Sony Alpha 7R II Review: Digital Photography Review

Buying guides 2015

News Reviews Features Buying Guide Sample Images Videos Cameras LensesPhonesPrinters Forums Galleries Challenges

Image Stabilization

The second generation models of Sony's a7 series cameras all benefit from the addition of in-body image stabilization. It's a 5-axis system, meaning the camera can make some correction for pitch, roll, yaw and both vertical and lateral translations (it's easier to make sense of if you see Sony's own diagram, included below).

If you fit one of Sony's OSS stabilized lenses, the camera passes responsibility for pitch and yaw off to the lens since it is likely to be able to correct for a much greater extent of movement than can be achieved by moving the sensor.

Sony says the IS system isn't exactly the same as the one used in the a7 II but would not be drawn on the differences, saying that it should offer comparable performance optimized for the a7R II's higher resolution. Make of that what you can.

To test the performance, we shoot the camera at a range of shutter speeds: first with IS off then with it switched on. We repeat this test at three key focal lengths: 24mm, 55mm and 200mm to check for consistency of performance. We then visually assess the images and break them down into four categories: perfectly sharp, acceptably sharp, visibly blurred and unusuable.

Lenses used:

24mm: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 OSS
55mm: Sony FE 55mm F1.8
200mm: Sony FE 70-200mm F4 OSS

24mm	55mm Equivalent	200mm

Stablization On	Stablization On	Stablization On
Stablization Off	Stablization Off	Stablization Off

Comparing the On and Off states, it seems the camera's IS is providing around 2.3 - 2.7EV of stabilization, which is broadly consistent with the performance we saw with the a7 II. It's interesting to note that the IS Off figures are worse for the 55mm lens than for the 24mm and 200mm settings. We believe that this is because the lens is so much lighter than the other two (and hence has less inertia to resist movement).

If you like to think in terms of the traditional 1/Focal Length rule-of-thumb, then it's worth noting that we're only seeing around 50% 'Excellent' shots at 1/FL when IS is off. This is presumably because the a7R II's high resolution means any slight camera shake is visible if you look closely. Turn IS on and you can be confident of getting the vast majority of your shots very sharp at least 1.3EV below 1/FL.

A note on using third-party lenses

If you're using a non-native lens on the a7R II via an adaptor, we'd recommend turing its image stabilization off. The adapter we used would report the presence of stabilization to the camera, presumably prompting the camera to hand-off responsibility for pitch and yaw stabilization to the lens, which made for poor results.

Gear in this story

Sony Alpha 7R II

549

I own it

1043

I want it

I had it

Discuss in the forums

Shop now

47 customer reviews

Base In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	$3,198.00 »
Deluxe Bundle In stock Usually ships in 24 hours	$3,198.00 »

Comments

Total comments: 1813

I'll say it one more time - if you are in for high res video, this might be it (I personally consider 4k currently a semi-useless and actually annoying gimmick for any non-commercial usage, but that's me). Next iteration of RX-10 might be even better though :)
But if you are into photography, or realize good image is more a function of a lens rather than body holding it, then D750 is much, much better value. Where I live - Switzerland, D750 body costs cca 1500 USD, with 24-120 F4 it costs 2000 USD. This thingie ain't twice as good at photography, that's pretty clear.
When you compare current lenses available, SONY is a loser, big time. I was choosing FF setup again, as I did 1 year ago, D750 would still be my choice. The whole system is just better, hands down.

0 upvotes

I love my FF Canons and prefer them over my Sony a7s for most shooting but I honestly wish this camera sells very well and stirs up the pot in the FF market. I'm just tired of Canon and Nikon's glacial phase of innovation.

1 upvote

A review without mentioning price in its final summary- especially when it's an outlier price such as with this model- is an incomplete review at best.

Price/performance is a very important yardstick in the business and engineering world.

3 upvotes

MSRP $3,199 body only, first page of review.

3 upvotes

And on EVERY single review...of any camera on this website.

2 upvotes

Impressive gadget with all the specifications and capabilities. When one is just looking for the final output i.e., the "feel" of the image, A7R has its virtues: the photo samples are techincally quite superior, but for me carry still a very digital look. Inspite of the improved jpeg-engine and FF output, it doesn't even come close to the ethos and "feel" of Fuji jpegs. I appreciate the Fuji jpegs even more, when i see the other's samples.
Just my 2 cents.

4 upvotes

This is without question an outstanding camera. But in regard to the sample images, what is the obsession with shooting so many images at, or near wide open aperture?
When viewing the sample images at 100% virtually none of them are tack sharp anywhere on the image. In most of the portrait shots the eyes are not in sharp focus, but often a cheek or nose tip is -- why?
A perfect example is the shot of the old red pickup shot at f1/4 -- really? I can't find a spot in that image that looks at all sharp.
I simply don't get the current wide open shooting fetish -- the variety of apertures on a lens are there for good reason.

5 upvotes

The image of the truck was shot well after dark. That exposure was lifted significantly in post-processing. Had I stopped the lens down significantly I would not have been confident about camera shake.

1 upvote

But you get a Nikon 810 for that price...or a Canon 5Dr/Ds whatever!
No way.

0 upvotes

Nikon D750 would be good to start of with better low noise though.

0 upvotes

Lower noise but then lower detail - which is important to you?

1 upvote

"Lower" detail? From a D750? Are you serious?

3 upvotes

Yes, silly comment really. Nikon has much more lens line up than Sony offered for the E and FE line up. So the chance of getting good quality lens from Nikon at better price is high. Compare to Sony with tight lens line up with mostly expensive Carl Zeiss does not help at all which blows the budget.

1 upvote

Even in low light high ISO noise, Sony A7RII and Nikon D750 are same, stalemate. And Nikon D750 comes at better cheaper price than A7RII. $2,299 for body only D750 vs Sony A7RII body only $3999 (Retail is $4500 normally when it is brand new release) after exchange rate. $3999 is special price though at the moment.

Also Nikon does much better job with Real World DR Difference, in shadow the noise is lesser than Sony. So I think you need to have a good long hard look at review before making comment.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Video is far superior on the A7rII than anything Nikon ofers or any Canon below the $13,000 C300mkII. The rear LCD on the D750 is absolute garbage, its resolution/refresh rate is terrible, making manual focus when shooting video a chore.

None of them shoot 4k. I'll take the A7rII FTW.

6 upvotes

guys wake up, new D750 body costs 1500 USD!!! It's amazing FF value for money, and probably more than most people including me will ever need.
with quite good walkaround lens 24-120 F4 (not stellar, but for general daylight photography by far my favorite) its 2000 USD (talking about current Swiss prices)

Sony might be better, and IS better in video (which is useless attribute to me for example), but it ISN'T 2x better camera, or more. Not even going into available lenses topic, that would bring it even lower.

0 upvotes

"a7R II is one of the most talked-about cameras of the last year" ? Nope, it takes a very honourable second place. The most talked-about camera of this, last and all other years is the Pentax FF DSLR!

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

Pentax still exist?

10 upvotes

Pentax needs an owner worthy of it's legacy.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

IF it comes out. Sony will release a A9 by the time it is ready.

