Industry News: Sony officially announces the Alpha A7s III

Nov 1, 2012
1,549
269
I was mildly happy to finally see camera with proper 240fps video with AF and all.

However, it doesn't weigh enough against the bad things:
$3500
Sony
CFE Type A (???? like seriously, Sony is notorious for using other format than anyone else, but I thought they'd learn in 30 years...)
Sony
I don't have and native lenses

So for me it's easy pass, although I'd hope I find Canon mirrorless with 240fps too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,678
2,592
I was mildly happy to finally see camera with proper 240fps video with AF and all.

However, it doesn't weigh enough against the bad things:
$3500
Sony
CFE Type A (???? like seriously, Sony is notorious for using other format than anyone else, but I thought they'd learn in 30 years...)
Sony
I don't have and native lenses

So for me it's easy pass, although I'd hope I find Canon mirrorless with 240fps too.

You forgot two things: Sony and Sony.

Oh, and Sony.
 
Upvote 0

AlP

EOS R5
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2018
94
188
The whole internet seems to be comparing the A7SIII to the R5. Makes no sense, but I think Canon marketing is at least in part to blame for that.

If I look at the website of Canon Japan, the R5 features pitched there from top to bottom are roughly (some are described in more detail than others):
  • sensor and processor
  • ISO range
  • Dual Pixel RAW
  • HDR PQ HEIF
  • IBIS and EF compatibility
  • 8K and 4K video
  • AF including animal AF
  • Framerate
  • Battery
  • Ergonomics
  • Durability
  • Connectivity/wireless
Video is one item out of many and it comes at 6th place. This is the description of a stills camera with video functionality. I would agree with the message being conveyed there, this is how a 5D-line successor should look like (although in my opinion wireless capabilities should have a more prominent role in 2020)

However, the hype-building marketing before the R5 launch focused mostly on 8K video, a strong contrast to the above. The internet then just amplified the hype.
The R6? It's a mini-1DXIII for less than half the price with excellent 4K (limited in recording time though), launched at the same time as the R5, and it has never been mentioned.

That's could be fine, but then you have to deliver. And I am not talking about performance. Some of the A7SIII video "reviews" seem to be well prepared, indicating that the cameras were available weeks before launch and could be tested thoroughly.
R5 and R6? With the exception of Canon ambassadors, the others got mostly pre-production models for a limited time and were not allowed to test everything. And likely they got them after the A7SIII. That will inevitably lead to the type of comparisons we are seeing now.

Youtube is not everything and such thing can happen, but add this to a somewhat incoherent marketing message and it is no wonder that suddenly 12 MP on the Sony are more than enough for stills, while 20 MP on the R6 were a disaster. Go figure.

As usual, dust will settle at some point once people start using the tools for the purpose they were designed for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
Aug 26, 2015
1,380
1,042
The whole internet seems to be comparing the A7SIII to the R5. Makes no sense, but I think Canon marketing is at least in part to blame for that.

Youtube is not everything and such thing can happen, but add this to a somewhat incoherent marketing message and it is no wonder that suddenly 12 MP on the Sony are more than enough for stills, while 20 MP on the R6 were a disaster. Go figure.

As usual, dust will settle at some point once people start using the tools for the purpose they were designed for.
No, it's actually not that. It is that Canon will not provide a direct alternative to the A7SIII as such, the R5 and R6 do provide some of features that the A7SIII does. (Some better some worse) So they are going to be compared as there is no A7IV to pitch against the R6 and it would be the same story again, some things better on one camera, others on the other.

So the alternative would be to say that the A7SIII is not comparable at all to any Canon and it is the default choice, Canon is still leaving the video by the wayside bla bla bla.

But it is not the A7S and A7SII vs DSLR Canon days anymore.
We are looking to have really good Canon mirrorless cameras with great IBIS, video features, and all that stuff.

