So here we are. Awake after the very long A7s announcement night. If you missed the A7s live announcement you just have to watch the latest 5 minutes of this 1 hour long video at Livestram. To quickly get all the information you need about the camera check out the A7s sites in different languages at Sony US, DE, UK, ES, FR, IT, NL, SE, FI, PL. The camera is listed at BHphoto but with no price or preorder option.
My first impression: This looks like a 4K camera made a bit in a hurry. And the not shared price info confirms that. So it’s hard to judge the camera without to know how much it actually costs but let’s sum the A7s weak and strong points:
CONS:
– no 4K recording on SD cards (Panasonic GH4 does it!)
– almost same A7-A7r autofocus system (why not use the A6000 hybrid AF system?)
PROS:
– no pixel binning at 4K
– 409,600 ISO!
– -4 EV auto focus sensitivity (A7-A7r has 0 ev)
– It has likely the best dynamic range and color fidelity of any Full Frame camera yet!
Professional videographers will use external recorders anyway (for 4:2:2 output) so the first cons I mentioned by not matter at all for them. I think the biggest strong point is the superb Image Quality you should get with the new 12 Megapixel Full Frame sensor. Would love to see some RAW’s of it! But I guess we will have to wait a couple of weeks until reviewers can test the camera. If the IQ is the best of any FF yet and the price is not too high than this could be a good day for pure photographers too!
And here are some more new news about the A7s: Hands-on at Newsshooter, Hands-on pics by Dpreview, New Atomos 4K recorder for the A7s (Cinema5d), French presentation at Alpha Numerique, German press text at Photoscala, Short Japanese text at DC.watch.
Let’s see what SAR readers think about the new A7s:
[poll id=”178″]
Image samples (Click on it to enlarge):
0 Responses
Wait a second. Weren’t they supposed to be announcing the availability of some lenses also? No news on that? I’d like a 24mm Distagon/Biogon and a 100mm Makro Planar, please.
No. They (Sony) don’t need lenses. It’s their policy to have more cameras than lenses for every of those many systems they produce.
This is really bullshit, sorry. It’s not like Canon or Nikon or anybody else was different at the Launch of a new Mount. Or do you see many Canon M lenses out there!? Oh and the lens development are completely different guys than the camera development, so lens development is not stopped when camera guys work on new cameras. And finally, some of the cameras are just variations of others, so no new development, even first Generation NEX-3 and NEX-5 were nearly the same camera. Plus any new generation is really only updating some hardware specs and some Software. A new lens is a complete new development!
So please, stop whining about that. Lens development is a time consuming process and Needs to be done EXTREMELY good done. Also never Forget how Long a lens will be produced and sold (and also how long the value will not drop) compared to the small life-span of electronics.
You guys with that “not enough lenses” every single time a new camera is announced, are really becoming more than ridicolous…
S-LOG 2 Option cost extra $$ Video Sony Manager:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT6Ui6rQI8k
They posted something about a Powerzoom 28-135.
Personally I’d like to see stabilised sony/G branded primes with oss (especially a tele macro)
They announced the 28-135mm f/4.0 powerzoom lens (you see an image on my previous post).
Who cares about that? How about a fast prime telephoto range 85+
Very small announcement at end of long talk, surprised they even mentioned the 28-135, although looking at the image it will be very much aimed at cinema, you can see the follow-focus gearing on it.
Video people care, this camera and lens was announced at the National Association of Broadcasters expo – the target market. If / when an 85mm lens is announced it will be for photo people at a photo expo like PhotoPlus or photokina.
three cameras and four lenses…for the love of god we need some glass
5 lenses now (FE70-200)…released in only 5 months – that is very impressive. Plus the huge amount of a-mount full frame lenses function quite well on the a7 cameras.
The next lenses will be a powerzoom version of the 4/24-70 and 4/70-200 …
whats the point of showing sample pics if you cant view them at full resolution.
I agree! Ridiculous! That is going to be what ultimately helps people decide wether it is for them or not I think.
I agree. Was hoping to see full size images too 🙁
Love my A7R…would like to add a Zeiss 85mm …what happened?!!
The camera was a “one more thing” at the end of a 1 hr long talk on high end video cameras and editing systems. Just a bit of publicity at a big show for the still camera line. Admin has mentioned an announcement in May that should cover the lenses and hopefully the A77II. They did this last year when I think the NEX5T (may have model wrong) got a mention at a big trade show CES? but most of the new stuff came out a month later.
And again: Is the “no internal 4K” bit really true? My impression from
reading dpreview was that the A7s *does* record 4K at 4:2:0 internally
and needs external recording hardware only for the best possible quality
which is 4K at 4:2:2 and 50 Mbps. Am I wrong?
Well that would be great but as I understand it’s only onboard 1080p.
Sony says FullHD on SD card. Read the linked Sony sites!
The last thing you should do is trust what DPReview writes when it comes to newly launched cameras. They are notorious for getting specs wrongs – usually caused by their copy & paste mentality.
Even much more important than ISO 409600 simulated is native ISO 102400 – Nikon D4S has “only” 25600.
Oh and the reason why no on sensor-PDAF is used is because this camera is about picture Quality with 1:1 pixel video . If you would place PDAF Pixels on the sensors you would need to interpolate those pixels with the Information around it.
PDAF pixels don’t have to be complete throw-aways, they still receive light, and light light can be used both for PDAF and for picture-forming.
Don’t think I will buy into the FE system having only those f4 zooms but it’s such a pleasure to see where Sony is going.
Of course they won’t give you ‘everything’ at that price point… But it’s a very decent camera showing good moves.
I will buy it. Sony have a policy of 30 day return if not satisfied privilege. That will clear up any misgivings I might have. I think it is a fantastic camera and I know that I will appreciate those quality pixels.
My take is that Sony is leaving the photography market for consumers like me. No A77II. Alpha-mount is dead. My lenses are going to be worthless soon.
In the meantime, E-mount has no IBIS, and a poor lens selection.
A77II in three-four weeks from now. mark my words 🙂
You seem very sure, which is good, but isn´t it a bit peculiar that if they have a camera ready for launch in 3-4 weeks, they chose not to mention it at yesterday´s event? I don´t see the logic in it…
Why would they announce a camera before the announcement?
I do, the event is mainly video oriented (4K in the case of Sony) , so it doesn’t make much sense to announce cameras and lenses that are more focused on stills. The suggested A77II probably doesn’t do 4K. That’s also why they announced the development of a video targeted FF E mount lens, but haven’t yet revealed specs of the soon also released E mount FF lenses (2) that are more targeted at still photography. They will likely surface when the new A mount camera does.
I´d LOVE to shoot video with an improved A77II. If you´re suggesting that they´re giving us the same LOUSY video they gave with us, therefore they´re avoiding it to mention it completely on a video related event, you might as well be right… 😀
Anyway, you might be completely right, I´m not familiar enough with these type of events, I just think it would´ve made more sense to give at least a hint of what you´re supposed to be announcing in a few weeks, therefore preventing potential watchers and buyers that are not interested in the A7S at all to look elsewhere and potentially buy a camera from another brand. But I guess they know what they´re doing…
I’m not suggesting that the video side of a suggested A77II will not be improved (I bet it will be, similar to the A6000 video being much better than the NEX 7 video), but it’s a camera that isn’t nearly as targeted to the video public and probably will not offer 4K. Sony made this a 4K centric event for them to begin with.
Thank you Andre, I needed that assurance! I just wonder what the sensor will be like on the A77II. I also hope that some time later in the year Sony also comes out with an A-mount FF, so I can make full use of my vast collection of A-mount FF lenses. Until then I get by with my A900.
I see this “Supreme sensitivity and an advanced new algorithm deliver ultra-high AF speed even in low-light conditions (as low as EV -4)” on http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/vq5f/index.html and if it’s true this is going to be a great camera for stills and video.
Nuh! GH4!
Does it have steady shot? If not, no thanks…high iso capabilities are great but I want to be able to shoot @1/15s iso 100 without worrying…
Achilles, why would you be commenting on a high sensitivity cam when low sensitivity is what you want? You do realise there are low sensitivity cams better deserving of your attention and criticisms, right?
I wasn’t criticizing its high sensitivity dear Andrew. Its a good thing although most of photographers won’t use more than 6400. I was criticizing its lack of steady shot! Why should I be forced to use iso 1600 instead of 400 I.e. ? And anyway it bothers me that Sony is abandoning all the real a-mount users and obliging them to move to Nikon d800 for a solid full frame dslr camera. I’m an owner of an a350,a55 and a77 and looking for the big FF leap…and Sony isn’t helping… that’s all!
a99 came out after d800 🙂 Whether you see d800 as better than a99 or not isn’t really the point. There are rumors about new a-mount FF-cameras, but Sony is hardly late with a new a-mount FF yet. But it is kind of nice to see somebody complaining about Sony replacing their cameras to slowly instead of moaning about Sony just releasing cameras and not lenses 🙂
NO PDAF on Sensor and Fast AF-C like the a6000 at this point seems just a bit strange to me. Because imho, SONY “needs” to find a way to have PDAF On Sensor for this a7s -4EV AF with the LAEA3 + A-Mount f1.4 ZA SSM lens. And have it AF FAST like it was Native A-Mount. (or better). Lack of f1.4 Lens would be less of an issue. (the PRO RES 4.2.2 seems to be what some have been asking for, and No Line skipping FF) … don’t think most will use 4K right now, but best to have it , now … which Sony did) … Sony NEEDS to work on the PDAF/CDAF “Swap” of A & E Mount “Auto Focus”, So you can swap A and E Mount lens between A and E mount New Bodys like it is TRUE-LY ALL ALPHA.
Video 4k ok whatever…how about a photography orientated a mount?
8 bit only !!!!
10bit and internal 50mb/s 4:2:2 would make this a GH4-killer
The ability to shoot stunning SLog-2 1080p at both full frame and Super35 already kills the GH4 for me.
The comments about AF are off base. Calling the A7r ‘slow’ is far from true. With a significantly greater sensitivity, AF accuracy and less hunting should be seen as well with the new camera.
