Llaasseerr

I think the FX3 sensor is superior to the FX30 regardless of it being full frame vs s35. It has excellent sub-10ms rolling shutter and more dynamic range, plus an amazing high base ISO - if those things are important to you. Due to the fact the sensor is “only” 4k and is full frame, each photosite (pixel) is quite large - about the size of an Alexa - and is excellent at light gathering.

Thanks for posting this! Do you know what the difference is between the IMX410AQL in the a7III and the IMX410DQL in the FX9? I’m actually interested from the perspective of the Sigma fp which I assume uses the AQL.

OK I don't get it because that's what I was saying I would plan to do, but you said that wouldn't work. You said "There is not a single camera on earth that I would want to trust to keep accurate timecode with a timecode box on it." Maybe you meant _without_?

I know you're a Sony guy (mainly the older cams) and a sound guy, so do you think the FX3 is just never going to work well enough for timecode? I do not yet have a lot of experience with timecode on set - my realm has been mainly post. I had assumed that keeping the TC unit plugged in was the only way to guarantee a more low-end camera with true TC-in to stay in sync vs. syncing it at the start of the day and unplugging it, and then the camera drifting a few frames by EOD. Are you saying a camera needs a more expensive solution like genlock? Overall, do you think the TC solution for an FX3 or even an FX6 (which has proper BNC TC in) is a waste of time? For either cameras I would want to use a Deity or TentacleSync unit, but I would have to use the proprietary cable for the FX3. There were some people reporting issue with the Sony cable, which is why I mentioned it. But I don't know the specifics. I figured that the Deity solution with their device plus cable specifically for the FX3 would be pretty tight.

Continuing this OT on 4K mainly being a Netflix and consumer TV-driven phenomenon vs 2K for theatrical with a lot of VFX, this article gives a pretty accurate breakdown considering it's a non-industry publication: https://www.vulture.com/2022/07/4k-tv-cgi-review.html Also it reiterates the point I made that indie films are easier to finish at 4K than bug budget ones. Back on topic: still waiting for the Ninja V to get a firmware update to support 24P DCI out of the FX3 now it has the firmware update. It's unclear Atomos will support it at all, but here's hoping. It would have to be a 4.2k raw 24p, I guess with a few lines of pixels cropped off the top and bottom to conform to the DCI aspect ratio.

Definitely interesting findings. I really liked the look of this camera for about a week (lol) as a kind of lower stakes FX3, but after the latest FX3 firmware updates, I'm back in on that. I'm super interested to see how the upcoming 120p plays out, also given these observations about the thermal behaviour. I wish it wasn't 119.88, but I don't think there's true 120p available in the FX3 or FX6 either, sadly.

So this is super interesting. The imdb tech specs have been updated and the Alexa 65 is not mentioned any more. It now just mentions the FX3 and states "Negative Format Sony RAW(4.2K)", which is the raw output via the Ninja V. Obviously I don't know who is in a position to edit these tech specs, but it makes a lot more sense if they did shoot it raw. By "Sony RAW" I assume they mean ProRes Raw since there's no X-OCN on these cameras. Also if they shot true 24p, then I'm guessing they had access to some unreleased firmware from Atomos which I hope becomes available soon.

Yeah, that's exactly it, but you'll see that in the big budget shows as well! Eventually it will all be 4k across the board, but right now it's mostly only lower budget projects or the extreme high end meaning like an Imax-shot sequence in a Nolan film. If $100-150m projects are shot on an Alexa 65 and are very vfx heavy, it's still normal to see them being finished at lower than 4k despite the res of the camera original. Besides Netflix and their 4k push (and good to point out it's associated with flogging tv's), I am a bit out of the loop with what all the streamers are doing for their spec requirements, but it would make sense for any footage for the Volume being shot as hi-res as possible. Also stuff like VR, that's a good place for 8k+. Yes the 4k hype has pushed Arri forward with the Alexa 35, which is an astonishing camera. And watching a 4k remaster of an old movie scanned off the neg is amazing. Ah yeah there you go, I shouldn't have said it was a rumor. The dual gain thing I mentioned WAS a rumor though, that sadly hasn't panned out: https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/fx6-features-19ev-wdr-via-v2-x-firmware-and-wdr-license/ Was hoping to see that in the FX6 and in my fever dreams, the FX3. I did a bit of online searching, and there were a bunch of papers published my Sony engineers in Japan that were using this WDR approach, but it hasn't made it into any mainstream camera releases. I'm always interested to see dual gain approaches in other sensors like Canon and the GH6. What I noticed is Canon have focused more on cleaning up the shadows, while Arri focused on the highlights. I think this is to do with the power requirements of using a DGO approach to capture highlights since the Alexa has a much higher power draw, but also probably a culture difference where Arri's film background made them more focused on capturing filmic highlights. I can imagine that the engineers at Canon are more interested in a lower noise floor. Another issue with Canon's DGO is slower rolling shutter compared to when it's turned off, so again an area to improve on.

It's one of the reasons I like Sony's stance on the FX3/FX6/a7sIII etc sensor being "only" 4k. It has about the same pixel pitch as the ALEV III sensor. I hope they do another version of these cameras that unleashes the sensor's rumored dual gain ability, if it really is 8k being binned to 4k. I would really like to see cameras in the affordable price range focusing on higher dynamic range and reduced rolling shutter or having a global shutter. We still haven't quite seen that breakthrough where we are getting a true 13 stops to match the original Alexa in a camera in the sub-10k market.

Oh, absolutely. I just want people to know that super hi res footage isn't a requirement for vfx. It's definitely good pixels over more pixels (Steve Yedlin's mantra, I guess). 4k+ is definitely becoming more popular with vfx shots, but I continue to see work in the region of 2k-3.5k on the most cg-heavy projects because otherwise the work is just too expensive unless it's for an IMAX sequence that can budget for it. Netflix is an outlier here.

Right, but that's not to do with the vfx. It's to do with the dp's choice for the format and the camera. The extra resolving power gives him more dynamic range in the shadows due to less noise, for example, compared to a single ALEV III sensor. Also it's to do with the joys of shooting a digital version of a 65mm film back and using 65mm lenses. I just came off a very high profile vfx heavy film shot on the 65 and the pulls were 3.5k. So that extra res is typically not making it to the vfx vendors by the time they start. But the extra IQ is baked in on the downres. And the vendors would have reduced them down further before they start work because the delivery required for DI is below 3.5k. So they will shrink resolution wherever they can in order to get the job done on time.

I'm not sure how the whole idea of "higher resolution is good/required for vfx" started, but it's a myth. Practically everything I've worked on has been Alexa plates at 2-3.5k. Particularly for a cg-heavy film like this, it's common to do it at 2k or a bit above, just because it gets way too slow and expensive. I think ironically 4k happens more at the low budget end, and then of course there's Netflix originals (lol). It makes a lot more sense if this was primarily shot on Alexa 65, but I do think the FX3/FX6 sensor is very good. It has the same highlight range as the Venice/Venice 2, which is to say it doesn't hold a candle to an Alexa 65 but for the money it's very good. Where the Venice has it beat is that it's cleaner in the shadows, but that's not accounting for the ISO 12800 option with the FX3/6 if you don't mind half a stop less in the highlights.

That makes a lot more sense.

On the issue of timecode, it seems like people want it to stay synced if you unplug the generator. I mean it should and that would be great, but if you need to keep it connected I can live with that. Those units are small enough.

Any bets on how much of this was shot with the FX3? I also heard the FX6 was used with Atlas Orion anamorphics. Looking forward to confirming details though. Got a feeling all the latest firmware updates were requested by Greig some time ago.