noone

Well Canon does EVIL (electronic viewfinder, interchangeable lens) better than any one.

Maybe the road to hell is actually paved with Canon cameras rather than good intentions?

On the plus side, Canon stills shooters should be able to get some good quality cheap cameras soon enough.

12 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

The screen in that video says 10-bit 4:2:2 4k 100p, which would mean 120p for those of us in NTSC-land. If it can do it internally with no issues, this rises to the top of my list since I can shoot it alongside an a7r3 or 4 for landscape work. I have a Ninja V for external recording, but it can't do 4k120.

It also blows out a few of the rumors on SAR as false. Guess we'll see soon enough.

Chris

 

I get the impression 120p in 4k is 8 bit internally and RAW and 10 bit is external.

Neither is anything i need so as long as it has decent 4k 25p AND proper tracking AF with a nice high res EVF and articulated screen, I am easily pleased.     IF they added a built in ND (not a chance in hell), that would ice the cake for me.     Oh and 1/16000 or even 1/32000 shutter would be nice too but not holding my breath.

Mind you, by the time I CAN afford one, the then current Kodalympus 2000 will be doing all I want in something the size of a matchbox and at only 2/3 the price.

With all that is now said to be in it, I will be doing whatever it takes to buy this as both my still and video camera.

An A7s with top flight AF, yes please.

It may take me a year or more to be able to buy it but there is one in my future.

I actually do get it.

Many people would rather have 20mp or more and only around 6.5 to 7.5 stops of DR at ISO 25600 or 5.5 to 6.5 at ISO 51200 than 12mp and 9 stops at 25600 and over 8 at 51200.    I am just not one of them and those ISOS are actually settings I use a fair bit if needed.

With SOME cameras (A7iii and to a lesser extent the 1DXiii) you get more pixels AND within a stop for both but most others the difference is more even for FF and medium format and for APSC and M43, well those "real photography" cameras fall off a cliff a lot earlier and many can not even get to 25600 or it is last resort only.

10 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

For sport and action I tend to crop a lot and I have a 200-400 1.4x lens so at 560mm it has some reach. I find it already limiting with 20mpx of the 1Dx series..  Going back to 12 is a no go.
The minimum goal that we set is to have a picture that fill 4k screens, TV, projectors so ca. 8 Mpix and with 12 Mpix you don't have too much to crop. You also want to have some margin for reframing especially on things that is a one time shoot only.

Bud good for you that 12 Mpix is plenty, for a lot of people is very limiting.

 

 

Agreed, but then how many people (serious photographers or otherwise) need a 200-400?    Just like a 12mp camera, it s for a limited market.    For sports i use an old manual focus 300 2.8 though not so much these days ...I used to use it with a 1.7x auto focus adapter for a National (Australian Greyhound racing) newspaper with a 12mp DSLR and have used it bare and MF  for Australian football shots with the A7s (and A7).

Instead of cropping or using APSC mode or a 1.4x TC with my A7s I would more often just use clearzoom since it is virtually lossless (jpegs and video) without giving up any resolution.

Ahh, just looked up AP and it is a different company entirely to what I thought it was and since it is a non profit, of course they would take any deal that got them free gear in exchange for selling just a little bit of their soul.

10 minutes ago, Nezza said:

I'm not sure what your point is. Media will accept any quality of footage these days, skype quality or worse. It's about getting the shot, not the quality. 

Slightly different scenario to something a pro may wish to crop and blow up, e.g. wildlife where you don't have time to perfectly compose the shot that needs a tight crop.

If you want to accept lesser quality and options in post that's your choice but in 2020 a camera costing 2+ grand offering iPhone resolution doesn't cut it for most serious photographers.

Tell me ANY photo competition anywhere in the world that wants entries only from cameras with more than 12mp?    There may well be some but all the ones I know of ask for things like a maximum of 2500 pixels on the longest side and that is both for entry and judging (even ones open to "pro" photographers).

I do not equate the pixel count of a camera with image quality and I would much rather my 12mp camera than any micro four thirds one or any APSC one for my uses.    Your choice can be otherwise but that is no more relevant than mine.

How on earth could anyone use anything other than a full frame (or larger sensor) camera for "serious" photography?? ( I do not actually believe that).

Surely a REAL "pro" would have the right lens for the job with them, no?

