/p/ - Photography » Thread #4236482

[35 / 2 / 14]

32KiB, 320x320, 33F21F10-2A23-49EF-8F71-3C72C94866DF.jpg

Sony FX6

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 04:19:58 No.4236482 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>4236484 >>4236659 >>4236897 >>4236996

I saved up enough money to buy a cinema grade camera and I’m considering purchasing a Sony FX6

The low light versatility, built in ND filters and autofocus appeal to me since a lot of what I’ll be shooting is ultra low budget and a very small team. Probably just myself and the subject and maybe someone else to help with sound.

Have any of you tried this camera out?
Any opinions or suggestions?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 04:25:09 No.4236484 Report

Quoted By: >>4236487 >>4236490 >>4236649

>>4236482
Invest in lighting, locations, and bigger team. The creator was filmed on a fuckin fx3 and canon 5d3s (and even aps-crap DSLRs!) were used as B and crash cams in shitloads of movies.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 04:29:40 No.4236487 Report

Quoted By: >>4236490 >>4236645

>>4236484
I want to shoot in public places and I don’t have the budget for permits, catering, crew. The dual iso appeals to me because I can run and gun in a busy street with real people as my extras and get out quickly without raising too much suspicion as I would with setting up lights

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 04:32:31 No.4236490 Report

Quoted By: >>4236651 >>4236774 >>4236777

>>4236484
>>4236487
What concerns me is the color science and look. I don’t want it to look sterile and boring. How does it compare to something like the black magic Ursa or old Komodo, in terms of color and look.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 14:52:00 No.4236644 Report

Quoted By:

Speaking as someone who uses FX6s every other week, and owns a RED, the FX6 is not a cinema camera. It’s an ENG camera intended as a workhorse for corporate shoots, broadcast, documentary-making, social media content, etc. It’s a pain in the ass to use as an actual cine camera because it’s missing ease-of-use professional elements like a native PL mount, built-in false colour, limited proper lens choice, hell half the time you can’t even tell what the histogram that you can bring up is measuring.

That said, it’s a fantastic all-rounder camera and if you’re planning to shoot all kinds of things and not just shorts or whatever you’re planning to do, it’s a great investment.

For the other cameras mentioned:
- Ursa is great, but unreliable in the long term (plasticky, sensor may or may not conk out, internal bits may or lay not fail, etc)
- Komodo is very good in terms of image quality, but shite in terms of usability, it feels like a beta version of a camera and RED already putting out the new version is proof of that. Also the SDI out is wonky and having a screen on top of the camera is, i’m sorry, moronic.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 14:56:18 No.4236645 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236487
While the dual ISO is handy, the argument that you want it so you don’t set up lights doesn’t hold up. You set up lights to create atmosphere, high ISO won’t help with that.

But I realize that’s not what you mean exactly, you just want to run and gun efficiently, and it is good for that. Keep in mind that thw footage will still be noisier and uglier than normal ISO if you do it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 15:16:43 No.4236649 Report

Quoted By: >>4236774 >>4236823

>>4236484
>fuckin fx3
Is this considered low end? What the fuck. Fucking zoomers these days. Even a FX30 is god damn amazing. We were limited to dumb shit like 1080i and 720p cameras with 1/3rd inch sensors with fixed lenses, 4:2:0, 8 bit, shit DR, no log not too long ago with stupid steadicam vest for a pos tiny sensor recording onto a minidv tape or p2 card. Now you got a bunch of different cams and mounts to choose from that will give you eye AF tracking in video with 4:2:2 10 bit 4k log footage with high DR and a large enough sensor to have a nice DoF with and inexpensive gimbals. Shit nigga.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 15:19:17 No.4236651 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236490
There's no problem even with a6700 even, slog3, slap on color space conversion to rec709, then you grade it to whatever you want it to look like, throw a lut on even, it's a non issue and pick any camera with 10 bit log capability that's s35+ sized

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 15:42:10 No.4236659 Report

Quoted By: >>4236879

>>4236482
How about the lens? Personally I would pick an FX3, or used A7siii, Panasonic S5ii x etc. Even an FX30. They all have dual base iso.

You're paying a lot for the privilege of not having to screw on an ND filter and a lot bigger package size and a few hundred more grams (not heavy, but will make a difference if it can even fit onto a gimbal, run and gun etc). There's a lot of downsides with an FX6 for barebones crew and low budget. You could have better/more lenses for the budget.

