Jump to content

Sony a7 III discussion


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Django said:

the small sensor - large body of the XH1 is what allows the class-leading IBIS system Fuji has developed. 

I seriously doubt the large body is a result of IBIS. A7 cameras have bigger sensors and smaller bodies with IBIS. 'Class leading' ibis is much more a function of sensor size - the smaller the better'....

some people do prefer bigger dslr form factor. especially when using larger/heavier glass as it balances better.

Yes sure... some people do....

it's also to note X-H1's uses a thicker full alloy magnesium construction with increased weather sealing.

basically, they're aiming it at pros.

Yes. I get this point. Pros think bigger is more 'Pro' and less amateur etc... 

Still I am not sure why the camera manufacturers are so keen to cater to the 'pro' when say BLS stats show they are a small and declining (halved since 2011) demographic as well as relatively impoverished...

https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes274021.htm

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks Don! It's an exciting time for Chris and I!

With all due respect, this is very wrong. The 400 f2.8 issue which you continue to reference and described as prattle earlier on was actually my prattle about the A9 rather than the A7 but I thou

Testing the A7iii in anamorphic setup in exterior condition, some quick run and gun test shoots but I m very happy with the result . A7iii ( full frame mode ) + Ninja V + Cinelux ES + Rectilux HC

Posted Images

Is this some sort of subtle trolling or is it the evolution of a new breed of avant-garde performance art?

IBIS occupies space, just like you do, so the camera has to allow for that. Larger cameras balance better with longer lenses - basic physics.

Camera manufacturers are keen to lose boatloads of money, which is why they continue to release reasonably priced pro bodies for a dwindling market.

’Class-leading’ does sound a bit like advertising jargon, though.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

I seriously doubt the large body is a result of IBIS. A7 cameras have bigger sensors and smaller bodies with IBIS. 'Class leading' ibis is much more a function of sensor size - the smaller the better'....

2

Believe it or not but Fuji has stated the larger body is in part to accommodate the new IBIS system specifically developed for H1. There are videos showing said mechanism, it isn't the most compact.

Quote

Yes. I get this point. Pros think bigger is more 'Pro' and less amateur etc... 

Still I am not sure why the camera manufacturers are so keen to cater to the 'pro' when say BLS stats show they are a small and declining (halved since 2011) demographic as well as relatively impoverished...

1

Sorry but it seems you actually totally missed the point. It's not about bigger is less amateur. It's about tougher build quality, and better weight balance for bigger lenses as well as enhanced handling with a deeper grip and to serve multiple uses including gloves etc..

As for your stats, pros may be declining but amateurs tend to aim more & more towards high-end.. also last time i checked Fuji/Sony/etc still sell a vast array of prosumer/consumer bodies..

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Is this some sort of subtle trolling or is it an evolution of a new breed of avant-garde performance art?

IBIS occupies space, just like you do, so the camera has to allow for that. Larger cameras balance better with longer lenses - basic physics.

Camera manufacturers are keen to lose boatloads of money, which is why they continue to release reasonably priced pro bodies for a dwindling market.

The word ‘class-leading’ does sound a bit like advertising jargon, though.

 

Nope. I am totally serious. If camera manufacturers aim their products at the wrong demographic - a demographic that is declining and increasingly impoverished, they will continue to decline.

I can promise you that 'Camera manufacturers are keen to lose boatloads of money, which is why they continue to release reasonably priced pro bodies for a dwindling market.' maybe a sort term phenomenon but it is not a long time survival strategy - it will inevitably lead to the replacement of the company or more likely its management.

And 'large cameras balance better with longer lenses' would make some sense if the 'average demographic' actually used large longer lenses with their cameras. But as the ratio of 'lenses to ILC camera sales' has remained pretty static a 1.65 over the last 10 years, we can be 100% certain the vast majority of photographers dont actually have longer lenses...

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/report_e.html

(Or they are a small (but fairly affluent demographic))

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Django said:

As for your stats, pros may be declining but amateurs tend to aim more & more towards high-end.. also last time i checked Fuji/Sony/etc still sell a vast array of prosumer/consumer bodies..

Aaah.... But this where you are missing the big point....

Did you miss this post from earlier....

'As someone who uses cameras mostly for travel and social occasions, I do very much appreciate the compact form of these cameras. In fact I wouldn't mind if they shrunk it down further to a6500 size. 

Don't forget if you want a chunkier body with pretty much the same features you can get the A99 II.'

