Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

[LightandMotion]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Been shooting all week with it now. Dynamic range over a stop better than my 1dx. Noise is similar.

Summary from a Canon Landscape Photographer

Sony A7R Cons:

- Needs battery grip to balance EF lenses properly.
- Slow autofocus with Metabones Adaptor. One shot AF is slow and AI servo is not accurate.
- Only 4 fps, so not suitable for sport
- Battery charger not included. The battery charges from either an AC or USB source, in camera. Separate charger is $79. If you have a battery grip and don’t have a separate charger, you need to remove the grip and place individual batteries in the camera body to charge.

Sony A7R Pros:

- When used with native FE lenses there is fast and accurate AF. It is a perfect setup for street photography. Remove the grip, and you’re good to go incognito.
- Fantastic Sensor with great dynamic range. Arguably the best of any current DSLR.
- Low noise. ISO up to 51200, still very usable
- 36.4 megapixel sensor – over 50% more than any current Canon DSLR sensor.
- When used with a grip, EF lenses (up to 100mm) balances well.
- Excellent EVF, Easy to manual focus with focus magnifier
- Customizable buttons and controls.
- Cost $2398.00 AUD – likely to be 1/3 the price of any future large megapixel Canon offering.

In Summary:

A great addition to the kit of any current Canon Landscape Photographer, particularly if your clients favour large prints. You can use all your existing favourite EF lenses, and manual focus is easy and quick. Factor in the cost of a grip, extra battery and an external charger though.

 

[AvTvM]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

I don't see from your pictures, with lens attached, how a 3% reduction in depth and 10% reduction width turns a dslr from 'huge' into compact. If anything it looks like it would take up nearly the same amount of space with lens in the bag but have an inferior grip. Less weight is nice, but when you are talking 900g vs 550g with lens, I think even the weakest person would be okay with either.

on the other hand, slap a 70-200 f/2.8 on both and I think you will see the ergonomics of the a7 fail big time!

yes, I agree to some point. I've deliberately picked the "worst possible view on size".
In front or rear view one gets a better sense, just how much smaller an A7/R is compared to even the smallest FF DSLR, even with lens mounted. Much less obtrusive too (important to me for street shooting and other situations).

Main issue are the lenses. Neither Canon nor Sony have the kind of pancakes/ultracompact lenses to go "small and light" - sole exception the EF 40/2.8 which I really like. The Sony FE 35/2.8 is ok for me sizewise, but not pricewise [not even with Zeiss written on it]. Unfortunately no wide angle pancake (e.g. 20/4) or ultra-compact tele (e.g. 85/2.8) on either side (yet).

70-200 ... depends. I use it quite a bit tripod mounted ... then it will be just fine on an A7/R with adapter. Hand-held I'll have to try it, once I get my hands on an A7/R. Bigger issue for me is the (apparently) extremely slow AF (if at all working) via adapter ... and in poor light on top.

Reported A7/R shutter noise irks me as well. Was really hoping for a silent "concert cam". Looks like the mirrorslappin' 5D III in "silent" mode is a better option for that. Too bad!

 

[Ruined]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

I don't see from your pictures, with lens attached, how a 3% reduction in depth and 10% reduction width turns a dslr from 'huge' into compact. If anything it looks like it would take up nearly the same amount of space with lens in the bag but have an inferior grip. Less weight is nice, but when you are talking 900g vs 550g with lens, I think even the weakest person would be okay with either.

on the other hand, slap a 70-200 f/2.8 on both and I think you will see the ergonomics of the a7 fail big time!

yes, I agree to some point. I've deliberately picked the "worst possible view on size".
In front or rear view one gets a better sense, just how much smaller an A7/R is compared to even the smallest FF DSLR, even with lens mounted. Much less obtrusive too (important to me for street shooting and other situations).

Main issue are the lenses. Neither Canon nor Sony have the kind of pancakes/ultracompact lenses to go "small and light" - sole exception the EF 40/2.8 which I really like. The Sony FE 35/2.8 is ok for me sizewise, but not pricewise [not even with Zeiss written on it]. Unfortunately no wide angle pancake (e.g. 20/4) or ultra-compact tele (e.g. 85/2.8) on either side (yet).

70-200 ... depends. I use it quite a bit tripod mounted ... then it will be just fine on an A7/R with adapter. Hand-held I'll have to try it, once I get my hands on an A7/R. Bigger issue for me is the (apparently) extremely slow AF (if at all working) via adapter ... and in poor light on top.

