Kino

I recently shot this cover song and music video in 8K RAW on the R5C with a Great Joy 1.8x Anamorphic (50mm). My daughter sings here and I recorded the music, so I was occupied with a lot of things aside from the camera. Having said that, the camera performs really well for what it is and is a great addition for those who already own Canon glass. It's not going to replace a proper cinema camera in terms of the best DR or latitude, but it is an amazing tool and the in-camera anamorphic de-squeeze is a priceless feature. The video is uploaded in 8K so choose that for best quality:

On 11/19/2023 at 5:53 PM, IronFilm said:

Canon is probably slashing the prices on their C200/C300mk3/C500mk2 because a new RF mount cinema camera is just around the corner from Canon 

Absolutely, but when will it be here? I mostly have EF lenses, though I may consider the Sony FX9 II if that comes along sooner and has the better features/price. The FX9 already looks great with the in-camera 10 bit:

And, with the RAW expander, it reproduces some beautiful colors:

Sony's advantage is that they don't need to introduce a new mount at this stage and have a better native and 3rd-party lens selection.

5 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

Thanks for the link to the video. I’ll take a closer look at the Komodo-X. I wonder, however, if it’s worth $4000 more just for some incremental improvements over the original Komodo?

The Komodo-X is $1000 more than a Canon C300 Mk3, and requires an external monitor, battery, charger, etc., that come in the box with the C300.

What would the Komodo-X offer over a Kinefinity Mavo Mk2 S35 at $4000? 

There are people here who have shot with the Komodo 6K and the Komodo-X, so I'm sure they will chime in.

As mentioned above, the Komodo-X has better I/O for professional use and a claimed half-stop advantage in the shadows, which is probably closer to a 1-stop advantage over Komodo 6K. The other main advantages are that it has a 2X faster sensor readout (80FPS in 6K 17x9 vs 40FPS in the Komodo 6K); an upgraded processor for the menu GUI; locking RF mount; mini V-mount battery plate; and an XLR breakout port with better preamps. You can now mount more accessories (e.g., monitor) directly to the camera and so it functions more like a traditional RED camera. The media has also been upgraded to CFexpress B and there are some autofocus updates not available on the Komodo 6K.

I believe it is worth it if you need all these advantages, especially the low light and the higher frame rates, both of which may be useful on a nature doc. However, for the additional $4K over the Komodo 6K, you could simply purchase an FX3 or A7S III and cover those bases. Then, you would have two cameras for the price of one. The one drawback is that the Komodo X also has a strong magenta bias (perhaps to make it more like the V-Raptor 8K S35mm). You can correct it in post, but it shouldn't be there. It is obvious when you compare it to the Komodo 6K and even the Dragon X.

In terms of the other cameras you mentioned, the Kinefinity Mavo LF II (FF 6K) is the closest in features and price, but it does have a significant amount of rolling shutter and dealing with their warranty service might be very difficult.

For nature docs, you are probably best off with a Canon or Sony, including the FX6, C70, FX9, and C300 III.

But there is one camera you haven't mentioned, the C500 II, which is now discounted to $11K. That is a serious cinematic machine and punches way above its price:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYM_DvGGhxc

If you watch the Netflix series Madoff: the Monster of Wall Street, you can see the C500 II in action. It looks especially great in Dolby Vision:

The one problem with this camera is that it doesn't have 4K 120FPS, if that is important to you. But, if you don't need that feature, then the C500 II is about the best you can do for a new cinema camera in this price range.

11 hours ago, padam said:

FX9II coming in early 2024.

Rumoured specs say global shutter, native ISO of 2000 & 6400 in S-Log3, seems in line with CVP's A9III tests.
If I read it right, oversampled 4k120p in FF, S35 crop can also do oversampled FHD240p as well.
Most interestingly, dynamic range is said to be maintained at 15+ stops.

Maybe the A9III DR isn't nearly as bad as some preliminary thoughts make it out to be, but it's annoying that they don't say anything about it.

