Not many things about the camera can be proved at this point but early users have reported that the camera has only the standard Sony lossy compressed RAW format.
BTW, my answer was to the OP who seemed to indicated that Sony ARW 2.3 format was something new. That is surely not the case.
I wish I had the luxury of waiting for 6-12 months, when the price will invariably be 25-40% lower on the used market and the grumbles have started about this or that Sony-shortcut. As with all new cameras today, Canon aside (low expectations), and particularly so with mirrorless, the hype and excitement is huge. I expect the machine to deliver unbelievable image quality... but many will sour on its quirks and missteps.
Here's what I think happened regarding pricing and features: Sony intended to price this at the same level as the A7R, or $200-$300 higher. This was/is the A7r replacement, and there was/is an A9 pro model waiting to be released. Then Canon came along and announced at 50mp 5Dr with some sensor quality improvements but nothing revolutionary. Sony realized that if they bumped the A7r2 specs up a bit (all those body improvements), gave us a new sensor which though not the megapixel king far outpaces the new Canon (prediction)-- it could keep its powder dry on a real pro model, make huge profit margins on a "false" flagship in the meantime... and drop the real flagship at an even higher profit margin level in 6-18 months.
There are parallels here to the Nvidia vs. AMD and GPU market for those who are familiar to it. For a while Nvidia and AMD/ATI released flagship against flagship, full-fat graphics processors. As AMD has lacked resources for R&D and has had to release re-branded or stagnated cards at the normal flagship price... NVidia has been playing a (smart) game of releasing mid-tier cards as temporary flagship cards at normal flagship prices, and then 6-8 months later releasing the full-fat cards at a big premium over their mid-tier cards dressed as flagship cards.
TL;DR: Sony isn't feeling the competition, so it can increase prices. I'm guessing the A7r2 has massive profit margins, and would have still been plenty profitable at $2,699. I will still buy one.
Exciting times. Let's see how the AF truly pans out and how DR/ISO holds up.
I'll be placing a pre order and I'm hoping they improve the controls so you can do the following; button switch between VF and monitor, single press to go to 1:1 pixels. DR better or no worse than the A7r, colour as good as the A7s. Lack of a pop up flash is an epic fail though but I can probably live with it.................
My understanding is that the lossy compression of RAW files is happening at the sensor read-out / hardware level to speed up processing.
I'm tired of people saying Sony is stupid not to offer lossless RAW, as if it were just a simple menu option to include it. You can agree or disagree with the hardware design decision that was made, but please stop acting as if the Sony engineers are just stupid or stubborn because the R&D and engineering that goes into a camera like this makes rocket science look easy.
ebrandon wrote:
My understanding is that the lossy compression of RAW files is happening at the sensor read-out / hardware level to speed up processing.
I'm tired of people saying Sony is stupid not to offer lossless RAW, as if it were just a simple menu option to include it. You can agree or disagree with the hardware design decision that was made, but please stop acting as if the Sony engineers are just stupid or stubborn because the tech that goes into a camera like this makes rocket science look easy.
For me lossy compression is a no go. Why invest thousands of dollars for a high quality camera and lenses to get the highest quality, but where the installed software will undo a substantial part of that quality. In this time I think it is unbelievable that this is still offered by Sony.
I would love to see some full resolution images. This is a totally new full-frame sensor design, and I'm sure that the per pixel quality hasn't been compromised, but it would still be nice of Sony to let us check a full resolution image.
Some of us has to make a quick decision in regards to a certain new Canon EOS that will be released in a few more days.
Stoffer wrote:
I would love to see some full resolution images. This is a totally new full-frame sensor design, and I'm sure that the per pixel quality hasn't been compromised, but it would still be nice of Sony to let us check a full resolution image.
Some of us has to make a quick decision in regards to a certain new Canon EOS that will be released in a few more days.
Exactly, although August is too late for my photo trip this year... Sadly.
Wondering if i will buy or rent the 5dsr for that trip and buy the A7rII later on. Choices, choices...
Lossy compression is a total non issue for me. In the 1000's of shots I have taken with the A7r often in quite difficult lighting conditions where I've had to bend the RAW file about quite substantially in ACR and C1 I have never ever seen this artefact. I think it's a non issue for 99.99% of users as well in it's effect on their pictures but it seems to effect at least 75% of non users / owners who are either put off buying an A7r or want to troll about Sony because they are a Canon/Nikon/etc brand fanboi
Kudos to Sony, BTW - great releases. It is good to see they are pushing things out. Canon and Nikon seem glacial by comparison. As for you, Fuji, time for a new gen. sensor, eh?
I have never had a issue with the a7r's files in Photoshop or capture one. They seem very similar to the Nikon d810 I just picked up. i can't really tell a difference tbh and I do all my work in photoshop from destroying details, changing colors and sharpening. the new sensor will probably blow everyone's minds like the first a7r and then people who don't have the camera will have to try their best to convince themselves that this camera isnt that great lol.
