Jump to content
GreekBeast

Sony a7 III discussion

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
53 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah I follow Casey Neistat for lack of anything else to do LoL. And he is not doing 4K now, and to be honest it looks like shit. "WHY DONT YOU SHOOOT 4k YOU IDIOT!" applies to him also in my opinion. It Ain't like he can't afford the stuff to do it!

Watch him on a phone like everybody else... it looks great. It looks great on my 40” 1080p TV as well. 

4 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I do not monetize my videos, but I certainly have an audience, however small. Why don’t you shut up, Glenn?

Jesus Jon, I wasn’t making fun of your audience or anything about you. I was just curious about the need for 4K vs. 1080p for YT videos. I wasn’t aware that the majority of Dave’s audience watches his channel on a desktop...

Obviously, I’m the lowest common denominator here, so relax... you win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, mercer said:

Watch him on a phone like everybody else... it looks great. It looks great on my 40” 1080p TV as well. 

Jesus Jon, I wasn’t making fun of your audience or anything about you. I was just curious about the need for 4K vs. 1080p for YT videos. I wasn’t aware that the majority of Dave’s audience watches his channel on a desktop...

Obviously, I’m the lowest common denominator here, so relax... you win.

I am too old to see much of anything on a phone! Why you think I use a 30" 2K monitor and look at Big signs!! Only in Texas LoL.

 

7871bd4a5a3a11f2b9854c785b7b1725_771b78d6fc473e15Taco.jpg

ass.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I am too old to see much of anything on a phone! Why you think I use a 30" 2K monitor and look at Big signs!! Only in Texas LoL.

ass.jpg

Isn't that like a viscous cycle? You eat nachos as big as your ass. Your ass gets bigger. you get bigger nachos, which in turn makes your ass bigger...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jonpais said:

4K is really just clean 2K. 

If you're referring to the resolution after debayering, then you're absolutely right.  People say that the 1080 from the C100 is so nice because it's downscaled 4K, and the A7III downscaling 6K to 4K seems to be a feature that isn't spoken about enough.

I find it strange that through this whole conversation about 4K vs 1080 on YT no-one mentioned debayering.  With film you shot at the same 'resolution' as what you delivered in, but digital doesn't do that.  Anyone who wants to see what 4K YT can look like if done correctly should compare it to a video by MKBHD, who shoots 5, 6, or 8K RAW.

and if you think he can't possibly be shooting 8K RAW because it's ridiculous in terms of camera equipment and storage, check this out:

There's a pretty strong technical argument that the A7III should be the C100 of FF mirrorless, because it should have a bunch more resolution in its 4K output than anything that shoots at 4K.  I'm surprised that the pixel peeping people aren't publishing test charts of this.  If I end up with an A7III then I'll do a comparison just for my own curiosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This, from an interview with Arri, published back in 2013 by THR:

Arri's Managing Director: HD Is 'Dumbed Down' to Make 4K Look Good

Arri's managing director Franz Kraus has called into question the industry's inexorable push toward 4K by suggesting that HD content displayed on HD screens at equipment trade shows is not being shown at its optimum quality in order to compare unfavorably with 4K displays.

“What annoys me, more than being asked about whether we are launching a 4K camera, is that at trade shows, HD quality is often being dumbed down, or not presented to its optimum quality, in order to make Ultra HD 4K look good,” Kraus said. “This is a bad trick because consumers will buy 4K displays based on the false expectation that the image is really that superior to HD.”

He argued, “The perception of picture quality has a lot to do with the physical performance of the display. For example, a 2K image displayed on an HD OLED monitor looks incredible because the active light source shows far higher contrast ratios in the picture.”

end quote

Unlike 4K, HDR is actually an even bigger deal, because it yields real improvements in local contrast, dynamic range and color.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised @jonpais, not even a little bit.

It's the same in the hifi arena with CD vs SACD - you'd go to a demo where they'd be comparing CD with SACD and the SACD would definitely sound better.  You'd look around and people would all be nodding their heads about SACD, but I'd be standing there and thinking "both sound completely awful compared to my CD setup at home - how is this a valid comparison?".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2018 at 7:54 PM, kye said:

There's a pretty strong technical argument that the A7III should be the C100 of FF mirrorless, because it should have a bunch more resolution in its 4K output than anything that shoots at 4K.  I'm surprised that the pixel peeping people aren't publishing test charts of this.  If I end up with an A7III then I'll do a comparison just for my own curiosity. 

I am not an engineer and can't really understand test charts and MFT scores and the like.

