p.36 #1 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jeremy_clay wrote:
I wait with baited breath for a high mp body from Canon too (almost went after a MF 645D), but what about the sample shots posted so far have people saying 'I wish my 5DIII could do that'? Or is their nothing (yet!) to say that over?
And this is exactly why I am asking for the 1:1 comparison photos between both of those cameras with the same lens attached (with adapter on the A7(R) obviously). The difference should be visible for example in contrasty landscape photography where high DR makes a difference. Another option could be wildlife photos with cropped areas for comparison. We already know from D800(E) tests how the sensor performs, but it would be very interesting to see how it does it in the Sony camera with the adapter-lens arrangement.
p.36 #2 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
My usual per day shooting is under 400 frames, but for some day long events, it will run to about 1200, and I consider myself conservative due to editing demands. So batteries that are only good for 300 shots are not something I'd look forward to using, but these new Sony's are not really in the running to shoot events!
I get quite a bit of battery drain when shooting LV mode on the 1Ds3 and 5D2. Really depletes batteries fast! I have to be careful if I've got cold twilight shots with LV and long exposures.
Really not too out of the ordinary for battery performance using the LCD liberally. As a special use camera, an extra battery would probably take care of my needs, possibly a third. That's not unusual -- I have multiples for every camera I own.
Jeremy -- Perhaps you are more discerning or demanding than I am. I see lots of detail and tonal transitions here in the example photos. And as has been mentioned, perhaps this camera will push Canon over the edge to a 40+MP camera. Obviously, a 36MP image isn't approaching an 80-120MP MF image, but it's getting there.
p.36 #3 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Can you get one of these large capacity battery charger packs used to charge phones, and plug it into the camera's USB charging port? You may be able to charge in the field when on breaks, though I'm not sure how fast. Does anyone know if the camera can actually be powered by USB? (probably not I guess).
I have a special Canon LP-E6 charger which allows charging via USB port, and when in the field I can plug that charger into the battery pack to recharge the spare. If Sony had a similar charger, it could solve some battery issues.
But as far as current capacity, its no different than my 5D2 - using OVF, I get about 1000 shots. When using LCD, about 300, so pretty much on par.
p.36 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Erik_J wrote:
The A7r is CIPA rated at 270 shots according to Sony's own website in my country. And also 270 in their English website.
There is a conflict of information there, as it is rated as 340 on Sony's US site, and that's also the number appearing on all of the review sites that I've seen. Maybe someone made a mistake when entering the information on that one site (like maybe a copy/paste error from the RX1, which is rated at 270).
Regardless, look at all of the other ratings for mirrorless cameras I posted. I think people who expect any mirrorless camera (much less a FF one) to deliver DSLR-like battery performance have unrealistic expectations.
p.36 #5 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
Regardless, look at all of the other ratings for mirrorless cameras I posted. I think people who expect any mirrorless camera (much less a FF one) to deliver DSLR-like battery performance have unrealistic expectations.
Are you opposed to progress? Do you accept the same old technology rebadged and sold as new? If the mirrorless world wants to take a real bite out of SLR, they need to address the limitations.
No one would opt for the battery life of the original 1D body. I have one and it is horrible for batteries. My 7D gets well over 2500 shots during a sports event (no LCD review). There are legitimate needs for battery life, especially if you only want one camera body.
Adding the grip and a bunch of extra batteries completely removed the benefit of a smaller camera system. And it turns it into a $3500 purchase.
p.36 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Gunzorro wrote:
Jeremy -- Perhaps you are more discerning or demanding than I am. I see lots of detail and tonal transitions here in the example photos. And as has been mentioned, perhaps this camera will push Canon over the edge to a 40+MP camera. Obviously, a 36MP image isn't approaching an 80-120MP MF image, but it's getting there.