So the big picture looks quite different, Sony has refined something that was very good (it's hard to argue about the A7SIII being very good, but it is expensive and does not act as a full replacement for everything), while Canon is coming in full steam ahead in 2020. Not perfect of course, but a huge change, all things considered. They are very serious tools for video even with the potential overheating problems, which can be mitigated with the R5 better since it has so many different recording modes and it isn't severe in about half of them (and the rolling shutter also becomes more comparable to the A7SIII which is its party piece). The R5 is the overall better video camera it looks like but of course the R6 might still be good.


I fully agree on the megapixel thing though, in the A7RII days it was that much better to have 42MP as opposed to 30MP in the 5D IV and suddenly 12MP is really enough.
 
Upvote 0

AlP

EOS R5
CR Pro
Sep 5, 2018
94
188
No, it's actually not that. It is that Canon will not provide a direct alternative to the A7SIII as such, the R5 and R6 do provide some of features that the A7SIII does. (Some better some worse) So they are going to be compared as there is no A7IV to pitch against the R6 and it would be the same story again, some things better on one camera, others on the other.

So the alternative would be to say that the A7SIII is not comparable at all to any Canon and it is the default choice, Canon is still leaving the video by the wayside bla bla bla.

But it is not the A7S and A7SII vs DSLR Canon days anymore.
We are looking to have really good Canon mirrorless cameras with great IBIS, video features, and all that stuff.

So the big picture looks quite different, Sony has refined something that was very good (it's hard to argue about the A7SIII being very good, but it is expensive and does not act as a full replacement for everything), while Canon is coming in full steam ahead in 2020. Not perfect of course, but a huge change, all things considered. They are very serious tools for video even with the potential overheating problems, which can be mitigated with the R5 better since it has so many different recording modes and it isn't severe in about half of them (and the rolling shutter also becomes more comparable to the A7SIII which is its party piece). The R5 is the overall better video camera it looks like but of course the R6 might still be good.


I fully agree on the megapixel thing though, in the A7RII days it was that much better to have 42MP as opposed to 30MP in the 5D IV and suddenly 12MP is really enough.

I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point. I am not talking about the products, and I am not talking about the camera market as a whole (that's why I started with "the whole internet", which was meant to be a bit sarcastic) or the big picture. I was mostly talking about Canon marketing and a certain incoherence in the message, and about delivering samples a bit late and with limitations about what can be tested.

One could of course argue that this will have limited impact on total sales, as the "internet" I mentioned is likely only a small subset of the target market (but for sure a loud one), and is therefore not that relevant. I would agree with that as well.

Personally I couldn't care less. My R5 should get here within the next 10 days and it looks like the perfect camera for what I intend to use it for :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
So ok to mention Sony overheating (after an hour?), but everyone gangs up on ya if you mention Canon overheating at 20 minutes....then 3 minutes...

Yeah, just like it is OK to think this 12 MP camera is the greatest thing since sliced bread right after bitchin' about the R6 having "only" 20 megapixels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
The release says it can do 4K60P for over an hour. I see nothing about 4K120 limitations.

" even during extended continuous recording sessions at 4K 60p 10-bit 4:2:2 video lasting an hour or more. "

If so, good. And I get the low light thing - I imagine that is attributable in part to their small sensor design. Dunno.

I guess you really need to be a player to understand the game.

Thanks for the info!

It's a crop sensor?
 
Upvote 0
Aug 26, 2015
1,380
1,042
I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point. I am not talking about the products, and I am not talking about the camera market as a whole (that's why I started with "the whole internet", which was meant to be a bit sarcastic) or the big picture. I was mostly talking about Canon marketing and a certain incoherence in the message, and about delivering samples a bit late and with limitations about what can be tested.

One could of course argue that this will have limited impact on total sales, as the "internet" I mentioned is likely only a small subset of the target market (but for sure a loud one), and is therefore not that relevant. I would agree with that as well.

