Sony announces ISO king with 4K video

[fractal]

Sony announces full-frame A7s camera that can practically shoot 4K video in the dark.

Sony's first mirrorless, full-frame cameras were designed to impress photographers. Now the Japanese company is going after videographers with a new variant of its 35mm, interchangeable lens camera, dubbed the A7s. For those who shoot video, the standout feature is that the A7s (unlike the A7 and A7r before it) can shoot full 4K video.

But there's another impressive improvement in the A7s: a maximum ISO of 409,600. That's the top end of its expanded sensitivity range, so it's safe to assume that results at that level will be a bit ratty, but it's an incredible number that matches Nikon's pro-level D4S. With sensitivity like that, the camera should be able to see in the dark (though focusing with such little light may be a problem). To achieve that kind of sensitivity, it's only natural that Sony would have to decrease the resolution of the full-frame sensor. The A7s has a resolution of 12.2 megapixels, compared to 24.3 and 36.4 in the A7 and A7r, respectively.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/6/5588278/sony-a7s-full-frame-mirrorless-camera-announced

 

[thomas998]

The only downside I see with it is that they still don't have a global shutter, so you'll have potential for rolling shutter issues and you have to get a separate recorder to capture the 4k, so you'll have to shell out another couple of grand just to get the full video benefits of the camera.

 

[ddbowdoin]

releases new body without addressing issues of a lack of native glass... Sony, you're skipping steps.

 

[wdwmagic]

Looking forward to see the high ISO images from that camera. Has anyone seen any?

 

[fractal]

releases new body without addressing issues of a lack of native glass... Sony, you're skipping steps.

The A7s is not available until summer. By that time they are planning to release a power zoom and strong rumors of a 85mm 1.4 and another fast prime. It would be great if they would take a more "Fuji" approach to their lenses.

Looking forward to see the high ISO images from that camera. Has anyone seen any?

Some images here...

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-a7s-the-morning-after-pros-and-cons-and-a-sar-readers-poll/

 

[Clamman73]

 

[donsullivan]

releases new body without addressing issues of a lack of native glass... Sony, you're skipping steps.

I've been fascinated by how far behind they are with the FE glass for these new cameras. I've got an a7R with all 3 of the currently available lenses most of which are fine but I'm not terribly impressed with the 24-70 f/4. I just went ahead and got the metabones adapter to use all of my Canon glass. It's a little Franken-Camera but all of my Canon L glass works just fine.

I'll be curious if the A7S improves some of the generally sluggish overall performance of the others due to the fewer number of pixels. If the ISO performance truly hits even close to the levels they are describing it could be a lot of fun on dark rides.

 

[NowInc]

This really impressed me. Like I've said many times..we are ALMOST there. I say by this time next year I'll be on this system (unless Nikon blows me away...which if the D9300 rumors are true..they might be able to hold on to me a bit longer).

 

[wdwmagic]

The electronic viewfinder and lens choices are holding me back so far.

Amazing how quickly Sony have come through the ranks after acquiring Minolta. I had their first DSLR, the a100, and at that time they seemed so far behind Canon and Nikon. Now they seem to be driving they industry.

 

[ddbowdoin]

Electronic view finders suck... The only cool thing I remember from the fuji is that it would almost preview exposure if you changed settings. Saves that 10 seconds I need to look at the LCD screen lol.

 

[donsullivan]

I'm not nearly so passionate about the EVF; while it's certainly not my preferred model it's not as horrible in regular use as I had feared.

Based on my real-world experience with the a7R and friends with a7 I would encourage anyone considering any one of the a7 bodies to get some real hands-on time in your shooting style before making the investment (especially if you're coming from a full-frame DSLR). There are a lot of little (and some larger) idiosyncrasies about the platform that do not show up on a spec sheet. For example, I find the a7R to be extremely slow at absolutely everything it does.

