Adding it up: Sony a7R II First Impressions Review

That's what varifocals are for.

More and more I think most of the reviewers never used or were going to use the camera.

There are also many oversights with the customization of the buttons. Those that one really needs are not there.

For you snarky smartasses .. both NewsShooter and NoFilmSchool report on this issue:
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/
http://nofilmschool.com/boards/discussions/a7rii-overheating-issue-improvements

From Newshooter;
"One thing I discovered about half way into the shoot was that the camera has a tendency to overheat when recording in 4K for extended periods"
Extended periods sounds much longer than your "after even fairly short video"

From Nofilmschool;
"So I flipped the camera on, pushed record (4k 100mbps, FF mode) and it goes all the way 30 minutes (actually 29:50 or so). I start it up again in FF mode and get maybe another 15 or so, then switch to Super 35, get like 5 minutes, then decide to cover up the EVF to switch off the LCD. Now I get 10 minutes. Go again and I get a full 30 minutes again."
So where is the "even fairly short video" quote?
Apparently you made this up.

There is an undocumented trick to get quicker focusing. In the menu, Gearbox/3, select "Live Vew Display, Setting Effects OFF". This causes the diaphragm to remain fully open until focus is locked, like the auto aperture in an SLR. If set to ON, the diaphragm closes to the preset value at all times. Keeping diaphragm open also requires less gain for the EVF, and facilitates manual focusing as well.

Once focus is locked and the shutter release remains half-pressed, the diaphragm closes to the preset value.

I would never consider this camera for anything remotely related to long lens action as it becomes hopelessly unbalanced.

downsample the a7r2 images and you will be stunned at how well it does at higher iso sensitivities

take care

Keep your 6D and be happy with it ... no need to buy A7rs. It's the most underrated FF on the market and probably the best bang for the buck.

HAR: A7rs is plural for A7r = when I buy into a camera system I never buy just one single camera ( as Pros = plural for Pro may quite easily understand).

HAR: you should be my manager, you seem to know all the answers ( at least from B as in B&H to N as in Navajo ... if I recall correctly ) ... may it be that you are running around with one camera only ... I hope it works 4u .... btw. what company is sponsoring you maybe I could send in an application ?

NoMirror, this was a double post.

But anyhow, a mechanical shutter reduces electronic noise significantly over an electronic shutter.

The D810 has greater noise control at higher ISOs, by a tiny bit.

Shoot into the worst lighting imaginable with deep shadows be the test.

And how do you know that ? :P

I use Sony A7 and A7 II and it recovers highlights far better than the 6D and 5D mk 3 I use often.

I can't compare them to the Nikon sensors though as I have hardly shot with Nikon.

Yup, I am with you Brendon. It has much better highlight recovery from Sony than Canon did I had before. Canon is no longer in competition. I have seen excellent video of comparison that was post link further down the page today by someone.

One of the changes between the D800 and the D810 was to give the D810 much more highlight headroom. There isn't a better camera out there for highlight recovery. It's one of the areas where the D810 is a bit better than the A7RII, so take this analysis with a little pinch of salt.

vscd,
yep sony definitely weasels it's way out of DR test by choosing to lower noise rather than increase the clipping point! LOL

But once again could not beat A7RII at high ISO noise in shadow recover. Perhaps pay attention to video closely to understand better why. D810 still struggle again and still a bit softness issue problem in image, not from lens, more like image engine.

Nikon need to move forward from old fashion CMOS to much better technology of BSI-CMOS that does MUCH better job in lower noise level in shadow recovery and high ISO.

@vscd: So that's why Nikon uses Sony sensors Mr. Troll. It all makes sense now.

You can't completely recover highlights exposed above 100%. That's an absolute ceiling with digital, and easily reached. In general, digital cameras give you about 4 stops margin against overexposure. The A7Rii falls in this category. You can also get partial recover if at least one channel is under 100%.

