Should I get the Sony FX3?

[insch]

I was planning to get an A7S MKIII until I was made aware of the FX3. I will primarily use this camera for 4K filming and have been advised that it's a better camera than the A7S for that task. From what I can see, the main differences for the FX3 are no electronic viewfinder but several mounting points, hence no essentail need for a cage. And a handle with XLR points. I have an Atomos Ninja V monitor/recorder that I could use with the FX3 to maximise its potential.

Is this the best camera for 4K in this price bracket?

Thank you.

[Snowfun]

There is no objectively “best” camera for any one task. Is it the best for you? That’s the key question. Given that you’re drawn to Sony the answer is possibly yes. But others will be able to reference many other cameras. Personally I’d rather take my Blackmagic but that’s probably  the style of camera which is neither wanted nor needed.  I’d give more detail about what you want the camera to do - how you use it, when you shoot, what your priorities are (AF? Audio? Etc.) which puts any responses into context.

But the FX3 is a super camera and is quite probably “better” than the A7S3. 

[bjohn]

I think the main caveat, when choosing between the A7siii and the FX3, is that if you ever envision yourself wanting to shoot without an external monitor, the EVF of the Sony A7siii can come in handy especially under bright conditions where it might be hard to see the LCD screen. Check out Brandon Li's comments on why he chose (and stuck with) the A7siii in his "favourite gear of 2023" video here:

 

[kye]

The way to choose the best camera for you is to look at what absolutely sucks about each camera (every camera sucks in several major ways) then pick the one that would hurt you the least.

Film-making equipment involves a huge amount of compromise, at every level, even regardless of budget (although that definitely sucks for most cameras!).

[ntblowz]

If you need anamorphic, dci 4k, cine-ei, timecode, 24p then FX3, if you think you don't need those feature then A7SIII, bear in mind a7siii doesnt have firmware update for years unlike FX3 which have more frequent feature update.

A7SIII is like abandoned child by Sony.

[newfoundmass]

16 hours ago, insch said:

I was planning to get an A7S MKIII until I was made aware of the FX3. I will primarily use this camera for 4K filming and have been advised that it's a better camera than the A7S for that task. From what I can see, the main differences for the FX3 are no electronic viewfinder but several mounting points, hence no essentail need for a cage. And a handle with XLR points. I have an Atomos Ninja V monitor/recorder that I could use with the FX3 to maximise its potential.

Is this the best camera for 4K in this price bracket?

Thank you.

I think whether or not it's the best camera depends on what kind of work you're doing and what your needs are. We're really fortunate to have so many options to choose from, and frankly you can't go wrong with most cameras these days as they're all quite excellent, but some cameras have better strengths than others and it also boils down to preference. 

At one point I was leaning towards going with Sony, but ultimately decided against it. For my work I do a lot of handheld shooting, so Panasonic's IBIS was a big selling point for me. I also prefer Panasonic's colors over Sony's, and find V-log to be better than S-log to grade. I did have to compromise though on things like autofocus (though I still insist its not nearly as bad as people say.) Ultimately that's what ya gotta ask yourself when choosing a camera: what compromises can you live with? 

I think though if you're just doing video, have decided that Sony is the best tool for you and don't need any photo features then the FX3 is the better option, especially given it has received more firmware updates as @ntblowz stated. The FX3 also pairs well with the FX30 in the event you ever need a reasonably priced b-cam. Heck the FX30 is an excellent option as an a-cam and is a bargain. 

[Django]

Personally I'd still take the A7S3 over the FX3 just because I favour an EVF on mirrorless and that the FX3 doesn't bring enough imo to warrant its higher price tag. If it had shutter angle, WFM, open gate etc  it would be way more compelling. I'd also consider the FX30 & ZV-E1 which are both half the price of an FX3. 

FX30 also means cheaper S35 lenses and you can always fit a speed booster for FF. However FX3 can't really do S35 a part from using clear image zoom which technically gives you sub 4K image. Don't get me wrong its a great cam, but the "best" is really subjective. Plenty of super options from Canon, Nikon & Panasonic.

[insch]

Thank you everyone for your advice. It isn't an easy decision. A lot of my work is experimental, working with abstraction and macro imagery. I get the feeling that the FX3 is seen by Sony as a bit more of a camera for film than the A7S MKIII and it does sound like it is being more supported with firmware. I don't know how much I'd miss the EVF.  I would be using my Atomos Ninja for pretty much all the shoots but recognise that an EVF might be helpful with bright sunlight an in other situations.