In my case I don't consider it anywhere near ready to replace my 5D3, but was purchased as a second body for landscape shooting where I wanted the much better dynamic range and resolution vs. my 5D3. I was seriously considering swapping platforms to a D800e (since Canon still hasn't introduced anything similar) but the a7R with a Metabones adapter allowed me to get similar results at a much lower cost and continue using my Canon glass which I'm very happy with.

However, when I go to shoot an air show like I did a few weeks ago, the a7R doesn't even go in the bag, it's simply too slow to keep up with all of that. I tried to use it to shoot Festival of Fantasy in MK and I was extremely unhappy with the focus performance for that and didn't like the results at all. If I had taken the 5D3, I would have almost immediately switched over to it.

Having said all of that, I'm extremely happy with the purchase as a second body for landscape shooting where speed is not an issue. I'm really looking forward to getting it out in some real landscapes during a couple of National Park trips upcoming later this year to really gain some benefit from the dynamic range.

 

[fractal]

 

[wdwmagic]

I'm not nearly so passionate about the EVF; while it's certainly not my preferred model it's not as horrible in regular use as I had feared.

Based on my real-world experience with the a7R and friends with a7 I would encourage anyone considering any one of the a7 bodies to get some real hands-on time in your shooting style before making the investment (especially if you're coming from a full-frame DSLR). There are a lot of little (and some larger) idiosyncrasies about the platform that do not show up on a spec sheet. For example, I find the a7R to be extremely slow at absolutely everything it does.

In my case I don't consider it anywhere near ready to replace my 5D3, but was purchased as a second body for landscape shooting where I wanted the much better dynamic range and resolution vs. my 5D3. I was seriously considering swapping platforms to a D800e (since Canon still hasn't introduced anything similar) but the a7R with a Metabones adapter allowed me to get similar results at a much lower cost and continue using my Canon glass which I'm very happy with.

However, when I go to shoot an air show like I did a few weeks ago, the a7R doesn't even go in the bag, it's simply too slow to keep up with all of that. I tried to use it to shoot Festival of Fantasy in MK and I was extremely unhappy with the focus performance for that and didn't like the results at all. If I had taken the 5D3, I would have almost immediately switched over to it.

Having said all of that, I'm extremely happy with the purchase as a second body for landscape shooting where speed is not an issue. I'm really looking forward to getting it out in some real landscapes during a couple of National Park trips upcoming later this year to really gain some benefit from the dynamic range.

Interesting, thanks for posting. What Sony lens do you have? What are your thoughts on those. Any samples?

 

[NowInc]

As many have pointed out..impressive as that video is..its not completely accurate.

The 1600 ISO is dark, yes..but the SCENE really isnt (in fact its underexposed). The camera is still impressive, without a doubt...but its sneaky showcasing it like that

 

[donsullivan]

Interesting, thanks for posting. What Sony lens do you have? What are your thoughts on those. Any samples?

I have all 3 of the currently available Sony FE lenses: 35mm f/2.8, 55mm f/1.8 and 24-70mm f/4. So far I find myself using the 24-70 most and I'm still looking for the right use-cases for the others. More often than not, I'm still falling back to my Canon glass when I want to go wide or long since the lens selection (as noted earlier) is in a pretty tight focal range.

Below are a couple of examples I can share in different configurations. In filtering stuff in Lightroom for these it highlighted how little I use Sony lenses other than the 24-70. In general I find the 24-70 to be a decent lens (if a little soft and low contrast in some conditions) but my reference for that focal range is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM which is an amazing piece of glass but more than twice the price.

a7R using a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II IS USM and the 2x extender via the Metabones adapter.

a7R with the Sony FE 24-70 f/4 (5-frame bracket)

a7R with Sony FE 24-70 f/4 (single frame) (not a fan of the tree branch I left in the upper part of the frame, but oh well)

 

[wdwmagic]

I have all 3 of the currently available Sony FE lenses: 35mm f/2.8, 55mm f/1.8 and 24-70mm f/4. So far I find myself using the 24-70 most and I'm still looking for the right use-cases for the others. More often than not, I'm still falling back to my Canon glass when I want to go wide or long since the lens selection (as noted earlier) is in a pretty tight focal range.

