Sony A7SIII = $3500, 10-bit 4K120p internal, 16-bit 4K60p RAW out

External 4K was pushed pretty hard on the original a7S (no internal 4K), and that was around the time both were growing so maybe that's what you remember.

[Atomos was growing as a fairly new company and Sony was about to embark on an industry and profit changing 3 years.]
 
sleekmedia said:
Great info here... I never knew that the A7 series couldn't output 10-bit for recording. I swear it was marketed that way a few years ago when Atomos became popular....
Click to expand...

Absence of 10-bit codecs on the Sony cameras has been a subject of many a rant over the last few years. It's how the cartel operates.

Cartels have also been a subject of many a rant. As has been the intentional product crippling. That's the industry status quo.
 
ahalpert said:
Frankly I think taking your guidance from the netflix list is overrated anyway. You can sell them something shot with an iPhone. And if Netflix is producing it, they'll rent you whatever you want
Click to expand...

It amazes me that really anyone who is not being commissioned by Netflix even cares this list exists. It's meaningless to the world of production at large unless you are an owner operator hired by a Netflix commissioned production or rental house who is renting
to the same. For everyone else, this list is 100% meaningless. Somehow, over the past few years, newbs have come to think that this list has meaning for them when it doesn't.
 
puredrifting said:
It amazes me that really anyone who is not being commissioned by Netflix even cares this list exists. It's meaningless to the world of production at large unless you are an owner operator hired by a Netflix commissioned production or rental house who is renting
to the same. For everyone else, this list is 100% meaningless. Somehow, over the past few years, newbs have come to think that this list has meaning for them when it doesn't.
Click to expand...

Hahaha yeah, it's almost like they think they need to shoot with a camera on that list to get a MEETING with Netflix.

I tried to explain this to someone once, "look bro - if you shoot a great proof-of-concept on a non-"Netflix-Approved" camera and it gets you a meeting and you deliver an amazing pitch and get hired to do something, are you really going to regretfully kicking yourself saying "Man I wish I had shot on a better camera so I wouldn't have to be back here being paid to re-shoot it with a much better budget"?

I think it's that Dunning Kruger effect where inexperienced folks know so little about shooting that they actually think that their shoot is likely to be so perfect that the only big thing letting it down will be the camera not being high-enough resolution.

Back to a7s3... ouch. It's looking more and more like a special-purpose rental for me if it really is limited to 12mp stills. I loved my a7r2 because stills were great AND video was great for the time. I preferred it to the a7s2 because you could switch between a low-rolling-shutter full frame mode and a pioneering-at-the-time "full readout, then downsample" high-quality APS-C crop... whereas the a7s2 was softer since it wasn't a full downsample, had bad rolling shutter, and its base ISO was so high you'd have to add a lot of ND for most stuff.

Sony has never really made a successor to that camera. The current closest successor looks like the Canon R5, actually!

I'm not sure whether to go R5, or just upgrade from my X-T3 to an X-T4 to tide myself over and wait to see what the next round of high-end full-frame DSLRs is like. I'm not dropping close to $4k on something I can't shoot stills with! I'd rather just keep shooting on my Fuji for proof of concept and rent Alexa / work with a DP with a nice proper camera for bigger things.

Come on Blackmagic, do a full-frame 18K version of that madcap 12K camera and put it in a smaller form factor, with phase detect autofocus, please :)

Bruce Allen
www.bruceallen.tv
 
Personally, if the a7S III is 12Mpix, I'll patiently wait for their first 24Mpix+ APS-C camera with 10-bit 4k 60fps and eye-detect AF in video mode. Hell, even if the a7S III has a higher-res sensor, I don't think I'll get a lot of use out of a new camera in the coming months, and $4k is a lot of $. That APS-C camera I would definitely buy at $1500 even if I know I'm not going to use it much until there's a vaccine for this %&@#€$·& virus.
 
I for one probably won't buy a new camera this year if my volume of work stays this low. I'll buy a new mirrorless camera eventually but I don't really need it now and if you hold out they may throw in a free card later or you night find a slightly lower price somewhere. Or an open box unit!

That being said, economists are expecting 20% GDP growth in Q3 this year - basically a resumption of most of the halted work. I'm not sure I share their confidence. But if it comes to pass, I'll buy sooner rather than later. I have the money earmarked from selling other gear recently anyway.

My feeling is that the R5/a7S3 will occupy that spot in their lineup for several years. Certainly on Canon's side. Sony may have an a7r5 and a7iv that have 10-bit 4k 60p soon but I'd be surprised if they didn't give the A7SIII some special video functions. So I dont think there will be another camera in the next 2 years at least to make us regret buying one of these.

