Let me catch up with some A7s related news:
On top you can see Frederick Van Johnson youtube video interview about the Sony A7s. And a must watch video is this one posted by Den Lennie who is actually one of the few that had the lucky chance to test the A7s:
A7s Launch Film BTS from Den Lennie on Vimeo.
An absolute must read article for photogrpahers wondeirng why the A7s is that interesting has been written by Soundimagesplus (Click here):
The quality of the image is at least as important, if not more so, than how big it is.And that is where a camera like the A7s will really score. Better performance at high ISO’s means faster shutter speeds, narrower apertures and cleaner, sharper images. The photographer is also freed from the constraints of tripods, flash and lighting rigs in many instances. And 12MP is certainly enough for most publishing requirements. Sensors that improve dynamic range and allow us to document the non-sunlit world with clarity and definition is surely something we should applaud and encourage as photographers. I’m actually more excited about this camera than I thought I would be.
A7s eyes-on by Engadget on Youtube.
Spanish A7s NAB video by CineDigitalTV on Youtube.
A7s sites in different languages at Sony US, DE, UK, ES, FR, IT, NL, SE, FI, PL.
0 Responses
Does it overheat?
Why would it? The capturing is done by your Shogun or whatever other 4k capture device you are using. The A7s avoids the possibility of overheating by leaving the tough job to someone else… just remember you’ll pay about 2 grand for the add-on equipment to do the actual video capture.
he’s talking about in camera recording. not everyone is willing to pay double the price for a recorder. A7 and A7r overheated.
Personally the more I look into this camera system the more Im disappointed. I can’t use third party lenses with this without a shitty overpriced adaptor which ruins the already shit AF speed. Burst mode is shit so no fast action whatsoever.
weather sealing is sub bar compared to dslrs.
The a7s would be great if it could do 1080p 120fps or at least deliver it via HDMI like 4k, would make an awesome combo with the Atmos Shogun
Would be more awesome if it were the Atmos Shotgun.
Wonder how this camera perform with rangfinder lenses? Looking foreward to the first test of this camera hooked up with the compact Voigtländer wide angle lenses: 12mm f5.6, 15mm f4.5, 21mm f4, 25mm f4 and 35mm f1.4!
The Soundimagesplus article has some misconceptions that because the dynamic range and noise characteristics of a large photo-sensors are better, that this automatically means that the performance will be better at equivalent output size. This is not necessarily so. Indeed, the basic mathematics and physics means that for sensors of equal size and equivalent levels of technology, noise performance, dynamic range and so on are basically the same. That’s because, at heart, what matters is the number of photons that are detected in the image (subject, of course, to there being sufficient resolution for the desired output size. By equivalent technology this refers to such things as QE (quantum efficiency), well depth (per unit area), read noise performance, analogue to digital conversion accuracy and so on. Of course, there are many variables there, and there is some room for optimising for certain characteristics, but there is no magic in large pixels as such.
If you look at the high ISO performance of the Nikon D4s against the D800E, you actually find that, at high ISO, only the DR is notably better on the D4s at equivalent output size. For colour sensitivity, SNR at 18% grey and tonal range, they are a close match (at base ISO the D800E significantly betters the D4s). What this implies is that the D4s has been optimised to minimise dark noise at higher ISOs, and probably suffers a bit at base ISO. This doesn’t mean the D800E amkes a great sports camera – processing all those extra pixels costs in processing power, it slows down the frame rate and there isn’t the ability in camera to perform the best down sampling. Also the D800E won’t be optimised for things like fast AF, dealing with moving subjects and focussing in dim conditions. However, put both cameras in a similar dark environment, and use similar ISO speeds, output to a common size using good post-processing from RAW and you’ll be hard pressed to see the D4 output as fundamentally better (probably a little more deep shadow noise in the D4s. Of course, if you look at the native resolution, the D4s will kill the D800E, but then the latter will do the same to D4 on resolution.
