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.
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.
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.
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
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
yeah...the autofocus on my FX30 is so good it is like having a partner...once you play around with the settings you can get it to do some really good things all on its on....I shot about 60 hours of video this summer...sometimes I just pointed the FX30 at the crowd and let it do its thing for B-Roll footage....I was surprised what it came up with..😁
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!
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.
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!
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
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 :(
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.
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.
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.
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.
It only took a few shots for me to lean towards the look of footage B. Very clean. Very cinematic. Always in focus. Footage A was in contention until I saw the horrible purple fringing in multiple shots. Huge confidence boost that I'm in the right ecosphere as a Sony shooter. 🤘
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 -
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
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.
@@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.
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.
*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. 👍🏿👍🏾
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.
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
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.
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.
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!
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 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. 😍
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.
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.
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.
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
On RUclips, 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. :)
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
They are all so close that I don't think it really matters. I thought it went A>B>C but there was maybe a 1% difference that I never would have noticed unless they were all side by side.
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.
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
Hah i recognized RED as more "reach" and sony as yellowish skintone (i didn't know what cameras were in test). Great job. You're have the tallent!! Love the vibe of your shots. Can't wait for feature film with you as DOP.
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!
0:54 here I thought A was FX3 because of the chromatic aberration, and B I thought it was the RED because it is the most cinematic and correct and it was the opposite woww!!!
I can definitely tell that the C cam is the BM6K. I initially thought the middle one was red and the left one was a Sony, but there's something about the 6K that makes it instantly recognizable.
This was a fun challenge for testing the eyes! My guesses were right, but they all do a phenomenal job! The slight blue streak 1:18 gave away the Komodo for me, they tend to give off that distinct flare with anamorphic lenses. The sony has the most Flat matte like finish, which is great for skin tones & naturally looks a lil warmer then the others. It also seemed to retain a little more detail in the darker shots. The bmcc always has the most rich clinically crisp imagery, especially with color for me, but it was a hard distinction between it & the Komodo for many shots. GREAT STUFF! By far one of the best camera test I've seen, especially with true cinematic style lighting and camera set-ups!
I clicked on this video as fast as I could without reading what cameras were here. My favorite by a little was the FX3 but my overall take away is that the BlackMagic wasn't fucking around. makes me feel real good about my purchase. good video👍
The main difference can only be noticed in outdoor where the background is blasting light andyou still be able to see the character, also the gradients of color is vast in outdoor locations .
So went through looking at most. My Picks Where 1. B - FX-3 2. BMCC - C 3. Red - A I thought Red would do better. Sony FX-3 is beast. BMCC, they just get it done. I think most people could not tell which is which though. Nice review!
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.
It's unbelievable what can be achieved with the Blazar anamorphic lenses. Nice to see that with the right light and color grading it's hard to notice the difference. Would also be cool to see the FX3 with raw video.
I couldn't decide between Camera A and C, but from the subtlety of the skin tones, I was pretty sure that Camera A was the Komodo.... and I was right! The FX3 was rather apparent. Lower color depth often renders skin tones differently... which is a big tell when going from 8 Bit to 10 Bit... I was rather surprised that the 10 Bit felt so flat versus the other two. That said, all three are gorgeous, and you would never be able to tell without such a wide variety of shots played side by side. But damn, the extra money for the Komodo seems like it's worth it if you're going for the ultimate in realism. Still, the takeaway is that that 12 Bit Blackmagic looks like absolute magic for its price. Such a lovely little camera!
in well lit scenarios it will be harder to tell a difference, but when shooting with only natural light the extra bit depth really does help, especially if your going to be displaying on a large screen.
I had a project recently where i changed the color of the lights from deep blue to green and it worked perfectly on that 16bit footage. One slider, My mind was blown. The client loved it, it was awesome to have that opportunity to get creative in post.
Lmao, I love these videos. "can you tell the difference between these different cameras, even though they are all shooting raw, and I'm using A RADICALLY DIFFERENT LENS ON EACH ONE????"
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.
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.
I thought C would be Red cause it looked best for me,the dynamic range and color tone and the Cinematic feeling looks perfect on C camera yet it's BlackMagic wow nice footages and good actress
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.
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.
Can you show a comparison to where these codecs will start to break? Like are you able to pull more detail out of the shadows or the highlights from one codec versus the other? These scenes have a lot of contrast so I would be curious if you could brighten the shadows so much and we could see where they start to fall apart and if there is a noticeable difference in how far one can be pushed. Same for the highlights.
my blind preference was B then C then A. B had rich colors and pleasing skin tones. A felt kinda flat compared to B and C. Shocked my favorite colors were B based on the results! Love it cause I use the baby brother version of that camera.
