FS7: Sony FX9 v Canon C500 mkII
- Thread starter Liam Hall
- Start date
Liam Hall
Veteran
I've now tried the AF on both the FX9 and C500mkII, it's great on both. On the FX9 with Sony lenses it's fast and accurate, the AI is a touch mechanical, but there will be so many instances when it will be a godsend. On the C500mkII, the touch screen makes it a doddle to use. Feels a little more human than the FX9 but that could be that I've spent more time with the Canon.
theraptor56
Active member
Having seen the FX9's autofocus menus in a video or two now, I've never been able to use a camera with so many ways to tweak the performance. I'm looking forward to adjusting the AF speed of the FX9 to where it will closely resemble the speed I focus manually. Wild stuff.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
The AF menus of the Z280 are pretty much the same ones as the FX9, and you are right, it makes a big difference to have all that power at your fingertips to customize how AF works.
Grug
Veteran
Congrats! Thoughts so far? What are the most irritating things about it?
AndreeOnline
Veteran
Liam Hall said:
That there's so little free space to put pens, documents and beverages?
AndreeOnline
Veteran
On another note: I'm not loving the look of it with the large battery protruding very awkwardly out the back.
Liam Hall
Veteran
This one is a loaner from Canon Europe for a shoot I’m doing in Palestine. I’ve ordered one, but they start shipping early December.
First impressions are very good. The image is stellar and I haven’t even tried RAW yet.
Only gripe so far is the battery draw - 45wh is what I’m getting, which is a significant increase over my FS7. For those people thinking of buying CoreSWX batteries and using the D-tap for accessories they will be eating batteries through the course of a day long shoot. I can see most people using the V2 or a V-lock plate.
I’ll do a longer right-up when I’m back from Israel.
Liam Hall
Veteran
Yeah, not the most elegant design, it is very solid though. It looks better with a BP-A30, so just shove one of those in when you're doing your Instagram shot...
Grug
Veteran
Thanks! 45w is still half of what my Arri draws, so that’s not too bad. Look forward to hearing more.
dmitrizigany
Veteran
I believe the FX9 is 36wh so the Canon is not that much more...
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
That is correct. Here are the exact numbers from the operation manual. I'm not sure if they have been published elsewhere so here they are . . .
Power consumption:
Approx. 35.2 W (body, lens, XAVC-I
QFHD 59.94P recording,
viewfinder on, no external device
connected)
Approx. 36.8 W (body, lens, XAVC-I
QFHD 59.94P recording,
viewfinder on, 3G-SDI×2, HDMI,
external device connected)
Liam Hall
Veteran
Using autofocus and some of the other features will add a little to those numbers. Anyone buying either the FX9 or C500 should work out what battery power think they need then add 25% IMHO.
Obviously both good camera,s.. this day and age its hard to get a bum camera picture wise .. its just down to favored design what you are used to.. what lenses you already have..
Liam Hall
Veteran
Absolutely. I have nothing against the FX9, even though I'm going back to Canon.
theraptor56
Active member
First direct comparison of the two cameras I've seen yet. FX9 review by CVP: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-kYtjH3eEs
I thought this was a valuable video considering CVP has a vested interest in selling both cameras. The test comparing the FX9 against the FS7, C500ii and Venice was especially telling. The dynamic range of the FX9 was very impressive for both under and over exposing the subject. The C500ii's skin tones desaturated while the FX9 retained color.
I feel like testing AF would produce mixed results depending up on the subject. In CVP's test they had a man walking toward the camera and the FX9 picks up the face well before the C500ii.
The FX9 is going to be a big hit in the marketplace if these tests are any indication of how these cameras will perform in the wild.
I thought this was a valuable video considering CVP has a vested interest in selling both cameras. The test comparing the FX9 against the FS7, C500ii and Venice was especially telling. The dynamic range of the FX9 was very impressive for both under and over exposing the subject. The C500ii's skin tones desaturated while the FX9 retained color.
I feel like testing AF would produce mixed results depending up on the subject. In CVP's test they had a man walking toward the camera and the FX9 picks up the face well before the C500ii.
The FX9 is going to be a big hit in the marketplace if these tests are any indication of how these cameras will perform in the wild.
Liam Hall
Veteran
From my testing, both cameras have their strengths. I think the FX9 will be the easier fit for a lot of people, particularly if you don't need RAW internal recording or FF60fps. If you do, and you need some of the other higher-end features, like anamorphic, or you need to fly it on gimbals/drones etc then the C500mkII will be the choice. The RAW looks amazing on the C500MkII. It's a massive jump in quality from the compressed XAVC format.
Does anyone factor in B-Camera options when selecting a new A-Cam? Personally I've always felt that Canon offers a lot better options for B-Cam, like the C100, 1Dx, or 5D series. When paired with a C300 or the new C500, these will be great B-Cams.
Compared with Sony, which right now really only has the old A7sII, which leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion. The FS5 is also a frustrating camera to use.
I've also just demo'd the Canon RF mirrorless camera, and it's an extraordinary piece of equipment. The RF lenses are lightyears ahead of Sony's lenses in terms of focusing (none of that jumpy focus-by-wire crap you get with Sony lenses.) The focus throw on RF lenses is really long and allows for precise manual focusing, so I see that as a major advantage. And overall, the Canon RF camera is just so much more user friendly than any Sony I've encountered. It is a joy to use, whereas I've always found the Sony mirrorless to be lacking on the usability front.
So right now for me, Canon still has the best lens choices on the market, and superior B-Cam options as well. With new RF lenses coming out, that sweetens the deal too. That puts the C500 in the lead, even though I'm a happy FS7II owner at the moment.
Compared with Sony, which right now really only has the old A7sII, which leaves a lot to be desired in my opinion. The FS5 is also a frustrating camera to use.
I've also just demo'd the Canon RF mirrorless camera, and it's an extraordinary piece of equipment. The RF lenses are lightyears ahead of Sony's lenses in terms of focusing (none of that jumpy focus-by-wire crap you get with Sony lenses.) The focus throw on RF lenses is really long and allows for precise manual focusing, so I see that as a major advantage. And overall, the Canon RF camera is just so much more user friendly than any Sony I've encountered. It is a joy to use, whereas I've always found the Sony mirrorless to be lacking on the usability front.
So right now for me, Canon still has the best lens choices on the market, and superior B-Cam options as well. With new RF lenses coming out, that sweetens the deal too. That puts the C500 in the lead, even though I'm a happy FS7II owner at the moment.