2 upvotes

First time I have ever commented here but....
A good, detailed review that has confirmed to me that ordering a D810 was the way to go, for me at least(primarily landscape). It's just a shame that the D810 hasn't been reviewed yet almost 18 months after it was released. Hrd to understand when it seems it is the camera all other high end cameras are compared to. Can we please see a review soon?
And all power to Rishi who takes the time to respond to and comment on reader's comments. That shows an admirable level of accessibility and devotion to doing a good job. Keep it coming.

1 upvote

I would never buy such an ugly looking camera.

4 upvotes

tell me what's camera good looking for you? :)

4 upvotes

Most people actually USE their camera. The look THROUGH it instead at it.
But I guess you are the person that byus uncomfortable shoes becouse they look good. Kinda like a twelve year old girl don't you think ?

16 upvotes

it's not like a Nikon Df - a camera only good to watch on it....

4 upvotes

The DF is an excellent camera. You obviously have never used it for making prints. It not only looks different and good for many, but has one of the best sensors.

1 upvote

I don't think it's ugly at all. having held one though, it's ergos are awful. I could not shoot with one for an extended time. I know Sony is putting all its cameras in the black can, and saving a ton of money doing it, but it is not designed for comfort.

1 upvote

I'm with you, JakeB.

One of my reasons to not seriously consider a Sony-FF system is the look of the cameras. They just don't look the way I'd expect an expensive camera to look.
I like walking around proudly with a camera that people notice and comment upon; they mistake me for a creative artyfarty person, hence they give me more credit. That motivates me to try harder to get the most out of a situation.

I want a €3000 machine to look like a €3000 machine. Sony cameras could look so much sexier. Employing one good desiger could make the difference.

0 upvotes

Put it in Gariz leather half-case and its like a Leica... for 1/2 price :)

0 upvotes

That's some sound logic. Sarcasm.

Leica is waiting to take your money if you're part of the camera jewelry camp.

1 upvote

No need for a Leica. There are plenty of brands that make cameras which looks I love, e.g.: Pentax, Fujifilm, Olympus, my Nikon Df. I like both 'classic' looks, as well as modern more 'unusual' design. It has to make a statement. In my opinion, Sony cameras don't do that. At least, no statement that appeals to me. It's just very plain and dull.
When buying a car, there too is a pricepoint after which you expect it to *look* good, even though most people use it for driving and mostly sit on the inside.

0 upvotes

There's very little difference between cars in the same class at the same pricepoints. There are big differences between the IQ from the A7rII and the Df. Who cares about what the camera looks like, its about the image, and there the A7rII looks pretty good, and better than anything from Pentax, Olympus, Fuji and the Df.

Cheers.

0 upvotes

"Who cares about what the camera looks like"

I do. Very much so. Cameras are about so much more than 'the image'. It's a tool that I work with almost everyday, and it matters if I *love* to take it out on the streets. It's how it works for me. So many cameras that have sufficient IQ for my needs and wishes.
Inspiration & creativity are the bottlenecks in 2015, not IQ. If my camera inspires me, than that's a big bonus.

0 upvotes

Still a better looking camera than the DF

0 upvotes

"I like walking around proudly with a camera that people notice and comment upon; they mistake me for a creative artyfarty person, hence they give me more credit."

Somebody needs to grasp the concept of irony...

0 upvotes

First, I'm not sure how so many negative criticisms add up to a 90% rating. Second, too many sample images are shot either wide open or stopped most of the way down. Few professionals shoot portraits wide open all the time. It's an occasional thing. And, if you're going to do it, at least make sure that one or both eyes are in focus, not the tip of the nose. Thanks for the hard wor, though, the reviews are pretty comprehensive.

2 upvotes

Good review with loads of negative points to warn against a dissapointment later on.This is a 3200-USD MILC which will be changed with a new one next year and value will drop dramatically and only God & Sony knows when a firmware upgrade will come to clear up this beefy software related cons list partially. Hardware related ones will stay there until it becomes a true paper weight. IMO the below items can't be corrected up with any firmware upgrade and real deal breakers for current DSLR users (I only use copy-pasted items partially to avoid being over limit):

Camera focuses stopped down in AF-C, ...
Eye-AF and Lock-on AF not available ...
Camera drops to 12-bit mode ...
Exposure parameters frozen while AF-C is engaged
Buttons and dials ...
Inane interactions ...
Buffer is sluggish ...
Video never shows low-light advantage of full frame sensor
4K shot continuously for 30-45 min can cause overheating
No touchscreen
Very limited battery life (IMHO, THIS IS THE ROOT OF MANY PROBLEMS)

6 upvotes

Wow! Some many -ve points still score gold.

2 upvotes

@KW Phua:
You buy a camera by the features you use and need or the score it gets on DP Review or other review sites?

0 upvotes

Please note that I already removed some software related issues after copy-paste. The remainder is (IMO) hardware related ones.
So, actually, this is not the whole cons list. :) Thanks in anyway Rishi to write all of them one-by-one. This is in anyway an unbiased review as nothing is hidden under the carpet. HOWEVER, giving the GOLD is the reservation of the reviever. Rishi thinks it deserves a GOLD. I think it deserves a SILVER. That's the pure choice of priorities. That's why reviewers say "read the whole article before jumping to conclusions page". If anybody buys such a camera in rush even without reading the whole pros/cons section but just by the color of the medal, than he/she has no place here anyway.

2 upvotes

Cihangir Gzey, as Rishi mentioned in the comment, the con list is long since the review is very comprehensive. They can make any camera con list long or short depending on the mode of reviewer and thoroughness of the review.

Doesn't prove crap. Your argument is nonsense. The camera gets gold and 90% because that's what the reviewers think it deserves.

10 upvotes

ET2,
"...camera gets gold and 90% because that's what the reviewers think it deserves."
That's what I said as well.
Reviewers may find some cons not so negative. Some may find some cons more important and give it a SILVER. It is the reservation of reviewer.

0 upvotes

I agree, very long con list for a gold camera. Compare to the D750. 12 bit and battery are pretty bad for this price. Still, the camera appears to be a great addition to the lineup, and Sony is upping their game. I would still take a D810 or D750 over it.

0 upvotes

How many $3000+ DSLR's have a touch screen? None.

How many of them shoot 4k? None.

If you shoot CaNikon you'll need two systems - one for high rez stills and one for 4k - to match the capabilities of this one tiny body. And Canon's DR is lagging far behind Sony.

Batteries are $10 each and weigh 1.5 oz, get the grip and carry 10.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting

5 upvotes

Nice review.
To put things into perspective, it's a $3,200 camera, so not that many people will be able to afford it before the price drops.

2 upvotes

Hoping to see most of this tech, apart from the hi res sensor, in a much cheaper A7mk3 some time in 2016. Please.

2 upvotes

Do I make beter pictures with my Sony A7RII in comparison with my Canon 5D mark III. Yes, definitely. Do I have more fun taking pictures? Yes, Yes! Do I need 42 mil px. No, but's very handy when art-directors yet don't know how they want to use my pictures (landscape or portrait). And least but not last: dynamic range! The weight! The articulated screen, the spot on autofocus, no back and front focus. The briljant (at least a number of them) Sony Zeiss lenses...