I think you may be more then me; I don't see images here that a 5d3 doesn't deliver. Of course a huge, lovely file gives me more space to crop, latitude to edit, etc - but based on these specifically, I don't get it (but honestly want to! lol)
p.36 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
No one would opt for the battery life of the original 1D body. I have one and it is horrible for batteries. My 7D gets well over 2500 shots during a sports event (no LCD review). There are legitimate needs for battery life, especially if you only want one camera body.
secondclaw wrote:
But as far as current capacity, its no different than my 5D2 - using OVF, I get about 1000 shots. When using LCD, about 300, so pretty much on par
I believe secondclaw already respond to your question. Mirror less cam requires sensor, evf and lcd "ON" to operate. DSLR doesn't use much pwr until the shutter.
p.36 #10 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Jeremy -- It's not a religion, so I'm not trying to make a believer of you. I'm pretty impressed with these as straight JPGs OOC. They look tight and smooth in structure, and I can imaging that RAWs would produce even better definition. We'll have to see, but for now I see these as a decent step above the 5D2/5D3 images I've seen.
p.36 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
There is a conflict of information there, as it is rated as 340 on Sony's US site, and that's also the number appearing on all of the review sites that I've seen. Maybe someone made a mistake when entering the information on that one site (like maybe a copy/paste error from the RX1, which is rated at 270).
Regardless, look at all of the other ratings for mirrorless cameras I posted. I think people who expect any mirrorless camera (much less a FF one) to deliver DSLR-like battery performance have unrealistic expectations.
It doesn't really matter. But the US site say it's 340 if using the LCD. The sony website in other countries don't say that
p.36 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
If the mirrorless world wants to take a real bite out of SLR, they need to address the limitations.
And to this point...I frankly don't care about what "the mirrorless world" wants to do. What matter to me is will a particular camera do what I want it to do. In the case of the A7r the answer is yes.
I've been shooting with both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras for awhile now. For me, this battery life thing just isn't very much of a limitation. And, as far as adressing it this as a limitation, Sony has by providing the option of a battery grip. The fact that I now can have a mirrorless camera with the option of a grip means I will feel perfectly comfortable using this camera for my personal walk-around shooting and my paid work as well.
If there was some miraculous breakthrough in battery technology that let the mirrorless cameras say, double their number of shots, that same technology would get applied to DSLR batteries. And then people would be saying, "Well, I can get 4,000 shots out my DSLR, so when is mirrorless technology going to catch up?" In battery life, it never will. Never. That's just the laws of physics. If you don't have a mirror to look through, you have to power the EVF. That's not a limitation. That's a trade off.
p.36 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I couldn't care less about mirrorless, I would certainly prefer a real OVF with a real phase detect AF like on Canon Body... Even not talking about battery life (live view and evf). But what I want amongs all is high resolution/DR, and Canon can't offer it. So this mirrorless camera I would certainly not have a look at could be mine soon.
Just waiting real EF lenses test/comparisons with metabones (having read Roger cicala article about adapters) and ability to load a few raw in Lightroom (5.3 ?).
Any idea when LightRoom support for a7r would be out ?
p.36 #14 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Gunzorro wrote:
Jeremy -- It's not a religion, so I'm not trying to make a believer of you. I'm pretty impressed with these as straight JPGs OOC. They look tight and smooth in structure, and I can imaging that RAWs would produce even better definition. We'll have to see, but for now I see these as a decent step above the 5D2/5D3 images I've seen.
Fair enough. I see no difference really; I find however I usually see less with the out of camera results, more with when I actually get to push them in real world processing. I hope it's a nice step forward, would like a larger MP body to snatch up without having to switch my glass.
p.36 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
chez wrote:
I really don't look at batteries when picking a camera. My number 1 priority is image quality...which for the type of photography I do, the Sony appears to have a BIG advantage. If I have to put a couple more batteries into my pack, that really does not affect the images I get at the end of the day...which is my biggest concern.
This whole battery thing is really a non issue...just carry more.
My experience with battery life on 5diii is quite short too because I am usually focussing and checking the exposure a lot with live view anyway when taking landscapes.
Plus with liveview, you don't need mirror lockup wich makes the process a bit easier. 1/2 the shutter presses and less confusion about which of the 3 or 7 autobrackets I am on.
p.36 #16 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
To provide some perspective on the battery life which people seem to be getting hung up on...this is not some engineering letdown on Sony's part. This is the norm for mirrorless. Let's look at the battery life ratings of some other mirrorless cameras:
The A7r is CIPA rated at 340 shots. That is well in line with expectations for a mirrorless camera. In fact, given that the sensor is bigger than any of those other cameras, I'd call that rating quite impressive.
