The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

[JJ!]

TBH I’ve no interest in Canon other than the RF 70-200mm (and curiosity as I’ve never owned a Canon other than a compact), but I’m pretty sure I’m going to get the Tammy 70-180mm which is even lighter. Maybe Sony will update their 70-200mm with something smaller and lighter but it’ll cost a fortune no doubt. I do wish the Sony had the Z7 grip though

Tbh I can tell the difference between the 46mp Z7 and 61mp R4 in terms of cropability but it not as much as you’d think. Still, it’s handy to have

70-180 is probably best option for you TBH.

I did consider it, but I have no complaints about the GM and quite like it’s weight and size now.

 

[twist]

On the other hand you make false assumptions about my experiences.

No, I don't, I know your experiences and arguments, we've had many a good chat. I move but appreciate every system and new developments are exciting amongst nothing happening in 3 years, you, not so much, which is fine. My switching days are also done for a while.

 

[nandbytes]

TBH I’ve no interest in Canon other than the RF 70-200mm (and curiosity as I’ve never owned a Canon other than a compact), but I’m pretty sure I’m going to get the Tammy 70-180mm which is even lighter. Maybe Sony will update their 70-200mm with something smaller and lighter but it’ll cost a fortune no doubt. I do wish the Sony had the Z7 grip though

Well canon RF lenses are more capable for the extra weight.
The RF 15-35mm for example is wider and has IS unlike the 16-35GM.
The RF70-200mm had better reach, IS and the bell & whistles you like vs. tamron 70-180mm.

For me decision is if these are worth the extra weight

 

[snerkler]

70-180 is probably best option for you TBH.

I did consider it, but I have no complaints about the GM and quite like it’s weight and size now.

I do like the extra compression of the 200mm, and the tripod collar and focus limiter, and from what I’ve seen I think I slightly prefer the rendering of the Sony, but as much as I loved my Nikon VRII it wasn’t used a great deal due to the weight and I fear that if I went the Sony route it would end up being the same.

The trouble with most reviews is that they seem to prefer the head and shoulders or half body portraits and I want to see full body to see how much ‘pop’ there is. I like the slightly ‘cut out’ almost miniature or brenizer look.

 

[twist]

I do like the extra compression of the 200mm, and the tripod collar and focus limiter, and from what I’ve seen I think I slightly prefer the rendering of the Sony, but as much as I loved my Nikon VRII it wasn’t used a great deal due to the weight and I fear that if I went the Sony route it would end up being the same.

The trouble with most reviews is that they seem to prefer the head and shoulders or half body portraits and I want to see full body to see how much ‘pop’ there is. I like the slightly ‘cut out’ almost miniature or brenizer look.

+1, I like depth, there are so many lenses that can do the half body shot thing well but as soon as they go full length or in back light the subjects are flat as a pancake. Environmental stuff is so much more interesting.

 

[snerkler]

+1, I like depth, there are so many lenses that can do the half body shot thing well but as soon as they go full length or in back light the subjects are flat as a pancake. Environmental stuff is so much more interesting.

The Sony’s definitely better at backlit stuff, retains noticeably better contrast. I don’t tend to take much back lit stuff tbh so that’s not as big a deal for me

 

[Raymond Lin]

Well not for normal people who video a 30 minute long boring clip, but why should that stop the advancement of technology at the upper end. Care to price up an upcoming 6k red and a few 1tb Cf express cards, that side of things is not aimed at Joe.

it shouldn’t stop technology advancing, note the word, an important word - yet, in my sentence.

it said, it’s not feasible yet.

 

[twist]

it shouldn’t stop technology advancing, note the word, an important word - yet, in my sentence.

it said, it’s not feasible yet.

For a certain amount of people. There are many that will find it feasible and appreciate it now though. Its not like nobody can process the files.

 

[Raymond Lin]

For a certain amount of people. There are many that will find it feasible and appreciate it now though. Its not like nobody can process the files.

Well, obviously, there are always people with lots of money but I don’t think Canon is making the R5 just to be a niche camera, they want it to be market dominant.

let’s say you shoot 5Tb per project, raid back up. Probably need 10Tb per job, 3 to edit on the go, with spare room you need about 40Tb.