I don't really care if the A7S3 is low res. I'll pick whichever camera has the best DR/color/AF/codecs
 
The a7S III will be unique in Sony's lineup for a while, but I think two years is too long for ALL the new features, I'd expect other models to get 10-bit 4k 60fps and the new EVF in a year or less, while 120fps and raw output to remain the differenciating features. I can live without those.

My problem with the 12 Mpix is a personal one: I also take pics sometimes, and I don't want to be carrying two cameras around. Lots of people won't care about that, because they don't mind carrying two cameras, or because they don't shoot both video and stills.

Regarding GDP... I'm afraid that high growth in Q3 depends on getting the virus situation under control, and that's not the case in the US. I'm more optimistic about Q4, when I think we have a good shot at having a vaccine (particularly the Chinese one with the good phase 1 results published a few days ago; the Oxford one looks good too but I think in the next phase the Chinese are going to skip all the stops and go for a human challenge study, which can give results sooner)
 
DLD said:
Not to annoy the nice folks here but, before dismissing a clearly crippled product out of hand for its stills inferiority, one might want to try a recently released upscaling program like Topaz. It's not inexpensive and there are other offerings. But it does some things well. Or well enough.
Click to expand...

I love Gigapixel and have actually used it on shots for some broadcast spots I directed (drone shots were mostly Inspire 2 but some were high speed and they were a little soft vs the others... Gigapixel upscale then downscale did the trick way better than any sharpen).

12mp still suuuuucks for stills though. I'd have to bring another body, which is a pain with airline limits etc.

The only way I'd buy this camera for above $3k is if they decided nobody's going to buy it for stills so actually added the video features a video-first camera has... eg internal ND filter, proper timecode, LUTs, anamorphic preview, lockable non-fragile HDMI port (my a7r2 HDMI port is dead even though it was in a cage most of the time), 4 channels of audio, maybe improve the wi-fi so it is a higher-quality lower-latency feed (if Hollyland can do it, Sony can!), maybe also record lens metadata per frame and also pipe it out of HDMI for virtual set use... I could go on and on.

BTW, I think the new lenses Sony will announce with it will probably be great (a trio of 2.8 zooms designed for cinema, right?) - nobody is talking about them though! I would love to see a proper first-party solution done by Sony for an AC to pull focus - eg a wireless monitor with touchscreen for autofocus and a proper focus wheel that can override - all talking to the motors inside the lenses.

Bruce Allen
www.bruceallen.tv
 
It's funny to me how everyone is griping about 12MP stills so much. Sure, 48MP is better and with only 12MP you can't crop. But 12MP is more than enough for the stills resolution I typically deliver. So if I can avoid the need to crop it would work.

That being said, I'm starting to feel like the R5 will be the better camera. And already owning EF lenses is a plus for me
 
puredrifting said:
It amazes me that really anyone who is not being commissioned by Netflix even cares this list exists. It's meaningless to the world of production at large unless you are an owner operator hired by a Netflix commissioned production or rental house who is renting
to the same. For everyone else, this list is 100% meaningless. Somehow, over the past few years, newbs have come to think that this list has meaning for them when it doesn't.
Click to expand...

bruceallen said:
Hahaha yeah, it's almost like they think they need to shoot with a camera on that list to get a MEETING with Netflix.

I tried to explain this to someone once, "look bro - if you shoot a great proof-of-concept on a non-"Netflix-Approved" camera and it gets you a meeting and you deliver an amazing pitch and get hired to do something, are you really going to regretfully kicking yourself saying "Man I wish I had shot on a better camera so I wouldn't have to be back here being paid to re-shoot it with a much better budget"?

I think it's that Dunning Kruger effect where inexperienced folks know so little about shooting that they actually think that their shoot is likely to be so perfect that the only big thing letting it down will be the camera not being high-enough resolution.

Back to a7s3... ouch. It's looking more and more like a special-purpose rental for me if it really is limited to 12mp stills. I loved my a7r2 because stills were great AND video was great for the time. I preferred it to the a7s2 because you could switch between a low-rolling-shutter full frame mode and a pioneering-at-the-time "full readout, then downsample" high-quality APS-C crop... whereas the a7s2 was softer since it wasn't a full downsample, had bad rolling shutter, and its base ISO was so high you'd have to add a lot of ND for most stuff.

Sony has never really made a successor to that camera. The current closest successor looks like the Canon R5, actually!

