Gerald Undone passes on Sony FX6, praises Canon

Samuel Berger · September 15

I don't know if you watch Gerald Undone but he pretty much passed on Sony FX6 and said that the Canon C500 Mark II was the best camera he ever used. Then he said the C300 Mark III was his new favorite camera. And after that, he said the Canon C70 was the one to buy. I tend to trust him because he doesn't care what camera companies will say (which is one reason he never gets invited to events). But he's not a DP. And his stance against camera companies manipulating review channels is why he won't get early access to the C80 or C400.

But yeah, his passing on the FX6 is very telling, since he uses mostly Sony, in spite of having a bone to pick with them as a company.

Tyler Purcell · September 16

In the C500MKII video, the DP who discusses the camera says it looks "gorgeous" and I'm looking at it, saying to myself, the camera looks completely lifeless and stale. This is the problem with so many modern cameras mixed with modern lenses. They are so damn sharp, the colors so steered towards white and pushing that envelope of what white actually is, that it's quite a lot of work in post to make a pleasing image out of them. This goes for nearly everyone.

I saw this precipitous shift going from the C300MKII to the R5 for instance. The C300MKII was more like the older 5D still cameras color science. It was a milkier image with a smoother over all look that was naturally warmer and responded slightly off to perfect color balance. When the R5 came out, I noticed right away how Canon basically started taking after Sony suddenly. All of those older imager traits were gone. I frankly hate the R5's color science, I can't say I'm in love with the modern Nikon imagers either.

All of that to say, none of these new cameras look anything like the BMD 12k Cine or of course, the Venice II or Alexa. I think this purposeful, so the higher end cameras have certain look, that the lower end cameras can't create? I don't get it, but for all their faults, Blackmagic never really had this issue.

Samuel Berger · September 18

On 9/16/2024 at 2:05 AM, Tyler Purcell said:

All of that to say, none of these new cameras look anything like the BMD 12k Cine

I guess I'll be a late adopter. My financial situation has changed enough that the C400 is no longer a possibility, so from the ones reviewed above, only the C70 is really worth it. Gerald's review makes it very clear that the only thing the C300 Mark III does that the C70 doesn't is shoot RAW, but he goes on to say he doesn't really like Canon RAW anyway.

It's a weird game that Canon is playing. The R5C has 8K RAW but the more expensive C70 doesn't? But the C70 has the better imager? What's going on? I'm not confident buying any of them now.

If I do end up choosing the Canon C300 Mark III it will be because they're really cheap used. But then again, the FX6 is only $5250 new. If only it were possible to get a usable image out of a Sony...

Jon O'Brien · September 18

Cameras like the FX6 and the new C400 don't have a viewfinder. They seem aimed at younger DPs or the type that grew up with DSLRs and small mirrorless and are most comfortable with that. You can probably sort an EVF solution out but it's obviously not a priority for these models.

There seems to be two main styles of cinematography: DPs who want to shoot hand held most of the time, staring at a monitor screen (not how I like to shoot unless I'm using a gimbal etc) and the more dedicated 'cinema' cameras that more traditional cinematographers might feel more comfortable with that are often used on a fluid head tripod. But those more traditional cinema cameras designs are now increasingly found only in the very high range cameras like from Arri. The latest, more mid-range pro cameras seem aimed more for the mirrorless sort of style of videography.

Or am I wrong? I don't get it 🙂

Why would a cinematographer not want a viewfinder?

Tyler Purcell · September 18

3 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

It's a weird game that Canon is playing. The R5C has 8K RAW but the more expensive C70 doesn't? But the C70 has the better imager? What's going on? I'm not confident buying any of them now.

Bro, this is how the Japanese brands work these days. They use to just release an updated version of the cameras, but everyone has to make every "type" of camera now. They can't just have "betacam cheap and betacam expensive". Na, they've gotta have a C70, C80, C100, C200, C300, C400, C500, C700, then update each of them on different schedules. So the newest one is some random variant. They're literally taking the same imager and compressing its capabilities down to save a few bux. But the C80 which hasn't come out yet, appears to be the same as the C400, minus a few functions that probably nobody really cares much about, for only $2k less. Like, what the F are Canon smoking? They release two cameras, with the same imager, make one 1/3rd the size and are like "ok which one do you want"? First off, flabbergasted they can't make an 8k video camera, which IS THE MARKET. I don't care what anyone says, 8k is the market. This whole screwing around with 6k nonsense, it's just horseshit in the long run. The market is 8k and the reason is so simple; being able to crop and reframe in post. You basically get 2x the focal length for a 4k output which means you can really do a lot of work in post, which saves a great deal of time on set. Shooting with the Red in 8k and now a bit with the Blackmagic 12k cameras in 8k, I'm sold on the entire concept.

