Sony A7R IV / A7S III / A9 II to feature 8K video, as new 60MP and 36MP full frame sensor specs leak

[DBounce]

6 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

That has little to do with the camera. That is called SKILL what you are talking about. And all of it is subjective.

Skill is part of it no doubt, but everything else being equal, some cameras definitely have "mojo". Case in point Arri Alexa. These a reason most of the Academy award winners are shot on them. The data is irrefutable. Mojo is real. Perhaps you are amongst the afflicted that cannot recognize it?

[HockeyFan12]

1 hour ago, liork said:

The Sony A7R III got rid of this yellow tint and does not have it any more.

I think I heard that from a friend (a working DP whose A cam is a C300 Mk II). He didn't like the the A7S, really liked the A7R III I believe.

[newfoundmass]

The original Pocket is another camera I'd argue had mojo, at least from the viewpoint of someone that came from camcorders. The images it produced just blew me away. 

[Andrew Reid]

57 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

I bought into the numbers and spec game that Sony played for a couple of years (2015-2017). Used the A7s, A7rII, and FS5. 4K! 40+ megapixels! 240fps!

They are very much a numbers company.

57 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

I call these the dead years. 

Yes, I got some good stuff with them and thanks to a great colorist, was able to grade some films so that it looked great. But the day to day shoots, the general travel photos, the one-man band work, the portfolio of work that doesn't have professional colorist attached to it just isn't even in the same ballpark image quality wise as something from a Canon or Panasonic.

I look back on my Sony shoots and think exactly the same thing.

Never spent so much time fiddling with a grade as I did with Sony cameras.

Time and effort that could have gone towards other things.

57 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

While you use a Sony, you don't really realize that there is something off - you just get used to it. My wake up call is when I looked at old, 8-bit HD footage from my Canon 60D that I shot in 2012/2013. It just looked so much nicer, natural, and beautiful. Quickly tested out some new systems, felt the same about the footage I was capturing on those, and dropped Sony as quick as I could.

What model did you go for at that time?

29 minutes ago, cameraeye said:

I follow the Sony A7 line news out of curiosity but, after owning an A7s II cannot consider them again. The argument of colour improving over time is crazy- why not take longer and get the colour science right- why should I wait multiple years, buying 4 generations of cameras to maybe get accurate colours?

Funny thing is they HAD it right, with the purchase of Minolta.

The full frame Sony/Minolta A900 has absolutely FANTASTIC colour science.

It also has a very clear and responsive menu system! ?

29 minutes ago, cameraeye said:

I sold my A7s II for the horrid colour alone. The tipping-point was after doing extensive research to grade its video when the best solution I could find was to take a damn canon camera on set for reference photos- and match the Sony to the canon.

That's pretty much how I came up with EOSHD Pro Color!!

29 minutes ago, cameraeye said:

I mean at that point what's the point? I was, like others, bamboozled by the immense specs of their A7s II. But you can throw the ingredients of a delicious meal into a pot- it's how you prepare them that matters. I am really not a fan of using paying users feedback to improve products- just use the things yourselves and release a well-rounded, considered product.

Sony has had all our feedback for free and they thank us for it by asking us to stump up another $3500 in order to make use of it.

29 minutes ago, cameraeye said:

The mark 3 versions of the A7 look much better than my s II, but I will not give them my money to be a member of a focus group for a future version of the product. Also- no thanks to those menus- do they even use them themselves?

Wish I tried Magic Lantern before buying the A7s II, would have saved a lot of time.

Magic Lantern remember didn't even have access to Canon's source code, it is trial and error reverse engineering and they still managed to implement RAW while the big manufacturers moan about not being able to do it in 2019 on their own cameras which are a fucking open box to them, and their multi-million dollar engineering teams. Instead they go running off to Atomos and fiddle with HDMI cables, promise it externally at great inconvenience and cost to users, and then spend 6 months Q/A testing while users wait wondering if it has been cancelled. I bet there are a LOT wrong with these big companies and we only are getting glimpses.

[webrunner5]

22 minutes ago, DBounce said:

Skill is part of it no doubt, but everything else being equal, some cameras definitely have "mojo". Case in point Arri Alexa. These a reason most of the Academy award winners are shot on them. The data is irrefutable. Mojo is real. Perhaps you are amongst the afflicted that cannot recognize it?

Please show us your Arri Alexa footage. I sort of thought this thread was more about Photography than Arri Hollywood movies. Anyone buying this MK IV for video sort of needs, ehh some education I guess.

[Palpet]

Strange. Philip Bloom shoots almost exclusively on Sony cameras and I never once thought the colours in his videos was horrible.

[DBounce]

1 minute ago, webrunner5 said:

Please show us your Arri Alexa footage.

Take your pick buddy. FYI: I do this for fun. But that said, I don't need to be a race-car driver to know who won the race. Buying a camera is a personal choice for me. After looking at @Andrew Reid example images, I can clearly see that he had an easier time getting great shots with the Canon. Like I said, some cameras make it easy to get great shots... other, not so much. Given I have little skill I need all the help I can get.

