Dpreview is certainly (still) the most famous camera review site. But some of their Sony A7 conclusions lead to a big discussion among SAR readers. And today DPreview (Click here) also explained in a new article some of the problems they had with thrid part lenses.
Well, not everyone agrees with Dpreview conclusions. A detailed critic of the Dpreview test has been posted by SoundImagesPlus (Click here). He writes that at least two “cons” listed by Dpreview are not correct:
1) Dpreview says: “Tools for shooting with third party lenses need improvement” SoundImagesPlus writes:
I really don’t understand the third party lenses quibble. One button press to bring up a magnified view and focus peaking. Both work really well and I haven’t used anything that’s any better than this. Their comments – ‘With so many adapters available, the a7 is a very attractive option for owners of third-party lenses (which is discussed in more depth in this article). While Sony has provided tools for focusing these old lenses – such as magnified view and focus peaking – they don’t work as well as we’d hoped.’ really don’t make any sense to me. The whole method works fine for me, it’s quick, accurate and reliable. What’s their problem?
SAR note: I own the [shoplink 22851 ebay]Canon 55mm f/1.2 FD[/shoplink] and am absolutely satisfied with how it works on the Sony A7r. Completely agree with SoundImagesPlus on that point!
2) Dpreview says: “JPEG quality disappointing compared to peers – crude sharpening, over-aggressive processing and occasional posterization.” and “The areas that need the most improvement are related to JPEG image quality. While we recognize that some a7 shooters will be using Raw exclusively, those who are shooting JPEGs will see smudged details and strange artifacts, which are amplified if you edit and re-save them.”
SoundimagesPlus answer: “Quite simply having minutely examined the jpgs. from my A7 and A7r, I have no idea what they are writing about. Plus they give an example from one of their test shots, which try as I might I just cannot see. In fact I take the complete opposite position to them. I think the jpgs. from these two cameras are the best I’ve ever seen“
SAR note: I am not a professional reviewer. But from my short experience with the Sony A7-A7r JPEG engine is quite a lot better than the NEX-7 engine (I owned the camera before). And I see no major difference with the Nikon D800 shots (my company owns the camera and I did some basic testings with it). That said other reviewers wrote exactly the opposite of Dpreview claiming the Sony JPEG look quite goo. Example: DSLRmagazine (google translated article), Focus Numerique (google translation here) or Cameralabs: “the out-of-camera JPEGs from the A7 looked comfortably superior to the 5D3. In the 20-24 Megapixel class, I’d say the A7 is an excellent performer.“.
Overall I found many of the Dpreview critics correct although most of them are very insignificant for the kind of shooting I do (Example: missing built-in Flash is not a problem for me!). But the two points mentioned here in these post really go against the personal experience I had with the A7-A7r.
————————
Specs and Store Links in US and Canada:
Dedicated Sony announcement page at Amazon US (Click here).
Sony A7r body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony A7 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
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.
Specs and Store Links in Europe:
Sony A7r body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE.
Sony A7 body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony RX10 at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, 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
Zeiss 24-70mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, SE, PT
Sony G 28-70mm lens at Sony DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO.
Asia:
A7r at Digitalrev.
A7 at Digitalrev, Amazon Cina.
A7 with 28-70mm lens at Digitalrev.
0 Responses
You forgot to mention the other big one, Imaging Resource, which praised the Jpeg engine as well, calling it as good or better than the competition and much better than previous Sony engines.
….which is not to say it’s without flaws. It clearly has some and shooting RAW with a good developer is still the benchmark, as it is for every camera out there.
But other jpeg engines have plenty of flaws too (Canon smudges greens and browns more at base ISO than any other maker, produces more sharpening halos than others too, Nikon leaves more colour noise than others and relatively soft defaults, etc.).
But generally nobody produces as many problems as Sony does on their jpegs. I sometimes get asked to retouch photos from Sony cameras on professional work. Without doubt the worst jpeg files to work with. They just do not withstand as much work before starting to fall apart compared to other brands like Canon, Nikon, Olympus. I am not a fan of Canon colours on their jpegs but at least they withstand more work on them.
Uh. You can’t regain back the details lost due to NR at base (!) ISO from Canon jpeg engines, nor smudging in the red channel in general. Fixing every single sharpening halo is also practically inpossible. Neither of which are much of an issue if any, at low ISO shots from the A7R and A7.
These “pros” shooting jpg for client work… Can you send them my way for a beating?
Lots and lots of Journalist including a few of my classmates from RIT who have Pulizters shoot JPG. There is no time in the field to process shots and and upload to the bureaus for distribution. They do actually spend time setting up there camera processing though.
OK, are you talking about Cybershot or older Alpha cameras or are you talking about the A7? Agreed that the JPEG engine on the old cameras is really awfull, but have you actually ever seen a JPEG out of the A7 which has a new JPEG engine?
I find even more quibbles with dpreview’s “review” 🙂
The JPEGs from my A7R look pretty good to me. Not worse than my Fuji X-Pro1 JPEGs. And the Fuji’s have a very decent JPEG engine.. Just calling it as I see it…
dpreview tested the A7 not the A7r. The links from DSLRmagazine, Focus Numerique and Cameralabs are with the A7r test. This is the correct link for the Cameralabs test: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7/index.shtml
dpreview also complained about jpgs defaults of the 6d and 5dmk3. The 6d had a rating of 83% even if it’s a worse camera than the A7: no 100% viewfinder coverage, few focus points and all in the middle, no tilt-screen, “only” 1/4000 max speed, 1/180 sync speed vs 1/250 in the A7. Also the 6d is bigger and heavier…
I own a Canon 6D and rented an A7R. If the A7R worked for me, I was going to sell my 6D as I prefer the smaller size. Plus, I have some old lenses waiting to work on a FF mirrorless (e.g., Canon FDn 50/1.4, Contax G 90/2.8, etc.). But I am an available light shooter and the A7R just couldn’t come close to matching the focusing speed or accuracy I get with the Canon 6D (center focusing point). I give the 6D a better score for my kind of shooting without hesitation. But if I was a landscape photographer and using a tripod then I would not hesitate to have the A7/R camera over the 6D. If I was more comfortable with manual focus most of the time then I’d also have an A7/R camera. But for fast AF and shallow depth of field in lower and available light then there really isn’t any competition. The FE Zeiss 35/2.8 is 2 stops slower than my Sigma 35/1.4. Sony needs faster primes, but they know that adds size and then that starts to remove the benefit of going small. Hmmm. I am still rooting for the little FF cameras. Once AF speeds improve, I’ll be on board.
