FS5: Sony PXW-FX6

Vik Kamenicky said:
Thanks for the sum up, quick question... because I cannot find it anywhere... is the FX6 handgrip the same as the FX9? Or you dont own a FX9 and cannot compare?
Click to expand...

I don’t own an FX9 but I had one for two
months while shooting a TV series. It’s
definitely not the same hand grip. The FX9
has the Arri rossetta style connection with ‘teeth’
and the FX6 has a connection more like a lens
mount where you ‘click’ it into place....similar
to the FS5.
 
Afterglow said:
Great rig shots, Grug. All the more impressive that they were taken in a gym (deep cleaned?).
Click to expand...

Well, my garage at least! :)

Afterglow said:
I've been shooting tests with my FX6 since December's delivery. Yes, it's tiny, and yes, you have to sweat a little over how to fit everything together and how strong the lens mount is (mine's carrying the 1kg Sony F4 28-135 zoom with lens support on rails). I can't find a clear answer to this on any Sony sites. Anyone know this?

For shooting off the sticks I threw an old hoodman loupe on the LCD, set it as far forward as possible and with the biggest battery I have managed to settle the camera with a pad on my shoulder reasonably comfortably. I'm hoping there'll be a telescopic extension for the detachable grip soon.

Still working through shooting modes and settings, including the user-set buttons and menus. No really satisfactory LUTs for it as yet except for Joel Famularo's Phantom LUTs for A7sIII (same sensor) and the pics look good. Soon he'll be releasing a set for FX6. Any other LUT recommendations welcome.
Click to expand...

Do you not like S709? I love it. Like Arri's Rec709 LUT I think it just starts everything off in a lovely, attractive space.

I've been trying to suss out whether I can get by with just my Gratical Eye on the rig, or whether I pickup one of Zacuto's Z-finders (so that I can go from an EVF to Monitor setup in a second, and just have the one power/video cable with Sony's LCD). Both units being 720p, there's really nothing much in it image quality wise. The LCD gives you a couple of extra function buttons as well.
 
Does anybody here who's planning to buy (or have already bought) an FX6 also own the Sony 18-110 Cine Servo Zoom lens? If so, are you planning to keep your 18-110 and use it on the FX6 in Super 35 crop mode which is HD only? Or are you planning to sell your 18-110 in order to buy the 28-135 full frame servo zoom?

I'm kinda torn here. I'm still debating back and forth on whether to go from my FS7II to the FX6 or FX9. A big part of me wants to get the FX6 just so I can enjoy a smaller camera moving forward. But, I love my 18-110 and from everything I've ever read, it's supposedly a nicer lens to work with than the older 28-135 (which is also reflected in its higher price). If I do grab an FX6, that lens would either have to go or would become an HD only lens for me which doesn't sound appealing. And I don't want to have to use Clear Image Zoom to get 4K with this lens.

I'm curious if any of you will be swapping over to or using the 28-135 on your FX6 camera.
 
I bought a used 28-135 last year in wait for the FX6. I might turn out to be a very good lens or not depending on how it works with the FX6.
 
Make sure your 28-135 is parfocal*. Many of them are not set up properly ( same for 18-110) even from the factory. Technically parfocal is the wrong word , but it should hold focus electronically throughout the zoom.
I should get a 28-135 for my FX9 but fundamentally don't like the lens nearly as much as the 18-110 so I'm procrastinating. I do have the 24-105 though and I love that. It's a little heavy but its way smaller than the 28-135.
I suspect its AF is better than the 28-135 just because its newer and smaller but I've never compared. The advantage of the 28-135 would be for manual focus esp if its "parfocal."

*Its hard to test this at f4 but find something that can get a good focus point on like a bookcase, then check whether the focus holds at f4 by turning on the color peaking, punching in to 4xs or 8xs in the viewfinder and comparing wide to tele. Otherwise at f4 28mm you might not see how soft the image might actually be even in a large monitor.
 
Last edited:
My 18-110 has never held focus. It’s not off a lot, but it is off. I worked with Sony to get that fixed and they sent it back to me saying it was fine. So I bought a “parfocal” lens that was never parfocal, not even electronically. But I still find the lens incredibly useful and it makes a nice image which is why I’m struggling to move on from it to the 28-135, but image wise I guess they will be similar. I just hope it’s ok to work with in the field considering the zoom cannot he de-clutched. I’m wondering how the manual focus is on it compared to the 18-110.
 
LennyLevy said:
*Its hard to test this at f4 but find something that can get a good focus point on like a bookcase, then check whether the focus holds at f4 by turning on the color peaking, punching in to 4xs or 8xs in the viewfinder and comparing wide to tele. Otherwise at f4 28mm you might not see how soft the image might actually be even in a large monitor.
Click to expand...