I would hold off the complaining about AF until there is a legit, functional reason to complain
Sony informa de que ya están trabajando en otro con ajuste directo en este cuerpo de cámara.
sONY IS WORKING IN A MODULE TO ATTACH TO THE BODY ANS USE XLR -LIKE GH4 MODULE- PLEASE PUT SOME FAST SD WRITER THERE TOO !!!!!
In my opinion 16 MPixels would have been a better choice… Who will shoot everyday at 409600 ISO or above 102400 without flash, except private investigator or pervert neighboor ?????? Would you buy a digital camera to shoot 4K video when you have to buy all the 4K mandatory gears to shoot video at 4K with the A7s and when u have dedicated and more featured camcorder surely for final lower price 😉
It’s one small step for SONY, a giant leap for dwarf-kind 😉 to sum up the general idea in comments.
Ultra high ISO would help in the golden hour before dawn and after dusk when australian wildlife near at my home truly performs. I see new opportunities that were previously unavailable.
you are looking at this the wrong way. Whereas the A7/R is a stills camera for photographers than also does video, the A7S is a video camera for videographers that also does stills however all A7X series camera leverage off all current mount choices and adapters.
I think it’s actually a smart strategic move by Sony.
Have you written this with Google? Translating from Ukrainian?
May you explain a little more what you try to demonstrate Vladimir ;)?
Btw NO :p
translation from russian as nothing about ukraine is allowed since Russian control Crimea 😉
As I told previously – 12Mpixel sensor cannot be directly used to produce 4K 4:2:2 video, as its frame consists of 16M samples! There should be some clever trick in it – “invisible” to photo extra pixels? Interpolation of consecutive frames? Splitted pixels?
4:2:2 is an encoding format, and shouldn’t be confused with the way data is read off the sensor. The 3840 × 2160 format requires about 8.3m pixels, which will undoubtedly be implemented as a 1:1 mapping with the sensor pixels, essentially a crop out of the 12M pixels sensor, about 90% of the width and 76% of the height to get the 16:9 aspect ratio. So that gives you 8 Mpixels sampled for the output.
Of course, each of those pixels only represents a single primary colour, so to produce the 4K luminance signal it will be necessary to generate that using some form of interpolation. From what I’m reading, the internal processing seems to be 4:2:0, so it seems likely that Sony will simply be using a 2 x 2 array of photosites (which, in a Bayer pattern sensor will have 1 x R, 2 x G and 1 x B) to produce the required colour difference signal as it has a sample of each of the primaries.
Of course, this can easily be output as 4:2:2, albeit slightly faked. Note that if a more authentic 4:2:2 output was to be produced, then as each row on a Bayer sensor only contains two primaries (patterned as RGRGRGRG and GBGBGBGB alternately), then it would be necessary to interperpolate the “missing” primary for each row. Better than the 4:2:0 approach, but it would require more processing.
Anyway, the point is that the sample size in the output is not directly related to the sensor sampling, albeit that (for efficient processing), there will be some shortcuts taken. However, a 16:9 crop out of an (approx) 2.8k x 4.2k pixel sensor is a pretty good match, but will still require interpolation.
nb.
if you use a classic square bayer pattern sensor and wanted to produce native 4:2:2 output you would actually need a sensitive area of 7680 x 4320 (about 33Mpix – equivalent to almost 50Mpix on the 24x36mm frame) to make sure that every two video pixels horizontal had all primaries represented. If rectangular (sensor) photo-sites were allowed, you might get away with 3840 x 4320, but I’m not sure about the practicality. It might also be possible to produce a non-Bayer matrix which would allow native 4:2:2 with fewer pixels, but again that might have practical problems
28-135mm f/4.0 powerzoom lens . When we can see this lens ?
According to Sony web site A7s , we see in summer time . What about this powerzoom ?
there are three problems here.
1. AVCHD is not suited to color correction unless the bitrate is very high (>70-100Mbit/s). Otherwise, AVCHD dumps the blacks (and macro-blocks them when you expose up).
Thats fine for out-of-camera (as you won’t see the missing data), but not so good for grading (much of the color brought out in post is in the blacks, as there is a lot of ‘hidden color’ there that you can play around with…. unless it has been cut, which standard AVCHD ~30Mbit/s does a LOT). I can fix it by using a low contrast filter (as that always lifts blacks towards mids), but not so sure that is the best solution for 4K, as the gain in resoluton may be degraded by the loss in micro contrast the filter gives.
2. HDMI is rarely 4:2:2. I bet its 4:2:0, and all you gain by recording it is that its uncompressed 4:2:0. This is very different from uncompressed AND 4:2:2, and you only see the difference when you try to push it in grading. If you want that, go Blackmagic.
3. I bet the camera doesnt allow a flat enough style. No other Sony camera does either. FWIW, a lot of the Pannys suffer from the same issue (far too ‘baked in’), although GH2 users get around it with high bitrates. If they’re serious about video, they need to allow users to make the footage flatter.
Probably a step in the right direction for video, but on the face of it, sounds like its only going to give you 4k and better noise over a hacked GH2…. but that could also be said of the GH3/GH4 (and if you look on the web, often is!).
I use the term ‘AVCHD’ when I should probably have used ‘XAVC S’ (although I’m not at all sure XAVC S is an improvement over AVCHD, so I’m perhaps being a little lenient in my discussion!).
Both AVCHD and XAVC S are just additional limiting specifications of H.264 codec and file formats. AVCHD is an open spec producing multiple files at up to 28 mbps (what Blu-ray players can read), XAVC is Sony’s proprietary spec putting up to 50 mbps into MXF container file.
Sure. H264 is pretty much ubiquitous. Except that AVCHD/ XAVC S compress a lot more than H.264, and they do this by removing all non-perceptual data (i.e. they remove all data you cannot see in the as-shot), and in the process lose you any ‘wriggle room’ for post.
That’s fine if you will not be color correcting (its actually very good because you no longer need high trhoughputs, and can do with slow low-cap SD cards).
But if you are color correcting, as soon as you expose up, you tend to see the missing information as banding or macro blocking. There are ways around this, but I simply cannot see why AVCHD/XAVC-S are the only serious in-camera options in a video DSLR.
I’d understand more if the bitrate was higher (the hacked GH2 high bitrate AVCHD intra hacks are actually very good for color correction) or there was a low GOP/Intra option, but I can’t see them. Clean HDMI out is just too fiddly (and as I noted, its actually interlaced so not quite as good as expected).
Personally, I’d say 50Mbit/s AVCHD is about right for 1080p, but not so good for 4k, hence my doubts about XAVC-S: it just seems to cut down on bandwidth to be useful for anything other than as-shot.
They don’t compress “more” than H.264—THEY ARE H.264! AVCHD & XAVC/XAVC-S are specific flavors/implementations of a very expansive set of guidelines that fall under the umbrella of the H.264 codec. I agree that it would be nice to have different compression options but Sony (in my mind) proved with the FS100 that a solid implementation of a codec can make up for a low bit-rate. The FS100’s AVCHD footage grades almost as well as the uncompressed footage coming out the HDMI. It is comparable with higher bit-rate footage from competing 8-bit cameras (like the hacked GH2).
IF this camera plays on that level WITH the addition of SLOG2 and the more advanced H.264 profiles implemented in XAVC-S (instead of AVCHD) AND it doubles the bandwidth it may finally be the 1080P video we’ve waiting for from Sony for years.
It is fine if you don’t like the camera. It certainly has its weaknesses (on paper—still curious to see how they work in person) but please don’t spread misinformation. There’s already too much of it floating around.
“Except that AVCHD/ XAVC S compress a lot more than H.264”
You are saying nonsense. h.264 is a big specification with different levels, XAVC specifically implements part 5.2 of it.
Well, ok, Im being brief. Maybe I should have said “Except that AVCHD/ XAVC S compress a lot more than other mainstream H.264 implementations”. Its splitting hairs though!
Unhacked AVCHD is better than a more standard H.264 implementation at the same filesize *as long as you dont edit it*, but if you do, you get macro blocking and banding far quicker with AVCHD,. Thats basically all I was saying.
I think the poll needs another option: “Yes, but I will not buy it, because I’ve already bought A7.” That’s exactly my answer. I do not want to change camera every few months. If I had known about coming A7 in December I wouldn’t have bought my A7. 🙁
Can anyone explain why frame rate for stills is so slow (2.5 frames/sec). I was thinking it would also double as a good sport/action shooter.
It also has a 5 fps mode. Not super fast but up to 30 RAW in the Buffer. Listed on the Sony Specs Page
Thanks Fred. That sounds alright with a 30 shot buffer. Is there any limitations in sports mode ie locked focus etc.
5 fps is a special mode, but I do not know what the limitations may be.
There is speculation that the RAW compression is more aggressive in the ‘fast’ shooting modes. You can learn more from the “RAW Digger” crowd. It is a very fringe issue, though
Sony tends to cheap out on buffer memory in the alpha cameras.
Why would you want to shoot 4K 50Mbps XAVC S to an SD card? That sounds like a nightmare.
Cheaper easier to work with 4K, then Raw/Pro Res via a recorder for production work.
Not going to shoot 4K RAW/Pro res for wedding work.
Not quite sure I understand what you’re trying to say. Could you elaborate?
The only 4K cams on the market at the moment (GH4 isnt out yet) don’t shoot 4K more compressed that Pro-Res, which is a wonderful codec, but way too big for day-to-day work (for what I’m doing)
My new FS700 will do 4K RAW, at 500GB for ~20mins. Wayyy too much for my normal wedding/commercial work. I can only use (4K) it for Production work (music videos, high-end commercial work).
Was hoping for a moderately compressed 4K Codec (XAVC) at the 200-400Mbps.
I was hoping to switch to doing all 4K this year.
Ditto.
Surely using an external recorder for production work is preferred? Just pick a recorder that has the codec and compression that you need. These are all tools for you to work with and 4K just is not a necessity right now for a lot of people. People want it, but they really don’t need it right now.
I just don’t see a point in 4K internally. It would plough through memory cards in an instant. Even if A7s did 4K internally, I’d want to record externally to SSD.