25 upvotes

Some of the nicest images in a DPR review yet.
Particularly the cloud over the mountain. Very nice tones and colours.

12 upvotes

I would give Sony an innovation award for doing away with the SLR - in principle if not in practice. This particular camera, however, given its high price, does not deserve an award due to its many significant shortcomings. Back to the drawing board, Sony!

4 upvotes

Seeing how Sony is fairly rapidly making newer improved versions, they will continue to improve each one as much and as quickly as possible. They don't at all appear to be sitting on their laurels to get to the finish line with each iteration. So at least they are trying, and by the looks of it, they are trying with some ferocity... the industry needs someone to try to beat anyway, and Sony appears to have stirred the pot in a positive way. All the camera brands using the Sony sensors have benefitted to some degree. This does help everyone potentially. Hopefully the other brands improve as well.

0 upvotes

I have the A7II but don't like it much (e.g. control, colors, AF speed). The A7RII seems a very advanced camera but is it much different to the A7II?

1 upvote

If you can't get good color out of the A711, you won't from this one either.

1 upvote

You know you can get the same tone/colour with every single camera on the market? That's why you go to post processing... and if you dont use that, you really don't need a $3000 camera, rather stick to P&S models.

5 upvotes

Good explanation of differences in color science between camera manufacturers here: http://www.eoshd.com/2015/11/sony-vs-canon-colour-science-does-this-explain-the-difference/

In my experience, I find it harder to get colors I like from certain models. I have owned several Sonys and Pannys, both DSLRs and enthusiast compacts.

Very happy with the Sony color and tone with very little adjustment of the RAWs in Lightroom.

Panny, particularly low light shots, seem to emphasize magenta - I can best describe it as making it look like everyone has lipstick on!

And it is a pain to resolve in post. So I know the feel, OP.

But it's all personal taste, so YMMV.

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I you a seeing reds turning towards magenta at high ISO... In low tungsten light the blue channel is underexposed. Less blue, more yellow. Since noise is uneven you get speckles of yellow. Camera tries to target this yellow noise by processing the image to remove saturated yellows. This upsets the yellow/magenta balance in reds, remove the yellow and your reds turn magentaish. First saw this in a fuji f11 near 10 years ago.

0 upvotes

Oh btw, the Sony A7RII is exceptionally good at maintaining colour at high ISO even in extremely warm light (camp fire, tungsten with warm coloured shades).

0 upvotes

@andrewD2 - Possibly the first piece of useful advice I have ever been offered in the DPR forums! THANK YOU.

Also, makes sense, my older Panny (LX3) used to have terrible yellow speckling, even blotches, at ISO800 under tungsten. Always wondered why. A subsequent update to Lightroom's RAW processing of the LX3 files improved it significantly.

And that's what I feel about my Panny LX100 now - The LR results look a bit version 1.0 to me. Like, maybe, they could improve the RAW processing a bit.

Any tips for handling it in RAW? I'd have assumed in RAW that it's Lightroom's NR that would cause the shift to magenta then?

0 upvotes

Thank you. You could try lowering the colour noise reduction and try to get a better average skin colour some other way. I'd have to take a look at the RAW file. I've not had to deal with this specifically recently but I used to use "selective colour" adjustment in photoshop, the reds are adjusted by default, slide to add some yellow and maybe remove some magenta. Skintones usually have a Y:M balance of at least 50:50 (except wind blown faces, thinning skin, high blood pressure which is why I sometimes still need to do it) so a check with the eye dropper afterwards to see if you are in the ballpark of Y>M. I think the additional problem is that it makes it difficult to judge color temperature and tint as you may be tempted to tint towards green just to get the skintones less magenta but neutrals end up with a green cast. I did ask one couple if the best man knew he had very high blood pressure because I'd struggled with the Y/M balance, turned out he was on already on tablets. :)

0 upvotes

I love my A7RII, so I don't really get too worked up about reviews. Coming from Nikon, this camera just works so well for my type of shooting (landscapes, portraits). I wouldn't even consider this if I shot a lot of sports though. But for my purposes it's great. I can go very compact and light if I want to, or grab all my lenses other times. The continuous eye autofocus is just insane. I get may more keepers then I ever have with any other camera.

My main gripe? Sometime it can seem to take a decade to review an image at full magnification. Especially if you just fired of several images back to back. If there was any way to speed this up with a firmware update I would leap for joy.

13 upvotes

Thanks, this is what I call a great short review ..

2 upvotes

Agree 100% with everything you've said. And Naveed - a lot of this is essentially what we say in the scoring widget at the end of the review, with out 'Good for', 'Not so good for', and 'Overall conclusion' sections. It's just that, as DPReview, we need to actually back up everything we say and, indeed, do all the tests first in order to be able to know what to say. :)

14 upvotes

Thanks Rishi for response. Yes, I know it's a much bigger deal to review a professional tool professionally and I read them thoroughly.. with great interest ..

However, sometime short reviews and personal experiences of other fellow photographers are reassuring and put emphasis on some points which otherwise we readers overlooked.

0 upvotes

This is perhaps the first truly ground breaking DLSR in terms of spec and stills capability since the original 1DS and 5DmkII, but here's the rub (for me) ... It won't make *my* pictures (currently via Canon FF) any better for my clients or myself. On every practical level I think this sentiment applies to the vast majority of long-term photographers too.

4 upvotes

Camera, or simply ILC to be more specific. It's not a DSLR

8 upvotes

It's actually not a DSLR. It's a mirrorless. There is no reflexing going on inside the shutter compartment. Just wait until the other camera companies come out with the next big thing. But then, by next fall, Sony will be up to the A7Smmxcviii, so who knows.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I believe DSLM is an appropriate term.

0 upvotes

All your comments about how to call it have nothing to do with Simons comment. In the end a camera is just that and if you can do it with a Canon why would you buy a Sony?

1 upvote

A good review. Image quality is impressive. But the"Not so good for' list is longer than the same list for 5D3 and includes the photography i most like to do.

2 upvotes

Please note that these lists, and the pros and cons, are not directly comparable between cameras. They're very dependent and specific to the reviewers writing a review. Furthermore, for the a7R II, it's worth noting that we spelled out very specific issues at a more low level than we typically have for many cameras in the past (that had more overarching cons) - simply because we've felt of late they can be lost in the body of large reviews.

That doesn't mean there are 'more' cons than another camera with a smaller con list. It could, but in this case, it's more that we're very specifically spelling out cons we think should be addressed by Sony or considered by the consumer.

Also, we test AF more in-depth recently, which also generates more pros/cons to talk about.

Furthermore, a camera with more overall features, like the a7R II, ends up potentially have a longer 'cons' list simply b/c there's more to talk about/assess.

27 upvotes

Rishi you guys do much good work so that's the Pro.

You wrote " it's more that we're very specifically spelling out cons we think should be addressed by Sony or considered by the consumer". Which is why you write Cons for all cameras? Right.

