A7RII rated highly over at DPReview

[david_smith110]

<p>I haven't had time to go thru all of the fairly in depth review but they seem to like it. Well they should, its a nice camera. :)</p>

<p>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7r-ii</p>

<p>And my apologies for not posting much news recently. I am back to playing a game I have been in and out of since 2006. It can be a little time consuming. For those interested...(oh, warning...a little bit of unsafe language).</p>

<p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>I read the review, and am more confused than ever about tracking auto focus. It's going to take experimentation to learn what works and when. There's nothing new about that, from auto exposure to GPS mapping. Sometimes it's more important to learn when it doesn't work than when it does.</p>

<p>Even in my most argumentative mood, I can't find much to disagree with DPReview's Pros and Cons list. Can't say I care about touch screen menus, even though it's true. Of note, the A7Rii resolves the finest test pattern in their motley target, and scores the best dynamic range they've ever tested. It beats my digital Hasselblad on both counts, and the A7ii is a close second.</p>

[Member69643]

<p>No surprise, Sony is one of their biggest advertisers. It's a nice camera though, and should be, for that much cash.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i dont think this changes anything WRT what's previously been reported about AF tracking in continuous shooting mode, although i do think this might mark a new record for in-depth articles by DPR about a single camera. Overall a nice job of technical explanations and pointing out both pros and cons, with maybe a little bit of a tendency to over-gush in the camera's favor [<em>"</em><em>It has many new features that photographers of the future will wonder how they ever lived without."</em>]. but hey, if you're DPReview, that's what you do. </p>

<blockquote>

 

</blockquote>

[aplumpton]

<p>A high quality digital body suggests that it may appeal to those with quality non Sony optics. I see little comment in DPReview on the effectiveness of the camera with short focus RF optics of Leica, Voigtlander, etc. It doesn't appear to be something Sony wishes to discuss. </p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>I haven't seen that review but I know enough about the camera to know that it is amazing. :-) In the future, which is not far away, it won't be 'Nikon or Canon' in the 36x24mm space, it will be 'A7s vs A7r'. Even today it's almost like that. Though Leica is focusing on something different than anyone else, so they're going to be up there anyway.</p>

<p>EVE looks amazing. I'm not much into games but I can tell it would be a blast. It doesn't have the charm of Elite II (an Amiga game) but it does look epic.</p>

[Aoresteen]

<p>I've never seen a bad review at DP. I wonder why.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Leica lenses work on a Sony body, but don't work particularly well in the corners. They don't work as well on Leica digital bodies as on film either, but good enough in most cases. The difference is the glass covering the sensor - 1.5 mm in the Sony and 0.8 mm in the M9. Perhaps people are more careful with a $7000 camera than one costing less than half as much (The real reason is limiting IR transmission v lens compatibility).</p>

<p>Between Sony and Zeiss, the A7 has more than enough in the lens department to satisfy users. Sony bears no responsibility to Leica for compatibility, and Leica hasn't the resources to make an effective counter move. I have an M9P, but the A7Rii does everything better in the same sized package, without limits on the focal length, and at a fraction of the cost.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I find DPReview a LITTLE less trust-able since they were sold (to Amazon, right?), but still some of the best reviews out there.<br /><br />Looks like a cool camera. Too big and too much for me, but very cool.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<blockquote>

<p>In the future, which is not far away, it won't be 'Nikon or Canon' in the 36x24mm space, it will be 'A7s vs A7r'.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, of course: "Both Nikon and Canon will no longer be selling FF cameras within 2 years." I can make hyperbolic statements too: it's really quite easy!</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>i think it's interesting that they rated the camera so high overall, while also pointing out "significant shortcomings"... clearly they are giving full marks to tech innovation which they hope will drive the camera market forward (and given some of the recent financial reports, there is clearly a need to generate buzz, especially going into holiday season). but i think they're also covering all their bases by previously running an article which assesses the performance in real world pro sports situations which isn't quite so rosy -- in particular it exposes the weaknesses of some of that technology in specific shooting situations, as well as limitations imposed by things other than the sensor, i.e. the EVF. that may not matter to potential buyers who have $3000 to spend on what looks like the next big thing.</p>

