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

UHDR

New member
while i enjoy sony new products and tech. i do fear for them sometimes. how they can re-coup the R&D cost... or may be they dont, lol, look at their balance sheet (sony as a whole).

lets hope they can keep up the pace and attack. remember what happened with A900, then A850... it was ages before a99 came out... a lot users were disappointed.

but...and a big but... they can launch anything they want; better...worse... any newer camera/tech comes out now will not automatically mean my current kit will stop taking pictures that i am currently happy with.
 

Annna T

Active member
I'm well aware of Sony stake on Olympus, but they have continuously denied sharing R&D outside medical imaging area. There already have been reports that things like how the IBIS is driven is completely different in the new Sony implementation. Anyway, having Oly ownership cannot be bad, if anything that should discourage any patent trolling between the companies.


Just checked the M1 manual and it does not clearly tell everything about how the camera operates when stabilized lens is attached, but it appears to me that it cannot "share responsibilies" like Sony can (pitch and yaw by lens, rest by sensor). Oly manual only speaks about "lens OSS on/off switch being given priority".
Well, interview is just marketing, so I don't believe every word they say in those interviews. I find it weird that just a few weeks before the issuing of the Sony five axes IBIS, it was Olympus who declared that they weren't sharing any camera knowledge with Sony. I have read several of their papers at the time when Sony bought the share they have in Olympus and concerning the photo business they were clearly saying that they would try to find synergy in the camera business. There is at least two domains where they are uniting their strength : the compact business and the distribution and support service worldwide. However now that the compact business has completely plunged, may be it's no more actual.

Concerning the new A7II IBIS, I have now seen the diagram published, particularly particularly the one explaining how they are combining OIS and IBIS and agree that it is different than what has been achieved in the OM-D line. They may have got some cue from Olympus, or not, but it is clear that they have added something to it.
 

tn1krr

New member
Concerning the new A7II IBIS, I have now seen the diagram published, particularly particularly the one explaining how they are combining OIS and IBIS and agree that it is different than what has been achieved in the OM-D line. They may have got some cue from Olympus, or not, but it is clear that they have added something to it.
Sony combo/hybrid-solution sounds pretty smart, assuming it really combines best of both worlds and they do not compete. One could assume that for example "panning stabilization mode" in FE 70-200/4 OSS is propably better optimized than when done in sensor and maybe (just quessing) it can compensate bigger movement in pitch/yaw.

As for Oly vs. Sony maybe IBIS-sharing, who really knows what is going on behind the scenes; I do not think we'll see conclusive proof one way or the other. Competitively Oly/m43 lost one key differentiator yesterday as they are no longer the only mirrorless system with IBIS. I've heard the argument "IBIS gives X stop advantage and thus makes m43 equal to APS-C or FF" propably million+1 times. Now that IBIS is in 4x bigger sensor in camera not much bigger than Oly M1.
 

sloppywmu

New member
I don't understand the speculation that Sony is receiving help from Olympus in regards IBIS.

Sony has used sensor based stabilization for years. In their Alpha line and video cameras. There was no talk before about the a99 borrowing technology from Olympus.

Here is a Sony tech page on SteadyShot from 2010 and the a900:

Sony Alpha | Technologies | Super SteadyShotT Inside

The system in the a7II is just a slightly more advanced version. There is no magical knowledge involved here. The engineers just worked hard to advance the amount of stops recovered and incorporate the system into the a7.
 

Valentin

New member
Why people care if the tech is from Oly or not? I care if it benefits me, the end user. I couldn't care any less if it's original or borrowed.
 

Annna T

Active member
I don't understand the speculation that Sony is receiving help from Olympus in regards IBIS.

Sony has used sensor based stabilization for years. In their Alpha line and video cameras. There was no talk before about the a99 borrowing technology from Olympus.

