Alexa Mini LF vs C500mkII vs FX9 vs VENICE // Full Frame Roundup
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- Which camera reigns supreme? Well... it kinda depends.
Watch the test footage :: bit.ly/lfshootout
Read the full article :: www.provideoco...
STRAY ANGEL FILMS
www.strayangel...
/ strayangelfilms
/ strayangelfilms
/ strayangelfilmsinc
OWL BOT
www.owlbot.co
/ _owlbot
/ _owlbot
/ owlbot
#LargeFormat #FullFrame #CameraTest
![Warhammer 40k: Space Marine 2 | เพื่อจักรพรรดิ ! [ตอนเดียวจบ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4M0ckYMA4-U/mqdefault.jpg)
I am actually quite a novice, so I wanted to upgrade from mirrorless Sony camera (A7R), so I think I like the FX9 here. I mean, I'd probably pick Mini LF or Alexa 35 or Venice 2 if money was not an objective, but all I read I like the versatility of the camera, and the fact it's very nice even without RAW out of the box, plus I know Sony's workflow, and the talked about crappy menu already and got used to it.
YEDLIN 2016 !
Juste génial , merci beaucoup.
Next time I would like to see a kinefinity camera compared with these models....seems like they always get left out of everything lol
I've never seen one personally so I can't compare. I can't speak for Stray, but my _guess_ is that they're never requested to rent, and I for sure have never seen one on-set, so it's not necessarily worth pursuing. Now, that being said if Kinefinity wanted to send me one to check out I'd happily review it/compare it to the cameras available to me, but yeah it's just more of a consumer camera. --Kenny
@@Owlbot okay gotcha
Great quick comparison! We have been big fans of both the FX9, and C500 mkII!
lol "Nascar it"
Hahah! Had a laugh watching this. Subbing right away! Nice job Stray Angel.
Great test thanks!
Damn the FX9 is the greenest thing I've ever seen. Seems way more green than the footage I get out of my A7III/A7RIV
Arkitect Fitness Just use the right LUT or the tint menue. And look at all the other tests of the C500 MK II and the FX9 in the web or on TH-cam. The sensor of the FX9 is superior to that of the C500 MK II. A good start would be the thread over at reduser. Of course this review is the result of a C500 MK II owner 😀
@@falkowehr8975 It's all irrelevant to me because I can't afford any of these cameras! haha.
Arkitect Fitness Never mind, you can get nice pictures with the A7‘s as well.
RED has joined the chat
strange because my FX9 is not that green
Did you check the tint in the options on the FX9? When I was testing one it was by default shifted towards green.
Think you may have your tint on the Fx9. If this is rented then people usually mess around with the tint.
What do u think of the Mavo LF?
Super uncommon. I've never seen one/don't know anyone who has one. I'd be happy to check it out if someone could send one over.
Thanks!
If your using the s709LUT (for Venice).. FX9 footage is green .. different sensor .. you don't mention price .. I would never have guessed you were a C500 owner :)
I love this quote everywhere "large format cinema cameras", which have 35mm sensors at most, or just a bit more... Where real large format starts at best over 6x9cm. Great vid btw ;)
Pure Color Media You’re thinking photography, not cinema. In cinema, anything over Super35 is considered large format. In photography, 4x5, 6x7, etc is medium format, and large format is 8x10 and larger.
@@Photographicelements I hope you see a point here as even your channel is called photographic elements ;)
There are already medium format cameras that are able to make videos. Lets say 33x44mm can be still named large format, but how you will call something over 54x40? For me thats already mistical 'super large format' and it is souds silly...
But lets say our imagination goes deeper and they will go larger? Cheers!
Pure Color Media Two different industries, with two different perspectives. Photography from the cinema perspective is called, “still photography,” as “photography” is cinematography, moving images. It’s confusing now with hybrid cameras, where there are so many crossovers. The cameras in this video are pure cinema, hence using the nomenclature from the cinema world.
I know industry names, but when something isn't right is not right. Like it was with 'great' idea to call something HD and then FullHD and all that it follows. Then someone started with 4K finally. And calling something large, which is not large it is naive at best.
But you are not right, Pure Color Media - Horizontally spaced 35mm film has been cinema standard for a century, as opposed to the vertically spaced 35mm film that has become standard in photography (though photography is and has always been less standardized). Cinematographers have referred to anything larger than Super 35mm as large format since way before digital cameras. Medium and Large formats from photography are nomenclature from another world.
Are there any good LUTs you'd recommend to mitigate the green skin tones of a Sony?
If only all these TH-cam creators had script writers or spontaneity half as good as you theyd be the grail of TH-cam
12 bit log raw and 16 bit linear is the same.
Hold on you've sent me down a bit of a rabbit hole, do you have any reading material I can check out about that?
