Sony Cinema Line & FX6

markfpv said:
^ I'm assuming that was sarcasm ....
Click to expand...

Yes. A bad joke. But the point was that he would make it look amazing and we'd all be asking what he shot it with. I remember him saying he would shoot on an iPhone or whatever suited a project best for whatever reason.

I don't mean to go overboard and say that there are no differences in the look different cameras provide. But after a certain image quality threshold is surpassed, I really feel like lenses and grading (and, always, lighting) just matter way more. (And the camera design/interface, but not if you have the time and accessories to work around its limitations)
 
ahalpert said:
Yes. A bad joke. But the point was that he would make it look amazing and we'd all be asking what he shot it with. I remember him saying he would shoot on an iPhone or whatever suited a project best for whatever reason.

I don't mean to go overboard and say that there are no differences in the look different cameras provide. But after a certain image quality threshold is surpassed, I really feel like lenses and grading (and, always, lighting) just matter way more. (And the camera design/interface, but not if you have the time and accessories to work around its limitations)
Click to expand...

I agree though Deacons is pretty outspoken about preferring the Alexa. He's even said the Alexa LF is better looking than the S35 versions. The sensors certainly work very well for his style of using no fill.

I am very happy with the latest batch of Sony sensors though, I am more concerned about practical things like XLR inputs, ski, battery life, weight, etc...
 
Any chance of Sony adding 4K 10-bit long GOP codecs to this camera?
A7SIII has the option for 4K 10-bit in XAVC-I and L, but for FX6 it's only in the intraframe.
Just want to save some space and lessen card switching...
 
Are you specifically asking about DCI?

Because the FX6 does have lower bitrate long GOP codecs in QFHD/UHD.

Sony FX6_QFHD.jpg

(And I don't think the a7SIII has L.)
 
If enough people make a fuss about it then maybe but I haven't seen any evidence that enough people care. It seems strange to me that it's not considered an issue for 'pro' cameras. You would think that the highest possible quality at a given bitrate would be considered important in a professional camera, especially when most modern NLEs have decent proxy workflows.

Sometimes you want the best possible quality and don't care about storage.
Sometimes you want the best possible quality and don't care about CPU cycles.
 
Someone else can correct me but I believe the specifications for XAVC-L limit UHD to 8bit.

XAVC-S, which is newer, apparently can do 10bit Long GOP in UHD.

The newer codec can also do high framerates with audio, which would be *really* nice to have. It's the one feature I miss that the A7S3 has that the FX6 doesn't.
 
They could probably make it 10-bit if they wanted to, but the above is most likely the case for UHD as I don't think there are any cameras with 10-bit XAVC-L UHD (and most likely won't be with the development of the newer formats).
 
drboffa said:
Someone else can correct me but I believe the specifications for XAVC-L limit UHD to 8bit.

XAVC-S, which is newer, apparently can do 10bit Long GOP in UHD.

The newer codec can also do high framerates with audio, which would be *really* nice to have. It's the one feature I miss that the A7S3 has that the FX6 doesn't.
Click to expand...

I remember someone mentioning that the FX6 is built off of the old FS line for the OS so it can't do 120fps with audio, so what you're saying makes sense.
So they probably won't add it in. I guess I'll have to live with it once I get my hands on it, but gritting my teeth over doubling the file sizes for interview footage.
Why can't they just add in the A7SIII XAVC-S...
 
I'm on the list for the FX6 but I'm debating whether I should pick up a C70 as an a-cam to my A7siii. At this point I'm mostly doing documentary work (a mix of sit-down and verite) but at some point I hope to get back some of the broadcast/corporate work I lost during covid...

My main reasons I would get the C70:
  • I own 5 or 6 EF lenses as opposed to two E mount lenses.
  • It's available now
  • Canon colors are pleasing (especially skin tones)
I'm hesitating because:
  • The monitor hinge issue on the C70
  • Poorer low light performance (as opposed to a7siii/fx6)
  • Matching the two color wise
  • Mini XLR vs full size XLR
  • AF not as good as the FX6
  • Super 35 (I've grown used to FF)
  • Dumb handle grip
  • I want a form factor that will impress clients
Any thoughts or opinions? Thanks
 
I would make your life easier and stick to one company, one sensor size. Or sell the a7SIII.

I know post solutions exist to make matching/grading easier, but I'm sure a FX6 for you is right around the corner.

As far as everything else, they are mostly even (besides maybe low-light) since both bodies wouldn't really impress clients unless you built them up (if that's the kind of impression you're going for), audio is mostly enough for you unless you need complex XLR setups, and AF for sit-down/easy stuff is undemanding for either.
 
Yeah , it's probably wisest just to wait for the fx6, as that would be the best fit for my workflow. I just have a mild case of G.A.S.
 
fx6/a7siii is the best value combo out there at the moment.

I wanted to like the c70 but it's hard to get over the delicate screen, even though I haven't used one myself.

You could rent a c70 for fun anyway until your fx6 arrives to use for paid work and test what it's like to shoot with. Then you'll already have experience if you have to hire the camera again.

I can see a future for projects I'm editing where cinematch gives good enough results to mix multiple brands of the recent generation cameras but if handing off footage I think mixing brands is still too much of a mental leap for people.

If you really like the fx6/a7siii and see it as your set up for the next few years then I would look into moving some of your EF lenses too, maybe holding on to one or two that'll get the job done if you have to work with canon cameras on the side.
 
Thanks, good advice. I should have also mentioned that I started shooting a feature doc a few months ago with the a7siii , so changing systems right now might not be such a good idea. The truth is I absolutely love the a7siii. Its been a dream to shoot with and I have absolutely zero complaints for once about a camera. I would expect the same from the fx6....
 
scorsesefan said:
I'm on the list for the FX6 but I'm debating whether I should pick up a C70 as an a-cam to my A7siii. At this point I'm mostly doing documentary work (a mix of sit-down and verite)...
Click to expand...

