any wedding videographers using a7riii cameras or have used them?

[ahalpert]

.

Life is funny in that now about 15 years later I'm using an Alexa Classic (which is going on 13 years since its introduction) shooting only in 2K and I can't get enough of it. I did try to sell it a few times so I can buy an AMIRA (pretty much the same camera) but just can't find a good price on it.

And as much of an absolute PITA it is to use, I don't see myself using non-ARRI cameras moving forward, it would be really difficult.

It's almost as if resolution isn't that important

 

[ahalpert]

. the increase between gens are not significant. I also feel the mfr do this on purpose. they dont make large jumps so to keep people hooked chasing after the next best thing because if they put everything needed into it, people wouldnt upgrade as often.

I think this is true. But I think that the larger issue is that the fundamental underlying technology doesn't change, so the characteristics are largely similar. I was looking ar a comparison on photons to photos recently of noise levels on a7riii vs a7riv vs a1 vs a7sii vs a7siii. This was to help me a7riii client decide if she wants to buy an a1 or maybe an upcoming A7RV.

The only impact on noise seemed to be the size of the photosites. There was no indication from the chart that newer models had made any substantive improvements on core performance

There are other aspects of image quality where that may not be true. But you can look at images from a 15-year old digital camera and they look fine. The biggest difference is not image quality but features--frame rates, resolution, autofocus, etc. Of course, those are important

 

[ahalpert]

great info and thank you for the heads up. im waiting a bit before assembling the gear I need so will wait to see how these samyang lenses are. our ceremonies here in my country start around 9pm and video guys dont use 70-200, let alone own one. I, as a stills photog, use it for reach but for video, the max ive seen used is 85. one video guy usually. 1 camera on tripod with wa lens. around 20 from what I saw. and 1 on gimbal , 35mm for part of the ceremony, then handheld with 85mm sniping. our weddings are usually at least 250+ people and the dance floor gets crazy packed. so while I really love 24 over 20, I have no choice since it can get dense and ill need the 20. video guy I spoke to yesterday in wedding I shot, says he has a spare brand new unused sony 35 1.8 for sale. maybe will get that. but I will do my buying in the winter when there is less work and people are willing to sell for a bit lower. if it were only a nikon camera I needed to buy but its also lenses. Im going to be a 2nd shooter at weddings which means coming at 6pm and stay till 2pm, and I only need 1 camera and mostly wide. 1 shots gimbal and 20-35mm shots all the wedding, and one does special shots like 50/85. do you ever use monopod for shots? spoke to video guy and says he just does handheld shots or gimbal
and do you turn OSS off completely and just stabilize in post?

In that case, I would either get sony 20/35/85 f/1.8 or samyang v-af (or "tiny" series primes) 20/35/75. (It looks like samyang hasn't released an autofocus 20mm yet. They have an 18 f/2.8, and in fact you can buy a 3-lens bundle for $1k with the 18, 45 and 75. But I think I'd rather have a 20 f/1.8 for the wider aperture.)

Samyang has the advantage of matched color, integrated focus gear ring, and probably superior manual focus performance for when you need it. (That's only true for v-af series, not "tiny" series. But the "tiny" series has unbeatable value. It looks like you could buy their 18, 35, and 75 for $800 total if you bought them used.)

I think the samyangs are really nice lenses for the price. the Sony f/1.8 lenses are a great value too. I recommended samyang v-af because they're not too much more expensive and have video-friendly features you can't get on other lenses

I shoot weddings virtually entirely on gimbals. I just put the gimbals on stands when a tripod is required. There are advantages to using a fluid head tripod instead . But I'm already rigged on gimbals, so its much faster just to set the gimbal on a stand. And then I can pick it up and use it as a gimbal whenever I want

A lot of times, I use the gimbal more as a monopod. In other words, I may just be getting static shots with it. But its faster to reposition than a monopod and you can pull a camera move whenever you like

I use OSS if the lens has it. Almost none of mine do, and I just use IBIS. I will stabilize in post if necessary

 

[NorBro]

It's almost as if resolution isn't that important

It's pretty important, but there is enough resolution to be had from great super-sampling to be satisfied.

A perfect example that I remember so strikingly is when I bought the BMPCC and then the BMCC right after each other. The BMPCC has a 1080p sensor and it was a soft, 16mm-like image. Beautiful but super soft. Then I had the BMCC and was moved by the jarring difference from the 2.5K sensor creating the 1080p.

With that said, I still continued to chase resolution then because back during those times, 2013-ish, the hybrids were pixel-binned to hell and back and you had to pay the big bucks for better non-Blackmagic options (as we all know).