A7 III

Revamp the 36mp full frame sensor from the A7r and give it PDAF pixels, copper wiring like A6300.

Give it the AF system of the A6300 but expanded for full frame plus any advances in AF between that and the release of A7iii.

4K video.

Keep the IBIS and perhaps IBIS mark 2 (I see Pentax is doing IBIS with 5 stops improvement which is better than Sony's).

Add the IBIS type features of Pentax K1 - astro tracking, high resolution mode, moire control.

Touch screen to aid in AF point selection just like smartphones have been doing for ages.

Same body and weight.

Time for an upgraded battery as well and some of those other points in previous posts.

Greg.

Astrophotographer 10 said:

Same body and weight.

Time for an upgraded battery as well and some of those other points in previous posts.

Greg.

Click to expand...

How do you do the "same body and weight" while upgrading the battery?

stevo23 said:

Catcher05 said:

A72 as we know came out in 2014, for now there are only 2 FF cameras (except A7S series which is more for videos and I lean towards stills - video is another topic), a72 and a7r2 that bear the latest technology for Sony FF in some way. The reason I left out prior or original iterations (A7 and A7R) because I don't think there are many people interested in buying them now 'cause they're sluggish, AF is just horrible, they're VERY loud and no silent shutter, no IBIS, just to mention a few drawbacks.

Now those 2 priced $1700 and $1900 respectively. I wonder if it's about time to introduce A7III that perhaps won't have the latest 42 MP but maybe it'll have TS and of course will not inherit the bad stuff that those 2 have. Price? I'd take it for $2200.

What do you think especially on the time it may come out? Or do you think we won't see A7 mark 3 at all? Give me your thoughts please.

Click to expand...

Not 42 MP. There is no reason to do that.

Click to expand...

Actually, from Sony's standpoint, there is a very good reason to make the A7III 42MP. It is the single best way to induce A7II owners to upgrade. How many would upgrade just to get 1 stop more DR or faster AF? Not as many as would be drawn to higher levels of resolution just because it's there. Meanwhile, the A7RIII may go as high as 60MP. The truth is that the MP race is not over. Sony's introduction of the G Master lenses tells us that.

This is all speculation on my part. Personally, I do not want more than 24MP, and I would prefer other improvements in performance.

Rob

Robgo2 said:

stevo23 said:

Catcher05 said:

A72 as we know came out in 2014, for now there are only 2 FF cameras (except A7S series which is more for videos and I lean towards stills - video is another topic), a72 and a7r2 that bear the latest technology for Sony FF in some way. The reason I left out prior or original iterations (A7 and A7R) because I don't think there are many people interested in buying them now 'cause they're sluggish, AF is just horrible, they're VERY loud and no silent shutter, no IBIS, just to mention a few drawbacks.

Now those 2 priced $1700 and $1900 respectively. I wonder if it's about time to introduce A7III that perhaps won't have the latest 42 MP but maybe it'll have TS and of course will not inherit the bad stuff that those 2 have. Price? I'd take it for $2200.

What do you think especially on the time it may come out? Or do you think we won't see A7 mark 3 at all? Give me your thoughts please.

Click to expand...

Not 42 MP. There is no reason to do that.

Click to expand...

Actually, from Sony's standpoint, there is a very good reason to make the A7III 42MP. It is the single best way to induce A7II owners to upgrade. How many would upgrade just to get 1 stop more DR or faster AF? Not as many as would be drawn to higher levels of resolution just because it's there. Meanwhile, the A7RIII may go as high as 60MP. The truth is that the MP race is not over. Sony's introduction of the G Master lenses tells us that.

This is all speculation on my part. Personally, I do not want more than 24MP, and I would prefer other improvements in performance.

Rob

Click to expand...

It makes no sense unless the A7RII goes beyond 42Mp and for that to happen, something new has to be introduced. The performance of the Canon 5D is showing us this.

rythie said:

If you want something better than the A7II you buy the A7rII. A A7III would most likely incorporate many of the features of the A7rII, so it would most likely hurt the sales of the A7rII so don't think Sony will be keen to do that.

