Sony A7S ii B&H Preview

[LlamaDom]

So I happened to come accross this in my subscription feed. It seems the godlike A7S has been succeeded by the A7S ii.  As far as I can tell, this is the first official news I have seen or heard about an A7s successor, and so quickly after the launch of the A7R ii (Sony's flagship stills camera).

It features:

• 4K internal recording
• 5-axis in-body image stabilisation
• New button layout (record button now much easier to reach with the thumb)
• Updates to the electronic view finder (T* coating)
• Sony S-Log 3 colour profile optimised for 18% grey

 

The canmera still has the same sensor resolution of 12.2 MP and the same ISO range as the original A7S, however Sony claims that the image quality across the whole ISO range is much better.

 

here is the preview video from B&H:

 

​

I don't often post new topics in the forums, but this news really had me punching my fist into the air out of ecitement (although I am nowhere near being able to afford it .)

 

Could be a new LMG B cam?

[ALwin]

Nah, I doubt they would go for a stills camera for video, the camera they could choose to use as a B cam would be one of the following:

 

• Ursa Mini 4K or 4.6K
• Sony PXW FS5
• Sony PXW FS7 becomes A cam, the FS700 becomes B cam

[LlamaDom]

 

Nah, I doubt they would go for a stills camera for video, the camera they could choose to use as a B cam would be one of the following:

 

• Ursa Mini 4K or 4.6K
• Sony PXW FS5
• Sony PXW FS7 becomes A cam, the FS700 becomes B cam

 

 

Those are good options, but the whole advantage of the A7Sii is it's insane low light capability (ie. very clean video even at moderate to high ISO ranges).  I will probably also be a lot less expensive than the cameras you mentioned although I dont know about the URSA Mini pricing. But the F55 and FS7 are a big leap in price above.

[bob345]

So I happened to come accross this in my subscription feed. It seems the godlike A7S has been succeeded by the A7S ii.  As far as I can tell, this is the first official news I have seen or heard about an A7s successor, and so quickly after the launch of the A7R ii (Sony's flagship stills camera).

It features:

• 4K internal recording
• 5-axis in-body image stabilisation
• New button layout (record button now much easier to reach with the thumb)
• Updates to the electronic view finder (T* coating)
• Sony S-Log 3 colour profile optimised for 18% grey

 

The canmera still has the same sensor resolution of 12.2 MP and the same ISO range as the original A7S, however Sony claims that the image quality across the whole ISO range is much better.

 

here is the preview video from B&H:

​

I don't often post new topics in the forums, but this news really had me punching my fist into the air out of ecitement (although I am nowhere near being able to afford it .)

 

Could be a new LMG B cam?

looks like a good possibility of it being a new lmg camera

 

[XTankSlayerX]

Brandon seems to like it.

 

https://twitter.com/Brandon_Y_Lee/status/642245286740422656

[ALwin]

Those are good options, but the whole advantage of the A7Sii is it's insane low light capability (ie. very clean video even at moderate to high ISO ranges).  I will probably also be a lot less expensive than the cameras you mentioned although I dont know about the URSA Mini pricing. But the F55 and FS7 are a big leap in price above.

 

I doubt LMG has any lack of lighting setups.

 

Also I am talking about the new FS5 that was announced today, not the F55.  The FS5 will have a street price around $4-5000.00.  As LMG has already invested in the FS700, they won't need to buy too many extra accessories investing in another Sony video camera.

 

The A7s II body price could be about the same as an Ursa Mini 4K body, yet the Ursa Mini will beat the A7s II for the frame rates and recording capabilities while the A7sII will definitely win the low light battle.  However low light capability is not the only defining feature to look at when choosing a camera.

[bob345]

I doubt LMG has any lack of lighting setups.

 

Also I am talking about the new FS5 that was announced today, not the F55.  The FS5 will have a street price around $4-5000.00.  As LMG has already invested in the FS700, they won't need to buy too many extra accessories investing in another Sony video camera.

 

The A7s II body price could be about the same as an Ursa Mini 4K body, yet the Ursa Mini will beat the A7s II for the frame rates and recording capabilities while the A7sII will definitely win the low light battle.  However low light capability is not the only defining feature to look at when choosing a camera.

