p.39 #2 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Paul Mo wrote:
But no performance section yet?
"Performance. Burst shooting performance of the Sony A7R isn't terribly swift, although that will likely be forgiven by photographers hooked on its pairing of huge sensor and compact body. With focus and exposure locked from the first frame, you can shoot at up to 4 frames per second. With autofocus and exposure between frames, the maximum rate plunges to just 1.5fps. The A7R's lower-res sibling performs better here, managing 5fps with exposure / focus locked, and 2.5fps otherwise."
p.39 #3 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jeremy_clay wrote:
"Performance. Burst shooting performance of the Sony A7R isn't terribly swift, although that will likely be forgiven by photographers hooked on its pairing of huge sensor and compact body. With focus and exposure locked from the first frame, you can shoot at up to 4 frames per second. With autofocus and exposure between frames, the maximum rate plunges to just 1.5fps. The A7R's lower-res sibling performs better here, managing 5fps with exposure / focus locked, and 2.5fps otherwise."
Yup, it's not a speed demon and most likely was never intended to be. Since the mountains I shoot are on the slow side of the motion scale I'm not too concerned
p.39 #4 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
schlotz wrote:
Yup, it's not a speed demon and most likely was never intended to be. Since the mountains I shoot are on the slow side of the motion scale I'm not too concerned
I'm with you on this. It will be my go to landscape camera. I have a 5d2 and 7d if I want to shoot anything fast.
p.39 #6 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
jctriguy wrote:
So why say it is still smaller than a DSLR?? If you want the grip, use it. But, why try and pretend that is somehow smaller? Same as others pretending that you can get a A7r for $2k. If it is so great, why do you need to pretend that it is 1k less than it actually is??
I said it "will not be bigger than a DSLR." Which I feel is a true statement. I've never said anything about price, and obviously whoever told you they think they can buy an A7r for $2k did not go check its list price of $2299. But I can tell you that the camera as I intend to buy it (body, grip, two extra batteries and a charger) will cost me $2724.
p.39 #7 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Imaging resources A7R review. In camera jpgs compared to A7, 5D III, D800E, 645D, RX1R.
Looks like Sony's in camera jpg processing is now very good. Gives the 645D a run for it's money. Does a little better than D800E in some areas, others a little behind.
Thanks for posting this link! This is exactly what I hoped to see test-wise. No big surprises here - simply a great sensor which makes the camera a front runner.
p.39 #8 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
artd wrote:
I said it "will not be bigger than a DSLR." Which I feel is a true statement. I've never said anything about price, and obviously whoever told you they think they can buy an A7r for $2k did not go check its list price of $2299. But I can tell you that the camera as I intend to buy it (body, grip, two extra batteries and a charger) will cost me $2724.
Yeh, and try to get the equivalent sensor capable camera from Canon...oh never mind, they don't have one.
p.39 #11 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
KiboOst wrote:
Yeah really great review, and largely better sensor than anything from Canon. Can't wait to play with a few raws...
Still waiting for a review with Canon lenses and metabones.
Champing at the bit to get ARWs. The jpg's themselves are impressive enough though.
Someone on alt gear forum posted 100% crops of A7R with a ton of alt glass, not Canon though. The Sony FE 55 f/1.8 is tack sharp on this camera corner to corner.
p.39 #12 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
I processed a couple of the RAWs (the ones with the test scene, bottles/crayons, etc) on Imaging Resource. The ISO 100 shot is jaw dropping. That was shot with the 55 as well.
p.39 #13 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
4fps is plenty good enough to catch fast moving glaciers and mountains, but you do have to watch out for those elusive mesas and canyons though!
Is the buffer write speed known yet? I've been known to fill the buffer on slow bodies when capturing panoramas. Of course after one panorama the A7r battery will be dead.
p.39 #15 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
EB-1 wrote:
Is the buffer write speed known yet? I've been known to fill the buffer on slow bodies when capturing panoramas. Of course after one panorama the A7r battery will be dead.
p.39 #20 · Sony A7 and A7r Full Frame with Canon Lenses
Robin Smith wrote:
"Why do you come onto a thread and slag others that can use the extra pixels and dynamic range."
It's a free country: my view is as valid as anyone else's - this my opinion. I think that you will find your landscape photos almost entirely unchanged going from, say a 5D3, to the new Sony 36 MP. Any differences seen will be entirely by you when pixel peeping. This is perhaps important to you, but I doubt anyone else would see the differences unless they join you in studying your monitor. If the high ISO performance is radically improved then you might see some noticeable change, but I doubt this will be the case and as far as I know high ISO is not usually the style for a landscape shooter....Show more →
Robin You've confused being entitled to an opinion with having a valid opinion. As a professional that works with large and very large high quality prints that people view close up (i.e. not billboards) there is a huge and obvious difference between the quality of 22 and 36 megapixels in detail and sharpness. You are certainly entitled to your opinion – but you are simply wrong.
