Considering going all in Sony- thoughts?

[dishe]

Currently I own the following cameras: Sony A7S, 2 GH2s (one black, one silver), and a Canon 550D.

I really like using the Sony and their colors look nicer to my eyes, but I keep the pair of GH2 cams to cover events like lectures, debates, concerts, events, etc. The fact that I happen to own two of them and they can record for unlimited clip lengths makes them worth keeping around for those jobs. But lately I really feel like I prefer my Sony footage and have been seriously considering selling them off in favor of a Sony-centric setup.

Here's my thinking-out-loud conversation I'm having in my head (excuse the run on nature of it, this is how I think)
In order to make this work, I'd need unlimited recording on the Sony. I already have a homemade power supply that can feed the A7S for 3-4 hours without a battery change, but I'd need an external recorder to get around the 30 min clip length. It looks like the Atomos Ninjas go cheap now (likely because everyone wants 4k recorders), well under $300 if used. I could sell one of my GH2s for around that I think, and replace it with a Ninja 2 or Ninja Star, and effectively use it for the things I used the GH2 for.

But then I'm left with one Sony and one GH2 for multi-cam event stuff, and I'm not too keen on color matching Panny and Sony. Assuming there's no way in heck I can afford a second A7S right now, what's the most affordable B-cam that will match up well? An A6000? Didn't the A5000 actually offer XAVC-S before the A6000 got it in an update? Those seem very affordable, but could I get one for the price of selling my other GH2? Not sure if I'm even barking up the right tree yet.

Then there's the issue of buying an additional Atomos for the other Sony (do the a5000/a6000/etc even do HDMI recording out?) so I can continue to get unlimited recording length. That Canon T2i has been collecting dust, I feel like I can sell regardless of what else I do now. I absolutely don't use it anymore and won't miss it. Looks like if I'm lucky I can get $275-300 for it with the kit lens. Maybe even throw in a spare battery or something. That should over the other recorder. Then all I need to do is build another extended power supply like I did for the first Sony (thank goodness they use the same batteries).

It would be weird for me, going all-in with Sony after owning so many different cameras for so long. But what do you guys think? Am I being crazy or does this seem like a good idea?

I guess more specifically what I am trying to determine is, what's the most affordable Sony camera that can match the colors of the A7S while still being at least as good as a GH2 in IQ? Preferably one that I can get for around the same price as a GH2, if that isn't ridiculous to expect. And if so, can that model feed an external recorder for unlimited recording?

[maxotics]

Personally, I would never depend on the Sony sensors to run for hours, let alone tens-of-minutes.  I shot some stand-up with an A7, and even with turning the camera off for a minute between comics, after about 4 of them, it cut out in the middle of the 5th.   It isn't a battery issue.  It's a large sensor uses a lot of heat.  I believe it will be years, maybe never, before large sensor cameras can shoot video as long as the Panny MFT cameras.  

The GH2's don't have much re-sale cameras now, so you don't have much value there; just the way it is.  However, they are excellent cameras for long-form events like concerts, lectures, etc., and still produce a marvelous image, sharper (or as sharp as) Sony because less space between the pixels.  As you know the Panny cameras are pretty idiot proof and reliable.  You should feel lucky you have two cameras to shoot those kind of events.  Just create two bags, one for corporate events, and the other for "filmmaking"

[dishe]

Personally, I would never depend on the Sony sensors to run for hours, let alone tens-of-minutes.  I shot some stand-up with an A7, and even with turning the camera off for a minute between comics, after about 4 of them, it cut out in the middle of the 5th.   It isn't a battery issue.  It's a large sensor uses a lot of heat.  I believe it will be years, maybe never, before large sensor cameras can shoot video as long as the Panny MFT cameras.  

Interesting. To be fair, I remember you were a Panny fan (I owned a G6 for a period of time after reading you raving about it). My experience has been quite different than yours. I've owned my A7s for a year now, and it has been super reliable for extended periods of time- the only hangup being clip length limits. 
In fact, I know my custom battery supply can feed my Sony for 3-4 hours at a time because I've worked gigs where it was actually on for that long, as a 2nd shooter for a wedding videographer. I've recorded events and speeches with it that stopped at the 30 min mark plenty of times, only to restart the next clip and keep going, never experienced anything like what you describe, constantly powered for hours at a time. Was it an A7S, or an A7 (which has more pixels and therefore more wiring on the chip to generate heat, as well as more processing to scale down)? Maybe its because my battery is external? Maybe your experience was a fluke? Maybe I've been lucky for a year? Who knows.

