It is not the first A7 camera with IBIS, the sensor does not improve over existing sensors in any substantial way, It does not solve the problem with small lenses and steep ray angles, and the AF with Canon lenses has severe limitations. Not saying that the A7rII is a bad camera, and not that it is a useful improvement in many ways, but I don't see it changing use patterns to any noticeable extent.
How about getting a very high MP, high low ISO DR sensor that takes Canon glass?
How about getting all that in a body that also gives IS to even non-IS Canon glass?
How about find me a body that does all of that and that and also offers you high-quality, non-binned, oversampled 4k video and takes Canon lenses?
I mean very high-quality internally recorded 4k, high MP FF, high low ISO DR, IBIS, takes Canon lenses (and at least some AF for some Canon lenses that isn't bad for basic stuff at times). That's a lot of stuff. Sounds a bit game-changing to me.
And for me personally what do I get by adding a 5Ds instead of an A7RII?
I get high MP count FF. One box checked. And since they crippled the RAW crop mode it has terrible buffer performance no matter what and is always stuck at 5fps so it's not like I could replace my 5D3 with it and I'd still need to keep the 5D3 anyway so it's not like I can count needing to still keep my 5D3 as a comparative knock against the A7R II since, unfortunately, I'd still need to do that anyway with the way they handled the 5Ds release.
But if I add an A7R II to my 5D3 (or maybe even paired to a 7D/7D2 makes even more sense) I get not just high MP count in FF but also the much better low ISO DR I am after (yeah 5Ds is better but not nearly as much better) and get my 4k video too, which is huge. With the 5Ds scenario I'd still be needing to spend yet even a ton more body on a second something or other else to add and sometimes need to drag up to three different things around and maybe even more lenses. And I even got some IBIS thrown in too with the Sony, so all lenses allow for hand-held shooting, at times (although tripod is generally better for video, minus a fancy motion rig).
To be able to get something that gives me high MP in FF and high DR at low ISO AND high-quality internally recorded 4k is kind of game changing for me personally. And I even get some IBIS thrown in for fun.
Now sure, a 5Ds with the SOny sensor and a 6-7fps RAW crop mode and the SOny 4k mode not crippled out etc. well of course I'd have been all over that 10000x more than this SOny. I could sell off my 5D3 and it would more thus a lot more cost effective and only need to drag one body around, ever. I'd have loved that. I pushed as much as I could for that for years to get things going in that direction, but Canon doesn't wanna try to go there, and all the Canon users in the forums just wanna praise whatever tepid steps they take and go on about how what I said could be possible by now was over the top ridiculous (only A7R II shows it was not), so what can I do? That would've been ultra game changing, but they won't do it, so for me the A7R II is my game changer.
Anyway I don't wanna get into this whole thing and if it starts then it'll just be the Canon usuals flooding the SOny forum and going on in all the usual ways.
So for me personally, it seems like a bit of a game changer. it won't be for everyone, but it doesn't seem to me to take much imagination to see how for at least some set of users, this is game changing.
skibum5 wrote:
How about getting a very high MP, high low ISO DR sensor that takes Canon glass?
How about getting all that in a body that also gives IS to even non-IS Canon glass?
How about find me a body that does all of that and that and also offers you high-quality, non-binned, oversampled 4k video and takes Canon lenses?
I mean very high-quality internally recorded 4k, high MP FF, high low ISO DR, IBIS, takes Canon lenses (and at least some AF for some Canon lenses that isn't bad for basic stuff at times). That's a lot of stuff. Sounds a bit game-changing to me.
And for me personally what do I get by adding a 5Ds instead of an A7RII?
I get high MP count FF. One box checked. And since they crippled the RAW crop mode it has terrible buffer performance no matter what and is always stuck at 5fps so it's not like I could replace my 5D3 with it and I'd still need to keep the 5D3 anyway so it's not like I can count needing to still keep my 5D3 as a comparative knock against the A7R II since, unfortunately, I'd still need to do that anyway with the way they handled the 5Ds release.
