Sony A7r2 - Are you happy?

I like it a lot

42 (59.2%)

It's pretty good, could see improvement; the next one could be great

17 (23.9%)

It's just a random camera, I don't care

8 (11.3%)

It's a POS, I should never have bought it

4 (5.6%)

Total Members Voted: 70

[ctz]

Yes, I'm happy 

My case:
I shoot mostly food and drinks visuals, I've done this with a P45+ on a Sinar P2 for about ten years. Plenty of lighting power, controlled environment of a studio kind.
Last summer I've thought maybe it's time for change my camera/back and I decided to give the new Sony a go.
Just a couple of casual shots in the studio, not (much) pixel peeping. When I put together a Phase and a Sony files, side by side on the same monitor, I've thought "Damn, this Sony is pretty close to P45, but the Phase is still an inch further", only to realise, seconds after this, that in fact that better looking image I was starring at was made on the Sony .
Short after this, I kept the A7R2, I swiftly bought an Arca Swiss M2 instead of the Sinar, sold the P45+ and bought one more A7R2 as backup.

Why I'm happy:
- excellent, excellent image quality, IMHO
- faster, way faster than my previous workflow due to the (now) decent live view and the possibility to shoot during live viewing, which was impossible before, on my Phase/Sinar combination.
- better speed when shooting liquids, splashes, pourings, etc, a kind of images that I usually do. (again, compared to using a MFDB)
- don't laugh, but I'm also happy that the IQ3100 launched 5 months after, otherwise I might have been attracted to it. But honestly, I still could not expose during the live view. And the recent tests made by the kind people from Digital Transitions (Doug and Co, thank you very much) still show how difficult it is to focus properly on MFDB (These tests show more miss-focused points in the IQ3100 images than in the Sony ones, IMHO).
- and I'm way happier with the extra $30k in my pocket, compared to the IQ3100 price, of course. Again, if I need to choose between them at the same moment, I might have taken the Phase route. Now, I'm not looking back and I know those $30k would not have been helping me to earn a cent more, from my (present or future) clients. Choosing "the right camera" is lesser and lesser important than having "the right" lighting, "the right" studio, making yourself known (self promotion and representation).

Why YOU might be happier:
- the stabilisation for any used lens is a killer, when you need it. (I usually don't)
- very good hi ISO performance (not for me, I usually shoot at 50-100 ISO)

Why YOU might not be happy:
- still poor lens range, depending on your subjects and style (in my case I use the view camera lenses anyway, 2 Schneiders and 4 Rodies, 1 Nikkor, plus the 55/1.8 and 90 macro which are, indeed, impressive)
- camera still looks and feels like a toy (compared to EOS1s, D4s, RZs, RBs, 500c or any other older or newer workhorses). In my case, I use the view camera anyway, the A7R2 is more like a digital back, so I would rather want it even smaller, please.
- short, very short battery life, compared to, let's say, EOS 5D Mark III. (Me? I don't care, I shoot tethered, so I'm using USB charging anyway. In five months, I used the charger just a couple of time, before firmware updates, just in case)

[Jim Kasson]

Why YOU might be happier:
- the stabilisation for any used lens is a killer, when you need it. (I usually don't)
- very good hi ISO performance (not for me, I usually shoot at 50-100 ISO)

Using the a7RII ISOs below 100 produce reduced headroom, and, with the exception of ISO 50, higher noise and thus lower dynamic range. I see no reason to employ them.

Lots of details and measurements here:

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=11622

From the summary:

So the fake ISOs are, for raw shooters, a complete shuck, and a misleading one at that. If you’re using the in-camera histogram to get ETTR exposure, you’re in danger of blowing the highlights at less than base ISO, since the in-camera histogram is derived from the JPEG preview image, which is artificially darkened at ISO settings below the base ISO.

The take home lesson from many of my photographic tests is sometimes complicated and difficult to explain. This one is not: if you shoot raw, don’t ever use the fake ISO settings.

Jim

[ctz]

Using the a7RII ISOs below 100 produce reduced headroom, and, with the exception of ISO 50, higher noise and thus lower dynamic range. I see no reason to employ them.

Lots of details and measurements here:

http://blog.kasson.com/?p=11622

From the summary:

Jim

Honestly, for well-exposed pictures, shot with controlled lighting, I didn't see any difference going down from 400 to 200 to 100 to 50 ISO. If there's any scientific proofs, I won't deny, neither I won't care. The IQ is simply stunning, IMHO.

[Jim Kasson]

Honestly, for well-exposed pictures, shot with controlled lighting, I didn't see any difference going down from 400 to 200 to 100 to 50 ISO. If there's any scientific proofs, I won't deny, neither I won't care. The IQ is simply stunning, IMHO.

