Buying guides 2015

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

2126

Sony Alpha 7R II Review

Published Nov 17, 2015 | Rishi Sanyal, Richard Butler, Dan Bracaglia

Buy on Amazon.com From $3,198.00

10 Previous

11 Autofocus: Options & tracking

12 Next

Autofocus

The a7R II features the latest iteration of Sony's continuously evolving autofocus system, in this case an implementation that uses both on-sensor phase detection (for depth awareness) and contrast detection autofocus (for high precision).

On-sensor phase detection means that the camera can be both fast and precise, even when shooting with fast glass and very little depth-of-field, and even when you combine these with fast walking motion. Zeiss Batis 25mm F2 \| ISO 2500 \| 1/500th, F2

Although DSLRs have traditionally offered the best autofocus performance, the results of these on-sensor technologies have improved rapidly and now challenge DSLR supremacy in many (though not yet all) respects. The great advantage that on-sensor systems have is that they are assessing focus from the same point that the image is being captured from. This means they have none of the cummulative errors introduced by manufacturing and alignment tolerances that can build up in DSLR autofocus modules, where focus is measured by light diverted via a secondary path to a separate sensor. Residual spherical aberration of lenses can also severely throw off DSLR focus systems, and appear to have less of an impact for most on-sensor AF systems.

Although some of these errors can be overcome by AF fine tuning, these rarely have the complexity necessary to correct for the many variables that can contribute to the problem (variation between focus points, differing results at different focal lengths or subject distances, impact of lighting color...). Practice supports the theory that focus measured at the imaging plane is a more consistent way of ensuring good results - something that is particularly important with a high resolution camera that will reveal any slight mis-focus.

AF options

Sony's broad range of AF options can be daunting but also rewarding. There are five different focus area modes (Wide, Center, Flexible Spot, Expand Flexible Spot and Lock-on AF). Within this, the Flexible Spot mode, where you manually position the AF point, offers three AF point sizes. Meanwhile, Lock-on AF, which can only be used in continuous AF, offers all other AF area modes as sub-options, so that you can decide the most appropriate means of initially selecting the object you want it to track. We've found, however, that changing the size of your AF point in Lock-on is virtually useless, as it appears to be largely ignored by the Lock-on algorithm and doesn't force it to be more or less specific when you use smaller or larger AF points, respectively.

On top of this, there's Face Detection mode, which is selected separately. This will indicate any faces that the camera has detected in the scene but the camera will only focus on these faces if your chosen focus area mode overlaps with the face. In other words, an off-center face won't be prioritized over the subject in the middle of the frame if you're in Center AF area mode, for instance. If you do want a face prioritized above all else, Eye AF - assignable to a custom button - overrides all else and will focus on an eye anywhere in the scene, though again it will prioritize one nearest your selected AF area. There's also an option to teach the camera specific faces, which it will then prioritize over unknown faces.

	The a7R II offers four main AF area modes, along with Lock-on (tracking) versions of those same modes. On top of these are the Face Detection and Recognition options, an Eye AF mode and, presumably for video use, a separate Center Lock-on AF function. It's worth learning how these interact with one another.

As we alluded to above, an additional option is Eye AF, now available in continuous AF mode, which is operated separately from all the other AF settings. You'll need to assign Eye AF to one of the camera's customizable buttons to use it. In AF-C mode, pressing this button will find and follow the eye nearest your selected AF area or, if no specific area is selected, the eye nearest the camera. In AF-S mode, it will highlight an eye for around 1 second as the eye is focused on. Eye AF does not require Face Detection to be engaged to work.

Center Lock-on AF: a vestigial function

Just to add a further level of complexity to proceedings, the camera still offers Center Lock-on AF as a separate function (not to be confused with the Lock-on AF Center AF area mode, with which it's incompatible). So far is we can tell, this is a vestigial feature that dates back to before Sony got the Lock-on AF area mode (triggered with a half-press of the shutter button) worked out. The Center Lock-on AF function is locked onto a subject by pressing the central button on the back of the camera and presumably remains in the camera because it's the only tracking AF mode available while in movie mode. It's a cumbersome, inefficient way of working compared to Lock-on AF which is triggered by a half-press of the shutter, so it's inexcusable it remains, and more so given it's the only way to enable generic subject tracking in video.

Autofocus performance (Native lenses)

Most contemporary autofocus systems can very quickly focus on a static target and autofocus speed itself is not an issue for the a7R II. The a7R II is incredibly fast at initial focus acquisition. The more interesting question is: how well does it take advantage of the depth information provided by its on-sensor phase detection elements, particularly for continuous AF?

To test this, we walked towards our test scene, shooting in continuous drive mode (5 fps, center point) with AF-C engaged. We conducted the same test with the Canon EOS 5DS to get a sense for the level of performance you should be able to expect.

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16

The performance is remarkable for most of the run: almost every image is in focus despite constant movement, save for the last few. At closer distances the hit-rate clearly drops off but overall performance is broadly comparable with the Canon EOS 5DS's results that we show later in this review.

We also shot one of our standard tests to see how well the a7R II copes with changes in depth over relatively long distances (something DSLRs have traditionally excelled at), tracking a cyclist riding at a moderate speed directly towards the camera. Read on below.

Center Autofocus Area

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16

We shot our cyclist at 5 fps with a Sony 70-200 F4G OSS lens, using the center point in AF-C. On the whole, the camera does respectably well - most of the shots are in perfect focus, with only shots 3, 13 and 14 noticeably less than perfect.

We're finally at that inflection point: where mirrorless on-sensor phase-detect AF (PDAF) is seriously challenging DSLR dedicated phase-detect modules, if not exceeding their performance due to obviating AF calibration requirements. That said, on-sensor PDAF is still not optimized at making measurements from extreme defocus like DSLRs; hence, though we didn't experience any during our cycling test, you will get hunting from time to time. Birds-in-flight and sports photographers will still benefit from the instant, decisive focus DSLRs provide even when starting from a completely defocused, blurred starting point.

Autofocus tracking performance

Having established that the a7R II does pretty well at interpreting changes in depth, we added an extra variable to the test: moving in the X and Y axes to see how well the camera would track the subject (rather than simply refocusing in the same place).

This test is intended as a simplified model of, for instance, a small child running across a lawn in an unpredictable manner but conducted in such a way that we can use it to test multiple cameras in a reasonably repeatable manner. In this first instance we set the camera to 'Wide Area' AF, with the camera selecting the subject, then trying to stick to it.

Wide Area Autofocus

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16

The results are very impressive: although a couple of shots aren't perfectly focused, all of them are pretty usable and a good number show the camera's full resolution benefit (which is no small matter on such a high-res camera). Click here to see the video feed from the camera, showing what it was focusing on. As you can see in the video, the camera's subject tracking system, which in this case uses distance information to understand and follow the camera's initially chosen subject, does a really good job of sticking with our cyclist.

The reality, though, is that 'Wide' AF area is of limited use: most photographers desire to define their subject themselves, not have the camera choose the subject. You can designate your initial subject, but have the camera track it thereafter, using 'Lock-on AF', which itself has number of different AF area modes you can select to define your AF point(s). We tested Lock-on AF: Center below.

Lock-on Autofocus

Sony's Lock-on AF attempts to identify the subject that you've initially specified then stick with it, wherever it moves in the frame. It does this using color and pattern recognition based on the information from the imaging sensor (presumably with depth information from the camera's phase-detection elements). This should, theoretically, lead to more accurate subject tracking than the predominantly depth-based methods used on traditional DSLRs. Click here to watch a video demonstrating the difference.

While Lock-on AF certainly has its value when it comes to tracking and keeping moving subjects in focus, as well to track a subject as you focus-and-recompose so you don't have to manually reposition the AF point, it's not without its issues. While it sometimes can, it often doesn't, live up to the consistent, reliable, pinpoint accuracy we're used to with Nikon full-frame DSLRs. We take an in-depth look below.

We also put Lock-on AF to the test in our cyclist test to see how it performed in real-world tracking of a moving, weaving long-distance subject. See how it did in our rollover below, and get an idea of its performance in this video footage we captured of the camera in action.

As you can see in the video linked above, prior to actually shooting in continuous drive, the camera's understanding of the subject is quite good, exemplified by the green square that sticks with our cyclist as he moves forward and weaves. However, almost as soon as the camera starts shooting, it drops out of subject recognition mode (Lock-on AF) and tracks the subject solely based on depth information (the small green squares), similar to the 'Wide' AF area we tested above. You can see this switch from Lock-on to depth-based subject tracking in our aforementioned video; note the large green subject box (Lock-on AF) replaced by a series of dancing squares (phase detection) just after the screen blacks-out in this video.

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16

As we'd seen in 'Wide' area AF above, results are pretty successful: not surprising since the 'Wide' and 'Lock-on' end up using similar depth-based methods during a burst. However, not all shots are focused. Furthermore, in our real-world testing, Lock-on AF itself isn't as reliable as we'd like it to be: we often found the camera will lose the subject. And that's before you consider the fact that Lock-on itself shuts off entirely in continuous drive, reverting to depth-based subject tracking - a method fallible to jumping off to the wrong subject, as we show in our video and as we've experienced with DSLRs operating similarly off of only depth information (like the Canon 5D Mark III). We wish actual pattern-recognition based subject tracking was maintained during continuous drive, like Eye AF and face detection are.

To be fair though: subject tracking during continuous shooting is something even most DSLRs struggle with, with Nikon full-frame DSLRs offering arguably the most robust system.

What we noticed with Lock-on reverting to a simpler tracking mode is something we've seen before: a number of mirrorless cameras can track a subject pretty well but the performance drops during continuous shooting, where the camera expends considerable processing power processing images and writing them to the card, and also experiences constant blackouts as the shutter is activated and sensor read. This is all consistent with the a7R II's inability to re-engage Lock-on AF when the camera is writing to a card - it appears the algorithms are very clever but require more processor power than the Bionz X can summon up. Try it: as the camera is clearing its buffer, Lock-on will initially engage, but will quickly revert to depth-based tracking (the little green squares) as soon as there's movement or you recompose.

What about sports?

In addition to the comparatively repeatable tests shown here, we also subjected the a7R II to some challenging real-world usage, and put the camera in the hands of a professional shooter pitch-side at the Seattle Seahawks. As you might expect, the a7R II performed significantly less well when trying to keep track of faster moving subjects during continuous shooting, and where there was a multitude of visually-similar potential targets. But not necessarily due to an AF system that can't keep up.

The reality is that these situations will stress even the best automatic subject tracking systems, and though the very best may perform better (Nikon's 3D tracking), many pros will revert to single-point AF. And here's where the a7R II struggles: (1) keeping the AF point over your subject precisely amidst EVF/LCD blackouts is difficult, and (2) repositioning the AF point quickly as the action changes without direct access to AF point selection via a dedicated joystick or D-pad is cumbersome. So while the AF performance is formidable, the success of the camera as a whole can be situation-specific, and we wouldn't recommend the a7R II over a traditional DSLR for continuous bursts in sports scenarios. It's simply too difficult to keep your subject in the frame, or the AF point over the subject, during continuous bursts. This is simply a reality of current mirrorless systems' inability to provide a live feed of the action during bursts, and not a reflection of the AF capabilities of the camera.

Does that mean the camera can't successfully shoot action/sports? Not necessarily. For example, in this simpler yet fast-paced scenario with a number of breakdancers in a water ring - where I could leave the camera in 'Wide' AF area mode and allow it automatically identify and track the main subject - the camera performed admirably. Again, success is situation specific, so while this won't be your go to camera for sports shooting, you may still experience a certain degree of success in some cases.

