A7RII initial thoughts and images

[rainer_v]

I only tried in tungsten light, if there was an advantage it was marginally. I will try in daylight today as well.

[spidermike]

An interesting view from a Canon forum. It seems to be saying 'nice camera to add to your line up but don't jump ship' (especially at those prices).

http://www.canonwatch.com/

The Sony a7RII is not a pro camera. It’s a consumer camera with pro features (and a pro price).

...

Canon has established an ecosystem that is as much consumer friendly as it is oriented to deliver the best possible service to professional photographers. These things make a huge difference. And it’s just the tip of the iceberg.

...

Don’t get me wrong. The Sony a7RII is an impressive camera and a great piece of technology, stuffed with advanced tech, and an amazing amount of functions and features. It’s just that it appears to be packaged in a product that’s neither fully mature nor really ready to hit the pro market. If the a7RII was software, I would say it’s still at beta level. That’s why I think the a7RII is over-hyped and over-priced. It’s a cool camera but nowhere an issue for the likes of Canon and Nikon. I mean, have a look at Sony’s sensor cleaning mode.

...

[telyt]

With regards to moving the sensor for AF as well as for flange distance adjustment, this has the disadvantage of altering the magnification of the image, sometimes to a large degree - for instance, when focusing close, a lens that is nominally 300mm could end up giving the same angle of view as a 240mm lens, or even shorter, if you had to move the sensor much closer to the lens to focus on a nearby object.

You've got it backwards.  The sensor is moved farther away from the lens to focus closer resulting in the angle of view of a longer lens, not of a shorter lens.  The effect you've described is what happens with an internal-focus lens.

[chez]

I received my a7rii today with the option to take a critical look on it till monday. First shots taken from tripod at base iso up to iso 6400 dont show an advantage for noise against the a7r. I would rate them as equallly good.
If the a7r2 wont be visible better in still mode, for me only remain two advantages ... stabilisation and 1. curtain.  It will make it hard for me to decide. I dont shoot videos so i dont care 4k.

Here is a test between the two cameras showing about a 1 stop improvement in the A7R2 at higher ISO.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1381125

[Quentin]

An interesting view from a Canon forum. It seems to be saying 'nice camera to add to your line up but don't jump ship' (especially at those prices).

http://www.canonwatch.com/

It the increasingly desperate world of traditional DSLR's, the comments you quote are unsurprising.

[eronald]

It the increasingly desperate world of traditional DSLR's, the comments you quote are unsurprising.

To frame this in legal lingo "The use of a third party camera with Canon lenses may or may not damage your artistic perception".

Edmund

[spidermike]

It the increasingly desperate world of traditional DSLR's, the comments you quote are unsurprising.

True. But then I would expect such cynicism from someone who likes the camera  


I will admit I am very rarely an 'early adopter' in any technology and I have a fair amount of sympathy with the initial premise in the article that there is an awful lot of hyperbole at the moment surrounding the A7Rii, much of it before the thing is even released. I guess it goes with the territory when you get a groundbreaking model: I last saw this with the E-M5 and it will be interesting to see if the 'cost-benefit' of the Sony plays out in the same way as it did with the Olympus line. We are starting to see comments on where it is (shall we say) 'not so good' so the next few months will be worth watching.

[eronald]

True. But then I would expect such cynicism from someone who likes the camera  


I will admit I am very rarely an 'early adopter' in any technology and I have a fair amount of sympathy with the initial premise in the article that there is an awful lot of hyperbole at the moment surrounding the A7Rii, much of it before the thing is even released. I guess it goes with the territory when you get a groundbreaking model: I last saw this with the E-M5 and it will be interesting to see if the 'cost-benefit' of the Sony plays out in the same way as it did with the Olympus line. We are starting to see comments on where it is (shall we say) 'not so good' so the next few months will be worth watching.

Don't worry, the next model is coming.

Edmund

[NancyP]

I think that Canon and Nikon DSLRs have very good system backup. I have heard plenty of praise for Canon service and nothing but grief about Sony service. Concerning camera ergonomics, I can't say anything about the Sony, not having one, but I do think that Canon designs are comfortable in my hands. The sports and wildlife shooters are going to be wedded to the optical viewfinder for a while. I would not be pronouncing the death of DSLRs. The whole point of the broad range of good cameras available today is that there are many users with many preferences. It is great that there are some very happy A7Rii users out there.

 At this point I have recognized that I need to invest in my brain more than in the latest and greatest gear.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I would agree that Canon has good reputation for services, especially with CPS.

Regarding Sony's reputation you are probably right.

A small point to make, a professional service doesn't help you if you are shooting in the Dolomites for a week. The only thing that can save you skin is a backup body. Ideally you would need lenses, too.

Regarding optical viewfinders vs. EVF I would agree, sort of. But, I am pretty sure certain that EVF is where the future is. Now, the question how close that future my be.

I would also say that in many cases the future is right now, but it may take a long time until EVF will be the optimum choice for fast moving action.

The reason I think EVF will reign is that both SLR viewing and EVF intends to provide "what you see is what you get" viewing. SLRs need a lot of moving parts that needs to be in alignment for that. EVF uses the signal from the actual sensor used to make the picture. So, it is in that sense optimal. But, it has a lag, limited brightness etc.

