It is amazing how much the image from cameras with the same matrix differs. I choose the second camera for FX-6 and I can’t decide between FX-3 and a7s3. If there were no difference in the colors of the fx series, then the choice would be much easier. Thank you for the video
I was pretty shocked as well. I think some simple adjustments in resolve would have them looking exact. I would have to say go FX3 over A7s3. Unless you really need a view finder. I actually find myself grabbing my FX3 more times than my FX6
@@codylarosa "find myself grabbing my FX3 more times than my FX6" most likely bc it's smaller. I had the ursa 12k and the pocket 6k pro, and I was grabbing the 6k pro more
Skin tone on the FX6 looks way better but seems like there is more of a green tint on the FX3 footage. If you correct for that how would the FX3 compare, is it still yellower in the skin tones? Asking as FX3 user curious about how the FX6 would benefit me for better skin colors out of camera. The Sony lenses are for sure sharper but maybe too sharp, the Tamrons have a look I almost prefer for video,
I’ll have to do a video where I try to match them exactly, I’d say if it’s purely image that’s making you want to get an fx6 it’s not worth it over the fx3.
@@codylarosa 24-70 gm. ii version i tryed but not like real crazy test just with normal look fx3 is better. also you can see when search on youtube fx3 and a7siii there is realy diffirient
????? Bro it's the same sensor, LITERALLY! You're legit making yourself believe there's a difference to justify your want. If you want the fx3 then that's all that matters. But there is no difference.
It's amazing how many people will swear up and down they see a difference. The A7siii, FX3, FX6 all have the same sensor. But because Sony makes you pay more for one over the other, or because one body has cinema on it they will swear they see a difference. Prime example skin tones. The fx6 leans a little more on the magenta side. You're telling me you'd rather pay $6000 because you can't adjust your magenta in post??? More money does not equal better quality
There is most definitely a difference, however it could be easily matched like you said. I’d say buying the fx6 just to get a better image doesn’t justify the cost. And even the argument of SDI, internal/ automatic ND, time code etc.. that’s all subjective if it’s worth that much more for you to have those things. But I will say people will always pay for convenience in the end of the day.
It's not just about the sensor. The two cameras have different processors and codecs which affect the image (color, sat, sharpness, noise) even within the same camera. All you have to do is watch this video to see that there is in fact a difference. Whether that, among other practical factors, justifies the cost difference is up to you.
It is amazing how much the image from cameras with the same matrix differs. I choose the second camera for FX-6 and I can’t decide between FX-3 and a7s3. If there were no difference in the colors of the fx series, then the choice would be much easier.
Thank you for the video
I was pretty shocked as well. I think some simple adjustments in resolve would have them looking exact. I would have to say go FX3 over A7s3. Unless you really need a view finder. I actually find myself grabbing my FX3 more times than my FX6
@@codylarosa "find myself grabbing my FX3 more times than my FX6" most likely bc it's smaller. I had the ursa 12k and the pocket 6k pro, and I was grabbing the 6k pro more
Skin tone on the FX6 looks way better but seems like there is more of a green tint on the FX3 footage. If you correct for that how would the FX3 compare, is it still yellower in the skin tones? Asking as FX3 user curious about how the FX6 would benefit me for better skin colors out of camera.
The Sony lenses are for sure sharper but maybe too sharp, the Tamrons have a look I almost prefer for video,
I’ll have to do a video where I try to match them exactly, I’d say if it’s purely image that’s making you want to get an fx6 it’s not worth it over the fx3.
I own both and I can tell right away which one is which. Fx6 skin tones look way better but they can both made to match with a little editing
Agreed! I like the FX6 image the best
i have a7siii and i rented fx3 for one jop. Fx3 sharper and colors are much more better. i am planning to buy.
Actually have not heard anyone say they see a difference in FX3 vs A7Siii footage. Did you use the same lens on both?
@@codylarosa 24-70 gm. ii version i tryed but not like real crazy test just with normal look fx3 is better. also you can see when search on youtube fx3 and a7siii there is realy diffirient
????? Bro it's the same sensor, LITERALLY! You're legit making yourself believe there's a difference to justify your want. If you want the fx3 then that's all that matters. But there is no difference.
It's amazing how many people will swear up and down they see a difference. The A7siii, FX3, FX6 all have the same sensor. But because Sony makes you pay more for one over the other, or because one body has cinema on it they will swear they see a difference. Prime example skin tones. The fx6 leans a little more on the magenta side. You're telling me you'd rather pay $6000 because you can't adjust your magenta in post??? More money does not equal better quality
There is most definitely a difference, however it could be easily matched like you said. I’d say buying the fx6 just to get a better image doesn’t justify the cost. And even the argument of SDI, internal/ automatic ND, time code etc.. that’s all subjective if it’s worth that much more for you to have those things. But I will say people will always pay for convenience in the end of the day.
It's not just about the sensor. The two cameras have different processors and codecs which affect the image (color, sat, sharpness, noise) even within the same camera. All you have to do is watch this video to see that there is in fact a difference. Whether that, among other practical factors, justifies the cost difference is up to you.