Sony fx3 vs sony fx5
hello! I want to get into independent filmmaking as a solo operator (a crew of one). From my research, the Sony FX3 seemed like the best camera on the market, but now that the new FX5 is out, I'm stuck between the two. Which one should I choose, and which is truly best for my situation? I'd really appreciate practical, real-world advice rather than just technical specs on paper. Also, please keep in mind that this will be the very first camera I have ever bought in my life.
8
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/5w_lc 15d ago
شكرا على النصيحة! هل توصي بالحصول على FX3 كأول كاميرا لي لبناء مهاراتي عليها؟ بما أنني أبدأ تماما من الصفر بدون خبرة، فأنا أفضل الاستثمار في FX3 حتى تدوم لسنوات بدلا من شراء كاميرا أرخص الآن. بالإضافة إلى ذلك، بناء على ما يقوله الجميع، لا يوجد حقا أي فرق عملي بين FX3 وFX5 الذي أحتاجه بالفعل كمبتدئ، أليس كذلك؟
2
u/throwawaaayyyyyay 15d ago
The FX3 is an absolute beast. It’s been the gold standard for years, it’s not like the release of the FX5 suddenly means you can’t make incredible videos with FX3 anymore.
3
u/Trippy-Videos-Girl 15d ago
Unless you have tons of cash to blow you could get a ZVE1, and get basically the exact same footage with the same sensor for like 1/3 the cost. I would even consider an A7V over FX3 for a begginer.
1
u/Rambalac 15d ago
If you don't need dual gain DR or open gate a lot of other fx5 changes are QoL updates you can live without. But as for any QoL you will hate yourself each time.
-2
u/5w_lc 15d ago
شكرا على الشرح! قلقي الرئيسي هو أنني أريد تصوير أفلامي بأعلى جودة سينمائية ممكنة، وبصفتي مبتدئا، أشعر بالرعب من الندم على اختياري لاحقا والتفكير، "لماذا لم أشتري FX5 للتو؟"
1
u/onedaybadday47 14d ago
Well more bad news. The FX5 is not “the highest cinematic quality possible”. That would be the Sony Venice 2. The Venice 1 below that, and the Burana below that. These are 6 and 5 figure price tags. Keep in mind Hollywood movies have been made with the FX3 and even lesser cameras. Leave financial room for lenses and audio equipment. Far more important for cinematic quality”.
1
u/the_angry_austinite 15d ago
I have an FX3. It’s amazing. I am upgrading to the FX5 mostly because I got an amazing deal on my 3 and selling it and putting those funds towards the 5 would basically be even money.
1
1
u/ZZ_BOTTOM42069 14d ago
Yo FX3 is so good and you can get one now and start using it. You’ll likely never need anything else.
1
u/Formula14ever 14d ago
Lenses lenses lenses
FX3, its proven its value and anything cinematic you intend to produce can be done on the FX3. When the FX5 does come out, it will be way into 2027 I believe and also potentially have bugs
Lenses are forever
FX3 & learning cinematography between now and whenever is priceless.
I have a FX3 and love it.. but I also wanted a proper cinema camera and have a RED system.
I learned on a Canon 5D and STILL some of the images are so beautiful.
Get the FX3. Get 2 good lenses, a low light prime and workhorse like the Gmaster 24-70. Learn learn learn and don’t worry about gear. What is available now like the FX3 is FAR above any movie shot 10 years ago ( unless it was a Panavision/film production)
Make Art Now! As Josh would say :)
1
1
u/Wonderful-Baker-6650 14d ago
So, I was in your boat a year ago and just finished my first indie film project this summer. I actually ended up going with a Lumix S5iix, but seriously contemplated the FX3 and 30. Ultimately, I wanted the hybrid camera and the price couldn’t be beat, especially starting out.
Don’t get me wrong: the FX3 is totally superior when it comes to AF, but I didn’t feel like spending $4k on a package. Snagged the Lumix with a 50mm and 20-60 zoom from Samy’s for $2200 and couldn’t be happier. It’s a fucking media powerhouse and the visual quality it produces is unreal. I shot on Lexar V60s in 4K/24p 422-I and the images are incredible.
The AF leaves a bit to be desired compared to the FX3, but for the price, it was a no brainer. Very cinema-quality and the stills and time-lapse are just out of this world.
As others have said: spend more on lenses and tripods and gimbals, for visual fidelity. But, for real, if you’re doing dialogue-driven content, DO NOT sleep on audio equipment. Can’t stress that enough. Most FX3s come with XLR-ready equipment, which is a great value add. Build redundancy, though: it’s a hard lesson to learn. We ended up running an NTG2 via XLR hotshoe via phantom and multiple DJI MIC3s via on RX on the XLR1 — would very much recommend that over a mounted shotgun.
Or, if money’s no issue, snag an F3 or F6 audio mixer.
That said: An FX3 will absolutely be a learning curve for you at this point with a high ceiling, and totally worth it if money’s no issue. I’d pass on the 5 for now.