Tags: review, sony

Previous page 10 Video

Next page 12 Autofocus: Low light & Eye AF

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Gear in this story

Sony Alpha 7R II

844

I own it

1271

I want it

139

I had it

Discuss in the forums

Shop now

71 customer reviews

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

Comments

Total comments: 2126

You(Dpreview) don't explain the word BSI sensor, like in "42MP Full Frame BSI CMOS sensor".
I think it means that light comes from under the thinned silicon and not where it normally comes, where metal is.

It also want help much if you explain it here. This comment will probably be comment #5656565... some day. No one will see this.

0 upvotes

I saw it.

You're right, it essentially means that you build up your sensor then shave the substrate off the back and use that (the back side in conventional terms) as the front of the sensor, meaning that light doesn't have to pass through the circuitry to get to the photodiode itself.

It's easy for us to forget that, although we've written about it many times over the years, it's not necessarily common knowledge. I'll see if I can sneak a bit more detail into the article.

1 upvote

Is there actually such a key as Focus Hold button that you list in your table? I can't find it on camera pictures and in the user manual. Please, review and correct if necessary.

0 upvotes

Focus Hold is lens dependent. Examples of lenses that include it are the 90/2.8 macro and 70-200G zoom. The 90 has one FH button and the 70-200 has three of them.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting

1 upvote

just bought one, awesome thing...

3 upvotes

Made the jump to using raw files. But now neither Sony's Play Memories, nor any of my older versions of Photoshop and Dxomark editors work, and I can't update them because my computer operating system is Windows Vista? Any suggestions?

0 upvotes

Upgrade your computer and buy Lightroom.

1 upvote

DOWNLOAD ADOBE DIGITAL NEGATIVE CONVERTER FROM ADOBE.COM TO CONVERT YOUR RAW FILES TO .DNG FORMAT.

1 upvote

DVB, using all caps indicate one is yelling and screaming.

0 upvotes

This is why I do not trust raw files. They are not standard file types such as JPEG. So, today having difficulty reading them imagine years from now the then computers and software will not be able to read them.

For those that doubt that, Adobe and their ilk dropped support for many of the older raw files (cameras not sold and long out of date). Thus, folks that want to use their original now very old raw files will not be able to open them.

Raw file formats change by vendor and camera model. In fact I have seen them change with firmware upgrades. Yes, raw has advantages, however, a properly setup camera should not need to shoot raw. If one is using raw for PP correcting issues they are doing something wrong. JPEG is good for quite large blowups, and spectacular images. For me shooting JPEG my workflow and time on computer greatly diminished, but not image quality.

Most photographers I know shooting raw are more proud of their computer skills than photography skills.

1 upvote

I was in Luxembourg last week for the first time, and spent much of the week shooting with my A7RII, 24-70 and 70-200 lenses.

https://500px.com/chrissyone/galleries/luxembourg

I couldn't wait for Canon to move on mirrorless any longer. I jumped to Sony and, so far, I have almost no complaints with the camera. Some of the controls are a bit fiddling - the front finger dial seems to always allude me. But that's about it.

If there's any doubt about Sony's low-light performance, well, take a look at the photos above. There is only one tripod shot in that entire set (can you find it?). The rest are all hand-held. 6400 ISO yields totally usable results with gorgeous, film-quality grain. I have never used anything like this. It's fantastic.

And the autofocus nailed almost every single frame. I can't talk highly enough about it. I had rented the original RX-1 a few years ago, and passed on buying one because the AF was so terrible. Not so the 7RII. It was bang-on every time.

Rent one.

5 upvotes

Nice shots Chrissy. I can't wait to take my a7RII on vacation sometime. I just got it in November and love it. BTW i'm guessing the tripod shot was "le Grund". Enjoy using your camera.

0 upvotes

Correct, as evidenced by the car lights. You win! =)

0 upvotes

awsome cam

0 upvotes

No anti-alias filter... It looks like it creates artifacts in the studio picture for all cameras without AA filter. It's even more observable on higher ISOs in RAW. Check the grey picture in the middle left quadrant comparing to a camera with AA filter (example Sony A 7S II, Nikon D750 or any other with RAW and AA filter). Not sure how good is the "better without AA filter"... Some picture may become difficult to correct...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

nice cam

0 upvotes

@ Rishi or others:
did you get a chance to try the Sigma 20/1.4 with the Sony A7RII? My order is pending because I would like to make sure that there is good compatibility....

0 upvotes

Exposure seems really slow to adjust - has anyone else noticed this? I am renting this camera and trying it out for digiscoping. Yesterday was my first day with it and I had the Canon EF 40mm on the camera, and they were mounted on a Swarovski STX 85 scope; I was shooting in manual focus. My biggest challenge was that I was shooting white birds on a dark background, and with the zebras set to 100% the camera was very slow to adjust to changes in exposure - panning across the dark water and then getting the white bird in the viewfinder. At first when I got the bird in the frame, it would have zebras covering it, to the point I couldn't see the bird, and then they would slowly (maybe over 1 1/2 sec) fade out and the camera would adjust. This was also visible in the histogram. Here is a sample image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/focused-on-birds/23032231414/in/dateposted-friend/

0 upvotes

It can be slow to adjust it in the live preview, but when you take the actual shot or half-depress the shutter, AE kicks in and the metering changes almost instantaneously.

0 upvotes

are there small lenses for the system?

0 upvotes

The 35mm F/2.8 is quite small...

0 upvotes

28/2

0 upvotes

Zeiss 55/1,8 (with AF); MF Zeiss 21/2,8 ; 35/2 ; 50/2....

0 upvotes

All of the loxias.

0 upvotes

A dummy battery AC-PW20 is useful for A7 outdoor shooting. it has a reasonable price.

0 upvotes

The A7Rii can be powered through the USB port by a portable USB battery. There's no need for a dummy battery, except for the A7ii and earlier models.

0 upvotes

2K plus comments...must a be a record.

1 upvote

And the review is still pinned on top of all news since several weeks.
This advertisement must be worth something to Sony.

1 upvote

It's our latest review. After expending months of effort behind a thorough review, you think that displaying it on the home page of Digital Photography Review means the content must be paid off?

22 upvotes

@Rishi You can't please everybody...

4 upvotes

@Rishi Yes, it does.

1 upvote

Conspiracy theorists are so lame.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

6 upvotes

@Rishi - I feel bad for you guys, constantly having to deal with the mouth-breathers of this community. Please know that the rest of us appreciate all the hard work you do.

6 upvotes

And the 5DS/R review is still pinned on top of all news since several weeks.

This advertisement must be worth something to Canon.

And thanks Rob - that's appreciated.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 40 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

Thanks for the review! Seems like a lot of praise!

I wonder when Sony will come out with a decent lens choice for FF E-mount. For example Nikon has 85 1.8, fantastic lens at a reasonable price. Sony seems not to have any option here, they have 90 but only 2.8 (and at a crazy price - come on....)

Also my Alpha (not the A7RII but A6000) is very clever and fast in focus but often the electronics focuses on the wrong place... the 6 year old Nikon D700 does a better job here, I feel I am in control of the focus.

Also my A6000 is way slow... although it focus fast, when I take pic after pic, there is long delay until I can take the next one, even with preview turned off. So, forget it for any action (action is not only sports, but often on a birthday party!). Is the 7R II better?

I wonder if the 7R II with all the praise is any better than my A6000, or we need to wait a few more years for Sony to bring out a really good camera to challenge the better DSLRs.

0 upvotes

Is that you, Rip van Winkle? An half dozen first rate lenses have been released since the A7Rii surfaced, and over a dozen since the A7ii in December, 2014. I'm covered from 16 mm to 200 mm.

6 upvotes

This review is not totally complete ultil 5DSR review is out, on my opinion... poke@DPRTeam

4 upvotes

I just watched a video where they compared the Sony A7rII to a Phase One IQ160 and the A7R II won!

0 upvotes

Yes, I've seen this Video too, and I commented on it because it is a total NONSENSE.

I commented on SonyAlphaRumors as well as on Vimeo, because it is not a scientific assessment of noise between these two cameras.
The guy fails to understant that he has to normalize the pics at the same size (i.e. he has to display the exact same portion of the image at the exact same size on his screen from the 2 camera).

He fails to do that, and because of its higher megapixel count the image from the IQ160 appears like "zoomed in". So he's also zooming into the noise, and he makes it appear more on the IQ160. This is nonsense, and he has to normalize the pics first.

He fails to understand and even says DPR does it the same way, which is wrong, eventhough the comparison tool doesnt normalize pics from different sensors...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

2 upvotes

@Esstee. Not a very well done comparison. Why not use PO IQ250, IQ180 is 4-5 years old?

0 upvotes

@surlezi - working on it :)

By the way, we definitely do allow for normalized comparisons in our studio scene widget. We don't have the IQ160 in there, but we'll try to get one of the latest Phase One cameras in there soon. I wouldn't be surprised if the a7R II, despite its smaller sensor, surpassed it though - the CCD MF backs have poor ISO performance generally, because of fairly high upstream read noise. The exception being the ones that use the latest ~50MP Sony CMOS sensor in them.

2 upvotes

Canon 5DSR Yea but just make sure to Shrink it down at high Temp in the Dryer and toss out that old Desktop PC in much needed favor of the lastest and greatest with a FAT CPU and Ram Memory that'll make most people Say WOWWWWW :-) if your expecting to take advantage of its highest resolutions and Monster Size RAW Files :-)

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Yea but just make sure to Shrink it down at high Temp in the Dryer and toss out that old Desktop PC in much needed favor of the lastest and greatest with a FAT CPU and Ram Memory that'll make most people Say WOWWWWW :-) if your expecting to take advantage of its highest resolutions and Monster Size RAW Files :-)

0 upvotes

Got the a7rII right when it came out at my only gripe is that none of the photo recovery software supports the .arw files from the camera. I've tried 5-6 different apps but none will recover accidentally formatted .arw files. (they will get the older .arw from a77 models but not the newer ones.

0 upvotes

Found out you can train the software to recognize the files so my gripe is withdrawn. I love the camera!

2 upvotes

Quick question. Do any of you know if with the firmware update Sony added the possibility to those different frames lines for other aspects ratios? I'm hoping it has frame lines for 6x7 (Pentax - which is the Ar I shoot), or even 4x5. Thanks so much. Martin.

0 upvotes

They didn't and it's a shame.

0 upvotes

That would be a really cool feature actually

0 upvotes

That was a good review, sadly it means I will probably shell out the money now. I made the switch from Canon 5d and 1ds ii to Sony a couple years ago, first with a NEX 7 and then A7. I have never looked back, menus were a mess but you get past it. Image quality is great and now that the A7r ii has improved the shutter, focus and ergonomics it's time. I missed my optical viewfinder at first but wouldn't consider going back now. As for the battery issue, it's no big deal the batteries are so light and small. I hope Sony keeps listening and improving with each new release. My photography has improved, not because of new features but the camera reinvigorated my interest, and it is small and light.

10 upvotes

Squareshot: You may be sad about paying now but once you have the camera in your hands, you will never look back. Every new thing you try, you discover there are possibilities you never even thought about before because of how the camera executes.
You should not be sad at Christmas, it's not good for your family. So for their sake, get the sadness over by buying the camera now!!

0 upvotes

I like the idea of mirrorless compact camera. After all, I used live view for quite some time in the beginning. But ever since I tried mirror, I forgot about LV button almost completely. It might sound really dumb and the professionals might tear me apart for that, but there is something in looking at the world before you take a shot exactly as it is, not through the digital screen. Mirror removes digital filter from your perception. There is something really nice in that. And, while the lag of lv can be fixed in the future, digital filter will always be in your way. If it makes any sense.

3 upvotes

It makes sense (and a lot of people feel that way), but bear in mind that a 'digital filter' will be applied to all of your images. Being able to preview the effect of that can be useful, too.

Also, do not make the mistake of thinking that live view on a DSLR is the same as the experience of using a camera designed around an EVF. It should be, but it's usually a much less fluid experience.