Im using an FS700 using the 4K RAW for production work (well when it gets here). so yes. Production work is not the problem. The Raw on the FS700 is 500GB for 20min with the 7Q and 60min with the Sony recorder. Both use their companies expensive propriety memory.
Normal storage isn’t really a problem, but in the field storage is (with that camera). If I could use regular SSDs and shoot in Pro-Res or w/e I’d be totally happy, but I don’t have that option.
What I’m referring to is non-production work (mostly weddings, cheaper work in general). I’d like to offer more affordable 4K to those clients as well.
Basically what I wanted was AVCHD compression for 4K, a much cheaper option to work with, but with some of the benefits of 4K still.
If there was an external option (for something like the A7 or VG cams) I wouldn’t necessarily care much, but internal is useful for wedding work where everything is done very fast, I cant be waiting on setup/etc..
I was hoping to get a cam from Sony that does something more compressed that Pro-Res internally, My new FS700 will do 4K Raw, which is wonderful, but too big for day-to-day work.
Nothing (affordable) from Sony shoots 4K internal. I don’t really like any of the other manufacturers cameras
7S? Westing time, dispointing a7 and a7r light leak and shutter vibration, Maybe 7S?
Did you literally just Google ‘a7 problems’ and copy/paste the first two asinine things you saw? Stop embarrassing yourself and say something thoughtful and informed next time.
I think it looks very interesting, but I’m surprised that it looks like Europe only gets 720p100 while USA gets 720p120. When using slow-motion you want the option to make it as slow as possible. Whether it matches the framerate of your normal video or not is uninteresting since it isn’t supposed to sync with the sound anyway.
Read about PAL and NTFS…
you mean ntsc 🙂 ntfs is for hard drives
Damnit, it doesn’t do NTSC and PAL, it’s either / or?
Sony does normally either/or and in the spec list in the previous a7s-post it says 1080 60i compatible device and 1080 50i compatible device, so I believe we don’t get 720p120 in Europe 🙁
It’s world camera, so you can switch between different framerates
I know, I was disgruntled when I realized that my a99 didn’t offer PAL rates. I thought I read that the rx10 does both so I thought Sony had turned a corner on regional differences.
What about continuous drive by A7/A7R/A7S: 5 fps/4 fps/??? fps
Here (http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/translation_img/products/vq5f/overview/spec.pdf) we see: Continuous shooting: Max. 2.5fps, Speed Priority Continuous shooting: Max. 5.0fps
Very poor frame rate!!! (((
How it correlate with: Continuous shooting: 88 frames (JPEG Extra Fine L) and Speed Priority Continuous shooting: 65 frames (JPEG Extra Fine L)?!!
I have long said that sony should make a camera for users that do not need high res but want the best possible low res camera.
This is thier camera.
The votlng however shows once again that the silent majority still wants the highest resolution.
Now sony should make the super high resolution that many of the other users like me want.
The voting does not show that at all. The poll simply asks whether or not we like the camera – it does not ask for reasons why.
The numbers are similar to A7R after the admin posted a sketch (ugly) of the cam. They turned around after the actual cam was announced.
Most of the interest here is around video, and the voting likely reflects that lean. Let’s see what Leica lenses look like in the corners on this. Show me clean corners, and I will show you a market that will buy a few of these things.
Sony introduced the a7 and a7r at the same time..2 comperable cameras with 24 and 36mp sensors.
The 36mp version outsold the 24 mp version even though the bulk of SAR coments were in the nateur of ..24mp is enough..or I dont need 36mp.
Thats what I consider to be the silent majority that wants higher resolution.
The new a7s is basically the same camera as th other two a7 versions but 12mp.
Most people including myself feel having this camera available is a good idea.
The voting however indicates that most of these people do not plan to purchase this camera.
I consider these preliminary results a further indication that what I call the silent majority is a solid core of users that want the highest possible resolution from thier camera system.
Please could you provide sales figures for the A7 and A7R?
I am having some difficulty finding the current sales figures..hopefull someone who reads this can find them for us. I based my comment on some previous figures posted by other readers.
I would appreciate if YOU could make the effort to find them, as you made the claim. Until then I am sceptical that the A7R holds any significant lead in sales.
It certainly wouldn’t surprise me if the A7r did outsell the A7 by quite a margin. Most of the reviews focus on the A7r and most the images taken with the 7 series on places like Flickr seem to be taken taken the A7r. I guess its not really much more to pay for higher spec camera so it makes sense if is selling far better. Having said that I’ve got an A7 and love it. Other than the autofocus its the probably the best camera I’ve ever used.
Weird, it is my impression from Flickr that the A7 is more popular.
Have you tried the firmware update? I did not do exhaustive before and after testing, but AF does seem improved after updating. It appears to struggle less in low light – I was able to focus successfully on a plain carpet the other night – tried a few times and it always lock on.
Good idea..you can remain sceptical.
I’m skeptical they will look much better than the A7 because the A7s is likely to have a heavy/thick AA filter which causes many of the problems with symmetrical lenses (which is why Leica has never used them). However, since the photo sites are larger I may be wrong.
Voted No, mostly because I have no budget for such a camera or much use. I like the camera for what it is, although short in some desirable features, such as an onboard 100mbps 4K recording mode. Other desirable features such as the A6000 focus system just may not be possible yet in a FF sensor, would need a lot more inside information from Sony R&D to know for sure. Not sure why the frame rate is so low, if the camera can feed 30 fps of 8.2 MP to the processors for 4K video, you would think it could handle 10 fps 12 MP to the buffers.
” Not sure why the frame rate is so low, if the camera can feed 30 fps of
8.2 MP to the processors for 4K video, you would think it could handle
10 fps 12 MP to the buffers.”
I would think it is because of the shot gun shutter. Why go 12 fps with that noise maker? It will probably disintegrate with a few minutes of such operation.
Nikon D4s or Leica M and such cams have much better and durable shutters. This is one reason why they cost so much.
The E mount cams are compromises in many fronts. Some can use what they offer, others look elsewhere.
e mount = yawn..
Roll on the A mount news
In calling “no binning” a pro, it’s important to note than “binning” is not in itself a problem. Indeed, using binning on a very high resolution sensor to produce an RGB value from all the photo-sensor sites which map to a video pixel would be a much better approach than so-called line skipping. The former uses all the information from the sensor, whilst the second uses a sparse-sampling technique, only (usually) reading – at best – one each of the RGB photo-sites which map to each video pixel. The consequence is that it introduces lots of artifacts, especially moire, and has worse dynamic range and noise than using “binning” techniques.
The reason that “binning” is not generally used to produce video from high-definition sensors is not because it produces an inferior result, it is because it simply isn’t technically feasible to read 20-30 million photosites and produce a down-sized output at sensible frame rates (indeed, you want to do it as fast as possible on CMOS processors to minimise rolling shutter effects). To work at those sort of data rates would generate lots of heat in both the sensor and processor and require a lot more battery power and active cooling. That’s wholly incompatible in relatively small consumer products.
The important factor is the full frame readout. Clearly with the 4K output, there will only be one photo-site corresponding to each video pixel, which means the eventual RGB value will contain one “native” primary colour value and two interpolated from adjacent photosites of the other two primaries. However, with 1280. each video pixel would map to one R, one B and two G photo-sites. In this case, using binning (in software) to combine the two G and then producing a composite RGB value using the one B & one R value.
With standard definition, even more could be done with binning as there will be multiple photo-sites for each primary colour which maps to a single RGB video value. Of course, it’s almost certain that there will be more to in-camera processing, perhaps to suppress noise, moire or other artifacts, but the basic principle remains. Use all the data from the sensor, don’t skip some.
Note that if there was a means to extract the actual raw sensor data from a video stream, it would be technically better than capturing HDMI for 4K as the actual data rates are lower, and more sophisticated processing could be done than is possible in-camera as there’s much more time and processing power available. It would also be possible to retrospectively decide what definition to output and process the RAW optimally for that format. Of course it would require a RAW video converter program (the sort of thing that RED does). Unfortunately, I don’t see such a development on a consumer camera in the near future as I estimate the data rates on 30fps 4K would be 180MBps with 12 bit depth and assuming 2:1 compression is possible. However, it’s much better than relying on the in-camera processing to decide at the time of shooting.
What hasn’t been clear to me is how the HD resolution is sampled. I guess (or hope) it is not by line skipping.
Wouldn’t the best be to read at 4K and downsample to HD ?
I too would certainly hope that HD (1280) is produced by reading all the 4K photosites, which would very neatly give a 2 x 2 block for each output pixel containing all three primaries. In principle it ought to be possible at 1280p 30fps as the sensor read data rate would be the same as 4K 30fps. However, that might not be possible at 60fps (which would double the read rate) as there’s no 4K 60fps. So a reasonable assumption might be that line skipping will be used for at 1280p 60fps, but the fear might be that they continue the same line skipping for 1280p 30fps, effectively throwing away half the sensor information. Until somebody tests this, we won’t know.
“World’s First Full-Frame Camera with Full Pixel Read-out3 (without pixel binning) during Movie Shooting When used in 4K (24p/30p), HD(24p/30p) movie setting”
It does say that full pixel read-out only works below 30p so hopefully that means that we will have great HD downsampled from 4K!
OK – that seems hopeful. It sounds like 1080p 30fps HD video quality should be better than anything outside the full-on dedicated professional video gear. It ought to produce excellent DR and low noise with minimal aliasing, although I suspect it will still have significant rolling shutter.
The camera is great, with a couple of major flaws, IMO:
1) I want FF mostly because I want shallower DOF. But since there are no f/2.8 24-70mm or equivalent lens for the FE mount, which means that I´m stuck indefinitely with buying an A lens+Adapter, which means more money, more bulk, more weight, and more focusing issues, depending on how good the adapter does its job.
2) And speaking of AF, there doesn´t seem to be any big improvement over the A7/A7r AF capabilities, which is probably the most criticized feature about them. The fact that a 650$ Sony A6000 is likely to have a much better, quicker autofocus, is quite simply shameful, considering the price gap.
Thanks
Given the sensitivity & clean high ISO, at least the light loss & gain boost from the LA-EA 4 should have a negligible effect on image quality. It should be a good combination.
