jonpais

Ok, interesting. Especially considering its like 1/4th the bitrate and 10-bit 4-2-2 vs 8-bit 4-2-0. 
 
Dave Dugdale did a video where he pushed the A6500 (I think that was the Sony model) against the Panasonic GH5, and he didn't notice very serious advantages of the Panasonic over the Sony. Also the 400mbps bitrate is just unnecessarily demanding on the space (and processors and cards). The XAVC codec seems to really have some secret sauce.
Plus the lower forceful limitation on dynamic range in VLog L seems to be a bad idea? 

I guess while this Site is called Eoshd.com, it was the GH2 (and its various hacks) that really got things going, and the various models of M43 cameras that got most indie filmmakers excited around here.
The Sony A7iii seems to have ruined the party for a lot of people, way more than one could imagine. And the below $2000 price tag has suddenly made things harder to sell, for almost everyone (Including Sony's own models that can be easily replaced by the A7iii, due to its price advantage, and plethora of superlat8ve features for the price).
It was the 10th Anniversary of the birth of the M43 and Mirrorless format, last week. While the GH5 and GH5s, and the Olympus OMD 1D are great cameras, their (former) $1999 price seems a lot, especially for Olympus.
What all areas do you think Panasonic and Olympus need to work on, to push the Mirrorless advantage for Mirrorless, now that Nikon is also finally crashing the party? 
Suggestions could be anything from the high bitrate (with no noticeable advantage except in very heavy grading) to the low dynamic range of VLog (between 1.5-2 stops below that of the sensor's in RAW), to the Lack of 14-abit RAW to lack of PDAF (on the Panasonic) etc.
 

Derr... that’s the point. This happens way too often on this site. People ask opinion between A and B camera and somebody goes off on some G option.
Yeah, typing too quick. 

Oh they have a great look no doubt. But the viewfinder, LCD, first gen DPAF, it, well it is just old and outdated. It is like the PMW F3, AF100, sure they are, well were great cameras at the time but their time is gone now, with heck mirrorless cameras that are 500% better overall.
I know he has a ton of Canon lenses but what can't the Sony A7 mk III do, and he can adapt all them on a Metabones SB I would guess, and 50 things more than the C100 other than built in ND filters. How often do you really have to use them. And they sell variable ones, or singles if you do need them. This is 2018. We have new stuff with IBIS and great AF that fit in your coat pocket. Why buy some clunky big outdated cameras for the same or more money. I don't see the reasoning. Heck this new Nikon may be ground breaking. Same with the new Canon ones. It just seems like a step backward in a day of magical cameras we never dreamed of.
The OP to seems to need a camera that is the jack of all trades. And the Sony A7 mk III is that camera. Now if he wants it to look pro get a rig from hell for it LoL.

They are Not dirt cheap here anymore for some reason with the DPAF. They run 1800 dollars or more. You can buy a brand new one from B&H for 1999 dollars. Stupid. I am not too sure an original one is worth 2 grand. Not with the GH5, GH5s and the Sony A7 mk III the same money or less. Heck you have the Fuji, Olympus EM1 mk II, on and on. This new Nikon, nah.

Cool.  I've said it can be useful in some situations, you've said it can be useful in some situations.
I'm just not sure how any of that added up to the below....?
Unless it was autocorrect and you meant to say "yes, you raise valid points, but have you also considered....."

Assuming that during filming:
you're not too busy operating other equipment to operate the camera if you are operating the camera then you have control of focusing (eg, gimbals often prevent MF) if you could do MF that you're not too busy doing anything else with the camera you can see the image well enough to actually see focus (screen bright enough, focus assists are good enough, etc) and also assuming that the time spent learning to MF (which is a skill that isn't easy to pick up) isn't better spent doing something else.
Remember, the object of all of this is a high quality finished output, not mad MF skills.  It's better to tell a good story and use AF than to use MF and tell a shitty one.

I can tell you that Canon and Nikon sure as hell have their work cut out to begin to match a Sony A7 mk III, and I think impossible at that price point for either of them. They are not going to do it at 3500 dollars!

