newfoundmass

I think whether or not it's the best camera depends on what kind of work you're doing and what your needs are. We're really fortunate to have so many options to choose from, and frankly you can't go wrong with most cameras these days as they're all quite excellent, but some cameras have better strengths than others and it also boils down to preference. At one point I was leaning towards going with Sony, but ultimately decided against it. For my work I do a lot of handheld shooting, so Panasonic's IBIS was a big selling point for me. I also prefer Panasonic's colors over Sony's, and find V-log to be better than S-log to grade. I did have to compromise though on things like autofocus (though I still insist its not nearly as bad as people say.) Ultimately that's what ya gotta ask yourself when choosing a camera: what compromises can you live with? I think though if you're just doing video, have decided that Sony is the best tool for you and don't need any photo features then the FX3 is the better option, especially given it has received more firmware updates as @ntblowz stated. The FX3 also pairs well with the FX30 in the event you ever need a reasonably priced b-cam. Heck the FX30 is an excellent option as an a-cam and is a bargain.

Keep us posted!

I think that's why the C100 is so good in log despite being only 8-bit 1080p; the 4K downsampled to 1080p gives you more flexibility in grading than if the sensor was 1080p. I helped a buddy film with three C100s a couple weeks back and the image still holds up. He upscales it and it looks really good. I wish the C70 had kept that form factor, because the C100 is possibly my favorite ever. It's such a pleasure to use. Heck, I wish more companies would copy it!

8 to 10 bit definitely is a more notable upgrade. For a lot of people 8 bit was/is enough, especially for personal use.

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to set up a video comparison for you. And as I (and others) have stated, whether there is a noticeable difference depends on the person's preference, what the scene is, what you're doing with the footage, etc. If you are talking about simply using footage straight out of camera or even doing a light grade, then 4:2:0 will most likely be fine for most cases. If I am filming 10 bit I'd prefer that extra information, but again, that boils down to preference. If you don't notice the difference is it really that important? I just don't feel like I can give you the answer I feel like you want to hear.

Not at all. I'm sorry that you took it that way. I am simply saying that none of this matters if you don't just pick up a camera and film. Six months ago it was "is there really that much difference between 8-bit and 10-bit" and now it's "is there really that much difference between 10-bit 4:2:2 and 10-bit 4:2:0?" Being inquisitive is good! But from my perspective it really does look like you're worrying about things that, in the big picture, won't really impact what you'll be using the camera for, especially if you're just an enthusiast or hobbyist. Regardless, none of us can really answer some of your questions because it boils down to preference and what is acceptable to you. If you can't notice the difference between the two then does it really matter? Does it matter that I can? I don't think so.

I don't mean any disrespect here, truly, but I don't have a ready link to a YouTube video or anything because I've never needed one since I work with footage every day and part of my job is seeing/knowing the difference. I am sure there are YouTube videos out there that show a comparison (though I'm sure YouTube compression will be an issue) but you have access to the same available online information that I do with a simple Google or YouTube search. There really is only one person though that can answer your original question of whether or not you can see a noticeable difference and that's you. You've been looking at getting a new camera for what feels like a year, and I feel like you are far too concerned with this stuff vs. just getting something, getting out there, and shooting. You can pick up an old camera that films in 8-bit and get awesome images. It ain't the camera that is gonna limit you. Well, except maybe if it's a Sony, I hear they have trouble filming outdoors! 😉

If you don't notice a difference then why are you asking? 😉

There are a lot of variables. 4:2:0 is good enough for a lot of stuff but it's certainly nice to have that extra information when you need it.

Yeah, I really can't think of a lot of reasons to film with the A7s over the A7iii. You might do a little better in low light, but it'll be lacking in pretty much every other way. Better rolling shutter, battery life, auto focus, IBIS (vs. None at all), color, less prone to overheating, etc. You used to have to really rig the A7s (and the A7sii) up to get the most out of them, especially when it came to battery life. One of the reason the production company I was working with at the time ended up selling theirs and going with the GH4 was because that, the rolling shutter, and overheating. That low light though, it blew our minds at the time. Low light across the board has improved so much, but 10 years ago it was voodoo magic!

I think there probably is something to sensor size being a contributing factor to overheating, but I don't think it's THE factor. I think it's the processing and overall body design. I mean, up until the S1H, GH6 and the S5II/X, Panasonic have been able to do it in both M43 and full frame without a fan. It really might boil down to Panasonic having superior processing (not just power, but more efficient coding) and body design. Once that wasn't enough to handle heating issues they added a recording limit, like in the original S5, or added the fans. Sony would get crap for putting in a recording limit, which is why I imagine they don't do it, but at least it'd be honest. At least then people would know how long they could record consistently.

I mean not all brands have overheating issues, so... 😉

Real pros film with laser precision anyway. If you need more than 3.5 seconds of footage the problem ain't the camera, bro, it's you!

