Unhappy with Sony DSLRs and Looking for a Change

Joshua Milligan

Joshua Milligan

Well-known member
Hey guys. I've been making commercials and promotional videos professionally for five years now and have been able to get a lot of clients over the last few years. I started off with a Sony AX2000 dedicated video camera and a Sony a77 DSLR. I liked the look of the SLR much better than that of the AX2000, so I sold the AX and bought a Sony a99 to go with my a77. So far, I have not been very happy with my decision. While I was never a big fan of the image the AX produced, I thought that the full frame a99 would be much better and give results similar to, if not better than my crop censored a77. I was wrong. So far I have yet to get anything that just screams at me. Everything is noisy and soft and it's really been a letdown. I will set it up on a rig with a matte box, follow focus and monitor and the images will look great in the monitor, but when I put them into the computer for editing, it just isn't what I want it to be. Sometimes I wish I would have just gone the Canon route, because the images I have seen from those cameras are just more desirable than mine. Just this last weekend I filmed a US senator's speech for his office and when I looked at the results, it just wasn't what it should be, and I feel that this a99 is going to hurt me in the long run. I guess that's why you don't hear about many people using Sony DSLRs professionally.

This is where I need help. I already have a ton of money invested in Sony a-mount lenses, so I feel stuck. But I can't keep going with this a99 look. So, my question is what can I get to replace this a99, or even the a99 and a77, that will give me much better results and allow me to use my Sony lenses with Metabones adaptors? Would it be a GH4? Maybe a GH4 and another SLR, or maybe even a GH4 and a new dedicated video camera that gives a better image than the AX2000? I do like that the a99 gives me up to 60 FPS in full HD and like that the GH4 does that as well as 96 FPS.

I just feel sick to my stomach that I have invested so much money into this a99 and decking it out with lenses and rigs just to have sub par results. I just want to sell the a99 and get another full frame DSLR that gives a more desirable image and maybe even sell the a77 for the GH4 and would love to hear some feedback on which cameras I should get. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Sony 70-200mm 2.8 G, Zeiss 24-70mm 2.8, Sony 16-50mm 2.8 DT, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Rokinon 14mm 2.8 and working on getting a Sony 70-400mm G right now.
 
Another alternative would be the A6000, and then the A7s when it comes out.
With Sony, I think the mirrorless line has always been a lot better for video than the reflex line.

I've got plenty of videos shot with the NEX-5N here.

And also: before you throw it away, you may want to play with the settings to see if the image improves. These are the settings I use with my 5N.
 
In my experience, you really have to spend some $$ to get the beauty of a good DSLR in a full-on "video" camera (small chip, XLRs, etc).

Many of my clients need interview type-stuff and they also have large events, charity stuff, grand openings. Nothing really beats a video camera for that stuff - I use a Panasonic AC130 with a shoulder mount that I can drop instantly on a tripod, with zoom, iris, and focus controls on the rig handles. With focus assist, it's a badass combination, and with a good wireless and a good blimped hyper, I am very covered and it's all second nature. It's likely not as good as an AF100 might be (I don't know if you get that much remote control with the AF series)... but I've been a commercial stills shooter for 20-some years and I need a good DSLR anyway.

But for really beautiful footage, I'd have to spend a significant amount of cash to beat, say, a D7100 (or maybe even a 5300) with a great zoom and some primes (I rely on the Nikkor 28-70 2.8 and the 85mm 1.8 for 90% of my "pretty" work). I use a Tascam DR-60D for audio in those cases. The DSLR stuff takes more setup and planning, the Panasonic is the "grab a fast moving event" camera. The Nikon's a pain on a crane, but it's pretty rockin' on a steadicam (with an 18-35 or a 20mm prime). The panny on a crane? I've got a monitor, zoom, iris, focus and trigger at hand. It can intercut but it's some work. I've never even tried it on the Steadi - not until I have a vest & arm anyway.

DSLRs - for me - really need a loupe, rails, FF, matte box and often a monitor with peaking (and external audio if you're going it alone) to consistently do pro work. But that stuff has plummeted in price since the T2i came out.

For me, both setups are vital and allow me a very wide range of gigs I can do a good job with. I did three videos for a national building maintenance company (Starbucks, target, etc) and they had low budgets and needed everything shot in three days. Even though it was interview centric, it was a Panny gig for me - just moving way too fast. Being able to choose is a huge thing.
 
Michael Carter said:
In my experience, you really have to spend some $$ to get the beauty of a good DSLR in a full-on "video" camera (small chip, XLRs, etc).

