Help me decide: Canon C300 Mark III or Sony FX9

[IronFilm]

19 minutes ago, Kino said:

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.

Yeah it's crazy the FS7 and FX9 needed the XDCA unit but the FS700 and FX6 did not??? 

Why do you think this is??

I am currently trying to sell my FS7, I hope I get a good price for it due to the fact I've selling it with the rather expensive XDCA!! But I am doubtful 😞

19 minutes ago, Kino said:

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).

That would put it too close in price to a Sony FX9mk2? 

Maybe the "Burano 6K" could be the same inflation adjusted price as the Sony PMW-F5 was? 

[BTM_Pix]

He's not coming back is he ?

[Kino]

13 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah it's crazy the FS7 and FX9 needed the XDCA unit but the FS700 and FX6 did not??? 

Why do you think this is??

I am currently trying to sell my FS7, I hope I get a good price for it due to the fact I've selling it with the rather expensive XDCA!! But I am doubtful 😞

That would put it too close in price to a Sony FX9mk2? 

Maybe the "Burano 6K" could be the same inflation adjusted price as the Sony PMW-F5 was? 

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.

[TomTheDP]

On 11/4/2023 at 3:50 AM, Kino said:

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.

I am seeing Venice 6k kits with all the licenses and the RAW recorder for 20k now. I just saw one go for 17k, another for 13k(with no licenses). Pretty wild considering a few months ago they were around 30k + 

[IronFilm]

7 hours ago, TomTheDP said:

I am seeing Venice 6k kits with all the licenses and the RAW recorder for 20k now. I just saw one go for 17k, another for 13k(with no licenses). Pretty wild considering a few months ago they were around 30k + 

The strike? People being forced to sell, so that they can keep on paying their mortgage, least they have to sell their house instead 

[TomTheDP]

43 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

The strike? People being forced to sell, so that they can keep on paying their mortgage, least they have to sell their house instead 

I think its the Burano honestly. Same sensor as the 80K Venice 2. Doesn't require the bulky raw recorder, weighs 3 pounds less. Why would you get the old 6k Venice when you can get the Burano for 25k. Now at 18k the original Venice is tempting, but for just a few more Ks you get brand new camera. 

The Burano doesn't have as many output or power output options though, but neither does the Alexa mini. 

[Jedi Master]

Wow! Thanks everyone for the interesting discussion. Very helpful.

Just some clarification of my intentions: I plan to use this camera for nature documentaries, strictly on an amateur, hobbyist basis. I'm not a professional and concerns like what others in my area are using and what clients want is not a consideration at all. I'm an electrical engineer during the week and go out on weekends to national and state parks and the coast to film and I cut it all together into short (15-30 minute) documentaries with background music and narration along with lots of Ken Burns effect shots of still images that I share with friends and family.

I've looked at other cameras like the BMD URSA Mini 12K, the FX6, the BS1H, the Komodo, and the Z CAMs and Kinefitity MAVOs, but found all of them wanting in certain ways. 

The URSA 12K looks great on paper, but digging around on the Internet revealed that it isn't as reliable as the cameras from the more mainstream manufacturers. I use Davinci Resolve Studio, so the BRAW produced by this camera would be a perfect match, but I just can't get the reports of unreliability out of my head. 

The Z CAM and Kinefinity also look nice on paper, but I'm hesitant to buy from relatively unknown Chinese companies, especially if they don't have a good support network in this country.

The Komodo is as expensive as an FX6, but requires a bunch of other outboard stuff to make it useful, driving the total price up to almost the C300/FX9 level. 

The BS1H is a cool camera. Small, featureful, and inexpensive enough that when adding a screen, cage, etc., that the price is still reasonable, and it's made by a company that's been around a long time with a good service network. This one is a serious contender.

The FX6 is tempting, and I might still seriously consider it.

The C300 Mark III and FX9, although larger than some of the others, and more expensive, just seem to me a better fit for what I do. The Canon has an optional PL mount that I'd probably get if I went that route, and the FX9 has a locking mount (although not PL). One thing that does concern me about the FX9, however, is its use of XQD cards, which are only made by a few manufacturers (Sony, Nikon, and maybe one other) and are only available in capacities up to 240GB. The CFexpress Type B cards used by the Canon are available from many more vendors in sizes up to 4TB, and cheaper to boot.

I don't need autofocus and plan to use cine lenses with whatever I get. My pace is slow and relaxing and I'm never in a hurry. After a day out in the field, with lunch breaks, I usually come home with 30-45 minutes of footage.

I'm not too concerned about Canon and/or Sony releasing new models soon.  I've given up on the waiting game as otherwise I'd be waiting forever the the next, latest and greatest thing, and I'm not getting any younger!

