Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A7IV launch on Oct 21

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
    ... The A7IV will be a nice camera, but it won't be those cameras. Those are my thoughts!
    If you have A1 - and I saw some A1 footage on YT last night, as the matter of fact - you're way above the A7IV market. A7IV, just like A7III, is basically a Honda Accord of cameras - an excellent value but not the top performer. A1 is in the 911 category - pricey but the best at what it does.

    PS. Has anyone seen a running Yugo?

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by DLD View Post

      If you have A1 - and I saw some A1 footage on YT last night, as the matter of fact - you're way above the A7IV market. A7IV, just like A7III, is basically a Honda Accord of cameras - an excellent value but not the top performer. A1 is in the 911 category - pricey but the best at what it does.
      I'm not necessarily above the A7IV market. Like I said in my previous post, I used to own an A7III, among various other Sony mirrorless cameras. The point of my post is that the A7IV market is for people looking for an affordable camera that has some sort of 4K 60p and some sort of 10-bit video. As such it's a camera that will sell well, but it's not a replacement for the A7SIII as there's an entirely different market for that camera in people who are looking for a camera that has no crippling for video, whereas the A7IV will likely be a dumbed down 24 mp version of that. Two different cameras for two different markets, not one that replaces the other.

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
        So I'll chime in and give my thoughts on the upcoming A7IV (like my thoughts matter haha).
        Your opinion on the subject arguably matters more than any of ours since it sounds like you might have the most hands-on Sony experience!

        Do you use the A1 for stills? If not, what sold you on that camera?

        We video people can talk all we like about the A7IV but the reality is that its main customer is photographers. I shot alongside an R5/R6 wedding photog last Saturday who told me that he has Sony gear for his 2nd shooters. (Why he would want to mix brands, I don't know. Maybe just Sony is better priced and he cares less about the 2nd shooter.) He sounded very excited about the A7IV rumors, mostly because he said it shares the A1 autofocus system (I wasn't sure if he meant number of points or something else) but also because the resolution is upped to 33MP from 24 on the A7III. Cropping is particularly important for wedding photogs because they sometimes shoot without looking at the screen, either because they have no good way of seeing the monitor when they raise the camera over their heads or because they shoot from the hip while making eye contact with their subject to disarm them. So, basically that small jump in resolution is what turns it into a great option instead of a decent option. And the cost makes it bearable to buy multiples.

        Separate issue - Bassman said that they can afford to cripple 4K60 because 24 is more important. Probably true. But for that same wedding on Saturday, I was asked to shoot 60fps all day (so I didn't have to "remember" to switch framerates). I ignored that directive and switched between 24, 60, and 120. But it indicated that the studio would prefer for every shot to have slow motion potential than for no shot to. So, if the A7IV can't do some form of 4K60 full-frame, it limits its potential for certain types of shooting.

        But for me, the A7IV was always about saving money vs another a7siii since I don't shoot much stills. I got an FX3 instead and I'm very happy with it, but the price difference between the A7IV and the FX3 is nearly the cost of the sony GM 135 I'm eyeing.

        Speaking of which - did you settle on a telephoto prime yet, Josh? I'm sort of having a similar debate with myself because having matching bodies at weddings is helping me move away from zooms. I just ordered the sony 24 1.4, and I'm thinking I will rock 2 gimbals - one with the 50 1.2 and one that trades between the 24 1.4 and either an 85 1.4 or a 135 1.8. I already have an 85 (the samyang), so I'm going to see if that lens satisfies that role or if I still find myself reaching for my tamron 70-180 2.8, which will be a strong indication that I need the 135.
        www.VideoAbe.com

        "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
          I'm not necessarily above the A7IV market..
          I don't think e disagree much on anything here. From the spec leaks, A7IV kind of looks like a poor man's A1 but it's still got quality 4K 24p and a reasonable resolution for stills. And, if you're shooting 4K24 with that camera, then there's no reason to pay more for A1. And, on a multi-cam shoot, you can pick and choose what camera does what.

          And, as I had written earlier, it's a meat-of-the-market model for the fall of 2021. It is a Honda Accord of cameras. It checks a lot of boxes for a lot of shooters. It is coming just in time for the Christmas shopping season. It should move lots and lots of units.

          Comment


            #50
            Originally posted by DLD View Post
            I don't think e disagree much on anything here. From the spec leaks, A7IV kind of looks like a poor man's A1 but it's still got quality 4K 24p and a reasonable resolution for stills. And, if you're shooting 4K24 with that camera, then there's no reason to pay more for A1. And, on a multi-cam shoot, you can pick and choose what camera does what.

            And, as I had written earlier, it's a meat-of-the-market model for the fall of 2021. It is a Honda Accord of cameras. It checks a lot of boxes for a lot of shooters. It is coming just in time for the Christmas shopping season. It should move lots and lots of units.
            I think we are essentially saying the same thing. I agree that it’s going to sell a lot. It’s just not going to replace the A7SIII for guys who need the more serious video tool.

