noone

I shoot a lot of concerts (mostly stills but a bit more video lately) and I used to own a Canon 7D first version and I would not have liked to use that camera for concerts at all. Your settings may well be ok but it is going to depend on the lighting and at least at many of the gigs I go to, most of the time it would be no. You may well be ok at many gigs IF you are shooting the person under a spot light but that will be a bit more limiting. I DO use 4.5 and even slower apertures for concerts but most of the time with those apertures I am well over ISO 800 (and sometimes am at ISO 102400). With faster lenses of course you will be at lower ISOs and if you can get back in the room you will have greater DOF. By all means give it a go but unless the lighting is good, don't expect miracles.

How about one of those USB drink coolers? The flat ones you put a can or cup on? They only cost a couple of bucks. If I had any over heating issues with my A7s that is what I would try. I will get one shortly anyway to play with but when I had my Pentax DSLR that overheated at any time it would have been worth trying at least.

I thought it was more than that. It doesn't (yet) have a middle codec for even HD? They are adding the higher bit rates for both full HD and 4k later but not so much is known about what they will be or when exactly I think. A little bit like if the A7s/A7s ii were sold with AVCHD only with the promise of XAVC-S the following year sometime?? who would have got those?

Wow, for me this is simply about 4k (something I don't need) but it really has been eye opening looking.. Just looking to see what 4k cameras exist and on one of Canon's Australian sites at least, they had a feature selector and the option available was full HD! (have there been any recent cameras from anyone for serious -or even not so serious video that DIDN'T have full HD)? Meanwhile Sony, in just the FF A7/A9 series alone has what, seven different cameras that can do 4k in some form somehow (if you include the ones that need a external recorder and the seldom mentioned S3C and SC3a) and not to mention all the others too. Even in handycam's Sony has several 4k versions (as do some of the other makers). Looking at some video store sites and what is available, there also a few other specialty 4k cameras from other makers and a lot of those seem to also have an Exmor sensor too. Seems to me that for some players 4k is standard but for Canon it is still something exotic.

Depends. Used for live music close to the band (stage if there is one), f4 will sometimes not be enough to get all in focus and in shot (the closest musician might be a fraction too close) though often f4 is ok but I will also stop down to 5.6, 6.3 or even f8 as the A7s can handle really high ISOs. Depth of field isn't really an issue most of the time (17mm FF has infinite DOF at f4 with a subject distance at 8 feet or more and 6 feet subject distance at 5.6) and I don't need infinite DOF if there is a wall thirty feet distant for example so I just aim at a middle musician and get the closest in shot and focus most of the time Shifting for a building generally needs stopping down more and more so if shifting a lot. The lens is pretty good at f4 as a general landscape lens though. Other than shifting, I would use it at 5.6 more often than not I suppose at night maybe a bit more (6.3/f8) in the day.

No profile used. Jpegs as as taken. The 17 TS-E is my favourite lens for both stills and video though for video I just use it on a tripod or table to shoot bands to record the odd song. I can get all the band members in shot and focus with little distortion from next to the stage. I have no issues adapting it to the A7s and in fact, I think it is actually better (at least much easier) to use on a FF E mount camera than on a Canon DSLR. I can use it walk around at night on an A7s (for stills at least) and I could never do that on a Canon DSLR (certainly not on my last one anyway).

A7s with Canon 17 f4 L TS-E

Option C for me but that I would use the A7s for stills to because I love the A7s as a stills and video camera especially in low light though is no slouch in good light either. It also gives you much more choice in lenses (Nikon is not so adaptable and the APSC Sony makes it harder for wide angle). The A7s will also give you a choice in both FF and APSC modes (especially for video). Should you ever need 4k (as you will in future) you can always add a external recorder to get it with the A7s and by then there might be zillions more cameras with 4k (or greater). The A7s is not a camera if you need tracking AF or AFC at any great speed or if 12mp isn't enough (actually even around 5 or 6mp is often more than enough for me) but otherwise it is a great camera.

For me, I click on the "low light" tab and all is right in the world with my "precious" (A7s) still number 1 for that and still a respectable #29 overall. Interesting that #1 low light is still the first version A7s while the A7sii is rated higher overall but not for low light.

I much prefer E mount (I like the size and shape and ergonomics of the original A7/A7s) but there are some nice A mount lenses that would be better on this camera. I did like the 85 2.8 SAM as a nice very lightweight portrait lens (used on FF E mount anyway) and I still have a nice cheap old A mount 180 5.6 APO Sigma - needs an LA-EA4 on any E mount and I would like to use it again. One thing I would love to know if it works on any of the recent A mount cameras is a Sigma adapter I have for MC/MD lens that will auto focus them on A mount.. I never could get it to work on an A7 on a LA-EA4 at all but it would be nice if it works. There is also a much rarer (never seen one) version for Nikon lenses on A mount that would auto focus manual focus Nikon lenses. They work similarly to the Pentax 1.7x AF adapter and Nikon TC-16A and there was another for Yashica I think. Just another old gadget these days (where there is now a Sigma adapter that auto focuses Leica and other MF lenses on E mount) but it would be nice if it worked still.