<p>i do hope we continue to see more innovation throughout the market, and hopefully some of the Sony innovations will trickle down to other cameras and prod Nikon and Canon into doing more than protecting their territory. the fact you can maintain AF with Canon lenses is kind of a biggie, but that comes with some limitations if you read the fine print. mainly i think this camera is for portrait and landscape photographers and well-heeled hobbyists. i'd like to see Sony develop a more performance-oriented model, perhaps with the 24mp sensor so it could have a higher frame rate, as well as a more complete lens set.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Until Sony has the lens sets that N and C have, and until N and C start losing the pro market, I think that they will be fine. They have cool stuff in the pipeline, always.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>They lost me. I don't give a hang about the camera market. What other people use is irrelevant to me. I've been using top Nikon and Canon gear my whole professional life. The Sony's are the best cameras I've ever used. That doesn't mean they don't have weaknesses (they all do). That means they are the best cameras <em>I've</em> ever used. Reviews and pundits opinions are fun and interesting to read but they don't guide me. I make up my own mind based on my photography, my eye, my hands and my imaging experience. No camera, of any kind, ever made me a better or worse photographer than I already am. But of all the cameras I've used, I like the Sony's best. Happy shooting with whatever <em>you</em> like best.</p>

<p> </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Sony plans to introduce up to 8 new lenses in 2016, and Zeiss has a similar number in mind, filling out the Loxia and Batis lines. Nikon just announced plans for a D5, without any details regarding features or timing. An early announcement is usually meant to slow the rate of defections, in this case to Sony. The D5 is rumored to have a 24 MP sensor. Combined with a robust AA filter, 24 MP should be a good fit with the Nikon menagerie of lenses, maybe a little better than needed.</p>

<p>Sony is not competing with Nikon and Canon for the pro football market, although it's within their reach to do so. The A7 is better suited for the vast majority of photographic applications, but especially for those now dominated by medium format. Perhaps the D5 will join Nikon's F6 as the last of a dynasty.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon just announced plans for a D5, without any details regarding features or timing. An early announcement is usually meant to slow the rate of defections, in this case to Sony. </p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

No, to Canon. The vast vast majority of people who buy a D5 are most likely working pros or those who fancy themselves working pros. Only Canon competes in this product class. Ruggedness and quick performance and ridiculous low light performance all together.<br /><br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p> Perhaps the D5 will join Nikon's F6 as the last of a dynasty.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Uh, yeah... right... no offense, but that's fanboi talk.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Sony plans to introduce up to 8 new lenses in 2016, and Zeiss has a similar number in mind, filling out the Loxia and Batis lines.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's ambitious; we'll see how that plays out. Canon and Nikon typically only introduce 3-5 lenses each annually and i dont think Fuji, Oly, and Panny have exceeded that in any recent calendar year. Obviously, this could address the single biggest limitation of the A7 cameras (lens sets), but in all likelihood, that number includes several E-mount lenses as well as FE, which would also be a Good Thing.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>An early announcement is usually meant to slow the rate of defections, in this case to Sony.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nikon has been experiencing leakers to Fuji as well, so maybe it's just showing signs of life with an official announcement of a long-rumored body. However, the D5, which would be a full frame pro sports/journalism camera, doesnt compete directly against ANY of the current Sonys, whereas the D750 competes directly against the A7IIs and the D810 competes directly against the A7RII.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Sony is not competing with Nikon and Canon for the pro football market</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thank you, Captain Obvious, for stating the obvious. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>although it's within their reach to do so.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Only in the sense that if they wanted to commit significant R&D resources to a niche market they dont actually need to be competitive, they conceivably could, although it doesnt make sense why they would.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Perhaps the D5 will join Nikon's F6 as the last of a dynasty.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why would this be the case anytime soon? Even if it wanted to, Sony would have significant hurdles to overcome before it could stage a palace coup on the pro sports market: it would have to a) up its frame rates, b) develop and release a plethora of pro-spec lenses it currently doesnt offer, and c) address technological limitations in its bodies (EVF) and UI -- all within the D5's product cycle. <br>

