Sony Introduces 61 Megapixel α7R IV

Heat is obviously an issue in the A7 bodies. I don’t think Sony is purposely not adding in 10 bit video or 4k60. Those tiny bodies simply can’t dissipate the heat that level of video creates.

They did remove rhe 30 minute limitation, so that’s one hurdle they were able to conquer with some improvements to the thermals.

If I were Sony:

- I’d leave the A9 as-is. It’s still unsurpassed for what it does.

- I’d kill the A7S line.

- I’d bring out the A9S. The bigger body could hopefully handle the increased thermal load of high bitrate, frame rate and resolution video, have better IBiS, and better i/o ports and handling.

But I’m not Sony, so...
 
A7RIII is the best still camera I've ever had but I don't care to much about its video recording as I rather use FS5/FS7 for that. The R series is about resolution and just get the standard Sony video recording options so the me at least the R cameras is not meant to be a working video tool. But for stills they're great.

Looking at my other still camera X-T3 it's way better equipped with video features and lesser in the stills part compared to A7RIII.

The way I see it, still cameras used for both stills and video is always a compromise and we can't have it all.
 
markfpv said:
hmmm.. well I'm interested in this camera (still waiting on final specs however). As someone who does video but also some stills work - the Pixel Shift Multi Shooting mode caught my attention right after the slog capabilities in video. While 10 bit would be nice - we all know 8 bit can look just dandy.
Click to expand...

My C200 which also has woefully under spec regular video, is also 8-bit XF-AVC, and I agree, under most circumstances (other than gradient lighting patterns, contrast patterns, horizons and skies where you see all of that glorious banding), 8-bit makes perfectly fine looking video. Of course, with the C200, I now rarely shoot XF-AVC, only RAW as the cards have become so cheap and 12-bit is so much better. What concerns me much more is the data rate on this new $3,500.00 Sony. 100Mbps?! My c200 records UHD at 160Mbps and I find it even a little skimpy if I push the grade at all. I shoot my Fuji XT-3 at 200Mbps (long form) and 400Mbps (shorter form) and that data rate is right where it should be for UHD. 100Mbps is a joke for a semi-professional mirrorless video camera, that's like a Go Pro or my iPhone when using Filmic Pro. They honestly should have made it a stills only camera, 100Mbps in 2019 on a $3,500.00 camera is an embarrassment.
 
TBH I already feel like I won the lottery with the impending S1H finally giving me vlog, 10-bit 4k 6p internal, IBIS, panasonic UI, and a camera that slots into a workflow with GHx cameras and the overall very good but imperfect EVA1.

I used to stress about switching to Sony, and follow these announcements with more careful consideration, but we're hardly for want anymore. Too many good options with minimal compromises now to consider a camera like this for video work. Any minor benefits it might give are outweighed by other impracticalities. It won't be long of a wait until another model gives anyone still discontented exactly what they want, things have been moving super fast.

I understand it is AF that is throwing most people for a loop but my sense is that if you wait it out with existing gear until next year there will be a combination of new models and new firmware updates that alleviate most of the existing analysis paralysis. I'm actually glad I haven't "tasted and seen" yet with AF until Panasonic has a good implementation, or until Sony steps up their game to match Panny in a number of ways, or until Canon gets more competitive against the new wave of heat. A short season of "ignorance is bliss" - sometimes it pays to not be an early adopter!
 
puredrifting said:
My C200 which also has woefully under spec regular video, is also 8-bit XF-AVC, and I agree, under most circumstances (other than gradient lighting patterns, contrast patterns, horizons and skies where you see all of that glorious banding), 8-bit makes perfectly fine looking video. Of course, with the C200, I now rarely shoot XF-AVC, only RAW as the cards have become so cheap and 12-bit is so much better. What concerns me much more is the data rate on this new $3,500.00 Sony. 100Mbps?! My c200 records UHD at 160Mbps and I find it even a little skimpy if I push the grade at all. I shoot my Fuji XT-3 at 200Mbps (long form) and 400Mbps (shorter form) and that data rate is right where it should be for UHD. 100Mbps is a joke for a semi-professional mirrorless video camera, that's like a Go Pro or my iPhone when using Filmic Pro. They honestly should have made it a stills only camera, 100Mbps in 2019 on a $3,500.00 camera is an embarrassment.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone would disagree, but that number comes from an industry-standard suggested calculation of providing the consumer 28-35mbps for 1080p (which you'd multiple by 4).

Whether it's 100 with Sony or 144 with Nikon or 150 with Canon (in the lower-quality setting on the EOS R), they are all providing you the bare minimum consumer data rate for these particular stills cameras that shoot video.

_____

Personally, I don't think it matters if it's 100 or 200. If one says he or she cannot see a difference between 200 and 400 then this matters even less.

If I could request anything, it would be to have a data rate of around 500mbps. ProRes 422 is where you will be cut off by many productions and that data rate (UHD 4K/24p) is 471mbps. (Some will only accept HQ, which is of course higher.)

Canon has forever offered Motion JPEG at 500mbps and I once read an article that they thought this was a bare minimum for DCI 4K acquisition.

So for a stills camera that's first and foremost designed to shoot stills this is what we get. 8-bit. 100mbps.

Once they get the 10-bit going on the a7SIII or a9II or whatever, they will hopefully introduce new numbers.
 