The best way is to wait for a second generation. This year or at the begining of the next one Canon could launch the 6D replacement (entry-level Canon cameras have high refresh rates than mid level – 5d- and high end – 1d -). By then Sony can tweak those problems via firmware updates or even a replacement model at the end of 2015…
Also your comparison is a little bit off the mark because the 6D is to be compared to the A7 which is faster than the A7r. The A7r is in the same league only with the D800e because Canon hasn’t a sensor with that high mp count.
“the A7 which is faster than the A7r”
The difference is negligible when compared to the 6D in lower light. I’ve seen people who have used the A7 and R and the A7 still struggles in lower light where people on the dpreview forums have suggested various workarounds (e.g., when it struggles, turn the camera to portrait to get it to lock in). I have an NEX 5N. I bought it in Sept. 2011. I also bought an RX1 in December of 2012. The biggest shock to me is that the RX1 AF speed in lower light did not really show any improvement over my NEX 5N after 1.5 years. The A7R also did not show any improvement after 2.5 years. There may be some lower light AF improvement, but these cameras are all much closer together than any of these cameras compared to my 6D. Sony doesn’t seem to be putting much effort into lower light AF speed (i.e., the speed the AF locks in on a face for example). I may seem a bit harsh, but it’s really disappointing to me as I still consider myself a Sony Emount fanboy. ;~) For that matter, I like Canon the least of the 3 full frame competitors in the $1,500 – $2,500 range, but I bought a Nikon D600 and it had oil on the sensor so they lost my business. I selected Canon by default.
I find it strange that my nex-6 which I sold and my A7 both work fine in low light. I always use the focus lamp and it will take a picture in total darkness. Maybe It has something to do with the objects i choose to take pictures of. I have to do some more testing at night outside.
I own both the 6D and the A7. My findings are opposite of yours.
An infamous ex-Sony Alpha related website owner insinuated on the dpreview forums that Camera Labs had had their objectivity compromised in their verdict of the A7, where they praised the JPEG engine…
“Someone got a free camera and trip somewhere…”
I’ve responded to that criticism on the dpreview comments.
Where did you post it, Gordon? I can’t see it.
It’s probably waiting to be moderated. Basically the answer was, yes, Sony took most of the major camera publications away on a trip to launch the A7 and A7r, but no, no-one was given a free camera. Trips to launch products are commonplace in the tech industry. I’ve been lucky enough to go on my fair share over 20 years of professional journalism, but none have ever influenced my editorial. But honestly, why would they? If you want to ruin a perfectly good career, you’d want more than a free trip or camera! I’m constantly baffled by comments suggesting that any of the big review publications are being paid by the companies – again I’ve been in this industry for 20 years and I’ve never seen it.
Thanks Gordon. I was aware of the A7 trip itself, as most of the big review sites seemed to be on it.
I took exception to the insinuation that your objectivity was influenced in order to ensure that the camera received a positive review.
Thanks for defending me! I can assure you, I’ve never been ‘bought’ for a review, but then I don’t know any major publications which have either. Some people like to assume there’s a conspiracy, but there isn’t, at least not with the publications I know. Products get good reviews when the reviewer thinks they’re good, and bad ones when they don’t. Some readers take reviews very personally and if they don’t agree with their own findings, assume there’s foul play at work. But ultimately we’re just offering an opinion, hopefully an informed one if the reviewer is experienced, but it’s still just an opinion.
It’s typical Carl style, sadly. By implying positive conclusions about the jpeg engine must have been influenced by a free trip et al., he basically also implies his former employer (Imaging Resource) was bribed to conclude something similar.
Your reviews are kick @ss by the way. If I need real info. I always read your analysis first- hands down. Very informative and well rounded. It’s all in the details as they say.
I don’t read dpr “reviews”. I just use their parent company, Amazon for some odd purchases. dpr is, in fact, a drag on Amazon and I hope Amazon will realize this soon and do the right thing- ie., close the “review” operations.
Actually, I enjoy reading DPreview, and learn a lot via their forums, although I’d like to know how much Jeff is paying those moderators, some of whom seem to confuse their powers with fairness. For example, removing or locking people’s threads/posts without explanation – that hasn’t happened to me but others have complained about it.
DPreview should add to their conclusion:
* We are extremely biased to CaNikon and can not write a neutral review of a Sony camera.
+1
Yep, absolutely bang on Emir!
+1000
where is the ultimate like button!?
DpReview conclusions are too often OFF. Also with the Xtrans sensors – http://www.thevisualexperience.org/web/camera-image-quality-why-dpreview-may-be-sometimes-wrong/. In our view A7R JPG are at least comparable to the fuji ones.
Exactly. Thank you for clarifying. The truth.
I think what Dpreview meant to express was that if you look at the JPEG images from A7r at 100% view, you will notice JPEGS artifacts due to crude sharpening, over-aggressive processing and occasional posterization. Not taking any sides here, well, I must say that there are noticeable JPEGS artifacts when viewed at 100%. There are enthusiasts who takes pride in viewing the images at 100% even though those artifacts will not be appear in print outs. It is the case of getting the best value for your money spent. The full frame Sony A7r/A7 is without a doubt one of the best breakthrough in the MFT system. Kudos!
The Olympus E-M1 has tons of artefacts (sharpening ones) in jpg default mode (and even low iso noise). dpreview said it has excelent image quality and never said anything about those artefacts 🙂
Andy you can turn the sharpening off on the E-M1. You cannot get rid of the jpeg issues on the A7.
lol? There’s plenty of options dealing with “JPEG issues” in camera… try turning NR off for a start. Or reducing sharpness. What EM1 can’t do is pretend ISO 6400 JPEGs are usable SOOC. A7/R does that with ease.
Pixel peeping can be a rather peculiar act. Some enthusiast/company uses or upgrades to newer and bigger screen just to view images at 100%. It is perhaps what going digital is about. Pixel peeping, while it is rather extreme to some, it does make sense to your bank account or financial controller or to an auditor, getting the best value for your money that is. Well, of course one may shoot with a compact camera and still print out nice photos. Take Canon S100 for example, comparing it with a camera with APS-C sensor , there can be little differences in an 7×5 print out, even harder to distinguish the print out after post processed. True story.
If you shoot for stock phography sites, pixel peeping is what the judges do before they accept the photos you’ve uploaded…I agree that when you print photos taken at lower iso values you don’t see quality diferences between a large sensor camera and a small one (only dof huge differences). Printing beyond iso 400 and those quality differences can be spoted easily.
