newfoundmass

seems like it has most of the same overheating issues as the a6700. 

7 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

That's mostly false. Breathing comp is an in-camera computational operation like active stabilization and the new reframing. Pretty sure Sony isn't going to pay its engineers to add 3rd party lenses to that capability. Other than TC's and hitting the a1's 30fps with tracking, Sony hasn't restricted AF in any way. The E-mount is open, they don't even charge a licensing fee. Sony does specify there is a license agreement and I'm sure that contains language about features that will be exclusive to Sony, like the TC's and 30fps. If a company is going to commit resources to developing lenses, there's also likely language that says Sony isn't going to suddenly brick their lenses as well. 

Non-functional AF is a product of the lens, not the camera, since there are literally hundreds of lenses without issue. Without knowing all the details from the random game of telephone quoted above, old Samyang lenses have horseshit AF, it wouldn't surprise me if there were AFc issues without an update with some of them. And some may not work well with new bodies period. I had the original orange glow 85/1.4 and it couldn't track anything shooting video - it was useless as an AF lens with video.

Chris

Nothing I said was false and nothing you said proves otherwise. Sony is putting out features like breathing compensation that only work with Sony lenses. It requires specific communication between the lens and the camera to computate the correction needed. If they wanted to they could work with third party lens manufactures to make it work with them, but they won't because they want people to buy their lenses.

It's not 2016 anymore. Sony now has a large lens lineup and has become a leader in the market. They really don't need to play nice with third party companies anymore, because they really don't need them to boost the system anymore. Bless your heart for giving any of these companies the benefit of the doubt, but my original statement strands: it would not shock me at all to see Sony clamping down on third party lenses in order to try and sell more of their own. And there is absolutely nothing stopping them from doing so, as a few lines of code can make third party AF lenses useless if they so choose. 

I went with a couple of Angelbird cards. We'll see how they go! Fingers crossed!

1 hour ago, Trek of Joy said:

Nonsense. Sony isn't clamping down on anything. E-mount protocols are open source - its precisely the reason every 3rd party AF lens maker has E-mount lenses and why there's nothing for the RF and only recently some for X-mount and such. The poor functioning lens likely needs a FW update, much the same way Sony bodies get an incremental update when certain lenses are released or lenses get FW updates when new bodies come out. Newer bodies like the a6700 with the AI functionality will certainly require some lens updates.

Everyone outside of Sony is not openly sharing AF protocols so they have to be reverse engineered. Nikon seems to have something with Tamron and Fuji has allowed Sigma and Viltrox in, but as we know outside of Sony options are severely limited. 

Chris

None of that limits their ability to clamp down moving forward. Nothing can stop companies from making lenses for the mount, but it's absolutely possible for Sony to limit how well those lenses work on Sony bodies. We're already seeing it with Sony developing features like breathing correction that only work with Sony lenses. 

I really wish they'd make these less tacky/cheap looking and relax on the branding, especially on something labeled "pro." It'd be nice if they were inconspicuous.

2 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Older (the newer was bought more than one year ago) Sandisk Pros, zero problems with them - dunno if the current huge problem with their external SSD could reflect in their newer cards.

Waiting for 2 Sabrent V60 256gb UHS-IIs to arrive.

That's what is making me wonder if it's time to switch. Never, ever had a problem with them but with the issues with their SSDs and now this card crapping in under a year, I'm a little weary. Well, weary enough to be looking at ProGrade and Angelbird cards anyway, as I've heard good things about both.

2 hours ago, Carz said:

There are a lot of fake SanDisk cards for sale, especially on amazon, so be careful on what you are relying on. There are some youtube videos showing how to spot fakes.

Yeah, I don't tend to buy from Amazon for that reason. Got these from B&H, so I assume they got them from SanDisk directly.

I didn't lose any work, thankfully, because I record on both cards, but still a bit concerning!

For the first time ever today I had a memory card failure. One of my SanDisk Extreme PRO UHS-II cards that is less than a year old stopped working during a shoot. It'd only record for a couple seconds before stopping, almost as if it couldn't write fast enough. 

What SD cards do you use? 

2 hours ago, ntblowz said:

Over at dpreview that Samyang lens wont work with A6700 on AFC.

I guess only Sony and Tamron lens works fine with A6700 atm.

I think we'll start seeing more of this happening with Sony, especially as they start releasing features that require more communication between the lens and the body like needed for breathing compensation, etc. 