If you think about backup, storage etc you will need hundreds of TB to run a business in 8k video. It’s not really the old target audience of the 5D previously, it’s the RED camera sector. It’s the same sector who had money for the cinema cams that canon also makes, that also takes EF lens, that also don’t overheat because it has fans.

 

[twist]

Well, obviously, but I don’t think Canon is making the R5 just to be a niche camera, they want it to be market market dominant.

Agreed but at the same time I think they are trying to make an impression across all sectors/industries/budgets after Sonys domination. Hey guys, we're still here.

Competition is good for everyone. Especially with a trickle down effect

 

[TGphoto]

Agreed but at the same time I think they are trying to make an impression across all sectors/industries/budgets after Sonys domination. Hey guys, we're still here.

Competition is good for everyone. Especially with a trickle down effect

Really? Two new cameras at £2500 and £4200 seems pretty elitist to me.

Lenses that are either ridiculously expensive or very odd apertures. They're making some odd decisions IMO. Packing cameras with pretty useless features like 8k at the moment.

*Ok, they have reasonably priced some of the 1.8 primes*

 

[justa1972]

I can’t see what all the fuss is about ! Canon were bound to get their act together but are still way behind Sony with lens choices.

The 5 is very expensive and the 6 is ‘only’ 20 mp - is IQ going to be better than my A7r iii? I really doubt it !!

 

[twist]

Really? Two new cameras at £2500 and £4200 seems pretty elitist to me.

Lenses that are either ridiculously expensive or very odd apertures. They're making some odd decisions IMO. Packing cameras with pretty useless features like 8k at the moment.

*Ok, they have reasonably priced some of the 1.8 primes*

Elitist? In a struggling market where prices are only going up, like Sonys 1224 at £3k?

Perhaps look at the pricing of Sonys cameras at rrp launch when people were more confident and the economies weren't screwed, excitement soon dies down, prices drop.

Is there much point in posting the price comparisons for lenses again? None of the (big 3) manufacturers over the years have priced themselves outside of the market (excluding specialist lenses).

1080p and 4k were pretty useless a little while back.

Useless to you, but clearly you are not the target audience.

 

[snerkler]

I can’t see what all the fuss is about ! Canon were bound to get their act together but are still way behind Sony with lens choices.

The 5 is very expensive and the 6 is ‘only’ 20 mp - is IQ going to be better than my A7r iii? I really doubt it !!

Tbh I don’t think Canon users will be bothered if it’s better, they’ve now got the choice of a camera that’ll feel very familiar, carries the ‘all too important Canon brand’ and is right up there in terms of performance. I’m sure it’ll stop any more migrators away from Canon and will probably tempt some back.

What I don’t understand with Sony is their lack of ability to sort out ergonomics. Sure they’ve improved them but 4 generations in and they’re still not as good as Canikon, who both got it right first time. It’s not as though they don’t know how to design good ergonomics, The A77 and A99 are great.

 

[twist]

Tbh I don’t think Canon users will be bothered if it’s better, they’ve now got the choice of a camera that’ll feel very familiar, carries the ‘all too important Canon brand’ and is right up there in terms of performance. I’m sure it’ll stop any more migrators away from Canon and will probably tempt some back.

What I don’t understand with Sony is their lack of ability to sort out ergonomics. Sure they’ve improved them but 4 generations in and they’re still not as good as Canikon, who both got it right first time. It’s not as though they don’t know how to design good ergonomics, The A77 and A99 are great.

It's nuts to think they could've just reduced the flange distance, slapped in the new sensors and called it a day. Those cameras are seriously comfy. I think the problem was they assumed people wanted cameras as small as possible, kinda like phones.

 

[addicknchips]

Really? Two new cameras at £2500 and £4200 seems pretty elitist to me.

Lenses that are either ridiculously expensive or very odd apertures. They're making some odd decisions IMO. Packing cameras with pretty useless features like 8k at the moment.