Shadow detail depends on noise, which is generally well above the absolute minimum digital value. Bit resolution plays a small part in shadow recover, but mostly affects the number of steps between black and white, not the dynamic range. The A7Rii is outstanding in this respect. I can shoot directly into the sun and retain both highlight and shadow detail. It helps that Zeiss lenses have very little flare.

Sony A7RII was able to recover highlight better than Pentax Medium Format 645Z. Its a pity Pentax RAW image is having issue problem with highlight though. Although happened to K5 back then though.

"You can't completely recover highlights exposed above 100%. That's an absolute ceiling with digital" <--- this.
It's the same thing with recording audio. There's a brick wall above a certain volume threshold, while there's still room for improvement in the noise-floor.

Because digital sensors don't work like film. They are simply, as used, and ignoring those unusual dual-photsite ones from Fuji years ago, simple linear so there is no such thing as highlight recovery. It's just linear right to clipping and clipped it clipped. There can potentially be some difference if the color filters are very slanted though I suppose.

Basically DR is all about shadow noise though.

So much Canon-hating and DR/Pixelpeeping in here... woho. Funny ;) It's quite important to get the fancy new Sonysensor pushed by 6 stops to see that the noicefloor is lower than on other sensors. Meanwhile McCurry made another masterpiece on a 5 stop lattitude Reversal Film or on an 11 stop EOS-1D3. *YOU* take the picture, not your fancy gear...

I know I'm on a camerareviewsite and this chitchat is natural, but a few people really miss the point of photography. If Canon (or whoever) comes out with a better sensor they jump to the next ship. Taking the same boring pictures again and again.

Btw. Nikon already gave up on developing sensors, I can't take them seriously in this regard. Buying Sensors from Sony may be good for the customer, but is nothing more than pants down for the own company.

vscd.
Canon-hating is good! ;-) AFA Nikon I disagree. Let companies do what they do best. Sony can do videocameras but cannot make a pro grade camera if they life depended on it. Nikon does great still cameras in a cost effective way. No pants down. Weddings, sports, wildlife guys will always go with canikon DSLR.

Sony does better recovering highlight and Nikon better at low-light. Based on what camera you use, a little change in practice is required for best results.

I think there're 2 reasons why they do this; 1) traditionally cameras do better recovering lowlight, so it becomes a standard test; 2) over exposing means clipping while under exposing means signal might be buried in noise. You can't recover what's lost due to clipping, but you can apply noise reduction to recover what's buried in noise.

chrisw, that generalization is incorrect applied to the D810 and A7RII. The D810 is better at highlight (and shadow) recovery at base ISO. However, the A7RII has better high ISO performance.

None of the other sites is anywhere near as indepth as DPR. Quality takes time.

Cons? The usual mirrorless-cons like batterydraining, no OVF, no handgrip for serious long focallenghts... ;) Sensor is great, indeed.

What I miss on information (especially on Fuji X-Series, Sony and Olympous mirrorless) is the Shuttercount. Most of them claim to be pro-cams but I don't know if they can survive 2 years of burstshooting on soccer-events. Any information on that?

vscd - A7R2 has 500 000 shutter and electronic shutter mode. I think, It will live much longer than 2 years)

Or maybe they are waiting for Sony to release the "uncompressed RAW" firmware update so they can finish their tests and avoid knowingly publishing bogus results based on the 'lossy RAW' format. It's called integrity, patients, and in everyones interest. It's the right thing to do.

@enenzo: I guess I'm part of the 2%. I've had no artifact issues with my files, and I'm not concerned about it. But I would still like to know how it compares to the D810 and 1Dx on noise. My guess is it beat or equal the 810 at low ISOs and equal noise performance of the 1Dx at high ISOs.

Yeah but A7s is old model now. A7R II is newer model. Disappointing to see Sony still stuck old fashion conventional CMOS in A7s II, could have gone for BSI CMOS for video. Check out the video from NX1 with BSI CMOS, impressive result.

naththo, A7s blows the crap out every other still cameras, including NX1, in video. Why do you think A7s II won't do the same?

