Man, I just want them all. But if not, at least the a7rII
Anyone else have their eyes and ears out for this one?
Man, I just want them all. But if not, at least the a7rII
Anyone else have their eyes and ears out for this one?
On A7R, the auto-focus speed is really not fast. It is good to hear that A7R II has huge improvement on auto-focusing.
What I am surprised is the connectivity port on A7R II. Sony should've implemented at least USB 3 or even better Thunderbolt for file transferring.
cameras: Sony A7 II, A7r, NEX-7, A350, HX50V; Canon EOS 70D | Flickr | a very happy Mac user
It IS a bit of a bottleneck, esp. for large files. I get over it by using a USB3 card reader. With a "good" card, say 60 MB/sec or higher,
it's about 10X faster than USB2 (camera to computer or just into a USB2 port) alone.
CC, Image editing OK.
Yeah, nothing's perfect unfortunately, but for a camera that will last a good time of my life needs, the a7rii is definitely one.
However, I'm really tempted for the Sony RX10mII for this point in time. Selling all of my current gear (except the a55, gave it to my sister-in-law), would I be able to make enough to buy a RX10mII? That's something to look into while I'm here in Vietnam.
But I'll need to have a look at the reviews though - I have high hopes that although it's only a 1" sensor, with the new technology, would it be on par with my current a65 (other than the focal length restrictions)?
Would sacrificing the wider focal length that I have now be worth the 4K video, constant f2.8 all the way to 200mm, and just the general update in features? Hm...
video. Since then, my elation has been toned down by the FACT that the phone camera of 12 Mpx produces VERY Ho-Hum images. I saw the exif the other day and noted it had 4.5mm focal length!!
Well, what could I hope to expect from something with such a tiny (implied) sensor as that?
Which is all a preface to checking out the quality of that camera's video output. And now to the 4K TVs... You do not get blown out of the water by their reproduction UNLESS you've got
some SERIOUSLY good feed - 1080i at the least. Yes, that's 1080i, but of course, 1080p would be better, and 2160p the acme. Such feed is rare on Sydney (presumably Aus) TV. It gets
there on SBS HD, who do put out a good lot of quality shows. On other so-called HD channels, much of the stuff is just upscaled sit-commery and is appalling to watch on a 4K TV. (Even
just mostly appalling!)
And so, good luck deciding.
That's a good point of how the sensor size can be an issue for various aspects of the camera.
Just came across this post:
So from the looks of it, the 1" sensor shouldn't have any problems recording 4k, and one thing I'm super happy about is being able to take stills whilst recording. I miss that function.
Though I don't do much video, I dabble here and there. So of course, at the end of the day, it all comes down to the images and if they can compete with the older APS-C in the a65, which is something I'm really hoping for. If it does, it's an instant switch over. If not, may need to do more saving up...
Well, just have to wait for the reviews.
If I was in the market to buy into the Sony system, I'd be pretty thrilled with the recent announcements.
I think Sony should be commended for pushing the design boundaries, particularly with their RX series.
By the same token, the pace of development does push down the prices of outgoing models pretty quick as witnessed in the outgoing first generation A7 models (except the S). Not that this should affect your photography but if I was a buyer I might be inclined to adopt a trailing edge purchasing strategy rather than leading edge.
There are exceptions of course but I usually skip gen I products since there're usually more idiosyncrasies (E-M5 and X100 for example) but usually by gen II, things get pretty good. Even though we're only in gen II of the A7r model, with three models in the A7 lineup the A7r II looks to be pretty matured already, at least on paper.
I'm really impressed with the new Sony lineup.
They seem to have a new model every few hours..
I just wish they spent more on lens development. From what i see their bodies are certainly pro level, but where is the pro level lenses for the full frame e-mount?
If they had a native 35f1.4 85 f1.4 and 70-200f2.8 they'd be a contender.
Maybe they can get into an agreement with Sigma to get some of their Art series lenses for the FF e-mount.
Until then very few pros will switch to Sony and its a shame cause their bodies are quite something.
“Your first 10,000 photographs are your worst" – Henri Cartier-Bresson
**Commercial Link Removed by Admin**
Zeiss are producing some pretty exceptional primes for the FE mount, albeit with slightly more modest max apertures but it seems complimentary to the slimmer bodies. F1.4 versions of the same standard or higher like the Otus would make them pretty big.
