nathanleebush

Doesn't look like a bad copy, because people have been telling me on social media that they are having the same problem with theirs. Some aren't, but it isn't isolated to just one faulty camera unfortunately.
One helpful guy told me he rented two of his out, both had the sunspots, but a 'reset to default settings' in the menu solved it. Maybe it is a bug with a certain option. I'm going to try the reset and hope it goes away.

The short answer is yes -- significantly more stabilized than lens-based OSS alone.
Here is a good explanation on how the two technologies interoperate:
http://briansmith.com/sony-a7ii-hands-on-review/
 

Also, BSI sensor with faster readout, same FPS despite 3.5x the MP.
PADF, which gives you vastly superior eye AF and better tracking AF - features I find to be awesome, but I shoot hundreds of stills a week.
Honestly, I was hoping for a MP bump with full readout on S35 mode, faster FPS and PADF - something we'll probably see next year in the A7sIII. To me this is just meh. But I'm pretty happy with my A7rII.
edit: honestly, sticking with 8-bit is the biggest disappointment. I have to step up to the FS5 to get 10-bit. 

​Love this detailed explanation. These do a real service for all of us, so thanks. I had the angle of view concept, but have always been a bit confused about how to multiply to find the DOF equivalent, so that's very helpful. It makes you realize that a big part of the equation is how well these cameras perform wide open or in that vicinity, since most lenses generally have a sharpness sweet spot in the middle of their range, but to get an decently shallow DOF on these 1" sensors you need to be shooting pretty open, so need a good performance from the lens wide open.
This all exacerbates my main complaint about the weak ND the RX100 IV comes with. I'd love to shoot these pretty well open, but .3 ND does not allow for that at all in bright daylight. You can maybe get away with F/11. It's a shame they didn't make it .6 or .9 or even 1.2. Very confused about the choice by Sony the first go round, but that they kept it for the RX100 IV is baffling. Am I crazy here? What is the point of that weak ass ND?

This camera is quite possibly the most hubristic camera-spec-to-price-point camera Canon have ever released.
I also think it's hilarious that they even mention the stills 'functionality' in the marketing. Chuck says "It can really do a credible job as either a video or a stills camera, depending on the needs of the user or the project." Uhhh, what? Unless you're a mom at a soccer game, I fail to see how 12mp JPEGs coming off a 1" sensor from a slow fixed lens will meet any photographer's needs. The whole spectacle is really absurd.
Meanwhile Blackmagic announce the URSA Mini with basically every spec I desire outside of internal NDs at a base price only $500 more. It's really fascinating to watch how long you can milk brand loyalty and lens ubiquity before people wake up that you're selling the same thing for 3 times the price, while your competitor (BM) undercuts everyone else by half with almost 1/100th the manpower.

This camera is quite possibly the most hubristic camera-spec-to-price-point camera Canon have ever released.
I also think it's hilarious that they even mention the stills 'functionality' in the marketing. Chuck says "It can really do a credible job as either a video or a stills camera, depending on the needs of the user or the project." Uhhh, what? Unless you're a mom at a soccer game, I fail to see how 12mp JPEGs coming off a 1" sensor from a slow fixed lens will meet any photographer's needs. The whole spectacle is really absurd.
Meanwhile Blackmagic announce the URSA Mini with basically every spec I desire outside of internal NDs at a base price only $500 more. It's really fascinating to watch how long you can milk brand loyalty and lens ubiquity before people wake up that you're selling the same thing for 3 times the price, while your competitor (BM) undercuts everyone else by half with almost 1/100th the manpower.

Best forget about great lowlight performance on this one. I saw it side by side a C300 Mark II in a special darkened room at the Canon NAB booth. It absolutely sucked. So if you have visions of intercutting material with the C300 Mark II, you better keep the lights blazing...

OMG....
I have been shooting with Canon for many years, never got any feelings about it, they were just tools. But nowadays, I am getting personal feeling about Canon.
It is embarrassing. You treat me like an idiot.
What cost-saving? This is a bloody expensive camera.
Without any lens, you could have realized even more "cost-saving".
No RAW while cost-saving.... Even my little cousin knows, that first comes the RAW then the JPEG.
Shame.
This is my other favorite.Canon tells us about their fantastic 4K lenses. 
Oohhh, yes, they are able to resolve 8MP...
And now you think, what should you put on your 50+MP topmodel
 
 
 

Probably Canon ignores that internet exists and some people use it, finding informations about prices, specs etc...

A friend of a friend that has a friend that work for them sent me this super secret picture of a new model that will be on the market in June: they developed a new camera that uses REAL reel, in order to achieve a real "raw" feel. 
The first model will have fixed lens (20x OPTICAL!!! wow!!!), EVF, some buttons and... no, it will be not cheap, but enthusiast have to spend if they are serious about video making!
(I hope it will be possible install ML on it!)

