There's been a lot of new mirrorless cameras produced since the A7 series. Now that the A7RII has been used in a variety of areas what is the consensus of this camera now? Is it reliable, rugged, and devoid of any major mechanical issues or overheating? This camera represents a great value now as they can be purchased new for approximately $1200 less than when Sony announced this amazing camera. I've come to appreciate an EVF, but still prefer an OVF, but the advantages of using M/or Nikon manual lenses on the Sony have me trying to convince myself I should get one. Although, I've read that wide lenses with oblique angles can be problematic with the Sony A7's, the clean high ISO and excellent low light AF could be convincing enough to add this camera. Any thoughts from users who've put this camera through it's paces in portrait, sports, street or other? How does this camera compare to the new Nikon Z?
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!
What's the consensus of the Sony A7RII now?
- Thread starter jdphoto
- Start date
V
Vivek
Guest
Nikon Z7 - made in Japan. :thumbs:
Sony A7rII - made in Thailand.
——————————-
Nikon Z7 - sensor stack thickness = 1.6mm
Sony A7rII = 2.5mm
=> Nikon will play better with old lenses.
Ancient Nikkor P.C. 10.5cm f/2.5 in LTM (made in Japan) on a custom modded monochrome A7rII (1mm sensor glass).
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
————————————-
Z7 is now offered with an OEM adapter. Allows use of DSLR lenses with AF.
A7rII 3rd party adapter (extra) is iffy.
————————————————
Z7- more mega pixels and made by Nikon in Japan. :thumbs:
Sony A7rII - made in Thailand.
——————————-
Nikon Z7 - sensor stack thickness = 1.6mm
Sony A7rII = 2.5mm
=> Nikon will play better with old lenses.
Ancient Nikkor P.C. 10.5cm f/2.5 in LTM (made in Japan) on a custom modded monochrome A7rII (1mm sensor glass).
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr————————————-
Z7 is now offered with an OEM adapter. Allows use of DSLR lenses with AF.
A7rII 3rd party adapter (extra) is iffy.
————————————————
Z7- more mega pixels and made by Nikon in Japan. :thumbs:
faberryman
Member
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
The only issue, I have with my A7R II, is that for fast action shots it sometimes focus hunts. So it can get some of those shots, but it also loses some. That's why I also have an A9. But for landscapes and such the A7R II is the better camera.
V
Vivek
Guest
Falun Dafa activists demonstrating against China in Amsterdam.
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr
Many have converted their stock A7rII with a Kolari thin filter (extra $$) so that it will fare better with old lenses.
Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on FlickrSony A7rII(m), Nikkor P.C. 10.5cm, f/2.5
Many have converted their stock A7rII with a Kolari thin filter (extra $$) so that it will fare better with old lenses.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
I don’t own any Nikon Z cameras but performance wise I’d say they are comparable to the A7RII... I’d say the generation 3 Sony’s (to include the A9) are better in general than the new Nikon and Canon bodies.
In real world use I’ve never had any issues with my Sony Cameras. They’ve been all over the world with me to include trips to Europe, Africa, Latin America/Carribean, and all of North America... I’ve used them for both personal and professional usage. No issues at all. I do very limited video so I can’t speak on any issues that may be present for heavy video users. For M lenses it depends on the lens you own. Some work done but others not so much. For SLR Lenses - I’ve never had issues on Sony lenses personally but other people may have different experiences.
Maybe the answer is to maybe rent one for a weekend and test it for yourself.
Tim
Active member
First up thank you to the OP for posing these two points as I am considering the same.
faberryman's brief price analysis shows that I could have a A7R II and a Loxia for about the same as the Z7.
I travel simple and light, usually a GR and a ICL camera with a 50mm or equivalent.
Lately I have been using a Fuji XE3 and the 35mm f2 (50) but either camera or I have been missing focus a lot of the time. Not sure whats up.
Additionally with some cropping from the XE3 files I have been disappointed with larger prints so am considering jumping ship to an "old" A7R II and a Loxia.
I'm used to manual focus from my OM4 and Zuiko days.
Its tempting.
faberryman's brief price analysis shows that I could have a A7R II and a Loxia for about the same as the Z7.
I travel simple and light, usually a GR and a ICL camera with a 50mm or equivalent.
Lately I have been using a Fuji XE3 and the 35mm f2 (50) but either camera or I have been missing focus a lot of the time. Not sure whats up.
Additionally with some cropping from the XE3 files I have been disappointed with larger prints so am considering jumping ship to an "old" A7R II and a Loxia.
I'm used to manual focus from my OM4 and Zuiko days.
Its tempting.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
With adapting I generally only recommend doing so if you’re using vintage lenses for a particular look. Otherwise I generally suggest going native. There are enough great options now to cover the needs of most with a few obvious gaps and omissions that will likely come in the future. In any case though I think most people would be happy with the performance of the Loxia, Batis, Sony Zeiss, or G-Master lenses... there are a handful of great gems in the Sony G and third party lineups too from Voigtlander, Tamron, etc.
