Sony A7SIII = $3500, 10-bit 4K120p internal, 16-bit 4K60p RAW out
- Thread starter ahalpert
- Start date
NorBro
Major Contributor
P.S. Check this video out...
Granted the lens and the camera will matter (such as a better AF camera than the a7III), but native AF will be light years ahead.
[1:48, MB adapter test.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOyyp_Yg1VY
Granted the lens and the camera will matter (such as a better AF camera than the a7III), but native AF will be light years ahead.
[1:48, MB adapter test.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOyyp_Yg1VY
16 bit linear will be encoded as 12 bit log on the external Atomos recorders ....
14 bit with 2 fat zeros at the end.
G
Guest
Guest
+1
filmguy123
Veteran
S1H has some serious competition here. On paper A7S III is a clearer winner.
Beyond good AF with Sony, the A7S III has 4k 120p 10-bit 422 1.1x crop vs the S1H with 4k60p at 10-bit 420 with 1.5x crop. It would also seem at first glance Sony has brought parity to the S1H in some of its key issues prior: overheating, intuitive menu UI so these may no longer be a clear win for Panasonic.
On Panasonic's side, it does seem the IBIS may be superior for video and the vlog/color arguably superior as well. In addition, S1H is a force to be reckon with in regards to ergonomics and physical buttons.
This might become a very close call depending on one's preferences. Maybe S1H will just feel like a better tool in practice, and possibly more reliable? Field testing will prove this out.
On the other hand, the features on the A7S III are so compelling between the improved lowlight with a BSI sensor, good AF, and better 4K 10-bit 422 up to 120fps with virtually no crop, a more robust lens system, and a lower price that I fear things will get very rough for the S1H. If the Sony isn't substantially bested by the Panny in reliability and useability, it seems a clear win here.
I say fear because I think Panasonic puts out a lot of stellar cameras but there seems to be a recurring theme of them getting one-upped right after launch and right before they can cement their place in the market. Or coming to market too late. Their timing just is unfortunately consistently sub-optimal. I hope they do not wait too long to release an S1H successor, even if its just an S1H Mark II or S1Hs which unlocks higher FPS/codecs, improved AF because a heated Sony v Panasonic battle would be great for us (look what it has already netted - pretty sure the A7S III is significantly more specced out than it otherwise would have been).
Either way, both of these cameras are near perfect - but barring longer term field reports, on paper the Sony is nearer. The A7S III is, simply put - wow.
Beyond good AF with Sony, the A7S III has 4k 120p 10-bit 422 1.1x crop vs the S1H with 4k60p at 10-bit 420 with 1.5x crop. It would also seem at first glance Sony has brought parity to the S1H in some of its key issues prior: overheating, intuitive menu UI so these may no longer be a clear win for Panasonic.
On Panasonic's side, it does seem the IBIS may be superior for video and the vlog/color arguably superior as well. In addition, S1H is a force to be reckon with in regards to ergonomics and physical buttons.
This might become a very close call depending on one's preferences. Maybe S1H will just feel like a better tool in practice, and possibly more reliable? Field testing will prove this out.
On the other hand, the features on the A7S III are so compelling between the improved lowlight with a BSI sensor, good AF, and better 4K 10-bit 422 up to 120fps with virtually no crop, a more robust lens system, and a lower price that I fear things will get very rough for the S1H. If the Sony isn't substantially bested by the Panny in reliability and useability, it seems a clear win here.
I say fear because I think Panasonic puts out a lot of stellar cameras but there seems to be a recurring theme of them getting one-upped right after launch and right before they can cement their place in the market. Or coming to market too late. Their timing just is unfortunately consistently sub-optimal. I hope they do not wait too long to release an S1H successor, even if its just an S1H Mark II or S1Hs which unlocks higher FPS/codecs, improved AF because a heated Sony v Panasonic battle would be great for us (look what it has already netted - pretty sure the A7S III is significantly more specced out than it otherwise would have been).
Either way, both of these cameras are near perfect - but barring longer term field reports, on paper the Sony is nearer. The A7S III is, simply put - wow.
