p.9 #1 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
I'm actually MUCH more excited about those two lenses. That 24-105 f4 is coming in at a competitive price with optical stabilization. If it has great rendering, it will be in my bag.
p.9 #3 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Playmemories Home is mentioned.
Playmemories Mobile is mentioned.
But in the spec page '-' is listed for use with the Playmemories apps
in question such as Timelapse, Smooth-Reflections, etc.
Same with the a9 and the RX10iv.
I would not get my hopes up.
A co-worker in the hospital who uses an A7Rii and HATES fiddling with filters saw the
release specs on the Riii said 'not interested if no apps'...I knew this was linked to his
avoidance of filters.
The only hope is smartphone implementation of this like timelapse I'm afraid.
I wasn't surprised on my a9 but the RX10iv that came last week did take me back thinking
apps have consumer level written all over them and that the RX10iv would be something the
smartphone users could relate to....Show more →
Good catch. Here's the spec page for the A7rII, which shows "Yes" instead of "-":
p.9 #4 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
jhinkey wrote:
Seems like some folks don't really know what pixels shift is and how it differs from stitching.
Well, instead of being snarky, perhaps you could enlighten those of us genuinely ignorant of the advantages. I asked the question in good faith and explained where I was coming from.
p.9 #6 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Duckysaysquack wrote:
I hope there's no banding with silent shutter. I use my A7rii on silent all the time but always have to remember to use 1/60 for indoor lighting to avoid banding, or switch to mechanical. I really think silent shutter is the future.
Sony said the A7rIII's shutter is 2x faster than the A7rII, which still wont be nearly fast enough to avoid banding.
p.9 #7 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Matt Grum wrote:
Not really. I've just come back from a trip where I intentionally left the tripod at home. I shot some images at 1/10s at 55mm without noticeable camera shake. It's just a matter of good technique and IBIS. I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to keep to the 1/fl rule with a higher resolution (say 60-80MP) sensor when combined with a 5 stop IBIS system. You might get some artifacts with wide lenses from the IBIS, but then the shutter speed requirements are even lower.
1/fl takes you well beyond "really bright conditions" only for landscape usage.
I will wholeheartedly admit that I have yet to use in person Sony's IBIS. I do however, find it extremely difficult to believe that any image stabilization system is capable of reducing camera shake at a per pixel level on any FF camera with MP of this level. And per pixel sharpness is what we are talking about when maximizing resolution. Not acceptable perceived sharpness.
You may be finding your hand held images acceptably sharp at 1/FL. I guess I am saying that a hand held a7rii with IBIS with 1/FL may very likely have no actual resolution advantage over say an a7r on a tripod. Both may be acceptably sharp, but I am saying you may not be acquiring the advantage of those extra MP without proper stabilization. The same would apply to the original commentators wishing for more resolution in the a7riii. Without proper stabilization, it is very likely that the imaginary a7riii (with say 60MP) could have no additional resolution advantage when compared to a a7rii (or this real a7riii) on a tripod. This pretty much falls in line with what Canon shooters said when the 5DSR came out, the only difference being IBIS vs Canon lens IS.
All these things aside, this camera sounds great to me. Sounds like it finally fixes many of the things that originally kept me away from Sony (dual slots and battery life mainly). Always personal, but I'd take the mentioned improvements over more MP.
p.9 #9 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
"USB is a nice improvement but anyone using a card reader doesn't care."
Don't forget tethering. I shoot tethered fairly often with Capture One and the old USB 2.0 speed kept me from considering an A7Rii. Now it's in the game.
p.9 #12 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
CorsairVelo wrote:
Yes this is big for me as well I shoot tethered to C1 also. I’m selling my A9 for it. Couple concerns. Buffer, Af speed are those and I’m hoping it’s very close to the A9. It does have -3EV like the A9 for low light work and a host of features that actually mean something.
My other concern is AF points on vertical can get Eye AF close to the top . I think I’m losing AF points over the A9. So I need a little more confirmation on certain things.
p.9 #13 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
dgpfotografia wrote:
Ok, so maybe I explain myself wrong. USB-C has what it is called alternate-mode: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB-C#Alternate_Mode_partner_specifications . That allows to send audio and video signals (Display Port, HDMI, etc...). That is it is independent if just an USB3 controller is present or if a Thunderbolt 3 controller is present.