Why did you not put up the other 90% Gold Winning Nikon D750 in the camera comparison drop area--here are those earlier Pro and Con conclusions: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d750/16

Ming Thein posted a list Cons for mirrorless recently;http://blog.mingthein.com/2015/11/03/how-to-design-mirrorless-right/

Perhaps it makes sense to take the time to write of cons in depth relative companies that are seeking to convince consumers that the future has arrived because those selfsame companies are seeking to dominate the present...and will act upon such commentary. While Sony is to be commended I am keeping my still shining Gold Star winner a7r...until the a7rIII hits or a new a99II, my d750 does all this a7rII can do except 4k.

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

@MDRCHINA
If you invested yourself in the A7R I might understand you might not want to upgrade already. However the A7RII is a completely different monster and there is so much more it can do compared to the A7R, not just 4K.

0 upvotes

For Rishi,
In that case then, in future it might be useful to have a Small and Smaller/Smallest Cons List... in order to put things in a useful context. If it makes the camera less useful or even useless in some context, it would be helpful to know - and on the other hand where particular cons are simply a niggle. How specific and refined can a review become? DPR is getting there. Thank you as always.

0 upvotes

This long awaited review is already buried below 6 minor news (LR update, D5 possibility in an unknown future, G5X gallery...)...
It doesn't even make the headline because it's occupied by roundups announcement.

Those pretending DPR favors Sony have noticed, of course.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

5 upvotes

It's featured on top at the moment...

0 upvotes

Yes, I see that, it was not the case one hour ago. So finally DPR really favors Sony ! ;)

0 upvotes

Yup. Tin foil hats on!

But truthfully we try to highlight larger pieces of content like this for a few days after publication because as you saw, things get buried by the mundane and trivial (don't hate me, Nikon!). :P

0 upvotes

Well at least we now know our pro-Nikon bias doesn't come from you, Richard...

3 upvotes

Today I looked through the viewfinder of a Canon 6D and was so shocked by that tiny and primitive focus area. You're getting so used to all the benefits this great camera system brings to you.

12 upvotes

Canon intentionally nerfed the focus area on the 6d to avoid cannibalization of the 5d line. So the 6d focus area really doesnt represent what the company can do. It represents a marketing decision.

4 upvotes

The days of trying not to cannibalize more expensive models are over; a camera company should build the best it can for a certain price point (only Pentax buys into that philosophy).

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting

9 upvotes

@steelhead3 I hope you are right. Also, I would add that Joe_leads is comparing a camera body that can be bought now for about a third of what the a7r2 costs. So... oranges and apples.

1 upvote

Canon is really pushing...Adorama is giving a free Samsung TV with a 5dIII

1 upvote

Then that would be Adorama. Not Canon.

2 upvotes

@Lawn Lends Look at the focus area of the A7 II for comparison then, if that is more apples to apples for you. The CDAF area covers almost the complete frame.

0 upvotes

joe, since the 6d costs about a third of what the A7r2 costs, wouldnt it be fair if the focus area were about a third the size of the Sony's focus area. You are comparing two cameras which share only the sensor size, their prices put them into different classes. So if you want to compare apples and apples, compare the focus area of a 5ds/r to the a7r2.

0 upvotes

It ought to. The A7R II cost about 3 times more than a 6D. Not to mention the watered down 11 point AF the 6D has doesn't help it's cause either. The 6D is still a good camera for the price. Not everybody can afford the A7R II.

1 upvote

Again, the A7 II is in the same price range as the 6D and has a similar AF field spread as the A7R II.

2 upvotes

This thread is about the A7rII. So unless you are comparing the A7II to the A7rII, you are OT discussing the A7II in comparison to the 6d.

0 upvotes

I love this camera, Very well deserved. Anyone who complains about this camera is doing something wrong.

4 upvotes

Like the speed of the camera's functions?

4 upvotes

No camera is perfect. This is still an exceptional tool if you learn to work with it.

0 upvotes

Oh I agree armandino, I'm just trying to figure out how someone could be doing something wrong if they complain about the camera functions being slow to respond. :)

1 upvote

Seems to me that the review is better than the camera. I know some photogs swear by this line of Sony cams, but the ergonomics, buttons, menus, A/F and overall "feel" of these cams just isn't up there with the best DSLRs. Yeah, the bodies are svelt, but with a couple of those big, fast Sony zooms and primes coming along for the ride, you've got yourself a pretty hefty, heavy, bulky package. What's the point? High IQ? Megapixels? High IQ and megapixels are the easy part these days. Making a camera that will last a lifetime ... as they did in the film days ... is what's really needed; that along with a camera that gets all of the basics right. Hmmmm ... like a Leica?

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting

9 upvotes

Why pack an already outated sensor and yesterday's technology in a camera that will last for 100 years or more? With a small camera you can build a compact system if needed, or a highest quality/bright & heavy lens system if this suits your needs. Balancing problems, you said? Just hold the lens/camera combo correctly and there will never be such a problem. To the point: a small camera means flexibility.

10 upvotes

Hmm. I don't often see people arguing FOR deliberate planned obsolescence.

0 upvotes

@veroman
Somewhat true however the facts are that this camera is so good that makes photographers put up with its quirks. I leave now my 1DX, 5DIII, and Pentax 645D at home unless I am shooting sports. The 645D is literally collecting dust.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Film cameras won't last a lifetime, either, when used the way we use digital cams (I shot 15,000 images last year). The sensor in this Sony will be completely obsolete in 5 years anyway.

0 upvotes

Yes, middle class body with lots of candy built in. That is my impression as well. In addition most of my Canon lenses did not run sufficiently well or at all on it. Far away from "as good as on the DSLR". Plus forget about small. My favourite lenses make nearly no difference compared to my DSLR at all. Make the body worthwhile and remove the long list of issues and restrictions. Then we start tslking again.

0 upvotes

In the old days, the sensor was film which you changed to alter ISO and color output. The cameras and lenses had simple robust mechanical designs and very limited use of electronics. Decent cameras were certainly not cheap. You can still use these cameras if you want to. I have many working 35mm and 2 1/4" square cameras.

Modern digital cameras blow 35 mm film cameras out of the water in terms of image quality and ease of use - including rapid and very accurate determination of exposure, focus, and color. You can change ISO and white balance with ease. You can have your images edited and printed in minutes rather than days. You have a built in video camera.

The penalty for all these advances is the need to regularly change your camera to get the latest advances. Unlike computers, you don't have to do this and most digital cameras should last many years - but not as long as a mechanical design.

To me this is the golden age of photography.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

2 upvotes

@TORN
I am curious to hear what are your favourite Canon lenses that do not go well with the A7RII. Also, what sort of performance are you expecting from them. I am very happy with virtually every Canon glass I have made exception of the 500/4 IS L. Some will not be as fast as the Canon Camera, but unless you are shooting sports they work fine to me. The fast glass in low light seem to be better on the Sony than on my canon cameras.

0 upvotes

An interesting thing to do is go to your local camera shop - ask to handle the A7r II and try it out. Then ask to see the Nikon D750 and try that out. In that order.

4 upvotes

Or any other Dslr of your choice. I agree with the order.