Even if it works beautifully, I´m still losing 1 stop of DOF, and everything else I said before: “more money, more bulk, more weight”. And light loss isn´t everything, since the adapter can potentially alter the way the camera was designed to focus, and its performance, which was my point.
It´s not only photography, but video as well: if I shoot video with my A6000, I get excellent AF with very smooth transitions, almost 70D-like. However, if I try to use the adaptor you mentioned, I get Alpha-like focusing, meaning the old, abrupt, jumpy transitions from point A to B that look awful in comparison. The adapter changes the camera´s behaviour completely, which is my point.
AFAIK, Sony hasn´t even made an announcement about the possibility of a 24-70mm f/2.8 FE mount, which means it´ll probably be YEARS until we have one, IF we ever do. The fact that Sony likes to charge more money for a 24-70mm f/4 FE than some other manufacturers charge for a 24-70mm f/2.8 “FF” lenses does not help either way.
You get no depth of field penalty with the A mount adapter. And you can always use any f2.8 zoom you want, seamlessly. It is still lighter than a DSLR. Why bitch and moan?
Also, at 12MP, almost any decent adapted glass will look great. There are dozens of great, fast, beautiful lenses that will work perfectly with this setup.
And who shoots pro video with AF? If you are just a casual, stick with a6000 then. All this complaining is tiresome.
Stop crying! Don’t act childish please.
Your comment, on the other hand, it´s every bit as mature as it is valuable…
I understand the focus system differences for video, however you do not lose any depth of field by using the adaptor.
You do not lose a stop either. What happens is that the sensor / processor adds about a third to a half a stop of gain (it’s debatable) to boost the signal and compensate for the SLT light loss. Thus ISO 6400 with adapter will have slightly more noise with adapter than without it – the exposure & depth of field remain the same. Given that the images from this sensor are so clean, this added gain should be fairly insignificant.
Sorry, you´re absolutely right, I was still thinking about the 2.8 lens when I wrote that paragraph, my bad. I know about that 1/3 of a stop and it´s certainly not that important with such great low light capabilities.
Every other point, though (additional bulk, weight, money, worse AF and overall inconvenience) are still valid though. It all comes to the fact that there´s no 2.8 normal zoom lens, and apparently no plans to release it either, which I find very troubling.
On a side note, I forgot to mention that video AF seems MUCH better on the A6000 than on the A7/7R, which is another thing I´m personally interested in, and not very likely to improve at all on the A7S, I´m afraid.
Agree with you; Sony are trying to keep lenses small I think so F4 min but I am sure we all want to see some F2.8 zooms!
No, I don’t want 2,8 zooms. I prefer f/4 zooms. Whenever I need shallow DOF I use wide aperture primes. Obviously you are not an experienced photographer.
That’s cool Maria , only fly in the ointment with that plan is that there is exactly one fast prime in the FE “system” . So you can have adapted A mount lenses and end up with a bulkier set up with impaired AF or go fiull manual and go back to the 1970s lol
There is no such thing as an FE system. You made that up to make it look like a limited system. That is mean and unfair. Why? Jealous? In fact the Alpha system is an extensive and fast growing ecosystem. Besides Alpha system, adapted lenses work great! Again you as well seem to reject options without having even tried them. Manual focus is a setting in most camera’s and it’s there for a reason, it’s a choice.
There’s nothing shameful about the A6000 having better AF. Firstly, the image sensor is smaller, and secondly it is newer than the A7(r). I applaud Sony for not waiting to release this new OSPDAF tech until everyone bought the A7(r) but providing us the choice immediately. Thirdly, Mark Weir clearly stated that advancements in mirrorless technology are going so fast that there are many improvements coming in the near future. I thank Sony for not holding back in that regard.
Regarding point 1, fast primes are the way to go with these A7(r) IMO. For big zooms, FF DSLR/Ts are much better suited.
Can’t judge AF without it being tested. Sony said that it’s similar to the A6000, despite the different system. Sony also said that the EVF refresh rate (and contrast) has been much improved in the A7S over the A7R/A7. Which hints at a much faster sensor read out (usually the weakest link, the specs of the OLED panel itself leave quite a bit of room for improvement), likely helped by the much lower resolution. And faster sensor read out is crucial for faster AF, see mirrorless cameras with smaller sensors that could benefit from this before.
The relatively slow fps in stills could be a limitation of the FF shutter.
Sony compared the AF of the A7s to the AF of the A7r. Where did they say it was as good as the A6000? If it were, that would not only be a breatkthrough, but they would be talking it up more.
so a new sony camera is coming? 🙂
as usual they are making lot of meaningless cameras and none of lenses for them…
i’m sorry……. it’s a sony.
it’s not meaningless…
A7 = Normal photography (also the cheapest)
A7r = Resolution priority
A7s = Sensitivity priority
A3500 is meaningless “downgrade” if you ask me.
BH says it comes with 2 batteries included. 🙂
12 pixels is better than 36 pixels in some ways, worse in some other ways.
I used my wonderful sel50mm and sel35mm on my A7r and ended up with 16mp image. Fine. How about now with the 12mp sensor? 5mp?
Yes, about that. Went back to check the specs page and the link has vanished. The main sensor is 12.2 MP which would leave 5.4 MP in crop mode.
Admin can you ask your sources for a price range ?
also add no 10bit, no 120p without crop
going to start a class action lawsuit against sony for scam and false advertising since the A7s does NOT record in 4k. It requires other products ir order to work.
Also who fucking cares about other camera? we need lenses!!!
Wow! The absolute hysteria whipped up prior to the announcement is followed by the sort of collective hangover I used to see on Monday morning in college. Based upon all the ‘take my money, please’ comments I thought any poll would easily favor 50% buying one. ;^)
I voted yes I like it because I get (mostly) why Sony built it but, no, I have absolutely zero interest in owning one.
It’s a bit of an odd addition to the Alpha line-up, IMHO, as it seems obvious to me the 12mp sensor was selected to make the primary use case for the a7S 4k video, not stills. No 4k recording on SD cards like their FDR-AX100/B 4k video camera not only will make it an expensive 4k system but will displease the typical e-mount owner obsessed with small and light.
I will say I’m very impressed with the video samples. Very sharp! Better than the YouTube videos I’ve found for their AX100/B (which may say more about YouTube than either camera!). The 409,600 ISO boast, as expected, is laughable. Sony’s sample video starts to show artifacts crawling all over the place at 5,000 ISO and above.
Typical of all the a7x bodies, I get the impression, like admin, it was rushed. Is this intentional to milk early adopters and give Sony engineers an easy upgrade path? Maybe. But I get the impression Sony’s camera division is driven by engineers without much discipline, strategy, or planning from their marketing department. The result is some really cool, cutting-edge tech wrapped in a disappointing package that won’t get any of my money.
While it’s hard waiting for any new a-mounts in a way it’s a blessing the e-mounts are coming out first because, except for the a6000 which looks like a rather complete package (and lack of an IQ bump is disappointing there), all of their recent e-mounts are misses in my book. I hope Sony is taking their time in getting any new a-mount bodies right with a solid feature set, significant IQ boost, and good value proposition.
They had the nex-7 and nex-6 to build off of for the a6000 so the I suspect the 2nd or 3rd gen will be very good. Sony cameras tend to fall in price rather quickly so I may still get one since I have always wanted sony to make a 12mp ff camera. I could have gotten my A7 for 1200 instead of the 1500 deal I thought I got a month before. I will just wait and see.
I think actually the A7s’ best feature is this one: -4 EV auto focus sensitivity.
It’s the same as the Panasonic GX7’s which can focus reliably in much less light than any E-mount Sony cameras I’ve tried (all of them except the A6000) so if the A7s can reach its level than it sounds like a great travel and street camera for me.
Interesting attempt but M43 at 4k is more realistic solution; Sony trying to compete with GH4 but not quite getting there. Maybe the A8s will be more realistic. Like that power zoom though, I think Sony found a hidden warehouse full of F4 zooms?
Sony is competing with other FF dual purpose DSLR, like the 5D Mark 3. To compete with GH4, all they need is a camera with Super 35 sensor.
Yes you have a good point but 5D MkIII was anounced in March 2012 shouldn’t Sony be setting their sights a bit higher?
Well how good is the 4K with the 5D MkIII? Since when does the GH4 have a full frame sensor? It will be interesting to compare high iso a7S footage with that of the GH4 – my guess would be that the GH4 will not be able to compete there.
A two year old camera design implies Canon is lagging, not Sony.
Where it counts namely sales Canon is slaughtering Sony
But when it comes to innovation and actually trying something new in Photography Sony is slaughtering Canon.
Where’s “I really like the camera but I’m really broke too” option?
If it’s priced competitively with the GH4 and Canon 6D than I can see it being a real hit. If not, than the a7S will be bought by few.
Boring! … what about new quality lenses for a-mount & e-mount? What about firmware improvements? No overheating flash unit? Lossless files … and so on …
i’m sorry. it’s a sony.
new camera body each 3 months…
..one new lens each 10 years 🙂
i’m sorry. it’s a sony.
Based on past history, Sony will do *some* firmware improvements to the version 1 devices, but they already have (!), but after that most firmware improvements will be sold as new models.
I do not expect many more A-mount lenses, maybe some tweaks or high end lenses as their previous production stockpile runs out on a specific lens.
The Alpha mount verbiage is what is most interesting to me. The new Alpha mount references make it clear that Sony views this as one system, and will accomplish that through new cameras at e-mount, with adapters to a-mount. That’s the only way ‘one’ mount makes sense (as you cannot adapt an e lens to an a mount camera). It will be interesting to see exactly how they accomplish this and its impact on their SLT line…
Sorry, that’s called proper engineering + a proper product strategy.
This is a Sony, it is just about luring in some sukkerz in the short term. If you want a proper camera system, look at Canon-Nikon-Pentax, there really is nobody else.
I would also include Fuji in your list for properly engineered cameras with a good product strategy.
If it is as cheap as the A7, and if the AF is better than the A7, I will get one. I think it will be more priced at A7r level though, in the most positive scenario it will sit between the A7 and A7r.
