The offset microlens design from the A7r (the A7 has no such design).
There are still many questions regarding the A7 and A7r features and performance. For example we just learned that only the Sony A7r (36MP) has the offset microlens design. This is very important to know if you plan to use third-party manual rangefinder lenses on your cameras (for example [shoplink 15491 ebay]M-mount lenses[/shoplink]). And most of you likely didn’t know that the A7 has front curtain electronic shutter. So if you still don’t know if you should get the A7r or A7 here is a list that mya be helpful:
Pros for A7R
1) A7R is 36 MP while the A7 has 24 MP. Also an advantage if you want to use current E-mount lenses (you get 16MP on the A7r and 10MP on the A7)
2) A7r has missing AA filter which should give you a kick more per pixel sharpness
3) A7R’s sensor has off set micro-lenses designed to better capture light hitting edges/corners (might work better with Leica M lenses) — A7 sensor does not.
4) On A7R micro-lenses have gapless design. A7’s sensor doesn’t
5) Front panel on A7R is magnesium alloy. It’s plastic on A7.
6) Top two dials (exposure compensation and mode dial) on A7R are made from solid aluminium billets. On A7 the dials have rubberized exterior.
Pros for A7
1) Costs $600 less (and best price quality goes to the A7 with 28-70mm kit lens option)
2) A7 has AA filter which avoids major moiree issues and is also great to have if you shoot videos (it’s harder to get rid of moire on videos).
3) A7 has front curtain electronic shutter — A7R does not
4) Flash sync on A7 is 1/250. It’s 1/160 on A7R
5) A7 has on sensor PDAF. A7R doesn’t.
6) Continuous shooting: A7 — 5 fps. A7R 4 fps
Thanks “OneGuy” for completing the list!
Preorders in US:
Dedicated Sony announcement page at Amazon US (Click here).
Sony A7r body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A7 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony RX10 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 24-70mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 35mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 55mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
70-200mm A-mount at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A-Mount to E-Mount Lens Adapter at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony A to E adapter with mirror at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
A7/A7r leather case at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
A7/A7r vertical grip at Amazon, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony W Series Battery Charger at Amazon, BHphoto.
Sony FA-CS1M Off-Camera Shoe at BHphoto.
Semi-Hard LCD Screen Protector for A7-A7r at Amazon, BHphoto.
Preorders in EU:
Sony A7r body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, FI, WexUK, WexDE.
Sony A7 body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, FI, FR, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, FI, FR, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony RX10 at Sony DE, WexUK, WexDE.
Zeiss 35mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT,
Zeiss 55mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT,
191 Responses
Admin: small error in title: “The A7R lens has “offest” lens design”
I didn’t understand it until I opened the article and sas the word offset.
First electronic shutter curtain.
Can someone be so kind and explain this feature to me? 🙂
Check this article, it is short:
http://www.mhohner.de/newsitem2/efcs
Just to clarify here, for most intents and purposes the biggest difference you are going to see would be the noise. Personally, I wouldn’t worry much about it.
That’s shutter noise, not image noise, just to clarify.
Yes, thank you.
Thanks Vlad.
Then I can amputate this feature from my thoughts.
Electronic first curtain also reduce vibrations which isn’t particulary important for everyday use, but it can make a differnce for high magnification use like macro and supertelephoto.
Also vibration –
I found it quite noticeable in my first NEX5 – hard to handhold at slow speeds.
You really see a difference in your files between using the EFCS or not? While theoretically, it would reduce vibration, I have yet to see any actual evidence of that.
I can confirm this. On my Nex5N I can hold 300mm lens at 1/40″ with EFCS on.
Electronic first curtain shutter also messed up the flash in certain situations. Much safer to have it off.
Actually EFCS also doubles shutter life and improves reaction times!
Normally the shutter is opened so that the sensor can receive light for you to compose via LCD or EVF. When taking a photo without EFCS the shutter first needs to close then open and close to take the photo then open again! With EFCS it just needs to close to end the exposure and reopen. This reduces reaction time and vibrations and increases shutter life.
Do you remember the video that the Camera Store TV did with the atrociously loud shutter? It won’t be there for the a7, just the a7r. I have it on my a65 and it is an enormous asset. However, as the link above states, it legacy glass can have issues with it. So for my Minolta 80-200g and 50/1.4, I turn it off. For everything else, (Primarily Sony lenses and a Tamron) I turn it on. It is significantly quieter.
EFCS will:
Eliminate vibration from the opening of the shutter.
Reduce wear on the shutter since less parts are used/moved.
Most photographers know that the mirror in an SLR will cause unwanted vibration and potential blurring of the captured image, but the opening of the shutter does this as well to a lesser extent (especially for large sensors). In macro photography EFCS is a must-have feature for non-flash work, especially at magnifications of greater than 1:1 where it can mean the difference between usable and unusable results.
That Sony has removed this functionality from one of its cameras is worrying, since Nikon does not support EFCS and Canon only to a limited extent.
Is the lack of electronic curtain on A7r due to sensor design? Or could Sony add later in a microcode update? If 36 vs 24 mp readout speeds are an issue, perhaps the electronic curtain could be offered for shutter speeds below a certain threshold.
The sensor design does have to support the electronic first curtain shutter. I’m curious myself why the a7 has it and a7R does not. I’m assuming it’s a sensor issue. Another article I read, which I have yet to confirm myself, is a mechanical first curtain shutter allows the sensor to fully dump its charge in each pixel. This means it has a more consistent bias to start, and thus, less electron noise in the pixel. Having to clear and immediately start gathering light as an electronic first curtain shutter does, could lead to leaving a small (and somewhat random) charge on the pixel as it starts collecting light, and thus, more noise.