Sony is just as bad too, they have overlapping camera lines all the way up and down the board. However, Sony purposely hinders their lower end cameras, literally purposely making them shit, so you buy the more expensive one. The Venice II has a great imager, wonderful color science and decent refresh. The Burano with the same damn imager, has a 18ms refresh. Are you fucking kidding me? Blackmagic's 12k Cine in 4x3 open gate full imager 8k (what you'd actually shoot normally) is only 6.7ms. The Alexa LF is around 5ms. So if Blackmagic can do it for $16k with a full kit, including storage, fucking Sony can do it, but they just don't give a shit. They purposely screwed the users, so they'd have to buy the Venice to get a decent imager refresh? 18ms is useless bro, 100% useless. Blackmagic knew it was such an issue with their 6k cameras, they literally designed an AI tool in Resolve to fix it, with a little check box in post. Bam, fixed instantly. It uses the gyro of the camera to cleverly figure out the camera movement and then re-builds the image based on that. So you can shoot open gate 6k full frame on a Pyxis or 6k FF pocket which is 25ms readout and with one checkbox, fixed. Sony on the A7SIII can do 8.7ms readout. That's the best of any full frame imager camera that isn't something specialized. So they stuck that imager into the FX6 and left the damn FX9 to languish with an older imager with a 22ms readout. Like what the F are you guys doing? Why didn't they just use that imager to make the FX9MKII? Are they going to stick the shitty refresh imager from the Burano into the FX9?

Yes, it's frustrating.

Samuel Berger · September 18

10 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

First off, flabbergasted they can't make an 8k video camera, which IS THE MARKET.

I agree with everything you said. However, for those random people browsing, I'll clarify that you meant no 8K cinema cameras. Because the R5, R5C and R5 Mark II all shoot 8K RAW.

Oddly enough the R3 also does 8K RAW with an external recorder.

I'm leaning toward waiting for the C80 after all this, but, my daughter is very keen on the FX6. We're kind of in business together. We'll see if we can agree on waiting till December.

Tyler Purcell · September 19

9 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

I agree with everything you said. However, for those random people browsing, I'll clarify that you meant no 8K cinema cameras. Because the R5, R5C and R5 Mark II all shoot 8K RAW.

Yea, tho I will admit our R5 does create some nice images in 8k, nothing like a BMD 12k Cine, Red or Venice however. Canon's raw color science is bullshit, it never works right.

9 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

Oddly enough the R3 also does 8K RAW with an external recorder.

Yep, but again more hardware.

9 hours ago, Samuel Berger said:

I'm leaning toward waiting for the C80 after all this, but, my daughter is very keen on the FX6. We're kind of in business together. We'll see if we can agree on waiting till December.

The C80 looks like a decent option, I was pretty confused when I saw that announcement. Canon literally undermining their own product launch (C400) with something that is smaller and lighter, but basically the same. Kinda blew my mind away.

Jon O'Brien · September 20

All pro video cameras are excellent but I did spend a fair bit of time a year ago comparing footage from the Sony FX9 and C300 Mark III cameras before deciding I prefer the look of the imagery you get from the Canon. In my humble opinion its footage looked slightly more filmic.

Sure you can change things in post but there are some subtle differences in my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

Edited September 20 by Jon O'Brien

Samuel Berger · September 20

4 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

In my humble opinion its footage looked slightly more filmic.

In my area, clients tend to request Sony. It's up to them if they want to spend the money. I'm pretty much set on a C80. But my daughter wants to go into business with an FX6. In the end I will probably get us both. They pay for themselves after renting to productions for a month or so. When she shoots, she charges the production $200 a day for the camera.

Samuel Berger · Thursday at 09:12 PM

On 9/20/2024 at 4:20 AM, Jon O'Brien said:

Sure you can change things in post but there are some subtle differences in my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

I guess I am about to find out. My new Canon C70 just arrived today. After watching all those videos I posted on the OP plus a bunch of other ones, I decided to wait a year on my C400 investment. My daughter will be getting the FX6 this Christmas.