Dude get the fx3, if each camera is comparable in specs then is there really a reason to consider an alternative.
If you really want a deeper dive into why camera systems now are so good that it doesn’t really matter what you shoot on as long as you understand the capabilities of the sensor, the go to Steve Yedlin’s website and look up his “on color science” demo.
Basically the biggest take away is that cameras that shoot high bit depth and resolution have gotten so good that with the right post color workflow you can make them look identical to whatever “look” you want to achieve. For example shooting 16-bit raw gives you so much information that a DP with the right tools and understanding of the the sensors capabilities can capture a raw image that lends itself to a massive amount of manipulation without showing signs of banding or artifacts, and if your look is based on let’s say film, then you can make it look identical if you have a reference of that look. This does involve a good amount of testing and trial and error but at this point you can find these results and even a few people that have created luts based on this same method (although I’d never advise to buy Lut packs because most of the time these are just basic luts you can create on your own if you have the time and know how)
Check out this thread. There is a lot in it from u/madsmadalin that applies to the cameras you are considering:
r/bmpcc Talk me into keeping BM6KFF
https://www.reddit.com/r/bmpcc/comments/1dgz91h/talk_me_into_keeping_bm6kff/
I would note, despite the praise here as far as I've seen a lot of users don't actually like Blackmagic's color science? I've seen vastly more praise for, in order: Arri (duh) RED (2nd, 2nd!) Canon (Yay!) Panasonic, etc. with many placing Blackmagic down below even Sony's newer color science. I don't know for certain but I wouldn't take one persons post for certain either.
There's no fix for rolling shutter really, it only matters if you're going to be shooting fast subjects/want a handheld look (global shutter can make people not feel sick with handheld, which is neat), but "you can just get the gryo data" is not a cure for that.
The GH7 and Fujifilm X-H2S are good considerations as well, depending on your requirements. The GH7 offers RAW recording and micro 4/3rds has a lot of very good, and inexpensive, options for lenses. The X-H2S doesn't have the lens options, but will give you nigh as much image quality as either the FX3 or S5 IIX outside shooting in low light, has better format options than the FX3 and has as little rolling shutter if you're doing 4k oversampled.
So I'd consider what it is you're after, more than just "image quality". Dynamic range, recording formats, lens choice, rolling shutter, there's a lot you could consider, I hope this helps.
The original BMPCC HD camera was regarded as the only camera that looks like ARRI. The newer ones are also so good. Depends what Canon or Sony you are talking about. FX30 and FX3 come close to BMPCC6K/BMCC6K but not quite there yet. There’s lots of weird things going on with these Sony h265 footage. Yes, the FX3 was used on The Creator. But because they needed something with amazing low light capabilities that can be used while saving on budget.
If you value color science and you have used all these cameras you are talking about, you will know that order you made makes no sense.
And you can totally fix the rolling shutter in post using the gyro data. It works amazingly well.
Dynamic range is pretty much the same across all of them nowdays.
Canon colors are trash, the only company that manages to be worse is Nikon. But Arri, Sony, RED, Blackmagic, Panasonic and Fujifilm are all light-years ahead of Canon and Nikon
Actually shooting log, every company is fine. I had the easiest time with bm and red to mix them with arri, but Sony, canon and even Nikon were doing fine also. (Nikon uses Sony sensors btw and usually get the skin tones a bit nicer than Sony)
Bro, if you're gonna go full manual, take a look at the H2s by FUJIFILM. The internal codecs are insane and it's 1000 cheaper than the fx3. Color profile beats Sony's, in my opinion. I love this camera and I can list tons of pros and cons. Let me know if you want some info.
Sony is better with lens selection and af. Many claim that requires more work in post production
Sonik supports anamorphic and open gate, has better ibis but worse has rolling shutter.
Fx3, a7sIII and fx6 have the same sensor. If you are going to need to operate on the shoulder, the fx3 and the a7sIII, being so small, they will destabilize you if you put large optics on it. I would go for black magic. Cheaper and directly you have a procamera.
