jonpais

For the two people still on the fence between Sony and Sigma Art lenses for video AF.

You’re smoking crack man. ?

I have the best words! ?

Re: GAS I really feel bad for my Canadian buddy who sold all his Nikon gear to go with Fuji because of back focus issues, only to sell all that off at a great loss to buy the Sony a7rIII for more megapixels and who is now probably kicking himself in the pants because of the Z cameras. ?

fanboy.

Are you familiar with the term gaslighting? Cognitive dissonance? I don’t even want to be part of a conversation where the merits of full frame are in dispute. It is a pointless waste of time.

Sony users have for years been well aware of the dozens of problems with their cameras: overheating, convoluted menus, poor ergonomics, screen dimming, color science, no touch screen, poor battery life, lack of lenses... the list goes on and on. No need to rub it in their faces! So why have so many continued to use cameras they are bat-crazy frustrated with, like the ‘toy’ a6500, for instance? Because of the image quality, I’m guessing. I don’t know, you might ask @BTM_Pix , who I thought was going to throw his against the wall just a little while ago but who has decided to keep it around a bit longer. I’m not going to try to convince the many haters here, many of whom don’t have real names, faces or a body of work to show; who continually bash brands like Panasonic and Sony; who put words into people’s mouths and launch into ad hominem attacks the instant reason is not on their side; some of whom don’t even own a camera, which camera to buy.

I see what you did there. Rather than directly confronting my response to you, written in plain English, you start throwing shade at Sony like the fanboy you are. You said I wasn’t civil with IronFilm, I explain my point of view and you begin immediately talking shit about the a7 III.

Noise reduction is turned all the way down in my clips and there is an enormous amount of shadow detail in a7 III footage. I see nothing cartoonish at all in the videos or screen grabs I’ve shared shot with the a7 III and quite frankly am at a loss to understand what you are referring to.

Shirozina wrote: Once you get down to base ISO levels where noise is not present there is no advantage other than DOF differences and as the Dual ISO in the GH5s proves sensor size doesn't necessarily mean poor higher ISO performance.  I replied that with the GH5s, noise is present and visible at all ISOs at normal viewing distances, whereas with the a7 III, noise is not visible until you get to higher ISOs. Lab tests bear this out - it is not my feeling, a hunch or fanboyism speaking. IronFilm put words in my mouth, claiming that I said noise would be a big issue for users of the GH5s, which is a falsehood. He goes on, putting words in Shirozina’s mouth, saying that if Shirozina said noise was not present in GH5 footage, he must have assumed there was even less in the GH5s. Which, being a mathematician, IronFilm should know there is no such thing as ‘negative noise’. As a matter of fact, in my years of shooting Panasonic, I don’t recall ever complaining about noise. However - while Shirozina and IronFilm may not, I and many others appreciate clean, noise-free footage. The difference between mild noise and barely visible noise may appear insignificant on paper, but it was one of the very first things that struck me when viewing a7 III clips on the timeline after my first shoot. Especially when sharing on the Web, where, because of compression, noise problems and artifacts in general can become amplified. Note: in that post, Shirozina neglected to mention the greater dynamic range of full frame. Probably just an oversight. ?

?

That makes no sense at all as they both release next month!

You’re just being silly. You cannot presume the GH5 and GH5s are comparable as they use entirely different sensors. If you really are a math graduate, you’d realize your conclusion doesn’t follow the premise. And I never claimed anything would be a big issue for anybody. Stop twisting around and distorting reality.

We’re not comparing three year-old tech. You guys are exasperating!

The gaslight is always on at your house. ?

Wrong again. Tests show little DR falloff with the a7 III as you raise ISO. Do I need to reproduce another lab test or what?

Then why make claims about GH5s sensor performance when you obviously have no real life experience?

Actually, noise is visible at normal viewing distances at all ISOs with the GH5s, whereas it is invisible at low ISOs with the a7 III. GH5s: Visual noise is moderate. In Viewing Condition 1 (a modelled condition simulating enlargement to 100 percent on a monitor), the noise is visible even at the lowest ISO s (e.g., score of 1.1 at ISO 160, 1.5 at ISO 800, 2.1 at ISO 6400). Visual noise would be most apparent in the darker tones. a7 III: Visual noise would be barely noticeable (score 1.0) at 100% (Viewing Condition 1) in frames shot at low ISO, but very noticeable (2.3) at high ISO.

It’s just plain common sense.

Weather sealing on the bottom. If you put Sony in a puddle, it’s dead meat.

Because I just flushed $8,000 down the toilet. I can’t tell engaging stories with my Sony!

See what they did there? Copying Sony’s strategy again!

hahaha The Veydras and Oly Pros, hello?

I feel you man. I’m suffering from buyer’s remorse too.

10 bit’s overrated.