*Ok, they have reasonably priced some of the 1.8 primes*

I'd have to disagree. The r6 is priced about right for what I'd expect a very good full frame camera to release at. I'm guessing it will fly off the shelves and in no way be considered elitist. The r5 is top end and probably priced about right too considering its formidable spec.

Sure the rf glass isn't cheap but top of the range 1.2 primes were never going to sit I'm the same basket as samyang. The adapted performance of EF glass too means you can build a suite of glass for relatively low amount.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Had i still got my Canon gear i would have swapped the 5D4 for either dual R5 or R6, adapt EF and upgrade lenses one at a time.

 

[twist]

Well, obviously, there are always people with lots of money but I don’t think Canon is making the R5 just to be a niche camera, they want it to be market dominant.

let’s say you shoot 5Tb per project, raid back up. Probably need 10Tb per job, 3 to edit on the go, with spare room you need about 40Tb.

If you think about backup, storage etc you will need hundreds of TB to run a business in 8k video. It’s not really the old target audience of the 5D previously, it’s the RED camera sector. It’s the same sector who had money for the cinema cams that canon also makes, that also takes EF lens, that also don’t overheat because it has fans.

Okay, so you added a lot to your OP.

If you can afford a ferrari, you can afford to run it. That's what I'm saying, you can shoot it at 8k if you want/can afford the best, it's not anywhere near red / canon cine money. You must be nuts if you think a movie is made with one camera and a scene is shot over 20 mins.

 

[TGphoto]

Elitist? In a struggling market where prices are only going up, like Sonys 1224 at £3k?

Perhaps look at the pricing of Sonys cameras at rrp launch when people were more confident and the economies weren't screwed, excitement soon dies down, prices drop.

Is there much point in posting the price comparisons for lenses again? None of the (big 3) manufacturers over the years have priced themselves outside of the market (excluding specialist lenses).

1080p and 4k were pretty useless a little while back.

Useless to you, but clearly you are not the target audience.

I agree the 12-24 price is silly, however Sony has many third party native mount options now. Canon doesn't (I know you can adapt EF lenses but that's not what I am referring to).

True, but cameras at those prices aren't exactly aimed at everyone are they? Canons mirrorless APS-C range isn't exactly popular.

No, please don't post the comparison, I've seen it all before. I'm talking about the random f4.5-7.1 and f11 constant aperture lenses they're knocking out.

Who is 8k useful for now? Probably people that should be using specialist cine cameras. Most wedding videographers are still on 1080p.

These cameras aren't cine cameras, so no need for 8k at present, it's hardly even usable anyway.

 

[TGphoto]

I'd have to disagree. The r6 is priced about right for what I'd expect a very good full frame camera to release at. I'm guessing it will fly off the shelves and in no way be considered elitist. The r5 is top end and probably priced about right too considering its formidable spec.

Sure the rf glass isn't cheap but top of the range 1.2 primes were never going to sit I'm the same basket as samyang. The adapted performance of EF glass too means you can build a suite of glass for relatively low amount.

I didn't say they weren't priced fairly based on what they offer, I just made a point that they cost a lot (and their decision to put a 21mp sensor in it).

True, not going to be cheap.

I do think they'll be a success though.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Okay, so you added a lot to your OP.

If you can afford a ferrari, you can afford to run it. That's what I'm saying, you can shoot it at 8k if you want/can afford the best, it's not anywhere near red / canon cine money. You must be nuts if you think a movie is made with one camera and a scene is shot over 20 mins.

Not the cost of the camera, the work flow that runs it. And I'm being very conservative with 5TB a job, if its a full on movie say 12 day shoot with 3 cameras at 12hr days...is that the same segment that the 5D in or is that overlapping into fhe cinecam segment? I am not saying they are not buying it, i mean they probably will when they need something small for certain shots but if you already have RED or canon cinecam that doesn't overheat then why would you replace it with the RF system for its 8k?

 

[twist]

I agree the 12-24 price is silly, however Sony has many third party native mount options now. Canon doesn't (I know you can adapt EF lenses but that's not what I am referring to).

True, but cameras at those prices aren't exactly aimed at everyone are they? Canons mirrorless APS-C range isn't exactly popular.