Personally I couldn't care less. My R5 should get here within the next 10 days and it looks like the perfect camera for what I intend to use it for :)
I don't see anything wrong with Canon's marketing. It should be attention grabbing and long-lasting, and the 8K is exactly that.

As the past perception was "they are leaving stills cameras (DSLRs) behind for video" while now they say "we are actually serious about FF mirrorless or about still cameras for video" which is actually true, they have a stils camera with an excellent sensor, that is actually able to shoot 8K before their Cinema cameras do - but of course they will leave some things to their Cinema cameras.

It is only the timing that's a pure coincidence and makes these comparisons all over the internet. In reality, there have been cameras with worse overheating and people had no trouble using them for their particular line of work. Same thing with the ISO, Sony is again looks to be the best, but is that really how most people shoot? Probably not, and Canon has once again made a significant step forward by utilising the whole sensor, so it also reaches an excellent level.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 25, 2011
2,509
1,884
i dont hate canon, i have been shooting canon since 2003, and i still have a 5d3. That said i am not loyal to any brand, i shoot sony, nikon and black magic as well. Canon dropped the ball here, if you cant see that youre just a fan boy.
I am a stills shooter... what ball, again?

Canon is yet to release an RF mount video camera.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
So like I absolutely have no interest in video so maybe I am missing the point of all this but are people so upset at Canon because the R5, a compact hybrid prosumer camera, offering specs that's never been seen before in this form factor and at this price point, is not performing on par with a dedicated video camera that costs double or more in price? Yea Canon gone done f*cked up here. /sarcasm

Having said that I would absolutely love to see a R5 stripped of its top end video features and come out at a price like at least $1000 cheaper; some of the specs for a stills shooter such as myself especially with the IBIS and eye AF seems like real a game changer here.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
4,722
2,655
So like I absolutely have no interest in video so maybe I am missing the point of all this but are people so upset at Canon because the R5, a compact hybrid prosumer camera, offering specs that's never been seen before in this form factor and at this price point, is not performing on par with a dedicated video camera that costs double or more in price? Yea Canon gone done f*cked up here. /sarcasm

Having said that I would absolutely love to see a R5 stripped of its top end video features and come out at a price like at least $1000 cheaper; some of the specs for a stills shooter such as myself especially with the IBIS and eye AF seems like real a game changer here.

The reason it has 45 MP resolution and can shoot 12/20fps is precisely because the video specs they were shooting for required the same kind of hardware that can do 45MP@ 12/20 fps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
The reason it has 45 MP resolution and can shoot 12/20fps is precisely because the video specs they were shooting for required the same kind of hardware that can do 45MP@ 12/20 fps.
Why can't it be the other way around?

Anyway it's all semantics; don't like a brand/camera, don't buy it/use it. I come on the forums to post photos (shocking I know) and for laughs at how aggressively angry and upset some individuals are at whatever is/not their favouite brands. As a Canon shooter I actually actively recommend people asking me for advice on getting a camera to also check out Nikon/Sony etc because they are typically better spec'ed (and more importantly find one that feels good in the hand that you'd actually enjoy using and suit your needs) than Canon offerings but for me personally I have zero inclination to swap because I don't find my Canon kit limiting and I've tried a Sony and disliked the ergo. Not to mention Canon has a great ecosystem and I've only had great experiences with Canon Australia's support.

But yea as much as I'd love a R5 I can't justify paying current Aussie pricing especially with me not shooting as much as before and not being able to travel (my M6II has taken over my day to day walk around duties from my 5DIV).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I pre-ordered one. It suits my style of hybrid shooting quite well. I always felt the ideal hybrid MILC was one with a balanced set of specs.

I hope it works well for you! But... "ideal hybrid", really? Even DPR are pretty clear this isn't so much a hybrid as a video camera that can also shoot stills. Surely an ideal hybrid would do both to the same level. Given how many people said the R6 was DOA because it had "only" 20MP, I'd be surprised if most people thought 12MP was enough for stills shooting. So not ideal at all...?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0