Reported A7/R shutter noise irks me as well. Was really hoping for a silent "concert cam". Looks like the mirrorslappin' 5D III in "silent" mode is a better option for that. Too bad!

I see where you are going, and the A7 would be truly smaller with a pancake, but that limits your photography to primes which is not ideal IMO. The size of the FF zooms appear to defeat the purpose of a mirrorless camera, unlike the APS-C mirrorless zooms which actually are quite compact.

In terms of the 70-200 2.8, I struggle with that lens handheld on a rebel, so I don't know how I'd possibly handle it on an a7. I am good with it on the 6d-5d etc though.

 

[Dylan777]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Hilarious, and unfortunately, too the point.

I think it may be a long wait for a similar piece of gear from Canon, Mirrorless does seem to be something Canon want to be in because everyone else is, but they concentrate on the FF DSLR market and possibly intend to remain that way for some time.

The news on new M disappointed me and I went and purchased the a7r, I like what I see so far, some things I'm not so happy with (The EVF takes some getting used to when you've never used one before), but I feel that way about my 1Dx & 5DMK III as well, but I do think Sony have a reasonable winner in the a7r, it's such a pity they decided to bring it to market with such abysmal support, in Singapore when I picked up the a7r they had just the Zoom Kit lens from Sony, or the Zeiss 35, which is a lovely Lens. I think if you stick to the Zeiss Lenses that will become available for the a7r over the next 12 months or so the Sony becomes a viable system, won't replace the 1Dx in any way, but might replace the 5DMK III.

As of right now, there is no other camera can replace 1D X eml58 ;D

As an owner of 5D III, I do agree with you A7 series is good candicate to replace 5D III in slower shooting. Wedding shooter might be able to get away with just two A7 plus some of these lenses: Zeiss 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, and 135mm. The weight reduction will be HUGE.

 

[Random Orbits]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

...

yes, I agree to some point. I've deliberately picked the "worst possible view on size".
In front or rear view one gets a better sense, just how much smaller an A7/R is compared to even the smallest FF DSLR, even with lens mounted. Much less obtrusive too (important to me for street shooting and other situations).

Main issue are the lenses. Neither Canon nor Sony have the kind of pancakes/ultracompact lenses to go "small and light" - sole exception the EF 40/2.8 which I really like. The Sony FE 35/2.8 is ok for me sizewise, but not pricewise [not even with Zeiss written on it]. Unfortunately no wide angle pancake (e.g. 20/4) or ultra-compact tele (e.g. 85/2.8) on either side (yet).

...

I picked up a EF 28 f/2.8 IS when it went on sale for 350, and it is much smaller than my other lenses. Only had took a couple snaps to make sure that it was functioning ok and to set the AFMA roughly, but I was impressed by its compact size and IQ. Never tried the EF 40 f/2.8 but it is even smaller. So a set of compact primes (24 f/2.8 IS, 28 f/2.8 IS, 35 f/2 IS, 40) exist for the EOS system. The difference in body size is not that significant to me because it's really lens + camera that matters, and if it doesn't fit in a pocket, then I'll be bringing a camera bag anyway.

The thing that bothers me, is that the lenses being offered for the A7/A7R are slow and expensive. 35 f/2.8, 28-70 (f/4-?), 24-70 f/4, 50 f/1.8... I see the advantages for landscape users like LightandMotion, because he can get a high IQ FF sensor at a good price and does not need AF. And those that have lots of vintage glass can use them with appropriate adaptors, but how big are these market segments? The slower lenses allow them to be more compact, but restricts their use indoors in ambient light. I'd rather use a 35 f/1.4 at ISO 3200 rather than a 35 f/2.8 at ISO 12800, where noise and DR suffer significantly. And the faster the glass, the larger the lens, and the less advantage the mirrorless system has.

I'm all for mirrorless versions of the 5D, 6D, etc in due time. Without a physical shutter, the sync speed and frame rate can increase. Focus peaking will be nice but only if the EVF reaches the quality/responsiveness of the OVF. More MP in smaller packages with higher frame rates will require more processing power, and battery chemistry has not changed. It's not surprising that these mirrorless offerings have abysmal battery life' they're using the same technology as DSLRs, their batteries are smaller and the electronics are active all the time. Unfortunately, there aren't any good technologies to replace Li-ion, so the battery will need to be bigger.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Sony A7R Cons:
- Battery charger not included. The battery charges from either an AC or USB source, in camera. Separate charger is $79.

