A7II with Torii Koubou case.
Dpreview posted the full Sony A7II review and the camera earned a Silver Award:
The Alpha 7 II continues to push Sony’s full frame mirrorless line of cameras into ground-breaking territory. It is the only full frame mirrorless camera to offer in-body image stabilization systems and its performance is excellent. The body is comfortable to shoot with and offers a broad set of features that should appeal to both still and video shooters. Unfortunately the a7 II’s high ISO image quality is not as good as other full framers. Raw files are also less malleable than the competition and JPEGs tend to suffer from aggressive noise reduction.
Fstoppers writes:
The Sony a7II delivers a barrage of awesome features and terrific well-rounded performance that amateur and professional photographers will appreciate. Having image stabilization in conjunction with a full-frame sensor is something that excites you every time you go shoot because it gets to be used universally across your lens arsenal.
Tyson Robichaud writes:
If you would have told me 5 years ago that I could buy a Full Frame camera with in body image stabilization, WiFi for remote control and WFT, weather sealing, a top notch 24mp sensor that could quite literally fit in my pocket for $1700, I’d probably have said you were crazy, then maybe slapped you because you were nuts.
A7II links:
Sony Alpha a7II (Body Only) for $1,698 at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, SonyStore and Sony Store Canada.
Sony Alpha a7II (Body Only) for 1.799 Euro at Sony Germany, Sony UK, Jessops UK, Sony France, Sony Italy, Sony Spain, Sony Austria, Sony Switzerland, Sony Netherland, Sony Belgium, Sony Portugal, Sony Sweden, Sony Finland, Sony Norway.
Sony A7II at Sony Store Australia, Digitalrev and Amazon Japan.
A7II Gariz cases sold in [shoplink 32354 ebay]Black (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 32396 ebay]Brown (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 32355 ebay]Orange (Click here)[/shoplink] and [shoplink 32356 ebay]Camel (Click here)[/shoplink].
115 Responses
I read that in continuous mode quality is worse.
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=8586
dpreview pics are taken in continuous mode. I guess they need to redo this?
Where does it say the samples are taken in continuous mode?
False alarm, dpreview clarified that they are not taking in continuous mode but in one shot mode.
Really, a Silver award? The only mirrorless FF with image stabilization? There are some crazy expectations out there. And which raw files re more malleable? Canon’s?
Wait for the 5ds/R reviews, they will get a super duper platinum square award for doing nothing but putting an old sensor in an old body.
It is an embarrassment.
I ought to say, my gear works with me and I am happy with it.
However, those looking at buying from Sony would stop by sites like DPR and be discouraged. Sadly enough, there needs to be a bigger voice out there that can have a more partial view on the current state of ILC market.
I am not saying Sony will be best for all, because preferences for any particular type of camera should always come first. That being said, any FE camera can achieve the same result as any SLR if the photographer skills are up to scratch.
Most buyers won’t ever noticed a compressed ARW limitations. Most buyers won’t ever notice AVCHD vs XAVC-S codec differences. Most buyers look at football matches and see Canon and Nikon. More knowledgeable buyers will look at Leica and think that’s the only way of doing “street” (what a term…serously) and then see they probably can’t afford a digi-Leica so look at the direct copy of Fuji.
By the time they get to Sony, they can only see “features” like FF, compact, light, blah blah. Sad, but true.
I wouldn’t say that. I just bought an A7II because I wanted to have FF, IBIS and the Loxia lenses. To be honest, the Loxia lens was actually the killer argument for me (love Zeiss colors, 3d pop and the classic handling
By looking at a system through a set of lenses, you are already above the average buyer of these cameras. Like I said, most buyers won’t be looking at them with a researched mind, but with a “what I remember this guy used” type of mindset.
I want an interchangeable full frame camera without the EVF hump.
I want the same feature AF feature of the A7II but with a touchscreen just like the A5100.
I also want a pancake lens that goes with it. A 24mm f/4 is cool. Thank you Sony!
The first (A5?) is only a matter of time.