14 minutes ago, Nezza said:

Agreed.

Mind you, the 20 or so festivals and half a dozen newspapers who have used my photos thought I was a reasonably serious photographer as where the ones silly enough to give me a photo pass to the likes of the Dixie Chicks when they were selling out stadiums and the biggest selling female act in history (to that time) or the people who gave me a photo pass to this  little concert (even though i was only using a low MP camera).

NO ONE has ever asked me how many megapixels I use, not once!

29 minutes ago, Nezza said:

I said 12M isn't enough for serious photographers that want to crop and make large prints, I didn't say 'only megapixels matter',  you said that. You ignored all the other benefits of an interchangeable lens system with all the manual control that enables and said just use a smart phone with high megapixels. Your words, not mine.

As you say, you'll have a hard time convincing anybody vaguely serious about photography that 12M or less is acceptable but if you're happy to accept that low bar go for it.

A) I firstly replied to your "joke" about shooting the same resolution as an I phone...I simply pointed out that there are phones with 48MP NOW (not to mention 108mp ones coming if not already here) so the same logic already applies to 16mp, 20mp, 24mp and even 36mp cameras....you added some uses in a later post but again, the logic still applies.

My phone has a camera but I could not even tell you what it is as I never use it (certainly less than 12mp).

B) You said photographers that want to crop and make large prints and I disagreed with that and again, I ask how large a print is large? Plenty of software to resize to pretty much any size you want is available these days.

I DID agree about cropping, not printing.

Personally I want a photography camera to be something I can fully use at night or get a decent wide angle tilt shift and missing those would be a much bigger limit to me than a few MPs. (LOTS of popular cameras would not suite me, that does not mean they are not serious photography cameras).

I had a 24mp FF camera alongside my first A7s and I sold it because I was not using it anywhere near as much as a stills camera (and I needed the money), I also sold my 18mp Canon and 16mp Panasonic as they were not even close to as good a photography camera for my needs ...I just got a 20mp Sony 1 inch sensor camera but did not get it BECAUSE it is 20mp.

I can not speak for anyone but myself (and neither can you).    I consider myself a serious photographer and 12mp is fine for me (I do not need to crop much since I have all the focal lengths I want covered).   To say 12mp is not for serious photographers is as silly as saying you need a 400mm 2.8 (or any other item of gear) to be a serious photographer.   It is just gear.

There probably ISN'T a huge market for what i like to do but that does not make it any less real or "serious".

14 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

But why would you get it over the a7 iii which is already quite old and a lot cheaper.

Better video (if/when I needed it) and especially slightly better high ISO (the A7iii is better for stills image quality than the A7s/A7sii up to 12800 and about the same at 25600 but not a whole lot in it and I would expect this new camera will be better than 1 and 2 versions.

Most shows like that I doubt I would want to shoot in 4k yet anyway (but would like to have it for headliners and favoured acts) and the FF 1080 is very nice still from the A7s (without doing much or any editing and zero grading) but there have been some concerts/festivals I have done that have been very dark (Metal festival in a cow paddock years ago I would have LOVED to have an A7s at). 

I often shoot at ISO 25600 and higher and for me, there is still nothing better than my now aging full HD only A7s (though I keep looking for a cheap 4k recorder for it).

1 hour ago, Jay60p said:

 

would really appreciate being able to shoot the kid's Jazz Band concert from beginning to end without stopping. 

 

Even if it is only an a7sii with A7iii AF it would be close to PERFECT for me to shoot a jazz concert (both stills and video).

I did stills for the last 7 or so Jazz and blues festivals here (3 day festival at multiple locations now in recess sadly) with just an occasional video though would be happy to do 50/50 now.

I doubt you would ever need to shoot a jazz band concert fully continuously .

As much as I like Sony, could it actually be because AP is in trouble and getting a bunch of free stuff (that to be fair is still good for their purposes) would be a major help?

The Australian Asscociated Press actually was slated to close recently but was saved at the last minute.

8 hours ago, leslie said:

people are over rated, try some wildlife or landscapes perhaps. got in a session with the p4k and the fd 50mm f1.4 ssc this afternoon. Cant fault either, although my dop and colour grading is pretty newbish 🙄

Well I am anti-social so yeah.     Still though, this was MADE as a portrait lens and I think it will shine for that more than anything.