I thought it was that rich people were called "eccentric" but for the same behaviour not-rich people were "crazy"

They are Really going to have to do something about AF or they are going to be out of business. AF is hot now even for Video. Having Crappy Photo and Video AF. Why even buy one?

The thing is that is two separate things.
A) Go on about specs- yep, but maybe that is because most of them are FORMER users of other systems (or still current multiple system users).
B) Bash- no, don't think so.      There are of course some in every room but I see far more people who use other brands and many who have never even tried Sony bashing Sony and often for other reasons (EG something completely unrelated to photography/videography).
I also sometimes suspect it is a lot smaller group (for all brand trolls) and they just have many accounts (some on DPR have had literally hundreds) and that in some cases the worst offenders may actually be working/paid shills for their oppositions though that might be a bit too conspiracy theory.

Nice.
As far as the lens release, I find it annoying too at times. I always palm the camera with my left hand and hit the button with my middle finger while holding helens with my right hand. Then I flip the camera over so the sensor is facing the ground to try and avoid dust entering while swapping lenses. A few times I've unknowingly bumped the button while carrying the camera and when I went to shoot the lens rotated a bit, scaring the bejeezus out of me. Fortunately I never dropped a lens, but putting the lens release on the grip side with so little space is stupid. 
Vietnam is really dusty, Cambodia and Myanmar were even worse - my rocket blower got a lot of use there and in many other places. My Fuji lenses inhaled a lot of dust. The sensor gel stick came in handy a few times.
Chris

Totally agree with @Anaconda_ - assuming you can get things in focus then go with the better codec.
Of course, you should make sure that whatever camera you get fulfils all your needs in terms of lenses, battery life, IBIS, and everything else.  Codec is great but there's more to a camera than just that.  You should also be aware of how good the A7III images are - @jonpais has shared some lovely ones here.

Thank you for your kind consideration of us potentially being tracked. ?

Hey I am not a big fan of them either. But this is 2018. Everyone is trying to make a buck on the old Inner Web. Unless a person is willing to do all that research and type all that shit out you are going to have Links like it or not, or not have shit for information.
Even people on here have links to their channels or websites. You want to ban that also? Shit where do you stop? Info is info and somehow you are going to pay for it. Either you, or me, or someone else is going to have to work their ass off to find and present it. I am lazy, so I will have to look at links, Oh by the way I Don't have to click on them, or sit here with my thumb up my ass waiting for incredible info to be typed on all that is new.
        
      
 
 
 
 

Wow that is a game changer for sure.
         @IronFilm   In his film acting days. 

Wow sure that would be the cats ass!

Yeah, poor Fujifilm GFX 50S and Hasselblad X1D-50c. ?

A lot of the change at least in the sports world will be related to controlling the image of the event as much as capturing the image of the event.
Organisations like UEFA,FIFA,IOC and the Premier League etc don't want the risks associated with that number of uncontrolled lenses pointed at their events as its the unique pictures of the controversies that will make far more money for an individual photographer than the generic goal celebration ones.
Of course, the controversies will be the cheating, diving, stamping, fighting, abuse of the officials, crowd disturbances etc that the organisers don't want damaging their brand.
For that reason, I think exerting editorial control by selling the rights to one agency will be the next step and there are already some half way house situations happening where this is to all intents and purposes in place by managing the most favourable pitch positions and access to specific agencies.
The connection that used to exist between the written press and photographic press working for the same publication has by and large fallen by the wayside as newspapers increasingly lay off their own photographic departments and use agencies so its not like the events need to fear a boycott if they only let in one agency's photographers.
There is also the issue of money in terms of the photographic rights should be a saleable commodity for the organisers in the same way as the TV rights are and it does seem strange that in an era of tons of different rights packages for TV (live, delayed, internet,xyz territory) that they are paying big money for that whereas for a photographer it costs no more than their own time to go and cover the same event and distribute it worldwide.
I don't think we are there yet in terms of stills extraction from live video for practical purposes (I've attempted this a few years ago shooting on the Tour de France with a RED Epic and it was abandoned after a few stages) but it will also be tricky from a rights issue.  The broadcasters pay eye watering sums for the coverage so if a photographers dares take video then he will literally be escorted from the stadium and struck off the organisers accreditation system for all subsequent events. This means that it will have to be derived or sold on from the broadcaster to the agency and I'm not sure how much money would really be in it for everyone at that point.
Creatively, all you would get is literally stills from the TV coverage (which in certain instances would be great because TV cameras get the best positions) but I would still maintain that the best sport photography images still stand apart as they're derived in a different way looking for individual isolated moments whereas TV images are having to convey a coherent continuous set of images.
The broader point of it changing beyond the scrum situation (which, to be fair, is only really the case for trophy lifts and team shots) at some point is right though and it just remains to be seen when and how.
I've already been advancing at least part of the demise of the old guard by winding down the number of shifts I've taken over the past few months and I suspect I'll be all but out completely by the end of next year.

