So I took my A7RVI on a short weekend trip with me last week and did some of my usual bird photography. Most of the time I was using it the same way as I use my A1II's and A9III--with the 600GM and 2x TC mounted. Here's my thoughts:
If you are mostly doing perched birds/birds and wildlife in habitat, it's great. You get 90% of the A1 benefits in a higher-resolution body that costs a lot less. Is the higher resolution vs the A1/A1II very noticeable? Not most of the time; only in edge cases with more extreme cropping. If you are not taking a lot of action shots like BIF or sports or fast-moving wildlife it's a great camera. Really flexible for moving between macro, wildlife and landscape. The black-out free shooting is amazing as it has been for years now with the A9/A1 lines--if you've never experienced it, you'll never want to go back once you do. The high-resolution EVF is great but IMO not terribly noticeably better than the A1II. Of course the flippable screen is highly welcome.
A big plus is the new batteries--I really wish Sony had rolled these out with the A1II/A9III. They last soooooo long and charge up very quickly. One pair in a grip easily lasted through an entire day of shooting with capacity to spare. Huge improvement. Yes, a PITA to get new batteries, but it had to happen at some point. The included double charger is a great bonus.
One thing I did notice is that there were more slightly soft shots vs. my A9III/A1II with the 600GM 2x combo. I think that's the result of a few things: First, the lower number of AF calculations and adjustments per second mean it's just not going to be as accurate as those cameras. Second, the higher pixel count makes even slight misses much more noticeable due to the different circle of confusion. Finally, the tiny pixels are just more prone to showing diffraction issues with that combination. Overall not a deal breaker, but worth noting. On a related note, and for the same reasons, tiny softening from heat distortion is more readily apparent if you pixel peep.
The AI AF is great, but IMO not a huge improvement over the version in the previous A7RV, which was very good. Not better than the A1II either, but very similar which is great. The AWB is now very good, again similar to what I am used to from my A1II's, maybe a tad better in some lighting situations. The high-ISO noise is very manageable with Lightroom's AI DeNoise.
Overall this is great evolution of the A7RV into a much more capable all-around camera. If you don't want to spend the A1II kind of money, this is a great choice as long as you accept the minor limitations. I personally would also take one of these over the original A1, as the AI autofocus really is a huge improvement. Speaking of which...it still doesn't rapidly find a small bird in the frame when you are shooting in wide or zone; this has persisted so long with Sony I feel its a choice they've made, although it would be nice to have them explain why. The simple solution I've used for years still works the best--just have a smaller zone set up and it works great. With the new custom AF zones you can set up, this really works well. I have one of the back buttons programmed to rapidly flip between two focus zones.
I like it enough that I think I'll take it with me on my next jungle trip vs. two A1II's but first I want to spend a few more shorter trips with it. I'd post some photos here but I always find the interface here frustrating so....if anyone wants to see any shots I'll fiddle around I guess.
jhapeman wrote:
So I took my A7RVI on a short weekend trip with me last week and did some of my usual bird photography. Most of the time I was using it the same way as I use my A1II's and A9III--with the 600GM and 2x TC mounted. Here's my thoughts:
If you are mostly doing perched birds/birds and wildlife in habitat, it's great. You get 90% of the A1 benefits in a higher-resolution body that costs a lot less. Is the higher resolution vs the A1/A1II very noticeable? Not most of the time; only in edge cases with more extreme cropping. If you are not taking a lot of action shots like BIF or sports or fast-moving wildlife it's a great camera. Really flexible for moving between macro, wildlife and landscape. The black-out free shooting is amazing as it has been for years now with the A9/A1 lines--if you've never experienced it, you'll never want to go back once you do. The high-resolution EVF is great but IMO not terribly noticeably better than the A1II. Of course the flippable screen is highly welcome.
A big plus is the new batteries--I really wish Sony had rolled these out with the A1II/A9III. They last soooooo long and charge up very quickly. One pair in a grip easily lasted through an entire day of shooting with capacity to spare. Huge improvement. Yes, a PITA to get new batteries, but it had to happen at some point. The included double charger is a great bonus.
One thing I did notice is that there were more slightly soft shots vs. my A9III/A1II with the 600GM 2x combo. I think that's the result of a few things: First, the lower number of AF calculations and adjustments per second mean it's just not going to be as accurate as those cameras. Second, the higher pixel count makes even slight misses much more noticeable due to the different circle of confusion. Finally, the tiny pixels are just more prone to showing diffraction issues with that combination. Overall not a deal breaker, but worth noting. On a related note, and for the same reasons, tiny softening from heat distortion is more readily apparent if you pixel peep.
