A7 III surfaces

[ahsanford]

https://petapixel.com/2018/02/26/sony-a7-iii-feature-filled-24mp-4k-full-frame-mirrorless-1999/

If the spec sheet complainers and value proposition folks don't have a field day comparing this to the 6D2, I would be stunned. Regardless of Canon's long-standing advantages with ergonomics, lens selection, sealing, quality, etc., one cannot deny Sony is offering a ton over the 6D2 here for $1999:

10 fps with mechanical shutter -- no forcing you to go to e-shutter for high fps like the A9
Sony sensor hotness (will it get the same +2.5 stop base ISO DR advantage as the A7R3?)
IBIS
Dual slots
4K w/o any crop
Eye AF

I'm not saying it's a better camera than the 6D2 -- we have no idea how well this thing works. But the delta in spec sheets is growing, and at some point, one might think that would drive conversions to the Sony fold.

Also, we are due for a Nikon D620 or D760, are we not? It, too, may stir the pot at this price point.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Anybody that buys a camera because of a spec sheet is an idiot. Anybody that buys a Sony because of a headline spec sheet is even more stupid.

I’m not saying a Sony camera or Nikon etc might not be a better purchase for any one user over a Canon camera, just that spec sheets are not the best way to get the best tool for your personal uses. Far too many caveats, limitations and overall dishonesty in the spec sheets to take them seriously now.

I was watching a video comparing the 1DX MkII to the A7R II earlier and the guy desperately wanted to prefer the Sony, but after using both for a few weeks for his personal uses he had to admit the 1DX MkII was the better option, the killer feature for him was AF during video. He did say if he only shot stills he’d prefer the Sony, he also said the Canon colors were shockingly better, he’d imagined that was an imagined thing, but after actually using the two he much preferred the Canon. Oh he also touched on the DR and said in his testing and actual use he couldn’t see any advantage in his real world footage from the supposedly better Sony.

 

[ahsanford]

Anybody that buys a camera because of a spec sheet is an idiot. Anybody that buys a Sony because of a headline spec sheet is even more stupid.

Yes, but you are informed. Many, many consumers are not.

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Anybody that buys a camera because of a spec sheet is an idiot. Anybody that buys a Sony because of a headline spec sheet is even more stupid.

Yes, but you are informed. Many, many consumers are not.

- A

Then they probably aren’t reading this! Those that are here are either equally well informed or are generally trolling, both of which we seem to have in ever increasing numbers here. :

Kinda like the M50, big 4K banner headline, turns out it is a heavy crop and DPAF doesn’t work when using it. However it’s 1080 is fantastic and the DPAF is a video market leader that nobody else is close to. So what’s more important? The 4K that you’ll try a couple of times then dismiss because it is too much hassle or the killer 1080 with unmatched AF?

 

[Tugela]

Anybody that buys a camera because of a spec sheet is an idiot. Anybody that buys a Sony because of a headline spec sheet is even more stupid.

Yes, but you are informed. Many, many consumers are not.

- A

Then they probably aren’t reading this! Those that are here are either equally well informed or are generally trolling, both of which we seem to have in ever increasing numbers here. :

Kinda like the M50, big 4K banner headline, turns out it is a heavy crop and DPAF doesn’t work when using it. However it’s 1080 is fantastic and the DPAF is a video market leader that nobody else is close to. So what’s more important? The 4K that you’ll try a couple of times then dismiss because it is too much hassle or the killer 1080 with unmatched AF?

I would choose to use the 4K I use all of the time and dismiss the 1080p I never use. The latest version of Sony AF is as good as DPAF anyway, so whatever advantage that supposedly might give the M50 at lower resolutions is irrelevant.

For me the M50 is a massive fail. If you are a consumer like myself, then the only real option is Sony and (to a lesser extent) Panasonic. Canon are not in the game at all.

 

[ecqns]

Why do so many here get upset when Sony releases a new camera? Obviously Sony does somehow make great cameras that pros use, I can attest to that, so why do many here disparage those that might be tempted to try one? Especially if you haven't owned both systems for a period of time you really can't have an educated opinion about the comparison.

 

[mjg79]

I've tried the A7 series (I've used the original A7R and the MkII) and it really wasn't for me, something about Sony gear just never quite seems to fit my approach and I felt like I was fighting against it or maybe I am just used to Canon's ergonomics. I also don't really trust Sony and wouldn't want to invest too much money in anything they create.

So I can honestly state I am not a Sony fanboy! Indeed had the A7 series been made by Fuji or Olympus I would have been far more likely to consider switching.

Despite all that I am always very happy to see more competition and must concede that the A7III looks a fabulous camera at the price. It will drive the market forward and if people buy this camera in large numbers it will push Canon to fight back with technology and keener prices.