Anyway, I'm not considering another FF camera. I can't afford a second one even if I wanted. The B-cams I mentioned above are all Sony crop sensor cameras. I have no experience with those and have no idea if they have overheat problems. Anyone here know more about them?

The GH2's don't have much re-sale cameras now, so you don't have much value there; just the way it is.  However, they are excellent cameras for long-form events like concerts, lectures, etc.,

You'll notice I listed approximate resale values of $250-300. I did the math above based around that and didn't make that number up. That's based on ebay listings by clicking "show completed" to see what items actually sell for. When I tried to sell my G6, I had more people asking if I wanted to sell a GH2 instead. They're still popular.

and still produce a marvelous image, sharper (or as sharp as) Sony because less space between the pixels.

Are you sure about that? Maybe other Sonys, but the A7S is ridiculously sharp due to the full sensor readout. I believe the GH cameras are very clean in their re-sample but the GH2 exhibits more pixel binning than the A7S does. My own eyes confirm this.

 As you know the Panny cameras are pretty idiot proof and reliable.  You should feel lucky you have two cameras to shoot those kind of events.  Just create two bags, one for corporate events, and the other for "filmmaking"

But the Sony looks so much better to me, and can handle uncontrollable lighting much better, which is a common problem to events. I've had to push my GH2s past 1000 ISO to expose events properly, and the image just isn't pleasant. Sure, a B-cam APS-C Sony won't have the amazing low light of the A7S, but I believe they do a better job than the GH cams do!

This whole thing just started because yesterday I brought out my GH2s for a gig, and I really didn't like it anywhere near as much as my Sonys. If I'm just being crazy, I'll stick with what I'm doing, but I feel like I can do better.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

I also wouldn't rely on an A7s for unlimited recording. Never.

Selling one gh2 for a ninja 2 is not a bad idea. It will give you longer prores recording and you have the other gh2 for backup and really long takes. 

I am glad you're liking the Sony colours!  

[Xavier Plagaro Mussard]

Do the Sony A7 series color have something to do with the Sony A5X00 and Sony A6000?? I wouldn't be so sure...

 

[animan]

I think the GH4 colours are very nice, compared to GH3, not sure about GH2, with a big card you can run forever with the US model..

[kidzrevil]

Hey if you like the aesthetic I say go for it !! I haven't used my a7s for extended periods of time like shooting 30min + clips....and I hear the a7rii overheats...so if you can confirm that it wont overheat I say do it

[maxotics]

Interesting. To be fair, I remember you were a Panny fan (I owned a G6 for a period of time after reading you raving about it). My experience has been quite different than yours. I've owned my A7s for a year now, and it has been super reliable for extended periods of time- the only hangup being clip length limits. 
In fact, I know my custom battery supply can feed my Sony for 3-4 hours at a time because I've worked gigs where it was actually on for that long, as a 2nd shooter for a wedding videographer.

You're right, my experience is with the A7, NOT the A7S, and you're right the less megapixel count of the A7S should allow it to run longer.  Sounds like others haven't had a problem with shoot length, so I'm simply wrong

I have both Panny and Sony.  I'm also trying to chose between them.  I currently have an A7, A6000, LX100, G6, GM1, BMPCC (I've owned a GH4 but sold it, though might not have if I didn't get into that bullshit "Log" craze which was more harm than good in what I was doing).  Anyway, the big picture is Sony has more saturated colors and (less noise), shallower DOF and better autofocus than the Pannys.  The Pannys are sharper, smaller, easier to use and have better remote apps.  

For stills I love the Sonys and have never been able to embrace MFT.  For video, Pannys are small, idiot-proof and have never let me down.

