FS7: Sony FX9 v Canon C500 mkII

Donny 123 said:
Yes I agree they might not sell the same as the fs7.. which I think was actually because Canon were very slow to make a 4K version of the C300.. almost all the C300 owners I know, bought fs7,s because they suddenly needed 4K at a good price .. most of my work is 4K now .. esp corps .. also totally agree there is the K BS factor .. but really I wouldn't be surprised if the 6k down sample thing will become the next fad that production will get sucked into .. honestly I think it will happen .. and there are alot of fs7/f5/55,s for sale now ..
Click to expand...

Downsampling is not a fad...out of everything that's provided it's one of the best things that they can do.
 
Why does AF suddenly matter?

For me
1) its hard to get critical focus at 4k end of. That is when looking through a 2k 5in monitor
2)gimbal
3) slider
4) telephoto walk towards
5) Shooter, questioner interviews.
 
cyvideo said:
Why my good sir shouldn't they be considered on the same level? Whether you go over the mountain or around it if the end result of the journeys are the same or have a very similar end result then both paths can indeed be considered equally and together and both approaches can be considered as valid. Both approaches are based on the logic that they will support evidence-based results and the evidence it there in the image results for us to see. Ergo comparisons are valid regardless of approach.

I still think the Sony is on the right if the highlight above the resolution circles on the chart are anything to go by. Better highlight handling on the FX9. This observation of mine is purely based on observing other sources of footage from the two cameras in question. I my be wrong but I'm prepared to put my bet on the right hand image as being the Sony. Would be interesting to find out?

Chris Young
Click to expand...

Probably for different reasons than the OP, I’d agree that we don’t learn a lot from this side by side..at least about the cameras....... given there are no reference patches, all we are looking are two LUTs, an unknown exposure, interpreted by a colorist, and not any metric of either camera. I’m sure the tester can gain some information, as he has access to raw/log images, but here we are seeing the results of two LUTs interpreted by someone. In the end, the tester has said the images can be graded to match. I’ll go with that.

The CML bunch has completed their camera and lighting test under the supervision of Adam Wilt and others. This will include all the important cameras, plus a special head to head between this threads two favorite sons (daughters?), plus an important test showing each camera’s response to a variety of lighting fixtures. Results should be edited and presented in a few weeks.
 
NorBro said:
Downsampling is not a fad...out of everything that's provided it's one of the best things that they can do.
Click to expand...

Yes sure .. I had said that was one of the main reasons that FF sensors are a big advantage .just read a few posts back... but alot of production people dont really understand even easy techie stuff.. it will become a buzz word to them.. "oh we have to shoot FF ,because thats what Netflix and Amazon are doing dude " in that sense I used the word fad..
 
Even though both - FF and supersampling - apply to these two new cameras, they are two different things and aren't directly related. Most downsampling thus far has been done with S35 sensors.

But I think I know what you're saying...maybe the FF could be a 'fad', not the method.
 
morgan_moore said:
IMO the reason to upgrade is

-AF

-more solid codecs? |Better colour science

BUt the reason is AF, AF and AF
Click to expand...

Maybe if I did gimbal work. But I honestly have never thought to myself “my work needs better maintaining of focus”. Often I am purposely losing focus and re-finding focus in-shot as a visual style / expression.

There is an irony in a camera being touted for having a feature that addresses difficulty in maintaining focus and at the same time employs a sensor size that makes focusing more difficult for both man and machine. Like a car that touts a feature to help prevent you from running out of gas AND has a smaller gas tank than the previous model, making it more likely that you run out if gas.

On another note: Have you noticed that glass that does not cover full-frame is falling in re-sale asking price? Those coveted Superspeeds are starting to approach re-sale prices that mere mortals can afford. So much for the old axiom that quality glass is the one thing that will hold value.

And closing with a random thought: I know that people developed software hacks to get a GoPro to perform things it was not programmed to do. Does anyone hack Fs7 / C300 level cameras? Could the FX9 be hacked to unlock features or to expand its capability? Or is that too far beyond the ability of any would-be hacker? Are there ever any “pirate” software updates? Or are people too afraid to jack with equipment of so great a cost? Theoretically, could the FX9 be hacked to record internal raw or to record in 6K?
 
As with the other cameras, only a small percentage of people have the understanding of how to do it. Or attempt it. And most wouldn't with legal implications in mind.

Firmware updates are essentially "hacks". Over the years, Blackmagic has provided some substantial changes/updates in their cameras (increasing framerates, adding resolutions, adding/removing RAW, various video tools, etc).

The hardware can only do what it can do, but usually it's capable of a bit more than the corporate/technical balance that's being provided.
 
JPNola said:
Maybe if I did gimbal work. But I honestly have never thought to myself “my work needs better maintaining of focus”. Often I am purposely losing focus and re-finding focus in-shot as a visual style / expression.

There is an irony in a camera being touted for having a feature that addresses difficulty in maintaining focus and at the same time employs a sensor size that makes focusing more difficult for both man and machine. Like a car that touts a feature to help prevent you from running out of gas AND has a smaller gas tank than the previous model, making it more likely that you run out if gas.

On another note: Have you noticed that glass that does not cover full-frame is falling in re-sale asking price? Those coveted Superspeeds are starting to approach re-sale prices that mere mortals can afford. So much for the old axiom that quality glass is the one thing that will hold value.
Click to expand...

Yep bigger sensors need more accurate AF - as does 4k - I bet you started in SD - where with 2/3 focus didnt realy matter or a little drift didnt anyway.

