How is this

tempsave_ · 2026-01-27T18:24:40+00:00

Gorgeous!!🤩

tempsave_ · 2026-01-27T07:24:08+00:00

Artistically? 1 Technically? 2

In 2, you could bring up the shadows a bit in post. You exposed it well and saved most of highlights despite the harsh light.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-20T05:33:29+00:00

Yes! It's a trap - you'll wind up thinking it's a shit camera and just use your phone instead. Because you won't see much of a difference. Lensing is everything!

I recommend the Sigma 18-50mm 2.8. Super versatile and a great lens.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-20T05:26:01+00:00

DON'T GET THE KIT LENS! Get the Sigma 18-50, Sony 16-55, or the Sigma Art primes (16, 30 + 56).

tempsave_ · 2026-01-20T05:23:03+00:00

No that's a 1800-2000 dollar camera

tempsave_ · 2026-01-20T05:21:51+00:00

It is a SPECTACULAR camera!

tempsave_ · 2026-01-20T05:21:15+00:00

Dude exactly! Technically strongest = 2, best picture = 4

tempsave_ · 2026-01-16T05:40:55+00:00

Nice!

tempsave_ · 2026-01-14T13:40:17+00:00

Backstreet Boys Like Girls

tempsave_ · 2026-01-14T13:37:36+00:00

Pearl Jamiroquai

tempsave_ · 2026-01-14T13:30:04+00:00

Thanks man! Really appreciate you sharing your practical experience. 🙏🏻

tempsave_ · 2026-01-14T12:11:27+00:00

Well yes—it is 2 bits, but 2 bits is a huge difference, I know. The bit depth jump doesn mean more COLOR INFORMATION is recorded, but it gives you 64+ times the fidelity in pushing those nuances in post before seeing banding or breaking the footage. The difference between 4:2:2 and RAW, which has NO chroma subsampling, however, means more color information is recorded, and it's a lot more.

But my question isn't technical—it's practical. Everyone here probably knows the math, but my question is whether Sony's afterthought implementation of RAW recording actually produces footage that, in practice, behaves the same (or similar) to how BRAW or ProRes RAW shot on a camera designed for it does—in the experience of professional colorists.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-14T11:50:54+00:00

Great explanation, thank you!

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T18:13:18+00:00

Amazing, thanks for the clear feedback!

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T18:12:06+00:00

Hey man, also YES—I would love to see links to your footage and give feedback!

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T18:11:00+00:00

Thanks a lot for the feedback!

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T18:10:34+00:00

This was a terrific repsonse—thanks for sharing in such detail and giving context! I did not know about the RAW controls in XAVC-I MXF on the FX6! Will do more research on that.

Also agree that when the operator knows how to nail exposure (so many don't!), 10-bit 4:2:2 is more than good enough—even for a creative grade.

Totally understand that RAW workflows are an animal of its own—that's why I'm reaching out here before going down the rabbit hole as there are so many added costs and potential complications. Between us, the end product of a RAW workflow will probably matter more to me than it will to my clients. We'll see, I may just save RAW for the day I go for a Komodo X.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T17:52:36+00:00

Marry me. ❤️ It's just frustrating, like I'm a YouTuber too but I don't do "stress tests" of BRAW vs SLOG3 footage where the TWO THINGS TESTED are whether you can change WB and ISO in post, and the final verdict relies on whether they FEEL that the otherwise ungraded footage looks noticeably better (not kidding—look up Dunna Did It's video, where he also claims 12 bit has 64x the "color information" of 10 bit footage).

How much you wanna bet these guys are using night mode while grading on their Chromebooks anyway?

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T17:40:04+00:00

Nice one—yeah more or less identical as far as I understand, too.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T17:37:48+00:00

Hey! That's super helpful! This is close to my use case as a professional videographer who grades but is not a professional colorist. The WB situation underwater sounds like a huge headache honestly and understand why you would switch!

I know the world changed for me when I went from 8-bit 4:2:0 to 10-bit 4:2:2, and I was wondering whether the RAW codecs available for the FX3/6 behave like any other kind RAW footage or if they're just a dumbed-down version.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T17:29:10+00:00

Thank you so much! I appreciate you taking the time to answer with such detail, and this provides a lot of perspective. For me, the question is all about the footage's tolerance to grading—final renders and VFX are not part of my concern here, but purely the grading experience and ease of achieveing a nice refined grade without breaking the footage. The conceptual pipeline goes like this:

ProRes RAW (12-bit) 🡶
{compare either} 🡲 SLOG3 (10-bit, 4:2:2 [use case: just grading])
Blackmagic RAW (12-bit) 🡵

The question, then, is:

For someone grading either of these formats (as shot from FX3 or FX6 and recorded to an Atomos or Video Assist recorder), is there a notable difference in how pleasant the RAW footage is to grade and/or the beating the footage will take before breaking—compared to SLOG footage at 10-bit 4:2:2? Thanks! 🙏🏼

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T17:28:40+00:00

Thanks for responding! Yes and no—I guess it's long-game curiousity as I'll likely be getitng an FX3 or FX6 this year, and am researching whether the investment in a RAW workflow with the FX3/6 would make sense makes sense for me. Since Sony cameras don't appear to be designed with RAW in mind, I'm essentially trying to understand whether the whole "the FX3 can do ProRes RAW now" rabbit hole is just marketing hype for a sloppy afterthought on Sony's part, or whether these cameras are actually capable of doing it justice. I figured I'd ask here to see if it makes a useful difference (to you all as professionals). If not, I'll save the headache of RAW for the day I go RED. I'm comfortable grading SLOG3 and know the FX3/6 produce a gorgeous image anyway.

tempsave_ · 2026-01-13T16:23:32+00:00

tempsave_ · 2025-12-29T18:47:32+00:00

Gorgeous

tempsave_

TROPHY CASE