But if I add an A7R II to my 5D3 (or maybe even paired to a 7D/7D2 makes even more sense) I get not just high MP count in FF but also the much better low ISO DR I am after (yeah 5Ds is better but not nearly as much better) and get my 4k video too, which is huge. With the 5Ds scenario I'd still be needing to spend yet even a ton more body on a second something or other else to add and sometimes need to drag up to three different things around and maybe even more lenses. And I even got some IBIS thrown in too with the Sony, so all lenses allow for hand-held shooting, at times (although tripod is generally better for video, minus a fancy motion rig).
To be able to get something that gives me high MP in FF and high DR at low ISO AND high-quality internally recorded 4k is kind of game changing for me personally. And I even get some IBIS thrown in for fun.
Now sure, a 5Ds with the SOny sensor and a 6-7fps RAW crop mode and the SOny 4k mode not crippled out etc. well of course I'd have been all over that 10000x more than this SOny. I could sell off my 5D3 and it would more thus a lot more cost effective and only need to drag one body around, ever. I'd have loved that. I pushed as much as I could for that for years to get things going in that direction, but Canon doesn't wanna try to go there, and all the Canon users in the forums just wanna praise whatever tepid steps they take and go on about how what I said could be possible by now was over the top ridiculous (only A7R II shows it was not), so what can I do? That would've been ultra game changing, but they won't do it, so for me the A7R II is my game changer.
Anyway I don't wanna get into this whole thing and if it starts then it'll just be the Canon usuals flooding the SOny forum and going on in all the usual ways.
So for me personally, it seems like a bit of a game changer. it won't be for everyone, but it doesn't seem to me to take much imagination to see how for at least some set of users, this is game changing. ...Show more →
Since you are into video, that makes a big point for you, and IBIS is great. The rest was already done by the A7r. But does a few people more than before adding a Sony camera ( I guess you will keep a Canon camera for fast motion AF anyway) make the camera a game changer? I added a Sony A7r instead of a Canon 5D III, you may add a Sony A7r II instead of a Canon 5DS and it will be great too.
Hey guys, fyi- I just got my an a7rii and fotodiox adapter. Well, all of my third party canon mount lenses (including sigma 12-24 and tamron 28-75) not only wont autofocus, but won't even work in manual focus - the camera just locks up. I have a metabones iv on the way and am hoping it works...I can live with manual focus for my landscape work, but the camera was mostly a gift and I can't afford to replace all my glass....
Thanks for the reply. By chance have you used the native 16-35 FE? If so, care to give your thoughts on each?
Yes, I have the FE 16-35 f/4 and it's a great lens especially at 16mm. When traveling light, I bring my light tripod/ballhead, the A7R and this lens. However, whenever possible, I shoot with the TS-E 17, 24 and 90 lenses for better perspective/DOF control.
Update: I remember I just posted a review here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/600/sort/7/cat/56/page/1
I got my A7R2 today. I am using Commlite adapter.
17-40L - very fast AF
85 1.8 EF - no go, fail. 85 1.8 EF was faster on same adapter with my former A7r mark 1. Too bad. 85 1.8 EF is for sale.
p.13 #10 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, I have the FE 16-35 f/4 and it's a great lens especially at 16mm. When traveling light, I bring my light tripod/ballhead, the A7R and this lens. However, whenever possible, I shoot with the TS-E 17, 24 and 90 lenses for better perspective/DOF control.
Update: I remember I just posted a review here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/600/sort/7/cat/56/page/1
I too, have the TSEs and the FE 16-35. Follow about the same practice that Fred describes.
I didn't do a review, but I do have an article on my blog describing how well the TSE works for creating panos.
p.13 #12 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
I've got the Commlite adapter and feel that it's very similar to what I've been reading about the Metabones Mk4. My thoughts are that in general I can sometimes get focus with my Canon lenses, even continuous auto AF with my shorter zooms.
At first glance it seemed to work well with my 24-105L and 17-40L. I did a family portrait shoot (friends) tonight with the 24-105 and it crashed and failed several times. Had to re-boot and even remove battery to restore basic function. Would never try to use again for any gig. More info:
Canon 50mm 1.8 mk1- No chance, hunts and bangs.
