Sony's New a7RII Camera Delivers World's First Back-Illuminated FF Sensor

[neuroanatomist]

But at some point, eventually, some start giving up or at least going for mixed solutions where instead of adding a new Canon body to replace their old one they add a Sony to their old Canon.

Many who are thirsting for more DR are only just now starting to do that.

But at some point, eventually, some start giving up or at least going for mixed solutions where instead of adding a new Sony body to replace their old one they add a Canon to their old Sony.

Many who are thirsting for better native lens selection, better ergonomics, or better service are only just now starting to do that.

I'm sure both are correct...but how many are 'some' and 'many'?

 

[Eldar]

But at some point, eventually, some start giving up or at least going for mixed solutions where instead of adding a new Canon body to replace their old one they add a Sony to their old Canon.

Many who are thirsting for more DR are only just now starting to do that.

But at some point, eventually, some start giving up or at least going for mixed solutions where instead of adding a new Sony body to replace their old one they add a Canon to their old Sony.

Many who are thirsting for better native lens selection, better ergonomics, or better service are only just now starting to do that.

I'm sure both are correct...but how many are 'some' and 'many'?

And how interesting is this debate? ... Puuhhh ...

 

[Dylan777]

But at some point, eventually, some start giving up or at least going for mixed solutions where instead of adding a new Canon body to replace their old one they add a Sony to their old Canon.

Many who are thirsting for more DR are only just now starting to do that.

But at some point, eventually, some start giving up or at least going for mixed solutions where instead of adding a new Sony body to replace their old one they add a Canon to their old Sony.

Many who are thirsting for better native lens selection, better ergonomics, or better service are only just now starting to do that.

I'm sure both are correct...but how many are 'some' and 'many'?

And how interesting is this debate? ... Puuhhh ...

I'm currently shooting 50% mirrorless 50% DSLR, love both.

Edit: For short term, I don't plan to own 2nd Canon body yet. Might replace my a7s with a7rII if I get decent high ISO.

 

[jocau]

Apparently they're also working on the lossy compression RAW file issue.

DE: Oh, interesting. I would have though it would be, just... it would be faster, I didn't realize it would improve your noise levels as well.

This next question is more of a request maybe, but we've had a lot of questions asking about raw format. And...

KM: Ah, raw. <laughs> 14-bit.

DE: Yeah, well 14-bit is OK, but many people are asking "could we please have uncompressed RAWs?"

KM: Sony RAW is compressed, not uncompressed. But if we're getting a lot of requests for it, we should make such a kind of no-compression raw. Of course we recognize that. But I cannot give you a guarantee when we're going to fix or not fix.

DE: Right. When you're going to address that, yeah.

KM: Sure, sure. And so we recognize the customer's requirement, and actually we are working on it.

DE: So it's something that you're aware of. I'm sure that the image processing pipeline is optimized for the way that it is now, but it seems to me that, while it might involve some trading off some performance, that it could just be a firmware change. Could it? Would you be able to provide uncompressed raw as a firmware update, or would it require new hardware?

KM: Right, yes. So... not hardware.

DE: It is firmware. OK, good! I think people would be willing to accept a slower transfer time or lower frame rate in an uncompressed mode. Some people really, really want that.

So the actual data readout from the A7R II sensor, I think I heard in the presentation that it's three times faster than the A7R. Does that mean that rolling shutter is reduced by that same proportion? Is it the case that rolling shutter is one-third as much with the A7R II vs the original A7R, because data readout is three times faster?

KM: There were many factors, the total is 3.5 [times faster]. As I said, the materials changed, and also the layout was changed, those are the main reasons.

Source: Imaging Resource

 

[Aglet]

This might be useful for some of you.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/canon-lens-owners-look-at-that-first-a7rii-autofocus-test-video-with-canon-mount-lens/

Hmm...I don't think I hear dynamic range mentioned once in these reviews. They seemed focused on autofocus, adapters for Canon lenses, frame rate and shutter volume. On all of these specs, it seemed as though the reviewers were basically saying that it is almost as good as a DSLR. Funny how no one seemed to care to mention this sensor that is supposed to be the king-of-super-awesomeness-that-makes-all-other-cameras-worthless-in-comparison.

Maybe that's not such an important criteria for the majority of customers?

We already know it's not such an important criteria for the majority of customers via market share stats and DSLR sales stats.

That's likely true with a large percentage of those "sales numbers" being the sort who only tend to get off the "green box" by accident.

That's quite an a$$sumption. And as is typical, with absolutely no evidence at all.

WTH?!? I posted an edit to that, last night, specifically for you. I suspected you'd feel goaded into replying, pretty much as you have, and that wasn't my intent.

the edit-addendum went along the lines of:
Giving Canon credit for having some of the best marketing out there, especially towards novices, and likening it to big tobacco by getting new users hooked into "the system." It's a very good marketing plan. They certainly succeeded, back when, by both saturated marketing and better product. They still have marketing, certainly have momentum from past efforts, and their easy-to-use, and technically acceptable, if not stellar IQ, products maintain that momentum which so many seem to have.
I don't have brand momentum, I use what's best for me, whether that's camera system or computer platform.

