TomTheDP

The Pocket 4k has good dynamic range. Above 12 stops when using davinci highlight recovery. 

You can mount a small Sony NPF on top the camera and get good battery life pretty easily. Variable ND's are very easy, you can get a magnetic one for quick removal. Variable ND's aren't great for skin tones but he's shooting landscapes. M43 lenses are tiny and cheap, but if he wants he could just get EF mount or something to future proof. 

If you aren't making a lot of money off your cameras it makes little sense to spend $4000+ on it. 

The Pocket 6k Pro is a good compromise though. You can get them for under $2000 used. Battery life is better and the built in screen is really nice. 

Honestly when I am not on set I like to have the smallest camera possible. The FX30 has been great for me. I want it to feel like there is no camera at all. 

On narrative film productions that is when I prefer a cinema body with all the bells and whistles. Carrying anything substantial around when I am doing solo or non paid stuff is a pain in the ass. 

Honestly the FX30 would be a good choice. The image looks great, especially for landscapes. Lens options are cheap and tiny. Good battery life too. The weight of the camera feels like you are carrying nothing. 

I think the choice for the FX3 was the second native ISO of 12,800. That is two stops more than the Sony Venice's native ISO. The RED Raptor may be pretty usable at 6400 iso but the FX3 is still a stop above that. 

The less light you need the quicker you get it done. I have done projects using almost all natural lighting and it is so much quicker in almost everyway. 

I once worked at a production house that produced TV movies for American TV. There was a guy there whose job was to go through the scripts and change things to make it cheaper. Replace expensive aspects of the story with cheaper things that had the same story progression, change the locations of two or more scenes to be the same location, etc. Pretty effective in lowering the budgets. 

Well my opinion is that RED rushed their products to the Market. If you look at the image from an Alexa Classic, which came out around 2011 same time as the Scarlet, it's image aside from resolution is pretty much identical to the more recent Alexa LF. If you compare the RED Scarlet to the most recent RED you can't say the same thing.

 Red has continually put completely different sensors in next gen cameras since the start. The image pipeline from RED has also changed. The older RED cameras are known for being pretty dang accurate in Daylight but not so much tungsten. It improved with the 6K epic dragon sensor. I really think they have nailed it with the Komodo. I compared all three cameras Epic Dragon, Komodo and the Alexa Classic. The Komodo was pretty much identical, the Drgaon looked quite a bit different.

I mean that was part of the appeal of REDRAW, you can get any look you want. It was meant to be something you had to fiddle with in post. The ARRI look has been known to be life like, what you see is what you get. Can't say the same for RED, at least in the past. Cameras in general are much more color accurate now though. I was really shocked how easily the Sigma FP matched to the Alexa. The gap is closing in on ARRI.

That said older RED cameras definitely have an appeal. The name still stands high in film circles and there are a lot of advantages to a camera designed for cinema use. It pisses me off incredibly that RED has their RAW patent, but you can't get around that 16 bit REDraw is a joy to work with.

Second image has a lot more detail each time but that certainly could be the lens. The GH5 resolves a lot more detail though as its 5k downsampled to 4K or HD, over just straight up HD. 

I am still a fan of HD as unless its a side by side it looks detailed enough. Though the GH5 was great with having no moire. 

I have definitely found RED easiest to work with color wise. But the C300 MK3 is way more run and gun friendly. Have you considered the URSA 12K. I know BM doesn't get the hype that RED, Canon and Sony do, but the image is really good. The crop of the camera is 1.3x, between S35 and full frame. I'd download some footage from that and see what you think.

Biggest difference is the one looks softer, would assume it's the Pocket. The color of the foliage also looks different but it's not as noticeable. 

When i graded with directors at my side almost all gave great input elevating my work in a substantial way for the narrative and the quality of work itself. But it was only fun and to the good of work when they had a understanding und emphathy for the passion and quirks i am embodying sometimes when i burn for a project. When a director is not appreciative of the process it loses all its magic and the project better be paid well enough. The shots above look good enough to not to invest too much work on them.:)

Here's my proposal for matching the two cameras. And a grade test. No LUT was used. 

@PannySVHS

Here is the Sony with the Alexa. I just adjusted the Hue on the sony and applied the Emotive Color ARRI Daylight lut. 

Now this is a really bad lighting situation. Sunlight, combined with Tungsten, and also bright green walls in the room lol. 

here is the raw video from both cameras as well as PNG stills of the LOG image if anyone wants to play with them. 
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fYuQyBHEq9zvrIB_pQ-GBMXWOKxIhP8W?usp=sharing

@PannySVHS

Here is the Sony with the Alexa. I just adjusted the Hue on the sony and applied the Emotive Color ARRI Daylight lut. 