This is from the Chinese website I posted above, but it could be fake. First of all, it was posted a few days after this review from CVP and seems to lift most of the above specs from the section on "future cameras":

It is very unlikely that Sony would release the A9III and FX9II, featuring the same sensor, within such a close timeframe. The A1 and Venice 2, which share a similar (but different) 8.6K sensor, were released one year apart. Moreover, while the A9III is a competent hybrid camera, the sensor is not designed for high dynamic range and would not be able to achieve 15+ stops of DR in video. It would be a downgrade from the current FX9, which has exceptional DR and ISO performance. Although Sony featured a global shutter on the F55 and F65, its newer cinema cameras lack this feature. I don't see them putting it back anytime soon, as it is too much of a compromise for overall image quality. Either the FX9II will get the IMX610 from the A1 or it will get some other 6K or 8K sensor that we don't know about.

2 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

How they're supposed to shoot a PR video with a camera that is not in production yet? 

Camera manufacturers do that all the time. It is common practice. In the case of the Sony A1, its promos came out in January 2021, well before the camera was in production or released to the public, which was March 2021:

The Canon hybrid releases follow the same pattern. The flagship 1DX III promo video was shot on that camera and posted on its announcement day January 6, 2020, well before it was released in mid-February 2020.

1 hour ago, kye said:

Maybe they're thinking of it like it's a great B or C camera on Venice / Burano shoots?  If so, having a demo video with A9iii shots mixed in would make sense.

The "lesser" folks who aren't shooting on Venice / Burano are more than capable of convincing themselves that "if it's good enough for them as a C-cam then it's an excellent choice as my A-cam!!"

It's more that I'm disappointed that Sony didn't shoot the video with the A9III exclusively, as they did with the Sony A1 promos.

Based on other footage I've seen from the camera, I think the A9III is fully capable. There is even an unsubstantiated but plausible rumor from a Chinese website that the exact same A9III sensor will feature in the FX9II with 6K recording:

https://m-weibo-cn.translate.goog/u/2424567755?jumpfrom=weibocom%2Fu%2F2424567755%3Fjumpfrom%3Dweibocom&_x_tr_hist=true&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp#&gid=1&pid=1

Sony itself doesn't believe in the A9III as a video camera. BTS of "Light Speed" promo piece shows Venice 2 and Burano were used for most shots, including all the really impressive ones:

On 11/5/2023 at 5:07 PM, TomTheDP said:

I think its the Burano honestly. Same sensor as the 80K Venice 2. Doesn't require the bulky raw recorder, weighs 3 pounds less. Why would you get the old 6k Venice when you can get the Burano for 25k. Now at 18k the original Venice is tempting, but for just a few more Ks you get brand new camera. 

The Burano doesn't have as many output or power output options though, but neither does the Alexa mini. 

The Venice 6K is a certified Hollywood A-cam and I don't think it should be compared with the Burano, as the latter only offers X-OCN LT. That is a significant downgrade from the RAW and X-OCN options on the Venice cameras. My hope is that if they do bring out a Burano 6K, it will have X-OCN XT and ST because of the lower resolution and the fact that the Venice 6K is a much older design. In scenes with a lot of movement or change, X-OCN will scale resolution, especially when it comes to the LT compression. That is how Sony's X-OCN avoids artifacts. This means that Burano's 8K X-OCN LT will not be a true 8K image in all scenarios.

29 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

I think I saw that they're 14-bit raw files and the camera has an option to pre-buffer about 1 second of them.  Depending on how long it can roll after that, I could see using it for high-quality internal raw video (without sound, but some cameras already don't bother recording it when overcranking).  Even if it's only for a second or two, that's enough for some inserts/effects shots.
Since it can also be toggled on mid-shooting, I could see a sports photog assigning it to a button and toggling it at an important moment.

If they can pull off GS with better DR than the Komodo or the ZCam E2-S6G, the camera could be a real winner.  If it's not better than Komodo, I'd expect people to go buy a used Komodo for $4-5k and enjoy internal raw, anamorphic modes, and not having to explain their camera choice to clients.  I was going to get a Komodo until another user sold me a barely-used E2-S6G for half off the new price.

Also, the upcoming E2-M5G could be pretty interesting too - apparently it's both GS and DGS.  Still waiting for some to get out in the field and see some test chart results.

