Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A7IV launch on Oct 21

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

    #61
    Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
    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!
    So I have this weird thing where I only let myself own 10 lenses. Anything over that and I feel overwhelmed.

    So as such I run four zooms for my run & gun work, four primes for my creative work, a macro for specialty shots, and a servo zoom for network type stuff.

    This is my current lens lineup:

    Sony 16-35 2.8 GM
    Sony 24-70 2.8 GM
    Sony 70-200 2.8 GM
    Sony 100-400 4.5-5.6 GM (also have the 1.4x tele)
    Sony 24 1.4 GM
    Sony 35 1.4 GM
    Zeiss 50 1.4 Planar (my favorite lens)
    Sony 135 1.8 GM
    Sony 28-135 4.0 Cine Servo Zoom
    Laowa 100 2.8 2X Macro

    I love this kit and feel they all work great for the wide variety of projects I do. The only changes I might make are to swap out the 70-200 for the new version that’s coming out and maybe replace the 135 for a 100 1.4 or 105 1.4 if they come out with one of them just so I’m not going straight from a 50 to a 135 in my primes.

    I also heard several rumors that Sony might come out with a 24-70 2.8 replacement and I’m really hoping they do and that the replacement has IS. That would be game changing for me for handheld FX6 work.

    Comment


      #62
      Pretty cool man. I've got a pretty similar set-up except where I cheaped out on 3rd party lenses to save money while switching from canon/panasonic. (to be fair, some are pretty good and/or save weight over the Sony equivalent). So I've got the tamron 70-180 (which is super light) and the sigma 24-70, both of which I can recommend without reservation. and I've got the sony 12-24 instead of the 16-35, which is great for wide horizontal FOV in vertical video. (I have the much cheaper f/4, not the GM, which is sharper but seems to have equal distortion). And I have the Laowa 60 macro instead of the 100. I also have the 28-135. Not sure I personally need a 100-400, so I'm holding off on that

      I'm trying to be much more strategic in my lens purchases in the Sony system than I was with EF mount lenses. I may be good now if the samyang 85 serves my telephoto prime needs. If not, then I envision either the 100 or 135 GM and then I'm probably done. (The Samyang 85 is actually a very pretty and capable lens, one that I can recommend if anyone needs a budget 85. Great eye AF. Tracking AF on objects is less consistent. But it's very pretty, unlike my Samyang 35 which has kind of busy out-of-focus rendering and seems like a step back in quality from the EF version, perhaps because they shrank it. But I don't know if I'll bother to replace it if I end up not using a 35 a lot)

      I wouldn't hold your breath on a 24-70 with IS! Since it's a stills-oriented lens, I'm sure they're happy to save the weight and cost and leave the IS to IBIS. But maybe their cine midrange zoom will have IS? After all, the Canon 18-80 does. If and when they launch that lens, it'll probably cost an arm and a leg but be a terrific investment. Or maybe there'll be an update to the 28-135, but likely not a 2.8
      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


        #63
        Originally posted by Bassman2003 View Post
        It will an interesting release. I think Honda Accord is a little pedestrian of a comparison for the A7IV ....
        Too pedestrian? Let me consult the latest edition - not yet released but rumored to have some car pics - of Car and Driver . I quote, "Honda Accord is A7IV of cars". So there.

        PS. OK, seriously. An average car in the US is ~ $40,000. The Accord is $35,000-$38,000 fully loaded, so it comes at just under the mean. An average camera price is $720, so A7IV will be over three times the mean. But there is also the difference between the consumer and the pro sides of the market. Most cars and SUV are consumer models, bought for the daily commute. This forum is about pro video, where A7III was at the lower end of the spectrum. A7IV actually makes a tangible jump in the weight class.

        Comment


          #64
          A new 24-70 2.8 GM with IS that's as pretty as the 16-35 2.8 GM would be an instant buy for me and those two would become my minimal doc kit with the FX6.

          Comment


            #65
            70-200 2.8

            FBc6lEPVcAMNWTV.jpg

            Comment


              #66
              Originally posted by DLD View Post

              Too pedestrian? Let me consult the latest edition - not yet released but rumored to have some car pics - of Car and Driver . I quote, "Honda Accord is A7IV of cars". So there.

              PS. OK, seriously. An average car in the US is ~ $40,000. The Accord is $35,000-$38,000 fully loaded, so it comes at just under the mean. An average camera price is $720, so A7IV will be over three times the mean. But there is also the difference between the consumer and the pro sides of the market. Most cars and SUV are consumer models, bought for the daily commute. This forum is about pro video, where A7III was at the lower end of the spectrum. A7IV actually makes a tangible jump in the weight class.
              I think you get what I mean. Even though this might be a "lower level" offering in the Sony FF line, we are still talking about a professional FF stills/video camera. It should produce top of the line image quality in many respects. Otherwise, we would not be considering buying it.