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by ahalpert View Post

              Speaking of which - did you settle on a telephoto prime yet, Josh? I'm sort of having a similar debate with myself because having matching bodies at weddings is helping me move away from zooms. I just ordered the sony 24 1.4, and I'm thinking I will rock 2 gimbals - one with the 50 1.2 and one that trades between the 24 1.4 and either an 85 1.4 or a 135 1.8. I already have an 85 (the samyang), so I'm going to see if that lens satisfies that role or if I still find myself reaching for my tamron 70-180 2.8, which will be a strong indication that I need the 135.
              I did man. I actually ended up picking up both a 35 1.4 GM and a 135 1.8 GM. I took them both out on a shoot yesterday and was blown away. I do think that the 135 is tight, but I like it more than I did the 85. If Sony comes out with their rumored 100 1.4 (or 105 1.4) and if it doesn’t have any weird issues, I may switch to that as the perfect happy medium. As a side note, I sold my Zeiss 35 1.4 to be able to purchase the 35 1.4 GM and I’m excited about that. It’s a sweet lens.
              Last edited by Joshua Milligan; 10-11-2021, 06:40 PM.

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by ahalpert View Post

                Your opinion on the subject arguably matters more than any of ours since it sounds like you might have the most hands-on Sony experience!

                Do you use the A1 for stills? If not, what sold you on that camera?
                What sold me was the ability to replace my A7RIII with a camera that was not only better for photography, but that could also keep pace with my A7SIII and FX6 for video. I shoot with three cameras a lot (multi-cam interviews, livestreams and just normal shoots where I like to have three different setups ready to go so I can shoot fast), so having all three have similar specs, features and color for easy matching is super important to me. And to have that third camera also double as one of the best photo cameras ever made, that sold me.

                It’s an incredible camera. It has essentially no flaws. I do wish it had the flip out screen that the A7SIII has, but outside of that, it’s a camera that excels at literally everything.

                Just last week I shot it in full frame 4K where it is technically pixel binned alongside my A7SIII and FX6 and despite behind being pixel binned, it looked indistinguishable from the other two. And considering that’s the pixel binned mode, just imagine how good it is in cropped 4K where it’s downsampled, or even 8K where you’re getting just about the full sensor. It’s just so dang good for video. Add the world class photo features on top of that and what more could you ask for?
                Last edited by Joshua Milligan; 10-11-2021, 06:42 PM.

                Comment


                  #53
                  It will an interesting release. I think Honda Accord is a little pedestrian of a comparison for the A7IV. Outside of the bells and whistles of speed, AF and extended video features, the camera will probably deliver image quality that will be indistinguishable from the A1, A9, R5 & R6 etc... in similar non-testing environments. Like Abe's example of needing 4k60 as a prominent format, then a more specialized tool would be needed for video. The A7IV will be a cracking stills camera just like the R6 is. We just want it to be an above average video tool as well.

                  Cameras are being sold on extended features these days more than just image quality. Take the same shot with an A1, A9, A7RIV, A7sIII etc... and the difference will only be in the saved file size. If one needs crazy fast AF for specialized applications, then the tools are there. But needing an A1 for a portrait shoot is truly overkill in terms of image quality vs price imho. Same thing goes for the R3 vs R6. For me, 10bit video with a full sized HDMI will be most of the way there to make it a useful and valuable tool given other expectations are met.

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by Bassman2003 View Post
                    Cameras are being sold on extended features these days more than just image quality. Take the same shot with an A1, A9, A7RIV, A7sIII etc... and the difference will only be in the saved file size. If one needs crazy fast AF for specialized applications, then the tools are there. But needing an A1 for a portrait shoot is truly overkill in terms of image quality vs price imho. Same thing goes for the R3 vs R6. For me, 10bit video with a full sized HDMI will be most of the way there to make it a useful and valuable tool given other expectations are met.
                    I would agree to a point. These cameras are definitely all getting to a point where they are pretty similar in quality for video, but cameras like the A9 and A7RIV like you mentioned really don’t look as good as the A1, A7SIII or even the FX6 for video. The 10-bit, the better codecs and the higher bitrates truly do make a difference, not to mention the big improvements in color.

