Alpha 7S III

Lol. An A7SIII is not a cine rig.

While I assume in actuality their marketing team knows much better than me, it seems odd that they always take this big swing at the phone market with phones that have great style, but with astronomically high prices. Sony prices their phones like they do their cameras, which doesn't make a whole lo

Looking at just numbers, it's not worth it. Honestly look at the numbers, $30/hr x 5hrs = $150. The cost of renting from your local camera store, the most newest camera (canon r5 or sony a7siii) is about that much or likely higher. You're basically working for fun or loss.

Well. Used a7sIII or FX3 is the answer here.

It’s plenty, i’ve shot wedding photography with the a7siii. Rarely in editing did I miss having more detail in cropping. You will be completely fine with the one camera.

Hmm nikon and lumix seem more relevant in a number of ways. Sony is still all about a7siii and fx3/6.

A7siii still rips

Canon was much slower and did a lot less than Sony to jump into the "content creator" game. Had Canon provided an FX3 equivalent around the same time as Sony did they alot more people would have been shooting Canon for video now. The A7S3/FX3 did more to hook people into the Sony ecosystem than all

Hey Mate, I've been a NIkon shooter for a long time and currently use a D4; dual D850s, still have a D750 and just bought a Z6iii. Lemme tell you a story about that So I made a massive mistake with a former partner I was working with and moved from Nikon to Sony with dual A&r4s, 8 lenses and a sony

Pixel size having any noticeable effect on low-light performance is a myth. https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm Add the A7SIII (12mp) and A7RV (61mp) and look at how they have the exact same performance from ISO 1600 to 12800.