Sony A7s - impressive iso 409.600 demonstration

[Pitbullo]

http://youtu.be/XgbUgNiHfXM

Not bad!

 

[sanj]

Turning night into day

 

[Wrathwilde]

Absolutely incredible quality! From what I've read... the A7S will retail for about $4200 (without lens). Canon has some serious catching up to do, what Sony has achieved is nothing short miraculous.

 

[Menace]

Sure is amazing!

 

[Click]

WOW

Sure is amazing!

+1 8)

 

[wsmith96]

Can't believe the quality. I thought for sure it would look like an old television that wasn't tuned it correctly.

+1 Amazing!

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

 

[privatebydesign]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.

 

[privatebydesign]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.

Canute sat on his throne and commanded the sea to not wet his feet too.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves

But if you have two current cameras in mind then let us know.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.

Canute sat on his throne and commanded the sea to not wet his feet too.......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves
But if you have two current cameras in mind then let us know.

Sony manufactures 36 megapixel full frame sensor, and also 12 megapixel. They are designed for very different purposes from one another. Which one will be the biggest sales success? Sony A7R or else A7S? Maybe none of them. But it's good to have options to choose from. I will not buy Sony A7S because I have too much money invested in Canon lenses and accessories, but it is tempting to see what you can do with a 12 megapixel sensor with current technology.

 

[privatebydesign]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.

Canute sat on his throne and commanded the sea to not wet his feet too.......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves
But if you have two current cameras in mind then let us know.

Sony manufactures 36 megapixel full frame sensor, and also 12 megapixel. They are designed for very different purposes from one another. Which one will be the biggest sales success? Sony A7R or else A7S? Maybe none of them. But it's good to have options to choose from. I will not buy Sony A7S because I have too much money invested in Canon lenses and accessories, but it is tempting to see what you can do with a 12 megapixel sensor with current technology.

Which one will sell more is a completely different subject from your belief that "SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO.", isn't it?

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I know I'm the minority here, but I still believe SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO. ??? I understand that the "down convert" 36 megapixel functions as a kind of noise reduction. However, until now no one could convince me that 36 megapixel "down convert" to 12, will have less noise than other sensor the same size, with 12 megapixel native. :

So what to cameras and what iso settings do you have in mind?

I defend the idea that Canon continues to make new camera models "low resolution" as 12 or 15 megapixel, using updated technology. ??? I think that with current technology, a 12 megapixel camera at ISO 25600 would have performance much better than the old 5D original had at ISO 3200.

Canute sat on his throne and commanded the sea to not wet his feet too.......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves
But if you have two current cameras in mind then let us know.

Sony manufactures 36 megapixel full frame sensor, and also 12 megapixel. They are designed for very different purposes from one another. Which one will be the biggest sales success? Sony A7R or else A7S? Maybe none of them. But it's good to have options to choose from. I will not buy Sony A7S because I have too much money invested in Canon lenses and accessories, but it is tempting to see what you can do with a 12 megapixel sensor with current technology.

Which one will sell more is a completely different subject from your belief that "SMALLER NUMBER OF PIXEL large size enables better performance at high ISO.", isn't it?

I would be grateful if someone makes a comparative test with Sony A7R and A7S to figure out which one has lower noise at ISO 25600. Though I imagine what would be the conclusion from such a comparison. :

 

[expatinasia]

what Sony has achieved is nothing short miraculous.

I wouldn't go quite that far, though it is impressive!

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Could someone explain to me what 1/50th means in a video and what Slog-2 refers to?

A very impressive video. Almost like a 4th gen NVG.

 

[wickidwombat]

Could someone explain to me what 1/50th means in a video and what Slog-2 refers to?

A very impressive video. Almost like a 4th gen NVG.

the video frame rate would be 24 fps so you need to set your shutter speed at 2x that to get smooth video that is not choppy 1/50th is the closest shutter speed
as a side note Magic lantern actually adjusts this to 1/48 on canon bodies that it works with

 

[thatguy_photography]

If anyone does not recognize this camera as being revolutionary and amazing needs to look more into the specs. Size alone is impressive, but to pack in full frame 4k capability is incredible. I knew the ISO on this camera would be great but wow that video proves it all. I am sure the noise at 1000 will be none at all. This camera is an indie filmmakers dream, almost eliminated rolling shutter and has so many options of fps(120 fps in HD). Canon will never panic because they have the biggest costumer group. However, the GH4, A7s, even the upcoming Gopro 4 with a rib cage and 40$ adapter mount for any lens all offer 4k with multiple fps options and a ton at 2k. I am hoping Canon will soon offer a camera in this same price range or a tad more that offers 4k without a software hack and tries to put out a camera that has every option for the prosumer video user. I think the 3d might be that and probably the 7d markii. I just hope they don't leave out something important. Like unable to do slow mo, do I dare even wonder if the cameras will shoot in 4k 24 fps. I think until canon releases a new camera the GH4 and A7s are better options for someone making movies with a DSLR or that size at camera at least. The only thing that can top it is the mark iii with Magic Lantern raw video. The 6d is kinda like Canon did not even consider the video user. When other companies listen to their costumers and realize that people use their DSLR or mirror less cameras for both video and photography, it is kinda frustrating that the biggest Camera company does not seem to have to video user in mind while making a camera as much as they do photography. I think there is a way to do both or at least come out and say this camera we made for video this camera was made for photography. I think Canon will finally come around soon since so many people are wondering the same things I am. Canon is an incredible company don't get me wrong.

 

[privatebydesign]

I don't recognise it as revolutionary.

I see it as an incremental improvement in a direction I have zero interest in, I don't give a damn about video. Let alone 4k video. I don't care about 400,000 iso either, well not until it has a respectable dynamic range and usable noise characteristics, but primarily I don't see it as having any value because of Sony's complete lack of commitment to, well anything, actually. I know they are never going to come out with the lens selection I can buy or rent for my Canon's and don't for one second mention adapters, I will never be able to make the array of images I can with a Sony because there will never be the system diversity that 20 plus years of commitment Canon have put into the EOS.

 

[thatguy_photography]

check out some photographers that shoot with the a7r. 14 bit sony probably has good dynamic range. The a7s isn't for you if you only want photography but I think all of my first post was about video and in that since it is amazing. I will be selling my markii and two L series lenses and invest in a Gh4 or sony a7s and use that until canon comes out the 3d or 7dii and proves it is at least somewhat directed for people wanting the video aspect.

 

[privatebydesign]

check out some photographers that shoot with the a7r. 14 bit sony probably has good dynamic range. The a7s isn't for you if you only want photography but I think all of my first post was about video and in that since it is amazing. I will be selling my markii and two L series lenses and invest in a Gh4 or sony a7s and use that until canon comes out the 3d or 7dii and proves it is at least somewhat directed for people wanting the video aspect.

That might have been true if they didn't compress the sh!t out of it in camera and never actually deliver more than 8 bits of information, which begs the question when is a RAW file no longer a RAW file?

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140214_1-SonyA7-artifacts-star-trails.html