If considering the Loxia 50 and a A7RII... it’ll cost you slightly more than a A7III body only and if you shop used you may find the 50 Loxia in the $500-700 range depending on condition. Even still the 55/1.8 is worth considering too and paired with the 28/2 (or 24GM) it makes a pretty light Autofocus combination. I haven’t seen any major focusing issues with the A7RII and I will say my keeper and in focus rate is very high when used for weddings.
Really my only major gripes (that haven’t been addressed in the subsequent model) is that the ergonomics (without the grip) could be improved when using the larger lens options (for instance allow the body size to grow on a future model to be close in size to the Fujifilm XH1 as this seems to be what the new Panasonic LUMIX S line is sized around) and I’d like the option of having additional aspect ratios in camera.
V
Vivek
Guest
Tim, AFAIK, the OP owned an A7rII and sold it probably after realising it was made in Thailand and not Japan.
For old manual lenses, consider the Z instead of the Sony for reason i pointed out.
The 55/1.8 Tre suggests is slow in AF but faster than the 50/1.8. Batii are ugly and huge.
Avoid Loxia. CV offerings are better. They come with distance encoders (unlike the Loxia) and allow you to make use of the 5 axis stabilzation.
For old manual lenses, consider the Z instead of the Sony for reason i pointed out.
The 55/1.8 Tre suggests is slow in AF but faster than the 50/1.8. Batii are ugly and huge.
Avoid Loxia. CV offerings are better. They come with distance encoders (unlike the Loxia) and allow you to make use of the 5 axis stabilzation.
Tim
Active member
I am surprised that the Loxia's can't make use of the IBIS. This is not a reported fact on a number of video reviews I have watched.
Thx.I will investigate the Z thoroughly.
V
Vivek
Guest
Loxiae can not make full use of the IBIS. With them it is like any other adapted lens with a dumb adapter as far as IBIS is concerned. 3 axis only.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Loxia are chipped and can make full use of the 5 axis IBIS.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
The 55/1.8 is NOT slow in AF... it is actually one of the faster focusing lenses but I’ve updated the lens firmware to the latest version as well. Batis lenses are not “huge” but the 135 and 18 are larger that the 25, 40, and 85... ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. Loxia lenses again are chipped and provide full metadata like the CV lenses which allow full ability of 5 axis.
I understand you have your list of issues with the Sony and it’s valid for you but please let’s not spread disinformation.
V
Vivek
Guest
Can you point to an official zeiss wording that supports this claim?
Chipped does not equal it has tne distance encoder. The TAP adapter, for example is “chipped”.
Chipped does not equal it has tne distance encoder. The TAP adapter, for example is “chipped”.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Consensus? :facesmack:
V
Vivek
Guest
The 55/1.8 is slower than the 35/2.8. I have both and use them it is based on experience and not made up!
Infact, the Samyang 24/2.8 is faster!
Batis , ha, ha, there is a thread on FM. I am not alone in that.
Before you start atrocious claims, check your sources!
it is based on experience and not made up!Infact, the Samyang 24/2.8 is faster!
Batis , ha, ha, there is a thread on FM. I am not alone in that.
Before you start atrocious claims, check your sources!
V
Vivek
Guest
Anyone starting anew with mirrorless and wants to use old manual focus lenses is better off with a Nikon Z than a Sony- based on a fact!
Consensus? :facesmack:
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
No Vivek, that depends.Anyone starting anew with mirrorless and wants to use old manual focus lenses is better off with a Nikon Z than a Sony- based on a fact!
V
Vivek
Guest
K-H, If you are not worried about fuzzy corners and other gremlins, a thick sensor stack might do, I suppose. Then one loses that lens characteristics that is sought after in the old lenses.
I have sensors with no cover glass and with very thin cover glasses. I can also vary glass thickness in the optical path by adding drop in filters. I can see the differences.
I have sensors with no cover glass and with very thin cover glasses. I can also vary glass thickness in the optical path by adding drop in filters. I can see the differences.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Lets see. I owned the 35/2.8 (sold it) and I still own the 55. So there’s that. I don’t own the 24/2.8 and probably never will because it doesn’t interest me.The 55/1.8 is slower than the 35/2.8. I have both and use them
Infact, the Samyang 24/2.8 is faster!
Batis , ha, ha, there is a thread on FM. I am not alone in that.
Before you start atrocious claims, check your sources!
As for the Batis lenses I own the 85 and owned the 25. I’ve seen the 40 and tested the 18 and 135... so the point is that I don’t care about a thread on FM... I care about people actually using lenses and providing their actual constructive experiences/critiques of performance in actual use in defined situations of the original post - for instance did the Autofocus speed make you miss an actual shot, was this a paid job, or did it work? Also for manual lenses with Nikon they don’t autofocus. Only the newest ones do but it’s possible that performance is improved... in any case I’ve never experienced issues with SLR lenses but to each their own.
No accusation was made other than the 55/1.8 does not Autofocus slowly. If one is slower than another lens it makes it slower but it doesn’t necessarily make the lens objectively slow to focus.