gt3rs

21ms 8k is good did not expect this....

On the comments he says that was 4k 30 on both but he does not recall if HQ or not....

I will give a try... AF is really good the wakesurfing at 1.6 is using face tracking and with the rope in between at the beginning and the various move it did not loose it. The rest is using focus square or focus with assist points. With things that are mostly in front of the scene I find the large rectangular very useful as they can move left and right and still be in focus like skaters or mtb

Some examples of screen grabs: ca 300mm 1/640 F5.6 heavy processing on tripod: 560mm 1/50 F22 directly from the movie clip on Tripod 16mm 1/50 F11 ND on Gimbal 24mm, 1.6, 1/50 10 stop ND on gimbal directly from the clip I think the workflow could be even more optimized

Is in my todo to grab the still in RAW -> LOG2 to TIFF without any LUT or correction and apply the lut in camera raw and compare the result. As whit photo I tend to do some variations. White balance still needs to be done in Resolve.... I did try the canon software for extracting the still but is a pita imo very cumbersome...

I would pay 4k for 45mpix, 20fps photo camera even if does not shoot video..... if I only would shoot video I would not buy a R5 but probably I would go for a cinema camera.... The big question is how usable is in doing both? Having 4k30 crop or LQ is a mitigation in case that a few times the camera will overheats so you can still capture what is needed but if the camera overheats every time in your normal usage then is not a camera to buy. The problem is the generalization of normal usage it is so different.... people doing mostly corporate interviews, then the weeding guys, then the action/sport ones, the narrative one etc...

I like the guy and he does really good informative reviews but I can say the same from my friend porshce dealer and former race driver and he would tell you that porsche are way better... with tons of details.... but in realty is that better that the lambo or ferrari..... He is also shooting 95% stuff in his studio so is also not really a great example of real world scenarios.... on 25min video there is maybe 3min if of outdoor or location sample. To me A7S III looks like a very good camera (mostly for video) but on trusting these reviewers is another story... In a couple of months we will get a much clearer picture on the various issues and limitations....

Yep my workflow is like this: - plug in the card reader or copy to a SSD depending if I need the space on the CFexpress card or not and if I need a fast turnaround or not. - create a new project using my preset with 5.5k timeline, full canon RAW - Go to color tab apply canon lut and do some basic color correction but not clipping anything - Go through the clip and every time I see a nice picture I right click and "grab still" - Save all the grabbed still as .TIFF - Open the tiff in camera raw and do the final edit including cropping and any rotation and save it to jpg Some times I save directly from the still gallery to .jpg but I find cropping and editing faster in camera raw for pictures. Then I switch to 4k DCI timeline and start editing the video and deliver the video. If video is more important I do the invese starting editing the video once finished switching to 5.5k timeline and grab still (here I copy the timeline and reset any scaling or rotating before grabbing the still)

Just saying he could have gotten 100k of sponsorship from Sony.... 10% re-invested. I would not trust any of these YT reviewers as I would not trust any car dealer.... they do their job and is up to the consumer to verify from multiple sources and ideally from people using it for a while how it really perform.... Not sure all this hysteria .... just wait that a few users here and on other forums buy this and the R5/R6 and see all the issue and reports. Basing a decision on these YT influencers is just silly..... is good that they exist as they give a lot of info and I wish more original files but they have their business to run.

Did not find anyone that mention it overheated in that mode but with the "YT speed of light reviews" how can you trust.... Also in crop modes it should not overheat..... In term of sharpness/artifacts 4k FF LQ < 4k Crop < 4k HQ < 8k RAW.... the A7S III seems similar to 4k Crop but less noisy... On RS the only test that I saw the R5 had a faster RS than the A7S III is 4k 30 but they guy did not remember if it was HQ or LQ (my guess is LQ). Why nobody is checking this out at least compare all the mode is like a 10 min work? My biggest fear is that if you use it as photo for a while you cannot use the advanced video modes... but need to see more people experience and also trying things like 60fps vs 120fps EVF refresh rate and so on....

