Leaderboard

From the people who brought you the blockbuster A7SIII. This fall, the A7III is back! But smaller. Not mightier! Just smaller. And flippy. Not floppy. Sell a kidney. Buy tickets now. Sponsored by Squarespace.

When the Sony A7 III was released it allegedly damaged the appeal of more expensive $3000 mirrorless cameras, not least of all Sony's own. In my opinion the electronics giant is now doing the same to affordable APS-C rangefinder-style mirrorless cameras, effectively ending their own APS-C line as well - an even more destructive move than last time. I am minded of the Nikkei Asian Review in July. "Smartphones are not the only reason [for the camera industry's decline]... Japanese industry, which has a penchant for competing against its own products, can also blame itself." The article goes on to quote Hiroshi Hamada (ex-CEO of Hoya / Pentax): "Digital camera companies intend to strangle their rivals through excessive competition, but in the end they'll strangle themselves" https://www.eoshd.com/opinion/opinion-why-the-sony-a7c-harms-the-camera-industry/

At 8:50 of this video posted today the GH5 successor is specifically mentioned to be in development.

Press text: Seems like JIP running Olympus imaging isn't such a bad thing eh?

On the UK Sony site the small print is: "The α7C is the smallest and lightest full-frame digital interchangeable-lens camera with optical in-body image stabilisation" A weird confusion going on in the heads of marketing people there of optical IS and mechanical IBIS.

"Olympus announces new firmware development to allow RAW video on the E-M1X and E-M1III." I couldn't believe what I saw. Olympus doesn't have 10-bit internal, and yet they jump to ProRed RAW via HDMI directly? Wow. Seems almost surrealistic. Now sure how most people would see this as something huge. Hopefully Olympus camera prices crash some more, before the RAW is released. https://www.43rumors.com/olympus-announces-new-firmware-development-to-allow-raw-video-on-the-e-m1x-and-e-m1iii/#disqus_thread

Hi Andrew, This would be the very first time ever that I disagree with you. Let me explain why: 1. In a free market if a product does not meet user's expectation and a better alternative shows up the market will balance itself out. If there is too much competition prices will come down. If the prices hurt producers some will die and the market will balance itself out again. In the end we all win as we'll end up with better spec'ed cameras at lower prices. 2. It's best to eat your own lunch rather than having someone else come eat it for you. I think this is a decent move from Sony to protect itself from the likes like Fuji in this segment (should they decide to come into the market with a compact full-frame alternative. And it's better to get a consumer to invest into a lower-margin Sony camera than spending the money on a competitor. And finally if someone decides to go for this camera instead of an A7III is because they know what they're into and wanted a lower price option with similar features, and again it's best for Sony to grab that money rather than losing it to someone else. 3. There is a specific user-case for this camera: People who know and understand the value of a full-frame sensor, but who do not want to carry around a massive camera with them, and also have the spare money to buy such a camera (maybe as a second camera). I aaaaaalmost fall in that category but I don't want to pay US$2,000 for it. Had this camera been US$999 I'd have placed my order right away and never look back (and probably later spend a lot of money on lenses, maybe even selling part of my huge Canon collection of lenses). Bottom line: This camera is not for everyone, but competition and experimentation is a good thing IMHO. Cheers and keep the good work.

I've seen E-M10iii for less than £200. Looking for a steal as a B-Cam to my E-m5iii. Same image, just no PDAF. Would love to see them open source the code. That could be revolutionary like Magic Lantern or the GH2! Imagine what people could squeeze out of that hardware. Olympus has the best IBIS hardware and PDAF sensor, they just need more software features like zebras and better codecs beyond the C4k which is quite nice.

Size is more timeless than technology and will for many people be more important than megapixels or 4k60p. Making comparisons purely based on specs misses the points when it comes to compact cameras. I've used the RX1RII a lot, and this seems like a decent alternative. I would still prefer the RX1RII over this for light weight photography, but at least it has a lot of quality of life improvements such as MUCH better battery life, IBIS and 4k.

2017 called at they want there camera back! This is so meh for the price. I get that there could be some good engineering to make it a bit smaller. If bloggers and autofocus was the play, from what I have seen so far it's not that great. What ever happened to the RX1?

Maybe it's just marketing. The FF enthusiasts / myopians will look at this and have their confirmation bias renewed and will be left with the impression that Panasonic understands them, sees FF as being the superior sensor size ordained directly by God, and that Panasonic is the brand to get. The MFT enthusiasts will look at this, be encouraged by the frame-rates and remember the track record of the GH line, and hold their opinions for when we see the IQ. Then the GH6 can be released and the MFT enthusiasts will see that the IQ is excellent. The FF myopians won't even look at "toy camera" reviews and will be none the wiser. ....and everyone gets what they want and Panasonic lived happily ever after. *roll credits*

Just found an old project I shot. These are some stills from a piece I shot 3 and a half years ago. Shot with the 85mm Zeiss. It's too damn shallow but I think the softness works okay for a close up.