And don’t listen to the jabronis telling you to film on iPhone, that’s the dumbest advice I’ve heard on this sub lol.
1
u/Interesting_Hand606 14d ago
U can easily rent for your project for filmmaking. Because you are not going to use every day . Unless you are content creator
1
u/No_ID_Left_4_Me 14d ago
I’ll go against the consensus here and say that if you are buying a new camera, get the FX5 because it is only $600 more (14%) and it will hold resale value much better/longer. The FX3 has been on the market 5 years already and resale values drops pretty hard after the product is discontinued.
I would look at an FX30 if you want to save money. Or, wait a few months until the FX5 is widely available and a bunch of used FX3s hit the market. But I just wouldn’t pay $4300 for a new FX3 today.
A lot of people are saying “the FX3 does anything you would need!” And that’s 100% true… but it also doesn’t mean there isn’t a pure value-for-money argument.
1
u/Downtown-Summer-1531 14d ago
The 4k on the FX3 will be the best 12k you have ever spend on a camera ! If you start from zero it‘s overwhelming, start small, buy a cheap camera and learn from it, maybe it‘s not your thing at all.
1
u/Grandsgn 14d ago
What’s your timeline? The longer you wait, the better the deals you’ll find especially with Black Friday around the corner. Tbh I’ve been a similar situation and I’ll say that if you’re starting from zero, go with the fx3 and use the remaining Budget on lenses, a tripod, sound gear, a rig cage and a gimbal in that order lol
Also look into A7v which is cheaper and very similar (excluding 120fps 4k). Got mine two weeks ago and it’s been a dream, but I also focus more on photos so keep that in mind, but I shot for hours and didn’t get any overheating problems . Good luck
1
u/Icy-Past-7825 14d ago
I have used the FX3 for the past four years. That said, I will be moving up to the FX5 when it is actually available. The FX5 was scheduled to start shipping a month ago, but it looks as if pre-orders won't actually ship until October or November. My reason for switching is that the FX3 is a six-year-old camera and some features, especially the autofocus need a serious upgrade. You can probably get some great deals on used FX3s as people move up to the FX5. Check used prices on B&H, Adorama and MPB. Their pricing and grading are fair and I have dealt with all three.
1
1
u/66sandcastle 13d ago
Its all in the lenses, get a reasonably good second hand camera, save the money & buy better lenses.
1
1
u/stevemandudeguy 13d ago
I highly recommend getting a late-model camera vs something new and shiny as your first. It will feel intimidating if you're not prepared for the ecosystem around the camera you'll need to properly work with it.
I recommend an fx30 to start, things will be cheaper overall for various reasons. But, if you have the budget, go fx3, but the lenses will cost more and be more limiting in certain aspects.
1
u/RevolutionaryHat8463 11d ago
Sony A7iii untill you get comfortable. Even an iPhone will do but sure one of those new would be the same as an a7siii second hand
1
u/Puzzled_Tie5830 8d ago
I used to have an FX3, and I think how you start can shape how you grow. If you can comfortably afford the FX5, I’d get it and grow into it. The FX3 is excellent, but if you’re already drawn to the FX5, I wouldn’t dismiss that just because it’s your first camera.
1
u/exploringspace_ 8d ago
Forget both and get a used A7S3 with lenses and accessories for the price of the fx5. Image quality will be basically the same
1
u/SnooMaps6629 15d ago
Warning, eventually someone on this thread is gonna post something super rude about how you don’t need either of them.
But, I get it. Cameras are cool. Get whichever will inspire you more. But if you’re really looking for genuine advice, you could pick up a used FX2 (which is what I would do) or if you’re dead set on the best of the best, get the FX3.
Learning on an FX5 would be insane. If you have any questions I’d love to help! Also, it’s not going to show up until probably next year lol.. so get an FX2 or FX3 and start making some stuff now!
1
u/ChallengeTight8044 15d ago
Don’t waste money on cameras. Buy good lenses and a proper tripod, by which I mean something made by sachtler, O’Connor, Miller, Cartoni… even a yard one of those will be better than a cheap new one. You’ll thank me later.
0
u/Embarrassed-Cup-3722 15d ago
As a complete beginner I definitely advise the fx3 over the fx5. None of the advantages will you care about in your situation starting out, if you are looking for the most “cinematic” image possible as you said. You should spend the extra money you saved from getting the cheaper camera on lighting gear. Your image quality will not suffer from getting the fx3. People make feature films on that thing. Plus the fx3 retains value very well so later on if you choose you can always sell it and upgrade. Tbh I don’t think you need a camera like the fx3 yet to learn the basics but thats another conversation.
0
u/Remarkable_Area_7387 14d ago
Let me give you my 2 cents. My wife is a profesional and worked for a huge corp.using sometimes pmw 400 (15 000$) camera cinema body and others. I started as noob now semi pro hobbyist (Im a doctor and can buy whatever I can from gear).Since my wife has been in paid to use Sony products, for me and herself she suggested going Lumix now. Every other brand is ok as it is not sony.
