shirozina wrote:
Lossy compression is a total non issue for me.
I'm happy for you.
Fortunately for those for whom this is an issue, according to imaging-resource, the top alpha guy at Sony acknowleded this shortcoming at the presser yesterday and that he would like to offer a lossless compression in the future, possibly via firmware update.
Paul Mo wrote:
Sony's marketing dept. are not being completely honest about this camera. The karting image supplied to illustrate 5fps burst mode - I'd put money on it being shot on either a 1DX or from 4K frame grabs.
Wilbus wrote:
Not saying you are wrong but do you have proof?
It's from the marketing department of course it's lies! Not that it matters though I ignore all of that and wait for the actual reviews...
matthewsaville wrote:
considering that DR is Canon's only "drawback", and considering how incredible Lightroom's new HDR DNG creation feature is, I'm thinking that any serious landscape photographer should feel no shame in getting a 5DsR, and any serious astro-landscape photographer should feel quite proud to have a pair of 6D's...
Depends greatly on your point of view, for me the 5DsR has many drawbacks, chief amongst them DR, lack of an EVF and the persistent annoyance of AF miscalibration. Add to that the 5DsR seems to lack any "icing" on its cake, there's no 4K video, no IBIS, and a rather low maximum ISO setting, and a higher price to boot
matthewsaville wrote:
In short, it makes a good add-on to an existing Nikon / Canon lens arsenal, but as its own system, it is a tough cookie to swallow, especially for me.
Again it depends greatly on what you shoot, I ditched my Canon system last year and haven't looked back. The native lenses whilst few in number are excellent, and complement the system well, they're not pushing the absolute limits of compactness, but neither do they compromise on performance, and front to back distance of camera + lens is shorter than any comparable full frame DSLR system...
justruss wrote:
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. ...Show more →
Yep, I completely agree about the feature bloat + massive grab for profit on this model by Sony. The price strikes me as pretty ballsy (particularly given the "7", non-pro model position). It will be interesting to see if they pull it off. I know so many here see it as the second coming and are buyers - but that price is going to be a no go for so many that would have jumped at an A7r replacement at it's same initial price point/ market position as a stripped down, dedicated, hi-res tool. If Sony is successful at this price, I'm not sure I want to see what they price the A9 Pro model at.
I have an a7ii and use it with the metabones and an ef lens.
It may as well be a manual focus lens.
It has pdaf.
How is this rii and its pdaf so different to the degree that performance can be close to a native canon body?
Matt Grum wrote:
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.
True and I definitely see that possibly being the case. I was also thinking that if there is an A7S MK2, it could be so focused on video performance that it may not even be that appealing to someone like me who really doesn't give a damn about video and just wants the best sensitivity. So maybe the A7R MKII is what I'm really looking for, only time will tell. I can't wait for those reviews.
Also I think it's safe to assume, if there is another A7S in the works, it will probably be at least a few hundred bucks more than this new A7R. I'm not sure I'd be willing to pay that much considering I'm still very happy with my A7S.
Jun 11, 2015 at 06:57 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
wiseguy010 wrote:
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.
It is the substantial part of the IQ in your quote that has not been born out in my experience. Fred has shown that the effect of the lossy compression only show up in pretty rare circumstances (very high contrast region where the highlights are in a very narrow band) then only when the shadows are pushed very far in post. Yes, it can effect image quality, but it has never affected any of my shots and I can prevent an effect just by not pushing shadows too far. I wouldn't call this a substantial effect on IQ. Do I want Sony to fix it? Yes, but I think it is important to keep the issue in proper perspective.
Matt Grum wrote:
It's from the marketing department of course it's lies! Not that it matters though I ignore all of that and wait for the actual reviews...
...Which probably means it will never happen. If it was going to occur, it would be there from the start. Promising a future feature on an unreleased camera, particularly by a company not known for firmware updates....that's classic.
justruss wrote:
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)
I think you're massively underestimating the length of the development schedule for a camera, I'm pretty sure the specs would have to have been finalised long before the 5Ds announcement.
justruss wrote:
TL;DR: Sony isn't feeling the competition, so it can increase prices.
The competition is the 5Ds, and since Canon set a high price for that it's left the door open for Sony.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
If Sony is successful at this price, I'm not sure I want to see what they price the A9 Pro model at.
If they can get anywhere close on performance (and usability/build quality etc.) with the 1DX / D4 then expect a $4000 price tag...