Given sensors of equivalent technology levels, what matters is the surface area. That’s why an FF will ultimately beat an M4/3. It’s simply going to be able to detect more photons before it saturates (assuming similar levels of technology). However, it’s important to note that (for equivalent ISO and shutter settings) this is only possible as the former’s camera lenses have to be proportionately bigger. For the same FoV, the FF has to have twice the focal length which, in turn, means that it has to have a lens essentially twice the diameter (4 times the area). That just delivers to the sensor four times as many photons per second than the equivalent M4/3 sensor. (If you are willing to quadruple the exposure time, you can use a lens 2 stops slower on the FF which would much reduce the size difference and keep the IQ gain, but such a change won’t be acceptable for photographs where exposure time matters).
Now this doesn’t mean that the A7S won’t be better than its higher resolution cousins at high ISOs, but the likelihood is, that when measured at equivalent size output, there will be nothing like the difference people might expect. It’s clear that the 12MP size has been chosen primarily as it works very well for 2K and 4K video, as the full frame data read rates are manageable. However, it’s equally clear that it isn’t optimised for still photography, and certainly not optimised as a sports camera (witness the AF system and slow frame rate).
I await some properly conducted formal measurements with some interest. I’ll also be interested to see what these ultra-high ISOs look like, as I wonder about their usability. (I’m assuming that the higher ISOs aren’t using a form of exposure stacking). It may be that this sensor is optimised for dark area read noise, but there’s only so much that can be done as the ultimate floor will be dictated by photon shot noise.
Wow, you have some misconceptions too!
Which are? Be specific.
And, by the way, I graduated in physics and did a lot of maths, optics and semiconductor physics in that subject.
You forgot one very important thing Mr. Wizard, this full frame sensor uses all available pixels to produce the video image unlike the D800. No binning or line skipping, so it will exhibit much better noise characterizes. You can do the math.
@Epson
Perhaps you ought to read the the title of the item, which features the line “And why the A7s is great for photographers”. The linked article was also about the camera’s abilities for still photography, and hence I was not dealing with the video quality issues at all. Look at the context of what I’ve written, and the article referred to, and that will be obvious.
If you care to look up the postings I’ve made about the video quality (on articles not primarily about the still image quality), then you’ll see I come to precisely the point of view that you’ve mentioned. That is, the DR and other technical aspects of the video quality are likely to be best in class for precisely the reason mentioned. That is, at least for 4K and 1080p up to 30fps, there is no line skipping albeit it must be doing it for the 1080p 50fps & 60fps, as it appears the sensor is capable of sustaining about 240 million reads per second as, presumably, beyond that it either gets too hot, can’t sustain the rate or uses too much battery power – or very likely some combination. I would therefore surmise for frame rates above 30fps, it is almost certainly line skipping, albeit probably in a more benign way than most SLR competitors.
One minor point, it’s apparent that video doesn’t use all the sensor photo-sites as, among other things, it has the wrong aspect ratio. It would appear that the video image will almost certainly be taken from a 16:9 aspect ration crop representing about 90% of the width and 73% of the height of the sensor, so that will be approximately two-thirds of the sensor surface, or 8 million sites out of 12.
So 9/10 for facts on your part, but not quite so many for comprehension.
Hi Steve , while I do not have a D4s I do have the D800E. Looking at comparable RAW files even as high as 6400 ISO .When re-sized and a little NR is added to the D800 file { the extra detail allows for this} the end results are very close.
With NR applied, especially such an effective as DxO’s PRIME D800(E) has great advantage up to 6400 and is slightly better at ISO12800 compared to D4(s).
Thanks – I’ve played around with RAW files myself in the past, and found much the same thing. The problem is that the issue is often presented simplistically as something like big pixels good, small pixels bad, rather than the underlying science. The one are where big pixels will probably be better, even after downsizing, is because of the fixed noise level, which probably means that in the very dark shadow areas, they will be better. However, an EV or two brighter, and you are into an area where shot noise dominates, and the statistical averaging process works very well.
I’m going to be fascinated to see the results of these 100k (and above) ISO sensitivities. Making some assumptions about base-ISO, and estimates of the full well capacity, that might be fewer than 200 photons being detected per photosite in bright areas of the image when properly exposed, which means DR and SNR will be limited (the D4s is below 7EV at 100k ISO). Heaven knows what 400k “boosted” ISO will look like.
I absolutely agree and wrote this yesterday, too, on an other sonyalpharumors thread.