Anyway, it's cool to have a lot of "affordable" GS sensors these days.  It'll be nice when one has enough DR to be used as my A camera - as it is, my S6G gets some use as a B camera and specifically for shots where RS jello is offensive (still need to rig it up to my front bumper to see how it looks when I drive down a bumpy dirt road - footage from the FP is absoutely unusable when doing that)

 

The promo piece includes short RAW bursts that are rendered as video:

13 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah it's crazy the FS7 and FX9 needed the XDCA unit but the FS700 and FX6 did not??? 

Why do you think this is??

I am currently trying to sell my FS7, I hope I get a good price for it due to the fact I've selling it with the rather expensive XDCA!! But I am doubtful 😞

That would put it too close in price to a Sony FX9mk2? 

Maybe the "Burano 6K" could be the same inflation adjusted price as the Sony PMW-F5 was? 

XDCA module was part of Sony's legacy design. On the FX9, it allows for much more than 16-bit RAW and 4k 120 (S35). You can power a giant B4 lens, for example, and offset the weight. You can also stream and transfer files. It's a full professional feature set for those who need it, especially broadcasters and those in field recording. This is all before they integrated RAW output into the body of the FX6. It will be interesting to see how they move forward with the FX9 II design in case they drop the module or modify it.

At the moment, we have the aging FX9 at $10K and the brand new Burano 8K at $25K. That's a huge price gap in the Sony cinema lineup that they need to fill. The "Burano 6K" could fill that gap nicely and still separate itself from both cameras. I believe the "inflation adjusted price" for the F5 was $3000 over MSRP, so I'm not sure how that will work.

I think you will find buyers for the FS7 who don't want to pay FX6 prices. It is still a capable camera and perfect for many applications. I still shoot with the C500 (original) and the image is great, especially in RAW. The only problem is the size/weight of the camera and Odyssey recorder when all rigged up.

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I don't think they need to boost the raw capabilities of the FX9/FX6, those are nice to have features for marketing rather than core features for the bread and butter purchasers of them. 

Neither is 8K being demanded strongly by this market segment at all. 

If 4K 120fps (which now even the Sony FX30 can do internally) is the only "major" feature in the FX9mk2 and everything else is tweaks around the edge (such as giving more anamorphic options), then I'd say this is a fairly incremental upgrade like the FS7mk2 was (but a bigger update than the FS5mk2 was!). And the type of possible update I'm expecting from Sony. 

That would be a nice release!

But where would they price it? There is only a $5K difference between the two VENICE bodies. 

Perhaps instead of $25K, they'll make it be $20K?? Would definitely put it within the reach of more FX9 owner-ops 

The FX6 is perfectly fine the way it is with the direct RAW output to the Atomos. The FX9 has the problem in that it requires the XDCA extension unit to do the same thing as the FX6. They need to allow for direct RAW out.

8K acquisition provides many advantages that Sony does not want to ignore for their flagship FX camera, especially considering Canon's plans for this segment. I don't see them going with 4K downsampled from 6K yet again. The camera will definitely have a new sensor, perhaps a repurposed A1 sensor (IMX 610) or something else we don't know about.

Brand new, the Venice 6K and 8K barely have any price difference as you note, but you can get a used Venice 6K for almost half the price. A Burano 6K would be amazing if they could get the price down to where the F5 was ($16K). The problem is that the Venice 6K is still very popular on many productions, both big and small, and listed as the official F5 replacement on Sony's website:

https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/digital-cinema-cameras/pmw-f5

I don't expect a "Burano 6K" for some time, but I only mention it because I think the possibility for this camera release determines the kind of features we will get in the FX9 II.

13 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Wonder how big the update will be if it is a FX9mk2

Maybe just a very small modest one like the FS7mk2 and FS5mk2 was?

I hope for a brand new FX model, such as a "FX300". The FX30 does 4K 120fps and is $1600 by itself (or $2K with the audio handle). And that is after the $200 price drop! ($1800 and $2,200 beforehand)

Having a sub $1K (or even sub $800) cinema camera would be awesome. Maybe if it was 4K 60fps, or even just 4K 30fps, that a new Sony FX300 is. But keep all the same codecs, cooling fan, timecode, full size HDMI, etc of the FX30/FX3.