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.
WOW!!!!! Throughout the video I thought A was the 6K and C was the RED. The 6K was my favorite in almost every shot except 2. I picked B in those 2 shots. IM VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE BMD6K.
I knew immediately B was the Sony, just didn't look right. I'm REALLY shocked how close C and A were. Sometimes I thought C was the Komodo. Great video.
You miss one thing with the FX3: it's actually a 48 Mpixels sensor that uses a Quad Bayer to make it act like a 12 Mpixel. This is why the image is so good.
Thanks its incredibly good material. but its now fair to compare with really different lenses. I shoot a lot on Komodo and picture I never seen so soft like in your images.
I got it right. Red always has a professional look with an extra 'blur'. Sony has trouble with very fine details, like in light skin, and Blackmagic looks professional, but the sensor ratio (seen in head shape) looks round, like a DSLR or something.
Nice vid, thanks for making it and sharing :) You're right in that if your image is set on set, then any modern camera these days will be fine. I find however, that the best test of colour is white balance and saturation adjustments. I picked the Sony straight away based on saturation of lower midtones. That is where the Sony will fall massively...especially when underexposed. BRAW on the other hand, keeps colour rich and full, with flawless WB corrections in post. I rely on that a lot, especially when I'm using LUTs that respond well when changing WB and exposure settings in raw.
Thanks for the bit rate comparison. Honestly, watched the whole thing because the cinema was intense. Great stuff. Who else geeking out about the image (*noise this and that, color looks better on this, sensor difference on this cam and that ) before the results displayed. LOL.
The bit depth thing is a little misleading here as REDRAW is processed in 16-bit linear space, recorded as 12-bit log. BRAW is recorded in 12-bit log and processed in 16-bit linear space inside DaVinci Resolve. Same applies to ARRIRAW, processed in 16-bit linear space (unless the ARRI 35 that is processed in 18-bit linear space), and recorded as 12-bit log (13-bit log for the ARRI 35). All in all, BRAW, ARRIRAW and REDRAW have all the same bit depth (but the ARRI 35), just somehow "advertised" differently. In a nutshell, 16-bit linear is equal to 12-bit log.
There really isn’t a bad camera today as we all know. If you know your lighting framing and coloring. You can get insane images from all of these. That being said, red is still the clear winner. The quality of the red has “that look” many are going for. Plus red raw. What I can do after the fact with red raw is straight up mind bending. I’ll tell you what though the lumix s5xii is another monster I also use. That camera is unbelievable. Minus the jelly…. slow pans only
How to look for differences, look for details in shadow area. Basicly, color depth means stops of dynamic range, less bits, less stops. So, fx3 can show no more then 10stops of DR. And Komodo can show no more then 16 stops. Of course, if the camera itself is able to record those 16bit color depth. FX3 could be build on better sensor, but it limitations then is 10bit color depth of recorded material. And in case of Komodo, it limitations can be sensor.
![Overrated: Camera features that don't matter [ft Gerald Undone]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SlLbkeNH9to/mqdefault.jpg)
![Overrated: Camera features that don't matter [ft Gerald Undone]](/img/tr.png)
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.
@@진-e5dUse Davinci Resolve
What lenses did you use on each camera?
@@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.
Whoa the Blackmagic is KILLING IT
Rolling Shuuuuuuutttteeeeer
@@frankbregulla564 Cheaaapperr priiiiiicccce
brah all the time i was like shit the camera c is gorgeous
@@byan2151 it’s so sharp. Could be the lens too but it’s so fire
@@jacksp8de do u know the name of the lens?
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.
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
8-bit cam and 10-bit cam feels like has the most difference in terms of flexibility on post. 10-bit above for me sometimes feels like OP.
💯
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.
Heavy on the lights
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
Me too
because of the new anamorphic he used
Absolutely the same thing! Sony is too obvious, but BM was BEST here!
@@MrPashee Sony is too obvious for its super sharp images which is not always a good thing specially in cinema
Me too!
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.
Amen!
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
series?? Tell me a little more about this, I'm interested in buying an FX3
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
yeah...the autofocus on my FX30 is so good it is like having a partner...once you play around with the settings you can get it to do some really good things all on its on....I shot about 60 hours of video this summer...sometimes I just pointed the FX30 at the crowd and let it do its thing for B-Roll footage....I was surprised what it came up with..😁
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!
