The Sony a7S III was just announced and it's so close to being my "perfect" camera.
I would love to own multiple copies of a single camera that can cover all of our photo/video needs but right now, we shoot stills with Sony and Nikon cameras and we shoot our videos with Panasonic GH5s. I was planning to switch over to Canon and buy a few R5s or R6s until I learned about them overheating... I'm not willing to deal with that again.
When Sony announced the a7S III, I got excited because it could be my perfect hybrid camera. In the video below, I went live to discuss the features of this camera and compare it to Canon's offerings.
During my live video, multiple people told me I needed to see Gerald Undone's review of the a7S III. It is quite good and he does a great job of getting me excited about this camera.
I wish the Sony a7S III was a little larger and easier to hold, I wish it had around 20 megapixels instead of just 12, and I wish it was $2,500, rather than $3,500. But, those are really my only complaints currently, and I'm excited to test this camera out for myself.
Yeah, So, it’s a Sony... I
Therefore, it’s not really a camera. It’s more like a machine that takes pictures, so I’m not sure if your statement is accurate.
Wut?
Maybe he's talking about the fact Sony designs cameras the same way they design all their other machines. No soul. I think that's what their customers want but I could be wrong and often am.
How would you know if a camera has soul or was designed with soul?
It's a Canikon thing. ;-)
Joking aside, for me, mirrorless cameras have no soul, regardless the manufacturer. They're all about the technical, and do that pretty well, but, alas, no soul.
The same can be said about DSLR in relation to film cameras.
Painting on canvas doesn't have the soul of daubs on cave walls...
:-D
Daubs on cave walls have no soul compared to the creation (using the term loosely) of the universe(s).
I was a little pensive about making the original comment but now I'm glad! These comments are too funny! :-D
For me a camera has soul when everything is so thoughtfully designed that everything is tightly integrated within itself.
What kind of horsebugger are you talking. Cameras having souls. What have you been smoking?
A camera is a tool to get a job done.
I'm assuming horsebugger is a made up word to illustrate a point, similar to saying a camera has a soul or not.
That being said, you've made my point for me. For a lot of people, and there's nothing wrong with this, a camera is, in fact, just a tool to get a job done. For others, a dying breed for sure, tools, whether photographic or otherwise, help to create an experience, rather than just for achieving a goal.
I wish I could think of a better analogy, 'cause this one sucks, but it's kinda like having sex with a whore versus making love to your wife. One is a tool to get a job done and the other isn't.
What’s all this madness about a soul? All I can tell you is since upgrading from a Canon 6D to an A7III it has made a vast improvement to my workflow and enjoyment. It hasn’t improved my photo taking ability but certain features make it more of a joy to use than the DSLR’s I was using before.
Since you voted my previous comment down, you've obviously read it so I can't add anything else. It's all good.
Sorry, that was a mistake, now corrected. Your ‘sex‘ analogy was quite weird though.
I know. I wish I could think of a better one. I thought about film vs digital but that's so obvious, I didn't think it would help.
I don’t doubt going from a 6D to an A7 III would improve your workflow, but if you haven’t tried something like a Pentax K1000 in Film, or a Fuji X-T, then you will never understand why the Fuji is so much fun to use.
I returned the A7 III, not because it wasn’t a competent machine, it had fast AF and good image quality, it just wasn’t very much fun to use.
For me, I don’t want to do this for a living, because the last hobby I turned into a career ended up taking the fun out of my hobby... So to me, the camera absolutely has to be a fun machine to shoot with.
Having owned a Pentax ME Super film camera many years ago, I am aware how having dials are so immediate and convenient and even ‘fun’ to use. I went with Sony mainly for the lens choices and native Voigtlander’s in particular (EXIF data with manual lenses) as I like manual lenses, even though the Fuji dials are a nice feature. It took me some time though when I first owned a digital SLR to get used to (read: put up with) being bombarded with loads of menus verses the simplicity of film cameras. At least with the A7III I have shutter speed and ISO on a couple of dials plus aperture on the lens and a few other options on the custom menus. I turn off the LCD screen when out taking photographs and it a pretty good, uninterruptible workflow. Tbh, being able to zone focus like I used to with a film camera is the joy I get from this setup.
A camera is supposed to do its job. Thats it. Clients dont care about the soul of the equipment they are using and if they are I'd most likely get super annoyed being around them.
Not everyone is a professional photographer. In fact, the vast majority of photographers are not professionals. They do it for enjoyment and the camera they use is a large part of that. As for you getting annoyed being around anyone, I hope you'll understand if not everyone notices or cares. ;-)
From what I recall from reviews, the a7r4 body addresses some of the complaints people had about the smaller a7iii body. If the a7s3 has the same shape as the r4, then the ergonomics might not be a huge problem for you.