It also wouldn't surprise me to see them start to try clamping down on third party lenses now that their lens selection has matured. When they were just trying to get people into the system those third party lenses helped a lot, but now that they've fleshed out their own offerings I imagine they're wanting people to purchase those instead. They aren't making any money when someone buys a Viltrox lens, but they do when someone buys a Sony or Tamron lens. 

16 hours ago, insch said:

I was planning to get an A7S MKIII until I was made aware of the FX3. I will primarily use this camera for 4K filming and have been advised that it's a better camera than the A7S for that task. From what I can see, the main differences for the FX3 are no electronic viewfinder but several mounting points, hence no essentail need for a cage. And a handle with XLR points. I have an Atomos Ninja V monitor/recorder that I could use with the FX3 to maximise its potential.

Is this the best camera for 4K in this price bracket?

Thank you.

I think whether or not it's the best camera depends on what kind of work you're doing and what your needs are. We're really fortunate to have so many options to choose from, and frankly you can't go wrong with most cameras these days as they're all quite excellent, but some cameras have better strengths than others and it also boils down to preference. 

At one point I was leaning towards going with Sony, but ultimately decided against it. For my work I do a lot of handheld shooting, so Panasonic's IBIS was a big selling point for me. I also prefer Panasonic's colors over Sony's, and find V-log to be better than S-log to grade. I did have to compromise though on things like autofocus (though I still insist its not nearly as bad as people say.) Ultimately that's what ya gotta ask yourself when choosing a camera: what compromises can you live with? 

I think though if you're just doing video, have decided that Sony is the best tool for you and don't need any photo features then the FX3 is the better option, especially given it has received more firmware updates as @ntblowz stated. The FX3 also pairs well with the FX30 in the event you ever need a reasonably priced b-cam. Heck the FX30 is an excellent option as an a-cam and is a bargain. 

Keep us posted! 

1 hour ago, kye said:

Yes, 10-bit vs 8-bit is a much larger consideration, especially if you're shooting in log.  It's rare to see issues with either 8-bit or 4:2:0 in real-world examples, but the ones I have seen appeared to have a similar impact where skin tones had larger squares of yellow/orange/pink instead of the same colours being much more granular and natural-looking.

The other consideration is resolution.  We haven't all changed to displays that are 4x the size since before 4K was released and 1080p was the standard, therefore the individual pixels are smaller today in the viewers field-of-view than they used to be.  IIRC 4:2:0 in 4K is the same as 4:4:4 in 1080p.

I think that's why the C100 is so good in log despite being only 8-bit 1080p; the 4K downsampled to 1080p gives you more flexibility in grading than if the sensor was 1080p.

I helped a buddy film with three C100s a couple weeks back and the image still holds up. He upscales it and it looks really good. I wish the C70 had kept that form factor, because the C100 is possibly my favorite ever. It's such a pleasure to use. Heck, I wish more companies would copy it!

1 hour ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

For me (personal use), I think that 4:2:0 will be enough - never had a 10-bit camera before, I guess that 8 to 10 bit is a much more noted upgrade.

8 to 10 bit definitely is a more notable upgrade. For a lot of people 8 bit was/is enough, especially for personal use.

11 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

I mean in all seriousness I shared that an a6700 user found 10-but 420 to not overheat. I’d that is true that could be great for those interested. My annual obsession of camera bodies is irrelevant and is as hominem. 
 

if you fell 422 is noticeably better than 420 I am merely asking for video evidence. I’m curious. 420 could be a good solution.  Just engage the content?

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to set up a video comparison for you. And as I (and others) have stated, whether there is a noticeable difference depends on the person's preference, what the scene is, what you're doing with the footage, etc. If you are talking about simply using footage straight out of camera or even doing a light grade, then 4:2:0 will most likely be fine for most cases. If I am filming 10 bit I'd prefer that extra information, but again, that boils down to preference. If you don't notice the difference is it really that important?

I just don't feel like I can give you the answer I feel like you want to hear.

2 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Ad hominem. 🥱 

Not at all. I'm sorry that you took it that way. I am simply saying that none of this matters if you don't just pick up a camera and film. Six months ago it was "is there really that much difference between 8-bit and 10-bit" and now it's "is there really that much difference between 10-bit 4:2:2 and 10-bit 4:2:0?" Being inquisitive is good! But from my perspective it really does look like you're worrying about things that, in the big picture, won't really impact what you'll be using the camera for, especially if you're just an enthusiast or hobbyist.

Regardless, none of us can really answer some of your questions because it boils down to preference and what is acceptable to you. If you can't notice the difference between the two then does it really matter? Does it matter that I can? I don't think so.