1 upvote

Why would you want the poor salesperson to unbox the A7rii twice? Start with the D750, move to the A7rii and you will stick with it anyway.

18 upvotes

I mention this because this is what I did recently at my local camera purveyor. I guess a lot of people would naturally assume that the A7r II would win out between the two because of its size. But actually, and I don't think I would be alone in this conclusion, I liked the D750 a lot better for its overall shooting design. I could imagine that an entire day with the D750 would be a much more pleasant experience than with the A7R II for a number of reasons. Despite the IQ advantage of the latter. Maybe that's just me.

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting

6 upvotes

Admit it, Pac, you just want something with a built-in flash.

10 upvotes

Ergonomy is mostly what you get used with. It took me a while to adopt from DSLR system to the A7. I think I would have experienced the same if I went the other way around. After using the A7 a lot, I am for sure not going back to a DSLR system. I am using lenses ranging from 16 mm to 400 mm + teleconverter. Handling and balance is just fine. Also, I bring this camera much more often with me than I did with the large and bulky DSLR.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

Ed, having one is nice, I'll admit. But not a deal breaker.

0 upvotes

Then look at the plastic build and cheap shutter box of the 750 and the A7rII will feel like a Leica.

2 upvotes

D750 has the same sensor as the A7. Maybe we should compare D750 to A7, not the A7r2. A7r2 is newer, but A7 is cheaper now. Price could sway a buying decision.

0 upvotes

@pacnwhobbyist
the choice is not so trivial. If you stop at the ergonomics and responsiveness then sorry I will stick with my 1DX and not even glance at the D750.
However a tool is also what allow you to do with it. Some things you can do with the D750 that you cannot with A7RII, but there are even more the way around.

0 upvotes

Other than 4K video, what shots could you take that i couldn't get just as well or better with my D750?

0 upvotes

What Magnar said --we weren't born with DSLRs in our hands. I shot for years with regular SLRs (60s, 70s, 80s) then took many years off, and found the ergonomics of a modern Nikon or Canon a complete mystery. Buttons everywhere and not where I'd put them. This made adapting to the NEX ergonomics much easier fro me, I imagine...
There's a lot I would change in the A7 interface, but I use it every day, and none of these things are dealbreakers, or cause me to lose shots I want. Frankly camera ergonomics needs to drop the fake film-reference, and that's a slowly evolving thing.

0 upvotes

Sony A7rii is imho the best camera one can buy today but not the best money can buy..

1 upvote

I conclude that one has to buy the A7Rii with something other than money, then.

2 upvotes

@ Dimit - What is the best camera money can buy, in your opinion?

0 upvotes

Α6000

1 upvote

I see...You're saying the A6000 is the best deal for your money...dollar for dollar, Kronor for Kronor?

0 upvotes

Some of the early reports on this camera raised an issue over a noise problem at high ISO when using exposure times in excess of a second. The theory was that the IBIS setup was impeding the heat sinking and the sample shots looked pretty bad.

Rishi/DPR - did you test this and if so what were the findings?

Anyone - did I miss it in the review?

If true, it would still be a great camera for the majority of users but it could really be a deal breaker for fans of astro etc.

0 upvotes

Anyone? I've been excited about this camera for ages and this (and the actual sharpness performance of Canon lenses via Metabones) was the big question I was waiting to answer. Can't believe I'm the only one (but can believe I've missed something - I'm no expert).

0 upvotes

A very fair review of a great camera!

Prior to Nov. 2013 I had been a Canon/Pentax user for decades. I now own the Sony A7R, A7S, A7 II and A7R II, and will never go back to a DSLR.

The A7R II is a vast improvement over the original A7R, as was the A7 II over the A7. I'm anxiously waiting to see how Sony's firmware update for the A7 II performs.

bwa

9 upvotes

Adding my endorsement for this camera for guys like me. There are so many really big improvements over the A7r... important focus fixes - Silent shutter, faster more accurate phase detect, and especially IBIS - mean average shooters can get stellar quality more consistently. But other improvements are also huge...dynamic range is way improved over the full normal range of commonly used ISO levels. Jpeg images up to 6400 ISO are much better--much less noise-- totally useable for all but the most demanding purposes. Sum total, for me, this is the best all round camera ever, period.
Complaints about dials, menus etc. are all things that users can get used to working with. And there are, as the review points out, some areas where improvements could be made. But these are conveniences for which work arounds can be found. Average users like me who can afford this camera, will love it.

15 upvotes

A good review.
I can't help thinking though that because DPReview is owned by Amazon, they have a vested interest in getting photographers to switch systems and constantly buy new gear.
If you're planning a switch from DSLR to Sony, and you make money off your photography, you'd be wise to test the A7RII first, extensively, in the hand.

3 upvotes

"I can't help thinking though that because DPReview is owned by Amazon, they have a vested interest in getting photographers to switch systems and constantly buy new gear."

False. But I'm glad you liked the review!

15 upvotes

false what exactly? amazon is not an owner? they're not interested in selling photo gizmos (among other stuff) and dpreview is not also a marketing platform?

0 upvotes

If DPR really was pushed by Amazon to make sure photographers switched gear faster, I'm sure they would publish many more reviews much sooner after the release dates...

(no need to thank me for the dubious support, Barney)

2 upvotes

Definitely is the job of DPR to keep the photo enthusiasts interested and to help stimulate and prop up the field of photographic equipment and technology in general. Apparently amazon makes enough money on photo gear to want to keep these guys around. I would say it's a long term type goal more than a glengarry glen ross type of sales scenario. ;-)

1 upvote

jkal implied that Amazon pushes DPReview to get people to 'constantly buy new gear'. This is false. The business side of DPReview is totally distinct from editorial.

1 upvote

And last ! Thank you DPR team for this review.

Can't wait for the 5DSR review to make a choice, I guess that it's just around the corner with the end of year roundups !

0 upvotes

Thanks. An excellent and very useful review. I haven't worked my way through it all but I am sure that you know that it's easy to move the focus point over the subject using the rear controller buttons. This is made much more convenient by setting the center rear controller button to "Standard". Apologies if this is covered in the review.

0 upvotes

Our point is that you shouldn't have to first press a button to then activate a 4-way dial for AF point selection. It should always be immediately available.

Especially when you also consider our observation that sometimes when you press a button - especially that center rear controller button - the camera just doesn't 'listen', or the button isn't actually pressed, meaning you may start using that 4-way controller thinking you activated AF point selection, but you actually haven't, so you end up, say, activating Drive Mode by pressing Left.

A direct controller has no such issues, and removes this extra layer that adds to the disconnected experience of moving the AF point. Of course, directly being able to touch the area you want to focus would be even better...

0 upvotes

Thanks for the clarification Rishi. I have a dedicated joystick on my Canon 7D but for general shooting I prefer the center button and then rear controller buttons of the a7RII, even though I can't move the focus point diagonally.

Face and eye tracking make the a7RII a much easier camera to use for photographing people in motion.

For tracking targets I need to hold the center point of the 7D on the target until it locks on which is similar to the way I operate my a7RII. However, I prefer the tracking capability of the 7D and I use it for aircraft shots and other fast action.