Imagine the reaction if Canon was releasing these cameras. You'd have your Canon apologists, of course, but man, Canon would be getting torn to shreds in Facebook groups, forums, and on YouTube (and rightfully so!). Sony though... not much of a peep from the usual crowd.

If only they were required to include that information in their marketing material. Instead we get "Powered-up by its combo of the latest 26.0MP back-illuminated Exmor R CMOS sensor and the BIONZ XR processor, the camera nevertheless weighs less than its predecessor, resulting in a mobile workhorse capable of an unstrained 11 fps continuous stills capture or stress-free UHD 4K video oversampled from a 6K resolution, making it a formidable multi-tool for the multi-hyphenate creative."

Imagine if these companies were required to add recording limits to any camera that overheats AND were required to clearly advertise those limits in the specs, on the box, and in the marketing material like they used to have to with the 30 minute limit! See how quick they'd figure out and fix the overheating then! Heck, imagine how quick they'd figure it all out if they had to clearly advertise that the camera overheats at all instead of burying it in the manual!

All of it is ridiculous, from comments like that to people claiming only us event shooters need to record for long takes. I will never, ever understand consumers making excuses for why it's okay for companies to give you less. THAT'S what I've really come to despise the most about the video/photo community, honestly. It's one thing to ask for something that they're simply not capable of doing in a camera at this price point, but overheating absolutely isn't one of those things, and reliability should be everyone's top priority. We're literally asking for the bare minimum, while people act like we're the crazy ones! Lol! It's not even an expensive or difficult fix!

Panasonic (and Sony) both put fans into mirrorless cameras before external fans started to become more and more of a thing. You see, until recently, it seemed as though overheating was becoming a thing of the past. See: why I keep saying it feels like we're going backwards. People's purchasing decisions impact all of us. So yeah, I do care that people keep supporting this nonsense. You give these camera companies an inch and they'll take a mile. Only when you hold them accountable and force their hand do they start to improve. You need only look at Canon trying harder after the R5 debacle to see evidence of that. What we've seen from Sony is that their overheating issues have gotten worse despite showing that they are more than capable of doing what is necessary to prevent it, given they did it before. What we're also seeing is an army of influencers and paid shills doing everything they can to downplay it, to the point that now people not only accept overheating but applaud third party manufacturers for creating a solution for a problem that shouldn't fucking exist in the first place! Maybe you weren't around back then, but there was a time when everyone loathed the 30 minute record limit imposed on these cameras. EVERYONE celebrated when those limits were removed. It was one of the things EVERYONE could agree on, a rarity! Just a few years later and now people defend cameras that can't even record for 30 minutes before shutting down! "Who records that long anyway?!" It's ridiculous and disheartening.

You must do some hardcore editing, haha! I've never had this happen thankfully!

That there's no incentive for companies to treat their customers better when people think having to buy an external fan is a reasonable thing to do for a brand new camera. I'm not trying to be hard on you, it's just incredibly frustrating.

It's such a bummer how little these folks care about being honest with their viewers. They don't care as long as they can make a couple bucks off affiliate links. Whether it works or not doesn't matter to them. I feel bad when I recommend something to someone and it doesn't work out for them. Meanwhile these people do it to b hundreds, possibly thousands and laugh about it.

People will never learn. It truly bums me out.

I mean, it doesn't take an engineer to come to the conclusion that Sony has made a calculated choice in releasing cameras that overheat. I think it's a very reasonable conclusion. They do. But it also isn't really the point: they SHOULD be able to do it, whether they ever do or not. They're spending considerable money for a camera, it should function. A professional is someone that, in my opinion, makes money from their craft and is knowledgeable of said craft. Why would I use a cinema camera when my Lumix S5 setup gives me professional features and the reliability that I need for a fraction of the price? Mirrorless cameras (well, good ones anyway) are such versatile tools and are a much better investment. I will have spent less on my three S5 bodies than it would cost to buy one FX3, and that FX3 won't even have all the features that the S5 has packed into it despite it being a "cinema camera". That's the other issue. Whether it's the overheating, or the recovery time, not having consistency or predictability is unacceptable, whether it's for professional or personal use. Have some respect and appreciation for your consumer.

I don't think hobbyists are less likely to film longer takes, but regardless, their new $1200 camera should probably be more capable than their cell phone and not overheat in the event that they DO decide to film for longer periods. We really do need to stop making excuses for this stuff. Most professional videographers I know don't use cinema cameras. I don't, and I'd like to consider myself a professional. 100%. Even the argument that it'd prevent them from hitting their intended price point doesn't hold water. How much, realistically, would adding a fan to these cameras cost per unit? Maybe $10 in parts?

It's probably a combination of both, but I just don't think Sony is interested in releasing a camera in that price range that is capable of doing it all. I think Sony has become the new Canon. They realize that they can get away with it, that most people will look the other way or make excuses. Ultimately the goal is to funnel people towards spending more money, because the reality is if you want to get a camera that takes good photos and has more reliable video, you need to look towards their more expensive full frame options (though even the A7IV can overheat.)