Sounds like you don't need all the DR the camera can deliver. Then set the ISO whereever you want.

Jim

[Dan Wells]

I've been all around the mirrorless world for a while (extensive experience using Micro 43, Fuji X and the original A7r). I had a serious look at the A7rII, and ended up getting out of Sony and putting a big deposit on an X-Pro 2 instead - here's why (for my specific needs).

1.) How big do you need to print? I own an Epson 7900, but don't have easy access to a 9900 anywhere, so my printing tends to go right up to 24x36, but stop there. My X-T1 is an "almost" at 24x36 - it works for many scenes, but there are some where it's not quite there. A much newer sensor with 1.5x the pixels should take the "almost" off of that. Micro 43 has never gotten there - it's ideal at 12x18, "almost" at 16x24. The A7r (original) is 24x36 easy, with some room to grow, and the A7rII is probably somewhat better.

2.) Weather sealing - the Sonys claim it, but I've never trusted it (it seems to be based on tolerances, not actual o-ring seals). Both Fuji and Olympus publish diagrams of their sealing, and the sealed Fujis are at least D800 class, while the best Olympi are in the D4/1Dx class.

3.) Lenses. FE lenses are huge and there's a limited selection, Fuji has a GREAT range of relatively compact lenses, Micro 43 has more variability in quality, but some great glass.

If I were doing less of my photography in the backcountry, and more close to the car, my considerations for an ultimate image quality system would be different from "the best image quality I'm willing to carry". I'd look at Sony with a mix of native and adapted lenses, Nikon (D810), and the Pentax 645Z. Canon's limited DR wouldn't be as appealing, and Phase and Hasselblad would be out of my price range. Sony might VERY WELL win that competition!

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I have great respect for that view. I think it is very reasonable to make a choice based on needed print size and buy a system optimised to that size. Optimising the system means among other things to develop lenses with capabilities matching the sensor, good selection of focal lengths and optimal size.

Fuji has done that and so did 4/3.

Personally I want to have the option to print large and seldom walk more than 1-2 km from the car, so I go with Sony A7rII. But I also am under the impression that Canon offers better lenses at a more attractive price than Sony. So, I will probably buy some more Canon lenses.

Best regards
Erik

I've been all around the mirrorless world for a while (extensive experience using Micro 43, Fuji X and the original A7r). I had a serious look at the A7rII, and ended up getting out of Sony and putting a big deposit on an X-Pro 2 instead - here's why (for my specific needs).

1.) How big do you need to print? I own an Epson 7900, but don't have easy access to a 9900 anywhere, so my printing tends to go right up to 24x36, but stop there. My X-T1 is an "almost" at 24x36 - it works for many scenes, but there are some where it's not quite there. A much newer sensor with 1.5x the pixels should take the "almost" off of that. Micro 43 has never gotten there - it's ideal at 12x18, "almost" at 16x24. The A7r (original) is 24x36 easy, with some room to grow, and the A7rII is probably somewhat better.

2.) Weather sealing - the Sonys claim it, but I've never trusted it (it seems to be based on tolerances, not actual o-ring seals). Both Fuji and Olympus publish diagrams of their sealing, and the sealed Fujis are at least D800 class, while the best Olympi are in the D4/1Dx class.

3.) Lenses. FE lenses are huge and there's a limited selection, Fuji has a GREAT range of relatively compact lenses, Micro 43 has more variability in quality, but some great glass.

If I were doing less of my photography in the backcountry, and more close to the car, my considerations for an ultimate image quality system would be different from "the best image quality I'm willing to carry". I'd look at Sony with a mix of native and adapted lenses, Nikon (D810), and the Pentax 645Z. Canon's limited DR wouldn't be as appealing, and Phase and Hasselblad would be out of my price range. Sony might VERY WELL win that competition!

[Phil Indeblanc]

Yes, I'm happy 

My case:
I shoot mostly food and drinks visuals, I've done this with a P45+ on a Sinar P2 for about ten years. Plenty of lighting power, controlled environment of a studio kind.
Last summer I've thought maybe it's time for change my camera/back and I decided to give the new Sony a go.
Just a couple of casual shots in the studio, not (much) pixel peeping. When I put together a Phase and a Sony files, side by side on the same monitor, I've thought "Damn, this Sony is pretty close to P45, but the Phase is still an inch further", only to realise, seconds after this, that in fact that better looking image I was starring at was made on the Sony .
Short after this, I kept the A7R2, I swiftly bought an Arca Swiss M2 instead of the Sinar, sold the P45+ and bought one more A7R2 as backup.

