#filmmaking #cinematography #colorgrading Motion Array motionarray.co... Sony FX3 vs Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera 6K Full Frame (BMCC 6K) vs RED Komodo
DId you get it right?! I’m looking at how robust they are and how far we can push the image without introducing artifacts or noise rather than the sharpness and color science of each camera:) Hope you enjoyed it😊
안녕하세요~ 선생님 덕분에 a7m4 질른 구독자입니다 ㅋㅋ I just wanted to ask you! Which computer do you use to edit your 4k videos?? I filmed with XVAC S-I 4K?? And then brought the videos to my gaming laptop and it still lags OMG Is it because I'm using Capcut and it's not powerful enough to run the video or is it the computer's problem? Even when I try to play the video on my computer it lag and buffers soooo much XD I have a gaming laptop which is MSI GE72 Raider I7-4710HQ 32GB GDDR3 Ram RTX 2070 HDD 1TB NVME SSD 2TB I cannot run the video smoothly nor edit the videos.. and I am just soooo upset that I bought and invested such an expensive and nice camera but cannot edit it like you!! 제발 도와주세요 형님 부탁드립니다!!! 영상 찍으시는것처럼 예쁘게 찍고 편집하고 싶은데 어떻게해야될지 잘 몰라서 속상해요 ㅠㅠ 도와주십쇼 !!
no, i got wrong, I was shure about the fx3, at least. kkk, fx3 look so sharpier than the others that made me be shure about it. But the bmcc 6k vs the red, I realy couldnt saw.
@@cagatota he used the Sirui anamorphic 1.33 on the Sony and the new Blazar Remus anamorphic 1.5x on the BlackMagic. The Remus gives more character, thats why the Sony looked more sharper.
Fuck I thought C would be The Komodo because that felt the most gorgeous consistently to my eyes!!! Surprised to see it's the 6kFF!! That definitely has some secret sauce in it
Only it's not a cinema camera. Cinema cameras can capture > 12 stops of dynamic range and have rolling shutter in the single digits. You're welcome to disagree, but those are my own criteria.
@@JonPais Sony burano has bad rolling shutters, canon c500 c300 have around 15ms, Kinefinitys have also maybe 15-20ms. Not cinema cameras but just say arris, high end reds and venices have great rolling shutter. rolling shutter problem is overrated.
@@itgeltdash8467 I think you answered the question yourself. The cameras you mentioned - Canon, Kinefinity- aren’t used to make feature films or episodic television for the major studios, any more than are Z Cam or Blackmagic. Preferred cameras are Panavision, ARRI, Sony Venice and RED. The Burano, like the Komodo, will be used as a B-cam on those productions.
@@itgeltdash8467 Canon and Kinefinty are not used as A cams on feature films and episodic TV for the major studios. The Burano will be used as a B-cam to the Venice.
The truth is your average viewers won't notice a drastic difference between cameras nowadays. It's all about lighting, lens choice, and color grading. I once shot 2 student thesis film with a Panasonic S1h 10-bit, while my other peers shot with REDs and Alexas. No one was able to tell the difference between the short films that were shot on a cinema camera and the one that was shot on a prosumer camera.
Yeah alot of people want expensive cameras but are unaware of how to utilize it’s features. Even just not being able to color grade well immedietly brings it’s quality way down compared to a cheap one with a good grade
People don’t shoot 12 bit or 16 bit because they think it looks better or the audience will like it more. They shoot it for the flexibility of advanced color and vfx workloads. If you’ve ever had to luma key, you’d know that 8-bit is difficult and doesn’t look good but 12 bit can pick up the subtle differences and key out cleaner. And just changing the white balance is not an advanced color workflow.
@@CompositingAcademy you forget that it was shot with the atomos ninja meaning it was prores raw. Prores raw is quite close to red raw meaning it's compressed raw bayer data. It also decodes from 16bit linear hdmi raw output -> 12bit log (atomos) -> 16bit linear in the NLE. You can then turn it back to slog3 in the NLE if you want. So no, the internal 10bit slog3 and the 16bit linear prores raw are not even close in terms of how much you can push the footage.