4 upvotes

I have discovered a new trend for me. When I make Photos, it is about making the photo and not about the picture. For this the best are old SLR.

0 upvotes

There are pros and cons. I have always been a SLR user and I have to admit that what you see is what you get from a mirrorless is nice. Also a bright image in the dark is nice. DSLR live view is almost useless for everyday shooting because of the very slow AF performance.

2 upvotes

Richard, I disagree. EVF only shows you the in-camera jpeg. It cannot show me what I would do to a raw file in Lightroom. Being able to preview the in-camera jpeg is pretty useless if you ask me.

But since apparently nobody is going to make a digital version of a Pentax MX or Nikon FM2, we must accept EVF if we want a small FF body. A shame.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

What ? ...only 290 shots max onthis camera, what about if you're using live view, some video clips and large tele lens? ...poor battery life indeed.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

2 upvotes

How about stop trolling? How about actually knowing first hand what the battery life is? How about 288 single frame shots over the course of a rock concert and still 83% battery life remaining?

12 upvotes

The camera effectively shoots in LV all the time.... With the LCD it's 340.

The 5DS scores 200 shots in LV using the LCD, using the same CIPA method for measuring.

12 upvotes

I only shoot with a grip now, but yea... battery life sucks with a single battery system.

0 upvotes

OH ! how it's funny to see all thoses guys refusing the time change...

6 upvotes

Is dpreview sponsored by Sony.

Mirrorless is NOT taking over ... at least not in the short term ... although that seems to be what bloggers and reviewers all over the Internet would like you to think, judging by the noise they make about it.

Instead of looking at % increase/decrease in sales look at the actual numbers of DSLRs and Mirrorless sales.

8 upvotes

No, DPReview is not sponsored by Sony. Let's get that out of the way immediately.

18 upvotes

I also don't think we've said that Mirrorless is taking over.

Mirrorless is where the interesting things are going on: advances in areas such as video that DSLRs aren't great at and improvements in areas such as C-AF that DSLRs have traditionally dominated. However, we're not blind to some of the shortcomings that some/many models have, and try to make those clear in our reviews.

However, while you're right that current sales trends don't tell the whole story (because you can't assume those trends will continue forever - it seems likely that DSLR and Mirrorless will co-exist at some level for the foreseeable future, rather than one replacing the other), absolute sales volumes tell you almost nothing useful beyond the fact that DSLRs are pretty entrenched.

18 upvotes

Importantly, our 'noise' is backed up by videos of the cameras in operation and rollovers with 100% crops and fully-downloadable 'test results' for each and every test, so you don't just have to take our word for it, you can judge for yourself.

So unless you're suggesting we rigged every test... your accusation and insinuation is unfounded, baseless, ludicrous.

Perhaps you could take the time to read and review the information we spent countless hours and months of our time collecting and making available to you, rather than jumping to an accusation of bias because you don't like the conclusion.

Also, are you suggesting that sales figures are an immediate, sure-fire indication of how good a product is?

22 upvotes

Dpreview is my most reliable source of information concerning digital cameras - it would be an unacceptable allegation that it makes courtesy expertises for money.

The present review on the A7rii is precise and exhaustive, strengths and weaknesses are adressed in a well-balanced way.

But what irritates me is the conclusion which is drawn on the basis of the qualified analysis: Gold Award! Best camera of the year!! How is it possible that a camera with so many flaws can earn such a high appraisal?

Mainly concerning ergonomics/handling, this body falls far behind my expectations. There is no excuse for bad ergonomics in a small body - as ist proofen by the Olympus E-M1 and Panasonics GH4.

There are other flaws: Weather sealing! Viewfinder (nervous, strong moiré), no touch-screen, handling of the focus point, and so one ...

This camera ist more an absurdly overpriced toy than a serious tool for professionals, and therefore deserves a Silver Award at most!

2 upvotes

@Ktrphoto The speed and rate of any hypothesized mirrorless take over can actually be calculated by using changes in sales and mathematic modelling based on Fisher & Pry's S shaped growth/substitution curve, or variations thereof. Bifurcation patterns based on changes in consumer demand as well as on competitive responses may of course emerge. The challenge is, it seems the numbers aren't growing, rather the opposite. The camera market has been in free fall for the past 5 years. Mirrored cameras are losing volume faster than mirrorless.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

"This camera ist more an absurdly overpriced toy than a serious tool for professionals, and therefore deserves a Silver Award at most!"

Let's add: to you.

Yet in the hands of many professionals it's more capable in many scenarios than anything costing up to twice as much or more (face tracking over the whole frame at large apertures, blur free prime shooting in low light, nailing focus down to pixel level at high resolutions, video, specifically 4K in general including AF and low light, etc.). To put "toy" and "absurdly overpriced" in to perspective.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

14 upvotes

Maybe - it excels in all those disciplines you mention, but if I don't have a comfortable feeling with the camera in my hands, and if I can't operate it intuitively and straighforwardly, then all those technical skills are irrelevant TO ME ...

0 upvotes

Exactly, to you. And since we all differ, it's probably fair to say that you can't discredit their conclusion, just because it doesn't reflect yours.

14 upvotes

Swiss Forester: get a grip. No, literally. It's only $148 with the a7R II right now, with a free Metabones Smart Adapter IV, effectively saving you $600, over at B&H Photo & Video.

1 upvote

Come on people. Lighten up.

Heck, if a tongue in cheek comment like "Is dpreview sponsored by Sony" is going to be taken literally I obviously need to be more careful in how I express my thoughts.

Of course I do NOT think that DPreview is in any manufacturer's pay, but it certainly seems to view mirrorless cameras with rose-tinted specs.

My other comments stand. DSLRs still outsell Mirrorless by a huge margin (except in Japan) and there is no compelling reason to believe that sales of DSLRs will fall below those of Mirrorless, at least not for many more years.

Projecting current trends very far into the future is a risky business.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I would be excited by a conventional DSLR with the ability to switch between TTL viewing (mirror down) and EVF (Mirror up) and an electronic shutter to eliminate vibration in mirror-up mode.

Add built in wi-fi (not a clunky and expensive add-on) and/or bluetooth, develop on-board software to allow the camera to be controlled remotely from a smartphone (yes I know Olympus already offers this - wake up Canon and Nikon).

Maybe even provide basic on-camera editing so that I can upload images to the net with corrected perspective, appropriate white balance, the colours I want and so on, direct from the camera, from wherever I happen to be.

0 upvotes

@Ktrphoto
"DSLRs still outsell Mirrorless by a huge margin"
"there is no compelling reason to believe that sales of DSLRs will fall below those of Mirrorless, at least not for many more years"

I'd check my information before making such bold statements.

See Amazon.de Best Sellers and you will see that mirror-less outsell DSLRs in Germany.

Then if you watched CameraStoreTV last video, they're saying in their store in Canada, there are people dumping $20k worth of DSLR gear and migrating to mirror-less.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtTPCAn6kU8

We have to wait and see the results of this quarter, but if the market does not flip now, it is very likely to happen in 2016.

It takes years for the momentum for a change to build up, but once there the change happens quite fast. All of a sudden everyone is dumping DSLRs and noone's buying.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

Mirrorless is the future.
And while it may not have taken over at this time, I'd add that the take over process has most certainly begun. As we're now witnessing mirrorless camera's encroaching on DLSRL territory. - Not much... that's true, though it is enough to invoke that sense of discomfort however. Which btw. is a natural response in cases such as these just as it was with film when digital finally took over. - and oh, my was that ever rough. So many naysayers rising up against digital saying things like "I'd rather die than switch etc.", though in the end, the inevitable happened and digital photography is now the undisputed standard above all things. - Just like mirrorless will become.

1 upvote

Some very sensitive people here at DPREVIEW. Chillax, already. For the vast majority of us, these are just rich boy toys, nothing more. Certainly nothing to get worked up about.

1 upvote

@everlast66

"I'd check my information before making such bold statements."

I did. Mirrorless outsell DSLRs in one or two places. In the rest DSLRs outsell mirrorless.

@Esstee

As you know how the future is going to turn out, please tell me which company's shares I should buy (but not camera companies please)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

Ktrphoto
What's really surprised me, is where you sentiment and statement was one that I heard someone say almost twenty years ago when digital camera's were closing in on film. :)

1 upvote

Ktrphoto, your statement was

"there is no compelling reason to believe that sales of DSLRs will fall below those of Mirrorless, at least not for many more years"

Definition of many - a large number of, numerous, a great/good deal of, a lot of, a large/great number of, great quantities of, plenty of, countless, innumerable, scores of, crowds of, etc. In other words at least 20-25 and even more.

Do you really believe that in a couple of decades DSLR cameras will still be outselling mirror-less cameras ?!? I'd call this totally inadequate judgement.

Looking at the current rate of rise, its safe to predict that, if not next year, the year after mirror-less cameras will outselling DSLRs.

1 upvote

I have little confidence in my, or anyone else's, ability to predict the future.

What we believe about the types camera that will be mainstream in 10 or 20 years time does not interest me. I have photos to make now.

0 upvotes

@Ktrphoto
"I have little confidence in my, or anyone else's, ability to predict the future."

Then why are you making bold statements about the future like these below?

"there is no compelling reason to believe that sales of DSLRs will fall below those of Mirrorless, at least not for many more years"

Just to annoy people?

A large share of readers here (if not the majority) are enthusiasts and care about the future. Actually, enthusiasts and early adopters make future happen!

That's why people like reading about mirror-less cameras, even if they are not the best tool for your personal use today.

If everyone was like you only caring about the present, you would still be using film cameras or even some sort of plates.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

After a month with the Sony, I'll say it right now - "Mirrorless will take over."

Bet on it.

0 upvotes

It sounds as if the a7R II would be awesome in terms of face tracking etc but it is ABSOLUTELY CRIPPLED by not having a touch screen. How do you change faces (or point of interest) for focus, in mid-take, while shooting video? Abandon the camera's intelligence and focus manually. Wait, what?
After shooting video with several cameras capable of cinematic focus pulls by simply touching the screen I will NEVER go back to another focus method for run-n-gun documentary type shooting. The touch to focus during video significantly increases the percentage of good takes while allowing me more time to think about composition and point of view and less time thinking about focus.
Another wonderful feature for stills and touch-to-focus: touch a point of interest and the very moment the camera attains focus it captures the image.

Hey Sony... anybody listening? Why no touchscreen? And please simply turn on the 10Bit HDMI output. Come on...

3 upvotes

I'm in the process of researching a new camera for video and I'd be interested to hear your opinions on the cameras you've used to achieve cinematic focus pulls using a touchscreen.

2 upvotes

@ProShooting: So, here we have a camera that arguably can do more than any that preceded it, and all you can do is complain and demand more? Hard to take someone like you seriously.

3 upvotes

@ProShooting I find that Sony's A7R II is an amazing accomplishment. You do understand that Sony has to have something to improve upon, or they would shoot themselves in the foot commercially? It's simply the way capitalism and product based markets work. I'm sure you'll see the touch screen appear on some future iteration. Look at their strategy for the RX100 and I believe you can/will see some similar variation for the A7R line.

1 upvote

Why not just buy a dedicated video camera?

0 upvotes

I'd say this is very much a work in progress. - I also think touch screen could be a good thing as well. Though I wouldn't want it without a flip screen option however.

0 upvotes

I don't know about anyone else, but does this camera really rate a 90%? It has as many disadvantages as it does advantages. Some are minor but some are major issues. Sony has always been a great innovator but they need to take their time and get all the little things and some major things right before they release a camera. I mean really if you are taking still pictures fine, but don't try to take a moving object with it, you will get a nice blurry pic. That to me is a major problem and this camera with all its bells and whistles should only rate a 85% at best.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Why do you think this camera can't shoot moving subjects or that you'll get a blurry pic with moving subjects?