Why I'm happy:
- excellent, excellent image quality, IMHO
- faster, way faster than my previous workflow due to the (now) decent live view and the possibility to shoot during live viewing, which was impossible before, on my Phase/Sinar combination.
- better speed when shooting liquids, splashes, pourings, etc, a kind of images that I usually do. (again, compared to using a MFDB)
- don't laugh, but I'm also happy that the IQ3100 launched 5 months after, otherwise I might have been attracted to it. But honestly, I still could not expose during the live view. And the recent tests made by the kind people from Digital Transitions (Doug and Co, thank you very much) still show how difficult it is to focus properly on MFDB (These tests show more miss-focused points in the IQ3100 images than in the Sony ones, IMHO).
- and I'm way happier with the extra $30k in my pocket, compared to the IQ3100 price, of course. Again, if I need to choose between them at the same moment, I might have taken the Phase route. Now, I'm not looking back and I know those $30k would not have been helping me to earn a cent more, from my (present or future) clients. Choosing "the right camera" is lesser and lesser important than having "the right" lighting, "the right" studio, making yourself known (self promotion and representation).

Why YOU might be happier:
- the stabilisation for any used lens is a killer, when you need it. (I usually don't)
- very good hi ISO performance (not for me, I usually shoot at 50-100 ISO)

Why YOU might not be happy:
- still poor lens range, depending on your subjects and style (in my case I use the view camera lenses anyway, 2 Schneiders and 4 Rodies, 1 Nikkor, plus the 55/1.8 and 90 macro which are, indeed, impressive)
- camera still looks and feels like a toy (compared to EOS1s, D4s, RZs, RBs, 500c or any other older or newer workhorses). In my case, I use the view camera anyway, the A7R2 is more like a digital back, so I would rather want it even smaller, please.
- short, very short battery life, compared to, let's say, EOS 5D Mark III. (Me? I don't care, I shoot tethered, so I'm using USB charging anyway. In five months, I used the charger just a couple of time, before firmware updates, just in case)

Same boat as you(SinarP2 with db, and about to change all that to pick up this little guy ...But also wondering about the Pro Alpha they are "soon" to release.

Did you see the video Vadim did with the IQ130?

https://youtu.be/Ku8xRf72xFA


But as a event camera or outdoor type ruggedness, I don't think the Sony would survive long...While my Canon has much wear in the looks,a nd its been in some battles, it is still ticking like an beast.

[ctz]

Same boat as you(SinarP2 with db, and about to change all that to pick up this little guy ...But also wondering about the Pro Alpha they are "soon" to release.

Did you see the video Vadim did with the IQ130?

https://youtu.be/Ku8xRf72xFA


But as a event camera or outdoor type ruggedness, I don't think the Sony would survive long...While my Canon has much wear in the looks,a nd its been in some battles, it is still ticking like an beast.

A "PRO" alpha might be a bit bulkier and I won't like that, considering that I have to mount it on the same view camera.

Yes I saw that clip, but I already had draw my own conclusions long before that

As a event camera, I don't know, indeed, Canon and Nikons still rule the world. Build wise, and also lens wise.

[rainer_v]

I liked the A7r a lot and the a7rii even more ...
Aside the file quality the best thing is that i can mount nearly all lenses. Small wideangles as the wate or the vl 12-15-21 mm aside with all kind of existing shift solutions, canon zooms and the old olympus and contax-g stuff.
Some wide lenses wont work, but there are so many which do fine that this is the best for me i have had ever in one camera.
42Mp is less than 100, but for static objects and with shift lenses often i reach similar file sizes.
And ... even 42 is a lot for every kind and size of prints.

[sbay]

2.) Weather sealing - the Sonys claim it, but I've never trusted it (it seems to be based on tolerances, not actual o-ring seals). Both Fuji and Olympus publish diagrams of their sealing, and the sealed Fujis are at least D800 class, while the best Olympi are in the D4/1Dx class.

I was at the coast a few days ago and got hit by a wave splashing the rocks. More than a spray, less than a soaking (but certainly not anything that would concern me with my old canons). Camera seemed fine and I just wiped off the water. Got home and was a little unnerved to see dried salt all over the bottom of the mount on both my lens/camera. I got hit from above so I'm guessing it got sucked up from underneath through capillary action.

How much it could it possibly have cost them to put a rubber o-ring on their lenses?

[chez]

Hi,

I have great respect for that view. I think it is very reasonable to make a choice based on needed print size and buy a system optimised to that size. Optimising the system means among other things to develop lenses with capabilities matching the sensor, good selection of focal lengths and optimal size.

Fuji has done that and so did 4/3.

Personally I want to have the option to print large and seldom walk more than 1-2 km from the car, so I go with Sony A7rII. But I also am under the impression that Canon offers better lenses at a more attractive price than Sony. So, I will probably buy some more Canon lenses.