 

Canon has the capability to really push its products and workflow forward but as you've been pointing out for quite a while now, it's going in the exact opposite direction. At one point last year I owned a C100, C300, C500 and two 5diii.  Needed them for work. Now I'm down to a C500 and one 5diii and I'll be glad when I'll have phased out canon all together from my workflow. The owner operator market needs smart, reliable tools that work and produce beautiful images. 
I wish they produced 3 pro dslrs,
1) a new super 35 1DC priced just bellow 10k,  with 10bit compressed 4k 60p, 2k 120p on two Cfast and the capacity to shoot 20mb stills. 
2) a 5dIV, full frame with 4k 30p 10 bit and 2k 60p on the full frame, and stills.
3) a better version of the 7D markII with a nice 10bit 2k 60p, and stills.
C300 mark II could work, but no one has seen any real tests yet. The short film is non indicative of the camera's look. If I had to rely on that, it looks like a 4k version of the 8 bit 50mbs that the c300 shoots. Same hard fall outs, no creaminess, very plastic and video just as the c300 was. Raw on the C500 is nice but the worflow is not great and while laying out new products they should have updated their pathetic software and workflow. 
I hope the rumors of a new beyond 4k C500 are not true, since Canon will not be successful in that market while making junkie cameras like the xc10. That's Arri and Red territory, and they don't make any crappy cameras. 
I got good use out of the C500 with the 7q, but that's the last Canon Cinema camera I'll be buying.

I've been in Japan for about 11 years now. That doesn't make me an authority on the Japanese camera market or anything but from what I have seen, the average camera enthusiast is shooting Canon or Nikon. I always approach professional camera men and women and ask about how they like video on their D800 or 5DMK3 or whatever and they all look kinda embarrassed and say, I haven't really gotten into video. When I go to the park there are a lot of old men with 1Ds and giant zooms shooting ducks and birds or kids playing with their parents whatever. I get the impression that the major chuck of the domestic market for these companies is probably not looking at the internet for reviews of lists of specs (I know many people are but probably not the majority), nor are they buying these cameras with the intention of doing something new. They are most likely in their 50s and 60s, with full-time positions in a company and nearing retirement and are reading camera magazines that are basically advertisements for these two companies and then going to the big electronics stores and buying them from salesmen who don't know anything about anything. My beef with Japan is that the older people have all the money and are the largest segment of the population so Japanese business and culture will cater more and more to what they want. This probably means less innovation. Japanese manufacturers are finding it harder to compete internationally so some retreat and focus on the domestic market and that means just playing on nostalgia. If they are confident that their domestic marketing campaigns will allow them flex brand power and sell inferior cameras for higher prices than the competition, they will continue to do it and find the logic of your argument incomprehensible. Like all paradigm shifts, people don't really change their beliefs. The older generation just eventually dies off and the new generation is left to choose between two alternatives and usually chooses different than the prior group because they don't have an emotional commitment to the past. I'm also willing to admit that I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about, though.

No-one has even shot anything with the camera but you already know the IQ it's going to be better then "a" Alexa?

I'm not offended by your post, but I do find it a load of tub thumping nonsense.
1) If a lead star on a production punched a producer, there would be consequences, even if it were Tom Cruise.
2) You seem to conveniently paper over the fact that he was caught saying nigger on camera and also called an asian guy a "slant'. Two of numerous offences that went unpunished and led to his final warning.
If you want to move into this sort of editorial you need to put down both sides of the story, especially when your followers are not all UK based.
This isn't bending over to political correctness, it is very lightly punishing someone for a constant stream of problems. Most other presenters would have been kicked in to touch long ago. You cannot let someone go unpunished, time and again, just because he is a creative asset and pulls in big bucks.
I don't mind Clarkson, he can be funny, entertaining, no nonsense and clearly knows his cars. But that isn't a green light to do absolutely anything.

These times of over sensitive, full of politically correct hypocrites are utterly annoying. You over protect kids so much that when they are by themselves in the jungle they are unable to deal with any issue, as minor as it can be, everything becomes a life and death drama. I hate the feeling of not be able to make a joke because I have to be aware of whatever, that's why I only surround myself with people that can easily understand the difference between a joke and my serious opinion about something, that seems trivial but nowadays, it's really hard to find people like that, at least the ones I find usually become close friends of mine.
One a side note, I don't really think that the US are really the place for Top Gear.

There was this one test on youtube that I saw (I cannot recall by who). In that test a important prospect was that aprently the A7S is bit too thin for follow focus work. The bottom part of the camera is too thin and that leasds to bending vertically. So in that sense a wider base of a camera is not a bad thing.

I think to fully damp high frequency jitter you have to move the sensor extremely quickly and nimbly, maybe it just isn't possible yet with such a big one. Another issue is that maybe the sensor is too close to the edge of the lens mount so it doesn't move enough? The E-M1 has more room around the sensor, more margin. Anyway I'm not an engineer, but Sony need to fix it. Let's not write it off completely - it might do a hybrid IS when a Sony OIS lens is attached, using OIS for the high frequencies and IBIS for the larger ones on all 5 axis.
 
