 12 bits of precision." Atomos and Convergent Design take this same 12-bit linear signal and encode as 10 bit log for their various recording options. I've linked an useful FS5 workflow article from Alistair Chapman below that provides some clarity on this.

I'm sure Atomos will eventually provide additional details but I think it's possible all of Atomos' existing recorders were engineered to work at 12-bit precision. If this is true it's possible that the existing Shogun models will just inherit the existing 12-bit Linear FS RAW workflow when working with the FX9 without being able to take full advantage of the full 16-bit linear potential of the camera.

Again, I'm not saying this is big deal since the target demographic for the FX9 doesn't appear to be terribly interested in RAW record.

https://pro.sony/en_FI/products/handheld-camcorders/broadcast-pxwfs7-pxwfs7m2-workflow

http://www.xdcam-user.com/2017/05/w...tween-raw-and-s-log-prores-re-fs5-raw-output/


Tamerlin said:
Raw isn't all that useful in documentary for example, mainly due to the data rate...
Click to expand...

There are some who might disagree with you. Puredrifting apparently uses Cinema RAW Light quite a bit on his documentary shoots.
 
B&H mentions a general December availability for the C500 Mark II (and that could be late December or could also be pushed back too), so a month won't make much of a difference, especially because one is much more money.
 
Tamerlin said:
I can't take credit for asking, because I wasn't able to make it to IBC (I was hoping...). I watched an interview with Cinema5D, and Jeromy brought that up.

Honestly though, with log encoding 12-bits is plenty. 16-bits is really only a big deal if you're using linear encoding. That's part of why basically everyone but Sony and Red record in 12-bit, and Sony generally only with higher end cameras.
Click to expand...

Cool, can you link that interview?
 
Gary T said:
That’s good to know. In your original post you specifically mentioned to Shogun Inferno so I wasn’t sure if that also applied to the Shogun 7.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if I got the model names mixed up... I do that :)

That said, AFAIK the only difference between the Shogun Inferno and the Shogun 7 is the display, though the difference there is huge. Jeromy talks about that in the same interview also -- how Atomos was able to update its peak brightness with a firmware update. It's an interesting listen.

Actually the FS7, FS5, and FS700 all start off with an 12-bit linear signal that the various recorders encode and capture as they will. Some of the details are on the page linked below.
Click to expand...

This is what I was thinking of:
"You really need 16 bit data for 14 stops of dynamic range with linear raw, so if you are really serious about raw you may want to consider a Sony F5 or F55."

I guess I remembered that part, and eventually that memory translated to "doesn't do linear in 12-bit" :)

I'm sure Atomos will eventually provide additional details but I think it's possible all of Atomos' existing recorders were engineered to work at 12-bit precision. If this is true it's possible that the existing Shogun models will just inherit the existing 12-bit Linear FS RAW workflow when working with the FX9 without being able to take full advantage of the full 16-bit linear potential of the camera.
Click to expand...

That 12-bit limit is most likely quite literally just a data rate wall. It doesn't sound like much, but going from 12 to 16 bits isn't a trivial increase in data (30%, after all). All I'm saying is essentially that it's probably not Atomos' fault that the Shoguns can't handle 16-bit raw. It's probably a recent development that Sony decided to work with Atomos as its primary (seemingly) raw recorder, and that it's for 16-bit raw, which is pretty rare at this price point. Or any other price point, since the only other company doing 16-bit linear raw is Red.

There are some who might disagree with you. Puredrifting apparently uses Cinema RAW Light quite a bit on his documentary shoots.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that it's bad for documentary, just that it's generally overkill -- and usually because of data rates. Of course, I'm coming from a cinema background, so my camera's raw isn't exactly lightweight.

The new raw codecs are pretty impressive in their efficiency. As storage improves, especially in the camera media, space and record times will be less of a issue. Now all we need is graphene batteries to replace LiPo and Li Ion so that we can get a nice boost in power density and battery life... :)
 
The practice in some industries of announcing a product that won't be available to purchase for many months is odd.

Imagine if Popeye's announced their chicken sandwich and made it available to food-testers but you couldn't actually buy the sandwich for another 4 months.
 
JPNola said:
I'll definitely buy the Fx9. I own a Fs7Mk1 and was already considering getting a Fs7Mk2 so that I have two cameras that match. Spending a bit more to get the Fx9 is a no-brainer.

There has been some knocking of the Fx9 in comparison to the C500MkII. But consider the Fx9 on its own: For only a few grand more than the Fs7MkII you get everything the Fs7Mk2 has plus you get FF, better 4k, Fast Hybrid AF, dual ISO, upgraded color science, an upgraded LCD, external volume control, and 4 audio channels with 4 external audio pots. And you also get a cool-looking ARRI-like textured grey finish that differentiates the Fx9 from all the Canon "C" cameras and looks more "high end" / more "cinema camera".

The C500MkII may be the "winner" in some tech-spec areas, but if you are a production company or corporate division looking to purchase a mid-range camera what does the C500MkII bring to the table that is worth spending 32% more? Internal raw? Okay. But in spending 32% more to get internal raw you give up the electronic ND. And you'll have to come up with a loupe-solution if you want the camera to be able to be used shoulder-mounted. Either the $6000 Canon loupe that is an add-on option or some third party solution that may or may not work well, eats up a D-tap, adds cabling, and also adds to the total price tag. The C500MkII costs considerably more and isn't a complete package out of the box. It costs more than the Fx9 yet in stock form the C500MkII is missing an important, if not crucial, element that comes standard on the Fx9. For those reasons, I think the Fx9 will out-sell the C500MkII. The Fx9 hits a sweeter price point than the C500MkII and the features gained by spending more for the C500MkII aren't features that most need or are even wanting much. If you already own some model of Sony alpha mirrorless, and a lot of people do, that's another reason to go with the Fx9 and keep it all in the family, an Fx9 matching an a7s better than the C500MkII and any e-mount glass you bought for the alpha mirrorless working on the Fx9 as well but not on the C500MkII.
Click to expand...

JP I think you should talk about the loupe situation a few more times!
 
JPNola said:
The practice in some industries of announcing a product that won't be available to purchase for many months is odd.

Imagine if Popeye's announced their chicken sandwich and made it available to food-testers but you couldn't actually buy the sandwich for another 4 months.
Click to expand...

Completely different industries...no earthly comparison at all.

Announcing technology months before it's shipping is necessary to evaluate actions and reactions. And also provides time to make some changes (not necessarily to the models that will be shipping, but provides lead time to start working on firmware updates or additional modules, or even other cameras).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top