Anyway, I'm trying to decide between the A6000 and G7.  I believe these are the best bang-for-the-buck cameras going.  I can afford the A7RII or A7S, but feel the extra money would be better spent on lighting or audio equipment.  With the A6000 I'll get best autofocus (the thing is amazing), rich colors and shallow DOF.  However, the G7's 4K downscaled to 1080 will give me perfect 1080 really (whereas the A6000 is still more like effective 720).  

When I look at the LX100 compared to the A6000 they are both super great cameras with different strengths.  Right now I'm leaning towards the LX100 because the image is so sharp and clean (even though in photography I'm more of a color/dof guy).

Here's a video where I use some of these cameras

https://vimeo.com/145871944 

[mercer]

You're right, my experience is with the A7, NOT the A7S, and you're right the less megapixel count of the A7S should allow it to run longer.  Sounds like others haven't had a problem with shoot length, so I'm simply wrong

I have both Panny and Sony.  I'm also trying to chose between them.  I currently have an A7, A6000, LX100, G6, GM1, BMPCC (I've owned a GH4 but sold it, though might not have if I didn't get into that bullshit "Log" craze which was more harm than good in what I was doing).  Anyway, the big picture is Sony has more saturated colors and (less noise), shallower DOF and better autofocus than the Pannys.  The Pannys are sharper, smaller, easier to use and have better remote apps.  

For stills I love the Sonys and have never been able to embrace MFT.  For video, Pannys are small, idiot-proof and have never let me down.

Anyway, I'm trying to decide between the A6000 and G7.  I believe these are the best bang-for-the-buck cameras going.  I can afford the A7RII or A7S, but feel the extra money would be better spent on lighting or audio equipment.  With the A6000 I'll get best autofocus (the thing is amazing), rich colors and shallow DOF.  However, the G7's 4K downscaled to 1080 will give me perfect 1080 really (whereas the A6000 is still more like effective 720).  

When I look at the LX100 compared to the A6000 they are both super great cameras with different strengths.  Right now I'm leaning towards the LX100 because the image is so sharp and clean (even though in photography I'm more of a color/dof guy).

Here's a video where I use some of these cameras

https://vimeo.com/145871944 

Max, I watched your test, and of the cameras tested, the two best in my opinion, are the BMPCC and the LX100. I understand the production concerns regarding the pocket, so my final vote is for the LX100. 

I am encountering a similar question as I too am in the early stages of developing a web series, so far my 2 options for cameras are my NX500, or a D5500. I am leaning toward the D5500, for ease of post and I just like the look of the flat profile.

Anyway, I hope you update us with the series' progress!

Sorry to the OP for OT. 

[dishe]

I also wouldn't rely on an A7s for unlimited recording. Never.

Selling one gh2 for a ninja 2 is not a bad idea. It will give you longer prores recording and you have the other gh2 for backup and really long takes. 

Why? Have you had a bad experience with the A7S? I'm gathering a lot of nay sayers are referring to experiences with Sony's older cameras like the Nex5 which was infamous for overheating. The A7s? Not so much. I actually tried to find an example on various forums of people complaining about overheating, and it seems that all I can find are ones confirming that it DOESN'T do that!

The Pannys are sharper, smaller, easier to use and have better remote apps.  

That seems highly subjective. I hated the remote app on my G6 and GH3, but the Sony remote is not only more capable and reliable (the Panny one crashed after a few minutes without fail), they also have their own API so you can actually write your OWN remote app that works the way YOU want! The Pannys are not necessarily smaller, the A5100 practically fits in the palm of my hand and has a smaller footprint than a GH2. And Sharper? Dude, have you *SEEN* the A7S footage? It puts my GH2's sharpness to shame (and its hacked for bitrate)!

Part of me feels like I'm somewhat playing devil's advocate because I DO very much have an emotional attachment to years of shooting Panny. But I'm reading over what I wrote here, and I think the love affair might be over. I don't think I see the value in them anymore!

[maxotics]

Sorry to the OP for OT. 

I think it on topic because dishe seems to be going through, what boils down to me, MFT of APS-C.  I've never had any interest in 4K as 4K.  As I mentioned, 4K is now 'real' 1080.  The A7S, with it's larger pixels REALLY confuses things because its fantastic saturated and moire-less image is very appealing.  

