Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2014 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...

  
 
popinvasion
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


The lenses available are expensive, super expensive and just don't fit my needs exactly. The alternative of buying a $400 adaptor that mostly works but compromises the lenses performace(af for photos etc) sounds unappealing. I love my canon gear and I'm quite invested but the A7S is nearly the perfect camera for my needs. I just don't see canon getting close anytime soon. It's a dilemma. Anyone else struggling with this?


Aug 17, 2014 at 03:14 AM
justruss
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


Doesn't sound like much of a dilemma to me...

Let me recap: There's a camera system out there with a few things that you think would be great for your work-- and a few things that make it a no-go for your work. You can't buy that system for this reason. But you look forward to the day you can buy this or a similar system that does everything you want perfectly.

Yes, I'm in the same boat (I think we all are), but with different parameters. It seems the pragmatic solution is best: Use what gets the job done. Switch when something comes along that's better enough to be worth the hassle/cost of switching.

This is going to sound daft, but: You can only use something that exists. So if the thing you want doesn't exist... use something else!



Aug 17, 2014 at 03:33 AM
Lee Saxon
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


If you care about AF, which is sounds like you do, FE is not the system to switch to. Right now FE is a system for adapted manual focus. AF users, check back when Sony's released 4x as many lenses.

And if you care about AF, I suspect you're not a serious enough motion shooter to have a second camera just for that.



Aug 17, 2014 at 05:03 AM
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


For normal HD (1080p) recorded in-camera the A7s is almost unbeatable today, if you want something that can also do usable still images in a comfortable way.

OTOH if you're looking for convenient, extreme quality video and don't mind a video workflow, it's actually a better alternative to aim for a Pana GH4 - and then use that as a pure "on-the-side" video camera (that's capable of some reasonably competent still imagery - though not in sports or anything else demanding AF-C focusing). There's plenty of reasonably-priced, AF, high-quality glass to go with µFT!
That focusing difference is there with the A7s too, mind you. No mirrorless camera on the market today can actually follow with accuracy.

They all boast "fastest AF" and "accurate AF-C" - but none of them actually work in reality. No matter what lenses I try and what technique I try, even mid-level DSLRs easily gives me at least twice as many in-focus frames per second. Everyone I know of that has actually tried it in reality (not forum and brand "nuts") have the same experience.

It all depends on your exact needs. Maybe staying with Canon, and getting a GH4 as a "backup/video" unit would make sense? The additional "usable lens line-up" cost is quite low for a start-up, and easily expandable later...

The only thing the GH4 doesn't do better in video is 1080p in-camera, and high-ISO work. OTOH, µFT have many very good, low-f/# lenses, so you don't need to crank ISO in the same way that you need with the A7s w. native lenses.



Aug 17, 2014 at 08:27 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


theSuede wrote:
OTOH if you're looking for convenient, extreme quality video and don't mind a video workflow, it's actually a better alternative to aim for a Pana GH4 - and then use that as a pure "on-the-side" video camera (that's capable of some reasonably competent still imagery - though not in sports or anything else demanding AF-C focusing). There's plenty of reasonably-priced, AF, high-quality glass to go with µFT!


I've been wanting to get into video for a while now, especially now 4K is becoming available. I looked for a long time at the GH4 on the basis that it shoots 4K internally and thus as a package is much cheaper than the A7s + Atomos Shogun 4K recorder. It's also proper cinema 4K in the GH4, not the TV standard 3.8K of the A7s.

However given I've moved to shooting the A7R for stills the need to acquire a set µFT lenses pushes me firmly back toward the Sony A7s. It just makes much more sense to share lenses and accessories. It does mean I'm going to wait until the Atomos Shogun is released, and potentially a bit longer for the price to come down or a competitor to appear.




Aug 20, 2014 at 06:59 AM
joychris
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


Are you looking to switch systems completely? I did, but about 90% of my focus is video so the A7s made a lot of sense for me. If you shoot a lot of stills and need fast AF, adapted Canon lenses are obviously slower than native glass. The A7s AF is good - for a mirrorless - but its not DSLR fast/accurate. I rarely shoot action with stills, so the A7s AF covers most of my needs. I'm getting the A6000 for faster AF situations.

