Jump to content

Sony a7 III discussion


GreekBeast
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 01/03/2018 at 9:01 PM, wolf33d said:

The A7III is a lot cleaner at 51 000 ISO than the GH5 is at 6400 ISO ...
Also cleaner than the A7RIII. 
And the surprise is that the FF mode is a lot cleaner than the APSC mode ! 

I would say 51000 ISO is definitely usable on the A7III, and 12800 is perfect, which is insane. 

 

 

 

 

 

Really? So entry level FF was a lot less than 2000$ before? I dont think so. And is the A7III entry level specs? I dont think so. 

Fact is, this camera is a bargain for what it offers VS anything on the market. Your comment is simply irrelevant. 

Well I got the original A7 with 28-70mm kit for £775 from a major high street  store  (jessops) in LOndon so that makes the new A7iii WAY more expensive, so unfortuinately you are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigfried said:

Well I got the original A7 with 28-70mm kit for £775 from a major high street  store  (jessops) in LOndon so that makes the new A7iii WAY more expensive, so unfortuinately you are wrong.

You got it for that price when it first came out in 2013? Or you got it for that price last week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

Honestly you are entitled to your opinion that 'pro photographers' are seen as 'objects of desire' in 2018 much in the same way as F1 drivers. Personally I see 'pro photographers' as overweight, underpaid and increasingly impoverished second class citizens. Where you see professional photography as glamorous - I see 'wedding photographers' 'oap photographers' 'child sports photographers' 'funeral photogs' (in my country) etc...

If Sony really thinks pro photography is glamorous, they could do better than sponsoring a fat chap with a hat....

Wow! Now I know why the world's economy going to hell and we will have World War III (I bet that happens before the A7sIII is out!) soon.

Pro photographers = Dozens of million of people

Overweight = probably a couple of billions

Underpaid = 4 billions

Improvished second class citizens = Half of the world 

This guy just managed to insult the 3/4 of the total human population on a short paragraph about a Sony camera! 

Edit: even this comment doesn't worth my "downvote"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

,Honestly you are entitled to your opinion that 'pro photographers' are seen as 'objects of desire' in 2018 much in the same way as F1 drivers. Personally I see 'pro photographers' as overweight, underpaid and increasingly impoverished second class citizens. Where you see professional photography as glamorous - I see 'wedding photographers' 'oap photographers' 'child sports photographers' 'funeral photogs' (in my country) etc...

If Sony really thinks pro photography is glamorous, they could do better than sponsoring a fat chap with a hat....

Reality is not the issue, it is the image that drives the model. Reality rarely matches a glamorized image. The same could be said of many other industries where marketing is targeting members of the general public who aspire to emulate the image of that industry.

For example, basketball superstars might be used to sell shoes, but most of the people who buy those shoes in response to that image will come no where even remotely close to matching that superstar because of their shoes, and in fact even most other professional basketball players won't either.

With cameras, marketing targets the desire of Joe Blo to emulate the images taken by pros (which they are very unlikely to do, no matter how expensive their "shoes" are). And in turn the pro's which are used to promote that marketing will be glamorized individuals who match the perception of what a pro looks and sounds like (even though most real pros are nothing like that). In the photography world that means attractive rugged alpha males. What people think a photographer should look like. And the sort of camera such a person looks right with. That is the camera YOU need, because you want to be that guy and take amazing pictures like him (and, of course, get all the babes as a result). 

That is the sort of thinking that drives marketing in the industry, which in turn drives the physical appearance of the cameras we use. There is an image of what a photographer should look like, equipment is designed for that person, and to be like that person the masses must have the same equipment as him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Sony seems to have addressed the overheating, low battery life and IBIS (except when walking) issues, I wonder if a lot more people would move to Sony (at the A7 iii price range of cameras) if the 30min recording time limit were removed (it seems to be the only serious shortcoming for people looking to shoot longer work like concerts and ENG stuff)?

