Sony FX3 camcorder registered - 8K?

DLD said:
Armando Ferreira made a short with FX-3 (starts at 5:40). Plus, there is a bunch of reviews out.


Yes, it has that.
Click to expand...

This was the best use case I’ve seen for auto focus, impossible to argue that benefit. And although Ferreira begrudges the lack of built-in ND, I don’t see him missing it here, not for cinema. It’s comes down to two heavyweights, FX3 with amazing AF and IBIS, DR and mounting points, versus P6K-Pro doing it’s thing internally, 6K BRAW, mini-XLR, optional viewfinder, tilt-able 1500nit screen, internal Luts and variable ND.

Too bad there isn’t one to do it all.
 
andykwilkinson said:
Apparently S-Cinetone is coming for A7SIII on 25th Feb.

I've scan watched a bunch of FX3 "review" videos but as yet can't find any info as to if the noise reduction can be set to off (like FX6) rather than minimum (like A7SIII). Anyone know? It looks a reasonable camera for a gimbal (how I'd use it) or drone but FX6 will remain my next planned purchase. Might pick up a FX3MkII when it gets e-VND.
Click to expand...
Yes, according to CineD it will be released the 25th. I hope they're correct...
 
Tom Roper said:
This was the best use case I’ve seen for auto focus, impossible to argue that benefit. And although Ferreira begrudges the lack of built-in ND, I don’t see him missing it here, not for cinema..l.
Click to expand...

I am not a big fan of this "sodium vapor" look but it is an artistic choice, I gather.

In either case, since they were shooting on an indoor set, they could control lighting and do without an ND of any kind.

Howevah!

Since FX-3/FX-6/A7SIII have such a high ISO range, one could probably get away with slapping a very dense ND filter onto it and then riding the ISO up and down as the condition changes. Anyone tried that yet? Anyone? Bueller? Abe?
 
DLD said:
Since FX-3/FX-6/A7SIII have such a high ISO range, one could probably get away with slapping a very dense ND filter onto it and then riding the ISO up and down as the condition changes. Anyone tried that yet? Anyone? Bueller? Abe?
Click to expand...

The big problem there is the donut hole of noise. The stop or 2 below high ISO is standout noisy.

And in general, that approach will depend on your tolerance for noise and inconsistency. Even though the camera performs well for a couple stops above low base ISO and a stop or 2 above high base ISO, you're still seeing an increasingly different noise profile, not to mention a different distribution of dynamic range and, at high base, a slightly lower dynamic range.

I haven't done what you're saying with a dense ND, but I have used a vari-ND at wedding interiors and kept the ISO at 12800 (but only because I was trying to avoid the stops below it where the filter-free exposure would have landed me, lol).

And I have used auto ISO for exposure adjustments during long-take "live" gimbal shots. Which would work well if I could get the camera to avoid the donut hole of noise, but there's usually a few cringeworthy moments (to my eyes if not to the client's). I should try to combine auto ISO with an upper limit of 5000 or less and auto aperture, if it allows me to set a range for aperture...
 
A7SIII switches at the 12,800, so one has to go either significantly under with a less dense ND or significantly higher with a denser ND? I guess a variable ND gives one more options on top of that. One'd have to try all the variables to pick if there's something feasible in the general idea.
 
Some heartburn being expressed by FX9 early adopters on Alister’s blog about FX3, where he mentions it as a good B-cam to his FX9. An FX9 owner is expressing some bitterness that his FX9 requires an expensive XDCA attachment to output raw yet 16 bit raw output is included on the FX3. Alister was chiding him that it was known “since day one” that the FX9 required an XDCA unit for raw and that the FS5 also output raw.

I knew on day 1 that my F55 required an expensive R5 recorder too. It’s why I waited until day 2500 to buy one at 1/10 the price.
 
Sony and Canon "flagship" owners (or close to it) are always getting the short end of the stick with new features compared to the newer cameras.

This has trickled over to RED and Blackmagic too.

If you're not using house money (not your own money), I find it difficult for anyone to invest more than $2K-$3K for a camera these days. I think many, most will have some regret with the rapid 6-month technology turnover.

It's easier to sell a $2K-$3K camera and upgrade than a $10K camera.
 
Perspective: The FX3 is damn amazing. Consider what you get for the comparatively “low” price.

If you slapped the “ARRI” logo on the FX3 and named it the “Amura” many now critical of the FX3 would be singing its praises and un-hesitantly paying twice as much for it.

Props to Sony for the little things they do that are not game-changers but are nice features to have and are also useful features. Here I am thinking of the tally-light on the FX3. Then there are the bigger things too: what Sony is doing with AF. Also, the sheer variety of cameras Sony produces for one to choose from. ARRI is a different type of camera-maker, granted. But even Canon, Nikon, and Panasonic have no where near as many different cameras available in the mid-tier and upper-tier market. Sony is doing both the high-end thing, Venice, to compete with ARRI and RED as well as being competitive in the mid-tier with Canon and Panasonic ( and Blackmagic ) in addition to being highly competitive in the consumer / hobbyist market. Is anyone else as widely competitive as Sony in multiple segments of video camera production?

We’re spoiled for choices and features. And I often shake my head seeing the whinging and complaint about a device that is a technological marvel and, while it may be lacking some features we’d like...inexplicably or peculiarily, the product is still UH-MAZING and is in many cases something we fairly recently only dreamed about seeing in a camera at that price and in a camera of that diminutive size.

I’m reminded of this Louis CK bit:


The FX3 is roughly the size of the human hand. And it can record in full-frame 4k. With a 5-axis stabilization system. With some of the most sophisticated auto-focus known to mankind. On these tiny lil’ cards the size of a postage stamp. And one can get all that and more for a price roughly 1/3rd the going price of one 20-yr old ARRI prime lens. A quarter of the price of a heavy-duty set of O’Connor sticks. Less than the price of a Joker 400.

