agoldstraw

I remarked elsewhere that the idea that vloggers even NEED a full-frame camera is a construct which has been hyped to ridiculous proportions.

Although I dislike the guy intensely, I'll give props to Jared Polin here for at least pointing out in his A7C review that a) it actually isn't very 'compact' at all – it's very close to the same size as an A7iii with the prism cut off; b) This 'compactness' comes at a tremendous detriment to the ergonomics of the camera, and c) you can't beat the laws of physics. (I should add that I was tremendously disappointed with Gerald Undone's very uncharacteristically uncritical 'review').

To see the advantages of FF, the A7C buyer will need to invest in bulky and expensive glass. The alternative is to use mediocre, slow lenses that entirely negate those advantages. So you'd have been better off buying an M43 or APS-C camera with better, more compact and less expensive glass. But no – the 'influencers' all agree that it's now FF or nothing, and the camera manufacturers are delighted to supply the sheep with a bigger, far more expensive camera than they really need.
 

Is it just me, or is the notion that would-be vloggers need a full frame sensor camera batshit crazy? There is a pernicious trend being driven along by an unholy alliance of 'influencers' and manufacturers. The result is that there are scores of people out there who THINK they need FF but don't really know why, nor do they understand the advantages and disadvantages of such systems. The irony is that this mass hysteria is threatening the existence of the crop sensor systems which would probably be a much better fit for most of these people.

Cousin to Finbar Saunders (and his double entendres)...

YouTuber Gaston Shutters reporting unconfirmed pricing of €2100 and €2400 respectively for body only and with kit lens. That...is...insane.

9 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

The a6600 is $1198. That’s a far cry from $2000. The a7IV isn’t going to get a $500 price hike as it’s a parts bin camera, it’s just cobbled together with tech developed from other cameras In a down spec body.

The S5 is DOA for anyone that’s not a Panny die hard mostly because of its trash AF compared to the competition and other hits from the cripple hammer. The R6 and the now ancient a7III will easily crush it. And the a7IV is going to mop the floor with all of these, unless the a7c turns out to be something special instead of just a small FF body. 

 

In the UK currently, the A6600 plus kit lens is £1700. The A7iii, plus kit lens, is currently available for is £1900. But it has only come down to that level because it's relatively old. The S5 is being debuted at £2000 including kit lens. I'm including one lens here because I suspect people stepping up to FF from M43/APS-C will largely be starting again, glass-wise. Sony's FF lens compatibility with its APS-C line might give it a modest starting advantage here.

Remember, Sony still has the upcoming A7C to squeeze in to the picture. Common sense dictates that that there will have to be some clear blue water between that and the A6600. The same principle will apply to the A7iv, which I confidently predict will put it much closer to the R6 in price than the S5. As for the R6 itself, I don't know how you think a camera which stops working so frequently 'crushes' one which just works, albeit you have to take more care with focusing issues. 

With the Sony A6600 already nudging two grand, and this weird A7c reportedly on the horizon to fit in between them, there's no way that the A7iv won't be priced at anything than around the R6 mark, leaving the S5 500 or so quid cheaper.