Video side. Not a complete 4K solution. Also, not many realize that there is one unpleasant issue with A7S: there is no full 4K DCI resolution (4096×2160) on camera – only UHD (3840×2160).
Stills side. Largest pixel size in the industry, perhaps best ever noise/DR. It is very appealing.
People want less megapixels, give us !
FYI the A7s autofocus is hybrid (PDAF and CDAF). Same goes for A7. May not be as fast as a6000 but that’s another story.
Where do you see this? Everywhere I look I find 25pt Contrast-Detect AF at -4EV http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a7s/sony-a7sDAT.HTM
http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/slrs/sony_a7s/specifications
However Sony says “The camera is also equipped with the same high-precision Fast Intelligent AF system as the α7R camera”. A7r is CDAF only. So both Dpreview and Sonyalpharumors made a mistake. So my conclusion was also wrong, I’m sorry. No hybrid AF in A7s…
Yes, if you read the pdf of the specs on the Sony website it states the AF is only CDAF. That’s a shame…it seems Sony will make us wait until next generation for improved AF. Now if they can match the A6000 AF in their FF series…then we will really have something.
I don’t really care. I have Nex 3n camera. It has CDAF only, and it works like a charm!
No Peter, it is unfortunately CDAF only. Either major fail or marketing decision to leave something for A9s.
There is still the issue of no IBIS.
Tamron currently holds a patent for a teleconverter with stabilization built in.
If this were built as an A to E mount teleadaptor it would be usefull for a mount users.
Wildlife photographers typicall utilize long lenses which are expensive and currently unavailabe for E mount.
This camera with its high iso would be a good choice for a long tele withe teleadaptor.
The other issue is high speed autofocus.
Currently high speed autofucus with E mount is not fully available.
If all lens/adapter options could utilize the full high speed af potential of this camera it would make purchasing this camera a more viable option.
By this comment I am refferring to both A mount and non-sony mount.
Another option that could make E mount more acceptable to A mount users would be an A to E mount adaptor that includes oss. This option may not currently be possible because Tamron holds a patent that may prevent anyone else from making such a product.
Isn’t Sony one of the major if share holders in Tamron if not the largest?
11%
when i saw the high jump photo i thought it has the speed of 1Dx and the AF of the A6000. thinking it’s only 12.2MP. FAIL! back to the A7R. i don’t need the 4K video
If price is $1700 it is interesting.
But would love to have A6000 auto focus speed.
4K video I dont use. For me 2K (Full HD) is enough.
You forgot among cons:
3) line-skipping in 1080p60 (and p50 in European version)
4) bad rolling shutter in 2160p30 and 1080p30.
5) same loud shutter as in A7 and A7r
6) Very slow sequential shooting 2.5/5 fps (not good for sports despite the high ISO sensor). 5 fps with focus/exposure locked?
7) Only 8-bit HDMI output
8) Only 4:2:0 recording, not even 4:2:2, and only 50 mbps compared to 200 in GH4.
9) Horizontally only uses 90% of the sensor, making wide lenses not so wide.
10) No cinema 4096×2160 ratio.
And, without internal 4k recording, it is not a 4k camera, it is a 4k HEAD.
And no binning is not a PRO, binning from higher res gets the same as no binning from low res sensor. No line skipping though is a good thing (in 24/30p).
Is the shutter electronic or like the a7r?
point 9 I don’t understand, you mean just the 16:9 crop of the 3:2 sensor? that seems unavoidable unless you want to shoot in 3:2 aspect ratio.
Electronic
It is not just 16:9 crop of 3:2 sensor, they crop not only in vertical dimension, but also horizontally, crop each sensor line from 4240 pixels to 3840. 400 pixels, or about 10% of each line, are lost in video.
you are right. it’s not a 4k camera. that’s pure missleading advertising. you CAN’T shoot 4k with it. unlike panasonic GH2 for example.
To be fair Panasonic is limited in many ways, to get the best from it { video wise} you need to bolt it on to the interface unit making a base cost of $3400. Plus you are stuck with mFT still image quality. I speak as a GH3 owner
The rolling shutter problem might be reduced if the readout is fast. There are many types of sports and for some a77 with 12 fps works even though it only lasts for about a second, and for others 5 fps with 30 frames buffer might work better. For others neither of them will do a good job. HDMI-out is 4:2:2 and with good data in from the sensor/AD even 4:2:0 looks good (though for green screen work you really want the extra color info of 4:2:2). We’ll see how good it is when the reviews start coming (or when you get hands on experience yourself). I’m sure for some GH4 will be better and for some a7s will be better. Price will be part of the equation.
I see some assumptions in there.
As for not being wide horizontally, it’s wider than a 1DC and for example the GH4 crops much further than that in 4K on an already smallish format. Which means that after all is being said, the difference in actual recording area between the A7S and GH4 is more than a factor 6 (was less than 4 in stills…). Even if the GH4 uses full pixel read out on that small area (no proof for that yet), that’s a huge difference.
A7s is not 4K camera is true.
It only support 4K.
A7s = sensitivity sensor.
Are you not understand ???
as usual…
always as usual…purposely limits few capabilities…
what sony what to be for A7s?
– a killer 4K video ….? it cannot even can record 4K to SD
– a killer ISO King in Still ….? it seem can be done easily
(is this to target high-end photographer pool? so 4K video consider a bonus to them?)
Panasonic GH4 exactly feed their followers what they needs;
Fuji actively improve their firmware for better performance for their cameras;
what sony wanna be….
Had it been able to record 4K internally, people would have complained it’s pointless as an E mount stills camera for being too large. If you want to beat the dog, you’ll always find a stick.
Weird how Sony outsell both of those manufacturers. Go figure.
Some sites here in Australia have it up for pre-order and they say the price is going to be around $3500+ AUD
Sony has the habit of throwing a lot of bodies on the market (with good tech specs) that eventually won’t sell on the long term because the system surrounding those bodies is modest (lenses, flashes etc). Also 12 mp in 2014 for ff…
I don’t see Sony coming out with a 12mp FF camera in 2014 as a step in the wrong direction or some backwards step in innovation as you may be implying. I have been championing a 16mp FF camera myself ever since the DF came out, since 16mp is sufficient for my printing needs, and yet you could possibly achieve some amazingly clean high ISO images from it compared to today’s 24mp standard. For those looking to hand hold their cameras in low light like street photogs for example, or any casual shooter taking pictures with friends over dinner, being able to jack up the ISO to keep your shutter speed high enough to prevent blur, and all without worrying about having some noisy image to work with in post, is very much welcomed no matter what year it is.
That should explain why Sony badge is on first, second and third best selling mirrorless camera’s on Amazon.com… 🙂
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Compact-System-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3109924011
So, not the camera for you then. Thanks for letting us know.
Some people mentioned on an earlier post that they applaud Sony for taking this particular route with the A7 trilogy rather than trying to devise some universal camera that can do everything well enough but nothing stand out on its own. While I do agree, and leaves it up to the consumer to buy the version of the A7 that best suits their needs, I wonder though, how they would be able to market the A9, or what exactly it would be able to do. Is it going to be a resolution champ? Videographer’s wet dream? General purpose top end camera say, like the Canon 5D?
I don’t think I’m making any sense. Basically, I would find it odd for Sony to come out with an A9 model that is better in some areas than one of the A7 versions, but then worse in other categories. Unless they can somehow merge every capability of each camera into a unified body? I’m seeing another NEX6/NEX7 or A7/A7r conundrum, where the top end model isn’t necessarily the “top end” in all aspects. Though looking at the A7/A7r example now, it makes sense since the higher-priced model in this case, doesn’t necessarily equate to a higher-level model, it’s just marketed towards a different audience like the A7s is.
Sony has recently introduced several different types of camera for differrent needs.
What is not currently available is a resolution champ and it is way overdue.
Sony makes the most sensors and what they do or dont manufacture determines what type of cameras the entire market will produce.
Sony does not dominate the camera industry but they do control it.
Agreements are in place that limit the speed of new technology so manufacturers can afford to keep up and compete.
So it is actually up to Sony to decide what technology we will be permitted to have in our new cameras.
It is now time to allow those of us that want much higher resolution to have it and I hope sony will allow that to happen.
I deliberately used the word ALLOW because Sony does indeed limit the pace of new technology whether you buy a Sony camera or someone elses.
You are always good for a laugh. The A7r is the resolution champ, matched only by the Nikon D800e.
You are such a joker.
It is the resolution champ only because no better competition is allowed in the game.
As I said agreements are in place that limit the pace of new tchnology..such as higher resolution..
Sony being the industry leader in sensor technology basicall determines the technolgy ” speed limit “.
Please supply evidence for this unsubstantiated claim.
Sony has superior sensor resources than anyone in the world and has the abilty to produce a better sensor than anyone if they chose..no one can compete.
In 2010 canon anounced the development of a 120 mp cmos aps H sensor wpith 9.5 fps refresh rate..that bigger than c..smaller than ff.
Canon agreed to hold off puttin this sensor in a camera till sony releases thier 54mp stacked or slightly after.
This sensor will be shared wiyh other manufacturers so all competitors will release a new tech sensor in early to middle of 2015.
Obviously I cannot produce the actual written agreement to that nut then again this is a rumor site not a trial.
If you can’t provide any internet based evidence, and don’t have a copy of this supposed agreement, how do you know about it?
By the way
The a7r is sonys current highest mp camera.
By any standard you choose to measure succes this is a hidhly sucessfull camera.
More so than ieter the a7 or a7s will be
Nevertheless I approve of all 3 of these models.
Certainly ff has the potential for much higher pixel densities. The a7r isn’t even close to the a77 density – you’d be looking at 56mp ff if they scaled it up, which should be feasible.
May I ask why you would need so many pixels? Do you print images, and if so, to what size?
I use my photos for referance and must be able to see not only the entire suct but also the finest of details
An entire bird in flight plus each feather plus the structure of the feather, and elid,pinfeathers,beak etc.
No camera today comes close to that capability.
Oh I see, it’s to do something for you that no camera has ever done before, and is unnecessary for 99.9% of other users.
That makes sense.