 

[Aglet]

For years now, Nikon and Sony have produced sensors with more DR at low ISO than Canon. For years now, DxOmark have weighted their scores to low ISO DR and have consistently scored those sensors higher than Canon. For years now, Canon has beaten Nikon in DSLR sales and for awhile that gap actually widened.

It is certainly reasonable to conclude that low ISO DR is NOT an important, or not one of the most important factors, to the MAJORITY of customers. Unless you are insinuating that a customer would say "That aspect is very important to me, but I'm not going to make my purchasing decision upon it." There is obviously some other factor or set of factors that is more important, that SoNikon lacks.

That's my only point. I'm talking about the sensor aspect of low ISO DR. No impact on sales that I've seen. Maybe I didn't make it clear at first that that was the only criteria I was considering. And I would hate to think that SoNikon is ONLY better at low ISO DR.

I'm using sales stats and data to make MY claim. He is using nothing but nonsense and bitterness.

Of course not. The Exmor sensors also provide (usually) better color (tighter CFAs) and lower overall noise at a wide range of ISO settings, all of which contribute benefits when your final output shows pixel level information.

 

[Aglet]

Many who are thirsting for better native lens selection, better ergonomics, or better service are only just now starting to do that.

Really, are Canon's products SO bad that service performance needs to be a major concern?
I've had probably nearly 100 individual Canon items of significant value, and, ironically, the only one ever needing service was an old ZR60 camcorder whch had a faulty (SONY!) sensor in it and was fixed under a silent extended warranty.

I don't buy my gear based on repair performance, it's too marginal a criterion.

EDIT: FWIW, of the hundred+ non-canon pieces of gear I've gone thru, none needed any real service either. Altho I DID send a Nikon D5100 thru the system a few times to see if they could effect a fix for the slightly tilted viewfinder vs sensor flaw. And an early Fuji ST1 went in for the minor light leak fix.

 

[meywd]

Many who are thirsting for better native lens selection, better ergonomics, or better service are only just now starting to do that.

Really, are Canon's products SO bad that service performance needs to be a major concern?
I've had probably nearly 100 individual Canon items of significant value, and, ironically, the only one ever needing service was an old ZR60 camcorder whch had a faulty (SONY!) sensor in it and was fixed under a silent extended warranty.

I don't buy my gear based on repair performance, it's too marginal a criterion.

Do you not factor the after sales service when buying a car? I understand that their products fail less, but that is also a part of the consideration.

 

[bdunbar79]

This might be useful for some of you.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/canon-lens-owners-look-at-that-first-a7rii-autofocus-test-video-with-canon-mount-lens/

Hmm...I don't think I hear dynamic range mentioned once in these reviews. They seemed focused on autofocus, adapters for Canon lenses, frame rate and shutter volume. On all of these specs, it seemed as though the reviewers were basically saying that it is almost as good as a DSLR. Funny how no one seemed to care to mention this sensor that is supposed to be the king-of-super-awesomeness-that-makes-all-other-cameras-worthless-in-comparison.

Maybe that's not such an important criteria for the majority of customers?

We already know it's not such an important criteria for the majority of customers via market share stats and DSLR sales stats.

That's likely true with a large percentage of those "sales numbers" being the sort who only tend to get off the "green box" by accident.

That's quite an a$$sumption. And as is typical, with absolutely no evidence at all.

WTH?!? I posted an edit to that, last night, specifically for you. I suspected you'd feel goaded into replying, pretty much as you have, and that wasn't my intent.

the edit-addendum went along the lines of:
Giving Canon credit for having some of the best marketing out there, especially towards novices, and likening it to big tobacco by getting new users hooked into "the system." It's a very good marketing plan. They certainly succeeded, back when, by both saturated marketing and better product. They still have marketing, certainly have momentum from past efforts, and their easy-to-use, and technically acceptable, if not stellar IQ, products maintain that momentum which so many seem to have.
I don't have brand momentum, I use what's best for me, whether that's camera system or computer platform.

Ok, my bad. I don't do well on internet discussions. Can't tell seriousness, moods, sarcasm, any of that. Maybe I should just stop typing and read instead.

 

[Aglet]

Do you not factor the after sales service when buying a car? I understand that their products fail less, but that is also a part of the consideration.

Nope! I do all my own repair work after warranty. Again, I pick the product that works for me, reported reliability can factor into the initial purchase decision in some cases but it's not like I'm buying a Yugo!

 

[meywd]

Do you not factor the after sales service when buying a car? I understand that their products fail less, but that is also a part of the consideration.

Nope! I do all my own repair work after warranty. Again, I pick the product that works for me, reported reliability can factor into the initial purchase decision in some cases but it's not like I'm buying a Yugo!

true, though a Sony these days is not all that better...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Many who are thirsting for better native lens selection, better ergonomics, or better service are only just now starting to do that.