Best regards
Erik

Actually if you look at sow of the quality lenses from Canon, I would not categorize them as being more attractive price wise.

[Dan Wells]

One of the most attractive features of the A7rII (and one of the two (the other obviously being the superb image quality)) that caused me to take a long look at it is the adapted lens performance. It has (with adapters) full performance with Sony FE, Sony A, Canon, Nikon and perhaps Leica M lenses. I ended up deciding not to mess with the adapters, and ended up with Fuji due largely to their great first-party lenses. Where weathersealing is critical, I'd rather trust one company than three, one of which I've never heard of, and which sells primarily on eBay. If I were Sony, I'd release Sony-branded Nikon and Canon adapters as quickly as I could get them out the door! I'm not sure about the odd variable extension tube adapter that claims to autofocus Leica M lenses  that may be too much of a niche item for Sony - but Canon and Nikon for sure.  Sony themselves have a very limited lens selection at this point (and some subpar performers mixed in with some of the best around), but, the day they introduce high quality first-party Nikon and Canon adapters, they have the best lens system around - since neither Canon nor Nikon takes the other guy's lenses. Oh, and Mr. Sony Marketing Guy - put out a video showing the A7rII switching between a couple of, shall we say, unique lenses... Try taking off a Nikon 6mm f2.8 and immediately replacing it with a Canon 1200mm f5.6. No other camera can do THAT with full functionality!

Dan

[Harold Clark]

I liked the A7r a lot and the a7rii even more ...
Aside the file quality the best thing is that i can mount nearly all lenses. Small wideangles as the wate or the vl 12-15-21 mm aside with all kind of existing shift solutions, canon zooms and the old olympus and contax-g stuff.
Some wide lenses wont work, but there are so many which do fine that this is the best for me i have had ever in one camera.
42Mp is less than 100, but for static objects and with shift lenses often i reach similar file sizes.
And ... even 42 is a lot for every kind and size of prints.

Rainer,

Do you use the Artec much now, or mostly the Sony? It is hard to beat the speed of operation and convenience of the 35mm cameras.
I don't own any MF digital equipment, but if I did I think it would be tempting to leave it on the shelf most of the time considering the subject matter I usually shoot.

[earlybird]

I am familiarizing with a A7RII loaner today. I have a Canon 35mm f1.4L on it and have just spent a few minutes perusing the menu while trying to figure out how to control shutter and aperture in full manual mode. I had to put the camera down and take a break because my right hand started cramping.

Between the menu, the basic ergonomics, and the control layout ergonomics I am very happy that this camera is a loaner.

[ErikKaffehr]

I don't agree.

Best regards
Erik

Actually if you look at sow of the quality lenses from Canon, I would not categorize them as being more attractive price wise.

[Phil Indeblanc]

I am familiarizing with a A7RII loaner today. I have a Canon 35mm f1.4L on it and have just spent a few minutes perusing the menu while trying to figure out how to control shutter and aperture in full manual mode. I had to put the camera down and take a break because my right hand started cramping.

Between the menu, the basic ergonomics, and the control layout ergonomics I am very happy that this camera is a loaner.

I hope its more of a learning curve than anything more......Not like a Capture One situation ;-P

[rainer_v]

Rainer,

Do you use the Artec much now, or mostly the Sony? It is hard to beat the speed of operation and convenience of the 35mm cameras.
I don't own any MF digital equipment, but if I did I think it would be tempting to leave it on the shelf most of the time considering the subject matter I usually shoot.

Mostly ( 95%) i work with the sony ...

[eronald]

Mostly ( 95%) i work with the sony ...

So basically you could go all-Sony?

Edmund

[DaveCurtis]

I'm really happy with the image quality compared to my 5D3 however I'm less enthused with the over handling of the camera when compared to my 5d3. Poor menu structure, fiddly buttons and controls, lack of joysick for focus point selection. I'm always taking my eye away from the view finder as the controls don't lie naturally under my fingers as does the Canon. It may just be due to the cameras small size however Im not totally convinced of this.

Generally works well will with my Canon lenses and metabones adapter. It does have the odd AF hunting fit when minutes earlier it focused quickly on the same subject in the same light. AF tracking works well once locked on.

Battery life is poor but small camera = small battery.

Im taking it to Africa with my Canon for Safari shooting in Botswana and landscapes in Namibia later in the year. I will be using Canon lenses and the Metabones.

Nice camera with huge amount of functionality.

[Phil Indeblanc]

I'm waiting for a no name or even a Sony brand housing that would help make the A7Rii look like a larger camera, so I have a easier time using it around clients. Maybe a Phase One type hosing would work well. Maybe have a external battery to help, with maybe larger screen?