You claim that .1% of people want super high resolution…which os toral nonsense..and you chalenge me to dubstatiate every one of my calaond..
Please substantiate your vlaim.
LOL what?!! Have you been drinking?
You have yet to provide sales figures for the A7/A7R, so do not tell others to substantiate their claims. You seem full of fanciful nonsense, most of which you cannot backup, so to criticise others seems a little bit rich TBFH.
This is a rumor site not a trail court.
If you want more info than I have provided..look it up yourself..
You choose to doubt or disbelieve..feel free to do so….
You have other info to contradict me you can post that..
2 facts remain
1..the a7r ..sonys highest mp camera is a successfull seller no matter how you measure or define it.
2 I dont drink.
The A7 is a successful seller too – don’t forget that. My impression “in the wild” is that sales are pretty even.
I will choose to disbelieve you. You make a claim, you back it up. If you can’t then it will be given the same credence as your conspiracy theories.
No, I did not. I said 99.9% of users don’t need super high resolution, and they don’t.
I ask again, please provide evidence that Sony manipulates and controls the camera market. Frankly, I don’t think you can, because it’s just one of your pet theories.
Canon anounced in 2010 a new 120mp aps H …..thats bigger than C and smaller than ff. With 9.5 fps continuous frame rate.
Sony can produce a better sensor than anyone and certaianly Canon canot go jead to head with sony in asensor technology war.
Canon agreed to release this senser at the same time sony introduces its 54mp stacked sensor in early to mid 2015.
The sony sensor will be available to other manufacturers at the same time.
This I was personally told by sony.
Google 120mp canon sensor to see for yourself.
No as to your claim that 99,9% of users dont need super high resolution.
I have provided the evidence available to back up my claim. Now show me evidence to back up yours.
I get the impression you don’t know what evidence is. All you have done is reiterate what you have said before, without any further evidence to substantiate your claim. I am familiar with the infamous telephone conversation you claim to have had. That’s called anecdotal evidence, and is not evidence at all.
Regarding my claim that super high resolution is not needed, just look around you. It’s not needed for magazines, websites, normal sized prints etc. We seem to have coped fine without super high resolutions so far. Let’s not even get started on the processing power and amount of storage required for super high resolutions. You seem to have confused needed with desired. Desired is a different story.
The burden of proof in a criminal trial is beyond a reasonable doubt
Civil..a preponderance of the evidence.
Just what level of proof do you expect to get for a rumer?
This is a RUMOR SITE
We talk abought the future..Time is the only evidence you will get.
Like all of us you must wait and see which of thes predictions happen.
If you demand more you need to go somewhere else…or find it yourself and share it with us.
Instead you make repeated denants for documentation you know you wont get and that would be a waste of everyones time if provided.
At the same time you make an unfounded unproven statement yourself and fail to provide the same level of proof you demand from me.
You seem oblivious of where you are..a rumor site..and none of the rumers here will ever be proved or disprved except by time.
If you have something to add to the discussion please feel free to do so.
As for for your demands you make of me….I have no desire or complieing
Yes, this is a rumour site. I like to point out the inadequacies in your pet theories, unsubstantiated as they are by anything, not even rumour.
if you shoot birds in flight you’re going to crop.
That’s a fair point. Perhaps one day we’ll have a camera that allows you to bin 75% of the image and still print posters.
The point I was making is that for the vast majority of photographers today, ever increasing resolutions are pointless. They require more processing power from your computer, and are simply not necessary for the averaged sized print.
True
A stacked sensor of the same pixel size as a 36mp bayer would have 36mp x 3 layers for 108 actual mp and be equivelent to 134mp in a bayer sensor.
The a9 doesn’t exist, just like there never was an NEX-9. For now, precedent shows that the 7 series is the highest end for e-mount (excluding the FS-100/700 video cameras).
They should allow 4k recording on sd card. They can put a limit to it, like 5 mins or 10 mins max if using sd card. Then will regular folks will also want to buy it.
I think the problem is not the size, but rather a sustained data rate. As far as regular folks comment, I dont think anyone, except you, is planning on taking a 4k video of their kids playing with the cat…
If sustained date rate is a problem then it is Sony’s implementation not with the technology itself. The GH4 uses UHS-I SDXC cards and it can write 4K in body.
I think this camera is a good variation of the a7x line for Sony aimed squarely at the video enthusiast. That sensor would be killer if it was bigger say 16-20mp and using the faster AF from the a6000. Specs like that would definitely go head to head with something like the Nikon 4Ds and Cannon 1Dx….maybe in the future as an A8
I’m disappointed with the lack of any relevant FE lens announcement or an updated roadmap! 🙁
minipixels.net | Automotive Photography + Design
I don’t think Sony has ever officially published a road map, so the best you can hope for is somebody leaking a more up to date version. 5 lenses in 6 months is very good going for Sony and we know as a minimum the 28-135, wa zoom and fast prime are on the way…
I’m an a99 owner (primarily for video work) for a few reasons:
1. Full Frame (DoF & good low light performance)
2. In Body Stabilization (this has saved me so much post editing work)
3. Nice selection of inexpensive a-mount lenses (minolta)
4. 1080p @ 60p (great slow mo – STILL no other manufacturer does this on full frame)
I most likely won’t purchase an a7s because:
1. No in body stabilization
2. e-mount / having to get adapter
3. Not sure why 120fps @ 1080p isn’t an option? Do people still record 720p footage for production work? It’s seems like the power is there to do this on faster cards?
4. Don’t care too much about 4k at this time… especially if I have to buy a recorder
I’m really interested in seeing real world examples of high iso footage & color/contrast reproduction.
Really hoping they release an a99 successor with this sensor/processor, XAVC-S & IBIS that focuses on higher frame rates (1080p/120p) rather than 4K.
The GH4s are nice… but not FF. Just my two cents.
I might end up getting an a7s at work. The camera profiles should make it possible to more or less match our other Sony cameras. We mostly use tripod and manual focus (to avoid a long recording of a mostly still target be ruined by focus hunting). I will need a HDMI to HD-SDI converter to connect it to the switcher for live production. With adapter I can use the Canon lenses from work or my Alpha lenses. We still record a lot in 720p50, so 720p100 is interesting though I wish they would include 720p120 in Europe as well. The high iso capabilities would also be nice when we can’t add light. The price will be an important part of the decision. Also what kind of control you get with wifi. It would be nice to be able to focus and zoom using a pad if the camera is mounted somewhere where we can’t put a person.
You may want to get the European version. The European a99 does both pal & NTSC (whereas the North American a99 is NTSC only).
The IBIS on the a99 does not function in video mode. The steadyshot in video is digital, the a7s can have digital steadyshot.
Don’t you find that the digital steadyshot makes the a99 video mushy and kills sharpness?
Your A99 is FF but it does not mean it is better than GH4 in video – because in video A99 skips lines (especially at 60p) and GH4 does not.
I’m kind of excited that Sony could pack a lot of good things into a full-size A-mount body that included IBIS.
Don’t worry, if your not happy the next generation of these cameras is around the corner. We’ll get the A9, A9R and A9S. They’ll have the auto focus of the a6000 and just enough upgrades to get people to dish out more money. I still haven’t bought one and don’t plan on it for some time. Lenses don’t interest me now and I found Olympus more versatile for small camera work.
Exactly – the successful business model of a consumer electronics giant.
im always impressed by the amount of feedback this site gets with so little information about the final product.
Has anyone been able to determine if it has a global shutter? That would be very important for video but I haven’t seen the issue directly addressed.
In the video listed elsewhere in the comments the sales person says you can provoke the rolling shutter problem to appear if you wave the camera around, so I think there is no global shutter on this one. If the readout is fast enough though, I think that should reduce the global shutter problem significantly?
Yep! An other slomo FF video camera !
I am happy with the a7r for now, and probably i will wait few more months for the A9s
My biggest regret is the shutter shake on the a7R, keep shooting at 1/200s to get sharp photos, i was so used to shoot at 1/60s with any other camera . Would be interesting to see how it is in this new camera.
Profiles and Log2 files are def a +
Mr. Shigeki Ishizuka looked so proudly during premier presentation BUT we have got a Big Crap (plenty of A7s weaknesses) with a little cherry (good low light).
This camera is not for pro, nor for amateur… just promise without fulfillment.
it seems a lot of people are misunderstanding, the good low light performance is not the cherry, that is the main emphasize of A7s, 4K video is the bonus. Have you seen the low light performance? are there any review about the low light performance & AF out there? have you seen the price? then save your whine until you see one.
but what about the rest? what about good light shooting? it will perform like every other 12mp camera out there. having clean high iso is nice and good but in low light colours aren’t that saturated as in good light.
good argument for clean high iso would be fast frames per second and blazingly fast AF so you could use it as a sports camera – but the first is meh and the other unknown
Good light shooting is already covered by the A7R and A7.
If you don’t see a benefit, you’re likely not the target market.
Zohee35, if I read correctly, this article is about A7S and it is the A7S which is claimed to have crazy high ISO is it not? yes it is so why bother replying with a nonsense like that?
What is “a nonsense”? Something we can eat? 😉
You were attempting to convince us that the A7S doesn’t have benefits in good light (wich is arguable too in high contrast situations which are very common in good light and where heavy shadow lifting can still show benefits). I said that that’s where the A7R and A7 already excel, Sony offers the choice. It’s like pointing out that a SUV isn’t compact, when the same car maker offers… also a compact, choice.
Next time, read, breathe, then reply.
“t’s like pointing out that a SUV isn’t compact, when the same car maker offers… also a compact, choice.” – and at the same time you drive all those options…
All I’m saying is that I agree with comment here, this camera doesn’t seem to fulfil any of the promises.
Only if you’ve been reading/expecting promises that weren’t made.
Colors aren’t as saturated in low light because your camera has tiny little pixels. A 12 megapixel point and shoot is not the same as a 12 megapixel full frame camera.
The point of a full frame 12 megapixel camera is now you WILL have deep, saturated colors in low light, because the pixels are so much bigger and can collect so much more light..
This is a camera no one else has anything close to. It is unique, and Sony promised unique cameras this year.