However, as I said, I don’t know if A) the a7R just can’t do an electronic first curtain, and B) if the electronic first curtain really does add a small amount of noise to the image. But both would be good reasons why the a7R and it’s uncompromising design, wouldn’t have it.
Also, the offset microlenses is one way that you could design a microlens that’s not as good at collecting straight on light, as it is light from an angle. Depends on how much of an offset it is in relation to the pixels. Some of the corners look like they’re actually behind the mount ring from the pictures. Those might have to have offset microlenses to get much of any light. Might cause problems for truly telecentric (image space) lens designs. Or crazy long focal lengths (like my telescopes).
Time will tell how effective this is.
I wonder why they didn’t call it A7 and A8 if there are all these differences between these cameras…
My guess would be since the two cameras are targeted towards different markets rather than one being an obvious model higher. If the A7r were labeled as A8, then the comments questioning why a more expensive body lacks some of the benefits of the A7 like OSPD and slightly faster FPS may be more pronounced. Same model but appealing to different markets helps justify the differences a little I think.
Although, after reading this post, it appears there are even more differences between the two models rather than just the sensor. At least we know what that extra $600 is paying for. If it were simply just for added megapixels and no AA filter, it is hardly worth it to me. If more discoveries are made down the road of other significant differences internally, then I would think the same, that they should’ve just labeled them as two different models entirely, even if the intent was to approach different types of uses.
What about the differences in Autofocus systems?
The hybrid cdaf/pdaf on the A7 makes it just a hair faster, and better for video.
The A7r had cdaf only, and less points (which makes it more of a ‘studio camera’ in my opinion, and not a ‘street camera’)
More metal on the A7r, yet it’s lighter.
Yes that is very typical of industrial designs. To retain the equivalent strength and rigidity with polycarbonate, it requires more total mass thus more weight. The metal in the metal parts is a magnesium alloy which you can barely tell is metal it’s so light but remains strong and resistant to twisting.
Of course the weight difference is negligible in this case.
I’m a bit sad that they use more plastic on the a7 🙁
And of course that M lenses perform that poor…
Good thing there is the 7r! 😀
Yeah, but so much more expensive. As a student I can get the a7 for 1200€, the a7r still costs 2100€. For the price difference I can get the Zeiss 55mm. But the a7r still has to prove that it does M lenses better… Some comments suggest otherwise.
So as a student you do not have enough for an a7r but you do have enough for M mount lenses? I am confused… 🙂
I’m a grad student myself so it’s pretty much an A7 as my only option if I get one of these models (still on the fence if I actually need FF or not). Unless it proves to be the A7r is enough of a difference other than a mp bump and lack of AA filter to justify that sizable price bump, I’d be happy enough without a doubt getting the A7. If the AF is much quicker than on the A7r and not just some “perceived” bump in speed as seen with the NEX6 implementation, then that might mean game over for any indecisiveness for me 🙂
Also, reviewers so far say that though the A7 isn’t completely mag alloy and feels the same, I personally can feel the difference and does change my overall perception of the camera’s solidity so I’m anxious to hold these two in person. In my mind, the NEX7 is far better to hold and to feel than the NEX6’s polycarbonate body. It just looks better too than that speckled junk on the 6.
Voigtlander, zeiss zm are relatively cheap used
Ben and hexx: exactly my opinion and what I wanted to say. Especially regarding the metal/plastic thing.
As a (university) student I can justify paying 1200€ for a camera and 800-1000€ for one lens. But 900€ more (75%!) for these features is hard… As I said for the differrnce I could buy the 55mm lens which will probably be a superb combination with the a7.
Then what’s holding you back? The ZA 55/1.8 seems to be as good as the Lux 50 ASPH. It certainly will outperform any CV 50 you can think of. The ZM 50/2 might be close, but again you’re paying similar price for a manual focus lens. I think for a budget student, you should stick with native lenses if you want a small and good IQ package. Personally, I hate the build of CV lenses. The focus feel is definitely not as smooth as the regular SLR manual lens. I used the 35/1.2 v1 and v2 and 50/1.1 for half a year.
Yeah this is probably what I’m going to do. In most parts you’re right but manual focus isn’t that problematic with wide angle lenses. For example the Voigtlaender 21mm f4 is tiny, cheap and very sharp on the M8 and on film but not really usable on the M9. So I expect the same for the a7. I would really love to use this lens but I guess I have to wait for the probably huge, 1000€+ wide angle zoom from Sony. It’s just sad that it won’t be possible to use lenses like this Voigtlaender on the camera.
And the plastic/metal thing is just annoying.
The Nikon D800 (a professional camera) has a plastic front and magnesium frame. It has plastic buttons. The A7 is probably just as well made or better than the D800 is. I’d not worry.
I own the Nex 7. It has also got a plastic front. Of course it is well made but it feels differently than an all metal body. Just my personal taste that an all metal body would be nicer, I would pay 50€ more for this.
Well, that’s nice.
Nice, but why make two sensors with so many different features? Was it some kind of internal design competition and they had two first placed teams :)? Why not make one sensor with offset microlenses, PDAF, no AA filter and electronic shutter?
+++++1
(Because Sony dont take lessons from apple )
apples and oranges my friend…
hahaha no, I didn’t mean anything by that, I just thought dropping that catch phrase here is perfect for your comment.
Funny this is: Apple has just released two almost identically named phones, and one has a lower res cam, a plastic case plate and no fingerprint sensor… 🙂
As someone who does night and low-light photography, and want to capture home video, I’m glad Sony made a sensor for me (the A7 sensor)
I’m sure people who do a lot of studio work or landscape photography are glad that Sony made a sensor for them (A7r sensor).
It’s nice that Sony took the ‘non-Ford-model-T’ approach here (ie. ‘you can get it in whatever colour you like… as long as it’s black’) 🙂
Everything not easy same as imagine !!
