Agreed, FX30 is a crazy value for RU-vidrs on a budget and I’m glad I waited - I love what Sony is doing with their hybrid FX series! I hope Sony delivers a FX-A1 in 2023
When you filmed yourself the difference is really impressive: the general color and especially the skin tone is perfect on the FX3! The color contrast in the various parts of the image is balanced!
Thanks Josh for sharing these insights. I am debating between the FX3 and FX30. The camera will be used for talking head videos, in a studio, with controlled lighting. I will be using shadows on my face (not flat lighting) and will have a darker backdrop with practical lights and a few other items in the darker background. Would I see any noticeable improvement visually by going with the FX3 over the FX30 in this use case? Thanks!
If you can control the lighting to keep the ISO at the base and not have a lot of dynamic range in the shot then they will be pretty similar. The one thing is really full frame vs APSC. If it is a tight space then you will need a pretty wide lens and you will have more distortion on the FX30 since you will need a wider lens than on the FX3.
@@Josh_Sattin thanks! I'm a bit confused though. Wouldn't a 35mm lens on the FX30 be the same focal distance as a 52.5mm on the FX 3? Wouldn't the room look the same (assuming the camera is in exactly the same spot)?
A 35mm lens on the FX3 will be significantly wider than on the FX30. So for example, if you have a spot for the camera and a 35mm lens looks good on a FX3, you will need a 24ish mm lens on the FX30. To get the same field of view, you need a wider lens on the FX30, which has more potential for distortion in a small space. And to answer your question, yes the 35 on FX30 and 52.5 on FX3 will have the same field of view but will look different because the lenses have different distortion, compression, etc. Neither is right or wrong. Just can be funky in really small spaces with an APSC camera. It's all personal preference.
@@Josh_Sattin Got it. Thanks for sharing. I've never heard anyone share that insight on distortion from the APSC (they just assume it looks the same when accounting for the 1.5x crop). I prefer the 50mm focal length and would go with the Sigma 35mm 1.4 on the FX30. I may have to research the distortion on that lens.
@@HopeProphecy No worries. Yeah I struggle with this in my studio because I need a fairly wide lens and want to limit the distortion. Yeah just remember, field of view is the same, but the look of the image will be different since its actually a different focal length. If you have space then you can back up the APSC camera, but then depth of field changes too. Again, no right or wrong here.
The only question I got about your tests are this: did you use HDMI out using 16-bit RAW data output? If all you did was use the in camera recording for the footage you showed, then, it would not be a great testing suite, because no one is going to use the in camera recording, unless there was no other choice - there is no point in having a camera with a function that you do not use. 16-bit RAW data output is the only choice with these cameras, using a Ninja V in a rig and walk amongst the gods of Olympus like a professional. Seeing how you got Full Frame on the FX-3, the output in RAW is incredible - especially for keying
@@gorehounds Then they should probably use a smartphone to record their footage. $4,000 spend on a camera that is full frame, and you will not use the fullest potential of the camera by gimping the quality? Spending $500 on an external recording device after spending $4,000 on a camera is par for course. Next you will be telling me that spending $2,000 on glass is a waste of money...
@@AlleyKatPr0 "Next you will be telling me that spending $2,000 on glass is a waste of money" Mate, please do not put words in my mouth. You are the person proclaiming what people should buy and how they should use it.. quote: "Then they should probably use a smartphone to record their footage" If you use an external recorder to get the best quality you can, then fine, more power to you. But saying "no one is going to use the in camera recording" is just incorrect. I get that maybe you personally would like to see a comparison with the Raw footage because that's what you use. But you can't fault josh's video because he used internal recording, as again, that's what the majority of people will be using as well. If it were me I'd have said something like. "nice video @Josh_Sattin, I personally use Raw footage and would love to see the same comparison but with Raw.. Thanks"
97.6%, you say? well then, 97.6% of people are idiots and 97.6% of people are not doing a full and complete test and should not be reporting nonsense about picture quality when they have not done a complete test. Don't waste my time any more.
Lol it does not seem like you work with these...😅 😂 Or work as a videographer...no one really uses external recording... Even some top notch guys in the industry uses the full hd mode as workflow is always king in the videography world 😅
Thanks for the video. Current personal FX3 owner looking at work budget and how to spend it. FX3 is the clear winner and worth the money for my use case.
Wondering if using noise reduction in post would give the fx30 the same “clean” image as the fx3. Considering there isn’t much loss of details when bumping it up to 12000iso What’s your thoughts?
I haven't tried it, but I think it would be worth experimenting with. Noise reduction in post is another step and can be demanding on your computer too. But I guess with that idea you could also add some noise reduction to FX3 footage and make that cleaner too.
