Sony A7rII - sensor tech

[Manoli]

Interesting interview on Imaging Resource with Sony's Kimio Maki discussing the new tech in the A7rII and commentary on EOSHD by Andrew Reid

[Telecaster]

Too much "full frame" fetishism from Mr. Reid IMO. I think Super 35 offers an excellent balance of DOF control without gimmicky extremes, along with the high DR and low noise characteristics of the A7r2's sensor. I'm looking forward to exploring it.

-Dave-

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Avoiding subsampling is in my view most important. Using information from all pixels. That should reduce noise and keep down aliasing, even if aliasing may still be a problem at the pixel size of the A7r. I don't really like the idea of dropping the OLP filter, but I will soon find out as I have an A7rII on order any day this week.

I would agree that full frame doesn't have the importance attributed to it. Smaller formats will do just fine, provided the lenses are good, which seems to be the case with high end Oly and Panasonic lenses. With Sony lenses, I don't know..., my impression is that Sony is lagging in that department.

Best regards
Erik

Too much "full frame" fetishism from Mr. Reid IMO. I think Super 35 offers an excellent balance of DOF control without gimmicky extremes, along with the high DR and low noise characteristics of the A7r2's sensor. I'm looking forward to exploring it.

-Dave-

[AlterEgo]

With Sony lenses, I don't know..., my impression is that Sony is lagging in that department.

it all depends on what kind of lenses and how many one want... there are people out there who use just few primes

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My impression is that Sony lenses are a bit below say Canon and Nikon in performance (MTF) and a bit above in price. There are obviously a lot of variables and I cannot compare all lenses.

I must say that I don't see much reason to complain about the lenses I have. Will be interesting how they stack up with new A7rII I have on order. I will also buy a Zeiss Batis 1.8/85 and a Canon 24/3.5 TSE to be used with that camera, so I will get some more reference.

Personally I have the 16-80/3.5-4.5 ZA, 24-70/2.8 ZA, the 70-300/4.5-5.6 G and the 70-400/4-5.6G plus a bunch of older Minolta lenses like the 100/2.8 Macro  and the 400/4.5 APO.

Best regards
Erik

it all depends on what kind of lenses and how many one want... there are people out there who use just few primes

[shadowblade]

Fortunately, Sony bodies give you the option not to use Sony lenses.

And, the further they develop their AF in this direction, the greater Sony's advantage will be. Concentrate on the bodies, sensors and other electronics (after all, Sony is primarily an electronics company) while leeching off all the good glass already out there. It's like Sigma in reverse.

[Jim Kasson]

Fortunately, Sony bodies give you the option not to use Sony lenses.

And, the further they develop their AF in this direction, the greater Sony's advantage will be. Concentrate on the bodies, sensors and other electronics (after all, Sony is primarily an electronics company) while leeching off all the good glass already out there. It's like Sigma in reverse.

I love this freedom, but I'm not sure the business model works. Isn't the usual camera manufacturer's pricing similar to Epson's printer pricing or Gillette's razor pricing? Ink, blades....lenses?

Jim

[shadowblade]

I love this freedom, but I'm not sure the business model works. Isn't the usual camera manufacturer's pricing similar to Epson's printer pricing or Gillette's razor pricing? Ink, blades....lenses?

Jim

Printer ink and razor blades are consumables. Not lenses. If anything, it's the bodies that are the consumables.

I replace bodies much more often than I replace lenses - a lens may be updated every 10 years,  but a body every 2 years. In addition, I only have one of each lens, but carry multiple bodies around to put behind them.

[Chris Livsey]

It's the huge number of "legacy" lenses from Canikon that are keeping them in business, largely. The inertia of those with a collection of branded mount specific glass slowed the leak to other brands/formats. Sony appear now, with the flange advantage, to be exploiting what was the strength of the big two against them. Look at the thirst for a Leica M equivalent that plays well with the glass.

Why are Sony only "looking at", "considering" changing or allowing an alternative in their firmware to their compression which whilst it isn't killing every shot is a niggle, do they get such an advantage from using it that it outweighs the internet groundswell against it? Would they loose 1fps if they did? Is that worth the noise it is generating?

[synn]

It's the huge number of "legacy" lenses from Canikon that are keeping them in business, largely. The inertia of those with a collection of branded mount specific glass slowed the leak to other brands/formats. Sony appear now, with the flange advantage, to be exploiting what was the strength of the big two against them. Look at the thirst for a Leica M equivalent that plays well with the glass.

Why are Sony only "looking at", "considering" changing or allowing an alternative in their firmware to their compression which whilst it isn't killing every shot is a niggle, do they get such an advantage from using it that it outweighs the internet groundswell against it? Would they loose 1fps if they did? Is that worth the noise it is generating?

I am sure the lossless RAW format is coming. IMO, they put in all their resources in getting the new bodies out of the door and now that this has been done, they will start working on value addition.

[hjulenissen]

I am sure the lossless RAW format is coming. IMO, they put in all their resources in getting the new bodies out of the door and now that this has been done, they will start working on value addition.

I think it is remarkable that their seem to have been surprised by the internet noise over lossy raw. It was there for all of the predecessors for what, years?

If this really is a matter of "changing a few lines of code" and accepting somewhat reduced framerates, I am really surprised that they did not do it before the A7rII (pre) release. Thus, I am speculating that "the fix" might be more involved than that.