Each sensor is optimized for its own use-case. Try to combine the features in a single package you end up with average performance. Jack of all trades.
Regarding video, do these use line skipping as sampling method?
From the amount of moire on the a7 sample vids, it would seem that way.
…what sample video are you referring to in specific.
just curious
Compare these two:
A7:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh3dKWglaXQ&feature=c4-overview&list=UUTTbWzYZZ-xxQecXddaqQ1w
RX10:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrrIrYsrMWU
Wow. What horrendous aliasing and moire. I thought the A7 with the AA filter would be much better than this. Now imagine what the A7/r will look like.
Would really like to know more about the video, too. There are sample videos on Youtube for both the A7 and the RX10 showing basically the same scene, and the image quality from the RX10 seems to my eyes to be much better.
That’s to be expected. BIONZ X actually reads out ALL information from the RX10 sensor without any line skipping.
So if that is not implemented on the A7 or A7R, why would it not have been done? I use my camera primarily for travel videos and slide shows, and I really wanted an all-in-one solution. It seems that the RX-10 is probably a better choice for me (top-notch video and excellent pictures), rather than the A7 or A7R (probably outstanding pictures, but maybe mediocre video). I already have an NEX-5T and a RX-100, and I do prefer the picture image qaulity of the 5T, but not by much.
Great summary of the (little known) difference between these models.
My understanding:
Street photography, low-light photography, general photography, family video, DSLR lenses —> A7
Landscape photography, Commercial or Studio photography, rangefinder lenses —> A7R
That appears to be the objective, at least on paper.
street and wide rangefinder lenses from 24mm to 35mm go toghether ..and a super_sofiticated and fast hyperfocal focus system is used …
So A7r love street photography too …
“street and wide rangefinder lenses from 24mm to 35mm go toghether ..and a super_sofiticated and fast hyperfocal focus system is used …”
There are plenty of really nice relatively cheap manual legacy (not rangefinder) lenses in the 20-35mm range and I think they’ll work well on the A7. You’ll be able to manually focus them, focus/prefocus at a distance, use hyperfocal technique or Marklinger technique… So personally I wont miss RF lenses 😀
Waiting to see someone test Sony 24mm f/1.8 E-mount lens on A7 /A7r in full frame mode. Could be a good
Wide-angle solution if, as some believe, this lens is in
Fact a full-frame design marketed as APS-C.
@Ross
If that’s the case, it may be enough of a reason for me to jump to one of these cameras! I absolutely love my 24mm lens and wouldn’t mind some added vignetting myself as I tend to add a little in post anyways. I usually favor the “classic” type imperfections of older lenses with character versus many of the modern, sterile and perfect lenses of today. I wonder how all the other E mount lenses do as well, and if they would all have the hard-defined black borders of an APSC lens, or if some of them would have more of a soft gradient, I can totally work with that!
I’ll be testing out my Nikon 35mm f2.0 on it (and likely my Nikkor 24-70 2.8 as well though that lens is too big for me to use normally on the A7 body I think)
@ross: on dpreview you can already see a sample with the 24mm in the different modes.
With the exception that commercial and studio photographers would definitely prefer the 1/250 sync speed.
Yup, the omission of 1/250 sync speed for the A7r dumbfounded me when the camera clearly look to be aimed for studio or portrait photographer use.
Since we can’t do anything about it, what are the alternative ways to overcome this limitation?
Shoot at 1/8000s with a non Sony flash or trigger!! It is more than likely that speeds like 1/8000s are via an electronic shutter than the electro mechanical shutter and that should allow for high speed syncs with no impediments. 🙂
Has there been a camera with such a scenario before? Yes. The Nikon D70.
The a850/a900 had a 1/8000 shutter and obviously no electronic curtain.
you can do whatever you want with both cameras.
For what it’s worth, the one and only rangefinder lens I’m interested in using looks fantastic on the a7. It’s because it’s a telecentric design. Of course, I am referring to the Voigtlander 35mm ƒ/1.2.
It was fine stopped down. But I Ron’s testing at f1.2, 1.4, 2 etc showed awful corner performance. I’m starting to think it’s not really so telecentric.
All you’re seeing in those corners at large apertures are the flaws in the lens. None of the issues are indicative of any kind of sensor issue with the lens.
It’s a cheap piece of glass you can’t really expect edge to edge sharpness at such ridiculously large apertures. There is zero color shift, and only a small loss of sharpness. It’s really quite good.
And besides, why the hell would you shoot at ƒ/1.2, 1.4, 2, even less than f/4 if you care about sharp corners? Only if you don’t understand how optics work 🙂
I disagree and know what can be expected from the lens. The softness was typical of all the other fast wide symetricals and not due to field curvature. Performance is much better on an M9.
Well, what if I need a silent shutter for theaters photography/street photography, but need also microlenses to use M mount lenses for landscaping?.. Sony messed up things, a little bit.
The shutter noise is definitely frustrating. But it’s really the only (known) weak point of the cameras imho
If everyone would be satisfied with 1/1000 shutter speed, it could have had a nice silent shutter. But if that would’ve happened, forums would be flooded with people complaining about slow max speed. I don’t need high speed shutters, obviously you all do… I can live with a loud shutter though.
Then buy a different camera. Not one of Sony’s mirrorless cameras have quiet shutters, electronic first curtain or not.
Have you ever heard the RX1? Right because no one has because it’s silent. Boom, lawyered.
@swade I’m also considering RX1, but just for fun on the streets and landscaping. It would be of little help in theaters.. But damn.. It’s hard to resist it. 😉
If Sony 7r won’t deserve my money, another camera will. I was hoping that the new FF from Sony was perfect to me, in theaters and on the streets, but it seems it’s useless for my work, therefore I would not be enough satisfied to justify the cost.