A quick Google search- https://backlothelp.netflix.com/hc/en-us/articles/217237077-Production-and-Post-Production-Requirements-v2-1 "Camera Requirements 4K Resolution: • Camera must have a true 4K sensor (equal to or greater than 4096 photosites wide).
 Recording Format: • Minimum of 16-bit Linear or 10-bit Log processing
 • Bitrate of at least 240 Mbps (at 23.98/24 fps) recording
 • Recording format must be set to either:
 RAW (uncompressed or lightly compressed sensor data)
 Log color space (i.e. S-Log3, V-Log, CanonLog3, REDLogFilm, BMDLog, LogC) • No looks or color corrections should be baked into the original camera files.
 • Files must maintain all metadata (i.e. Tape Name, Timecode, Frame Rate, ISO, WB, etc.)
 Aspect Ratio / Framing: • Aspect ratios greater than 2.00:1 must be evaluated and discussed with Netflix for approval.
 • Framing chart must be shot before principal photography begins, and processed through the dailies pipeline which will be shared with editorial, post-production, and VFX.
 Secondary Cameras: • Any cameras other than the primary camera (crash, POV, drone, underwater, etc.) must be approved by Netflix.
 • Test footage should be shot and provided to dailies and post-production to ensure compatibility with primary camera. Approved Cameras:" Then follows a very short list of cameras all of which cost quite a lot. https://backlothelp.netflix.com/hc/en-us/articles/229150567-What-kind-of-secondary-cameras-can-I-use- "Question: What kind of secondary cameras can I use? Answer: Since we understand the wide range of shooting scenarios (drones, crash cam, tight spaces, etc.) cannot always accommodate a large camera, we do allow smaller 4K cameras to be used that are not on our approved camera list. Our rule of thumb is if these shots will make up 10% or less of the final cut, a non-approved camera can be used. Please contact us for our recommendations in these cases."

I cant even afford a cat let alone this camera! Looks very nice and way beyond me but I can not help but think with all its goodies it seems to be missing something for normal cat filming full HD and will be until the update.

Actually it is more like zillions of quotes of ONE just MAYBE overheating issue when someone got the first of TWO warnings the camera is getting hot.. The camera may well get hot after a prolonged use but so far it seems the vast majority of those who have it are very happy.

My only remaining 28mm prime is an ancient Promura 2.8 m42 screwmount. It spends its days in retirement on an old Pentax Spotmatic. I should give it a run sometime ( FF and APSC and maybe M43).

The Vivitar 28 f2 was made by a few different makers including Komine and Kiron. The serial number tells you who made it and there used to be a few sites around the web you could find out (maybe still can- I will search later). I had two of the Vivitar 28 f2's a few years ago used for stills. Some of them are notorious for having stuck blades due to oil (one of mine did). They were nice enough though lots of distortion. From memory both of mine were made by Kiron I think and had 22 as part of the serial number (I think?). I don't use 28 all that much so probably would use a zoom if I need that focal length these days. EDIT - yes, serial number starting 22 is Kiron, 28 is Komine for the Vivitar 28 f2

Yes. It seems the A9 actually has two warnings. The first is just letting you know the temp is rising. Doesn't seem to be an issue for almost all users so far. I would love to have that camera but it is a bit too rich for me.

I don't use any profile. I have tried a couple but find I like it as it is. I am trying a few creative styles but currently have it set to standard with Contrast and saturation at 0 and sharpness at -1 though that could be changed again. My video use isn't so serious yet. I tend to try and get it how I like in camera as my editing skills are pretty poor. I do love this lens for stills but I do want to use it more for video now but I do need to put it on a tripod (for video, not needed for stills).

I never got to a gig last night. Went for a photo walk with the FD 24 1.4 L on my A7s early this morning and took a few short clips on the spur of the moment. Most were too bad to show but here are probably the two "best" together. I should have had a tripod to do this. Any (all) problems are down to me and not the camera or lens.

Lamest of the lame. Mucking around with the A7s and FD 24 1.4 L I used dual record and this is just the smaller MP4 straight from the camera (I don't want to post it on YouTube) Tripod mounted and at ISO 16000 I think it was and at 1.4 and using clearzoom so zoomed from 2x to 24mm ETC. DOF is extremely shallow close in at 1.4 MAH05561.MP4

No sorry. My video use though consists mainly of setting the camera (A7s mainly) on a tripod or table or even trying to hand hold still (very carefully and pretty much unsuccessfully), getting everything in focus and shooting a rock/blues band and letting the band do the work. For that, the lens I use the most is a Canon 17mm tilt shift lens. I am curious now though so I will use the 24 FD instead and have a go as soon as I can (maybe tonight after work if I feel like it). Will also see what I can do over the next few days (warning, it will be lame).