I don't experience the button problems that you mention.

1 upvote

I never move the focus point...man am I missing out ;*)

0 upvotes

Gimme some money!!!!! ;-D

1 upvote

Congratulations Sony on raising the bar yet again.
It's insightful to read this review against DPR's D810 review for comparison.

10 upvotes

Very nice review. I do not understand one thing. You wrote: No direct AF point control… Isn’t this a major drawback? I mean, how can you take good pictures when there’s no controle over your focus point? This must be a mistake?

0 upvotes

By "direct" they mean a control that can be dedicated to just moving AF point.

You can control your focus point with A7r2 of course, but you need to press a button to activate the point selection and then use the dials or the read wheel/d-pad, which the reviewer(s) apparently feel is too slow.

0 upvotes

Good, positive review, insightful, detailed and carefully done. But the photographs! They do a terrible injustice to the camera. Looking like a compendium of friends’ portraits on a trek to a lousy outdoors, many are overexposed, blurry and all horribly composed. There are no corners visible where one can check the sharpness or the resolution. There is no grand interior or for that matter exterior view to appreciate the virtues of the camera. If the review presents a most desirable, superb camera, the photographs shown give it a resounding lie. A friend of ours commented on how nobody on the editorial board thought of removing the offensive image of a man shoving the sole of his shoe to the viewer.
We tested the camera in the Sony showroom in New York (Madison Avenue). Based on that and now amply corroborated by dpreview’s review we will buy a couple.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

I'm looking forward to you showing us how a master uses this camera.

9 upvotes

Oh you tested it in a shop? Cool.

9 upvotes

Barney, how is the fact that he held it in a shop in any way an invalidation of his critique of the samples gallery? The two topics are completely unrelated to each other. Poor paragraphing perhaps, but his point sounded a little bit like "this looks like someone's Facebook gallery rather than a review site's samples gallery." Cue a snide remark to reinforce the point. I don't think he's commenting on whether the pictures are good images or not, artistically speaking, but rather on whether or not they are useful from the standpoint of demonstrating what the camera is capable of technically in a real world scenario. You have test shots that are a great indication of certain abilities, but do you do those test shots at different focal lengths, different distances, different apertures to really give a real sense of ability? Maybe you should...I honestly have never understood why test shots are always done varying the ISO variable and graphs replace every other variable.

2 upvotes

Ironic that he complimented the entire review and only had a negative thing to say about the samples and yet got the reaction he did.
And I get why test shots aren't done a one distance varying aperture, focal length, and ISO; then one aperture varying distance, focal length, and ISO; then one.....you get it. It's because that would be an enormous undertaking and a huge amount of data and there's no end to varying distances. However, if someone just did test shots they could really become efficient at creating a much more comprehensive test scene comparison tool. Maybe that's overkill.

0 upvotes

JaimeA, what are you talking about someone shoving the sole of their shoe at the camera? I see a picture of a guy with his foot up on a table and in the foreground, but is that offensive to your culture? In a good majority of the western world shoes aren't seen as an offensive symbol or object. I will say that using cultural norms to censor the media is found to be offensive, but even we still manage to do that most of the time. :)

4 upvotes

Having an arsenal of Sony equipment purchased at Sony [Madison Avenue] we were able to bring and use a Sirui tripod for the test. The camera was fitted with the Zeiss 24-70mm. Exposures were done with a 2-second delay by self-timer for minimum vibration. The showroom has floor-to-ceiling windows facing the street and a 3-floor high ceiling full of shiny railings to fit showroom lights. The result is a space that has plenty of contrast and detail and straight lines from top to bottom. Examining the images later, everything stated in the Review is confirmed. A great camera with an outstanding dynamic range.

0 upvotes

JaimeA, it's almost like you have some idea of what you're doing.

0 upvotes

Unnecessary, unprofessional, patronising, snide response from Barney. Please withdraw it.

1 upvote

No-one has a sense of humor anymore, do they? Testing cameras in shops is fine - I took some of my first pictures in shops...

Point being, if someone is really, seriously trying to argue that the samples in this review are "lousy... overexposed... blurry... [and] horribly composed" to the point of doing "a terrible injustice to the camera", I really don't know what to tell them. I would hope that anyone who's looked closely at both the samples and Raw files which can be found throughout this review would have plenty to go on.

The shot of the guy with his feet on the table is a pretty good demo of the sensor's dynamic range. (Which is why it was taken)

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

It looked to me like sarcasm but I take back my comments if it was not.

0 upvotes

Of course it was sarcasm! But it was intended light-heartedly. In contrast to the less than polite comment to which I was responding...

4 upvotes

is there no C-Af (be it stills or movies) with an LA-EA3 adapter? i thought there was.

0 upvotes

85mm lens on Nikon D810. 55m lens on A7Rii, not 90mm. It is easier to make a wonderful 85mm than a 55mm. I know it is just sort of a reference. A bias reference, i can explain why nikon photo seem sharper. But does everyone know that? Maybe. Maybe not. I think probably not.

There are opus 85mm for nikon and sony mount. Why not use that twin lenses for all camera. So dpreview get two 85mm OPUS. One nikon and one canon. All camera use the same lens, whenever possible.

Comparing photo using one lens 85mm and another at 55mm is unfair.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

What might this rating predict about the upcoming RX1Rii?

1 upvote

You assume there will be a full review but DPR does not give fixed lens cameras ( first impressions for the Leica Q was 5 months back ) the space they warrant.

1 upvote

Hopefully Sony is forcing Canon to release a Pro version of the SL1. That way people who like DSLRs can get a top performing but small camera.

1 upvote

DSLRs have one set of capabilities and a mirrorless has an overlapping but different set. For example, it's hard to imagine a DSLR that could accept a very wide range of non-native lenses. On the other hand, DSLRs have the advantage of having optical viewfinders It would be very interesting to see a pro DSLR the size of a Canon SL1, but it wouldn't match the 7RII's full set of capabilities, just as Sony can't match the Nikon 810 in every way.

0 upvotes

"Introduces on-sensor phase detection AF". Lazy and ignorant writing - Olympus would be rather surprised by that statement

3 upvotes

Full Frame sensor

3 upvotes

With respect, you've not only selectively quoted the first part of a sentence, but you've also edited the fragment you've repeated.

The full quote would be:

"The a7R II also introduces disruptive on-sensor phase detection AF, with the widest coverage of any full-frame camera, precise focus on eyes, professional AF results in video, and the ability to focus non-native lenses."

It's stating that this implementation is disruptive and then explains why.

Also, why would Olympus be surprised by that statement? Off the top of my head, I think it was Fujifilm that first introduced on-sensor PDAF.

14 upvotes

@ Butler: I think the Nikon 1 system had it first. They even advertise it as as such.

0 upvotes

The Nikon 1 might have been the first ILC to offer on-sensor PDAF (I don't know), but there were two Fujifilm compacts around a year earlier.