I could go on saving for a monochro e, “at least” I would enjoy the rangefinder experience (I love it), and M mount lenses I own.
It’s still too early to take a decision and I won’t buy any camera based on hype.
The 7r looks like a nice solution for a gradual transition from APSC to FF for those who plan such a move. Still, I would like to see some new APSC cameras before making that step.
Waiting to see someone test either of these babies with old Contax or Olympus SLR glass.
I’m hopeful of good results with those lenses as today they are good performers on the NEX line (including the 24mp nex-7) 🙂
Please me people state an opinion. These little messages here are actually helping us decide which camera to get or to get one at all. Please Help(this is not sarcasm/seriously)
Never, ever use a comments section to decide what camera to get. Its all anecdotal. And here, its worse. These are unreleased products which no one has had in their hands. Wait till there are official and trusted reviews if you are unsure, based upon specifications. Everything until then is just all of us (myself included) speculating and interpreting data, which may or may not have flawed conclusions.
…agreed, but it is still great fun to speculate while waiting for the camera to finally arrive (late november in my case).
Every new bit of information that trickles through is always followed by a wave of deception, anger, joie, euphoria and frustration. Better than Shakespeare, more endearing and contemporary too.
Someone tested the Voigtlander 15 on both cameras, and both had pretty obvious color shifts, the A7r worse. At least that’s what I heard.
Reviews will come out pretty soon, we’ll see.
Oh my…
I would love to see results of a comparison of a7 and a7r with the Voigtlaender 21mm f4 “pancake”. I love how small and cheap this lens is…
yep .. but it seems a bad performes on the leica M too:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/151228-cv-21mm-f4-color-skopar-leica.html
No free lunch … some wide rangefinder lenses will have always problem with this sensors technology!
Please don’t shatter my hopes that early 😀
Both the Voght. 15mm f/4.5 and 21mm f/4 are generally better on film than digital. The 20mm f3.5 color-skopar is the one that works well on M9.
…thanks Andrea to sum this up, it certainly beats skimming through several pages of comments.
however with respect to the anti alias filter there are two things that need to be specified:
1. An anti alias filter on a full format sensor makes the use of legacy, wide angle, range finder lenses not just difficult but pretty much impossible since the corner smear (increasing loss of sharpness towards the corners of the image) is quite severe. So the the A7 is not only less recommended it should be considered completely out of the equation if that is your intended use of it.
2. The anti alias filter on the A7 will do virtually nothing to improve moiré since not all of the pixels are going to be read for the video image. To be more specific: the function of the anti alias filter is to blur just very slightly the transition between adjacentl pixels to avoid aliasing (jagged edges) and moiré. Since the alias filter in photographic cameras is optimized for the native resolution of the sensor (in this case 6000×4000 pixels) it will do next to nothing when only every third pixel or so of the sensor is read as is the case when shooting video. That is one of the reasons why shooting videos in these kind of cameras is so much more prone to moiré than when using dedicated video cameras.
Here’s an interesting article on that subject:
http://photo.vanderkolk.info/photo-nikon-d800-moire-antialiasing-artifacts.php
I’m going to sell my Nex 3, 6 & 7 with most of the lenses and then get Both Camera Bodies. I suspect other readers of this site will be doing the same. After that it will be building up a new collection of lenses over the next few years. I will need a Nikon adapter right away as I have plenty of legacy and modern Nikon glass.
Yes! Also, in early 2015 we will scrap all our lenses again and buy the NEXA77r+ with the new Eplus mount, because it has IBIS, and Sony has hinted that it will also make fast lenses one day. Oh, and because support for the existing platform has been dropped.
In 2017 we will all sell all our cameras and just have a mobile phone with 72 mega pixels and ISO 100 000. The lens can be extremly small and doesn’t need moore than one f-stop 66!
Based on thes specs the gapless microlens and offset should pluss no aa should actually produce as good ir better pixel sharpness an iso as the lower reselution a7.
If pure image quality is the criteria there should be no comparison.
Drunk posting? I kind of understand the second line, but the first…. totally lost.
Based on these specs, gapless offset micolens plus no aa filter, the a7r should….
My fingers are substantially fatter than the touch keys on my smartphone.
Except that you’ve have the additional vibration on the A7r because it lacks the option for the electronic front curtain shutter
…the vibration of the focal plane shutter alone has virtually no impact on the sharpness of the image (I tested it extensively with the Nex-7), but the audible noise it produces seems to be bothersome to some.
I really hate the noise, I’d rather they get a prototype electronic shutter onboard if they’re having technical difficulties with it.
I tried turning off the electronic first curtain shutter on my telescope with my NEX-6, and compared it to being on, since I’m most interested in the a7R. For long exposures (I don’t shoot the moon or planets, really), you can’t tell the difference at all. By long exposures, I mean 30 seconds – 10 minutes. Yes, very long focal lengths, very sensitive to vibration, but for the tiny fraction of a second that its vibrating, I don’t think you could get it showing up. I couldn’t see it on 30 second shots at all, and I’m imaging stars a few pixels across.
Makes more audible noise. Hard to tell if the image noise is better or worse without some analysis. I have the tools to measure the signal to noise ratio on both and see if there’s any difference, but I’m doubting it.
The first Full review you posted earlier doesn’t synergise with what you’re saying now. According to it, the A7R has the 250 Flash Sync speed and is the one that has teh First-Curtain Electronic Shutter..
http://www.photoreview.com.au/reviews/advanced-compact-cameras/interchangeable-lens/first-look-sony-ilc-a7#Full_Review
These specs. on this link makes more sense. I think there may be a mistake , and the 1/250 and front curtain shutter is on the A7R.
There is a huge amount of incorrect information being passed around, from reviewers, even some from Sony themselves. At this point, you can’t trust anything.