My team has two FX6s, about seven A7SIIIs, an FS5 and we just sold our DVX200. Some people we work with have C-series Canons, but not the C70. I've previously shot a lot of stuff on Blackmagic Ursas. The FX6 and A7SIII match very well. if they are both properly white balanced and exposed, it's hard to tell the difference between them visually or if inspecting a ColorChecker card with the vector scope in post.

As you know from the A7SIII, the native ISO jump from 800 to 12,800 in SLog3 can be a issue because noise levels can be considerable from 3200 to 10,000. The smooth variable ND on the FX6 mitigates that, since it's easy to to to 12,800 and dial in ND.

The battery life on the FX6 is incredible -- I just shot a non-stop 5 hour 4k/24 test using XAVC-I on a single Sony BP-U70 battery.

The menus on the FX6 are complex, like most higher-end cameras except for Blackmagic which are easy. The FX6 AF has a "face/eye only" setting, vs the A7SIII which is "face/eye preferred". If shooting an interview and the FX6 momentarily loses the AF lock, it won't hunt around, but just wait until it reacquires the face or eye. The FX6 has adjustable video noise reduction, vs the A7SIII which is not.

The FX6 does not have a 10-bit internal Long GOP codec, just 8-bit 4:2:0. The XAVC-I codec is 10-bit 4:2:2, fairly smooth to edit, but it eats a lot of data. We normally shoot external regular ProRes 422 on an Atomos either via HDMI or SDI. I've done a lot of testing on ProRes RAW but it is true RAW so there is no in-camera noise reduction. It is definitely noisier but it cleans up very well with Neat Video. The 12-bit and 4:4:4 (equiv) chroma are nice but you normally don't need that or even notice the difference unless doing an aggressive color mask.

The new Canon and Sony cameras are finally good enough to use AF in some production cases, but in general that requires native lenses. It's still unclear to me how important that is since we've used only MF for many years. But we have a bunch of E-mount glass so will be trying that. The FX6 does not have AF object tracking like the A7SIII does, but for interviews the face/eye registration works very well.

Today I tested jam syncing timecode from a Tentacle to the FX6 BNC input. That worked well and the FX6 stayed in sync for two hours, just using the internal timebase. Timecode on the FX6 or similar cameras is really nice because it doesn't use half an audio channel for LTC and the NLE can sync directly from file timecode. However the A7SIII doesn't have that so you'd need a Tentacle or similar device.

In theory you can use "poor man's sync" by using free run TC and zeroing the timecode on both cameras via a button or IR command, but the FX6 doesn't accept IR like the Alphas. Dave Dugdale demonstrated the method here. I have the IR remote he mentioned and have used this on several Alpha cameras simultaneously:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3Fuoxbv81E
 
Thanks for the notes, Joema. Good to know about the VND in high ISOs on the fx6... I was never a believer in AF until the a7siii. It's absolutely amazing and a lifesaver as a solo operator knowing you can shoot a sit down interview and know that eye AF will cover any movements by your subject...
 
joema said:
The FX6 does not have a 10-bit internal Long GOP codec, just 8-bit 4:2:0.
Click to expand...

Just a small clarification: there is a 10-bit internal Long GOP codec, but it's limited to 1080p. In 4K you are limited to 8-bit 4:2:0.

Otherwise I'd only add that apart from agreeing with everything already said, I'd emphasize just how easy it is to match the FX6 and the A7S3 in both slog3 and S-Cinetone modes. It's a fantastic A/B combo.
 
joema said:
The FX6 does not have a 10-bit internal Long GOP codec, just 8-bit 4:2:0. The XAVC-I codec is 10-bit 4:2:2, fairly smooth to edit, but it eats a lot of data. We normally shoot external regular ProRes 422 on an Atomos either via HDMI or SDI.
Click to expand...

Seems strange that you think XAVC-I eats a lot of data, but then you record ProRes externally -- which is even worse. Why bother with the hassle of an external recorder? I'll put the quality of XAVC-I up against ProRes any day, but with much smaller file sizes. You cannot beat the ease and convenience of internal recording with a camera like the FX6 that has excellent built-in 10-bit 4:2:2 codecs.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Seems strange that you think XAVC-I eats a lot of data, but then you record ProRes externally -- which is even worse. Why bother with the hassle of an external recorder? I'll put the quality of XAVC-I up against ProRes any day, but with much smaller file sizes...
Click to expand...

I only meant it takes a lot of data relative to the 10-bit 4:2:2 Long GOP codecs supported by the A7SIII, since that's what scorsesefan has. I agree XAVC-I on the FX6 is a nice balance of size, quality and editing smoothness. Unlike the FS5 which could not record 4k 10-bit 4:2:2 internally, the FX6 opens up more possibilities for high-quality internal recording in a compact rig.

My group normally uses ProRes 422 because we have a large post-production team with many editors and a well-established ProRes workflow. We use FCP a lot and it cannot import tree-oriented media with "leave files in place"; it requires a copy and re-wrap. ProRes can be imported "in place". Also, smooth as XAVC-I is, ProRes is a little smoother to edit. When the renamed media files are turned over to finishing or archiving, it is easier if they are ProRes.

We also use external recorders because of the improved shooting aids, better visibility, and larger available media size. It is easier for the ingest people if the shooting teams hand them a stack of similar SSD SATA cards which have "flat files" not a tree-oriented structure.

BTW your FX6 Master Class is great and I highly recommend anyone with an FX6 get that class, no matter how much prior experience they have: https://youtu.be/95G_LlomWWQ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top