The Sony A7II

[jfirneno]

Well back on topic... Here's Steve Huff's initial impressions. It's his usual overly enthusiastic (or pessimistic in some cases) but the shots DO look like like Sony did do some tweaking to improve the IQ judging from the JPEG's. The look is just a bit smoother and much closer to the look of the A7R to my eyes even at the smaller JPEG sizes.

I'm still waiting to see how that rumored A9 is going to come out but it adds some excitement to that upcoming release for me.

Yeah, he is an enthusiastic bugger. I'm interested in the A9 too or maybe the A9 II (no pun intended). But currently I'm pretty much finally happy with one A7 (the A7S). At the moment I'm waiting for more reviews on the 16-35 zoom and the Loxia lenses and eagerly waiting for the 28 f/2. Plenty to buy (and not buy) in Sony world. My interest in the A7II is from a research point of view. I'm interested in the real world difference from 30% AF improvement. I'm very interested in what Guy and the other early adopters find. I agree with the sentiment that short update cycles like Sony's mean you have to be patient and not think of buying every iteration. But once you understand that concept, then you really can enjoy the Sony circus from the sidelines without going broke eating all the cotton candy.
Regards,
John

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Totally agree sometimes it's not a bad idea to skip a generation. Easier said than done for us gear sluts sometimes. This one I'm excited about.

 

[retow]

I hope the next generation will have 14-bit raw files with no underlying artifacts and fully recoverable data instead of compromised 11-bit raw files (the reason why Nikonized Sony sensors produce superior files). IBIS and improved ergonomics are nice to have. But only once Sony improves to 14 bit raw files, a silent shutter and touch screen for the A7r I will consider an upgrade.

 

[Show Performance]

In spite of all technological wizardry that has gone into the 7 cameras, Sony looked more like photography company when they launched the A900. I wonder how many of the Minolta people are still with them...

Minolta was just Sony's "buy-in" to the high end market. Did anyone seriously think they would just churn out legacy SLR tech for long?

What exactly is a "photography company" today? I can tell you that it isn't the same thing it was 5, 10 or 20 years ago. Photography is on a fast track. I'm not completely sure where it is going but Sony is one of the drivers and so far I approve of their direction.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I think the danger is a lot worse than that. Now that the digital camera bubble has burst there is a real danger that the remaining market may not be enough to keep Canon and Nikon afloat. In ten years professional photographers may be using Samsung and Apple cameras. And those cameras may not be exactly what photographers would like. They'll be what Samsung and Apple are willing to produce. I think we'll be lucky if Sony or Panasonic make it through the next few years. At least they've tried to become camera companies. God help us if we're left with the Google camera or the Amazon cam.

I talked with a friend in the camera business the other day, and he said many are seriously questioning the future of Canon's camera division. The only really new DSLR they have launched the past two years, other than changing numbers on lower end models, is the 7D II, and that model is priced 40% over the 6D in this country, making it a no-go for most. Mirrorless around the corner?

 

[Viramati]

While Steve is is being his over ebullient self he does seem to think that there have been some IQ improvements which I presume are software related as I believe the processor and sensor are the same. Add to this the focus improvements that are again probably software based I will once again say that Sony will get my respect as a camera manufacturer who wants not only to sell cameras but support the Photographer over the years if they start offering firmware updates with these improvements (where possible) to the present A7. This lack of upgrade especially niggles me as the A7 is only a year old and we now get the mkII and hey may have a mkIII in 6 moths time and so and and so on.
If only the Fuji X series had been full frame I would probably have stuck with them as I prefer their camera and lens design and what they have done over years in the way of firmware updates has been impressive.

 

[Paratom]

I talked with a friend in the camera business the other day, and he said many are seriously questioning the future of Canon's camera division. The only really new DSLR they have launched the past two years, other than changing numbers on lower end models, is the 7D II, and that model is priced 40% over the 6D in this country, making it a no-go for most. Mirrorless around the corner?

Inthinknthe 5diii is still one of the most flexible dslrs. Superfast and good AF, 24mp is a very good compromise. And while the dr is a little limited at lower iso its ahead of competition at higher iso.
The 2470/2.8 iCanon seems the best midrange zoom for FF dslr.
And then there is color where quite some people (including me) believe its better for skin and people images tha other brands.
Inthinknitnmakes more sense to look at the products and how good they work except at the frequency of updates.

Regarding Sony at the moment I also will wait until spring. If I didnt have an body allready I would probably get the A7ii or the A7s again?

Sony the new Leica? I dont see much parallels between those cams besides comparable size maybe.

To Jurgen: I think in some forums mirrorless gets a lot of attention, because it is nice to have smaller cameras. But if you look at PROs and what they use it gets clear that mirrorless cameras and EVF are far from becoming the most used cameras for photographers.
But its no wonder that in an A7 thread people read and post who do like mirrorless ( I like both)

 

[Viramati]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5XVGAgPKk4&t=4m54s

 

[biglouis]

Interesting set of comparisons.

Do you not think that once you go EVF it is hard to see the virtues of an optical viewfinder?

LouisB

 

[jonoslack]

Yes, thankfully, the A7 II is much smaller and less intimidating than a comparable DSLR. Weighing 150 grams less will of course also save your back. Luckily, Sony also got rid of that annoying top LCD that tended to make cameras huge and unwieldy

Hah - well, let's look at the front view

I don't disagree with lots of your points, but there really is a size difference.

 

[jonoslack]

Jono, I'm not trying to say you didn't see what you did, I believe you. I'm just trying to understand why you saw what you did, because I still have 2,725 NEF files according to my Lightroom catalog from my D700 that are telling me a different story. Either your D700 shooting technique is far superior to my own, which is certainly possible. Mine was a second body I never learned where the limits were or how to push them.

