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!

So, is it a keeper? (A7R II)

tashley

Subscriber Member
Plenty of us have got the camera now and plenty of those cameras have been put through their paces. None of us is infallible but we're generally a fairly experienced crowd and we we mostly have had lots of experience of other cameras and systems.

So what's the consensus so far, if there is one?

I'll go first. My take is that it is a keeper, as a travel and walkabout which if treated right can produce gallery quality prints, but that though I had a quote from my dealer for him to buy my D810 system, I've decided that I need to keep it and run it in parallel.

MKII pluses:

* a bit more resolution (but in truth not enough to matter much to me).
* much more 'sorted' than the MkI, especially the shutter.
* much nicer focussing and the tracking ability is now genuinely useful, if not perfect
* nice files and DR but actually no real improvement on the MKI (which I sold months ago because of the shutter)
* I happen to find the lens range useful. Many disagree. QC could do with a boost but that problem is not Sony's alone
* I have few M mount lenses left but I am not in the "huge improvement over the Mk I" camp
* I can use a whole load of legacy glass, which is fun, flexible and cost-effective.
* IBIS. IBIS IBIS IBIS. IBIS.
* same old light weight and small form factor, better ergos than before. I really like shooting it.
* I LOVE not having to AF Fine Tune my lenses.
* Video, which I am using more and more, is way better than the D810 and in fact is so good that I have sold my A7s

Minuses:

* under perfect conditions and with good light you probably still get a better file from the D810, a tad less noise, better colour gradations, I suspect slightly better DR at low ISO. The Sony might be better at higher ISO but that matters less to me.
* less pro feeling usability than the D810 and a far worse menu system

Overall I'll use it a lot more than the D810 but for really critical stuff and the finest results, assuming I don't have to carry it far, I'll stick to the Nikon system. But then I've never quite been able to part with my IQ180 for when I need to go ultimate ultimate.

Final thought: I spent a week shooting my new RX100 IV just before the A7RII arrived and i love, love love that camera. It will seriously bite into the use cases for the MkII, it really is that good.

Gear slut? Moi?
 
Last edited:
V

Vivek

Guest
Thanks, Tim. :)

I think you answered my earlier query.

Yeah, I am trying to sort out my funds to get a RX100 IV (The 7s stays!!).
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
I'll go first. My take is that it is a keeper, as a travel and walkabout which if treated right can produce gallery quality prints, but that though I had a quote from my dealer for him to buy my D810 system, I've decided that I need to keep it and run it in parallel.
I think this says it all..... I still have my 800e but the real problem I see with it is that Zeiss seems to be/is putting more emphasis on the E mount, maybe rightfully so, which means that DSLR lenses could go to the back burner. I don't trust Sony, even with the colaboration with Zeiss, to consistently make quality lenses..... I think you really have to get lucky. So...... I may pull the plug with some Zeiss Glass but since I'm in Lens Rental's back yard I'll probably waste some money renting it with a couple of Loxia's to put it through its paces.

Thanks as always for your valued input......

Victor
 
Last edited:

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
All depends, not on the camera, buy how you use it.

I plan on trialling it as a replacement for my MF kit. If I take the time and trouble to use it in same way, and with the same care, I have little doubt the results will be comparable.
 

Jim DE

New member
That says a lot Quentin!!!

I am pretty much looking at this camera system as a high end light weight system for scenics. As a tester I would be a horrible example to expect information from for all the high tech bells and whistles in this body. Why? Because I bet 95% of the time it will have ibis turned off and mounted on a lightweight tripod, shot in M mode, manually focused, triggered remotely, using Singh Ray filters, and at base iso. That is what I bought it for was to use my legacy CG glass and a few OEM lenses like I did my NEX7 system. I don't care about AF speed, frame rate, ibis, multi point AF, or most of the bells and whistles for my needs and wants.

I took it out yesterday and firmed up what I already expected......... it will do even better than my expectations when I pre ordered it!! I am happy to move forward and use it for what I bought it for. I have other cameras for other things and in fact far more than I need to keep around with this new tool in the line up.

All the pixel level non-realworld issue I am seeing discussed or what if any other manufacturers OEM glass will AF on this body sound just like the teacher on a Peanuts cartoon to me .... "blah, blah, blah, blah" ;) It all means nothing for my needs and wants but could be deal breakers for some.......

My results will be my praise and flag waving and if others like it and pay well for my work then I will have all the affirmation I will ever need ... I expect that those who liked my work before will continue to like it using this tool. This is how I test a tool ;) strictly real world print results. Any good or bad things deeper than this level is just like the 6th gallon of water running into a 5 gallon bucket from the faucet for me.
 

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
Exactly so, Jim.

On a tripod, IBIS turned off, manual all the way, most of the tech, while impressive, is utterly redundant.

What then matters is the quality of sensor and the glass.

The latest technology is nice to have when using for street shots, etc, but otherwise not a lot of use!
 