BRAW is actually 12 bit log. When you open BRAW in Davinci Resolve and go to the color page, under info you'll see that the file actually unpacks as 16-bit linear. I believe RED only gives us the linear value which is also 16-bit. But in the end, there is not much difference between the 12-bit BRAW file and the 16-bit linear RED raw file. I love Blackmagic and it's what I own. But i also believe that 10 bit 422 is enough most of the time for all practical purposes.
I have a lot of respect for all these cameras, but this is why I enjoy using the FX3 the most; it gets you 90% of the way there in terms of image, but with half the effort.
Couldn't have said it better. I've been using it for a couple months now and it is by far the best camera I've ever used. Very straight-forward to use if you know your way around a camera, incredible compactness, jaw-dropping image quality, I mean list goes on. I probs won't switch cams for at least the next 3-5 years
totally agree, since I got the fx3 my ursa mini is in gathering gust, I still prefer the quality and raw of the Blackmagics but the FX3 allows me to capture twice as much footage in the same amount of time
Some of these shots are your best yet, in my opinion. I consistently chose camera C, once or twice B, and I think one time for camera A. So BMPCC for me I guess. Thanks for this video!
I knew right from the start that the camera C was Blackmagic. But I made a bad assumption about Red and Sony. Sony and BM6k I liked the most. Good job!
Not using the same lenses really affected the value of this test. The different types of aberrations really distracted from being able to have a clean read between the 3. The lens on the Komodo, was less sharp, had more chromatic issues, the lens on the fx3 was sharp, with little aberrations and clean contrast, and similarly the lens on the BM was really nice... I immediately noticed the differences in the lenses before anything else. To my eye camera A was the least attractive, camera B the most with camera c a close second.
Took one lesson home from this video “I bought the Red Komodo because I WANTED it, and not because I NEEDED it”. Following your channel had made me to know that’s you can create magic with the gear you own and don’t need a more fancier or expensive camera.
to me B looked the best, then C, then A. after knowing which is which, and reading comments, i get why many prefer C. the highlights are much smoother. Red also does well with highlights and maybe even clips them. but i still prefer B, and im not a sony user. i liked the sharpness and overall pop. good video.
The Sony stuck out like a sore thumb on my projector in a bad way. I knew right away it was a mirrorless style camera with too much processing done in camera. A byproduct of in camera digital sharpening can also be seen in the blacks like mentioned in the comment above mine.
As a sony shooter (A1) I actually saw it as the least sharp of the three. It was pretty soft in a lot of the shots. IDK if it was the glass or lack of focus (could be user error) but compared to the two 6K sensors it was pretty lackluster IMO. I mean I don't have an issue on my sony because mine is 8K downsampled from 8.6 and the 4K is downsampled as well. But owning an A7sIII before I always thought the image was a tad soft since it is almost native UHD with like a 4.3K downsample to UHD.
It has less actual detail but harsh edge sharpening. So the edges look sharp and processed compared to the more detailed 6K images. The actual details appear softer though on the 4K image in many shots despite the sharpening artifacts.@@RiceCubeTech
Only amateurs and people that dont make a living out of producing videos for clients ( not youtubers ) talk about the best camera blablabla. The truth is they all look amazing specially these days, technology has shrink the quality gap between pro consumer, and professional cinema cameras. Rather then quality, the camera sets the system you gonna need for all of your work, including all the accessories and thinks to rig up your camera and make your vision possible. It is also dependent on your post production flow, how much you need and will edit, if it will have CGI effects and so on. That's why is really hard to tell the difference on a youtube video when you just shoot simple scenes by your self, specially if you try to match all the cameras. All the 3 cameras you used are great cameras, you could have probably mix in a arri and a sony venice there as well, and the image quality would probably look very similar, but some cameras are made for big productions, so if you try to bring a small camera that has limited IO interface to a big production you will run into many issues very quickly.