The size differences of EF v E mount are often overstated (indeed put a 24-70/2.8GM on an A7 and it's bigger than a 5DSR with 24-70/2.8L) and there is no "right" answer as to which is better in that sense so I don't really focus on that. But a feature like Sony consistently offering full frame cameras with in body image stabilisation will get noticed. Sooner or later Canon will introduce it in their DSLRs and I am sure they will do it better than Sony - I look forward to a full frame version of what Olympus does with in-lens and in-body stabilisation working together to give some astonishing results. However Canon will introduce it when they feel under some pressure. The same can be said of including some very advanced focus systems in this price bracket.

So really we should be pleased to see this camera and pleased too to see Sigma's Art lenses - if people buy them then Canon will fight back and the consumer wins. Not long ago one could state very easily that the Sony offerings were severely compromised - in terms of lens selection, features like auto-focus and battery life. That is no longer the case. It makes me excited to see what Canon comes back with in the coming years.

 

[Deleted member 379512]

Why do so many here get upset when Sony releases a new camera? Obviously Sony does somehow make great cameras that pros use, I can attest to that, so why do many here disparage those that might be tempted to try one? Especially if you haven't owned both systems for a period of time you really can't have an educated opinion about the comparison.

Being on a Canon forum, I can kinda understand why this opinion comes up, but I do feel a lot of the disparaging comments are based on older models, a bit like how much of the dynamic range is mostly based on the older Canon models - battery life, hand grip etc. Sony have really made some big jumps in nearly all these areas. Every one will have a different opinion on what matters in a camera, and some of these improvements won't be quite there yet for others, but I do feel that Sony have stepped up to the criticism on the most part.

I am quite keen to see if Canon can make the same improvements in the areas where they are behind too

 

[dak723]

Anybody that buys a camera because of a spec sheet is an idiot. Anybody that buys a Sony because of a headline spec sheet is even more stupid.

Yes, but you are informed. Many, many consumers are not.

- A

Then they probably aren’t reading this! Those that are here are either equally well informed or are generally trolling, both of which we seem to have in ever increasing numbers here. :

Kinda like the M50, big 4K banner headline, turns out it is a heavy crop and DPAF doesn’t work when using it. However it’s 1080 is fantastic and the DPAF is a video market leader that nobody else is close to. So what’s more important? The 4K that you’ll try a couple of times then dismiss because it is too much hassle or the killer 1080 with unmatched AF?

...For me the M50 is a massive fail. If you are a consumer like myself, then the only real option is Sony and (to a lesser extent) Panasonic. Canon are not in the game at all.

Yes, consumers like you should buy a Sony. For the 99% of consumers who understand that they definitely won't need 4K for their YouTube videos the M50 sounds ideal. I plan on doing some how-to videos in the future and will definitely be looking at the M50.

 

[Mikehit]

For me the M50 is a massive fail. If you are a consumer like myself, then the only real option is Sony and (to a lesser extent) Panasonic. Canon are not in the game at all.

Out of interest - you say the M50 is a 'massive fail'. What did you want to see in a camera at that price? A competitor to the A7Rii?

 

[padam]

While it obviously carries some of the usual Sony issues such as usability, color, EVF is not quite today's tech etc. the feature set is so useful for many people and many of the quirks of the earlier generations such as responsiveness battery life, custom menu etc. have been addressed. The video features are insane (2 in 1 either FF or APS-C), basically the same as the A9 for less than half the price, and not missing S-Log, maybe the rolling shutter is not the same, but if it is not worse than the A7SII the latter is starting to get superfluous.

And the Canon EF adapters will work reasonably well or Sigma lenses can be purchased or converted to native E-mount as well.

It is definitely going to be a big hit of 2018, I think it will be a while until the store stocks get filled up, but maybe they have already prepared for it.


At least we can expect somewhat similar jumps ahead with the next generation of Canon and Nikon mirrorless or DSLR cameras with ergonomics as good as today's ones.

 

[ecqns]

While it obviously carries some of the usual Sony issues such as usability, color, EVF

What are these usual Sony issues? As an owner of an a7rIII and a7rII (used to have the a7r) I have not had these problems.

 

[beforeEos Camaras]

While it obviously carries some of the usual Sony issues such as usability, color, EVF

What are these usual Sony issues? As an owner of an a7rIII and a7rII (used to have the a7r) I have not had these problems.

no idea but your in a canon forum and preaching to deaf ears.

try Sony rumors you may get a better response.

 

[alienman]

Sony has a lot going for them, they're turning a lot of heads. One thing they're really doing well is responding to the criticism. They improved battery life, they improved ergonomics, and seemed to resolve the overheating issues with the a7r iii and a9. I really like what they're doing as a company giving consumers and pros what they want. I took some shoot with the a7r iii and it made me sell my 5d iv. Honestly I thought canon would have responded a lot better than they have but I guess they are more concerned about cannibalizing sales and maximizing profit as any business would. I'm excited to see the a7 iii along with future release like the a7s iii, this is something I haven't said about canon for some time now with the constant release of disappointing products.

 

[Tugela]

Anybody that buys a camera because of a spec sheet is an idiot. Anybody that buys a Sony because of a headline spec sheet is even more stupid.

