Under the hood: A closer look at the Sony a7R II

Yup, I keep hearing that. The perfect picture needs the best camera. I could most likely cover a wedding with an iPhone (with some struggle) and the output would still be great. ;-) In fact, beware of the photographer who advertises herself saying "I carry high end equipment" as her opening spin.

With equipment these days, anyone can take a nice picture. The real question however, is taking a picture that is more than nice or sharp.

While I appreciate the details, I believe that a picture is to be seen as a whole. We all pixel peep to a degree, but I have NEVER once been in a situation where an image was good because it is sharp and for no other reason. A good picture never needs to be sharp. Henri Cartier-Bresson's photos are nearly 100 years old, and certainly nobody's idea of sharp. Yet they remain the benchmark for good photography today.

The reason why pros get better equipment is so they can shoot in more difficult conditions with less noise or color degradation A pro camera is more capable of judging a situation, therefore leaving the photographer free to concentrate on the composition instead of fiddling with dials.

As someone who isn't a pro photographer, I have to completely disagree. As others have pointed out, the camera doesn't do everything. It doesn't compose the shot and THAT is what makes the difference. Just because you have fancy hammer doesn't mean you can build a house.

Yes cause I have an amazing Oven and that makes me a Chef! And I have an amazing power saw and that makes me a carpenter, and I have an amazing tool kit and that makes me a Plumber……

Unfortunately - at these prices - only pros can afford them.

The point is more that a photo of fifty sports togs using your gear is a very effective advertising ploy to appeal to the average consumer. Don't listen to any technical nonsense about why canon makes white lenses - it's so people see this: https://papermiles.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/canonshades.jpg

Absolute Rubbish ! I don't give a damn if sports photographers shoot Sony or Canon. I don't shoot professional sports.

If someone bases their buying decisions on if someone with a 4 ft long white lens uses the same brand, they are uninformed fools.

No, they're average consumers, rather than enthusiasts. That's what most of the population is - average consumers. And things like that matter to them, otherwise companies wouldn't pay celebrities and athletes millions of dollars to use their products.

It doesn't matter to you - cool. But if you think it doesn't matter AT ALL, the uninformed fool here is the one you see in the mirror every morning

It will never happen. I love mirrorless cameras, but there's no way they can handle breakneck action at high fps rates and large volume shooting. They'd probably freeze in the middle of an important shot and you'd see a pro photog throwing their camera straight into the pavement out of frustration! lol

The last thing Sony should do is waste billions on huge lenses and the sports market. The only people who want that are a few hundred sports shooters globally and retired - middle aged North Americans. It is a shrinking market.

All Sony are doing is developing leading edge Tech. That is enough. Their sensors can and will pop up in all sorts of cameras and phones. As the market changes, Sony tech will be there.

The kids in the crowd at sports stadiums dont care / arent impressed by the sports shooters and their canon bazookas. They just snap on their iPhones. This is why camera sales are falling.

Because sports photography is the only type of photography that exists, right?

The other thing to remember is that a lot of sporting event photography (especially at the Olympics) use pre-focused cameras, often shot remotely. This is often the case at track events. When the athlete enters a particular zone, the camera is triggered remotely by a human operator located somewhere else. I can easily see mirrorless cameras eventually overtaking remotely-fired sporting event setups where there's no need for a big, bulky DSLR. Especially when you consider that these sporting event photographers might go to an event with a dozen cameras, any reduction in camera size and weight would have a huge cumulative benefit. It's an even bigger benefit when you consider the fast frame rates that mirrorless cameras are capable of, in such a small size.

No, sports photography is not the only thing that exists. But nobody needs sneakers that perform at the level Lebron James does, yet magically Nike is willing to pay him millions of dollars to endorse their product because it makes people buy it. Tiger woods' watch has zero to do with his performance , yet Rolex will dump money down his throat till he chokes to get him wearing their watches. Because it makes other people want them.

Sports photography at high profile events is high profile. Consumers pay attention to that. It's not rocket science , just good advertising.

Yeah, Sony might not sell many A7RII bodies to the 0.1% of photographers that photograph professional sports. Oh no!

I can see that obtuse is in fashion. High profile users create brand recognition and perception of prestige. This results in sales. This is a basic fact of advertising - It obviously works, or every company on planet earth would not dole out money to the end of obtaining high profile users of their product.

