Jump to content

noone

Members
  • Content Count

    998
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About noone

  • Rank
    Frequent member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

3,432 profile views
  1. I think a lot of people expect more from this (a7s update) than what it is. Not really made to be a camera for shooting in well lit studios or sets (though you probably could). Sure it is a camera for video and stills but the S stands for sensitivity and I would expect it to have a noticeable improvement over the earlier version at higher ISOs (which are already excellent). The small jump in pixel count will give it a rise in stills shooters too and the faster FPS for stills (with possibly actual tracking AF in an A7s version ????) It might be an excellent camera for sports pros too for really low light (as a second camera). Seems like a pretty big upgrade for an A7s to me
  2. The only video i have left from my Pentax Kx is Australian blues/rock legends Spectrum playing their song "I'LL be gone" (one of very few blues songs to get to number one on the Rock/pop charts). Not sure I can post it though for a number of reasons (I have a couple of versions over a three day festival) and one is way to dark but the other is ok i think if not quite complete...I forgot about them but thanks to the thread I went and watched again....how i wish I had a Sony A7s back then!
  3. I will always have a love for Pentax (not so much Ricoh though they are ok). I still have a Pentax SLR and have had a few of those, I had a IST*D, K100d and a KX as well as a Pentax Q (the K100d and Q both died before their times due to me overloading the stabilization I think by using silly long lenses with it). Video on the KX I thought was ok even though the camera got very hot very quickly. I wish more ILCs still took AA batteries like my three Pentax DSLRs did (I know it limited life but was great knowing they were easy to get and easy and quick to charge).
  4. noone