No, please don't post the comparison, I've seen it all before. I'm talking about the random f4.5-7.1 and f11 constant aperture lenses they're knocking out.

Who is 8k useful for now? Probably people that should be using specialist cine cameras. Most wedding videographers are still on 1080p.

These cameras aren't cine cameras, so no need for 8k at present, it's hardly even usable anyway.

Of course they have but do you really believe tamron, sigma and decentered samyang won't start making lenses for the biggest camera manufacturer in the world?

So you think the the £2000 a7iii, £3,500 riii/riv, and £4,500 a9/a9ii are aimed at everyone? Let's not forget those were better times worldwide.

I won't, because the comparisons for 'standard' lens prices are valid and mostly on par or cheaper. The random lenses, like a 600mm and 800mm f11 at 750 quid or 1k, small lenses, slow apertures, not everyone shoots in miserable UK weather. We are a small audience. Care to show some lenses from other manufacturers with that spec and price?

When did I ever state 8k is what wedding photographers or average Joe needs?

You stick with your VHS, it must look great on a large 4k TV.

 

[twist]

Not the cost of the camera, the work flow that runs it. And I'm being very conservative with 5TB a job, if its a full on movie say 12 day shoot with 3 cameras at 12hr days...is that the same segment that the 5D in or is that overlapping into fhe cinecam segment? I am not saying they are not buying it, i mean they probably will when they need something small for certain shots but if you already have RED or canon cinecam that doesn't overheat then why would you replace it with the RF system for its 8k?

You seem to have missed the cost of running.

No, it's not a 5d, it's 4k/8k. We're not travelling back in the past to the days of 1080p.

Its not a replacement, its an addition, they don't use 1 camera, how do you not get that? Watch a movie sometime, pay attention to how long a scene/shot lasts.

 

[Raymond Lin]

You seem to have missed the cost of running.

No, it's not a 5d, it's 4k/8k. We're not travelling back in the past to the days of 1080p.

Its not a replacement, its an addition, they don't use 1 camera, how do you not get that? Watch a movie sometime, pay attention to how long a scene/shot lasts.

My whole point is the cost of running, hence im taking about file size.

You seem to keep missing things that ive said, from the word yet and then 3 posts about workflow and file sizs. You think storage is free?

I also just said 3 cameras! You quoted it! You are losing your eyesight man.

 

[twist]

My whole point is the cost of running, hence im taking about file size.

You seem to keep missing things that ive said, from the word yet and then 3 posts about workflow and file sizs. You think storage is free?

Nope, do you you think running a ferrari is free? You don't buy a ferrari if you can't afford to run it. People who require high end video will easily afford the storage, production companies are used to having a ton of storage, they aren't crying about buying another 5/10/15/20/50 etc tb hard drive, it's peanuts in the overall cost.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Nope, do you you think running a ferrari is free? You don't buy a ferrari if you can't afford to run it. People who require high end video will easily afford the storage, production companies are used to having a ton of storage, thet aren't crying about buying another 5tb hard drive, it's peanuts in the overall cost.

Go to sleep, ive already answer all this, you also misread my entire post. At least until you've been to Specsavers.

 

[twist]

Go to sleep, ive already answer all this, you also misread my entire post. At least until you've been to Specsavers.

You've made it clear, youre trying to make your usage apply to companies that spend much more in production. They can afford pretty much unlimited storage, you can't.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Look how I said 3 cameras on a movie set.

Look how I said when they need something small, I imply that they would use it when they NEED something small, hence normally they use something else.

But I don't get that? I should watch a movie some time?

Not only you got that totally wrong, you are condescending in your tone.

You've made it clear, youre trying to make your usage apply to companies that spend much more in production. They can afford pretty much unlimited storage, you can't.

I already KNOW they can afford it, I that much imply that the people who shoot RED would probably get one "when they need something small". But my OTHER point is the old 5D segment, this isn't for them, it's not their workflow. This body is trying to encompass more than 1 crowd and I am talking about more than 1 side to this. If 8k isn't for the normal 5D segment audience, then it is for the RED camera audience, why would they get it when there is an option out there that doesn't overheat? Which I answered myself by "perhaps when they need something small"

I am fully aware and appreciate the application and audience of this camera and I can read your posts perfectly fine.

