This topic is in the 2015 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2015A7rII rumour
p.1 #1A7rII rumour
SAR has posted a rumour (SR4) for an A7rII (rather than an A9), May-June timeframe
I think I'll be 1st in line for one
... to be honest I thought they would go for an A7sII before the r. I just wish/hope that Kolarivision will come up with a conversion for the sensor in the IBIS module.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-sony-a7rii-is-coming-very-soon/
Mike
I think I'll be 1st in line for one
... to be honest I thought they would go for an A7sII before the r. I just wish/hope that Kolarivision will come up with a conversion for the sensor in the IBIS module.http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-sony-a7rii-is-coming-very-soon/
Mike
Mar 18, 2015 at 04:49 AM
p.1 #2A7rII rumour
Also, most probably from same source:
mirrorlessrumors:Sony A7rII to be announced in 4-5 weeks!
mirrorlessrumors:Sony A7rII to be announced in 4-5 weeks!
Mar 18, 2015 at 05:03 AM
p.1 #3A7rII rumour
Well, if true, I guess I will play the curmudgeon.
I really like the light weight and small size of the A7r. It's probably the camera that reminds me the most of shooting with something like an old Nikon FM or similar. Adding weight, size and complexity to the body is not something I welcome as all I feel is needed with an upgrade is a better shutter release (less delay and better feel) and an electronic first curtain. I suppose I would have preferred the rumored "Pro" model to go that way versus the svelte A7r.
I really like the light weight and small size of the A7r. It's probably the camera that reminds me the most of shooting with something like an old Nikon FM or similar. Adding weight, size and complexity to the body is not something I welcome as all I feel is needed with an upgrade is a better shutter release (less delay and better feel) and an electronic first curtain. I suppose I would have preferred the rumored "Pro" model to go that way versus the svelte A7r. Mar 18, 2015 at 05:50 AM
p.1 #4A7rII rumour
If the A7r successor comes with the IBIS, then I would expect the camera to be on the lines of the size of the A7II and would then be larger and heavier than the existing A7r. The next questions regarding the camera are will there be a change in the sensor, the sensor MP, and whether the sensor stack can be changed by Kolari for those of us that would want to use the camera with MF M-mount (and in particular Leica M) lenses and film based SLR/DSLR lenses? If Kolari or anyone else is not willing or able to change the sensor stack of the new camera, then such revisions may end with the A7 and A7r cameras. 
Rich
The next questions regarding the camera are will there be a change in the sensor, the sensor MP, and whether the sensor stack can be changed by Kolari for those of us that would want to use the camera with MF M-mount (and in particular Leica M) lenses and film based SLR/DSLR lenses? If Kolari or anyone else is not willing or able to change the sensor stack of the new camera, then such revisions may end with the A7 and A7r cameras. Rich
Mar 18, 2015 at 05:51 AM
p.1 #5A7rII rumour
I think there's a market for a 50MP A7ʀ II with EFCS but no IBIS. It would be a great lightweight tool for all sorts of cityscape/landscape/travel/studio photography.
However if it does turn out to be an A7 II but with a 36 megapixel sensor, I wont be too disappointed personally (I'm after one body that can do everything, that includes handheld low light work).
I'm very much hoping for 50MP, regardless of IBIS
- I get the feeling if a "pro" oriented A9 appears it will be 24MP and oriented toward speed not resolution.
However if it does turn out to be an A7 II but with a 36 megapixel sensor, I wont be too disappointed personally (I'm after one body that can do everything, that includes handheld low light work).
I'm very much hoping for 50MP, regardless of IBIS
- I get the feeling if a "pro" oriented A9 appears it will be 24MP and oriented toward speed not resolution.Mar 18, 2015 at 06:10 AM
p.1 #6A7rII rumour
I'm hoping for 36MP rather than 50: I'm worried that getting EFCS to work on 50 might not be possible yet, and that bust rate and focus could be no better than the A 7r or even worse. Whereas we know that Sony have a 36MP sensor with EFCS coz they use it in the Nikon D810.
Of course Id take 50 Mp if there was no downside, but if there is .....
Of course Id take 50 Mp if there was no downside, but if there is .....