The FX3 turned out to be 80% of my choices, it looks a little better than both and more detailed despite being the only one that records in 4k, I am surprised by the treatment of Sony's sensors and their ability to take advantage of the entire image, I am surprised how a 4k camera looks more detailed than two 6k cameras.
Love the look and color on C. Definitely had something special going on. Softens up the edges in all the right ways. Hard to tell how much the lenses are playing a roll though. The lenses on the 6k and Komodo definitely have a lot more character (aberration) and have a shallower depth of field compared to the FX3. All look stunning to be honest, and the FX3 has so many addition benefits it's hard to pass up.
also Suyorukun got a quick question.. do you also get ugly color noise in the shadows or dark area's in general on your fx3? for some reason my low light footage (even though in native iso) I still get that ugly colored noise :(
One thing here that's not being addressed, Red's codec captures at 16 bit linear, but must be converted to 12 bit log to edit. Blackmagic raw also has the same bucket. 16 bit linear on capture and 12 bit log in debayer.
Uhm you do a bit of confusion, both sensors capture in 16bit, encoded raw in 12bit log for braw I don’t sure for red, but when you are edited in good software like resolve, both of files are decoded again in the original 16bit linear space. encoding in 12bit log is only data space compression to optimize disk/card space but this happed at separated sensor matrix (raw), and this procedure keep original quality, is not comparable with 10 bit log of Sony which is a process on a debayered signal. Anyway in the both situation (Sony and red/bmd) there are a lots of data’s and if you do wrong exposure you can do a tons of corrections.
R3D is a 16 bit format. The software development kit (SDK), which is the portion of the imaging process we control in all non-linear editing systems (NLEs), has the ability to deliver 16 bit image data from the R3D to the NLE, regardless of if it’s Log or Linear. It is up to the individual NLE’s to define what level of footage they want to work in. - RED -
Man that's some wonderful cinematography!!! Camera B seems to grab my attention, then Camera C. But all three look AMAZING! B is BMCC6K, C is FX3 and A is RED
A & B where my favorites. Initially I favored A, but then liked a few B-shots more. The BMCC 6K cam was third. But you really made your point. You aligned them nicely and its hard to tell the difference.
Why does it say 12bit for the Blackmagic and 16bit for the Red ??? They are the exact same bit rate. Both those cameras are 12bit log, and 16bit linear cameras. Red only advertises their linear bit rate, and Blackmagic advertises their log bit rate. The only camera over 12bit right now is the Arri at 13bit.
R3D is a 16 bit format. The software development kit (SDK), which is the portion of the imaging process we control in all non-linear editing systems (NLEs), has the ability to deliver 16 bit image data from the R3D to the NLE, regardless of if it’s Log or Linear. It is up to the individual NLE’s to define what level of footage they want to work in. - RED -
So by your own admission the Red files are of higher bit depth than an Alexa 35 ? This is not accurate, I don't think you're following me. Your explanation does not change the fact that both cameras are technically using 16 bit sensors, and the way some manufacturers choose to word it can misleads consumers.
@@Suyorukun I was not offended at all - and I am truly open to hearing out anyone that I could learn from - there's tons of confusing phrases within the filmmaking industry - so it's no ones fault other than the companies not educating their consumers. For example (NLE) is not even the same Linear when discussing bit depth. Tons of phrases like Full Frame / Large Format / Super 35 / APSC - all of this is an issue due to camera manufactures mixing photo and video cameras together. Large Format in cinema is a 35mm sensor, Medium Format in photography is over 43+ mm, but If you were to buy a Medium Format Photo camera, and you didn't know better, most would automatically assume its less quality than a Large Format. Super 35 is a APS-C sized sensor (about 23-24mm most of time, although cameras like the Red Komodo, and the Ursa 12k would technically be closer to an APS-H sensor are still called Super 35, although they have a larger sensor around 28-29mm, which gives them an obvious advantage of larger photosites. This is our industry, but we have to accept it at their pace lol.