If you're thinking A7s mostly for video, IMO AF should be less of a concern since no DSLR AF does a great job of maintaining focus when shooting video. I use the AF as a starting point and focus manually from there. But I mostly use Zeiss C/Y lenses for video because of the long focus throw and manual aperture. Small adjustments are much more difficult on AF lenses because the focus throw is so short on most of them. The 70d is pretty good, but most of the time it doesn't look very natural to me. If you're heavily invested in Canon, rent an A7s to see if it works for you.

The 1080p from the A7s is amazing as long as you watch out for the rolling shutter in FF mode and the highlight aliasing that comes up from time to time. Sharp and detailed, killer DR, with far less noise than anything Canon or the GH4. The noise at 1600 on the GH4 is about the same as 12800 on the A7s.



Aug 20, 2014 at 08:48 AM
rishio media
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


After trying my first Canon FD to eMount adapter for the Sony A7s, I wouldn't recommend going that route. The adapter (I have a Fotodiox) takes about 5x the force to mount onto the eMount and I fear it could damage the mount so I'm returning it. Probably best to go native rather than taking chances with things that can destroy your expensive camera mount! Let's see if new lenses are announced at Photokina.


Aug 20, 2014 at 04:58 PM
Jonas B
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


All adapters aren't the same. Buy a good one instead of ditching all those great options out there (the mentioned Zeiss C/Y lenses is just one way to go).


Aug 20, 2014 at 05:23 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


Its 12 mpix, not that demanding as 24 mpix or 36 mpix. About as much as good old D700. Which really isnt much..


Aug 20, 2014 at 05:29 PM
rishio media
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


Know of the good adapter companies? I'd like to find one for my Canon FD lens and my Zeiss M42 Lens. The prices for good ones are a bit crazy - I see the best ones are over $300 on B&H! I didn't expect to spend so much on quality adapters.. Is high quality under $100 possible?


Aug 20, 2014 at 05:38 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


rishio media wrote:
After trying my first Canon FD to eMount adapter for the Sony A7s, I wouldn't recommend going that route. The adapter (I have a Fotodiox) takes about 5x the force to mount onto the eMount and I fear it could damage the mount so I'm returning it. Probably best to go native rather than taking chances with things that can destroy your expensive camera mount! Let's see if new lenses are announced at Photokina.


I've bought about 10 different Ebay E-mount adapters and they have all been just fine.

Certainly some bad ones may be out there, I'm not arguing that point, but these things are $10 or less. If one doesn't work right, chuck it and get another. Odds are it will be fine.

Thousands of people are using adapted FD glass on the A7 models with no issue. Don't let one rare incident shape your overall perception.

There is a whole world of adapted glass out there, and much of it is fantastic for video. In fact, for video I wouldn't even use AF, just doesn't work well.

Even when shooting otherwise nice native lens like the 35 and 55 FE's, I manually focus them during video



Aug 20, 2014 at 06:19 PM
herion
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


It's not a A7/r/s, but I have an EOS-M. I'm waiting to see what Canon comes out with since like the OP, I am invested in the Canon system. While I see the appeal and applications for a MILC camera, I'm not going to jump in half-cocked and complain because I can't do what I want/need. I have the Canon EF/EF-M adapter and it works great.

The hardest thing is being patient.



Aug 20, 2014 at 06:55 PM
rishio media
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


>>
I've bought about 10 different Ebay E-mount adapters and they have all been just fine.

Certainly some bad ones may be out there, I'm not arguing that point, but these things are $10 or less. If one doesn't work right, chuck it and get another. Odds are it will be fine.

Thousands of people are using adapted FD glass on the A7 models with no issue. Don't let one rare incident shape your overall perception.

There is a whole world of adapted glass out there, and much of it is fantastic for video. In fact, for video I wouldn't even use AF, just doesn't work well.

Even when shooting otherwise nice native lens like the 35 and 55 FE's, I manually focus them during video

>>

Thanks for the insight. I manually focus as much as I use back-button auto focus as well. Waiting to see what Carl Zeiss offers down the pipeline.

Good to know that my first experience with adapters isn't the norm. I'll try something else and see if it feels right..



Aug 20, 2014 at 07:08 PM
jimmy462
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


popinvasion wrote:
The lenses available are expensive, super expensive and just don't fit my needs exactly. The alternative of buying a $400 adaptor that mostly works but compromises the lenses performace(af for photos etc) sounds unappealing. I love my canon gear and I'm quite invested but the A7S is nearly the perfect camera for my needs. I just don't see canon getting close anytime soon. It's a dilemma. Anyone else struggling with this?