I am not saying Canon makes their living by having sports photographers or any other kind of high profile photographer using their gear.

In fact, they probably lose money along the way in the amount of freebies, loaner gear, quasi instant turnaround on repairs and other butt kissing that they to do to keep those markets happy.

But when someone walks into walmart thinking "What kind of camera should I buy to take pictures of my kids soccer games" it results in them thinking the word "Canon" , and that makes the outlay worth it.

Yes, I heard a news story on the radio a few years ago about how marketing, many times, does not have the effect that companies think it does. For instance I can watch a commercial and many times, seconds later not even know what product they were advertising. But this is slightly different - because if you recognize the product then that is all they want.
But this is what these companies do. They pay or offer special services to get equipment in top pros hands. Then everyone on this website complains when they think a certain pro switched to a certain brand because they got paid to. Well, maybe they did, maybe they didn't - we can't know that. But we do know that these companies want to have equipment in the right pros hands.

There's no doubt in my mind they reward them handsomely for using their systems and evangelizing the brand.

And in the end, we are all jaded enthusiasts, and so we think it's bad and hem and haw about it, but paid or not, it has to perform or they would walk away because it would threaten their livelihood.

So even if Sony pays Fong, or Fuji pays Arias , or Canon pays Kelby, if the equipment was bunco they wouldn't use it to make their livings because it would threaten their livelihood. So regardless of being jaded about it, it lets you know it performs to a certain level that is required.

@Joed700
Thanks for the advice. I am not in the market for a new camera right now. I already have D800E and D5500, Fuji X-T1
I was just "teasing" DPR :-)
I had the impression that the D810 review is coming. At some point, it was considered, by many, the best FF camera in the market. It seems to me that DPR is scrambling to get any article about Sony's A7RII these days. They just see the momentum in the market and they just want to be part of it. I am not criticizing them. I just find it interesting. At the end it's their site and they can do whatever they want. And they basically want to make money like the rest of the world :-)

It seems to me Diglloyd is not much into Sony. At all.

This pic is useless: it went thru Photoshop CC2015 and it is 200ko, so it's clearly not an out of camera JPG and it's worthless has a proof of posterization from the camera. With such a low quality JPG it could very well come from the photoshop settings.

surlezi, you can get a better sample on the site and others on the web who have been testing as well.

IchiroCameraGuy

I was not aware of a posterization issue with the A7RII (apart from specific problems due to compressed RAW).
I can't find any pics hinting there could be such an issue. Can you provide links, because none can be found easily it seems.
I checked on Diglloyd: couldn't find a proper shot, i.e. a RAW file nor a meaningful JPG. Google couldn't help me much more for something else somewhere else.

All I could find on Diglloyd were the comments and answers below his un-documented un-scientific article.
Diglloyd makes fun of what he calls "Sony fanboys" and his comments about Sony are so Canicon-fanboy-ish (to speak the way he does) that I don't think he can be much trusted as an independent reviewer...

For serious work, there are good quality blogs, one of them you might enjoy for its scientific value :
http://blog.kasson.com/
The A7RII and its shortcoming are discussed, but with valid data and in a scientific maner, not a partisan one:

surlezi: Did you see slide 8 in this article? Pretty obvious posterization there. Thom Hogan has some examples on his site as well, albeit with older Sony cams of various flavours (including the RX100, which he raves about).

That said, I'm not sure how critical it is. Maybe as much as the banding issue with the D750, which is to say not much of an issue at all.

There is no posterization issue because there is no reliable picture of posterization that can be found anywhere, be it a RAW or a good quality unedited JPG.

There is no slide 8 on DigLLoyd.
There is no review of the A7RII on Thom Hogan's site...

Again if I'm wrong please provide a direct link here, but searching on these sites and on Google just provide nothing.
All this is just becoming some kind of hoax. There is indeed lossy RAW compression with potential edge artifact as described by Kasson, but certainly no daylight posterization issue as falsely declared by DL.

Not sure about the validity of daylight posterization claims - I like the A7 series, I really wish Sony would provide some sort of firmware update to introduce lossless compression.

Um, deliverator, I'm not trolling here, I've remained polite, and I don't need your benefit of the doubt, you may keep it for you as I'll keep mine.

