Cindy Flood
Super Moderator
B&H is accepting pre-orders for the A7s. Price is $2,498.00.
Sony a7S Alpha Mirrorless Digital Camera ILCE7S/B B&H Photo
Sony a7S Alpha Mirrorless Digital Camera ILCE7S/B B&H Photo
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Sony A7s pre-order- price announced
- Thread starter Cindy Flood
- Start date
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
Yikes!
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Not bad
I was out by $100, said $2400 but it will be at and below that level soon enough ;-)
Sony likes giving customers value for money. Now lets see how good it is - you don't see a new Sony FF sensor every day - even if it sometimes feels like you do.
The fast lens on the RX100 III is sure to be very welcome.
Sony likes giving customers value for money. Now lets see how good it is - you don't see a new Sony FF sensor every day - even if it sometimes feels like you do.
The fast lens on the RX100 III is sure to be very welcome.
kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
The RX100 III is the sleeper for a do-anything, carry-everywhere, camera, IMHO: stabilisation's built in; video has useful frame sizes and frame rates; control of camera operations by smartphone (including NFC) and a wider/faster lens (with 9, count then nine aspherical elements)... it could be amazing. And it has a viewfinder, too.
The A7s is too expensive for me, as heavily invested in µ4/3rds as I am (I can't see a grand's extra value over its siblings), but the RX100 is perfect. And the lens, although shorter on the long end, is wider where it counts, for me, and way faster at the long end. Would I prefer 85mm EFOV? Sure, but 70 will do.
The A7s is too expensive for me, as heavily invested in µ4/3rds as I am (I can't see a grand's extra value over its siblings), but the RX100 is perfect. And the lens, although shorter on the long end, is wider where it counts, for me, and way faster at the long end. Would I prefer 85mm EFOV? Sure, but 70 will do.
Kolor-Pikker
Member
Guy Translator: I'll be $2,500 poorer soon, and hopefully live to tell the tale.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I can ship my spare helmet to help lesson the blow from the baseball bat. Lol
Seriously though I thought this would sell a little higher my guess was about 2800. My one issue with it and need to read more is it only has 25 AF points. Was hoping it was more like the A6000 or A77ii versions. I need to go find the specs on it again. High ISO this maybe king in the lineup but we still need AF points around the horn and video is no exception either as it needs it. I'll have to read this again but 2500 for a video shooter this maybe punch there ticket for them. I hope so it just keeps bringing other product into Sonys house for us end user.
Seriously though I thought this would sell a little higher my guess was about 2800. My one issue with it and need to read more is it only has 25 AF points. Was hoping it was more like the A6000 or A77ii versions. I need to go find the specs on it again. High ISO this maybe king in the lineup but we still need AF points around the horn and video is no exception either as it needs it. I'll have to read this again but 2500 for a video shooter this maybe punch there ticket for them. I hope so it just keeps bringing other product into Sonys house for us end user.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Sony is on a market share warpath and you got love the aggressiveness as a end user. This is one big reason I switched over. Everyone else is stuck in the mud at least for now. Who knows what Photokinia will bring but some of us can't wait and need to eat today if you know what I mean. I can't wait for what's next I need now.
This hits the streets just about when I need it so I will rent it first and see how it flys.
This hits the streets just about when I need it so I will rent it first and see how it flys.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Not that its on my radar but even the RM100m3 looks like fun. Love the pop up EVF and for a pocket cam that is very nice.
ken_vs_ryu
Member
Just out of curiosity, how does one easily attach a small external flash to the RM 100m3 without a hot shoe (besides the obvious, a bracket)? I wonder if they could have been creative and put a hot shoe on the top plate of the pop of flash (and of course one wouldn't pop up the "pop up flash" with a external flash attached on top of it).
Dave (D&A)
nostatic
New member
fwiw I've been using the A7 and RX100ii and they are a great pair. I've only had two complaints with the RX100ii - no EVF (unless you want to use the external) and the lens slows quickly as you zoom. The new version fixes both of those. The 1" sensor punches above its weight, you've got a ring around the lens that you can use for MF, and it is small and silent. I wanted to like the a6000 but it didn't click with me. The RX100iii probably will.
The RX100 III has an in-built ND filter. No need to muck about with external filters!