*I actually got it spot on , not from a difference in colours but in dynamic range and field of view.* The three shots starting at 00:21 were the giveaway. Cam A and C retained details in the highlights out the window while B was blown out. So I knew B was the Sony camera being 10 bit (but remember that’s the codec not the sensor as it can output much higher RAW out via HDMI). B also had a wider FOV than the first so again I knew it was likely the FX3 which is full frame vs the Komodo S35, so another clue. To me C had less of a field of view and slightly less detail than A so I imagined that was the Blackmagic cam. That was a fun experiment. Thanks for posting. 👍🏿👍🏾
I was gonna say that Camera A was the FX3 because it isn't as sharp as the other cameras! I was surprised because footage from the Komodo tends to have an amazing level of detail. I'm guessing that has more to do with the lens than the sensor. But you did a great job of matching them up. Footage looks amazing. For me, what sets the Komodo apart is the natural level of image detail but also the global shutter. Even the FX3's fast sensor readout can't compete with a rock-solid moving image. It brings me back to shooting on film!
@@rizzo-films there is a point of "proper" picture to make it better in post. Too sharp picture - is bad, too blurred also bad Go check difference between Canon Cxxx cameras and old Arri, the final image is more pleasant at Arri, but not because it is expensive lens, it produces balanced image just from the sensor
Didn't watch the whole comparison and my Gaming-Monitor isn't the best way to give the best estimation, but Camera C (Blackmagic) looked a bit warmer and better for me. Camera A has this heavy CA but seems to have the best Dyn. Range and less detail.
As a Komodo owner, I think what I learned much too late is that REDRAW is an amazing codec if you’re planning to heavily process your image. The sheer depth of information within the files is impressive. I’ve recovered some insanely blown highlights. That said, if you’re shooting everything like an experienced DP would, you will rarely need to access that information in most instances. If I could go back, I might’ve just gone with an FX3/FX6, but I’m not upset about my purchase. I’ve rented my Komodo kit out for $4000 before, so it’s paid for itself at this point.
@@RiceCubeTech productions rent cameras all the time. I’m sure there are tons of agencies who could own way more than just Komodo’s lol. Just how the industry works I guess.
@@RiceCubeTech depends on funding stipulations, I know a lot of indie funding opportunities require you to rent not own. Larger productions will rent as well as it makes tax management easier for the production company.
Bit Depth is only half the story. The codec and compression is just as important. As you pointed out, until you grade heavily, you can't really tell them apart, it's marginal. But once you do VFX, heavy crop, etc, it's all apparent. In fact most prosumer camera have 4:2:2 codecs now, which is okay, but less ideal --sometimes a non-starter, for serious VFX work.
yup got it right, also a note the 12bit in the bmpcc6k is a logarithmic 12bit whilst the 16bit in komodo is linear, hence why theose two had the closest gradients. I not that the komodo had quite a bit of trouble with fringing.
How wow. I wasn't trying to guess which was which, just which I liked most based on image quality (Dynamic range, Sharpness on in focus objects, Highlight fringing, etc.) My rating was: FX3 > BMCC 6K FF > Red Komodo. This is a perfect way to demonstrate how most of the difference comes from how you set up the shot and lighting, not from the camera that you use.
crazy reading everyones preferences. I felt like C had a much more "film" look to it. It had a much better "looking" dynamic range and a nicer highlight roll-off. It REALLY IS just down to your preference and this proves it
Not sure why everyone keeps saying the Blackmagic did great. People on here are just looking at sharpness and getting all excited about crushed shadows. Most movies dont have that sharp video look to it. Watching this in a dark room on a HP Dreamcolor monitor the Red was clearly the winner for using these shots. Blackmagic had that 'video' look in multiple shots and lost of shadow detail like here 0:53 and at 2:10 it had that video look to it. Red had a more constant movie look to it.