A7s III looks like a well rounded camera but is basically a video camera not really an hybrid so for me is not really attractive. I would rather buy a C200 used instead if I wanted a video only camera. I need a second camera for both photo and video, still looking in to the R5 but I want to see more real case usage to see all the limitations. If I can take around 20 30-60 sec 8K RAW or 4k 120fps in a 2h timeframe under the sun it would be a good B cam but not sure it can do it. On the still side is a dream 20fps at 45mpix is a perfect ice hockey netcam where I use a fisheye but then I need to crop in a lot depending where the action happen... this is a 6mpix crop out of 18mpix you can imagine you get a better image out of a 45mpix: Also I have a fairly good and expensive collection of EF lenses and no way I want to use them adapted with subpar AF and limited framerate on a non canon body. I really like the 1Dx III, I shoot 90% of video in RAW and I do pull a lot of stills out of the video, I wish it was open gate but nevertheless is allows me to do both at the same time, depending on the request I optimize for video or for still. This weekend I did film 5 athletes and pull stills and the other 3 only did stills and the hit ratio is a bit better in still but the quality is basically the same. One thing I have noticed that by pulling the still I get picture with expressions and celebrations and so on that I did miss a bit while shooting only still....

was a alpha rumors: best ever dowsampled hd....

I think he is one of the best reviewer but he is also making money out of his review business and once you go there you will never be fully neutral and it is ok as most of us will do the same. Is just naïve to think that he or others are really neutral. Bias can come from money, loaned or priority to get a camera, travel, future project, etc... You make a favor to Canon they will give you any camera to test first so you have an advantage, you do the same with Sony and you are ahead there too and in this game speed and early access is more important that unbias. Alternatively you do like Andrew that he is probably the opposite going so strong against the drawbacks that nobody gives him any hw to test. Imo both are not really neutral as one in biased due to the manufacture push and the other is driven by sectionalism to generate "tabloid titles" to get visibility. Combining both view you get a more realistic view.

Until the part that he is cancelling the C300 III I would have given the doubt but it smell a bit fishy with his conclusion..... also not sure why you choose a cinema camera with ND, RAW, can run for hours, great audio control, etc.... and suddenly an hybrid is better... would he have chosen an FX9 then I would understand. But if he mostly uses for indoor fixed scene like his YT channel then you get two camera and you don't care to much about the advantage of a true cinema camera. The problem with all these YT review that is a race against time and you cannot really compare with others view that are all under NDA so you don't have any input on what to double check. If they would do the review after a few weeks that is broadly available would be much better but nobody will care at that point....

My guess is that on the 1Dx III they went with a more conservative approach with no IBIS, probably and heatsink on the sensor, larger body and pure guess probably running the CPU and lower clock speed. Imagine they would have given RAW 5.5k 60fps with AF but only for 15-20min before overheating there would be a huge discussion, not reliable, not professional etc.. but personally I would love to have this option. I really like the RAW 5.5k quality is the sweet spot for me but the RS is quite severe. If I could choose two improvements via firmware would be: - AF enabled on 5.5k 60fps even with time limit like 15 min - Zebra (this one they should really do it)

I shoot tons outdoor and under the sun.... surfing, horse show jump, trial bikes, parkour, mtb, car racing.... but I could hire a grid girl to hold an umbrella.... actually two... one additional with a fridge for the R5😂😅

Seems like the cooling system puts the heat on the body so if there is a direct sun that warms it is not able to cool it down. This would explain why is not the temperature but the sun playing a role....

It does not have dual gain iso.... afaik

sorry I though you were talking about A7S III vs R5.... I was referring that the R5 is sharper than the A7S III

Check the comparison.....4.2k oversampled vs 8k oversampled....

So far from what I saw: 4k <= 30fps details: R5 4k > 30fps details: A7S DR: ? RS: R5 but to be confirmed in which modes. Photo: R5 Thermal: A7S but seems an issue here too. Card max size: R5 Dual card recording: A7S 10bit 4:2:0 NLE HW accelerated: A7S (to be confirmed by test) RAW R5 Lowlight A7S 120p with audio A7S Colors R5 (still to be compared) AF ? Super35 R5 Audio A7S with the adapter HDMI A7S Battery ? IBIS R5 Ugliest menu color😊 A7S These two cameras they should have a baby and then it would be the one 😊

The RS seems better on the R5 that is crazy but I think it was tested in 60fps but I'm not sure....

At the end the only real test is to rent it and to test it in our own worst case scenario..... there is the same issue with the insta360 One R some reports overheats and create moisture inside and mine I never had any issue even filming even 40 min under the sun at 32c...

Boy the ibis in the A7S is pretty bad. 4k 120 fps quality seems better on the A7S but not by much I was expecting more but whiteout comparing the original files and sharpen both until they break apart is hard to judge.

oversampled > 1:1 nothing shocking here