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.
Thank you 🥹🥹
and that thinking has lead to a movie being filmed on an iphone.
Bro the black magic looks so fucking good ngl
No way bro, Camera B was the finest of those
Really not a super-sharp, not a super-smooth picture, just acceptable one
an image being sharp doesn't make it good. Its off context, you get a camera based off of your needs@@nikostalk5730
It's an amazing camera. The type of image it can produce is worth WAY more than what the camera body costs.
@@nikostalk5730 B was literally the worst
The image for the blackmagic is amazing ¡¡
New Blackmagics are perfecto in handy hands:)
Yup that's why I bought one, lol
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!
keep in mind he used a new character anamorphic lens on the BMPCC which added much of that image
Thank you so much!
i choosed b almost all the time. So i gotta seel now my bmpcc4k to get the sony fx3
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.
I thought that B had the most crushed blacks. I guess it’s preference
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
I agree. Thought the same thing. B looked most pro
I'm a Sony guy (I have a ZV-E1 aka mini fx3) but damn that BMCC 6k FF is a beast! that highlight rolloff makes such a big difference in my eyes :o
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 :(
The FX3 looked the most digital and less filmic out of the 3.
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.
thats cause the Blackmagic had a nice new character anamorphic lens on it. that lens will make anything more soft cinematic looking
你才是正确的 镜头决定一切 这就是为什么镜头永远比录影机还贵的原因 尤其是电影公司的镜头 Panavision
It also has a built in optical low pass filter.
BMCC 6K is a monster for $2,500!!!
i got my bmpcc 6k pro today finally and out from eos R
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.
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.
Felt, I’m in the same boat. The red always pays for itself but I wish I’d gotten an fx3 and spent more money on grip and lighting gear.
Why would someone rent it for $4000 when it can be had to own for like $4500 used LOL. i swear some people be crazy.
@@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.
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.
thats crazy because i preferred C on almost every shot
It only took a few shots for me to lean towards the look of footage B. Very clean. Very cinematic. Always in focus. Footage A was in contention until I saw the horrible purple fringing in multiple shots. Huge confidence boost that I'm in the right ecosphere as a Sony shooter. 🤘
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 -
@@Suyorukun ...and they won't be able to color grade unless it's debayered to 12 bit log. That is unavoidable
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!
Very strange decision. For me "A" - is way too blurred one, B - nice balanced, C is oversharped with less motion blur
@@nikostalk5730 what decision are you talking about? To use a less sharp lens on the Komodo? I was wondering that too.
@@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
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.
The difference is apparent when you try to push the footage further and further.
If the bmcc still had cinemadng instead of braw i guarantee you it would match the red when pushed except in latitude
True.
True especially in some harsh situations
How far though? The Creator was on the FX3 and it looks better than 90% of movies?
@@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.
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.
Thank you!!
*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. 👍🏿👍🏾
Your outro , with the cool, jazz song was just as awesome as the comparison!
Thanks a lot! 🙏
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.
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 red comodo b sony fx3 c blackmagic
Thank you!!
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.
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.
Thanks for watching!
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!
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.
Hi there!
No, this is not my explanation and I’m not an expert in camera specs either like you are.
Sorry if I offended you🙏
Have a great day:)
@@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 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. 😍
Amazing camera for sure!
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.
Amazing camera for sure!
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.
I actually found myself liking the Sony footage
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.
My favourite was definitely camera A, with B in second place and C in third.
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
On RUclips, 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. :)
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!!
throw a promist on and boom less sharp
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
You’re absolutely correct. The industry utilizes 16-bit mainly for post processing
They are all so close that I don't think it really matters. I thought it went A>B>C but there was maybe a 1% difference that I never would have noticed unless they were all side by side.
i actually could tell straight from the start that A was the Komodo
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.
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
Yes, had similar issues. I shoot Sony a lot and i like it for what it does. But BM is just a whole different level @@RafalGendarz
Hah i recognized RED as more "reach" and sony as yellowish skintone (i didn't know what cameras were in test). Great job. You're have the tallent!! Love the vibe of your shots. Can't wait for feature film with you as DOP.
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!
0:54 here I thought A was FX3 because of the chromatic aberration, and B I thought it was the RED because it is the most cinematic and correct and it was the opposite woww!!!
Chromatic aberration has nothing to do with the camera, is the lens
@@gianlucazanga8432correct 😅👍🏿
I can definitely tell that the C cam is the BM6K. I initially thought the middle one was red and the left one was a Sony, but there's something about the 6K that makes it instantly recognizable.
