p.30 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
Sony just released a camera with a 2yr old sensor that is worse than the D800 and shitty AF and battery life and very expensive and slow native glass for $2300. I don't see that having much impact on FF pricing of real semi-pro DSLR bodies. Canon also released a low cost FF and are hitting that market. They won't be combining the 6d and 5d lines. I'd fully expect the next 5d series to be above 3k again.
I think I missed the part where it was shown the A7r sensor is "worse" than the D800 Looks just as good to me. Also curious where the metrics are coming from that we are able to rate its AF and battery life in such disdainful terms? We have comparisons already? And to what?
p.30 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
I think I missed the part where it was shown the A7r sensor is "worse" than the D800 Looks just as good to me. Also curious where the metrics are coming from that we are able to rate its AF and battery life in such disdainful terms? We have comparisons already? And to what?
Read the DxO info. Scored worse in several areas. No noticeable difference, but aren't we all about extremes and hyperbole here? retro says that any camera from Canon has to be way above otherwise it will be behind, not sure how a Sony gets away with making zero improvements after 2 years.
AF will be slower than any current SLR camera and drastically slower than a high end one like 1dX or 5d3, especially in servo. Sony rate the battery at 340 shots, how is that great?
So, as a niche camera, it'll do just fine. As a camera that will usher in a new era of technology and cause a huge drop in FF prices, not likely. It costs as much as a 5d3 if you plan on using EF mount lenses.
p.30 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
Read the DxO info. Scored worse in several areas. No noticeable difference, but aren't we all about extremes and hyperbole here? retro says that any camera from Canon has to be way above otherwise it will be behind, not sure how a Sony gets away with making zero improvements after 2 years.
It may have to do with a contract with Nikon. Perhaps Sony's next great sensor has already been exclusively allocated to the D810 or whatever.
p.30 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
Read the DxO info. Scored worse in several areas. No noticeable difference, but aren't we all about extremes and hyperbole here? retro says that any camera from Canon has to be way above otherwise it will be behind, not sure how a Sony gets away with making zero improvements after 2 years.
AF will be slower than any current SLR camera and drastically slower than a high end one like 1dX or 5d3, especially in servo. Sony rate the battery at 340 shots, how is that great?
No, we are not all at all about hyperbole here. If you want to feed into that, that's your choice. I will not. Reading the scores to me, the difference looks so small as to be within a margin of error. Trying to take the miniscule difference displayed in DxO scores and say that it's "worse" is basically just trying to fan the flames.
As far as AF being slower, it very well may be, but exactly "how much" slower is not yet known and will likely be a subjective topic. Battery life.... 340 shots seems pretty good for a mirrorless full frame camera. How is that great? I would ask the reverse. How is that shitty?
p.30 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
Battery life.... 340 shots seems pretty good for a mirrorless full frame camera. How is that great? I would ask the reverse. How is that shitty?
I would not enjoy hiking with 6 batteries for one day of shooting (2000 frames). I get that much with one battery in the 5D III.
p.30 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
No, we are not all at all about hyperbole here. If you want to feed into that, that's your choice. I will not. Reading the scores to me, the difference looks so small as to be within a margin of error. Trying to take the miniscule difference displayed in DxO scores and say that it's "worse" is basically just trying to fan the flames.
As far as AF being slower, it very well may be, but exactly "how much" slower is not yet known and will likely be a subjective topic. Battery life.... 340 shots seems pretty good for a mirrorless full frame camera. How is that great? I would ask the reverse. How is that shitty? ...Show more →
So to put things in context, since it might be getting muddied here with so many different tangents going. This is the original point in a string of posts that I replied to:
David Baldwin wrote:
Bottom line: Sony have effectively lowered the market price for a top of the line FF sensor. Canon's future releases need to reflect this new reality. A month ago I would have to accept whatever Canon asked for a full frame body, now I can opt to go Sony. Real choice, and I fully expect Canon will rise to the challenge, perhaps late 2014
In this context, AF speed, battery life and cost are all relevant factors. For the new Sony to cause a downward trend in the FF market, it needs to have mass market appeal. Right now, it appears to have a strong niche appeal. Cameras are so much more than sensors, they are tools that fit into a system. Sony has no system in place and even the positive reviews have raised serious reservations for certain groups of users.