A problem I have with the LX100 is at 70mm it really isn't long enough to shoot over-the-shoulder shots (which I imagine you'll want too).  It seems to me, two G7s with the 14-140mm would be a good approach.  One can get two of those, with lenses for $2,000.  It would cost $6,000 for similar A7S setups.  

The problem with dishe's goal, which I'm sure he understands all to well, it that it gets expensive.  IMHO you should have double the camera bodies expense in lenses and the same amount in lights.  So a $1,000 body should end up as $1,000+$2,000+$2,000 = $5,000.  Yes, shooting out of my a__ here.  But what I remind myself!

I loved the colors you got out of the NX.  It handled the clouds very nicely.  

[dishe]

BTW, as for the comment on Panasonic being smaller:

 

If anything, I'd prefer the larger body of the Panasonic for the better ergonomics. But I can deal with the Sony as a B cam and work around the buttons and touch screen when I need to. The ergonomics on my A7S as an A cam are good for me. This tiny  model supports XAVC-S 50mbit, supposedly blends well with A7 colors and costs about as much as a GH2 does, so I can trade it in and break even hopefully.

[maxotics]

That seems highly subjective. I hated the remote app on my G6 and GH3, but the Sony remote is not only more capable and reliable (the Panny one crashed after a few minutes without fail), they also have their own API so you can actually write your OWN remote app that works the way YOU want! The Pannys are not necessarily smaller, the A5100 practically fits in the palm of my hand and has a smaller footprint than a GH2. And Sharper? Dude, have you *SEEN* the A7S footage? It puts my GH2's sharpness to shame (and its hacked for bitrate)!

Part of me feels like I'm somewhat playing devil's advocate because I DO very much have an emotional attachment to years of shooting Panny. But I'm reading over what I wrote here, and I think the love affair might be over. I don't think I see the value in them anymore!

Dishe, one of us is horribly wrong   I was wrong the first time, I'm hoping to even the score!  With the Panny Image app I can manually focus the LX100, With focus zoom.  I can zoom the lens in an out.  I can start/stop 4K recording.  I can view the scene LIVE on the Android app!  I can do NONE of those things, in VIDEO mode, with the A6000 or A7.  Can you do that with the A7S?  

The A5100 doesn't have an EVF so isn't a fair comparison to the GH4.  Put it next to an LX100.  

There's a lot of confusion on this blog, in my opinion, about what makes for contrast sharpness and and what makes for color sharpness.  In low light, the GH4 will be detail sharper than the A7S, but color blurrier.  Or, the A7S will be color sharper, but detail softer.  I don't have an A7S, so you'd know better than I which the better trade-off is.  

Again, I LOVE both systems, Panny and Sony.  You're comparing an old Panny camera, the GH2 with a new Sony A7S.  As I mentioned above, if money is no object, I'd get some A7S's or IIs and call it a day.  However, for the money, the Pannys deliver a fantastic value in video--if you look at their current 4K cameras!

[dishe]

Dishe, one of us is horribly wrong   I was wrong the first time, I'm hoping to even the score!  With the Panny Image app I can manually focus the LX100, With focus zoom.  I can zoom the lens in an out.  I can start/stop 4K recording.  I can view the scene LIVE on the Android app!  I can do NONE of those things, in VIDEO mode, with the A6000 or A7.  Can you do that with the A7S? 

YUP!  I'm suprised the A7 doesn't, I thought they use the same Play Memories app as the A7S. One of the things that really impressed me is how great a remote monitor a Samsung AMOLED phone is for live viewing WHILE RECORDING. Well, the zoom part I can't do because I don't own any of their Servo-zoom lenses, but they do make them and it appears they are supported in the app. I love using my phone as a monitor. The GH3 couldn't do that, and the G6 started to and got very buggy after a few minutes. I'm glad the app got better- maybe the GH4 and G7 have proper apps that work just as well as the Sony now! But my experience has definitely been bad with the Panasonic apps at the time, and extremely positive with the Sony one. At best I'd call this a draw since I'm comparing it to the older version of the app. 

The A5100 doesn't have an EVF so isn't a fair comparison to the GH4.  Put it next to an LX100.  