“Colors aren’t as saturated in low light because your camera has tiny little pixels.” – are you sure about that, my eyes say otherwise, colours are reflection of light, that’s how you perceive colour, no light, no colours so 12 megapixel full frame won’t give you ‘deep saturated colours in low light’ because there are no deep saturated colours in first place.
Aren’t you judging the camera too soon? It’s not even in the market yet! Stop trolling.
Thats how trolls operate.
Sleep – troll(feed) – sleep – troll – sleep – troll ….
There is no reading or any other kind of input in their process
I assume you don’t know what you’re talking about… Several features of the 7s are quite unique, and will be appreciated by professionals who know what they’re all about!
The low light, +/-4ev, high ISO specs are excellent.
No internal 4k is at least a good thing for stills people as they don’t want to pay for video specs that they would rarely use.
Agreed.
For now, the only people shooting 4k for serious use are film people. They would gladly pay for small camera + 4k recorder. Your average photographer who just wants a good low light camera and take nice videos for home will be happy with great 1080p, and won’t want to pay the extra $2,000 and all the size, weight and power of the 4k recorder built in. Don’t worry, they’ll offer a built in version soon enough. It’ll probably cost $3000-$5000, too. And be 5 times the size.
This is an example of a company taking an honest look at the needs of each kind of user, and tailoring a product to fit a few key demographics well, rather than shoehorning one camera in to try and meet everyone’s needs.
+10000
If it has NEX7 style, I’ll buy it
It looks exactly like the A7 and A7r. Look at the photo heading this post. smh
Yes I know. Therefore I’ll not buy this one
> – no pixel binning at 4K
GH4 does not do any binning either…
> – -4 EV auto focus sensitivity (A7-A7r has 0 ev)
GH4 does that… GX7 does that… old news.
GH4, GX7, are small sensor cameras, not FF! The features you mentioned are all great news on a FF.
If the gh4 doesn’t pixel bin then it crops so your wide lenses aren’t so wide.
l was literally inches away from purchasing an A7, yes the A7 and not the A7r, since that much resolution was not needed for what I was shooting. Liked the size, AF system, the slightly better ISO and FPS. Ended up getting a Fuji X-T1 instead, and I have to say I’m impressed. The photos I’m getting out of the system are much more true, the AF is very fast and the EVF is amazing. No it is not a full frame and no it does not have 36 mpix, but for the shooting I’m doing it is a great fit.
The A7s does look very interesting for its high ISO feature. I have used a D3s for many years, and am seriously considering ditching it for the A7s. Yes the D4, D4s are better cameras, but for the cost, size and weight savings I can live with loosing some of these features.
If you want tons of features, take a look at he Olympus OMD-EM1. It has tons of features, a menu system that will take NASA to navigate and is so small and compact that the system with 2 lenses weighs less then my D3s body.
The trick is to know what your shooting and choose the correct tool for it. I don’t expect to haul sheets of plywood with a Porsche.
Well said! Makes you think, what works for you is what it’s all about! I am having a good time with my A7. Jus a happy thought. Have a good one!
Not what I was hoping for, really needed something with decent internal 4K for day to day work. Going to be sticking to 1080 work for now, which my new FS700 can handle beautifully.
Yeah I need to to shoot 4k for my day to day work too, just like my 80mp stills. There is no camera for me.
My clients are requesting it, so yes I do need it. I’ve seen first hand the amazing improvements over 1080p. I’d shoot it for everything if I could, but the FS700 RAW footage is going to be a bear.
If your clients need it then you should not be shooting internally, an external Prores or similar more usable format makes sense for speed in the edit and higher quality.
except a recorder that does that doesn’t exist right now.
I’m an A-Mount user, somewhat subconsciously preparing for the possible move to E-Mount. Managed to pick up both adapters at half price at a Sony store closing! I am thinking seriously about this camera for Astro-Photography, anyone see any downsides or insight that might be helpful.
Thanks!
Is full frame ideal for astrophotography?
Telescopes usually have clock drives or even more advanved tracking progams.
It seems unlikely that the advantages of the high iso will outweigh the disadvantage of the lower resolution.
A long time exposure and a larger telescope seems to me to be the best bang for the buck.
I am NOT an expert on astrophotograghy but this comment reflects what my common sense tels me.
When dealing with full frame many telescopes do have issues with distortion on the edges or lack of full frame coferage.
A focal reducer is one option for the isue that also provides a faster effectif f# the cost of the wider field of course is less magnification.
Some telescopes have built in flat field correction that is particlarly usefull for astrphotography.
Generally the larger the scope the more the light gathered so the higher the resolving power.
Lastly there are different telecope desighns.
Scmidt cossecrain are probably the most compact and easy to use however desghns like Dobsonian provide more telescope for the money but are much larger and difficult to handle.
I’ll chime in since I have a pretty good background in astrophotography. I’ll post a quick note here: Bigger pixels are usually better. There’s a limit to how small you can resolve with a given telescope, mount, and the location you’re at (atmospheric distortion), and it’s usually a lot bigger than the size of a pixel in a modern camera. So you usually have to drastically downsize the images to make them appear sharp and well defined. Larger pixels and wider angle telescopes (ie, 400-600mm) will yield vibrant, sharp images, if done from a very dark location with a good tracking mount. Oh, and a LOT of crazy image processing steps and extra special imaging procedures.
That said, ‘ideal’ is a strong word. Full frame gives you a larger field of view and usually, larger pixels. However, as animalsbybarry notes, your telescope needs to be able to give you a good image to cover a full frame sensor. It’s actually difficult/expensive to get a telescope and all the correctors to cover a full frame sensor properly.
Like camera lenses, telescopes are designed with certain image circles and ‘cameras’ (the normal one being a human eye) in mind. Like crop sensor lenses vs full frame lenses. So you may have to dig to find out what size image circle a given telescope produces, how flat the field is, and where any aberrations may crop up and how bad they are. Most telescopes were not designed with photography in mind, so they don’t have a flat field, though a some newer ones are, or are designed with matched flat field correctors. You want it to have a good, flat field in a circle large enough to cover your camera’s sensor. Or, you just crop the image down in the center and throw away the bad portions. But then, why have a full frame camera? Most telescopes and imaging correctors tend to focus on the APS-C size right now, but you can get stuff for full frame if you do the research and pay the money for it.
What gets me real interested with this camera, is how sensitive it is. For astrophotography, there’s only a few things that make a huge difference in photographs on the camera side: Pixel size, noise (at a given ISO), and if you really get into it, noise uniformity. Being a newer sensor, the noise is a going to be a lot better than a sensor with the same size pixels made 5 years ago. The pixel size is also huge compared to most cameras, meaning the dynamic range (and again, noise) are going to be superb. I haven’t figured out the physics as to why, but combining 4 pixels into one still isn’t as good as one pixel 4 times larger when it comes to dynamic range and noise. I imagine it has to do with inserting so much noise (probably more than 4 times) in reading out 4 pixels vs one. So it has me curious. But I’ll stick with my a7R for now.
Looks like Sony is using the A7 series to test the optimal specifications for A9. Hope to see A9 with A6000 focus system this year. (then I can drop my favorite, but heavy, Canons)
Well, i was thinking about this A7s…
Now, i just can’t understand this camera.
First as a photographer mind:
What i might like
1.Probably the best low light quality to date.
2 Possibly the best Dynamic Range to date.
3.Compact system (not so sure) less weight, more time shooting, better to travel
What i might don’t like
1.Same 25 CDAF as A7R. WHY SONY?
2.MAX fps with AF 2.5fps. WHY SONY?
3. 12mpx.
Ok, lets resume this: You make a 12 mpx ideal for low light photos or high shutter speed and put this probably not fast enough 25pt cdaf to track subjects, yes, to track subjects otherwise you don’t need all that high iso performance, because with stationary subjects you can use long exposures, and 2.5 fps, laughtable, really…
Ok so this camera is not for sports. And has low resolution. Not for landscapes too, then this camera was made for video enthusiasts because pro really dont care at all about this size, you already have to something to transport a gazilion of lights and microfones, etc…. OK?
As a video enthusiast mind:
What i might like:
1.Probably the best low light quality to date.
2 Possibly the best Dynamic Range to date.
3.Compact system (not so sure) less weight, more time shooting, better to travel.
4. XAVC S 1080 60p/50mbits; 24p/50mbits, 720 120p/50mbits Slog2
5. Many audio controls and monitoring…
What I might don’t like:
1. 4k 8bit 4:2:2, only with external recorder, added size and weitgh here, and cost 2.000 dolars
2. 1080p 8 bit only 4:2:0?
3. CDAF for video tracking
4. 1.1x crop
5. Not real 4k 3840 x 2016 and not 4096.
6. Probably (assuming that max 5 fps is limited by the sensor and or the bionx) bad rolling shutter.
Resuming:
This camera will be good, not great at 1080p/24/50mbits 4:2:0, i don’t want to buy extrasomething when weight is what i don’t want, neither pay another 2k, to have the possibility to record at 4k or 1080 422. The AF, we don’t use much, but could be usefull if it worked very well, (this should be one of the benefits of being mirrorless).
The crop 1.1x is a bad thing because don’t use the entire sensor, neither use the sweetspot of the lenses, like the super 35mm 1.5x crop.
Well if this camera is intended for video enthusiasts, why not produce a video camera format and not a DSLR like format?
Really i can’t understand for who they are selling this.
A product with this price is not for the basic consumer neither professionals. The Panasonic’s GH4 seems to be everything this camera should be, except for the low light capability.
Well, i think i know why the price will be 1700 dolars for this one.
Its like they made a human with a very good brain but can’t walk alone…
A very long post that is basically you saying you don’t know who this camera is for. You don’t like it, fine. You want a GH4? Go buy one.
Nope, i will not, I just wanted to have a substitute for my d700, this camera would be perfect, but as always, sony let down something.
I look at sonyalpharumors everyday hopping for sony to launch THAT camera that will make people go out of canikon, but they simply miss the oportunity every single time. I’m getting old and tired of waiting. I guess they miss someone with knowlege or they do this on purpose, they have the tech but don’t implement on the right camera at the right time, i think they keep making bad choices.