Just wish it was not so damn cold (for me) right now.

9 hours ago, Nezza said:

That would assume the only thing that counts in a camera is megapixels which is clearly not the case. There's a reason Apple has stuck with a 12M for so long. It's perfect for the job in hand, posting on social media, looking at on small screens, standard size prints.

For a full frame, interchangeable lens system 12M will limit you if you want to crop or blow up large prints, which I'd assume somebody that wants to drop thousands on a body/lenses is likely to want.

If Sony does go 12M in the A7S3 it's a no from me and I suspect others. Most people are buying these because they are hybrids, not solely video.

But that is the same assumption you made about the pixel count.

What size do you think you can not print from a 12mp FF camera?    What sizes are the vast majority of photos used at?

People have used 6mp cameras to produce billboards.

By FAR the AF of the A7s and A7sii (AFC that is) is what stops them being more a mainstream hybrid camera and yes, I agree most are not going to be buying it as a hybrid if it is 12mp but that is not to say it ISN'T a hybrid or the vast majority would actually be fine with it.

It is a perception, not the reality (though again, I know I am not going to change anyone's mind and I would rather more pixels IF the camera does exactly the same otherwise).

There has been nothing I have been missing with my A7s asa stills camera ...macro, super telephoto, tilt shift, fast portraits, slow lenses at night hand held (first camera I have been comfortable doing that with), sports (manual focus though)

On 6/19/2020 at 4:08 PM, heart0less said:

There is a solution, although it'd require buying another item.

A FD → Sony E helicoid.

At its minimum setting it should allow you to focus at infinity and if you want to have smaller MFD, then you turn the helicoid slightly and voila.

https://www.ebay.pl/itm/Canon-FD-lens-to-Sony-E-mount-adapter-Macro-Focusing-Helicoid-NEX-6-A6000-A6300/283131024151?hash=item41ebec9317:g:EZwAAOSwf95bh9Gf

Again, Thanks!

I ended up getting a helicoid adapter from Ebay.

Makes it sooo much better.     I still need victims but once it starts warming up and the virus is less an issue it should be good.

2 hours ago, Nezza said:

It's not, not in this day and age.

"Shoots stills at the same resolution as  your iPhone!"

Probably not the best marketing slogan ever.

By that logic, since there are phones with 48mp sensors already (ironically made by Sony), NO BODY would ever use any m43 camera again or most of the cameras made by anyone.

I know I am never going to convince anyone but for the vast majority of stills photographers, 12mp is MORE than enough and about the only thing is it is a bit more limited for cropping or if you want to use an APSC mode (where 5mp is a bit lower than I like but even that is ok for many uses).

6 hours ago, Márcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Interesting that Olympus have all in hand to make the perfect vlogger camera - which looks like a target demographic now.

Get the E-M10 MK III (or the new IV), put the E-M5 MK III sensor with PDAF, make some work with the AF especially with eye / face detect, correct the auto exposure in video (Camera Conspiracies had a very good video about it) headphone and mic jack. Maybe ditch the EVF if it is not needed by them (I really don't know). Put a flippy screen and a $699 price (or $799 with EVF) and bingo.

Has Olympus put a PDAF sensor in ANY camera other than the EM1 (1,2,3 and X)?    

I would love it if they did because I want as cheap a camera as I can find to adapt my two 43s DSLR lenses and they really need a PDAF camera (mine have issues so may not work at all or only partly so currently the lead candidate is a used EM1 mark 1).

History tells me they will not put it in any camera as it stands and might be a small part of what has killed them, to do so now would be too little too late and a bit of a WTF moment.

New account with "my cameras and kit" Canon 70D?

 Then first posts says he is on his second A7s? 

13 hours ago, martin085 said:

Hi all,

I am on my second A7s and have just noticed (after several years)  that when I select a cooler white balance, Face detect AF does not work and neither does eye AF (A7s has a very crude early eye AF only in AFS mode).    RAW or Jpeg makes no difference and I am assuming it must also affect AF in general and including for video...AF does still work but I am guessing just not quite as well.

I thought it might just be a Sony "thing" (maybe just an A7s thing) but a search found a few older items in various places on colour temp affecting AF.

Are recent cameras affected by this?    

This is not a huge issue (or much of any issue really) for me since most of my lenses are MF on the camera and only my 55 1.8 is proper AF and used for that now and it has always worked as required.   