 

[twist]

I also just said 3 cameras! You quoted it! You are losing your eyesight man.

You brought up overheating, the R5 overheats after 20-30 mins, they wouldnt use just one, its likely a b cam alongside that might get trashed, because it costs way less. Overheating in 20 mins isnt going to concern them if they have 6 of them for the cost of 1-2 reds and can risk destroying them.

When they only need something small? You're ignoring affordability but somehow brought up the cost of storage.

 

[TGphoto]

Of course they have but do you really believe tamron, sigma and decentered samyang won't start making lenses for the biggest camera manufacturer in the world?

So you think the the £2000 a7iii, £3,500 riii/riv, and £4,500 a9/a9ii are aimed at everyone? Let's not forget those were better times worldwide.

I won't, because the comparisons for 'standard' lens prices are valid and mostly on par or cheaper. The random lenses, like a 600mm and 800mm f11 at 750 quid or 1k, small lenses, slow apertures, not everyone shoots in miserable UK weather. We are a small audience. Care to show some lenses from other manufacturers with that spec and price?

When did I ever state 8k is what wedding photographers or average Joe needs?

You stick with your VHS, it must look great on a large 4k TV.

I didn't say that at any point, but they don't exist right now do they? It's been ages since canon brought out mirrorless. Before you quote how long Sony mirrorless existed before they third party lenses existed, they have the designs etc ready to go now so would be easier for them to make for other mounts.

Did you miss the APS-C part or just choose to ignore it?

You didn't, but who else is using it on a non-video dedicated camera? Hollywood?

Why are you anti Sony all of a sudden? No need to justify owning Canon, I'll probably own a Canon again in the future at some point.

 

[Raymond Lin]

You brought up overheating, the R5 overheats after 20-30 mins, they wouldnt use just one, its likely a b cam alongside that might get trashed, because it costs way less. Overheating in 20 mins isnt going to concern them if they have 6 of them for the cost of 1-2 reds and can risk destroying them. But again, please show me a decent movie scene at 1 angle shot by the same cam for 20 mins.

Right, shoot for 20mins and instead of swapping memory card, swap cameras. Sure the pocket is deep, but have 10, 20, 30 of these lined up? What kind of workflow is that? It's absurd. It's not about cost, its about efficiency.

The truth is 8k is not useful for the wedding crowd (yet), look, I said the word YET!!! see it? just in case, I said YET.

The people who can take advantage of the 8k, its niche. Canon didn't make this for niche, however 8k is impressive, impressive that they have pulled it off and for that they deserve credit, and it will create some halo effect for the brand. In practice however, it will be limited in use.

I am sure there will be lots of people shooting home movies and little projects with it, 30seconds clips here and there, long set ups in between and it won't bother them. They wouldn't notice the heat even. For a long shoot, you just can't have something that would overheat.

 

[twist]

I didn't say that at any point, but they don't exist right now do they? It's been ages since canon brought out mirrorless. Before you quote how long Sony mirrorless existed before they third party lenses existed, they have the designs etc ready to go now so would be easier for them to make for other mounts.

Did you miss the APS-C part or just choose to ignore it?

You didn't, but who else is using it on a non-video dedicated camera? Hollywood?

Why are you anti Sony all of a sudden? No need to justify owning Canon, I'll probably own a Canon again in the future at some point.

No, but they will soon enough and why ignore adapted? Most of sigma lenses on e mount are dslr design.

Are we talking about canon apsc?

Shall we all live in caves and ignore technological advances? You tubers are shooting in 4k, that hasn't been mainstream very long has it.

I don't need to, your arguments about pricing are nonsense.

 

[twist]

Right, shoot for 20mins and instead of swapping memory card, swap cameras. Sure the pocket is deep, but have 10, 20, 30 of these lined up? What kind of workflow is that? It's absurd. It's not about cost, its about efficiency.

The truth is 8k is not useful for the wedding crowd (yet), look, I said the word YET!!! see it? just in case, I said YET.