On top of crap battery life, you have to plug the camera in to charge the battery…Sony, WTF?!?

 

[Eldar]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Sony A7R Cons:
- Battery charger not included. The battery charges from either an AC or USB source, in camera. Separate charger is $79.

On top of crap battery life, you have to plug the camera in to charge the battery…Sony, WTF?!?

I´m not sure this is a bad thing. A camera like this will attract a different user community than a 1DX. These users will not fire off high fps series shooting wildlife, birds or sports, but rather use it as a walk around on a vacation, for family arrangements, street photography etc. That will primarily mean single shots and not in the thousands. And they will have easy access to a computer with USB or use the same USB charger they have for their mobile phone, which again requires less hardware and they can charge it every night.

At the moment it does not appeal to me though, but you never know ...

Elm58; It will be interesting to read your views on this camera, when you´ve had it for a while. You seem to be a more extreme user than most

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Sony A7R Cons:
- Battery charger not included. The battery charges from either an AC or USB source, in camera. Separate charger is $79.

On top of crap battery life, you have to plug the camera in to charge the battery…Sony, WTF?!?

I´m not sure this is a bad thing. A camera like this will attract a different user community than a 1DX. These users will not fire off high fps series shooting wildlife, birds or sports, but rather use it as a walk around on a vacation, for family arrangements, street photography etc. That will primarily mean single shots and not in the thousands.

Personally when walking around on vacation, if I'm out walking around, I want my camera with me, and if I'm not out walking around, I'm sleeping. On many vacations, I average well over 300 shots per day - kinda hard on a 200 shot battery, right? When out shooting landscapes/architecture, I use battery power at a faster rate than the number of shots would imply, due to time spent composing, tilting and shifting in Live View.

OTOH, having the ability to charge via USB in addition to a standalone charger is a nice feature, given that there are charging stations in airports, etc. (in fact, in a park in downwotn Boston, there are chairs with solar-powered USB chargers!).

 

[Eldar]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Personally when walking around on vacation, if I'm out walking around, I want my camera with me, and if I'm not out walking around, I'm sleeping. On many vacations, I average well over 300 shots per day - kinda hard on a 200 shot battery, right? When out shooting landscapes/architecture, I use battery power at a faster rate than the number of shots would imply, due to time spent composing, tilting and shifting in Live View.

But you´re not the average user, are you

 

[Albi86]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Sony A7R Cons:
- Battery charger not included. The battery charges from either an AC or USB source, in camera. Separate charger is $79.

On top of crap battery life, you have to plug the camera in to charge the battery…Sony, WTF?!?

I´m not sure this is a bad thing. A camera like this will attract a different user community than a 1DX. These users will not fire off high fps series shooting wildlife, birds or sports, but rather use it as a walk around on a vacation, for family arrangements, street photography etc. That will primarily mean single shots and not in the thousands.

Personally when walking around on vacation, if I'm out walking around, I want my camera with me, and if I'm not out walking around, I'm sleeping. On many vacations, I average well over 300 shots per day - kinda hard on a 200 shot battery, right? When out shooting landscapes/architecture, I use battery power at a faster rate than the number of shots would imply, due to time spent composing, tilting and shifting in Live View.

OTOH, having the ability to charge via USB in addition to a standalone charger is a nice feature, given that there are charging stations in airports, etc. (in fact, in a park in downwotn Boston, there are chairs with solar-powered USB chargers!).

If you don't mind carrying around a truckload of equipment, surely carrying just an extra battery won't be a deal breaker?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

But you´re not the average user, are you

True…but then, I'd say very few 'average users' buy $2300 cameras.

 

[Ruined]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Personally when walking around on vacation, if I'm out walking around, I want my camera with me, and if I'm not out walking around, I'm sleeping. On many vacations, I average well over 300 shots per day - kinda hard on a 200 shot battery, right? When out shooting landscapes/architecture, I use battery power at a faster rate than the number of shots would imply, due to time spent composing, tilting and shifting in Live View.