Steve Spencer wrote:
It is the substantial part of the IQ in your quote that has not been born out in my experience. Fred has shown that the effect of the lossy compression only show up in pretty rare circumstances (very high contrast region where the highlights are in a very narrow band) then only when the shadows are pushed very far in post. Yes, it can effect image quality, but it has never affected any of my shots and I can prevent an effect just by not pushing shadows too far. I wouldn't call this a substantial effect on IQ. Do I want Sony to fix it? Yes, but I think it is important to keep the issue in proper perspective. ...Show more →
Agree and if you want to see horrendous image / lens investment ruining digital artefacts then try pushing Canon RAW files in the shadows - Canon RAW files with the superior lossless compression................
Jun 11, 2015 at 07:16 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Yorg wrote:
I have an a7ii and use it with the metabones and an ef lens.
It may as well be a manual focus lens.
It has pdaf.
How is this rii and its pdaf so different to the degree that performance can be close to a native canon body?
The spec of 392 PDAF sensors suggests it is a very different system. I expect it will work better than the A7 II, but we only have a couple reports that it works well with the metabones and Canon lenses. These might be a bit exaggerated. My guess and it is just a guess is that it will work ok, but clearly not as well as a Canon camera. Among other things I can't see how it would have AF micro adjust.
matthewsaville wrote:
"Just live with it" is exactly what to say if we don't care at all to pressure Sony into improving a feature / function.
Ironically, the "just live with it" philosophy is also Canon users' downfall when it comes to demanding any sort of DR improvements like, 2-3 generations ago. If folks would calm down about brand pride and be a little less argumentative just for the fun of it, They could have gotten a clear message across by now and seen some real change. Instead, we have Chuck Westfall pre-emptively stating that 5DsR DR is going to be about the same as the 5D III, and many die-hard Canon fans just shrug or make excuses.
So, sure, we could certainly "live with it" just like we could live with a good many things. But why do so, when speaking up could actually create change? What harm could come from adding a menu option for RAW file settings? Would it make the price of the camera go up $5 per camera? $20 per camera?
This is why I feel confused when folks say "can't win 'em all". This, like USB 2 vs USB 3, was a relatively affordable improvement that they absolutely should have made.
I'm never here to bash a camera or a system, I'm only ever hoping to be a voice that joins a chorus that creates better cameras for all, in the long run....Show more →
No need to preach, I didn't want to live with what canon offered, so I ditched them mostly. Sony gave me 15/10 things I asked for, and I was not ever one to complain about the raws, in fact super large raws scare me more than the supposed lossy scare.
On the scale of important issues, it's a 1/10 for me, least important, like popup flash. You can complain about it, and hopefully Sony can get the fix out, but to me, it's a non issue. It's all about priorities.
The PDAF only works on e-mount lenses, and only for af-c, tracking, and face or eye detect. It does not work for a-mount lenses at all, which is why the la-ea4 has a slt mirror. This is new tech from the ground up with a greater integration of pdaf and cdaf.
Yorg wrote:
I have an a7ii and use it with the metabones and an ef lens.
It may as well be a manual focus lens.
It has pdaf.
How is this rii and its pdaf so different to the degree that performance can be close to a native canon body?
matthewsaville wrote:
Yes, looking at the system as a whole is EXACTLY what I did. ;-) In short, the lenses I'd be using for what I do are almost exactly the same. Rokinon 14mm 2.8, Rokinon 24mm f/1.4, Sigma 35 1.4, Nikon 50 1.8...
For astro-landscape photography, there are no native Sony lenses that make sense, other than the Rokinons which are basically just a built-in adapter'd version of the DSLR lens. And the Sony would offer me worse weather protection (the body, that is) and zero EXIF transmission, while my Nikons can transmit and control almost all EXIF data.
I'll indeed grant that if the A7R II is an apple, then the D750 is an orange. 24 MP is no substitute for 42 MP, in many applications. And having a BSI sensor would be great for what I do. However, as I mentioned, in theory megapixels weigh nothing, so a D750 body with Nikon's next Sony-supplied sensor is not out of the question.
