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
- Thread starter Rawfa
- Start date
V
Vivek
Guest
Looking at my own number of cameras, I just realized this. Complaints about prices, new models and such come from people with too many cameras with very little use of them.
Sony is the only innovative company at the moment and it comes with its own characteristics.
Let us face it, they are not fooling people like Hasselblad or Leica by repackaging someone else' cameras for a premium or sticking to the old SLR stuff like Canikon.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Guys I love the speed of these products. One main reason lets take the A7r if this was a Leica product we would be stuck with it for maybe 2 years before improvements are made. Look at Canon they can't get a new body out for years lately. I love Sony is doing it yearly at some point you will get one you like or need. Does not make the old ones not work anymore. Okay resale value is the biggest bitch. Well go buy a new car you lose 20 percent of its value just driving off the dealers lot. Lenses yes expect holding value. Digital cameras are as disposable as diapers today, get used to it and thank you very much Sony now give me my A7r replacement now. It has its flaws I want a new one fixed. So I lose my shirt on resale that's my problem not there's.
V
Vivek
Guest
Just exactly how much % the Leica S2 lose and how much does it translate in Euros or US $. The buy/sell section gives a glimpse.
If the definition of innovation is the quantity of new features and buttons per 3 months than I agree.
edit: I think the last sentence doesnt say what I intended to say, so Forget it and replace it by: I dont see how Sony is more innovative than other brands.
Last edited:
pegelli
Well-known member
Why so cynical? Being an early adopter has it's price but also the advantage of knowing you have the latest/greatest camera. If you're not willing to pay for that you should maybe adopt my strategy and skip 2-3 generations before getting a new camera. I still use on old A850 and maybe it will be succeeded by an a7II (but not sure yet). Thereby I skipped the A99 and a7 first series but also saved quite a bundle.
And tell me, which other brand has a full frame camera with IBIS on which you can almost adapt many legacy lenses. That innovation is worth something as well.
jonoslack
Active member
I'm inclined to agree Vivek, I shift 'em if I'm not using them as fast as possible.
Well. Olympus and Panasonic seem to be working hard as well, Lots of ideas and some decent kit. IBIS and some really excellent lenses (lots of them)
mbroomfield
New member
There are good points to made on both sides of the fast upgrade cycle, but if I had to choose between what Sony are doing vs what Canon are (not) doing it's a no-brainer for me, and for the record I still have my 1ds2 and 1ds3, as well as an A7r and backup
After roughly 3 years of use I sold my S2 for about 60% of the price I paid for it. I assume thats the percentage I would get for the 6 week old A7 (however I wont sell it at the Moment).
Just exactly how much % the Leica S2 lose and how much does it translate in Euros or US $. The buy/sell section gives a glimpse.
I think the word "disposable" is the key. I dont like the tendency the industry sells us things with the Intention to replace them after a short time.
I even go so far that they will NOT put all innovations they have into the product, because they want to earn money multiple times. They just offer enough to make people switch, and then 3 months later the do the same thing again.
jonoslack
Active member
IBIS, full electronic shutter. huge pixels. etc
OK,
I didnt want to say that the Sony would be not innovative. They are. I still think others are as well (and I include Leica, Nikon, Olympus here).
I personally also use the A7-system because I like the small size and sometimes want to use zooms and AF an longer focal lengths than I have for my Leica M.
In regards of using all kinds of lenses on the A7 ... Most of those lenses work better on native bodies (in case of rangefinder lenses they work better on the M) or in case of SLR lenses it can lead to a funny size relation between lens and Body. I can see to use a T/S lens on an A7 but other than that my M-Adapter is collecting dust but other than than I dont see much sense and much prefer native Sony FE lenses.
MikalWGrass
New member
Ok, maybe someone can help me out here. I looked at the youtube video that was linked to few posts ago, and maybe I missed something, but I still don't see what the fuss is about with the new phase detection and stabilization systems when slowly panning over a garden gnome in perfect lighting. Also, the girl walking towards the camera in the opening shots is walking at a slower pace than usual, so the AF and phase detection systems aren't stressed.
The 7II looks like a nice camera to have for most things, but if the AF is 30% better than when taking pics of a slow moving turtle who is moving horizontal to the camera, than the advance is not much of an advance. I may also venture to say that some of the "new" advances are geared towards making photographers lazier; the camera companies are appealing to the lowest common denominator of picture takers because they are responsible for their corporate bottom line.
My a900 is getting long in the tooth, and for water polo and swimming shots, I have to wring whatever I can out of my camera and brain, not just point and shoot. The 7II won't help me when a water polo ball is being passed around at lightening speeds if I cannot anticipate the action, even then the camera won't be able to see what my eyes see. Sometimes I have even taken to shooting with both eyes open in the hopes that I can see / anticipate where the ball is going next (guess that is just a hold over from having been trained on an M6 and being able to see what is outside of the frame lines) but then my eyes get tired.
