noone

Yes it shoots both APSC and FF for full HD (4k only via an external recorder). I mainly use it for photos in low light though and just for recording live music for the odd song or two for video.

I have enough cameras still as it is now (after getting rid of some) and am very happy with my original A7s. I am also very poor now. Gotta start saving for the day the A7s dies.

New day, searching again. Australia only sold items "sony a7s" lowest price first (Australian dollars which vary with dates sold against other currencies). A7s body only $1300, A7s original packing $1475 A7s with cage AC power batteries $1500 Sony A7s with Cage AC Power Canon power m42 and nikon adapters, batteries $1550 Very low shutter count A7s body only $1560 A7s body only $1600 A7s brand new $2037.30 A7s brand new $2099 A7s new $2688.85 A7s body only $2750 (this was used!!!) The first A7s ii was used at $2600. https://www.ebay.com.au/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_sop=2&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&_nkw=sony+a7s&LH_PrefLoc=1&rt=nc&_dmd=1 Australia only sold items "Canon 5d iii" lowest price first ETC. 5diii body only $1276 5diii body only $1450 5diii body only $1500 5diii body only $1501 5diii body only $1550 5diii body only and accessories $1602 5Diii body only $1605.92 Then there are another eight under $1700, another eight 17-1799, and about thirty more up to $2000. The first new ones was sold at $2350 (two separate listings) and the dearest new body only sold was $3299 (sold last month). https://www.ebay.com.au/sch/i.html?_sop=2&_dmd=1&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=Canon+5d+iii&LH_PrefLoc=1&_pgn=2&_skc=50&rt=nc Those are actual sold cameras. All the listing I could see for the A7s and all the listings up to the 1605.92 one.

If anything, I think it more depends on the camera model. I got a A7 and GX7 new from shops two doors apart on the same day a few years ago. I paid from memory about 2/3 of the price of the A7 for the GX7. As I said before, I sold the A7 after a bit more than two years solid use and got a reasonable price for it I thought. I still have the GX7 but its price drop would be far greater than the A7 did and I don't think it is really worth selling (I might use it to trade in next year). Not sure if it still happens but for a while at least, Sony employees could get a very healthy discount and many were buying to sell. I just did a comparison between the A7s and the Canon 5d ii on Ebay Australia only. The ranges of sold listings (A lot more Canons) with the 5D iii sold body only up to $3299.99 (new) and the cheapest (used) being $1276.00 body only 36 bids (works perfectly normal signs of wear).. A7s range was New body only up to $2688.00 (though there was a used body only that went for $2720.00 with 38 bids) down to $1300 for a used A7s body only (buy it now/best offer "screen has minor marks but doesn't affect operation when lit"). So actually, at least here in Australia from this sample as an example, the Canon 5D iii sells for more new and less used than the A7s. EDIT and looking at sold listings for the A7 against the 6D, the prices are very similar (the 6D down to $805 and the A7 down to $750 with a fair number of each in the range up to a bit more than $1000) and the Canon was dearer than the Sony originally new so they run pretty close in what they have come down I think

Seems to me that Sony cameras have been generally holding their own for value quite well. I have sold a few cameras and the one I lost the biggest amount on was a Canon and then a Pentax and the Sony A7 I sold after two years solid use got a fair price when I needed the money. The original A7s is close to being a couple of generations old but still sells for more than I would have thought (most of the time) but then it is still about the best low light camera for stills and HD video around. You can still buy first generation Sony A7 series cameras new here though (as well as Nikon cameras a couple of models old).

Exactly the same as now, A7s for me. Maybe I would add an A7sii and a A9 if money was no object but I would still be happy in a year or two as is. A7s is still about the best for low light for stills and video (unlike an Alexa), it has both FF and crop modes (unlike an Alexa), it adapts many lenses well (unlike an Alexa), it is quite small and I can take it and a few lenses on a plane as carry on (unlike an Alexa).

Use a shorter lens? Use a tilt shift lens and tilt (or camera movements if your MF camera allows)?

Sure, use a longer distance to subject. You will be at infinity even with a fast lens wide open (regardless of the format). Fast lenses are nice to have but they don't have to be used wide open.

As long as my life doesn't go on for too much longer. I guess the one camera of my life TO DATE has to be my A7s. Adapts just about any lens, is excellent in low light/high ISO and can shoot in both FF (stills and video) and APSC (for video and smaller web size photos). Can use fast primes as short (2x) zooms with little if any loss. I don't need more than 12mp 99% of the time and I don't need tracking AF or AFC at any great speed. For my limited video use, I can at least use it for 4k if I ever need that via an external recorder. I would think I will upgrade in a year or two if I can afford to but so far, the A7s is the camera I always wanted.