Yes, but you are informed. Many, many consumers are not.

- A

Then they probably aren’t reading this! Those that are here are either equally well informed or are generally trolling, both of which we seem to have in ever increasing numbers here. :

Kinda like the M50, big 4K banner headline, turns out it is a heavy crop and DPAF doesn’t work when using it. However it’s 1080 is fantastic and the DPAF is a video market leader that nobody else is close to. So what’s more important? The 4K that you’ll try a couple of times then dismiss because it is too much hassle or the killer 1080 with unmatched AF?

...For me the M50 is a massive fail. If you are a consumer like myself, then the only real option is Sony and (to a lesser extent) Panasonic. Canon are not in the game at all.

Yes, consumers like you should buy a Sony. For the 99% of consumers who understand that they definitely won't need 4K for their YouTube videos the M50 sounds ideal. I plan on doing some how-to videos in the future and will definitely be looking at the M50.

You mean all those consumers who will be buying large screen 4K TVs (as probably 95% of those who might buy a camera in this price range likely would, if they are in the market for a new TV) are going to be cool with something that shoots poor 4K? (and probably soft HD to boot)

Keep believing that.

People who shoot home video will want to watch that video on their new TV sets, and soft HD looks pretty terrible on a 65" 4K panel in comparison with 4K. They will see the difference immediately and will want proper 4K.

 

[Tugela]

For me the M50 is a massive fail. If you are a consumer like myself, then the only real option is Sony and (to a lesser extent) Panasonic. Canon are not in the game at all.

Out of interest - you say the M50 is a 'massive fail'. What did you want to see in a camera at that price? A competitor to the A7Rii?

It is still an expensive camera, and can be compared to higher end fixed lens products that have superior capabilities, and have had superior capabilities for quite some time. When you arrive two years late to a party and are wearing fashion that went out of vogue last season, you are unquestionably a "fail".

Maybe Canon's long term plan is to be king of the bargain bin. Because that seems to be where they are heading.

 

[Tugela]

While it obviously carries some of the usual Sony issues such as usability, color, EVF

What are these usual Sony issues? As an owner of an a7rIII and a7rII (used to have the a7r) I have not had these problems.

That is because you own a Sony. The people who have these "usual Sony issues" are those who own other cameras

The a7R III is not "Brand X", therefore it has the "usual Sony issues". That, basically, is their logic.

 

[Mikehit]

While it obviously carries some of the usual Sony issues such as usability, color, EVF

What are these usual Sony issues? As an owner of an a7rIII and a7rII (used to have the a7r) I have not had these problems.

That is because you own a Sony. The people who have these "usual Sony issues" are those who own other cameras

The a7R III is not "Brand X", therefore it has the "usual Sony issues". That, basically, is their logic.

Instead of making assumptions and creating straw men, why not ask the person who made the remark.

 

[bwud]

While it obviously carries some of the usual Sony issues such as usability, color, EVF

What are these usual Sony issues? As an owner of an a7rIII and a7rII (used to have the a7r) I have not had these problems.

That is because you own a Sony. The people who have these "usual Sony issues" are those who own other cameras

The a7R III is not "Brand X", therefore it has the "usual Sony issues". That, basically, is their logic.

Instead of making assumptions and creating straw men, why not ask the person who made the remark.

Not sure why someone needs to be asked, the “usual issues” were stated in the original post.

Usability: if someone has only used previous generation Sony mirrorless cameras, they rightly may have been frusterated operating them. My A7Rii felt like it did everything it could to get in my way of shooting. Full disclosure, Nikons feel that way too, so my long time canon familiarity may be tilting that a bit. However, my A7Riii is mostly a joy to use. I don’t struggle making it do what I want it to. It’s a proper tool with few quirks. Sony has improved usability dramatically.

Color: if you prefer canon reddish tones (I typically do, again maybe due to my long time using canon cameras), AND if you only shoot jpeg, then color could be an issue.

EVF: if you don’t like looking at lit screens, MILC isn’t for you. It can be fatiguing.

 

[dak723]

Yes, consumers like you should buy a Sony. For the 99% of consumers who understand that they definitely won't need 4K for their YouTube videos the M50 sounds ideal. I plan on doing some how-to videos in the future and will definitely be looking at the M50.

You mean all those consumers who will be buying large screen 4K TVs (as probably 95% of those who might buy a camera in this price range likely would, if they are in the market for a new TV) are going to be cool with something that shoots poor 4K? (and probably soft HD to boot)

Keep believing that.

People who shoot home video will want to watch that video on their new TV sets, and soft HD looks pretty terrible on a 65" 4K panel in comparison with 4K. They will see the difference immediately and will want proper 4K.

Obviously, you can't read very well. I wrote about YouTube not watching video on TV. For those that want to record in 4K so they can watch their videos on their 4K TVs, the M50 has 4K. The fact that you are assuming that the 4k will look terrible and the HD will be soft only proves that you are being a troll. And like all trolls, your opinion is BS and you should really go away. And learn how to read.