I'm not sure whether to go R5, or just upgrade from my X-T3 to an X-T4 to tide myself over and wait to see what the next round of high-end full-frame DSLRs is like. I'm not dropping close to $4k on something I can't shoot stills with! I'd rather just keep shooting on my Fuji for proof of concept and rent Alexa / work with a DP with a nice proper camera for bigger things.

Come on Blackmagic, do a full-frame 18K version of that madcap 12K camera and put it in a smaller form factor, with phase detect autofocus, please :)

Bruce Allen
www.bruceallen.tv
Click to expand...

Yeah, it’s not even for everything Netflix, only commissioned Netflix Originals. You can go and shoot something on a Fisher-Price Pixel Cam and if they like it enough, they will buy it. The Netflix Approved Camera list is one of the most misunderstood things in this industry and probably does as much harm, as good(meaning people get hung up and fixated on it and it’s probably never going to affect them). Heck, I’ve shot on a Netflix show and I own a camera on the list, but it didn’t mean a thing. It was all productions gear. That’s how these shows work. They’re not low budget indie’s where everyone is piling their gear together to make a package to eek out a movie or show.
 
Samuel H said:
Personally, if the a7S III is 12Mpix, I'll patiently wait for their first 24Mpix+ APS-C camera with 10-bit 4k 60fps and eye-detect AF in video mode. Hell, even if the a7S III has a higher-res sensor, I don't think I'll get a lot of use out of a new camera in the coming months, and $4k is a lot of $. That APS-C camera I would definitely buy at $1500 even if I know I'm not going to use it much until there's a vaccine for this %&@#€$·& virus.
Click to expand...

Just a kind reminder...you've been asking about eye-AF in video for 3-4 years, and the first time I saw you post about it back then I agreed and thought that would be so amazing...but you know they have eye-AF in video now, right?
 
puredrifting said:
It amazes me that really anyone who is not being commissioned by Netflix even cares this list exists. It's meaningless to the world of production at large unless you are an owner operator hired by a Netflix commissioned production or rental house who is renting
to the same. For everyone else, this list is 100% meaningless...
Click to expand...

By that reasoning the fact that Associated Press just switched totally to Sony Alpha and video cameras and will be buying each of their worldwide staff two A9II bodies and 4-5 Sony lenses doesn't mean anything, unless we work for AP.

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...-director-of-photography-about-switch-to-sony

It's true that AP switching to Sony, NetFlix approving the S1H or NASA using only Nikon DSLRs on the space station doesn't have immediate impact if we aren't working for AP or NetFlix or becoming astronauts. But it's completely normal to discuss industry trends and who or what organization uses what equipment. Sometimes this is highly publicized by the manufacturer, such as RED's "Shot on RED" page: https://www.red.com/shot-on-red/

Other times it's just a quieter industry observation such as documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras using an "old" FS100, Sennheiser MKH416 and Lectronics lavs for her Oscar-winning film CITIZENFOUR: https://www.newsshooter.com/2015/02...documentary-citizenfour-shot-on-a-sony-fs100/

I'm not going to rush and buy a case full of Lectrosonics lavs on the idea that I'll now win an Oscar, but discussing who uses what equipment is normal.
 
joema said:
By that reasoning the fact that Associated Press just switched totally to Sony Alpha and video cameras and will be buying each of their worldwide staff two A9II bodies and 4-5 Sony lenses doesn't mean anything, unless we work for AP.

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...-director-of-photography-about-switch-to-sony

It's true that AP switching to Sony, NetFlix approving the S1H or NASA using only Nikon DSLRs on the space station doesn't have immediate impact if we aren't working for AP or NetFlix or becoming astronauts. But it's completely normal to discuss industry trends and who or what organization uses what equipment. Sometimes this is highly publicized by the manufacturer, such as RED's "Shot on RED" page: https://www.red.com/shot-on-red/

Other times it's just a quieter industry observation such as documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras using an "old" FS100, Sennheiser MKH416 and Lectronics lavs for her Oscar-winning film CITIZENFOUR: https://www.newsshooter.com/2015/02...documentary-citizenfour-shot-on-a-sony-fs100/

I'm not going to rush and buy a case full of Lectrosonics lavs on the idea that I'll now win an Oscar, but discussing who uses what equipment is normal.
Click to expand...

It's not the "discussing it" part, it's the fact that a lot of people interpret that list to mean that they have to buy a camera on that list "just in-case" they try to sell their project to Netflix(or that cameras not on the list aren't any good). But even then, it still doesn't matter, except under a very specific set of circumstances. I'm a gear head and I've been in this industry over half of my life. I like talking about this stuff and I can interpret these things and know there real relevance to me and the larger industry as a whole, but there are those out there, especially those that are 'newer to the game' who thinks that it carries lot more weight and means a lot more than it actually does.
 
joema said:
By that reasoning the fact that Associated Press just switched totally to Sony Alpha and video cameras and will be buying each of their worldwide staff two A9II bodies and 4-5 Sony lenses doesn't mean anything, unless we work for AP.