Much of our review is spent emphasizing that this is the opposite of the truth.

18 upvotes

Does anyone else have in camera 5 axis stabilization yet?

0 upvotes

@Nick Spiker The higher end Olympus OMD cameras have in camera 5 axis stabilization. This is the review from 2012 of the original OMD EM5. It's not a new thing.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusem5

3 upvotes

Er, are you sure you've setup your camera properly?
Maybe this has something to with the lens?

That said, I'd say this camera tracks very well indeed. And so I'm thinking you may need to have a closer look at your setup.

0 upvotes

What are the compatible adapters (besides Metabones) that would allow the camera to autofocus properly with third party lenses? Also, are there any adapters that allow autofocusing with Nikon lenses, especially the older AF-D and pre-G lenses?

0 upvotes

Best adapter is Sony's LAEA3 which works with Sony A mount lenses, or third party lenses made for A mount. Many third party lenses (I have Tamrons, work with it also, but lack the eye focus function. No good Nikon adapter yet that does autofocus etc. There are good adapters for Canon, but I have no experience with those; someone else will have to answer.

0 upvotes

Thanks! I'm waiting for a firmware update to give the A7II similar focusing capability, after which I'd like to adapt some of my Canon lenses over.

I've only tried the LA-EA4, and on my Sony A6000. It slightly front focuses when I use the 135mm Zeiss on it, though with the Minolta 24-50 f4 lens, it did focus pretty well. Does the LA-EA3 focus with Minolta screw-drive lenses? Because if possible, I'd want to hunt for a Tamron 28-75 f2.8 that uses the screw drive instead of the slow and noisy inbuilt motor.

0 upvotes

I had the LAEA4 with my Sony A7r. It is very different. The LAEA3 focuses based on the camera's focus; the LAEA4 replaces the camera's focus with its own. I got Tamron's new 24-70 to go with the A7rii. This is a better lens and combo. (My A7r and the excellent Tamron 28-75 were stolen) Focus noise has not been an issue for me.

3 upvotes

this is a pretty good guide to the compatible lenses. the A4 and A3 adapters behave differently with the A7 and the lenses so its not really the case of one or the other http://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-a7s-lens-guide/

0 upvotes

There's a new Nikon to E-mount AF adapter out also. No word yet on how it performs, but my guess is that these are in their infancy and will likely continue to evolve(improve) as time moves on. To the point where they'll begin to meet or exceed existing standards.

0 upvotes

@Thermidor: But there is the firmware already out for the A7-II with the fast autofocus.
LA-EA3 does not support autofocus on screw-driven lenses, sorry. Only SAM and SSM and other lenses, that provide their own motor.

0 upvotes

Thanks for your reply. It rules out the possibility of getting cheap legacy Minolta lenses for use unless I manual focus or get the LA-EA4. I don't mind the LA-EA4 and was considering it for my A6000, but it's not reliable for low light or moving subjects, more so when using the screw drive motor. The old Minolta lenses aren't amazing optically (don't expect sharpness, heavy distortion and some color fringing), but I really like the color rendition, which is very natural and only needs a slight bump in the contrast to get the colors looking to my taste.

I only have two Canon full frame lenses, the 70-200 f4 and 85mm f1.8 (my main workhorse is a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 on my 70D), so it's not really justified to get a Metabones adapter, when I already have Nikon manual focus lenses and an adapter for them.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

A Chinese made "Complite" adapter was just announced, which will allow at least AF-S auto focus on the A7 with Nikon lenses. The price is about $300.

0 upvotes

Ah, thanks! Would be interesting to see the review on this. It does beg the question of how much of the AF speed and accuracy boils down to the adapter when we're talking about something like the A7RII. Because even a Metabones adapter takes like 5-10 seconds to focus on an A7S, and the accuracy is pretty spotty.

0 upvotes

I want to buy this A7R II. What 3 lenses should I get?
I am upgrading from a well used NEX7 and have 3 lenses now:
Sony 18-200
Sony/Zeiss 16-70
Sony 10-18
I am assuming these lenses will not be compatible with the ff sensor..
Thanks for any input.

0 upvotes

Alankushnir: I have an Nex7 with the exact lenses you have. You are right, not ideal on the FE mount full frames. The lenses you need to get first are: Zeiss 1.8 55mm. Sony F2 28mm and Sony F4 70-200. I recommend these because (1) They are all top rated lenses by Dxomark, and (2) I have them, and they are wonderful, and cover the range of shots we need to take. . The two primes give you essentially the range of a 24-70 but with really clear shots. To the extent you can't zoom in it's ok because with so many pixels, you can crop to get your exact image. The two primes are also quite small, and also comparatively economic. And they get you to the low f numbers needed for good low light shooting. I have also the Zeiss 24-70 f4, which I never use. is not a dog, but it also does not deliver the clarity available from this camera. Same for the 18-35. Also they are f4. It's a limitation you will run into much more as you try to push the low light limits of the camera. Good luck.

1 upvote

The A7rII has a crop mode (aps-c) and your 16-70 could be a decent compact zoom for it. The 10-18 works actually reasonably well in FF between 13mm-15/16mm or in crop mode. For general travel/reportage snaps aps-c mode provides sufficient resolution. To get the best of FF out of the sensor, prime lenses are the way to go. Batis 25mm, Zeiss 55mm, Batis 85mm and the upcoming Loxia 21mm (only MF) are all excellent.

1 upvote

I agree with ekaton, but with the following comments: Even though the Nex7 lenses do work, and do give you wider field of vision than on the Nex 7, quickly I became dissatisfied with them because they don't use the full frame...But also, if budget is an issue, then the Sony 28mm F2 at less than $500 is a lot cheaper than the Batis and still a very high quality lens.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Appreciate the attention to detail and hard work put into this review. I don't quite understand this statement though. In what way are these three cameras (or just the Canon and Nikon if that's what's meant) "consumer-oriented"? - they are at the top of their product lines as the high resolution professional options in terms of sensor, build, pro support from the companies, specifications, button and dial format.

"The a7R II joins a growing list of high-resolution consumer-oriented cameras like the Canon 5DS/R and Nikon D810."

0 upvotes

I mean like not Pentax 645Z and not Hasselblad or Leica or Phase One, etc. For the $3200, it's quite a lot for your money.

9 upvotes

OK interesting, yeah it's a huge amount of bang for buck and really given the size and tech a new genre of camera. The scarcity mentality of some critics is predictable but doesn't really make sense - I shoot with DSLRs but in the end they're all ILCs and the developments are exciting.

2 upvotes

What I can't figure out is the amount of noise still present at ISO 100.

Check out Image16, well lit on a bright sunny day, but the sky has a slight 'dirty' blue look. Or am I expecting too much from a 42Mp sensor?

2 upvotes

I've looked at the pic, yes it's grainy at 1:1.
You can check with a similar sky from the 5DSR, it's the same look:

http://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/6820530125/canon-eos-5ds-r-real-world-samples-gallery-beta/9888158533

The view at 1:1 is like looking at a large film print from very close, you actually see the color points that make a picture.

3 upvotes

Very easily fixed

0 upvotes

If you do not mind cutting out the DR a touch I find that shooting at 50 ISO makes the file pretty much grainless.

0 upvotes

Because of post-processing. I suppose this is a topic we'll have to cover, b/c there's a lot of confusion about it.

Whereas a straight-out-of-camera (SOOC) JPEG/Raw may not show much noise for a properly exposed ISO 100 shot, by the time you do contrast and saturation adjustments in post (I'm even leaving out exposure adjustments), underlying noise is made more visible. This is something many pros are familiar with as they typically post-process significantly.

You can't compare heavily processed files to SOOC results.

This is another reason larger sensor, higher full-well capacity (lower ISO), and ETTR is so important to get clean, crisp results. You can never just expect images to retain their ISO 100 'cleanliness' after lots of tonal adjustments. This is why it's important to start off with high signal:noise, which you can do w/ (1) larger sensors, or (2) by giving your camera more light by properly ETTR'ing (even if you want a dark image - you can always decrease exposure later)

6 upvotes

... or by using a camera like the D810 that has ISO 64. ISO 64 essentially means you can give the camera 1/2 - 2/3 EV more total light before the same highlights clip (compared to a conventional camera at ISO 100), which gives most tones higher signal:noise ratio (SNR) to begin with.

The important take home point: when you give the camera more light, SNR for most tones goes up, with makes your entire image more malleable.

The other thing to remember is that if you're pixel-peeping a 42 or 50MP file and comparing it to a 100% view of a 24MP file, that's not really fair, as noise levels will appear higher. That's because per-pixel noise will necessarily be higher than a lower resolution, same sensor-size camera (simply b/c of statistical or shot noise), but once you view the same total areas of the image at the same size, similarly performing sensors will look similar, no matter large differences in resolution.

9 upvotes

Finally, armandino - you could get the same results by giving the a7R II the same exposure you were going to give the camera at ISO 50, but expose at ISO 100, and then dial in -1 EV to the resulting Raw. That's because ISO 50 isn't 'real' on the a7R II; it's just the camera doing that -1 EV relative to ISO 100 before writing the JPEG or Raw (or ACR doing it to the Raw, if you implement it intelligently).

What you're doing by going to ISO 50 is increasing the total exposure, kind of like ETTR. You of course have to be careful not to blow highlights - which is always important to consider when ETTRing.

If you like this method of using ISO 50, you'd be better off with a camera that has a native ISO 50 due to a higher full-well capacity, like the Nikon D810. For the same exact exposure of the same exact scene, brighter objects will blow more easily on the a7R II (or any other modern FF camera for that reason) than on the D810, which means generally you can give the D810 more light.

5 upvotes

@ Rishi Sanyal
thank you for the very extensive explanation. I know that this topic has been beaten to death in forums here and also in your articles. I do understand also that dialing down 100 iso will give you the same results and you are basically loosing 1 stop of DR, and having to watch the highlights more closely. From a workflow point of you I find more intuitive and direct to operate at 50 iso rather than overexposing 100 ISO.

2 upvotes

Considering your explanation, Rishi, would you expect the A7S2 to produce a cleaner sky, despite it's lower S/N, compared to the A7R2? (All things being equal at base ISO)

0 upvotes

No, I'd expect the a7S II to produce the same SNR as the a7R II in normalized comparisons. Deeper tones will have lower SNR on the a7S II though, since it has lower dynamic range than the a7R II.

The only camera that beats every other full-frame out there is the Nikon D810, because they eked out higher full-well capacity at ISO 64. I really wish I could find the time to write an article about this. :)

0 upvotes

But again if DR is not an issue just expose to the right or at iso 50

0 upvotes

Thanks Rishi. Just checked and the D810 does sit at the top for being the cleanest.

Using the colour swatch (RAW 100%), I've looked at all of the cameras you have tested and they are all noisy. Even the mighty Phase one looks muddy!

Please find the time to explain what is going on here. Since to me it looks like we will have to rely on software noise reduction algorithms (tricks!), despite how much we pay for our cameras.

0 upvotes

RE: Flashback
And the D800 advantage in terms of cleaner output is due to the moire filter. Which comes at the cost of detail.

That said, I'm thinking the reason why you may feel this way is due in part to your interpretation of the digital data capture and demosaic process(developer). Which in itself relies on software to render clean detailed images. ie, ACR and LR apply default NR to images in part of a good starting point. Which usually takes care of noise in certain color channels. As opposed to OOC JPG output, which more commonly embeds default NR to achieve similar results.