Look up the luminous-landscape article on dxomark scores of sensors and they are telling the same thing. Downsizing images gives you similar noise levels (the lower res sensor is a little better since there are less pixel-boundaries not detecting photons) but with higher resolution. I could point you to scientific articles on that topic, too.
There’s also the fact that binning say, 4 pixels (so taking a 36MP pic down to 9MP) will have 4 times the readout noise as if it were one pixel 4 times larger. In addition to the fact that you could eliminate the wasted space taken up between pixels. That space not only lowers efficiency and quantum well depth, (number of photons before saturation), but it also adds even more noise in the form of more cross-talk.
So yes, a 36MP full frame sensor and a 12MP full frame sensor with the same technology behind them will be similar, but the 12MP sensor will probably still be better in terms of dynamic range (lack of crosstalk and noise) and sensitivity (well depth and noise). Just maybe not that much better to give up the flexibility of the higher resolution.
No, it depends on the readout noise distribution, but it is close to normal one. Thus, the consider the readout noise of 4 times higher pixel count is nu. Binning 4 pixels into 1 performed via P=frac{p_1+p_2+p_3+p_4}{4}. Thus readout noise distribution is close to normal we can express its standard deviation, which is close to sqrt{frac{sigma(p_1)^2}{16}+ldots+frac{sigma(p_4)^2}{16}}=sqrt{4frac{sigma^2}{4}}=frac{sigma}{2}. Thus we have the readout noise of a pixel taked via binning 4 is less then a readout out noise of original pixels.
I think you’re trying to confuse people with fancy maths. But, if I follow, you’re saying you can average the readout noise of the 4 pixels and actually come out with less randomness in the noise than reading once. That I could buy, but I’m not a math guy, so I won’t argue it.
I do know that there are advantages in the signal to noise ratio, as well as dynamic range that has been pretty well recorded on camera test sites (again, astrophotographers are big into this, and crunch a lot of numbers). I hear some has to do with electrons bleeding to adjacent photosites, where bigger pixels take advantage of a smaller border/photon collection area ratio, some is crosstalk of the signals, but it gets into things that’s over my head, and I’m an electrical engineer.
I showed you how averaging signals will lead to readout decrease. And this model is abosolutely precise since it is how it was built. And remember, it is read averaging, not just counting, because signal amplification performed on the sensor itself and it has analogue nature, so no readout noise really involved, only photon.
I am still crying my eyes out over the fact that the a7s doesn’t output 10bit…
Look at 50,000 ISO “noise” darn.
Question does that S Log2 work in still mode? If so , we wouldn’t have to use fill flash right?
So is this the full frame were expecting by the end of the year or will there be another one? Only saying bcs I would like one w a few more mega pixels and no light leaks/shutter vibrations. The sensors in the a7 abd a7r are now more than a year and half old. The new af system would be a plus too
Sony will introduce a new version of the A7 every month for the rest of the year, the next designation will be the A7M, followed by the A7J and finally ending with the A7D in December.
That is the A7. There is no light leak or shutter vibrations an the new af system.
Sensors in the Canon 5DM3 are like, 5 years old. Doesn’t make it a crappy camera.
Most pro cameras have small light leaks. Shutter vibrations are only visible because your angular resolution on a 36 megapixel full frame sensor with a telephoto lens are in the arc-seconds range. Yes, measured in thousandths of a degree. You try damping any vibrations there without a 2lb weight. The D800E? Oh, wait, it’s 2lbs, huh?
Just trying to throw some practical data into all this fear-mongering. I swear, reading these forums is like going to a political and/or religious debate.
I always find it odd why so many people post the old who needs high ISO routine. Even as an amateur shooter. I enjoy having the ability to shoot in a wide selection of situations .Many of the social events /activities I attend are held in poor light { low light pubs & restaurants, any outdoor night event etc} .Being able to get good quality results in these circumstances without resorting to often harsh and unflattering flash
As of this writing there are 14 comments here and not a single one of them mentions the “who needs high ISO”. Am I missing something? Btw, I would agree with such a comment.
If it is harsh and unflattering you’re doing it wrong 😛
That said, I would LOVE to have cleaner high isos – use no flash in the right situations, use higher shutter speeds when you need it, smaller apertures, or use super low powered flash at really high isos 😀
not interested. thank you!