Canon 17-40 f/4- seems to get good focus but with this lens all I really need is manual anyway-landscape/astro lens.
Canon 24-105L f/4- works for the most part, but not reliable (see above)
Canon 100-400L Mk1. Works 50% of the time at shorter focal lengths in bright light. Partial pre-MF assist helps it find focus better. At 300-400, quite poor to un-useable.
Currently thinking that I'll just give up and get Sony E-Mount lenses to truly take advantage of this camera. Biggest complaint is that I love my 100-400L Canon and there is no E-mount to replace this lens. I just don't think the 70-200 will give me what I want. I've heard that you can shoot the 200 and crop in, but then you're leaving all that resolution on the table. I want FF, 42MP at 400mm with the full A7Rii AF capabilities and no adapter. Is that too much to ask? Any suggestions?
Aug 13, 2015 at 11:47 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.13 #13 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
ShayArt wrote:
I've got the Commlite adapter and feel that it's very similar to what I've been reading about the Metabones Mk4. My thoughts are that in general I can sometimes get focus with my Canon lenses, even continuous auto AF with my shorter zooms.
At first glance it seemed to work well with my 24-105L and 17-40L. I did a family portrait shoot (friends) tonight with the 24-105 and it crashed and failed several times. Had to re-boot and even remove battery to restore basic function. Would never try to use again for any gig. More info:
Canon 50mm 1.8 mk1- No chance, hunts and bangs.
Canon 17-40 f/4- seems to get good focus but with this lens all I really need is manual anyway-landscape/astro lens.
Canon 24-105L f/4- works for the most part, but not reliable (see above)
Canon 100-400L Mk1. Works 50% of the time at shorter focal lengths in bright light. Partial pre-MF assist helps it find focus better. At 300-400, quite poor to un-useable.
Currently thinking that I'll just give up and get Sony E-Mount lenses to truly take advantage of this camera. Biggest complaint is that I love my 100-400L Canon and there is no E-mount to replace this lens. I just don't think the 70-200 will give me what I want. I've heard that you can shoot the 200 and crop in, but then you're leaving all that resolution on the table. I want FF, 42MP at 400mm with the full A7Rii AF capabilities and no adapter. Is that too much to ask? Any suggestions? ...Show more →
You might consider the Sony A mount 70-400 f/4-5.6 II with the LAEA3 adapter. Brian Smith in his blog claims it has fast and accurate autofocus with the A7r II. It is a lens that has an excellent reputation among Sony users. Probably close in performance if not equal to the 100-400L Mk II.
p.13 #14 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
Firstly, thanks for your suggestion. I've been looking at that....
But, it's $2,100 US + $200 adapter +tax, which also adds extra weight (kinda defeats the small body idea) and I think is not able to utilize the continuous center lock-on AF for moving subjects. Also, I'm not certain, but I think you would have to manually enter the magnification of the lens to utilize 5 axis IBIS? And if I'm correct, how do you accurately enter the amount of zoom prior to shooting a moving subject?
p.13 #15 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
Imagine if Sony would offer a 100-400mm native E-mount!! With no IS to save weight and enhance weildability. Suddenly you'd see A7Rii's on many a safari. Has there been a good or any comparison between the AF of the A6000and the A7Rii? My very limited use so far with the newest full frame lends me to believe that BIF is possible-why? Because excellent BIFs were had in the days of the Nikon F2 and the AF of the A7R2 is way beyond my old Photomic The only thing missing is glass and surely if Panasonic-Leica can plan a 100-400G Sony can too.
p.13 #16 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
Jimi3 wrote:
Hey guys, fyi- I just got my an a7rii and fotodiox adapter. Well, all of my third party canon mount lenses (including sigma 12-24 and tamron 28-75) not only wont autofocus, but won't even work in manual focus - the camera just locks up. I have a metabones iv on the way and am hoping it works...I can live with manual focus for my landscape work, but the camera was mostly a gift and I can't afford to replace all my glass....
