TomTheDP

Yeah it's not bad at all, but still too much when on set. If you are using a Sony FX9 it could be as quick as a lens swap because the you can get adapters that attach the same as a lens. That isn't as secure as a mount that is bolted in though. If you aren't using vintage or stills glass it doesn't matter though.

For me as someone who isn't renting high end cine glass it gives me more lens options. Most vintage lenses can be adapted to EF but very few can be adapted to PL, at least not without really expensive modifications done by pros. If I want to throw on an old FD lens or something like that I'd have to swap the mount from PL to EF, which is time consuming. Now that depends on the camera. Swapping the mounts on a mirrorless system is usually fast. On an ARRI or Blackmagic it is a pain.

True though a lot of budget "cinema" lens options have an EF mount option. Even some mid range lenses like the CP3 have an EF mount option. Often times they are swappable so you can switch to PL relatively easily. I definitely prefer RF mount (or any mirrorless mount) as it just opens up more lens options, particularly vintage ones. The form factor and output options on the C500 are much better but that may not be valuable to you.

This really isn't surprising considering camera gets all the attention. I hear constantly from sound mixers that they are never given any luxuries on set or in post.

Interesting I am not sure how successful the GH6 was but they are coming out with a G9 II, so they continue to sell M43 cameras. One of the issues with the GH6 was it simply didn't offer enough over other options. If the GH6 was global shutter and had internal RAW or something to separate it from larger sensors it could have been a different story. I agree in general M43 is less attractive then 5 years ago. I personally have no gripes with it. I personally wouldn't get an M43 camera simply because there are no options for it in the higher end bracket of cameras. Good point. I think EF is almost as good an option as PL. You can adapt EF to all mirrorless systems. All higher end cameras (RED, Sony and ARRI) have EF options as well. Something to consider though. There is always a new camera coming out and at least the C500 MK2 has been reduced in price a lot since it's release making it a better value. In general though camera's tend to lose value a lot quickly. I think the Monstro is probably a bit more stable price wise as the new replacement for it, the Raptor, has already been out for a minute.

Have you considered a C500 MK2 6k, Internal ND, Great lowlight performance, great latitude and good dynamic range, internal RAW and 10 bit capability. Pretty well designed package that works great for building up or building down, good battery life. To me IQ/usability wise it would be the C500 MK2 or the RED Monstro. In that price range they are the top performers. With the Monstro you have to deal with 8k but you have tons of compression options. You're getting better dynamic range and color depth over the C500. Only downside is no internal ND's, probably more expensive media (redmags), and power consumption is higher(though not terrible). I see some mentions of the S1H. I think it's a great bang for your buck camera. Great battery life, great sensor. They sell used now for incredibly cheap. Downsides are the HDMI out latency is terrible, slow rolling shutter, no internal 12 bit/RAW, and color isn't the greatest compared to higher end cameras. Again you can get great images out of it and for a hobby camera it would excel. If you are looking for a more high end experience I just don't think that would be it. In terms of value it is incredible though. I might also suggest an ARRI Alexa XT, but that might be too far into the too heavy spectrum. It's quite a beast.

The Pocket 4k has BRAW which means you get 1 stops more in the highlights with highlight recovery in Resolve. The Red Komodo does this internally to get its 12.5 stop rating ( a $6000 "cinema" camera). That makes around 12.6 stops for the Pocket. Also the C70 only gets 12.3 stops in RAW, because it has no NR. Again you can get an additional .5 stops or so out of the Pocket with NR. The comparison between a RODE wireless GO and the Pocket 4k makes little sense to me. Also the Pocket has held its value pretty well over its entire lifetime. Hardly a waste of money. I still see them making money all the time on different projects. M43 mount is hardly dead. The GH6 just came out with a brand new dual gain sensor, Z-cam is putting out a new global shutter M43 camera with higher dynamic range. Z-cam didn't likely design that sensor, probably made by Sony, which wouldn't be designing and making M43 sensors if there was no demand. But it doesn't really matter. If you aren't shooting for clients the camera you have is irrelevant outside of it giving you a usable image, which almost any camera on the market in the past 5 years does. Recommending a cheaper camera is not dissing someone's abilities. Award winning films have been shot on a GH2. The Pocket 4k is very capable. Anyways the Pocket 4k wouldn't be my choice in camera. Something like an S1H, FX30 would be as they are more run and gun friendly. My reason for not getting something "high end" for hobby uses is not because I don't want to spend money. It's because such tools are inconvenient and annoying for doing anything non work related. But that's me. Maybe you like to move slowly for your hobby uses an a big ass camera rig works for you. Even a DSLR for photos is annoying, would rather have the smallest APSC or M43 mirrorless option that I can at least sort of fit in my pocket.

I partly shoot on an Alexa for work simply because I can and want to. So I get you. Though if you get a bigger camera setup like a C300 or FX9 you may get annoyed with it overtime. It's just bigger and if there is any element of travel involved to what you shoot, the heavier it is the more of an annoyance it is.