Hi popinvasion,

I consider the a7s a small-form video camera, not a stills camera. Something Sony put in the market to hold their place, if you will, with competition from BlackMagic. The a7S is half-baked, from my perspective, with 8-bit 4:2:2 out vs the 10-bit 4:2:2 of the GH4 and BlackMagic cameras, and only 120 fps @ 720P vs. 120 fps @ 1080P on the FZ1000.

What this tells me is that Sony is marketing to protect its higher end video products rather than marketing to prevent camera sales hemorrhaging to external competition. And they are not alone in this strategy.

So where does that leave independent shooters looking for creative tools that will deliver better product than what current DSLR or mirrorless or mobile devices are cranking out? Between a rock and a hard place, literally.

I agree, the thought of using my Canon lenses on the a7S is not filling me with thrill and excitement. But it would be truly nice to shoot SLog2 at ISO 102,400.

Canon gets off easy with me for the time being, I'm budgeted for 2 new camera heads sometime early next year, and they might not be Canon DSLR's at this point. But they're a dollar short and a day late for plenty of other shooters who've already moved on to the competition's gear.

I have the luxury of being able to wait for the next 6-months or so to see what the market place will bring. Hopefully the choices for small-form video heads will have something to please us both! I am looking forward to what lays beyond my current 5D2 and 7D 1080P days.

I hope your needs are answered soon.


Jimmy G



Aug 20, 2014 at 07:18 PM
theSuede
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


Matt Grum wrote:
I've been wanting to get into video for a while now, especially now 4K is becoming available. I looked for a long time at the GH4 on the basis that it shoots 4K internally and thus as a package is much cheaper than the A7s + Atomos Shogun 4K recorder. It's also proper cinema 4K in the GH4, not the TV standard 3.8K of the A7s.

However given I've moved to shooting the A7R for stills the need to acquire a set µFT lenses pushes me firmly back toward the Sony A7s. It just makes much more sense to
...Show more

Given that you already made the jump to the A7r, that would make a lot of sense. You already have the absolute need to invest in lenses for the Sony system. And actually, the 1080p in-camera material you get from the A7s is better than the in-camera 1080p from the GH4. So it depends on what workflow you want... The GH4 is best when used at 4k, and scaled in post.

But after having worked with the convenience of 4K material (PP cropping-zooming, and then downsampling to 1080p) you don't really want to go back. IF you're willing to take the step and get fluent in video-PP, something I'll gladly admit isn't for everyone.

The noise difference per ISO is about 2Ev, which is exactly what you'd expect. Used with native lenses, that difference gets closer to zero, since you have lots of good native F1.4-1.8 lenses for the Pana, less so for the Sony unless you go full manual adapted.

When compared at equal image settings (camera settings that give the same look and DoF in the finished product, the video) the difference is very small indeed, approaching zero. I don't often shoot F1.2-1.4 on the FF videos, it's much easier and less cheezy to use more reasonable DoF's like you get at F2.8 @ FF.



Aug 21, 2014 at 06:45 AM
Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


popinvasion wrote:
The lenses available are expensive, super expensive and just don't fit my needs exactly. The alternative of buying a $400 adaptor that mostly works but compromises the lenses performace(af for photos etc) sounds unappealing. I love my canon gear and I'm quite invested


I'm loving shooting Canon lenses with manual focus on the A7R. It's only AF that's poor, everything else works like a dream, even better than the native lenses (which are focus-by-wire and wont let you MF with the lens wide open in exposure preview mode, unlike adapted Canon lenses!)

jimmy462 wrote:
I consider the a7s a small-form video camera, not a stills camera


Exactly, you'll never have a camera that's great at both stills and video. The resolution requirements are too disparate, a high res stills camera will always be line skipping at the cost of sensitivity whilst the full sensor readout cameras will be limited in resolution.


theSuede wrote:
When compared at equal image settings (camera settings that give the same look and DoF in the finished product, the video) the difference is very small indeed, approaching zero. I don't often shoot F1.2-1.4 on the FF videos, it's much easier and less cheezy to use more reasonable DoF's like you get at F2.8 @ FF.