@@Josh_Sattin that wasn’t the question tryna make fx30 clean like Fx3 not fx3 clean as fx6 or wtv can we get a same crisp look by doing that to the fx30 no one asked about what if we do it to fx3 ..?
Josh, great video! A couple of questions 1. What do you do in pre or post to make the image look less digital? 2. Skintones on a6700/fx30 seem more canon pink which I like but the ISO in zve1 etc are better. Any way to get that canon look on zve1 easily?
Hey Josh, in the side by side comparisons, are you shooting on super 35 on the FX3 to match the images to the FX30 or are you shooting full frame and cropping it?
I just bought a FX30, I like it. As a serious hobbyist filmmaker I am hoping the FX30 will serve me well for the next few years. Please continue to make more FX30 videos.
Depends on what you do. If you’re a full time professional content creator (I am in Corporate Video) there is a need to pay double. You get the best equipment to fulfill your needs for the job. Camera manufacturers expect professionals to monetize this gear and make 20 to 30 times what they invested in purchasing it. My clients pay for my gear and if I have a tool that is capable of giving me more to get the job done, then I will pay for it knowing that ultimately it will make my life easier and pay for itself. If you’re doing this as a hobby and/or B2C then absolutely…save yourself the extra $2000.00
@@swashyhimself Really? What do you do for a living? tell me how many consumers own lenses like the Sony FE 400mm f/2.8 (retails for $12,000) or how many hobbyist own an ARRI Alexa (cost $78,000). I just shot a job my client paid $12k for with an FX-6 and a 135mm F/1.8 that I own. How many regular consumers buy a $6000 camera and a $2000 lens? This “professional” equipment is not based on professionals to make a profit? Then what do the manufacturers produce it for? To offer the best gear for anyone who might want to try their hand in photography, videography, filmmaking? Or Is it for the average consumer to impress his friends and neighbors who don’t know what aperture is or shutter angle? How does Sony, Canon, Nikon, LUMIX, stay in business without the professional being the largest demographic they sell to? Ever call B&H Photo? On the telephone prompts they ask if you are a consumer or a professional. Why do you think that is? Since as you stated: “Cameras are not priced on the profit professionals make with them” , then how do these investments help the professional who buys the gear stay in business and remain profitable? If you plan to shoot professionally (for a profit) then the only camera you should ever purchase with your money earned from a 9-5 job is your first camera. As a professional If you have to save up your money with your 9-5 to purchase your second camera, then you are doing something wrong. Clients pay for my gear, I don’t. How do the camera companies stay in business selling full frame FX-3s or A7R5s and a $3000 70-200mm F/2.8 to the average consumer who wants to take pictures at their kid’s soccer game? Please advise.
@@95Ldunc It is conceivable the Arri Alexa has an inflated price as they are used on movies with huge budgets. The idea that a $2000 camera is for lowly casuals, but a $3500 camera is for elite professionals is ludicrous. You seem to have an elitist mindset and think that there’s no overlap between the two, eve heard the term “prosumer”? Go back to making you’re boring videos boomer.
Until Sony releases a major software update for these cameras I cannot justify purchasing them. A major peeve of mine is the lack of focus breathing compensation. My a7iv has it. A cinema camera should have cinema quality software. Until then I'll stick with my a7iv.
I do a lot of green screen and the FX30 was out of the race as soon as you filmed yourself. The loss of hair detail on your beard and eyelashes showed me the FX3 is better. The funny thing is I'm not really interested in either, but I was considering an FX6 before the C80 was announced.
Very good video man 👌 I own both the FX3 and A7SIII and after doing some tests I found the the FX30 performed incredibly in comparison. Definitely too good to be true for the price
Hey, thank you so much for this in-depth video! Really helped me make the distinctions I needed between fx3 and fx30 to make a choice (and get a new camera without breaking the bank, haha). Much appreciated!
The one thing holding me back is that while the FX30 is new the FX3 is nearing its second birthday and I can't help but think we'll get a Mk2 version early next year. I'd hate to buy an FX3 given the cost and missing features only to see everything I really want in the FX30 finally coming to an FX3Mk2 a few months later. If the FX3 and FX30 had been released at about the same time it would be a different story.
Judging by Sony's releases, the a7s successor usually comes out soon after a7r release. If we go by that cycle, the FX3 mk2 should be around that same time too
@@shem44 3 years would be next year. A7SIII released Oct 2020. So Oct 2023. Given the competitive market and the FX30 has features not in the FX3 it may be sooner given given an FX3MKII would only be minor improvements. It was only 3 years between A7RIV and A7RV (and let's not forget the A7RIVa (which was 2 years after the IV).
