Canon vs. Sony
When choosing a camera system, it’s essential to take a step back and focus on your needs and what each brand offers — leave behind any stigmas or preconceived notions. For me, I needed a reliable "B" camera that could handle client work and grow with my career. After weighing my options, the Sony FX3 stood out as the perfect choice. It gave me everything I needed without compromise.
Choosing the Right System
If you’re a hybrid shooter, you might lean toward cameras like the Canon R5, R5C, R6, or Sony A7IV. But if you’re primarily focused on video and prefer a minimal kit, the Canon R5C or Sony FX3 are likely at the top of your list.
The FX3 is an excellent choice for almost anyone, especially filmmakers who want a single, versatile camera that can handle just about everything.
FX3 vs. Canon R5/R6
Here’s some advice: buy a camera based on its current capabilities, not future promises. When I was doing my research, Canon was teasing cameras like the C50, C90, and R5C. These "C70 companions" never materialized, and the R5C didn’t launch until 5-6 months after I already owned the FX3. I didn’t want to invest in a camera like the R5 or R6 based on rumors of something better coming later.
FX6 + FX3 vs. C70 + R5/R6
The FX3 pairs beautifully with the FX6, sharing settings, full-frame sensors, gorgeous colors, full-size XLR inputs, and slog3. While the FX6 has a base ISO of 800 compared to the FX3’s 640, they’re an ideal A/B camera setup.
The Canon C70 is a great camera, but pairing it with the R5 or R6 isn’t as seamless for video work. The C70’s DGO Super 35mm sensor delivers stunning image quality, but the R5 and R6 are full-frame and lack features like clog2 (Canon’s equivalent to slog3). For me, having a consistent workflow and everything built into the camera is key.
FX3 vs. Canon R5C
Would I have chosen the R5C over the FX3 now that it’s out? Probably not. While Canon has made strides toward a video-focused design, the R5C is still a hybrid camera. It includes a cinema menu, but the body is bulkier, lacks built-in XLR inputs, and only offers clog2 in RAW—an overkill codec for most projects.
FX3 vs. A7SIII
The FX3 and A7SIII are very similar but have critical differences. The FX3 costs a bit more ($3,900 vs. $3,500) but includes features like tally lights, a built-in fan, and a top handle with XLR inputs. While you can add XLR ports to the A7SIII with the Sony XLR-K3M accessory, the FX3’s video-focused design makes it more intuitive. The preset, labeled buttons for video settings—like iris, shutter, white balance, peaking, and zebra—are incredibly convenient. Having multiple record buttons also makes starting and stopping recordings easy, no matter how you’re holding the camera.
My Recommendation
If you’re a serious filmmaker looking for a video-focused camera, the FX3 is hard to beat. Its built-in XLR inputs and streamlined design make it incredibly practical. That said, the A7SIII is also an excellent choice and a great backup option. In the future, I plan to add an A7SIII to my kit to complement my FX3. While two FX3s would be ideal, the A7SIII’s lower price makes it a solid backup.