[eatstoomuchjam]

Given some of the cameras that you considered, you might also want to look at the Panasonic S5II or S5IIx.  Use them with Video Assist 12G and you'll have really nice braw.

FWIW, I've been a Z Cam user for some years and I've owned a number of their cameras (and sold some).  They've been rock solid and if you're in the US, they have vaguely decent local service through a partner.  Also able to do braw with Video Assist 12G - and good enough to be used on the new Mission Impossible series (obviously not as the "a" camera).

Really, basically every camera that you listed is decent/fine and is going to be more than enough for whatever nature documentary stuff you want to shoot.  If you want wildlife, you might also take a stronger look at the Canon C70.  It has bizarrely good DR and S35 will give all your lenses a little extra reach.

There really aren't any/many "wrong" choices in the cameras you're considering or have considered.  At some point, you should rent some top contenders or go to like a B&H or similar and put hands on them.  Then just choose one and go shoot.  🙂

[TomTheDP]

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. 

[Kino]

On 11/5/2023 at 5:07 PM, TomTheDP said:

I think its the Burano honestly. Same sensor as the 80K Venice 2. Doesn't require the bulky raw recorder, weighs 3 pounds less. Why would you get the old 6k Venice when you can get the Burano for 25k. Now at 18k the original Venice is tempting, but for just a few more Ks you get brand new camera. 

The Burano doesn't have as many output or power output options though, but neither does the Alexa mini. 

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.

[IronFilm]

8 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

Just some clarification of my intentions: I plan to use this camera for nature documentaries, strictly on an amateur, hobbyist basis. I'm not a professional and concerns like what others in my area are using and what clients want is not a consideration at all. I'm an electrical engineer during the week and go out on weekends to national and state parks and the coast to film and I cut it all together into short (15-30 minute) documentaries with background music and narration along with lots of Ken Burns effect shots of still images that I share with friends and family.

Interesting.... "nature documentaries" is a bit vague, but I assume you don't need AF from your other comments. 

I strongly feel that something along the lines of a BMD Pocket 4K (or perhaps one of the ZCam E2 series), or the latest Blackmagic Design Cinema Camera 6K (with the Lecia L mount) or Panasonic S5mk2 (also L mount) would be the best pick for you. (or something closely similar to these options, perhaps the Sigma fp camera, or the Kinefinity MAVO)

This is the latest BMD that just came out:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1787634-REG/blackmagic_design_cinema_camera_6k.html

While even the likes of the little older P4K would still be an extremely good choice, as the Pocket 4K with a pair of DZOFilm zooms would be an ultra compact and very high quality setup, that you could easily take hiking far into the woods. 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507681-REG/dzoptics_dzo_6226611_13_bundle_10_24mm_20_70mm_t2_9.html 

I wouldn't worry at all about the reliability of BMD, as you're not having a multi million dollar production riding on your shoulders. The concerns of professionals are not the same as yours. You can tolerate the odds of the 0.01% happening. 

Likewise I wouldn't worry about XQD cards existing or not, as the most popular of all popular cameras use them! XQD cards are not going away anywhere. 

[eatstoomuchjam]

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

perhaps the Sigma fp camera

I have the fp and the fp-l and based on the given description, it's definitely not what he wants (I'll also probably be selling one or both of mine soon-ish).  🙂

 

[Jedi Master]

11 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Interesting.... "nature documentaries" is a bit vague, but I assume you don't need AF from your other comments. 

No, I don't need AF. I also don't need high frame rates (I think the use of slow motion in nature videos is horribly cliché), or anything specifically designed to make fast-paced work easier (because my work is almost the opposite of fast-paced).

I also don't hike long distances with equipment. Mostly up to a mile or less from the car.

I mostly film wide, sweeping landscapes such as surf crashing on shore, or trees blowing in the wind, or fog creeping through valleys. I don't specifically target wildlife unless it's part of the overall scene.

[eatstoomuchjam]

With that description, basically every camera on the list will be good enough.  Go for whatever has the best DR (and maybe has some option for internal ND or ND-on-adapter/mount like Canon or Z Cam) and get nice glass.  

[markr041]

Nikon Z8 or Z9: 8K 60P 12bit RAW video - no need for an external recorder to shoot RAW. 8K for all the detail that landscapes need, and 60P to capture naturally those crashing surfs. RAW  (but you can also use ProRes HQ) for maximum flexibility in post. Nikon Z lenses are optically superb

[TomTheDP]

14 hours ago, Kino said:

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.

