Sony Cinema Line & FX6

Question. As a former XDCAM EX3 owner and a (current) PMW-300 owner (which replaced it), one of the things I truly hate about my FS5 is the naff, prosumer menu options. There are so many things about the (superb) Sony XDCAM workflow with those class cameras that make them a joy to operate and shoot with.

Maybe I've not seen the right FX6 review videos yet - but I'm trying to work out if operating a FX6 will be like my 5-year old FS5, albeit a bit better, or (hopefully) much more like the true XDCAMs...which would be a LOT better. Appreciate any insights. Thanks!
 
Menus change as cameras change...for better or for worse.

What exactly do you like in the older cameras that the FS5 doesn't have? (Just wondering.)

As far as codecs (if that's also being compared), IMO you can't compare them in the same way as you used to because the higher-resolution sensors (and overall look and color in some cases) are so much better these days. Like I think 99% of 8-bit 4:2:0, barely 100mbps images look better than almost all older, smaller sensor HD cameras (even with superior recording formats).
 
DLD said:
It was as close to being a dead duck as a C300 heir was going to get. Let's not forget that FS-7 was $8,000 w/grip and EVF, while C300 MKII was $16,000 at the release. And while C300 MKII did have the dual pixel auto focus, FS-7 could work with any S35 manual glass available. One might argue that Canon grossly miscalculated. I'd argue that it was all prearranged.
Click to expand...
I don't know why you think specs are relevant to a camera's success. A camera could come out now that's limited to 480p, top frame rate of 30p, 4:2:0, and according to you, it's a dead duck, but if it sells well and is profitable for the company releasing it, as far as I see it, it's a complete success.

As far as I can tell over the course of it's time, the C300 Mark II has sold well and been rather popular, so it was a success regardless of specs. Many of my friends and co-workers bought them, moreso than FS7s, and I see more of them in the wild. FS7s got bought a lot by reality TV companies. I would not be surprised if the FS7 sold more than the C300, but I don't think it would be by a landslide.

Arri cameras have lower specs than most of their competition but it still dominates the high end.

Too many spec chasers on this forum who don't take into account more important aspects of cameras. Specs don't kill ducks, poor sales do.

Actual dead duck cameras are cameras like the AJA Cion and C700. They have decent specs, but no one bought them.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
...

1) Arri cameras have lower specs than most of their competition but it still dominates the high end.

2) Too many spec chasers on this forum who don't take into account more important aspects of cameras. Specs don't kill ducks, poor sales do.

3) Actual dead duck cameras are cameras like the AJA Cion and C700. They have decent specs, but no one bought them.
Click to expand...

1) Alexas have the spec most desired by the high end production - dual-readout and the top dynamic range.

2) If the market doesn't demand cameras - and off all accounts, C300MKII has a very small share - then shooters don't buy it for themselves and the rental houses don't buy it for others. You can blame the price or lack of 60P - obviously that didn't deter you, as is your wont - but it had a detrimental effect on the camera sales. If one builds a sports car with a 200 hp engine and, most things being equal, his competitors have a 300 hp engine, then sales will go to the manufacturers with a 300 HP engine.

3) As to C300 MKII being a dead duck, it had a tremendous built-in advantage due to the immense popularity of its predecessor and the overall ecosystem. And it blew it.

C700 was a statement camera, based upon which C500 MKII was developed.

Cion was a train in vain.
 
Brian Hallet has a good review of the FX6 over on Provideo Coalition as he tested the camera for about 2 weeks:

https://www.provideocoalition.com/reviewing-the-new-sony-fx6/

He also posted some footage:

"Shot on the Sony FX6 with the Vazen 85mm T2.8 Full-Frame 1.8x Anamorphic lens."
https://vimeo.com/480220770

"Shot with the Sony FX6. This is just a simple test around my house. Testing AF with a flare."
https://vimeo.com/480204029

ISO noise test with the Vazen 85mm T2.8 Full-Frame 1.8x Anamorphic lens
https://vimeo.com/480200565
 
Last edited:
Teddy_Dem said:
Brian Hallet has a good review of the FX6 over on Provideo Coalition as he tested the camera for about 2 weeks:
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting, Teddy. That first video looks VERY natural to me (much more than Sky on Fire). And the Vazen looks dreamy
 
NorBro said:
Menus change as cameras change...for better or for worse.