Just one? For me it would be this but I could NEVER live with just one lens- I have a hard enough time limiting it to 8. Wait, 9.

For EF to E mount smart adapters there is about a zillion different adapters (I have four different ones). Prices range from under $100 (I have a cheap Fotga I like though it is mostly plastic) to a lot more in things like the Metabones IV (or whatever they are up to now). With your camera AF should be good for stills I would think but nit so much for video. I have only used my adapters on an original A7 and A7s and AF is slow on those and AFS only for me with all combinations of camera/adapter/lens (some combinations did not work for AF at all). For A mount, you have the LA-EA3 or LA-EA4 (there is also the LA-EA1 and LA-EA2 for APSC if you intend sticking with APSC only). The LA-EA adapters differ in some are AF for lenses with focus motors only (LA-EA3) and others are also for AF for screwdrive lenses too (LA-EA4). AF with my cameras and LA-EA4 was quick but does have some limits. Much smaller AF area for a start. I sold my LA-EA4 and A7 some time ago though I might get another LA-EA4 as I still have a nice old Sigma macro in A mount I can not use currently. I would prefer EF mount to A mount though as I also use M43 and smart adapters work great for EF lenses there. There is also less limitation on use with Canon lenses (other than slower AF speed for me- maybe not for you). I would suggest trying either if at all possible before deciding.

I have never shifted while recording before. I just did that because I was being lazy and it was cold and I didn't want to upload two lame temporary videos. I am still deciding if I go to the show (I really want to try and shoot a few things there up close but it isn't all that good a show by most accounts this year). Here are two stills shot from the same spot with the same settings (f8 1/60) except shift being used in one of them ISOs (auto ISO) 40,000 unshifted and 32,000 shifted. Just hand held jpeg snaps (I took the 17 and A7s for a early morning walk). Video would be very similar.

Depends on the sensor size and subject distance. DOF will range from less than 2mm to infinite (if your subject is a bit more than 100 metres away FF).

It depends I guess on how good it is. The Mitakon 50 f0.95 for Sony E mount is under $1000 but manual focus and after the initial interest seems to have not all that much discussion though that might be because of how many good to great normal lenses are available for E mount FF.

The clip I posted at the start has no shift, then I shifted during the video and then I used zoom (while shifted). It doesn't show up with converging verticals because in the middle of that passageway it doesn't look bad for converging verticals. It really shows up the closer you get to a building/wall or for taller structures. Yes you have to be in the centre or it can look odd sometimes (both stills and video). I will try and shoot something where the difference shows more.

I am a stills shooter who just dabbles in video and this really needs someone better at this than me to properly demonstrate but it is simple to do with a TS lens. I think the 17 might best show for exteriors of buildings from fairly close in. I don't have any other 17mm lens but it is the local show here this weekend and I am thinking (if I get there) that it might be ideal to shoot a Ferris wheel from close in at night both shifted and not (and if I am allowed a tripod in a busy sideshow alley).

Very quick and dirty (and temporary) shot using the 17 TS-E on the A7s shifting and then using Clearzoom. Was tripod mounted (I know it isn't level- but this was very quick and it is cold away from my heater) and about ISO 8000 I think. Normally I would have used maybe f8 (this was 5.6).

It will mean being able to shoot similar shutter speeds at night to using in the day time, maybe not quite an Olympic 100m runner in the dark yet but more than now . Useable (for me) ISO 160,000 and maybe a bit more!

If you have the lenses, why doesn't it justify using them? It is not like you can only use a lens so many times. The fact that it IS rare in video could well be a selling point for further jobs. You CAN use the TS lenses on M43 but it isn't as useful for the OPs needs I think. Maybe the 17mm TS-E on the GH5 would have some use for real estate but I know I don't like it on my GX7 (with or without focal reducer) anywhere near as much as on my A7s. With the FF Sony's, you also get double duty by having APSC and FF and you can also use the TS-E lenses as zooms in video using clearzoom (variable to 2x is close to lossless at 2x and even better at less).