The AI AF is great, but IMO not a huge improvement over the version in the previous A7RV, which was very good. Not better than the A1II either, but very similar which is great. The AWB is now very good, again similar to what I am used to from my A1II's, maybe a tad better in some lighting situations. The high-ISO noise is very manageable with Lightroom's AI DeNoise.
Overall this is great evolution of the A7RV into a much more capable all-around camera. If you don't want to spend the A1II kind of money, this is a great choice as long as you accept the minor limitations. I personally would also take one of these over the original A1, as the AI autofocus really is a huge improvement. Speaking of which...it still doesn't rapidly find a small bird in the frame when you are shooting in wide or zone; this has persisted so long with Sony I feel its a choice they've made, although it would be nice to have them explain why. The simple solution I've used for years still works the best--just have a smaller zone set up and it works great. With the new custom AF zones you can set up, this really works well. I have one of the back buttons programmed to rapidly flip between two focus zones.
I like it enough that I think I'll take it with me on my next jungle trip vs. two A1II's but first I want to spend a few more shorter trips with it. I'd post some photos here but I always find the interface here frustrating so....if anyone wants to see any shots I'll fiddle around I guess. ...Show more →
Thanks for the report.
Can you post some photos to your Flickr site?
arbitrage wrote:
Thanks for the report.
Can you post some photos to your Flickr site?
Here's an album with a selection of the typical "static" bird shots I took. I didn't spend any time trying BIF. There were a few shots where just the bird launching from the perch showed motion distortion--not always, but it's there, unlike say never with the A9III or almost never with the A1/A1II. Not a surprise to me, this wasn't marketed for that, but you know, it will happen and I just wouldn't pick this camera up if I intended to shoot action at all.
And for those wondering about whether 60fps af calculations is enough... looks good enough to me.
If you think you are a pro - stick with an A1/A9 series camera. For the rest of us this will do just fine.
While the camera will probably track a cheetahs eyes just fine don't forget you will get quite some lean on any trees/grass unless the animal is coming straight at you - and even then you will get some distortion on the animals body. It is evident on the dogs - but is anyone going to notice!
Thanks for sharing, this was a great review that addressed a bunch of the questions I had about the a7rVI. I do wish he were clear, though, when testing dynamic range and astro photography, whether he was using the electronic or physical shutter. The electronic shutter is getting the buzz, but I feel like most photographers are going to be better served with the physical shutter on this camera.
How is the viewfinder in HDR mode? Does it work when you are shooting RAW? Or do you need to shooting heif? Also as there’s a hdr view finder is there raw or hdr histogram?
cajer wrote:
How is the viewfinder in HDR mode? Does it work when you are shooting RAW? Or do you need to shooting heif? Also as there’s a hdr view finder is there raw or hdr histogram?
I’ve barely used the camera, so please correct me where I go wrong. I don’t think that there is a built in HDR workflow like you find in the Hasselblad X2D2. The HB starts with a modified metering mode and produces HDR files that can be viewed in HDR on the rear screen. The Sony allows you to set your viewfinder to a brighter mode, but that is about it. The rear screen is not HDR capable, nor is there a special metering mode to preserve highlights, beyond what was available in previous cameras. I’m not aware of a JPG-XL, or HEIF (HDR) output from the camera. I have played around with shooting RAW and metering with HDR in mind; producing LRC HDR output saved to Zonerama.
bwcolor wrote:
I’ve barely used the camera, so please correct me where I go wrong. I don’t think that there is a built in HDR workflow like you find in the Hasselblad X2D2. The HB starts with a modified metering mode and produces HDR files that can be viewed in HDR on the rear screen. The Sony allows you to set your viewfinder to a brighter mode, but that is about it. The rear screen is not HDR capable, nor is there a special metering mode to preserve highlights, beyond what was available in previous cameras. I’m not aware of a JPG-XL, or HEIF (HDR) output from the camera. I have played around with shooting RAW and metering with HDR in mind; producing LRC HDR output saved to Zonerama....Show more →
You can directly shoot and output HDR (HLG) HEIF from A7R5/6. When you enable HLG HEIF and shoot only in HLG HEIF (no HEIF + RAW) the histogram does shift in A7R5 giving you something closer to the raw histogram. However it reverts back to normal when you select HEIF + RAW.