But I'm not comparing it to an LX100. I have a pair of GH cameras and I'm looking to switch. You said the Panasonics have the advantage of being smaller- but the irony is that one of my concerns with the A5100 is that it is so much smaller than my GH2s!

There's a lot of confusion on this blog, in my opinion, about what makes for contrast sharpness and and what makes for color sharpness.  In low light, the GH4 will be detail sharper than the A7S, but color blurrier.  Or, the A7S will be color sharper, but detail softer.  I don't have an A7S, so you'd know better than I which the better trade-off is.  

Again, I LOVE both systems, Panny and Sony.  You're comparing an old Panny camera, the GH2 with a new Sony A7S.  As I mentioned above, if money is no object, I'd get some A7S's or IIs and call it a day.  However, for the money, the Pannys deliver a fantastic value in video--if you look at their current 4K cameras!

I'm really not interested in the current 4k cameras. Even if just to downsample to 1080p, its a workflow that is entirely unnecessary. The 1080p in the A7S is already a 4k resample internally. When I want top quality, that's what I'd go for. When I'm shooting multi-cam events, I'm more interested in ease of use/workflow for lining up multi-cam than I am looking for the super-sharpest detail (its going to end up on a website or DVD archive). As long as its moire free and not noisy in dim light, the clients love that it doesn't look like a camcorder (which a lot of my Pany footage does). In fact, for a while I preferred my "unhacked" G6 footage to the GH2s because the files were more manageable and the GH2 ones didn't have more detail that was appreciable to the clients!

[mercer]

I have an a5100 I am going to sell. Not because I don't like the camera, it's actually a pretty cool, tiny camera that is pretty amazing for the price point. It can be configured that everything you need to access can be assigned to a physical button, anything that kept me out of Sony's clunky menu set up is much appreciated. I love the zebras and the magnification, the focus peaking is not as good as the nex cameras, but still very usable. A 64gb SDXC card is  the minimum card you can use, but for your purposes that seems like a logical choice anyway. With ClipWrap or EditReady, the conversion to prores is practically instantaneous. Like I said... Many pluses are checked off. At the native ISO of 800, the camera had a good amount of dynamic range, but in the end I only need so many cameras and I just do not like what it does to skin tones. And I felt the image felt a little thin or brittle. 

[maxotics]

The 1080p in the A7S is already a 4k resample internally. When I want top quality, that's what I'd go for. 

I'm trying to f__ you up in the head and you're doing it to me   I haven't seen any good comparison of the A6000 to the A7S.  If, as you say, the A7S has as good 1080 as the downsampled LX100/G7 then it would make the A7S very appealing as their prices drop in the used market.  Anyway, if that's what you're seeing, to answer your original question, I'd go with the A7S and bag the Pannys.  Even though it is more expensive, it would be worth it because MFT, IMHO, don't hold a candle photography/still wise to MFT and, as you know the colors are much richer and shallow DOF better.  Hmmmm.....  I was thinking MFT for video, but now you have me turned around!

[mercer]

I think it on topic because dishe seems to be going through, what boils down to me, MFT of APS-C.  I've never had any interest in 4K as 4K.  As I mentioned, 4K is now 'real' 1080.  The A7S, with it's larger pixels REALLY confuses things because its fantastic saturated and moire-less image is very appealing.  

A problem I have with the LX100 is at 70mm it really isn't long enough to shoot over-the-shoulder shots (which I imagine you'll want too).  It seems to me, two G7s with the 14-140mm would be a good approach.  One can get two of those, with lenses for $2,000.  It would cost $6,000 for similar A7S setups.  

The problem with dishe's goal, which I'm sure he understands all to well, it that it gets expensive.  IMHO you should have double the camera bodies expense in lenses and the same amount in lights.  So a $1,000 body should end up as $1,000+$2,000+$2,000 = $5,000.  Yes, shooting out of my a__ here.  But what I remind myself!

I loved the colors you got out of the NX.  It handled the clouds very nicely.  

Thanks, I have had more failures than successes with that camera... It's a love hate relationship. I just recently found its sweet spot as far as settings go. And I have some nice lens sets that pair nicely with the camera. I convert the 4K to 1080p prores before I do any post, and I agree there is a really nice weight to 4K downscaled to 1080p image that isn't quite replicable with a straight 1080p camera. 