Just gonna have to wait for production cameras to get into actual hands (not “bloggers” who can’t even make in-focus test images half the time).
The specs on that link are incorrect. The info that SAR posted come officialy from Sony
http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/uxc2/index.html#specifications
http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-us/products/o4j5/index.html#specifications
The specs on that link are incorrect. The info that SAR posted come officialy from Sony
This is really just a random hypothetical question, but I wonder if Sony would ever consider releasing a bare bones FF option. While the A7 is definitely a great value, what if all someone wanted was a FF sensor to get that shallow DOF and low light capabilities but didn’t necessarily need the more pro-oriented features onboard the A7 cameras? Something like the A3000 in concept where you’re basically paying for a case with a large sensor. Same body, sensor, and autofocus as the A7 but that’s it. I wonder just how low a price Sony could really offer a FF model if the A7 costs that much WITH all the enthusiast features included.
Which pro-oriented features though?
I imagine they have a rather low margin on the A7 and quite a big one on the A7r.
I was wondering the same. What pro features? These cameras barely squeak by to qualify as “pro” oriented cameras. Their utter lack of speed being a huge part of questioning that moniker.
Actually, I expect to see a higher end mirrorless full frame next year. An a9, probably with a lower res sensor and designed to compete more directly with D4’s and 1D’s of the world.
On that same token, however, it’s almost impossible to justify a full frame camera at full frame camera costs if all you are after is slightly shallower DoF. You can achieve that with the metabones speed booster adapter for less money on a cheapo bottom-run NEX or similar camera.
16 mp professional camera— this is an OXYMORON..
Well for one, though many people may use these cameras for videography, I have no reason to believe everyone would need it. Then you also get WIFI and NFC, weather sealing, durable build of incorporating mag alloy, and just other features that are absolutely “needed” these days but do little to actually affect the image quality in the end.
Whether said features are “pro” or not, you get my point right? Something similar in concept to the A3000 where you essentially have a basic body encapsulating an awesome sensor.
Yep, I see your point. But I am not sure that what you want is really possible. See, some rubber for the weather sealing, a wi-fi module and some mag alloy don’t really add much to the price. The wi-fi module is what, 20 bucks? And you probably wouldn’t like to have an EVF like the one in the A3000 in your FF camera 🙂
I think,the A3000 pricing has much more to see with it being a model to get you into the system, i.e. a lower margin product.
That is true, the A3000 for all we know just breaks even since Sony could easily make that money back if they hook new customers into the system.
At the current price point for the A7, I suppose there is really nothing to complain about huh, easy to get greedy when it comes to spending one’s hard-earned cash.
I would love an A-Mount FF with the feature set of the a57 or a580/560. I don’t need much, but a FF sensor dropped into a mid-level body would be all sorts of awesome for me.
It wasn’t clear, but what I understood at the announcement was the only the 36MP sensor had microlens.
But nonetheless the differentiation between the models are pretty weird
All CMOS imaging sensors have microlenses. The special thing about the 36mp sensor in the a7R is that A) the lenses have less gap between them so there is less light merely bounced off the space between sensor sites, and B) the lenses (or perhaps the pixels, hard to tell based on conflict between what is said and what is shown in illustrations) are shifted as you move away from center in order to better catch light coming in at high angles.
But again, all CMOS image sensors have microlenses or almost no light would make it into the sensor sites at all.
Hello everyone – This is my first post, but I’ve been reading all your comments over the last few months while I awaited the Nex-7 upgrade. I preordered the 7r, as I’ve decided to invest in the new FE emount lenses. Admin – I used your link to Amazon to purchase the camera. I had already purchased the Touit 12mm lens, so I’ll upload some images once I receive my camera. I understand that it will only work in crop mode, but maybe I’ll keep the lens until an UWA lens is delivered for the new system. Thanks for all the great information and discussion! This is a great source of information for someone trying to learn more about photography.
I wonder why A7 does not have offset micro-lenses, price would be higher?
seriously? not both offset sensor ?
Larger pixels have larger microlenses which negates the need for the shift, and don’t forget the blurring filter which assists in this area as well. Only the most extreme lenses are apparently worse on the 24mp sensor and so far there have been very poor tests to even demonstrate this. There is nothing but hearsay that the 36mp performs better with ancient designed RF lenses, and there is plenty of evidence that it’s perfectly fine with the new native lenses.
It’s really only important for the 36mp sensor to have the shifted sensels due to necessarily smaller and more tightly arranged micro lenses.. It’s likely that the native lenses perform poorly on a standard 36mp sensor and this is the true reason they made this design choice.
Sony, Sony. Always leaving something out so nothing’s perfect, and that’s not comparing with future possiblities or competitor products, just a comparison within its own lineup.
There is still room for an A9 that combines all the features of A7 and A7R. 😉
Of course, that’s all I could hope for now.
Or features that neither have *and* some not included that are on either :-S
Yes, it will have both an AA filter, AND no AA filter!
Why not? 🙂
http://nikonrumors.com/2013/08/27/nikons-patent-for-electrically-controlled-optical-low-pass-filter.aspx
Here an interesting point of view regarding A7 vs A7r
http://photographylife.com/sony-a7-vs-a7r
and here
http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/10/16/sony-a7-a7r/#more-7324
My opinion is that even with Leica Lens you will have bad suprises with the A7r (not all Leica lens are recommended for the M240 so why will be the same lens better on the A7r?)
More about:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/royprasad/8684886071/
http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/02/22/2013-leica-m-typ-240-review/
This are marvellous machines that need state of the art lens (particulary for the A7r) designed primarily for Sony/Zeiss lens. If an other of your old dusty lens works, then good for you 🙂
Why would anybody cripple its own flagship? This logic is just impossible.