I am not at all wedded to Sony - I have a Canon 5D MKIII, Panasonic Lumix GH5 and Sony A7S MKII (dedicated to infrared). I am just looking for the best match for my needs, within my price range. The A7S MKIII has generally been very well reviewed and the FX3 too. I know that there are others.

I think I am swaying to the FX3 - really appreciate your thoughts on this - it's helping me.

[Django]

Well if you're also on Canon, do check out the R5C. It's imo bit more cine cam oriented with the actual full C-line menu that includes things like shutter angle, gain ISO, WFM, false color etc. It can also do 8K60p FF, 6K S35, 2K S16. And internal RAW. All things the Sony can't do. And it has an EVF! The higher resolution may come in useful if you do macro/crop work. And the various crop modes open up a lot of lens options. It's not perfect, its downsides are poor battery life and no IBIS but there are workarounds. 

In the end I think your lens preference should dictate what system you choose but that's the alternative I'd consider (I'm also on both Sony & Canon systems).

[MrSMW]

Purely Sony, if video/filmmaking was my sole thing, I’d personally go FX3 for the form factor.

Hybrid, then the A7Siii.

But if hybrid, I’d skip the A7Siii and go Lumix S5iix.

[Django]

The A7SIII/FX3 should really be considered for two things: low-light and rolling shutter. It pretty much sits on top of the pyramid for those two categories. For hybrids I'm more into high resolution sensors so R5/R5C/A7RV/Z8 would be my picks but stacked sensors are even more clutch so Z8/R3/XH2S are also ace choices. I think the next gen of Sony's and Panny's equipped with stacked sensors will be lit. But yeah all current cameras are still pretty great!

[PannySVHS]

S1 and S1H should provide less mush and more detail at high isos than A7s3 or Fx3 afaik from online tests. Though I graded some FX3 material at ISO 6400 and it looked great regarding color and being without recognizeable mush. But so does the Lumix S series of cameras. For size, timecode, full hdmi, reliabilty, frame rates and overall image quality the FX3 is if course a compelling camera though. I loved how it responded in grading.

[Django]

..and don't forget AF. It is SO good these days. I still think Canon is on top with things like Face Only but Sony is right up there too with neat tricks up its sleeve. Anything Panny pre-S5ii isn't bringing it which is why I'm saying their next-gen flagships should hopefully finally be competing on all levels.

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, Django said:

I'm saying their next-gen flagships should hopefully better finally be competing on all levels.

Updated that for you Mr Unchained.

[A_Urquhart]

Greg Fraser's latest film 'The Creator' is ENTIRELY shot on the FX3 and apparently getting an IMAX release......

Pretty impressive!

 

 

[A_Urquhart]

On 8/25/2023 at 10:00 PM, insch said:

I was planning to get an A7S MKIII until I was made aware of the FX3. I will primarily use this camera for 4K filming and have been advised that it's a better camera than the A7S for that task. From what I can see, the main differences for the FX3 are no electronic viewfinder but several mounting points, hence no essentail need for a cage. And a handle with XLR points. I have an Atomos Ninja V monitor/recorder that I could use with the FX3 to maximise its potential.

Is this the best camera for 4K in this price bracket?

Thank you.

One thing to keep in mind is that the FX3 (and FX30) are getting more video centric features via updates in  firmware that the A7 series are not getting. It seems that for video creators, Sony is steering people to the FX series. I'd go for the FX3 unless you NEED an EVF

[IronFilm]

On 8/26/2023 at 12:00 AM, insch said:

I was planning to get an A7S MKIII until I was made aware of the FX3. I will primarily use this camera for 4K filming and have been advised that it's a better camera than the A7S for that task. From what I can see, the main differences for the FX3 are no electronic viewfinder but several mounting points, hence no essentail need for a cage. And a handle with XLR points. I have an Atomos Ninja V monitor/recorder that I could use with the FX3 to maximise its potential.

For sure the FX3 is a much better buy for filming with than the a7Smk3: better UI, no risk of overheating, more codec options, has timecode, etc 

On 8/26/2023 at 12:00 AM, insch said:

Is this the best camera for 4K in this price bracket?

