0:45 Wondering what focal lengths the cams were at for this section? Guessing you compensated here instead of being both at 35mm and zooming in on the FX3 footage, would assume you did so. Interesting the sharpness difference. Thanks for sharing your tests.
It's not less sharpened it's just less sharp. The fx30 downsamples from a 6k sensor. The fx30 doesn't look overly sharpened in my eye, it's just sharp due to resolution.
You should not care about that. Softness + better highlights & darks are much more important. Must say I don't know how he did to accumulate so much noise at 800 ISO with the FX30 on the girl's face... seems a bit to much really, even for the FX3
Yes cause fx3 has more depth of field, resulting in a blurrier background. FX30 is a bit flatter due to not as much separation from the subject and background (mainly due to full frame sensor vs super 35).
All things considered, this test is terrible. I think the FX30 can produce very similar results to the FX3. The only real difference is the low light performance, where the FX3 is a clear winner.
@@TravisVarga Super 35 was totally fine for the vast majority of "real" movies shot over the past several decaades. Now shallow depth of feild fanboys/girls/theys think super35 is obsolete. Well, one day they'll grow up and realize not every shot needs to be a blurry, indistinct mess for no reason other than a weird prefernce they have, not supportrd by any story logic in most cases. I get it. I used to love a shallow look too, 15 years ago. Then I grew up.
3 things you should know about me. 1.) I love me some macgregorworks, from the vimeo days ten years ago. He is the master. 2.) there is no way the cameras are correctly labeled in this video. Its backwards.
@@boomboombaby9140 Hard time for FX 30 owners, but who would refuse that FX30 for free ? Sure, nobody. I'm pretty OK with GH5 and great lenses. Get great lenses first. Really really, that's where that FX30 price can help those starting.
@@1994guardian What? I'm not the channel owner so the video isn't mine. How about look at the history of this channel and you will see many different cameras being tested because he's a professional cinematographer and doesn't need clickbait views lol..
@@1994guardian Macgregor is a working DP so you can trust the content he puts out. There are a lot of fake videos out there so I understand where you are coming from.
Wow this was surprisingly helpful! Thank you for providing the comparison in 4k!
In case you dont know , higher iso in bright lights gives btter highlights in your footage.
thanks for the comparison. not worth the price on the fx3 expecially when my main objective is low budget pornography..
😂😂
Yea but what about those low light shots
i would like to see your work please lol
Lmao better Get some pocket or key lights for those dark scenes
LMFAO
what is the name of the trial, I wanna go visit. Is there fall color to see nearby?
Which lenses were used please?
looking like fx30 got more dynamic range ?
Wow! Iso test in broad daylight
en 4k 30p hay recorte en la fx30?
0:45 Wondering what focal lengths the cams were at for this section? Guessing you compensated here instead of being both at 35mm and zooming in on the FX3 footage, would assume you did so. Interesting the sharpness difference. Thanks for sharing your tests.
24mm on fx30 35mm on fx3 to match FOV
What`s the picture profile (or gamma) on both cameras? The difference between tho underexposed shots is night and day.
slog3
Thanks for the comparison, Did you have to use ND Filters for the bright scenes?
De calidad de imagen se ven muy similares, verdad? incluso parece que clipean sobre el mismo punto en altas luces
diria que la fx30 incluso tiene un pelin mas de rango de highlithts. por lo demas muy igual, mas ruido en sombras pero tambien mas resolucion
wow really makes me want the fx30 - that said, how easy is it to get similar color and DR out of the fx30 similar to fx30?
If u have the FX3 budget, get it.
Awesome!
Is that Mt Whitney? or near Coyote flat or Inyo National forest
Looks like Joshua Tree National Park
Can you take a few steps back with the FX30 and get relatively identical images?
2steps
Yes...or change the lens....
The FX3 looks slightly less sharpened which makes it look better. Besides better noise.
was the same lens used? that could be the difference
It's not less sharpened it's just less sharp. The fx30 downsamples from a 6k sensor. The fx30 doesn't look overly sharpened in my eye, it's just sharp due to resolution.
You should not care about that. Softness + better highlights & darks are much more important.
Must say I don't know how he did to accumulate so much noise at 800 ISO with the FX30 on the girl's face... seems a bit to much really, even for the FX3
Sharp because of 6k you can easily Lessing the sharpness in post or shoot in 1080p if that’s your take away from All this
Is it just me or does the FX30 look more like a smartphone and the FX3 more like a camera?
Still looks great. Specially for half the price!
Yes cause fx3 has more depth of field, resulting in a blurrier background. FX30 is a bit flatter due to not as much separation from the subject and background (mainly due to full frame sensor vs super 35).
All things considered, this test is terrible. I think the FX30 can produce very similar results to the FX3. The only real difference is the low light performance, where the FX3 is a clear winner.
@@TravisVarga Super 35 was totally fine for the vast majority of "real" movies shot over the past several decaades. Now shallow depth of feild fanboys/girls/theys think super35 is obsolete. Well, one day they'll grow up and realize not every shot needs to be a blurry, indistinct mess for no reason other than a weird prefernce they have, not supportrd by any story logic in most cases. I get it. I used to love a shallow look too, 15 years ago. Then I grew up.
@@TravisVarga It's the opposite, fx3 has LESS depth of field due to the sensor size
Looks good. But do you ever miss the old F35?
nop, hahaha
@@blackmilk_studio has something better than the F35 finally come along, in your opinion?
The almost look the same. If you want to save money you will be very happy with fx30
3 things you should know about me.
1.) I love me some macgregorworks, from the vimeo days ten years ago. He is the master.
2.) there is no way the cameras are correctly labeled in this video. Its backwards.
Fx30 is god 😊
No
@@heyimstarlordd BLASPHEMY!!! 🤫
@@boomboombaby9140 no
@@boomboombaby9140lol
👊🏼
I am confused, why does the fx30 look better????????????????????????//
Damn, the SONY FX30 is far more better looking than the FX3.
FX30 looks better to my eye. Super35 look = movies. I don't care what anyone says.
I agree. When the FUUK will the shallow DOF for no logical reason trend go away?
Good test. FX3 would be much more cheaper.
No fx3 is more expensive, buddy!
No buddy is fx30 so exspensive!@@FrankieTheOne
Fx3 is superior
I own the fx30 so I’m going to say the fx30 is superiorer
@@boomboombaby9140 no
@@boomboombaby9140 Hard time for FX 30 owners, but who would refuse that FX30 for free ? Sure, nobody.
I'm pretty OK with GH5 and great lenses. Get great lenses first. Really really, that's where that FX30 price can help those starting.
I think a high contrast scene would’ve been in order to compare the dynamic range difference.
fx3 is better by default hands down
Bad test!!!
I immediately noticed how noisy the FX30 from the promo videos.. As if the noise is almost on par with a6300 sensor? Am I wrong here?
you are wrong because this is a fake video
@@1994guardian This video isn't fake Mr..
@@pieceofadrian prove it. i beleave that you make this videos for clickbait. upload an unedited footage of FX30 video to download.
@@1994guardian What? I'm not the channel owner so the video isn't mine. How about look at the history of this channel and you will see many different cameras being tested because he's a professional cinematographer and doesn't need clickbait views lol..
@@1994guardian Macgregor is a working DP so you can trust the content he puts out. There are a lot of fake videos out there so I understand where you are coming from.