<br>

Another elephant in the room is that Sony would also have to provide more impetus for current working pros to <em>want</em> to switch over other than just having tricked out, state of the art bodies, which are only part of the equation. That's a trickier proposition than it might appear on the surface from a practical standpoint. If you've invested 10 or 20k into lenses over the years, you're probably not looking forward to taking a significant depreciation hit on the lot. It's great that some Canon lenses reportedly work better on some Sony bodies, but not so great that that compatibility is situation-specific. The fact that some of the shooting modes on the A7RII wont work with non-native lenses is a huge disincentive to the pro sports photographer or anyone with a major investment in pro glass in general. <br>

<br>

In real terms, for Sony to establish any kind of dynastic rule over the pro market, it would have to a) make current systems obsolete in terms of performance/technology, while b) also offering 2.8 zooms and exotic primes over both full-frame and APS-C platforms AND c) give D4s or 1Dx users reasons why they should sell off all that gear, potentially at a loss. <br>

<br>

That's a very tall order, and probably not one which can be accomplished in under five years at a minimum, even if that were Sony's plan, which it almost certainly isn't. What's probably more likely is that Canon and Nikon will try to compete more against Sony in terms of technically-advanced bodies, which theoretically gives heavy investors into their lens systems more reasons to stay put. <br>

<br>

As it stands right now, not only is the A7 line unworthy of the pro sports crown, but Sony's best mirrorless APS-C body, the A6000, doesnt really fully compete in the performance arena against the 7DII or the D7200, either, and loses ground to the top Fuji and Olympus mirrorless bodies when you factor in available lens sets. Some of that may shift in 2016, depending on what is released by who, but i dont see that market share completely flipping overnight. DSLRS still outsell mirrorless 3:1, so you would need exponential growth in that sector as well as significant decline in DSLR sales to achieve any kind of actual paradigm shift. What i'm saying, in other words, is that hype and buzz are all well and good, but once you look past their somewhat superficial surface value, all that does is raise expectations which then have to be met. Sony is currently attempting to justify its hype across 5 different platforms: high-end compact, bridge mirrorless, A-mount, E-mount, and FE-mount. No other camera manufacturer is as spread out.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>All Canon & Nikon need to do at some point is to remove the mirror and put in an EVF instead of the traditional optical viewfinder. That is what will happen soon. There's no point shrinking the size of the Canon and Nikon cameras because the larger pro bodies handle better anyway, especially with the larger pro lenses. Sony is doing all the hard work and innovation at the moment. Canon & Nikon will just wait until the EVF tech is perfected and then jump in with both feet. If they can do that whilst maintaining the same standard of tracking AF then the Sony cameras will remain compact cameras for enthusiasts only. </p>

[Peter_in_PA]

 

<blockquote>

<p>All Canon & Nikon need to do at some point is to remove the mirror and put in an EVF instead of the traditional optical viewfinder.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jamie, I hope that Nikon does some great (DX-based I hope, I might come back) compact awesome mirrorless camera that is more like µ43 in form factor than the awful (to me) Nikon 1 stuff, but expecting them to take away the EVF on their full frame stuff... Right now that stuff has AF that simply rules, largely because of the whole camera design (including that mirror box), for clients who need performance above all. mirror-based FX cameras aren't going away, and I hang out a LOT at the Nikon forum here... if Nikon even HINTED that FX was going to to mirrorless, there would be talk of a mass defection to Canon in no time flat.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>All Canon & Nikon need to do at some point is to remove the mirror and put in an EVF instead of the traditional optical viewfinder. That is what will happen soon. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>How soon were you thinking? because i dont see that happening at present. DSLRs would have to lose 2/3rds of their market share just to even out with current mirrorless sales, and <a href="http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/no-bottom-hit-in-cameras.html"><em>current CIPA numbers show mirrorless sales as flat</em></a> (0% increase/decrease over last year), while DSLRs are down just 5% in sales overall. You can account for minor slumps by shifting to high-end products which generate higher sales value, which is exactly what Canon did with the 7DII, and Nikon did with the D750 and D810.<br>