Ohhh . That's why I love camera A&C. The color saturation on A and the highlights on C, or maybe because they have different lenses.
This was a fun challenge for testing the eyes! My guesses were right, but they all do a phenomenal job! The slight blue streak 1:18 gave away the Komodo for me, they tend to give off that distinct flare with anamorphic lenses. The sony has the most Flat matte like finish, which is great for skin tones & naturally looks a lil warmer then the others. It also seemed to retain a little more detail in the darker shots. The bmcc always has the most rich clinically crisp imagery, especially with color for me, but it was a hard distinction between it & the Komodo for many shots. GREAT STUFF! By far one of the best camera test I've seen, especially with true cinematic style lighting and camera set-ups!
I’m so glad you liked it! Thanks so much😊
The only big difference you'll see in the color correction session is how far you can push the limits of the picture without destroying it.
I clicked on this video as fast as I could without reading what cameras were here. My favorite by a little was the FX3 but my overall take away is that the BlackMagic wasn't fucking around. makes me feel real good about my purchase. good video👍
First off thank you for making this! This is what the world needed, I had it A Sony B black magic C Red.. C was my favourite thought
Thank YOU!
The main difference can only be noticed in outdoor where the background is blasting light andyou still be able to see the character,
also the gradients of color is vast in outdoor locations .
So went through looking at most. My Picks Where
1. B - FX-3
2. BMCC - C
3. Red - A
I thought Red would do better.
Sony FX-3 is beast.
BMCC, they just get it done.
I think most people could not tell which is which though.
Nice review!
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.
It's unbelievable what can be achieved with the Blazar anamorphic lenses.
Nice to see that with the right light and color grading it's hard to notice the difference.
Would also be cool to see the FX3 with raw video.
I early guessed which one was the FX3.
I own a BMPCC6K and owned a Red before. But I inverted BMP6K and Komodo !
Thanks for this relevant comparison.
I couldn't decide between Camera A and C, but from the subtlety of the skin tones, I was pretty sure that Camera A was the Komodo.... and I was right!
The FX3 was rather apparent. Lower color depth often renders skin tones differently... which is a big tell when going from 8 Bit to 10 Bit... I was rather surprised that the 10 Bit felt so flat versus the other two. That said, all three are gorgeous, and you would never be able to tell without such a wide variety of shots played side by side. But damn, the extra money for the Komodo seems like it's worth it if you're going for the ultimate in realism.
Still, the takeaway is that that 12 Bit Blackmagic looks like absolute magic for its price. Such a lovely little camera!
in well lit scenarios it will be harder to tell a difference, but when shooting with only natural light the extra bit depth really does help, especially if your going to be displaying on a large screen.
I had a project recently where i changed the color of the lights from deep blue to green and it worked perfectly on that 16bit footage. One slider, My mind was blown.
The client loved it, it was awesome to have that opportunity to get creative in post.
Lmao, I love these videos.
"can you tell the difference between these different cameras, even though they are all shooting raw, and I'm using A RADICALLY DIFFERENT LENS ON EACH ONE????"
Thanks for your honest opinion!😊
Not a good way to compare imo, but nice lighting setup and recreation of The Killer. Whatever lens you had on the Sony looked the best to me.
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’m glad you liked it! Thanks so much😊
The XH2s’ 14bit Flog2 would be an awesome gap filler between the BM and Red, if you ever get your hands on one in the future :)
If you bring in the MXF files from the FX3 you get the full 10 bit and are able to use the Sony Raw controls in Davinci.
Thanks for the information!
nice to see....the red rigging portion towards the end was also a nice watch....
Thank you! 🙏
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.
same here.
I thought C would be Red cause it looked best for me,the dynamic range and color tone and the Cinematic feeling looks perfect on C camera yet it's BlackMagic wow
nice footages and good actress
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.
Whatever lens is on cam c looks better than the others. Wonder if its the neutral flare that effects the rest of the color through the lens
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.
Can you show a comparison to where these codecs will start to break? Like are you able to pull more detail out of the shadows or the highlights from one codec versus the other? These scenes have a lot of contrast so I would be curious if you could brighten the shadows so much and we could see where they start to fall apart and if there is a noticeable difference in how far one can be pushed. Same for the highlights.
amazing... hope you release the lighting breakdown soon.. what brand lens you are using on fx3?
it was Sirui, don't know which one, but it was the cleanest without any fringing
Sirui!