I only edit in HDR these days, so I wanted to know if the HDR mode allows your to: visualize HDR better when shooting raws via either just showing, modified zebras, or modified histogram it so you have a better idea of highlight headroom. As I'm basically guessing right now when I ETTR for HDR.
This wouldn't necessarily show up in or require a special metering mode, it maybe a silent change. If you are willing would you be able to run this quick experiment that would give us an answer?
Look at a scene with high dynamic range in SDR or standard view finder brightness (ideally with a bit of clipping in SDR), have the zebras and histogram on, and remember what they look like. Turn on the brighter viewfinder and see if the zebras/histogram/scene rendering changes.
overall it's a nice camera but has limitations for BIF (some serious IMO)
3 Slow readout speed / rolling shutter related issues below :
- EVF experience : it has a quite visible and annoying " jello effect" in the EVF when panning hard at long FL (even 600mm let alone 1200mm).... being used to A1 series one would notice it immediately.
- BG distortion : unfortunately sometimes it does plague shots even with natural BG. If panning fast even shrubs in the BG can look distorted and funky... cannot be fixed in PP and the image is a delete.
- wing distortion / funny looking wings : It is rare but does happen for song birds I already got few examples in just one hour shooting. Sometimes the wings look just a bit funny and if you didn't know about rolling shutter you may not notice but once you know you cannot "unsee" it
EVF
- with pre-capture ON EVF shows stutter and "jerky image". I have been in touch with Sony Pro about this they have confirmed it is a bug and notified the corporate. no ETA for FW fix, it is quite annoying to me
AF
- it's good and definitely head and shoulder above A7R5 but not as good as the A1 II. The percentage of tack sharp files in a burst is lower, the difference is small when subject distance is not changing rapidly (BIF parallel to the back of the camera) but it can become significant when BIF is flying towards the camera. ( note that I reject even slightly OOF/soft files)
other notable bugs
- Focus distance save and recall function does NOT work with zoom lenses. Sony thinks this is a bug too, to be fixed.
I have not yet decided if I will keep it or send it back, if I do it won't be a back to my A1 II like my original plan, rather it would be used only for perched birds (which can be done with A7R5 as well)
Incoming swallow
Tricky conditions today with filtered light and couldn’t use 1/8000s shutter speed so not really keeper quality but the camera is pretty impressive. Shooting at 600mm with 1/4000s doesn’t work so well I find, it’s ok for under 400mm fl.
I was acquiring the birds as they flew their downwind leg - yep, wind in the wrong direction - so they were legging it a few inches above the surface and the camera was outstanding at acquiring them when between 20 and 30 meters away. As good as the A1ii was which I have with me and used with the same lens. The A1ii images were also a little ordinary, two at the end.
The A7RM6 AF seemed to be a bit more consistent - but I noticed the A1ii was never quite as consistent as the A1. In any event the A7RM6 is more than capable of acquiring the same birds the A1ii does.
speedmaster20d wrote:
some frames from last week with 300GM + 2X mostly
overall it's a nice camera but has limitations for BIF (some serious IMO)
3 Slow readout speed / rolling shutter related issues below :
- EVF experience : it has a quite visible and annoying " jello effect" in the EVF when panning hard at long FL (even 600mm let alone 1200mm).... being used to A1 series one would notice it immediately.
- BG distortion : unfortunately sometimes it does plague shots even with natural BG. If panning fast even shrubs in the BG can look distorted and funky... cannot be fixed in PP and the image is a delete.
- wing distortion / funny looking wings : It is rare but does happen for song birds I already got few examples in just one hour shooting. Sometimes the wings look just a bit funny and if you didn't know about rolling shutter you may not notice but once you know you cannot "unsee" it
EVF
- with pre-capture ON EVF shows stutter and "jerky image". I have been in touch with Sony Pro about this they have confirmed it is a bug and notified the corporate. no ETA for FW fix, it is quite annoying to me
AF
- it's good and definitely head and shoulder above A7R5 but not as good as the A1 II. The percentage of tack sharp files in a burst is lower, the difference is small when subject distance is not changing rapidly (BIF parallel to the back of the camera) but it can become significant when BIF is flying towards the camera. ( note that I reject even slightly OOF/soft files)
other notable bugs
- Focus distance save and recall function does NOT work with zoom lenses. Sony thinks this is a bug too, to be fixed.
I have not yet decided if I will keep it or send it back, if I do it won't be a back to my A1 II like my original plan, rather it would be used only for perched birds (which can be done with A7R5 as well) ...Show more →
A7R6 at ISO 12,800 photographing a fireworks show at local amusement park. This is higher than I usually like to go and it was definitely noisy but that cleaned up pretty well with Denoise in LR. The sharpness and fine detail held up very well and colors were maintained good enough for this type of subject.