There's PLENTY of things that are possible today that simply were not at all possible just 10-20 years ago. I can do timelapse photography in the middle of the night with no moon, or I can shot hand-held snapshots by the light of a full moon...

So, while the argument has a good point, and people should generally not complain about "cameras these days", there are still some folks who push the envelope in weird ways and they are welcome to yearn for every last fraction of a stop of this-or-that aspect of image quality. ;-)

OH NO!
Democrats AND Sony in the White house?
We are all doomed....doomed I tells you.

Haters note...I am Australian and Apolitical.

Lenses, my friend. It's all about the lenses. Pick the camera whose lenses give you the look you want. Everything else is just noise.

I believe Lloyd has a valid point. And I love the hyperbole. So the next time I'm heading out hiking in the mountains above 10,000 ft. and below 32 degrees for a week, and posting from that location, I'm definitely not taking my Sony.

Only the second paragraph relates to temperature.
And the more I see of the hysteria surrounding the release of each new high-end camera, the more entertaining KR's contradictions become.
That said, there's a big difference between KR and LC. The latter's methodology, whilst sometimes resembling medieval "angels on a pinhead" disputes, is pretty consistent - and he doesn't mind biting the feeding hands, which is more than can be said for most photography sites.
These latest Sony miracle cameras will soon enough be paperweights, like each one that preceded them.

"These latest Nikon miracle cameras will soon enough be paperweights," This holds true for every modern camera.

As a subscriber to LC's site, comments like those you quoted make me wonder why Lloyd bought an R2 and uses it to do his Zeiss lens tests with instead of the Nikon for which the Milvuses were designed. There must be a good reason; Lloyd does things with precision or not at all. In my experience only LC and DPR are willing to state the unpopular.

The D810 is a tempting choice, especially at the new, reduced price. Unfortunately, you are stuck with Nikon lenses if you want auto focus. It's hard to go back after using Zeiss and Sony G lenses on the A7Rii.

Lloyd and Rockwell have hit the "nail on the head," with their thumb in the way. Ouch!

@Ed: You're right, Sony has a vastly superior choice of lenses it can use. And to be fair, the Canon and Nikon are severely limited if you require stabilization.

I like the D810. Its an amazing camera but shooting from the viewfinder all the time is very limiting. Once you get used to the freedom of shooting from an LCD going back to being forced to use a viewfinder is not a pleasant experience.

@Randy
It is not if you know what you are talking about.
I do not know about your NX1, but A lot of Mirrorless camera's like the Panasonic M43's, Olympus M43's, Sony FE, E can do Auto Focus with Canon Lenses by using the right adapter. the A7RII can drive the canon lenses using its Hybrid Phase Detect Autofocus as well. A Nikon adapter with Phase Detect Support for the A7RII is being developed and tested as well

Perhaps we should have actually left you to figure it out by yourself. Perhaps you never would have.

JunzInc,

LOL, you agree with the statement, "you are stuck with Nikon lenses if you want auto focus"???

I've got to mark your post for future reference. That is priceless! Thanks for the good laugh.

Only because Lloyd is used to the Nikon. He missed the nail and hit his thumb.

" but it was nowhere near what the 5DS R hybrid AF could do "

Curious you mention Canon's hybrid AF. Are you shooting stills with a DLSR in live view? Or did you just mean Canon's PDAF is superior to Sony.

Greg,

I had a similar experience.
I have been using an A7R for the past 2 1/2 years, with Canon lenses, as my primary system (with a 6D as a back up).

After shooting for nearly three weeks in northern Mongolia with the A7R and 6D side by side I came to the conclusion that I preferred using the Canon.

Reviewing files after the trip I further found that – although the Sony files are excellent overall and superior in dynamic range – the Canon's were excellent as well... and I preferred the Canon color in general.

