Who has gone mirrorless?

AlanU wrote in post #18895861
Charlie,

Since you own the R3 you may be underwhelmed. I'm on the other hand intrigued as I do not own a high res body. In reality if Sony rolls out with an A9mk2 with 30MP sensor body that would be much more logical for me. I wouldn't complain picking up a current A9 mk1 TBH.

I'm still analyzing my uses for a high MP body. 30MP is more of a sweet spot for my application.

the flexibility of 60mp is certainly nice, just not nice enough for me to plunk out 1500+ to do the upgrade (assuming I can sell my old cam for 2k).

it's not all about the pixels, I upgraded from the R2 to R3, took a bath, and well worth it IMO. The body adjustments were huge for their time. The camera much faster, battery more than doubled, joystick touch screen, custom functions, etc.

The problem with this R4 is that all those previously very important weaknesses have been addressed, so the R4 had to improve on stuff, and outside the pixels, additional sealing, I'm just not seeing much that warrants the upgrade..... however if you're shooting 24mp and want something much higher..... this will hit the spot. Either way, usability is a bit lacking with this upgrade, and thats an area I'de like to see Sony tackle more. They're doing that with this R4, just not enough. Less or no blackout, better touch screen experience, A9 like UI, which has improved a lot? (might be there already).

The top dials like the A9...... what gives? Why cant all the models get that? They're friggin dials, and it's still a 3500 dollar camera. It just bothers me when going from the 7 to 9, when they're essentially the same form factor. Hate fiddling with stuff when I get disoriented. Thankfully, I'm using the R3 mainly for very still life, and video, not a big deal, would love to have a 61mp body, but I'm asking for more than megapixels

here's a video of the difference which should be really bug fixes that come in firmware updates....

Great video on the mindset of Sony, not often do we get interviews from actual execs:




Touched on many issues that people complain about and reasoning behind it.

Charlie wrote in post #18896262
Great video on the mindset of Sony, not often do we get interviews from actual execs:




Touched on many issues that people complain about and reasoning behind it.

Video explanation - undecided.
Size explanation - fair enough. I'd prefer bigger but they are doing what they think more people want.
Card explanation - good explanation and backed up with what seems to me good logic.
File size explanation - not so good IMHO. I think it's obvious many would want an option for choosing smaller RAW files in some shooting situations.

.
The discussion about overall size starts at 3:48 in the video.
.

Choderboy wrote in post #18896311
Size explanation - fair enough. I'd prefer bigger but they are doing what they think more people want.

.
I, too, would, of course, prefer a larger camera. . A body that is both taller and "fatter" would fill my average-sized hands better.

While I am concerned that Sony caters to those who prefer a small, compact body ...... but at least there is some pressure being put on them to produce larger bodies, and they are aware of that segment of the market and their preferences.

There are ways to make these cameras effectively larger. . A friend of mine has a Sony mirrorless camera that he loves, except for its small size. . He has a metal cage that wraps around the camera, that mounts to it via the threaded tripod tap on the bottom of the body. . This cage makes it a bit tough to access the buttons, battery, and card door, but it increases the overall size so that one's hand and fingers don't have to curl as much when holding it, and is quite effective in producing a much more comfortable grip.

But ideally you don't want to have to mount an awkward steel cage on your camera just to make it big enough, and many of us would prefer that the body just be made larger in the first place. . The Canon 1D series are a perfect size, and my hands are comfortable using them for extended periods of time. . And my hands are very average size at a total span of just nine inches. . Hopefully one day either Canon or Sony will make a mirrorless body that is the same size as the 1D series.

.

There are conventional grips for the alpha series, which would provide a bigger footprint as well as longer battery life. The problem I had with the 3 series was the grip itself, but it appears the a7r4 will have a beefier grip which is great. The grip below then addresses what to do with the last two fingers on my hand.

https://www.bhphotovid​eo.com …Es5dqS4U_8BUaAh​AOEALw_wcB

Which is pretty much what the difference between a 1d series and a 5d series body is. One has a built in grip and the other doesnt

The issue for me is that the Alpha platform is quite a bit smaller than the 5D4, which fits my hand just about perfectly. I would have to add a grip just to get it to around the 5D stature, and up to now, the grip itself wasn't deep enough. Perhaps the vs 4 will change that.