3 minutes ago, Palpet said:

Strange. Philip Bloom shoots almost exclusively on Sony cameras and I never once thought the colours in his videos was horrible.

I like PB, but I HATE his color grades.

[Andrew Reid]

10 minutes ago, Palpet said:

Strange. Philip Bloom shoots almost exclusively on Sony cameras and I never once thought the colours in his videos was horrible.

You're entitled to have an opinion on Philip Bloom's many hours of custom grading and his LUT collection.

But it's an opinion on that, not the Sony colour science or defaults, you do realise what you are seeing is not straight from the camera don't you??

[webrunner5]

99% of us on here do it for fun. This oh you Have to have a Canon shit, is just that, shit. Sure 5 years ago Sony CS was Wonky. I sort of liked the gritty look, no I loved the gritty look of the original A7s, the Sony RX10 mk I. It was a pleasant change for the Pat Boone look I sort of hate. That got to be old shit. But now with the Venice CS Sony looks more Canon than Canon does like it or not.

So you like what you like. and I like what I like. How hard is that. I don't give a Rats Ass if you Ever buy a Sony. But don't knock everyone on here that does.

[Andrew Reid]

16 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Please show us your Arri Alexa footage. I sort of thought this thread was more about Photography than Arri Hollywood movies. Anyone buying this MK IV for video sort of needs, ehh some education I guess.

No the thread is not about photography. It's about a hybrid of both. Just like the A7R IV is a hybrid camera. Video is very important on it. It's not a Nikon Df.

Sony has decided to sit back and consolidate their sales.

The A7 III killed the A7R III sales. They need a new model to justify the $3500 again.

Problem is they haven't been very creative with it, simple as that really.

Bringing Eye AF in from the cheap A6400 is useful but how is it ground-breaking flagship stuff?

61 megapixels? Nobody asked for that.

If you find a use for it instead of 42 megapixel let me know

The expectation was that this camera would at least be better than a $1300 Fuji X-T3 for video.

It is $3500 after all.

2015 called and it wants its 8bit and frame rates back.

[DBounce]

3 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

You're entitled to have an opinion on Philip Bloom's many hours of custom grading and his LUT collection.

But it's an opinion on that, not the Sony colour science or defaults, you do realise what you are seeing is not straight from the camera don't you??

i know it's not straight from the camera. IMO his grades are just a bit long in the tooth for my taste. Granted, horses for courses. I know many love his grades. 

[cameraeye]

I get the impression Sony's success was due to fully jumping on mirrorless and the engineering advantages followed- like a smaller, nostalgic body and EVF. I'm not so sure they innovated per-se and thus didn't know their own products well enough to improve them in the areas that were lacking.

8 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

That's pretty much how I came up with EOSHD Pro Color!!

Ha, you did a lot of the hard work for me then! I used ProColour on a 10 minute short to mix the A7s better, well worth the cost. TBH the other clincher was the complete lack of latitude in the grade. If you pushed it a little hard the image fell apart.

11 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Magic Lantern remember didn't even have access to Canon's source code, it is trial and error reverse engineering and they still managed to implement RAW

I think that's what makes using it so sweet. You get this very tangible sense that you're using this amazing technology to the fullest and not some artificially limited feature list. The only limits of ML are the limits of the camera.

 

19 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I bet there are a LOT wrong with these big companies and we only are getting glimpses.

I think most have a lot wrong and it is simply down to the drive for money. Nothing wrong with earning money at all- but put it above everything else and it corrupts.

[Andrew Reid]

1 minute ago, DBounce said:

i know it's not straight from the camera. IMO his grades are just a bit long in the tooth for my taste. Granted, horses for courses. I know many love his grades. 

Was referring to @Palpet's comment DB.

The point anyway is not about whether you can correct or grade Sony footage nicely. You can. I do it myself. Also Pro Color works well and saves a lot of time and effort as well.

The point is that it should be fucking right in the first place.

I know from A7R II / A99 II point, colour took a turn for the better but it still isn't as good as 2008's Sony A900 with Minolta DNA. I took both out on a casual shoot the other week and saw it for myself. The Playstation team is in charge of colour at Sony with their very yellow blow-up dolls.

[webrunner5]

9 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

No the thread is not about photography. It's about a hybrid of both. Just like the A7R IV is a hybrid camera. Video is very important on it. It's not a Nikon Df.

Sony has decided to sit back and consolidate their sales.

The A7 III killed the A7R III sales. They need a new model to justify the $3500 again.

Problem is they haven't been very creative with it, simple as that really.

Bringing Eye AF in from the cheap A6400 is useful but how is it ground-breaking flagship stuff?

61 megapixels? Nobody asked for that.