I hope sony doesn`t break, i like the company very much.
hi
its a mee tooo cam
too Slow 2.5 fps as a photo cam!
not avalable within 4 days – learn from rip steve apple
not a round product
need furiously expensive (FE) lenses
not for the masses of switchers aka buyers – I think sony will sell about 5000 units of the a7s_low
its a 4k-video cam in a still body
dissapointig investment of time, design,sonys reputation and customers money – not a good performance for sony as a business farm – they all academics not biznesmen
mac-baar
I suspect the new 12MP sensor will see duty elsewhere, probably in some prosumer camcorders because, like you, I don’t see the a7R burning up the sales charts and Sony needs to cover the sensor’s development costs. I wonder if other manufacturers are biting?
It’s perfect for the VG 9000 successor or FS100 successor.
Me too camera.. like there are already plenty of 12mp camera out there?
I haven’t read all these posts yet, but I hope this has been mentioned already. People aparently don’t understand how the phase detect system in the a6000 works at a system level. Each phase detection point they talk about (192 or something?) effectively removes several pixels from being used, or sometimes they just gimp them a bit. But in effect, every PDAF point ruins the sensor for photography at that spot. The camera has to guess what the light level should be for those missing or altered pixels, much like it already has to do for the Bayer array, only much worse. So for a camera where image quality is priority, you don’t want to malign the sensor all over for faster AF. For sports, AF is probably a bit more important, but not for video, landscape and portrait.
So quit crying about cameras focused on image quality not having the cool new AF system. It would ruin the camera’s goal: resolution or sensitivity.
I wonder… would those “fake” pixels be visible on a developed tiff file with no interpolation applied? if we use dcraw -d -T, we obtain a tiff file in which we can identify the RGGB pattern.
Unfortunately, these days ‘raw’ files are never true raw data. (Unless you have like, a scientific camera). There’s been some pretty extensive measurement done on how much scaling, for example, is done on a few specific cameras, before it gets to the raw file. This is a big deal for people wanting to use cameras for astrophotography, so it’s something I’ve been watching. I would be surprised if the artifacts caused by the PDAF points aren’t already ‘fixed’ before it’s saved to the memory card. Would be interesting to try and see. Even if it were, I imagine there would be a way to do some sort of high-spatial-resolution resolution test where you could see the reduced resolving capability over a phase detection point compared to the pixels around it. Kind of like how you can do those tests to find the optical nerve blind spot in your eye. But they may be getting so good that it’s hard to tell.
There were a few articles kicked around when on-sensor phase detect first came out explaining how it worked and how they corrected the image around them. Canon even made most, if not all of the pixels able to do phase detect on their new 70D. This made them all a little less sensitive, but it lets it get a lot more phase data. And as they get better, phase detection pixels may not cause as much of a loss any more, or they may come up with a way to use normal pixels and get phase data from them.
In reality, you’ll probably never notice the difference in normal photography, but people who are focused on superior resolution or sensitivity don’t want any compromises there. On sensor phase detect is an image quality compromise, at least for now, even if a small and/or circumstantial one.
I kind of wish Sony had gone this route earlier on. When I saw Nikon bring out the D700 I considered making the switch. I am heavily invested in the a-mount system (by my standards anyhow) and there are some lenses I just won’t give up. I guess when I eventually get this camera I’ll be getting an adapter.
This is just an A7 with a low resolution sensor; great for low light…until you try autofocus in that dark room. When you can eventually hit the shutter button “boom” all the furniture will shake!
I don’t know why people say the shutter is loud. It’s not silent, certainly, but unless your shooting Speed Priority Burst, it’s no louder than a D700.
Agreed. I have my a7R, and no one has ever commented on a loud shutter. If anything, I think someone said ‘that sounds like a real camera!’ or something.
I don’t take pictures in theaters or churches, or of people that don’t want to be photographed, so I guess I lack the need for an absolutely silent shutter.
Again, people complaining about the 0.1% of cases that might be affected be a ‘flaw’ that’s common in most other cameras.
finally! a camera that really fits my need! :DDDD, finally xavc s 50mbps :D, slog2 OMG!, compact! 120fps @720p is enough!, plus a fullframe look!
There will be no fullframe look at 120fps @720p. It is APS-C crop.
really?!! well that’s pity :(, but still, this camera stole my heart :), i think still can live with fullframe look @60p, 120p is nice but probably i wouldn’t use it that often
Looks like a great video camera, 18 mega-pixel would have been a winner for still images (which I shoot). I really wanted the a7r but after trying one in a low light situation, I passed (focus was slow at best).
Can anybody answer why the a7s has a focus rating of -4-ev and the 7r is 0. Having a camera’s high ISO over 10,000 and not being able to focus in low light is like having a 800 horsepower Lamborgini on snow tires.
It’s a different sensor. It is probably related to the added sensitivity of this sensor allowing the AF to pick up on contrast unobscured by noise.
thank you, that makes sense
Minus 4 is better than zero. So that explains it.
If they had only addressed the same problems the A7 and A7R have. Few lenses and very poor AF. Stoked about the sensor and innovation coming from Sony, but I would have hoped for at least an AF upgrade. I guess they’re saving that for the next series of FFs to follow these.
What are we talking here….15EV…18EV????? How much dynamic range. A7/R has 14.2EV I believe. Two more isn’t enough IMO to make a difference. 17 or more and we’re talking.
And how useful is it with 14bit raw output? But remember, going from like, 12ev to 14ev is a pretty big jump, if I remember my math right. I don’t think it’s just 1/7th higher. But it’s late, and I’d have to do reading on that one again.
Honestly, this photo (http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj524/picrumors/picrumors001/n3_slide_02_zps85af34a5.jpg ) is really stunning. ISO 12,800! Regardless of everything else, this crazy good high-ISO is an accomplishment.
http://www.atomos.com/shogun/
the 4K recorder
You do not have a solid proof that this picture is been shot with a A7s(low).
May be its a Nikon D3100 with a lot of photoshop and photosell?
We do not have any solid proof of the existence of this camera… nor of the pictures!
Its only the saying from Sony: this pics are taken with this (phantom) A7s(windle)…
And you all believe! Ha! No one is sceptical? Has any of you a proof of some sort?
I think: in June 2014 or some weeks later… sony will annouce bevore Photokina 2014:
we regrett to inform you that the production of the a7s will be delayed… but we have a new cam! the A7.07 with 777.777 ISO or OIS and very fast 1.0 fps sorry, fph (h for hour)… and a integrated tripod!!! next step: 2.0 fpd (d for day) and you can preorder it bevore Photokina 2016!
get the damn mechanical mirror back in this toy-cage – even a a100 or nikon d40 is faster!
Sorry, this apparillo is FOR MY TASTE AND USE extremely badly designed load of …. panic engineering à la sonyiese
mac baar
Ps:
this pict could be real if… photoshop and other do-a-fake software would not be existent
since photoshop I do not believe in a picture taken by some else than me
Ok, so we’ve established you don’t like this camera, and you’re a sceptic. Cool.
I believe it doesn´t have PDAF because it makes the sensor noisier and it is not needed for the kind of pro that used manual focus on 5d Mark III so..even though iyou can have it with 5fps.
With LA-EA4 adapter and have PDAF (with cluestered points in the center but its PDAF and sports people usually don´t put subjects too far from the center since they use telephoto lenses anyway. It doesn´t have many fps for mode (only 2.5/5 because its the same shutter as A7).. And I believe Sony is working on a “cheap” expansion module/grip to get HDMI out to that part.
By the way the iso12800 was shot with studio light (notice that there is no public on the background) even though its still great, but in the video there is clean iso12800.. if maximum iso is any clue … in RAW it could well be a iso 25600 still that is equal to Sony A7 downsized to 12mp at iso6400 (but never better than this at iso 25600).
Does anyone that has an A7 find the PDAF mode autofocus usefull?
This is just the machine ive been looking for for ages. I mostly do events photography, where low light performance is very handy to have. Also being able to scale down from the full backpack of camera gear to something almost pockatable is an awesome prospect. Sure if you want sports photography go buy the bargain Nikon D4s (compared it to the cost of the large telephoto lenses you will need / have). Ive had both Canon and Nikon before, so im a bit worried about moving over to Sony, but Carl Ziess make some nice optics so im looking forward to seeing some real life tests.
I switched from Canon. (Mostly. Sold it all to my brother so I can still borrow it for some astrophotography.) When I finally get my FE 70-200, I’ll be set. This indeed could be a great camera for certain people. I bet in 6 months this will start becoming a hot item for portrait and event shooters, assuming it lives up to the claims for low light.
I take pictures of space (like, astrophotography), and things. Mostly indoors, some landscape. Had I not already gotten an a7R, I would be sorely tempted to buy this one instead. It hits the thing I want the most: Excellent low light and dynamic range. I generally don’t care much about resolution, save it lets me crop more, which is good for taking pictures of things. Or down sample to reduce noise. But this wouldn’t have as much noise to begin with! The low light sensitivity and dynamic range would be great for most static, artsy sort of pictures. Probably not sports, maybe landscape, but I can see this doing well in most other areas.
To be honest, and drooling fanboys may disagree, but in the end, after all the cleaning up and ready to print/publish, MOST pictures don’t need more than 12 megapixels. (Heck, most don’t need more than 2-4mp, since it all goes on the web). You usually need the extra megapixels to clean them up. In theory, this camera won’t need that work.
Indeed this camera is the hot topic of conversation in my circle of pro friends. Just like you say, with web gallery photos or magazines none of my work will see bigger then a3 size! 12mp is fine. Small form factor and the ability to have fully functioning l-lens glass via an adapter is making it an attractive proposition for my friends with canon systems still. I’m going to get one and my friends are looking to see how I get on with it before they put their cash down but if all goes well im sure there will be a few more orders for sony!
Does anyone know if they releasing anymore FF Emount cameras this year or this is it (A7S)? thanks
Not only will pros use an external recorder, they also don’t care about AF. I’d say Sony is definitely aiming for the pro users. IMO worth the extra $800 over GH4 for it’s full frame sensor, insane ISO capabilities and better build quality overall.