Why can't you get good over the shoulders with the 70mm? It seems like the perfect focal length for that shot. 

I use only vintage lenses, so my lens budget is waaay smaller than that, but I get your point. I tend to prefer a practical lighting set up with a overhead China ball and a couple led panels to boost. Of course, I'm poor so I work with what I have. 

[dishe]

I'm trying to f__ you up in the head and you're doing it to me   I haven't seen any good comparison of the A6000 to the A7S.  If, as you say, the A7S has as good 1080 as the downsampled LX100/G7 then it would make the A7S very appealing as their prices drop in the used market.  Anyway, if that's what you're seeing, to answer your original question, I'd go with the A7S and bag the Pannys.  Even though it is more expensive, it would be worth it because MFT, IMHO, don't hold a candle photography/still wise to MFT and, as you know the colors are much richer and shallow DOF better.  Hmmmm.....  I was thinking MFT for video, but now you have me turned around!

ROFL- I know, right? What a crazy market this is! I didn't even mention the 15+ stops of DR that the Sony is capable of- I know, not all of that range gets recorded in the 8bit 4:2:0 codec (or 4:2:2 if external), but with a decent bitrate I'm finding it very easy to grade and push, much more than my Panny footage.

I'm more than pleased with the IQ and sharpness out of my A7S, it looks to me like 4k downsampled to 1080, which I think is exactly what its doing internally (That's why we keeping seeing the term "full sensor readout" thrown around- the sensor is a native 4k size with no pixel binning, as I understand it. And this is unique to this camera). That being said, even if that isn't good enough for you, the camera does output 4k so an external recorder downsampling it to 1080p prores or some high quality codec couldn't hurt either, and be doing it in real time!

Anyway, my point is, I'm keeping the A7s. That was never up for debate. The question is, can I practically replace my GH2 setup for long form recording. I think I can, but I was hoping to hear from people who've done this before.

I have an a5100 I am going to sell. Not because I don't like the camera, it's actually a pretty cool, tiny camera that is pretty amazing for the price point. It can be configured that everything you need to access can be assigned to a physical button, anything that kept me out of Sony's clunky menu set up is much appreciated. I love the zebras and the magnification, the focus peaking is not as good as the nex cameras, but still very usable. A 64gb SDXC card is  the minimum card you can use, but for your purposes that seems like a logical choice anyway. With ClipWrap or EditReady, the conversion to prores is practically instantaneous.

Don't forget, shooting with the A7s for long periods of time, I already own a few 64GB cards and would likely hook this up to an external recorder anyway. Also? No conversion necessary- the external would record in Pro-res, but I actually like the internal XAVCS codec. It edits natively just fine (I don't use Quicktime based editors, so I've never had the gamma shift problem and XAVCS has always been natively supported in my NLEs of choice- Premiere and Vegas).

Like I said... Many pluses are checked off. At the native ISO of 800, the camera had a good amount of dynamic range, but in the end I only need so many cameras and I just do not like what it does to skin tones. And I felt the image felt a little thin or brittle. 

Interesting. What camera are you comparing it to? I never really liked the skin tones out of my Panasonics, I was just OK with it because the IQ was so much better than anything else I was using at the time. I think I prefer the skin tones on my Canons the most, but that footage was awful in every other way. The Sony A7s is the closest image I've seen that gives me acceptable skin tones (to my eyes at least) while still offering a phenominally sharp and clear image. I'm not expecting the A5100 to be able to produce the same IQ as the A7s, but for multi-cam shoots, I just care that the colors will be easy to match and that it will be "good enough" for a second angle. At some point in the future, if I can afford it, I'd propbably replace it with another A7s (or A9 or whatever else comes out!). I never tried to match my GH2 color to my Sony, but after attemping to match a Canon to my GH2, I'm not looking forward to trying. Panasonic has their own mojo of coloring. Which is cool, as long as you aren't trying to quickly grade it along other types of cameras. I either want to shoot 2 Sonys, or 2 GH2s. This is my dilemma.

On that note, how much are you interested in selling? I found someone on another forum selling for a pretty good price, hope they still have it.