I've since replaced the 6D with the 5DRS – which is now my primary system.

In my opinion the Sony files are generally better, but I find the Canon files to be excellent as well, and I find the system to be more robust and pleasurable to use.

I'm keeping the A7R for now though...

It is constantly surprising how someone can claim the other side is complacent, sheep-like, and ill-informed while displaying exactly those same characteristics in the basis for their own opinion. photomedium is a great example of that. Statements that display a gross misunderstanding of how priorities change from situation to situation and person to person while simultaneously dismissing true leaps in technology simply because the single variable out of several, the only one receiving laser focus, isn't up to whatever arbitrary standard he considers acceptable. Killer AF dismissed as "good enough", class-leading sensor resolution and pixel density is just "lotsa MPs", and a full frame camera with excellent detail and color and, yes, even very good DR is "APSC performance" and no "money into R&D." FF chips with 50MP just spring forth, pre-formed, from nothing and walk into a camera of their own accord. You can't simply not like something, it has to be garbage. No balance or thought.

Thanks for sharing. I consider comments like this to be more valuable than pixel peeping into lab comparisons or the next incarnation of +7 EV shadow lifting, because it truly reflects real-world experience.

Of course, to get a complete picture one has to consider similar reports of other photographers who have kept their a7R II.

Reviews of the A7Rii by Lloyd and Rockwell were marked by lack of familiarity with the camera. For example, battery life is a problem, but greatly extended by two simple actions - turn the WiFi mode to "Airplane" if you're not using it, and turn off the rear screen. That way the viewfinder is only active when it's up to your eye. On a recent visit to a local park, I took 403 images in a course of 3 hours before my battery quit. Extra batteries only weigh 42 grams each, and I carry six (for chimping). There are nine programmable buttons, which gives you instant access to the features you use most, and a customizable short menu for others.

I have a fairly complete set of Nikon primes and f/2.8 zooms, which I have used on the Sony. They don't compare well to Sony G and Zeiss lenses, especially in the corners and wide open. All Zeiss lenses for the Nikon are manual focus, which is okay only for static subjects.

@Greg: You used a 3rd party lens on an adapter. Don't judge A7rII AF speed while not using a native lens.

Ed,
403 in 3 hours? A wedding photographer would be overwhelmed by the dozen batteries he had to carry around and change every hour just to make sure a battery didn't die in the middle of something important. My ancient 7D has gone thousands of shots without killing a battery. Certainly the camera has its applications and people will gladly adapt to it should other considerations warrant, but there are some limitations that many won't find acceptable at this price point. Sony always manages to excel in one area and just ruin a camera in another. Always may be an exaggeration, but I used own Sony cameras and one day had to cut my losses. They may understand technology but they don't understand photographers.

Agreed that my Nikon D3, with a 2500 maH battery lasts more than twice as long as a 1050 maH battery in the A7Rii and 3x the images, but I still got twice as many images and three times the life as claimed by Lloyd Chambers. Hey! If I need auto focus and continuous shooting, I'm taking the D3. I'll shoot more weddings once mothers-in-law are excluded (can never be pleased), but events are still safe territory. If I need something sharp, really sharp including the corners, flare-free into the sun, it's the A7Rii.

In terms of noise, the A7Rii defaults with high ISO NR ON. Turn it off, and the noise loses it's wormy appearance. A quick review is one thing, but it's important to decide what you wish to accomplish, then find the best way to do that with a given tool. It doesn't hurt to read the 306 page manual, at least the parts that matter.

@Ingold: Which lenses did you test? I have a lot of Nikon lenses and some FE mount (even had A-mount adapted) and many Nikon lenses have a very good performance/price ratio. There are very good Sony lenses (not all are native Zeiss AF lenses, only the Batis are), but a general Sony better Nikon exclamation is a little too easy.