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

It's not just DR, armandino. And however much you ETTR or use ISO 50 on an a7R II, you can ETTR that much more on a D810, or use ISO 32, or heck 16 or 8 equivalent for that matter if your scene allows it. ISO is kind of meaningless, frankly, for those ETTR'ing Raws. It's just about how much light you can throw at the camera, & you'll always be able to throw more light at a D810 before the same tones saturate, which means your image is cleaner to begin with, which means after all your manipulation and whatnot, you'll just have cleaner images & less chance of noise. Recall that one of the points I've been trying to make is that noise that's not evident in an OOC JPEG may be evident by the time you've post-processed your image, be it exposure adjustments, contrast adjustments, saturation adjustments, what have you. Most such adjustments make underlying noise (read: lower SNR) more visible, so it's always better to start with a higher SNR image. It's the same reason you go FF over APS-C.

0 upvotes

Flashback: easy, the D810 was given 2/3 EV more exposure at base ISO b/c its base ISO is 64, as opposed to 100. That means less shot noise contribution, which means higher SNR, which means lower noise and cleaner image.

0 upvotes

@Rishi Sanyal
My observations are not intended to compare the A7RII to the D810. I am just saying as an A7RII user. You can wrap your head around all the physics AD conversion etc: as a photographer, when shooting in studio, or in scenes where DR is not an issue I find 50 ISO being a convenient setting as the grain is basically non existent.

0 upvotes

And the great irony in when you say 'you can wrap your head around all the physics' is that my comments relate to the real world, not just academics.

Having extensively shot Canons, the Nikon D810, and the Sony a7R II, I know full well - and understand the physics of - why the D810 will always have the potential to render cleaner images than any other full-frame camera. That's simply a fact.

Whether or not you need 'clean' or 'cleaner' is entirely up to you, and in this sense, the a7R II may very well be good enough for you. It certainly is for me (it's what I mostly shoot with now). But that doesn't change the fact that the D810 will be better, b/c it can collect more light, and denying this would be denying the truth, and would also give Sony less incentive to try & develop lower ISO, higher full-well capacity ability :)

0 upvotes

And it's not just high DR scenarios where the lower ISO/higher FWC helps - you've probably heard people complaining about base ISO images still looking noisy full-frame cameras for 'normal' scenes. That's because there is still underlying noise, even at base ISO, even for FF cameras. And it becomes more and more visible as you perform contrast / saturation adjustments.

That's why starting with a higher SNR by using a longer exposure helps - it's why ISO 50 helps you. But at some point, ISO 50, or overexposing ISO 50 1 or 2 or 3 stops, is going to clip tones, right? And here, the D810 will allow you to go ~2/3 EV more before clipping the same tones, giving you cleaner images to start with.

Does this make sense? I'm not saying a7R II images are inherently noisy, I'm saying that no matter what, the D810 always has the potential of giving you cleaner images if you can throw the extra light at it - ironically in a studio or landscape scene, where you can readily increase exposure.

0 upvotes

Thank you for the explanation Rishi.

If you can excuse the pun, it's all a lot clearer now:-)

0 upvotes

@ Rishi Sanyal
I feel like going in circles here. Again I never questioned and compared to the D810 64 iso. I just stated that with the A7RII in studio or in controlled lighting where extreme DR recovery is not an issue I find shooting at 50 ISO beneficial, and technically wise more intuitive than exposing to the right at 100 ISO. For who is interested here a picture shot at 50 ISO and tell me if you see any grain. If I was to shoot conventionally at 100 ISO there would be a lot more grain. I am interested in the end product. And again matter of personal taste about how to shoot.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/96121329@N04/acs34b

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

"And again matter of personal taste about how to shoot."

Exactly. That was the only point I was trying to make. A bit long-winded, but if it helps at least one person understand this stuff fundamentally, then I'm happy. :)

1 upvote

I have Sony a7 II and I was delighted, it made very good photo!

0 upvotes

I'm very interested in the A7Rii and I really appreciate the detailed review.
However, there are so many one-sided comments of both fanboys and disbelievers, that it is very hard to make my own, as much as possibly impartial opinion. Even the review itself sometimes feels like down grading some flaws.
What I'm also missing are *real* real-world examples (not in particular by DPR but any gallery in the web). IMO the DPR gallery is not very meaningful and some issues of several shots (out of focus and so on) have already been posted here.
So if this is such a great camera (at great price ;-), where are the great examples providing the expected "wow effect"? Great landscape, wildlife, portrait, ... whatever which blows you away? Anyone providing such examples?
Comparing with other top dogs in real world would be nice, too. There is only one single example, the static Seattle cityscape at sunset, which is about DR only.
So after all I will have to try and find out myself.

1 upvote

Check out the 1275 pages of Sony FE Images at Fred Miranda, you should be able to find some good A7R II photos.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1255248?b=2

1 upvote

@mm1975 Thanks for the link.
Really some good examples and much more "real-world" IMO.
Unfortunately they cannot be viewed at 100% but I understand that this would go beyond the scope of Fred's thread.
Many of the DPR examples however look a little bit fuzzy at 100%.
I wonder whether this is an inevitable result of the high resolution (will the 5DsR for example give similar results?),
the lens, the adapter or some effect such as shutter induced shake, CA, ...

0 upvotes

Voila-

https://500px.com/chrissyone/galleries/luxembourg

Short review - this is the best low-light camera I've ever used. The nit-picky comments in this thread are hilariously bitter and jaded.

1 upvote

I am not sure why, but my experience so far with the camera is that it gets just does a great job on maintaining highly nuanced colors even in very high dynamic range situations. I usually shoot at the highest DRO setting and at -.7 exposure.

0 upvotes

Laughing out loud at all the haters trying to tear apart this camera. I just bought one and absolutely love it. Top tier performance in a compact package with loads of features. The Native lenses I've already acquired are phenomenal, albeit on the expensive side.

12 upvotes

I see nothing in the sample images that I can't do with my Nikon D7200 and a Nikon 70-200, and for a fraction of the price.

4 upvotes

If you do not understand the difference then it is not for you.
On a different note, sell your D7200: if your do not get it then even D7200 is too much camera for you.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 59 seconds after posting

16 upvotes

First, you're an idiot for that comment, and get what??? Please explain it to me, if you are such an expert!!!

2 upvotes

@GPW,
your post was silly once, now you insist? Get educated in the field. I can do that for you but it will cost you ;-)
Hint: are you seriously comparing a crop sensor to a FF? Your camera is not even in the same class!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting

9 upvotes

My comment was that I can get images as good as the images that I viewed on this site that was taken with the Sony a7R ll with my Nikon D7200 and my Nikon 70-200 lens. You should get educated in believing that a FF camera is the "be all end all" format for photography. I have see a lot of crappy photos taken with FF cameras. A camera is just a tool to help a photographer to achieve/express a moment in time. If you think that you can only get great photo by only using a FF camera, then you sir really don't understand photography. Your still an IDIOT

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting

8 upvotes

And a lot of people can get most of the pictures that you can take with your D7200 70-200 on any Super Zoom camera!!

9 upvotes

Hey GPW, why do you call someone an idiot? Can't you express your opinion without being rude?

6 upvotes

So GPW, the D7200 is a fantastic camera. Congratulations on owning it. it's true the D7200 is an awesome camera and in many situations, especially when there is plenty of light, will be able to take images indistinguishable from those of the ff cameras. Almost always, the difference between photographers will be more important than the difference between cameras, at this level. In fact if you watch the contests you will see that more of the contest winners use APS-C cameras than FF.
But in challenging light conditions, to achieve better images in high dynamic range situations, for color depth and nuances, and for shots where you want very narrow depth of field, this camera, The D750 and others do have an edge. (I don't comment on other brands cause I don't have.).
On a budget, a D7200 and better lenses is a great choice. I wish I had one. But I wouldn't trade it for my A7rii even if your pictures are better than mine.

2 upvotes

BTW for your D7200, you gotta try the Sigma 18-35 1.8. And I like also the Tamron f 2.8 17-50, the one with image stabilization.

0 upvotes

@GPW
most of the images are taken with Zeiss Batis 25mm and 85 mm wide open. Many with the Canon 11-24.
Would you be kind and elaborate on how you would get these images with your D7200? Even your 70-200 will not deliver the same sharpness and view angle for what matters to match a FF. http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_70-200_2p8_vrii_n15/4. you are borderline troll or straight out cluelessly incompetent.

5 upvotes

First I have an experience with all sorts of cameras (FF, APS-C, and the smaller sensor ones). If you're after that FF feeling, you can achieve it with fast lens, even on a APS-C or 4/3rds. Personally I'm not a huge fan of anything faster than a good f/1.4 on a FF or even on APS-C for the reason of loosing everything out of focus. Now, these fast lenses were primarily produced in the film era when high ISOs were sci-fi. With, say 50mm f/1.2 on a FF everything gets lost in the bokeh, and according to my taste, that ain't good.
The other fact is that CA tend to be better on FF bodies, cause the same DOF can be produced stopped down to about 1 f stop.
Eitherway, you can produce about the same results as shown here with a D7200, you only have to use 50 f/1.2 or Sammy 16 f/2 which is a heck of a good lens. Print the photos from the A7 and D7200 A2 size and there WILL NOT be a considerable difference (if any) to a casual observer. Of course, first correct the CA in post, and see 4 yourself!

1 upvote

And yes, FF has the edge, but not by a lot, only if you watch the photos full size on a monitor. Btw, did anybody notice the heavy CA blue/cyan, red/magenta? Same as in every other modern (and older models) camera. In the forest shot (rectangular) they are even visible when picture is reduced on my not so great Full HD monitor on the laptop. So, I'll save myself for the WOWs on this one, it may be good, and certainly good enough, but not something unheard of...

0 upvotes

@martindpr
you cannot reproduce the same effects of a FF with a crop sensor because the perspective/dept is not the same (Comparing the Sammy 16/2 to the Batis 25?). I agree that for a CASUAL observer there is not much difference. But the casual observer will probably shoot with an iPhone anyway. Your comments reflect GPW that indeed if you do not need the FF for your shooting is is fair, however that is untrue if you want to step up he game. Do not forget that the A7RII offers 42MP vs the 24MP of the D7200, which also does not offer the lens compatibility, IBIS 4K etc. Note that at pixel level the A7RII also offers an advantage with slightly larger photodiodes and BSI. Finally, it is quite obvious that you are going to get more chromatic aberration on a FF that on a crop sensor with a full frame lens. Also, many pictures here are shot with extreme wide angles or very fast lenses which are both prone to this and it is easily corrected in post and are not a problem with the camera.

1 upvote

Armandino - this thing isn't as good at high ISO as my Canon 7D Mk II!

0 upvotes

@ Keith Reeder
what do you base your statement on? For how much Canon users love to dismiss DXO Mark did you try to compare low light performance of the 7DII to the A7II. Bring to the table hard evidence and be specific (in other words avoid BS). Note that I own both cameras (7DII and A7RII). It looks like this thread is a photography beginner/troll magnet. Btw you might want to bring more respect to "this thing" that packs most tech than anything else on the market. But obviously you do not know what you are talking about anyway.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

I doubt the sample images are intended to show everything the camera can do. That said, one needn't look far to exceed a D7200 sensor with the A7R II

1 upvote

@ Esstee
exactly. The A7RII can match and outperform the D7200 with just half of its sensor.

2 upvotes

Armandhino, one would assume that you work for Sony. Saying that Canon 7D2 or Nikon D7200 is less than half of the camera the A7 is equals to nonsence. Let me try to analyze your mindset: First, you seem to be quite a geek, and value MP more than anything. OK, give your A7 or mine D600 (or any of the 20+ cameras I have) to my 3 years old nephew, and see what happens. Well, having all sorts of DSLRs and stuff - FF or APS-C, a few of my most loved cameras aren't D600, D3, or D700. Nope, it's the D2X and the S3 Fuji. And neither will be the A7. Why? Because of the feeling of the pictures! Match the color of S3 or D2X with any of the modern cameras and hats down to you! Btw, I don't need your 42/50/100 MP to make a good picture, I'm OK with 24MP, and I was OK with Fuji S3 6MP back in the day. Suppose a 50mm f/0.5 lens existed. Will you need that one and use it wide open? Most certainly not. Why? Cause there is a limit to the area of information in focus vs bokeh that looks good to the eye.