@@Owlbot haha yeah. Notice a lot of camera companies say their cameras are 12 bit raw but never say that kind of raw it is. 10 bit log is better than 12 bit linear raw. 12 bit log raw (black magic, Canon & Arri) Is the same as 16 bit linear (Sony Venice & Reds). Basically Log evenly distributes the bits across the image while linear has the least bits in the dark areas and most of bit information is in the highlights (there is a chart for this). When you put Black Magic's Raw into DaVinci Resolve it will say 16 bits. It is shot at 12 bit log and unpacked to it's 16 bit linear for editing. Basically if you convert 16 bit linear to log it'll be 12 bit. It Properly distributes the information across the image and it's better to work with. So if the raw is linear it must be 16 bits... If you see 12 bit linear on cameras (FS5, SH1, ZCAM) you may get a lot of banding in the shadows because of the lack of information down there. I believe the Panasonic EVA 1 is using 10 bit log for their raw. They get the point LOL. You can easily type this in Google and it'll show you. Shouldn't be a hard fine :)
It's a bit misleading to say they're the same. How can they be the same? They might in average use cases give you the same amount of fidelity, but they're not the same thing. 16-bit linear lossless RAW from a 16-bit A/D is a fully lossless recording mechanism whereas recording 12-bit log RAW from a 16-bit A/D is going to throw away a quarter of the data - granted its throwing away data in a sensible way. In Theory, near overexposed 16-bit linear RAW would contain a lot of information you would miss with 12-bit log
@@smleh thats not what I was talking about thought. Im saying the bits are in different places because of the method of the recording. Log evens out the bits over the image while linear doesn't.
@@kendrickgray2873 I cannot find anything on the whitepaper for blackmagic and canon when it comes to their RAW being log vs linear. Sony right out of the gate says they're linear but never the other companies and they (canon / BM) don't specify if their "log" curve is baked in based on the dp gamma selection or if there's a "RAW GAMMA" at 2.0 curve then from that log base gamma the log transforms to the clog3/clog2 etc which are weird s curves not a straight curve if you get my drift lol
The size of the FX9 is disappointing. Just doesn’t need to be that large ... the Canon does more and its significantly smaller.
...that's my only beef about it, too
Skin tones too yellow. Yellow cast so ever present. I dont know why did you have a color chart...all of the neutrals were yellow. At least you can color match all these cameras i really cant tell which is which.
Great video, I tried to click on the link to the write up , but it said there was an error. I just wanted to let you know. Keep safe.
It's working for me, but here it is again just in case -- www.provideocoalition.com/large-format-shootout/
OWL BOT Thanks - that works for me.
Canon ftw.
A bit dumb no to use the dual native ISO. That’s what that’s there for. To get a less noisy image.
Would've been really really great if you could drop a Red Gemini 5k in this test
I don't understand this test. You have a color chart to show different color response, but white balance is all over the place in each camera. How is that a test of color reproduction. Seems like beginner user mistake to me. To make this test meaningful at all, you have to get white balance to neutral first and than you judge color and tone response. You don't just point and shoot. That makes no sense. It does not tell us anything about cameras, but a lot about the user.
Koko video yhtä Kenny McMillan juhlaa.
4:12 6:22
Why is the FX9 tough because it can‘t shot RAW. It can shot RAW, but not within the camera. Btw, you don‘t need to, because the highlight recovery is as good or even better then with some raw-shooting cameras. Please check the reduser thread. You need to be comfortable with the camera before you shoot with it, otherwise the results are not as expected. That is with every camera. All your footage looks a little on the green side, when watching. Maybe you should check your post workflow, if there is not the problem somewhere? Thanks for the test.
The FX9 cannot shoot Raw because none of the Atomos Neon range or any other hardware yet supports it. I mention the Neon because that is literally the only confirmed recorder to eventually, provisionally support RAW recording from the FX9. At some point in the future it will shoot RAW (almost certainly) - with the addition of two very costly add ons (XDCA-FX9, and Atomos Neon - which by the way is 4 thousand dollars and 17 inches across), however it's not a feature that can be tested and compared. As of today, 17th April 2020, the Sony FX9 cannot shoot RAW in any circumstances, for any budget. It is yet to be demonstrated, or even promised to shoot RAW in any kind of mobile, non studio context. Either way, the total cost to produce RAW footage on this camera greatly exceeds the cost of the C500.
Gareth Stack Did you even read my comment? You don‘t NEED to shoot RAW with the FX9, because the results are amazing even without it. If you want to shoot RAW for a project that needs it, and want to stay in the Sony universe, rent the Venice . If you doing documentaries, all you want ist a robust 10-Bit Codec. I worked with RAW lite before, and believe me or not, you can almost push the 10-Bit from the Sony FX9 as far as the RAW lite
@@falkowehr8975 The second line of your comment is "it can shoot RAW, but not within the camera". Without putting too fine a point on it, you're taking a camera review personally, while spreading misleading information. This consumerist tribalism is a big problem online. If you choose to purchase the FX9 and are happy, great.
@ Gareth Stack yeah, so nothing I wrote, condtradicts that line, does it? Where are the misleading information here? Hold your horses, it‘s not personal. You can get wonderful results with either camera, so just pick one and shoot it. cheers
Regarding the green shift on the FX9, when I tested the camera the tint was shifted towards green for some reason. It's possible that they didn't check the tint option because it's not very obvious in the menu.