They're the earliest examples I can think of.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Read through a lot of comments. The negative ones are mainly Canikon users me thinks. Yes this camera is not ideal for sports, if that was the main requirement then spend 10k on a Canon. The fact is Sony has rewritten the rules of photography, and provided a range of camera's other than A7rII that have awesome capabilities and knock the socks off competitors. Many can't deal with what Sony have done and are probably feeling insecure with what they have. I was a Canon user for a long time, I switched to Sony as it suits my requirements far beyond what Canon could offer. My A-mount SLT performs brilliantly for me, hopefully at some point I may move to full frame. Canon has been on the throne as king for a long time, a Sony revolution is taking place.... Innovation is champion, and at the moment Canon isn't doing much of it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

18 upvotes

"Rewritten the rules of photography"? "A Sony revolution"? Wow, what a seething cauldron of hyperbole and self-delusion. Someone can make a good camera without it being the second coming of Christ. Someone can compliment a good camera without glossing over its flaws. You don't appear to be that person.

8 upvotes

I believe that many people attack Sony cameras in order to justify their decision to stay with Cannon or Nikon. I desire more competition in the Camera market, because that competition will breed excellence. I may use the Sony Mirrorless system because of how well it performs, but I have a great deal of respect for other companies. It is a big sandbox and there is room for all to play.

2 upvotes

Or maybe they stay with Canon or Nikon on the basis of a considered decision. What the heck is the matter with people here? The football fan mentality of this place is pathetic.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

2015 Roundups: Fixed Prime Lens Cameras:
Best overall/best for video: The Sony Cyber-shot RX1R II

2015 Roundup: Advanced Zoom Compacts:
Overall winner / Best for video: Sony Cyber-shot RX100 IV

2015 Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-800:
Best Overall/Best Value: The Sony a6000

And product of the year:
Sony A7R II

What a year Sony. It must be a bit hard to be a Canikon these days ;-) Still - let's hope that Canon soon will have a response.

20 upvotes

EISA awards:
EUROPEAN PROFESSIONAL DSLR LENS 2015-2016
Canon EF 11-24mm F/4L USM

EUROPEAN PROFESSIONAL DSLR CAMERA 2015-2016
Canon EOS 5DS/5DS R

EUROPEAN PROSUMER DSLR CAMERA 2015-2016
Canon EOS 7D Mark II

EUROPEAN CONSUMER DSLR CAMERA 2015-2016
Nikon D5500

;)

4 upvotes

erm that's because sony don't make DSLR anymore?

EUROPEAN PROFESSIONAL COMPACT SYSTEM CAMERA 2015-2016
Sony a7 II

EUROPEAN COMPACT SYSTEM LENS 2015-2016
Sony FE 90mm f2.8 Macro G OSS

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

25 upvotes

Sony has the A-Mount.

2 upvotes

Problem with EISA is that they are missing a professional non-DSLR non-Compact category and their DSLR categories are outdated for cameras of today. The full frame mirrorless flagship cameras don't fit any of their categories.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

Just a note that the a6000 came out in Spring of 2014

0 upvotes

Read the review again. Definitely will wait for discounts :) 3200$ is just too much for me (but maybe OK for others).

4 upvotes

Add to that the cost of good lenses if you do not have satisfactory 3rd party lenses worthy of it like I do. it is simply just too expensive for rme. It is without a doubt class leading along with the Nikon D750 in my opinion but I simply cannot afford either. I will humble for the crappy 7d or 6d and some top notch L glass.

0 upvotes

Yeah I reckon it is far too expensive at the moment ozturert. Not a point to buy yet till price is dropping nicely or when USD is back to normal after woeful exchange rate at this latest down to disgusting 0.71 per $1 AUD. Sick of market exchange greed. Waiting for it to go back to normal.

1 upvote

Nice cam for sure, but i have to wait for the A7r III !!

Why?

Because A7r II's will get cheaper by then on.

And they will still be superb!

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Waiting for mirrorless lens. Mirror lens are too big to fit with mirrorless camera.

2 upvotes

28/2, 35/2.8, 55/1.8, 85/1.8 and 16-35/4.

7 upvotes

Small camera big lens?

0 upvotes

Big lens, if you want, small lens and small camera if you want that too - with some obvious compromises.

4 upvotes

I think the OP wants lenses to shrink with the body size regardless of aperture and sensor size. If anyone can rewrite the laws of physics then that's probably Sony - but still ... :-)

2 upvotes

I agree with this.
Pentax did a good making lenses were both small and very good performing.

1 upvote

My Nikon f/2.8 zooms fit on an A7, but after trying them, I'll take a pass. Once you start getting images sharp in the corners and even sharper in the center, there's no going back. My largest Sony lens, a 70-200/4, is 7" long and 3" in diameter - about the length of a Nikon 28-70/2.8 and an inch less in diameter.

0 upvotes

Not sure what the big deal is. We've used big lenses on DSLRs for decades. Ever put a 70-200/2.8 on a DSLR? Those are big lenses. Much larger than the DSLR bodies we put them on. Have you seen the size of Nikon's latest 24-70/2.8E ED VR? That's a massive lens, especially for a 24-70 range:

http://camerasize.com/compact/#486.479,ha,t

But with proper handholding technique (left hand supporting the lens), it really doesn't matter how much larger the lens is compared to the body. You just need to learn proper camera-holding technique.

3 upvotes

Case sensitive ... Pentax DO make lenses .. small good but although I love them they are slow

0 upvotes

where is the low light performance with the studio test scene setup...

0 upvotes

At the widget?

0 upvotes

got it.........

0 upvotes

Looking forward to buying the next iteration, when hopefully they will get the ergonomics right.

2 upvotes

How is it not right now? I find it to be very comfortable hold and all the dials and buttons are very reach to reach. The only thing I prefer ergonomically over it would be the E-M1, and not by much.

5 upvotes

I consider Canon in a different league in terms of ergonomics. I love the specs of this camera but it still feels like a toy, not something made for photographers.

BTW ergonomics has already improved a lot vs previous model. They are getting there.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Not really sure why you would get this impression. So when you use a D810 (or a DSLR not made by Canon), you also feel like it's a toy?
Just to understand this a bit more, is this a matter of weight (or lack of)? Is this a matter of placement of dials or buttons? Is this built quality? Personally the only thing I dislike about the camera are its front and rear dials - they are a little too recessed to my preference (I like the mark I dials better). But other than that, I don't feel that it is any worse than other higher-end DSLRs.
As the matter of fact, the smaller footprint actually makes using it a bit nostalgic as it reminds me of the Nikon FM2.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

D810 definitely not a toy, even though i prefer canon ergonomics and the no frills commands and menus.

It is a matter of placement of button and dials, and their quality. And the grip (even though the new one is much better).
Just does not feel it was made by photographers for photographers.

0 upvotes

Have you tried the A99?
Based on this, I'd say it isn't for Sony's lack of know how as this was clearly demonstrated on their Alpha mount bodies.

1 upvote

I guess it really boils down to personal preference. I have no issue with what Sony's doing with the ergonomics at all. In fact, all the dials & buttons are well-made and logically placed. The grip is fantastic. I do have some reservation about the quality of the rubberised parts of the body as the one I have on the older A7 has began to peel off after only 2 years of use.
Sony's menu is not the best, but I also find it to be quite serviceable most of the time (though the unexplained grey-out can be annoying). It is certainly much better than the lunacy that is Olympus' menu.