I stand corrected, yes, it does have ND filter, that's what I get for reading DPR's comparison chart when too tired, they ordered columns from newest to oldest model and my brain subconsciously interpreted them in I, II, III order.
This changes things a bit but still might not make a difference in final result for me.
That's why in my post "above", I ask why they couldn't be innovative and mounted a hot shoe on top of the built in flash so when it's not popped up, a small external flash can be attached.
Dave (D&A)
kit laughlin
Subscriber Member
I had an RX100, but it was the lack of a viewfinder that was THE reason I sold it.
On the video side, I can see the A7s being a kind of game changer, but the existing Panasonic range outputs truly excellent video right now. I have just finished a five x 1.5 hour programs shoot using three Pannys and an OMD E-M5 (for the inbuilt steady cam) and the footage looks great. Plenty of foreground-background separation too, in a moderately sized room (16m x 8m). One of the advantages of the µ4/3rds is its sensor size, which is similar to 35mm film, when used vertically in a movies camera.
35mm movie film "sensor size" is 21 x 11mm (1.85:1 mask); µ4/3rds is 18 x 13.5 mm (4:3, which is cropped top and bottom to make 16:9, or 1.7777, what we now call the HD ratio. See how close they are? And we were shooting 14, 17, 20, and 45mm lenses (so the classic 28, 35, 40, and 90mm EFOV) lenses at ƒ2.8-4, because we needed enough DOF field to keep the performers in focus as they moved.
My point in mentioning this is that for shooting video, very shallow DOF is not necessarily a benefit. Using the 45mm lens at ƒ2 on µ4/3rds (so head and shoulder close-ups at a distance of 2m or so) is as shallow DOF as I would ever use (tops of ears are soft).
The 'film look' (and always reckoned at 24fps) is, IMHO, much more about lighting that any other factor. All our productions, though, are shot at 30fps, even though all our cameras can do 24p, because 30fps renders human-speed movement much more naturally. Until you shoot vistas at 24fps, and pan, you will not realise how limiting this frame rate is (you have to pan MUCH more slowly that you think, otherwise the movement of the objects in a wide shot is jittery and looks really nasty).
So much more to say on this, and I will, but for now, although the A7s will be a low-light monster, and it is a camera I would like to own for stills, I honestly think µ4/3rds is perfect for now on the video side. And those cameras are almost throw-away cheap, too.
On the video side, I can see the A7s being a kind of game changer, but the existing Panasonic range outputs truly excellent video right now. I have just finished a five x 1.5 hour programs shoot using three Pannys and an OMD E-M5 (for the inbuilt steady cam) and the footage looks great. Plenty of foreground-background separation too, in a moderately sized room (16m x 8m). One of the advantages of the µ4/3rds is its sensor size, which is similar to 35mm film, when used vertically in a movies camera.
35mm movie film "sensor size" is 21 x 11mm (1.85:1 mask); µ4/3rds is 18 x 13.5 mm (4:3, which is cropped top and bottom to make 16:9, or 1.7777, what we now call the HD ratio. See how close they are? And we were shooting 14, 17, 20, and 45mm lenses (so the classic 28, 35, 40, and 90mm EFOV) lenses at ƒ2.8-4, because we needed enough DOF field to keep the performers in focus as they moved.
My point in mentioning this is that for shooting video, very shallow DOF is not necessarily a benefit. Using the 45mm lens at ƒ2 on µ4/3rds (so head and shoulder close-ups at a distance of 2m or so) is as shallow DOF as I would ever use (tops of ears are soft).
The 'film look' (and always reckoned at 24fps) is, IMHO, much more about lighting that any other factor. All our productions, though, are shot at 30fps, even though all our cameras can do 24p, because 30fps renders human-speed movement much more naturally. Until you shoot vistas at 24fps, and pan, you will not realise how limiting this frame rate is (you have to pan MUCH more slowly that you think, otherwise the movement of the objects in a wide shot is jittery and looks really nasty).
So much more to say on this, and I will, but for now, although the A7s will be a low-light monster, and it is a camera I would like to own for stills, I honestly think µ4/3rds is perfect for now on the video side. And those cameras are almost throw-away cheap, too.