Best regards
Erik

I think that Canon and Nikon DSLRs have very good system backup. I have heard plenty of praise for Canon service and nothing but grief about Sony service. Concerning camera ergonomics, I can't say anything about the Sony, not having one, but I do think that Canon designs are comfortable in my hands. The sports and wildlife shooters are going to be wedded to the optical viewfinder for a while. I would not be pronouncing the death of DSLRs. The whole point of the broad range of good cameras available today is that there are many users with many preferences. It is great that there are some very happy A7Rii users out there.

 At this point I have recognized that I need to invest in my brain more than in the latest and greatest gear.

[eronald]

Erik,

If you already own Canon, you  have a backup for the Sony.

I just wish people put as much effort into thinking about nuclear energy matters as about cameras - it certainly is amusing to see the country with almost the densest use of space, and the highest routine occurrence of earthquakes, rely on the only human engineering product whose failures we cannot predictably contain. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against nuclear energy, I'm against corrupt and lazy idiocy.

Edmund

Hi,

Regarding Sony's reputation you are probably right.

A small point to make, a professional service doesn't help you if you are shooting in the Dolomites for a week. The only thing that can save you skin is a backup body. Ideally you would need lenses, too.

Regarding optical viewfinders vs. EVF I would agree, sort of. But, I am pretty sure certain that EVF is where the future is. Now, the question how close that future my be.

I would also say that in many cases the future is right now, but it may take a long time until EVF will be the optimum choice for fast moving action.

The reason I think EVF will reign is that both SLR viewing and EVF intends to provide "what you see is what you get" viewing. SLRs need a lot of moving parts that needs to be in alignment for that. EVF uses the signal from the actual sensor used to make the picture. So, it is in that sense optimal. But, it has a lag, limited brightness etc.

Best regards
Erik

[NancyP]

Yes, you need a backup for a pro job or major trip. I was referring to a sense of hassle when dealing with the company repair department. I agree that electronic viewfinders are going to get better. It will take a while before the EVFs are good at high speed panning keeping a small bird under the focus point. I already love magnified Live View for landscapes, tripod macros.

I have to say that the Japanese putting the nuclear reactors back online is rather cringe-inducing.

[eronald]

Yes, you need a backup for a pro job or major trip. I was referring to a sense of hassle when dealing with the company repair department. I agree that electronic viewfinders are going to get better. It will take a while before the EVFs are good at high speed panning keeping a small bird under the focus point. I already love magnified Live View for landscapes, tripod macros.

I have to say that the Japanese putting the nuclear reactors back online is rather cringe-inducing.

I expect Sony probably make a pro video camera that can do the panning by itself. And if they don't they have their engineers working on it (sports) 

Edmund

[capital]

Edmund, I am not sure they would want to pan their own product...

sorry for the pun.

[shadowblade]

An interesting view from a Canon forum. It seems to be saying 'nice camera to add to your line up but don't jump ship' (especially at those prices).

http://www.canonwatch.com/

Yet plenty of pros are using the A7 series. Just not many action/event pros (although there is an increasing number of wedding photographers using it)

The definition of 'pro camera' on SLR forums seems to be so narrow - essentially, cameras that are action-focused and tuned to the needs of event or sports photographers who shoot fast-moving thiings in the dark and don't need to print very large - that many other cameras don't meet their definition of 'pro camera' either. This includes most MF cameras, all medium-format digital backs, scanning backs, any sort of technical camera that requires a lot of fiddling around to do the job, etc.

[adrian tyler]

yes, it's the idea that a "pro" is hammering nails with the thing all day long, preferably in an high adrenaline action situation, and in these kind of macho circumstances the nikon and canon "pro" bodies would survive longer. however, i wonder how much of this "pro" need "pro (tank") body is a case of "malborough man" marketing... riding off into the smoke ridden sunset after the bombs and bullets die down... driving into the dust storm savana to hunt lion... into the rugby scrum with the wide angle... it's a concept for most, reality for very few.

[telyt]

At this point I have recognized that I need to invest in my brain more than in the latest and greatest gear.

This is good advice for the vast majority of us.

[shadowblade]

yes, it's the idea that a "pro" is hammering nails with the thing all day long, preferably in an high adrenaline action situation, and in these kind of macho circumstances the nikon and canon "pro" bodies would survive longer. however, i wonder how much of this "pro" need "pro (tank") body is a case of "malborough man" marketing... riding off into the smoke ridden sunset after the bombs and bullets die down... driving into the dust storm savana to hunt lion... into the rugby scrum with the wide angle... it's a concept for most, reality for very few.

Not so much about build quality, which is important for a lot of different professional usages - gear needs to be able to handle a certain amount of abuse if you're shooting it in the field, regardless of what you're shooting. More about the relative importance of AF speed (great if you shoot sports, not so important for anything else), the importance of high-ISO performance (great if you shoot events in the dark without flash, not so useful if you sell landscapes or primarily shoot property or fashion) and the unimportance of resolution (not so unimportant if you need to print large or are shooting for advertising, or shooting backdrops and environments for cinema or SFX production).

[adrian tyler]

yes, but my point is that how many users need to "capture the falling soldier" or "shoot the pouncing lion?" i would venture that less than 3% of "pro" camera owners. perhaps the concepts of "pro" requirements are more of a marketing myth, which is as we know in our slogan saturated culture, as good as fact.
there again, what do i know, there are a lot of wars right now, not so many lions though...

[Bo Dez]

I was initially quite excited by the the Sony a7r2, but I'm not impressed with it's output at all.