I have a grip for the 5D4 and it doesn't make it feel like a 1D series however. Size-wise perhaps, but feel, nope. The 1D is a sound well designed body, and a gripped non 1D doesn't have the same feel.

The real problem for many with Sony body size is the lack of space between the grip and the lens. My small fingers only just fit, easy to see how those with larger hands would be unhappy. It would not be too difficult to make, have someone make or adapt a bolt on grip to make it a satisfactory size but your large fingers would only just wrap around the front of the grip, you would not get the secure feeling you get with a DSLR being able to firmly grip the grip. IMHO the EOS R is really good. A bit smaller than DSLR but plenty of space between grip and lens.
For me, I'd prefer larger but my small fingers just fit between grip and the Sigma MC-11 adapter.

Something like this Fuji X100 grip could improve the limited space between grip and lens.

One of the reasons I like mirrorless, AF with a 2xIII and 100-400II... I am sure the 5D4 would do this in midday sun too, but alas Canon decided to simply make the camera not even try, locking out AF. I could try to tape pins, etc, but not worth the trouble when the M50 can do it.

Charlie wrote in post #18896262
Great video on the mindset of Sony, not often do we get interviews from actual execs:




Touched on many issues that people complain about and reasoning behind it.

So the reasoning may be a mixture of real reasons and what Sony wants people to hear. It was said they didn't want to release something until they got it right. Sony did release the pixel shift option. Now .. Tony Northrup revealed that the pixel shift was pretty unpredictable. It sounded pretty crappy from what he conveyed.

One thing that looked nifty that nobody seemed to test or show was the way the hotshoe adapts for a microphone.

Anyone know if the A7R iv has one processor or two processors?

mdvaden wrote in post #18897223
So the reasoning may be a mixture of real reasons and what Sony wants people to hear. It was said they didn't want to release something until they got it right. Sony did release the pixel shift option. Now .. Tony Northrup revealed that the pixel shift was pretty unpredictable. It sounded pretty crappy from what he conveyed.

One thing that looked nifty that nobody seemed to test or show was the way the hotshoe adapts for a microphone.

Anyone know if the A7R iv has one processor or two processors?

It seems pretty clear, Sony is playing the segmentation game. Their Video features are still at a very high level and the R4 has the best video features as a whole.

They are reserving additional features for the A7s or equivalent video centric camera. That video cam won’t have all out cinema camera features. Keep in mind, this is not new. Sony Won’t even include profiles for the A9 because it would be the best video camera on the market. There simply is not a camera on the market that I find better for video than current Sony’s, not to mention lens ecosystem dedicated to video, nobody makes power zooms.

Pixel shift is a mess, and basically, if there’s motion, it’s a fail. What tony doesn’t mention that even in failure, you still get some, if not all successful RAWS, which still give you 40/60mp depending on cam. So while it won’t work in many scenarios, it’s not a total loss.

Processor is the Bionz X..... not sure if the same one from the A9, but I think so. So far, only that processor can deal with the new smart tracking AF

Don't think I'd say that Sony A series are the best [Stills] video cameras on the market. They don't have 10 bit 4:2:2, there is no raw and a low 100mbps in quality. They really need to have included more than they did to make it up there for video.

I shoot both Fuji and Sony for video and am loving the X-T3 for it's size and the video quality is amazing, it's 10 bit 4:2:2 colour with h.265 400Mbs is beautiful. Sony's PXW series are very good though. I guess if you want that 135mm sensor their A7* a good option. BTW the GFX100 shoots 4k30 in 10bit 4:2:2 without crop, that's 12K down to 4K. Sony's a series are good but far from the best in my mind, perhaps the A7s3[4] will up the game.