I hate that I got it right, because it means that spending that extra money does make sense 😭 And all I did was become the viewer. I removed all technical knowledge and just focused on "Which FEELS more cinematic? Which one makes me forget I'm watching a movie?"
Wasn't sure about A and C but I knew that B was the Sony. The image just has that more digital and slightly flatter look to it. Can't really explain what it is but it was clear when looking closely. Obviously still amazing shots but I kept loving the C camera and sometimes A the most. Having the Sirui which is by far the least and flattest anamorphic in this lineup as well def didn't help the Sony either.
I'm real sensitive to motion cadence, and the komodo and the pocket 6k def has that cinematic motion. I think its more apparent when shooting raw even if a cam has global shutter. My fav cams that display this beautifully are the old panny dvx100, the original pocket cinema cam, and the alexa. the pocket 6k does a good job but I think it maybe could be the fact that the raw isnt truely raw beyer data or something, idk been struggling with noticing these forever. The true king is any film format obviously, super 8, 16, 35 they all have it obviously and I love it wish all 24p was created equal.
Nice test. The only problem is that the use of different lenses makes it hard to compare the results. The footage is awesome and well shot, but the the 2 flavours of CA in cameras A and, especially, C, make it very hard to have an unbiased opinion. Also, it's possible that the lens also have different sharpness (that can be noticed on the actress' skin), render colours and produce flares in different colours, so, as good as the color grading is, it's possible to see some differences between the lenses that make it harder to evaluate the different formats. The video is looking amazing and the idea is amazing. If you could do something similar using the same lens, it would be perfect. I get that your point is to show how you can push all 3 images to match them before they break, I'm just saying I got curious to see something similar shot in equal conditions. Congratulations for the great video!
I mostly picked camera C and a few times cam B. I've been a fan of Blackmagic for years. They're innovative and "affordable" and have the best color science neck and neck with Arri imo and that's the most important aspect when I choose a camera. I have an Ursa which I love and might have to add the 6K to the arsenal. 😍
Yes, i can tell the difference. Yes, you can get pretty close to the look of something like a BM or RED or even Arri and for most productions the better image quality isn't worth losing all the convenience features like auto focus, small form factor, etc. Especially if you're a one man band... But I personally would pick a Blackmagic over a Sony anytime I can. The difference in image quality shows especially in uncontrolled lighting conditions. My BM tends to get me to the desired look 80% of the time and Sony footage often needs a lot more attention and tweeking, especially in the skin tones. But great comparison!! I confused the Sony footage with the RED at first.
Exactly when i come back home with Sony it was always meh always something off and it couldnt be repaired with temp or tint, whilst in blackmagic you just tweak temp slider and it’s so east to bring it to good place and it’s so inspiring to shoot
It's crazy to think that the cost of the BM6K body plus lens is about $3600 while the RED is $24,000. From what I can see in the video, the Orion lens on the RED is about $10K (great lens). The Blazar Remus on the BM6k is about $1k and the Sirui in the Sony is about $1200.
My Top Choices Before the Reveal #1 Cam C #2 Cam B #3 Cam A I was surprised it was the Blackmagic. But I think you used a different kind of lenses where it is a big differentiation when it comes to the image quality.
you see the difference when you start graing and bending the footage. Nevertheless, I have 5 Reds and havent used one for 5 months....instead I use my fx3. Customers dont have the budget at this point in time. Economy sucky.