If the FX9 II does come along, it will not be an incremental upgrade like the FS7 II. It has to compete with Canon's next generation Cinema EOS cameras, so it will need to offer 8K recording, better external RAW recording options, and proper 4K 120 internal. There is a possibility for X-OCN 16-Bit at 4K or 6K, but I doubt it. I suspect they plan to replace the discontinued F5 ($16K) with a Burano 6K (using the Venice 1 sensor) and that camera will be the cheapest entry point for Sony's X-OCN. Then the Burano line would mirror the Venice 8K and 6K perfectly.

I wouldn't buy either one at this stage unless you absolutely must have a camera today. The C300 III has been discounted to $9K from $11K and is likely to got down even more as Canon replaces it with an RF mount version with higher resolution. The Sony FX9 is selling for $10K and is now 4 years old. Sony has registered a new camera (WW279317) in China that could be its replacement:

https://weibo.com/2424567755/NoKDocBsC

This registration will be produced by the Shanghai plant (like the FX6 and FX9), so it is most likely an FX camera (or possibly a new camcorder). In any case, the FX9 II is close and when it drops so will the price of the FX9. At that point, you can decide which camera is better for your needs.

I just returned the GFX 100 II and GF 45-100mm after owning the camera for a week. It is an amazing photo camera but only half-baked for video. Here are the main problems I found after some testing:

1. 5.8K and 8K modes suffer from significant rolling shutter, especially the 8K. This is a shame as I was looking forward to the 5.8K "cinemascope" (2.35:1) format.

2. Aliasing is present in 5.8K mode, which uses the full width of the sensor, but much less prevalent in all other modes.

3. Noise is a problem at ISO 2000 and above, especially in the cropped formats. The camera is likely ISO invariant above 800, so you are not really changing anything in the gain signal.

4. I didn't notice "chroma smoothing" in my footage on Resolve, but I wasn't really looking for it or shooting skin tones and foliage. I have seen it in other footage posted online from the camera and it really worries me. It has a plastic effect on skin/flesh tones that can be obvious.

Despite these issues, the camera does have some amazing video qualities:

1. The AF and stabilization work very well for a large format sensor. The 45-100 has OIS and is highly recommended for anyone who buys this camera.

2. The dynamic range is amazing on this camera! It is definitely in the realm of RED and Sony cinema cameras. Some reviewers have compared it to the ALEXA, but I wouldn't go that far.

3. The ergonomics and design of the camera are lovely. It is a beautiful camera in terms of design. It is also tactile and enjoyable to shoot with. The EVF is likely one of the best in the business.

4. I didn't have time to test the anamorphic modes, even though I had all the kit for it. Test footage from others shows that it is one of the best features of the camera. It is certainly a rare feature in this hybrid segment. Only Panasonic offers anything like it.

I was very sad to return it, and I really wanted it to be that "dream camera," but I need a camera that does not compromise on cinema/video specs, especially when it costs $11K for the camera and one lens. There are so many cameras coming out in 2024 that there will be better options.

On 10/7/2023 at 8:51 PM, kye said:

To be honest, the whole thing of this movie getting all this hype for being shot on an FX3 seems ridiculous.

I think on paper it sounds like this is an incredible thing where a big budget movie shot on a tiny cheap camera, which is the kind of story that makes people who can only shoot on tiny cheap cameras feel better, but it's not true.

Even if you have a tiny cheap camera, you don't have $72M to spend in post...  

.....and if you had $72M in post, you could have shot it on an EOS M using Magic Lantern and it would have looked almost as good (professional colourists and VFX artists are incredible - high-end work looks great mostly because of those, not the camera that was used).

The image isn't really that much better than other things

I mean, can you tell which of these below is the FX3, or the Venice 2, or the G9ii, or the R6ii, or the GH6?  It should be obvious right - the Venice 2 is something like $50K, and the G9ii and GH6 are consumer MFT cameras, and the FX3 should be easily identifiable, right?

 

Well, I couldn't resist a blind camera challenge.

This is the Venice 2:

The other cameras aren't bad, but this looks nice and creamy!