I would imagine that EFC is not supported by the sensor design, this may be possible since the design was originally implemented in the D800. There may also be something to the high pixel count – I’m no engineer but surely it must be more difficult with more pixels to process in EFC?
This annoys me as well, but practically it makes little difference in terms of photography. If you aren’t comfortable with sticking WAs into people’s faces you might as well use an SLR with teles instead of a smaller body.
Ok, so they claim a new sensor but not only is it an old one only with offset microlenses, it has design flaws hindering it from utilizing EFC, not much on an SLR but quite a common and useful feature on mirrorless？
Processing speed should be less of a problem since they brag a lot about the speed of the new processor, EFC possible on 24MP NEX but impossible on 36MP A7r with “5x” processing power？
Processing power has absolutely nothing to do with readout speeds. Just because your camera’s CPU is faster doesn’t get the data off the sensor faster and it doesn’t magically give clearing speeds (which is more relevant here for EFCS) that are required for one feature or another. These problems are vastly harder to solve with CMOS technology than the image processing that happens after the fact.
Fine, I’m no engineer either and don’t know why it’s taking so long for readout speeds to progress, or why if there’s circuitry problems, no FF BSI?
Also, EFC isn’t necessarily better. It’s quieter, possibly reduces a very small amount of vibration (depending on shutter design), but there’s reports that the EFC may add a little bit of noise in the images as it tries to quickly clear the pixels and start exposing them all at once.
All of the differences in the a7R are focused on sharper images at the expense of convenience:
On the a7:
The PDAF reduces the number of active pixels and requires an AA filter. So, gives better focus speed, but you loose sharpness.
The AA reduces moire, but also reduces sharpness.
The 24 megapixels (with the same processor) increases shooting speed, but reduces sharpness.
Something tells me that the EFC is another feature that was going to cause issues with getting a good sharp image. From what I know of CMOS design, I can imagine supporting EFC on the sensor would require more circuitry and less space for a photosite, but that’s conjecture. So it’s probably either because you had to make compromises on the sensor that reduced image quality, or some function of the shutter itself maybe.
So just because it doesn’t have a feature certain people want, doesn’t mean it’s not more advanced or better for other people. In this case, the target audience.
Also, take a look at DXOmark’s sensor scores for the NEX-5 line. They actually get a little worse in low light between the NEX-5N and 5R. I bet it’s because of the PDAF.
The disadvantages of the EFCS versus a mechanical one are irrelevant, because you can turn it off.
Don’t you think if that were to be the case Sony would’ve advertised it as a sell point? Like no AA-> more moire(admittedly rare but still appears sometimes) but better sharpness, so no EFC-> more audible noise more shutter wear but less signal noise?
>Something tells me that the EFC is another feature that was going to cause issues with getting a good sharp image
Yes, EEFC lets me skip the first curtain shutter and get a good sharp image. From experience, I am sure the 36MP paired with a telephoto lens for landscapes will be wasted with shutter shock coming to bear.
And from my experience, it wouldn’t be much of a problem.
Why 55mm(1.8) if i have 50 1.4?
Why 35mm 2.8? 24mm 1.8 is better.
Autofocus?
I’m guessing Sony won’t release really fast glass initially in order to keep the size small. Maybe later down the road (after they’ve done the f1.8s and f2.8s) they’ll make some faster/larger f1.4 lenses?
I am not sure if you are serious or not, but just in case you are serious:
Because there is so much more to a lens than simple aperture. By all accounts, the 55/1.8 will perform on par with Sony’s CZ135/1.8, which may be the best lens at that focal length produced today. Check the MTF on the 55mm. I would take a 55/1.8 that is sharp wide open over a 50/1.4 that needs to be stopped down.
Not necessarily. If one of the disadvantages is that the sensor will just not perform quite as well if it supports it (on or off), then that would be a reason to design a sensor without it, if performance were paramount.
That seems to be the trend between the a7 and a7R.
The a7 is for people who want a good full frame mirrorless camera.
The a7R is for people who want the sharpest sensor in that body, even if it makes a few things more inconvenient. If the EFCS makes the images a little less sharp, for ANY reason, then the logic is: out it goes.
Now, this is all assuming there really is a solid engineering reason Sony couldn’t put EFCS on the a7R, or that it would somehow inhibit sensor performance. I suspect that’s the case, but if not, I would really like to know why it’s not there.
It’s also assuming there’s no EFCS on the a7R to begin with. A fact which hasn’t really been verified entirely. Even Sony can’t seem to get a straight story out on it.
Wow. That got put in the wrong place. Was a reply to Vlad a few posts up.
No worries, found it. You do have a point there, although I do not see a reason why it would affect IQ just by its existence. But then I am not engineer 🙂
>If the EFCS makes the images a little less sharp,
In my experience, it is just the opposite.
Did Sony officially state the a7 does NOT have a microlens design? We may all be lost in marketing here…
All those features mean nothing until we see real world performance of both a7 and a7R side by side. Until then I would´nt speculate too much…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronscheffler/
Voigtlander Ultra Wide-Heliar 12mm f5.6 Aspherical (CV12)
Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f4.5 Aspherical M (CV15)
Leica Summilux-M 21mm f1.4 ASPH. (21 Lux)
Zeiss Biogon T* 21mm f2.8 ZM (ZM21)
Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f3.4 ASPH. (21 SEM)
Leica Summicron-M 28mm f2 ASPH. (28 Cron)
Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.2 Aspherical VM II (CV35)
Canon 35mm f2.0 LTM (a lens from the late 50s-early 60s)
Zeiss C Biogon T* 35mm f2.8 ZM (ZM35C)
Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 35mm f2.8 (新镜头)
Voigtlander Nokton classic 40mm f1.4 (CV40)
Leica Summilux-M 50mm f1.4 ASPH. (50 Lux ASPH)
Canon 50mm f1.4 LTM (50-60年代的老镜头)
Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f1.5 Aspherical LTM (CV50)
Zeiss C Sonnar T* 50mm f1.5 ZM (ZM50C)
Zeiss Planar T* 50mm f2 ZM (ZM50P)
Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 55mm f1.8 (新镜头)
Sony 28-70mm f3.5–5.6 OSS (新镜头)
Leica Summarit-M 90mm f2.5 (90 Summarit)
among the wide (21/28/35mm _ I didn’t give a look to the LTM lenses
28mm summicron and 21&3mm Zm Biogon are bay far the worst … and Biogon design was bad on Nex also, so no surprise.