I’d also vote for more small lenses. 35/2.8 was a step in the good direction.
Do you think that Sony might design a new 35mm f2 or f1.8 while mentaining the same size as the carrunt 35mm f2.8?
Put simply, no. No chance.
Only if optical performance was compromised. Think about the Loxia 34/2 MF, which is a nice but not perfect lens (suffers from coma) Sony would need to offer AF (obviously) and that will mean a different optical formula which needs to account for the AF motor’s ability to move a small enough element and give a bit of space for the motor itself.
So, bad lens compact size? possible. Great lens compact size? very expensive if using exotic elements. Great lens compact size and affordable? No, that’s difficult.
its not weather sealed, the guy is wrong.
DP Review is a nice source of information but its ratings (and often opinions) are garbage.
Look at this, same sensor:
– Nikon D610 – MSRP $1999.95 – DPR Gold Award
– Sony A7 II – MSRP $1,700 – DPR Silver Award
Let’s see, the Sony is 30% lighter than the Nikon, yet adds 5-axis IBIS.
I think they rated D610 more than a7II because of ISO low-light performance.Which they stated that on the a7II it doesn’t deliver a good perfomance as the compititors.
I don’t know how really they measure things there. Sometimes I feel they over rate any thing.
Yes, but then if I look at their own studio comparison tool the A7 II retains far more detail at high ISO than the D610. I mean, it’s the same sensor different processing.
I have both. The D610 is a better performer, especially at higher ISO. That doesn’t mean the A7ii is a bad camera. But they made it clear in the comment section that from the time of release of the D610 to the A7ii they expected better improvements in IQ and ISO performance.
A big point… what it takes to win the gold award in 2013.. 2014.. 2015.. the standard increases over time. I doubt the D610 would win the gold award if it was reviewed today… They’d give the gold to the D750 (which they did), and they would give the D610 a silver in comparison (as it’s build and AF fall behind the D750).
lol, as much as i like the a7, D610 is better than a7 at high iso + AF performance, and has slightly better overall IQ in terms of color depth and dynamic range, Nikon tweaked the sensor.
I think it is still the best site at what it does. If you read the review, the author makes some valid points as to why it did not merit gold. The unfortunate part is that it comes down to fairly subjective reasoning; valid to that author and others who share the same concerns; irrelevant to others. I personally would not be swayed against purchase and actually part of me is glad they gave it only silver. While the negatives are not deal breakers for me, giving it silver sends a stronger message to Sony fix the few nits we should admit that it has. Still, for me FF in a smallish package, IBIS, strong feature set, & reasonable performance and handling merit gold +.
if you compare the reviews of Nex-6 with the one of A7 II you will get the answer.
Nex-6 JPG, high iso performance and focus accuracy are better than A7 II …
Might or might not be the same sensor, but the Nikon gets better results. Not just from dpreview, DXO testing also scores the D610 much higher. The D610 has a noticeable edge in dynamic range and ISO performance.
Though one could say it’s subjective, it’s also easy to conclude that the D610 has better ergonomics. Not to mention, A7ii autofocus still lags behind Nikon dSLR af performance.
Plus… Not sure of the pricing at the time of the reviews, but currently, the D610 is $200 cheaper than the A7ii.
So cheaper… better IQ.. better AF.. better ergonomics.. better batterylife… I think there are plenty of arguments to support dpreview’s conclusions. One can’t say it’s baseless.
I wouldn’t equate “noticeable” with “much higher”, but that might be just me. Also, ergonomics are subjective, simply because ergonomics include more than just the grip. If DPreview base their rating on some minor IQ differences, rather than more relevant things such as, say, IBIS, well… it is baseless.
One could say lossless raw… Or bigger lens selection… Or better flash system, etc, etc, are all more important than ibis, especially with so many stabilized lenses available. There are just so many criteria. Fanboys will of course think that their brands advantages are paramount, and their brands disadvantages are meaningless. But an objective reviewer looks at it all.