Looking at this camera makes me think the camera makers know the end is near and they are stretching. The megapixel race is very long in the tooth. 61Mpx - who cares? Sony has tied itself to a small body and it might prove to be a hinderance for high end sales but at this stage in the game does it matter what size your barrel is when you are all streaming towards the waterfall? :)

Panasonic saw a weak point in the big three and that is video or more specifically 10bit video. Panasonic has the engineering to pull of the heat requirements and the larger body size. Sony has the smaller body size and great AF. Canon and Nikon are well defined with stills and are trying to be present in mirrorless with smallish bodies and decent but not total pro specs so far. The way I see it, the ground is all laid out for the next few generations. Personally, I would not be surprised if Sony held off on the 10bit stuff for a while longer. Is there even a chance Canon would put anything 10bit in a stills camera? I thought not... So why would it be out of character for Sony to do this?

$600 for the XLR unit? Is it even 24bit? That is outrageous. Color fidelity and DR are what is most important these days along with color depth and bit rate for video. We have pixels coming out of our ears with many cameras but sadly it is tough to market around DR.
 
What's really surprising is that Sony hasn't at least offered a model that can provide 10-bit externally while Canon and even Nikon both have.
 
NorBro said:
What's really surprising is that Sony hasn't at least offered a model that can provide 10-bit externally while Canon and even Nikon both have.
Click to expand...
I was going to write this ... but without the "surprising" part. The lack of 10-bit, external or otherwise, was a gimme. And none of this is incidental or due to heat, weather sealing or lack of a suitable processor.

PS. Fuji has a $10,000 GFX 100 with 100 MPX. A $3,500 RIV can stitch together 16 images for 240 MPX. Digital tech is an amazing thing.
 
DLD, since we're both retired, I think it's time we finally build that camera. :engel017:
 
puredrifting said:
Hmm...interesting idea but is it plastic or metal? If this is plastic, with it's height, I can see it easily getting sheared off or cracked.
As much as I hate cables, putting audio data through the hot shoe is a consumer type move, makes everything ultra proprietary
and not sure how that will hold up in the real world?
Click to expand...

Not all that different from the receiver slot on broadcast 2/3" cameras that requires proprietary kit. And the Fs7 also has the hot shoe data capability. If you want it, it's there. If you don't, you go the traditional route.

I put a Lectro receiver on my Fs7's hot-shoe mount regularly. Hasn't sheared off yet.

As to your comment about still photogs moving to Sony, I've encountered several Set Photogs who have moved to Sony from Canon DSLR's because going mirrorless enabled them to get rid of the blimps. And Sony recently overtook Nikon for the #2 spot in interchangeable lens camera sales.
 
Blackmagic Design is having another good day.

Still no challenger to the P4k.


I laugh that people said the GH5 was dead once the P4k came out and yet that at least had a solid 10bit codec internal and a very solid external 10bit path. With 10bit cameras like the GH5 and Fuji out there and the P4k providing raw I just don't see the logical need for an 8bit camera anymore. I love to shoot stills but I would switch to the Fuji for that long before I would to a 8bit crippled camera.

Seriously DSLRs need to now figure out a way to provide raw video even if that means ProRes raw to an external recorder. 10bit is quickly becoming the budget format for professionals.
 
NorBro said:
DLD, since we're both retired, I think it's time we finally build that camera. :engel017:
Click to expand...

I have a Phillips screwdriver and a paper clip. We're half way there.

Side note - R IV seems to have a (Charles Barkley voice) turrrible rolling shutter. So, there ought to be a video oriented cam coming out some time later. A9II seems likely to be the next one, however.
 
The a7r4 can shoot video but it's not for video shooters. But I don't think it's improving that much over the a7r3 for photogs either: even more Mpix, better EVF, slightly improved AF, slightly improved image in general, better dual SD card support... Lots of small things but nothing compelling, if you ask me. No idea if this will sell great or if it won't*, it's really puzzling.

What's for sure is that whenever I go to events now there's lots of Sony cameras covering them, mostly for video but some also for stills. So maybe this is enough for a lot of people and I'm just an irredeemable whiner. Maybe the p4k spoiled me. Anyway, dear Sony: I'll be waiting for the a6x00 with internal 10-bit 4k 60fps with eye-detect AF and DR to match the S1/S1H.


* Just for fun, I checked the sonyalpharumors polls. They make one every time a new product is announced. When the a7rIII came out, 41% of voters said they would buy it (link). Now, with a similar number of votes, only 26% say they will buy the a7r4 (link). So yeah, photogs aren't seeing a big improvement either.
(yes, I know most of those people won't actually buy it, or at least not yeat; but it measures hype and there's much less of it now)
 
Last edited:
Apparently one full resolution RAW photo from the A7r4 is 130 MB, and it can shoot 10 fps while it's buffer isn't full.
 
That must be in the uncompressed RAW format (61 Mpix at 16-bits per pixel is 122 megabytes), I know modern Sony cameras have that option but I don't know if there's a choice of going for compressed RAW, which should be around 60 MB
 
From early videos, there doesn't seem to be a compressed Raw in stills option. It's either uncompressed or J-Peg.

Of course, in a pixel shifting 16x 240 MPX composite, the file size is almost a gigabyte per shot.
 
Possible scenario how things will turn out with Sony:

On IBC 2019 Sony will introduce A7S IV skipping mark III all together because of a technical leap that it will have.
Alongside newest A7S they will also present full frame FS7 successor with same sensor as A7S but higher framerates etc.
This way they will not cannibalize their own market also creating demand for their full frame lenses. They could create a new line of full frame cine lenses as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top