Alpha FX3

An S1ii costs less than an FX3 and outperforms it. If I didn't have Sony glass I'd take that over an FX3 or FX30 any day (I'm still shooting Sony with over 1k paid gigs done on an a7siii/FX3 so not a Panasonic shill, just being objective)

Saying an fx3 let alone an fx30 delivers a better image than a ursa g2 is so far from reality. The Ursa has one of the best latitudes for a S35 sensor, build in ND's, RAW flexibility and overall a better user interface. The image quality outperforms both the fx3 and fx30 in lab tests. Media options

The FX3 has a lower MP sensor with larger pixels which reduces rolling shutter and can record in basically any framerate. The FX3's image will look better. Personally, I take Lumix cameras over Sony

Honestly the X-H2S is a great camera and in some ways has a better image/video specs than either Sony (open gate, 6K, ProRes or high data rate H265, great color). The biggest improvement you’ll notice is autofocus (Fuji AF is terrible) but the lenses are bigger and more expensive. If you do get a So

If you do want to shoot Sony and need to buy something now I'd get an A7V. More detailed image, better AF, better screen, better stabilization than FX3 for under $3000

I’ve been following the minutiae of CMOS sensor technology for the better part of 15 years now, and the dominance of Arri’s imagers really is a testament to their approach. The thing to keep in mind with Arri when considering the sensors is that they spare no expense. The first thing they do is a co

i shot northern lights with the A7s II and felt the same about that noise reduction. the FX3 and A7s III are better but still have some of that digital feel in shadows. for organic noise the Panasonic GH5S or S5 II actually give you a more filmic grain structure in low light. also look at the Nikon

I have an FX3, FX30, A7V and A7IV and I’d say go for the A7V. A7V has better AF better, better Ibis, is cheaper, sharper image, allows you to import viewing luts, better screen, allows smart AF while in clear image zoom. 8000 base ISO is a lot more practical then 12,800 and having to ND or stop down

Easy part dynamic range colour accuracy. Alexa's is s35 Vs fx3 is full frame so the fx3 has a shallower depth of field unless you stop the lens down to match the s35 Subjective part the arri has a very organic image Vs Sony's digital image. And noise pattern is more filmic on a Alexa Vs a Sony

As a person working with the Komodo og and an FX3 I totally feel you about the autofocus. Didn't had the chance to try the Dji focus pro, was it that bad? I honestly like the image from the Komodo way more than the Sony. But pragmatism...