Yeah I figured the low light advantage would more or less be moot given the need to stop down on the full frame sensor to get a manageable DOF. The one exception would be shooting wide with something a 21mm f/1.8, for my purposes DOF would be ok for non closeup shots, and the shortest comparable lens for µ43 is a 17.5mm f/0.95

I also considered the Blackmagic production camera. I'd love to work in RAW, the workflow doesn't phase me at all, but I'd probably need to shoot with a lighting rig as the sensor isn't tuned for low light (mainly due to the global shutter I imagine). I'll take rolling shutter and the ability to shoot with available light any day.



Aug 21, 2014 at 08:23 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


DPReview: "Sony a7S used to shoot Chevrolet commercial",

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2453194558/sony-a7s-used-to-shoot-chevrolet-commercial

...with a Nikkor *ED 600/4 lens.



Aug 21, 2014 at 08:45 AM
snapsy
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


theSuede wrote:
Given that you already made the jump to the A7r, that would make a lot of sense. You already have the absolute need to invest in lenses for the Sony system. And actually, the 1080p in-camera material you get from the A7s is better than the in-camera 1080p from the GH4. So it depends on what workflow you want... The GH4 is best when used at 4k, and scaled in post.

But after having worked with the convenience of 4K material (PP cropping-zooming, and then downsampling to 1080p) you don't really want to go back. IF you're willing to take the
...Show more

Would agree on most these points except the importance of native lens selection. Most video is shot in MF mode; as good as the GH4's AF is, the demonstrations I've seen of its AF in video mode is still lacking for all but the most basic use. As for MF, the GH4 still lacks the ability to magnify while recording, which for me is a deal breaker if you're not carrying around a rig with an external HDMI monitor for focus.



Aug 21, 2014 at 08:49 AM
joychris
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


jimmy462 wrote:
Hi popinvasion,

I consider the a7s a small-form video camera, not a stills camera. Something Sony put in the market to hold their place, if you will, with competition from BlackMagic. The a7S is half-baked, from my perspective, with 8-bit 4:2:2 out vs the 10-bit 4:2:2 of the GH4 and BlackMagic cameras, and only 120 fps @ 720P vs. 120 fps @ 1080P on the FZ1000.

What this tells me is that Sony is marketing to protect its higher end video products rather than marketing to prevent camera sales hemorrhaging to external competition. And they are not alone in this strategy.

So where
...Show more

Numbers don't tell the entire story, the A7s internal files have more DR and far less noise than the GH4 - regardless of GH4 output. There's a great thread on DVXuser - both cameras recorded externally - that shows the GH4 noise at 1600 is about the same as the A7s at 12,800 - despite "only" being 8-bit. The GH4 at 3200 is so noisy, I found it unusable even after noise reduction, and that's with the 200mbps bitrate, the A7s easily tops it at 50mbps. So my 64gb card has 4x the recording time and produces better 1080p. I have to push the A7s beyond 51200 before noise hits the unusable point, the FZ1000 will be worse than the GH4 noise-wise due to its sensor size. Blackmagic have very limited ISO's and no frame rates beyond 30p, plus they're plagued by aliasing and moire - except for the 4k cam which uses the global shutter at the expense of DR. Blackmagic cameras are the very definition of half-baked, they have numerous issues that BM doesn't seem to have the engineering staff to overcome. The A7s is also free of aliasing and moire. Rolling shutter can be an issue, but then you just shoot in APS-c mode and its at the same levels as any of the other top performing DSLR's.

Everyone's needs are different, but the superior DR of the A7s makes the image less video-ish, highlight rolloff is so much more natural and its pretty tough to introduce banding in the video - something that will appear far more often when using the smaller sensor - especially the FZ1000. The A7s 1080 24/30/60p outclasses everything in its price range, 120fps is a nice to use in a pinch, but I would think that's not the criteria most decisions hinge on. No camera is perfect, but the A7s is an amazing value when you consider you have to spend twice as much to get a marginal improvement in IQ - the Canon C100 which doesn't do 60p. YMMV



Aug 21, 2014 at 08:55 AM
AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · I would love an A7S mostly for video but...


jimmy462 wrote:
The a7S is half-baked, from my perspective, with 8-bit 4:2:2 out vs the 10-bit 4:2:2 of the GH4 and BlackMagic cameras, and only 120 fps @ 720P vs. 120 fps @ 1080P on the FZ1000.


How many cameras do you know that have a full frame sensor and the capabilities of the GH4 or FZ1000? The difference in sensor size makes fast readout more challenging.



Aug 21, 2014 at 09:57 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.