19 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Let me rephrase - I’ve yet to find a video demonstrating the difference so I don’t know.  You’ve made a statement in confidence and was hoping you could educate me with an example. 

I don't mean any disrespect here, truly, but I don't have a ready link to a YouTube video or anything because I've never needed one since I work with footage every day and part of my job is seeing/knowing the difference. I am sure there are YouTube videos out there that show a comparison (though I'm sure YouTube compression will be an issue) but you have access to the same available online information that I do with a simple Google or YouTube search. There really is only one person though that can answer your original question of whether or not you can see a noticeable difference and that's you.

You've been looking at getting a new camera for what feels like a year, and I feel like you are far too concerned with this stuff vs. just getting something, getting out there, and shooting. You can pick up an old camera that films in 8-bit and get awesome images. It ain't the camera that is gonna limit you. Well, except maybe if it's a Sony, I hear they have trouble filming outdoors! 😉

8 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Any media I can see to notice the difference? I can’t find much difference between 10-but 422 and 420

If you don't notice a difference then why are you asking? 😉

6 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Is there an appreciably noticeable difference in 4:22 and 4:20

 There are a lot of variables. 4:2:0 is good enough for a lot of stuff but it's certainly nice to have that extra information when you need it.

Yeah, I really can't think of a lot of reasons to film with the A7s over the A7iii. You might do a little better in low light, but it'll be lacking in pretty much every other way. Better rolling shutter, battery life, auto focus, IBIS (vs. None at all), color, less prone to overheating, etc. 

You used to have to really rig the A7s (and the A7sii) up to get the most out of them,  especially when it came to battery life. One of the reason the production company I was working with at the time ended up selling theirs and going with the GH4 was because that, the rolling shutter, and overheating. That low light though, it blew our minds at the time. Low light across the board has improved so much, but 10 years ago it was voodoo magic! 

I think there probably is something to sensor size being a contributing factor to overheating, but I don't think it's THE factor. I think it's the processing and overall body design. I mean, up until the S1H, GH6 and the S5II/X, Panasonic have been able to do it in both M43 and full frame without a fan. It really might boil down to Panasonic having superior processing (not just power, but more efficient coding) and body design. Once that wasn't enough to handle heating issues they added a recording limit, like in the original S5, or added the fans. 

Sony would get crap for putting in a recording limit, which is why I imagine they don't do it, but at least it'd be honest. At least then people would know how long they could record consistently. 

10 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

In fact, all environmental data is important when comparing overheating issues, for all brands.

I mean not all brands have overheating issues, so... 😉

Real pros film with laser precision anyway. If you need more than 3.5 seconds of footage the problem ain't the camera, bro, it's you! 

Imagine the reaction if Canon was releasing these cameras. You'd have your Canon apologists, of course, but man, Canon would be getting torn to shreds in Facebook groups, forums, and on YouTube (and rightfully so!). Sony though... not much of a peep from the usual crowd.

If only they were required to include that information in their marketing material. Instead we get "Powered-up by its combo of the latest 26.0MP back-illuminated Exmor R CMOS sensor and the BIONZ XR processor, the camera nevertheless weighs less than its predecessor, resulting in a mobile workhorse capable of an unstrained 11 fps continuous stills capture or stress-free UHD 4K video oversampled from a 6K resolution, making it a formidable multi-tool for the multi-hyphenate creative."

Imagine if these companies were required to add recording limits to any camera that overheats AND were required to clearly advertise those limits in the specs, on the box, and in the marketing material like they used to have to with the 30 minute limit! See how quick they'd figure out and fix the overheating then!

Heck, imagine how quick they'd figure it all out if they had to clearly advertise that the camera overheats at all instead of burying it in the manual!

44 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

Well said! I see this type of comment pop all the time, I guess only us "old" people shoot event, speeches under the sun, while new ppl just shoot 5s of b roll and call it a day lol.

When did shooting under the sun become extreme scenario?

I guess by current projection of temperature rise it will be standing under the sun is the extreme condition 😂

All of it is ridiculous, from comments like that to people claiming only us event shooters need to record for long takes. I will never, ever understand consumers making excuses for why it's okay for companies to give you less. THAT'S what I've really come to despise the most about the video/photo community, honestly. 

It's one thing to ask for something that they're simply not capable of doing in a camera at this price point, but overheating absolutely isn't one of those things, and reliability should be everyone's top priority. We're literally asking for the bare minimum, while people act like we're the crazy ones! Lol! It's not even an expensive or difficult fix!