@Black: People need recognition. And if they are upvoted, they feel accepted. Much easier than being balanced.

The sony is ok but... CANON knocked it out of the park with the game changing 5DS/R cameras!

@Snapper: Canon has 6MP more than the Sony. Please enlighten us on the 'game changing' aspects of 5DS/R. I can't think of any.

@nomirror99 - i cant think of anything either. Evern on a 24x36 print, those extra 6mp will be invisible. However, the better dynamic range and tonality is apparent, when needed, in a print of any size. He has a long history of Canon fanboyism here.

No they should buy an NX1. D7200 does not have BSI Sensor or the Copper Interconnects of the NX1 neither does it have 4K Video or the 15 FPS Frame rate or the Incredible Buffer that the NX1 provides?

But still one has to wonder why oh why is the NX1 not selling well in US.

JunzInc:

The D7200 is better high ISO camera than the NX1, not by a lot, but about 2/3s of a stop.

Then NX1 looks to be popular in the US, but it's Samsung's first really serious APSC body, it's not cheap, a fact that indicates it is selling. It uses a difficult to work with video format.

The NX1 is still a specialized tool, I'd buy one, if I also had the money for new very very fast computer, and my current computer is far from slow, and the money for the better Samsung lenses.

HowaboutRAW, I have a 5 year old laptop and there are zero issues with it and the NX1. The NX1 does not need a super fast PC. As with anything, a faster PC always helps.

@HowaboutRaw
:-) NX1 popular in the US!! really? Where did you see it selling well?

@HowaboutRaw - Alright let me look.

NX1 - 23 Reviews on B&H 49 reviews on Amazon. Released Sept 2014 # 293 on Best Sellers List on B&H Among Digital Cameras

A7R II - 47 Reviews on B&H, 39 reviews on Amazon. Released June 2015 # 1 On Best Seller List on B&H Among Digital Cameras

I don't think The NX1 is a popular camera.

Seems like some over here are pushing the NX1. They go over its technical abilities wondering why it does not sell well (or telling us it is selling well). Based on several ratings it is not selling well, based on the number of post on the Samsung forum it is not either.

Is it a good cam? Surely it is. But when you target DSLRs like D7200 etc you need a lot more than technical capability. A strength of Nikon and Canon and to a lesser degree Sony is consistency and an USP.. Sony has consistently scored with very good sensors over the last decade, not just one. A7RII has a clear USP: A7-series is the only mirrorless FF out there, A7RII has the best FF out there. A7RII is MUCH smaller (at leat its bodies) than the FF DSLR competition. THis all combined sells. Samsung is not selling well for that reason.

Now: if they come with a NX2 that is again comparatively as good as NX1 they will get some momentum. If NX3 is similarly good, they will get traction certainly with good lenses.

@Mr Randy. Please share the Info you have. Where did you check?

@HowaboutRaw. I used announcement date for both Cameras. The A7R II started shipping much later than the June 2015 announcement date.

It is amazing how well the NX1 which is 1/2 the price competes. The results are near identical for the +6 EV push.
I see some beginners do not realize that to a sensor would need 112MP to be twice a 28MP image.
Look at all the other specs too. The A7Rii has no weather sealing. The A7Rii can only shoot 5 FPS compared to 15 FPS.
If someone buys an NX1 instead of an A7Rii and a set of native lenses, not only will they have near identical functionality, they will have enough money left over to buy a car! :)

:-) Sadly no one is taking your advice Randy. I wonder why.

RV, great advice.
FYI, the NX500 (which lacks a and EVF but can be used with a small hood loupe) costs even less, uses the same sensor as the NX1 and can shoot at 9 FPS.
So for only a few hundred dollars more owners of the NX500 are also getting near A7Rii image quality. (note: I did not say 'identical')
btw, my favorite NX lens in the F/1.4 85mm. When Sony releases that 130mm F/2 prime for $800 we can talk.

