newfoundmass

Yeah, it's yet another example of how spoiled we are. I came from the world of camcorders, so people talking about M43 being terrible in low light made me chuckle.

Being a Sony apologist isn't particularly professional, either. You've argued that the A7siii isn't meant for professionals, even though the very first thing Sony said in it's marketing material was how this camera is for "movie makers." You've then faulted people for not immediately selling their A7siii and buying the FX3, because apparently that's a reasonable thing to expect people to do less than a year after they dropped $3500 on the A7siii. Frankly it's pretty ridiculous for Sony to have released the FX3 in the first place just six or so months after the A7siii, given it was pretty much the same camera in a different body, but that's a debate for another day. And now you're faulting folks, many who use the camera professionally, for feeling burnt because they dare "whine" about features being withheld from their flagship cameras but not entry level ones even though it could be easily done in a firmware update. This is silly. @Andrew Reid you should check to see if his IP address is located at one of Sony's headquarters! 😉

People can repeat that until they're blue in the face but it won't suddenly make it true.

It's kind of gimmicky, but I kinda like the different colors. They're fun.

Yeah JCC has always had decent gear. I'll probably purchase this with the summer coming, if only to shade my pale ass a little (there's a bigger version available!) From the sun!

Is that a real product? Edit: it is, I'll be damned!

I'm not sure it has been confirmed either way. I heard a few say it was 1080p only, but others didn't mention that at all

I took would not be opposed to this. I do hope more of these companies start making L-mount versions now that the system has seen an increase in interest.

There are good and bad things about it, I definitely get why people dread it, but it's the future. Social media is how they get their feet wet and THEN that's when their world opens up to filmmaking and videography. I mean, we're already seeing it happen. People who think my friend is a rare example aren't paying attention. You're still missing the point. No one is saying you buy one camera and that's it. Someone starting their video journey though probably shouldn't have to purchase a whole new camera in a year or two because the camera they spent $2200 on can't record for extended periods or in hot conditions without overheating. At least not in 2023, anyway. People need to stop making excuses for these companies. He's a nice enough dude, but unfortunately he's a Sony shill. I probably wouldn't take what he has to say, re: whether you should buy a camera, very seriously.

Right now I'm shooting with two Lumix S5 bodies and a GH5. I don't intend to "upgrade" anytime soon. Before getting a second S5 I was still using a G85 and GX85! I do miss the GX85 though, it was so nice to have such a tiny camera with good video quality. I might end up getting another one, we'll see. Welcome back! To be honest I wish there were more threads about things that weren't about the latest cameras! Any reason why you use the P4K over the P6K for work?

Times change, as does how people get into video production and videography. You're unable to see things from a perspective that isn't yours @Kisaha. If you're a 21 year old kid (that's how old he was when he got his first paid gig) that is offered $75 to film a theater performance because you happen to own a camera for a YouTube channel you're trying to get off the ground, you're not going to have the experience and knowledge of someone that has been doing it for years and years. You're also probably not going to turn that opportunity down, either, because that's a credit card payment for the camera you put on credit. I was only relaying how his path into videography began, and how he first purchased a camera that was limited and how that impacted his unexpected, but ultimately successful, transition into doing paid work. He now shoots with three A7siii bodies and is doing well for himself. His criticism of the ZV-E1 is pretty valid, because 5 years ago he would've been the target demo for this camera, probably purchased it, and found he'd spent $2200 on a camera that he couldn't use for the work he'd eventually end up doing. As he put it, there's dozens of better options that won't limit a person from following whatever path they end up taking, whether it's being a YouTuber or becoming interested in filmmaking or videography as a job. His perspective was different from mine, and obviously yours, so I figured it was worth sharing.

I'm loving the videos @Andrew Reidhas been posting on YouTube lately. They're cracking me up, because he's saying a lot of the things I'm thinking, but doing it with the British humor and wit that I lack. The Matt Granger one did me in this morning! If you haven't watched them you should! Keep it up, Andrew!

As I said it might not be typical, but I don't think it's one rare case at all. I think quite a few YouTubers end up producing video work for others, whether it's a friend asking to film their kid's recital or a family member asking if they'd film their wedding. Once the ball gets rolling it can lead into something else. Many of us "blue collar videographers" started out as hobbyist and got our first paid gigs because we were known as "the video person" or "the person with the video camera." My first paid work was because as a 13 year old I'd bring my video camera to pro-wrestling shows to film for my own enjoyment and one time I was offered money in exchange for the footage. In many ways the aspiring YouTuber is the modern equivalent of that. To say that it's rare I just don't think is correct.

