Sony A7R II

I'm thinking of purchasing a Sony a7r II I know it's a little bit behind the times that the latest greatest but this pretty good prices on this camera.

 

I'm looking for users of this camera I'd like to purchase this camera and run the new Sigma art lenses with the Fe Mount that are made for the Sony cameras I'm wondering how the focus is how the eye auto focus is just looking for General feedback on anybody that has this combination.

 

Thanks again I appreciate any feedback that anybody can give me.

Clyde Butcher uses a 36mb Sony A7R. He used to only shoot film, but he's gotten older and started to use digital. I've seen 60" wide prints of his from digital in his Venice Florida gallery. Very impressive. Here's his link for equipment he uses (used). The Sony digital stuff is on the right towards the bottom.

Technical Information - Clyde Butcher | Black & White Fine Art Photography

 

Here's his digital collection

Digital Collection Archives - Clyde Butcher | Black & White Fine Art Photography

Hey thanks for the reply he does very nice work I don't know what that device is he's using on the Mamiya RZ lenses not practical for me.

 

The Sony a7r is plagued with Shutterstock it has to be mounted I'm massive tripod I own that camera before very hard to get good shots don't like it.

 

I do appreciate the information I need to find some of this actually using the a7r II with the sigma art lenses.

 

Yeah Clyde does some really nice work for sure I'm more into portraits than landscape. I do appreciate your reply.

Thanks AK. His images are very nice, and though its just subjective on my part, they seem to mostly be over-sharpened. Probably how he likes them I imagine.

I’ve owned and used a Sony A7Rii since May, 2015 to the present. It is a very capable camera. Shutter shake is eliminated by using the electronic first shutter or silent shutter. Eye focus recognizes an eye of the subject as the focus spot. It must be assigned to a button and held wile in continuous focus mode. Assign it to the center button in the 4-way, and the focus lock buttons on certain lenses. Great for portraits. The camera is ideal for macro and landscape. So so for action.

 

The sensor and image processing is identical to the newer A7Riii. You should find one used for $1200 or less, and new for $2400. Sigma lenses may not be fully compatible electronically. No problems with the optics.

 

The original A7R is a non-starter. Less resolution, lower ISO, shutter shake and no in-body image stabilization.

Edited July 3, 2018 by Ed_Ingold

Thank you for your reply and it sounds like this is probably the camera I'm going to get as as far as Sigma art lens is down they are now in Sony e-mount so they should be fully functional with everything the camera will do you don't need an adapter.

A quick check on the Sigma website indicates ART lenses with an E-mount are compatible with Sony AF, and communicate electronically with the camera. In addition to AF, full compatibility offers customized IBIS, based on the focal length and (optional) viewfinder magnification when you turn the manual focus ring.

 

Lenses designed specifically for the Sony compensate for the relatively thick cover glass on the sensor. This causes the edges to be out of focus. It mainly effects lenses 50 mm and shorter, and is negligible for 90 mm lenses and up. Mounting the lens without an adapter is good, but you may not get optimum results from the otherwise excellent optics.

 

You will want at least 2 extra batteries for the A7Rii. Get the real Sony brand for best results. You get about 300 shots or 3 hours use on a battery charge, whichever is less. I have six batteries, and have used as many as three in a single day (e.g., on vacation). Watson makes a very good fast charger for two batteries.

 

In contrast, I have only needed to change batteries in my A9 once in a single day while traveling in Ireland, stopping every 200 yards or so to shoot. The new A7Riii uses the same battery as the A9. The new battery is 2.25x as large and the camera uses 40% less power.

Lenses designed specifically for the Sony compensate for the relatively thick cover glass on the sensor. This causes the edges to be out of focus. It mainly effects lenses 50 mm and shorter, and is negligible for 90 mm lenses and up.

This is generally only an issue for lenses that are designed for a short flange-to-sensor distance (like adapted Leica M-mount lenses), not the ones that are designed (like the Sigma ART lenses) for the much longer DSLR flange-to-sensor distance.

 

I recently purchased a used A7RII but can't comment on how the camera performs with the new E-mount Sigma Art lenses.

If you already have DSLR lenses, it makes sense to buy and adapter and use them on the A7Rii. As Dieter says, the long back focus distance mitigates effects of the thick cover glass. I would not recommend buying a DSLR lens specifically for use on the Sony, nor any lens designed for a rangefinder camera (e.g., Leica or Zeiss ZM). The A7Rii has very high resolution, matched by very few DSLR or third party lenses.

 

A new Sony lens is getting very high reviews, and the specifications (MTF) are outstanding. It is the Sony FE 24-105 f/4 G OSS. I have a Sony 24-70/2.8 GM, which is as sharp as the primes with which it overlaps. The 24-105 is a stop slower, but with specifications as good or better than the GM, minus one stop and half the weight and cost.

 

One stop is of little consequence. High ISO performance of the A7Rii is very good. I set a max for AUTO ISO at 25,600, at which the noise is quite tolerable. At 8000, which I often use for available light shots, noise is barely noticeable.

A new Sony lens is getting very high reviews, and the specifications (MTF) are outstanding. It is the Sony FE 24-105 f/4 G OSS.

Quite surprising that Sony can produce a lens with a wider zoom range that performs substantially better than the Zeiss-branded (and initially about as expensive) 24-70/4 which is a rather mediocre performer.