But I think that Max Yuryev has a pretty good video demonstrating the amount of details in the a7 III 4K image when compared to the GH5 as well as the a7R III and the a6500.

https://youtu.be/eaPmInvxC_A?t=7m47s

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah for the money just about impossible to beat for all it offers.

Great.

Now the ONLY thing I have to do is practice patience until the 23rd. I heard a rumor somewhere that some camera company somewhere might be coming out with some kind of a mirrorless camera or something as well. Pretty obscure rumor, don't think it has been publicized much so maybe not too many people know about it...

 

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

I am not an engineer and can't really understand test charts and MFT scores and the like.

But I think that Max Yuryev has a pretty good video demonstrating the amount of details in the a7 III 4K image when compared to the GH5 as well as the a7R III and the a6500.

https://youtu.be/eaPmInvxC_A?t=7m47s

 

Ah!  Thanks - I think I missed that review.  It sure looks good, even compared to other downsampling cameras!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kye said:

Ah!  Thanks - I think I missed that review.  It sure looks good, even compared to other downsampling cameras! 

Yeah, I think the thing is for the a7R III it is downsampling and doing some line skipping / binning / electric voodoo.

The a6500 is downsampling from 6K similar to the a7 III

The GH5 is downsampling from around 5K (???) instead of 6K.

BTW: No one is going to ever mistake me for an electrical engineer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure probably this new Nikon FF mirrorless will be pretty good, probably great, but it will Not be 2000 bucks, and have all the bells and whistles that Really all work on their first try. They will have all the good stuff in the top end one that cost 3200 dollars or more.  But for the average DSLR shooter it will probably be all they have wanted or needed. It is the Video side of it that is still damn hard to make happen, even for Sony, at the lower price points. We want a C300 mk II for 2000 bucks, in a Sony A7 form factor! Maybe the BM PK4 might damn near be that without DPAF.

But both Canon and Nikon could surprise us.. I would certainly wait for the 23rd LoL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I am sure probably this new Nikon FF mirrorless will be pretty good, probably great, but it will Not be 2000 bucks, and have all the bells and whistles that Really all work on their first try. They will have all the good stuff in the top end one that cost 3200 dollars or more.  But for the average DSLR shooter it will probably be all they have wanted or needed. It is the Video side of it that is still damn hard to make happen, even for Sony, at the lower price points. We want a C300 mk II for 2000 bucks, in a Sony A7 form factor! Maybe the BM PK4 might damn near be that without DPAF.

But both Canon and Nikon could surprise us.. I would certainly wait for the 23rd LoL.

Yeah, I think you are right about that.

I could certainly see myself paying $3,200 for a camera that was BRILLIANT at both stills and video, but it is hard to imagine that Nikon is going to come out with a brilliant camera on the first try.

The other thing is: What about the D760 (or whatever the D750 successor is called). A (relatively) small DSLR with great stills and video quality would be awesome, as long as it has terrific dynamic range (anything to avoid shooting in slog if I don't have to).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mark Romero 2 said:

The other thing is: What about the D760 (or whatever the D750 successor is called). A (relatively) small DSLR with great stills and video quality would be awesome, as long as it has terrific dynamic range (anything to avoid shooting in slog if I don't have to).

I guess the D760 will be the 2000 dollar A7 mk III competition in Nikon's mirrorless body style. I doubt it will be a DSLR version?? I am not sure about the D500, could go either way. I think Only the D850, D5 will survive as DSLRs for a few more years?

Same with Canon, 5D mk IV, 1Dx mkII only DSLR's left. I would surely think the 6D mkII and the 80D will be Mirrorless or just go away completely, especially the 6D mk II.

I don't see a market for ANY APSC cameras down the road years from now. Why bother? With the crop mode on the A7's it is a waste of time to make a dedicated camera that Only does that. I thnk Fuji might have to change, but I think m4/3, 1" is safe for awhile. Not everyone wants or can afford FF stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I don't see a market for ANY APSC cameras down the road years from now. Why bother? With the crop mode on the A7's it is a waste of time to make a dedicated camera that Only does that. I thnk Fuji might have to change, but I think m4/3, 1" is safe for awhile. Not everyone wants or can afford FF stuff.

Yeah, I agree.

When the a7 III has it's price reduction (whenever that is), it will be selling for around maybe $1,800 (I am guessing).

When the new a6700 comes out, it will probably be selling at $1,600 or something (if sony keeps their pricing consistent).

Heck, right now at Adorama an a7 II is $100 LESS than an a6500 ($1,100 vs $1,200)

As for m43, I imagine they have to keep pushing the envelope. For instance, if GH5 didn't have 4K 60p, or didn't have 10-bit 4K 30, or didn't have that amazing IBIS, what would have been the appropriate price point???

Share this post


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...