However, as I mentioned in my most recent response, I'll take the "clunky" OVF system any day, for nighttime landscapes in general, let alone for multi-hour timelapse shooting. Besides, the D750 and D810 both have a pretty sophisticated exposure delay mode that integrates very smoothly into a shooting workflow....Show more →
Matthew, let's just say you cornered yourself in with those lenses and insisted on saying Sony system is not right for you. So what are you trying to do here? Arguing your points of picking a Nikon in a Sony forum or trying to convert some to the other camp? I think all Sony users here prefer the EVF over the OVF system for their kinds of shooting, astro and nighttime landscapes included (I'm one). We do have a different set of lenses than yours to accomplish the same goal while being smaller and lighter. If one can treat any main feature as "nothing," I can go on and on as to why I would never pick a Nikon system since all the advantages would weigh nothing to me (Samyang EXIF, built-in exposure delay, etc.). Well clearly, they are since I'm a Sony shooter. But to be clear, I pick the tool that fits my style. If and when Nikon is able to produce a mirrorless camera that would exceed a Sony camera in all the features that I value at a reasonable price point, I would jump ship. Right now, I don't see that happens any time soon.
johnctharp wrote:
It looks like it's combining sub-pixels; if it's turning a 2x2 Bayer patch into a single pixel, which would eliminate quite a bit of artifact possibilities, then it should put out some really, really clear, really sharp video.
Only real complaint is that it's cropping full-frame for 4k to begin with; so you get the choice of full-frame DOF control at 1080p, or sharp 4k output with a Super35 crop.
Actually from the press release it has a full frame 4K mode. They mention that Super35 crop is done by oversampling, which implies the uncropped 4K isn't oversampled (that would require a very high readout rate and a lot of processing) but instead simply skips half the lines (or possibly on chip binning as you say, but skipping lines is more likely).
miguel_13 wrote:
I'm pretty curious about this, if its not line skipping for 4K than it must be cropping more than APS-C, and the combination of no AA filter and line skipping doesn't seem suported by the video samples I'm looking at.
Skipping every other line to produce 4K is much better than skipping two out of three lines when producing 1080p which other cameras have done in the past, resulting in less aliasing. Also the image from the lens will likely be slightly soft at the full native 8K resolution. Secondly even if there is some aliasing it should clean up nicely when downsampled to 1080p for a very crisp picture.
I assume you're viewing the samples in HD not 4K, which explains why they don't look as if line skipping is going on.
All in all I'm very excited about the video capabilities of this camera, which is a huge added bonus for me as I'd been on the fence about getting an α7s, but now I don't have too, and it's all recorded internally so no need for an expensive recorder and rig to go with it. For dabbling in high resolution video that's great.
DPReview updated its spec sheet to show a CIPA battery life rating of 290 shots for the A7r II. Not as good as the A7 II rating but not as bad as I imagined.
Great camera. I will buy one.
I am suspicious of claims like 40% faster etc.
Even if its true, that makes it slightly faster than A7r, which was an AF dud.
Expect slow focus.
I really have no concerns at all. The two sticking points dual card slots is always going to be a safeguard issue. Advice do not buy cheap SD cards. Spend the money on high quality cards like Sandisk extreme Pros and the like. You want fast cards for buffer reasons shooting and downloading. Don't skimp here. The compression stuff has not been a issue for me but it's a firmware upgrade and Sony is said to be working on it. I believe they are and also it maybe in the final production unit. Buying regardless. Batteries is a non issue for me. I actually like the small batteries and 3rd party batteries like Watsons work really well and are cheap as heck.
AF speed unless your shooting professional sports this is highly overrated. It's a non issue for real sports shooters . This thing can track very well and if it's even close to the A6000 than there is nothing t much better out there. FPS 5 frames for a 42 MPX sensor is just flat out outstanding. People forget that data rush on pushing this many MPX. You need more than you need less MPX cameras to do that , keep your canon. But I'm old school I shot sports with no motor drives no winders and still was successful. Honestly don't take offense but this is lazy people talking that just want to lay on the shutter and not think. Had to be said.
Price is price pay it or not. Leica in my mind is overpriced but others buy them like buying a bottle of water. Good for them. There really is no argument here buy it or not, it's a personal call. I happen to think for the specs and the feature sets plus the ability to now take on canon glass with AF, Sony A glass with AF with speeds and full AF points is priceless. I'm buying not quibbling on this stuff. It's a camera that checks a lot of boxes for me. It's what I have been waiting for and I'm first in line.
Here is my real bottom line in all this. I have made some really outstanding images with the A7r and I mean on a technical level and IQ. This can only improve on the technical side of continuing that trend. Coming from a lot of systems and MF digital for years, I am really extremely pleased with my results and I'm one of the stickler persons around on that level. It may not fit everyone but it sure fits me and I see continued success on my ART and that's my bottom line. Now I just need to complete my lens lineup and get this body and I'll go hide in the dark corners of this planet and make some Art.