 

I think the main attraction for using Sigma Art lenses on a Sony FF mirrorless is the rather attractive price combined with a generally quite respectable performance. I have and use a few on my Nikons but have no intention to adapt them to my Sonys. One drawback of many of the Sigma Art lenses is their heft - way beyond what similar lenses from other manufacturers weigh.

I own no D SLR lenses at all I'm starting from scratch.

 

I read that the sigma art 85 1. 4 outperforms the G master pretty handily.

 

the Sony 85 1. 8 gets pretty good reviews my first land is going to have to be a portrait lens.

 

For a little bit more I can get the Zeiss batis 85 1. 8 performed very well on the Sony.

I have a Batis 85/1.8. It is contrasty, with good color an bokeh. Focusing is very fast and totally silent. It's over 3" in diameter, but very light. It's a good lens to use with the Eye Focus option. It's sharper than the 85/1.4 GM, but a half a stop slower. Ordinarily you'll stop down a bit anyway. You want the background OOF, not the nose and ears. Batis MTF looks better than the Sigma, but it's hard to compare between manufacturers. The price is about the same.

Sounds great Ed I can't wait to pick this up and start shooting think I'm going to go with the batis.

This was taken with a Batis 85/1.8, f/2.8, 1/100 at ISO 2500, on an A7Rii.

Quite surprising that Sony can produce a lens with a wider zoom range that performs substantially better than the Zeiss-branded (and initially about as expensive) 24-70/4 which is a rather mediocre performer.

 

There's a lot less glass and technology in an f/4 lens compared to f/2.8. Most companies seem to "dumb down" slower lenses, but Sony must feel they can attract customers on a tighter budget with quality.

 

Taken by itself, the Zeiss 24-70/4 was pretty good, just not nearly as good as their 16-35/4. This is an extremely useful focal range, but I took a pass until the f/2.8 GM version came out. A lot of what I look for is build quality. We'll see how opinions of the 24-105/4 hold up once the rush of novelty wears off. Its definitely worth consideration.

Yeah I think the Zeiss 85 mm batis is going to be my first lens for sure. The Sony a7r II is about $2, 000 new there's there's several of them on eBay between $1, 200 and 2000. Trying to find one somewhere in the$1, 500 range in good condition low shutter clicks.

Manual focus on Batis lenses is "fly by wire" like most other Sony AF lenses (exception, the 90/2.8 macro), however it is more useable than usual. Like others, it is velocity sensitive, so a quick movement changes the focus more than a more deliberate one. Turning the ring the same speed as you would with a manual lens gives just the right sensitivity. The OLED display is novel, and not all that useful. You can use it to set the focus to infinity, e.g., for astrophotography. In manual mode, turn the focus ring to the point infinity first appears. Like most lenses, the Batis focuses past infinity to accommodate focus shift with aperture and temperature changes.

 

I don't understand why Zeiss hasn't made a 35 mm or 50 mm Batis lens. Competition with other lens families? Probably not. Both Loxia and Batis have 25 mm and 85 mm lenses. The Batis 18/2.8 is not far from the Loxia 21/2.8

"This was taken with a Batis 85/1.8, f/2.8, 1/100 at ISO 2500, on an A7Rii". Ed.

 

Nice, but lacks a crispness.

 

A7Rii slow auto focus compared with a DSLR or Sony's latest offerings.

How slow is the auto focus on the a7r II?

Depending on the autofocus you know what I may have to do is I may have to go rent the Sony a7r II for a day with some and see how the auto focus is and see if it's a deal-breaker.

 

If it's a deal-breaker my other camera would be the Sony A7 iii.

 

I've also heard the 90 2. 8 macro lens Sony is a pretty good portrait lens maybe something to consider.

Autofocus in the A7Rii is very fast, at least until the A9 came along. There are 399 phase detectors, covering nearly 90% of the screen. There are many AF options, some of which work better depending on the situation. In general, I use a large center spot with lock-on, plus face detection, and AF-C or DMF (for focus and compose).

 

The 90/2.8 Macro is slower to focus than the Batis 85, but not sluggish. The OOF character of the macro is good, however I prefer the rendition and "character" of the Batis for portraits. If you want a macro, the 90 is the one to buy. You probably don't need both, but the Batis only focuses to 3' or so. Both have OSS in addition to IBIS. It would be nice to borrow or rent them for a week to try out (e.g., Lensrentals.com).

 

Unlike most DSLR lenses, the Sony Macro and Zeiss Batis are sharp corner to corner, even when wide open. There are many credible reviews for these lenses, to help you with your decision.

"I may have to do is I may have to go rent the Sony a7r II for a day with some and see how the auto focus is" Michael.

 

Very good idea, with any camera: to see if it fits your purpose.

Folks can be very biased and offer all sort of technical data....to support their believes...because they own that camera. They like to have a feel good factor...yes, they have made the right decision.

 

Rent one, then its all about what you think....not anyone else.

Crisp.

 

Thanks for sharing your photo, Ed.

Everything I've read about it says that the auto focus is pretty darn good. I'm going to go down next weekend to my local camera store and I'm going to rent it for the weekend and I'm going to run it through all the tests and I'll be the judge of myself if the auto focus is good enough.

 

I think this is the best way to come to a good conclusion and decision whether to buy the camera or not.