Sony FX3 vs FX30 is it worth it? 

Wait is that right? Wasn't video film also 35mm? Not talking cinema medium format imax or super 8 just standard film.

​@@snaphappy7530 35mm film is oriented differently in cinema cameras. Full frame camera is 36x24mm while in film the size is around 24x18 or 22x16ish if audio is included

​@@snaphappy7530 it's the same film but oriented vertically, that's how the chassis works in a film camera, resulting in a much smaller frame.

I'm glad apsc users have been keeping m43 prices down. 👍

Funny enough, the term "full frame" is also in the cinema industry, meaning .980"×.735" (24.89mm×18.66mm).

😅😅😅 cake

😂😂😂😂😂

Exactly what I thought... When I heard "full frame requires more processing power" I was like "what?"...😅

@@robertolsen6797 It’s just an empty phrase when he doesn’t have anything else to say. Possibly comment bait to get interactions up.

so, videography doesn't need a lot of megapixels like photography?

​@@josephchristoffelphotography doesn't need many megapixels either, 26 is overkill for 99.9% of use cases.

​@@josephchristoffelyou need 8Mpx to get a 4k in 16:9 approximately. Higher count if for oversampling or for photography. The fx3 has 12mpx because it's a 3:2 sensor but only use the 16:9 portion of it for video. The 4k120 use no oversampling hence the 1.1 crop, it uses a true 4k portion of the pixels

Does this 4k 120p crop actually crop the usable space on the sensor, therefore reducing the available light even more and have even worse low light peformance?

​@@CheefyArbiterYes, but at the point of 120p, low light performance is the least of your worries as the time the sensor has to be exposed to light is minuscule anyways. So the low light performance isn't really the bottleneck

something i see as advantage. I have acceptable 4k60 uncropped and superior 4k60 (1:1 pixel readout) in crop mode giving another 1,4x crop on top of the Canon R7s APS-C crop. Also we have to keep in mind most lenses you will pick on the effective focal length they have on the given camera, so in fact you can even make out of a lets say 17-55 aps-c lens (28-88mm on canon crop) another about 40-120mm with the crop video mode.

Exactly! a 35mm on an aps-c is already a 52.5. add in another 1.6 crop factor and it’s an 84. cropping a 35mm lens to an 85mm is ludicrous. mind you, this also is a crop on the aperture. a 35mm 1.4 becomes roughly equivalent to an 85mm 3.36

@@LeonardEisen wait what? Can you explain why there are 2 crop factors in play?

dont mind his nonsense he is mostly trash talking

I don’t think so. There’s already a 1.5x crop in normal use, but I think there’s an additional crop using 4K 120.

@@ags911 you're right, I seem to have typed my reply too fast, before checking specs 🤦‍♂

With that kind of budget, they probably won't need it and go with external

@@raveliogyt317yeah true

Yeah, that's not even 720p.

Might also be a deliberate choice because the envisioned FX30 users (more beginner) might not use an external monitor.

@@HarvardsonsOr battery life drain could be increased from a higher res brighter screen on a full frame camera. And also because it’s more likely to be used as the main screen as pointed out above.

Help! I accidentally upgraded my camera!

I cannot afford full-frame lenses yet. Oh! the horror.

You are right, but he is describing the crop in 4k120. Both cameras have a 1.1x crop from their standard sensor size. 1.0 -> 1.1, 1.5 -> 1.6.

No. For 4k/120 the APS-C Sony has crop 1.6. Learn before you write.

@@petrpohnan875so a 1.5 crop for aps-c then an additional 1.6 crop? If so, that means a 35mm will be 84mm ff equivalent.