Of course, you had throw in the “fanboys”. I saw your reply below about the “objective reviewer” and now you are repeating it. Apparently, the objective reviewer can only choose the Nikon. Talk about fanboys, lol.
Only choose Nikon? Huh? Last I checked, dpreview has given lots of gold awards to Sony, Canon and others. But a fanboy gets all upset, thinking only their brand deserves any praise. Sony has gotten plenty of gold awards from dpreview.
You continue with your fanboys and your other nonsense. Impressive. I don’t care about other gold awards Sony has reveived. I am talking about this review (which you are so keen on defending for some reason) and why it doesn’t make much sense. It’s not even really about the D610, but you clearly can’t get beyond the fanboy argument.
Huh? You say you don’t care about gold awards… You have a review that showered the a7ii with tons of praise, while also pointing out deficiencies. Ultimately awarding a silver award. So what’s your problem with it then?? You’re upset that ibis doesn’t automatically merit a gold award??
No, I am saying I don’t care about *other* gold awards, because we are discussing this review. Also, the problem is not necessarily about Sony only, which is why other gold awards don’t make up for this one.
What you are basically saying is that because the reviewer has chosen valid points to base himself on, it means that he’s objective. That doesn’t work.
My problem is that imho the review is giving too much weight to things that don’t deserve it and forgetting others. Mind you, most reviews nowadays do that, the above is simply one example.
So your whole issue… Even though they gave the A7ii a ton of praise, high scores, and a silver award… They still didn’t shower it with enough unconditional love for satisfy you. How dare they love the camera a bit less than you. How dare they put less value on IBIS than you do. Because IBIS is such a huge amazing advantage, that every rational photographer should consider it the biggest priority. That’s why Sony A-mount and Pentax have dominated the dSLR market so much, while Canon and Nikon have struggled in the dSLR market… Because who would ever buy Canon and Nikon cameras lacking in IBIS? Everyone know, IBIS is more important than image quality, more important than great autofocus, more important than a big lens selection..
What I’m saying is that the reviewers used objective standards, there is a very rational basis for their conclusions. To you, IBIS may be the greatest thing on earth, and there are certainly some other reasonable people who share your view. But there are also tons of reasonable people, who don’t share your view. You’re like a student complaining when a professor gave you an A-, when you think you deserved an A+.
You either can’t think or read. IBIS was just a mere example; there are many others. Whether the camera is Sony, Pentax or whatever is irrelevant. It’s the review that is the problem and your concept of “objective standard” is preposterous, for the reason I posted previously. It lokks like you really can’t understand that, so I am giving up. By all means, continue measuring camera prowess by 0.1 stops of DR advantage. That’s objective, right? Haha.
A7II better Stabilization .. better Video .. better Software .. better Network Connection .. better
Maximum shutter speed 1/8000
X-Sync 1/250
Video XAVC S 1080/60p
SLog 2
Size and weight
Adapter 3rd-party
Can go back and forth for hours. Nikon with better customization, better lens selection, better flash system, lossless raw…
Sure, there are advantages to the Sony. So a rational shooter -could- opt for the a7ii. And there is a long list of advantages for the Nikon, so an objective reviewer is fully justified in preferring the Nikon.
Nikon D750 very good at that price.
does anyone share their opinion that the size and weight gain of the mark II make it impossible as a ‘always to carry with you’ camera for every day use? Really undecided now between a7s and this one although I was definitely in favour of the mark II because of the better ergonomics.. Coming from a D600, I just want a more portable camera that you can just throw in your bag, while keeping the standard of image quality.
Any opinions are highly appreciated.
What is a good size for a allways to carry with you camera? It all depends on you! I find a camera larger then my A6000 as to large, an other may see a Canon 1Dc as not to large or heavy. It all depends on you!
I find remarks like that in a review not objective.
You’ve definitely got a point there. Guess I have to go to the store and check them out side by side to make an appropriate judgement.
The size gain isn’t that much other than the grip being deeper and a slight thickness change. The DPReview picture comparing them is very misleading since they put a small lens on the A7 and a much bigger lens on the A7II – it is s stupid comparison on their part.