SoundImagePlus cannot see the problems with the samples on the review… it take a split second to see the issue.
Well, DP Review never has liked Sony JPEGs. They pounded the a65 for “smearing” back when I bought it. I’m strictly amateur but I’ve been very happy with the JPEG a65 results and I have never bothered to switch on the RAW-JPEG option. Contrast that to the Lumix super-zoom I owned before which I quickly learned I needed to shoot saving both RAW and JPEG because the JPEG colors often were off and needed work. DP Review didn’t raise so much as a peep about problems with JPEGs with that camera that I recall. Yet, that’s why I ultimately dumped the Lumix. Personally, my idea of fun isn’t spending hours editing hundreds of shots.
And as many here point out, I’m a rarity in this crowd. Pros certainly and most serious amateurs are going to shoot RAW and post-process. So DP Review put way too much emphasis on JPEGs in their review.
All that said, I could see from their examples what their talking about. It’s subtle and even they say the problems are “nuanced” and they may be criticized for making too much of it. But isn’t that always the issue with these sorts of reviews? Pixel peeping. It serves it’s purpose to point out differences but, ultimately, it isn’t very important in practical applications.
Personally I think people make too much fuss about jpeg quality. If you want to maximise image quality, you’ll almost certainly be shooting raw. If you’re pixel peeping with jpegs, you seriously need to get out more. Reviewers blather about jpeg quality because ooc raw isn’t review friendly…
I agree regarding shooting RAW when best quality is needed. But how about the A7 raw which is actually 11 bit and not 14 bit like Sony claims? This is another issue that the dpreview states. If this is true, than a MFT camera with 12 bit RAW is better than the A7 🙂
Sony use an adaptive lossy RAW compression scheme which takes a block of 16 14-bit RAW values and stores them using a total of 128 bits, at an average of 8 bits per pixel.
That is totally different to storing an 8-bit value.
In the same way that a stereo MP3 encoded at 128kbps is not a 1.5 bit audio format.
This has been done to death before. Basically the Sony compression algorithm appears to work by encoding blocks of the image to 11 bits based on the characteristics. Whilst this might appear to be a problem, it isn’t in practice as in dark areas the higher order bits are all 0s anyway, and in the brighter areas the lower order bits just contain noise. In other words, if you examined a very bright pixel, then there aren’t really 14 bits of information. Due the bottom bits are essentially shot noise. Of course, in an area of the image which is (say) 8EV darker, then those bottom bits are significant, but then you can discard the top bits anyway as they are all zeros.
Note that when these RAW compression systems are described as “lossy”, then you have to be careful about meaning. In data terms, a “lossy” compression will mean that you can’t restore the source to bit equivalent level. However, if you are encoding something which is inherently “noisy”, it’s possible to throw away that part of the resolution which is noise.
For instance, you might consider capturing a vinyl audio recording to 24 bit depth, but the that’s way beyond the dynamic range of the medium. If you drop the last 8 bits, then clearly it’s “lossy” in data terms, but it certainly isn’t lossy in the sense of Shannon’s theorem if you are considering the anologue source.
This sort of compression algorithm was used by Nikon many years ago. Also, people might remember when the first Minolta (and Sony) digital SLRs supported both RAW and cRAW. Nobody was ever able to show any qualitative difference between the two file formats.
There’s a discussion about Nikon’s implementation here :-
http://www.openphotographyforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5499
Just to add to this, somebody has done some tests comparing “lossy” DNG to the original. The author has struggled quite hard to get any discernable difference between lossily compressed DNG and the originals. In short, it’s very marginal, and “lossy” DNGs are about one fifth the size of the originals.
http://helmersworks.com/journal/2013/03/digital-negatives-dng-with-lossy-compression-is-it-worth-it/
“This is another issue that the dpreview states. If this is true, than a MFT camera with 12 bit RAW is better than the A7′
I’ve never really understand why 10–11-12 or 14 bits matter if the noise shows up in an 8-bit jpegs. Bits below that are drowned in noise.
The reason why shadow noise is visible in 8 bit JPEGs as that a non-linear tone curve is applied so that, in effect, the darker areas are digitally amplified. That means that they can represent a wider dynamic range than you might expect to fit into the 8 bit resolution.
With RAW files, values are essentially linear with light intensity (as that’s the way photodiodes work), and this means you need sufficient bits to represent changes in luminosity in dark areas. Hence, if you want to capture 14 stops of dynamic range at a pixel level, you need 14 bits of ADC resolution. Incidentally, if you down-size an image, you can actually gain more DR due to the statistical effect of combining adjacent values. That’s why some DXOmark scores on the “print” output apparently exceed the bit depth of the ADC. The screen level scores never show that.
Incidentally, whilst the bottom 5 bits of a 14 bit area in the measurements of bright area will be effectively representing “shot noise” (assuming the full-well capacity id of the order of 45k electrons), you need those extra low-order bits when you get to darker pixels. At a photosite with 6 EV less intensity, “only” the lower 3 bits will be noise. Go down to 12 EV below saturation, and only the last bit will represent shot noise. (However, SNR gets a lot worse with lower intensity as the total photons captured drop at a far faster rate than the shot noise).
So you can see that you need those “deep” bit files to capture subtleties in dark areas, but you don’t need the least significant bits in the bright regions as they don’t represent real image data.
Each review site HAS to say something pro and con …
If DP Review has to stretch so far as to complain about no built-in flash and jpgs on a FF 24 meg camera … well … that’s sort of an endorsement in itself.
If it had a built-in flash, I’d super glue it shut … and why would I spend that kind of money on a FF 24 or 36 meg camera to treat it like a P&S by using resolution chopping, color truncated jpegs?
Face it, if the NEX cameras were a shot across the bow of the camera industry, the A7/A7R is a Cruise Missile aimed right at it. A lot of vested turf is being protected now.
Circle them wagons boys, Sony is on the war path.
LOL!
Based on it’s current sales and the lack of interest a lot of shops are reporting it is not even a blip on the radar yet. The product was rushed to market for the Christmas period rather than delaying it. That is the worse thing Sony could have done because now they have got to repair the damage and that means A8 and A8r. Hopefully they will not rush those out for this Christmas and spend time getting them right and relaunching with the right lenses in place. Plus scrap the kit lens and bring an improved one out at the same time. Yes the camera can take a good photo but there are far too many limitations at present.
You keep repeating “sales”, without any relevant data to back up your claim.
Almost like you have an axe to grind somewhere…
If “Stu 5” is the same “Stu 5” at DPR, bear in mind he claims to shoot large and medium format cameras but gripes endlessly about AF of a camera he’s never used. It’s almost as if he’s trying to make m4/3 trolls look bad 😀
Anecdotal evidence and acceptable issues. This is what your rant is all about.