Just curious since I am bored out of my tree stuck at home most of the day ( eating three days worth of food in one).

 

That is just my post from a while ago just reworded slightly.    Scam account.

37 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@noone

Yes, we did shoot. When you have EXT scenes, you do them outside, in the exterior/most shooting happens outside in the summer, because the sun and the sea is our selling point!

Athens is the capital with the less green in Europe, so working outside in summer time is a torture. Working on the beach, the sun reflects on the sand or pebbles and is scorching hot all day.

 

It IS hot there for you,I get it, but it is NOT as hot as many OTHER places.     It is certainly not as hot as in Las Vegas for that test (at least if an ambient temp of 36 c VS 43 c to start).     I used to live near a beach in both Qld and NSW and know how hot the sand can get in summer.

I work both indoors and out now and outdoors in summer on a 40 degree day or higher means the concrete is going to be far hotter (right now in winter, while it is freezing at 8 am, by the time the sun has come up a bit just an hour or so later, working on the concrete is very pleasant and much warmer than it otherwise would be...same thing happens in summer except not so pleasant).

I would LOVE to live in a place with your summer temps, you should be proud and happy with it.

If I was rich enough, I would live in Darwin in the Northern Territory in winter and Launceston Tasmania in Summer

I hate winter but I recognize here in Wagga Wagga (capital of the world and all) it is not THAT cold by world standards in winter but it is hotter than average in summer (and there are hotter places still in Australia and the US and Asia and Africa in particular).

Back to that test, though, that was quite something and I would like to see a similar test with all the FF cameras.

2 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

Unfortunately, we have to work under those conditions very often, especially now with the climate change, it is getting worst and worst.

We also have another phenomenon which has been increased a lot lately, Sahara dust clouds.

https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=883555736 it reached U.S this year! imagine we, that are just in the corner (literally). This is the worst, as you can not breath easilly and the sand is toxic because of polution and illegal mining in the North African countries. You have headaches and fee terrible and week for days, if you work in the open.

Another problem that we have all the time with synch sound, is that we turn off the airconditioning most of the time (except for special airconditioning units in studios and the such) and the sound man turns the worst enemy of the set immediatelly! 

Anyway, there have been a lot of times that I was shooting together with Sony users, and I had to keep shooting alone with my NX, because they have been shut off because of overheating, especially when I was doing weddings some time ago, and weddings happen early afternoon here. 

So you are NOT shooting in the temps he did the test in.

Those dust clouds are horrible.

We do get large dust storms here (just not on that scale) but still big enough to cover hundreds of miles and it is at its worst when there is a drought mixed with wind as all the topsoil from further west gets blown here.   They seems to have been getting worse lately with a couple each year on average now I think.    I will not use my cameras in it but it is a pain in my bathroom as it gets covered in dust through the louvered windows

8 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

These temperatures you mention are under shadow. I am pretty sure his 

I am working on a feautre that starts the other week, and they send us the weather forecast because we have a lot of shooting on beaches, and the forecast was 37-38 until the end of the month.

Last week a did a web video on a famous beach site as a camera op and the Sachtler was too hot to catch..I took me a couple of days to cool off..

Ahh, see that is what I mean.

When he is talking about the temp being 110, THAT is ALSO the official recorded temp under cover and that is how they measure temps everywhere.

Outside in direct sun like on his table, it is probably a LOT hotter just like here when it hit 43 to 46 degrees c this year, it was a LOT hotter outside, even jut on grass, it would be hotter and on places like on concrete or bitumen roads, it would be well over 50 c.

My point is, the temps he did the test in would be beyond what most people anywhere on the planet would be using those cameras in regularly  (though I am sure there would be some).

25 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

 

These are pretty normal temperatures for mediterranean professionals, mind you.

 

Where?

Just curious, but looking at Athens temps for July last year and this year so far, they look pretty much perfect to me (mostly low 30s c up to 36 c a couple of days).

I see Athens did hit a European record in the 1977 heatwave.

It was probably MORE than 110 f on that table too.

It is usually hotter where I am than where the official temps are recorded.

Mind you, when it DOES get that hot (which it does here often in summer), I am hardly going to be using a camera and will head for air conditioning (my home isn't air conditioned) or just lie on my bed with a large fan on me.