<br>

Although it's been speculated that the entire industry will one day shift to mirrorless simply because of lower manufacturing costs, there's <em>little to no incentive</em> for Canon and Nikon to do so at this point. Otherwise they would have already done so. I think the Sony fanboy set has somewhat overstated the threat the A7 series pose to the Traditional Two, because those bodies would need several years of record-breaking sales to dislodge either Canon or Nikon from their spots. You kind of get that feeling with the non-aggressive way the T2 have approached mirrorless thusfar -- more of a grudging nod to market trends than an all-in wager.<br>

<br>

It's different for camera makers who dont have extensive legacy lens lines to protect like Fuji and Sony (Minolta doesnt really count), but the fact is that both mirrorless and DSLR sales are actually <em>up</em> in the USA in 2015; where the bottom is falling out of the market is in compact cameras and in other regions (Mirrorless is down 11% in Japan, which is its #1 market, which should be a cause of some concern). <br>

<br>

In the short term, we'll probably see Canon and Nikon try to stabilize DSLR sales and push more high-end DSLR products, and try to offset low-end compact volume losses (which are likely almost entirely due to smart phones) with high-end compact products. Meanwhile, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic, and Sony are all trying to carve out enough of a market share in mirrorless to stay in the game. Something's got to give ultimately, and it will probably be m4/3, since we're close to the limit of what those sensors can be pushed to at 20mp. We'll probably see more bridge/high-end compact all-in-ones like the LX100 and more adoption of videophile features in the near future, as m4/3 tries to stave off its (possibly inevitable) demise, but its long-term prognosis doesnt appear to be all that great, as the inherent sensor disadvantage means a high-end m4/3 is competing against APS-C and even full frame bodies at the same or similar price points.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I hope that Nikon does some great (DX-based I hope, I might come back) compact awesome mirrorless camera that is more like µ43 in form factor than the awful (to me) Nikon 1 stuff</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The Nikon 1 system isn't without potential, with its small form factor and speedy AF, but the cameras have just been too "consumer" so far, with UI and ergonomics which undercut its usefulness -- and a puzzling marketing strategy. Selling a V3 for the same price as a D7200 suggests Nikon doesnt really want you to buy a V3. I wouldnt mind seeing an APS-C Nikon camera with a fast fixed zoom similar to the LX100, particularly if it had speedy AF, but the Coolpix A was pretty much a whiff, as it was overpriced and undermarketed, despite being fairly close to decent.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> if Nikon even HINTED that FX was going to to mirrorless, there would be talk of a mass defection to Canon in no time flat.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Or people would just buy up all the remaining stock of mirrored FX cameras and hunker down in bunkers with their 200-400s. Once you've invested past 5k or so into a camera brand's lenses, switching back and forth isn't something you're going to want to do often. What i see as a definite possibility, though, is a fixed-focal Df-like body with an EVF, although i dont see this as a priority for Nikon unless Sony's RX1 series suddenly starts selling like hotcakes.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>I'm not sure Sony would need to make revolutionary changes in their design to match the performance of DSLRs with regard to action photography.</p>

<ul>

<li>Larger battery</li>

<li>Dual card slots</li>

<li>Improved focus tracking logic</li>

<li>Faster continuous rate (not limited by mechanics)</li>

<li>Alternately, 8K video (24 MP/frame) on demand.</li>

<li>Brighter, higher definition EVF</li>

<li>Improved EVF logic (return to live view, even momentarily, between shots).</li>

<li>Built-in vertical grip (q.v., larger battery)</li>

<li>A few long primes, 300 and up, either f/4 of f/2.8 (minor changes from current A-mount versions).</li>

</ul>

<p>Should I mention hiring a few pros to flaunt their gear, with jacket logos and caps (like Canon did/does), or a NASCAR sponsorship.</p>