The Sony FX3 is UH-mazing. It isn’t the only amazing little camera, of course. But it is amazing.

I’ll go full fan-boy and share that to me the FX3 just looks really cool. The magnesium body, the texture and color of the body, the industrial aesthetic of the body, the mounting points built INTO the body, and the choices made in the badging / “A” logo sizing and placement on the body. It is a classy looking camera, imo. Even if Sony has borrowed heavily from the ARRI aesthetic in camera design. If you are going to rip off someone else’s look, at least rip-off the competitor held in highest esteem, right?
 
JPNola said:
The FX3 is roughly the size of the human hand. And it can record in full-frame 4k. With a 5-axis stabilization system. With some of the most sophisticated auto-focus known to mankind. On these tiny lil’ cards the size of a postage stamp. And one can get all that and more for a price roughly 1/3rd the going price of one 20-yr old ARRI prime lens. A quarter of the price of a heavy-duty set of O’Connor sticks. Less than the price of a Joker 400.
Click to expand...

The only thing is - you could say the same thing about the a7siii. Sure, (some) things are improved on this camera. But it doesn't feel like a quantum leap forward to me.

I’ll go full fan-boy and share that to me the FX3 just looks really cool. The magnesium body, the texture and color of the body, the industrial aesthetic of the body, the mounting points built INTO the body, and the choices made in the badging / “A” logo sizing and placement on the body. It is a classy looking camera, imo.
Click to expand...

Is that a lens in your pocket or are you just happy to see the fx3?
 
Armando Ferreira made a short with FX-3 (starts at 5:40). Plus, there is a bunch of reviews out.


wasn't that the guy who praised the R5 while he wrapped cooling pads around it? :)
It's good at least to have many options from various manufacturers.
 
JPNola said:
Perspective: The FX3 is damn amazing

...the tally-light on the FX3. .

mounting points built INTO the body,
Click to expand...

You are correct it and many other cameras are amazing chip/computers.

Haveing an external tally light is not a wonder.. its about the only bit of camera software im convinced I could write.

if recording==true then
tallylight==on
end if

Programmers can have that one on me for free.

Its just a cure for previous imcompetence. The old cameras that had a tally light on screen right where the boom drops into frame should never have been produced. Any one older than eight would have never let them out of the development lab. Same goes for the FS7 no tally light (or visible on light) when veiwing in clean mode.

As for those mounting points. Well the primary mount point in any camera system is the tripod plate. Having a simgle mount point there is absolutely unnaceptable*. Again something that should not have got near the the development lab door. Or even off the CAD screen.

Having the HDMI sticking out the side is also completely unacceptable.

It is an amazing bafflement where such a computer wonder (and yes it is a wonder) can be so physically lacking

*it becomes an order of magnitude more unacceptable when adding that long lever and mass known as the tophandle mic co_ck up.
 
I am surprised the FX3 does not have shutter angle or waveform. Are important tools now a differentiator between camera models even when this one has the coveted "Cine" designation? Kind of reminds me of the early days of HD cameras when they put low resolution viewfinders which were useless for focus. But it high definition...

Still a cool camera though but I think without a viewfinder or waveform, it relies upon a lot of external stuff unless you want to shoot like tourist. :)
 
Bassman2003 said:
I am surprised the FX3 does not have shutter angle or waveform. Are important tools now a differentiator between camera models even when this one has the coveted "Cine" designation? Kind of reminds me of the early days of HD cameras when they put low resolution viewfinders which were useless for focus. But it high definition...

Still a cool camera though but I think without a viewfinder or waveform, it relies upon a lot of external stuff unless you want to shoot like tourist. :)
Click to expand...

To add to your points, I'm surprised that it didn't get the Sony Cine EI mode, unless it does have it and I just missed it. Being that it is part of Sony's "Cinema Line" I sorta assumed that Cine EI would be on there.
 
Bassman2003 said:
I am surprised the FX3 does not have shutter angle or waveform. Are important tools now a differentiator between camera models even when this one has the coveted "Cine" designation? Kind of reminds me of the early days of HD cameras when they put low resolution viewfinders which were useless for focus. But it high definition...

Still a cool camera though but I think without a viewfinder or waveform, it relies upon a lot of external stuff unless you want to shoot like tourist. :)
Click to expand...

BM really puts sony to shame in this regard. maybe waveform will come later? even panny has that in their mirrorless cameras

the fx3 is a massive wasted opportunity to take the a7siii and fully convert it from a photo camera
 
ahalpert said:
... the fx3 is a massive wasted opportunity to take the a7siii and fully convert it from a photo camera
Click to expand...
And who's going to buy A1 then? Or FX-6? Or some other currently unknown model?

PS. Sony really owes the FX-9 owners now. I expect FX-9II to be out sooner rather than later.
 
DLD said:
And who's going to buy A1 then? Or FX-6? Or some other currently unknown model?

PS. Sony really owes the FX-9 owners now. I expect FX-9II to be out sooner rather than later.
Click to expand...

I'm curious about if the close integration with the Alpha and Cinema Lines will result in Sony taking the A1 sensor and following the same product release cycle as they did with A7SII---> FX6---> FX3 and perhaps go A1---> FX11? (goes to 11)---> FX4?

They have confirmed that there will be more cameras released this year, and they are really proud of the A1 sensor:

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/son...rview-we-will-launch-other-cameras-this-year/

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...a-1-is-the-first-step-towards-the-next-decade
 
FX6 is already the A7S3 in a video camera form so FX3 makes little sense. Regardless of how marvellous it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top