I spend 10x the amount travelling than I do on my camera equipment each year. If you havent actually noticed, inequality in the world is increasing - where pretty much the top 1% take all the cash every year. (BTW I dont think this it as 'should' be but it is what it 'is') 

So when you say 'pros may be declining but amateurs tend to aim more & more towards high-end..' you are totally missing the point of where the 'high end actually is now'. If you think 'declining number of pros, still represent the 'high-end' demographic of the camera market' you are simply misinformed.

And to answer 'jonpais' question - I say that as a 'statistician/economist' rather than a 'photographer' because at the end of the day - you shouldnt argue with facts!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, jonpais said:

are you a statistician or a photographer? The a7 III is going to sell like hotcakes.

I am 100% an economist before a photographer.

So on that basis have considered why exactly Sony has introduced the pricing of the A7ii at such a 'disruptive price point'.

It is actually quite simple. Look at Sony's report and accounts. The sensor business has higher operating margins and much higher gross margins than the camera business. Canon, the market leader, basically has it lower end cameras with lower end margins to entice users in and then move them up the margin curve. This doesnt work for Sony that is the major sensor manufacturer (it is where its competitive advantage lies) and therefore wants to encourage as many users to higher sensor sizes.

Ultimately Sony wants as much price competition in FF sensors as possible to move consumers up the 'sensor curve'.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Totally irrelevant to the topic. Maybe start a new thread about the endangered species of professional photographers.

Sorry. This is an 'A7' thread' and I have bought at 7 x A7 cameras - which is probably 7 more than you - why should you tell me what is off topic?

'I’ve got small hands. We don’t need tiny flagship cameras. What we need are cameras with buttons, dials and handgrips that don’t feel cramped. And even small cameras can benefit from chunkier dials and a beefier hand grip.'

This sort of comment - which sort of is 'well if you make the camera bigger I might eventually buy it' is on topic while my comments about 'why I am a multiple customer of this camera is off topic' - give me a break!

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Happy for you. Many cameras give much joy. Ergonomics on topic. Economics dissertation new topic.

Nope. Sorry, I simply will not accept that because you are so WRONG.

The complete collapse of the global camera business in a world where photography has increased 'exponentially' is entirely due to ''pros' talking ergonomics' = 'it should work with a 400 f2.8' rather than listening to 'economists'. You can all prattle on about how an A7 series doesnt balance with a 400 2.8 lens as long as you like but you should recognize that as well as getting a smaller demographic, a more impoverished demographic you are 'literally' a 'dying demographic'.

In a world whereby 99% (almost exactly) of photographers use smart phones, where are you in a position to define 'ergonomics'?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Robert Collins

Did you even read the CIPA numbers that you posted?

ILC sell around 12.000.000 per year, and stabilizing greatly. what is declining is the cheap compact camera market, which honestly this segment is better with their mobile phones.

The older A7 cameras were terrible for pro use, using full frame workhorse zooms, terrible battery etc the new designs are is the right direction.

Stop confusing m43, APS-C and full frame ergonomics. The lenses are very different in weight and size.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Robert Collins

Did you even read the CIPA numbers that you posted?

ILC sell around 12.000.000 per year, and stabilizing greatly. what is declining is the cheap compact camera market, which honestly this segment is better with their mobile phones.

The older A7 cameras were terrible for pro use, using full frame workhorse zooms, terrible battery etc the new designs are is the right direction.

Stop confusing m43, APS-C and full frame ergonomics. The lenses are very different in weight and size.

Yes of course I know those numbers.

And note since the peak of ILC unit sales in 2012 - DSLRs (ie large sized ILCs) have halved from 16m units to 8m while mirrorless  have increased in volume and over doubled in value. I am not confusing anything with anything. I absolutely know the numbers, I have analysed the report and accounts of the major camera manufacturers etc.. I know them pretty much like the back of my hand.

So if you want to argue CIPA stats, I can argue you them to the cows come home...

And please stop arguing along these lines 'A7 cameras were terrible for pro use'. I 100% realize that this argument might apply to 'YOU' and I totally understand the concept that you think that camera manufacturers should design cameras 'based on what I  really want' but assuming you are a 'PRO' you are not a large demographic in even units or volume.

It is an argument that is 'totally incoherent' and simply explains the mess these companies are now in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

Yes of course I know those numbers.

And note since the peak of ILC unit sales in 2012 - DSLRs (ie large sized ILCs) have halved from 16m units to 8m while mirrorless  have increased in volume and over doubled in value. I am not confusing anything with anything. I absolutely know the numbers, I have analysed the report and accounts of the major camera manufacturers etc.. I know them pretty much like the back of my hand.