The a7 series was never made to compete or replace these higher end cameras. Its the formfactor and the quality that you can get from that form factor that makes it sell as well as it does. You can take an a7s into places that you wouldn't be able to bring an fs7.

[ALwin]

The a7 series was never made to compete or replace these higher end cameras. Its the formfactor and the quality that you can get from that form factor that makes it sell as well as it does. You can take an a7s into places that you wouldn't be able to bring an fs7.

 

I'm not comparing the cameras to say which is better.  I am simply stating that for LMG (the business entity, not the individual person) that produces videos, as they have already invested in a proper video camera like the FS700, for them to pick a camera to use as a B camera or upgrade their FS700 it makes more sense to go with another proper video camera and not a stills camera with video features.

 

Simply because if you compare the recording capability of the A7sII to the Ursa Mini, FS5 or FS7, those video cameras have internal video recording capabilities that are better for a media production company.  Higher bit rates, better frame rates, better codecs, better audio recording, etc.

 

Sure a camera like the A7sII can be pimped up to achieve some of those, especially using external audio and video recorders, but pimping it up to match what LMG may need as a production camera would probably bring the investment cost up to the level of a FS7.

 

Now if any individual staff member of LMG were picking a camera for their use, I am sure they would pick the A7sII.

[TroubleKlef]

Looks like an excellent choice for LMG B cam. I wonder if MKBHD picked this up or has the A7r ii.

[LlamaDom]

Looks like an excellent choice for LMG B cam. I wonder if MKBHD picked this up or has the A7r ii.

 

I think hes has a RED camera, possibly the dragon as he mentioned it being away to get upgraded.  Which means he is probably getting the 8K sensor upgrade... yes 8K, for reviewing phones.

[LAwLz]

Does LinusTechTips even need a B cam? Could be useful for things like SuperFun but for the rest of their videos it seems like a single camera would be sufficient.

 

 

This camera seems like such a beast.

I really hope Sony becomes a bigger player in the camera market. Nikon and Canon both seem kind of dull in comparison.

[Texhnlyze]

Good for video and not for stills.

 

But is it actually good for video? The A7 line has been known with really terrible rolling shutter. I still think that R3D products and Blackmagic, especially Ursa, are to go for. 

 

 

Those are good options, but the whole advantage of the A7Sii is it's insane low light capability (ie. very clean video even at moderate to high ISO ranges).  I will probably also be a lot less expensive than the cameras you mentioned although I dont know about the URSA Mini pricing. But the F55 and FS7 are a big leap in price above.

 

 

How many people have you seen shooting with 51200 ISO and beyond? Or even beyond 6400?

[Bsmith]

things camera has to live up to the mk1's low light reputation, gonna be though.

 

 

hint for LMG, a review wouldn't be a bad idea

[TroubleKlef]

I think hes has a RED camera, possibly the dragon as he mentioned it being away to get upgraded.  Which means he is probably getting the 8K sensor upgrade... yes 8K, for reviewing phones.

 

I meant as a b-cam. He just posted a picture on instagram of a Sony. I looked at it closer this time and its an A7r ii.

[LlamaDom]

Does LinusTechTips even need a B cam? Could be useful for things like SuperFun but for the rest of their videos it seems like a single camera would be sufficient.

 

 

This camera seems like such a beast.

I really hope Sony becomes a bigger player in the camera market. Nikon and Canon both seem kind of dull in comparison.

 

Yeah I really like what they're doing. The only thing I don't like about their cameras is the way the floppy screens work. Seems a bit too flimsy, I would much prefer one similar to the GH4.

[Lauen]

All you guys talking about B cams for LMG must not know that they have a GH4 for B-roll. 

[TroubleKlef]

All you guys talking about B cams for LMG must not know that they have a GH4 for B-roll. 

 

Are they not allowed to upgrade their equipment? 

[Lauen]

Are they not allowed to upgrade their equipment? 

I do believe that in the video describing it, they said it was sufficient. 

[ALwin]

Are they not allowed to upgrade their equipment? 