Well said filmguy123 but with one exception, IBIS superiority depending on how safe you can afford to be with it. The consequence of having more shake reduction includes the possibility of warping corners with wide angle lens. IBIS on GH5 is good but also wrecked some professional footage I shot with it.
joema
Active member
All good points. There have been a couple of reviewers reporting thermal shutdowns on the A7SIII in very hot ambient conditions at 4k/60 or even 4k/24, but others in similar conditions didn't experience that. More testing is needed. The S1H seems impervious to that.
The S1H IBIS is much better, but at least the A7SIII is improved over previous Alpha cameras. I virtually never use AF but for gimbal work it's a big deal. The A7SIII has a clear advantage there.
The S1H has a super35 crop mode, whereas the A7SIII does not. Operationally that's a big deal for me, as I've become accustomed to using selectable S35 crop to give each lens two effective focal lengths. Some reviewers mentioned using Sony's "Clear Image Zoom", which is essentially digital interpolation. I've tried that on other Sony cameras and didn't like it.
For such a video-centric camera I wish the A7SIII had waveform monitor, but most external monitors have that. The BMPCC4k, 6k and even Ursa cameras don't have built-in waveform monitor, for reasons I don't understand.
The A7SIII has some nice features not mentioned by most reviewers such as built-in intervalometer, and the ability to program buttons to control Sony power zoom lenses.
However it wasn't necessary the A7SIII be perfect, only that it avoid disastrous problems, and it's done much better than that. It seems more in the S1H mold of unrestricted video features and real-world practicality than the R5.
They have false color though, can be thought of as a 3D interpretation of waveform monitor.
filmguy123
Veteran
You are right, and I've unfortunately experienced that from time to time as well on wides. That said, I've learned at times to simply disable IBIS. Generally, I'd prioritize great IBIS and turning it off 10% of the time when it might cause a problem, rather than mediocre IBIS that gives me perhaps a 50% reduction in severity of problem 10% of the time. So at least for that particular metric, the S1H remains a win for me.
It's a good point, the forced S35 crop is not such a negative for me as it might be for some. I too love shooting with certain S35 lens... the Sigma 18-35 f/1.7 on the S1H is simply brilliant, to name one. And I've also found when shooting primes, the S35 crop option is immensely helpful to suddenly perform a quasi lens change. My preference would of course be that the S1H required no crop at all in any mode, but retained the S35 crop option. As it is, i generally just leave the thing in S35 crop all the time to think in more traditional cinema terms (also means focal lengths pretty much match my EVA1 and GH5 w/speedbooster so a 35 is a 35 is a 35). Then, I'll use the FF option as a way to make the camera suddenly go wider without needing to change lenses if need be.
Objectively it's a benefit that A7S III can shoot 4k120p 10-bit 422 sans crop, but it's also too bad Sony did not included an S35 crop mode as I've found it to be immensely helpful. Especially since it's exceedingly rare to need a wider FOV than afforded by S35 lenses.
bruceallen
Well-known member
Agree!
I think the S1H at $4000 was always expensive for a DSLR with weird autofocus and a sensor that seems rather similar to the one in the $1800 Sigma FP (and worse than the one in the Nikon Z6 and Sony A7 mk3 because it didn't do phase detect!). I get that it does anamorphic and full 3:2 readout for video but still it's clearly a close cousin.
I hope that Panasonic has the pricing flexibility to now take the S1H down to $2950. They would have had a hit if they could have started the prices a bit lower from the beginning though (and / or just done phase detect AF.. or got raw output working sooner!).
Sigma had the right idea with low pricing and fun stuff like raw to USB-C - but were hampered by the firmware issues with v1.0... sadly they missed out on a lot of sales and now that stuff is fixed, we have a pandemic. Ouch. I hope they don't give up because an updated Sigma FP with a refreshed sensor with less rolling shutter and phase detect autofocus would crush it!
Both Sigma and Panasonic are missing out on lens bundles too. Panasonic should also bundle their S1H with their $2100 24-70 2.8 zoom (or heck, a full trio of 2.8 zooms... though they would have to make a wide one first!) for a good price - currently there's a whopping 98 cent discount for buying the two together! Difficult to pity them if they don't want to say "thanks for committing over $6K to our new L-system, here's a discount!"
