Highlight rolloff is almost always the biggest indicator for me between the super high end sensors and the more “prosumer” ones. Even on a really really good sensor like the FX3.
Great comparison. I think that because of The Creator, more productions - especially small budget, independent ones - will turn to the FX3 and cameras of similar quality for their productions. I have the FX30, and I've been pretty impressed with what I can capture with it. Digital cameras have come a long way in democratizing film production in ways that benefit filmmakers in general.
Yes! Over the last ten or so years, it's becoming more about what's in front of the camera than the camera itself. Yeah it's important to know your camera, lenses, and what you get from the tools you choose, but great-looking films are no longer reserved for super expensive cameras. Learn lighting, practice the language of cinematography, and go make your movie with the camera you have or some affordable used gear! - Justin 😎
Well simple fact is i own an fx3... Ill never own a venice. As someone else commented you crippled both cameras but even in doing so, the footage is fine for anything i expect to do. Then again, my smartphone surprises me how great they have become, won't ever see aa major motion picture shot with one, but i bet if you made one with a killer story (not some rereleased rehashed film we get now) nobody watching would be complaining about its quality either. And, to be honest, i was more critical of differences of shots than cameras in those video. Maybe should have created a dual mount system they ran exact same shot on both at same time from (nearly) same vantage and take. The one glaring difference was the natural light with hard shadows across her face. Venice hands down easily beat the fx3. But if you shot it on fx3 raw external... Would difference close some? Plus, i like putting m42 mount vintage lenses on my fx3 over modern glass anyway. Nor am i a professional filmmaker/dp. Inonce years ago comapred 2 (same design) large diaphragm tube condenser mics. One a $2k modern mic vs a $7k modded vintage mic by one of best in business. Both through same signal chain. 99% of people probably couldnt tell a difference... And the 1% would be unable to identify it correctly evey time. One would think in the time we live in putting such high quality in hands of jist about anyone we would be in a creative Renaissance. Ill leave it at that so i can go film the cat doing silly things to my dogs.
Coolio. Nice to see. If the cameras are reliably enough to be on all day without falling apart, of course larger productions will use them. It's down to consistency, power, robust construction and reliability with lens choices/ outputs for multi monitoring. Most of the prosumer cameras have a nice output but are not built well enough to withstand the rigours of production without being built out soo much before being usable that you may as well opt for crash cams like the little komodo. Keep in mind that using a $20k lens on a most cameras with production, set design and lighting will yield fantastic results as you will not find a set soo poorly managed and still budget enough for a set of ultra primes 😅🎉 but that's just an opinion 😮
The size and scope of a production definitely impacts your camera choice. That being said, films like 'The Creator' definitely prove that with today’s “prosumer” cameras productions can save money on the camera/lens choice and put that budget towards locations, production design, effects, and a killer cast/crew. Thanks for watching! Justin
Venice does look a little better but you have to understand if you're not comparing them side by side against each other the FX3, FX6, FX9 will easily hold it's own for any higher production value.
Hello, I would have an important question to ask you on this report that I find excellent elsewhere. When you recorded with the FX3, it was probably the XAVC S-1 4K format in 10 bits 4: 2: 2. And as you did not have the back of Venice which records in X-OCN format, you then used the internal XAVC format which also gives the same format of the FX3, 10 bits 4: 2: 2. This is the reason that the two images are practically identical. To compare the Sony Venice camera to the FX3, the X-OCN format should have been used. From there, we would have seen the difference between an image 10bits of the FX3 and 16 bits of Venice. Damage. Finally, knowing this, we have no idea the difference in real rendering between Venice and FX3. You know, you pay 10 times the price for the FX3 because of the 16 bits image. The back is essential with the Venice if not, don't buy Venice because it will give the same image of the FX series.
We hear you on that! Shooting OXCN with the Venice definitely makes a huge difference, as does externally recording Pro Res RAW with the Fx3. Perhaps a follow up would be comparing both cameras’ external recording abilities… Thanks for watching! Justin
Highlight rolloff is almost always the biggest indicator for me between the super high end sensors and the more “prosumer” ones. Even on a really really good sensor like the FX3.
This comparison is so good, thank you MPB!
