Kino

Absolutely, but when will it be here? I mostly have EF lenses, though I may consider the Sony FX9 II if that comes along sooner and has the better features/price. The FX9 already looks great with the in-camera 10 bit: And, with the RAW expander, it reproduces some beautiful colors: Sony's advantage is that they don't need to introduce a new mount at this stage and have a better native and 3rd-party lens selection.

There are people here who have shot with the Komodo 6K and the Komodo-X, so I'm sure they will chime in. As mentioned above, the Komodo-X has better I/O for professional use and a claimed half-stop advantage in the shadows, which is probably closer to a 1-stop advantage over Komodo 6K. The other main advantages are that it has a 2X faster sensor readout (80FPS in 6K 17x9 vs 40FPS in the Komodo 6K); an upgraded processor for the menu GUI; locking RF mount; mini V-mount battery plate; and an XLR breakout port with better preamps. You can now mount more accessories (e.g., monitor) directly to the camera and so it functions more like a traditional RED camera. The media has also been upgraded to CFexpress B and there are some autofocus updates not available on the Komodo 6K. I believe it is worth it if you need all these advantages, especially the low light and the higher frame rates, both of which may be useful on a nature doc. However, for the additional $4K over the Komodo 6K, you could simply purchase an FX3 or A7S III and cover those bases. Then, you would have two cameras for the price of one. The one drawback is that the Komodo X also has a strong magenta bias (perhaps to make it more like the V-Raptor 8K S35mm). You can correct it in post, but it shouldn't be there. It is obvious when you compare it to the Komodo 6K and even the Dragon X. In terms of the other cameras you mentioned, the Kinefinity Mavo LF II (FF 6K) is the closest in features and price, but it does have a significant amount of rolling shutter and dealing with their warranty service might be very difficult. For nature docs, you are probably best off with a Canon or Sony, including the FX6, C70, FX9, and C300 III. But there is one camera you haven't mentioned, the C500 II, which is now discounted to $11K. That is a serious cinematic machine and punches way above its price: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYM_DvGGhxc If you watch the Netflix series Madoff: the Monster of Wall Street, you can see the C500 II in action. It looks especially great in Dolby Vision: The one problem with this camera is that it doesn't have 4K 120FPS, if that is important to you. But, if you don't need that feature, then the C500 II is about the best you can do for a new cinema camera in this price range.

This is from the Chinese website I posted above, but it could be fake. First of all, it was posted a few days after this review from CVP and seems to lift most of the above specs from the section on "future cameras": It is very unlikely that Sony would release the A9III and FX9II, featuring the same sensor, within such a close timeframe. The A1 and Venice 2, which share a similar (but different) 8.6K sensor, were released one year apart. Moreover, while the A9III is a competent hybrid camera, the sensor is not designed for high dynamic range and would not be able to achieve 15+ stops of DR in video. It would be a downgrade from the current FX9, which has exceptional DR and ISO performance. Although Sony featured a global shutter on the F55 and F65, its newer cinema cameras lack this feature. I don't see them putting it back anytime soon, as it is too much of a compromise for overall image quality. Either the FX9II will get the IMX610 from the A1 or it will get some other 6K or 8K sensor that we don't know about.

Camera manufacturers do that all the time. It is common practice. In the case of the Sony A1, its promos came out in January 2021, well before the camera was in production or released to the public, which was March 2021: The Canon hybrid releases follow the same pattern. The flagship 1DX III promo video was shot on that camera and posted on its announcement day January 6, 2020, well before it was released in mid-February 2020.

It's more that I'm disappointed that Sony didn't shoot the video with the A9III exclusively, as they did with the Sony A1 promos. Based on other footage I've seen from the camera, I think the A9III is fully capable. There is even an unsubstantiated but plausible rumor from a Chinese website that the exact same A9III sensor will feature in the FX9II with 6K recording: https://m-weibo-cn.translate.goog/u/2424567755?jumpfrom=weibocom%2Fu%2F2424567755%3Fjumpfrom%3Dweibocom&_x_tr_hist=true&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp#&gid=1&pid=1

Sony itself doesn't believe in the A9III as a video camera. BTS of "Light Speed" promo piece shows Venice 2 and Burano were used for most shots, including all the really impressive ones:

The Venice 6K is a certified Hollywood A-cam and I don't think it should be compared with the Burano, as the latter only offers X-OCN LT. That is a significant downgrade from the RAW and X-OCN options on the Venice cameras. My hope is that if they do bring out a Burano 6K, it will have X-OCN XT and ST because of the lower resolution and the fact that the Venice 6K is a much older design. In scenes with a lot of movement or change, X-OCN will scale resolution, especially when it comes to the LT compression. That is how Sony's X-OCN avoids artifacts. This means that Burano's 8K X-OCN LT will not be a true 8K image in all scenarios.