They could have just used much smaller spherical lenses and done the look in post like Fincher does. At the end of the day DP's/Directors almost always sacrifice convenience and time for a certain look that the audience won't really care about.

The Pocket 4k has good dynamic range. Above 12 stops when using davinci highlight recovery. You can mount a small Sony NPF on top the camera and get good battery life pretty easily. Variable ND's are very easy, you can get a magnetic one for quick removal. Variable ND's aren't great for skin tones but he's shooting landscapes. M43 lenses are tiny and cheap, but if he wants he could just get EF mount or something to future proof. If you aren't making a lot of money off your cameras it makes little sense to spend $4000+ on it. The Pocket 6k Pro is a good compromise though. You can get them for under $2000 used. Battery life is better and the built in screen is really nice. Honestly when I am not on set I like to have the smallest camera possible. The FX30 has been great for me. I want it to feel like there is no camera at all. On narrative film productions that is when I prefer a cinema body with all the bells and whistles. Carrying anything substantial around when I am doing solo or non paid stuff is a pain in the ass. Honestly the FX30 would be a good choice. The image looks great, especially for landscapes. Lens options are cheap and tiny. Good battery life too. The weight of the camera feels like you are carrying nothing.

I think the choice for the FX3 was the second native ISO of 12,800. That is two stops more than the Sony Venice's native ISO. The RED Raptor may be pretty usable at 6400 iso but the FX3 is still a stop above that. The less light you need the quicker you get it done. I have done projects using almost all natural lighting and it is so much quicker in almost everyway.

Second image has a lot more detail each time but that certainly could be the lens. The GH5 resolves a lot more detail though as its 5k downsampled to 4K or HD, over just straight up HD. I am still a fan of HD as unless its a side by side it looks detailed enough. Though the GH5 was great with having no moire.

I have definitely found RED easiest to work with color wise. But the C300 MK3 is way more run and gun friendly. Have you considered the URSA 12K. I know BM doesn't get the hype that RED, Canon and Sony do, but the image is really good. The crop of the camera is 1.3x, between S35 and full frame. I'd download some footage from that and see what you think.

Biggest difference is the one looks softer, would assume it's the Pocket. The color of the foliage also looks different but it's not as noticeable.

It's a great sensor. The DSMC2 System is light weight and the powerdraw isn't bad about 50wh. The C300 and FX9 powerdraw are probably half of what the Dragon is though. R3D and the red color science are really nice and the Dragon has pretty outstanding dynamic range. The dragon also is a bit of a baby. For optimal results you want to bring it up to temp and then blackshade it, which takes around 10 minutes. You probably won't want to venture much past 400 iso though, where as you can shoot at 4000 iso with the FX9 and 1600 on the C300 MKII with pretty clean results.

Didn't realize it only shoots X-OCN LT. Though if the end delivery is 4k, that is still probably plenty for most productions.

I'll do one with a grey card next time. what looks glaringly off to you in the above comparison?

It's gonna be a personal preference thing in the end. You'll get cleaner high ISO performance on the Sony. The Canon has internal RAW vs you need with an Atomos or the unit to do it with the Sony. The Sony can't do full sensor 4k 60p. You have more lens options with E-mount. The canon is easier to mount on a gimbal. If your only gripe with the FX6 is the mount then you can get a locking EF mount that has bottom support, making it bullet proof. Of course that isn't an option with emount. Although I feel emount lenses don't really need a locking mount as they are pretty light. You'll love Sony E-NDs. The FX6 is pretty amazing for fast paced stuff. It barely weighs anything yet the body is big enough where it isn't awkward to rig up. E-ND's are out of this world nice to have.

@kye I used your hue adjustment technique as a starting point. I think that improved it a lot, no more pink/magenta from the Sony. Might have went too far though. I still have hope for the FX3 as an A cam. 😅

@PannySVHS Here is the Sony with the Alexa. I just adjusted the Hue on the sony and applied the Emotive Color ARRI Daylight lut. Now this is a really bad lighting situation. Sunlight, combined with Tungsten, and also bright green walls in the room lol. here is the raw video from both cameras as well as PNG stills of the LOG image if anyone wants to play with them. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fYuQyBHEq9zvrIB_pQ-GBMXWOKxIhP8W?usp=sharing

Venice 3?

You have to go further then simply exposing the cameras the same and having them set to the same WB. For example having say the Alexa set to 5600k and the FX30 the same in a daytime situation will yield very different results.

Yeah I purchased his luts, as well as emotive color(probably more precise), and the trendy Phantom luts.

Man I could do it but it would be tough. I mean moreso than my ability, all my jobs would be gone as none of the productions I am on can afford to shoot motion picture film LOL.

I don't do enough multi cam stuff for it to be worthwhile. I prefer to shoot 1 cam for narrative which is 99% of what I do at this point. If I were to go back a year though when I was mostly doing multi cam corporate it definitely would make more sense. It looks like this weekend I'll be using the Alexa(requested by director), a Fuji XH2S (directors personal camera), and maybe an FX30 or Pocket 4k as a C cam. We'll see how the color chart does 😅