I think the Sony FX30 is a better buy. It's a lot cheaper, so you can put the saved cash elsewhere to better usages. Plus the FX30 is the industry standard Super 35 sized sensor, making a great match for a whole tonne of high end cine lens sets if you wish to step it up another notch. 

[MrSMW]

3 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

Greg Fraser's latest film 'The Creator' is ENTIRELY shot on the FX3 and apparently getting an IMAX release......

Pretty impressive!

It was, but also I imagine a super high end set of cine lenses, big crew, decent budget and at least one pro colourist.

Still good bragging rights for any FX3 owners for sure!

[A_Urquhart]

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

It was, but also I imagine a super high end set of cine lenses, big crew, decent budget and at least one pro colourist.

Still good bragging rights for any FX3 owners for sure!

Of you watch the behind the scenes video I linked to above, you can see that most of the shots are actually done with a fairly minimal rig. P&S technik lenses and most surprisingly for me, a Tilta Nucleus M follow focus system! I have that system as a backup to my Teradek RT kit and really don’t know why anyone would choose it unless there were very strict budget constraints which this film wouldn’t have had. 
Interesting either way and with Cooke announcing native E Mount lenses l, it’s interesting to see where things are heading. 
 

as Iron Film said, I think the FX30 is a better buy. I’m a big fan of fast APSC lenses and pretty impressed how good the Sigma 18-35 1.8 performs on my FX30 with the MC11 adaptor. The AF when on a gimbal is extremely useful, fast and reliable. 
 

I’m now looking at replacing my Pocket 6K Pro with another Sony camera and while I initially thought about going FX3, I’m leaning more toward the Fx30. 
I like the native ISOs of the fX30 better and the price difference will be better spent on lenses I think
 

 

[IronFilm]

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

Of you watch the behind the scenes video I linked to above, you can see that most of the shots are actually done with a fairly minimal rig. P&S technik lenses and most surprisingly for me, a Tilta Nucleus M follow focus system! I have that system as a backup to my Teradek RT kit and really don’t know why anyone would choose it unless there were very strict budget constraints which this film wouldn’t have had. 

My guess was that they had a constraint with budget in term of labour rate, not able to hire top established 1st ACs. But instead younger ones, within the first decade of their career, and they're more likely to have a Tilta Nucleus M instead. (I see these a LOT on film sets) The production isn't hiring the follow focus, they're hiring the 1st AC, and that's what they're bringing along. 

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

Interesting either way and with Cooke announcing native E Mount lenses l, it’s interesting to see where things are heading. 

I thought that was an interesting announcement too!

https://www.newsshooter.com/2023/09/05/cooke-sp3-prime-lenses-for-mirrorless-cameras/

With almost everyone having shallow mounts now as an option (even ARRI! With their LPL mount), maybe that is the future? Shallow "mirrorless mounts" (with swappable mounts). 

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

as Iron Film said, I think the FX30 is a better buy. I’m a big fan of fast APSC lenses and pretty impressed how good the Sigma 18-35 1.8 performs on my FX30 with the MC11 adaptor. The AF when on a gimbal is extremely useful, fast and reliable. 
 

Glad there are  few others who see it that way! 🙂 I think even if the FX3 and FX30 were the same price, there is still a strong argument in favor of getting the FX30 instead of the FX3. 

And the fact there is instead a quite big price gap between them, makes the argument for FX30 even stronger!

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

I’m now looking at replacing my Pocket 6K Pro with another Sony camera and while I initially thought about going FX3, I’m leaning more toward the Fx30. 

It only P6K Pro came in MFT or E Mount, then it would be a lot more appealing option vs a FX30. (even though it has no AF)

2 hours ago, A_Urquhart said:

I like the native ISOs of the fX30 better and the price difference will be better spent on lenses I think

Indeed, I think that's an aspect which isn't talked about enough! 

People talk about how much "better at low light the FX3" is, ignoring the facts: 

1) is it even necessary?? Would you need a camera with 10 Billion Trillion ISO?? 

2) What ISOs do you actually use the most? The second ISO level of the FX30 is a much more practical ISO level you'd work at more often than the overly high second ISO level of the FX3, as you said "I like the native ISOs of the fX30 better"

3) what's the point in having a higher ISO if your sensor is so much bigger you lose all the low light benefits because you have to drop the F Stop way down to match with the DoF that the shot wants/needs?