 

I do believe that in the video describing it, they said it was sufficient. 

 

Agree, if LMG has already a sufficient camera, they don't need to spend a few more $xxxx to upgrade.  Even professional photographers or videographers do not upgrade their gear every time a new generation comes out.

 

Additionally while Sony may be able to brag about the ultra 400K+ ISO capability of the sensor, very rarely does any professional use such high ISO.  Be practical.

 

As a business entity that produces videos, albeit they are mostly tech review videos, the new Sony camera doesn't offer significant upgrades over the GH4.  Apart from the larger sensor and low light capabilities the video recording frame rates are almost identical between the two cameras, and the GH4 costs less than half the price.

 

Additionally a larger sensor is not always an advantage, there are several downsides to having a larger sensor and for the types of videos that LMG produces the MFT sensor of the GH4 seems a better choice.

 

So insisting that the Sony would make a great secondary or tertiary camera is wishful thinking at best.

 

PS: the only time I have ever seen digital photos taken at ISO 102400 are photos taken for testing and review purposes.

[Swndlr]

G_G

[LAwLz]

Additionally a larger sensor is not always an advantage, there are several downsides to having a larger sensor

Such as?

[ALwin]

Such as?

 

Very shallow depth of field, harder to keep things in focus with shallow depth of field or to have a sharp image across a deep DOF unless you step down the aperture a lot.  And stepping down an aperture can reduce quality of your recorded images or videos if you are using a cheap lens.

 

Potential that the recorded video will not be as sharp, especially for sensors with high MP count, as the manufacturer may have designed the camera to use various methods to scale the image to fit a 1080p resolution.  Sensors with MP count close to intended recording resolutions are ideal.

 

Glass is more expensive, larger sensors could mean buying larger lenses that have an image circle to cover the entire sensor.

[LAwLz]

Very shallow depth of field, harder to keep things in focus with shallow depth of field or to have a sharp image across a deep DOF unless you step down the aperture a lot.  And stepping down an aperture can reduce quality of your recorded images or videos if you are using a cheap lens.

Wait a minute. Either I got this wrong, or you got it wrong.

You compensate for the shallower depth of field by stopping down (as in, going from for example F/2.8 to F/4). As far as I am aware, most lenses will give you a higher image quality when they are not near being full open, so I don't see why having to use a higher aperture would reduce image quality.

Also, kind of doubt that LTT uses cheap lenses since they got cameras for several thousands of dollars.

 

 

Glass is more expensive, larger sensors could mean buying larger lenses that have an image circle to cover the entire sensor.

Again, I am pretty sure LTT can afford it. Also, I am not entirely sure they would need new lenses if they are just going to use it for filming but more on that later in the post.

 

 

Potential that the recorded video will not be as sharp, especially for sensors with high MP count, as the manufacturer may have designed the camera to use various methods to scale the image to fit a 1080p resolution.  Sensors with MP count close to intended recording resolutions are ideal.

But we are not talking about a camera with a high MP count. The Sony A7S ii got a 12 megapixel sensor. That's actually less than the GH4 with its 16 MP sensor.

 

You bring up something I haven't thought of before though. How do cameras handle recording (and picture taking in general) at non-native resolutions? I have always kind of assumed that they just shut pixels off in an even pattern.

I am 99% sure that cameras either turns pixels off or just ignore the output from some pixels in the sensor when in video mode though. That's why the aspect ratio and field of view changes. If this is the case then it doesn't matter how close or far off the native resolution of the sensor is, because it will only use the number of pixels required.

It wouldn't make sense to take the full output from a 3:2 sensor and then downscale it to 16:9.

 

If this is the case then they might not even need full frame lenses when shooting video, because an APS-C lens might fully cover the area of pixels that will be used when recording video.

Don't know if Edzel/Brandon has forum accounts but it would be interesting to hear what they got to say. They probably know how it works. Maybe @6God, @.spider. or @ShadowCaptain knows.