    Lenses

    I think they will make the currently available EF lenses for as long as they make EF cameras (and some years beyond too maybe) but this just means they will not be developing any future EF lenses (there are likely some still yet to come though). I guess it just means the next round of tilt shift lenses will be RF mount and not EF for example. The replacement RF lenses will probably mostly be better so the value of the EF lenses could well drop fairly quickly once there is a decent supply of new RF lenses.
  5. I used to have four Camera stores within a couple of hundred yards but now the nearest is hundreds of miles away I think. BTW, Thanks for the site! Working great for me.
  6. Andrew I do not think anyone is arguing he (or anyone) can not have an opinion that "Sony sucks" but it is when he says rubbish like no serious photographers/videographers use Sony that his "opinion" takes a massive credibility hit. Even that thread of yours on Canon and Netflix had Sony actually equal second that seems to have been missed by some. That SI cover has band skin tones? OK, what about looking at all the previous ones, I am sure there would be flaws detectable with them too (still no way I will ever have a SI cover no matter how much I tried). For ME, the worst camera I ever owned was a Sony but so was the best one. It is great we are all different.
  7. At least with Sony You could buy something like a Sigma 16mm 1.4 and use clear image zoom and you have a 16-32 1.4 zoom in effect with little loss of image quality for video and jpeg stills. I have it set with the down button on my Sony A7s and then use the left/right buttons to zoom in and out (on the little NEX-3N it works from the zoom switch like a P&S camera) Works great with all lenses but with things like the 55 1.8 and FD 24 1.4 it is fun. On really fast lenses like an 85 1.2 at 1.2 it is too shallow to use while filming (for me anyway) and even 1.8 FF would be something i would zoom first then use rather than zoom while shooting. I wish all manufacturers would allow something like this.
  8. Not sure I would say TOTALLY abandoned the video side but yeah, it is a bit behind some of the opposition now (they only really had the A7s pair and a few odds and ends before that in the ILC space that were more video centric though). I would just say NOT class leading and they still make great hybrid cameras with excellent stills and decent enough video for many serious users. They are due for something soon I think (as are some others). Great time to like and use photo/video gear.
  9. Right now though the Sony A7iii is the most popular single model FF camera. (If the Canon 5Diii was listed it might give it a close run still). I think it would be very telling if it was also broken down into what class of video (and stills) user we consider ourselves. I think Sony would tend to be more stills first users so around 10% on a video forum seems fair.. I consider myself to be an enthusiast photographer who dabbles in video (mainly just recording a few songs at pub/club gigs i photograph).. I shoot a lot in low light and I still do not think there is any other camera I would want over my A7s as I am often at ISO 25600 or even 51200 and at those ISOs its DR is a little better than even the three cameras rated by DXO as better for low light now because they drop away a little quicker. At light levels low enough to use that, the DR I am seeing with my eyes is not huge anyway. I do not need a huge pixel count or tracking AF
  10. Again, you can hold whatever opinion you want but when you make a blanket statement about Sony not used by serious photographers, as far as I am concerned your opinion is as valid as if you said your "opinion is that one plus one equals three". I AM a fan of Sony (because of the A7s and Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 among others) but equally i am a fan of Canon (because of the 17mm TS-E for example) and there are things i like in most brands. I see great work from Sony users and Canon users and Nikon ETC ETC ETC if you don't that is your problem.
  11. I did address it to you. Just pointed out that part is what i objected to. Look, you can have an opinion that YOU do not like Sony (or any camera or brand) if you want but to say that a brand is not used by serious photographers or videographers (and especially one that is selling quite well) is simply trolling as well as being absurd in my opinion as well as being insulting to the many people who make their living using such gear. You don't like it, fine....others DO. I like all the brands of photography gear I have used and just occasionally do i not like a piece of equipment. I never got on with a Canon 7d for instance but that does not mean others did. I almost never watch Tony and Chelsea and have not for a year or so and last I was aware of there were just a few more Sony Users than the Northrup's. No gear is perfect ...for ME, the A7s (first version is still the camera I want and use), for others it would be the last thing they want...same with the newer higher FF Sony's and all those cameras from any brand. Yes, Sony has a colour issue for many people (not all) but equally, other people find greater limitations with different brands. I think the main issue is AWB for Sony and I mainly use Jpegs and do not grade the songs i video....I do not consider myself to be anything but an old amateur but my photos and (odd video) do get used by newspapers, councils, record companies, bands and others from time to time. I have to use RAW with my old Canon DSLR as there is a noticeable difference but with my A7s, not so much.
  12. Andrew, I agree that there ARE a lot of stills pros STILL with Canon and Nikon (I actually do not think the number with Leica is huge at all and many of those that DO actually use dual systems) but there ARE an increasing number using Sony (or rather an increasing percentage in a shrinking market). I also think a LOT of Pros that use Sony are also dual system users including quite a few Canon users who investigate Sony (while keeping their lenses still though that is dropping off a bit now maybe or some have settled on Sony and selling off their canon gear). Again though there is an increasing number, at least around here. It also depends on what you mean by "pro" as around here at least there are a LOT of people who hang out a shingle and shoot weddings on the weekend...many of those are still "serious" photographers and seriously good. Then there are those using APSC cameras to take Santa pics/portraits at the mall. I would also take the work of many high end "enthusiasts" over many pros too and are clearly "serious photographers". This is the bit i objected to especially... "Most of these users are not serious photographers or videographers either. If they do video then they know how much work goes into fixing Sony color. I've seen professional photographers that use Sony and post work with horrible unnatural skin tones that can't be fixed by shooting RAW. Sony is not being used by serious professionals." And THAT is as ridiculous as it would be to say that ONLY Sony users are serious photographers/videographers....it is rubbish!
  13. So far I have looked at a total of one lens for this. For stills jpegs (I did shoot a video of the band but I deleted it by accident before I could look at it). An ancient Canon 20-35 2.8 L (probably the most updated lens around with 17-35 2.8 L, 16-35 2.8L 16-35 2.8L ii, 16-35 2.8 L iii all following on). This battered old thing is something I love more and more even though I usually prefer primes. It might not hold up for high pixel count cameras now or for 8k video. Both these are f4 (24mm and 35mm) I do like how this lens renders at f4 to f8.
  14. Yeah that is why most of the video pros i see with a "proper" camera and not a DSLR or mirrorless ILC are actually using Sony. As for not being serious photographers (and increasingly serious hybrid shooters) You really need to get out more....there are more that i see with Sony than other brands around here now with quite a few who switched from 5D mk whatevers. Again, to many there IS an issue with Sony colour and its seems I am not alone in thinking a LOT of that is due to auto white balance but it is hard to take you seriously with what seems an extreme bias against Sony.
×
×
  • Create New...