Case in point from earlier mention:
 

I don't see the profesionnal photography market moving away significantly from Canon/Nikon and even less from DSLR to MILC just yet:

World Cup Moscow, June 2018.

Paris Fashion Week
 
Lens selection, OVF, weather sealing, battery life, off-sensor AF, grip, balance with big lens etc.. The DSLR still remains king.
It will take indeed at least another decade imo for MILCs to take over and I suspect it is still Canon/Nikon that will pave the way by adressing things like weather resistance, ergonomics etc.. giving pros a mirrorless DSLR experience.
Sony is more focused on enthusiasts & semi-pros by making the smallest, most compact advanced cameras which is what Japanese tech giant companies aspire to. 
But cramming the most features in the smallest body has it's limitations. Sony are well aware of all this and even somewhat admits to it:
Do you think we’ll see mostly mirrorless cameras at the 2020 Olympic Games in Tokyo?
Yes.
How many of those cameras do you want to be made by Sony?
Many! But the professional market is very conservative, so we’re taking it step by step. We saw some photographers using the Alpha 9 at this year’s winter Olympics but of course the majority was Canon and Nikon. But the number of Sony photographers is increasing.
There have been questions about the weather sealing of a7-series and a9 cameras. Is this something you want to address?
In really bad conditions, in really heavy rain, will photographers keep on taking pictures [for long periods of time?] I don’t think so. In those conditions, most photographers will use some kind of rain cover. But of course durability is very important. Photographers should be able to shoot [in poor weather]. We have an internal ‘weather test’ and for each kind of customer we will aim to produce products with adequate durability.
Is that something that your professional users are asking for?
Yes. But we need a balance between durability, and size and weight. For a professional camera, the requirement for durability is higher, but for hobbyist kinds of camera, the priority is smaller size and lower weight.
 

How does he do VLOG material on a 1D X II with that MJPEG 4K codec? It would create an impossible workflow for the fast turn around his stuff needs, and massive amounts of material for archival. Or has he dropped his channel back to 1080p?
He either doesn't care about 4K, or thinks AF is king... Either way, should have given the A7 III an audition, surely?
Meanwhile in smartphone land, check this out
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-45208546
Motorola is now owned by Chinese company Lenovo, who are one of the least innovative fuckers on planet earth. If China doesn't start respecting the US copyright law, they are going to be in deep shit. And not just because of tub-thumping or bullying by small-hands Trump - but because losing access to Android and Qualcomm parts will be on the cards.

I didn't say it sucks, I also don't think it is weightless and magical. I think it is partly a very utilitarian design and I think that it is based on a nearly 30 year old design in a market that is well known for not liking change. I would argue I much prefer a C200 over a Sony PDW-900, but ENG stalwarts still run around with big ol' ENG cams. 
I think it works well as a body hanging off a big long heavy lens with a monopod propped underneath where the weight isn't on the wrist and the body is there for control and swinging things around. I think when you have a stumpy and heavy lens, like my Sigma Art 85 or the 105 Art, then the extra heft of the body is actually not good at all. Even with modestly heavy lenses. At that point the smaller body is actually better IMHO. 
Canon's system is far from complicated. But their tracking is just not as well set up or works as well. Saying that, most people using them aren't using the famed tracking modes anyway. In typical AF-C Canon is still faster than Nikon (and very easy to use). 
 