Many of my clients need interview type-stuff and they also have large events, charity stuff, grand openings. Nothing really beats a video camera for that stuff - I use a Panasonic AC130 with a shoulder mount that I can drop instantly on a tripod, with zoom, iris, and focus controls on the rig handles. With focus assist, it's a badass combination, and with a good wireless and a good blimped hyper, I am very covered and it's all second nature. It's likely not as good as an AF100 might be (I don't know if you get that much remote control with the AF series)... but I've been a commercial stills shooter for 20-some years and I need a good DSLR anyway.

But for really beautiful footage, I'd have to spend a significant amount of cash to beat, say, a D7100 (or maybe even a 5300) with a great zoom and some primes (I rely on the Nikkor 28-70 2.8 and the 85mm 1.8 for 90% of my "pretty" work). I use a Tascam DR-60D for audio in those cases. The DSLR stuff takes more setup and planning, the Panasonic is the "grab a fast moving event" camera. The Nikon's a pain on a crane, but it's pretty rockin' on a steadicam (with an 18-35 or a 20mm prime). The panny on a crane? I've got a monitor, zoom, iris, focus and trigger at hand. It can intercut but it's some work. I've never even tried it on the Steadi - not until I have a vest & arm anyway.

DSLRs - for me - really need a loupe, rails, FF, matte box and often a monitor with peaking (and external audio if you're going it alone) to consistently do pro work. But that stuff has plummeted in price since the T2i came out.

For me, both setups are vital and allow me a very wide range of gigs I can do a good job with. I did three videos for a national building maintenance company (Starbucks, target, etc) and they had low budgets and needed everything shot in three days. Even though it was interview centric, it was a Panny gig for me - just moving way too fast. Being able to choose is a huge thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah I have all of that. I have several lenses, a cage, a follow focus, rails, a shoulder rig, a large matte box with a donut, a 7" monitor, jibs, sliders, tripods, fluid heads, external audio recorders, shotgun mics, wireless mics, studio lights, etc. I just am looking for an SLR that gives a better overall image with less noise and more sharpness that my Sony a99.
 
Joshua Milligan said:
Yeah I have all of that. I have several lenses, a cage, a follow focus, rails, a shoulder rig, a large matte box with a donut, a 7" monitor, jibs, sliders, tripods, fluid heads, external audio recorders, shotgun mics, wireless mics, studio lights, etc. I just am looking for an SLR that gives a better overall image with less noise and more sharpness that my Sony a99.
Click to expand...

I have zero experience with SONY cameras generally, but I really like what I ve seen so far from the A7s. If you can adapt your existing gear to that camera, I believe it could be your best option! Of course you ll have to wait a little more until real and not just promotional footage will start to hit the web...but it sure is a very promising camera. While the GH4 is very capable with a fair price...there is just ''something'' about the A7s images...in my opinion of course!
 
As someone who have done this professionally several years surely you must have an idea what kind of quality/features you need and where to get it !?

Forgo research can be expensive and probably a lesson learned.

There is no question that the A99 video features leaves a lot to be desired. However compared to the A77 there shouldn't be any real difference in video performance.
(when it comes to still it's a whole other ballgame, the A77 is a toy in comparison)

The A99 video seems much like a fragile JPG, it's picky and you need to be cautious with exposure as the files doesn't respond to grading as kindly as one might hope for.

What kind of settings do you have on the A99 ? What NLE and grading do you use ?

The clarity and sharpness can be helped a little both in camera and in post.

Bottom line if the A99 doesn't cut it for you, just move on.

The GH4 will give you better video quality, it will be a real step up, and with metabones you won't miss FF to much.

The A7s seems like a nice option especially since it will be easy enough to adapt your lens collection, final price and performance is yet to be determined though.

If you can forgo the DSLR form factor the BMC4K could be a option as well.

There is a Kipon adapter to mount Sony lenses to 4:3 mount, haven't tried it my self so i can't speak of the quality and fit. But I do believe there is a aperture control on it though.

As commercial still photographer who just started to dabble into video and done a few assignments my A99's does the job for now. I do however recognize the issue with subpar video quality and plan to move onto BMC4K once the clientele is large and demanding enough.
 
Last edited:
Even the nex cameras has better video than the Alpha line, pretty good video samples coming from the a6000 are on vimeo, look for yesterday comments from Philip Bloom, if the new a77 MKII has similar video it will be a nice option for video too, but for my own experienes i can tell you that the GH3 and much more the GH4 are one of the finest video dslr cameras you can get.
 
vainlord said:
As someone who have done this professionally several years surely you must have an idea what kind of quality/features you need and where to get it !?