On RU-vid, a lot gets hidden as well. Use case and viewing environment will have a big impact on things, so will mastering format/resolution. Even in situations where the difference is easier to see while viewing it at full-resolution on a nice computer monitor... if you master at 2K/1080p, or if you like adding grain to your images or other post/dirty fx, the differences disappear even more... entirely in most cases. Ultimately that bit-depth difference does stick out in the right situations, so when someone says "there's something about it" on the RED end, I think they're noticing smaller differences in color, but mostly a better/smoother tonality in things, skin, skies, falloff, etc. but again, if you're someone who is intentionally downsampling, adding grain/noise/grit, etc. then you help hide issues or introduce additional dithering to the image. It all just depends. Good/bad are the wrong words really. Use case and what you need or like should take priority. I tried the C70 and A7sIII and the cams had so many benefits but in the end I found their internal recording, even RAW on the C70, to be pretty muddy/blotchy feeling and too low of a bitrate. In some context this would be fine but it bugged me more than I thought it would. All of these cameras are amazing though and I'm so glad we have something we didn't really have years ago... OPTIONS. :)
사실 처음 봤을땐 매우 멍청한 비교여서 영상이 끝나고 뒤에 어떻게 말씀하실지 궁금했습니다. 대다수의 상용 디스플레이는 8bit가 한계여서 10,12,16bit를 비교하는 건 의미가 없으니까요. 물론 후보정에 이점은 존재하지만 16bit가 필요할정도로 컬러를 뒤틀어야한다면 그것은 잘못촬영한 것입니다. 다행이도 뒤에 나오는 이야기는 너무 압축한 면이 없잖아 있지만 크게 의미없다는 것을 잘 알려주셨습니다. +추가로 알고 계시겠지만 코모도를 사용하실땐 반드시 전원선을 꼽고나서 모니터 sdi 케이블을 연결하는걸 잊지 말아주세요 sdi 단자가 타버립니다.
Fantastic comparison. Thanks for doing this. They all look amazing in their own way. Camera A fooled me. I guessed Sony because the highlights were brighter and the cream handrail color leaned more towards white. Sonys capture so much light. They all still great.
I can buy a used Sony A7S ii with a limited warranty for $800.00 that competes with these cameras. Before you laugh, think about how lighting and grading can make or break a shot. Then think about how RU-vid delivers video in 8 bit colour depth and a low bitrate. I just bought the Viltrox Epic anamorphic three lens set because I didn't spend money on new cameras. Yes, I am actually thinking about buying a third Sony A7S ii with Atomos recorder, knowing that other cameras are "better." Am I crazy?
Cool test. I was sure that camera B was the 10bit. Granted, I have owned all three of these cameras, but the real winner here IMO is the Blackmagic. Does it look better than 16bit R3D...no, but it looks a LOT closer than it has any business being for what, like $1500 these days? I also think the benefits of Komodo, like the awesome control app and a codec nearly impossible to break give awesome value over the Blackmagic cam, but yeah, it's hard to look at that final image and diss BM at all. And yeah, the FX3 image is passable, as long as you don't put it next to those other two..lol.
wait I actually got it right LMAO I knew the sharpest one would be the FX3, I'm so familiar with this sensor's look because I shoot with an a7S III which is essentially the same sensor but sharpest isn't necessarily best. I really loved the look of all three. beautifully lit and composed scenes!!
Right? I was able to pick it out too that its the FX3. You just know the sensor youre on. Crazy how you pick up on that the more time you grade footage from those cameras! I think it comes down to preference after watching this. I really prefer my FX3. Ive rented the RED Komodo a few months ago and a few lenses and I was SOOO excited to get it. Picked it up, went out and shot with it, threw everything in Davinci to start grading and I was like ".....I feel like im grading my FX3 right now." Nothing felt that different about it. I rented it to tell myself my FX3 isnt good enough and ive reached my limitations and maybe I should look into a RED. I deff do NOT need a RED lmao
Fx3 is not the sharpest. Its the worst out of the 3. It has the lowest mp sensor and the lowest resolution. You gotta be the biggest redditor with a brain like that
Fantastically made!! This is the best video I've found for telling the difference. Boring shots aren't useful, since any camera can make a shot look boring. These shots are great for comparison because they're well shot/edited. I've compared raw photos on my R6 to the 10bit video and once other variables are controlled for (eg. well made preset to standardise colours and tones) there is not much difference surprisingly.
