The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The Sony A7II

sloppywmu

New member
Any word about the shutter ? Is it still loud ? Does it still induce vibration ?
Seems to be the same as the a7. Which I don't find that loud and has zero vibration effect.

What are you comparing it to? The a7II has an electronic first curtain shutter. So it shouldn't be as loud as an a7r.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Certainly not a "deal breaker". So why do it? Is anyone hurting for extra hard drive space? I can fit over 1000 raws on a 32gb card. I would be more than OK with half of that if I knew I was capturing every last bit of information from the sensor for my later use.

I guess I should point out that I'm taking these photos for myself and I do everything I can to make sure I capture the best file I can. Then Sony compresses it? Why? I bought $800 and $1000 dollar lenses to grab fleeting personal moments as best I can. Then Sony compresses them. It's just an unnecessary interjection into the process.

If I remember correctly the a99 stores uncompressed RAWs. So Sony knows how to do this already.
If you didn't like the IQ then why buy the camera is the larger question... :rolleyes:
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Tre, The "famous" names come out whenever there is a new Sony cam. Don't take the bait. ;)
Yeah I know some people like to complain for the sake of complaining. Not saying that's the case here but buy one or don't buy one - it's that simple.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Fuji just announced a huge new firmware upgrade for the X-T1. Rather than making us all buy new cameras, Fuji keeps adding value to the one we bought. Bravo Fuji!
Yeah... I guess I don't get the point...

No one is making anyone buy a new camera. It's just an updated iteration and a more enticing reason to add a Sony body for those on the fence. It doesn't make my A7 or A7r magically worthless now.

I'm glad that Fuji is making firmware updates for Fuji owners. Many of them were to correct flaws many didn't think should've been in place from the get go like sluggish AF lock for some. Sony has done the same type of improvements to decrease start up times and make tweaks to image quality. Sony has released three firmware updates within a year. So they do support their products but there wasn't much wrong with the A7 or A7r for my purpose.

The only way to get different ergonomics, improved shutter button placement, a possibly quieter shutter, improved new generation sensor, or IBIS on ANY camera that didn't have it before is to buy another camera though.
 

sloppywmu

New member
If you didn't like the IQ then why buy the camera is the larger question... :rolleyes:
I don't want to derail the thread but I will. :D. It was simply the best compromise at the time that my Nikon gear was stolen. And the IQ is great. Never said it wasn't.

Either way this II version looks good. I just wish Sony would polish the firmware up a bit.
 

philip_pj

New member
There are a few remaining memes still breathing life into Sony forum dissatisfaction. That cupboard is starting to look bare though, and may soon look like a Monty Python sketch.

This is a very significant and prompt response to the first order set of issues in the a7 series. Four stops of solid stabilisation, plus a strong mount and the ergo fixes alone (dials look to have more ergo and affordance too) after just a year. For what will be very good money after the dust settles.

Sony now own off brand legacy lens usage. I hope the memory settings save the FL legacy lens choices. I think they will look at the market response to the a7II and use that in the final decisions for the new a9, expect very big things from the first new high Mp sensor in two years, to be announced in perhaps two months.

Where they are going? With the innovation curve still resembling a 787 at an air show (Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner performs acrobatic stunts - Jumbo Jet Stunts Farnborough Airshow 2014 - YouTube) Sony will not linger long before giving the user community what they know they can use, and what they want.

The pace of change will slow - and they have said they want models to last longer in future - but only after the second iteration releases. And how good is their security? No one knew about this...no one.
 

horshack

New member
I'll be placing a preorder as soon as Sony USA gets around to announcing this thing in the states. I'm a huge fan of the IBIS on the Olympus bodies and having it on a FF sensor will open up lots of new hand-held shooting opportunities that aren't currently possible with other cameras.
 

tn1krr

New member
Let's be honest though... Compressed RAW hasn't made the difference of whether or not a great picture you took was a great picture.

