Sony FX5 Hands-On Honest Review 1
Support ProVideo Coalition
Shop with

What Do You Think? Let Us Know.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
1 Comment
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Pete

Thanks for the honest review. Sony finally added internal RAW, and not just internal RAW, but a superior codec with 16-bit color and an EVF! I was an early adopter of the “NEX” cameras and shot with the A7 and FS100/700. They were fantastic when they came out, but when other brands started giving me internal RAW, I jumped ship. I’ve used other studios’ original Venice and FX3s with a Ninja, but that was all too clunky and/or expensive.

The 16-bit RAW from the FX3 was as good as anything I’ve used in the past five years, and now that they’re putting that internally, I’m considering trying Sony again. My only hang-up is the cost.

Thanks for mentioning the CFexpress Type A. I hate those stupid cards. They’re slower and far more expensive than CFexpress B, and everyone I know has a card wallet full of them, so why the hell is Sony still using them? I know CFexpress A has gotten faster, but it’s still half as fast as CFexpress B 4.0 and twice as expensive. Just because the X-OCN takes up less space doesn’t mean you should force your customers to pay $1,250 for an hour of media.

Literally every other camera I’m considering uses CFexpress B, which I already have enough of to shoot for days on end. So it’s not just the cost of buying CFexpress A cards; it’s also the money I’ve already invested in CFexpress B.

Also, it seems like Sony has become the go-to for “creators” who don’t need, understand, or use the true cinema features, so used versions of every Sony camera seem way too expensive to me.

You Might Also Like