That is what I thought as well until I read the article. Very misleading from their side and quite an exaggeration. If you are really concerned about this you can only find out for yourself I guess, but their statement is just too dogmatic. Shame on you, dp!
Well, a7II is very light compare to a700. I can say if I can hold my a700 with battery grip + flash 58 + SAL50f1.8 for 2 hrs to feel the stress of the wight then I can hold a7II with FE55f1.8 for half the day. I may over saying things but this is how I feel.
I own both the A7 and A7 II. The increase in size between the two is negligible, the biggest difference in body shape is the grip. While I find that the A7 grip looks nicer (aesthetically), it is true that that grip is a pain to hold and the A7 II fixes that problem.
However, the increase in weight is significant. The increase is 125 grams or the weight of the 35/2.8 lens itself. The build quality is definitely more sturdy, and then there’s the IBIS mechanism adding mass to the body.
I’d say if you will stick to small lenses only (35/2.8, Loxia’s, etc..) go for the A7S. If you are planning to also use some of the larger lenses, go with the A7 II without a doubt.
For me (look at my nick) size is one of the biggest issues. Having a bigger grip is welcome at all, because the overall size with mounted lens stays the same. Having 3.5mm thicker body is not a big deal, too.
My biggest size concern is the unnecessary viewfinder dome – I prefer A6000-body-style with popup-flash!
In terms of weight, I wish to buy more lightweight lenses without OSS, so the overall weight is about the same as A7+OSS-lens. Together with a bigger grip the weight balance would be much better. (And Note: the tests rated the IBIS to be more effective vs Zeiss-Lens-OSS of the 2470).
I’d wish there were a lens available with that specs:
AF 24-70mm, f2.8, no OSS, can have a big diameter, but built as short as possible.
Ricoh GR
I love my GR, but worth mentioning that the low light performance leaves much to be desired
No one should forget that ….
DP REVIEW IS OWNED BY AMAZon
And what does tell us that fact?
That Amazon don’t want to sell the A7II? Or that Amazon wants to sell an other camera? Did you look at DXO? The Nikon D610 is better then the A7II! And you can buy it at a lower price at the moment.
No DPR is not without flaws, but I don’t think they are to biased, Dit you see the gold awards for the: A7s, The A7r, The A6000, A99, RX1, RX100III and the RX10?
When they where against Sony would so many cameras get the gold award?
The bias, if anything, leads to overly positive reviews across the board. In fact, you almost never see a “bad” review. They hand out silver awards like candy. But they want to sell cameras, attract advertisers, etc… So their bias is simply to be overly positive.
I suppose I should have elaborated on my initial point. Since the reviewer is also the retailer I see a conflict of interest. Do you want to trust the review from the guys trying to get you to buy from them or would you prefer and independent tester? Do you think that having a vested interest is a positive or a negative when reading a review?
Dpreview has become a joke site now. Biased and lacks morel. Enough said.
A site without good mushrooms, morels or other types, is a joke.
The American education system… that’s a whole other story.
Is this the real Anton?
They forgot to mention in
Conclusion – Cons:
no built in popup-flash
That’s not a con. Pop-up flashes are small light sources, attract water, and use more battery
What’s the point of a full frame camera if it doesn’t have fast lenses?
An APS-C body with a 16-50 f/2.8 will give you the same performance as a FF with 24-70 f/4.
And if an FE 24-70 f/2.8 ever arrives, it won’t be any smaller than those that already exist.
1.. Full frame is about more than just a 1 stop ISO gain.
2. Even if use f4 lenses, you like have some 1.8/2.8 primes in your bag… so when you need them, they will outperform the same lens on APS-C.
3. For telephoto lenses…. Using 2.8 lenses becomes very heavy. So whether shooting APS-C or telephoto, I’d want to use f4 lenses. Which will obviously perform better on FF>.
f2.8 lenses look better at f4 than f4 lenses look at f4.