0 upvotes

As for the 16mm Samyang, there you go: http://3zgehi1uaxi23dphbrgqa50r6z.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Chris-Gampat-The-Phoblographer-Samyang-16mm-f2-review-images-6-of-9ISO-1001-100-sec.jpg

0 upvotes

@martindpr
ahah! thank you that is funny :-) I really think I am stating the obvious to be honest. Most of my friends tell me I should work for Canon as that is what I have been shooting for years actually. Maybe I have a great future as a sales rep.
My argument is not really about the MP count but about the sensor size. Megapixel count actually plays somewhat a role because Cameras like the A7RII and 5Ds can shoot full and crop maintaining good resolution. Smaller sensor is inferior to larger, period. Especially when you are matching the pixel size so there is no pixel density advantage with the crop sensor. Glad to hear you enjoyed your D2X colours. Too bad that DXO is not on your side for colour depth when comparing it to the A7RII. The Nikon might have good colour straight out of the camera, but I doubt the Sony cannot match or better them with appropriate processing or the proper colour profiles.

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Keith Reeder - stop trolling our site. Your comments are repeatedly solely intended to incite Sony users, & this sort of instigation is not welcome.

Also, you're wrong. Saying a 7D Mark II is better at high ISO image quality is nonsense.

@martindpr: suggesting armandino works for Sony illustrates well why jumping to baseless accusations only makes you look worse: armandino has been known to shoot Canon for some time.

Furthermore, he's right in what he says: the a7R II's ISO performance is almost on par with the D7200, which means that you could use half its image sensor (half the surface area) to get the same normalized high ISO noise performance as the D7200. You can verify this in our studio scene: ISO 25.6k on the a7R II looks roughly like ISO 12.8k on the D7200.

Which makes @Keith Reeder's comment all the more ridiculous. The a7R II has, at the very least, twice the high ISO performance of the 7D2.

Our site clearly debunks these ludicrous statements, & yet the persist...

4 upvotes

Rishi, the A7RII is a great camera, maybe the best camera money can buy today! And it shines in every possible way or should I say - light! But, other cameras can still produce excellent output too. It all comes to the convenience of shooting and managing the photographs/image files. I shoot mostly Nikon which uses Sony sensors and I'm pretty much satisfied shooting pro work on 12-24MP FF (and APS-C sensors), because I can manage the files more promptly than this 40+ camera. They print amazingly well even very large. I don't know your background but I've owned many cameras through the ages. Just for fun of it, sometimes I resurrect my older cameras and I'am amazed by the results they produce. If the alpha is stellar, and those cameras are excellent, but the alpha isn't 2X better overall. Maybe in low light, but that's 20% of the time. But then again it's a tie between D600 and the alpha in low light... 7D2 is an excellent camera as well, I'd take one for wildlife... Cheers!

0 upvotes

@martindpr
2X sensor size does not mean 2X better. Besides better is such a subjective and qualitative term. There are things that you can do as well or event better with a lesser camera, and there are things that you cannot just do right now with anything but the A7RII. Pick your choice of what you need. Know the capabilities and limitations of your tools.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I love & distrust Sony. I own NEX7 - A7r - A7r2. Why the love? Great technology. The distrust? Spring 2015- I took my A7r into a brick and mortar repair dept. (Good guys). I had scratched my sensor. Sony's outsourced repair service took 6 monthes to fix it. The brick and mortar guys expressed deep concern about not getting a quicker repair. Search the internet you will see many express disappointment. Before buying my A7R2 - I emailed several very high up Sony Execs. One's who say they like to hear from customers. I wanted to know if they could assure me better repair service. None responded. I bought the A7r2 first day on sale - at the brick and mortar store anyway. The camera is just so damn good. I was sold an insurance with it as an effort to protect me. I hope I never have to test it. And yes - I know there is a Pro Support system available for a fee from Sony. Although I am Pro -- with three Sony's. I am one Zeiss lens short of their qualification system.

1 upvote

Why would a "high up Sony executive" (Mike fasulo for example) respond to an email from a person who themselves scratched their own camera sensor?

The fact they they didn't respond to you shows their focus on more important things.

Sorry about your troubles but people like you need to move on. These cameras are so cheap to own and rent that I never understood why people come to message forums with their issues.

What does your post have to do specifically with the a7rmk2?

5 upvotes

Thanks Thematic... Try and put yourself in my shoes... If you have to wait close to 6 months to have a simple repair from Sony's only authorised repair facility on a virtualy new A7r -- Wouldn't you like to be assured that Sony was working to eleminate that kind of aweful repair delay for the new camera? OR that they indeed knew about their only repair source working so slowly. - My Ar7 would rent for around $100 a day from a company. So the cumaltive cost of not beign able to use it - was by that standard - awful. Sony people should care. And again -- I LOVE the new Ar7 2 A I said I bought it day one- amazing camera!!!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

I am just a FORMER pro photographer but I distrust Sony, too. Why?

First, because their customer support and repair service can be disappointing in many countries (I know it from own experience in video/TV/broadcast).

Second, because you never know if they'll continue to support a platform in the future. In my opinion they've dropped way too many products, platforms and formats too early in the last decades (in audio, video, broadcast, PC, etc).

That's okay for equipment you know you'll use just for a couple of years but if you want to invest in the future an try to build a system that is supposed to serve you as a professional for the next decade(s), you'd probably look somewhere else. Just my 2c.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

1 upvote

They've actually supported many of their formats, long after they lost their economic value (read: sales that can actually lead to profits).
Think Betamax and Betacam, DAT, MD, Memorystick, etc. On the subject of photography, they actually support many dozens of lenses (by providing full functionality for them) that were produced as early as '84 with full AF and stabilization, from different makers (Minolta being the most obvious) on cameras sold today. Hint, very few camera makers can say the same.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

I had this camera with me on a tour to Iceland at the start of September. In my bag was also Canon equipment (5D mk III) that I have been using for several years. Nevertheless it was the Sony I preferred for a given scene - all in all an astonishing camera, that works perfect with all my Canon lenses.

6 upvotes

Many amateurs have professionals' inconveniences as their complaints/deal breakers with this camera and Sony in general.

0 upvotes

This is because all the amateurs are paying a hefty professional price for the Sony minus the existing professional conveniences on their DSLR, a step backward sort of...

2 upvotes

yeah, 4K in body, 5 axis IBIS, 399 PDAF points covering more of frame than any other FF camera, worlds first BSI FF sensor, Eye AF, silent shutter... no way they should charge more than $500 for this step backward sort of...

20 upvotes

Jonath - step backward means things are already working or you already have, but you no longer have it...900 plus photos per battery charge, instantaneous speed...these are given performance on FF DSLRs...yes, a step backward sort of....

2 upvotes

Yes, I get that, just not sure how those two things alone should dictate either the price or if the camera should be called professional or not... or even if it matters?

Just love the way that 'professional' is bandied round on these comments streams in a passive aggressive way, tied to the specific features of whichever camera is being slighted and that that camera happens to be weak at, to imply if a camera is 'worthy' or not... surely pro's will decide that? or worse still marketeers.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

6 upvotes

The only reason people brag about the A7rII at this point is that it has the latest Sony sensor with the best DR performance at the high MP range. I'll definitely give credit to Sony, but when looking at the overall performance, Sony system is not refine enough to overtake the FF DSLR at this point, not by a long shot. If Sony continues to sell it sensors to Nikon, the next gen Nikon, assuming using the same/better sensor than the A7rII, people who are familiar with FF DSLR will still stay with Nikon. Surely, I for one will not get a A7rII so I can get 95% performance out of my Nikon lenses minus the AF. Sony has a lot of potential if it's willing to address at least the battery issue by increasing the size of the camera body so it can have a bigger battery; something easy to do. I'm speaker as someone who actually own a mirrorless system and know it's pros and cons. While we're debating this issue, Sony will probably release the next A7xx soon, so why bother...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

yeah, the sensor is the only reason to like this camera, see my OP....
Thanks for the pro Nikon monologue too, but back to your original post... what has price or the word 'professional' got to do with anything?
BTW - some of my best friends are DSLR owners... :-)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting

5 upvotes

Yes but Jonah, are you willing to be seen in public with them when they are carrying those cameras?

0 upvotes

Jonath - I'm not a pro Nikon person. FYI, I also shoot Canon and Fuji XT-1. I'm pro whoever or whatever that can provide the best photographic equipment person. The only reason I say Nikon is because Sony sensors are the best, right now anyway.
"what has price or the word 'professional' got to do with anything?" It has everything to do with price and....professional. For over three grants, one would expect the A7rii to have everything that a DSLR has plus more...speed and battery life are two very critical requirement for 2015 because it's already an established baseline in the DSLR world. I still remember there were numerous times when I wish I had my FF DSLR when the battery on my XT-1 dead or missed the shot because the speed wasn't quick enough to catch the moment. I had deliberately stopped using my FF DSLR for over a year and strictly used a mirrorless platform. My opinions and conclusions about mirrorless are based on that....

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The MSRP of the A7Rii ($3,198) is very much in line with the competition, its a little lower than the D810 ($3,300) and quite a bit lower than the 5DS/R ($3,699 / $3,899) and also lower than the Canon 5D MKIII ($3,500) when that was launched, so I'm not sure why one would expect it to "have everything and more than a DSLR"? Or is the bar simply higher for mirrorless? (these comments seem to suggest it IS). Ironically it does offer a lot more than current DSLR competition as I mentioned in my OP (I'm certain no one is bragging and even if they were it wouldn't be just because of the sensor) but you seem to be saying that this doesn't matter because two things you've decided matter most, battery life and responsiveness aren't up to DSLR standards. I disagree on two counts. Firstly, these are not the only things that dictate a camera's price or its pro / am status. Secondly, the problems are massively exaggerated, like your own use of phrases like 'hefty' with regard to the price.

2 upvotes

If I may correct you, the D810 is about $2800 while the D750 is about $1800. The 5DIII is at $2500 plus a 40" LED TV. You seem to think that just because the Sony has a new sensor, we should all be happy, pay ,and ignore all other aspects of what a good camera is. This is my opinion because battery life and responsiveness is important to me. Other issues include the lack of native lenses and MF only with certain lens/adapters. No benefit in terms of size when coupled with fast lenses......It seems like you got hung up on the pricing and the word pro. The day when you and I both seeing pro in sports, news and or fashion all switch to the Sony A series, that's the day we say goodbye to DSLR. Until then.... If you are so much in love of the A7rii, I would assume that you've bought one already. BTW, what's are you shooting with right now, just curious?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Jonath - One more thing just in case you are not aware. Sony systems do not hold their values. Ask Sony A series owners and they will tell you. Sony has been releasing one new version of the A series after the other within the last few years. What do you think that would do to the previous models? Go check on eBay and used photo equipment stores and see for yourself. The same goes for Fuji X series.

0 upvotes

Where to start... I'm wondering if you're reading my comments properly... I'll try again...
- My issue is with you saying the camera isn't worth its 'hefty' MSRP and is a 'step backwards, sort of', due to the 2 reasons that you stated in your OP - I just don't think the two (exaggerated) issues you stated are enough to make those claims, especially given what you get for the money.
- NOTE: I couldn't give a monkeys about your interpretation of what 'professional camera' means and I thought I'd made that clear in one of my other comments...
- I'm not just talking about the sensor either, read my OP.
- If you read my comment, you'll notice the abbreviation, MSRP. It's hardly objective to judge a recently released cams price, which has yet to be discounted, against bodies many of which have been out for over a year and some even longer. MSRP is one objective way of saying 'what does the manufacturer think it's worth at launch', before market forces take care of the price for them.