The people who can take advantage of the 8k, its niche. Canon didn't make this for niche, however 8k is impressive, impressive that they have pulled it off and for that they deserve credit, and it will create some halo effect for the brand. In practice however, it will be limited in use.

I am sure there will be lots of people shooting home movies and little projects with it, 30seconds clips here and there, long set ups in between and it won't bother them. They wouldn't notice the heat even. For a long shoot, you just can't have something that would overheat.

I was talking about the upper end, not wedding videographers and average joe. But perhaps you missed that.

The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

On the other hand you make false assumptions about my experiences. No, I don't, I know your experiences and arguments, we've had many a good chat. I move but appreciate every system and new developments are exciting amongst nothing happening in 3 years, you, not so much, which is fine. My...

www.talkphotography.co.uk

 

[TGphoto]

No, but they will soon enough and why ignore adapted? Most of sigma lenses on e mount are dslr design.

Are we talking about canon apsc?

Shall we all live in caves and ignore technological advances? You tubers are shooting in 4k, that hasn't been mainstream very long has it.

I don't need to, your arguments about pricing are nonsense.

Read above.

No signs of it. Not recent sigma lenses, they’re redesigned.

Not saying that, I’m saying 8k is a feature to put on a specs sheet to get attention. Overheating and massive file sizes render it useless anyway. Plus, I thought you were a photographer, not videographer?

Haha, ok - but that wasn’t even my original point. My point was about using the 21mp sensor and half of this thread going on about how amazing canon is and how Sony are somehow being left in the dust. You seem to, as mentioned above, just defend the brand you use at any one time.

 

[snerkler]

It's nuts to think they could've just reduced the flange distance, slapped in the new sensors and called it a day. Those cameras are seriously comfy. I think the problem was they assumed people wanted cameras as small as possible, kinda like phones.

Tbh they didn't have to be quite as big as the A77/A99 but make them as nice to hold. Both Nikon and Canon have made a smaller form factor camera yet managed to maintain the DSLR feel to the grip, and not crap the fingers between grip and lens despite Nikon having a crazy large mount. Don't get me wrong the A7R4 and A9-II are pretty good, good enough for me to finally buy into Sony, but there's still room for improvement 4 generations in.

 

[addicknchips]

Tbh they didn't have to be quite as big as the A77/A99 but make them as nice to hold. Both Nikon and Canon have made a smaller form factor camera yet managed to maintain the DSLR feel to the grip, and not crap the fingers between grip and lens despite Nikon having a crazy large mount. Don't get me wrong the A7R4 and A9-II are pretty good, good enough for me to finally buy into Sony, but there's still room for improvement 4 generations in.

I'm surprised Sony have ignored the fully articulating screen too.

 

[snerkler]

I'm surprised Sony have ignored the fully articulating screen too.

Yep, said that before I've no idea why the screens from the A77 and A99 haven't caught on. I prefer those to the regular flip out as you can't tilt the regular flip out without flipping it out and 99% of the time I just want tilt.

 

[twist]

Read above.

No signs of it. Not recent sigma lenses, they’re redesigned.

Not saying that, I’m saying 8k is a feature to put on a specs sheet to get attention. Overheating and massive file sizes render it useless anyway. Plus, I thought you were a photographer, not videographer?

Haha, ok - but that wasn’t even my original point. My point was about using the 21mp sensor and half of this thread going on about how amazing canon is and how Sony are somehow being left in the dust. You seem to, as mentioned above, just defend the brand you use at any one time.

Finally there's some competition and another brand is innovating and nobody is allowed to talk about it in this thread without being labelled, says more about you. Where did I say Sony aren't making great cameras? Sony forced everyone else to make better cameras and they wont be sitting idle letting Canon take their hard earned market share.

 

[nandbytes]

or they might do

I still see no firmware update for the A7RIV, animal eye-AF is non-existent on this for all practical purposes.

 

[twist]

or they might do

I still see no firmware update for the A7RIV, animal eye-AF is non-existent on this for all practical purposes.

Is it worse than the A7iii and A9? Wonder if its to do with the higher MP sensor.