And on Reddit a photographer said "if anyone is still looking for a wired intervalometer for USB-C, you can use a Godox Xpro3 trigger and a 2.5mm to USB C. It works wonders as it’s tactile"
rd4tile wrote:
I used the old Sony RMT-P1BT Wireless Remote Commander via bluetooth for the FW shots above.
I just paired my old blue tooth Sony RMT-P1BT to the A7RVI, seems working so far. I also ordered a JJC wired remote (USB-C) from eBay, supposedly it works with the A7RVI. Will find out in few weeks when it arrives from China. I like to have two working remote controls just in case.
Does anyone have the slightest understanding why, or even speculation why, this legacy feature of the slower USB port (USB port 2) is an undocumented function of the camera? All the old wired remotes do is pull one terminal or the other low to trigger focus and shutter (short one or the other to ground). Apparently the old functionality exists and obviously no harm is done, but for some reason Sony doesn't want it promoted. It's a total mystery to me.
AZSteve wrote:
Does anyone have the slightest understanding why, or even speculation why, this legacy feature of the slower USB port (USB port 2) is an undocumented function of the camera? All the old wired remotes do is pull one terminal or the other low to trigger focus and shutter (short one or the other to ground). Apparently the old functionality exists and obviously no harm is done, but for some reason Sony doesn't want it promoted. It's a total mystery to me.
This is common in complex product development. While the Sony product management decides which features to build, document and support, the reality is that Sony cannot design & manufacture every component of a camera. They work with OEM partners who supply them with the components as long as they conform to the product specification. It's common for a supplied part to support MORE than the product spec called for. Sometimes the extra functionality is disabled. But when it can't be done, it's simply not mentioned/documented. It is also importnat for supply chain protection, when you have an OEM with the extra fuctionality, but the next generation of that particular part may not have it.
Another possible reason would be the obsolescence planning. If their product people believe that a certain functionality will not be used/needed in a distant future, but the future is too distant to discontinue the support right away, they choose the "soft landing" path when the feature is retained but no longer talked about, in order to gradually "drain the usage" among users prior to eventual discontinuation with minimized backlash.
Anyone have a link to a solid review of the camera from a video perspective, rather than photo? Been sorting through reviews for a few hours and now I'm overwhelmed lol.
Tarekith wrote:
Check out Chris and especially Jordan’s take on the PetaPixel review.
While I found that review generally informative regarding video capabilities, it made it sound like there is no good mode for getting sharp 4k video out of the thing, which is surprising to put it mildly. Reading between the lines, though, it left open that there might be a crop mode where the line skipping wasn't severe enough to cripple the output. Does anyone know of a review that goes into enough depth to see if that is true?
I downloaded a sample RAW file for the A7R VI, but in Lightroom Classic (the latest version), there are no camera matching profiles. Only the Adobe profiles. Is anyone else seeing this?
bcaslis wrote:
I downloaded a sample RAW file for the A7R VI, but in Lightroom Classic (the latest version), there are no camera matching profiles. Only the Adobe profiles. Is anyone else seeing this?
The current version of Lightroom is described as having 'preliminary support' for the A7Rvi. I'm guessing this means, in part, that the profiles haven't all been created yet. I'm sure they will show up in an update before long.
They still don't have camera matching profiles for A7V
bcaslis wrote:
I downloaded a sample RAW file for the A7R VI, but in Lightroom Classic (the latest version), there are no camera matching profiles. Only the Adobe profiles. Is anyone else seeing this?
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
Anyone have a link to a solid review of the camera from a video perspective, rather than photo? Been sorting through reviews for a few hours and now I'm overwhelmed lol.
See the video by Jason Morris on youtube. Specifically the one where he compares it to the FX3. It is actually a great video performer considering it is 68 megapixels. The DGO in 4k and being able to do decent 4k 120 are standouts for me. The detail is in line with what the fx3 produces and you can get more detail by shooting in 8k or in crop model.
MikeEvangelist wrote:
The current version of Lightroom is described as having 'preliminary support' for the A7Rvi. I'm guessing this means, in part, that the profiles haven't all been created yet. I'm sure they will show up in an update before long.
Probably not the right place to ask, but has anyone tried the Cobalt profiles for the A7R6 yet? It is listed on the Cobalt website.
MikeEvangelist wrote:
The current version of Lightroom is described as having 'preliminary support' for the A7Rvi. I'm guessing this means, in part, that the profiles haven't all been created yet. I'm sure they will show up in an update before long.
That’s one of the several reasons that I wait a while after a new camera’s introduction to buy. A few months later a lot of important/critical stuff for the camera arrives: software updates, L-brackets, etc.
rob_ww wrote:
Probably not the right place to ask, but has anyone tried the Cobalt profiles for the A7R6 yet? It is listed on the Cobalt website.
Maybe not a "wrong" spot but with this thread gaining on 80 pages, several internal points at work, a separate thread for profiles, adding "software" support, etc., might be easier to add to and follow, too?
rob_ww wrote:
Probably not the right place to ask, but has anyone tried the Cobalt profiles for the A7R6 yet? It is listed on the Cobalt website.
I have, and use, the Cobalt profiles for my A7R6. They work fairly well, although I would like to have other choices for some shots... all in good time.
InFocus2014 wrote:
I have, and use, the Cobalt profiles for my A7R6. They work fairly well, although I would like to have other choices for some shots... all in good time.
Thanks. Did you get the new spectre version? I haven't bought a profile since the one for my A7CR a few years ago, so I don't know much about the latest versions. I like the one for the A7CR however and use it pretty much all the time unless there is a specific challenge with an image. For me it is consistently better than the *standard* profiles provided by Adobe in LRC.
I did try a couple of add-on profiles to the base pack but they never really worked for me. I just found that the base pack gave truer colours (to my eye) than anything else, so I have stuck with that.
gdanmitchell wrote:
That’s one of the several reasons that I wait a while after a new camera’s introduction to buy. A few months later a lot of important/critical stuff for the camera arrives: software updates, L-brackets, etc.
There are those of us who have the mental deficiency that serves to seek instant gratification and dopamine hits, all aroused by manufacturer pre-release propaganda contrived to do just that. Therefore, we (of questionable mental stability) have learned, over time in this same cycle, to endure living without such "necessities" for the initial period of newly-released equipment ownership. Rinse and repeat.