                    When I switched from the FS7II, A7RIII and A7III to the FX6, A7SIII and A1, the difference in image quality was shocking.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
                      If Sony comes out with their rumored 100 1.4 (or 105 1.4) and if it doesn’t have any weird issues, I may switch to that as the perfect happy medium.
                      Interesting - I forgot about that rumor. And there's a new rumor now that there will be another lens (besides the 70-200 ii) announced shortly after the a7iv. Could be the 100 1.4! I feel like all of Sony's recent GM prime releases have been on point, so I expect good things. (Although the 24 1.4 - which wasn't announced THAT recently so maybe I shouldn't hold it against them - seems to have some IQ drawbacks that I bet are due to keeping the size down. Nevertheless, I think the rendering is nice and the AF is good and I expect to like it.) I'd be a little sore getting a 100 1.4 when I already have an 85 1.4, but it could be the perfect focal length for what I need and anyway the Samyang was cheap. I just want to settle into a suite of nice primes that I use constantly and therefore merit the premium price tags
                      www.VideoAbe.com

                      "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by ahalpert View Post

                        Interesting - I forgot about that rumor. And there's a new rumor now that there will be another lens (besides the 70-200 ii) announced shortly after the a7iv. Could be the 100 1.4! I feel like all of Sony's recent GM prime releases have been on point, so I expect good things. (Although the 24 1.4 - which wasn't announced THAT recently so maybe I shouldn't hold it against them - seems to have some IQ drawbacks that I bet are due to keeping the size down. Nevertheless, I think the rendering is nice and the AF is good and I expect to like it.) I'd be a little sore getting a 100 1.4 when I already have an 85 1.4, but it could be the perfect focal length for what I need and anyway the Samyang was cheap. I just want to settle into a suite of nice primes that I use constantly and therefore merit the premium price tags
                        Man there are definitely no drawbacks on the IQ of the 24 1.4 GM. I have that lens and absolutely love it. It’s seriously incredible. And it has beautiful flares and beautiful sun stars which I’m a sucker for.

                        I sold my Zeiss Batis 25 f/2 for that lens and as much as I liked the Batis, the 24 1.4 GM is on another level. I think it’s a true gem.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post
                          When I switched from the FS7II, A7RIII and A7III to the FX6, A7SIII and A1, the difference in image quality was shocking.
                          Yeah and let's not forget what you said about weird motion cadence on the A7III. That's not something I had heard before, but it definitely points to technical aspects that don't get reported on a spec sheet. Whether or not it's a dealbreaker depends on the application of the user, but it's hard to even make an evaluation if they don't report it

                          And then there are marginal differences in autofocus, etc. Autofocus really complicates camera and lens evaluations. And just little design and usability differences.

                          I think a lot of people will do a lot of great things with the a7iv but it's good to know what you're getting and what you need. For example, I've only had minor overheating issues with the A7SIII (and typically only when shooting 4k120 while wifi smartphone monitoring - which I do a lot). And if I turn off wifi monitoring or switch down to 60fps it will go away. But then I had a recent shoot where it was overheating on and off and the client was coming and going over my shoulder. It only takes about 10 seconds of downtime to cool off and get shooting again, but it was a really stressful experience and it sold me on getting an fx3 instead of a 2nd a7siii.
                          www.VideoAbe.com

                          "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post

                            I would agree to a point. These cameras are definitely all getting to a point where they are pretty similar in quality for video, but cameras like the A9 and A7RIV like you mentioned really don’t look as good as the A1, A7SIII or even the FX6 for video. The 10-bit, the better codecs and the higher bitrates truly do make a difference, not to mention the big improvements in color.

                            When I switched from the FS7II, A7RIII and A7III to the FX6, A7SIII and A1, the difference in image quality was shocking.
                            Sorry, I was speaking more in terms of photo quality. I agree, Sony seems to have really made progress with the A7sIII generation in video quality. Let's hope the A7IV carries that new standard forward.

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by Joshua Milligan View Post

                              Man there are definitely no drawbacks on the IQ of the 24 1.4 GM. I have that lens and absolutely love it. It’s seriously incredible. And it has beautiful flares and beautiful sun stars which I’m a sucker for.

                              I sold my Zeiss Batis 25 f/2 for that lens and as much as I liked the Batis, the 24 1.4 GM is on another level. I think it’s a true gem.
                              I'll have to tell that to my buddy. His studio head was trying to talk him into the Batis 25 and he was debating between that and the 24 GM

                              You may have put this in your other post, but which Sony lenses do you own? Sounds like you've got a full house of GM primes at this point!
                              www.VideoAbe.com

                              "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Originally posted by Bassman2003 View Post

                                Sorry, I was speaking more in terms of photo quality. I agree, Sony seems to have really made progress with the A7sIII generation in video quality. Let's hope the A7IV carries that new standard forward.
                                I agree with this. There are obviously things you pay for with the more expensive bodies in terms of shooting photos - faster burst speed, or AF acquisition, or minimum light of AF, etc. But the IQ is probably not that different? (Then again, I said that about different generations of the 5D and someone with more experience comparing them strongly disagreed with me. But I think this may be more true here)

                                And they could totally give it great video if they wanted to, even if it had fewer framerate or codec options. It's just a question of their corporate strategy IMO
                                www.VideoAbe.com

                                "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X