Below are a couple of examples I can share in different configurations. In filtering stuff in Lightroom for these it highlighted how little I use Sony lenses other than the 24-70. In general I find the 24-70 to be a decent lens (if a little soft and low contrast in some conditions) but my reference for that focal range is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM which is an amazing piece of glass but more than twice the price.

a7R using a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II IS USM and the 2x extender via the Metabones adapter.

a7R with the Sony FE 24-70 f/4 (5-frame bracket)

a7R with Sony FE 24-70 f/4 (single frame) (not a fan of the tree branch I left in the upper part of the frame, but oh well)

Wow they are some impressive images - nice work.

How do you find the AF on the 7r? Is it feasible to use on anything moving?

On the 24-70, I've ben reading a lot of people are unhappy with it. It sounds like you think its acceptable. Do you think its worth the asking price?

 

[MickeyPeace]

I have the A7 and I love it. The focus is faster on the A7 than the A7R. Just do a Google search of both cameras and you will find many reviews comparing the two cameras and explaining the similarities and differences.
A7 is an amazing camera for the price. And for most park enthusiasts it will exceed expectations.

 

[donsullivan]

Wow they are some impressive images - nice work.

How do you find the AF on the 7r? Is it feasible to use on anything moving?

On the 24-70, I've been reading a lot of people are unhappy with it. It sounds like you think its acceptable. Do you think its worth the asking price?

I find the AF on the A7R to be acceptable (slow but accurate) for stationary subjects (landscapes) but too slow for any sort of moving subject. My 5D3 blows it out of the water with fast AF and focus tracking of moving subjects; it's simply no comparison. I've talked to a number of folks who prefer the a7 for AF performance since it uses a different AF system and is just a faster device all around than the a7R. I wasn't looking at the a7R as a replacement, but a second body to provide improved dynamic range and resolution for landscape shots so I'm fine with those constraints; I have an alternative in the bag. My objectives in adding this camera to the bag were far different than most. I'm still hoping Canon finally produces something of similar features to the Nikon D800e but until then, the a7R is acting as a bridge camera for me. Who knows, if they don't get into that space I may be making a switch to Nikon after over a decade as a Canon shooter.

As for the Sony 24-70 I would say I'm okay with it for when I want to go light but if I'm shooting something I deem 'important', I probably wouldn't use it. It's priced a couple hundred dollars over what I feel it's worth but there is so little FE glass out there Sony can charge what they want right now. Personally, I don't think it is worthy of the Zeiss badge on the side of it. I find it can be soft, but that might also just be the lens not being able to resolve up to the resolution level of the a7R, it might be a completely different experience on the a7.

So for me for a day walking around the parks I might be fine with the Sony 24-70 but when I go to Yosemite this summer and Glacier NP in the fall, I'll likely be using my Canon glass with a7R behind and leave all the Sony glass at home.

 

[MOXOMUMD]

I have all 3 of the currently available Sony FE lenses: 35mm f/2.8, 55mm f/1.8 and 24-70mm f/4. So far I find myself using the 24-70 most and I'm still looking for the right use-cases for the others. More often than not, I'm still falling back to my Canon glass when I want to go wide or long since the lens selection (as noted earlier) is in a pretty tight focal range.

Below are a couple of examples I can share in different configurations. In filtering stuff in Lightroom for these it highlighted how little I use Sony lenses other than the 24-70. In general I find the 24-70 to be a decent lens (if a little soft and low contrast in some conditions) but my reference for that focal range is the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM which is an amazing piece of glass but more than twice the price.

a7R using a Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II IS USM and the 2x extender via the Metabones adapter.

a7R with the Sony FE 24-70 f/4 (5-frame bracket)

a7R with Sony FE 24-70 f/4 (single frame) (not a fan of the tree branch I left in the upper part of the frame, but oh well)

The monorail picture is brilliant.

 

[wdwmagic]

Pricing is out for the A7s - $2500 body only. Any takers?