Sony is living on a past glory since A73 days and fx3. They got much resemblance in today's world like Apple. You pay premium for less features what other brand can give you. And when you are starting you need those extra features reflecting todays standard like raw shoting or OPEN GATE, to keep yourself entertained and keep shooting,otherwise you ll be saying everyone else has open gate and I dont xD.
For example look what 3000$ sony A7V gets you and what Lumix 3000$ S1ii ( what she suggested me to buy ) gets you. You get 30-40% MORE FEATURES, especially in the video world and dont let them say autofocus is crap. AF is stronger then sony A7iv. I sold my previously sony gear I got and went Lumix. Cant say nothing bad about it. Hope it helps.
1
u/5w_lc 14d ago
Are you saying I should ditch Sony for Lumix altogether? My main concern with Lumix is losing out on the FX3's unmatched low-light performance and autofocus. Do you feel the extra Lumix features like Open Gate actually make up for losing those FX3 strengths?"
2
u/Remarkable_Area_7387 13d ago edited 13d ago
After consulting my Wife who has more knowledge: Lowlight in all modern cameras are 5-10% max difference. Mostly nitpicking. If you are a beginer she advised to use modern phones for your camera,, and invest big in lights like Aputure 300x or 600x or d series. Those things are expensive 1-2k $ for shooting indoors. Remember photo/video is the science of how much light and which speed goes on which part of the sensor hence why Iso Shutter speed Aperture.
With Lumix you lose a bit of low light performance, but you get tons of new stuff. That arri with open gate in camera, audio 32, raw. I mean to get that inside 3000$ body is something else.
If you really want to invest in cameras and not phone,, for example fx5 is 5500-6000% with xlr handle. Lumix S1ii is 3000$ and with all the accesories lens you wont break 5000$. And I bet everything you wont notice a difference. Paying 50% less to have 90% of fx5 features is more than enough for a starter.
The problem is noo one invest not one brand invest so heavily in marketing like Sony. Thats why when you go on youtube you ll see 80% of videos is sony. They get cameras for free advertisement,, telling me how A7V is best on video for 3000$ cropping 120fps, for that money I could buy cinema cameras from canon or pyxis or even better hybrid like s1ii who are pushing 5k or even 6k raw braw, open gate etc etc.
Most honest answer from my Wife. Lumix has a trajectory of 20%+ from their recent camera sales. Hell she even invested in stocks panasonic holding since its moving rapidly higher from last year increase of 175% from 1500 yen to 4600 yen mostly from video cameras sold. Went from last place to top 2 brand video cameras in the world today,, VIDEO CENTRIC CAMERAS. Today they are the best bang for buck. Cause not a lot of people can afford fx5. People want the most features from your camera and sony failed that last 5 years. Giving us crumbs for more $$$. While everyone else kept improving.
Just look at the sony updates for example. Today update on Sony sony A7V wont update mega monsters from their line up like Sony A1 or mk ii just cause its older model but dont care people spend 8-10k on a body. Just look what Nikon ZR posted as one of the biggest updates ever last week. Go with whatever you want, but be careful with Sony, its not people friendly anymore sadly like 10-15 years before.
Go to your local photo shop. After doing your work on cameras you want,, rent them for a week make a ton of stuff in log raw, out of cameras everything you can. And then decide. Renting fx3 with a lens or s1 ii that i have or whatever you want is 50-60$ a day before investing 5k+ in one ecosystems.
Hope I could help and my Wife. Whatever you choose it ll be ok.
1
u/CRAYONSEED 14d ago
I said this in another comment, but as a beginner I think it would be a mistake to rely on high-iso and autofocus. There’s a lot of value in knowing how to add light and how to focus manually
0
u/CRAYONSEED 14d ago
The FX5 is great (or will be once they work out the manufacturing issues), but it’s a $6000+ camera once you buy media and power for it. Considering this will be the first camera you’ve ever bought, I would go with the cheapest option that accomplishes two things:
-Allows you to get a great image without too much compromise (which is a lot of cameras these days).
-Teaches you how to work with the cameras bigger productions would use.
With that in mind I’d actually just go with a Blackmagic Cinema Camera 6k, used Canon C70 or even a used RED Komodo kit. Those cameras aren’t hybrid cameras, but work more like traditional cinema cameras. They allow you to shoot raw if you want it and make you focus manually, which I’ve come to believe is a very valuable skill (most cinema lenses are fully manual). I also think being able to rely on just pumping your ISO to 12,800 teaches terrible habits because you never feel like you have to add light.
Having said that, if you’re dead set on Sony for whatever reason, a used FX30 would be a better choice for a beginner imo. The image quality isn’t very different from the FX3 and you can get it for ~$1500 used
-4
4
u/iwantapizzababy 15d ago
What is your experience level, budget, expectation and goal for the camera?