I just wish at the minimum they'd match the competition... Minimal moire like D750, nice and clean... And IBIS up to E-M1 standards. Oh well.

I love this comment, by which i mean its just plain idiotic.
Everything you've seen from the FS7 has been shot within the first 5 minutes someone has had the camera. Let's wait a few months before making such a wide declaration. Early A7s footage/GH4 footage also looked pretty crappy. Give people a few shoots with a camera - then make your judgements. 
 
Now to your "video" point. It has zero to do with frame interpolation. Its called over-sharpness. What really annoys me is people who shoot a digital sensor camera that isn't a RED, want a "cinematic" output, and yet use no softening filters (RED deliberately keeps their image as soft as they can get away with). None. An Alexa can look over-sharp shot poorly. 35mm film can too. When we shoot film (too rare!) we often have 3 layers of softening in front of the lens. 3 layers! When shooting a commercial or drama we have a range of Tiffen softeners ready to go for the Alexa or the F55, and we often will soften the highlights again in the grade. 
 
However - if you're shooting for broadcast, and you're matching $150k studio cameras which are horrifically sharp, being able to look 'video' is actually a plus! Sony and Canon and Panasonic understand this.
 
You want a more pure 'filmic' camera that's value for money? I can't recommend the BMs enough.
 
You need a camera that can shoot reportage, TV interview, a feature doc, a music video AND an indie feature? Better to start off hella sharp and adjust to taste.
I tell people all the time: A Swiss Army knife is actually a pretty terrible hunting knife. Unless you NEED that flexibility. 

I'm loving my A7s as well. Sweet video.. I wonder, though, if the A7s is necessary for this kind of work. It seems to be a retro throwback, and you were looking to achieve a vintage music video look and make it look more like video. I think the best thing to do is just use the technology of that time to achieve that look, insofar as you can. Like my friend shot a music video in 8mm film and I was like "how did you get that 8mm vintage look?" And she was like "Uh, I used an 8mm vintage camera." Here's a music video I shot a couple years back using the FS700 (didn't have control of color or post, but many of the effects we achieved in camera anyway).
 

This is the best new camera of 2010!

I agree with Quirky on a lot of his points. I'm not sure why 5D RAW comes into this at all... It's a massively different kettle of fish. Although I think it's ok to show how cameras such as the a7S can match it in perceived performance.

I'm very close to ordering an a7S because I want a different look and toolset compared with my GH3. Rolling shutter, weird record button, odd skin tones on a7S.... Doesn't faze me. There will be work arounds... Love to learn and just shoot.

I'll be renting the a7S first though. Don't know why more people don't try before they buy. Did this with the GH3. Loved it, bought it. Tried the BMCC, thought it was ok, didn't buy it. Same goes for pretty much everything.

Also... You can't judge a camera just by watching a few Vimeo clips and tests, as this depends on skill and creativity. It's cool to see it's capabilities in the right hands, but to write it off just because someone had filmed something with bad rolling shutter or yellow skin is a little silly. Love camera and what they can do.... I'm just more interested in the subject of the filming :)

The raw looking camera moves actually didn't bother me as much as the pretentious gimmicky concept, or the lack of one. They used all kinds of visual tricks that have been done many times before but with no story line or main concept to guide them, it's all kind of random, trying to be Michel Gondry but lacking his genius, since his visual gimmicks always serve and fit a story or concept.

But hey, it's got millions of views, so I guess it did the job!

Andrew, while it's relatively easy to get great color and especially skintones from 5D3 RAW, the same cannot be said for the A7S. While the A7S can look great, especially with post work (sometimes a lot of post work), it has a problem with green that can make skintones a challenge. Have also seen examples online where the highlights make skin look like plastic (something I don't recall seeing with 5D3 RAW examples online (certainly not with anything we have shot)).
 
When the A7S can produce something like this:

The FE 2.8/35 is an excellent lens, no surprises, it just performs superbly.  Take a look at the FE 4/24-70 if you're using the A7S for video & stills, it really is very good on that body, the OSS is superb for video and it's small and compact.  The zoom is as good at f/8 as the prime on the A7S if sharpness is part of your criteria.
 
On the A7S the FE 4/24-70 really is worth a look at, it performs better on that sensor.  Both the FE 2.8/35 & FE 1.8/55 are top flight optics for stills on the A7S & A7R.  I shoot a great deal on the A7R and use both primes exclusively but on the A7S I'll reach for the FE 4/24-70 for the OSS.
 
Chris

The 1080p image quality gains from a 4K GH4 file are well documented, but I've got a basic workflow question to extract the maximum IQ from my 4K files destined for FullHD output:
 
I've got a basic two cam interview I shot with the GH4. I'm wondering how to maximize the extra information when outputting to 1080p. Will I have equal sharpness and color information gains if I edit on a 1080p timeline and output to 1080p as if I edit on a 4K timeline and output to 1080p? Is it the same effect in the end?

OK Go, the band that only exists because of its capacity to make gimmicky viral videos.