A mount is so dead. We don’t even get accessory or lens updates. It’s like nothing is going on alpha land- nothing. All of these improvements and rushed to market full frame e-mounts and no sense of urgency with alpha mount. I don’t care about making as many alpha mount cameras, but the innovation and marketing approach should be shared by both systems- it isn’t. The alpha marketing department is as cold as ice.
The A mount is now in high end model cycles only where cameras are replaced every 3-4 years. The E mount is in consumer cycles and will be constantly updated. The only high end A mount camera at the end of its cycle for now is the A77.
A mount already has a decent lineup of lenses and bodies. The E mount series still needs to be fleshed out. A mount isn’t dead, it’s just been somewhat pushed to the side in order to flesh out their new product line. That’s not to say that it’s being ignored though, as there will be new A mount products released this year.
We need a price 🙁 I hope it’ll be priced well
If you guys watched the Atomos Shogun video (newsshooter) there is a mention that
the combination A7s+4k Shogun recorder will sell just under 5K…Shogun will cost 2k
which would put the A7s just under 3k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-THzgdsRTZM
Why on earth has no one asked if the 1080p mode of the camera is still susceptible to pixel binning, line skipping, moire etc
it has been discussed. no pixel binning and line skipping up to 1080/30p
If the image is being pulled off an 8MB section of the sensor, then to go to 1080 you have to either pixel bin or line skip. The sensor has more pixels than the final output so you have to either bin them or throw them away.
you forgot to take the aspect ratio into account. once you crop the 2:3 down to 9:16, you are left with approx 8mp
2:3 cropped to 16:9 is about 10mp
Additional 1.25x crop is required to get it to 8-9mp, which is 4k. 1080p is 2mp(1k). So you have to bin 4 pixels together, to get down 2mp from 8mp
Sony’s claim, quote:
“World’s first full-frame sensor capable of full pixel read-out without binning process for movie*1
The sensor reads out image data from every pixel, even during Full HD and 4K*2
movie output, and enables recording and output of Full HD movies at 60p
(50p), 60i (50i), 30p (25p) and 24p frame rates, as well as output of
4K movies at a 30p or 24p frame rate, with both resolutions available at
both full-frame and APS-C (Super 35mm equivalent) size.
*1 When used in 24p/30p(25p) movie setting.
*2 4K movie recording requires a 4K compatible recorder.
Note, they do not mention 1080/60p, only 24p/30p(25p).
you can read it here at the official Sony site, scroll down to about 1/3 of the page
http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/vq5f/index.html
There’s a difference between native resolution, line skipping, subsampling, and supersampling.
Native resolution is like 4K on this camera. It crops to a 16:9, then each pixel recoded is a pixel on the video. Plain and simple.
Line skipping, you throw away entire lines of data. It’s gone. So details and transitions that were in this data, are also gone. This speeds up processing and reduces number crunching, so most cameras do this. It causes moire and other issues.
Subsampling is even worse (but is actually more work for a camera than line skipping, in most cases). It only takes a few pixels out of each line, and skips entire lines. More problems.
Supersampling is reading off the native resolution, just like in the native mode, then adding the data from every pixel into a corresponding superpixel. This is also called ‘binning’, and is actually far better than anything here, save native resolution. And it should be almost identical to native resolution, save that if you actually had larger pixels, they’d work a little better than binned pixels at collecting light.
The a7R, when doing 1080P is perfectly capable of doing supersampling, since it already can natively read the 4K video. It would be surprising if it had the horsepower to do this, but not to then bin down to 1080P. It’s a pretty simple step, processing wise, if you can get the data to begin with. (The Canon 5DM3 has such good video because it too can read all the pixels for video)
So, I would put money down that the 1080p video is just as awesome, just not as high resolution.
I meant the a7S there at the bottom. ;p
I have from a french source who saw some samples comparaison with 5DIII that iso 51200 looks perfectly usable and way better than 5DIII and even the D4
http://www.lesnumeriques.com/appareil-photo-numerique/sony-alpha-7s-409-600-iso-video-4k-n33920.html
The reason why a7S will be better is because this special camera will be shipped quicker.
