eatstoomuchjam

In fact, the actual reason for his death was severe dehydration after an epic self-shitting when he unboxed the FX2 that Sony sent for the camera review YouTube channel he intended to start. As a counterpoint, if there's any artist absurd enough that someone might buy and build a shrine to their ironing board... Plus there was this! And there's some more near the end of the full episode, starting at 17:00 or so. ``` https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7ww2rd

I'm gonna swap the M43 mount on my Z Cam E2-S6G for the Z Cam EF mount and put in the electronic ND filter. I'll also hook up the Video Assist 12G so that the recording choices can be h.265, ProRes, and braw. Get those pants ready! 😉 Or if the ND doesn't have to be electronic, I'd like to introduce you to the Komodo and the Canon EF-RF ND filter adapter. 😅 I'd post a picture of both things side-by-side, but I don't wanna be on the hook for everybody's dry cleaning bills. Pooter McCubbins - NEW FX1 MADE ME CRAP IN THE LEATHER UNDERWEAR I MADE MYSELF (AVAILABLE AT MY STORE) Maati Haapoja - FX1 MADE ME POOP IN THE PANTS POOTER HANDED DOWN TO ME iPhoneyDo - FX1 MADE ME CHANGE MY NAME TO IPANTSDOODOO Mac Mackey - FX1 INSPIRED A NEW SET OF UNDERWEAR POOP LUTS AVAILABLE NOW IN MY STORE MarcusPix - HERE IS THE MOST PORTABLE LIGHT STAND THAT I USED TO FILM MY FX1 PANTS POOPS ArtOfPhotography - I USED TO TALK ABOUT PHOTO HISTORY BUT NOW I JUST WANT SOME CLEAN SHORTS THANKS FX1 Slanted Lens - WHICH FX SERIES CAMERAS MAKE YOU CRAP YOUR PANTS THE MOST? HERE IS A COMPARISON THAT IS BOTH DULL AND NOT TOO ACCURATE Snapchick - HERE'S A TUTORIAL FOR SELF-BOUDOIR PHOTOGRAPHY AFTER THE FX1 MAKES YOU POOP IN YOUR LINGERIE

Is there even an underwear changer? What would that look like. There are already cameras on the market that shoot in resolutions that surpass human perception at a reasonable viewing distance/screen size combination (anything 8K+). There are already cameras that shoot those resolutions at silly frame rates (UC12K does 8K at like 160fps). Dynamic range on current mirrorless cameras is already within spitting image of Arri and arguably better than most film stocks that were ever produced (give or take pleasant highlight rolloff). Sensitivity? For years, the A7 III has been able to shoot with a pretty fast lens by moonlight. How much darker do we need? So really, with that in mind, it's a bit hard for me to think of the specs on a camera that would make me go out and buy some underwear, put them on, and then crap them... especially since at least some of them come with compromises - like the UC12K has photosites so small that, while I haven't done the math, I suspect would suffer from diffraction before f/8. So does the camera need to have even more resolution that I don't need? Or even higher framerates that I will use on about 1 out of every 5 shoots? Computational photography more similar to what a phone could do? That could be interesting, but I'm still not sure that's "holy crap" level.

As expected, Camera Conspiracies isn't a fan, comes complete with the expected boardroom sketch with a blonde wig.

Yes, but negativity also likely cuts off the supply of pre-release review cameras from Sony (and possibly others who are afraid of a similar negative review). Sony doesn't need Cam, but Cam needs Sony and other vendors to send him free cameras to review so he can get in on the launch day view spikes instead of publishing a review a few months later with the rest of the schlubs who have to buy their gear.

Wow. You know a release is really ho-hum when one of the YouTube camera reviewers doesn't like it - especially one who never met a camera that he didn't like enough to film a video that looks... basically like all of his other videos. Sony really missed the mark when they didn't send it to him with a bespoke leather case with a bird on it.

Are you talking about internet reviewers? Because here, it seems like the reception has been pretty similar to those other cameras - extremely lukewarm feelings for an extremely lukewarm product. (And RS is really a spectrum - 32ms RS is pretty bad and you will see it in a lot of footage, RS under 20ms is fine unless you're whipping the camera around, 20-32ms depends more on what you're doing - 27-28ms for this camera is definitely more on the "you will notice it" side) The R5 and R5c are great values. Other than someone having a pile of Sony lenses and a big investment in that ecosystem, I don't personally see any real reason that somebody would choose an FX2 over a used R5c or Z8. Even less in the latter case since I'm told the Nikon Z to Sony FE adapter is quite good. Really, I'm not even totally certain why somebody would buy the FX2 over a Z6 III, unless "has a flippy EVF" is their main criteria for buying a camera. 😉

That doesn't match the usual style (FX3 is more expensive than A7S III, FX30 is more expensive than A6700) - and if $2,500 is MSRP for A7 IV, selling the cine version for around $200 more is right in line with those other models. If I were choosing between A7 IV and FX2, FX2 would win hands-down. I'd definitely spend $200 for the flippy EVF. But then I might have my head checked because the Z6 III + Sony FE adapter would still cost less, use any Sony lenses, and record 6K full sensor width video internally with decent RS (and with a raw option!) - and going from 24 to 33 megapixels for still photos is... 🤷‍♂️ (Looking for a B Cam to FX6 that can also take some nice still photos, it's totally fine and people aren't crazy for buying it - but it's just not the choice that I would make right now) ----- The other thing that seems interesting with this release is that it seems to suggest that Sony don't have a lot of other new bodies in the pipeline. If they do, this release would seem to be an attempt to grab cash from people who are still willing to buy the older sensor and will be annoyed when cameras with the new sensor are released. Otherwise, if Sony have a bunch of shiny new mirrorless cameras coming soon and supporting better-than-4k recording, etc, why release this one now? The competition is releasing cool mirrorless bodies with superior capabilities and Sony is re-releasing a camera from 2022, but stuffed into a different body. If they keep sitting on these models for another year, we might see the production pendulum swing back to Canon (or Nikon, if they write "RED" on some upcoming mirrorless model and make no other changes from one of their existing cameras).

I was wrong about this. I guess it's $2,700 in the US or $3,100 with the XLR handle. That's a lot better. Question withdrawn! (Though I'd still be far more apt to get the R5C or Z8 than the FX2, but at least now it's not more expensive than they are)

Jumping the gun makes a lot more sense than Chris/Jordan being actually critical of Sony. 😅

Uh oh. Did someone at Petapixel say something to make the bosses at Sony mad? Maybe they had to go back and edit out any minor criticism they might have had. 😅

@Andrew Reid At least here in the US, the FX2 is $3,500 and the A7 IV is selling for about $2,500. Is it different there? At least here, I'd say the FX2 costs a lot more than the A7 IV - like, enough to just buy a pretty nice cage and a lens or two more. It'll certainly sell/move some units, but even though the rotating EVF is nice and the body has the pleasant boxy look that goes with Sony's cinema line, I don't think this would be the hybrid that I would buy at that price. A used R5C is about $3,000 and a used Z8 is about $3,200. I just don't see how this camera competes with either of them in any meaningful way... unless you have a bunch of Sony glass and want better stills than the FX3 (available used for only a little more, about $3,700 here).

"Finally, the A7IV, but in a more differenter body."

Nice! Looking forward to seeing what you shoot with it!

Are you sure it was on May 25 and not sometime in the middle ages? 😛