[dishe]

The problem with dishe's goal, which I'm sure he understands all to well, it that it gets expensive.  IMHO you should have double the camera bodies expense in lenses and the same amount in lights.  So a $1,000 body should end up as $1,000+$2,000+$2,000 = $5,000.  Yes, shooting out of my a__ here.  But what I remind myself!

I forgot to comment on this- I already have all of that. Years of glass manually adaptable Samyang, Nikon, EOS and vintage glass (EOS even works electronically with Image Stabilization via $99 adapter!) are already in my arsenal.  And lights don't really change from camera to camera. As far as shooting photos (where I want more expensive AF lenses made for the camera), I've actually discovered how much I really like Minolta A-mount glass. Sony makes an official adapter (since they bought Minolta in 2007 and actually still make A-mount cameras as well) that works surprisingly well with those. I have a 70-210 f/4 that looks amazing on my A7S, focuses fast and accurately with the adapter like a native lens, and only cost me $60 from KEH. You're right, camera body shouldn't be your primary expense. Thankfully it isn't, and I'm actually looking to change my existing infrastructure which I already own and can bring along!

[mercer]

 

ROFL- I know, right? What a crazy market this is! I didn't even mention the 15+ stops of DR that the Sony is capable of- I know, not all of that range gets recorded in the 8bit 4:2:0 codec (or 4:2:2 if external), but with a decent bitrate I'm finding it very easy to grade and push, much more than my Panny footage.

I'm more than pleased with the IQ and sharpness out of my A7S, it looks to me like 4k downsampled to 1080, which I think is exactly what its doing internally (That's why we keeping seeing the term "full sensor readout" thrown around- the sensor is a native 4k size with no pixel binning, as I understand it. And this is unique to this camera). That being said, even if that isn't good enough for you, the camera does output 4k so an external recorder downsampling it to 1080p prores or some high quality codec couldn't hurt either, and be doing it in real time!

Anyway, my point is, I'm keeping the A7s. That was never up for debate. The question is, can I practically replace my GH2 setup for long form recording. I think I can, but I was hoping to hear from people who've done this before.

Don't forget, shooting with the A7s for long periods of time, I already own a few 64GB cards and would likely hook this up to an external recorder anyway. Also? No conversion necessary- the external would record in Pro-res, but I actually like the internal XAVCS codec. It edits natively just fine (I don't use Quicktime based editors, so I've never had the gamma shift problem and XAVCS has always been natively supported in my NLEs of choice- Premiere and Vegas).

Interesting. What camera are you comparing it to? I never really liked the skin tones out of my Panasonics, I was just OK with it because the IQ was so much better than anything else I was using at the time. I think I prefer the skin tones on my Canons the most, but that footage was awful in every other way. The Sony A7s is the closest image I've seen that gives me acceptable skin tones (to my eyes at least) while still offering a phenominally sharp and clear image. I'm not expecting the A5100 to be able to produce the same IQ as the A7s, but for multi-cam shoots, I just care that the colors will be easy to match and that it will be "good enough" for a second angle. At some point in the future, if I can afford it, I'd propbably replace it with another A7s (or A9 or whatever else comes out!). I never tried to match my GH2 color to my Sony, but after attemping to match a Canon to my GH2, I'm not looking forward to trying. Panasonic has their own mojo of coloring. Which is cool, as long as you aren't trying to quickly grade it along other types of cameras. I either want to shoot 2 Sonys, or 2 GH2s. This is my dilemma.

On that note, how much are you interested in selling? I found someone on another forum selling for a pretty good price, hope they still have it.

Right now I have been using the NX500, but I come from a Canon background. I am mostly a writer that has picked up video as a hobby and a possible outlet to produce some short films when my skills get better. 

I am definitely going to sell it, in fact I should have it listed on eBay by week's end. I bought it in the middle of the summer as a manufacturer refurb and probably used it for a few hours testing it out and then I found a great deal on the NX500 and I have been pretty much obsessed with figuring out that camera, which is so different than the canon line. I don't have a native lens for it, just the body, a separate battery pack and a couple batteries. I also had a butt load of adapters and some vintage lenses I'll probably throw into a bundle.