I’m amazed by the 35mm voigtlander, looks better than the 35mm sonnar that is really good! Also the 21mm f1.4 is good stopped down!
The 55mm f1.8 looks really and the 50mm Planar is good
P.S.
I let other people look at the 12mm and the 15mm, focal lenghts I don’t need and I’ve never owned one 😀 so I cannot judge …
P.S.2
But in real life .. what these tests says about the camera/lens? … for me nothing. I’ll wait for more complete reviews in different light conditions head bye head with a M9 …
I’m starting to thinking that,
1 – If the A7R has Offset Micro-lenses and the A7 not,will be with the same FE-Lenses differences?
2 – If so, there will be optically for the A7R optimized, so will the A7 worse perform?
Good thinking! 🙂
Sony should answer that. 🙂
Micro-lenses work well for fixed lens cameras where you can design it for one lens. But in the case of mirrorless if you do aggressive micro-lenses then there maybe some fallout with certain lenses. If Sony is only using the aggressive micro-lenses on one FF sensor that that complicates it even further.
Sony’s biggest problem is their reliance on the E-Mount flange distance for FF. It is just too short to get sharp corners on many wide/normal lenses. This will always be an issue to some degree.
Are u sure? … is not a question of flange distance from the sensor. It’s a question of distance of the rear lens from the sensor and telecentricity of the lens itself. One can have a short focal distance but a bigger distance of the lens from the sensor.
Wide rangefinder lenses usually are designed for the film era, come close to the sensor and are not telecentric lenses!
This “digital sensor tech” need telecetric lenses to obtain the best Image quality quality … thats all
Yes, but that would require larger lenses.
I have seen numerous samples, full size, of images from the FE 35mm ƒ/2.8 and the FE 55mm ƒ/1.8 on the A7 and they look just fine. No apparent smearing or color shift. The 35/2.8 vignettes throughout the entire aperture range but that’s most likely just a side effect of making such a small lens. To be fair, the RX1’s 35mm lens vignettes badly as well (but is corrected even in RAWs)
aah now the price difference makes actually sense.
Today i try the 15mm Heliar on the A7 and A7r. At the A7r it does work very bad. Semering corners and magenta shift.
At the A7 it work s a little better but it´s not the lens i will us with a fullframe camera .
We need better full frame WW-lenses like the three elmar 16 to 21 mm.
I think the A7r microlens design can compensate to a certain degree, but 15mm lens might be too much for it, and the A7’s larger pixel size benefit kicks in.
I can’t recall who posted Zeiss Zm 18 4.0 pictures on the A7R but they were really good. I wonder if anyone has tested on the A7. That lens works well on the cropped Sonys and Fujis as well.
I wonder are they both good for video. They lack body stabilization so camera movement is very sharp and shaky. Isn’t the Olympus MD1 better?
Given the tech in these cameras, I think we need to hear from the design team, and not the marketing team.
How ’bout it Sony? A 20-30 minute video presentation from the lead engineer on the project??
Note that it is not a given that the A7 is better for video than the A7r just because it has an AA filter. There have been reports that the A7r produces sharper video. Another point, the phase detection feature on the A7 compromises pixel size I believe. Last point – short flange distance is not a problem because you can design the lens retrofocus if you want. IE, it doesn’t have problems with Alpha lenses and mounting leica lenses on the camera show that it is of no benefit to have a longer flange distance. Take what is reported as facts on this post with a grain of salt.
Great points! re: pixel size – It’ll be interesting to see how the low-light performance of the A7 (with hybrid AF) compares to that of the D600/610 (which is top-notch)
re: video – I don’t do any ‘serious’ video (just ‘home movies’ type video) so I’m OK with it being a little less sharp (if that turns out to be the case)… but the continues AF from the hybrid focus is appreciated as a) I don’t want to manual focus for home videos, and b) I find the ‘hunting’ that CDAF does kind of annoying 🙂
I wonder if Sony will steal Canon’s dual-pixel tech for the next release…
Any news of rumoured A5 and A5R APS-C cameras?
Every time I read the details of the differences from each source I get different information. Last I saw this info, the reviewer (who actually had cameras) claimed that it was the A7r with 1/250s sync, not the A7. I would look to Sony’s website for such info, if they had posted it, but right now Sony store US website claims the 55mm Zeiss ƒ/1.8 FE lens has optical stabilization so clearly they don’t know what they’re talking about either.
So as much as I’d like to believe this post… I guess I’ll just have to wait until the real cameras are shipping to know for sure. Luckily it doesn’t really change my choice. I need CDAF to make proper use of that 70-200/4 coming next Spring (hopefully).
Sony Sucks Ballz. Buy Nikon. Buy Canon. Hell, buy anything other than their crappy-poop-dookey-eating junk. Forget Sony. Long live the squirrels!!!
The rumored Nikon FM2-alike camera does sound very sexy (if the rumour is true)
Pro Nikon: cool retro styling and design, ability to use awesome Nikkor F-mount glass
Con Nikon: bigger and heavier than the A7 (765g?), won’t fit in my jacket pocket even with a small 35mm prime?? likely more expensive…
I hope the official announcement is soon so we can make a better comparison between these 2 cameras
Can anyone point to a test with a production version of either of these cameras with production version firmware, maybe even an A/B comparing them to the only other FF mirrorless camera available?