Forgo research can be expensive and probably a lesson learned.

There is no question that the A99 video features leaves a lot to be desired. However compared to the A77 there shouldn't be any real difference in video performance.
(when it comes to still it's a whole other ballgame, the A77 is a toy in comparison)

The A99 video seems much like a fragile JPG, it's picky and you need to be cautious with exposure as the files doesn't respond to grading as kindly as one might hope for.

What kind of settings do you have on the A99 ? What NLE and grading do you use ?

The clarity and sharpness can be helped a little both in camera and in post.

Bottom line if the A99 doesn't cut it for you, just move on.

The GH4 will give you better video quality, it will be a real step up, and with metabones you won't miss FF to much.

The A7s seems like a nice option especially since it will be easy enough to adapt your lens collection, final price and performance is yet to be determined though.

If you can forgo the DSLR form factor the BMC4K could be a option as well.

There is a Kipon adapter to mount Sony lenses to 4:3 mount, haven't tried it my self so i can't speak of the quality and fit. But I do believe there is a aperture control on it though.

As commercial still photographer who just started to dabble into video and done a few assignments my A99's does the job for now. I do however recognize the issue with subpar video quality and plan to move onto BMC4K once the clientele is large and demanding enough.
Click to expand...

As far as settings go, I use -3 Contrast, -2 Saturation, and -3 sharpness to allow me to sharpen and color in post. I edit with both Premiere Pro and After Effects, while using Magic Bullet Looks to color grade. I know it sounds crazy that the a77 gives a better image than the a99, but all jokes aside, I really do get better shots with my a77 than my a99, most of the time. Either that's truly the case, or I was expecting more out of my a99 than what I'm getting, which could make me subconsciously think the a77 is better. All I know is like you said, it is subpar, which doesn't cut it for me. Maybe the A7s is a start. I do like that the GH4 can do 4K internally and that it also can do up to 96 fps slow motion, because I use slow motion in a lot in my work. I would go all out on the GH4 if I knew my lenses would work well and not be very difficult to use. That's the only thing that worries me about that camera.

I do like having the full frame capabilities of the a99, however. So would it be wise maybe to hang on to the a99, sell the a77 and get the GH4, barring that the GH4 does well with my lenses, and then eventually sell the a99 for the A7s?
 
Last edited:
Joshua Milligan said:
I do like having the full frame capabilities of the a99, however. So would it be wise maybe to hang on to the a99, sell the a77 and get the GH4, barring that the GH4 does well with my lenses, and then eventually sell the a99 for the A7s?
Click to expand...


Yes FF is nice, i would be all over BMPCC if it wasn't for the crop factor... as i said the only adapter i'v seen is the kipon and if it works plausible the GH4 sounds like a excellent plan. Again the 2x factor for me is a bit steep. So i would get a native UWA zoom like the Oly 9-18mm/4-5,6 or preferably the Lumix G Vario 7-14mm/4 that would cover the widest end and get you shots where the A99 simply can't match (Wide exterior/interior stopped down shots) and also the Oly 60mm/2,8 Macro for slowmo. Tele won't be a problem with the 2x with your adapted sony lenses. :-)

The A7s looks like a great tool, one big drawback for professional use (to this point at least) is the flimsy build of the NEX series. The A7 and A7R is slightly better but still they are quite fragile compared to the DSLR body.

Also external recorder required for 4K makes it less desirable, even more so if sony put a hefty price tag on it.

Still in terms of video quality it will be head and shoulders over the A99.
 
Sony Alpha Rumors says that the price of the A7S should be officially released in London at midnight EST tonight, 5/15:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com

The price in euros appeared to be "leaked" at 2,295.

I don't know how inclined you are to be an early adopter? On the one hand it can be fun. You can also blog and get some traffic if you are so inclined.

On the other hand, if you are busy with commercial work, you may not want to invest the time or take the risk- you just want something that works!

It is a bit of a calculated risk. How long can you get by with the A99, A77, a NEX, etc.

Given all of the Sony glass that you have, it is probably worth trying to make Sony work for you, at least for a few months.

Good luck!
 
I'd agree with others about waiting for the A7 to see if that would be a good option for your situation.

If you're leaning towards a video camera solution, check out some of the videos shot with the Panasonic AC90 and AC130... I've been very impressed with these cams.

I've also been looking at the Canon 70D because of its excellent auto-focus. Several users are reporting that it is a very good run and gun solution, unlike most DSLRs that require a lot of set-up time and extra accessories.

As for all your Sony lens, just sell them on ebay, Amazon or here (if you don't get an A7).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top