(THIS IS A JOKE I just put together to cheer everyone up) I have some great news my friends. Sony has promised to speed up camera shipment. That is what the “S” stands for in a7S = Super fast shipping just for this camera. Look carefully at the picture. LOL. Just a joke.
LOL!!! Sorry I just had to post this a 2nd time because people aren’t seeing it in an older post. Laugh hard because its good for you! HAHAHA!
LOL! XD look at the guy avoiding the a7S… why would you “avoid a good camera?” LOL.
The new stainless steel mount is to hold the new
BATTERY GRIP/4K RECORDER that will also allow FASTER CONTINUOUS FRAME RATE.
That is why these features were left off the camera…so they could be added to the special grip and aviod the problems associated with building them into the camera.
They also allow those who do not need these features to not buy them.
I heard a rumor that the battery grip/4K recorder will also include a non-defeatable GPS. LOL
Unlike your comment mine was serious..
This camera was obviously desighned to accomadate the battery grip/ recorder I described
That would be a great idea, but only if it did not include GPS.
The gps is in the camera otherwise it would be defeatable
You can always turn it off. Don’t see why having it is such a problem.
Old joke from an old post.
I’m happy that Sony is making a camera with the IMPORTANT features, and nothing else. And then making add-ons to support other nifty things. This makes me quite glad I switched to Sony. They seem to be looking at cameras from a unique and fresh point of view. I love it.
They’re asking ‘What’s important? How can we make something to please group A and B, without compromise?’. Like make different cameras for the two groups. Or make cameras with expandability for people needing expensive extras.
I really don’t like the shooting in 4k and pulling still from video although I think it is pretty cool & would help for shooting someone who may not be a good model but has a certain look the photographer likes. My friend does that now on his iphone and has some very nice pictures but can’t take actual pictures that look good with just photos. Everybody thinks they are a photographer now a days. I normally do event photography and there is so much competition now with people who buy gear put it in auto and come out with some very good results. They charge less and do less work so people who just don’t get it or see the difference want you to charge less. I know it takes more than just a well exposed picture to make a good picture but I miss when taking pictures was more complicated and you actually had to learn certain things.
This is where the professional has to show the difference between a professional and someone with a Canon 60D and a kit lens.
Professional is about more than taking the picture. As you pointed out, taking the picture itself is almost to the point that anyone can do it. (Trust me, I was amazed at the pictures a relative of mine, who’s not very tech savvy, was taking with a point and shoot). And there’s professionals who’ve done great work with camera phones, just to prove that it’s not the mechanics of taking a picture that makes you good. A professional goes into more. Delivery of product, being there when the customer needs, tailoring to suit needs, etc. There’s entire books written on this these days. You don’t need a professional to take pretty pictures anymore, you need one to do it right. If your skills are just in taking good pictures… you better get learning on the rest of the story.
I agree with 100% I actually don’t do events like I did before. I feel I am wasting my time with certain people, since they just want pictures that are good enough and anyone with a dslr and a flash pointed at the ceiling with Auto and ttl on can take great looking pictures. I refuse to charge what they charge because I get a lot of work from word of mouth so if one person gets a dirt cheap price they will all want it dirt cheap. I will just continue to do what I do and charge what I charge and learn as much as I can. The people that notice the difference are far better to work for anyway.
Steve Huff guess $1800 for the body, hope he is right.
add another $1500 for 4k.
No. I don’t need 4K. I have a choice.
not really with the lack of lenses.
What lack of lenses? You can adapt just about any lens you want, and if you’re doing pro video, you probably don’t use Autofocus anyway. The ability to adapt any manual focus lens you want pretty much makes the lack of native lenses a moot point and a non-issue. However, I realize you’re just looking for reasons to dislike this, so don’t let me get in your way.
just because YOU don’t care that doesn’t mean the majority of the people don’t too.
there’s ONLY 5 FE lenses. 2 of them are very similar to other 2. So in reality it’s just 3 options. compare that with systems that have over 100 lenses. or with systems that have lenses that cover all the focal lengths.
Using an adapter just ruins the main purpose of having a small and compact mirrorless full frame. It’s more expensive and heavy and a lot larger. If someone gets it with the purpose of adapting lens is better of buying a dslr.