Log footage is very easy to use in davinci. Speaking of, with dual base iso, you'll want some ND filters if you want to shoot any lenses wide open at f/1.8 etc to get a reasonable shutter if your project base fps is 24,25 or 30 fps. I have some relatively inexpensive VND filters that don't appear to affect image quality (get a narrow VND range like an ND8-ND128 for this purpose), I also got an Amaran second gen 100 watt X light I made a battery for. More than enough power to use in a 150cm softbox, the issue is ambient light has to be dim enough to make good use of it.

Ive used slog3 10bit footage in both FF and S35 mode and like it a lot, after sticking with s.cinetone for so long I gave it a try and didn't realise how easy it was to use.

Just stay away from RED and stick with S35 or FF that has 10 bit log 4:2:2 and you'll be golden

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 20:02:37 No.4236774 Report

Quoted By: >>4236869

>>4236490
You’re right to be concerned, but recent Sony color science is better than FS series cameras’ color science. It’s not as nice straight out of camera as an Arri or a RED, or even a BM in my opinion, but you can get it to what you want no problem.

>>4236649
Of course FX3 is considered low end. Taking into consideration what you get out of high end systems, it’s not great. What I mean by that isn’t image quality per se (although it’s that too, if you ever have to grade Arri footage next to FX3 footage you’ll notice it), it’s more to do with: reliability over a long period of time, ease of use, exterior design, durability, peace of mind. That’s what you’re really paying for with high end systems in my experience.

But objectively speaking, for a hobbyist or semi-professional, it’s fantastic quality obviously.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 20:06:19 No.4236777 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236490
Buy a color checker card. The "look" of a camera is basically irrelevant once you're shooting 10bit. You can get it to look like anything in davinci.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 21:35:04 No.4236823 Report

Quoted By: >>4236825

>>4236649
>Is this considered low end?
In 2023? Abso-fucking-lutely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 21:37:14 No.4236825 Report

Quoted By: >>4236826

>>4236823
What's a high end camera?
Hard mode. Arri and Red are excluded because, no shit they're high end.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 21:41:37 No.4236826 Report

Quoted By: >>4236827

>>4236825
>asks what's a high end camera
>nooooo, not THOSE high end cameras
kek
Sony Venice / Venice 2

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 21:43:15 No.4236827 Report

Quoted By: >>4236828 >>4236831 >>4236870

>>4236826
Reason I excluded those and even would the Sony Venice is because people don't own those cameras, they're usually rented.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 21:45:55 No.4236828 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236827
>because people don't own those cameras, they're usually rented.
So? They're still the high end for video.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 21:50:15 No.4236831 Report

Quoted By: >>4236870

>>4236827
It's not that uncommon for people in the video production business to own RED cameras. You see plenty of people owning Blackmagic URSAs as well. A RED Komodo costs peanuts compared to an Arri or a Venice, now those you don't see around much outside of large budget sets.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 03 Oct 2023 23:59:56 No.4236869 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236774
It is absolutely unreal how good we have it today. As said before the FX30 is ridiculously good even.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:00:02 No.4236870 Report

Quoted By: >>4236874

>>4236827
>>4236831
I don’t know where you guys are but in London at least I know a number of operators and DPs who own Alexa Minis, LFs or various REDs (not Komodo, the proper ones).

Going back to the original question though, if you exclude those there is no high end. Those are the high end. Arri, RED, Venice are it, everything else is not really a cinema camera.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO john-david-washington-the-creator.jpg, 70KiB, 990x557

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:05:56 No.4236874 Report

Quoted By: >>4236880

>>4236870
People owning an Arri to shoot shitty YouTube ads and SoundCloud rapper videos is beyond retarded. But I'm sure what they're doing looks a lot better than The Creator. Right?

Right?

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:18:27 No.4236879 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236659
>You're paying a lot for the privilege of not having to screw on an ND filter
Dude, that's A LOT. It isn't simply not having to screw one, the quality is tangibly superior not to mention how it facilitates the use of barn doors and reduces glare.
As for the weight and size, that's a plus not a minus. You'd be surprised by how stable a shoulder-mounted camera can be. That's what produces the cinematic shaky cam footage, because the shakiness isn't extreme.