The promo piece includes short RAW bursts that are rendered as video:

XDCA module was part of Sony's legacy design. On the FX9, it allows for much more than 16-bit RAW and 4k 120 (S35). You can power a giant B4 lens, for example, and offset the weight. You can also stream and transfer files. It's a full professional feature set for those who need it, especially broadcasters and those in field recording. This is all before they integrated RAW output into the body of the FX6. It will be interesting to see how they move forward with the FX9 II design in case they drop the module or modify it. At the moment, we have the aging FX9 at $10K and the brand new Burano 8K at $25K. That's a huge price gap in the Sony cinema lineup that they need to fill. The "Burano 6K" could fill that gap nicely and still separate itself from both cameras. I believe the "inflation adjusted price" for the F5 was $3000 over MSRP, so I'm not sure how that will work. I think you will find buyers for the FS7 who don't want to pay FX6 prices. It is still a capable camera and perfect for many applications. I still shoot with the C500 (original) and the image is great, especially in RAW. The only problem is the size/weight of the camera and Odyssey recorder when all rigged up.

The FX6 is perfectly fine the way it is with the direct RAW output to the Atomos. The FX9 has the problem in that it requires the XDCA extension unit to do the same thing as the FX6. They need to allow for direct RAW out. 8K acquisition provides many advantages that Sony does not want to ignore for their flagship FX camera, especially considering Canon's plans for this segment. I don't see them going with 4K downsampled from 6K yet again. The camera will definitely have a new sensor, perhaps a repurposed A1 sensor (IMX 610) or something else we don't know about. Brand new, the Venice 6K and 8K barely have any price difference as you note, but you can get a used Venice 6K for almost half the price. A Burano 6K would be amazing if they could get the price down to where the F5 was ($16K). The problem is that the Venice 6K is still very popular on many productions, both big and small, and listed as the official F5 replacement on Sony's website: https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/digital-cinema-cameras/pmw-f5 I don't expect a "Burano 6K" for some time, but I only mention it because I think the possibility for this camera release determines the kind of features we will get in the FX9 II.

If the FX9 II does come along, it will not be an incremental upgrade like the FS7 II. It has to compete with Canon's next generation Cinema EOS cameras, so it will need to offer 8K recording, better external RAW recording options, and proper 4K 120 internal. There is a possibility for X-OCN 16-Bit at 4K or 6K, but I doubt it. I suspect they plan to replace the discontinued F5 ($16K) with a Burano 6K (using the Venice 1 sensor) and that camera will be the cheapest entry point for Sony's X-OCN. Then the Burano line would mirror the Venice 8K and 6K perfectly.

I wouldn't buy either one at this stage unless you absolutely must have a camera today. The C300 III has been discounted to $9K from $11K and is likely to got down even more as Canon replaces it with an RF mount version with higher resolution. The Sony FX9 is selling for $10K and is now 4 years old. Sony has registered a new camera (WW279317) in China that could be its replacement: https://weibo.com/2424567755/NoKDocBsC This registration will be produced by the Shanghai plant (like the FX6 and FX9), so it is most likely an FX camera (or possibly a new camcorder). In any case, the FX9 II is close and when it drops so will the price of the FX9. At that point, you can decide which camera is better for your needs.

I just returned the GFX 100 II and GF 45-100mm after owning the camera for a week. It is an amazing photo camera but only half-baked for video. Here are the main problems I found after some testing: 1. 5.8K and 8K modes suffer from significant rolling shutter, especially the 8K. This is a shame as I was looking forward to the 5.8K "cinemascope" (2.35:1) format. 2. Aliasing is present in 5.8K mode, which uses the full width of the sensor, but much less prevalent in all other modes. 3. Noise is a problem at ISO 2000 and above, especially in the cropped formats. The camera is likely ISO invariant above 800, so you are not really changing anything in the gain signal. 4. I didn't notice "chroma smoothing" in my footage on Resolve, but I wasn't really looking for it or shooting skin tones and foliage. I have seen it in other footage posted online from the camera and it really worries me. It has a plastic effect on skin/flesh tones that can be obvious. Despite these issues, the camera does have some amazing video qualities: 1. The AF and stabilization work very well for a large format sensor. The 45-100 has OIS and is highly recommended for anyone who buys this camera. 2. The dynamic range is amazing on this camera! It is definitely in the realm of RED and Sony cinema cameras. Some reviewers have compared it to the ALEXA, but I wouldn't go that far. 3. The ergonomics and design of the camera are lovely. It is a beautiful camera in terms of design. It is also tactile and enjoyable to shoot with. The EVF is likely one of the best in the business. 4. I didn't have time to test the anamorphic modes, even though I had all the kit for it. Test footage from others shows that it is one of the best features of the camera. It is certainly a rare feature in this hybrid segment. Only Panasonic offers anything like it. I was very sad to return it, and I really wanted it to be that "dream camera," but I need a camera that does not compromise on cinema/video specs, especially when it costs $11K for the camera and one lens. There are so many cameras coming out in 2024 that there will be better options.

