[OregonJim]

Why do you think I said 1.5 to 2 stops (compared to 4 on the spec sheet)?

How much improvement do you think they'll show?

I don't see where you said "1.5 to 2 stops", and I don't know what you mean by that - what does it have to do with marketing ISO vs. usable ISO?

[DSims]

I don't see where you said "1.5 to 2 stops", and I don't know what you mean by that - what does it have to do with marketing ISO vs. usable ISO?

This is a good way to look at it:

Sony Alpha 7R Review: Digital Photography Review

Comparing the a7 and a7R to the Nikon D4s in RAW at ISO 25600, you can see that the D4s at ISO 51200 (1 stop higher) still has less noise, while at ISO 102400 (2 stops higher) it has more. So the D4s is about 1.5 stops better.

So what you called "marketing ISO" is 4 stops higher on the spec sheet, while "usable ISO" is only about 1.5 stops higher. I'm predicting that the situation will be similar or slightly better with the new a7S. A couple of others in this thread stated there should be little or no improvement, but I believe that's highly unlikely.

[Rondec]

I think this would be a tough camera to use for wildlife in general. I suppose it will have better dynamic range in high iso situations, although this isn't magic. DXO Mark tests the D800 and D4s the same below iso 6400 , with the D4s having one EV more of dynamic range at iso 6400 and above. It isn't magic.

At the same time, you have a lot less "reach" with this sensor, meaning that you will need to have longer lenses. I think this camera is really targeting video and that is where it really does seem to bring something special that is better than preceding models -- too bad it doesn't have a better form factor for video usage.

[DSims]

At the same time, you have a lot less "reach" with this sensor, meaning that you will need to have longer lenses.

Of course, if you're going to be cropping significantly this is a downside. But if your lenses are long enough this camera should have an advantage.

Nevertheless, as I've said before, I agree that it's targeted more toward videographers. It's just that I believe it will also be a better still camera than most people are giving it credit for.

[Rondec]

Of course, if you're going to be cropping significantly this is a downside. But if your lenses are long enough this camera should have an advantage.

Nevertheless, as I've said before, I agree that it's targeted more toward videographers. It's just that I believe it will also be a better still camera than most people are giving it credit for.

Oh, I think it will be a great camera, particularly for indoor work. It is just that my experience with wildlife is that it is tough to get close enough using a 300mm lens on APS-C and this doesn't feel like a camera that is particularly made to handle 500 or 600mm lenses.

[DSims]

Oh, I think it will be a great camera, particularly for indoor work. It is just that my experience with wildlife is that it is tough to get close enough using a 300mm lens on APS-C and this doesn't feel like a camera that is particularly made to handle 500 or 600mm lenses.

I don't know what you're talking about - Sony makes a fine 500/4 AF lens for only $13,000!

[Fogel70]

Nikon's 16MP D4s has about a 1.5 stop high-ISO noise advantage over the a7 and a7R. That's because they engineered it that way. It has a max ISO of 409600, the highest of any camera. Now Sony's a7S will have the same max ISO of 409600, in contrast to the 25600 of the a7, a7R, D800, and D800e. It would be foolish of Sony to allow such a high ISO without significantly improving the low-light performance compared to the other a7 models. Besides, what other selling point could a 12MP FF have - especially one that doesn't appear to be oriented towards sports?

The main selling point for Sony A7s is 4K video.

You've haven't heard of spare batteries? If you can afford an a7S, you can buy a few batteries for it. Much cheaper than getting a D4s, BTW.

We have the most amazing technology of all time at our fingertips, and suddenly we can't fathom changing a battery!?

The problem with batteries is that you can't always decide when they run out of power. In my experience they tend to run out at the worst possible moment.

[DSims]

The main selling point for Sony A7s is 4K video.



The problem with batteries is that you can't always decide when they run out of power. In my experience they tend to run out at the worst possible moment.

But even if 4K video is the main selling point (which I'm not completely convinced of) it doesn't negate anything I said about still performance.

And people somehow managed to figure out how to plan ahead and swap out batteries and video/audio tape early for years. If the camera's indeed better, it's worthwhile to do this to get the better performance one needs.

[jogiba]

Oh, I think it will be a great camera, particularly for indoor work. It is just that my experience with wildlife is that it is tough to get close enough using a 300mm lens on APS-C and this doesn't feel like a camera that is particularly made to handle 500 or 600mm lenses.

[Rondec]

I don't know what you're talking about - Sony makes a fine 500/4 AF lens for only $13,000!

I guess it was ergonomics I was thinking about -- as Joe was so kind to demonstrate with his photo.

[jogiba]

The main selling point for Sony A7s is 4K video.



The problem with batteries is that you can't always decide when they run out of power. In my experience they tend to run out at the worst possible moment.

There is no battery problem.
http://www.amazon.com/Wasabi-Power-SLT-A55V-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX10/dp/B0049WBZE...ony+a7+battery

You Tube

You Tube

[ElJamoquio]

I guess you haven't seen Sony's promo video! The low-light video capability of this camera is amazing!

I have seen it.

[Winder]

It won't be much of a wildlife camera. It just doesn't have the right features. The AF is definitely not up to it. The camera itself isn't all that exciting. I'm more interested in the sensor and what other manufacturers can do with it.

[g026r]

[yet another photo that's been posted before, with no context and no additional contribution to the discussion]

Ah yes. The Metabones adapter. Let's add some of that missing context, shall we? Direct from Metabones themselves:

Autofocus speed is very slow and inadequate for most moving subjects. The autofocus speed is unfit for professional use for sure, and it would disappoint most enthusiasts.
[...]
Continuous AF is not supported.
[...]
The first two autofocus attempts are used to calibrate the lens and as a result may not lock successfully on the target. Half-press the shutter release button again and autofocus will lock successfully.

I can just see the wildlife photographers now. "Excuse me, Mr. Beastie, could you hold still for a little bit until the autofocus can lock on?"

Which is to say: it's usable sure, for certain definitions of usable, but it's hardly ideal. (And if you're using the EF 200-400, I think you're able to splurge a bit and get a body it performs up to expectations on.)

[Shanti]

It won't be much of a wildlife camera. It just doesn't have the right features. The AF is definitely not up to it. The camera itself isn't all that exciting. I'm more interested in the sensor and what other manufacturers can do with it.

before its tested how do you know the AF is not good enough
if set up in a hide with wifi remote lens length is Not a problem
batterypacks are easy to make yourself
its more if you can a the shot because of the high ISO capabilities then its worth it

Now if Pentax would come out with something similar