Sony has a goal of doubling the current FE range by the end of this year
The lens compatibility via adapters (specially on the a7rii) is capable of giving Canon lenses a run for their money
Can't forget about the old classic Minolta glass.
Some fans are waiting for the a7000 and a7sii (people are guessing this is the next upgrade coming)
One thing for sure, it seems the a-mount series aren't dead yet either, just on hold - interesting...
Guess I should start saving even more, we'll see what Sony does.
If i was buying a travel camera I would have no problem with the A6000.
Looks pretty amazing.
For pro work, I think 2 years and mirrorless will be on par with teh best Canon or Nikon can offer.
And that may be the time my 5Dmk3 will be past it's prime..
I think, electronically and are already there, with AF, they are close. If they offer pro level glass, there will be no reason to use a DSLR.
Not that we all need to switch, but we'll have a genuine option.
regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff
Regarding 'pro' work, that's very subjective I would think.
Take Jason Lanier for example, wouldn't his work be 'pro' work? If not, then what's 'pro' work?
It's simply what our needs are - if it's sufficient for the job, then it works.
I think a DSLR will always have the advantage of more slots and longer battery life (bigger batteries) though (until technology becomes even smaller again)
Weight is a factor - though many opt for the lighter mirrorless, there is definitely a huge market for the heavier DSLR for various needs, until weight actually starts becoming an issue where something has to give.
So it's just needs.
And just as Kym said, once we start on a path, it isn't to move out. At the same time, that's where Sony's pricking the nerves - adaptors on the A series. Yes, older versions weren't that good, but the new ones, it's almost on par with the DSLR equivalent, thus mirrorless are currently giving DSLRs a huge run for their money.
I'm interested to see what the new sensors can do, oh August reviews... feels so far away... lol
Not trying to be argumentative or anything but when you have to use an adapter, what is the advantage over eg. a DSLT.
I picked DSLT instead of DSLR intentionally cos some will have a preference of one type of VF over another so this levels the playing field.
IMO the key is native FE lenses. Let's hope Sony does come through with their offerings.
I just subscribed to his chanel on youtube.
I like his workshops and even if i'm not that fond of his HDR look, i like his calm and deliberate posing style.
I always have to skip past his rants about having to shoot in manual mode or you can not call yourself a photographer..
I guess he never heard of Joe Buissink or Cliff Mautner.
He just switched to Sony recently and seems happy with it. But he shoots with f4 as his widest fstop.
That may be ok for his style of photography, but you dont want to rock up at a greek wedding in a dark church with an f4 lens.
Unless you like the ISO 12800 look...
His jump to Sony, however is encouraging.
I lag my 5D for 12 hours at a wedding and i am NOT liking it.
Sony is def a contender, and I wiould be ok to switch. I actually stopped buying new gear for my Canon...
Just waiting to see what happens in teh mirrorless world.
I'm actually interested in Fuji, I already own an x-e1.
They use Sony sensors, and they are cropped sensor cameras, which means they will be even smaller and lighter, and the lenses will be half the weight of a FF glass.
If only they could fix their AF... I tried my x-e1 at a wedding. Missed a few shots, put it back in the bag.
I'm keen to switch to mirrorless, mainly for the weight as tehre is nothing wrong with my Canon.
I know I will not sacrifice image quality or ISO performance. They are just as good if not better.
And their shutter is rated at half a million shots compared to 300K in my Canon... but
I need superfast AF and i need f1.4 glass
And I guess I'd like to switch sooner rather than later... so I can still sell my Canon gear for a decent amount
It's simply needs, and with adapters, though there may be those who dislike them, there are those who don't mind them.
Hopefully the FE range does pick up its pace.
The only thing holding me back from the purchase is whether the 1" lens can keep up with the APS-C sensor or not.
The key will be the new technology in the sensors. If it keeps up, there's no advantage of my a65 anymore.
Of course, getting a sensor with the new technology in the APS-C or full frame size will obviously be better yet, but I can only afford what's in my limits (after selling off my a65 and lenses...)
This will obviously be lighter than holding an a65 and 70-200mm f2.8 lens, by a mile (using my friend's 5Diii and 70-200mm for his wedding was just like holding bricks).