Mar 18, 2015 at 06:20 AM
p.1 #7A7rII rumour
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
Mar 18, 2015 at 06:24 AM
p.1 #8A7rII rumour
I'll buy if it has EFCS and the focus is as good as A7II; I am pretty sure we'll have wait for the pro model to equalnornbest the A 6000.
Mar 18, 2015 at 06:36 AM
p.1 #9A7rII rumour
naturephoto1 wrote:
If the A7r successor comes with the IBIS, then I would expect the camera to be on the lines of the size of the A7II and would then be larger and heavier than the existing A7r. The next questions regarding the camera are will there be a change in the sensor, the sensor MP, and whether the sensor stack can be changed by Kolari for those of us that would want to use the camera with MF M-mount (and in particular Leica M) lenses and film based SLR/DSLR lenses? If Kolari or anyone else is not willing or able...Show more →
+1. Exactly my thoughts! I doubt that Sony will change the sensor stack in their new camera models - why should they? For the ones like us who are using rangefinder MF lenses mostly on the A7 series cameras instead of FE lenses? Sony rather wants to push for their FE lens line where the thicker sensor glass ist not an issue.
My feeling is that Sony might still use the current 36 MP sensor for the A7R II if there is really an A9 "professional" camera coming later. They might rather improve on IBIS, AF, maybe shutter in the A7R II. The full hoped for feature-package with 50 MP sensor might only arrive in the A9. Sony is under no pressure, they can do a slower approach now especially if Canon's 50 MP sensor turns out to be inferior to the new Sony sensor (DR for example).
I am with you that the new version II cameras are more bulky in size which I also don't like. If the A7R II comes with a top notch new sensor, then I might consider an upgrade of my A7R even if it is a bit more bulky, but not if the same sensor is still used.
If the A7r successor comes with the IBIS, then I would expect the camera to be on the lines of the size of the A7II and would then be larger and heavier than the existing A7r.
The next questions regarding the camera are will there be a change in the sensor, the sensor MP, and whether the sensor stack can be changed by Kolari for those of us that would want to use the camera with MF M-mount (and in particular Leica M) lenses and film based SLR/DSLR lenses? If Kolari or anyone else is not willing or able...Show more →+1. Exactly my thoughts! I doubt that Sony will change the sensor stack in their new camera models - why should they? For the ones like us who are using rangefinder MF lenses mostly on the A7 series cameras instead of FE lenses? Sony rather wants to push for their FE lens line where the thicker sensor glass ist not an issue.
My feeling is that Sony might still use the current 36 MP sensor for the A7R II if there is really an A9 "professional" camera coming later. They might rather improve on IBIS, AF, maybe shutter in the A7R II. The full hoped for feature-package with 50 MP sensor might only arrive in the A9. Sony is under no pressure, they can do a slower approach now especially if Canon's 50 MP sensor turns out to be inferior to the new Sony sensor (DR for example).
I am with you that the new version II cameras are more bulky in size which I also don't like. If the A7R II comes with a top notch new sensor, then I might consider an upgrade of my A7R even if it is a bit more bulky, but not if the same sensor is still used.
Mar 18, 2015 at 08:07 AM
p.1 #10A7rII rumour
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I really like the light weight and small size of the A7r. It's probably the camera that reminds me the most of shooting with something like an old Nikon FM or similar.
I prefer the A7M2 because it feels and sounds more like my F2A - much more solid and precise than the first-generation A7 cameras. I think the slight increase in weight adds to the stability of the camera.
I really like the light weight and small size of the A7r. It's probably the camera that reminds me the most of shooting with something like an old Nikon FM or similar.
I prefer the A7M2 because it feels and sounds more like my F2A - much more solid and precise than the first-generation A7 cameras. I think the slight increase in weight adds to the stability of the camera.
Mar 18, 2015 at 08:16 AM
p.1 #11A7rII rumour
I'll have my eye on this. I'm not an A7 shooter yet, but if this comes out not too much larger than the A7r and can mitigate shutter shock via EFCS or some other means then I'll be looking closely at it. The larger "Pro" model is of no interest to me, so if they are really going to release both a "Pro" as well as something more in akin to the original A7r form factor that would make me happy!
