Viscount Omega

Yep. I can almost hear them discussing it in a meeting. "What about Takumi's work on the LA-EA4's implementation?" "I'm glad you brought that up. I have an idea to boost our e-mount inventory sales." 🤑 💵 There are about 400 A-Mount zooms and primes from different companies out there that are affected by this. It feels like a slap in the face from Sony.

I don't know if this has been mentioned elsewhere but if you have some vintage A-Mount lenses (Minolta, etc..) and you plan to shoot stills or video with the A7S III, the auto-focus will not work anymore with the LA-EA4 adapter. It seems Sony disabled it. And the new LA-EA5 can only do stills--not video. This forces customers to buy e-mount lenses if they want auto-focus with their video.

Color is the obvious difference. I don't debate that. But I can grade anything in S-log3. I just think there's something tricky going on with the amount of info gathered. Like I said, 600 Mb/s , right? Same codec? Right? Doesn't look the same to me.

I can think of a lot of stuff that ruin an image. You think it's the noise reduction on the A7SIII vs. the FX-9? C'mon out and say it.

Well, yeah. But that has been worked on for years and continues to evolve. Noise reduction is only part of the equation.

What is "NR"?

Hey, I'm just drinking Yuengling and doing shots of Cinnamon Fireballs now and then. Whatever trip you're on, have a good one. 🤣

Trying to decide between this and the FX9. Forget the sound. That's done externally anyway. They both shoot at H.264/XAVC S-I 4:2:2 10-Bit UHD 4K (3840 x 2160) at 23.976p/25p/29.97p/50p/59.94p [240 to 600 Mb/s] 600 Mb/s. So, same as FX-9. What is the difference between 600 Mb/s on an A7SIII and an FX-9? So, 7K for Venice color? Don't care about slow motion. Not one bit. Rolling shutter IS an issue. Image stabilization. Yeah, that's a factor but not a deal-breaker. Why do I like the FX-9 footage better in the videos I've seen? 600 Mb/s is 600 Mb/s, am I right? Or is Sony crippling the cameras so as to not compete with their other products? Sort of like Intel would cripple Celeron chips vs. Pentium chips.

I'm sorry Andrew but I'm going to have to report you to the authorities. Your article is misleading in that it features a young, attractive Caucasian woman that does not fully reflect the diversity of Manchester. You should know better. Be more inclusive next time. Get the Manchester Experience. Live it. Learn it. Love it. https://www.manchester.ac.uk/study/experience/

"The other adapter I will be trying in the full review is the Sony A mount range, both for full frame Alpha glass – of which there are some rather nice ones, indeed some of my favourite of all time, and the superbly cinematic Minolta AF range." I also think they have a distinctly cinematic quality. It's nice to hear I'm not the only one who thinks that. Ya know, when you mention the word "Minolta" some cinematographers are like, "What are you crazy?" Fuck them. LOL.

It's not even worth it to argue. It's like that guy is still talking about sensor sizes, DOF and equivalence from 5 years ago. It's like me against the world so when I say "Fuck this", I mean I'm going to stop reading this thread. It's like being lectured to by a homeless guy drenched in his own urine. Your Aunt Sally can't tell the difference between formats anyway.

Do I have to go back to square one with someone like you? It's like trying to talk to a fucking grad student who thinks gov't creates jobs. Fuck this.

Eh, more stills. How 'bout an animated .gif or a 3D pie chart? Doesn't look like anything special I couldn't replicate (close enough) with my A7SII using regular full-frame vintage lenses. (of course certain people will howl that "all formats are the same" after I said that). That said, your distance from your subject in the previous video "Michaela" exploits the "look" very well. I defy anyone in the "all formats are the same" camp to match the perspective you had there and replicate what you did there with their Iphone. I've been shooting terabytes of full-frame stuff for a couple of years and nothing I have done can match the medium format perspective you have in that video. Btw, you look like Charles Manson. People should not trust you with their children.

That's because you're not using a larger lens circle. When you put a full-frame 35mm lens on an APS-C camera you're not using a full-frame lens the way it was intended. You're only using the center section of glass in the lens.

I'm being a little sarcastic here (maybe not hard enough for some people). As if a little thing like "lens aberrations" could account for what I (and others) are seeing. Anyway, still waiting for an answer. p.s. sorry you were offended by the "vignetting" comments earlier but I did think it was funny and insane. Still do.