Never seen a pro with hundreds of events experience shooting on a apsc dlsr with 18-55 kit lens. Kit doesn't prove the skill, but likely someone rocking fx3+fx9 will potentially be more experienced than someone with a a6000 and 18-50 kit

​​@@cbflazaroYou have a good point, but I think that's beside the original point. Plus, sensor size hardly has anything to do with quality in the age of 12800iso camera bodies - the APSC trash-talk came from a time when 3200iso was an "artistic endeavour" and produced nearly unusable stills and video, and camera manufacturers have been selling the snake oil ever since. The main reason you'll see a professional use a FF cam like the FX3 is because their existing kit is all FF gear. This is usually because they were starting their professional endeavour anywhere from 10-30 years ago when the extra image area and larger pixel pitch of a FF sensor _DID_ make a visible difference to the final image, and they still want to use their existing lens set as they always have, without any cropping. Plus, the main draw of a higher-end video-focused body is ease of use. Something like a Canon DSLR, especially the APSC ones, were designed with stills in mind, and the video capability was hardly a concern and often got thrown under the bus, with rare exceptions like the later 5D models. At worst, you have to install 3rd party software (Magic Lantern) to even unlock the video modes on some older EOS cameras. And even then, they lack most of the video controls and UI elements that are so useful on these FX cameras, which is why they exist. The music production world has this all figured out. The end-user listening on their TV speakers won't notice the difference between a song mixed on a £2k Behringer mixing desk or a £200k custom-built SSL desk, but the main difference is _ergonomics._ The Behringer has all its functions and controls hidden away in menus, all 3 or 4 button presses away, with a proprietary button/menu layout only ever used on that specific console that was released in 2012. The £200k SSL has most of the controls mapped to physical knobs and buttons that are repeated for each audio channel. Those knobs and buttons react nearly identically to the same knobs and buttons laid out within a few mm of the SSL desks produced since the 1970s, that have mixed the majority of the music recorded in the last 40 years. The £198k difference pays itself off in the minutes you save each recording session not having to dig through menus to dial in the exact sound you want.

@@cbflazaroyes. Gear does not make you a better filmmaker but when you start to know what you are doing and know the basics of it gear elevates your knowledge if you learn how to use said gear. There are scenes that you simply cannot record the same way without an Fx6 forexample. Just lets do a basic test. Record a scene in a dark cave and the camera is on a slider or dolly , panning from the dark cave and following a subject that leaves the cave. Your sky will be overexposed. You either have to manually turn a VND while following a subject ( which is gear ) . Or use a camera w an built in electronic ND filter to compensate. You can raise the iso in the cave and mid shoot turn it down but thats gonna look nasty because the toning is not gradual and it would create a lot of noise in the dark scene.

Or you can tone it down in post but oh wow thats another “gear” because you would need some kind of raw format to be able to really compensate and thats gonna either cost you an atomos ninja or a very expensive camera that can shoot internal raw.

The lens options are they key factor here. Sony has a lot and i mean a LOT of cine glass.. nikon has ? Zero… sony has a lot and i mean a lot built in ND and sony E to PL adapter like kipperties , nikon has? Zero… sony has XLR handles , nikon has… nothing. This is not saying that the nikon is not a phenomenal photo video camera , i think it is . But 8K is only important when you want to crop in and pro res raw can be recorded w a sony and atomos ninja. The gear around sony wins for video production. If nikon steps up their game and allows a lot of third party manufacturers to make lenses for it , cine lenses!!! Than we will have a talk about this. Not until than.

Nikon Z8 is 45mpx which is good for photography but not so good for video. Sony a7s III is only 12 mpx which is perfect for video and has amazing performances in low light

@@GDvisualARTproduction the a7Siii is quite okay for pictures too if you are not aiming to photograph something that will be printed on the side of a building. 12mpx is enough if you dont crop in or print it on a huge sheet.