Another way to look at what's happening with focus is to be at a sharp angle to your bookcase (almost like looking down the row of books,) have color peaking on and see whether the focus point moves to the left or right as you zoom out. (It doesn't need to be a bookcase -- it could be something as simple as a flattened newspaper page taped to the wall. Of course the main thing is to make sure you're off-axis enough that only a small part of it is in focus...)
 
The 28-135mm is just an awful lens to operate. The mechanics are hot trash. I’d suggest saving your money and putting it towards something else.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Does anybody here who's planning to buy (or have already bought) an FX6 also own the Sony 18-110 Cine Servo Zoom lens? If so, are you planning to keep your 18-110 and use it on the FX6 in Super 35 crop mode which is HD only? Or are you planning to sell your 18-110 in order to buy the 28-135 full frame servo zoom?
110.
Click to expand...

I sold mine along with my FS5 for the reasons you mentioned. I've been totally happy with the 16-35 f2.8 GM - 24-70 f2.8 GM combo on my FX6.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
My 18-110 has never held focus. It’s not off a lot, but it is off. I worked with Sony to get that fixed and they sent it back to me saying it was fine. So I bought a “parfocal” lens that was never parfocal, not even electronically. But I still find the lens incredibly useful and it makes a nice image which is why I’m struggling to move on from it to the 28-135, but image wise I guess they will be similar. I just hope it’s ok to work with in the field considering the zoom cannot he de-clutched. I’m wondering how the manual focus is on it compared to the 18-110.
Click to expand...

You should send it back to Sony. Its really shameful the way they have failed to oversee the 18-110 and the 28-135. Mine is parfocal but after sending it to Sony for a minor repair they "recalibrated" it and it was no longer parfocal. I sent it back to them twice and the failed to fix itt properly. They didn't even know how to evaluate it it . Eventually they sent me a couple of used lenses from "borrow lenses.com and said pick one. They were both parfocal. Friends of mine have bought new ones that were off, returned tehm and got ones that were right. One friend sent hers in to Sony LA and they fixed it correctly. Don't accept one that is off. They are not supposed to be .
I'm not sure the 28-135 is a sharp as the 18 -110. I've only tested one and it was bad but it had been dropped.
 
OnSet said:
Another way to look at what's happening with focus is to be at a sharp angle to your bookcase (almost like looking down the row of books,) have color peaking on and see whether the focus point moves to the left or right as you zoom out. (It doesn't need to be a bookcase -- it could be something as simple as a flattened newspaper page taped to the wall. Of course the main thing is to make sure you're off-axis enough that only a small part of it is in focus...)
Click to expand...

Cool idea.
 
I wish they would just come out with an improved 28-135 II based on the mechanics of the 18-110. I assumed they would do this with FX9 but not yet. In the old d
ays you could ask Sony for something like this but they don't seem to care for feedback anymore.
 
They will probably come out with a full-frame midrange zoom of the same caliber as their new autofocus cine 16-35, but who knows what the exact focal length range will be
 
Do you have some secret info on this? are we talking an inexpensive Sony lens like the 18-110 or a genuine break the bank zoom that i can't afford?
 
Yeah it's a holy trinity I think. The middle lens is the 16-35. The left is something like a 70-200. Judging by the size of the one on the right, I'm guessing it's a 24-70 or 24-105, something with about that range and ratio. I doubt it will have as much zoom ratio as the 28-135, so almost certainly not a true ENG ass-kicker. But still cool. If they go T3.1 like the 16-35 then it will probably be more like a 24-70. And the 2 upcoming lenses will probably cost at least as much as their $5500 cine 16-35
 
ahalpert said:
Yeah it's a holy trinity I think. The middle lens is the 16-35. The left is something like a 70-200. Judging by the size of the one on the right, I'm guessing it's a 24-70 or 24-105, something with about that range and ratio. I doubt it will have as much zoom ratio as the 28-135, so almost certainly not a true ENG ass-kicker. But still cool. If they go T3.1 like the 16-35 then it will probably be more like a 24-70. And the 2 upcoming lenses will probably cost at least as much as their $5500 cine 16-35
Click to expand...

That'd be my guess too:

16-35mm T/3.1
24-70mm T/3.1
70-200mm T/3.1

If they work as well as it sounds like the 16-35mm does (strong manual mechanics in addition to auto focus), then it'd be an extremely useful (if incredibly camera-specific) set. Being able to flip to autofocus in an instant, then back to manual control the second you need to - that's a pretty enticing prospect.
 
Nate Weaver said:
28-80 is my guess. And then of course 70-200.

It’s like Zeiss all over again!
Click to expand...


But presuming its rehoused lenses ,like the 16-35.. would it not be more likley to be 24-70 and 70-200.. either way they are going to way too front heavy for a fx6 hand held .. or even on many tripods.. ? .. a new 28-135 (albeit cheaper and more plastic ) ,but being 24-120 mm FF, with better manual functions would be better .. IMHO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top