Here is a Sony tech page on SteadyShot from 2010 and the a900:

Sony Alpha | Technologies | Super SteadyShotT Inside

The system in the a7II is just a slightly more advanced version. There is no magical knowledge involved here. The engineers just worked hard to advance the amount of stops recovered and incorporate the system into the a7.
There is such talk because :
1) Olympus were the first to introduce five axis of stabilization instead of three.
2) Sony has bought a lot of Olympus shares when Olympus was in dire straight due to a financial scandal. They are mainly interested in the medical activities of Olympus, but when the deal was made, the project said that they would try to find synergies in the imaging department too.

PS : I don't care either when it comes to taking pictures, provided the stabilization works well. I just find it interesting to understand how these big corporations manage their R&D, how they are linked together or not. But most probably we will never know, I agree.
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
Sony didn't invest millions into Olympus just so they can sit patiently on the sidelines humming Kumbaya folks. There is a reason for every dollar invested at this level. It is either for a direct profit return or a technology transfer. Frequently for both.

For the record, Sony did NOT invent the transistor, the integrated circuit, the RAM chip, or silicon camera sensors either. This does not mean they don't make some of the best ones out there....
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I only have one comment to make. Why did they keep the AA filter? A real mistake, imho and a reason why I won't be upgrading any time soon.

LouisB
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Sony didn't invest millions into Olympus just so they can sit patiently on the sidelines humming Kumbaya folks. There is a reason for every dollar invested at this level. It is either for a direct profit return or a technology transfer. Frequently for both.

For the record, Sony did NOT invent the transistor, the integrated circuit, the RAM chip, or silicon camera sensors either. This does not mean they don't make some of the best ones out there....
Could not have said this better!
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I clearly remember at the time having read that Sony would collaborate with Olympus on IBIS. Maybe that news was accurate or not. Or I got it wrong.

Anyways, as Olympus' IBIS works so well I certainly hope that Sony's does likewise.
However, I should wait for reviews based on experience whether that is so before putting in an order for the A7II.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Any word about the shutter ? Is it still loud ? Does it still induce vibration ?
HI Bart
I doubt it'll be any quieter - but EFC helps . . . maybe IBIS can also deal with vibration from the shutter? I guess it should!

Why people care if the tech is from Oly or not? I care if it benefits me, the end user. I couldn't care any less if it's original or borrowed.
I'm afraid I was guilty of mentioning this in the first place, but I'm with you Valentin . . . If it works - then fantastic.


T
So I don't trust Sony. I trust their products. They are among the best money can buy. But I don't trust their strategies. Sometimes, I wonder if they have strategies.
Me too - but perhaps they just try different ones until one takes off? . . . this one (FE) seems to have taken off so I imagine they'll stick with it?

Only Time Will Tell.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Good strategy. :)

Leica increases the prices to add value. Also, good strategy. :)
Sony gear is not in a " hobby" category. You may want to check some other fine manufacturers who cater to that segment. ;)
Tre, The "famous" names come out whenever there is a new Sony cam. Don't take the bait. ;)
You did not return either or sell them and start a thread why you did that? :eek:
HI Vivek
I hope you're well, long time no speak - you're certainly in cracking form on this thread :)
 

horshack

New member
I only have one comment to make. Why did they keep the AA filter? A real mistake, imho and a reason why I won't be upgrading any time soon.

LouisB
Because the pixel density for a 24MP FF sensor is not high enough to avoid aliasing/false detail in a lot of shooting situations.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
if it were not for Sony, would we have 50mpx full frame (35mm) sensors, eh, Nikon, Sony, maybe even Phase and Blad?
 

dandrewk

New member
Some of us were attracted to the "a" series for its compactness. The a7m2 is 183 grams heavier, a 44% increase. Make no mistake, that weight gain is very significant, as is the increase in the overall girth.

For most, it is very worth it to get the IBIS and larger grip. I love the new feature, and I believe it will be a game changer.