And no I’m not looking for any reasons. I really love the camera but unfortunately the lack of lenses prohibits me from getting one.
I would easily sell all my nikon and nex gear and just get an A7.
If your only consideration is weight and bulk, then I suppose I can see getting upset over using adapters. However, you’re going to have weight and bulk with a DSLR, but you’ll be limited to whatever lens options fit that mount and very little else. I honestly don’t see that as a benefit. Aside from that, if the only reason you want the camera is size, why not just get a point and shoot or something similar? Personally, the fact that you can adapt just about any lens (and that includes lenses which are awesome and cheap) is just about the best advantage the system has. If you haven’t tried using adapted lenses, you really should. Especially if you already have a NEX. It’ll breath new life into your photography, and it’s a lot more fun than you’d think it would be.
I think you’ll see that adapted lenses make the lack of native lenses irrelevant. The fact that you can get top notch old lenses for a song is icing on the cake. Seriously, give it a try, I doubt you’ll be disappointed.
Additionally, most pro video guys don’t use Autofocus, so they don’t really care if their lenses are native. On top of that, if they have lenses for a previous system, they can use them on this camera without any issues.
I’ve a nex-6 and a D600. I dislike both. The D600 just outperforms the nex-6 in so many ways. The D600 is huge I can’t carry it around. The nex-6 is great even fits in my pocket. And lenses are small too I can carry all my gear without a bag. just with pants with pockets.
The A7 would be perfect. But there’s no lenses.
I do have a choice. I only need a good standard zoom, a 50 and a telephoto. I have a Metabones adaptor for my nice Canon telephoto, that kit lens, and the 55mm. I’m good. I just ordered the 70-200, so when that comes in, I’ll be set with native lenses. I still have my Metabones and borrow my brother’s macro lens occasionally, but I’m sure that’ll be remedied soon.
You don’t NEED a native lens, you just really want one. I sympathize, because I don’t like the idea of having to adapt third party lenses either, but the truth is, it works well enough. So for now, I do that until Sony has all the FE lenses I want. My brother lugs all his lenses around when we go places, so I just pack my adaptor.
I shoot 90% of the time with a 16-35mm fr vr. I absolutely need a wide angle zoom.
Adapting one doesn’t make sense. It’s a lot more expensive and I lose AF that I do need OR I’ll just have to spend a LOT more to get a metabones or a LA-E4. I’ll also have to use bigger lenses than the FE could use. It will be a lot bigger and heavier and have less performance. In fact, using my D600 it would be smaller and lighter and less expensive.
I wouldn’t mind the telephotos because if you add an adapter it’s not going to be a lot more heavier and big. it’s not going to make much 300gr difference in a 2000gr setup.
But even the available lenses are not nothing special. the zeiss zoom even sucks. and for that price it doesn’t make sense. I could get a 2.8 with OS with much better performance for much less.
If I at least had a wide angle zoom to choose I would change it.
I love the form factor and the camera is great. Too bad I can’t use it 90% of the time.
closer look at the 28-135 cine lens http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR1FWoPwwa0
http://youtu.be/tR1FWoPwwa0?t=5m43s
5m43s
imo it will cost more than the camera. looks great. would like to see specs about it here on sony rumors. it can’t be that hard, some folks have already put their hands on one…
woah, a monster of a lens, this thing is huge
It’s amazing how each an every one from Sony that talks about the E mount keeps stressing the fact that the camera can be used with any lens thru adapters.
They’re really trying hard in convincing CaNikon shooters (and not only them, maybe) to buy a Sony.
There are no problems, only adapters…
They’d be dumb not to. The fact that the E mount can adapt just about any lens is a great selling point which has attracted a lot of people to the NEX and Alpha E mount series (as well as to MFT, but that’s a different subject), and rightfully so, as people who invested a lot into cameras and equipment during the early film days can get more use out of their investments. It’s a win win for Sony and consumers.
it can be a great camera but too bad there’s no lenses for it. only 5 and they are nothing special just chec the review of the zeiss zoom on photozone. crap lens.