I have seen this remark in this thread twice. What is so amazing 'cause I don't see it. When I look at bulb mode, take "comp" in the comparison tool ISO6400 on SOny A7RII looks identical to ISO1600 on NX1. Not saying NX1 is not great, just asking where to look as it seems I am missing something.

":-) Sadly no one is taking your advice Randy. I wonder why."

many are waiting for the inevitable price slash to buy?

'Bulb' mode today is near useless. It restricts the spectrum of light to a small section that is different than newer florescent and LED lighting. It is very different than what is found in all outdoor lighting where the amount of light is low but the spectrum is broad.
I am not sure if there was an issue with he DPR test or if the tiny spectrum range is one the Samsung sensor has difficulties with, but either way the test is of no benefit when using modern lighting systems or outdoor lighting.
Compare withe standing lighting. It limits the amount of light the same, but uses a more realistic spectrum.
When comping with the far more common lighting, the NX1 as good as the A7Rii.

Randy..I call it bulbmode as you select a bulb (lamp) in the comparison slides on this side. It is simply a low light mode. It is clear a 2 stop difference exists and not a 1 stop like some have remarked. In that mode, ISO3200 on the NX1 is visibly worse than ISO6400 on A7RII.

Regarding +6EV Push from ISO 100, the NX1 is close but certainly not better than the A7RII. That actually is to be expected based on the DR results at base ISO that we already know. The NX1 has excellent low ISO DR very close to the A7RII. How ever as the ISO's start increasing, especially after the ISO 640 mark the A7RII leaves the NX1 behind. Not just the NX1 but a lot of other Full Frame Cameras as well. This is shown in Measurements by DXO, Jim Kasson, Bill Claff and also clearly demonstarted by Michael Tapes in a video that was shared on Luminous Landscape. If you want to see, try taking a ISO800 shot a pushing it and you will see the NX1 fall apart much faster than the A7 RII.

Regarding High ISO performance

The A7RII is a clear stop ahead of the NX1 at ISO 3200 in the normal lighting scenes and is almost 2 stops ahead of the NX1 in lowlight scene at ISO 6400.

What you say about the Low light Studio scene of Dpr being not applicable :-) is just BS

No one is denying NX1 is a great camera. But there is just no point in trolling each and every Article about Sony cameras with how great the NX1 is. And besides, NX1 is not really the best APS-C camera w.r.t Image quality, that is most probably the Nikon D7200.

I think DPR has exactly explained what you're talking about right here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7r-ii/6

IMHO, it's NOT ALWAYS better to "properly" expose. It can be as good or better to "underexpose properly" and push, if your camera is ISOless, because using higher ISOs leads to loss of Dynamic Range and Color Range.

"There's an increasing amount of noise visible in the pushed low ISO shots, meaning the a7R II is not, strictly speaking, ISO invariant (or, at least, not across its whole ISO range*). Shooting at ISO 640 and above gives a better performance than shooting at low ISOs and pushing (which becomes visible at ISO 800 in this test). (...)

However, the camera is adding very little noise. What's happening is that the a7R II has more than one conversion gain mode, meaning that it is adding a tiny bit of additional amplification somewhere early on in the process, to push all the collected data above its very slight read noise."

It is 'essential' in extremely rare situations for most photographers. But my point is still valid. While it is okay to compare camera A with camera B, it would be more useful to compare camera A (no shadow lifting) vs camera A (shadow lifting). If you are looking for ultimate IQ, of course. If you are looking for artistic expressions, all these analysis is utterly boring, any PS will do the job.

"While it is okay to compare camera A with camera B, it would be more useful to compare camera A (no shadow lifting) vs camera A (shadow lifting). "

Have you actually ever read any DPR article?

"....If you are looking for artistic expressions, all these analysis is utterly boring, any PS will do the job."

Why are you making such fool of yourself?

Samsung has mostly itself to blame. Its not very aggressive in either marketing or distribution.

