Leaderboard

Let's keep this discussion in one topic :) To post go here to the original - '?do=embed' frameborder='0' data-embedContent>>

Digestion issues.... ...kidding Gear Acquisition Syndrome

Or just get a a6000...

Interesting test. Makes this camera much more versatile. Personally I think for some shooting styles rolling shutter should be embraced - if you know when it is going to happen and can exercise some control over how it affects the image (the "rhythm" of the jello perhaps?) then it can be a pleasant "flaw" just like lens flare etc. I'm sure all of this has been said before ... Lovely shots by the way. Really nice. Exactly kind of subject matter this camera lends itself to imo. The grade is very nice too, though not my cup of tea. I still haven't seen ANY footage from the A7S that looks really convincing in terms of colour. Everything I've seen looks a little washed-out/thin. Perhaps this is because everyone is trying to extract maximum DR from the image so flattening it a bit too much, but I'm not sure ...

Sure. Usually you're balancing DOF (aperture) and ISO to get a properly exposed shot (in all light conditions). With this camera the only consideration the aperture, not the ISO, as it's usable to a much higher number than any other camera. So when composing in poorly lit scenes, you're thinking only about what sort of DOF you want, and you don't have to be wide open any more. See the scenes out the car and several other here; clearly he's stopped down and getting considerable DOF, which wouldn't be possible with most other large sensor cameras, and small sensor cameras wouldn't be properly exposed with these levels of light (or very very noisy): Dynamic range is generally high for this camera, so we're having to make fewer choices about what to lose, highlights or shadows. The image is more detailed, than, say Canon DSLR (it's direct competitor). It has a full frame sensor and reads the entire sensor, which is a first for a full frame. It has a proper aps-c function built in, multiplying the apparent number of focal lengths you have with you. It has the ability to do 120fps at what appears to be a pretty sharp 720p. It's half the weight of a canon full frame DSLR. If you can't figure out what to do those things creatively to increase the quality of the work you're outputting, you might consider a different line of work.

Reasonable arguments. In practice, however, there is a simple reason why I would like to stay fullframe for ever - I'm socialized with 24x36 since decades and as a wideangle prime lover, a 20 mm is not only a focal length nor an angle of view, but a special look of exactly that old glas. Allthough I like to keep my gear simple and small, I regulary found use for three totally different 20 mm lenses, for example a modern rectalinear zoom for straight lines (architecture, some landscapes), an old prime with a lot of moustache distorsion that IS GREAT for shooting people and sometimes a 16 mm fish with an 1.4 extender and an extension ring for some special closeups... Of course the same could achieved with a speedbooster and Super35 might be the future as bigger sensors are disproportionally expensive. But 4/3 is obviously a nogo. Regarding shallow DOF, I would agree on using it sparingly - more like an effect. It could be a great tool for portraits in special moments; IIRC both in 'Private Ryan' and in 'Gladiator' for example the DOP chooses to isolate the protagonist for a single short shot in the opening sequence(s). But all this shots are mostly done by at least f=4 and by having a greater distance to the now blurry background, so in short it's for me mostly a question of composition - remove all non-essential stuff out of the frame with an ultra shallow DOF as last resort... :-)