Thank you anyway for clarifying your assertion and providing a link.
I hadn't understood you were talking about slide 8 of this very article in DPReview, because I am discussing DigLloyd's article of full daylight severe posterization invention.
This has nothing to do with the problem dealt about in DPReview page 8 (posterization at high contrast boundaries when pushing file of 5 EV). I fully know this last problem and I've refered to it myself.

What Diglloyd claims about daylight posterization remains a hoax. And indeed nothing else can be found about it, even from Thom Hogan who discusses A7R known issue.

I will be even cooler if one can use touch focus on those 399 points. Maybe A7R3.

Er, yeah, no need for me to manually select one of 399 points. Proper subject tracking, which is undoubtedly the future of AF, means the camera automatically picks one of those 399 points at any instant of time, constantly re-updating every split second. But not without first having an understanding of what your subject is.

And that's where Eye AF comes in, as well as a way for the photographer to indicate what the primary subject is. Currently, we do define our subject by initiating AF on it, at which point the camera 'remembers' what was underneath the AF point when focus was initiated. Or which eye was under the AF point when focus was initiated.

It's a far, far better way of focusing.

But if you want to revert to the old ways of pre-selecting your point or zone, more focus point is never a bad thing.

But, yeah, as @ttran88 says, the point of having that many points is not so you can choose one of them. It's so the camera can. It gives Eye AF uncanny, unprecedented precision.

@Rishi,

Don't you feel that the lack of a touch screen is not much of a problem ?
With my A7, the feature I use a lot for AF is to press the middle button of the wheel (set to "Standard"):
- this brings the square selection box for the Autofocus lock in the center of the viewfinder (or screen if using screen)
- I aim at the subject with this box and validate it as the subject to track by clicking center wheel again.

I can't see anything faster nor as precise, especially not a touchscreen.
If the A7RII can use the same feature but with a better AF and tracking, then it's a perfect way to choose your target.

@surlezi: yes and no.

The feature you speak of, Lock-on AF, can be incredibly useful, but is often too erratic to trust. But, yes, having your camera subject track as a way to move the AF point automatically is something I've been trying to sell to our audience for some time now. Many don't get it, so I'm glad you see the power of this.

In fact, that's how I use my Nikon D810, which works in an even faster manner: you just place whatever AF point you currently have selected over your subject, depress the shutter halfway, & from that point on the camera 'remembers' your subject. Even after you've taken a shot, as long as you don't fully lift your finger off (keep it half-depressed), the camera will still remember.

This is a fantastic way to get multiple compositions of your subject. We're moving away from a world where we focus right before the time of capture, to one where our subject is always prefocused, ready for the moment you wish to capture.

But Lock-on AF is still too erratic for me to trust as much as I trust Nikon's 3D tracking. When it works, it's brilliant, but when it doesn't, it really fails, like with this RX100 IV example from our review. See the rollover under 'subject tracking'.

Not only is it inaccurate, it also lags, which causes a # of missed shots. Nikon's 3D tracking on the D7200 in a similar example performs much better.

Samsung's NX1 also has a more reliable version of Lock-on tracking.

So, yes, if in the future Lock-on AF is re-engineered to be more reliable (we almost feel it's overengineered, growing, shrinking, and morphing the box around your subject a little too much as it tries to understand your subject), then, yes that'll be the fastest way to AF, as it's exactly what I do with my D810. Which has been game-changing for my hit rate with wedding, newborn, candid portraiture, etc.

Yeah I was bummed out when I discovered the A7R II's subject tracking would reset in certain modes, and I'd be forced to re-select my focus.

But, like so many other things, I believe these fixes are just a firmware update or two away, potentially

The point is, we're missing the forest for the trees with regard to the overall truths: certain technology is reaching a dead-end and shouldn't be invested in, while other technology is about to shatter previous standards.

@surlezi

Between the A7 and A7R II, the differences are also significantly hardware-based, too.

For the record, I believe Sony has made firmware for at least some cameras that improves AF. Not sure if it was the A7, A7 II, or the A6000, but I know they do it when possible. Fuji, Nikon and Canon have done this too, but not nearly often enough.

IMO, the A7R II is simply the first camera to contain both the hardware and software to "git 'er done". Its phase-detect AF is performed on-sensor and in harmony with contrast-detect AF, which is something no previous A7-series could claim to do as powerfully.