1 upvote

I decided to take a look at eBay too as you suggested, this is a bit of an inexact science. I looked at the US ebay, where mirrorless are less popular than DSLRs, then used a rough average based on what was for sale.
Old models
D800 - MSRP $2,999 – ebay av. used $1499
D600 – MSRP $2,099 - ebay av. used $875
5D Mkii –MSRP $3,499 – ebay av. used $1,100
A7R - MSRP $2,299 – ebay av. used $1,150
A7 - MSRP $1,699 – ebay av. used $799
Latest models
5D Mkiii - MSRP $3,500 – ebay av. used $1,899
D810 – MSRP $3,300 – ebay av. used $2,399
D610 – MSRP $1,999 – ebay av. used $1,199
D750 – MSRP $2,299 – ebay av. used $1,500
A7R MkII – MSRP $3,198 currently no used cameras listed on ebay.
It looks to me that if you pay MSRP you lose on average the same amount of value as a percentage of your initial outlay – the loss is less if the camera is still the ‘latest model’. Sony used prices, another cliche peddled on here without evidence... I shoot Sony, Canon and Fuji listed on my profile.

1 upvote

Jonath - I thought I had stated my OP clearly along with other issues that I find not an incentive for me to get into the Sony systems or stay with mirrorless altogether. Of course, you don't have to agree, because it's an OP. What's worth to you and for me are totally different things, and I don't think we could ever come to an agreement. It's like asking people why you would/wouldn't shoot either Canon/Nikon. After they gave you their OP and you find it not agreeable and kept on asking why???? Where is this going? To me, three grants ought to get me a product that can do everything that I've been able to do plus more. You have no problem with the battery issue/responsiveness of the system and thus you bought one, congrats! It's my money and I can decide what's worth to me, and that's my choice. This is all I'm going to say and I'll leave it at that.

0 upvotes

I don't own it, if you actually read my post I pointed you at my profile which shows all the cameras I own. This isn't one of them.

As for your opinion, if you share it publicly you need to be able to defend it, especially when it's as massively generalising as...

"all the amateurs are paying a hefty professional price for the Sony..."

or as tired, cliched and unsubstantiated with any evidence as...

"Sony systems do not hold there values".

anyway, such fun while it lasted, ciao.

1 upvote

First of all, I don't care about your profile. I did defend it; I spend a whole year shooting a system very similar to the A7rII series and I did run into trouble that I never had before. For me, it's not worth it to spend that kind of money and get that kind of results when I know the FF DSLR didn't have that kind of problem. BTW, did you check out the used photo equipment store? I talked to guys that work there on a weekly basis, and they too say that Sony equipment don't worth sh_T and they are having a hard time getting rid of them. Yes, all used equipment drop their prices, but Sony's just happened to be dropping faster. I've been paying attention to all systems/platforms and talk to people who sells those things for a living because I buy and sell on eBay for more than 10 years...anyhow, that's beside the point.

"all the amateurs are paying a hefty professional price for the Sony..." So live with it Sony fanboy!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Oh, good, we've not stopped yet...
I post data at your request and its not good enough, so now you want me to take your word based on a conversation with a bloke in a shop and no evidence? I'd say in terms of justifying your opinion, that's ..a step backwards, sort of.

And your qualifying criteria for a Fanboy = someone who doesn't agree with and asks you to justify your opinion?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Ok, it's obvious you didn't read or pay attention to the things I posted since the beginning of our debate. I don't know how often your travel and if you travel, do you travel outside of the states. When I travel, the biggest thing on my mind is what gear to take and two issues always come up: weight and battery. When I started to use mirrorless (Fuji X...), I found myself always worry about battery life because when you are traveling, you're out eight hours a day, and you can only charge when you are back in the hotel. The charging takes time and you can't really get up at the middle of night and swap batteries for charging. In colder regions, a fully charged battery does not last very long. As I had mentioned earlier I also shoot Nikon + Canon. To me, I spent quite a bit money invested in the 3 systems: Fuji & Canikon, the system that I felt not quite reliable was my Fuji because of that. With Canikon, one battery would last a whole day and the spare is really just in case.

0 upvotes

Continue from above....As I had stated earlier, I'm not a pro brand person. Looking at the 3 systems I have/had, I come to a conclusion, if I spent so much money, they should pretty much do the things that I want. IQ wise, they are very similar. MP? I got over that already because my D750 produce similar IQ as my D810, which is not way above Canon either.
IMO, Sony has lots of potential, especially in the sensor territory. However, it's not mature enough in terms producing a complete system (lens + Camera bodies). This is where the pro idea comes in. Between Fuji and Canikon, they have all the nobs and switches at your finger tip where you don't have to toggle through pages of manual...in terms of lens choices, Canikon are well established and even Fuji have it's native lenses that offer top performance. On the other hand, Sony has many good features and didn't quite paying attention to finer details. Lens choices for Sony is obvious an issue for me....

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

I went to the camera store and check out the A7rII with the Zeiss 35mm f1.4. I placed next to my D750 with a Nikon 35mm f/1.4 and I realize I didn't get much advantage with the Sony in terms of size. I took some sample shots with the Zeiss and noticed there were quite a bit CA/color fringing. The Zeiss is not cheap either...same price as the Nikon 35mm f/1.4.
I don't know what kind of background you have when it comes to photography...for people who's been shooting for a long time, those minor details (battery, speed including buttons at your finger tips...) do matter because these things have been well established in the FF DSLR world for years. Based on the issues mentioned, this is why I feel that three grants for a developing system is not worth it. If Sony were to address those issues, I would have no problem putting up three grants and get it in a flash. IMO, Sony will eventually get there....
BTW, the conversation with the guys at the camera store is no BS.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Jonath - I should have looked at you profile before our debate. The A7r is the only FF you ever own and your lenses selections are not quite at the pro level. You have an entry level Canon with a crop sensor. Basically, you don't have a whole lot of experience with FF DSLR. That explains why you didn't understand what the fuss is all about. BTW, I was in UK this summer. I love that place; my second time there.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

So refreshing to have a proper personal opinion positioned as such. For the record I agree with the way you have characterized the A7R MKii in your last posts, clearly our opinions only differ about its price.

In terms of my own experience, I'm an enthusiastic amateur with some paid for experience (weddings, commercial buildings) and 1 or 2 pieces published. The cameras listed are the ones I own, not all the ones I've ever used. I note you own the 6D and the D750, both of which I've used in the past 3 years. I thought about buying the 6D and just as I was about to buy the A7R came out which I bought for personal use.

D750 is a great camera, I have a friend who owns two, IMO probably the best all-rounder available at the moment. As for lenses, Tamron is the best standard zoom I've ever used and and 70400G2 is also optically brilliant, sigma obviously well known for its optics.

0 upvotes

Jonath - Thank you for sharing that. It was very nice! :-)

0 upvotes

To me, the greatest feature of this camera is continuous eye tracking autofocus. I am happy with the image quality that I get from my 6D, but I really wish my camera had this capability. I would love to capture candid portraits with shallow DoF. Even in case of posed portraits, I would be able to concentrate more on composing and lighting, whereas my camera would keep on focusing on the eye of the subject.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

16 upvotes

Thermidor - I agree with you. I have a Canon 7D with a joystick and find that using the center point and recomposing much easier. I should say that I don't generally use an f/1.2 lens wide open or go to pro sports events. If I am locking onto a target for tracking, I have to start with the center point anyway.

The focus point or focus area can be moved on the a7RII easily with the rear buttons (or control dials) which is more than adequate for a camera that is not designed to cover sports photography. One tap of the large center rear button (if it is set to "standard") is all you need to dedicate the rear buttons to moving the focus point. It isn't hard to do :-).

I enjoy using both cameras (7D and a7RII) and make my choice depending on the subject of the day. When you do this you find that all the intense arguments about DSLR versus mirrorless are pretty pointless (no pun intended!).
Sorry - this post should be under Segaman's post.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Exactly KLO82 - that's the point we've been trying to make for months, if not over a year now (when we introduced the idea of using Nikon 3D tracking for eye-tracking when you 'tell' the camera you want to focus on the eye by initiating focus on it in AF-C, 3D area). :)

1 upvote

great camera for some , but prefer a DSLR body with greater control overall

6 upvotes

Greater control of what?

3 upvotes

guess!

0 upvotes

Focus point! Bloody focus point! The most basic function of any camera, being able to tell camera where to put the focus!!!

Why sony didn't give a small joystick?!

1 upvote

next iteration hopefully...

0 upvotes

@dlcolak Focus point adjustment is either something you use a lot, or not at all. I used it a lot previously, but I've stopped altogether now because I simply prefer shooting from the center point and recomposing, even when I'm shooting something fast, like a dance performance.

This is because I've always found the center point to be the most accurate, even if all the focus points are cross-type. And secondly, it's to avoid any accidents where the focus point is off center and I don't notice until I've snapped. I tried playing around with the focus points of my 70D, since I can directly set to move the points via the rear control, but I find that it slows down my thought process too much.

With that being said, I can see why it's important to certain photographers, and hopefully Sony takes a serious look in their design review. Honestly though, I dislike the A7II's ergonomics, especially the dials. I actually liked the A6000 and A7 controls much more.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Focus and recompose is a certain way to miss the focus, specially wide open.

http://digital-photography-school.com/the-problem-with-the-focus-recompose-method/

"Focus-Recompose is easy, intuitive, quick and self-defeating. While this method will work in some situations, there’s no way to know how well it will work without calculating your depth of field before each shot to see if you have any wiggle room with your depth of field."

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

That's not quite true. My 85mm f1.8 lens was much more likely to get the focusing slightly off wide open when I use an off-center point on my previous 650D. It's fine when stopped down, but at wider apertures, it was much more likely to soft focus. It's for this reason primarily that I switched my shooting style to center point focusing and recomposing.

0 upvotes

@Thermidor
the 650D off centre points are not very good. Your adaptation make sense, but if you have a camera with a more advanced AF points your point does not hold, while the more accepted and reliable method is indeed using off centre focusing points as dcolak pointed out. It is highly unlikely that I am going to nail the focus by reframing my 85/1.2 wide open at headshot distance.

1 upvote

The problem with the 650D's off center points (despite being all cross-type) is they're unreliable for professional use, but you wouldn't know from testing it in the store. If you shoot a bunch of inanimate objects on a flat plane, they focus just fine, and most casual shooters won't really have any problems with the results. Now that I've switched to a 70D, I honestly didn't find the camera to be doing any better (or worse) when I use the off-center points, so I just stick to what works for me.

I'm primarily a stage photographer, so my subject is likely to be at least 2 meters away, if not further. In this case, there's not much difference between focusing on someone's eye, or their clothes. If I was shooting a closer subject portrait however, I would switch the focus points. Since things are so fluid, I don't need to get a critically focused shot (though it's always nice), as long as it isn't obviously soft focused, that's good already.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

agreed

1 upvote

Good points raised here, specifically that sometimes off-center points lead to even worse performance than the focus plane shift from focus-and-recompose.

Also, as you go to more telephoto focal lengths, the plane shift is minimal, b/c you don't actually rotate your camera very much to change the FOV significantly. Therefore, the plane shift from focus-and-recompose can be more of an issue with fast wide primes, like 24/1.4.

And, of course, focus-and-recompose doesn't work if your subject moved between the time you focused and then recomposed. Which can happen all the time if you're shooting newborns, or brides, candids in action, kids, etc.

1 upvote

No such problems with mirrorless. All focus points are equally good.

0 upvotes

@dcolak, could you elaborate? I have a Sony A6000, but again, I don't really move the focus points around as the interface makes it difficult, so I just focus and recompose instead.