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:21:48 No.4236880 Report

Quoted By: >>4236886

>>4236874
>The Creator
It's just another example of a gimmick movie made to advertise a product, in this case the FX3. And it may or may not be entirely filmed on it, smells of NDA.
Not saying the FX3 isn't capable or anything but it's seriously more trouble than it is worth when you can get an used Alexa Mini for cheap.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:36:20 No.4236886 Report

Quoted By: >>4236889 >>4236890

>>4236880
A lot of blue hour shooting and lots of bts footage showing their setup. The whole reason they managed to make the movie so cheaply is because they had a small crew. The reason they could have a small crew is they could shoot at 12,800 with fewer, smaller, lights, they only need an operator and a focus puller to get the shots, and it does t take a minute and a half to boot up.
Even Oscar winning DPs don't buy their own Alexa. I can only imagine it's a status/marketing thing. Like "let's hire this guy because he's got an Alexa" because it doesn't make any sense to anyone otherwise.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:43:27 No.4236889 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236886
Ignore me, I'm not a professional cinematographer so whatever.

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:47:55 No.4236890 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236886
Shooting at astronomical ISOs to compensate for poor lighting rarely works out, and I don't mean in terms of image quality but of the qualities of the image more precisely. Stunning pictures come from blasting sets with light. Also the FX3 is hardly first at that kind of thing, the Mavo LF was around for years and can handle those levels of ISO too.
>BTS footage
As if that couldn't be carefully selected, lol. It's a movie in itself. Photography isn't only about what you show, it's also what you leave out. That's where the sleight of hand is. And I'm not talking only about this dishonest deception but the use of techniques to make honest-to-God fiction. Things like motivated lighting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 00:59:34 No.4236897 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236482
Just get a DJI Pocket. No, seriously.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 01:08:52 No.4236903 Report

Quoted By: >>4236907

You do not need to "blast sets with light". Lighting quality and lighting intensity are 2 different things. If you have somewhere to shoot that is dark enough to use low power lights then you can shoot high quality lighting just fine. I use the Amaran 100x S. Though it is still more than enough for first base ISO.

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 04 Oct 2023 01:16:47 No.4236907 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236903
Sure, but you can't get the much cherished look from the golden era, from the time when color film was like ISO 50 and carbon arc lighting was used.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 01:49:17 No.4236923 Report

Quoted By: >>4236926 >>4236931

Apparently they had to do shit ton of post tinkering with noise removal on The Creator and it still looked pretty muddy and noisy on the big screen. And it had some of the best post production people on the planet working on it.

I think Gareth Edwards is wildly overrated as a director. He came from the effects world and it shows. He is more interested in that side of filmmaking than a story that makes sense on the page. He's adamant about operating himself, which is partially why they also went with the FX3 on The Creator. IDK how much of the Rogue One reshoots were because he insisted on operating himself and it's not easy to operate and direct that kind of movie, especially when shooting on Arri LF.

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6

cinefag !CiNE/YT/e6 Wed 04 Oct 2023 01:53:31 No.4236926 Report

Quoted By: >>4236932

>>4236923
Yeah it's sad when that happens, same with Soderbergh and Unsane. It looks like shit but HEY IT WAS SHOT ON AN IPHONE.
That said some directors that came from the FX world are worth their salt, see Neill Blomkamp.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 02:16:46 No.4236931 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236923
If it was the only recent Lucasfilm production that had been fucked around with during production then I'd blame Gareth, but it's been a running theme.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 02:22:17 No.4236932 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236926
I will watch everything that Neil Blomkamf makes but, let's be real, nothing else has lived up to the promise of District 9.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 12:29:44 No.4236996 Report

Quoted By: >>4236998 >>4237007

>>4236482
>Ultra low budget
>FX6

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK

cANON !!5Dz+C7v45HK Wed 04 Oct 2023 12:32:27 No.4236998 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236996
Considering it's a baby mount B-cam I'd say it's a fair assessment.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 04 Oct 2023 12:52:04 No.4237007 Report

Quoted By:

>>4236996
cinefag and cANON are total gearfags. Ignore them. Ultra low budget is probably like the EOS M with one of the f/1.2 primes with magic lantern, 1080p but up to 14 bit. A bit more budget gets you up to an fx30 etc

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Sony FX6