Depends on the lens….. And at a price of much greater weight.
I am currently using the Nikon 70-200/4. Half the weight of the 70-200/2.8. At F4, very very very similar IQ. The 70-200/2.8 would win by a hair, but just a hair.
>more than just a 1 stop ISO gain
About 1 1/3.
>1.8/2.8 primes
Same with primes. f/1.4 and f/1.2 lenses on APS-C (as Fuji have) will get you same results.
>Using 2.8 lenses becomes very heavy
Think APS-C designed f/2.8 lenses, like Sigma or Samsung 50-150 f/2.8. Not larger/heavier than FE 70-200 f/4.
Agreed
Samsung 50-150/f2.8 and Fuji 50-140/f2.8 are more or less 70-200/f4 with a built in 1.5x focal reducers. But when using fast fast primes, I expect a FF f1.8 to be sharper than a APS-C f1.2.
On A7 you can attach a Voigtlaender 40mm f1.4.
Even if there would be a 25mm f0.95 APS-C counterpart, I think f1.4 is sharper.
-I meant that the advantages of full frame are more than just the ISO gain. Not that the ISO is much more than 1 stop.
-And those 1.4 lenses work on full frame as well. (Fuji only does APS-C.. But Canon, Nikon, Sony… have plenty of 1.4 primes for full frame.. it’s not as if 1.4 is APS-C only). Again, a 1.4 prime on the full frame will out-perform the 1.4 prime on APS-C. 1.8 on full frame will outperform APS-C, etc, etc.
– That’s nice if you shoot Sigma or Samsung. Sony/Canon/Nikon do not have APS-C designed 2.8 telephoto lenses.
– You mean DR?
– I wasn’t saying that FF as such isn’t better than APS-C (of course it is). My point was that Sony’s FE system specifically is no better than APS-C, because Sony seems reluctant to release fast lenses for FE. The only f/1.4 AF prime they have is the new 35mm, and there’re no fast zooms.
– I had Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 for Canon… nice lens.
Better IQ, narrower depth of field (or easier to achieve narrower DOF)..
I don’t think Sigma even makes the 50-150 anymore..
I will somewhat agree that the Sony FE system is a bit overrated. I’m not a huge fan. But I’m trying to be objective… What are you comparing it with??
If you compare it to Sony APS-C e-mount.. there are no 2.8 APS-C zooms there either. And they really don’t have great APS-C lenses. I would say that for IQ, with the lens lineups as they exist, Sony FE is better than Sony E-mount.
Now, does does Sony FE compare to a *good* APS-C dSLR system? That’s a tougher comparison. There are tradeoffs….
The FE system is still smaller and more compact than APS-C dSLRs.
It’s cheaper than most full frame dSLRs.
Stick the 55/1.8 on a Sony A7, you will certainly outperform any APS-C dSLR, even with a 1.4 prime.
And no APS-C camera is going to give you the 36mp resolution of the A7r.
And even with an F4 zoom, the A7s will beat an APS-C dSLR with a 2.8 zoom by a decent margin.
So I agree….. the Sony FE system doesn’t exactly blow away a good APS-C system… But it still had advantages that can put it on top.
(And I’m not going to start getting into comparisons with m4:3, Fuji, etc… don’t want to write an encyclopedia)
Uhm… you do realise the picture in the article up there shows it with a fast lens, right?
There’s currently only one truly fast AF lens for the A7x, the 35mm f/1.4, and it’s not pocketable.
I like how you define “truly fast” exactly like how you’d define someone as being a “true Scotsman”. Also that you’d throw in that the 35/1.4 isn’t pocketable, although I have no idea what your point is. My 500mm isn’t pocketable come to think of it, maybe I should throw it away.
Also, by your standards a lot of people don’t have *any* lenses for their A7x cameras. I didn’t have any lenses for mine for about half a year… I only had a bunch of Nikon lenses, but I guess the photos from those don’t count since they weren’t made by Sony? I’m such an idiot, what was I doing with only a camera body and no lenses??