I agree with you the price should be $2500. If indeed in it needs to be $3500 than they obviously underpriced A7RIV - not that I am complaining.
It could be $250 and I wouldn't buy it since video is on the very bottom of my requirements for a camera. And as a stills camera, it is a non starter.
While 12mp is on the low end, some may try to use this camera for astrophotography since it will be very good at low light. You're basically looking at taking 4k images. Pair that with something like the Sony 24mm G master and the images should be good enough for smaller prints. I wouldn't go beyond 20x30 but on a canvas print, no one would notice anyway. Now the price is another story.
They have the a7R iv for you then. Plus it's less expensive.
The IV is a terrific camera if you like Sony and all that entails. My subjective problem with Sony is the ergonomics which are about 3.5 miles behind my Canon. If I'm not happy with how the camera feels just getting it out of the box, how's that going to translate into enjoying it in the field?
People are adaptable! To each their own... and other cliches!
Like I said, it's my subjective evaluation of Sony cameras. I don't pretend to speak for other people. I have no reason to adapt to Sony since my Canon works so well for me.
Of course, just blabbing.
This right here...although if it was $250, I'd buy it for video. But I agree, 12MP when my much older DSLR is 24...doesn't make sense. A7sIII is a nice new 'video camera' that can take pictures too.
I agree with Lee Morris that the Sony a7S III is almost the perfect camera. Personally, I'm not interested in 8K video. So the new Sony upgrade has everything I would want in a camera except for photography. I wish is had a minimum of 20 megapixels.
I don't shoot video but I am excited to see these features in a future stills camera. I don't think the aR7 IV was the upgrade people needed from the aR7 III. I'll take another 42mp camera though.
Quote: "I would love to own multiple copies of a single camera that can cover all of our photo/video needs but right now, we shoot stills with Sony and Nikon cameras and we shoot our videos with Panasonic GH5s. I was planning to switch over to Canon and buy a few R5s or R6s until I learned about them overheating... I'm not willing to deal with that again." What about Panasonic S1H/S1R/S1?
I nearly bought an S1H just before the pandemic hit. I'm glad I didn't spend $4,000 just before all shooting stopped.
But I'm still interested in it. I like the fan, the timecode input and the 6K option.
autofocus
Is it the perfect camera because of it's 4k 120p? If you don't really need 120p that often then why not go for the Canon R6. Pretty much has everything you need, Lee?
Because it's more fashionable to comment on a camera that hasn't even hit the stores yet... and it attracts more clicks on the website.
Disagree Rayann. I don't see anything wrong with Lee's article here and I pretty much agree with him on being the perfect camera for non-hybrid video shooters.
That's why I'm asking Lee if he would consider the R6 as it does tick most of the boxes except for 4k120, record limit and potential over-heating. Also the price point is great.
I'm 98% convinced on purchasing the R6 but prefer to wait for more real world footage comparisons.
For predominantly video, and in particular the types of videos Lee does, I would think the record limit and the overheating issues with the R6 are too problematic to make that a worthwhile purchase. Their video shoots will all likely be longer than 30 minutes. Additionally, at least for me, not being able to dual record video to both cards in the R6 is a massive fail from Canon. It renders the dual card slot feature useless for videographers.
For their live stuff, yes, the record limit is a problem. But for their video tutorials they certainly don't record for greater than 30 min for a single shot. Agree about the not recording to both cards simultaneously. In regards to overheating I would still like to see more real world testing on the R6. I wont be buying the R5.
" the perfect camera for non-hybrid video shooters". That's how the title should read.
unlimited record time on the r6?
How can this almost be the perfect camera when you have to carry a different set of cameras for your stills? I know you travel a lot as I do and I like to keep all unnecessary weight down. If you have to carry 2-3 a7s3 and also have to carry 2 extra bodies for stills then this is far from perfect solution. also the hassle of carrying and switching bodies just so you can shoot stills is very inconvenient.
What would be perfect is if Sony releases a9iii body with this video functionality. I use a9 and a7riv and for video I usually have to use a7riv for video because of profiles that a9ii STILL doesn't have.
I'm sure r5 overheating issue will be fixed at some point(or r5mk2) and that camera is something I wish Sony would exceed. We are not always shooting in a cave or pointing lens at a distant meteorite in the sky. If light is low I have supplemental lighting(such as pavotube) without needing to crank iso to 16000. 24-45megapixel(like s1h) video cam with 10-bit and raw functionality is key. 8k frame grabs would also be very useful for me.
It's the perfect camera NOW, but in six to twelve months it will be an antique paperweight hopelessly outclassed by whatever is then the fashionably perfect camera.
Not only does film photography slow the photographer down, it also slows the passing of fashionable fads.
And slows my ability to make money with it ;)