Popup Flash – Why I want it – Commander mode!
Just like the D600 and D800, I want a popup flash to work as a commander for other off camera flashes! I hate being forced to waste one of my HVL-58AM flashes as a commander when it should be off camera working for me.
This is why I did not buy the a99 – in principal, it pisses me off. Sony, don’t follow canon 5dm with no flash, follow Nikon and give us a commander flash.
The flash con did not make any sense although I find the flash in my nex-6 can be used as bounce flash when tilted back for small items or even people if the ceiling is low and the iso is high enough. If they found a way to put it on the A7 I would use it but I never looked at the camera and thought it should have a flash.
jpeg …. raw ….. it means nothing if you don’t have a good shot ..^^
You’re missing the point in the original article: he’s not saying the focusing tools don’t work. He’s saying the LENSES aren’t working as well as they hoped for. And he’s referring to the colorshift and soft corner problems with the telecentric designs suuch as Leica 35mm etc.
Even if that is the case, what about all of the SLR lenses which are working just fine? Or actually be serious for a second and realize that Sony is not supposed to support every lens out there.
I can tell from the comments here that very few SAR readers are photographers – nor pros nor amateurs. Here is the absurdity of it all: non-photographers offended by review on photographic tool. Feel that. Does everybody here work for Sony?
+1
Unfortunately there are a lot of gear heads but they do keep the industry going by chopping and changing their systems and buying multiple systems. The shops love them and even keep them amused. It’s not unique to this forum though.
Well Bollox/Stu5, what exactly are YOU then doing here apart from deriding other commenters here as non-photographers, fan-boys and gear heads?
Thing is, people like Sean Lancaster have a volume of splendid shots whereas nothing can be seen from you.
Well we are just “deriding” you and the other geeks. Taking the piss out of geeks is fun.
Have you ever thought about the possibility that many posting here might actually use the cameras for photography (and not brick wall tests or fences) and are quite happy with their tools?
Did you also know that Amazon own dpr?
Silly shutterbugs pull away from the safety veil of your sophomiric fanboyism and take photos. Imagine the greats from the F64 Group wasting their time arguing the points of their Commercial Ektars v. someone else’s Goerz Dagar lens! And, a parting shot, all this prissy talk about the “noisey” shutter on the A7R -truth of the matter, stand just a few feet away from someone shooting a Nikon D-600 then switching to the Sony -been there, done that and the Nikon was “louder”. But, so what. Louder or just something for reviewers to feed on. Photographers, people who make money and create art have no time for computer talkers who would be hard pressed to take a decent photo with an iPhone.
Think about it, on another level -James Joyce arguing (and wasting time) with Albert Camus about “who has the better typewriter.”
The best camera in the world is the one in your hand!
There is no consistency in the reviews at Dpreview.
That is unless you look at their ability to overlook or downplay any 4/3rd problem and make a minor problem a major one for any other brand. Heck they have even made up stuff in the past. Remember the no two button format in the Nikon DF review?
They are there to help Amazon sell the cameras that Amazon wants to sell. Olympus happens to be that brand right now since it is so severely overpriced.
Face it the Sony is a better camera, with much much better IQ then the Em1. Dpreview sees this as competition and does something about it. They trash the smaller cheaper and better camera in a review. I would be totally surprised if Amazon doesn’t make some kind of sales package with the EM1 to take advantage of it.
Just because it has a larger sensor does not automatically make it a better camera. Although it does to gear heads.
Exactly! It is not automatic A7 is just MUCH better camera than M1 in IQ in responsiveness in well designed ergonomics in porperly designed hardware it is just better.
Try using E-M1 with the art filters and peaking turned on at the same time. It just does NOT work. It sometimes crashes….it is not actually well engineered.
Pixel peeping can be a rather peculiar act. Some enthusiast/company uses or upgrades to newer and bigger screen just to view images at 100%. It is perhaps what going digital is about. Pixel peeping, while it is rather extreme to some, it does make sense to your bank account or financial controller or to an auditor, getting the best value for your money that is. Well, of course one may shoot with a compact camera and still print out nice photos. Take Canon S100 for example, comparing it with a camera with APS-C sensor , there can be little differences in an 7×5 print out, even harder to distinguish the print out after post processed. True story.
If you shoot for stock phography sites, pixel peeping is what the judges do before they accept the photos you’ve uploaded…I agree that when you print photos taken at lower iso values you don’t see quality diferences between a large sensor camera and a small one (only dof huge differences). Printing beyond iso 400 and those quality differences can be spoted easily.
This is a quite funny thing and the Sony bashing or scepticism is simply there by people which have hardly any experience with the cameras. As a matter of fact I have picked up my Sigma lenses from their oficial service shop. The pro guy which is doing the lens alignment does not have a Sony body to test the lenses with, so I had to leave my A77 there for 2 days. Today he explicitly says to me- I have not had a Sony, I do not like Sony, but the focus peaking is just awesome tool! My take on this is, that while Sony produces cameras with great features, they completely fail in comunicating the features even to the prosumer crowd.
And this is my experience also with many people in the stores here. “I do not like Sony” … “why?” … “I like other better”… this is to me a very childish behaviour, unfortunate, but very true.
Very easy to check if DPR is being fair. Compare the words in the review with the conclusion:
“JPEG quality disappointing compared to peers – crude sharpening, over-aggressive processing and occasional posterization”
Crude sharpening? Let’s see what they say:
“On the plus side, the JPEG has done a good job of preserving detail in the face, while smoothing the beige wall to the left. Our processed Raw file uses the same noise reduction over the entire image, meaning a balance has to be struck between smoothing the background and retaining detail. As such, our chosen settings, while appearing to retain more detail, have neither the well-defined edges or smooth background of the camera’s JPEG.” – Oh what’s that, it did a better job than you?
“Where the context-sensitive approach falls down is at transitions between areas it concludes to be smooth and those it considers detailed … Our test scene suggests the problem becomes visible around ISO 12,800.” – ARTIFACTS AT ISO 12,800 STOP THE PRESS OMG DISASTER
We printed the central 19 x 13″ of a similar image … the results were pretty usable.”
Noise:
“Overall, the noise suppression is too aggressive in the JPEGs, making particularly the a7 images seem artificial at times. Naturally this can be turned down…” Stopped reading right there. Come on, there’s actually three settings of NR (you can do more than turn it down, you can even turn it off! Amazing!) and 7 settings of sharpening and contrast so you have plenty of in-camera options for working with it if you’re dedicated to JPEG shooting.