<p>f/2.8 doesn't make a zoom lens any more than 1:1 makes a macro. It's what people are told to expect, not a practical necessity in either case. Prime lenses don't get any more exotic than Loxia or Batis lenses, if it's performance you want. The Sony 28/2, 35/1.4, 55/1.8 and 90/2.8 aren't exactly schlock either.</p>

<p>Sony cameras are biting Leica and Hasselblad. Canon and Nikon are next, and probably inside of 5 years.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Premature announcements of a new product is a standard marketing ploy to head off defections. It is often done in anticipation of a similar announcement by a competitor. We see it most often among the software giants, particularly Microsoft and Apple, although the practice is often derided as "vaporware." I could cite similar examples in the pharmaceutical industry, or even the scientific community through channels with weak or non-existent peer review (e.g., "Nature", "Wall Street Journal", or "USA Today")</p>

<p>It is very important to be "first," but if you can't be first to the market, at least be the first to announce - Marketing 101.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure Sony would need to make revolutionary changes in their design to match the performance of DSLRs with regard to action photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>i wouldnt call direct focus point control revolutionary, either, but an action camera should be able to move focus with less than three button touches. all that stuff you mentioned is good, but it's the overall sense of integration of design and performance that they need to nail, from AF focus tracking to EVF all the way down to menus, UI, and action ergonomics, i.e. AF-On which doesnt lock out in practice. some of this is firmware, some is design philosophy, some is market strategy. i just dont think action/performance is their first priority.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>The only time I've used direct focus point control is when taking a series of shots where the composition was off-center, as for portraits. It is also useful when using a tripod and it's inconvenient to focus and recompose. I don't see the utility of this control for action sports, where the point of interest can vary from moment to moment. Even with direct control, it takes time to use. Area focusing is a better approach, but tends to be unreliable and often slower than single-point control, in both the Sony and Nikon. What hey! Sometimes you just poke and hope.</p>

<p>In a practical sense, I think direct focus point control is important only in its absence, like the proverbial "missing link" in evolution. Once found, something else becomes the missing feature.</p>

<p>Focus tracking is more a logic issue than technical problem. How "sticky" does the focus point need to be? In my Nikon, it is not sticky enough unless the subject is isolated. In the Sony A7, it is too sticky, even when the subject of interest changes. The active area is much larger in the Sony than in my D3, where the focus points are clustered in the central 50% of the image area. Most of these things are configurable in firmware, and will change with user feedback. (Compressed to non-compressed RAW was a big change, yet done in firmware.) Meanwhile, the best Sony option appears to be variable area tracking (which I select in the short menu, instantly reverting to single focus with the center button).</p>

<p>The menus in a single-digit Nikon aren't confusing? Most of us set up a certain configuration which we find most useful. That's how the Sony works too, but you have many more options than a single, programmable button on the Nikon.</p>

<p>I can throw in another beef with Sony. The diaphragm closes to the preset value once focus lock is achieved, whether in single or continous mode, even if "viewfinder effects" are turned off. Once this happens, phase detection becomes less effective, and focusing tends to become sluggish. Why not key this action to the shutter, like in an SLR? Seems like an easy fix.</p>

<p>An all-electronic diaphragm seems to be slower than the mechanical version Nikon has used for the last 50 years. The mechanical lever may not be as accurate, but it is definitely snappy. How does Canon fare in comparison to Nikon in this regard, or the new Nikon "E" system?</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>I don't see the utility of this control for action sports</p>

</blockquote>

<p>uh... maybe if you actually shot action sports, you would see the "utility" of this. it's just silly to try to justify this omission.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I think direct focus point control is important only in its absence</p>

</blockquote>

<p>in a practical sense, its absence means you can miss shots because you can't select the focus point fast enough while the action is happening. it's not something you have to think about on Nikon DSLRs because its implementation is seamlessly integrated into UI. Why Sony didn't think this was important, i'll never know, but maybe they just never intended their cameras to be used in this manner.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Most of these things are configurable in firmware, and will change with user feedback. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>let's hope so; Sony's MO seems to be to release a new camera every six months instead. The one company which has been outstanding as far as providing FW upgrades to older models is Fuji. it would be great if other companies actually listened to user feedback.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>