I wouldn't file that under "deal breaker." We were all enamored by the IQ that the A7 and A7r COULD produce way before someone with too much time on their hands sat down to figure out if the RAW's remained 14-bit or were compressed to 11-bit.
I do not see the RAW thing as deal breaker personally either, it propably is not for 99.9x % of people. But this issue was not dug up with someone with too much time, I actually shot FE 16-35 vs A Mount 16-35/2.8 comparison last week with the guy who took the origial "Sony RAW compression poster pic", the star trail pic seen in for example here and that Lloyd Chambers 1st made public

RawDigger: detecting posterization in SONY cRAW/ARW2 files | RawDigger

The photographer is a local guy doing a lot of very cool night/star stuff, you will be hard-pressed to find a more dedicated nature-photographer than he is. He came from Nikon D800 and this issue popped up after he had spent hours in darkness taking long exposures, the artefacts surfaced as part of his normal post processing workflow. I can well understand his frustration with this, he has posted other examples of compression acting up in local photography forum.

Unless the lossy RAW Compression is part of Bionz X HW pipeline Sony really should give us the option of lossless format.
 

horshack

New member
Fixed it for you...
I do not see the RAW thing as deal breaker personally either, it propably is not for 99.9x % of people. But this issue was not dug up with someone with too much time, I actually shot FE 16-35 vs A Mount 16-35/2.8 comparison last week with the guy who took the origial "Sony RAW compression poster pic", the star trail pic seen in for example here and that Lloyd Chambers 1st made public

RawDigger: detecting posterization in SONY cRAW/ARW2 files | RawDigger

The photographer is a local guy doing a lot of very cool night/star stuff, you will be hard-pressed to find a more dedicated nature-photographer than he is. He came from Nikon D800 and this issue popped up after he had spent hours in darkness taking long exposures, the artefacts surfaced as part of his normal post processing workflow. I can well understand his frustration with this, he has posted other examples of compression acting up in local photography forum.

Unless the lossy RAW Compression is part of Bionz X HW pipeline Sony really should give us the option of lossless format.
The situations where Sony's compression has an effect on IQ are exceedingly remote. At the height of the hysteria many were blaming the compression on all kinds of otherwise typical image artifacts, 99% of which had nothing to do with the compression. To help sort that situation out I wrote free software that lets anyone see which parts of their Sony images are compressed, so that they can correlate any artifacts to the compression. You can read about (and download) the software from my dpreview thread: Those 14 bits (part 2): Sony Alpha/NEX E-mount Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
 

dandrewk

New member
The claim is that IBIS adds 4.5 stops.

Question - how many stops do stabilized lenses add, by themselves?

Question #2 - when using the A7m2 along with OSS lenses (-assuming- they will work together), will there be any improvement in stabilization?
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I do not see the RAW thing as deal breaker personally either, it propably is not for 99.9x % of people. But this issue was not dug up with someone with too much time, I actually shot FE 16-35 vs A Mount 16-35/2.8 comparison last week with the guy who took the origial "Sony RAW compression poster pic", the star trail pic seen in for example here and that Lloyd Chambers 1st made public

RawDigger: detecting posterization in SONY cRAW/ARW2 files | RawDigger

The photographer is a local guy doing a lot of very cool night/star stuff, you will be hard-pressed to find a more dedicated nature-photographer than he is. He came from Nikon D800 and this issue popped up after he had spent hours in darkness taking long exposures, the artefacts surfaced as part of his normal post processing workflow. I can well understand his frustration with this, he has posted other examples of compression acting up in local photography forum.

Unless the lossy RAW Compression is part of Bionz X HW pipeline Sony really should give us the option of lossless format.
Fair enough but anecdotal evidence of one person (real or otherwise) doesn't constitute a problem for all that SOME try to make it out to be. If that one guy didn't post about it then people wouldn't have such an issue... kinda like the shutter shock "issue." Few people would even know it existed if someone didn't go out of their way to create a mob of people that decided it was unbearable for them as well even when their longest lens goes to 200mm (which is very easy to handhold BTW.)

