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

scorsesefan said:
Ah. Just from that menu item I can see their new menus are more intuitive...
Click to expand...

The really nice thing about the menus (aside from the fact that all the photo menu options are absent in video mode) -

The starting menu orientation is a list of icons on the left (representing image quality, exposure settings, autofocus settings...), a list of categories within each section in the middle, and then on the right a list of parameters within each of those categories. So you're looking at 3 levels of menu options at a time instead of 2.

Comparing it to the GH5 menu now, I see that the GH5 options are sprawled out on a longer list. The A7SIII has that additional layer of sub categorization. And you peek inside it without clicking through.

It's a little thing, but the main reason I've had such an easy time navigating a menu that's new to me.

unnamed (2).jpg
a7siimenu (1).jpg
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
Now FCPX just needs to work with the gyroscope metadata!
Click to expand...

I'm getting good results with metadata image stabilization, except Catalyst Browse will only save the stablilized file in HD, not 4K. To get 4K it seems you need to upgrade to Catalyst Prepare for $150/year. Since I don't like Catalyst much anyway this is giving me heartburn. If FCPX could do this, or in my case Resolve, it would be a big plus for workflow, and expense.
 
Thus far, my brief AF-assisted vertigo-effect test was a fail. If I zoom the lens while moving in or out on an object at close distance, it goes out of focus until I stop zooming, and then snaps back into focus.

Conversely, if I move without zooming, it holds focus. and if I zoom without moving, it holds focus. (Though maybe the lens has little focus shift - Sigma 24-70.)

I will try it later with different focus settings and in brighter light (it was quite dim), as well as on more distant objects, but I have the feeling that my dream of effortless gimbal vertigo effects will have to wait.

I wonder if a different lens would behave differently. I wonder if DPAF behaves differently. It's not a dealbreaker for me, but I had gotten my hopes up.
 
NorBro said:
You try this with E-mount lenses?
Click to expand...

Yes it's the sigma 24-70 FE. In other testing, it autofocuses with admirable speed and precision. Gerald Undone's review comparing it to the Sony 24-70 GM concluded that it was nearly as accurate and IIRC performed better in the low-light portion of the test.

Did you ever test simultaneous zoom and "dolly" moves on the R5?
 
NorBro said:
I've never tried that on any camera. Like the Hitchcock one?

Nevertheless you should go to B&H one day and try it with a newer Sony lens like the 35mm. (That GM is about 5 years old now.)

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1492866-REG/sony_sel35f18f_35mm_f_1_8_fe_lens.html

That lens was awesome on the a6400.

It's hard for me to believe the Sigma would work as well as the Sony, but maybe you'll find out.
Click to expand...

Right, the Hitchcock one. Or the famous shot in jaws or goodfellas. Also called dolly-zoom

It seems like it's not fully readjusting while it's zooming. I dont think it's a matter of marginal difference, it seems more like a behavior (or lack thereof) during zooming. Probably could be changed by firmware, but I doubt that will happen. Sony lenses might have differently programmed behavior and I'll have the opportunity to play with the Sony lenses of clients and colleagues. Though theres no way I'd buy a different lens specifically for this ability. This sigma is very pretty and the autofocus is fast as hell
 

I did the color grade on this teaser. Rafael Asquith filmed the dolly-zoom with a 5DMKIII which begins about 9 seconds in. It was a timelapse sequence. Plays automatically in HDR if you have the Google Chromecase Ultra 4k or supporting tv app.
 
Man, the smartphone remote control features are really nice, especially the touch focus tracking control and being able to change all exposure and codec settings. But I cant figure out if it's possible to show the focus selection boxes on screen (eye AF etc) or a histogram or even an exposure estimate. All of those omissions make it less likely I could ever use it as my only external monitor even though I'll want it for focus control and general remote control.
 
ahalpert said:
Thus far, my brief AF-assisted vertigo-effect test was a fail. If I zoom the lens while moving in or out on an object at close distance, it goes out of focus until I stop zooming, and then snaps back into focus.