54 minutes ago, androidlad said:

Flog2 D range priority mode is achieved by using 12bit Low Noise readout mode.

Dual Conversion Gain (DCG)? Something has to account for the increased rolling shutter.

9 hours ago, androidlad said:

2 x readout speed is achieved by using 12bit readout mode https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100-ii/more-on-gfx-100-ii-electronic-shutter-speeds/

GFX100/S aren't able to do that likely because of the limitation of the processor, not the sensor.

Fuji has confirmed that video mode on the GFX 100 II is 12 bit. Does the original GFX 100 have 14-bit readout in 4K video?

Perhaps they wouldn't be offering a "new and improved sensor" for $2500 less. The new PDAF could be exclusively software based.

There is also the interesting setting described in the manual on page 197:

It seems like this will restore 14-bit readout in video, as the tradeoff is increased rolling shutter, but Fuji will not confirm how this extra DR is achieved. I would be curious to see some tests in this mode.

On 9/30/2023 at 6:25 AM, androidlad said:

https://blog.kasson.com/the-last-word/how-fast-is-the-gfx-100-ii-electronic-shutter/

Readout speed for GFX 100 II is the same as the 100, 100S??

The sensor has a slightly different performance in DR, especially because of the addition of ISO 80:

https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100-ii/fujifilm-gfx-100-ii-edr-16-bit-precision/

The new PDAF would also necessitate changes. The 4K (line-skipped) mode has a 15ms rolling shutter (vs 30ms on the GFX 100), so the readout speed is definitely faster by a factor of 2x.

It is likely based on the same sensor but with the new additions in autofocus, low ISO performance, and faster readout speed.

@Andrew Reid Burano has shipped with X-OCN LT. If Sony charges you $25K for the lowest quality 16-Bit codec, it means that you will never see that on any Sony mirrorless. The smaller bodies wouldn't be able to deal with the heat management involved in 16-Bit readout, processing, and recording for video. This is also a slap in the face for those shooters who were hoping to see X-OCN in the FX series, since that is also less likely to happen for several years. It is Sony's answer to REDCODE, although it doesn't violate RED's patents as it is not technically RAW.

This camera has impressive image quality, even in the pixel-binned (or line-skipped) 4K and 4K/60p modes. The aliasing is also very slight. It's a great achievement for a 12K sensor.

The only potential issue I can see is the IBIS compatibility with gimbals. The Mediastorm review mentions this as a problem, but most of the other footage I've seen looks just fine. I'm not sure if there are settings that reduce the high-frequency vibration they experienced:

12 hours ago, MrSMW said:

What is the source of these if you would be so kind?

I've been collecting these A1 frames for months on different platforms! I'll try my best . . .

The night still frames from Japan are all from TeemusPhoto (above). He has shot many videos with the A1. You can look on his channel for more of where that came from.

Many images were taken from Mina Rhodes's work with the A1 here in L.A.:

I've had my eye on the Sony A1 for a long time. I was hoping Sony would announce the A1 II, so that the prices on it could drop a little. At $6500, it is a bit steep. LongGOP 8K is also not ideal, but the video footage overall is very impressive for a mirrorless full-frame camera. The DR, roll-off, ISO performance, and texture are all amazing. These are video frame stills if you can believe it!

On 8/9/2023 at 11:02 PM, MrSMW said:

Nice footage and grade, but it’s all sunset and as such, only showcases one very specific use case.

This is true. The footage looks good here because of the limited use case, but you can already see some issues with dynamic range in the shadow areas.

Here is another example that more effectively demonstrates both the strengths (color depth) and the limitations (dynamic range) of the Z9's NRAW:

The camera produces beautiful colors in NRAW and ProRes RAW, but the dynamic range is a problem:

You can see how easily the highlights clip in the footage above. Here are other examples of highlight clipping, along with a tutorial on red and blue channel clipping:

Although the grade is always important, NRAW's rich tonality is once again evident in this beach footage, which has been interpreted in linear color space as opposed to N-Log gamma (where DR could be better preserved). Despite the varying workflow, the expansive tonal range is consistent with Nikon's own Venice clip as posted above.

Nikon should pay this guy! That video will sell cameras.