Posterization:
“As you can see, the problem [posterization] isn’t image-destroyingly bad – indeed, whether you can even see what we’re talking about will depend to a large degree on the device you’re viewing the site with. But, once you’ve looked at the image’s red channel, it should be much more obvious what we’re talking about.” – Read that again folks, “whether you can even see what we’re talking about”. Yeah everyone views their beautiful photos in Red channel, especially the JPEG shooters who PP heavily (what?!) *groan*
So let’s look at that conclusion again:
“JPEG quality disappointing compared to peers – crude sharpening, over-aggressive processing and occasional posterization”
I think they meant to say “we didn’t like JPEG quality at default settings and even though you can barely see some problems until ISO 12,800 or if you switch to red channel, and you can switch them off if you don’t like it in-camera, we are *still* gonna moan about it.”
+1 well said. Well said. ANNNNNNND well said. I could not agree more. Like I said: they’ve lost all credibility with me. I don’t even send people their way anymore… unless they’re looking for that easy Amazon link. :/
Should read “with NO workarounds.” Comment editing feature, please…
Bravo… you absolutely NAILED it with this comment! They immediately explained why most of their nitpicks didn’t matter in the slightest and/or would never be noticed… yet the summary is written as though each of them is a huge issue with now workarounds.
When a review fails the internal integrity test so flagrantly it’s very difficult to not read editorial bias into it… i.e. it seems they had a particular goal in mind (Silver? Not hurting Amazon Canikon/MFT sales?) and went through some contortions to justify achieving that goal.
Should read “with NO workarounds.” (initially posted under wrong comment)
Inability to edit/delete comments, how do I hate thee? Let me count the ways…
Sony: please remove autofocus, jpeg file output, AA filter, auto-ISO, and movie capabilities from the A7. Also remove all shooting modes except M. Make the PASM dial as dedicated exposure, and the exposure comp dial as dedicated ISO. Remove the front dial and move the shutter button forward and on top of the grip like the NEX-F3.
Lastly, remove $700 off the price tag and call it the A7L(ite).
If you follow my instructions carefully, you will sell boatloads of these.
DRpeview was always biased towards Canon. I said that years ago when I was shooting Olympus, I say that now. They often lower the marks of other cameras with some insignificant things and raise them a bit with same kind of things for Canon.
Several years ago I saw they placed “Only 3 AF sensors” to be a Con for Olympus, while they placed the same thing (!) to be a Pro for Canon. That was funny 🙂
Nevertheless, they give LOTS of useful information, even being a bit biased…
I have more confidence in DPR than in Sondimageplus. Having said that I like to see many different views and test before any conclusion.
Sondimageplus is strange. The author suffers from heavy gear acquisition syndrome (?)and changes views every day.
Concerning the A7´s they are the first of its kind and it is understandable they are not perfect.
About jpg: Some pro´s use jpg (time saving), but there are presets in the camera, no big deal.
About shutter: Loud yes, but more important vibrations (Digilloyd and Reid Reviews). Sony need address this.
About lenses: Is the E-mount optimal for “FF”? This is a major question. Wide angle 3rd party lenses do not go well. Lets see what happens with Sony/Leica wide angle lenses. Will they work optical or need strong in camera processing?
+1 well said about the soundimageplus administrator.
His writing is nice but he is unreliable. I remember him smashing down the Nikon 1 system but when he owned one he became a fanboy. A few more stories like that. He reviews, he is not only a photographer. So his mistakes count.
Only a personal note; According to his poor post processing skills, I can see why he can not see the JPEG artifacts at all.
I love my A7r and hoping dpreview will change their canikon attitude for their upcoming review.
Your comment about his post-processing skills is misplaced. He post-processes for image libraries, and that’s what they want. He just happens to post pictures ready for the libraries in his talking points.
🙂 indeed I was aware of that. That’s why I said “only a personal note”
It’s my opinion that the guy makes sugary images not only because of image banks want it that way. If he keeps his editing a little more realistic, image banks will be happier believe me. If you happen to see his images with exaggerated colors and over forced hi dynamic range with craving to find more details in highlights and shadows, over vibrant blue skies, hallow around contrast edges etc you will perhaps agree. And maybe not.
This is only my personal opinion. Too much sugar hurts my teeth.
Why knock on Soundimageplus? He might have GAS, but here’s the difference between 99% of the people that post on these forums and him – he makes money from his cameras. He actually uses his cameras to stock his online image libraries. Does DPRevenue do that? By their association with Amazon, the most they do is sell cameras. So who would you rather have confidence in – someone who sells cameras and reviews them from one camera to another – or someone who uses the cameras they buy, make money off of them, review their pros and cons – backed up by stock photography sales? In my line of work, I trust the do’ers vs the wannabes.
+1
Sony was always problematic on area of .jpeg compression and if critics will come from owners of Canon or Nikon then it is obvious that they are overshooting to proof their own choice :-(.
About third party lens using tools I am sure, that critics are way unreasonable. Other producer are even not close what Sony offering on his latest products…
Maybe, just maybe, Sony didn’t pay dpreview enough to write a positive article
That’s how the world works
On the DPR portrait shot DSC05589.JPG the posterization is quite obvious, mostly residing in the blue channel.
dpreview did not only claim things, but gave proof.
The only biased party are the majority of You, guys.
The jpgs clearly show heavy posterization issues, and I know these issues from jpg shots from the RX100.
I assume that Sony is trying to keep the file sizes small, while steadily increasing MP. Or the algo is simply bad.
But first one needs to acknowledge what one sees.
I just wanted to note that neither the 6D or 5D III have a built in flash, and this isn’t mentioned as a con in the DP Review articles.
Granted the D610 and D800 do have a built in flash, but I find it hard to believe someone picking up this camera or any of the ones mentioned above would use a built in flash on a regular basis.
Commander mode for off camera flash. Very important.
I use commander on my a77 to control other off camera flashes every time I’m out shooting and can’t set up studio lights. Being forced to waste one of my HVL-58AM’s as a commander really bothers me! It’s a major reason why I skipped the a99, no popup commander flash.
Wireless costs $30 and is far more reliable.