In the future I think Sony is going to have to either release the A7rIII first or at the same time as the A7III.

Click to expand...

Why would an A7III have 42mp? A7R stands for resolution, thats why the R model always had 36mp or 42mp. I would imagine the A7III to be an improved 24mp, middle of the road camera, improved sensor would be coppered wired, better High ISO performance...etc. Improved AF, could take Canon glass well....etc.

It's Sony, let's face it, there's going to be an A7III. And it's going to be less money and different than the A7rII so won't hurt sales. The only sales it would hurt are when amateurs jump to the highest price thinking it makes their photos better. I see many on here talking about, I have this so and so, should I buy A7rii or *some obscure unrelated camera. If they don't know the answer they shouldn't be in the market for either. A7r and A7s are both need-based cameras, if you don't need the extra resolution or the better high iso performance you should be looking at the best all around version and usually cheaper one.

Sometimes I struggle to see the use in all 36mp of my D800e but its there when I need it, I just dread the memory it takes. High mp isn't as needed as people think. Keep in mind, the 'professional' bodies have 12-20 mp.

Catcher05 said:

A72 as we know came out in 2014, for now there are only 2 FF cameras (except A7S series which is more for videos and I lean towards stills - video is another topic), a72 and a7r2 that bear the latest technology for Sony FF in some way. The reason I left out prior or original iterations (A7 and A7R) because I don't think there are many people interested in buying them now 'cause they're sluggish, AF is just horrible, they're VERY loud and no silent shutter, no IBIS, just to mention a few drawbacks.

Now those 2 priced $1700 and $1900 respectively. I wonder if it's about time to introduce A7III that perhaps won't have the latest 42 MP but maybe it'll have TS and of course will not inherit the bad stuff that those 2 have. Price? I'd take it for $2200.

What do you think especially on the time it may come out? Or do you think we won't see A7 mark 3 at all? Give me your thoughts please.

Click to expand...

Sony seems to have been slowing down their release dates to match the rest of the industry as the product lines mature.

A7III before November 2016 (2 year mark) is very unlikely. Could happen, but unlikely.

A6300 was almost exactly 2 years from A6000.

Robgo2 said:

stevo23 said:

Robgo2 said:

Not 42 MP. There is no reason to do that.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Actually, from Sony's standpoint, there is a very good reason to make the A7III 42MP. It is the single best way to induce A7II owners to upgrade. How many would upgrade just to get 1 stop more DR or faster AF? Not as many as would be drawn to higher levels of resolution just because it's there. Meanwhile, the A7RIII may go as high as 60MP. The truth is that the MP race is not over. Sony's introduction of the G Master lenses tells us that.

This is all speculation on my part. Personally, I do not want more than 24MP, and I would prefer other improvements in performance.

Rob

Click to expand...

I disagree, what's the point of having the A7R series then? 42MP is still and will be considered high density for a while to come. I feel like the R series will always have twice the resolution of the A7, and the S series will have half the A7.

The best way to induce upgrade to a MKIII is 4K video, and BSI sensor giving it low light capabilities as good as the S series, maybe a bit less to keep the S series relevant. But that's about it.

Sony might end up taking the incremental route with the A7, as Canon does, so that they won't have to innovate every year and push the market too fast. Better to milk the cow as much as they can.

From what I see, the A7 series is mainstream, so it'll get features that the R and S series have a generation later.

The cutting edge photo tech will be in the R, and the cutting edge video tech/codecs/lowlight abilities will be in the S, with the A7 getting a mix of these a generation or two later, depending on the market.

More likely, IMO, A7-III features:

Electronically defeatable AA filter from the RX1R-II.

BSI, maybe regardless of whether it helps.