@@poti732 - Yeah that's because Sony was first, but with Nikon acquiring RED, that'll quickly come to a close. So the cine lenses, codecs will expand for Nikon. As for normal lenses, Sony has NOTHING that competes with Nikon's primes. You either spend $1300-1899 for a good 50mm or $250 for a total turd. The Nikon 1.8 Primes are the best of any manufacture in price to performance. The optical quality of a Nikon 50mm 1.8 S is quite close of a 50mm GM and you can get a like new Nikon 50mm for $400. The same goes for 24mm all the way through 85mm. Nikon is focusing on amazing features at a VERY competitive price and its really paying off. The best selling brand in Japan for much of 2023 was Nikon so they're on the up and up. Can't wait to see what the RED acquisition will bring

@@GDvisualARTproduction - Z8 is phenomenal for both, but at low light it'll struggle. But truth is, Sony's baked in NR in the A7S III make it seem a lot better than it actually is. It could go either way... just depends on use

yes it does. larger sensor equals higher signal to noise ratio equals higher useable bit depth equals more digits to process.

it doesn't. this dude is talking out of his has. the fx3 has half the megapixel's as the the fx30.

bigger photosites = higher useable bit depth = numbers with more digits = longer calculations to process them.

@@creepyloner1979 Seem to be 16 bit raw for both. I was too lazy to check the number of pixels for both when I wrote the comment but there was 12 vs 26 megapixels on the FX3 vs FX30 so more pixels on the smaller sensor.

i was speaking in general.

How is it not a factor. Have you never seen a film with a slow motion sequence? Why was 4k 120 an option limited to only cinema cameras like red until recently?

@@SamRiellyhe heard somewhere that film is recorded at 24 fps and his math is not mathing. He does not seem to know that when you slow down 24 fps it becomes a slideshow so actually we slow down 120 fps to 24 when we want slow motion footage.

Which is better for motion pictures?

@@davidward6162 I mean, it depends on your budget and what you’re doing. The FX3 is superior, but the FX30 has some use-cases as well. If you want to see examples, I have some comedy short films shot with both on this channel I’m commenting from. “Home Sweet Home Invasion” and “Attack of the Chipmunk” are both shot on the FX3. “Call of the Creep” was shot on the FX30

You can use full frame lenses on a apsc camera

You don't have to crop if you use the right lens on a full frame camera, and the APSC cameras are not smaller and lighter, for instance, look at the comparision of the FX3 and FX30.

@@GDvisualARTproductionAn actual macro photo is 1:1 or higher. If you put an ant on a APSC sensor it takes up more sensor space than if you put it on a full frame. You have to use more magnification on a full frame to get the equivalent as APSC. I mean I use a loawa 100mm 2x on a APSC camera and I still crop. It's actually why I'm going small to 4/3 sensor. And sure there's cameras you can point to that are just as small but is that true overwhelmingly across the board? As someone who shoots at 4x I know how hard it is to reach that. So I wouldn't want to have to shoot at 6x to get the same shot. Just ask yourself why dedicated macro photographers use APSC or 4/3 😅

@@GDvisualARTproduction I forgot to mention the effective focal length between sensors sizes. A 60mm crop is equivalent to 90mm full. Smaller lenses are lighter and ... smaller. I'm sure you can scour the internet and find edge case lenses but they cost more ... Just to reach equivalent.

It needs that precision to see if the image is sharp or out of focus.

@@GDvisualARTproduction I don't think you understood what I was saying. Generally horizontal and vertical count of pixels is used for screen resolutions. Million dots is just a way of hiding shitty low resolution screens

makes perfect sense, you're just slow.

U rich homie

Y

Why? Anything the FX30 can do, the FX3 can do better. You can even use the sane lenses.

@@Malficion Why not? Why would I buy 2 fx3's and spend 8 grand when I can get an fx3 as an a cam and an fx30 as a b cam and save 2 grand?

@@Malficion why better? in daytime with fx30 you have more detail... starting from a 6k recording.. down to 4k..

Good luck getting people to understand that...😂

you gain a stop worth of lower noise but most of the time you lose it to full frame requiring a stop smaller aperture to get the same dof, and therefore a stop higher iso.

The look might differ noticeable. Just keep in mind, to replace a 50mm 1.8 lets say, you would need a 35mm F0,95 lens to keep the low DoF.

