Leaderboard

I also find this quite baffling, this camera in a FX2 body would have been a great move! I don't get it!

The a7 V is quite a predictable upgrade, nevertheless it's excellent. It does however miss a lot of video features that are present on the Panasonic S1 II / S1R II for a similar price, and the cheaper Nikon Zr / Z6 III... No open gate, no anamorphic, 4K is still maximum resolution, no real-time LUT can be baked into footage, and of course Sony still has no internal RAW codec to call their own. Still, this is a $3000 entry level camera so we can't be too greedy can we? Compared to... Sony a7 IV. The previous a7 IV is now even more of a bargain, it will probably go down even further in price used, most likely to region of $1200. Stills quality the same as a7 V and probably more than most people will ever need. Video quality is excellent but the rolling shutter is on high-side, that's one area as well as the Super 35mm 4K/120p where a7 V has an advantage. Sony a9 III. Well, keep an eye on that used price as it's already not a million miles off what a new a7 V costs... Sony a1. Again, the more powerful option vs a7 V albeit with a few of the new features missing, you can pick one up used in the UK for £2700, same price as a new a7 V. Nikon Zr. THE choice if you want fake raw. Nikon Z6 III. Much more price competitive than the new Sony. Panasonic S1R II. The dark horse. It does more. Price is high though and I much prefer the Sony body design and build quality. Panasonic S1 II. Certainly has the edge on the a7 V for video, if not autofocus. More expensive, but again keep an eye on the used market prices. Overall I think the a7 V is predictable - it's good that we have another partially stacked sensor option though.

GH5 GH4 EM10iii OM-1 5Dii XPRO2 XT-5 P1100 DSC-RX10 iPhone15 iPhone12 Xiaomi12 Ultra DJI Mavic Pro GoPro Hero All those different cameras were used to make our latest indy documentary on-and-off over the last 3 years. We finally finished post-production (for real this time) last month. Not to mention all the different ridiculous vintage lenses and modern lenses employed along the way. So that happened. My advice? Yeah, don't use so many cameras...and then try to make all that cohere somehow with no legitimate color grading skills... Surprisingly, I found the EM10iii footage the most pleasant looking color-wise when exposed correctly.

I dunno real winner for me and surely my next cam purchase is R6 mk3: 7k, RAW, OG, 4K120p no crop. Tried it out and couldn't find any flaws. 7K open gate C-Log2 looks excellent. Recording 7K OG 10-bit H.265 to a normal SD card is super efficient. The S&F mode is surprisingly practical. Being able to set odd frame rates like 46 over 25 directly in camera, in Log, makes it easy to get subtle slow-mo without post tricks. They finally nailed it, third lucks a charm. In comparison, this A7V feels crippled AF. At least they updated the sensor but why no 4K120p no crop, no OG or +4K? Also I'd be mega pissed if I bought an FX2. Sony's strategy is just plain weird, they lost the plot. The four year old A7SIII /FX3 is still leagues better than this for video.

Looks like a fine camera and it's overall a nice improvement over the A7 IV. It is a little weird to see it being released right on the heels of the FX2 which still uses the older sensor. That said, even though 4K is plenty, it is weird to see a major vendor releasing a new model that tops out at full frame 4KP60 and cropped 4KP120. For a mostly video shooter, the A7S III is about the same price used as this one is new. It has pretty similar dynamic range performance and the RS is like 9ms vs 14ms here. If I remember right, the older camera also doesn't need to crop in to get to 120fps. Or get a used ZV-E1 with most of the performance of the A7S III for 2/3 the price of the A7 V. For a hybrid shooter, it makes more sense - but approaching the new camera from a purely video perspective, it's really a "meh." It's not a terrible choice and people are going to shoot decent stuff with it, but it's sort of hard to imagine existing Sony shooters swapping up to it and even harder to imagine people who are invested in other systems changing to it.

Is the 16 stops in the room with us right now?

Train Dreams on Netflix I don't know how many of you have already seen it, but I still wanted to recommend a film that I watched a few nights ago on Netflix that hit me right in the heart. It was presented at the last Sundance Film Festival but then went directly to Netflix without going through movie theaters. And it's a real shame because the cinematography is stunning. Shot in 3:2 in the Idaho forests with an almost documentarian feel. The story is infinitely sad and very slow. The reviews are almost all enthusiastic, and it has become one of the most viewed films on the platform in recent weeks. The negative reviews accuse it of being truly slow, but in my opinion and that of others, the beauty lies precisely in the film's slowness. If you manage to get into the mood, it hits you right in the heart. I don't want to spoil too much about the story, but the ending truly moved me. The DoP says that the film was shot almost entirely using natural light (à la Lubezky), and many scenes are set at dawn, sunset, and nighttime using real candlelight. The chiaroscuro is a delight for the eyes. https://filmmakermagazine.com/129137-interview-cinematographer-adolpho-veloso-train-dreams-sundance-2025/

Same. On this particular project I found myself reaching for it more than the GH5. Not for the bird shots as that really required good slow-mo, but for the people shots? Looked awesome. It pancakes the highlights though; just loses details that LUMIX cameras hold onto. Other than that, pretty great for a $300 camera.

Oh god. That thing. When online people complain about lousy footage with the cliche "was that shot on a potato"? They're probably talking about the D90's codec.