Internal 4K (yes, that competes with the A7R-II, but it's also in a ton of other lower line cameras from Sony and their competition)

More OSPDAF coverage.

Maybe 36MP, but not more.

"4D focus" from the A6300.

--
A7-II with kit lens and a number of legacy lenses (mostly Canon FD); A3000 converted to IR (soon to be a NEX-7 converted to IR).

I think if they're persistent with yearly upgrades, then they're making a poor business decision. It made sense to start with. If they do go this route, there's plenty of room for upgrades.

They could improve sealing dramatically and not have to spend much on research and development.

Adding a second card slot might prove to be problematic because they've had to change the design of the body to make room for it. I'd almost like to see a full SD and a micro SD slot even though it'd obviously be slow.

I think the models focus fast enough now that they don't necessarily have to worry about the latest technology just this moment.

Random Photographer said:

Robgo2 said:

stevo23 said:

Random Photographer said:

Not 42 MP. There is no reason to do that.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Actually, from Sony's standpoint, there is a very good reason to make the A7III 42MP. It is the single best way to induce A7II owners to upgrade. How many would upgrade just to get 1 stop more DR or faster AF? Not as many as would be drawn to higher levels of resolution just because it's there. Meanwhile, the A7RIII may go as high as 60MP. The truth is that the MP race is not over. Sony's introduction of the G Master lenses tells us that.

This is all speculation on my part. Personally, I do not want more than 24MP, and I would prefer other improvements in performance.

Rob

Click to expand...

I disagree, what's the point of having the A7R series then? 42MP is still and will be considered high density for a while to come. I feel like the R series will always have twice the resolution of the A7, and the S series will have half the A7.

The best way to induce upgrade to a MKIII is 4K video, and BSI sensor giving it low light capabilities as good as the S series, maybe a bit less to keep the S series relevant. But that's about it.

Sony might end up taking the incremental route with the A7, as Canon does, so that they won't have to innovate every year and push the market too fast. Better to milk the cow as much as they can.

From what I see, the A7 series is mainstream, so it'll get features that the R and S series have a generation later.

The cutting edge photo tech will be in the R, and the cutting edge video tech/codecs/lowlight abilities will be in the S, with the A7 getting a mix of these a generation or two later, depending on the market.

Click to expand...

BSI might not be too much of a benefit at 24MP - not sure. The benefit of BSI is dependent on the base manufacturing process used and the sensor density. With the 36MP A7R sensor, around 40% of each photosite's width was being wasted on wiring. What I don't know is how much height - I'm assuming Chipworks was showing the worst-case dimension in https://www.chipworks.com/about-chipworks/overview/blog/full-frame-dslr-cameras-part-i-nikon-vs-sony - so the worst possible scenario is that the same amount of height is wasted, which results in 60% of the photosite area being wasted by wiring.

For a 24MP sensor, the photosites are going to be 6000 nanometers wide. 1781 used by wiring (assuming wiring does not change significantly in usage per site for a given manufacturing process), so with that sensor, we appear to be losing 30% in the horizontal dimension. So we have 70% area efficiency if there's 0 vertical wastage, (0.7^2)*100 = 49% area efficiency if the vertical equals the horizontal.

So the best case for BSI is you gain a stop. But you would also gain most of that by just moving to a smaller manufacturing process. For example if Sony is using the 45nm fab they bought at its full capability (45nm) and wiring goes down in size linearly with process capability, we lose 455nm per photosite, or 7.5%, so 93.5% area efficiency if there's 0 vertical wastage and 85% efficiency if vertical wastage equals horizontal. So best case, BSI gets you 15% more.

The real question is - which process will provide lower costs for FF. It may be another few years before they're able to get acceptable yield from that fab for FF sensors.

Similar analysis applied to A6300 - again, a number of assumptions made which I clearly stated (such as Sony using that fab they bought from Renesas at its 45nm capability) - http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57254927

Although my guess is that it'll be at least another year before they're confident using that process for FF sensors.