Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Clair Denuages

Fuji xt-3 strong

Recommended Posts

I just want to place this here. I use my xt-3 for corporate gigs under 15k of budget for a year now and been really happy with it. I also made a tv pilot with it. All recorded in 4k 200mbps 10bit. And macro shots in 4k 60fps 200mbps 10bit. For storage space and quality, it's a sweet spot. I rendered prores LT 1080p proxys to edit in Davinci. It's a great workflow. Basically, I got my money back with this little 1600$ camera and love the casual pictures I take with it. Anyway, you don't need to look at the future Canon 8k dslr camera because it will save in 4k h.265. Same thing. Fuji's xt-3 take a 6k raw image debayer and scale it down to 4k so you get a really great rendition of details.

 

much love for my litle xt-3 monster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see someone post about a Fuji camera.  I have an X-T3 and mostly love it for all the reasons you note.  I bought it to get into the Fuji system while bidding time for the X-H2 and a bit let down the X-T4 came first.  Really missing IBIS, need better battery life and ergonomics and there are some issues for me with the manual/autofocus functions which I hope will be addressed via firmware in the X-T3.  I'll post regarding those - I'd like to see what your thoughts are and perhaps you have solutions or work arounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the focus issue? I personally use canon EF lenses with an adapter and native fuji fx lenses. I don't particularly have any issues. I look into a 5 inch monitor like the smallhd or ninja V with a LUT and focus peaking. Just regularly look for firmware updates on the fuji body. Also for batteries I am looking into the kessler batterie adapter that uses dewalt power tools cheap batteries. I could plug the monitor as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi Tom, thanks for your reply.  I started another thread where I detail things.  I'm mostly shooting verité doc footage and want to avoid rigging the X-T3 up which is clearly what you're doing.  I have a base plate, rails and matte box I sometimes use when shooting interviews or for lock down shots but in those situations the problems I mention usually aren't an issue.  I mostly shoot handheld with the X-T3 and want to keep it small and light.  The battery grip improves ergonomics and battery life (even then batt life isn't great).

Question: are you using Resolve to generate your proxies (which can be slow) or an auxiliary program like EditReady and then match back to master?

Edited by mopixels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mopixels said:

Question: are you using Resolve to generate your proxies (which can be slow) or an auxiliary program like EditReady and then match back to master?

I need 10bit in my proxy so I render in prores LT from Adobe media encoder sadly.

I use Resolve on a PC for editing and grading  (I edit in a 1080p timeline with the prores LT proxy). Then at delivery you can place all the native 4k footage in a different bin and ask Resolve to conform with the target bin. It's quite useful.

On a proxy note I didn't find any avid dnx flavor that was as light and 10bit to render to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Giuseppe Vitellaro said:

What lenses are you folks using?

I go between x mount lenses for small jobs,  and PL glass on bigger ones.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm using my pair of X-T3s more and more for smaller jobs. Since one can live on the Ronin-s and the other built up for tripod/slider/handheld work, it's a nice speedy workflow on set.

Since the camera NEEDS external monitoring anyway, I'm always just recording Prores masters (rather than relying on the internal codec). However, for anyone shooting h265 exclusively, I'd HIGHLY recommend you get yourself a GPU with hardware encoding/decoding of h265 video.

If you're working off a laptop, get an eGPU that will give you the functionality. Before, when I had a 12GB Titan X in my Mac Pro, I couldn't even begin to playback h265 footage - it was completely unusable. However now that I have a 16Gb Radeon VII instead (with hard video encoding/decoding enabled). I get buttery smooth playback from the X-T3's 400mbps 10-bit files.

It completely changes the equation.

And given the time it will save you in rendering out proxies/prores masters. The new GPU will pay for itself very quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Popular Topics

  • New Posts

    • What are people's general views on gimbals? I have a love/hate relationship with gimbals (I own two relatively lightweight ones) and, in the few years that I've owned them, I simply cannot get to like them. I've tried a cheap Glidecam clone and just hated it, as balancing it was always like trying to get a drunken wife into a car (been there, done that). The gimbals work fine, but they simply can't hold my run & gun rig that weighs 4.3 kg. There are of course gimbals that can hold that weight and newer ones that can do that without having to break down the rig for full movement, but you then end up with a huge weight to carry around (and I'm able to carry some fairly hefty weight). For the sort of work that I was doing before COVID, I was using an Easyrig clone to support a very heavy rig, but I subsequently reduced the weight to a nice 4.3kg and did away with the support (wandering around some places looking like a Ghost Buster started to wear thin). But there are times when I want to move about with the rig and get reasonably stable footage, which kind of points to a gimbal of some sort. Recently I did some testing with a counterweight system, by attaching my monopod to my rig, with the monopod extending horizontally from the rear of the camera (aligned with the lens). The results from the monopod experiment were actually quite surprising, giving an almost gimbal like movement with a bit of stabiliser added in post. Noting that I can't Ninja walk (more like Bobba Fett sitting on my shoulders) the results looked little different to shots using another camera on one of the gimbals. This could be an option with some practice. Gimbals are all the rage at the moment, but are they really an ideal option for documentary style work, which is my main aim? Has anyone come up with a portable solution that doesn't involve a gimbal?  
    • Do check requirements of any festivals you plan to submit to, as well as DCP specs. Many may be fine with whatever format, but some may be fussy. You may find capturing in 16:9 (but framing for 2.35:1) and then editing for 2.35:1 a safer option, so, if necessary, you can re-edit for 16:9 later down the line if required (may involve re-doing some “pan and scan”, but with the vertical alignment). Unless of course you’re shooting anamorphic, then you can’t do this and will need to crop your master heavily to create a 16:9 version. Also consider that, if theatrical release is intended, it’s unlikely to be 16:9, but rather DCI 4K or DCI 2K (1.89). So, if you can shoot in one of those formats instead of UHD/HD, then do! The few pixels of extra width will help you anyway if you’re going for a wider look, and will mean slightly less cropping of the height is needed (you’ll need to work out the correct crop to cut a 2.35:1 portion out of 4096x2160 or 2048x1080). Agree that creative intent is a part of choosing what to do here.  
    • Good luck with your new venture... and ask away away (in the appropriate sub-forum)!
    • I shot plenty of docs and doc style content in 2.35:1, here's a few examples. Ultimately I'd say its down to personal choice and what's best for the project. I picked 2.35:1 in these examples as it was my preference and suited the style of both pieces. Hope that helps...!  
    • I updated my FX9 firmware to version 2.0, and it appears to have broken color peaking. Normal peaking works, but color, b&w, etc. doesn't work. I primarily work on verite stuff, so I rely pretty heavily on color peaking. Anyone else have this issue?
×
×
  • Create New...