So if you want to argue CIPA stats, I can argue you them to the cows come home...

And please stop arguing along these lines 'A7 cameras were terrible for pro use'. I 100% realize that this argument might apply to 'YOU' and I totally understand the concept that you think that camera manufacturers should design cameras 'based on what I  really want' but assuming you are a 'PRO' you are not a large demographic in even units or volume.

It is an argument that is 'totally incoherent' and simply explains the mess these companies are now in.

I don't have any cows, CIPA statistics are very easy to read and comprehend, and since the peak a lot of things happened, Goldman Sachs happened, the political climate has changed through out the world, Brexit happened (is happening right now, actually), and now mobile phones have good enough quality to - as Casey Neistat calls them - Casual As F$%# users take a few snapshots per day.

Why to stop arguing? If the A7 bodies were good as they were, Sony wouldn't change them, right?

And I can not see how you fail to realize that a Panasonic 12-35mm m43 is  2.66x2.91" (67.6x73.8) and 305gr, an APS-C Fuji 16-55 is 3.28x4.17"(83.3x106mm) and 655g and the Sony 24-70 is 3.45x5.35" (87.6x136mm) and 886g. Don't you think it could problematic using a full frame workhorse lens, on a m43 body for 5-10 hours per working day? Do you think the market for an A7Riii + 24-70mm = 5800euros in my country, is targeting the entry level market and casual users? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that the video performance might be similar to the A9. Has anyone tested digital zoom on that camera? In theory for 1080p shooting a 1:1 pixel readout would give up to 3x zoom without significant loss of quality. If that is also true for slow motion shooting, then this could open up a lot of options for shooting action, without having to shell out for the largest lenses, maybe even with primes, and using digital zoom to frame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my experience with clear zoom and the A7rII, the readout of the sensor does not change. There is just a fancy interpolation back to the original resolution. Of course this might have changed in the latest models, but I wouldn't bet on it. See here for more details:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

I spend 10x the amount travelling than I do on my camera equipment each year. If you havent actually noticed, inequality in the world is increasing - where pretty much the top 1% take all the cash every year. (BTW I dont think this it as 'should' be but it is what it 'is') 

 

OT, but most of the cash that "1%" take is re-invested into making more money, while most of the cash made by the other "99%" tends to be re-invested into "sex, drugs and rock and roll", with relatively little going into wealth generation. That is the big problem with modern society, it is all about the here and now, and not about the future.

The fact that the 1% is getting richer is due to what they are doing with their money, not because they have it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Sorry. This is an 'A7' thread' and I have bought at 7 x A7 cameras - which is probably 7 more than you - why should you tell me what is off topic?

'I’ve got small hands. We don’t need tiny flagship cameras. What we need are cameras with buttons, dials and handgrips that don’t feel cramped. And even small cameras can benefit from chunkier dials and a beefier hand grip.'

This sort of comment - which sort of is 'well if you make the camera bigger I might eventually buy it' is on topic while my comments about 'why I am a multiple customer of this camera is off topic' - give me a break!

Well, I have small hands, and pretty much all of Canon's cameras larger than a Rebel are uncomfortable for me to hold, since I can't get a solid grip on them due to their size. A camera should be an extension of your primary arm, you should be able to do everything with it using one hand (short of whatever you might do with lens controls). Ergonomically the best camera I have used personally in terms of hand fit has been the NX1. Not saying that most MILCs are better, since they often have little or no grip at all, and that makes things equally awkward, just on the other end of the scale.

Canon/Nikon's cameras appear to be designed with alpha males in mind. I don't think that is accurate representation of the overall population though. In the days when these design concepts originated it might well have been true that the ILC market was dominated by alpha males (in the old days ILCs were mockingly referred to as "male jewelry" due to the sorts of people who typically would carry them), but that is no longer the case and today in the modern egalitarian and equitable world the average hand size using cameras is smaller (all those pesky females are skewing the average down).

Body size has to accommodate the average user, not just whatever happens to suit you in particular. Irrespective of what size a manufacturer chooses, it is probably going to be a good size for someone. Alpha males are probably going to gravitate to Canikon due to the bulky design paradigm they use, while females and average males will gravitate towards the smaller MILCs. The latter is the growth market in the industry, and my guess is that is the reason why cameras like the a7 are the size they are. They are the right size for market growth potential, all that remains for Sony to do is make tweaks to the more subtle aspects of shape.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...