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

[Jedi Master]

How about a RED DRAGON-X? I can get one, including accessories, for a good price. Is it too much of an antique for my stated use case?

[IronFilm]

14 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

I have the fp and the fp-l and based on the given description, it's definitely not what he wants (I'll also probably be selling one or both of mine soon-ish).  🙂
 

They're pretty slow based nature documentaries that OP is filming. I can't see the sigma fp being a bad choice for it in that scenario? (probably not the optimal choice, but not a bad choice either)

5 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

How about a RED DRAGON-X? I can get one, including accessories, for a good price. Is it too much of an antique for my stated use case?

It's the DSMC1 body (which is what came out after the RED ONE, the  DSMC2 though has been out for quite a while). But it is the Dragon sensor, which is the "newest" you can find in a  DSMC1 body. 

Honestly, I'd just get yourself a Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6K instead of a Dragon or older sensor. 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1787634-REG/blackmagic_design_cinema_camera_6k.html 

If we were talking about say the Gemini sensor, then maybe you'd have a case for RED?  (I dunno, haven't seen any head to head shoot outs yet)  But any Gemini body is going to be waaaaaay more expensive. 

9 hours ago, Jedi Master said:

No, I don't need AF. I also don't need high frame rates (I think the use of slow motion in nature videos is horribly cliché), or anything specifically designed to make fast-paced work easier (because my work is almost the opposite of fast-paced).

I also don't hike long distances with equipment. Mostly up to a mile or less from the car.

I mostly film wide, sweeping landscapes such as surf crashing on shore, or trees blowing in the wind, or fog creeping through valleys. I don't specifically target wildlife unless it's part of the overall scene.

I am wondering if perhaps an old ARRI ALEXA Classic might make sense for you. 

Would be seriously pushing the max of what you could operate yourself, especially once you factor in the tripod / mattebox / lenses / batteries. 

But it sounds like you take things at a slow pace, and never go to far from the car. And I think you'd get personal enjoyment out of using "an ARRI". 

Otherwise, I'd be seriously strongly suggesting you go with one of the Blackmagics. 

URSA Mini 12K or any of the URSA Mini Pros (G1 or G2). 

Or the new "Pocket" (except they're not calling it a pocket...) 6K with the L Mount.

Or even the P4K (lots of great cine lenses for MFT) or P6K (you can get that in PL mount). 

I would not at all be worrying about reliability or ergonomic considerations that others might think about for BMD, they're completely irrelevant / overblown in your circumstances. 

Maybe I'd give a wild card consideration to the Z Cam series as well. Or a secondhand Panasonic S1H (or BS1H). Or Fujifilm X-H2s with braw (not really a fan of an external recorder, but fine for your usecases). 

But there is absolutely oodles of info out there about how to setup / rig / use / postproduction for URSA Mini and BMD Pocket cameras, so you can very easily jump in by yourself and get the most out of your camera. 

[IronFilm]

5 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

But there is absolutely oodles of info out there about how to setup / rig / use / postproduction for URSA Mini and BMD Pocket cameras, so you can very easily jump in by yourself and get the most out of your camera. 

So there is a strongly compelling case to go with those, because not only are they so very good but you'll be able to get the most out of them. Vs going down a wild and unusual path, unless that is what you want?? 

If you like exploring new territory to squeeze the most out of something unusually new and different? Then maybe even pick up a secondhand Kinefinity from the previous generation, or splurge on the latest Kinefinity MAVO S35. You'll definitely be unique and pushing the limits on that camera!

Heck, maybe go use whatever is the latest beta version of Magic Lantern with a Canon 5Dmk3 body??? 

Another thought, don't underestimate just how big and bulky a set of PL cine lenses can be when properly packaged up. (as you've mentioned before, you're buying PL lenses?)

It's pretty normal I'm on a shoot, and it is lens cases. (yes, plural! They don't fit all into one pelican case. And transporting even one of those pelican cases and the camera can be a major hassle to do on your own even just for one mile)

This is a benefit of going with mirrorless stills lenses, or even mirrorless cine lenses (such as the DZOFilm MFT cine zoom lenses I linked to earlier for the P4K), is even as a OMB you can still carry around a semi complete-ish set of lenses with you. 

 

[kye]

+1 for going with one of the Blackmagic cameras.

They're straight-forwards to use, record incredible images in RAW, lenses are available and practical for use, and you can concentrate on the creative aspects of the image.

Seriously - the best cameras look crap when not used creatively, and the best DoPs can make the most of whatever they have access to.  Optimising the equipment at the expense of the creative aspects is a ridiculous tradeoff.

The point of the whole thing is making good finished videos - start there and work backwards.  Don't start at the camera and work forwards...