This is a series on Building the Baby FX9 using the Sony A7S Mark III. We will identify the capabilities we want from the FX9 and then address each shortcoming of that capability in the Sony A7S Mark III. We will keep track of the overall costs, size, weight, and capability as we go with the main goal being to build a smaller, less expensive package, that in some cases is even more capable than the big brother FX9. Each article in this series will then address as many of the short comings of the A7S Mark III, so that we can get as much of the FX9's capabilities in our Baby FX9 buildout as possible.
So, you want to add a Sony FX9 to your production company. Maybe it is a second one or your first one and you either don't have the extra dollars right now and/or would like something a little smaller. With Sony's release of the A7S Mark III, I believe we make a solution that is under half of the cost, weight, and size, yet will provide more versatility overall.
In this article, let's first dive into the following:
What capabilities would we want from the Sony FX9
What do the FX9 and A7S Mark III have in common
What does the FX9 have that the A7S Mark III doen't have
What does the A7S Mark III have that the FX9 doesn't have
Final thoughts
The Sony FX9 buildout details we will base the capabilities analysis on
$10,998.00 - Sony FX9 Body Only (8.8 pounds: body, viewfinder, eyepiece, grip remote control, bp-u100 battery, xqd memory, handle, mic holder)
$2,498.00 - Sony XDCA-FX9 Extension Unit (2.2 pounds)
$1,499.00 - Atomos Shogun 7 HDR Pro/Cinema Recorder (3.225 pounds)
$280.00 - Atomos UltraSync ONE
$249.98 - Qty 2 Sony G XQD 64GB memory
$450.00 - Sony BP-U100 97Wh battery
TOTALS - $15,974.98 and 14.225 pounds **NOTE** I'm excluding a lens, because they use the same lenses
What do the FX9 and A7 Mark III have in common?
15 stops of Dynamic Range
4K 10bit 4:2:2 QFHD
* 16bit RAW output
4K/60 fps from full sensor read out
Recording modes with All Intra 10bit 4:2:2 and Long Gop
Advanced stabilization using gyroscope data
** Advanced fast AF with touch controls and eye tracking
Customizable AF settings for transition speed and subject shift sensitivity
Dual recording with proxy as well as output at the same time
Greater than 120fps in HD mode
Multi-Interface shoe
Full size HDMI
Internal 5Ghz and 2.4Ghz WIFI and FTP as well as tethering
customizable picture profiles with S-Log2, S-Log3 and HLG Gammas
** Touch menu system * well... technically on the FX9 ONLY after another $2,498 ** for FX9 with 2.0 firmware
What does the FX9 have that the A7S Mark III does not have? (these will also be the individual posts for this blog series)
4 channel audio input and recording (LPCM 4ch 48kHz 24bits)
12G-SDI and 16bit RAW output
Can use imported LUT’s
4K DCI 4096 x 2160
Viewfinder with eyepiece
GenLock IN/REF OUT (switchable)
Larger main battery that can power accessories
Dual base ISO (800 / 4000)
Internal variable ND filters
S-Cinetone color science
Shoulder style shooting and grip remote control
6K sensor used to provide high quality down-sampled 4K
Many externalized buttons, knobs, controls
4.41 pounds body only (10.58 pounds ready to shoot)
What does the A7S Mark III have that the FX9 does not have?
4K 10bit 4:2:2 at 120fps
16bit RAW output without adding a $2,498 component that weighs another 2.2 pounds
MUCH larger pixel pitch at 8.35 microns (35.6mm / 4,260 pixels) vs 5.83 microns (1.38" or 35.052mm / 6,008 pixels) for the FX9
240fps in HD (FX9 with Firmware 2.0 can do upto 180 though)
9 million dot EVF (vs 2,760,000 of the FX9)
Much less cost at #3,498 for the body (vs $10,998 for the FX9 body)
Much less size for the body at 5.13" x 3.87" x 3.25" (JUST the FX9 body is 5.75" x 5.61" x 9.02")
Much less weight for the body with gear that comes with "body only" (FX9 is 7.9 lbs with everything that comes in the "body only" box)
The AF system has 759 selectable phase-detection points and 92% of the imaging area covered (vs 561 phase detection points and 94% horiz on the FX9)
USB 3.2 Type-C for not only fast transfers at 5Gbps, but also PD charging
Well, now that we have all of the specs and capabilities out of the way, we can concentrate on addressing each of the shortcomings and see what if we can resolve each of them on the smaller mirrorless body of the A7S Mark III. We won't be able to address them all, but I am confident we will tackle a good majority of them and still come in under half the cost, weight, and size of the FX9.
Comments