True. Canon are flooding the bottom of the market with dozens of entry level DSLRs. But the funny thing is, in these discussion forums NOBODY cares about those. And in the product space we do care about, Sony just took the top spot in North America. 
Of course you are. You are stating that it is obvious that Sony are taking this spot because they are the only ones with a recent release. This couldn't be further from the truth and is a device many are using to downplay the significance of this announcement. It isn't a small sample size at all. It is half a financial year in one of the biggest markets on the planet. Sample sizes don't get much bigger. I love how Canon make these announcements every 6 months and everyone just nods along. Every time Sony say something similar everyone disagrees. 
Of course it does. Do you care how many 1500Ds Canon sold? How about D3400s Nikon dropped? In the higher end of the market (not the top end), Sony have just proven that they can not only exceed Nikon in #2, but Canon in #1. Yes Nikon claimed something similar earlier this year. Again that's significant in that Canon have held the #1 spot for so long, to see this tidal wave of change will force them to adjust. 
The numbers are literally there, in this release and you want to try and still make that claim? Are you serious? Sony outsold Canon over half a year with their A7 (and A9) products over the entire portfolio of FF products from Canon. That is a far cry from the claims the 6D II (on it's own) would outsell the entire Sony catalogue. I know for a fact that people have a VERY skewed perception of how much Canon actually sell of these things vs Sony (and others). Also if you look on ANY sales chart you can find, a number of individual Sony FF models will be outselling the 6D II. That's one model on it's own outselling the Canon on it's own. Same can be said about the 5D IV and 1DX II. None of these have ever been particularly hot sellers at any time. 

Consider this: The person you describe is essentially not going to be buying ANYTHING. They are therefore no longer part of the market and manufacturers can't really make them something they need. So nobody is gunning for that non-existent market. However they MIGHT be able to snare a few of those from that group that want to downsize (reducing business, changing focus, retiring etc) or want a smaller companion option without the compromises. Nobody with a D850 and $15k worth of lenses is dragging that around to picnics. They are exactly the sort of market that might not be satisfied with just a smartphone. This becomes a 'dabble' system. 
New buyers building new systems from scratch are buying mirrorless. These manufacturers know that, that's why they are pursuing it. They can't live off their stalwarts forever. 
One of the BIGGEST things Sony are claiming (that again nobody seems to be picking up on nor understanding), is not that they are poaching Canon and Nikon sales, that they are actually building new sales from non-existing customers at a really significant rate. In a shrinking market that is a huge deal. Fanboys seem to want to get caught up in whatever else, to me that is the most signifiant thing. 
I don't think we will. The product will be announced, but I don't think details like how well adapted lenses work will be available for some time yet. 
Exactly. Nikon has been particularly hard hit by all this change. I don't think the 23rd is about launching a product (I don't think it will be hitting stores for months), it is a desperate attempt and plea to 'wait'. 
 
Well on sensor can have many more sites that collectively gather more light. My M50 mostly out focuses my 1DC, especially in low light. My (sold) A73 definitely out focussed the 1DC in low light. I think this is an incredibly outdated notion. 
 
Again strongly disagree. That's assuming that Sony has the market strength to reach number 1 just because they have the newest release. Most of the fanboys out there would disagree Sony was ever in such a position. It's never been the case in the past that 'just because' Sony have the newest one out they are also definitely in #1. I mean Nikon have never been #1 just because they had a newer model than Canon before. It's a silly notion being spread around to downplay the significance of this shift. There has ALWAYS been a duopoly and now that is being shattered. This is incredibly good times for us (the consumers) that I don't know why people are getting their backs up about it (elsewhere, not saying that's happening here). 
You know you don't have to use Log right  I think it is one of the downfalls of the Sony's - They give you Log in everything, so we feel compelled to use it! They are capable of outputting a decent ready-to-use picture too. 
Personally have never cared who is number one. But I agree, it will be swings and roundabouts. It will be nice to have even more options. 
645Z is a wonderful beast

