10-26-2017, 01:05 PM
11-03-2017, 05:27 AM
Quote: Its bigger than the cannon 24-105
83.45 x 107.15mm vs 83 x 113mm
and virtually the same weight
664.5 g vs 664g
by class do they mean mirrorless?
The Canon is crap ...
11-03-2017, 09:17 AM
Also I was quoting the sizing of the mk1, the mk2 is somewhat larger. Fair play to Sony. If only they were any near affordable (for me!).
11-03-2017, 11:03 PM
Quote:It seems they took a new logic this time.I would say it is both. 🙂 With huge R&D investment in new sensor tech and several new sensors launched in short time, Sony is bound to start getting money back, so sell in quantities. Same sensor tech and (relative) lower price for a7rIII makes sense. Together with refinement of other features and by drilling down a9 technology into the higher volume product, they aim to make a7r more competitive, even against Nikon’s 850.
In the past it was like never-ending more megapixels with the same body.
This time, they kept the 42MP sensor and changed almost everything around it: 2x faster AF chip, 3x larger buffer, better EVF, UHS-II SD card, USB 3.1, 2x larger battery etc...
Not sure it it's a sign of sensor maturity or the urgency to react to the D850.
For FF users thinking outside SLR box a7III could be very tempting.
11-04-2017, 12:38 PM
For FF users thinking outside the "has to have no mirror" box, DSLRs could be very tempting.
11-04-2017, 02:17 PM
Sure, in principle it can go both ways. 😉
11-14-2017, 11:21 AM
Pretty awesome! Sony goes the Foveon way and calls it pixel shift
Okay, that's exaggerated. Pixelshift movement always happens at the cost of adding extra information and needing a pretty stable tripod, but the results are competing MF sensors. Which are also made by Sony B) It's amazing how much more sharpness lenses can deliver if the Bayer interplation is out of the equation. I just wonder how one can shift a sensor about 5 µm in each direction. and bring the four images back into one.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/5645755619...landscapes
The samples are about what I saw when I compared APS-C Fuji with 12 mm Zeiss and APS-C Sigma dp quattro 14mm - one looked pretty soft and it wasn't the Sigma
Okay, that's exaggerated. Pixelshift movement always happens at the cost of adding extra information and needing a pretty stable tripod, but the results are competing MF sensors. Which are also made by Sony B) It's amazing how much more sharpness lenses can deliver if the Bayer interplation is out of the equation. I just wonder how one can shift a sensor about 5 µm in each direction. and bring the four images back into one.
https://www.dpreview.com/news/5645755619...landscapes
The samples are about what I saw when I compared APS-C Fuji with 12 mm Zeiss and APS-C Sigma dp quattro 14mm - one looked pretty soft and it wasn't the Sigma
11-14-2017, 03:31 PM
Just to be clear: max. ISO is 32000, not 3200.
3200 is the price.
3200 is the price.
11-14-2017, 04:19 PM
1 $ per 10 ISO... and the dollars ISO stretch like 50-102400....
SNCF
12-13-2017, 10:00 PM
I have a question about electronic shutter
<span>Does anyone know about it in MK3 of A7r ?</span>
<span>I mean does They improved it in MK3 compare to MK2?</span>
<span>In Sony A9 sensor have memory and rolling shutter is not visible, is the same in A7RIII ?</span>
<span>Does anyone know about it in MK3 of A7r ?</span>
<span>I mean does They improved it in MK3 compare to MK2?</span>
<span>In Sony A9 sensor have memory and rolling shutter is not visible, is the same in A7RIII ?</span>