Mar 18, 2015 at 08:16 AM
p.1 #12A7rII rumour
ecarlino wrote:
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
It will be interesting to find out exactly what Sony thinks a "pro" camera is all about. For Canon and Nikon the "pro" designation is not about high resolution. The pro 1DX has 18 MP while the 5D III has 22 MP (and the 5DS has 50 MP). Likewise the pro D4S is 16 MP to the D810's 36 MP. But, Sony is neither Canon, nor Nikon, so we shall just have to see.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely superior overall performance including top-of-the-line AF performance, shooting speed, build-quality, etc.
I'm with Matt in sincere hopes that the a7R II will be more about high resolution and less about those other things that true "pro" cameras really need.
Edited on Mar 18, 2015 at 10:56 AM · View previous versions
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
It will be interesting to find out exactly what Sony thinks a "pro" camera is all about. For Canon and Nikon the "pro" designation is not about high resolution. The pro 1DX has 18 MP while the 5D III has 22 MP (and the 5DS has 50 MP). Likewise the pro D4S is 16 MP to the D810's 36 MP. But, Sony is neither Canon, nor Nikon, so we shall just have to see.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely superior overall performance including top-of-the-line AF performance, shooting speed, build-quality, etc.
I'm with Matt in sincere hopes that the a7R II will be more about high resolution and less about those other things that true "pro" cameras really need.
Edited on Mar 18, 2015 at 10:56 AM · View previous versions
Mar 18, 2015 at 08:58 AM
p.1 #13A7rII rumour
ecarlino wrote:
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.
retrofocus wrote:
The full hoped for feature-package with 50 MP sensor might only arrive in the A9.
I'm not so sure, the trend has been for the flagship models from Canon and Nikon to have prioritised frame-rate and AF over resolution whilst the highest resolution sensors have been in smaller lower spec bodies. I don't see why Sony would be different, a small 50MP with slow frame-rate and modest AF makes more sense to me than a large, robust weather sealed pro oriented body, with a slow frame-rate and modest AF.
edit: whilst I was typing Darbo made a near identical post!
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.
retrofocus wrote:
The full hoped for feature-package with 50 MP sensor might only arrive in the A9.
I'm not so sure, the trend has been for the flagship models from Canon and Nikon to have prioritised frame-rate and AF over resolution whilst the highest resolution sensors have been in smaller lower spec bodies. I don't see why Sony would be different, a small 50MP with slow frame-rate and modest AF makes more sense to me than a large, robust weather sealed pro oriented body, with a slow frame-rate and modest AF.
edit: whilst I was typing Darbo made a near identical post!
Mar 18, 2015 at 09:03 AM
p.1 #14A7rII rumour
darbo wrote:
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.It will be interesting to find out exactly what Sony thinks a "pro" camera is all about. For Canon and Nikon the "pro" designation has never been about high resolution. The pro 1DX has 18 MP while the 5D III has 22 MP (and the 5DS has 50 MP). Likewise the pro D4S is 16 MP to the D810's 36 MP. But, Sony is neither Canon, nor Nikon, so we shall just have to see.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely...Show more →
Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution? I believe a lot of pros use medium format digital for the extra resolution. Just because Canon and Nikon feed you their views does not mean they are correct.
I want high resolution, great AF and tight weather sealing...in a pro body.
ecarlino wrote
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely...Show more →
Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution? I believe a lot of pros use medium format digital for the extra resolution. Just because Canon and Nikon feed you their views does not mean they are correct.
I want high resolution, great AF and tight weather sealing...in a pro body.
Mar 18, 2015 at 09:07 AM
p.1 #15A7rII rumour
I'm not super worried about the size if it's A7II like. I guess 125g is something, but nothing terrible. I mean the smallest FF camera from Canon is the 6D. Plus it would be nice to have IBIS for lenses like the 55 and 35 and probably the upcoming 85.
For me, the biggest issues are shutter lag, AF, and the shutter shock issue. I fear, however, the AF issue is going to be hard to fix. From my understanding, Sony said they could put PDAF in the A7R because there was no AA filter.