The Zeiss zoom will be great on this camera.
let me just quote part of a review of this piece of overprice shit glass made by those who really tested and have great reputation doing so with over 400 lenses.
“The Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar T* FE 24-70mm f/4 OSS ZA didn’t really
convince us completely – not at this price point for sure. While it is a
joy to use the lens thanks to its high quality finish and super smooth
controls, the optical characteristics aren’t quite as impressive.
Sony/Zeiss seems to follow the ugly trend of under-designing lenses
based on the assumption that digital correction will fix the flaws. This
may be an acceptable compromise when decreasing weight, size … and
price. However, the Zeiss lens isn’t really a hell of a lot more compact
than e.g. the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4 USM L IS. Thus why is it necessary
to design a lens with such massive distortions ? Now distortions aren’t
really a primary concern for most users but the lens is also not all
that sharp – at least at the extreme ends of the zoom range. The corners
are generally soft at 24mm and it’s not all that hot at 70mm @ f/4
either – even with activated (lossy) distortion correction. This is
rather surprising given the moderate max. aperture which should make
things comparatively easy for the lens designers. The CAs are well
corrected except in the corners at 24mm. The vignetting characteristic
is rather typical for a full format lens in this class. However, another
downside is the quite rough bokeh. Combined with the high price point,
this offering leaves a couple of question marks. For sure it proves
again that it isn’t trivial to design a really good standard zoom lens
for mirrorless cameras.”
so, no it’s not great.
Don’t blame the equipment for yourself being a shit photographer!
Zeiss zoom will be worse, than it is on A7r. It has been proven by countless tests, that lens resolving power is directly related to sensor density.
Distortion will be the same, which is pretty steep. Vignetting will be the same as well, only CA will reduce very slightly, due to a lower resolution sensor
Corners will be sharper, vignetting slightly less because of larger pixels , and CA drastically reduced. How will it be worse than on A7r? Makes no sense.
Exactly – lenses like the Minolta 75-300 and Sony 18-250 were perfectly usable on my a500 but we’re terrible on my a77.
Resolving power of the lens will not change because of the sensor.
Resolving power of the lens+sensor combination can change, of course, with the sensor. However, an awesome lens like the 55mm will show less resolution on the a7S because it can resolve a lot more than 12MP. The 24-70 actually won’t get much worse, because it resolves probably right around 12MP.
The a7S will actually make crappy lenses, shaky hands, and motion blur all mater that much less. It’ll take better pictures with poorer lighting, crappier photographers, and bad equipment.
What’s not to like?
55 is pretty special…
So use your Canon or Nikon glass on it…
S
Is anyone asking Sony what happen to the larger pro body 4k concept they had on display last year? Is this going to be launched later on in the year, or did sony evolve the tech into a smaller bundle?
Fingers crossed they will announce a larger e mount similar to the 1DC that does. 4k internally and has proper video features.
As good as the A7S may be, it is a camera that is clearly targeted against the Panasonic GH4. As noise-free as the sensor may be, there is no way that images will have the amount of detail that is so breath-taking about the A7R.
They don’t need it to be like the A7r. This camera is targeted towards video shooters. Exactly why there are 3 different versions. Of course I would love to have all 3 pros of each cameras be in one but….oh well.
As a video person the camera is really interesting because of it’s extreme sensitivity. Those here who complain in this comments section about too few lenses and don’t understand why so many people jump on the Sony almost exclusively for the lens reason should know: When you shoot video nobody uses autofocus – you _always_ focus manually, that is how people tell a story with lenses by ‘rack focussing’ as it is called. Any good manual lens can be used for this as long as one has an adapter to fit the lens on the cam and perhaps lens gears to use a follow focus. All this is available at little cost and that’s why this cam is so interesting.
I saw a really nice video of the northern lights taken with an a7, done in real time, not as a sequence of stills. Something that most cameras can’t do. I can’t wait to see someone take a video of the northern lights with an a7S.
It can do things no other camera can. I don’t think that’s sinking in very well with people yet. Either they don’t believe it, or it hasn’t been advertised well. Assuming it lives up to claims, I don’t think there’s another consumer camera out there with this kind of low light sensitivity. Again, assuming we can take them at their word this will allow photography, especially in the video realm, that’s next to impossible right now.