Being as bad as the rest of them is not a badge of honour. I don't think reading data off the FF sensor is much more power hungry than a smaller sensor. BTW my OM-D does not get anywhere near the claimed 360 shots, more like 260 and I only use the EVF for composition, not the rear LCD. I'll believe the 340 when I verify myself.
In the phone market, the manufacturers actually try to do something about the battery life issue and we see each generation flagship move to a larger and/or higher density battery, yet still maintain light and thin phones. It seems to me the mirrorless brigade are not putting the effort into the problem they should and take the attitude, just carry spares.
And I don't need to read about how somebody only takes 100 shots max and says it's not an issue. It's clearly an issue and we have to work around it. It's also not even remotely a deal breaker, but we can still bemoan the fact. Just like people still bemoan Canon's sensors and then happily shoot with them and get great results.
p.36 #17 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Being as bad as the rest of them is not a badge of honour. I don't think reading data off the FF sensor is much more power hungry than a smaller sensor. BTW my OM-D does not get anywhere near the claimed 360 shots, more like 260 and I only use the EVF for composition, not the rear LCD. I'll believe the 340 when I verify myself.
In the phone market, the manufacturers actually try to do something about the battery life issue and we see each generation flagship move to a larger and/or higher density battery, yet still maintain light and thin phones. It seems to me the mirrorless brigade are not putting the effort into the problem they should and take the attitude, just carry spares.
And I don't need to read about how somebody only takes 100 shots max and says it's not an issue. It's clearly an issue and we have to work around it. It's also not even remotely a deal breaker, but we can still bemoan the fact. Just like people still bemoan Canon's sensors and then happily shoot with them and get great results....Show more →
The point is that "bad" is relative. If you take other mirrorless cameras as a baseline, the A7r is not "bad" at all, it is in line with expectations.
I'm not saying there can't or won't be innovations in battery technology. But again, improvements to battery technology will be just as applicable to DSLRs as they will be to mirrorless cameras, and so mirrorless cameras are always going to be worse in battery life because the fact is they have to power the EVF function and DSLRs don't. That's just the trade off.
So let's talk work arounds. Sony has offers a grip that expands battery capacity as a work around. That's an option no other mirrorless camera has offered yet. If you won't use it just because you think it's ugly, well, not much can be done there. And it doesn't mean others won't use it and be perfectly happy with that as a solution.
With regard to the bemoaning, sure, I get it. But, keep in mind that those who were bemoaning Canon's sensor technology were doing so because a better technology existed and was actually in use. Show me any mirrorless camera that exists today which can get 1,000 shots on a charge, and I'll jump on the Sony battery bemoaning train along with anyone else.
p.36 #18 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
With regard to the bemoaning, sure, I get it. But, keep in mind that those who were bemoaning Canon's sensor technology were doing so because a better technology existed and was actually in use. Show me any mirrorless camera that exists today which can get 1,000 shots on a charge, and I'll jump on the Sony battery bemoaning train along with anyone else.
No one is asking for 1000 shots, but I'd expect 500 as a worthwhile target and like I said the phone makers are finding solutions and can somehow fit larger batteries into smaller phones (yes I realise it's more imperative for them). I just don't see the effort from the mirrorless brigade, they clearly aren't even addressing the issue. We are now about 4 years into the mirrorless project and no improvements in sight still.
p.36 #19 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
No one is asking for 1000 shots, but I'd expect 500 as a worthwhile target and like I said the phone makers are finding solutions and can somehow fit larger batteries into smaller phones (yes I realise it's more imperative for them). I just don't see the effort from the mirrorless brigade, they clearly aren't even addressing the issue. We are now about 4 years into the mirrorless project and no improvements in sight still.
Solution...use your phone camera to take photos or live with the limitations we have today with mirrorless systems.
p.36 #20 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
In the phone market, the manufacturers actually try to do something about the battery life issue and we see each generation flagship move to a larger and/or higher density battery, yet still maintain light and thin phones.
A.
Not gonna lie, my iphone battery, if anything, get s a little worse compared to previous models - and it's not user replaceable, at that.
I'm pretty impressed with these as straight JPGs OOC. They look tight and smooth in structure, and I can imaging that RAWs would produce even better definition. We'll have to see, but for now I see these as a decent step above the 5D2/5D3 images I've seen.