Too early for compact cameras with pro performance?

[uaiomex]

I've been finding and reading a myriad of posts about anomalies and glitches found in the new Sony A7rII. Mostly they seem related to compressed raw and over-heating. Perhaps possible to fix with new firmware but Sony had enough feedback and enough time to work on a non-compressed raw. Then what, constrains because of not enough room for more powerful processors? No room to dissipate heat? No time to develope better hardware? Lack of knowledge? Battery life still too short for pro standards.
Why Sony doesn't license some Nikon know-how? Or is it that the A7 bodies are too small? Therefore, is it too early for small bodies with pro performance?

Eduardo

[Paulo Bizarro]

Perhaps you could join this topic:

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=101707.60

As for the glitches you talk about, this compressed RAW stuff has been discussed to death. Sensor heating? Normal if you take lots of video.

IMO, the pluses of the system far outweigh the minuses...

Pro? What is pro? For sure pros select the right tools for their jobs. If you take lots of photos with severe underexposure and then push shadows a lot in linear areas adjoining highlights (say stained glass in churches), then you may see artefacts.

Other than that, the A7 system seems to be making fine.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Lloyd (Diglloyd) is making a lot of noise about artefacts he things to see that he relates to Sony compression artefacts. Sony actually applies two levels of conmpression, one of which may cause some observable artefacts in rare cases. Sony could probably disable the "delta compression" if they wanted.

I don't know if overheating is a real problem. Could be or could be not. The Sony does a lot of things that Nikon does not,  like 4K or in body stabilization. Both generate heat and both can be switched off.

Naturally, an optical viewfinder draws no energy and thus does not generate heat. All vendors use ASICs to handle signal processing and I guess that the design of those ASICs and their programming is regarded to be significant intellectual property that is not easily shared.

Much of this noise is coming from a few observations. They may be real or not. It is good they are discussed, because it is good to know about limitations and information may put pressure on vendors to improve their products.

But, discussions on these issues are often overblown.

In general, there is no need to compare a Sony to a Nikon or a Canon. If you want/need a Nikon buy a Nikon, same goes for Canon. If you want/need a full frame mirrorless camera with full frame sensor you have two choices Sony or Leica. If you want/need more than 24 MP there is only Sony, right now, unless you go MFD.

Oddly enough, I have not seen any real discussion on lack of OLP filter on the Sony will cause a massive amount of artefacts, still almost zero discussions about. Perhaps artefacts are good at least till some starts complaining about them?

Best regards
Erik

I've been finding and reading a myriad of posts about anomalies and glitches found in the new Sony A7rII. Mostly they seem related to compressed raw and over-heating. Perhaps possible to fix with new firmware but Sony had enough feedback and enough time to work on a non-compressed raw. Then what, constrains because of not enough room for more powerful processors? No room to dissipate heat? No time to develope better hardware? Lack of knowledge? Battery life still too short for pro standards.
Why Sony doesn't license some Nikon know-how? Or is it that the A7 bodies are too small? Therefore, is it too early for small bodies with pro performance?

Eduardo

[hjulenissen]

I've been finding and reading a myriad of posts about anomalies and glitches found in the new Sony A7rII.

Any camera, new and old will have undesirable aspects. These are things designed by mere mortals under significant pressure to keep costs down, to keep time to market within bounds.

Cynically, if Sony (or Nikon) offered the perfect camera today, how would they make you upgrade in 2-5 years? Sony seems to be about rapid product cycles, release what you have today and offer an improved product in 6 months.

Battery life still too short for pro standards.
Why Sony doesn't license some Nikon know-how? Or is it that the A7 bodies are too small? Therefore, is it too early for small bodies with pro performance?

If it is Nikon that you want, then why not buy Nikon? Sony offers a different product, and I am happy that it is not a Canon/Nikon "me too" kind of product.

Being somewhat compact and mirror-less while doing high-quality stills and 4k may explain some of the compromises vs DSLRs. As to the lossy raw, I am guessing that it is a matter of both the technology they are using (being able to read out the sensor rapidly enough for 4k video) as well as the classic "invented here" syndrome.


It would have been interesting to see the A7RII developed as a purely landscape/hiking camera. How would the compromises play out in that case (never mind the perhaps significant lost sales due to well-off family people wanting "the best" 4k video and stills camera in one).

-h

[Hywel]

I've just got an A7R II and I'm fully intending to use it professionally, in my case for fetish fashion photos of pretty girls. 

I've had it a few days and first impressions are pretty good. I've not done any serious work with it yet, but I can already say that it is looking good for the purpose I bought it for: handheld photography.

I wanted it to fill a gap in my camera lineup between my Hasselblad (great for stuff where I control the lighting, including outside where I use flash to counterbalance daylight) and my GH4.