What exactly do you like in the older cameras that the FS5 doesn't have? (Just wondering.)

As far as codecs (if that's also being compared), IMO you can't compare them in the same way as you used to because the higher-resolution sensors (and overall look and color in some cases) are so much better these days. Like I think 99% of 8-bit 4:2:0, barely 100mbps images look better than almost all older, smaller sensor HD cameras (even with superior recording formats).
Click to expand...

Hi there, sure I understand the huge improvement the FX6 has over my FS5 codec wise but it's usability in the field because the XDCAM menus and options are so much more flexible and designed for professional interaction, making the camera an easier to use tool (if that makes sense). Doug Jensen sums up the differences between the XDCAM and the ones like my FS5 brilliantly in several sections of his introductory Z280 video...which is also very high (in fact at the top!) of my list to replace my PMW-300 as well.

In particular see at around 6.30; 7.30 and 11.30 in on the video and you'll get the gist of how I also think about this.

https://vimeo.com/297946781

So what I'm asking is, does the FX6 now have menu options like the XDCAMs (last clip delete, ability to custom name clips...no more Clip0001, 0002 etc., Clip duration display etc. etc.) or would it be more like the FS5 still. Thanks!
 
Yeah I heard you can actually rename clubs finally on this camera unlike the FS5. That in the auto focus with 10 bit internal pretty much make it worth an upgrade for me alone not to mention the massive improvement on low light price speed is going to be super helpful. Now I just sell my FS5 and wait until The FX6 arrives I guess.

I wish the touchscreen autofocus worked like the A7S but maybe we'll get it as a firmware update one can hope
 
Food for thought -

I commented on the newsshooter article, "personally, I will only upgrade from my fs7 if client demand upgrades first"

Response:

Jordan Blue Abe Halpert • 17 minutes ago
FS7 is still the most in-demand camera
in my market (Unscripted TV) so I agree with you. I’m still getting requests for the F5 and F55, too. None of my clients have even heard of the FX9.
Click to expand...

So, I feel like the FX6 is unquestionably a step up from the FS5 and will be a very popular camera that shoots a lot of great stuff in the coming years.

But, purely as a business decision, I see little need to jump on ordering it. Especially since I have an A7SIII which is possibly a better gimbal camera anyway
 
ahalpert said:
Food for thought -

I commented on the newsshooter article, "personally, I will only upgrade from my fs7 if client demand upgrades first"...
Click to expand...

I am not in that market but here's what I probably would do. I'd get the FX6 and would keep the FS7 for now. Everytime if there's a request for the FS7 I'd offer the FX6 with Venice cinema color science. If they go for it: great. If not you don't loose the job because you still have the FS7. I see the risk that you miss the point where Venice colors get popular. It will come and I would not want to miss the start. From the guts I's guess the request for the FX6 it will come very soon. I'd get it and offer it proactively. It's always a good moment to get into contact with your clients when you offer new technology instead of begging for jobs. my 0,02€

I had a warning example from my former boss in the early 2000s when digital photography became affordable with the 1st Canon 5D 11MP. He said he still could do that if his clients ask for digital shots. They asked for digital shots but not him and the guys who offered it instead.
 
I am willing to bet the FX6 has the same sensor as the A7siii. The low-light capability is impressive due to its lower number of megapixels and large photo sites. I would love to know the pixel pitch and I bet once the spec is realeased it's very close to the A7siii at near 8.36 µm :thumbsup: That sensor with the now better codec, DR, and 10-bit color has brought the image a long way from the original FS5 IMO. Highlight roll-off is much more pleasing and smooth. Image at times still feels a little over-sharp which I do find I like for landscapes but not for talent. At times I feel the image is a little thin and digital but I am sure can be dirtied up by lens choice and various filtration.
 
Last edited:
Guessing the answer is no to this, but any possibility of a 4k super35 crop on the RAW output eventually via firmware? Just curious because I'm often pairing the fs5 with a 25-250 or 24-290 angeniuex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top