@Rishi, thanks for your input. I find there are some lenses that are especially difficult to shoot off-center wide open, even with my 70D, most notably the 85mm f1.8 and 135mm f2, but I also noticed it with the Tokina 11-16 f2.8, and especially the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 Art when shot wider than f2.8. It's fine when I'm shooting something flat, like a signboard or text, but that's hardly real life use, and once I start shooting faces, that's where it becomes hit and miss. It doesn't mean that the center point doesn't miss critical focus, but at least it's usable.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

There seems to be lots of colour fringing with subjects against a bright background and I haven't seen anybody complaining.
Isn't this a deal-breaker?

3 upvotes

HINT: maybe there is something in that 'haven't seen anybody complaining' thing you mention? Oh and the fact that the review is hugely thorough and has taken months to publish...

2 upvotes

colour fringing is mostly caused by the lens, not the sensor itself...

3 upvotes

Why did dpr use such poor lenses to show off the sensor?
The fringing really is bad so I'm wondering were these the best lenses Sony has. Having more resolution but with colour fringing can't be a bonus surely...

0 upvotes

That could mean that the A7rII does not include lens profiles to correct the CA when shot in jpeg. Sony/Zeiss lenses are relatives new to the A7 series and it will probably take a couple generations for these lenses to have the CA resolved along with distortions, bokeh quality, etc... Unfortunately, many people just focused on the new sensor and no one is paying attention to the system's performance as a whole. The fact that the A7 series has the adapter option also gives people the false sense that they can fall back on their existing Canikon lenses believing the they will get 100% performance on the A7xx.

0 upvotes

It doesn't look like Chromatic Aberration with the two colour edges ..it's more colour fringing with outlines taking on the colour of the over-exposed backgrounds. The Indian people interior shot displays this vividly. We have orange fringing on one lady, one main lady with red blooming on her hair and the man with green fringing with probably a foliage background causing it. Most cameras have some fringing but this example is worse than a compact camera. Can't figure out what the fuss is about!

1 upvote

geraldPP - I think we are talking about the same thing here: http://www.imatest.com/docs/sfr_chromatic/

0 upvotes

FE 55mm 1.8 has HUGE color fringing. I have no idea how all the reviewers missed it.

It also has really strange, unnatural colors. Faces come out gray/dead.

Again, I have no idea how reviewers missed it.

Sharp? I don't think it's sharper than Sony SEL 50mm 1.8.

I have them both on A7RII.

P.S.
Sony SEL 50mm 1.8 has MUCH better colors (closer to reality).

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

It's fringing resulting from significant post-processing. The reality is is that professional photographers will post-process most images, & the contrast and color and exposure adjustments invariably 'amplify' defects, including chromatic aberration.

So even a lens that starts with modest LoCA (like the otherwise incredible Zeiss Batis 25mm here) will end up looking significantly worse after post-processing that doesn't target removal of the LoCA: contrast boosts, highlight reduction, and some small saturation tweaks make green and magenta fringing look much worse than something that may have been barely visible in a SOOC JPEG.

I didn't do any LoCA removal, but LR/ACR does allow you to remove some green/magenta fringing, at the potential cost of some color artifacts (that are rarely seen). It's usually an acceptable tradeoff.

Few F2 or F1.4 primes have such little LoCA that you wouldn't see it after PP. Canon 35L II is an exception, and Sigma Art primes come close.

1 upvote

We hope to do controlled LoCA, amongst other, tests in the future. I think it'd be very beneficial to our community, and photographers-at-large.

Incidentally, my comment about post-processing also explains why a lot of audience members here are aghast at how noisy ISO 100 images are. Contrast (not to mention exposure) adjustments and up increasing the visibility of underlying noise. This is why I often stress that tools to help one ETTR (Raw histograms), or higher full-well capacity, are important tools for the cleanest images. The more light you collect, the higher the SNR, and the cleaner your images will look and the better they'll withstand post-processing. It's one reason Nikon D810 files are so malleable if you shoot ISO 64 - you can give the camera 2/3 EV more exposure than conventional cameras at ISO 100, which increases overall SNR, and make images crisper. Because the camera can actually record more total light than most (all) other full-frame cameras. Just as an aside. :)

1 upvote

I am not seeing magenta/green fringing but rather single colour fringing all over a subject which is seen against bright backgrounds. One of your tree shots has such extreme fringing that not a single branch or leaf is spared from the colours of the sky. Is this solely due to over-exposure? Magenta/Green fringing is much easier to fix because they are not the colours that are usually in the scene. Also why is there such significant processing in the first place? This is quite puzzling as I shoot JPEG with Fuji and I never have to deal with CA anymore. Yes, the X-trans sensor has its own issues regarding foliage and some conversion software but with most of the Fuji lenses I have stopped looking for CA.
Take a look at image 22 in your samples gallery =
a7RII-RS-DSC08713-ISO_100 There's HUGE fringing and artifacts at the back of his neck!

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting

1 upvote

... disorganized mess ....

Obviously a technical marvel, but can it be used?

I'll never be able to afford one of these, but the challenges of such a tiny body (compared with my old Canon 20D), and particularly the controls are not favorable.

And their refusal to dedicate enough space for a real battery is a persistent weakness.

Sigh, if only....

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

yes, having read the review I can only come to the same conclusion. What a DISASTER this camera is... I'll join you in sighing... <sighs?>

3 upvotes

@spikey27
it depends on the photographer really. I have been a Canon user for a long time, owning at some point every single Canon DSLR worth having. Since I owned the A7RII my canon bodies are used strictly for sports. Am I giving up ergonomics and some other logistic? Absolutely. Is it worth it? Absolutely.

1 upvote

spikey27. Mirrorless camera manufacturers find themselves in a difficult position regarding battery life. If they use a large and heavy battery, people scream about massive weight. If they don't, people scream about only 300 shots per battery.

The adopted solution seems to be offer an add on grip with two batteries. That way you can take ~600 shots before changing the batteries and you can carry a lighter camera when ~300 shots plus a spare battery in your pocket meets your needs. This approach works for me.

0 upvotes

The sensor is excellent. The camera not very good. If you go to operate a Nikon or Canon, the controls and information is up front. Sony needs to stop coming out with the same old body each time. They need to create a camera to par with the sensor. They have an excellent point and shoot. The RX100 IV, it operates nearly the same as the A7 series. I do not want a great point and shoot.....I want a camera. Bottom line excellent images, poor camera.

6 upvotes

Who are you talking to?

22 upvotes

A live histogram, focus magnification, peaking, replay, seeing shutter speed, video, face and eye recognition AF, gain in the EVF are not very up front in a Dslr. Canon seems to be successful with the same old body and OS.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

6 upvotes

@km25
the camera needs work, but it is far better than you think. What do you use your camera for?

0 upvotes

Man, if only it does 4K videos in 60P ! That would be my deal breaker

0 upvotes

It is one fantastic camera and I have enjoyed working with it, but I would like a Sony FX wide angle lens about 10mm. Hopefully they will come out with one soon. I don't care for the available non Sony adoptable lenses.

0 upvotes

Voigtlander are releasing a 10mm native FE mount lens in spring. Its Manual focus although frankly DoF will be so great AF really isn't needed and I believe it is electronically coupled so move the lens focus ring and the camera will automatically zoom to aid focussing anyway. On my list!

http://voigtlaender.com/10-mm-f-5%2c6-hyper-wide-heliar-e-mount.html

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting

9 upvotes

The five-axis stabilization ONLY works with native Sony lenses, as does the face recognition system. If you use an adapter, you also negate features. You will also add weight negating the promoted weight savings.

1 upvote

Such BS. Unlike ANY other FF camera, it can combine the IBIS and ILIS to achieve 5-axis stabilization. Unlike ANY other FF camera, it allows for 3-axis stabilization with ANY lens attached, regardless of brand, type or age. Funny that somebody would still whine.

23 upvotes

Face recognition and at least 3-axis, if not more, work with adapted lenses when using an electronic adapter.

18 upvotes

Your name should be "7829 Off the Mark". My everyday lens on this camera is a Tamron 24-70 for Sony A mount, used with the LAEA3 Adapter. IBIS works like a charm, It is turned off by the software only when it detects competing lens based IS. IBIS also works with my Tamron 150-600.
And as Rishi says, face recognition focus works. Is true eye focus doesn't work with theses lenses.

7 upvotes

Yeah, all this camera's peers are much more flexible with non-native lens stabilisation and eye AF and they're SO much lighter... <sarcasm>

3 upvotes

Nikon & Canon are on their way to the mirrorless world to be sure :o)

1 upvote

I was really looking forward to trying out this model. However, after actually using one, I know I will never buy one. While the images may be spectacular, the user experience is simply not.

If Sony puts a 35mm BSI CMOS sensor, hybrid autofocus system and 4K video capability in a new Alpha model with a mirror, I'll buy two. As it stands, I'm leaning toward a migration to Nikon...

2 upvotes

Now if Sony could just put this sensor in an A-mount camera without an SLT mirror, and I would happily mount my 600/4 or 300/2.8 on it without an adapter.

Till then Nikon still gets my money!

4 upvotes

I believe that camera will be called the Nikon D820.

1 upvote

In the image stabilization test, the FE 70-200 is already stabilized. Did you by chance run tests with the IS "on" for the lens or camera and "off" for the other? Are the test results that are published with IS on for both? It would be nice to see how that lens does on its own and whether the camera's IS improves on that.

0 upvotes

This is a fantastic camera, which I own and love! But one thing bothers me enourmously, and that is the memmory slots and the way they work. Not only that 4 of them goes on the card which is very impractical but also, and much worse, that the memories only hold settings from pane 1. What we need with a complex camera like this to be able to work fast, are global memories, or an option to choose between pane 1 and global. We need memories that holds all camera settings. So SONY PLEASE LISTEN and put this on top of your list for next FW update. I am possitively sure that a lot of users would greatly applause you for that. I work a lot in the field and in the studio and I very often siwtch from outdoors to indoors and again between video and stills. To make this work more smoothly global memory settings would be just awesome! Steen

3 upvotes

Nice Camera that's really stirred up the competition, well done Sony, let's hope Nikon and Canon embrace this challenge and start to properly innovate rather then coast.

11 upvotes

I'm like Canikon just they way they are: Fat, dumb, and happy.

3 upvotes

Total comments: 2126

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 - 2016 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site


Special K? Pentax K-1 First Impressions Review Feb 17, 2016	History Repeating: Olympus PEN-F Review Feb 24, 2016	Techart brings AF to Leica M lenses on Sony’s a7 II and a7R II Feb 11, 2016	Heavy hitter: Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM first shots Feb 5, 2016

	Pixel Shift
	Shake Reduction on full-frame
	Articulated screen
	Astrotracer
	LEDs to help work in the dark
	The ability to use my old K-mount lenses
	I don't care, I shoot [other camera brand]

126	Leaving m4/3 (hope temporarly)
99	Have M43 caught up to DSLRs for IQ?
95	PART 6 This Week Through your m4/3 2016.02.20
88	New Lumix 12-60mm zoom!
85	Question 1 inch sensor...
85	Batis 85 focus shift
85	Why the new Sigma cameras have an SA mount
62	Fuji 100-400! Sony, deliver, else I may be gone!
58	RIP N1
58	Still wanna pay $1699 for Xpro2?
56	Altering pictures
53	Guess the price of the new SDQuattro-C and SDQuattro-H contest!
51	This is not the forum for DL talk...
50	Read the specs carefully
49	If Nikon does phase out V series . . .
49	* Wed C&C "No Theme" Thread #409 2016 02 23 *
47	An APS-H-only thread
47	Did you see this coming? No, you didn't!
46	Here is the list of lenses supported by the MC-11 from Sigma
44	The Sigma MC-11 adapter