Thos manual S35 zooms (I was sorely tempted by a CN7) IMO yes the price will crash
 
Barry G said:
Probably for different reasons than the OP, I’d agree that we don’t learn a lot from this side by side..at least about the cameras....... given there are no reference patches, all we are looking are two LUTs, an unknown exposure, interpreted by a colorist, and not any metric of either camera. I’m sure the tester can gain some information, as he has access to raw/log images, but here we are seeing the results of two LUTs interpreted by someone. In the end, the tester has said the images can be graded to match. I’ll go with that.

The CML bunch has completed their camera and lighting test under the supervision of Adam Wilt and others. This will include all the important cameras, plus a special head to head between this threads two favorite sons (daughters?), plus an important test showing each camera’s response to a variety of lighting fixtures. Results should be edited and presented in a few weeks.
Click to expand...

What i’ve learned from recent shoots with a variety of cameras, is that we have gotten to a sort of equilibrium again. All of the cameras are good. So the decision is now often more about which one you like, rather than which one is best. 2004-2018 saw rapid improvements in video, and in most cases, the newer camera was the better camera. Now, they are all good.

I enjoyed shooting with the C500ii recently. It felt at home on an indie feature, doc, or fashion film. The size was adaptable to any tool or posture. The interface is not cluttered. The rolling shutter is one of the best i’ve ever scene on a FF35 camera! The ND’s are very nice.

It all makes for a tool that doesn’t get in the way of creativity. For some, that may be reason enough. We want to capture moments, not wrangle a machine.


The Fx9 would be my choice for single op RnG. Has insanely good latitude for those tricky lighting situations. It has an interface that requires some familiarity, which for news and doc people they get their hours in really fast! However, the fx9 can also double as pretty awesome camera for commercials and films, as is seen in some of the footage posted, like the ad that Norbro shared. The fx9 has that Amira like essence to it. Designed for doc, but could shoot a tv show. Will probably start seeing it on those 30 for 30 style shoots.

We’re kind of back to the point of preferences are less technical. Like the old Canon vs Nikon. Wasn’t that one camera was good or bad, just one brand spoke to certain types of shooters, and the other to another set of shooters. Both were good. And, i can say, this is the first time in larger format digital camera history that we’ve gotten to this point. I almost don’t know how to react. Find my self defaulting to writing on of then off, but they’re all at a point now, where i like them all. And i am really liking that. These are now tools i am looking at possibilities rather than restrictions. It’s awesome!
 
I am excited for the lesser versions of these cameras. Even if they are much more limited, they are probably still going to be really good, and for some of us even better options.
 
NorBro said:
I am excited for the lesser versions of these cameras. Even if they are much more limited, they are probably still going to be really good, and for some of us even better options.
Click to expand...

Yeah, tbh, i’d be ok with a camera that had almost zero options, but an amazing sensor and picture profile.

Box with screw holes for lens mount options
24p/180 (it’d kind of be cool to only have 24 and 23.98 with a 180degree shutter, that’s it)
Native clean iso 800 that can push to 3200 with a bit of post NR. 4K raw or higher.
Mag erase and eject control.
Rec button
Internal ND

Done.
 
Last edited:
I would take a legit 16-stop 2.5K 444 camera in a box. ND filters sound good.

With lovely colors that make the images pop. The BMCC from 2012 was a very simple box with almost zero options and like 5 menu items. Its specialty was supersampling and RAW. An advanced version of that would be nice. 120p all the way through, no crop.

This camera can still play 8 years later. Some view it as BM's best sensor ever.

 
I like having a slightly larger 4K sensor, rather than a standard size 2K one. End of day is somewhat similar resolution, but has the option for anamorphic or using more of a spherical lens. I also like the proximity i can find on 35mm and 50mm with APS-H. Which is a reason i love the 1DC and Red Gemini.
 
Last edited:
Oh, yea - the sensor should definitely be 4K or more...just meant a 2K output above. (The BMCC was a throwback from a different time.)
 
Does the FX9 have 180fps, or is it at least getting that feature later on? I've read conflicting reports on that. I don't shoot that high very often, but it is nice to at least have that on the FS7.
 
This chap mentions a price drop due to currency exchange rates- if accurate for your country, an even better deal:


Regarding memory cards for the FX9 (Sony XQD) and C500 II (CFExpress): they are identical, can even insert into each others readers. Apparently a firmware update might make them compatible with each other https://www.slrlounge.com/prograde-digital-xqd-vs-cfexpress-cfast-memory-cards/ :
So what does this mean for those who adopted XQD cameras? Well, actually, it may mean you are just fine and ahead of the curve. CFexpress has the same form factor as XDQ, and the nature of the format is backwards compatible, so theoretically they should both be able to be used interchangeably, though likely with a firmware tweak. This is good news though, because that form factor is more resilient and cheaper than the pin-less CFAST cards that are prohibitively expensive.
Click to expand...

Getting CFExpress support on the FX9 would be an attractive FW update to reduce operating costs if one already owns CFExpress cards (quick search appears XQD and CFExpress are priced about the same).
 
Last edited:
JPNola said:
Does anyone hack Fs7 / C300 level cameras? Could the FX9 be hacked to unlock features or to expand its capability? Or is that too far beyond the ability of any would-be hacker? Are there ever any “pirate” software updates? Or are people too afraid to jack with equipment of so great a cost? Theoretically, could the FX9 be hacked to record internal raw or to record in 6K?
Click to expand...

Man, I would legit pay someone to hack the Canon 1DX Mark III just to remove the 30 minute video recording time limt.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Does the FX9 have 180fps, or is it at least getting that feature later on? I've read conflicting reports on that. I don't shoot that high very often, but it is nice to at least have that on the FS7.
Click to expand...

I just returned the FX9 to Sony yesterday. 120 FPS 1080 only today, 180 FPS is coming in the V2.0 FW that is announced at NAB 2020. So is DCI. It would be nice if that also added 2K.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top