All Fstoppers Tutorials on Sale!

Can the Sony a7S III Hold Its Own as a Stills Camera?

The Sony a7S III is finally here, and it offers impressive video performance and a refined feature set for professionals. Can it be used as a hybrid camera for both stills and video work? This excellent video review takes a look at the camera from both perspectives and if it is a good all-around choice. 

Coming to you from Hyun Ralph Jeong, this great video review takes a look at the Sony a7S III both from a stills and a video perspective. There is no doubt that the a7S III is a refined and powerful tool for video work, but if you are primarily a videographer who also occasionally does photo work, you might be wondering if it can also handle stills jobs. Of course, the biggest concern regarding photo work might be the camera's resolution, which comes in at just 12 megapixels. Personally, I think it is important to remember that in the early days of digital photography, professionals frequently worked with camera that sat around 10 megapixels. As long as you are not making very large prints and you are careful about your compositions so as to avoid needing to crop much, 12 megapixels can be quite usable. Check out the video above for the full rundown. 

Log in or register to post comments


Peter House's picture

I used to shoot all my commercial work on a Nikon D700, which was 12mp. I used that for several years. I eventually moved to the 800 series, and the extra resolution is nice to have in some situations. But it is absolutely possible to work at a professional level with 12mp. These days with the other options on the market, i wouldnt be choosing the a7siii as my stills camera, personally, but anyone who has a primary need for video with a supplemental need for stills, this is a great choice of camera.

John Vander Ploeg's picture

I don’t doubt it takes nice 12mpx pics, but if I’m going to spend $3,500 on a stills camera it certainly won’t be this one! It’s a video camera first, I barely consider it a hybrid camera.


Perfectly usable.

But I've seen the look on a few client's eyes when i say i will deliver them the 20mpx high resolution images.

They say "high resolution? My phone can take 108mpx!". Them i have to remind them that instagram in 1mpx or so, and that 20mpx can be printed pretty much wall sized and not all pixels are created equal.

Cool Cat's picture

I agree. The Sony a7S III is a fantastic video camera first. But because it has huge pixels it takes in more light and makes it wonderful in low light conditions. Unfortunately most people don't understand which is why they use smartphones to take photos. "What? Only 12 megapixels? My Google phone takes 108 megapixels". They don't understand specifications and real world results are miles apart.

Troy Phillips's picture

For what I mainly shoot I’ve been looking at this camera. All my glass is Nikon f mount though. I shoot live music video and photos. The stuff the bands need for advertising their shows doesn’t need to be more than 12mp . And it’s low light performance makes it a perfect fit . Then video galore.
Just wish Nikon would put out this camera in the new Z mount . I’d be golden

Jamieson Dean's picture

Everyone's photography needs and priorities will differ. For our studio, we specialize in hybrid wedding coverage, and though I would prefer to be around 20mp, I would be okay with 12mp. If we're bringing the R5/R6 into the discussion, I still wouldn't chance it with a camera that needs mandatory cooling down on a wedding day. My clients likely wouldn't count pixels, but they would definitely notice if we missed parts of the day because our cameras needed to be shut off to cool down.