Next camera, 5D-3 ML raw or Sony A7SII w/ext. recorder ?

R

raf702

Active member
I'm in a bit of a dilemma on choosing a secondary camera. Right now my main setup is a GH4 w/Atomos assassin for 10-bit 422 recording. Awesome setup and very satisfied with it.

2-3 years ago I had a 5D2 ML raw, didn't work out to well for me due to the workflow/bugs/etc. Just the other day I've been looking at the 5D3 ML raw and it seems to be more stable now a days and workflow has gotten easier. But there still inconsistencies with it in terms of reliability.

Now on the other hand I've been pretty ecstatic about the A7SII, but it also has its drawbacks such as the color science and gradibility is much harder, among other things. BUT I do get to use my Atomos assassin with this.

My current setup I use for pretty much everything, except live events or concerts.

Anyone here with experience on either one or both? Would like some opinions from users of both systems.

Thanks!
 
Why not just get another GH4? If you're doing multicam stuff, having two identical cameras is great.
i film a lot of live shows. The FS700 and A7S are too different in colour to my liking for that.
 
David W. Jones said:
If you don't have to have a second camera right away, I would save my money and wait.
Click to expand...

You're right, I don't need a second cam. But 5D3 are dropping in price around USD $1,500-2,000 around craigslist, etc. A7SII is still new so it's still at premium of $3K USD.

My ideal budget is no more than $3K USD, otherwise I'd continue to save more and look into the Ursa mini 4.6K, red scarlet, etc.

Great low light performance, clean image up to at least iso 3200 or so. Minimum of 60fps in 1080 or higher. My GH4 offers slow mo which I have no complaints about. The low light capabilities is it's main drawback for me.
 
dmitrizigany said:
Why not just get another GH4? If you're doing multicam stuff, having two identical cameras is great.
i film a lot of live shows. The FS700 and A7S are too different in colour to my liking for that.
Click to expand...

Ideally that would be great but I don't do multicam or live event stuff. And GH4 isn't great low light to begin with which is why I'm looking to a second camera. I have no interests in the FS700, plus I would have to get the O7q+ for raw recording so that would put me well over my budget, and I don't really like the look of the FS700 w/raw.
 
I'd also vote for not buying anything you don't need yet, but in any case:

* The colors from the 5D3+RAW are the best of any camera under $5K, if you ask me. Also, the lack of compression keeps the image clean and detailed. It's a very good option. But it takes A LOT of storage space and the workflow is still more painful than with any other alternative (though much better than a year or two ago).

* The a7S II has nicer colors than the a7S, I would definitely not complain about them. Plus, it has IBIS and internal 4K that doesn't take a lot of space, and it does reasonably good slow motion. And unbelievable low-light abilities.

It's very difficult to go wrong nowadays. Any of them would do. As would another GH4, or an NX1, or a D750, or a pocket.

Personally, I went for "none". I sold my a7S and bought an RX100 IV, which is barely enough for what I need as I wait for even better cameras to come out (I was a bit disappointed by slog3 on the a7S II not delivering any better DR than slog2 does, plus, the price does sting quite a bit).
 
David W. Jones said:
If you don't have to have a second camera right away, I would save my money and wait.
Click to expand...
CP+ is in about six weeks. Some new announcements are expected and, even if they're above the range desired by the OP, their presence may force the competing products to lower their prices.

My take is that, for someone already with a 4K external recorder, ~ $800 retail difference between A7S and A7SII may be hard to justify.
 
When shooting ML raw on the 5DmkIII you also need to factor fast CF cards and HD storage into your budget. Uncompressed raw really does take up that much space.
 
Samuel H said:
I'd also vote for not buying anything you don't need yet, but in any case:

* The colors from the 5D3+RAW are the best of any camera under $5K, if you ask me. Also, the lack of compression keeps the image clean and detailed. It's a very good option. But it takes A LOT of storage space and the workflow is still more painful than with any other alternative (though much better than a year or two ago).

* The a7S II has nicer colors than the a7S, I would definitely not complain about them. Plus, it has IBIS and internal 4K that doesn't take a lot of space, and it does reasonably good slow motion. And unbelievable low-light abilities.

It's very difficult to go wrong nowadays. Any of them would do. As would another GH4, or an NX1, or a D750, or a pocket.

Personally, I went for "none". I sold my a7S and bought an RX100 IV, which is barely enough for what I need as I wait for even better cameras to come out (I was a bit disappointed by slog3 on the a7S II not delivering any better DR than slog2 does, plus, the price does sting quite a bit).
Click to expand...

Hard choices, even the A7S w/assassin is reasonably good, especially since they go for the same price as a 5D3 from what I've seen.
 
DLD said:
CP+ is in about six weeks. Some new announcements are expected and, even if they're above the range desired by the OP, their presence may force the competing products to lower their prices.

My take is that, for someone already with a 4K external recorder, ~ $800 retail difference between A7S and A7SII may be hard to justify.
Click to expand...

It certainly is hard to justify, I already have the 4K recorder which pairs perfectly with either one.
 
David W. Jones said:
When shooting ML raw on the 5DmkIII you also need to factor fast CF cards and HD storage into your budget. Uncompressed raw really does take up that much space.
Click to expand...

Yes definitely what I already looked into, I also have a BMCC 2.5K and used it with raw and compressed raw, storage was going fast. But it's manageable for me that I can work with.
 
difficult, I've seen many stills from the 5d3 and as a standalone camera, they look incredible!
 
The new A6300 surely hit the specs targets (except the 10-bit out via the HDMI). For $1,000, it is a solid option for both 4K and 1080p.
 
DLD said:
The new A6300 surely hit the specs targets (except the 10-bit out via the HDMI). For $1,000, it is a solid option for both 4K and 1080p.
Click to expand...

Yes I looked at this too, and looks very tempting. I'm waiting on real world testing and reviews.
 
I got one last dilemma, 5Dm3 is no out of the question. Now it comes down to these 2 cams. Also I already have an Atomos Assassin which I use with my GH4.

A7S w/atomos assassin or A7SII w/atomos assassin ??
 
do you need slog3/sgamut3 and 120fps in 1080p? then you need the a7s2. if not, save a bit of money and get the 1. obviously internal 4k is of little value since you're recording externally (better image anyways).
 
caseywilsondp said:
do you need slog3/sgamut3 and 120fps in 1080p? then you need the a7s2. if not, save a bit of money and get the 1. obviously internal 4k is of little value since you're recording externally (better image anyways).
Click to expand...

I read many places slog3 isn't drastically better than slog2, and probably would shoot in slog2 regardless. I'm not esctatic about 120fps, plus it's cropped to 2.2. So 1080-60p is still a good to me.

So I guess version 1 is the one to go with, maybe it's just me but a7sii is just newer, which is why I'm leaning toward that side. I don't know.
 
Slog3 is drastically better than slog2: it allows for two stops better DR. But slog3 on the a7S II is not properly implemented, and ends up giving no advantage at all (same DR as slog2), it's just a waste of codec color space (that some may want to go for if they're going to cut the footage with, say, FS7 footage).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top