Sony FX2 ain't selling - but I like it

[Andrew Reid]

Had a bit of time with the Sony FX2 today along with a Canon C50, same sensor as EOS R6 III but no IBIS or EVF, and it takes forever to switch photo / video mode.

The FX2's viewfinder was chunkier than expected, it's massive and crisp, and articulated. I love it.

The screen is so-so.

The a7v has less rolling shutter, better screen and screen tilt method.

But I do like the FX2, it's the only modern small CINEMA CAMERA that has the full photography feature-set.

I just wish they'd put the a7v architecture in there, new sensor... I was told that apparently the Sony a7c II uses a different sensor to the a7 IV, it's tweaked, but didn't sell - so Sony had loads left over and hence needed a way to use them so FX2 was born. Sounds like a typical sales rep story to me so take that with a pinch of salt but it did come originally from a Sony employee.

I am happy with the FX2's image, it's enough for me for just Cinema 24p.

There's no denying the C50 and R6 III have a specs advantage with the 7K RAW but I just think it's complete overkill. Where is our footage being seen? IMAX screen? Phone more like, laptop if you're lucky. I'm not suggesting to go back to 1080p... lol. I just think 4K H.265 is fine.

A lot of people are asking "who is FX2 for"?

Well I guess it's for weird people like me who has always valued the hybrid convergence of stills and cinema.

There's a nimbleness to it. No faffing, no huge weight, just as capable at photography.... It's the polar opposite of a Blackmagic Pyxis or Ursa.

Yet the "it ain't selling" problem is really concerning... It's as if the market has gone a bit batty.

All the stills people are buying the a7r V instead and all the video people hanker after an FX3.

So the FX2 sat in-between the two suffers from that dreaded "middle" failure because people are unable to snap out of their binary thinking.

In a way, the Nikon Zr because it doesn't have a mechanical shutter or EVF, and is lower resolution, in not pretending to be also a really good stills camera has made it appeal more for video.

Also Nikon are undercutting Sony pretty deep on price at the moment.

So not hard to see why that will further pummel the FX2's sales.

Sony need to be careful.

Their customer service is poor, the reliability is iffy (the firmware update problems in particular) and their pricing strategy is becoming Canon-like. At the same time meanwhile, Canon are putting top-level specs in a 6 series enthusiast body and getting aggressive on price with the R8, and Nikon is putting RED codecs in things that cost $2k...

So in sales terms they may have peaked and might see a downturn.

But I for one will be picking up a lovely FX2 if it ever drops below $2000 used.

[ND64]

FX3 ended up as both elixir and poison for Sony. It established E mount as go-to choice for professional video, and at the same time became the benchmark of "good enough". They will update it with a super fast sensor (either a 6k120 from 12k, or 5k240 from a 67MP sensor with dual gain HDR, both available next year), but that makes it a $5000 camera, then FX3 wins again with just being cheaper.

[newfoundmass]

14 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Yet the "it ain't selling" problem is really concerning... It's as if the market has gone a bit batty.

All the stills people are buying the a7r V instead and all the video people hanker after an FX3.

So the FX2 sat in-between the two suffers from that dreaded "middle" failure because people are unable to snap out of their binary thinking.

I think people didn't buy it because at it's heart it's a 4 year old camera re-released in a Sony cinema body (albeit in a vastly improved form, with the awesome EVF), using a sensor that wasn't necessarily optimized for video to begin with. 

Now that they've released the A7V it makes it an even harder sell. Now people are wondering why they didn't put that sensor into the FX2. I think there probably is something to the story of having to try and get rid of those older sensors, but almost immediately undermining it with the A7V doesn't make sense either. 

It was a weird release a few months back and even more so in hindsight. 

[Andrew Reid]

It's really deeply unpopular.

You're right 4 year old a7 IV hardware doesn't help the marketing appeal even though I rate the image as one of the best ever.

So we can chalk up the reasons as follows:

1. Filmmakers want FX3 instead

2. a7 IV old hardware cropped 4K60 / higher rolling shutter

3. Missing newer features - no open gate, anamorphic, 6K, 7K, no internal raw codec

4. Photographers will all go a7v or a7rv instead for similar price

Hybrid cameras are now a crowded market so if you really want best of both worlds, I reckon they are going Nikon Zr, Canon C50, Sony a1 or some of the popular used cameras like a Z8 or even plain old a7 IV. Canon R6 III going to make it even tougher for FX2.

This is great as used price will plummet and it could be under £1500 before long like our much maligned S1H

[newfoundmass]

I think there are reasons for even video folks to choose the A7V over the FX2. It's interesting, because they could put that A7V sensor into a cine camera body and mark it up $500-800 and have a successful release. Maybe they still will? Still makes the FX2 feel like a weird release that, even if it hadn't received a lukewarm reception, they undermined almost immediately. 

 Almost feels like one hand doesn't know what the other is doing at Sony.