The Sonys seem to have some excellent autofocus for video (and obviously stills), something missing in the Panasonics. The A7iii lacks serious weather sealing (it has resistence or something), which is ok for most people I guess. Lens prices were prohibitive for a lot of good zooms and many primes, but since Sigma seems to have promised 9 lenses for the Sony A series, I guess that issue, to some extent, should also be addressed.

The 10-bit video codec mandate is great, but it sounds more like fuddy duddy fluff, almost like some ludicrous rules made, which don't affect final delivery, but merely interfere with your choice of camera. I remember the BBC also making all sorts of such strange and unnecessary rules.

Is there any other feature that people think is necessary in Sony cameras (8-bit 4-2-2 internal?), which is missing presently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sanveer said:

Since Sony seems to have addressed the overheating, low battery life and IBIS (except when walking) issues, I wonder if a lot more people would move to Sony (at the A7 iii price range of cameras) if the 30min recording time limit were removed (it seems to be the only serious shortcoming for people looking to shoot longer work like concerts and ENG stuff)?

The Sonys seem to have some excellent autofocus for video (and obviously stills), something missing in the Panasonics. The A7iii lacks serious weather sealing (it has resistence or something), which is ok for most people I guess. Lens prices were prohibitive for a lot of good zooms and many primes, but since Sigma seems to have promised 9 lenses for the Sony A series, I guess that issue, to some extent, should also be addressed.

The 10-bit video codec mandate is great, but it sounds more like fuddy duddy fluff, almost like some ludicrous rules made, which don't affect final delivery, but merely interfere with your choice of camera. I remember the BBC also making all sorts of such strange and unnecessary rules.

Is there any other feature that people think is necessary in Sony cameras (8-bit 4-2-2 internal?), which is missing presently?

I think I am right in saying that the incremental video cam tax is 12% which equates to some US$200. So a better question might be 'how many people would pay an extra US$200 to be able to record longer than 30 minutes in one shot?'

My guess is very few as I suspect that 90% of A7iii users dont shoot video at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Inazuma said:

This forum recently has a worrying trend of posters pulling statistics out of their ass. Unless you can back it up, please don't use them to back up your point. 

..and recently became more "polemic" of their arguments. I remember when we were a mild, peaceful community of farmers - videographers!

@sanveerI believe the A7iii is good as it is, but I have to use it first to be more specific. The color science seems a little bit off, and while for people who do a little bit of post it's ok, I see that Sony are behind everyone in the color science department right now, dead last actually. Even Panasonic seems to improve the color science each release, with the GH5s (from what I see online) being the best so far.

For the price is perfect as it is, spec wise (and ergonomically I am not 100% sold yet, but they are in the right direction definitely, even for man bags and lady hands!). 

The different codecs, bits and recording limitations are more important for video orientated cameras such the GH5S and the A7Siii.

P.S leave the BBC argument out of it - I am sure BBC is in business more years than us, and they do a lot of things right, because they are the BBC and not Sanveer and Kisaha. I have told people here before, that the BBC and EBU standards are valid and a necessity in the TV industry. I do not believe Sony had BBC and Netflix in mind when they were designing this camera, I do not even know how it came into conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

I think I am right in saying that the incremental video cam tax is 12% which equates to some US$200. So a better question might be 'how many people would pay an extra US$200 to be able to record longer than 30 minutes in one shot?'

My guess is very few as I suspect that 90% of A7iii users dont shoot video at all.

Most folk who shoot 30 minute+ takes are doing it in quite specialised circumstances. If you are leaving a camera on a tripod pointing at a speaker on a platform and pressing record there are 100 other video cameras that can do a decent job. Who shoots more than half and hour shallow DOF video? I am trying to think of the last time I shot more than a minute of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, BasiliskFilm said:

Most folk who shoot 30 minute+ takes are doing it in quite specialised circumstances. If you are leaving a camera on a tripod pointing at a speaker on a platform and pressing record there are 100 other video cameras that can do a decent job. Who shoots more than half and hour shallow DOF video? I am trying to think of the last time I shot more than a minute of anything.