I know it is frustrating to buy a camera and then it gets replaced, and to be constantly told "the next one will be much better!" But keep in mind that much of what Sony is doing is basically "from scratch". They don't have a couple decades of AF technology under their belts like CaNikon do, and yet they're pioneering a direction that even CaNikon seem to be avoiding still.

Yes, what @Lightcapture said. Our role is actually quite different.

For example, a working pro only reading reviews of Brand X and never even learning what Brand Y offers is not exactly a good thing, because what happens when Brand Y offers compelling features that would helps said pro's photography significantly? Said pro misses out.

And that's just one isolated example. What about the new parent who knows nothing about any brand and needs a sort of 'summary of the playing field'? Would that person benefit from an isolated review that has no context of everything else out there?

I think not.

@Rishi: The only notable exception is thecamerastoretv channel on youtube. They are Canadians and though it's obvious they are sellers of all kinds of imaging equipment and accessories, they will call it as it is if they are not thrilled with the gear they review, and even pitting one camera make against another...

@Lightcapture: true.

@kodakrome: Please tell me you're being sarcastic...

@davidsphoto: Hard to figure out where you are coming from, but if money is important, there are lots of really good cameras with functionally comparable dynamic range available for a lot less: Dynamic range on this camera is great; but it's also great on the A7ii and the Nikon D750 for a lot less money and some really great APS-c cameras like the D7200, and a big advantage of the APS-C cameras is that the lenses are also cheaper.
Bascically, you buy this camera if: you want D810 quality in a smaller package. There are a couple of truly superb small primes like the Zeiss 55mm-f 1.8 and the Sony f2 28mm that give you superb quality with a great size advantage. For this the IBIS and improved focus are critical to an average user because at high megapixel counts, it is much more difficult to get truly sharp pictures without them. Good luck.

Probably because they didn't pay. A7RII clearly deserves an award, along with Samsung NX1. Both are breakthroughs in the mirrorless category.

What DPJoe2 said. You can't trust face detect to nail the eye with F2.8 or faster apertures.

We did do the focus test one people with no make-up. Guys. With glasses. You name it. Works some >90% of the time. The only person it didn't work so great with was one young fellow with very blonde hair and blue eyes, who I think didn't have much contrast in his eyelashes or eyebrows. I think the algorithm is looking for something of contrast a third of the way down the face, so sometimes if the eyelash/eyebrow hair is the same color as the skin, and the iris isn't very dark either, it might struggle.

But, that's just a n of 1, so please take with a grain of salt.

@Rishi

Another question for you Rishi:
Why would it be harder for the AF to face detect with a wide aperture ? It seems to be standard knowledge, but i've failed to find it explained when it's talked about...

Another thing I've always wondered is why are they making AF with on sensor electronics ?
Why are they not using the video signal seen on the EVF/screen to process face recognition and focus from that whole image, like it could be done on a computer ?
Too slow to process ? Too much processing power needed ?

Interesting, because Nikon seemed to produce better image quality with Sony sensors than Sony can. So it's a shame if they don't sell this sensor to Nikon. And I am saying this as a non-Nikon user so I am not biased at all for Nikon. Maybe Nikon and Canon will get together on a new sensor of their own. I don't think Sony would like that. But I don't see any alternative if things go as you say they will with only Sony and Olympus.

My sony a7r destroys my nikon d800e experience in every way. I don't know what you are smoking.

I can care less if Nikon has this sensor, going back to an OVF is dreadful. If rumors are true Pentax is aiming to offer two FF models this year, 24MP and 42MP cameras. This looks to be the big push for Pentax. Their 645z is doing better than expected. I hope Fujifilm goes FF and offers an alternative EVF FF camera.

The D810 just had better colors out of the gate... but I can't stand optical view finder..being able to light things with constant or modeling lights with grids and being able to instantly see the finese of your light is HUGE with Sony. You can see all my work done on sony @ www.mikeallenphoto.com

Lawn: Actually, what I wish is that Sony would figure out how to process the data from the sensor like Nikon does, not that Nikon gets this tech. Both happening would be fine with me, too. But the odds of me ever using a Nikon are vanishingly small.

I doubt I will ever use Nikon either. But I am thinking about the "Big Picture" and about competition in the market. I have learned from many discussions in these forums that arguing about the "Big Picture" with people who think only about themselves is pointless. It is like a different language.