Just to be clear, the Video Assist only does ProRes HQ 422. The benefit of the 444 model when using the video assist is to get 60p through one single SDI cable. If I still owned it, I would get one of these low profile mounts to make it even cleaner. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1570342-REG/smallrig_bse2346b_swivel_and_tilt_monitor.html

If the GH6 hasn't been released (or even officially announced), how can anyone be wrong or right about the GH6? Genuinely curious.

To test this you could use: standard 16mm, Bolex (Kern Paillard 10mm at f/1.8 4/3rds, 17mm at f/3.2 APS-C (Nikon DX), 22mm at f/4 Full Frame, 34mm at f/6.3 8x10, 256mm at f/45 The 16mm would have to be wide open and the 8x10 would have to be completely stopped down (my 8x10 270mm is f/4.4 - 45) This is according to this calculator: https://www.pointsinfocus.com/tools/depth-of-field-and-equivalent-lens-calculator/#{"c":[{"f":13,"av":"8","fl":50,"d":3048,"cm":"0"}],"m":0} Damn it you’ve got me doing it now! Like Oliver Hardy and his taxi driver getting involved in Stan Laurel’s jigsaw puzzle, and they miss his wedding ceremony…

The Sigma Fp and even Canon RP is lighter than the A7C In some of the marketing Sony outright say "smallest and lightest full frame camera" as if their own RX1 series never existed. So much for honesty

I love the rich colors that you can get with prores raw. S1H + ProRes RAW is a super combo !

All I will say is if you want to prove an exact match would not give the same photos, do it yourself but again, when YOU do, make sure you have multiple lenses and cameras for each format otherwise I will just point out the differences why the equipment is not going to be an exact match and say it is invalid. ALL the photos I have seen about this prove to my satisfaction the theory matches reality and even my crappy photos are close enough to prove that. Beyond that I disagree. Thanks for playing,.

Not at all, the mount on the camera is very strong. Metal mount + steel Nikon G adapter from Optitek. If I was mounting a cinema lens on it yes I'd use a rail support, but photography lenses are relatively light in the grand scheme, if cheap DSLR can handle it this mount certainly can. It's a larger PIX-E7 with the XLR adapter attached. Honestly the camera itself is bulky so not going to switch to a smaller recorder to get it a little lighter. Working on the videos, but have other work I have to get done first. Including shooting a short on the F3 alongside the S1 on Saturday. So we'll see how they do!

It’s not surprising is it? Everybody wants full frame look, full frame low light, full frame image quality. Influencers scream it at the top of their lungs. “Great camera...but its not full frame.” So I’m not surprised at all. Sony asks a lot of money for their ASPC cameras. I’m not surprised they are moving their FF into smaller and smaller bodies. I recently picked up a used Pentax K1000 for cheap and bought some film and have really been loving it as an escape from the optimum capture settings mini-game we all play with these digital cameras.

I agree. It's kind of sad how self destructive the camera industry and its pundits have become. Hopefully this is just an ebb in inovation. It will be so interesting to reflect on this period some years down the track.

From the third department of PR at Sony... Sorry, I mean DPReview: "The Bionz X processor is also borrowed from the a7 III, which unfortunately means that all of the fancy new menus and touch functionality from the a7S III and its updated processor aren't included here." LOL!! "In the hand, the a7C feels incredibly solid, thanks to what's called a magnesium alloy monocoque construction. It's sort of like what US auto manufacturers call 'unibody' construction, and the result is a camera that's free of creaks and flex and exudes a sense of quality." Exudes quality!! Finally a $2K camera that is free of creaking noises and doesn't bend. Had been waiting for this moment for years.

Great! Though I'd prefer 40/60p and 10bit internal. (EM1X and EM1 Mk III owner.)

Don't think this will sell well, terrible video specs for the price, bad viewfinder, and not in any way better than the A7III for photographers.

Is it just me, or is the notion that would-be vloggers need a full frame sensor camera batshit crazy? There is a pernicious trend being driven along by an unholy alliance of 'influencers' and manufacturers. The result is that there are scores of people out there who THINK they need FF but don't really know why, nor do they understand the advantages and disadvantages of such systems. The irony is that this mass hysteria is threatening the existence of the crop sensor systems which would probably be a much better fit for most of these people.