I love my A mount lenses but I hate the weight of the a900 with the battery grip and a 70-200/2.8 G. If Zeiss made a 100-300/2.8 in A mount I would buy it before anything else if I had the money, in spite of the weight.
If the goal of the 7II is a lighter newer system, I wish Sony the best. If the bodies last 1/2 as long as the a900, the new system will be a success. That said, if the 7II could handle the A mount lenses with aplomb, it had a stop or two faster new lenses, and it was better geared to what I need the new body for, I would consider it. Otherwise, I will let you guys figure things out for the rest of us.
The 7II looks like a nice camera to have for most things, but if the AF is 30% better than when taking pics of a slow moving turtle who is moving horizontal to the camera, than the advance is not much of an advance. I may also venture to say that some of the "new" advances are geared towards making photographers lazier; the camera companies are appealing to the lowest common denominator of picture takers because they are responsible for their corporate bottom line.
My a900 is getting long in the tooth, and for water polo and swimming shots, I have to wring whatever I can out of my camera and brain, not just point and shoot. The 7II won't help me when a water polo ball is being passed around at lightening speeds if I cannot anticipate the action, even then the camera won't be able to see what my eyes see. Sometimes I have even taken to shooting with both eyes open in the hopes that I can see / anticipate where the ball is going next (guess that is just a hold over from having been trained on an M6 and being able to see what is outside of the frame lines) but then my eyes get tired.
I love my A mount lenses but I hate the weight of the a900 with the battery grip and a 70-200/2.8 G. If Zeiss made a 100-300/2.8 in A mount I would buy it before anything else if I had the money, in spite of the weight.
If the goal of the 7II is a lighter newer system, I wish Sony the best. If the bodies last 1/2 as long as the a900, the new system will be a success. That said, if the 7II could handle the A mount lenses with aplomb, it had a stop or two faster new lenses, and it was better geared to what I need the new body for, I would consider it. Otherwise, I will let you guys figure things out for the rest of us.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Mostly its just a speed improvement
MikalWGrass
New member
Guy, I understand your need to use one system so you can swap lenses, batteries, etc. I just don't see what the fuss is about, especially since the you tube videos and the beta tester's photos do not reveal much.
V
Vivek
Guest
40% of a Leica S is a lot of cash in real terms!
Did you make one satisfactory (to you) picture with the A7s with its very high ISO capability? If the answer is yes, it is worth every cent.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Well the A7 original version was very very close to my AF needs but I needed faster. The A77II rocked the house but I wanted to get back to the FE camera so I am thinking this is it with a 30 percent increase in AF tracking that was my ticket. Having two different cameras was more a hassle than it was worth. Will see if it does it . Otherwise I will get a A77II again, there certainly cheap enough
MikalWGrass
New member
Guy, when I shoot swimming or water polo (purely for fun though I should charge) I notice that I am the only one out there shooting with a FF camera. The 77II appeals to me because then the 70-200/2.8 would be a 300. If I bought the slowish lenses that expanded to 400, the reach would be longer yet. Even the 77II won't help anticipate the shots, but it may get me there a fraction of a second sooner.
Maybe.
Maybe.
Yes, the s-System is expensive butthe Image Quality you can achieve with MF really stands out in my eyes. By the way a new sensor-Format, lenses where you dont have to do any Focus fine adjustment because the Information is safed on a chip and automatically controlled, a MF camera in this size and weather-sealed, is pretty innovative IMO. Of course it Comes at a high Price and its a luxury to use something like this as a hobby-shooter.
Regarding the A7s - I have used ISO 6400 a couple of times and I do like the hih ISO capabilities of the A7s (I added the A7 because I though to Need more Resolution sometimes but if I use the A-System it is the A7s 90% of the times. But its winter now.)
I wish the A-series had a few less Buttons and menues, and I wish I could set a Limit for exposure time in auto-iso, other than that its a very nice camera. I also like the 24-70 a lot, to me it seems much better than I thought it was from reading Reviews.
jonoslack
Active member
We just compared the high ISO between the A7s and the Nikon D700 (you may be too young to remember it). identical shots etc. there was some dispute, but basically the A7s had 1 stop advantage over the d700 so perhaps it was choosing s 12 MP sensor which was Sony's brainwave here.
V
Vivek
Guest
No, Jono, it isn't that ordinary as you make it out to be. You can not stick a tiny CV 12 or 15 on the D700 (you can try Cosina's F mount versions but it will surely damage the mirror when it comes down after a shot) and get decent images. There is no shutter noise. The package is tiny. You can get wonderful high ISO HD videos. With an additional recorder you can get 4K video. The list goes on and on.