My Fotodiox Pro works fine with all lenses tried so far.
p.13 #17 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
skibum5 wrote:
I mean very high-quality internally recorded 4k, high MP FF, high low ISO DR, IBIS, takes Canon lenses (and at least some AF for some Canon lenses that isn't bad for basic stuff at times). That's a lot of stuff. Sounds a bit game-changing to me.
Technologically it sure looks like a game changer but in practice, for stills photography, less so - you really have to have the right Canon lenses to benefit. Otherwise the big promise - filling the gaps in the Sony lens line with your Canon lenses - is not realized. IMHO it depends on the subject: for sports, wildlife, BIF etc. suitable lenses that offer reliable and fast AF and high optical quality are still missing, maybe unless one has an unlimited budget and can buy the latest Canon big whites.
p.13 #18 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Imagine if Sony would offer a 100-400mm native E-mount!! With no IS to save weight and enhance weildability. Suddenly you'd see A7Rii's on many a safari. Has there been a good or any comparison between the AF of the A6000and the A7Rii? My very limited use so far with the newest full frame lends me to believe that BIF is possible-why? Because excellent BIFs were had in the days of the Nikon F2 and the AF of the A7R2 is way beyond my old Photomic The only thing missing is glass and surely if Panasonic-Leica can plan a 100-400G Sony can too....Show more →
A Sony version of lenses like the Nikon 4/300PF (with converter option) might be interesting as well, as the design (relatively light and compact for the spec) fits the light/compact premise of A7 series. But due to patents that might be impossible and a well working adapter for Nikon lenses might take even longer than one that works well with most Canon lenses (on the other side, it might finally cure the IS issues of the 300PF lens around 1/60-1/250s).
You can take good BIF shots with MF; I shoot dragonflies in flight with MF only, because the AF of my DSLR is way too slow. But a capable AF system will give much better opportunities and higher keeper rate. Will be interesting to see how A7RII AF performs for subjects like BIF. Apart from lack of suitable lenses the viewfinder lag might be a problem compared to a DSLR. MF for moving subjects is probably more difficult than on a basic DSLR, so you really have to rely on the AF system.
p.13 #19 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Imagine if Sony would offer a 100-400mm native E-mount!! With no IS to save weight and enhance weildability. Suddenly you'd see A7Rii's on many a safari. Has there been a good or any comparison between the AF of the A6000and the A7Rii? My very limited use so far with the newest full frame lends me to believe that BIF is possible-why? Because excellent BIFs were had in the days of the Nikon F2 and the AF of the A7R2 is way beyond my old Photomic The only thing missing is glass and surely if Panasonic-Leica can plan a 100-400G Sony can too....Show more →
I'm sure Sony can build any lens...but like any smart business they want the most return for their investment. It's a very high hill to climb to compete with both Canon and Nikon when it comes to sports or wildlife systems. The travel and events markets are much larger...where Sony is currently focusing.
Aug 14, 2015 at 06:51 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.13 #20 · A7RII and Canon lenses AF compatibility
ShayArt wrote:
Firstly, thanks for your suggestion. I've been looking at that....
But, it's $2,100 US + $200 adapter +tax, which also adds extra weight (kinda defeats the small body idea) and I think is not able to utilize the continuous center lock-on AF for moving subjects. Also, I'm not certain, but I think you would have to manually enter the magnification of the lens to utilize 5 axis IBIS? And if I'm correct, how do you accurately enter the amount of zoom prior to shooting a moving subject?
One of the nice things about the LAEA3 adapter is you don't have to enter the focal length for zooms (you don't for the metabones adapter either). With the LAEA3 with lenses that report distance you will get 5 axis IBIS, but with lenses that don't report distance you will get 3 axis. With the metabones you will get 5 axis with some lens I believe, but I know I only get 3 axis with my ZE lenses.
With regard to cost and size, the Sony lens is very similar to the Canon 100-400L MK II, and most indications are that the quality is similar too. IMO, the Sony makes more sense for the A7r II because of AF issues, but I would rent before spending that much money to make sure it was what I wanted.
The only thing missing is glass and surely if Panasonic-Leica can plan a 100-400G Sony can too.