Pretty sure Canon, Nikon, Ricoh and Leica all make an array of full frame cameras. Granted most of them not mirrorless. 
It speaks volumes about the popularity of mirrorless, people seem to be missing that about this press release. 
So when the K1 II launched Pentax were #1? That seems to be the logic here. You're making the assumption that everyone is on an equal footing and therefore the brand with the latest release gets boosted to the top spot (temporarily). That is definitely NOT the case. Most Canon fanboys will gleefully state (when someone pans the lacklustre 6D II for example) "oh but it outsells the whole A7 range 5:1..." which is absolute bunk and has been for years. 
You do realise how little sense that makes? Are you just repeating what every other numpty is saying? 
Can definitely agree on this. 
Honestly I cannot see the point of this Nikon branded Sony clone that has fanboys drooling (and suddenly retracting everything they ever said about mirrorless). I also don't think that Nikon is the dominant brand that people think it is. Just take a look at their last mirrorless effort... abandoned. Now take a look at their action cameras... abandoned. They couldn't get a foothold in either market. Now look at how weak the EOS M line was, abandoned in the US immediately after launch. BUT the Canon name has built it up as a power in asian markets. Canon can do that, Nikon couldn't. Nikon couldn't beat (or even compete) with Sony in the 1" market. 
Disagree. My latest is a 1DC, but have had pro bodies dating back to the Nikon D1. My 1DC feels nothing like you describe. 
Couldn't agree more. More RX1 and RX10 IMO. But it isn't about controls, or what people crassly call 'colour science'. I just almost never feel good about images when I capture them on a Sony. I know I can make them good in post, but they simply don't jump out. Ergonomics and menus and features and lenses and abilities are all top notch, better than most I would argue. Yep, including menus. But the results just don't feel good. 
Fuji's lack of grip pre-X-H1 is a real put off for me. Works ok on an extra wide X-Pro2 with small primes... For everything else they're kind of garbage. It's just a shame a lot of the actual controls went backward with the X-H1 over the X-T2. 
People do all the time. It is genuinely head and shoulders above basically everything in the hybrid market and people notice. They also say 'oh that crop' or 'oh that terrible codec' when talking about things like 5D IV, or 'oh that useless AF' or obviously the mount when talking about Nikon. Though I would take the 5D IV for much of the reasons you state. 
Almost too much to take in here. Clear to say though that photo isn't a high priority for you and that's fair (as well as being a really swell place to be in that you're spoilt for choice at absolutely minimal outlay - so yay!). 
Yep. I find it remarkable that the anti-Sony crowd (lets call them fanboys) have being saying for so long 'oh those mirrorless toys, nobody wants those' and claiming that Sony is full of it when it comes to these sales numbers because according to their own (completely nonsense) calculations that nobody ever buys these cameras ever and it's only because Nikon can't keep up with demand for the D850... blah, blah, blah... 
Let me ask them this: If that is true, that nobody wants these cameras - WHY IS YOUR FAVOURITE BRAND(S) COPYING THEM ALMOST TO THE LETTER? There is clearly no market for these things, yet they've just put ALL their eggs in to that basket? Unbelievable. 
Yes but the people making these claims have absolutely zero clue just how much Sony is in that market. Like how the people claim some kind of superiority that their brand is being used by the newspapers to capture still images for the World Cup or Olympics, while not reading those platforms and watching the game(s) delivered to them on Sony broadcast systems costing 100x what was spent on the photography. Mind boggling. Oh and then make little fanboy jokes about how there is Sony branding at the stadium. 
I actually don't think they were capable of it when that camera came out. Next round they have the tech, whether they implement it or treat us with disdain (again) remains to be seen. I don't think any brand can just sit idle at this time. 
The original had some really special mojo. I too would rate it as one of my favourite ever cameras (stills and video). It's a shame in many ways that they cow tailed and went with a more DSLR-mini design in latter models. The original body had a more modern and dare I say premium design to it that fit (I felt) better with the mirrorless ethos (plus the S was the last and most refined of the original design). They also designed much prettier lenses then too, plus they didn't make everything enormous. I may just have to own one for the third time. 
Indeed and well said. Though I would say filmmaking is art and science. 
And the perfect example of this is the Sony F35