Panny is lucky that Sony didnt give this camera a good Inter codec with 10bit for 1080 up to 60p and 4k 24,25,30p. Gerald Undones outlook makes good sense. Miniaturization is an important step in technology as it has always been. A7c represents that, A7III tech with A7SIII autofocus in an A6000 body plus swivel screen! With codec options like the S5 and without overheating this would be a mega seller. Sony will consider that, I am sure. It´s the smallest LF 4K videocamera in the world that has IBIS and an EVF. Sigma FP becomes very appealing indeed now, being the smallest LF 4K camera with a great image.

The K2 Pro also seems quite sweet. It's basically 2xE2 syncronized in a single box. It's possible to acquire, but seems to be in the prototype/beta phase.

Something like external prores raw @ 60fps FF, somewhere between 4k and 6k, with a low rolling shutter would get my attention. Sounds doable based on what they're currently doing... they just also need to do a good job on the included monitor and choice of media.

420 8bit, old style menu system, WTF are they thinking to charge $2000 on it?

Is this just fantasy? Lockdown in pandemic No escape from reality...

Good news in 2020??? Is this a dream?

This announcement appears to have caused a lot of anger in the comments at Newsshooter for some reason. Someone has even played the CineFran card. Thats like the Godwin's Law of discussion about an independent camera development.

Interesting, I saw another video compare c200 RAW and Komodo, the c200 also retain highlight better than Red, but shadow area Komodo hold better.

That would depend on the lenses but if someone really went to the trouble of trying for an EXACT match they would need to take into account everything including each individual lenses characteristics, and that would be almost as difficult to do with two M43 lenses of the same focal length as it would with a Pentax Q and a Mamiya 7 with a digital back (assuming you can find lenses to match). I am satisfied the photos I posted show enough similarity to prove my point and just to satisfy myself I DID test with my Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 VS the RX100 iv Sony Zeiss lens and it is as i suspected a closer match still.....now since it is not an EXACT match and was also just a quick and dirty comparison, there is zero point posting because you would just say it is different. Feel free to set things up to match theoretically lenses of two (or more) different formats but include a couple of lenses for each format used....If you do that, I am sure the photos would be the same, if you are not, then maybe you should disprove it... Lastly regards Dr Caldwell, "Do the experiment properly and you'll find that the perspective is the same. Surely you must have heard countless times before that perspective depends only on the subject distance. This is a truth that you shouldn't ignore. More precisely, perspective depends on the distance from the subject to the entrance pupil of the lens. For this reason, the entrance pupil is sometimes called the center of perspective. " I disagreed with you in that thread and I disagree with you in this one hence why this is pointless now. Enjoy what you use and use what you want!

Yeah, the problem with equivalence tests is finding or having the equivalent lenses to not prejudice the FF camera. Having to have the FF at f4 because the APS-C had to be at f2.8 and the MFT with the SB could be f2 is not doing the FF any favours. Matching the focal lengths also make it a challenge without using a zoom as well of course as at least they maintain the same contrast and colour for each camera. I'm trying to think about which set of cameras and primes that could be used for be a totally accurate test if someone wanted to do it properly and its a tricky ask to get exact matches.

Interesting DR comparison between the S5 and the BMPCC 6K :

Thanks for the reminder of that thread. That thread alone is reason enough to not proceed any further since people would argue with the bloke who designed the Metabones speedbooster as well as one of the best lenses ever (Coastal Optics 60mm f4),there is zero point in a non entity like me trying any further..

I think the biggest drawback for larger sensors is they have always been a few years behind the smaller sensors in performance, at least in mirrorless hybrids. My most important spec is 4k60p. Fuji had it in 10 bit HEVC two years ago. The FF Sony & Canon 10bit took two years to catch up & match it. And they are still nowhere near the $1500 the X-T3 was. Panasonic's GH5 4K60p also looks great from two years ago, I still have MP4 samples I downloaded late 2018 that look indistinguishable from FF 4k60p. It used to be in the old film days that a doubled increase in format size gave a doubled increase in resolution. So when I first heard DSLRs were about to go full frame I thought, Great! But, in digital it's not that simple. Video UHD is still 3840 x 2160 no matter the sensor size. The other major drawback is price - this from Wikipedia... "Production costs for a full-frame sensor can exceed twenty times the costs for an APS-C sensor. Only 20 full-frame sensors will fit on an 8-inch (200 mm) silicon wafer, and yield is comparatively low because the sensor's large area makes it very vulnerable to contaminants—20 evenly distributed defects could theoretically ruin an entire wafer."