My ISO 6400 from the D700, the noise is so bad that by the time I get it cleaned up with noise reduction, the high frequency detail is completely gone so the image quality is considerably degraded. As to the dynamics, well they sure don't show me much in the first place. I'd give it maybe eight - nine usable stops, vs 12-14 usable on the A7S?

I have to be at least four or five stops happier a camper shooting the "S" than I ever was using the D700

HI Chuck
I was really surprised - not my D700, and I really have no agenda over this - maybe it was an unlucky subject - I've probably got the images somewhere (or at least I can get them).

 

[jonoslack]

No mention of silent shutter - just EFC. So evidently it didn't inherit the option from the A7S.

Hi Todd
Sad - but not that bad - the IBIS should deal with any vibration, and the noise itself on the A7 was pretty supportable.

 

[Vivek]

Actual images, lots of them!

Sony A7 II

I may even get one from Sony.nl with the danger that it could become addictive.

Simply awesome development! :thumbs:

 

[Paratom]

Interesting set of comparisons.

Do you not think that once you go EVF it is hard to see the virtues of an optical viewfinder?

LouisB

I dont believe so. As a user of both I overall prefer ovf.
Why? no time delay, specially when shooting more than one frame;
you see the real light and color for composing and framing, not something on a small screen with limited dr and color If people say you see in the evf what you get... I can not agree, because the evf is not capable of showing the potential of the sensor.
I prefer EVF for certain things and for cameras, where an optical viewfinser doesnt fit in the body. I prefer a large EVF over a smallish ovf, but prefer a nice ovf over a nice evf. Thats why I thin EVF makes sense i the A7. Also nice for people who like to use third party lenses

 

[jonoslack]

So, this is some sort of a crusade?

Look at this site: this is the only forum that is vibrant and that is based solely on the number of pics posted and not the troll talks. m43 (once very active), CaNikon, and even Leica are in doldrums. Isn't it better to show your passion in a more positive way by what these wonderful cameras do in your (anyone, not you in particular) capable hands?

HI Vivek
I think Jorgen's contributions are entirely constructive - it's good to have an anchor as well as a sail, and he's providing a pretty good one right now. He does motorsport and similar where tracking focus is a real issue - me - I like fast focus, but don't need tracking - we all have different needs.

I just spent a very cold morning out with the E-M1 and the new 40-150 f2.8 - what an exciting combination - lightning focus, IBIS, great uncompromised image quality and a couple of lovely new ergonomic tweaks on the lens (collapsing lens hood, snap to MF). . . . . but of course, it won't shoot my lovely Leica lenses and it's compromised at very high ISO . . . and it's tougher to get limited DOF.

I didn't like the A7 or the A7r because of the shutter and the vibration . . . . I did like the A7s very much, but 12mp wasn't enough for everything. . . here comes the A7ii and I'm tempted to get both (A7s and A7ii) for different situations with the same lenses. . . . . . but as Tre points out - the Nikon Df is a tempting option as well. . . . and I certainly haven't finished my love affair with a rangefinder either!

Such an embarassment of riches, and yet there still isn't quite one camera which will do everything (Maybe the A9 will be it). I'll keep see-sawing back and forth.

Whatever - fantastic thread with lots of great points (typical of getDPI in fact)

 

[Vivek]

Hi Jono, I do not agree. Better to take the camera size comparison based discussions, OVF vs EVF, etc to the no holds barred section, IMHO.

 

[Annna T]

Interesting set of comparisons.

Do you not think that once you go EVF it is hard to see the virtues of an optical viewfinder?

LouisB

For me yes, absolutely. But probably not for those photographers needing a fast action camera. There is still a perceptible little lag between what occurs in reality and what the EVF and LCD are showing you. You can diminish that lag by lowering the EVF resolution and accelerating the refresh rate, but whatever you do the lag is still there. Add to that a rather slow focus in low light and I can see why some still prefer an optical VF. Especially Jorgen Udvang, who if I remember correctly is shooting car racing among other things. I admit that with the A7r it can be a little difficult to photograph moving children. It isn't impossible, but you get more misses.

However for all the other kinds of photography, the EVF has more advantages than disadvantages. I love it in itself, not to speak of the fact that it allows manufacturers to offer lighter bodies.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Hah - well, let's look at the front view

I don't disagree with lots of your points, but there really is a size difference.

He he... yes, I was in a nasty mood when I posted that

One important point regarding the noisy shutter, since that has been an important reason for me not to buy an A7 or A7r:
This makes the camera difficult to use in churches, temples, at concerts and in many situations where noise will disturb the scene. What I don't understand is why the shutter has to be noisy. Every OM-body I've owned are much more silent and they have a shutter and a mirror. My Contax RX is much more silent and so is the D810.

It's surprising because Sony could have sold much more cameras if they didn't have this problem, making more profit. It's as if they don't have any quality control during product development, and it makes me wonder: Are there other things they didn't think about, things that aren't apparent now, but may show up after a few year's use?

Sony is of course not alone when it comes to sloppy product development, oil on the sensor of the Nikon D600 springs to my mind, but this is a "feature" that anybody picking up the camera will notice right away. It sounds crude, and gives an impression of being cheap. That's not the impression consumers spending a couple of thousand dollars want to be left with.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Hi Jono, I do not agree. Better to take the camera size comparison based discussions, OVF vs EVF, etc to the no holds barred section, IMHO.

I will write a lengthy piece about my reasons for going back to conventional cameras and post it in that section in a few days.

 

[Vivek]

From SAR- Sony A7m2 updated roundup post! Size comparison with the A7. | sonyalpharumors

The day after:

Just a reminder.