Chris
For me, the biggest issues are shutter lag, AF, and the shutter shock issue. I fear, however, the AF issue is going to be hard to fix. From my understanding, Sony said they could put PDAF in the A7R because there was no AA filter.
Chris
Mar 18, 2015 at 09:41 AM
p.1 #16A7rII rumour
chez wrote:
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.It will be interesting to find out exactly what Sony thinks a "pro" camera is all about. For Canon and Nikon the "pro" designation has never been about high resolution. The pro 1DX has 18 MP while the 5D III has 22 MP (and the 5DS has 50 MP). Likewise the pro D4S is 16 MP to the D810's 36 MP. But, Sony is neither Canon, nor Nikon, so we shall just have to see.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely superior overall performance including top-of-the-line AF performance, shooting speed, build-quality, etc.
I'm with Matt in sincere hopes that the a7R II will be more about high resolution and less about those other things that true "pro" cameras really need.Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution? I believe a lot of pros use medium format digital for the extra resolution. Just because Canon and Nikon feed you their views does not mean they are correct.
I want high resolution, great AF and tight weather sealing...in a pro body.
The post I was responding to was making the assumption that pro level Sony mirrorless FF camera will naturally be the highest resolution model. And I am simply suggesting that, based on the precedents of the leading manufacturers of 35mm format cameras (Canon and Nikon), a flagship or "pro" level camera is not necessarily the manufacturer's highest resolution camera.
You ask "Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution?" And my answer is I do not necessarily believe a pro camera needs to have a limited resolution. I was simply drawing a predictive conclusion based on historical precedents. Why did Canon and Nikon limit the resolution of their flagship "pro" cameras (1DX and D4S) as compared to their other lesser models? But, my reason for stating why I think a pro camera should have a modest resolution is simply because I don't get a strong sense that the vast majority of photography professionals want a 50 MP camera. Certainly Landscape, Architectural, and Studio photographers need the greater resolution, but they do not represent the majority of professionals do they?
Regarding medium format: yes a lot of pros (Landscape, Architectural, and Studio pros) use medium format for the ultimate in resolution and image quality. And not only that, but a whole lot of pros use 5D IIIs and D810s. What pros actually use, and what camera manufacturers designate as "pro" is not always the same thing. A good number of pros are already using a7/a7R/and a7S cameras now, are they not?!
Finally, you are right: Just because Nikon and Canon have made their flagship/pro-level cameras with more limited resolution than their other cameras doesn't make them "correct". Sony can certainly define "pro" a completely different way.
darbo wrote
ecarlino wrote
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely superior overall performance including top-of-the-line AF performance, shooting speed, build-quality, etc.
I'm with Matt in sincere hopes that the a7R II will be more about high resolution and less about those other things that true "pro" cameras really need.
I want high resolution, great AF and tight weather sealing...in a pro body.
The post I was responding to was making the assumption that pro level Sony mirrorless FF camera will naturally be the highest resolution model. And I am simply suggesting that, based on the precedents of the leading manufacturers of 35mm format cameras (Canon and Nikon), a flagship or "pro" level camera is not necessarily the manufacturer's highest resolution camera.
You ask "Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution?" And my answer is I do not necessarily believe a pro camera needs to have a limited resolution. I was simply drawing a predictive conclusion based on historical precedents. Why did Canon and Nikon limit the resolution of their flagship "pro" cameras (1DX and D4S) as compared to their other lesser models? But, my reason for stating why I think a pro camera should have a modest resolution is simply because I don't get a strong sense that the vast majority of photography professionals want a 50 MP camera. Certainly Landscape, Architectural, and Studio photographers need the greater resolution, but they do not represent the majority of professionals do they?
Regarding medium format: yes a lot of pros (Landscape, Architectural, and Studio pros) use medium format for the ultimate in resolution and image quality. And not only that, but a whole lot of pros use 5D IIIs and D810s. What pros actually use, and what camera manufacturers designate as "pro" is not always the same thing. A good number of pros are already using a7/a7R/and a7S cameras now, are they not?!