@@Suyorukun hello, between blazar and sirui which one would you recommend ?
my blind preference was B then C then A. B had rich colors and pleasing skin tones. A felt kinda flat compared to B and C.
Shocked my favorite colors were B based on the results! Love it cause I use the baby brother version of that camera.
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?"
What are your thoughts about the Canon C500 mk2? Or the C70?
haven't used them but look great
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.
WOW!!!!! Throughout the video I thought A was the 6K and C was the RED. The 6K was my favorite in almost every shot except 2. I picked B in those 2 shots. IM VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE BMD6K.
I knew immediately B was the Sony, just didn't look right. I'm REALLY shocked how close C and A were. Sometimes I thought C was the Komodo. Great video.
You miss one thing with the FX3: it's actually a 48 Mpixels sensor that uses a Quad Bayer to make it act like a 12 Mpixel. This is why the image is so good.
Great video! Every blind comparison video I've seen between the Komodo and the 6K Fullframe I've always unknowingly preferred the blackmagic!
Glad it was helpful!
Thanks its incredibly good material.
but its now fair to compare with really different lenses.
I shoot a lot on Komodo and picture I never seen so soft like in your images.
the BMPCC had a very noticable Dynamic Range difference. Deff had much higher Dynamic Range and a nicer highlight roll off
Camera c was my pick of the bunch &
watching this after the new blackmagic pyxis announcement just confirmed it for me
I got it right. Red always has a professional look with an extra 'blur'. Sony has trouble with very fine details, like in light skin, and Blackmagic looks professional, but the sensor ratio (seen in head shape) looks round, like a DSLR or something.
open in 1080p then see the black or shadow part you will see the pixel color bending blow that is why camera A is powerful
very nice comparison. had a hard time telling the difference between Blackmagic and RED
Thanks a lot! 🙏
The 6K FF looks best
Definitely.
日本語字幕とてもありがたいです。ありがとう。
こちらこそありがとうございます😊
A looks the best to me when it comes to dynamic range, I 'll take that one thank You
Nice vid, thanks for making it and sharing :) You're right in that if your image is set on set, then any modern camera these days will be fine. I find however, that the best test of colour is white balance and saturation adjustments. I picked the Sony straight away based on saturation of lower midtones. That is where the Sony will fall massively...especially when underexposed. BRAW on the other hand, keeps colour rich and full, with flawless WB corrections in post. I rely on that a lot, especially when I'm using LUTs that respond well when changing WB and exposure settings in raw.
Wow. I thought A was Fx3. I’m even more happy with my A7siii
Thanks for the bit rate comparison. Honestly, watched the whole thing because the cinema was intense. Great stuff. Who else geeking out about the image (*noise this and that, color looks better on this, sensor difference on this cam and that ) before the results displayed. LOL.
The bit depth thing is a little misleading here as REDRAW is processed in 16-bit linear space, recorded as 12-bit log. BRAW is recorded in 12-bit log and processed in 16-bit linear space inside DaVinci Resolve. Same applies to ARRIRAW, processed in 16-bit linear space (unless the ARRI 35 that is processed in 18-bit linear space), and recorded as 12-bit log (13-bit log for the ARRI 35). All in all, BRAW, ARRIRAW and REDRAW have all the same bit depth (but the ARRI 35), just somehow "advertised" differently. In a nutshell, 16-bit linear is equal to 12-bit log.
Precisely. Very misleading if you ask me but people get confused easily regarding bit depth and technical information in general.
There really isn’t a bad camera today as we all know. If you know your lighting framing and coloring. You can get insane images from all of these.
That being said, red is still the clear winner. The quality of the red has “that look” many are going for. Plus red raw. What I can do after the fact with red raw is straight up mind bending.
I’ll tell you what though the lumix s5xii is another monster I also use. That camera is unbelievable. Minus the jelly…. slow pans only
좋은 영상 감사합니다. 계조는 a>c>b 순서로 좋아보였는데 반대로 색수차는 b가 깔끔하고 a가 제일 심해서 조금 의아했었네요.
봐주셔서 감사해요!☺️
As a Komodo x owner, I can happly to say that the BM6k looks on par.
wow i love B so much. not too sharp and stiff like c and not too blurry like a.
How to look for differences, look for details in shadow area. Basicly, color depth means stops of dynamic range, less bits, less stops. So, fx3 can show no more then 10stops of DR. And Komodo can show no more then 16 stops.
Of course, if the camera itself is able to record those 16bit color depth. FX3 could be build on better sensor, but it limitations then is 10bit color depth of recorded material. And in case of Komodo, it limitations can be sensor.