Seems a little early to conclude anything about the A7 or A7r, these are only preliminary shots fired in the preorder marketing circus.
Just when I thought I could live happily with the A7… Seems like I have to consider many other things before I buy either a7 or a7r.
I wonder when they release an updated A7R with PDAF, 1/250 sync and electronic first curtain shutter. Will really benefit us poor ebayers 🙂
So here’s my take on this:
I have a significant investment in Canon glass. The A7 vs. A7R decisions appears to come down to this for me:
A7: Better focusing with the Canon glass due to PDAF
A7R: Better image quality with adapted glass due to sensor offset design
So is that really the heart of it when using adapted glass? IQ vs. AF?
Wait for official clarification from Sony. At this point is all speculation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P_9yvcxYlc
Has anyone else seen this video yet? I saw it linked in another forum. It appears he is announcing future lenses for the A7 and A7r? Can someone verify this?
Thanks!
http://photorumors.com/2013/10/21/new-zeiss-touit-macro-lens-coming-soon/
Found another link… Maybe he was not referring to the A7…
don’ you guys know if this was shot using a7r?
http://timg.eprice.com.hk/hk/dc/img/2013-10/16/3951/alexchow_5_Sony-_158f02c585ec4934917e4ed09767362bori.JPG
think i saw it in some review… but not sure.
I’m having a hard time deciding which camera I want. I want the A7R sensor with the A7 features.
Don’t worry. When we get the actual reviews, it’ll become much clearer.
Is it bad that I mainly want the A7r for the magnesium front plate and metal dials?? Sensor is nice of course, but build quality is important to me.
What do the microlens mean for native FF E-mount lens? I know for adapted Leica lens, it could help with corner softness. Does that mean that there could be future compact wide angle E-mount lens that would also perform better on the A7R due to the microlens? Or does that not have any affect for native lens?
A7R needs gapless microlenses because the photosites are smaller and less light falls on them.
Imagine one A7 pixel. In A7R, the same space would be occupied by, lets say, two pixels. The two pixels are separated by metal wire so the light gathering surface of these two A7R pixels is smaller than that of the one A7 pixel. Thus the need for better microlenses.
These microlenses will not be the savior of M mount lenses. I wouldn’t bet a lot of money on it.
For bird photography I need small pixel pitch, fast autofocus (if I’m ever going to buy a system lens – I shoot mf nikon on nex7 now), and all the help I can get reducing vibration.
Neither of these cameras is an improvement on the nex7. The A7 pixel pitch is much larger; the A7r loses elec front shutter.
Sucks for me, I was really hoping to upgrade, now I wait for someone to improve on the nex7 whereI need improvement. In the mean time I’ll cry over the amazing dynamic range of the a7r knowing I’ll never buy one…
Sony made every decision against what I need. I won’t soon forget that.
Sony ALWAYS do that. Crap company, I hope for more adequate manufacturer in this field. For example, I’m waiting for 24 october, where Leica will show something they did in collaboration with Panasonic.
Leica and Pana is out of FF marget. Crap Company too.
market*
Bumpy, If you’re a bird photographer , i think the best miroirless system for it, is definitly the Olympus EM-1. faster tracking focus of them all , IBIS and smaller sensor give you lenses with more reach and smaller …so less expensive. My Olympus Rep told me that there is a 300mm f4 coming soon ( 600mm equiv ). At this lenght you can use f4 for sure , imagine a 600mm f4 on a fullframe… to much shallow depth of field for birding IMO, So you gain 2 stop ISO advantages.
Yeah and that almost makes up for the two stops sensor performance you lost by dropping to a tiny sensor 🙂 Not to mention that any more pixels than 16mp and you’ve pushed too far both for practical lens design and good sensitivity performance.
Besides, there isn’t an MFT lens yet in the 200+ mm range that isn’t garbage. I’ll believe it when I see it.
The olympus 40-150 f2.8 will likely be very good for micro 43. Certainly better then the sony 70-200 f4 in low light at about the same price and at 300 equivelant.
Has it occured to anybody that with this full frame cam, metabones can now develop and speedbooster for medium format lenses?
So can we please petition metabones to make a medium format speedbooster? 🙂
This occured to me the moment that FE 35/2.8 was leaked.
So using an e mount lens effectively gets you only 16mp on the a7r after the crop. Can you shoot without the crop and correct it with lr once they release a software update? What about the m mount and a mount lenses?
Yes, you can shoot without crop. As expected, this results in heavy vignetting.
Many comparisons here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52374631
I asked Sony support Australia about the manual for the a7b and a7r.
Their response.
Hi Jim,
My name is Scott, thank you for your email and interest in the A7/r camera.
Unfortunately the manual is not available until the unit is released on the market, however I have passed on your enquiry to our development team to see if it is at all possible to have this released sooner.
I have also provided a link below which will provide some extra information regarding the camera and its features.
http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-gb/index.html
Thank you again for your email and interest in the A7.
Kind Regards,
Scott
Customer Support Representative
Sony Australia and New Zealand
AU 1300 137669
NZ 0800 766969
Note: they want pre orders but what are you buying? a load of marketing hype, a load of crap or a good camera. One would not know would one? Will it do what one wants? are the customisable buttons fully customisable or just a 2 way choice, this or that? So why are bods falling over them selves to buy a marketing ploy.
We seem to be finding bods stating thins are not what they thought, so what else is ‘not so’?
At least Olympus released the E-M1 manual when the camera was announced. It enabled buyers to see what they may or may not be getting, BEFORE they forked out the money.
Does anyone know if the A7/7R goes in to crop mode for video? I hope not it’d be better to utilise the whole sensor! I only ask as my old NEX-5 does this.