But you´re not the average user, are you

But, the average user buys a $500 Rebel SL1 or uses their cellphone

Hence, my questioning of who exactly this camera is designed for. Average folks won't buy it, pros wouldn't depend on it, so all that is left is the wealthy hobbyist category. That is pretty niche IMO.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

But you´re not the average user, are you

True…but then, I'd say very few 'average users' buy $2300 cameras.

If you don't mind carrying around a truckload of equipment, surely carrying just an extra battery won't be a deal breaker?

It's not carrying the extra battery, so much as having to use the camera to charge it. If the battery is built in, fine, but for an item with a removeable, rechargeable battery to ship withouth a standalone charger is just annoying. It's more personaly preference than anything - if I shot tethered all the time, being able to plug the camera in without spending extra money for a separate AC adapter would be annoying.

But there's also this:

If you have a battery grip and don’t have a separate charger, you need to remove the grip and place individual batteries in the camera body to charge.

Does that sound convenient to you? It sounds like a real PITA to me.

But, the average user buys a $500 Rebel SL1 or uses their cellphone

Hence, my questioning of who exactly this camera is designed for. Average folks won't buy it, pros wouldn't depend on it, so all that is left is the wealthy hobbyist category. That is pretty niche IMO.

Agreed. Anyone thinking the a7R is going to have a major effect on Canon dSLR sales is crazy or under the influence of mind-altering substances.

 

[Dylan777]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

But you´re not the average user, are you

True…but then, I'd say very few 'average users' buy $2300 cameras.

Carry 1 or 2 extra batteries not going kill you in term of weight neuro. If average user can spend $2300 on a body $79 shouldn't be an issue. I do agree with you Sony should include standard wall charger.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Carry 1 or 2 extra batteries not going kill you in term of weight neuro.

Not worried about the weight - worried about how many hours I wouldn't be able to use the complex $2300 camera because it was tied up doing the job of a simple, cheap battery charger.

 

[Dylan777]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Carry 1 or 2 extra batteries not going kill you in term of weight neuro.

Not worried about the weight - worried about how many hours I wouldn't be able to use the complex $2300 camera because it was tied up doing the job of a simple, cheap battery charger.

With all respects neuro, you should test drive a7 before we are getting into long discussion here.

 

[Eldar]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Carry 1 or 2 extra batteries not going kill you in term of weight neuro.

Not worried about the weight - worried about how many hours I wouldn't be able to use the complex $2300 camera because it was tied up doing the job of a simple, cheap battery charger.

With all respects neuro, you should test drive a7 before we are getting into long discussion here.

And, looking at your gear list, I suspect you would find the funds to buy a charger and an extra battery

 

[Albi86]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

It's not carrying the extra battery, so much as having to use the camera to charge it. If the battery is built in, fine, but for an item with a removeable, rechargeable battery to ship withouth a standalone charger is just annoying. It's more personaly preference than anything - if I shot tethered all the time, being able to plug the camera in without spending extra money for a separate AC adapter would be annoying.

I agree with you that not including a battery charger was unelegant. Even more unelegant is selling one for 79$. Seems that sony has stepped up their engineering department but not the marketing guys. However, I imagine third-party units will storm the market pretty soon.

The good news about a battery grip is that it completely discharges 1 battery before touching the other. This is a very good thing, because it means that at the end of the day you won't have 2 half dead batteries.

Anyway the battery life should be >300 shots if you don't keep the LCD on all the time. It's nothing like a good DSLR, but it covers reasonably for 1 day, even more if you have a second battery.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

The good news about a battery grip is that it completely discharges 1 battery before touching the other. This is a very good thing, because it means that at the end of the day you won't have 2 half dead batteries.

Interesting! The Canon discharge both batteries during shooting - when I used a (non-integrated) grip, I had four batteries so I could swap both at the end of the day.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Re: Off Brand: Sony Announces the A7 & A7R Full Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Personally when walking around on vacation, if I'm out walking around, I want my camera with me, and if I'm not out walking around, I'm sleeping. On many vacations, I average well over 300 shots per day - kinda hard on a 200 shot battery, right? When out shooting landscapes/architecture, I use battery power at a faster rate than the number of shots would imply, due to time spent composing, tilting and shifting in Live View.

But you´re not the average user, are you

But, the average user buys a $500 Rebel SL1 or uses their cellphone

Hence, my questioning of who exactly this camera is designed for. Average folks won't buy it, pros wouldn't depend on it, so all that is left is the wealthy hobbyist category. That is pretty niche IMO.

i think this hits the nail right on the head.