[ALwin]

snip

I was speaking in general about sensor size and MP count.  Yes the lower MP count of the Sony A7s II seems to be much better for video than the A7r II.  And because of it's lower MP count it may take the image reading from the entire sensor and do some down sampling to achieve the 4K and 1080p resolution.  But even if the camera reads only certain pixels to achieve the 16:9 ratio, a full frame sensor is quite larger than a cropped sensor.  Cropped sensor glass' image circles are quite smaller than FF glass' image circles.  One technique used by cameras is called line skipping.  It reads the full width of the sensor but not the full height.

(Note: lower MP count doesn't necessarily mean better image quality, I have a 36MP full frame camera that records better 1080p HD than my 16MP full frame camera.)

 

Even if they can afford the lenses, do they need to upgrade from the GH4?

 

About shallow depth of field, if you use a very wide aperture it's hard to keep a subject in focus when it is in motion.  As any slight movement of either the subject or camera can bring it out of focus.  I forgot to mention that this requires skill in using a follow focus or have a camera with good AF that knows what you are trying to track.  Additionally, you can step down the aperture to have a deeper DOF so that slight movements can be compensated.

 

Another thing is with larger sensors providing deeper DOF at tiny apertures, if you want to film a large crowd for example you may need to step down to f/11 and beyond, but depending on the quality of the lens it may reduce image quality due to exceeding the lens' diffraction limits.  Most lenses are optimal between a certain aperture range. While this loss in quality may not be noticeable in smaller screens or video resolution, if you record in 4K resolution it could be noticeable on a large screen, especially if you use a cheap lens.  Of course some of this can also be negated using certain filming techniques.

 

Anyway, most of LMG's videos are indoors with a stationary camera setup.  I'm sure they wouldn't have to worry about these things much.  And they publish their videos on Youtube.  So I doubt anyone would be able to tell (without seeing the camera used or being told which camera was used) the difference between a video shot on a GH4 or Sony.  So again, do they need to upgrade?

[LAwLz]

I was speaking in general about sensor size and MP count.  Yes the lower MP count of the Sony A7s II seems to be much better for video than the A7r II.  And because of it's lower MP count it may take the image reading from the entire sensor and do some down sampling to achieve the 4K and 1080p resolution.  But even if the camera reads only certain pixels to achieve the 16:9 ratio, a full frame sensor is quite larger than a cropped sensor.  Cropped sensor glass' image circles are quite smaller than FF glass' image circles.  One technique used by cameras is called line skipping.  It reads the full width of the sensor but not the full height.

(Note: lower MP count doesn't necessarily mean better image quality, I have a 36MP full frame camera that records better 1080p HD than my 16MP full frame camera.)

Thanks for mentioning line skipping. Hadn't heard of that before and wasn't sure on what to google to find info about it.

So in that case you do need full frame compatible lenses for video since the entire area of the sensor will be used, even though not all pixels will be used. That shouldn't be a problem for LTT though since I am sure they could afford full frame compatible lenses.

 

I know MP doesn't mean better image quality. I am sure the A7S II will take better images than the Galaxy S3, despite the S3 having a higher resolution.

 

 

Even if they can afford the lenses, do they need to upgrade from the GH4?

No I don't think they need to upgrade. One of the first replies to the thread was me saying:

Does LinusTechTips even need a B cam? Could be useful for things like SuperFun but for the rest of their videos it seems like a single camera would be sufficient.

 

 

 

About shallow depth of field, if you use a very wide aperture it's hard to keep a subject in focus when it is in motion.  As any slight movement of either the subject or camera can bring it out of focus.  I forgot to mention that this requires skill in using a follow focus or have a camera with good AF that knows what you are trying to track.  Additionally, you can step down the aperture to have a deeper DOF so that slight movements can be compensated.

Ehm, are you even reading my posts?

Stopping down the aperture was exactly what I was saying they could do to counter the shallower DOF. I said it right here:

You compensate for the shallower depth of field by stopping down (as in, going from for example F/2.8 to F/4).

 

 

 

So if I understand you correctly, the drawbacks you see to using a bigger sensor are:

More expensive lenses.

Shallower DOF.

 

Is that correct? I don't think the first one is a major issue for LTT, and the second one you can easily compensate for (like both you and I said, by stepping down the aperture).