A7r jpegs are better than the ones of A7 I heard. I have the A7r because I got significantly more resolution and this cropping capability in APS-C mode. I often just shoot JPEG, even with my FE55 and FE35 lenses and I even go “down” to 15 MP JPEG most of the times when I just walk around and shoot street etc. I’m so satisfied with the JPEG results, white balance is much better than on previous Sony cameras, high ISO is quite clean with low noise reduction setting and I still see enough details. Further the dynamic range optimizer and lens correction make the jpegs perfectly usable for me. If one knows how to use the EVF and it’s benefits, it’s MUCH EASIER to get the shot right at the first time than with any OVF DSLR. I simply don’t see the need of going to a raw converter and adjust all those things that the camera can do for me.
I would not call DPREVIEW biased to any brand out there, the NEX-7 and other Sony cameras also got a Gold-Award and there is still the A7r, they can’t give gold to both cameras.
But there is some bias still towards DSLRs in my opinion. There is still this “okay it’s smaller but respect it’s quality is good” tone in their reviews. But let’s be honest, there is only the AF-speed left on the cons list for a DSLR. The viewfinder is more a thing of getting used to, but the advantages of the latest generation of EVF from Sony and Olympus outweigh the pros of an OVF by a big margin, especially getting the shot right at the first try.
The majority of the dpreview reader are americans, DSLR are still the most popular in the US. It’s a totally different market than Europe and Asia where mirrorless are much stronger and people are a bit less conservative, to be honest. They need to make money and they will make more with praising DSLRs. DSLRs are dead eher So all reviews of dpreview have to be taken with a grain of salty.
Silver award goes okay, the results of the A7r I’m JPEG are much better though and I think it will get the gold award as many hope.
Whatever a gold award means… It’s just the one reviewers opinion and had nothing to do with the % score. RX100II they said it’s best of the class, but it didn’t get gold. So a silver award doesn’t mean that there is any better comparable camera but just that it isn’t perfect. But no camera is
*Begin Rant*
I got to play with a Sony a7 at the Sony store recently for an hour or two… I was considering buying the a7r… and while the technology in these cameras is truly amazing (please give me a full size alpha camera with the same ISO performance), there is a MAJOR problem with it.
The ergonomics of this camera in my smallish hand is abysmal!
I am a full manual shooter, adjusting shutter and aperture manually for every shot. The wheel and button placement on the Sony a77/a99 and nex-7 are magnificent and very comfortable.
The a7 on the other hand… the front dial and the shutter release button placement… not so much. With my small hands, I can’t physically reach the front wheel AND the shutter release button on the top of the camera with my finger without completely changing my hand position on the grip after using the front wheel. That totally throws off my framing, and slows everything down, and is just annoying. Pretty much the most uncomfortable camera I have ever tried to use. It seems like they wanted to make it look a little retro or leica-ish by putting the shutter release button on the top… I just don’t get it. Maybe it’s just my hands.
I’ll be waiting to buy the a99 replacement that is hopefully going to be announced soon.
Has anyone else that’s held an a7 or a7r experienced similar ergonomic issues? Can you reach the front wheel and the shutter button without readjusting your whole hand on the grip?
Why is no one discussing dpreview’s assessment of blur due to shutter vibration and the camera’s love of the 1/60th shutter speed? Why spend all this money on a camera that requires a tripod for every shot.
Or why rely on auto algorithms for every shot (great that others find use for it, I have yet to use Auto-ISO other than a few trial runs, I prefer my own selection) and why such shaky hands? Surely not everyone is of the age or physical condition where shake at 1/60th will ruin every shot without a tripod?
I think because the shutter vibration isn’t an issue with the A7’s electronic shutter
And the 1/60th shutter (and lack of min. shutter speed setting) is also a non-issue for most. The ability to shoot in M with autoISO solves the problem (and is arguable a BETTER, more elegant solution than digging through menus to set a min shutter speed)
The only good thing about dpreview is their forum. The actual website is shit.
what do you mean today? the other article was written days ago
I just don’t get it why people can’t accept their carmera have cons. A7 was a good carmera but not perfect.No carmera was perfect objectivity. I own A7 couple weeks and sell it last month
The A7 jepg was fine on low iso 50-400. But on high iso was different story, the detail was wash out very quick when the increase ISO. I don’t surprise Dpreview complain about the A7 jepg engine. The jepg was usable but you will shoot RAW if you looking for Full Frame quality.
A7 got the silver award which was pretty high score.
I like DPReview for their thoroughness in testing, and (somewhat) methodical and consistent approach in their benchmark tests.
However… I find the more ‘subjective’ parts of their review (usability, conclusion) often to be wayyyyyyyy off, at least for me.
My sense is that they are gearing that portion of the review to your typical ‘soccer mom’ who would be using the camera (despite the fact they sometimes say otherwise). And fair enough, maybe that is the market segment for the majority of DSLR’s today and those who would get the greatest value perhaps from DPReviews opinion.
But I use my camera in a less generic way and while I appreciate their opinion, I weigh it for what it’s worth to me.
Still… a few things I find off-putting about this particular review are:
1) the extreme over-emphasis they place on jpeg images.
To me the jpegs I’ve seen look quite nice, and very much improved. However, as I almost never shoot jpeg it seems alien to me that such importance is placed on them… let alone that there are people who shoot jpeg for uses beyond posting to social media requiring the type of pixel peeping DPR does with them. Do people really create large prints based on out-of-camera jpegs? Hard to imagine anyone does, but if they do, I gotta believe it’s the rare soul with a fairly specialized application/need.
2) the knock to the A7 because there are issues with some 3rd party lenses
AFAIK, there are no abnormal issue when using any SONY lenses (FE or A mount). The ability to use *non* Sony-mount lenses is nice, and a huge advancement – but it’s unreasonable to expect lenses designed for other camera systems, used via an adapter made by some 3rd party, should all work without issue. I’m simply grateful that so many do work so well. I consider it a bonus, not an entitlement. If you’re going to knock Sony for that, then what do you say for the D800 and 5DIII and their (lack of) compatibility with non system lenses?
Sigh I’m no DPR fan but people WAKE UP
Jpeg NR off, compare Sony to everyone else..jpegs suck
end of story. Did you not see the mush grass shots on dpr?
Jpeg NR off, compare Sony to everyone else..Sony’s jpegs are inferior no question
end of story. Did you not see the mush grass shots on dpr?
Isn’t the ‘mushed grass’ shot taken with NR *on*?
Are you talking about the shot with the Robin in the grass?
The one criticism that continues to drive me crazy is, that there is no battery charger that comes with the a7 series. NEX owners have one, it in no way affects image quality, and it is easily solvable by spending $20 US. This is waste of time to bring it up in a serious review.
Its not a waste of time and should be pointed out when discussing cost.