ILCE-7RM6E 28-75mm F2.8 A063 lens46mmf/2.81/60s12800 ISO0.0 EV
Ross Martin wrote:
A7R6 at ISO 12,800 photographing a fireworks show at local amusement park. This is higher than I usually like to go and it was definitely noisy but that cleaned up pretty well with Denoise in LR. The sharpness and fine detail held up very well and colors were maintained good enough for this type of subject.
Damn, I didn’t realize that this camera could take images of something other than birds. Thanks for reminding me that this camera is primarily a high resolution full frame camera and not primarily a sports, or BIF camera.
I bought the camera because I wanted what the 50-150mm f/2.0 had to offer for travel. A great kit when paired with the 24mm f/1.4 GM, Sigma 17mm f/4.0 and Nomadic 25L Backpack.
Regarding noise, I found this to be the highest useable ISO for many subject/lighting that cleans up nicely in LRC. Great example of high ISO on A7R6.
That said, some really impressive BIF images posted above.
Yes, I take mine up to 12,800 as I think that cleans up OK, though I do leave a little grunge. I have the camera set to 12.800 ISO Max when in Auto ISO
jhapeman wrote:
Second, the higher pixel count makes even slight misses much more noticeable due to the different circle of confusion. Finally, the tiny pixels are just more prone to showing diffraction issues with that combination. Overall not a deal breaker, but worth noting. On a related note, and for the same reasons, tiny softening from heat distortion is more readily apparent if you pixel peep.
Thanks for sharing your detailed experience with the new camera.
I want to comment on the above since some people get confused about these issues.
The “circle of confusion” and diffraction are exactly the same on any full frame camera, regardless of the sensor resolution. These are optical qualities that are produced by lenses, not by sensors.
What is different is that if you look at a crop of a given pixel dimension (say 800x800 pixels) from the higher resolution camera you are simply looking more closely at a smaller portion of the overall image. In fact, if you made equal size prints of images from a 30MP camera and a 60MP camera… there would be exactly the same amount of diffraction blur.
(In these cases, the potential image detail advantage always goes to the higher resolution sensor, since it has the potential to get slightly more detail when shooting at its diffraction-limited aperture… and will be just as good at smaller apertures.)
Bottom line: It isn’t that there’s a softness issue from diffraction or a larger “circle of confusion” — it is just that you are looking more closely at a smaller section of the image area.
And, of course, none of this is to say that everyone needs the highest MP sensor. In fact, there’s a strong argument that most don’t. And there are performance trade-offs when opting for higher resolution sensors.
Thanks - very interesting from a travel standpoint, too. We were just on Oahu and saw the albatross chicks out on Kaena point - the islands are definitely a fun place for birding!
The video does contain the saddest phrase in Sonydom "Maybe they can fix it [the AF issues] in a firmware update" : )
Incoming swallow
Tricky conditions today with filtered light and couldn’t use 1/8000s shutter speed so not really keeper quality but the camera is pretty impressive. Shooting at 600mm with 1/4000s doesn’t work so well I find, it’s ok for under 400mm fl.
I was acquiring the birds as they flew their downwind leg - yep, wind in the wrong direction - so they were legging it a few inches above the surface and the camera was outstanding at acquiring them when between 20 and 30 meters away. As good as the A1ii was which I have with me and used with the same lens. The A1ii images were also a little ordinary, two at the end.
The A7RM6 AF seemed to be a bit more consistent - but I noticed the A1ii was never quite as consistent as the A1. In any event the A7RM6 is more than capable of acquiring the same birds the A1ii does. ...Show more →
Nice shots! I'm renting one to try out with the Sigma 500mm 5.6 - what settings, if any, did you change in the AF section? And are these all shot with lossy compression set?
seaSharp wrote:
Thanks - very interesting from a travel standpoint, too. We were just on Oahu and saw the albatross chicks out on Kaena point - the islands are definitely a fun place for birding!
The video does contain the saddest phrase in Sonydom "Maybe they can fix it [the AF issues] in a firmware update" : )
The reviewer seems pretty harsh with the VI for astro. Is it really a problem after post processing and downsampling? My A7RIII does fine in astro but I am thinking the illuminated controls, better EVF for focusing may be helpful and the AF should be better in other applications. I stack or track anyways but am worried about the noise seen in the long exposure foreground image.