I sold my a7 kit in anticipation for this camera and bought a Nikon d810 to use for the next couple of months to see if this camera is all that. Sony and zeiss don't ever disappoint lol so I am expecting to make my switch back to Sony in August.
New a7r ii equipped with canon 24-70 2.8 ii and zeiss primes seems like a dream come true lol.
Those complaining about the lossy raws, do you actually take any photos? Seems to me that you spend more time bitching about it than actually shooting.
And regarding the battery life, just last weekend I took 1200+ photos and didn't even use a complete charge. If you're walking around with your camera on all the time, it is going to use battery.
I usually don't get all excited by new camera announcements, but the last 2 in the A7 series have certainly got me all agog. I ended up purchasing the A7II, and while I don't think I will buy the A7RII any time soon, I do expect to buy into it a few months down the line to possibly replace both my A7II and Canon 6D. The ability to focus Canon and A-mount lenses (without LA-EA4), the silent shutter, improved AF and AF area are very enticing features. The other really interesting feature is the 18MP crop mode. If AF tracking is reasonably good, this could also obviate the need for a dedicated sports & wildlife camera like the Canon 7D II for those of us who are not professionals, and hence don't need the exacting standards of the 7D or pro DSLRs. I can envision the possibility of ending up with just 2 bodies: A7R II & one Fuji body (I don't know that I'm willing to give up Fuji at this time).
darrellc wrote:
I wonder if they are trying to converge the A7s and A7R bodies, or if there is a monster A7sII coming out next.
leetmode wrote:
I can't wait to see if Sony has any plans for an A7S MKII!!!!!!!!! Surely it'll have to come at this point!
I think if anything this signals that an α7s II is much less likely. Not that that is a bad thing at all, basically this camera is what I've been asking for for a long time. Back in the A9 thread I called for a high resolution camera that doesn't compromise on speed, sensitivity or autofocus.
Canon seem to have gone all out for resolution but not really upgraded any of the other specs.
pmklausler wrote:
Uncompressed RAW is *not* what we want -- or, more precisely, it would be a lame second-best option.
What is absolutely required for critical work are (1) fixing the bit depth reduction in many shooting modes, including bracketed exposures, (2) fixing the tone curve so that it's at least linear in the shadows, and (3) wrapping this up in a *losslessly* compressed format.
2) The tone curve is perfectly linear in the shadows, all the way up to 2000 ADU, and you only lose 1 bit there (which will be mostly noise), so delta-compression aside, you essentially have a 13-bit RAW in the shadows where you need it most.
The fact that it's 11-bit in the highlights is largely irrelevant if you're converting images to a colour space with nonlinear gamma (such as sRGB or Adobe RGB) as highlight differences of 1ADU will be mapped to the same value anyway, even if you have a 14-bit RAW file.
There is no need to get so worked up about lossy RAW compression either way.
The effects are well documented. There is not any problem with tonal resolution related to this. There are problems with the Sony algorithm related to artifacts in very high contrast transitions. The likelihood that you get this in you image depends on what you shoot, but is generally small. But if you do things like star trails, the artifacts look bad when viewed at actual pixel resolution.
I had been using Canon since 2007 (XTi then 7D plus a 5Dmkii) and ended up switching to a D750 over an A7ii several months ago, when the body was $2150 Canadian. I wasn't so invested in Canon glass that I lost much on them (most lenses were bought used and sold for about the same). Still holding a 70-200F4Lis.
If this was out then it would have been a tough choice but I'm not sure how many people will skip a D750 class camera for this given the price difference and the enormous price difference when AF on a quality lens is considered.
I probably won't sell that 70-200 until I read the reviews of Canon lenses on this thing, and likely won't buy too much more glass for my D750 in the near future:-) I've actually been using older AI and AIS MF lenses which have been amazing, and I can imagine the EVF would make that experience even more enjoyable.
Price is an issue though. It *may* drop though I don't see as big a drop as with other Sonys given the feature set. The glass price especially in AF remains a big issue. If Sigma were to hop on board...
I am not in the camp of pre-ordering (I never do), but I will closely follow tests and reviews of the A7R II. As others mentioned earlier, I still find its introductory price a bit too high.
Where I am really curious about are the following points which are not too clear yet:
a) How do rangefinder lenses work on this improved back-illuminated sensor, especially wide ones? Is it a big difference to A7R performance with them or just marginal?
b) Even for me AF is not a "must", I am curious how much better in comparison to a Canon 5D series camera EF lenses work with AF using the MB adaptor.
c) Electronic camera menus - are they redesigned and improved or still very similar to the A7R? New/improved apps for all Sony A7 series cameras or only for the latest generation of them (A7 II, A7R II)?
Even I feel the euphory about the new A7R II, I am currenly more leaning towards waiting for its successor. I could change my mind especially if (a) shows a really big benefit with rangefinder lenses. For the rest I am able to manage well enough with my current A7R.
Just to add to ealier posts here, the lossless compression was never an issue for me throughout the time I am working with the A7R. So I don't see it as an issue to have it in the A7R II also even I wouldn't mind having the uncompressed RAW, too.