Dude get the fx3, if each camera is comparable in specs then is there really a reason to consider an alternative. If you really want a deeper dive into why camera systems now are so good that it doesn’t really matter what you shoot on as long as you understand the capabilities of the sensor, the go to Steve Yedlin’s website and look up his “on color science” demo. Basically the biggest take away is that cameras that shoot high bit depth and resolution have gotten so good that with the right post color workflow you can make them look identical to whatever “look” you want to achieve. For example shooting 16-bit raw gives you so much information that a DP with the right tools and understanding of the the sensors capabilities can capture a raw image that lends itself to a massive amount of manipulation without showing signs of banding or artifacts, and if your look is based on let’s say film, then you can make it look identical if you have a reference of that look. This does involve a good amount of testing and trial and error but at this point you can find these results and even a few people that have created luts based on this same method (although I’d never advise to buy Lut packs because most of the time these are just basic luts you can create on your own if you have the time and know how)
Thanks, this was really helpful.
Check out this thread. There is a lot in it from u/madsmadalin that applies to the cameras you are considering: r/bmpcc Talk me into keeping BM6KFF https://www.reddit.com/r/bmpcc/comments/1dgz91h/talk_me_into_keeping_bm6kff/
🙌🙌
I would note, despite the praise here as far as I've seen a lot of users don't actually like Blackmagic's color science? I've seen vastly more praise for, in order: Arri (duh) RED (2nd, 2nd!) Canon (Yay!) Panasonic, etc. with many placing Blackmagic down below even Sony's newer color science. I don't know for certain but I wouldn't take one persons post for certain either. There's no fix for rolling shutter really, it only matters if you're going to be shooting fast subjects/want a handheld look (global shutter can make people not feel sick with handheld, which is neat), but "you can just get the gryo data" is not a cure for that. The GH7 and Fujifilm X-H2S are good considerations as well, depending on your requirements. The GH7 offers RAW recording and micro 4/3rds has a lot of very good, and inexpensive, options for lenses. The X-H2S doesn't have the lens options, but will give you nigh as much image quality as either the FX3 or S5 IIX outside shooting in low light, has better format options than the FX3 and has as little rolling shutter if you're doing 4k oversampled. So I'd consider what it is you're after, more than just "image quality". Dynamic range, recording formats, lens choice, rolling shutter, there's a lot you could consider, I hope this helps.
Blackmagic is consistently cited and rated as one of the best color sciences.
The original BMPCC HD camera was regarded as the only camera that looks like ARRI. The newer ones are also so good. Depends what Canon or Sony you are talking about. FX30 and FX3 come close to BMPCC6K/BMCC6K but not quite there yet. There’s lots of weird things going on with these Sony h265 footage. Yes, the FX3 was used on The Creator. But because they needed something with amazing low light capabilities that can be used while saving on budget. If you value color science and you have used all these cameras you are talking about, you will know that order you made makes no sense. And you can totally fix the rolling shutter in post using the gyro data. It works amazingly well. Dynamic range is pretty much the same across all of them nowdays.
Canon colors are trash, the only company that manages to be worse is Nikon. But Arri, Sony, RED, Blackmagic, Panasonic and Fujifilm are all light-years ahead of Canon and Nikon
Actually shooting log, every company is fine. I had the easiest time with bm and red to mix them with arri, but Sony, canon and even Nikon were doing fine also. (Nikon uses Sony sensors btw and usually get the skin tones a bit nicer than Sony)
What features do you value?
Get FX3. All these cameras are very similar.
They've sold tons of FX3s and a7Siiis and used units aren't easy to find, I think there must be a reason.
Bro, if you're gonna go full manual, take a look at the H2s by FUJIFILM. The internal codecs are insane and it's 1000 cheaper than the fx3. Color profile beats Sony's, in my opinion. I love this camera and I can list tons of pros and cons. Let me know if you want some info.
Sony is better with lens selection and af. Many claim that requires more work in post production Sonik supports anamorphic and open gate, has better ibis but worse has rolling shutter.
Fx3, a7sIII and fx6 have the same sensor. If you are going to need to operate on the shoulder, the fx3 and the a7sIII, being so small, they will destabilize you if you put large optics on it. I would go for black magic. Cheaper and directly you have a procamera.
Did you know they shot the creator on fx3?