Sony's direction as you described it is good but I wanted a more up to date implementation.
Hopefully Sony will force Canon to at least equal them by 2020. My other system is the a7R II
p.9 #14 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Luvwine wrote:
Well, instead of being snarky, perhaps you could enlighten those of us genuinely ignorant of the advantages. I asked the question in good faith and explained where I was coming from.
I'm not him, and this may not be what he is getting it, but this is how I see it:
This isn't pixel shift to increase the image resolution or file size (pixel dimensions), it's de-bayer-filtering the pixels, so this is really completely different from a stitching approach. The file size remains the same, but the ability of the file to hold onto detail increases because the data is collected for R, G, and B at every location, rather than being approximated from nearby pixels.
It would be possible to increase the file size or resolution if they were to shift by 1/2 a pixel and then make a set of shots. It could feasibly be done by shooting a single 1/2 pixel shifted to the left and down, for example. However the much better implementation would be to shoot four with a full pixel shift over to de-bayer and then shoot another set of four 1/2 pixel shifted, for a total of 8. I think this is what Olympus does to double their resolution.
If you do a lot of copy work or art reproduction, this might produce a substantial improvement in sharpness from a 42MP file (assuming you have the optics to pull this off). I'm not sure how useful this will be for much of anything else the way they have it implemented.
What is clear is that you can use play memories for a number of things with the camera. You can use it to trip the shutter, which is important to a lot of folks. You can use it for GPS coding. You can use it to load photos to the web from your phone over cellular. Whether you can use it for smooth reflections and such we don't know, but I would be surprised if you cannot in time, but I don't know that for sure.
p.9 #16 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
Becoming more intriguing, but short of fast long teles still not interesting enough compared to Nikon or Canon for BIF. And still that body and that menu system.
Also wondering what their naming convention now means: does A9whatever stand for speed, body type, low resolution?
p.9 #18 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
dolina wrote:
Sony's direction as you described it is good but I wanted a more up to date implementation.
Hopefully Sony will force Canon to at least equal them by 2020. My other system is the a7R II
Well, videographers already hate mini-hdmi connectors, not sure if a dongle with USB-C Connector will convince them that it is better than a full HDMI connector.
p.9 #19 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
mjm6 wrote:
I'm not him, and this may not be what he is getting it, but this is how I see it:
This isn't pixel shift to increase the image resolution or file size (pixel dimensions), it's de-bayer-filtering the pixels, so this is really completely different from a stitching approach. The file size remains the same, but the ability of the file to hold onto detail increases because the data is collected for R, G, and B at ever location, rather than being approximated from nearby pixels.
It would be possible to do that if they were to shift by 1/2 a pixel and then make a set of shots. It could feasibly be done by shooting a single 1/2 pixel shifted to the left and down, for example. However the much better implementation would be to shoot four with a full pixel shift over to de-bayer and then shoot another set of four 1/2 pixel shifted, for a total of 8. I think this is what Olympus does to double their resolution.
If you do a lot of copy work or art reproduction, this might produce a substantial improvement in sharpness from a 42MP file (assuming you have the optics to pull this off). I'm not sure how useful this will be for much of anything else the way they have it implemented.
Thank you for the explanation. It does seem like Sony's implementation of Pixel shift leaves some things to be desired if I am understanding correctly. Still, I have read folks saying that Sony's implementation of pixel shift will provide a 99 MP image file after combining. I get the advantages of color reproduction--nothing to sneeze at for copy work and some other still life photography--but it was the larger image file that got me thinking. Again, with play memories SR app, we get less noise in the shadows and a single raw output. Now, they seem to be killing the apps but give us pixel shift. What the right hand giveth, the left hand taketh away. I would be much more attracted to pixel shift if it output a single raw file--especially if it increased resolution. As it seems to be, with the requirement of combining images in post (with proprietary software??), the advantage of pixel shift may be more limited than it could (should) have been and for those who are primarily interested in more resolution, stitching and combining in post may remain a viable (if inconvenient) alternative. Thank you for the helpful response and discussion.
p.9 #20 · Pre-orders open! Sony A7R III and FE 24-105mm f/4 OSS lens!
dgpfotografia wrote:
Well, videographers already hate mini-hdmi connectors, not sure if a dongle with USB-C Connector will convince them that it is better than a full HDMI connector.
HDMI is pretty large