I was talking to a friend this morning who started out planning to be a YouTuber but ended up doing actual paid work and losing interest in YouTube. He's a Sony user and he gave me a different perspective for why this camera sucks and it is a pretty simple one: given it's limitations it can't grow with you. His first paid jobs were because people knew he did "that YouTube stuff" and they wondered if he could film something for them. He was of course stoked about it, but ended up having a problem: his A7iii was good for his YouTube channel but the 30 minute record limit didn't cut it for the theater productions he was asked to film. Suddenly the camera that he bought because all the YouTubers he wanted to emulate were using it, and that he bought on credit (he was 20 at the time and didn't know better), wasn't the right tool for the job. He was able to get around it when he found out the trick to remove the limit, but he still found it'd overheat sometimes. His parents eventually helped him buy an A7siii once they saw the potential in what he was doing, but it was a costly lesson. Obviously his experience might not be typical, but his point was that if he was just getting started now he'd probably buy this camera but end up regretting it because of it's limitations. People's intentions/priorities change over time. People buying this camera might only intend to use it for YouTube and short takes, but what happens when your co-worker offers to pay you to film their kid's play? Or you're asked to film your cousin's wedding? Anyway, it was an interesting perspective from someone that started out as a YouTuber that I thought I'd share.

No offense to the other posters, but the original poster mentioned taking stills with the camera so Blackmagic isn't a good option.

The S5II with the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 if you're looking for a zoom lens Or The S5II with Panasonic Lumix S 24mm f/1.8 and the Lumix S 85mm f/1.8 I went with 24 and 85mm because it'll give you a wide shot and a great portrait lens. The Sigma primes are also excellent, and are faster (f/1.4) but the 24 and 85mm would put you over budget.

It's one thing if the hardware can't support it, or if the camera is ancient, but the only reason these new features aren't being added to recent cameras via firmware is because Sony doesn't want to. As you said, they are features you can live without, but that's not really the point. These companies want brand loyalty without giving it back in return.

Unless you're shooting in a log profile or doing lots of color grading 8-bit is fine. I film the majority of my event work in 8-bit because 10-bit just isn't necessary when I don't need to do a ton of corrections. I film in the natural color profile on my Lumix cameras, set my custom white balance, and I'm good to go. 10-bit is great to have for narrative, commercial, and even corporate/interviews where you're going for a certain "look." It is also very good for green screen work. Since getting the Lumix S5 and full v-log I've filmed more in 10 bit. I really like it, but it's just not necessary for a lot of stuff.

I've seen some really good stuff from the S5II, so I think overall it's a very good release. But they do need to fix the issues that are there and let people know that they're working on them. Given their track record I am confident that they will, but I hate how poor their communication can be.

I'd also argue that they've already got people's money, so they don't care. They want you to buy the next camera, not increase the value of the camera you've already bought. And it works, because more than a couple notable YouTubers ended up getting the A1 and the A7RV after selling the A7SIII, which I'm sure then influenced others to do the same since that's how it works. I just wish more people cared about this shitty behavior.

If you're dropping $2200 on a camera you probably should be able to in 2023. These tests also don't take into consideration things like humidity during summer, which can make it feel a lot hotter than it is.

Some of the AI features ARE decent, but overall it's just a re-release of a 3 year old camera that is meant to appeal to those on a budget. It'll do great, I'm sure, but it's not much more than an attempt to squeeze a little more juice out of an old sensor and processor. I couldn't possibly rely on this camera in the summer even at the temps Gerald tested it at because that doesn't account for how warm it really feels with humidity, in direct sunlight, or in a venue filled with hundreds of people with no AC, etc. And I live/work in Vermont! But it's not meant for users like me. I will say, I'm not a fan of companies releasing cameras that have these kind of reliability flaws, even if they are honest about them. To me it feels like a step backwards, especially for Sony. I thought they'd moved on from releasing cameras that overheated. That you need to pay a premium to get a camera that won't overheat will never sit right with me. If you pay $2200 for a camera it should be usable in all but the most extreme conditions.

I think there are better cameras out there for what this camera is marketed for, but for those who've spent the last several years watching YouTubers gush about the A7Siii or the FX3 but couldn't afford one, I think this will be popular with them. I think we forget that the "famous" YouTubers are but a small fraction of those trying to create successful YouTube channels. There are millions of people on there trying to become the next big YouTuber but with limited resources. This is a camera that will probably appeal to them. They were probably ready to whip their credit cards out the second every reviewer said "it's like a A7Siii but for half the price."

Canon users really have a victim complex. Of course it is a flaw. As is the plasticky body, the single card slot, the insane crop needed to get usable stabilization, the overheating, etc. The difference is that Sony has more credibility with people because they haven't spent the last decade dicking people around while Canon has, so people are a lot less fervid in their criticism. If you want to criticize Sony then their firmware upgrades are a great place to start. It's ridiculous that they don't push some of these upgrades that are available on cheaper cameras to their more expensive ones, given the hardware is capable of it. Not everything on the ZV-E1 can be carried over to older cameras, but a lot of it can be and SHOULD BE if Sony values their customers. Finally, can't understand the complaint of the sensor. 12 megapixels isn't a flaw because it has a purpose: better low light. If you don't need those low light capabilities or just want more megapixels then you should get the A7IV.

This will probably do well for people producing social media content for businesses, but it'd do much better if they'd included an open gate mode so people could output video to the aspect ratios each service uses. Maybe it's a limit to the sensor size?