0 upvotes

The Sony cameras sure generate a lot of comments....both good and bad.

1 upvote

Its a consumer toy (with still lots of technical flaws) priced as a pro camera. For what you get, price for this toy is outrageous. Same counts for the Sony & Zeiss lenses. Both Sony & Zeiss introduced several incomplete lens lines in low capacity production, instead of one complete lens line in high capacity production. Furthermore, today there is simply no competition within e-mount lens business with other brands producing autofocus lenses and common focal lengths. This is all done to maintain premium prices and milk the consumers ... so no thanks for the offer. But hey maybe one positive note to end this, all this mirrorless tech attempts that are sold will maybe one day become mature thanks to the early adopters actually buying this. And then we can still jump the wagon when all technical flaws are resolved and prices are at an acceptable level thanks to some more healthy competition ...

15 upvotes

I believe, sincerely, @Zakzoezie that every one's opinion is worth listening to but the motivation for your post is baffling.

Your unsubstantiated diatribe is appended to a substantial camera evaluation by a team of professional experts who have ( slowly ) come to the opposite conclusion ; most of us will tolerate flaws in a camera that takes superb photo's/video's as this one does.

You are right on one thing ; the high-end Sony cameras are expensive but the recent R&D expenditure that allows Sony to make these groundbreaking products has to be balanced with profitability. If their stream of enhancements ever abates, I am sure we will see cheaper cameras.

You don't say where you think the "healthy competition" for Sony's mirrorless range will come from but if the Canikon teams are as unimaginative in their industrial espionage as they are in everything else, you will have a long wait.

30 upvotes

Maybe you should read the review again? And wake up... this is the best camera to get right now :-) End of story.

27 upvotes

If its a consumer toy and I were Canikon, I'd be really really worried, imagine if they built a 'pro' version, how much better would that be than their products?

16 upvotes

It's actually a pretty high quality camera.

2 upvotes

...today there is simply no competition within e-mount lens business with other brands producing autofocus lenses and common focal lengths.
LOL, are you serious?
Sony is made possible to use AF Canon lenses on Sony body!!! Show me Canon body that can accommodate Sony lenses with AF, please.

4 upvotes

Sony is making a Pro version... it will come out in 2016.

0 upvotes

This could be viewed as a positive also. As it goes to show that Sony has much room for refinements in their product development.

0 upvotes

I think people who feel the need to call these cameras "a consumer toy" are acting like children, haha.

As for you comment, "Both Sony & Zeiss introduced several incomplete lens lines"...how many companies introduced "complete lens lines" right from the start? The Sony FF mirrorless system is only barely two years old (it was introduced in October 2013).

6 upvotes

@Esstee This is exactly what I'm saying. Because we are early days, for mirrorless tech there is still so much room for improvement that we should be aware of before spending $$$$. Certainly when big improvements can still to be made in the main areas of camera operation like user interaction (menu system, body ergonomics, button layout, software run speed, overheating control, etc), AF system, battery system, parallel processing to separate images shown on the fast live view (visible on EVF or backscreen) from what is written slowly into memory & SD ... Personally I don't care about brand names or camera scores. I simply look at the price/value ratio of the complete system including desired lenses and camera. Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate DPR team efforts reviewing all these cameras to have better insight in the camera capabilities, but to be honest I couldn't care less about their final score ... It's up to the user to give a score because he or she is spending the $$$$ ...

0 upvotes

@T3 "Time on market" has no relation with lens availability. Read my initial comment again. You have Sony lens line, Zeiss Batis and Zeiss Loxia. 3 different lens lines at low production capacity. If they would have started with one lens line at higher production capacity ie Zeiss Batis you would have today a wide range and consistent lens setup.
About your intro sentence, it's simply not worth giving any further attention. It's a photography blog, not a psycho blog so please stay on topic ...

0 upvotes

.... and what has the E mount lens range to do with this camera review topic ?

0 upvotes

@dynaxx The E mount lens range and lack of allowed competition is setup by Sony & Zeiss in such a way premium prices can be to charged to milk the customers. Same premium pricing strategy is applied to the A7 bodies by delivering consumer toys at pro camera price levels & at the same time defining a very short product cycle to increase the need for their customers to make more frequent camera upgrades. So there is clearly an analogy in premium pricing strategy deployed by Sony & Zeiss that is applicable to both E mount bodies & lenses. If you would read my initial comment again, you would find this message. So although for you at a first glance from a pure technical perspective cameras & lenses have nothing to do with each other, pricing wise the E mount lens system with its different & limited lens range to charge premium prices (and to milk the customers) has everything to do with this and every full frame E mount camera review !

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

To be clear, I'm not posting this info to bash Sony or Zeiss companies or their customers. I'm just giving marketing view on these companies pricing strategy so existing & future customers are aware of it, that's all. I'm also not wasting too much time in giving my feedback on a technical level since the net is full of tech reviews ...

0 upvotes

One question: What was the experience regarding IQ with adapted lenses? The adapter (depending on its quality) might introduce tilt and shift or general softness. Any experience with this?

2 upvotes

there are a lot of discussion about this on the net... it is a fairly complex subject. In short, it all depends on what lenses you want to use, but *generally* SLR lenses with a good quality adapter (like the metabones, for ex) you get the same IQ as on native bodies.

0 upvotes

adapters can't alter the path of light going through the lens, so there is no loss of resolution... "general softness" is fud.

there could be a very small amount of tilt, but do canon tilt/shift lenses look "soft"? i think not.

1 upvote

@osv: adapters have production tolerances which might be more or less tight. That means that the "extension" is not exactly what is needed. More over the adapter might be a little bit thicker on one side than on the other. The result would be softness on one side. You definitely introduce an additional piece of tolerances into the imaging chain. My question is to what degree is IQ really affected by this. Probably not an issue when lenses are stopped down, but certainly one with fast lenses wide open.

0 upvotes

As i said already, with good adapters the result are perfectly ok.
Yes, even with the best adapter you could get a bit of tilt in the focus plane .... but most lenses have already a bit of tilt anyway. And it is only visible in shooting of plane subjects... such as testcharts. With 3D subjects, it's not an observable issue.

With wide angle rangefinder lenses there is a real problem, as the image gets problematic away from center. Not only soft, but you get more problems as well.

Here you get a "lab investigation" on adapters: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters
I also think roger has other articles as well on the subject.

0 upvotes

""extension" is not exactly what is needed" has no effect on the picture quality, because nearly all non-sony adapters are slightly shorter than the factory register difference, on purpose.

that allows all lenses to focus past infinity, the old dslr concept of hard stop infinity focus is obsolete with mirrorless cameras.

with a shorter register difference, even if an adapter is very slightly thicker on one side, as you speculated, there is still plenty of rotation to focus past infinity, and you will never see a very mild tilt.

i probably have a dozen cheap adapters, i've been through all this already.

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Total comments: 1813

Editorial content

Product database

Community

About us Work for us Advertise with us FAQ Feedback Interest-Based Ads Privacy Legal

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2015 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site