Two Hot Shoes wrote in post #18897267
Don't think I'd say that Sony A series are the best [Stills] video cameras on the market. They don't have 10 bit 4:2:2, there is no raw and a low 100mbps in quality. They really need to have included more than they did to make it up there for video.

I shoot both Fuji and Sony for video and am loving the X-T3 for it's size and the video quality is amazing, it's 10 bit 4:2:2 colour with h.265 400Mbs is beautiful. Sony's PXW series are very good though. I guess if you want that 135mm sensor their A7* a good option. BTW the GFX100 shoots 4k30 in 10bit 4:2:2 without crop, that's 12K down to 4K. Sony's a series are good but far from the best in my mind, perhaps the A7s3[4] will up the game.

I realize that Sony doesn't match the bitrate and compression, and at the same time they don't compete with Fuji as much as they compete with Nikon and Canon. Nikon doesn't have AF squared away, Canon doesn't shoot full frame video.

I'm not following Fuji's reasoning behind models, XT's vs XH's don't seem to have a clear video distinction, while Sony has a clear cut video camera, the distinction is clear in that regard. Different philosophies.

It does seem that bigger sensors have a harder time with video, all manufacturers have one issue or another, even Panasonic can only do 4K 60 in crop mode. R's have binning in FF mode. I suspect the gfx does 4K pixel binning, uses a cousin sensor to the R4.

I personally view the bitrate, color space, and compression a bit too extreme in video features, deviating into the pro video market, you keep increasing all of that, and you're in external recorder territory, and once there, you start considering the black magics, cine cameras, all have a ton more video features. 400mb just seems so extreme, I struggle with file management of 100mb, even drop down to 1080 30p at times to save on size

Bitrate doesn't translate to better IQ proportionally, so I tend to try and then see what I'm comfortable with, it's a spec that I need to test with eyes before concluding.

4 minutes in, 400mbit vs 100mbit




On the extreme side of things, sigma FP will have a 12 bit Dng Cinema raw. Clear cut best IQ on paper, but the camera doesn't have phase detect AF.

It may have the best video specs in terms of IQ, not necessarily the best video camera, especially if it can't AF well.

How I would rate video features: It needs reliable AF. Needs to capture the full sensor. You can't do those two, can't be considered.

After that, the compelling features

Framerates, ability for slow motion is huge.
Crop/zoom ability, this is just huge.
Color space, this has got to be a distant third place. Important but has no bearing on how well composed your video is.
Bitrate and compression. H265 is the best, and has no bearing on how you craft your video. Like Sony's photo compression vs no compressions, little material difference however H265 can save space with no penalty. Also not compatible with many systems, like USB-C, a little ahead of the times.

I'll say after using panasonic 10bit 422 for a few shoots now anything 8 bit seems like it falls apart so quickly in editing.

Only a couple of year ago I rmemebr how the a7s2 8bit seemed magical compared to the 5d3 video files when in post ..

How time flies

Time sure does fly, as I mentioned I shoot with a Fs7 and have an A7s too - until I got the X-T3 I didn't consider using Fuji for video work until I shot an ad with the Fuji as primary for one of my corporate clients, not a lot of room and was on the glidecam. Having 10bit colour in 4:2:2 with 4k60 h.265 400mbps is truly wonderful quality to work with. Raw would be nicer though, I have asked..

The colour and detail with the Fuji is so much better when you are editing, it's just all round better than the Sony A7, the new R probably has better AF but we don't really use AF all that much when shooting video. Look either will do fine, my phone will do fine. But if you were to ask me which is better there is no way I'd say the A7 is the better camera. Of course none of those small camera are a good video camera, no built in ND no XLR - record limits and power issues....

Fuji's X-H1 was built for those who need a stills & Video camera in the field, hence it has a thicker body (more rugged) and ibis. The X-T3 kinds kicked it out of the park with the Video in terms of quality of output. And yes your composition has nothing to do with the camera, that should really be a given.