That's the problem with many new electronics and the internet. People go out of their way to look for problems most wouldn't encounter in normal usage then demand a total redesign.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Fair enough but anecdotal evidence of one person (real or otherwise) doesn't constitute a problem for all that SOME try to make it out to be. If that one guy didn't post about it then people wouldn't have such an issue... kinda like the shutter shock "issue." Few people would even know it existed if someone didn't go out of their way to create a mob of people that decided it was unbearable for them as well even when their longest lens goes to 200mm (which is very easy to handhold BTW.)

That's the problem with many new electronics and the internet. People go out of their way to look for problems most wouldn't encounter in normal usage then demand a total redesign.
You seem mistaken on this issue, badly mistaken! :eek:
 

Stefan Steib

Active member
Hi Vivek

I am not sure this is like you describe. There is a feature site especially for the Stabilization which say the OSS Lenses are splitting the movements on 2 systems with full capacity with OSS lenses. But it can also be used with OSS Lenses and all 5 axis on chip only mode.
Google translate from Jajanese site


"...Equipped of 5-axis body within the camera shake correction, such as A-mount lenses as well as E-mount lens, you can compensate for camera shake in a variety of lens. E-mount lens of OSS (lens in the optical camera shake correction function) lens featuring the (* 1) when worn, correction of angular camera shake (Pitch / Yaw) in the lens side, Shifutobure (X / Y) and rotational camera shake (Roll) of correction was performed in the body side, by combining the correction of lens side and the body side, to achieve the optimal 5 Jikute shake correction. When mounting the A-mount lens via a mount adapter LA-EA4 / LA-EA3 (optional) is carried out 5 Jikute blur correction at the body side (* 2), etc., while making the most of imaging performance of the lens can be optimal camera shake correction..."

https://translate.google.de/transla...y.jp/ichigan/products/ILCE-7M2/feature_1.html
 

sloppywmu

New member
Sony Global - Digital Imaging ? ?7 II

That is the only official information I can find in regards to this camera. If you scroll down to stabilization and select the second image it explains that two axis will be done by lens based OSS, when available, the other three by the IBIS. The is no information about increased or decreased effectiveness so I won't speculate.

I have used lens and body stabilization with a Panasonic lens on an Olympus body. But the two systems just fought each other. Hopefully Sony can integrate them for some kind of super stabilization but who knows.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Stefan, Go here: Sony Global - Digital Imaging ? ?7 II

Scroll down to the space just before th pic samples, look at "Automatic Optimization". That should explain it for you.

In both the cases 5 axis stab would work.

Hi Vivek

I am not sure this is like you describe. There is a feature site especially for the Stabilization which say the OSS Lenses are splitting the movements on 2 systems with full capacity with OSS lenses. But it can also be used with OSS Lenses and all 5 axis on chip only mode.
Google translate from Jajanese site


"...Equipped of 5-axis body within the camera shake correction, such as A-mount lenses as well as E-mount lens, you can compensate for camera shake in a variety of lens. E-mount lens of OSS (lens in the optical camera shake correction function) lens featuring the (* 1) when worn, correction of angular camera shake (Pitch / Yaw) in the lens side, Shifutobure (X / Y) and rotational camera shake (Roll) of correction was performed in the body side, by combining the correction of lens side and the body side, to achieve the optimal 5 Jikute shake correction. When mounting the A-mount lens via a mount adapter LA-EA4 / LA-EA3 (optional) is carried out 5 Jikute blur correction at the body side (* 2), etc., while making the most of imaging performance of the lens can be optimal camera shake correction..."

https://translate.google.de/transla...y.jp/ichigan/products/ILCE-7M2/feature_1.html
 

sloppywmu

New member
The situations where Sony's compression has an effect on IQ are exceedingly remote. At the height of the hysteria many were blaming the compression on all kinds of otherwise typical image artifacts, 99% of which had nothing to do with the compression. To help sort that situation out I wrote free software that lets anyone see which parts of their Sony images are compressed, so that they can correlate any artifacts to the compression. You can read about (and download) the software from my dpreview thread: Those 14 bits (part 2): Sony Alpha/NEX E-mount Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
Thank you for doing that horshack. And thanks for the link.
The only place I've noticed artifacts is in very high contrast areas.
 
Top