@@harrison00xXx incorrect again. The DOF doesn’t change with sensor size. If you put the subject the same distance from a M4/3 sensor and a full frame sensor they would look identical apart from the subject appearing larger in the frame on the m4/3. An f0.95 lens will look, perform and keep all its characteristics no matter what sensor you’re using.

@@rowanstothard6758 No, you are wrong. To get the DoF and FoV of a 50mm 1.8 on FF with APS-C you need about 35mm F0.95. you know… shorter focal length also increase depth of field, and so you have to use a bigger aperture.

@@harrison00xXx I think you need to do some more research and learn about this subject.

@@rowanstothard6758 i am 100% sure you have to

Don't understand what you mean here, it's seen as a 1.6x crop because it is. It's not really negligible at all, it effectively gives you a micro four thirds image and removes the wide end of any of your ultrawides.

there's always a compromise.

Is a6600 still manufactured? I guess not, cause they have a6700 now. a6600 is 3 years older than fx30: a6600 released in 2019, fx30 in 2022 - and it's hybrid camera with viewfinder and mechanical shutter, which fx30 does not have, that's primary meant for photo, but also can do video. I own a6600 and A7III, a 6 year old camera, and am pretty happy with them, no need to upgrade yet

@@kuros85 you are right. Actually should be a6700. I think of a6700. If you look through, there is no big reason to upgrade from what you have though you can in a year when another camera and upgrades from Sony have been made.

@boxoffisa a6700 has exact same sensor as FX30, but other body, that has mechanical shutter and viewfinder, but no fan and no additional threads for accessories. And only 1 card slot. I think there are a lot videos comparing these in youtube

@@kuros85 mechanical shutter, dual cards, view finder and price tag should be the biggest difference as I can see. A6700 because I like taking photos and also making videos. But FX30 for video. Though I heard it overheat. Not sure.

ZV - e10 is for vlogging The a6700, a6600 and a6400 is for pro work

Larger sensors will always have a light advantage over smaller sensors ignoring pixel density.

@@komaywhy?

​@@daesong1378Take two lights with the same intensity, and the larger one will always be ''''brighter'''' than the smaller one because it covers a greater area. The same is true for the size of a sensor. I imagine the Alexa 35 is the case of a camera with a LOT of money put into its sensor and circuitry design, so it can't exactly be compared to cheaper FF cameras like the FX3 given the money they have to play with. If you were to apply the Alexa 35's technology to a larger sensor, the larger sensor will absolutely outperform it. That's why OP's comparison isn't a good one.

Sony A7SIII is made for video, it's a full frame sensor with only 12MP.

...with the significant image quality penalty given by the speedbooster.

only pixel pippers will notice @@petrpohnan875

google pixel binning.

FX30 fixes it in September I believe.

@Tobirama_isHimju It's sensor readout speed, camera CPU. It can't be fixed by firmware update. Ony new camera will fix it. But Sony Catalyst app can fix it on post.

@@Moriarty2007 what's the news about the rolling shutter? I thought the fx30 had a new sensor and had lesser rolling shutter??

@@prathamshenoy9840 No news. FX3 - rolling shutter not noticeable (8.7 ms). FX30 - visible rolling shutter(15.9 ms).

lol nice one buddy

@@trimotionmedia5487 Why, thank-you!

not downsampled, they just read 4k worth of the sensor's photosites.

@@creepyloner1979 I usd the wrong term. The FX30 is doing oversampled 4K out of a 6.2K images downsampled into 4K. That's a little confusing. Even more so for the camera since it needs to process that 6.2K video into a 4K one, and that's much harder than simply reading out 1:1 4K on the sensor. This is what the FX3 does (kinda) What you're mentionning however is either pixel binning or line skipping, which the FX30 doesn't do.

The 1.6 he's talking about here is what the 4k120 mode does on top of the normal Sony aps crop of 1.5.

@@hotfootrabbit oh my ok makes sense.