4season

Well-known member
Final thought: I spent a week shooting my new RX100 IV just before the A7RII arrived and i love, love love that camera. It will seriously bite into the use cases for the MkII, it really is that good.
Tim,

You may have just sold me on an RX100 Mk IV! Sounds like I can safely skip the A7R Mk II, Nikon D810 and Pentax 645D/Leica S2 or whatever :ROTFL:

Jeff
 

jrp

Member
Well I am keeping mine. I have been looking for a lighter setup than my current Nikons and have settled on Leica, as the lenses are portable.

I never tried them on the A7r as the online samples looked horrible, but they seem more than adequate on the A7rII, which is lighter than the M240 (and so may well be on the A7r, which is even lighter). Yes there is a bit of corner smearing, but it is not nearly as intrusive as I had expected. Being able to focus the Leica lenses on what I am trying to photograph without recomposing and having IBIS are significant benefits.

I have the Sony 55m f1.8 and 35mm f2.8, but am not attracted to any of the other available lenses: they are either as heavy as my Nikon equivalents, or seem are no better than my Leicas in practice: other than the 35mm f1.4 and 90mm f2.8 (if you get a good sample), they seem middling performers. The Batis 25mm is marginal in weight, but seems to be unavailable in the UK. I have a few NEX lenses like the 10-18mm zoom, the 24mm f1.8 and the excellent first generation Sigmas that I have yet to try.

The 42Mpx is great and the additional dynamic range over the Leica body very welcome. Noise is great, but still quite messy even at 6400, when the famous orange peel effect is prevalent.
 

philip_pj

New member
The words 'real world' crop up a bit in the above, and I think the more you dwell in that rather unusual place (for photo enthusiasts) the more the new camera suits you. The new technology is broad and deep, real world oriented and well applied in a finely balanced package that pretty much relegates the larger cameras to niche status - low ISO tripod work and the like, some events..and even then a paltry lens choice constricts the use cases further.

For serious travel-street-culture-people-adventure (for want of a better description but definitely more real world than any studio), comparisons with any DSLR only end up going one way. IBIS, bespoke Zeiss optics, small form factors, high ISO, near a7s video capabilities..in a strong chassis and silent/EFCS shutter, mature EVF for legacy lenses.

These are all large scale operational advances, almost all of them no one else is offering to the same extent, or even has the capability to offer - at all. You had better like what the big Nikons do for you, and even then be prepared to look very hard for the advantages they offer in the diminishing kinds of work they are better suited to do!

For users who require a full featured, multi-faceted single system, the Sonys are getting close to being the only choice if your work is highly diversified. Sony/Zeiss are betting on the vast bulk of users wanting a balanced camera they can do just about anything with, at a very high level of performance. The low weight and small size was just the 'hook'.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Sandy has already told me she loves it. I've yet to actually use it but like the files Sandy is getting with hers. See actually sold her A7r within a couple of hours of getting the II.

Don
 

ohnri

New member
Easy choice for me. The A7r2 is, for my use, a far superior platform than my D800/D4 combo.

Locked down on a tripod, which is rare for me, Nikon has nothing better. Handheld and on the move, the Sony is simply in a different league.

For camera bodies shooting stills, Sony is only missing a high frames per second option.

And video?? Forget about it. The Sony goes where Nikon fears to tread.

I have been shooting Nikons since the Nikon F. No longer.

My Nikon gear is gone and, though not forgotten, it is part of my past.

Is the A7r2 a keeper?

Yeah, not just a keeper but the best camera I have ever used.

-Bill
 

sjg284

Member
Any more word on the video?
Especially coming from the A7s with the 2 major upgrades - 4K internal & IBIS.. plus better rolling shutter in FF.

Seeing complaints on the video forums of 20-30minutes recording leads to overheating when using internal 4K.
This can be individual (one long shot) or cumulative over multiple shorter clips, per reports.
I don't shoot clips longer then 3-4 minutes, but worry taking enough consecutive ~3min clips in hot, sunny weather getting it to overheat as well.

Other minor quibbles I can deal with - slight weight gain, loss of a 1-2 stops high ISO, worse rolling shutter in APS-C mode

The IBIS really tempts me...
Spent 2 weeks playing with a rental gimbal (Nebula 4000 lite). Loved the smoothness of shots. Hated just about everything else - ergonomics, weight, setup time, futziness, weight limits, price.
Will have to see how much smoother IBIS can make my simple stationary / stationary&pan type shots.
I don't expect to walk/run with IBIS, that is what gimbals are really for...

Trying to stay patient for A7sII I think :-D

Plenty of us have got the camera now and plenty of those cameras have been put through their paces. None of us is infallible but we're generally a fairly experienced crowd and we we mostly have had lots of experience of other cameras and systems.

So what's the consensus so far, if there is one?

I'll go first. My take is that it is a keeper, as a travel and walkabout which if treated right can produce gallery quality prints, but that though I had a quote from my dealer for him to buy my D810 system, I've decided that I need to keep it and run it in parallel.