But, even with all the technological advances, Sony's biggest bottle neck is still their algorithms. The images just aren't all there yet, but very close. Canon and Nikon images, I think, are just that little bit more clean and crisper. Sony has improved their algorithms, but still a while to go. Here's hoping...
Well, Imaging Resource has some test shots from the RX100iv, and using that as a comparison of what the RX10ii will be like, I've compared their shots with the a65
a65 are all f/8 at 70mm
RX100iv are all f/5.6 at 25.7mm
RX10 ISO 125 http://www.imaging-resource.com/came...LI00125NR1.HTM
a65 ISO 100 1/20 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...A65hSLCON1.HTM
RX100iv ISO 125 1/25 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00125NR0.HTM
a65 1/40 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00200NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/40 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00200NR0.HTM
a65 1/80 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00400NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/80 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00400NR0.HTM
a65 1/160 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00800NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/160 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI00800NR0.HTM
a65 1/320 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI01600NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/320 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI01600NR0.HTM
a65 1/640 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI03200NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/640 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI03200NR0.HTM
a65 1/1250 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI06400NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/1250 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI06400NR0.HTM
a65 1/3200 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI12800NR1.HTM
RX100iv 1/2500 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI12800NR0.HTM
Well, from the looks of things, it looks like the image quality hasn't caught up to APS-C yet, but it's pretty darn close.
What the RX100iv looks like compared to the a65 is a sensor without the AA filter, giving it something slightly crisper, but due to the smaller sensor size, it isn't able to capture all of the same detail the a65 is able to.
What I found interesting is that the translucent mirror in the a65 technically should cut off about 33% of the light it receives (which is why the noise performance of the SLT range isn't as great as comparative cameras) but based on the settings used, it seems like the RX100iv need more light to get a balanced image, compared to the a65. Could it be simply due to the size of the lens? Would the RX10ii fair any better?
What I did was try some noise reduction to compare the images and though both ended up looking nice, the RX10ii still had too many image artifacts. Once assumption could be the noise reduction - I believe on the RX100iv, it was turned off, thus we have all the artifacts.
So, I did the closest thing I could do to check the quality:
a65 ISO 6400 http://www.imaging-resource.com/PROD...LI06400NR1.HTM
RX10 ISO 6400 http://www.imaging-resource.com/came...LI06400NR1.HTM - Noise reduction on low
The amount of noise is very similar, though the RX10 has slightly more, it does look a little more crisp. With the new sensor onboard, the assumption is that we should see an improvement.
One thing to note is that the RX10 is able to still capture some part of the pattern on the red fabric on the right until ISO 3200, compared to the a65 at ISO 6400. That's very close.
ISO 200 was the RX100iv's limit, losing all hope at ISO 400 already.
Obviously, I'll have to wait for an official RX10ii review to confirm results, but based the RX10 vs a65, there's high hopes that the rX10ii should have at least equal, if not, more image quality, even though it's a smaller sensor.
It looks like my upgrade to the RX10ii is becoming more justifiable - I'm happy. New features, everything.
Last edited by bitsnpieces; 10-07-2015 at 4:14pm.
Just to add on:
Alpha Rumours has released some image samples from the A7Rii:
It's quite impressive
Is it perfect? Hm... Sony has a funny way of processing their JPEGs - it's improved from the old SLT models though.
Although there's no RX10ii samples yet, I've used the older RX10 images, all on noise reduction low, and using the sample photos from the RX100iv and RX10 as a comparison of what the RX10ii will be like, I've compared their shots to the a65
One reason I can think of that the images in the RX100iv look more crisp than the a65 is the new JPEG engine that Sony uses, beginning from the a99 or a77ii (can't remember)
I applied some sharpening on the a65, and it does look better (close infact, better in some parts), but the RX100iv still has a very slight edge (overall)
I'm really excited - the upgrade from a65 to RX10ii means I can still keep the same image quality (presuming), and have much better video recording capabilities.
Of course, I lose 4MP, wide and super telephoto lenses, bokeh, and battery life (there may be 1 or 2 more things, meh).
But the overall improvements, it's definitely looking more justifiable indeed.
My wife's has given me to buy it if I wanted it too, so that's a positive... (of course, that's after selling my current gear) lol
Last edited by bitsnpieces; 10-07-2015 at 4:31pm.