If this A7r was $1000 I would jump on it immediately, as would countless other people. At nearly $2800, I won't even look twice. I'd rather wait for Canon to come with something even if it was 4k for a body.
p.30 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
So to put things in context, since it might be getting muddied here with so many different tangents going. This is the original point in a string of posts that I replied to:
In this context, AF speed, battery life and cost are all relevant factors. For the new Sony to cause a downward trend in the FF market, it needs to have mass market appeal. Right now, it appears to have a strong niche appeal. Cameras are so much more than sensors, they are tools that fit into a system. Sony has no system in place and even the positive reviews have raised serious reservations for certain groups of users.
If this A7r was $1000 I would jump on it immediately, as would countless other people. At nearly $2800, I won't even look twice. I'd rather wait for Canon to come with something even if it was 4k for a body....Show more →
Yes an $8000 1DsX would also be a niche too, so either they have to make it like 12fps fast like the 1DX or maybe just forget it and make a reasonably priced, smaller 5D4 thing instead.
p.30 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
Read the DxO info. Scored worse in several areas. No noticeable difference, but aren't we all about extremes and hyperbole here?
Yes but saying something is beyond amazingly better because it does ISO100 3 stops better with respect to DR is just slightly less hyperbole than saying something is worse because it is a fraction of a bit/stop worse here and there and easily within any likely margin of error on top?
p.30 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
skibum5 wrote:
...or maybe just forget it and make a reasonably priced, smaller 5D4 thing instead.
In-between would be my choice - you know the 5D3 build quality isn't that great IMHO. If they could just build the mythic 3D - compact like the 5D, but built strong like a 1 series.
p.30 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
skibum5 wrote:
Yes an $8000 1DsX would also be a niche too, so either they have to make it like 12fps fast like the 1DX or maybe just forget it and make a reasonably priced, smaller 5D4 thing instead.
No one knows what the next Canon bodies will look like. Some on this board make bold proclamations, but are constantly proven wrong. Others on this thread are making comparisons to a mythical camera and trashing it while at the same time chastising people for making up claims about a current camera that is being reviewed.
"How could a 2K body not have an impact on Canon's plan to gouge for an 8K high MP 1DS brick that can't match the DR of a 2K body that's less than half the size/weight and 1/4th the cost? You will see these little "disposable" A7r in many LS'ers bags until Canon responds, IF they are even able to catch up some day."
Somehow, this poster knows what Canon's plans are, knows how the technology will perform and has already made his conclusions. Somehow, 5 people 'like' that comment (the usual groupies). Somehow, no one challenges this ridiculous statement of utter BS. EDIT: forgot to add that the poster is making blatant mis-representations of the prices to suit his jaded view of the world.
p.30 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I find it utterley hilarious that the people would and have held off buying a new Canon body because of the slight possibility of minor tech problems with a release that can be solved easily are the very same people at the site of a slight improvement in DR are happy to dive into a world of dramas with unproven AF performance and god knows what other compatability issues that will surface.
Good luck with that one..lol..you guys must be desperate to shoot HDR from a single frame..
p.30 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
EB-1 wrote:
It may have to do with a contract with Nikon. Perhaps Sony's next great sensor has already been exclusively allocated to the D810 or whatever.
EBH
That's a great deal. Sony signs off on a contract that forbids them from using their best sensor in their own cameras!
While the slight differences between the Sony and Nikon are not important, I do find it weird after 2 that Sony's own engineers can't do any better than Nikon's. Nikon obviously make their own modifications to the processing pipeline and EXSPEED just does a better job than BIONZ it always appears.
I suspect there is little room for large improvement with the Sony tech. Next gen would be more incremental.
Nov 02, 2013 at 02:27 AM
a.RodriguezPix Offline • • • • [X]
p.30 #20 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I still want a 6D, hands down, just because, I like to take photo's. If anything, maybe I'll shot more film in my Rolleiflex 6008 Pro., so I can have every single bit of whatever a DSLR can't ever achieve? What is it that a DSLR can't ever achieve anyhow vs. a film camera? Heck, whatever works, I spent way to much money chasing crazy achievements, now its time to learn how to capture the damned photo! I only shoot instant film, on my Rollei with its Polaroid back, because I haven't even learned how to load the damned film in my 120 6X6 back for crying out loud!
Looks just as good to me. Also curious where the metrics are coming from that we are able to rate its AF and battery life in such disdainful terms? We have comparisons already? And to what? 
Paul.