Conversely, if I move without zooming, it holds focus. and if I zoom without moving, it holds focus. (Though maybe the lens has little focus shift - Sigma 24-70.)

I will try it later with different focus settings and in brighter light (it was quite dim), as well as on more distant objects, but I have the feeling that my dream of effortless gimbal vertigo effects will have to wait.

I wonder if a different lens would behave differently. I wonder if DPAF behaves differently. It's not a dealbreaker for me, but I had gotten my hopes up.
Click to expand...

Have you tried a combination of moving the camera without zooming and digital zooming?

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlgWtnTwXOE&t=2m54s
 
ahalpert said:
Thus far, my brief AF-assisted vertigo-effect test was a fail. If I zoom the lens while moving in or out on an object at close distance, it goes out of focus until I stop zooming, and then snaps back into focus.

Conversely, if I move without zooming, it holds focus. and if I zoom without moving, it holds focus. (Though maybe the lens has little focus shift - Sigma 24-70.)

I will try it later with different focus settings and in brighter light (it was quite dim), as well as on more distant objects, but I have the feeling that my dream of effortless gimbal vertigo effects will have to wait.

I wonder if a different lens would behave differently. I wonder if DPAF behaves differently. It's not a dealbreaker for me, but I had gotten my hopes up.
Click to expand...

More than likely because the lens is not parfocal and the camera can't continuously adjust the focus for the continually changing focal point and the continually changing focus position because it's slightly different for each infinitely variable/changing focal length position.
 
Run&Gun said:
More than likely because the lens is not parfocal and the camera can't continuously adjust the focus for the continually changing focal point and the continually changing focus position because it's slightly different for each infinitely variable/changing focal length position.
Click to expand...

This is basically what I'm thinking. But I doubt that the lens/camera is incapable of doing it, I think it just hasn't been programmed to.

What it reminds me of (conceptually, not visually) is that Gerald Undone mentioned that the lens would snap between distortion correction settings at some point in the zoom range, or maybe once you stopped zooming. Then they fixed it with a firmware update so that it would continuously adjust the distortion correction, or at least at small enough intervals that the changes are imperceptible.

I'm not sure that being parfocal should matter since doesn't the camera just figure out which direction is more in focus and move that way without knowing what the true distance is?

Also, it seems to hold focus when I'm zooming from a stationary position (and at very close distance/shallow DOF). Maybe the lens is close to parfocal, maybe it's programmed to readjust to a constant focus distance, or maybe it can handle the readjustment as long as the camera isn't moving as well.
 
rob norton said:
Have you tried a combination of moving the camera without zooming and digital zooming?

- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlgWtnTwXOE&t=2m54s
Click to expand...

That looks very effective. Makes sense, since cropping is the exact same thing as zooming in terms of perspective. But you lose resolution and it's an extra step in post. Something to keep in mind, but not a fun, extra variant you simply hand off to the editor in your b-roll
 
ahalpert said:
But you lose resolution and it's an extra step in post. Something to keep in mind, but not a fun, extra variant you simply hand off to the editor in your b-roll
Click to expand...

A shoot that's fine with a single person doing a vertigo zoom on a mirrorless doesn't get to complain about resolution losses and an extra step in post IMO.

It's simply how to achieve that shot given the circumstances (lack of people and capable equipment during production).

I'm not sure any editors would have trouble with adding a couple of keyframes with different scaling?
 
+1 for the zolly through digital zoom in post. That's the reason for shooting 4k: so you don't have to worry about losing resolution when you (willingly) mess things up in post.
 
To Abe or Dan - How is the A7sIII when it comes to green skin color casts? Are you seeing this in your testing? Easy to get rid of with the in-camera global color hue shift?

I have seen a few YouTube videos that the Sony has this going on as the only flaw out of the box. Thanks for your feedback.
 
Bassman2003 said:
To Abe or Dan - How is the A7sIII when it comes to green skin color casts? Are you seeing this in your testing? Easy to get rid of with the in-camera global color hue shift?
Click to expand...

Sounds like people can’t agree; First it’s Sony magenta and now green? They are complimentary colors after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top