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...-director-of-photography-about-switch-to-sony
Click to expand...

That's insane. I've known some AP shooters for a few decades. I wonder how the rank-and-file feel about this? Wonder what will happen to all of their Canon gear? If they'll simply retire it and let the shooters keep it or sell it off or keep it as back-ups? Just think about the MILLIONS of dollars worth of glass they have...

Wonder if this pushes(or accelerates) Canon to the "R1"?

*edit* Looks like they will be collecting all of the old Canon gear as they distribute the new Sony gear.
 
Last edited:
Being on the Netflix "approved list" gives most producers sufficient cover to defend their choice of equipment. It's a practical choice.

Of course, with the list expanding and expanding, picking off that list is no longer exclusive.

Until Netflix revamps it to 8K only and tells Scorsese, "No film for you!"

As to SIII, I'd curb my enthusiasm.
 
Run&Gun said:
It's not the "discussing it" part, it's the fact that a lot of people interpret that list to mean that they have to buy a camera on that list "just in-case" they try to sell their project to Netflix...
Click to expand...

I have never seen anybody say this on any forum. OTOH I've seen a lot of people with apparent mind-reading powers who believe people are *thinking* this.
 
joema said:
By that reasoning the fact that Associated Press just switched totally to Sony Alpha and video cameras and will be buying each of their worldwide staff two A9II bodies and 4-5 Sony lenses doesn't mean anything, unless we work for AP.

https://www.dpreview.com/interviews...-director-of-photography-about-switch-to-sony
Click to expand...

It's far more useful to understand WHY Netflix or AP uses Sony or whatever.

As far as I can tell, Netflix needs 4K deliverables and they want RAW footage that is as malleable as possible - probably in case they want to screw with it later and use it in some different form or remaster the whole thing. They mandate what codecs different cameras can use, not just the cameras. They may also be concerned about camera reliability, I'm not sure.

As for AP - it seems like they want to have matching photo/video cameras to use the same lenses or even flip a switch to change modes - true hybrid shooting. So you need most importantly a high-end news/sports stills camera, which a few companies have. But then you also need good in-body video. Sony has crappy codecs but they are far less limited hitherto than Nikon or Canon. They win by default. ("The 2 sweetest words in the english language")

That's how I interpret these happenings. Their decisions are basically meaningless to me and don't tell me anything I dont already know.

PS Citizenfour was great
 
NorBro said:
Just a kind reminder...you've been asking about eye-AF in video for 3-4 years, and the first time I saw you post about it back then I agreed and thought that would be so amazing...but you know they have eye-AF in video now, right?
Click to expand...

YES! Just not in the cameras I have (a6500 and a7R2, where I can use if for stills but not for video), so I'm still longing for it. I could get the newer models and get the eye-detect AF working in video mode, but instead of that I went for a p4k with manual lenses in order to get even better IQ at the cost of having no AF at all. Oh, the mental consistency... XD
(what I want now is a camera that gives me better IQ than my p4k and eye-detect AF, hopefully with APS-C sensor and at least 24 Mpix stills; not having to buy new lenses is a big plus and the reason I didn't get an XT4 for an IQ comparison... yet?)

RE: 12 MP stills: I had the original a7S and used for both video and stills. For video it was awesome at the time, really loved it. But for stills it's enough most of the time but not always, it felt limiting because of the 12Mpix resolution, which sometimes led to frustration when editing the pics
 
Last edited:
Mate - you'll have a hard time getting better recording than the pocket as it records 12-bit raw from some higher bit-depth DGO sample (as brawley likes to remind us)

The R5 does raw at unwieldy bitrates and isn't apsc, though it's got the AF.

So who will deliver the camera you want? BM doesn't seem likely to delve into AF. Z-cam I dont think they're doing phase detect either. Komodo could be a possibility but surely it'll be some time before their AF is useful.

The A7SIII they claim will have RAW out. Not sure of the bit-depth. Supposedly it's a craptacular micro HDMI port (but could they have a USB-c raw output?). But A7SIII to a recorder could get you the bit-depth and color sampling that you seek. Probably not as much detail as the P6K but you're comparing to a 4k. You get the AF but only 12MP stills and it's FF.

Hard for you to get what you want... if the R5 engineered RAW from an APS-C crop you'd be set! And they could probably run it at 60fps too. I doubt they'll do it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top