I mainly use a Metabones IV (not the latest version) but I also use a couple of others sometimes. The Metabones is designed to take TS lenses with a larger sculpted hole (bigger at the corners so shifting is covered better). I also use a cheap no name as a back up to the MB and an even cheaper Fotga that is very lightweight and I wouldn't use it that often except it has a small ledge in it that almost exactly matches the glass from a 43mm filter which means I can use cheap filter glass (the metal rims filed off) which is a LOT cheaper than using 150mm filters in my filter holder. Only have a IR filter and graduated filter so far (the IR filter works well with it). This Fotga adapter is the one I use for AF with other Canon lenses mainly.

I use the 17 and previously used the 24 ii on an A7s and on a (sold) A7. I actually prefer them on Sony mirrorless FF as they are easier to use (I use them for live music full band shots as well as other more usual subjects). I use the 17 f4 L walk around at night, something I would never attempt to do with any current Canon. For video, I have used the 17 for a really low light night time light festival as well as for some live music videos.

A7s. Sometimes a GX7. Maybe next year the GX7 will get replaced and maybe the year after that the A7s will.

Actually, I think that left corner is down to the smoke coming there (I used to like smoke but have come to hate it lately The light was changing rapidly (and varying in intenstity greatly too) and at other times was very different in colour. I have looked at this shot on four different computers and the red colour varies on all of them (very red on the one i am using now, less so on the one i posted it with). If the A7s has a problem with any lighting I think it is more blue it has an issue with but even that is only some situations.

The thing is that for video with the A7s for live music, you can use the same high ISOs that work for stills. Plenty of cameras will work great at many gigs but it really depends on where the gig is. I just can shoot more often or with more choice in my lenses. I shoot mostly in pubs and clubs these days and the stage lighting (sometimes isn't really any) varies greatly. I typically use one or two fast primes for individuals and either 17mm or 24mm for full band shots. I use auto ISO with it set to either 51200 or 102400 and use the same for stills and video. I would love to try an external recorder for 4k but it isn't something I need as the full HD is nice as long as you are not using too low an ISO. With my GX7 (and previous cameras from many makers back to film), I had to use fast lenses and worried about ISO a lot. Each generation of digital camera got better and better which would allow me a bit more leeway in that I could shoot in slightly more situations or use a slightly slower lens (or slower aperture). With the A7s, I can still use fast lenses but I don't HAVE to. Fast lenses are for blurring the background or subject isolation (though FF means you can do that with f4 or even 5.6 sometimes) but the choice is mine. My GX7 is actually ok at many gigs for this and even my previous old long sold Pentax Kx was ok for gigs (at the time I thought it was excellent) for stills and sometimes video was ok (though it over heated in seconds sometimes, other times making it through a full song or two if short enough ). With the A7s, ISO 51600 is good (for me) and 102400 is still somewhat useable and ok but I sometimes set that knowing the camera might only go to an intermediate ISO as the camera is still pretty good between those settings (I wish it had selectable intermediate ISOs). Video does need a slightly higher ISO sometimes in order to keep the shutter speed matching (IE with auto ISO I might be at the limit I have set and if the shutter speed drops below 1/25 at 25fps that I use, THEN I might have issues but if I reach that with an A7s (I do sometimes at some low light gigs), I doubt I would be any better with anything else. I would love to post some of the videos I have of bands/singers (especially some that are at very high ISOs) particularly Sarah Mcleod (Superjesus front woman) but I can not . I mainly just set the camera with all in shot and focus and hit record and let the band do the work. If the OP can control the light and uses the camera in light that would mean never going over ISO 6400, then anything recent would be fine for stills and the GH5 would be the video choice I think but for me for live music, well I wouldn't swap for anything. There will be a day when I would but it isn't here yet. I am not even sure I would prefer an A7sii over my first generation camera. I used to have a Canon 7d and that was not a camera I would use for live music. This photo of Sarah Mcleod is at ISO 8000 but that is at 150mm 2.8 under a light (about the brightest it got at her gig). Imagine what ISOs I was using at that venue for other gigs and for musicians not under light or when the lighting changed (as it did at her gig).

While I like your post, one thing I find a bit odd is that you say the A7sii has a slim lens selection but the GH5 can use just about any lens on the planet? You do realise the E mount cameras can actually take the same lenses but M43 can not use E mount lenses? Now if you want to USE some on an A7sii is another thing. All I know is I use many of the same lenses on both my A7s and M43 camera but the A7s adapts more. The A7s meets MY needs for a photo and video camera but I don't need super AFC or fast tracking AF or more than 12mp though I would take some of those things if I could keep the rest as is. The D850 does seem to be getting close to a do everything camera, so does the A7Rii to a point.