Well, I couldn't resist a blind camera challenge. This is the Venice 2: The other cameras aren't bad, but this looks nice and creamy!

Dual Conversion Gain (DCG)? Something has to account for the increased rolling shutter.

Fuji has confirmed that video mode on the GFX 100 II is 12 bit. Does the original GFX 100 have 14-bit readout in 4K video? Perhaps they wouldn't be offering a "new and improved sensor" for $2500 less. The new PDAF could be exclusively software based. There is also the interesting setting described in the manual on page 197: It seems like this will restore 14-bit readout in video, as the tradeoff is increased rolling shutter, but Fuji will not confirm how this extra DR is achieved. I would be curious to see some tests in this mode.

The sensor has a slightly different performance in DR, especially because of the addition of ISO 80: https://blog.kasson.com/gfx-100-ii/fujifilm-gfx-100-ii-edr-16-bit-precision/ The new PDAF would also necessitate changes. The 4K (line-skipped) mode has a 15ms rolling shutter (vs 30ms on the GFX 100), so the readout speed is definitely faster by a factor of 2x. It is likely based on the same sensor but with the new additions in autofocus, low ISO performance, and faster readout speed.

@Andrew Reid Burano has shipped with X-OCN LT. If Sony charges you $25K for the lowest quality 16-Bit codec, it means that you will never see that on any Sony mirrorless. The smaller bodies wouldn't be able to deal with the heat management involved in 16-Bit readout, processing, and recording for video. This is also a slap in the face for those shooters who were hoping to see X-OCN in the FX series, since that is also less likely to happen for several years. It is Sony's answer to REDCODE, although it doesn't violate RED's patents as it is not technically RAW.

This camera has impressive image quality, even in the pixel-binned (or line-skipped) 4K and 4K/60p modes. The aliasing is also very slight. It's a great achievement for a 12K sensor. The only potential issue I can see is the IBIS compatibility with gimbals. The Mediastorm review mentions this as a problem, but most of the other footage I've seen looks just fine. I'm not sure if there are settings that reduce the high-frequency vibration they experienced:

I've been collecting these A1 frames for months on different platforms! I'll try my best . . . The night still frames from Japan are all from TeemusPhoto (above). He has shot many videos with the A1. You can look on his channel for more of where that came from. Many images were taken from Mina Rhodes's work with the A1 here in L.A.:

I've had my eye on the Sony A1 for a long time. I was hoping Sony would announce the A1 II, so that the prices on it could drop a little. At $6500, it is a bit steep. LongGOP 8K is also not ideal, but the video footage overall is very impressive for a mirrorless full-frame camera. The DR, roll-off, ISO performance, and texture are all amazing. These are video frame stills if you can believe it!

This is true. The footage looks good here because of the limited use case, but you can already see some issues with dynamic range in the shadow areas. Here is another example that more effectively demonstrates both the strengths (color depth) and the limitations (dynamic range) of the Z9's NRAW: The camera produces beautiful colors in NRAW and ProRes RAW, but the dynamic range is a problem: You can see how easily the highlights clip in the footage above. Here are other examples of highlight clipping, along with a tutorial on red and blue channel clipping:

Although the grade is always important, NRAW's rich tonality is once again evident in this beach footage, which has been interpreted in linear color space as opposed to N-Log gamma (where DR could be better preserved). Despite the varying workflow, the expansive tonal range is consistent with Nikon's own Venice clip as posted above.

Nikon should pay this guy! That video will sell cameras.

I managed to download a few brief 8K 50fps NRAW NEV samples from another forum and view them in the latest version of Resolve (18.1.4): https://forum.grassvalley.com/forum/editors/editing-with-edius/572094-n-raw-from-z9-sample-download They are now listed as 12 bit according to Nikon specs. There must have been a decoding problem that has been solved since Resolve 18.0. Perhaps NEV files are captured in 12 bit log and Resolve previously converted them to 14 bit linear. It is hard to know what the issue was as TicoRAW compression is new to the camera world (hence the RED lawsuit). The same TicoRAW conversion that the Z9 utilizes when compressing for photos in the "High Efficiency" RAW mode at 14 bit readout is also utilized to create the NRAW files. In photo mode, this is limited to 20fps at full sensor readout (8256 x 5504). Although the video mode uses a crop (8256 x 4644), which produces a 38mp image, it doesn't seem possible that you could get 14 bit RAW video at frame rates higher than 24/25. The Canon R3 could do 14 bit RAW at 30fps with its 6K video, but Canon would never do such a thing! That would obliterate its current cinema line. In any case, the rich color tonality we were seeing in the Z9 footage is still there and the files edit nicely on a 4K timeline. They are perhaps not as optimized as R3D files, but they should be easier for editing than Canon 8K RAW Light.