I thinking about FX30 to make it my vlogging video camera. I did some calculations and found that I can but Fx30 + Sigma 10-18 + 160GB memory card * 2 + rode videomic go mk2 and it is still very cheaper than only FX3 body. The price, size and specs looks very tasty to buy FX30 as a second camera only for video purposes.
Excellent vid. Thanks for this. I'd love to know how it stacks up against the RV video as I've just bought one and would like a separate video body as a backup and secondary camera. At that price it is very attractive but I haven't seen a comparison of the output. Any thoughts?
Great comparison, I primarily shoot in the studio, however because it's a man cave I keep it pretty moody which is normally at 3600 Kelvin at about 7%. Therefore, I gotta keep the FX3 in 12800, usually around F4 for the aperture. Using my a6600 in the same environment, I usually have to keep the ISO 1250 however, I'm usually using a lens that's down to f1.4 but I so want the fx30 just to swap out the 6600
Great comparison, Josh! I have both cameras, and despite the FX30 being fantastic value for money, I think most reviewers have only really commented on its comparative 4K performance. I shoot predominantly for broadcast, and need to shoot and deliver in HD only. This is where I feel the FX30 just can't compete with its full-frame sibling. The FX3 has a rich and clean HD image, and its the first small Sony camera I've owned that really excels here. I had an A73 and A7C prior to this, both of which looked great in 4K, but delivered a soft HD image that was troubled by artefacts such as moire, possibly due to a significantly reduced bit rate? I've decided to sell my FX30 after just two months, as it seems to be plagued by the same issues. I'll pick up another FX3, or maybe save for an FX6 instead.
Thanks for sharing your experiences with 1080p. I only shoot in 4K and have been for a while. Good to know about the 1080p on those two cameras. I have shot in 1080p on the A74 before and it looked amazing.
Excellent video. The FX30 is a bargain, get 2x FX30s instead of 1x FX3. I can't wait to pair my vintage nikkor primes with my metabones speedbooster on the FX30.
Be careful with those metabones adapters. I’ve seen cases where they have fried the camera body. Using anything other than OEM voids the warranty on the camera during the warranty period.
Your information is amazing and very much appreciated ….. I still have a list of questions on These cameras regarding my work flow as a surf videographer ….. would it be possible to set up a call with you ? Thanks so much …
Can't believe how good the image quality that you can get from a relatively "cheap" camera nowaday. I am able to shoot at iso 10.000 on my A6700, with just a little bit of NR in Resolve the image cleaned up nicely and still retain alot of detail. Just over a year ago, all we can get from a Sony crop sensor was 4K 30fps 8bit video with shit ton of noise at high iso, now we have 4k120p, 10bit 422, dual ISO...just crazy.
Just ordered one as a Second cam to my Zcam S6. Itl be interesting to see the difference in noise between the two. But all this lowlight stuff is funny, unless youre shooting only events, lowlight is just irrelevant. Any film maker worth his salt knows how to light a scene. I've never had an issue with S35 or even MFT sensored cameras in regards to noise, also Resolves NR is phenominal.
I've got 2500 to spend .. fx30 new .. a7iv used $2200 .. sony a7siii used 2500 .. im big on image quality .. im a s1h lumix user of 10 years.. ready to try auto focus etc .. what are you picking ??
Sony has done what black magic has done with their cameras, the 4K costs 1300 and has massive value for what your getting. 1800 for a really similar camera as the fx3 is mind boggling.
Very interesting compression. Both are fantastic video cameras. If you don't need the low light capabilities the FX30 may be a very smart choice. Personally, I got the FX3 because I wanted the low light capabilities. In fact i used it to film the lunar eclipse earlier this week and it worked great. Really wish it had focus breathing compensation and animal autofocus tracking in video like the FX30. These two missing features are a huge drawback to the FX3. I do have an FX30 on order because it will work as a great second camera and it will allow me to film my cats in action easier. Take care and thank you for your time putting this video together.