I’ve got no need for unlimited record time either, but I could see how it could be useful when shooting interviews. And I think shallow depth of field is beautiful in those situations. Same for a musical recital. A medical procedure. Nature filmmakers. Photographers who shoot tutorials and behind the scenes footage of themselves at work. And on and on... Just because I don’t need it doesn’t mean there aren’t others who do. 

Basically, what you’re saying is, if someone needs to shoot for longer than an hour or whatever, get a camcorder - which is complete and utter foolishness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The need for no limit during video recording is fairly limited for the target audience of these cameras. Hence it is hard for a company to include this feature and increase the price of a camera, unless it is targeted mostly for video like the GH line. 

What could be done from the side of the camera companies is 1. Have a model for Europe with the limitation and another for the rest of the world 2. Allow users to pay extra for this like the V-log. How easy are these I don't know, but they are definitely doable as Panasonic has shown. 

I understand that it might not be optimal, but an easy way for the user to get "unlimited" recording time is with the use of an external recorder. Even a 1080p recorder when downsampling from 4K would give excellent results for an interview.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Inazuma said:

This forum recently has a worrying trend of posters pulling statistics out of their ass. Unless you can back it up, please don't use them to back up your point. 

I dont necessarily disagree but for instance when I state that 'Pro photogs only make up around 2% of ILC camera buyers' do you really want me to explain that...

The BLS data from 2016 shows 48,000 thousand professional photogs in the US...

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

The CIPA data for 2017 shows 2.9m shipments of ILCs to the US...

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201712_e.pdf

So if you assume that every pro photog buys one camera a year, they represent 1.7% of the total ILCs sold....??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

The same could be said for at least enabling 10-bit with an external recorder, no? 

At least there you could argue that depends on the capability of the hardware, whereas the recording limit is mostly an artificial limitation of the firmware due to licensing (if you exclude overheating issues like with the X-T2/X-H1/RX100V). 

Can't be sure if this is the case of course, but I believe for example that Fuji at least would love to include a 10bit output if it was supported by their hardware. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kisaha said:

.S leave the BBC argument out of it - I am sure BBC is in business more years than us, and they do a lot of things right, because they are the BBC and not Sanveer and Kisaha. I have told people here before, that the BBC and EBU standards are valid and a necessity in the TV industry. I do not believe Sony had BBC and Netflix in mind when they were designing this camera, I do not even know how it came into conversation.

Based on your argument, since Canon had been leading the ILC market for the longest, there was no need to introspect on the need for lighter weatherproof cameras and cameras that do nore than Full Frame/ 1080p.

I remembered the BBC argument because of bitrate requirements previously, I guess during the time of the GH2 and/or a few other cameras.

I saw a very interesting video of Dave Dugdale where he compared how well the Sony A6500 held up against the Panasonic GH5, in 8bit (4-2-0 100mbps) vs 10bit (400mbps 4-2-2)

http://www.learningvideo.com/gh5-5-review/

 

7 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

My guess is very few as I suspect that 90% of A7iii users dont shoot video at all.

Has the A7iii been around long enough, to have statistical data conducted regarding users??? I thought it hasn't even been released it yet. 

 

3 hours ago, Robert Collins said:

The BLS data from 2016 shows 48,000 thousand professional photogs in the US...

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

The CIPA data for 2017 shows 2.9m shipments of ILCs to the US...

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201712_e.pdf

So if you assume that every pro photog buys one camera a year, they represent 1.7% of the total ILCs sold....??

This is too random, and doesn't really mean anything.

1. I don't live in the States, but I pick up equipment all the time from there. I am sure a lot of people buy equipment from the States, who don't live there.

2. You assume professional photographers only have 1 camera or use 1 camera at a time. I know many professional photographers who own 3-4 cameras at a time.

3. Many people buy high end ILCs, and are brilliant at photography, and they aren't really professional photographers (in the sense that they don't sell their pics). 

3 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

What could be done from the side of the camera companies is 1. Have a model for Europe and another with the limitation and another for the rest of the world 2. Allow users to pay extra for this like the V-log. How easy are these I don't know, but they are definitely doable as Panasonic has shown. 

Both these suggestions seem fair. I don't know why users globally should have to suffer due to some stupid EU laws. 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...