If you find a use for it instead of 42 megapixel let me know

The expectation was that this camera would at least be better than a $1300 Fuji X-T3 for video.

It is $3500 after all.

2015 called and it wants its 8bit and frame rates back.

The a7r cameras since day one, which I have had several, Never were worth a crap video wise. It is more of an afterthought than a selling point. That is what the A7s is for. The R stands for Resolution. The new A7r is one heck of a cheaper, smaller, lighter kit to buy than a MF camera is, They both have their place, but this camera is putting several pretty expensive kits on notice.

Sure who doesn't want a Phase One under their Christmas tree, but that Ain't happening to many people come December. If you have been Really, Really good your wife, or girlfriend might spring for a A7r mk IV. ?

[Andrew Reid]

7 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

But don't knock everyone on here that does.

It's hard to have a debate with someone who takes everything personally.

Yes 5 years ago Sony colour science was even more wonky. Again, don't take it personally. You didn't design it!

If you liked the zombie film look then fine. Maybe you were actually shooting the undead, then it would come in very useful, with no grading required.

Sony's colour science has also saved The Simpsons thousands in post production.

When the apocalypse comes I know I will reach for my RX100.

What is this mysterious Venice colour science you talk about. Do you own a camera that uses it? I don't. I am pretty sure it's all Creative Style shit and decades old Picture Profiles on the new cam as well, oh dear.

[thebrothersthre3]

I don't think the new A7R matters that much. Its for photographers not hybrid shooters. 

The alarming thing is where the heck is the A7S3 or even the A7000? 

Lots of people would love a better Sony hybrid camera to make use of their sony lens collection. 

They should have released a more expensive APSC camera along with the A6400 imo. Or just release a slightly higher priced A7000 with 4k 60p and minimal rolling shutter, with 10 bit maybe. 

 

[currensheldon]

31 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

What model did you go for at that time?

After dropping the FS5 and Sony A7s combo, I had the C200 for awhile and used the GH5 as a b-cam. But jobs were asking for 10-bit 422 4K, so switched it over to the EVA-1/GH5 combo. Currently have the S1 as well and once the V-Log update arrives, will slowly move away from MFT gear.

If Canon had a 10-bit 4K RF C100 III and no-crop mirrorless, I'd strongly consider that. Same with Fuji if they had a mini cinema camera. 

But Panasonic seems to be my go-to for now. Going to lock down on something soon to just have for 3-4 years (until people start asking for more than 10-bit 4K) - but with all the new mounts and directions, might be a bit more before everything shakes out. Hoping EVA-2 with L-Mount arrives soon to go along with the S1H.

[Andrew Reid]

3 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

The a7r cameras since day one, which I have had several, Never were worth a crap video wise.

You're talking a right load of cobblers.

The A7R II was a massive leap for video. It came along at a time when the A7S was only shooting 1080p internal and the Nikon D750 the same. The NX1, GH4 and 1D C were the only other games in town for 4K video.

Summer of 2015 was very good.

Summer of 2019 and we STILL have same fucking codec and hardly anything has improved. Even the stills side is not a big leap. So if this is JUST a stills camera (and it isn't) they haven't exactly done a great job there either with just minor tweaks.

The handling is finally an improvement, but partly only because it was so dreadful to begin with!

4 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I don't think the new A7R matters that much. Its for photographers not hybrid shooters. 

The alarming thing is where the heck is the A7S3 or even the A7000? 

Nope it's a hybrid camera. Otherwise it wouldn't have S-LOG2, S-LOG3, knee, black level, gamma curve, colour mode, XAVC-S, S&Q, 4K, Super 35mm mode, timecode, HDMI, slow-mo 120fps, proxy recording, IBIS, video eye AF and be marketed towards video users.

Quite a lot of video focus for JUST A STILLS CAMERA.

Geeezus wept.

Yes the alarming thing is the lack of A7S3 in 2019, after 2015 brought us the prior model, 4 NABs have passed with Diddy shit.

[Andrew Reid]

When I shot this on the A7R II, I was reasonably pleased with the skin tones....

After 200 hours of LUT work.

[HockeyFan12]

44 minutes ago, Palpet said:

Strange. Philip Bloom shoots almost exclusively on Sony cameras and I never once thought the colours in his videos was horrible.

I think that's what these arguments ultimately come down to, personal preference. 

I think the PB grades look hideous, but that's just my personal preference. I think the grades themselves are very well done, much better than most YouTube channels. I just don't like the style with lifted blacks, sort of a monochromatic faded wash, etc. My favorite film stocks are generally Ektar and Velvia type stuff, so very saturated and higher contrast. Just a difference of opinion. I think he has a good eye and is technically adept, just not my favorite style.

And I do like his reviews, he's charismatic. But it feels like an instagram filter over everything (to me). Then again.... look how popular instagram is.

But that's 100% personal opinion. And why I think arguing over color is a bit worthless once you've made up your mind about what you like. I strongly suspect we all see color very differently from each other.