Hi Josh thx for the video. I don't have any gear at the moment and want to get into wildlife film making and there a few things are important, low light, animal face detection, fast and accurate focusing, and $$$ off course and as one is not just buying a body one needs glass to. and if money was not a problem then a 400-800 would be great but I'n not in that budget range. but I like the 60-600 and think it would be great on a crop sensor. Low light well that is a interesting one as there's actually only maybe 2 hours per day that one are allowed to be out in a National Park in Africa before you have to be back in camp 1 in the morning and one at sun sett and how often would I have a lion or leopard at those times and if I did then I might just except the quality I'll get I think as there's probably always a better camera out there. But you said the FX30 has the same sensor as the a7Siii but that has a full frame and ISO 80-409 600 so does the FX30 match that. In one hand I was leaning towards the Nikon Z9 as Ive always been a Nikon shooter and although its kind of out of my budget its focusing is not as good as the Sony and I don't need 8K I just sold my insta360x3 and it's 6k really filled up my hard drives to quickly. I think 4k 120 would be nice but I'm not sure if you can tell the difference between 4k and 1080 on RU-vid on a smart phone so I think shooting in 1080 and export in edit to 2k or 4k might be good enough. So that does cut the costs for me. But say I could afford the Z9 then I can also look at the FX3 so how does that compare to say the a7iv or the a1? thx
FX3 and A7S3 have the same sensor, not the FX30. Unfortunately I have not used a Z9 so I can't help you out there. If you are strictly video then I would go for the FX3 over the A74 or A1. The A74 can overheat. If you are doing both photo and video and want one body, the A1 is amazing.
Excellent video. Looking to get the best all around video camera with good pics , I see sony 7r 5 with 8k vs the 2 your talking about , what would you recommend for a new guy , thx
The one word of caution I would give you about the a7r5 is that the rolling shutter on that is terrible. That’s definitely way more of a photography camera but I feel like the video capabilities are not quite there yet on that
I bought the FX30 recently and I have to say that so far I am disappointed to the extent that I really regret the purchase. My primary use is for landscape and so far, testing in excellent light, I have yet to get images with the sort of sharpness that I would expect or want. Inferior to my a6600 and in fact inferior to some much lesser cameras I use for video. I know that for many if not most video subjects softness can be helpful, and definitely more so than excessive digital sharpening. If my yardstick was a full-frame Sony then that would be misplaced. However it isn't, it is another much older Sony APSC camera as well as some much lesser recorders such as the DJI Mini 3 Pro. I have been shooting in slog3 etc and color grading with Resolve Studio. I have also experimented with S-Cinetone to see if it was my slog settings but no better there either. I have tried shooting at MM 0 and MM 1.5. I have tried a number of lens as well as seeing how far I can push things (sharpen and mid-detail) in post and so far pretty disappointing. Perhaps it is a question of getting used to the camera however sharpness is fairly fundamental, you can see how sharp things are long before you get the colors where you want them. Here's hoping it is my inexperience with this type of video camera, I certainly want it to work.
@@tvchay Using slog 3 there is no sharpness option though there is a workaround using slog 3 in a Picture Profile but then you do not get the full set of slog 3 options. It is a real hassle.
A little confused how its inferior to the 6600 considering its the same/ similar sensor. Shooting in slog 3 turns sharpness down to -7. The fx30 and turns down/off noise reduction. So fx30 is pretty much a more raw version of the 6600. Have you tried upping the sharpness and noise reduction through your nle?
@@HAlariousInc You are right, and after a lot more experimentation, with sharpening applied in post it comes out pretty well. You can see an example here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kVfEor2Rnp8.html. However I do wish it was possible to add some sharpening in-camera as it would make my editing workflow faster and easier.
You are probably just too used to viewing the over sharpened footage from lower end devices. For examole, the DJI mini 3 pro's footage is pretty much like a mobile phone footage, very obvious digital sharpening. Cinema cameras does not produce that kind of footage.
What did you shoot the talking head parts in this camera with? And would you say that the in camera noise reduction from the Canon line up, the R3 for example, is less heavy handed when shooting in clog3?
I used the FX3 for this video. It's tough to compare the noise reduction in all of these cameras because they all kind of work differently. The good thing is that the High ISO NR is adjustable in the Canon cameras.
They are literally the same body design. The only differences are a few cosmetic things like the color of the 1/4-20 screw holes and a few other small things. The LCD in the FX30 has a higher resolution but doesn't have a mechanical shutter.
I would love to make a video about that and have been meaning to for a while. I will eventually. I have a long list of videos to get through. Thanks for watching!
Unfortunately I don't have that lens. I did make a video about clear image zoom on Sony cameras though: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-tDbbrL1xrRU.html
The fx30 with the 16 works as normal with the FX30 consistent with the other cameras - you lose face and eye detect in clear image zoom and it switches to centre focus.
@@Josh_Sattin sad🥺 I watched you compare Xh2s to Fx3, but they are in different price and frames, I believe if it was Xh2s and Fx30, will get more comments🤣
Thanks for the video! I noticed in your past 2 videos the FX3 seems to have missed focus on a few of the shots. I know you mentioned it in the last video. Have you found that to be a big issue for shooting anything other than the low light tests?
You really make me thinking about the FX 30 the only thing what really bothers me are these immense Prices of the media CF Express Type A u need to use on this camera. Thank you like always super good and useful information.