The only option available to you is to jump system. Sony has made it clear to people like you that if you need a small and compact system bugger off and go elsewhere.
They didn’t make any small lenses for their APS-C line up so expecting them to make small lenses for their bigger FE lenses is simply an opportunity to get crushing disappointment.
You need small body and fast lenses get to m43 land. They have what you need.
The hype is thick with this one.
The joke is old with this one. Even in the most backward rural parts of Japan, your line was so worn out in the 80s. One must go to Akita prefecture to find this joke novel.
80’s are back in style kid. Tube socks, New Wave Synth- you feelin it?
Morning Anton Berlin, a new pseudonym, well done.
Final Word:
“… Sony is a stone’s throw away from having a mirrorless full-framer that
can compete with big boys’ DSLRs; the a7 II is oh-so-close to being that
camera, it just comes up a bit short.”
Totally agree with DPReview – very good review at all. Praise and critism at the right places!
The keeper rate you get from the A7II IBIS is worth its weight in gold. It should of received GOLD!!! The A7R gets gold and this gets silver? Seriously?
Keeper rate? Are you serious!
Yes I get so many more shake free shots I can keep while out shooting. The IBIS is amazing especially after the firmware update.
There seem to be diverse definitions of a “keeper”. For me it is a “real image”, interesting subject, good composition, worth keeping, printing and looking at more than once. Yours is a technically okay image (shake-free, in focus, correctly exposed). 🙂
I weighed a blank SD card put in an my A7II and took 1000 photos and got a 92% keeper rate. I weighed the SD card a second time and there was no increase in weight. So the worth must be equal to zero ?
Lol that’s not what I meant. The camera is worth it’s weight.
A7 & A7II high iso performance is horrible, since both use the same sensor.
this picture matches what a lot of people have been saying https://www.flickr.com/photos/izumiflowers/16140745596.
Funny, I have an RX1 and ISO 6400 is not as bad as this.
My guess is that he is either bad at post, or the software he is using is not making the most out of the Sony file. An example of this would be Lr/ACR vs Capture One. I use both and I get so much more from the files from C1 that I can with Lr/ACR.
That being said, if you complain about this at iso 6400, then you should aim for an a7s, 1D X or D4.
could be. That said, it is still a great camera.
From what I have read so far, the RX1 is better in low light. So, no contradiction with your experience.
And yes, the above shot looks not that bad. He should indeed go for a A7S if he calls this image “horrible”.
How can it be? Is it not the same sensor? I thought plenty or marketing babble specified that. At least it would be newer gen sensor, no?
At least DXOmark ranks the RX1 significantly higher than the A7 in low light.
Ah man. As much I respect DxO, sometimes their results baffle me.
Agreed. C1 produces noticeably less noise, sharper images and punchier colours than Lightroom out of the box. Highlight recovery is also significantly better. I’ve only switched recently and aside from the teething issues with a different workflow I’m kicking myself for not doing it sooner.
Weird. I recently saw a comparison with one arw file processed through C1 and LR, and the LR photo showed significantly better sharpness. But the colours and smoothness was more pleasing on the C1 process.
It isn’t easy to get used to C1 and process well through it.
The default values, as noted by Stephen, are a bit aggressive with NR so I find that although there is less noise out of the box, there is too much softening of the image.
That being said, if you learn the tools of the program well, you can get similar noise signature to ACR. What you do get improved in C1 is the amount of information throughout the image for you to process. To that end, a high iso file in ACR will only go “as far” but in C1 it will go “further”.
My other guess would be that he isn’t good at exposuring because his exposure bias was already -1EV according to his EXIF with Auto exposure and Auto white balance so why underexpose ISO 6400 and then push in post?
That image is not representative of ISO 6400 on the A7.
definitively not horrible
Look more like poor processing of a poorly taken photograph.
Mr. Robichaud,
please show me the pants, or coat, that allow you to fit the a7II “…quite literally… in my pocket…”.
BTW… nice photos on your review.
hahahaha 100% agree!!