Because the FX3 and BMCC 6k record the light in the scene logarithmically and Red does it linearly meaning the tonal range is more realistic the Red. Log always seems to compress the highlights too much and the darkest shadows leading to unrealistic tonal ranges no matter how high the bitdepth.
Was very easy to tell from first few shots. I wished 1 and 3 was swapped but it is what it is )) Looking really good! Sony … well, of course is closest to cellphone-ish feeling.
Thank you for really nice comparation video! I did pick up Slog3, but the different was not clear enough between Red and BM. Sony color science is towards to red and you can pick that one up quite easily. BM was my favorite. For a moment I wondered that is that actually Arri? It looked just so good.
I saw that you have the Atlus Orion and the Blazar Remus lenses, how do you feel they compare? I'm looking into the Remus and would love your thoughts!
So many people will buy a camera today, hoping that it will magically fix all of their technical problems. However, they always fail to read the fine print in the user manual which says: "Talent not included".
Camera A The RED camera footage looked the worst. Plus RED cameras a pain to film with. Camera C Black Magic footage visually looked the best to me. But camera B the FX3 had the second best image quality and has more user friendly features than the rest.
This makes a point I've been holding in contention for a while now: Unless footage is put side by side, and NOBODY WATCHES A MOVIE THIS WAY, no one in the movie audience is going to see a difference, or CARE. They won't know what the 16 bit footage would have looked like compared to the 10 bit footage they are watching. They just know this is a great story (if well written and there's good acting) and the shots absorb them into the film, if well lit and edited. No one will know or be able to tell if you tightened the screws with a $7 screwdriver or a $21 screwdriver.
The only thing of note is that the Blackmagic BRAW is 16-Bit also. Why? Because it’s 16-Bit Linear just like REDRAW is 16-Bit Linear. Both are then 12-Bit LOG when decoded into your NLE/Color program. Exactly the same as ARRI Alexa ARRIRAW. However, now the Alexa 35 is 17-Bit linear and 13-Bit LOG. It’s the one descriptive bit about Red’s marketing in claiming the 16-Bit number when it’s the same 16-Bit that ARRI, Sony, and Blackmagic get in their Raw because it’s linear. Log for all (with exception being new Alexa 35) is 12-Bit. Thus the only true winner of the Bit Depth challenge is the Alexa 35, which remains king for dynamic range and colors.
The difference is that RED has true 16 bit readout at the sensor level. If this yields any true advantage over 14 bit readout for example is beyond me.
I guessed the BMCC6K straight out because I used to shoot with the BMPCC4K and I am aware of the warmer image that the BM cameras capture straight out of camera.
A was pretty obvious, needed 2 min to determine between B & C, glad i got them right. Could be easily fooled, with a good lighting even 8 bit can be indistinguishable from 10bit.
Dang. I got got. I thought C was the Komodo. If anything, this is a lesson that at the end of the day, it's all about the lighting, composition, post workflow, and the talent of the user. Really great video! Cheers!
I actually got them all right, even though I’ve only shot with one of them (FX3, I’ve just seen the footage and know their quirks/characteristics enough from seeing them online. They’re all great images though!
I mean the images are online so the advantage and the difference of Raw are gone, raw is a tool that we could use while grading and there we could see the difference 😁
Coming from a VFX background, I can tell you PRORES Raw out of the FX3 is perfectly suitable for feature film level VFX. I just finished a virtual production shoot using the FX3 and the keys came out great. Also same reason The Creator worked with Industrial Light and Magic using that footage. The technical differences here are a huge diminishing return - it seems like filmmakers are trying to justify their expensive purchases. Would love to be proved wrong on this but someone please explain to me a specific scenario (that's frequent, not filming into a live action explosion or something with insane range).