Great comparison. I think that because of The Creator, more productions - especially small budget, independent ones - will turn to the FX3 and cameras of similar quality for their productions. I have the FX30, and I've been pretty impressed with what I can capture with it. Digital cameras have come a long way in democratizing film production in ways that benefit filmmakers in general.
Yes! Over the last ten or so years, it's becoming more about what's in front of the camera than the camera itself. Yeah it's important to know your camera, lenses, and what you get from the tools you choose, but great-looking films are no longer reserved for super expensive cameras. Learn lighting, practice the language of cinematography, and go make your movie with the camera you have or some affordable used gear!
- Justin 😎
On the right side the image is reacher in details on the sweater and the jacket looks better in the shadows. I suppose the right one is Sony Venice.
This was useful, thanks.
When you shoot xocn the difference is immidatly noticeable
You can also just shoot in pro res raw in the fx3 if you truly need raw.
Well simple fact is i own an fx3... Ill never own a venice. As someone else commented you crippled both cameras but even in doing so, the footage is fine for anything i expect to do. Then again, my smartphone surprises me how great they have become, won't ever see aa major motion picture shot with one, but i bet if you made one with a killer story (not some rereleased rehashed film we get now) nobody watching would be complaining about its quality either.
And, to be honest, i was more critical of differences of shots than cameras in those video. Maybe should have created a dual mount system they ran exact same shot on both at same time from (nearly) same vantage and take.
The one glaring difference was the natural light with hard shadows across her face. Venice hands down easily beat the fx3. But if you shot it on fx3 raw external... Would difference close some?
Plus, i like putting m42 mount vintage lenses on my fx3 over modern glass anyway. Nor am i a professional filmmaker/dp.
Inonce years ago comapred 2 (same design) large diaphragm tube condenser mics. One a $2k modern mic vs a $7k modded vintage mic by one of best in business. Both through same signal chain. 99% of people probably couldnt tell a difference... And the 1% would be unable to identify it correctly evey time.
One would think in the time we live in putting such high quality in hands of jist about anyone we would be in a creative Renaissance. Ill leave it at that so i can go film the cat doing silly things to my dogs.
Coolio. Nice to see. If the cameras are reliably enough to be on all day without falling apart, of course larger productions will use them. It's down to consistency, power, robust construction and reliability with lens choices/ outputs for multi monitoring. Most of the prosumer cameras have a nice output but are not built well enough to withstand the rigours of production without being built out soo much before being usable that you may as well opt for crash cams like the little komodo. Keep in mind that using a $20k lens on a most cameras with production, set design and lighting will yield fantastic results as you will not find a set soo poorly managed and still budget enough for a set of ultra primes 😅🎉 but that's just an opinion 😮
The size and scope of a production definitely impacts your camera choice. That being said, films like 'The Creator' definitely prove that with today’s “prosumer” cameras productions can save money on the camera/lens choice and put that budget towards locations, production design, effects, and a killer cast/crew. Thanks for watching! Justin
Venice does look a little better but you have to understand if you're not comparing them side by side against each other the FX3, FX6, FX9 will easily hold it's own for any higher production value.
I can’t, but my
Bank account can 😅
I could tell the difference.
Hello, I would have an important question to ask you on this report that I find excellent elsewhere. When you recorded with the FX3, it was probably the XAVC S-1 4K format in 10 bits 4: 2: 2. And as you did not have the back of Venice which records in X-OCN format, you then used the internal XAVC format which also gives the same format of the FX3, 10 bits 4: 2: 2. This is the reason that the two images are practically identical. To compare the Sony Venice camera to the FX3, the X-OCN format should have been used. From there, we would have seen the difference between an image 10bits of the FX3 and 16 bits of Venice. Damage. Finally, knowing this, we have no idea the difference in real rendering between Venice and FX3. You know, you pay 10 times the price for the FX3 because of the 16 bits image. The back is essential with the Venice if not, don't buy Venice because it will give the same image of the FX series.
We hear you on that! Shooting OXCN with the Venice definitely makes a huge difference, as does externally recording Pro Res RAW with the Fx3. Perhaps a follow up would be comparing both cameras’ external recording abilities…
Thanks for watching! Justin
I was right :)
Very soon, you won't even need a camera, in fact.
If you don't want to video anything, that is 100% true! Thanks for watching, and long live cameras! 🙂 Amy
The eyes are constantly out of focus on Venice
First to comment 😍