Given Sonys reluctance (?) to support previous cameras with firmware updates, I would be sceptical about buying this camera if lossless raw was critical to me, until the test is actually released and tested.

Happily, I don't think that the present file formats would be a big issue for me.

-h

[synn]

Personally, I think the issue has the usual internet amplification effect.

I've worked on a few A7R RAW files and it doesn't seem to me that they are giving much away to my Nikon D800 files. At least for my workflow.

[eronald]

It's the huge number of "legacy" lenses from Canikon that are keeping them in business, largely. The inertia of those with a collection of branded mount specific glass slowed the leak to other brands/formats. Sony appear now, with the flange advantage, to be exploiting what was the strength of the big two against them. Look at the thirst for a Leica M equivalent that plays well with the glass.

Why are Sony only "looking at", "considering" changing or allowing an alternative in their firmware to their compression which whilst it isn't killing every shot is a niggle, do they get such an advantage from using it that it outweighs the internet groundswell against it? Would they loose 1fps if they did? Is that worth the noise it is generating?

I think the compression -delta encoding-  a necessity for some reason related to architecture, bandwidth and thermal effects.

The question is rather do users actually care?

As for the lens system, it's clear that Canikon have needed a stable mount precisely to lock in users, and that this means their patents have run out. I'd expect them to try something like ink cartridge locking in reverse soon. It own't work and will make suers angry, but they'll do it anyway.

Edmund

[eronald]

Personally, I think the issue has the usual internet amplification effect.

I've worked on a few A7R RAW files and it doesn't seem to me that they are giving much away to my Nikon D800 files. At least for my workflow.

 I would be inclined to agree with you.

 I have heard it said that the D800/A7R sensor can work in a Sony and in a Nikon mode.

Edmund

[Jim Kasson]

 I have heard it said that the D800/A7R sensor can work in a Sony and in a Nikon mode.

Edmund, I would be surprised if that were the case. The Sony a7x's go to 12 bit precision in continuous and bulb modes, while the D800x's do not. If the a7x's could stay in higher precision in those modes, I can't see why they wouldn't.

The a7x's don't just throw away a bit in 12 bit mode; the read noise increases, too, indicating that there's something going on with the ADCs.

Jim

[AlterEgo]

Printer ink and razor blades are consumables. Not lenses. If anything, it's the bodies that are the consumables.

+100500... indeed the bodies are what you can sell like razor blades, in addition to everything else... and more so when you can sell them bodies to Canon lens owners or else as a 2nd system even better for Sony.

[AlterEgo]

My impression is that Sony lenses are a bit below say Canon and Nikon in performance (MTF) and a bit above in price. There are obviously a lot of variables and I cannot compare all lenses.

what is the point to include their consumer zooms in that math for example ? plus manual focusing Canon TS-Es are as Sony lens and they are Canon's... even if Canon will get the money from the lenses, Sony will still make the sell at least of the body and then may be some native E-mounts of their own too.

[hjulenissen]

I love this freedom, but I'm not sure the business model works. Isn't the usual camera manufacturer's pricing similar to Epson's printer pricing or Gillette's razor pricing? Ink, blades....lenses?

Jim

It will be interesting to see. I agree with others that lenses are not directly comparable to razor blades. But there is definitely some lock-in for the camera platform (camera, lenses, flashes, proprietary raw developer etc). If some of these components are kept for a few years while others are kept for 10 years and they are all updated asynchronously, then you have effectively created an obstacle for changing systems. Not an insurmountable one, but enough to keep me using Canon for 10 years even though I advice others to check out the competition.

Perhaps Sony are introducing a new business model? If they can continually innovate on cameras and persuade their customers to replace cameras every 18 months (like cellphones) instead of every 5 years (like DSLRs?), perhaps they can be profitable without the ecosystem-advantage that Canon and Nikon seem to rely on?

It would be interesting to see what profits Sony have on the A7 series vs the profits that Canon/Nikon have on DSLRs in the same price range.

-h

[synn]

Open systems are not a guarantee for commercial success.
Look at M43. Open, but hardly the best selling mirrorless system out there.

While I understand that sometimes customers will get frustrated at the closed nature of some systems, a certain amount of lock in is necessary for  long term success in most business models.

[shadowblade]

Open systems are not a guarantee for commercial success.
Look at M43. Open, but hardly the best selling mirrorless system out there.

While I understand that sometimes customers will get frustrated at the closed nature of some systems, a certain amount of lock in is necessary for  long term success in most business models.

It depends what you make, what you are good at making and where your position in the market is. Sony is an electronics company without much of a background in making lenses (hence the reliance on Carl Zeiss) and they're starting from a position where no-one has Sony lenses and most people are 'locked in' to either Canon-mount or Nikon-mount lenses. If they want to sell bodies to professionals who use multiple lenses (beyond those who are simply using them as digital backs and manual-focusing everything) they will need to let them use their existing lenses at full capability. If they don't do it, then Panasonic, Samsung or someone else will, once they have the technology to do so.

It's how it works in the large format and MFDB world. You can stick pretty much any large-format lens in front of any large format technical back or medium-format digital back, so long as the image circle is wide enough to cover your sensor. You may have to adjust a few things (e.g. mount board) but it still works normally.

Besides, there are still accessories such as flashes, batteries, etc. Not as strong a lock-in as a suitcase full of lenses, but still something.