The GH4 is a real Swiss-army knife of a camera (love its ergonomics and its light weight in the mountains, fab 4K video, timelapse and very long battery life) but which is a little low on resolution for my professional model photos and not as super at colour reproduction at moderate to high ISO for the particular use case of available natural light in low-ish light levels, like daylight indoors.

The A7R II is to allow me to shoot hand-held in natural lighting indoors, replacing my 7D which has been filling but not excelling in that role.

I've already discovered that I can hand hold at 1/15th of a second with the A7R II if I'm careful- a good 4 stops better than my shaky middle-aged hands usually manage with standard lens. It's noise performance looks pretty good too, another couple of stops advantage by the looks of it. I'm really excited by the opportunities this opens up to use beautiful natural light on location more often.

I tried the Sony in the mountains a couple of times so far- loved the results, but I don't think it'll replace the GH4 as my preferred mountain camera. The lenses are heavier, the battery life poor, and no built in timelapse. Still, for the right situation, the Sony kicks ass.



In theory, that's Snowdon behind those clouds. Shot from Moel Siabod.





Sunset, the Milky Way and a bit of light pollution over Moel Y Golfa, Welshpool





A fuller shot of the Milky Way later in the night.



So far I'm very happy with my purchase, anyway!

Cheers, Hywel

[AlterEgo]

Cynically, if Sony (or Nikon) offered the perfect camera today, how would they make you upgrade in 2-5 years?

very easy - they will stop selling cameras, they will only allow you to rent a camera, for a monthly/annual fee... that's it... will go with some cloud bs too

[uaiomex]

Beautiful work Hywei!
In reality I never doubted the A7 system could be used for heavy duty or more sublime (Snowdon) work than cat pictures and yours certainly prove it. I personally have used the A6000 succesfully and even used a RX100Mk3 as second camera in a wedding with results that couldn't be obtained with a dslr.
It is just that many glitches that have been met (real or unfounded) seem to be related to enginering compromises that in turn seem to be related to the small physical size of the A7 bodies.
Eduardo

I've just got an A7R II and I'm fully intending to use it professionally, in my case for fetish fashion photos of pretty girls.  

I've had it a few days and first impressions are pretty good. I've not done any serious work with it yet, but I can already say that it is looking good for the purpose I bought it for: handheld photography.

I wanted it to fill a gap in my camera lineup between my Hasselblad (great for stuff where I control the lighting, including outside where I use flash to counterbalance daylight) and my GH4.

The GH4 is a real Swiss-army knife of a camera (love its ergonomics and its light weight in the mountains, fab 4K video, timelapse and very long battery life) but which is a little low on resolution for my professional model photos and not as super at colour reproduction at moderate to high ISO for the particular use case of available natural light in low-ish light levels, like daylight indoors.

The A7R II is to allow me to shoot hand-held in natural lighting indoors, replacing my 7D which has been filling but not excelling in that role.

I've already discovered that I can hand hold at 1/15th of a second with the A7R II if I'm careful- a good 4 stops better than my shaky middle-aged hands usually manage with standard lens. It's noise performance looks pretty good too, another couple of stops advantage by the looks of it. I'm really excited by the opportunities this opens up to use beautiful natural light on location more often.

I tried the Sony in the mountains a couple of times so far- loved the results, but I don't think it'll replace the GH4 as my preferred mountain camera. The lenses are heavier, the battery life poor, and no built in timelapse. Still, for the right situation, the Sony kicks ass.



In theory, that's Snowdon behind those clouds. Shot from Moel Siabod.





Sunset, the Milky Way and a bit of light pollution over Moel Y Golfa, Welshpool





A fuller shot of the Milky Way later in the night.



So far I'm very happy with my purchase, anyway!

Cheers, Hywel

[uaiomex]

I just read this in another thread written by fellow member shadowblade:
"Ever seen the AF on a professional video camera used to shoot sports, or a portable, pro-level camcorder used to shoot wildlife? Mirrorless, and the AF is nothing short of amazing - just as fast and accurate as the D4s or 1Dx. The technology is there. Thing is, running AF and an imperceptible-latency display at that speed requires fast processors and lots of battery power - something a small, mirrorless body doesn't have just yet. Mirrorless cameras are capable of being better than SLRs, or smaller - just, for the moment, not both at the same time."

This words pretty much say how I feel about the A7 cameras. And god knows I'm only one degree away to become a Sony fanboy.  

[Telecaster]

Having little to no interest in photographing sports or fast-moving wildlife, the benefit of SLR-style PD-AF is lost on me. OTOH the greater accuracy & consistency of (well-implemented) CD-AF is a huge plus. That seals the deal, whatever other drawbacks—lower battery life & such—there may be. As always, YMMV.

-Dave-