I have had soooo many vintage lenses over the years. Some of them were not quite so vintage when I got them though. First reason I got many of them was I wanted whatever I could afford that fit my camera (stills) and I like to experiment and try things that people tell me I cannot do. With the arrival of mirrorless and adapting a much wider range of mounts my choices expanded exponentially and then more so with Sony FF E mount. I got a little bit more money a few years ago and so could get some better gear for a while so tended to stop buying the lower vintage lenses and started getting some nicer ones both vintage and modern. I found I prefer adapting modern lenses more than I like adapting vintage for the most part though it was fun trying the same lens on a Pentax Q, M43, APSC and FF at times. I have got rid of many of my old lenses, some through selling and some just fell apart from over use. I am now back to being as poor as ever but have most of what I want now for stills and my video use is limited but I think I am set for my needs there also. I still haunt pawn shops and charity shops looking for bargains and still look on Ebay for cheapies but don't NEED anything. Current favourite vintage lenses I still have are not so many but include the Tamron adaptall 300 2.8 and these two old warriors

Video AF and AFC is crap (or non existent) with EF lenses on M43 but AFS is pretty much native. EF to E is much slower with most E mount cameras though I believe the later ones are much better.

The value of a lens is very subjective. What one person values and uses daily, someone else may leave in a drawer unused. I wouldn't pay the high price of the best M43 lenses because it is not my primary system and mostly I will adapt lenses. Doesn't mean they are not good, just not good value for me. Even the Olympus 12 f2 was not being used all that much and I needed some money so I sold it and the same even with the 45 1.8 (as cheap as it is). Best value lens I own is also by far the most expensive (Canon 17mm TS-E) but other lenses I consider great value at the price include the cheap Canon 40 2.8 STM (which makes a nice portrait lens on M43), Canon EF 100 f2, Sony Zeiss 55 1.8, Sony FE 28-70 kit lens and even the cheap 18-55 APSC IS ii Canon kit lens and the Sigma 150 2.8 APO macro is a very nice dual system lens. I do get more value if I can use a lens across systems though some are much better used only on one (the Canon 17 TS-E is almost only used on FF Sony). Value is what you are prepared to pay. The Pentax 1.7x auto focus adapter is a case in point. This thing was around from the film days and the start of auto focus. It allows manual focus lenses to be used for auto focus and is high quality. I got mine with a film camera before digital was a thing for most people. It seems Pentax stopped making them so there was a reasonable but limited number around when Pentax started with the IST*D and through the first few DSLR models, there wasn't a huge range of longer AF lenses and the price of the AFA on the likes of Ebay went from around $100 or so up to around $1000 or more even. It seems Pentax (or someone) started making a new batch and also a few AF lenses started appearing and the price of the AFA plummeted again all in the space of a couple of years. Those who paid around the $1000 would have said they got value in many cases (I thought it was worth it which is why I didn't cash in and sell mine then). I went mirrorless and sold most of my Pentax gear so sold the AFA for a fair price (a LOT less than $1000). It worked great with a manual focus 300mm 2.8 lens on a stabilized camera. HMM, they seem to be at around $500 on Ebay now.

Yes. If I was making money from video or photography, I would be in trouble as I am more like Social Influenza than an influencer. I post on Instagram and might get five likes in a week but one of those will repost one of my photos and get a hundred in a day. That said, I am pretty anti social anyway and camera stuff is a hobby. People that would otherwise cross the street if they see me coming do want me to take their photos when I am out and about with a camera though at pubs and clubs. If doing this for money I might have to learn to like (more) people and would certainly need a social media manager.

Is that the Fotodiox Vizelex Light Cannon? It started life as a cheaper Metabones Speedbooster substitute (actually more like a cheaper Lens Turbo substitute which is a Metabones Speedbooster substitute) but is obviously nowhere near as good so it "became" a "soft focus adapter" at a greatly reduced price and I think they were then giving them away with other purchases in the end. I got one in Nikon to M43 mount when they became the "soft focus adapter" for cheap but was still way over priced. As it was originally intended, the Lens turbo is much much better (both being "dumb" focal reducers). I was actually hoping to adapt it to my FF Sony with my M43 to E mount adapter but it doesn't fit in the adapter (adapter is too thin). If you start with a REALLY sharp lens, it can be used I guess and it may well have some benefits for a soft look so I hang onto it instead of tossing it in the bin. EDIT- Just checked and it seems the Excel +1 is the IMPROVED replacement for the Light Cannon!!!!!!