My guess is that both Nikon & Pentax will get this BSI 42Mp sensor, but at least 6-12 months after A7RII release and they might get a simpler sensor without the 399 on-sensor PD-AF points. Since both Nikon & Pentax will be making DSLRs with dedicated PD sensors, they would not need them as much, and Sony would want to differentiate their A7RII with the better Eye AF & other advanced AF modes.

What? I use A7r's No issues. Not sure what help line you need. If you have a backup camera or two what is the issue? Shooting on Sony totally destroys my twin d800E nikon experience with image quality and shoot experience. I rely 100% as a working professional on Sony. I think you are making an issue out of nothing.

What can I say, nycgazelle, I am happy for you. When confronted with Sony photo equipment issues (see the articles on diglloyd, for instance, of lenses not centered properly or cameras with misaligned flanges) I end up having to deal with someone who in the previous call was discussing with a customer about fixing a DVD player, a TV set, or a smartphone. Nothing special with Sony re: out of specs equipment (Canon and Nikon are not free from their share of problems) but the quality of after-sale support is very important to me. I want to deal with an organization totally focused on photography.

BTW that is why most people get the real info not in the article itself but in the comment section. ;-)

Panasonic chose to avoid IBIS so that they could dissipate heat better. Sony chose to put IBIS and live with the consequences. As a still shooter I would take the Sony every single time. Video crybabies please go that way ->

Who's this Carver guy, and why do you humor him?

EOS HD got 45 minutes of shooting in 4K mode so it's hardly "10 minutes". If you need a video camera that shoots longer than that, then buy a video camera.

@Eric Hensel
He's some guy who really hates the A7rii, although he doesn't have one so all his criticisms are borrowed from other people - many of whom probably don't have one either.

The heat issue becomes a major concern if it is still there when the camera is released (production cameras).
That's what I started talking about in this thread.
I am not too concerned about prototype copies.

As an electrical engineer by profession, it is hard to imagine how the heat issue will be resolved here, considering the size of the camera body, and the processing power, support electronics, sensor, etc., without turning off certain video features.

Space (body size), while desirable here to the consumer, is a nightmare for such powerful and complex electronics.
Sony may eventually (future) have to use larger bodies for their high-end cameras.

If Sony cannot resolve the "excessive" heat issue that shuts the camera down after about 15-18 minutes of 4K video in the production camera, then it becomes "Houston: We Have A Problem!" ...

Pull the movable LCD away from the body when shooting an hour straight of 4k video, BAM, (non existent) problem solved.

Show me your data.

LOL ... Likewise, I'm sure you can search and find it :)

OK, I'll be nice. See this report:
http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/08/02/sony-a7r-ii-part-iii-5-axis-stabilisation-and-heat-issues-going-handheld-to-tell-the-story-of-a-london-busker/

There are few exception indeed but in many others situations Sony lost the train of the history. When it comes so digital sensor it is also a world leader

@Ruy Penalva: From what I know their xperia phone line is quite successful. This same old betamax comment is less and less convincing with every rehash.

Xperia is not a commercial success.

Simple question Ruy ; if "Sony disappeared in every field it tried to be a leader" how did they transform themselves from makers of transistor radios to become the biggest media company in the world ?

Nikon, however, have a grimy history ; "During World War II the company grew to thirty factories and 2,000 employees, supplying items such as binoculars, lenses, bomb sights, and periscopes to the Japanese military."

So which company is more to be admired ?

Get your facts checked!!!
1. Experia phone is loss making(Sony statement, not mine)
2. Vaio no longer exist
I wish Sony success in what they are doing but in Camera department they haven't created the entire system to compete against Canon/Nikon yet. Good sensors alone don't make good cameras.
But for me what takes the biscuit is, in support of Sony someone above wrote play station on a photography website. :-))))

... and Ruy, are you one of the few that bought the Canon Desktop PC ( Canon A-200 III HD20 and others ) ? They have their fanboys but it was not a commercial success.

@oselimg: thanks.

please note that asking for your sources will never be a "cliché". Conversely, the geeky rudeness/self satisfaction such as that you're showing will, unfortunately, continue to remain a cliché.

Yes, I guess it does have 'eyelid' detection. It continues to focus even when the subject looks down. At least, this subject. No problem at all. I don't think it's actually looking for retinas and irises as such, instead just looking for horizontal features a third of the way down a detected face, or something simple like that. There's probably some 'fuzzy logic' involved.