It's a bit difficult to buy into a system and drop thousands on lenses when you can't see what the lenses can do when paired with a proper phase-detect autofocus because nobody has made that camera yet. A discount would help a lot!
But yes, Panasonic need an update ASAP with phase detect autofocus - and ideally a faster readout version of that sensor that can do full frame 60p, proper 4-perf S35 anamorphic, and by extension S-35 4K 120p.
I do wonder if Panasonic and Sony have some kind of agreement to segment things - eg this is why the new a7s3 has no anamorphic support, no full 3:2 readout, no waveform, no timecode, etc.
Of course as a guy who is playing around with virtual production I'll just point out that whoever gives me camera metadata and genlock and a low-latency output would get a buy from me. It's a small market but growing, ha! And it's something you need to buy a camera for so you can mess with it. You can't just rent an Alexa and hope it works!
Bruce Allen
www.bruceallen.tv
Last edited:
joema
Active member
I don't think there was any option, given a 12 megapixel sensor. The big pixels are scanned 1:1, so there is nothing to crop to. The cameras with higher-megapixel sensors are using pixel binning to downsize to a 4k video frame, and when they crop to S35, shift to 1:1 pixel scanning on the cropped region and obtain higher effective magnification with no penalty in image quality. The Sony A7RII actually had better video quality in S35 mode than in FF mode.
It's just a tradeoff Sony made to achieve large pixels and best low light ability. I will be interesting to see the inevitable comparisons with the S1H which has S35 mode plus excellent low light ability in FF mode. When I first heard the A7SIII might have a 12 megapixel sensor, I immediately knew that ruled out S35 crop mode.
It's interesting that S35 mode was a side effect of downsizing photographic resolution to video use, yet that mode itself has proved extremely useful in video. For stills it doesn't matter much since in FF mode the sensor is scanned 1:1, you get all the pixels and can crop it in post.
Has anyone located a link where you can download some decent log footage to evaluate how well it grades?
Bassman2003
Veteran
The heat wave continues... This video shows the Sony overheating before the R5 in 4k60. Seems like there are a lot of things to be determined about these cameras. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-SAUNuBCNM&feature=emb_title
filmguy123
Veteran
Aha! You are so right, at least for 4K mode. Would have been nice in FHD mode - but then again, at the beginning of last year I still shot everything in FHD, but today I shoot everything in 4K. Storage, codecs, benefits, workflow, etc. all seem to have caught up, so I suppose a S35 cropped FHD mode would get very minimal playtime anyways.
Personally I've been disappointed with cameras enough times now to have learned to wait out the hype train for at least 3 months, once all the real world reports start coming out.
joema
Active member
You can set an iPad in the direct sun -- with LCD off -- and it will overheat and show a temp warning.
The solar energy on a hot clear day at southern latitudes in the summer is about 1,000 watts per square meter. A rough approximation of the camera + lens cross-sectional area is about 35 square inches or 0.023 square meters. Given perfect absorption, this alone could impart 23 watts of thermal energy to the camera.
The NP-FZ100 battery is 7.2v and has 2.28 amp hr capacity, for an output of about 16 watts at 1 hr running time.
So it appears the thermal load from direct sunlight is significantly more than the camera electronics.
You'd expect this to affect all cameras of similar size, shape and color equally. However the published internal cutaways of the A7SIII show lots of thermal tape carrying heat from the electronics to the frame. It's possible it could rely on heat flow from the frame to cool the electronics, whereas the R5 seems more insulated and less designed for those heat paths.
There could be a disproportionate impact from having the A7SIII in direct sun. It would be interesting to test those same exact cameras indoors or in a shaded outdoor area.
Bassman2003
Veteran
He says the Sony did not overheat inside. So you are right, (he says it in the video as well) that the Sony cooling system is effected by ambient temps quite a bit. I do not want to see any of the cameras overheat and shut down. This trend was started by Sony and I never thought it was cool to release cameras that have "flaws" just to bring the latest tech. But here we are anyway.