Finally, you are right: Just because Nikon and Canon have made their flagship/pro-level cameras with more limited resolution than their other cameras doesn't make them "correct". Sony can certainly define "pro" a completely different way.
Mar 18, 2015 at 09:44 AM
p.1 #17A7rII rumour
darbo wrote:
I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.It will be interesting to find out exactly what Sony thinks a "pro" camera is all about. For Canon and Nikon the "pro" designation has never been about high resolution. The pro 1DX has 18 MP while the 5D III has 22 MP (and the 5DS has 50 MP). Likewise the pro D4S is 16 MP to the D810's 36 MP. But, Sony is neither Canon, nor Nikon, so we shall just have to see.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely...Show more →
Actually, the speed/build preference of Canon and Nikon Pro bodies is a fairly new thing. Prior to the current gen CaNikon offered a choice between a Speed Pro body and a Resolution Pro body in the same physical casing. So you had the 1D/1Ds split from Canon and the D?/D?x split from Nikon. Both Canon and Nikon decided to go with speed only on their current Pro bodies (D4(s) and 1D X) and offer the resolution body in a more compact body down the line (D8x0 and later the 5Dr)
ecarlino wrote
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.I'll buy if it has an AF system that bests the a6000 and includes an EFCS, otherwise I'll wait to see what the 'pro' offers.
In my opinion the "pro" camera really should be the one you've been waiting for. A pro camera should have a modest resolution, but absolutely...Show more →
Actually, the speed/build preference of Canon and Nikon Pro bodies is a fairly new thing. Prior to the current gen CaNikon offered a choice between a Speed Pro body and a Resolution Pro body in the same physical casing. So you had the 1D/1Ds split from Canon and the D?/D?x split from Nikon. Both Canon and Nikon decided to go with speed only on their current Pro bodies (D4(s) and 1D X) and offer the resolution body in a more compact body down the line (D8x0 and later the 5Dr)
Mar 18, 2015 at 10:05 AM
p.1 #18A7rII rumour
mawz wrote:
Actually, the speed/build preference of Canon and Nikon Pro bodies is a fairly new thing. Prior to the current gen CaNikon offered a choice between a Speed Pro body and a Resolution Pro body in the same physical casing. So you had the 1D/1Ds split from Canon and the D?/D?x split from Nikon. Both Canon and Nikon decided to go with speed only on their current Pro bodies (D4(s) and 1D X) and offer the resolution body in a more compact body down the line (D8x0 and later the 5Dr)
You are quite right; I'm glad you brought that out.
Actually, the speed/build preference of Canon and Nikon Pro bodies is a fairly new thing. Prior to the current gen CaNikon offered a choice between a Speed Pro body and a Resolution Pro body in the same physical casing. So you had the 1D/1Ds split from Canon and the D?/D?x split from Nikon. Both Canon and Nikon decided to go with speed only on their current Pro bodies (D4(s) and 1D X) and offer the resolution body in a more compact body down the line (D8x0 and later the 5Dr)
You are quite right; I'm glad you brought that out.
Mar 18, 2015 at 10:25 AM
p.1 #19A7rII rumour
chez wrote:
Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution? I believe a lot of pros use medium format digital for the extra resolution. Just because Canon and Nikon feed you their views does not mean they are correct.
It doesn't need to have limited resolution, it just that speed has been the most important factor for other manufactures. If Sony intends to compete with those bodies then they will also probably emphasize speed, which ultimately means lower resolution (however fast you make your processor you can always get a greater framerate by lowering the resolution (especially with mirrorless when you don't have a mirror to move).
If however Sony want to compete with medium format instead then they might decide to emphasise resolution over speed, but then this is a much much smaller market to go after than high speed DSLR users.
chez wrote:
I want high resolution, great AF and tight weather sealing...in a pro body.
So do I, but I don't think it's going to happen, unfortunately.
mawz wrote:
Actually, the speed/build preference of Canon and Nikon Pro bodies is a fairly new thing. Prior to the current gen CaNikon offered a choice between a Speed Pro body and a Resolution Pro body in the same physical casing. So you had the 1D/1Ds split from Canon and the D?/D?x split from Nikon.
