A few of the latest a7s III specs rumors from SAR, this time from several unproven sources.

  • AF system is the almost the same as a7r4
  • 4K RAW output yes, but not sure if it supports 4K 120fps RAW output.
  • Firmware is not available, apparently Atomos is working on it to support a7sIII’s hdmi signal.
  • Screen: Touch function available when navigating the menu.
  • Ports: Removable port door. Two usb-c, one micro hdmi, no flash sync port.
  • Here is something unfortunate, there will be a crop on the 4K. A small one, similar to a7s2.
  • Also, ONLY Up to 4k60 will be 10bit 4:2:2 internal.
  • They are claiming to not have overheating issues for at least 1hr even at the highest frame rate.
  • 4k60 10 bit unlimited recording time confirmed.
  • At least 180fps 1080p with full AF and sound confirmed.
  • Downsampled 1080p from 4K, No line skipping or pixel binning.
  • No internal RAW.
  • New codec similar to FX9.
  • S-Cinetone

My own observations:

1. Sony AF might see only minor improvement, if at all. From what I’ve seen, and according to Jordan and Chris of DPReview, Dual Pixel AF II is the best of any mirrorless currently on the market.

2. I’m 100% certain the a7s III will record ProRes RAW. I’ve written about the downsides to this previously (1) added cost ($1,000.00 for recorder, cables, batteries, cage, magic arm, SSD); (2) added weight, bulk; (3) increased points for failure; (4) exposed cables and recorder, no weather-sealing; (5) have to purchase new Atomos recorders every few years because older units are not updated; (6) ProRes RAW WB and ISO metadata is hidden in Final Cut Pro; (7) ProRes RAW is not compatible with DaVinci Resolve, a more polished, refined color grading platform.

3. At last! A touch screen on a full frame alpha camera!

4. I’ve graded sample footage from the FX9, it’s nice to work with.

5. Aside from some changes to layout of the dials, it seems to borrow heavily from the a7R IV. I’m not particularly fond of Sony bodies.

6. There appears to be a small crop.

7. I’m not seeing anything here that exceeds expectations, except for the EVF maybe. And no mention of improved IBIS, which will be disappointing to video shooters.

8. Final comment: Aside from the banding and some chroma noise in low light situations, and the lack of eye AF in video, the A7 III produces pretty spectacular footage for just $2,000.00 – and I don’t see a compelling reason for Sony users to upgrade, especially given the cost. And I certainly don’t see Canon shooters switching over to Sony for this release. On the other hand, until the announcement and the inevitable flood of gushing YT videos to follow, it’s too soon to call. I’ve no doubt the image quality itself will be beyond reproach, if softer than oversampled 6K that is the norm in hybrid cameras nowadays.

10 thoughts on “More a7s III Rumored Specs

  1. I spent hours looking at what the external recorders/monitors can offer, never bought one.

    My feeling is that there are too many drawbacks.
    All of what you said in your post but also: full/legal range problem.
    To correct this range problem you need to load a corrective LUT in the external device but it is not 100% reliable.
    Finally, it is recommanded to check the zebras on the camera (Paul Leeming).
    Also, Philipp Bloom realized that the Fuji autofocus result is better when we record internally compared to externally. I don’t know why but also a bad point.
    (Well I tend to do manual focus more and more).

    What advantage still has the external monitor? Focus peaking? Yes.

    However, if a camera has a 3.2″ fully flipping screen with 1.6 or 2.1 millions pixels it may be enough to erase the very little advantages of the external device.
    Add an internal AppleProRes recording and it’s done.

    Add in body IS + OIS and the gimbal is useless for shots with not a lot of movement.

    1. Yes. I have a feeling the a7s III will have EIS like the FX9 that uses an accelerometer to save data to file which can then be used to stabilize in post using a plug-in from Sony. I’m beginning to suspect it has no IBIS. What do you think?

  2. It’s not a bad idea because the in body stabilization is sometimes buggy if not well implemented (Nikon Z6 or first firmware versions of the XT4).
    Besides that, the post stabilization analysis will be quicker because the metadata will be already stored with the video files.
    The downside is that it creates a dependency with the Sony software.

  3. Very expensive but the A7SIII will not be cheaper I think.
    They are gonna make pay the XX bits raw external recording functionnality (which for sure will bring extra costs for expensive external AtomX SSD, etc).
    About the RAW possibilities, be sure the camera is really ready for that.
    The Z6 was not and people had to send back their camera and pay for the upgrade.

  4. When you look back a bit: the GH5 was awesome.
    Essential inside the camera: 4:2:2 10 bits and good inbody IS.
    Downsides: autofocus and low light IQ.
    For its price now, it still does a lot compared to what is being released and the prices announced.

      1. Yes.
        The GH5S sensor is said to be better but not stabilized and the camera is only video oriented.
        A GH6 with 16Mp stabilized sensor?
        I think I will wait a lot before selling my XT3, best to really compare.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.