In my country Samsung is available only in compact camera form or some very old models.

Sony was similar earlier but they had done a media blitz and pushed their products in many stores which took their sales to very high levels and now no one sneers at me when I tell them I use a Sony camera.

If I want to buy a Samsung camera there is currently no way to buy one officially and there are a good 1 billion people staying in my country. Now Samsung is very much here and is #1 in TVs and other electronics but sadly there is zero focus on their ILC cameras.

brendon1000 x2

The NX1 is yet to be seen in many of the big countries in Europe... In my country Samsung has all of their small mirrorless but the NX1 is missing.

It is a shame because they are underplaying their own powerhouse.

I don't see the 2 stop advantages. I only see a bit over a stop, NX1 iso3200 is comparable to A7II iso6400.

@Rishi: I don't say Canon is ahead. Even as a Canon owner I must admit, that they are in fact a little bit behind. But I'm just implying that they are not that much behind as this and many other articles suggest. Since as you can see in my comparison, though I applied noise reduction, the detail preserved in the picture is still comparable to Sony.

It is a statement of a fact which Sony fanboys cannot swallow.

"Fanboys" : a term only used by the intellectually handicapped.
Why is it that so many Canikon users feel obliged to run around like fevered badgers whining about Sony?
Tiresome and childish.

Implying that a Sony sensor cannot be overtaken by a superior one is like a cock saying "if I don't crow the sun will not rise"

???
Of course it can, but stating that it´s a "fact" at this point is untrue and a result wishful thinking.
Your time would be better spent wondering/discussing why Canikons tech is lagging behind at this point and why they´re giving their customers as little as they can get away with.

Three observations:
1) You do realise you're implying that Sony's sensor is currently the best with your comment - I'm not sure that was your intention
2) Why does Sony need to be 'Put in its Place'? what heinous crime has it committed (other than produce a market leading sensor)??
3) I'm wondering why you chose the word 'Joy' as part of your username....

Hey guys, It's time for a little reality check.
1. Sony is already King of sensors. Owing in no small part to their number one customer, Nikon.
2. Sony is in the sensor selling business. They aren't going to spit in the eye of their number one customer.
3. All this tit for tat about stopping sales to win a urinating contest with Nikon or anyone else is pure nonsensical rubbish!

It's not the first time DPreview did this and won't be the last either.
Their Reviews take a long time to write. And in order to provide information whil it's relavent they just release it piece by piece when they are finished with their piece.

In this case dynamic range.

Completely agree: it is the big Sony show over here. Now might that be because they are under the thumb of Amazon? I don't know of course. But I will repeat: GH4 came out with 4K video. it did not get anything like this. Au contrire: they just gaeve the limleight to the A7s with a shared review.

And now it is Sony Sony Sony Sony A7RII A7RII A7RII...WHy? Undoubtedly good, excellent work by Sony, admirable excecution, a cam many are interested in. All true..but this all does not warrant so much attention versus so little for other brands.

@Jorginho: "but this all does not warrant so much attention versus so little for other brands." Well actually it does. Remember, DPR is a publishing business. They write about whatever the most people want to read about so more people come to DPR to read. Higher readership greater ad revenue. That is DPR's reason to exist. They aren't going to write about things that reduce total readership.

@AngularJS:

"Another day - another Sony A7r2 post!"

Ain't it wonderful!

Get some glasses and walk away.
Even a blindfolded can see at the dark buildings of the scene, the Nikon provides much less noise, even in print size.

I particularly like those who take an image at F1.4, with only the left eye in focus (not the right), and then complain because there isn't enough detail in the corners.
At an event I might take 1700 photos in a day. If I had to raise the levels of 5% of them by 6 stops I'd want to self-immolate.

It's unrealistic, like people who complain about banding when they shoot a night scene and raise levels so it looks like daytime (though it's no day like I've ever seen).