Give me a break! You’re talking about spending $2000 and up for a camera. It is NOT an issue.
sure it is. If sony is cheaping out on the charger would else would they cheap out on. I didn’t say it a big issues I said its a fair issue to bring up when every other camera in that range comes with a charger. I doubt its a deal breaker for anyone but you have to have your mouth on the sony wang to no think this isn’t cheaping on on their part. AND I WORK FOR SONY and I think that.
I think it is a bonus that I can charge my A7r in the car via USB and from the computer.
A few bucks for a charger is no deal!
C’mon – this is the second decade of the 21st century… nothing should need a dedicated charger anymore.
Use the same USB external (high capacity) battery you carry for your phone and tablet.
What, you don’t have one?… oh, THAT’S the problem…
I’ve used Canon Camera’s they are fine, but I never liked my rebel more than my Minolta 3xi. When I pick up a camera I expect a good camera to take excellent imagine whether it’s in Manual or Automatic. My rebel film Camera was just average. My Minolta was fantastic. I like the advanced features it had over the Canon camera. So when Sony took over Minolta I was happy. I have been using there Video gear for many years. I do balk at some of there decision on there prosumer gear. Canon is better at putting pro features in there prosumer gear, but there picture quality is not as good as Sony sensors. Back to Sony taking over Minolta. Sony has done a fine Job. They still tinker around much with there gear. That good and bad, but is also great. One can’t make the next great piece if they don’t play around. I’m happy with my SLTA77 even if it does not have great ISO in a high setting. I will continue to read SAR. I wish I could afford a Sony SLTA99. I love DSLR style cams. I’m not crazy about small hard to be sure the gear won’t slip of your hands kind of camera’s. I think if it’s small then a wrist strap would be fine, but a wrist strap won’t work then the gear is to heavy and should have a grip built into the cam. I’m sure the A7 And R are fine pieces of gear. Although I think they are over priced. How do some think that Sony will bring a low cost SLR style cam for a low price if a A7 is $1,700 for one. A less featured SLR type like the A88 would if you asked me, be priced around $2,400, so that’s no low ball priced gear, and it would be a 24mp cam. no doubt. If the A88 came out today with a 36mp cam it would cost more than the A99, with less features and be $3,000 if you asked me. The nex line is design around small form. I just don’t see the reason for extra long lenses and ultra wide being famed on these cams.
The only thing I have to say here is that ever since DPR got picked up by Amazon their qualitative credibility has absolutely plummeted. The sample images are sub-par, and the reviews have been loaded with misrepresentation and inaccuracy. I no longer visit their site simply because all it does is infuriate me.
I believe the A7 system cameras challenged the point and shoot techniques of the review team and they came up short. Sucks when a camera asks its photographer for direction, doesn’t it? When it acts like your tool and doesn’t try to take over your shot without permission?
DPR is dead to me.
I cannot follow the critic at point 1. Every third party lens over 50mm I own has been hard to handle regarding awful flares at side light situations (Zeises and Leicas and also modern AF Lenses).
For me it is clear, that the A7r Sensor is optimized for a specific set of lenses. I really miss the resolution and a few features after selling my A7r but as all my lenses does not have any issue on the 6D’s Sensor except some vignetting for the wide angles wide open, I will keep the 6D and my Nex-7 as a combi and hope, that there might be optimization at later models.
The A7’s ARE a innovative new products and the A7r has a great sensor regarding dynamic and resolution, but yes, they have issues. For me it did not fit my needs, but for landscape photographers and other ones they can be great stuff.
Raphael, how dare you bring decency and logic into a camera forum. You know that’s against the rules. I sentence you to 20 days Instax, and 45 days Minolta 110af. That’ll teach you.
I had been reading their review for years.
Dpreview is a Canon web site.
Usually I disvovered that sony and nikon’s camera
Got lower scores against canon’s.
Many of u can feel on their review on sony Rx100 and nikon D600
Of the 32 Gold awards, Sony is in second position:
Canon 8 Sony 7 Nikon 5 Olympus 3 Pentax 3 Panasonic 3 Fujifilm 3 Ricoh 1
Sony is also tied for number 2 (with Nikon) in the Silver Award leaderboard, at 14, (Canon has 17).
Guess what… somebody has got to be second and third etc and somebody has to be first. Or do you want every camera brand to have the same amount of golds?
DpReview, a company heavily biased towards Canon/Nikon nit picking a Sony camera… No surprise there.
JPEG noise is very easy to fix in post, so the pixel level noise is irrelevant. The JPEG examples on DPReview show better overall quality on the A7 than the D610 at low ISO and very high ISO. In the middle, the D610 could be described as better.
But more importantly, the JPEG on the A7 seems better for reliably producing an OK result at print size. Since that is almost always the point of JPEG, I think the A7 wins on JPEG quality. It’s not perfect, in the sense that there are shots that are better in JPEG on the D610, but overall, I think A7 wins on JPEG.
Did those guys even read the review? One of the reasons they stated for it being difficult to use manual lenses is that the magnification view has a minimum of x7 zoom and that you often need to switch the peaking intensity depending on if youre zoomed in or not. I had similar complaints about the NEX series.
dpreview has been going steadily down hill ever since Phil Askey sold it to Amazon. I don’t give a rat’s ass what they say about the A7. Obviously they haven’t done their homework. Anyone who actually owns the camera and spends any time shooting with it knows how good it is. I’m just going to continue shooting with mine and enjoying the outstanding image quality it produces.
The only reason I ever visit that place is to pull their chain. Useless, just useless.
After drinking wine the entire evening (Casillero del Diablo, excellent red wine from the great nation of Chile), I have to say that the JPEGs from my A7 look rather on the mushy side, quite awful in fact. Almost like looking into a caleidoscope. I’ve seen better images taken through a rectoscope. Shouldn’t a camera this expensive give consistent results no matter what beverages the photographer has consumed? Absolutely scandalous, I’d rather have scabies (or is it rabies?) than shooting a single more picture with this putrid abomination of a camera. First thing in the morning, at the crack of dawn, I will contact my local Sony representative, and tell that bastard what I think of their so called “mirrorless full frame camera”. Full frame my ass! It’s a point-and-shoot, I know it is. God, I’m drunk right now, but I assure you, this has not clouded my judgement. You know, I once dated a girl from Luxembourg, who taught me everything I know about photography. I’m gonna call her tonight and see if she wanna come up to my apartment and look at my A7 pictures. Lalalalala lalalala lala the room is spinning like a carousel on steroids wiiiiiiihh 😀
“One button press to bring up a magnified view and focus peaking”
Can someone explain to me how it’s possible? I always have to press twice for magnification (need to select the sqaure area first, which is annoying)
These claims that DPR is biased are strange. Canon shooters complain about Nikon bias, Nikon shooters complain about Canon bias, fans of other brands complain about CaNikon bias, DSLR shooters complain about mirrorless/small camera bias, and mirrorless shooters about DSLR bias. And none of these claims are supported by the actual review history on DPR. People see bias when their own opinions or preconceptions are challenged, that’s a psychological fact.