Now this is a really bad lighting situation. Sunlight, combined with Tungsten, and also bright green walls in the room lol. 

here is the raw video from both cameras as well as PNG stills of the LOG image if anyone wants to play with them. 
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fYuQyBHEq9zvrIB_pQ-GBMXWOKxIhP8W?usp=sharing

It's gonna be a personal preference thing in the end.
You'll get cleaner high ISO performance on the Sony. The Canon has internal RAW vs you need with an Atomos or the unit to do it with the Sony. 

The Sony can't do full sensor 4k 60p. You have more lens options with E-mount. The canon is easier to mount on a gimbal. 

If your only gripe with the FX6 is the mount then you can get a locking EF mount that has bottom support, making it bullet proof. Of course that isn't an option with emount. Although I feel emount lenses don't really need a locking mount as they are pretty light. You'll love Sony E-NDs. 

The FX6 is pretty amazing for fast paced stuff. It barely weighs anything yet the body is big enough where it isn't awkward to rig up. E-ND's are out of this world nice to have. 

@kye

I used your hue adjustment technique as a starting point. I think that improved it a lot, no more pink/magenta from the Sony. Might have went too far though. I still have hope for the FX3 as an A cam. 😅

Seems like my temptation to buy any Luts is still lower than my urge to save money, even moreso after your message is rather calming any desire to purchase anything for even the most little amount of pennies. 😂 @TomTheDP

You have to go further then simply exposing the cameras the same and having them set to the same WB. For example having say the Alexa set to 5600k and the FX30 the same in a daytime situation will yield very different results. 

Yeah I purchased his luts, as well as emotive color(probably more precise), and the trendy Phantom luts.

Unfortunately or maybe fortunately depending how you look at it, the skill to get in now doesn't need to be as high anymore. Even many people at very lofty levels of the film industry are not as skilled as they used to be. 

DP's can utilize high resolution color accurate monitors to see what they are getting rather than light metering. Cameras are so sensitive now you don't need crazy light fixtures. A lot of big budget shows are now are using mostly small LED fixtures combined with natural lighting. There's certainly a level of skill still required especially on the biggest of productions but it's become less and less. 

Think about changing a 35mm film mag vs digital media. Same with getting good results shooting 35mm film for a wedding vs digital. Night and day 

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. 

Unfortunately or maybe fortunately depending how you look at it, the skill to get in now doesn't need to be as high anymore. Even many people at very lofty levels of the film industry are not as skilled as they used to be. 

DP's can utilize high resolution color accurate monitors to see what they are getting rather than light metering. Cameras are so sensitive now you don't need crazy light fixtures. A lot of big budget shows are now are using mostly small LED fixtures combined with natural lighting. There's certainly a level of skill still required especially on the biggest of productions but it's become less and less. 

Think about changing a 35mm film mag vs digital media. Same with getting good results shooting 35mm film for a wedding vs digital. Night and day 

Sounds like a good method. 

I didn't use the color chart in a precise way, it was held closer to the camera, probably a 6ft difference. Plus I shot the color chart about 20 minutes later. That said I'd still imagine it being closer than it was. It was a room with Cyan walls, so there is a lot of tinted light going on. I am going to try it again today and make sure I do it properly and see if it makes any difference. 

A normal shooting situation would involve more pure lighting. 

Skitones are a large reason I choose to shoot with an Alexa or at least RED. Every time I have done a mixed camera situation the colorist comments on how nice the Alexa/Red skin tones look compared to 10 bit DSLRs. 
 

I didn't need to even wait until my next gig on Monday! I'm here at a Halloween Party 🎃
 
And totally unprompted, Captain America himself brought up "The Creator" and that it was shot on a Sony FX3: 

Looks like a winner on the FX30. Gimbal one and done lens maybe

Yeah boot times don't bother me too much. I am used to them with older red cameras or Alexas. 

2k 444 is ideal for me codec wise. Should be pretty nice if its downsampling from the 4k sensor. 

Rolling shutter is a bit annoying but 15ms is very usable. I have honestly never noticed rolling shutter ever across my life shooting videos, other than for strobe lighting. 

Looks like a winner on the FX30. Gimbal one and done lens maybe

Test video - GX85 with Standard profile and 12-35mm F2.8 wide open.  A few shots were ISO 400 or 800 towards the end.
SOOC:

After grade:

Despite being fully manual, the shots had significant colour variation.  Not sure if it was the vND or what, but colour management is critical to give ability to WB and expose in post on 709 footage.