@ZJ24 - you're missing the point and the reason for doing it.

@RichRMA - it's a test for dynamic range. What else would you do? How else can you see what the range is?

Shoot a normal image in a wide-dynamic range situation and look at it? There are times when the scene exceeds the DR of the camera. Why raise a dark area multiple stops? It shows what minor detail is left, the horribly skewed colours and hugely increased noise, but no one is ever going to use such a tactic for a finished image.
It's interesting from an experimental standpoint, I remember when the D3 came out, people were boosting images to 1,000,000 ISO just for the novelty of seeing what detail was actually there.

@Rich - You're right, you would never want to do it for a finished image, these are worst case and essentially to give an idea of where your noise level is. Look at this as a kind of "cheat" to achieve the desired measurements. Also natural scenes like you mention are unpredictable and difficult to control thus difficult to measure.

It's really no different than going outside and shooting a very high DR scene. Problem is, the very bright day may not actually have more DR than the camera or it may change a lot or trigger a lot of flare and and ghosting and other fun phenomenon that obscure the measurement you're after.

Not to mention, they can be difficult to meter and expose in order to get the kind of measurements that give a true picture of DR. But if you use the studio scene with controlled lighting, you can eliminate most of the other variables.

What rubbish is this ? DR is most important in landscapes and I am struggling with DR issues for a while now. Long ago with my 12 MP Sony A700 I was forced to use GND filters to get any detail in the sky for exposing for the foreground.

With my old but much better 16 MP Sony A55 I found I could recover much more detail and push shadows better than earlier.

For one trip I made with my friend I realised how much better my sensor was compared to his 7D when he asked me to process his photos. Most of the time his sky was pure white and I could recover precious little while my photos taken at the same location had much better detail.

I'm wondering how much DR compression is happening since the latest sensors have 23 times the DR of monitors and 230 times the DR of a print?

Rich, you're obviously never shooting a landscape, do you? Or are you still fiddling around with your old set of ND gradient filters, that never match the line of the mountains or the canyon that you're about to photograph? Film is still the measure of all things that must not be exceeded? Cars are dangerous because they exceed the speed of horses?

Nurse, can I have 10cc of thorazine please?

@stevo23: "it's a test for dynamic range. What else would you do? How else can you see what the range is?"

By taking a photo of a high DR scene?

True. What good is it if it never comes to light in a REAL image? It's like the banding when raising levels 4-6 steps, doing it and seeing it is an intellectual exercise, but nothing that matters for actual photography.

Pushing products to the extremes of their capabilities provides insights into how they work, in this case it is clear that the Sony sensor is introducing less noise than some other competing sensors and equivalent noise to some others when pushed to its extreme. If you read hifi / audiophile reviews you'll see that those reviewers do the same, pushing the volume of amps for example to see when distortion cuts in and to ascertain the quality of the circuitry. As many people have said many times on this thread, this is a product test and is designed to understand the characteristics of the sensor and electronics. As you keep pointing out it is obviously not going to be much use in 'everyday shooting situations' I'm amazed that you feel you have to make that argument, because its SO OBVIOUS and if anyone based their decision to buy this body on this analysis alone, well, good luck to them...

Nonsense. Depends on output size and intention. If you have a practically ISO-invariant camera, there is no difference in whether you use ISO 6400 or push ISO 640 in post, with the benefit of preserving highlights. So if the camera would choose ISO6400 anyway, why shouldn't that be useful? A typical scenario you face in weddings. Clients usually don't want 42MP files, 16MP is enough 99% of time when shooting the dance floor etc. in bad light. So it is a brilliant thing to push 3-4 stops in post without seeing a lot of noise. Look at how clean the 3 or 4 stops push of the Sony or Nikon looks like compared to the Canon. Very usable. It is different to use a 5 stop pushed image for fine-art landscape prints at 100% of course. But for normal print sizes I often push 3-4 stops with my D810 and nobody complained.