Really, are Canon's products SO bad that service performance needs to be a major concern?
I've had probably nearly 100 individual Canon items of significant value, and, ironically, the only one ever needing service was an old ZR60 camcorder whch had a faulty (SONY!) sensor in it and was fixed under a silent extended warranty.

I don't buy my gear based on repair performance, it's too marginal a criterion.

It all depends on individual needs. Service/repair turnaround time isn't a factor in my camera buying decisions, either. But for equipment I depend on at work, it certainly is a major factor.

 

[Aglet]

Ok, my bad. I don't do well on internet discussions. Can't tell seriousness, moods, sarcasm, any of that. Maybe I should just stop typing and read instead.

Jeez, system just did it AGAIN!
I posted a reply and it didn't stick.

so, once again,

HAHA! no worries. Altho I think my line still stands it's better with it's supporting argument and, well, whatever else I wrote, It sounded better in the 1st version that didn't stick.
I think I'm logging out and clearing caches and stuff, something's acting funny on my browser. ???

 

[neuroanatomist]

I think I'm logging out and clearing caches and stuff, something's acting funny on my browser. ???

If you have a Sony computer, it could be a hardware problem. Hope you can fix it yourself.

 

[sdsr]

.... At least we agree that the majority of people don't care about low ISO DR.

It's funny how you say "Many who are thirsting for more DR are only just now starting to do that." Do you know that for fact or is that just a false assumption used to refute my false assumption? Nikon/Sony DSLR sales aren't growing nor is mirrorless.

I'm sure it is the case that most people don't care about low ISO DR, though putting it that way is a bit misleading: I suspect it's also the case that most camera buyers (including most mirrorless buyers) don't even know what low ISO DR is - so their not caring about it (or, in neuro's terms, not needing it) is rather different from and perhaps less interesting, say, than your not caring about/needing it.

As for sales not growing, don't the latest figures show that there has been an increase in both dslr and mirrorless sales during the past few months and that they have been doing so in such a way that mirrorless cameras lag behind as much as ever?

(My perspective on this debate is more than a little perverse and iconoclastic, I expect: right now, I most enjoy using old manual lenses made by a wide array of manufacturers; the easiest way to do that is via adaptors on mirrorless cameras with EVFs; FF sensors are better than smaller sensors; to date, the only FF mirrorless cameras are Sony; thus, I like the a7 line - though of course I'm also pleased that their image quality is first rate. I also own a couple of Canon dslrs, though I guess I may reconsider that if the a7rII really does provide high-speed AF for Canon lenses via Metabones.)

 

[sdsr]

Well, about that, Leica has made smaller lenses for "full frame", for almost a century already.. That is why I expect smaller and lighter lenses for the A7-series.

The same is true for Pentax and Olympus too, even with fast apertures (at least up to c. 135mm) - though of course none of these are AF, and none have IS. (Even Nikon, occasionally, for that matter - their excellent E series 100mm f/2.8 is ridiculously small and light.)

 

[EdB]

43 pages that can be summed up in one sentence. Canon makes better cameras and Sony makes better sensors.

 

[benperrin]

43 pages that can be summed up in one sentence. Canon makes better cameras and Sony makes better sensors.

I think it's more like there are different cameras out there and some will suit different peoples needs more than others. Pick the one that is good for you and go out and make some art.

 

[Aglet]

I think I'm logging out and clearing caches and stuff, something's acting funny on my browser. ???

If you have a Sony computer, it could be a hardware problem. Hope you can fix it yourself.

Don't let the irony come back and bite you, but I mostly use Macs, like your platform of choice?..
and... I was a certified Apple Service Provider in the past.
So, ya.

 

[Aglet]

...
That's one reason why I'm skeptical of the "mirrorless will take over the world" crowd. Any size advantage is lost once you get past about 100mm in lenses. If you are traveling and want to have a telephoto along, you are much better off with a DLSR. Lightest, smallest option may be the SL-1 and a Tamron super-zoom.

You haven't used a m4/3 mirrorless solution. You can fit the equivalent of the SL-1 plus lenses covering 24-300 in the pockets of your pants. Mirrorless is here to stay.

The real sensor advancements have been in improving smaller sensors, so it seems like the full-frame mirrorless are likely to remain a tiny niche market. I think the jury is still out on EVFs. If they improve significantly and the cost eventually drops below that of a mirror box, we may see DSLRs shift to D-EVFs, but I don't see that happening anytime soon and when, and if, it happens, it will only happen is the cameras retain the current lens mounts.

EVFs are very good in dark conditions as they can apply gain to artificially brighten the scene.

But as others have pointed out, the majority of "it must be an OVF" are older generation "analog" folks and the younger generation is perfectly fine with digital.

I'm totally old-school-generation but I find a good EVF is way better than a OVF for certain kinds of work.
And the Fuji XT1 EVF system gains-up decently in very low light, can provide better MF clues than OVF in many cases unless using other focus tricks to make the OVF useful. What little opportunities I had to compare the 2, it worked alongside my D800s in obscured moonlight with similar success, viewfinder use only.