              Comment


                #67
                Originally posted by DLD View Post
                that's v2 to you they got the weight down from 3.26 lbs to 2.95. Still way more than my 1.78 lb tamron 70-180 2.8
                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


                  #68
                  Originally posted by Bassman2003 View Post
                  I think you get what I mean. Even though this might be a "lower level" offering in the Sony FF line, we are still talking about a professional FF stills/video camera. It should produce top of the line image quality in many respects. Otherwise, we would not be considering buying it.
                  A7III will be sold until the inventory is cleared. It'll be interesting to see its price point after the 21st. A7c will also be sold ... also at an unknown price point. And there are some A7II bodies still around. It's now at $1,400. My hunch is that A7II will go down to $1,000 and A7III down to $1,400-$1,500. A7c will stay at $1,800. And then A7IV will indeed be a jump in weight class with a corresponding improvements in a lot of areas.

                  What happens in the photo-video industry is that the "sweet spot" changes far more often and far more unexpectedly than in a car market. Going off the A7IV specs, Canon might have to respond with either R6II or RII or both. Fuji's supposed to have an 8K AS-C model in 2022 and that is expected to be priced at around $2,000. And, if one assumes some form of the market coordination, one has to also assume the entire product map will have all of its slots filled within a short time frame.

                  Now, if only Honda upped Accord's horsepower to 300 like Toyota did with Camry TRD.

                  Comment


                    #69
                    One thing's for sure, at this point with the A1, A7SIII, FX3, FX6, FX9, EOS R3, EOS R5, C70, C300III, C500II, RED KOMODO, RED V-RAPTOR, BMPCC 6K, BM URSA Minis, etc., there are a TON of fantastic video options available at numerous price points. Whether you like Canon, Sony, BM, RED, ARRI, Panasonic, etc., the brand you gravitate to will have a good video tool available for you.

                    At this point the debate on color science, resolution, etc. should be dead. All of them look good and a good colorist can get pretty much any of them to match, so at this point your purchase decision should come down to feature set and price. Find the tool that fits your workflow and that has the features that are important to you, make sure it fits your budget and then go out and shoot. If you can't capture quality imagery today with any of the major brands, it's on you, not the camera.

                    This is an exciting time because you can pick the right tool for you and for your work and then put the rest of your energy into shot design, storyboarding, lighting, sound, etc., and less time worrying about what one camera does over another. That's when creativity really comes alive.

                    Comment


                      #70
                      And, as a side note, A7IV should probably be named A8 because it's not an Accord anymore. It's an Audi.

                      Comment


                        #71
                        Originally posted by DLD View Post
                        And, as a side note, A7IV should probably be named A8 because it's not an Accord anymore. It's an Audi.
                        Someone should design a widget where the user can type in what type of car they want in a camera and it will tell them what camera to buy
                        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


                          #72
                          This might be something ... or nothing. Sigma is supposed to announce a new E-mount 18-50 2.8 APS-C lens any time. This looks like a high quality product. Which means there's an upcoming high end Sony APS-C camera. Which has been bandied about a long, long time. A6600 was announced in August, 2019 and remains the top APS-C model in Sony's lineup to this day.

                          Comment


                            #73
                            Originally posted by ahalpert View Post
                            ... that's v2 to you they got the weight down from 3.26 lbs to 2.95. Still way more than my 1.78 lb tamron 70-180 2.8
                            Getting great reviews by the YouGoobers.

                            Comment


                              #74
                              Originally posted by DLD View Post
                              Getting great reviews by the YouGoobers.
                              Youtubers aside (and I havent watched a single video about this lens) - it's an impressive announcement. I don't plan to upgrade because it's very expensive and my lightweight telephoto zoom is easier for me to gimbal. But the 4-motor AF design that they gave the new 70-200 (which is the same, I believe, as in my 50 1.2 and also the 135 1.8) is seriously fast. It will be a major asset for the lens. There are a lot of other things to love, including reduced weight. I don't know what the IQ is like, but you can glean something of that from YT videos, as well as tests of its focus breathing and if it's anything close to parfocal.

                              If the lens sees an improvement in IQ, it's a big development because a lot of demanding photographers who love GM primes (such as hyper-anal landscape photographer Lloyd Chambers) have been clamoring for updates to the GM zooms. Not because the zooms are bad but it was always like "yeah, the gm zooms are good but the 3rd party options aren't bad either." Whereas the gm primes handily slaughter the 3rd party competition by every metric and are probably at least as good as the Canon and nikon equivalents.

                              And now there's a rumor that the GM 24-70 II will be released by the end of the year. Which is good news for sony and Sony users (tho I don't plan to buy it) but makes me sad because I was hoping to see the gm 100 1.4
                              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


                                #75
                                Apparently, very little focus breathing, very sharp, great AF. Pricey.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X