It’s not a DSLR but still bulky… and thicker than A7!!
Here is the a7II w/CZ55/1.8, fitting, very easily, into my coat pocket 🙂
It really is no larger (noticeably anyway) than an EM5 or EM1 with say the Pana-Leica 25mm f/1.4, which is kind of insane to me and one of the reasons I’ve decided to purchase it. It certainly won’t fit in a pocket when we start to look at larger lenses, but this combo is a great all’rounder for me, and when out and about in the rain, it’s great to know I can slip it into the coat pocket for a little extra protection.
So, here is my “literal” pocket cam in action 🙂
Cheers,
Tyson
Sorry, for some reason, the pic I’d attached, or attempted to, didn’t stick. Regardless, I’ve added it to the article to see it “literally” fit into my pocket.
Haha awesome. Tyson delivered.
I fit the a7II and 55/1.8, or my adapted Voigtländer Ultron 40/2 in my coat pocket with ease. It’s a Marmot coat with fairly decent sized pockets, admittedly, but it is my everyday winter/spring coat, and the rig does in fact fit.
Thank you for the compliment, and for taking the time to read through 🙂
DPR is laughable! They had to dig some Cons otherwise how could they avoid a Gold for the A7II?? Even then the “Cons” they managed to fabricate are somewhat ridiculous… c’mon, high ISO noise? My A7II beats my A99, mainly if I shoot RAW! Sony has greatly raised the bar in sensors IQ, everybody is plaiyng catch-up now! Also, IMHO the sensor is a bit different than the one on A7, since the both CD and PDAF are different and quite better ( I have both ). Well, I guess DPR had to open space for the Gold they’ll give to the “new” 50MP Canons…!
I’ve learned quite sometime ago that DPR can’t be trusted on their review ratings, although lately they seemed to be getting better…!
I just bought the A7II and CZ55mm yesterday and after reading the review I wondered if I was better off with a regular old A7. I think the comments here have made me more comfortable with my buy. Hoping to get my hands on the camera tomorrow!
I think if DPReview would now test A7 / A7R and apply nowadays standards, it wouldn’t even be a silver award!
I forgot to mention that the AF is MUCH faster on the A7 II, and I’m noticing very little of the reduced battery life.
Yep. Low light on this thing is junk. Handheld 1/13 f3.5 12,800
OOC?
It’s unedited .jpg sent via wifi-export- compressed to 401k.
Here’s the REAL size difference without making one look much bigger by hanging a bigger lens off of it to mislead the viewer – not so much of a difference at all. Once you put a lens on it, which extends past the grip anyway, the difference is insignificant.
Still think they could make the grip bigger.
Still think they could make the E-M1 smaller.
Still think they could make the grip deeper.
I have both cameras. Yes size wise there is little to choose from but weight wise I feel its just over what I would find acceptable for a mirrorless camera. True thats my benchmark but almost everyone I gave it too complained about the weight.
Yup, agree. I was just reacting to the unfair size comparison picture that DPReview had in their review.
April Fools! I mean DP Fools.
Sony, please take note that I’m not the only one advocating a two-class lens system:
I see Tyson Robichaud also recommends that Sony produce a range of great enthusiast lenses –
24mm f/2, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/2, 85mm f/1.8, 105mm f/2 and 135mm f/2.8 at affordable prices just like the recently released 28mm f/2.
Sony can then go overboard with the rip-off prices on the Zeiss of G class lenses:
15mm f/2, 20mm f/1.8, 24mm f/1.4 35mmf/1.4, 55mm f/1.4or8, 85mm f/1.4 etc.
What is there that is so hard to understand in that?
Go, contact Sony and apply yourself as a product manager. I’m absolutely sure you will get the job in a hardbeat. And the best part is, that you can even claim much more money than the current product managers earn (and that is already alot), because they are so damn stupid.
Cheers!
PS: I love the appeals to Sony in this forum. LOL
Only silver… Sony’s RAW file compression finally bites them in the ass.