However, I am very shocked and disappointed that they have not upgraded the autofocus system to (at least) match what is found on the a5000 & a6000. Flabbergasted, actually. How can a $400 camera have better AF than an "upgraded" camera costing four times as much?

Clearly, this is not a technological issue. It's pure marketing. It really seems that Sony is afraid making the a7m2 TOO good will take away sales from the A mount cameras and the upcoming a9.

It's not that the AF in the a7/r is all that bad. I also own an a6000, and I can tell you the AF improvement is profound and very welcome. This is a technology that was released several months ago, is it too much to expect in the newer generation a7?

I hope the blurbs are wrong about this, and the a6000 AF is part of the new camera. I see that Sony is otherwise claiming an improved AF in the a7m2. We'll see. If it doesn't match that of the a5000/a6000, it will be a big disappointment.
 

sloppywmu

New member
Sony didn't invest millions into Olympus just so they can sit patiently on the sidelines humming Kumbaya folks. There is a reason for every dollar invested at this level. It is either for a direct profit return or a technology transfer. Frequently for both.

For the record, Sony did NOT invent the transistor, the integrated circuit, the RAM chip, or silicon camera sensors either. This does not mean they don't make some of the best ones out there....
They invested in Olympus for access to their thriving medical imaging business (where the real money is made).

Sony to invest $644 million in Olympus, become top shareholder

Hopefully they do share some technology. But let's be realistic. The photography business isn't great for any company right now. The weaker ones (Olympus) will try to leverage their profit centers to save their own butts. Olympus's photography business doesn't do much if anything for the bottom line.

Olympus Results | Sans Mirror — mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan

Hopefully Sony can make some money and continue developing the a7 range.
 

sloppywmu

New member
It's not that the AF in the a7/r is all that bad. I also own an a6000, and I can tell you the AF improvement is profound and very welcome. This is a technology that was released several months ago, is it too much to expect in the newer generation a7?

I hope the blurbs are wrong about this, and the a6000 AF is part of the new camera. I see that Sony is otherwise claiming an improved AF in the a7m2. We'll see. If it doesn't match that of the a5000/a6000, it will be a big disappointment.
I just assumed the increased focusing speed and tracking abilities were equivalent to the a6000. I can't imagine Sony would not incorporate those.
 

dandrewk

New member
I just assumed the increased focusing speed and tracking abilities were equivalent to the a6000. I can't imagine Sony would not incorporate those.
According to the published specs, the a7m2 has the same 117 points of phase-detection AF as the original a7. The a6000 has 179 points.

How all that translates into real life AF performance, tracking and predictive AF, remains to be seen. I expect some immediate AF comparisons once the a7m2 is released.
 

Valentin

New member
The new ergonomics are welcomed (from my point of view). It seems that the camera is a little bit bigger and heavier but not sure how it translates in real life use.

From the specs, it seems that it has the same viewfinder as the current lineup. Many talk about how great it is (and it's not that bad) but from an event photographer point of view, it's lacking. In low light, the refresh rate is bothersome. I almost got a headache after a minute of trying it. And that was with decent light (compared with events) at PhotoPlus.

Another weak point: the battery. With the bigger grip would have been nice to come out with a bigger battery. A lot better than adding the vertical grip as suggested by the rep :confused: ... one of the reasons I'm looking at the camera is size ... as in smaller.

A7II is almost there (from my perspective). I hope they address these in the rumored A9 (and a dual card would be a nice bonus). And let's not forget some fast primes (Canon/Nikon 24mm/35mm 1.4 is small enough so size can't be used as an excuse).
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Some of us were attracted to the "a" series for its compactness. The a7m2 is 183 grams heavier, a 44% increase. Make no mistake, that weight gain is very significant, as is the increase in the overall girth.
It's quite possible that the camera will feel lighter in hand with the larger grip as you'll hve more surface to hold onto. It's even possible that maybe the weight with a lens is more evenly distributed in hand causing for an improved balance in feel.
 
Top