People who believe that websites like DPReview and DxOmark operate without commercial motives are naive imbeciles.
Just look at whichever company consistently scores the highest on either website and you can deduct who is footing the bill. Quite blatantly that is Nikon for DxO, and Canon for DPR.
Especially in the west, brand loyalty and pride are strong. Of course noone want to be told in their face that their $$$ owned device sucks and that we can’t make a rational choice, but the annoying thing is people refuse to admit it – rather than reading 1-2 ultimate reviews I prefer reading top reviews from multiple sources so I can pit them against each other and make a more objective decision >.>
Conclusion: commenters there are whiners 🙂
I think DPReview is totally right, especially about #2. I’m sorry that you Sony fans are finding it to be offensive. Judging Image Quality is not an easy thing. Anyway, IMHO, the best ‘out of camera’ pictures come from Fuji, Olympus, and Nikon. Sony and Panasonic, and others have been improving recently but still behind competition.
I agree that Sony is not known for the best out-of-camera quality, and truthfully I Nikon has a better JPEG engine than Sony, proven by the scores with the same sensor. But ‘technical’ reviews always pick on a single issue and beat it to death.. It’s just like choosing between Canon, Nikon, and Sony – I know photographers who talk all day about the technical features of their gear – and all I say is ‘I like Sony’s colors more than Canon or Nikon’. Photos are for eyes to see, so we should choose based on what our eyes like not numbers >.>
I too judge photos perceptually (through what I see); and think that Sony Images are acceptable. However, with the experience that Sony has, their processing engine should have been much much better.
can’t this all be sorted by adjusting the image setting for the camera. I know I made my nex 7 jpg look better by tweaking the settings. Also if you are shooting RAW+jpg the jpgs are never very nice because they are generally for review only since well you shot a raw. Did they shoot JUST jpg or did they use raw+jpg to review the jpgs?
No, settings will improve things a little bit but will not sort them out; and even using RAW will not fix everything. RAW is not RAW.
Are you saying that the a7 and a7r images aren’t as good as the NEX 7? Because I shoot high end client work with my NEX 7 sometimes and that landscape that was Calumet picture of the week was NEX7 RAW.
The conflict of interest might not com from free trips and cameras. It does come from advertising revenues. As long as they make their living from advertising by camera industry they cannot make fair reviews.
This is a general problem with today’s media. There is no solution of continuity between editorial content and advertisement
I had similar experiences compared to what DPReview claims on these issues. Enough so that I returned the camera and lenses. For posterization, it was really really bad, but, I did narrow it down to mainly underexposed even colored backgrounds. Unfortunately, that’s very common for what I shoot so it was a big problem. The underexposure is common in all Sony cameras and only seemed worse when using the heavily vignetted FE lenses. I did not feel like constantly fighting an underdesigned metering system.
As far as focus peaking, I found it very inconsistent. Do you remember what Sony said about it on the RX1? They said they didn’t want it working outside of magnified views because it wasn’t accurate at all. I think that applies here. Though it can still be used as a guide, particularly in middle to low light, it usually showed things in focus that simply were not, often about 6-8 inches behind the focus. Of course, one can get used to this but it’s highly variable so it’s a lot of extra work.
Anyway, it’s not like these issues they reported on do not exist. They are well demonstrated and proven on numerous blogs since the cameras came out. They have workarounds (zoom in for manual AF, expose properly for posterization) but, the problem is, the entire system is incredibly expensive and not yet offering anything native that is an advantage over other options. If Sony was selling us some actually fast lenses and such, well, it would be more worthwhile. And maybe for people who mainly shoot old glass it’s still pretty interesting. Personally, I am sick of living in ancient tech and manually focusing bad old lenses that lack modern color corrections and coatings. So I am focused (hah) on the native lenses. There are hardly any. There will still be hardly any worth looking at in a year. All the slow lenses are disappointing. The 55/1.8 is really the only interesting lens to me. It performed well besides nasty vignetting. I really liked its bokeh, but, $1000!!!!‽??? insanity. For the few hundred bucks you “save” on these “affordable” full frame cameras, you give it back repeatedly on overpriced underperforming lenses.
So I think their final score of silver is entirely fair. And I personally plan to look at this system again in one year after it has a chance to mature and maybe Sony will review and change their path on not making fast lenses. That seems entirely stupid. Why would I buy f/4 lenses for a full frame camera for more money than f/2.8 lenses for APS-C cameras? I wouldn’t. I won’t. So there must be a better value proposition for many people before this system justifies its existence.
+1000
I haven’t bothered to look at the DP review on the A7, because I already knew they would write it off as junk. I don’t bother any more with that site. I used to use a Sony but now use Pentax, and DP write off Sony and Pentax all the time. If you want a better review you have to go to Imaging resources or Ephotozine. There are obvious commercial arrangements going on at DPreview that makes them biased. But this gripe about DPreview is growing across the web, and the only thing you can do is comment on their site and complain en masse. I haven’t got a problem with Canon, Nikon, Sony or Pentax, I’ll research the products and personally I prefer Sony,Pentax and Olympus over Canon and Nikon – thats because they have to try that little bit harder to crack into the market.
The problem for DPreview is that there is a thing called the internet, and people use it to look at stuff, like reviews, and there are lots of other reviewers and some with very differing opinions. So when reviewers have wildly differing opinions, you know something is up. If they write-off a product, and its praised on another site, then it makes you sit up and take note. DPreview heaps praise on Nikon and Canon, end of story. So if you want to know about Sony, Pentax, Olympus etc look elsewhere.
So far I find the Sony A7 to be a very exciting camera system, and it will mark a significant turning point in photography. Sony was the first to bring pro level 35mm mirrorless, and the all super-fantastic Canikon (the so-called standard setters) are years behind. I wouldn’t expect the A7’s to be perfect, no camera is, and if they claim it is, you’ll always find a user leaving a comment online saying this-or-that was wrong with it. The Sony A7 is the game changer and DPreview can’t take that way from the A7, but they’ll try. A nice and tiny A7 which is full of powerful options and no mirrorslap to take away sharpness – VERY impressive camera.
I commend this site for raising the bias on DPreview !