I think that is just a sign that resolution hit a threshold where what could be offered in a fast body became "enough" for most people.
Why do you think a Pro camera needs to have limited resolution? I believe a lot of pros use medium format digital for the extra resolution. Just because Canon and Nikon feed you their views does not mean they are correct.
It doesn't need to have limited resolution, it just that speed has been the most important factor for other manufactures. If Sony intends to compete with those bodies then they will also probably emphasize speed, which ultimately means lower resolution (however fast you make your processor you can always get a greater framerate by lowering the resolution (especially with mirrorless when you don't have a mirror to move).
If however Sony want to compete with medium format instead then they might decide to emphasise resolution over speed, but then this is a much much smaller market to go after than high speed DSLR users.
chez wrote:
I want high resolution, great AF and tight weather sealing...in a pro body.
So do I, but I don't think it's going to happen, unfortunately.
mawz wrote:
Actually, the speed/build preference of Canon and Nikon Pro bodies is a fairly new thing. Prior to the current gen CaNikon offered a choice between a Speed Pro body and a Resolution Pro body in the same physical casing. So you had the 1D/1Ds split from Canon and the D?/D?x split from Nikon.
I think that is just a sign that resolution hit a threshold where what could be offered in a fast body became "enough" for most people.
Mar 18, 2015 at 10:41 AM
p.1 #20A7rII rumour
Matt Grum wrote:
I'm not so sure, the trend has been for the flagship models from Canon and Nikon to have prioritised frame-rate and AF over resolution whilst the highest resolution sensors have been in smaller lower spec bodies. I don't see why Sony would be different, a small 50MP with slow frame-rate and modest AF makes more sense to me than a large, robust weather sealed pro oriented body, with a slow frame-rate and modest AF.
edit: whilst I was typing Darbo made a near identical post!
I've said this before on other threads, so sorry for repeating myself - but it's in response to the repeated statements that the high MP cameras from other brands don't sport their brand's fastest AF, etc.
let's not forget that Sony a7 series cameras have very very poor AF and continuous shooting RELATIVELY speaking (so let's not start flaming me over this) compared to DSLR and there is A LOT OF ROOM for improvement - so the a7r2 could have a big improvement in AF (and a lot of other things) and still leave room for improvement.
I'm using an a7ii right now and can't believe how poor the viewfinder experience is with continuous shooting - how does anyone follow something that is moving around other than hoping and praying and guessing? because you certainly can't see anything when you hold the shutter down for a few seconds. And, yes - perhaps - compared to other mirrorless it's par for the course, but coming from a D800, it sucks. everything else w/ the a7ii and a7r have been fine to great, but there is a huge amount of room to get better on this.
I'm not even asking for D4 performance, but just to get the a7r up to D810 will probably be a few iterations, so each release needs to improve on AF and EVF, amongst other things.
ecarlino wrote
SAR mentions that this is NOT the 'PRO' model - probably to temper the expectation of 50 MP in this camera.retrofocus wrote
The full hoped for feature-package with 50 MP sensor might only arrive in the A9.edit: whilst I was typing Darbo made a near identical post!
I've said this before on other threads, so sorry for repeating myself - but it's in response to the repeated statements that the high MP cameras from other brands don't sport their brand's fastest AF, etc.
let's not forget that Sony a7 series cameras have very very poor AF and continuous shooting RELATIVELY speaking (so let's not start flaming me over this) compared to DSLR and there is A LOT OF ROOM for improvement - so the a7r2 could have a big improvement in AF (and a lot of other things) and still leave room for improvement.
I'm using an a7ii right now and can't believe how poor the viewfinder experience is with continuous shooting - how does anyone follow something that is moving around other than hoping and praying and guessing? because you certainly can't see anything when you hold the shutter down for a few seconds. And, yes - perhaps - compared to other mirrorless it's par for the course, but coming from a D800, it sucks. everything else w/ the a7ii and a7r have been fine to great, but there is a huge amount of room to get better on this.
I'm not even asking for D4 performance, but just to get the a7r up to D810 will probably be a few iterations, so each release needs to improve on AF and EVF, amongst other things.
Mar 18, 2015 at 10:46 AM