MKII pluses:

* a bit more resolution (but in truth not enough to matter much to me).
* much more 'sorted' than the MkI, especially the shutter.
* much nicer focussing and the tracking ability is now genuinely useful, if not perfect
* nice files and DR but actually no real improvement on the MKI (which I sold months ago because of the shutter)
* I happen to find the lens range useful. Many disagree. QC could do with a boost but that problem is not Sony's alone
* I have few M mount lenses left but I am not in the "huge improvement over the Mk I" camp
* I can use a whole load of legacy glass, which is fun, flexible and cost-effective.
* IBIS. IBIS IBIS IBIS. IBIS.
* same old light weight and small form factor, better ergos than before. I really like shooting it.
* I LOVE not having to AF Fine Tune my lenses.
* Video, which I am using more and more, is way better than the D810 and in fact is so good that I have sold my A7s

Minuses:

* under perfect conditions and with good light you probably still get a better file from the D810, a tad less noise, better colour gradations, I suspect slightly better DR at low ISO. The Sony might be better at higher ISO but that matters less to me.
* less pro feeling usability than the D810 and a far worse menu system

Overall I'll use it a lot more than the D810 but for really critical stuff and the finest results, assuming I don't have to carry it far, I'll stick to the Nikon system. But then I've never quite been able to part with my IQ180 for when I need to go ultimate ultimate.

Final thought: I spent a week shooting my new RX100 IV just before the A7RII arrived and i love, love love that camera. It will seriously bite into the use cases for the MkII, it really is that good.

Gear slut? Moi?
 

Paul David

Member
Sandy has already told me she loves it. I've yet to actually use it but like the files Sandy is getting with hers. See actually sold her A7r within a couple of hours of getting the II.

Don
Hey Don,

I'd be very interested in seeing some comparison photos to the PhaseOne back. My A7rii arrives tomorrow and I definitely plan to compare them for prints to 30x40". The new Rodie lenses are just too heavy for me in the field. As a small (Ken Doo size) guy carrying a surface pro with the Alpa in a backpack isn't terribly appealing. The dynamic range as compared to MF is really going to be the key.

Paul
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yes but I need review space to answer it properly. I also need a bit more time. I'm going slow on this one
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Hey Don,

I'd be very interested in seeing some comparison photos to the PhaseOne back. My A7rii arrives tomorrow and I definitely plan to compare them for prints to 30x40". The new Rodie lenses are just too heavy for me in the field. As a small (Ken Doo size) guy carrying a surface pro with the Alpa in a backpack isn't terribly appealing. The dynamic range as compared to MF is really going to be the key.

Paul
Paul, I'll see what I can do however I really don't like the thought of trying to compare a 42-megapixel 35mm camera to a 80-megapixel medium format; likewise totally different sensors. That said, I'm sure the II can hold it's own in the 35mm world. Also, I've never liked the idea of trying to compare what I feel are 2-totally separate systems.

We're in Sedona currently and will in all likelihood shoot similar things which in that case I'll share. I'm currently more concerned with getting enough info to post a blog on just how well the XF handles then if I can pry the camera out of Sandys hands I do something with the II.

Ramblings as it's late and I'm tired..............
 

Uaiomex

Member
Please, please do it. :thumbup:
Eduardo


Hey Don,

I'd be very interested in seeing some comparison photos to the PhaseOne back. My A7rii arrives tomorrow and I definitely plan to compare them for prints to 30x40". The new Rodie lenses are just too heavy for me in the field. As a small (Ken Doo size) guy carrying a surface pro with the Alpa in a backpack isn't terribly appealing. The dynamic range as compared to MF is really going to be the key.

Paul
 

Jim DE

New member
Yes but I need review space to answer it properly. I also need a bit more time. I'm going slow on this one

Guy I am sure you are following those "artifact" issues being discussed with a7rII's and pushing the darks up 4-5 stops under very specific light/subject conditions and the hot pixel/noise issues also being discussed on long exposures.

Now I am no brainiac and as stated before some of these issues and discussions have so little importances to the effects of my needs and wants they tend to sound like the teacher in a Peanuts cartoon. But, I put this out to you and the rest here...... Lets forget just how over the top the exposure settings have to be for these objections occur but being as there is documented differences on how obvious or not these issues are with various PP softwares could these possibly be PP software issues and not the camera's?

If you read the posts of some they seem to want to rattle the tree's to possibly force Sony to lower the MSRP more than determining if the problem is a real issue to final output or one that needs Sony to correct or who the source of the problem is? Makes one wonder their true objectives.... and whether they have a agenda.

I have not seen a hot pixel issue personally yet with long exposures so I don't have much to say about it but the artifact issue when pushing the blacks up 4-5 stops all I can say is really???? In what/who's world is that a real issue as I have always felt that as a photographer we have a obligation to at least get our exposures close. If one wants HDR shoot the shot that way with multiple exposures and stack them.

Mark my words the so called professional reviewer's are listening and reading these absurd complaints (whose parameters to observe them are so ridiculous no good photographer would ever intentionally encumber himself with them in a proper shot he took) and depending on their hidden agenda's will dissect these issues to the nth degree and malign this body like they are issues that every photo you shoot with this body you just can't avoid them. One can see the writing on the wall already and with the pre volume hype of letting other manufacturers glass function as well or better on this body than their own has brought forward over critical evaluations from people who are based in the other camps who worry this just might happen one day.

Sad to see this happen yet again.....good ole agenda driven misinformation and the sky is falling; mentalities.
 
Top