Rishi, could you please perform the following test?

Have a human subject close his/her eyes and look down BEFORE you attempt to focus on the face.

I want to rule out the possibility that the camera simply held the focus where it had previously done the Eye AF detection.

Good questions. Yes it does even start on eyes looking downward. Within reason of course, but I did initiate on my subject when she was looking down in slide #13. To put it lightly, Eye AF on the a7R II is literally one of the best things since sliced bread. In my humble opinion. Nailing shots at 85/1.8 on the eye is just... it's just cheating.

You're probably right. From where I stand, this camera seems to be mostly for reviewers, wannabe videographers and youtubers that get the camera, review it and hope that if enough hot air is lifted the sponsored traffic will pay for it.

Amazing how with enough aggressive hype, a Beta test stage consumer camera can be dressed up in a pink skirt and passed on as a serious photography and videography tool for hard-core professionals.

So a camera that, amongst other things, solves some of the largest focus accuracy and subject recognition issues (for human subjects anyway) that plague DSLRs, and solves a lot of the issues that plague DSLRs around getting the most out of high resolution sensors is, somehow, a camera for reviewers, but not a camera for professional photojournalists, for example?

That's a very interesting viewpoint.

Given significant differences in demographics (as there was a survey a couple of months ago with Canon and particularly Nikon forum participants being much older than those on the Sony forum) it feels like those who go for Sony have a generationally different mindset than those who don't. Even though most current Sony owners are probably ex or current Nikon and Canon owners.

Likewise, for whatever reason, there is also a considerable amount of insecurity exhibited that's above and beyond what I have seen for other types of gear and automobiles. It's fascinating to see - on a couple of threads on Open Talk, a few were analogous to someone with a late model Mercedes trashing whatever new vehicle BMW or Lexus comes out, bringing up past misses that have nothing to with the latest. Or Nitendo/Sony owners citing overheating issues on the first generation Xbox to dissuade consideration of the latest Xbox One.

Maybe a 'starbucks' photojournalist in NYC or Seattle that can afford this rig and has time to deal with all the quirks. Like I said, I don't dispute the speed & tech prowess of this camera but this is Sony this is what they do. I have just grown used to the amazing things they can pull off and to the very simple things that they cannot.

Interesting comment considering this camera is better than the one you use in nearly every circumstance. How are your videos going to look in 10 years? I'll go ahead and answer that for you; like crap.

You are out of luck so far with Nikon lenses which use designs out of the film era (except for the new E lenses).

Hmm, you created your account just a couple of days ago and all your comments have just been about this?

Surely you don't work for one of their competitors?

Posting these comments here repeatedly won't help your case, get a tattoo of 14bit RAw on your body and then people will listen to you

@ttran88: Yup, it works especially with the butt cheeks. One cheek should be tattooed 14-bit, and the other RAW. You'll have a lot of attention that way, I am sure of it. ;)

Your name and that fact that you joined a week ago and have posted only about this 'issue' suggests you are a fake identity created by an astroturfer.

In a forum post you even linked to what purported to be a lawsuit against Sony but is just a bogus wordpress page.

I have been using Sony cameras for 9 years shooting only raw and I have never encountered this issue, so to say it is blown out of proportion is an understatement.

ttran88: Wow, you are into small measures, aren't you? Personally, I was more thinking self-immolation in front of Sony headquarters was the way he should go.

Does your Polaroid come in pink?

I love the fierce fanboy animosity directed at any hint of criticism.

Not only Nikon, but Canon too. They can't produce these sensors. And Sony's camera department never seems to get it quite right which leaves lots of room for Conikon to sell their versions. Is this the sensor that Conikon will use for their first mirrorless ff?

First of all its Sony's decision whether to sell the sensor or keep it for their own use like the A7s sensor that has still not appeared anywhere else.
My guess is, the new 42Mp sensor will be Sony exclusive for at least an year or two ... or perhaps they may sell a simplified version without the 399 PD-AF sites, since they both Nikon and Pentax make DSLRs that have their own PD-AF system anyway.
This way Sony will be able to differentiate their product with the excellent Eye AF feature and other modes and still generate profit from third Nikon/Pentax selling their cameras.