Equivalency is such a silly topic, especially with mirrorless. Who actually walk around with a MFT, APS-C, or medium format camera and says: what would this look like on FF? That person is missing the point IMO. Is it really that hard to understand that 24mm f2 is a 24mm f2 regardless the size of the sensor or lens? The only question that comes into play is: does the image produced by the lens cover the sensor or not. This is easy to know because we now have mirrorless WYSIWYG.

Strongly disagree here. Even if #1 and #3 match according to the "equivalence principle," they won't look the same. The DOF on a Super 16mm camera can be made to "mathematically" match the DOF on an 8"x10" camera, but they will not look the same. Furthermore, in the same scenario, the rate and manner in which the DOF "rolls off" will differ between those two different formats.

No one has said that MFT or S35 or even 1" sensor is necessary for anyone to deny that it is not. Fullframe however seems to have some users suggesting it is necessary, hence I imagine why this thread was created, asking that very question. I shoot MFT and don't feel that format is necessary, nor do I feel S35 is necessary. It maybe a requirement if you're looking at cinema cameras, as there are few fullframe cinema cameras out there. Fullframe ILC and their equivalent lenses are numerous and affordable as they are targeted for Photography which has often favoured 35mm in the past. Professional photo cameras are more likely to be fullframe with APS-C reserved more for budget users who are less likely to buy a wide variety of expensive lenses. Once you look to invest more money in dedicated cinema lenses, there are more options for S35. For most of us, this is out of our reach. I'm sure for many looking for a single or just a few lenses to invest in, fullframe is more ideal, as you can get a great single zoom lens that covers most needs, lowlight and zoom range at a good price. With MFT, I use a variety of primes that give me a range from 12mm 1.4 to 75mm 1.8. I have a 12mm to 35mm zoom lens at 2.8, which only disadvantage to a 24 to 70mm 2.8 is that depth of field and lowlight will be inferior at the lowest aperture. The range is still there for regular shooting. And of course the lenses are smaller, and easier to carry a number of. So there are advanatges a smaller sensor can provide, cheaper options if your needs are extreme telephoto. You can adapt a lot more lenses out there to it and video functions are less likely to be crippled by crop or overheating.

Nobody asks. Sony delivers!

Holy shit, in full flesh is even worse. No front dial, no joystick, almost no custom buttons, af-on in a very bad spot... Sony was always kind of a ergo nightmare, but they outdone themselves.

I'm bucking the trend, i have my eye on low shutter count mark two, e-m10. Mostly for the remote port so i can wire up a remote shutter, The mark 3 e-m10 is tempting but no remote shutter port, Wifi or bluetooth shutter control isn't good enough / suitable for me or my project.

My cameras get butchered out on the field, they are hardly sellable once they've had a few years with me. Buying new gear is part to replace worn out gear and partly to add new features that make my work easier and more to my taste.

No you would be too happy if it was the case right ahah. Little brother let it fell off... Thank you, im going to check this but i really don't know if there is such a thing where i live, i already did some soldering myself on small parts like this but this seem very tricky this time, might have to buy an other one but that's ok, i reaally want to use the f3 at its best again.

It could also be the GH5 still sells well enough for them to hold off...who knows.

Yes,...if the S1H did have phase detect AF, it WOULD be flawless. Too dangerous and that us why it won't ever have PDAF. The camera industry has a "pizza pie" of customers. They work together to divide the customer revenue so that each company has a "group" to live off of. Panasonic has its crowd, Sony has its people, Cannot and Fuji and Oly each have their own customers...for carefully calculated reasons. The Japaneese camera industry is an important one for the country of Japan. Its almost a "national pride" issue. They cherish it and the Japanese companies want each company to succeed or at least survive as a matter of pride and respect for each other. Each company will spar with each other, yes!...but always see that each refuses to deliver a true "knockout" blow to the other. Ot just won't ever happen. This is why every camera will be crippled in some way to save the Japaneese "brotherhood" from being destroyed. Everybody is given a bowling lane to operate and survive in. The camera crippling we have all seen in the past 20+ years is no accident. Its mostly designed to preserve the health of the Japaneese camera industry as a whole. Believe it or not....but Sony doesn't want Cannot to die. Cannot doesnt want Lumix to die...etc. They are each valuable to the country they all love.

The 18-135 NANO is the way to go. Much smoother AF than with a STM. SAme optics. Also the ability to add a power zoom module. BTW I am selling one since our nonprofit is switching to GH5s. Although it is not the best optically, it is good enough and the AF difference is astounding. Absolutely accurate AF following with no hunting. It is the ONLY lens to take full advantage of the dual pixel AF. I ended up using it in preference to any other zoom since focusing was dead on.