It’s hard to belive all those sceptical people who A-mount is dead when you see this: The brand new Canon 7DmarkII comes nowhere as close to the excellent Sony A77II performance according to DxOmark sensor tests. Anything else to say? 😉
—
A77II: Up to $500 off on the body and kits at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
A6000: $100 off on the body and kits at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
A5100: $100 off on the body and kits at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
A5000: $100 off on the body and kits at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and SonyStore.
0 Responses
Nice to see the A77II get rated better . For the price it’s a great value .
But wait…didn’t the Illuminati say that the SLT mirror made any of the current A mount cameras so terribly useless that we shouldn’t even consider calling them cameras at all???
You don’t get it, Admin. The Freemasons have plotted A-mount’s demise. It doesn’t matter if the A77 II has a better sensor than the 7D2, what matters is the Freemason’s commitment to the mount and not the Elpha/Epsilon/Eliptical catastrophe that people call a mount!
GOSH!
The NWO is upon us! BEWARE! Sony will blend it’s believes in Freemasonry and only those who persevere shall be granted the new future of DSLR/SLT for the WIN, your kids, the the kids of your kids.
A mount is DEAD! UUAAHHHH!!!
http://englishrussia.com/images/carshed_camera_photos/1.jpg
i thought a77ii was known only for the fast focusing, but the stills were suppose to be inferior to the 7dmii
Guess you’re wrong, in fact I’m sure of it. The facts don’t lie, only fan boys do.
What does this have to do with lens mount? That’s all about sensor performance, and there’s no reason they couldn’t get that exact same performance out of that sensor in an E-mount camera. This proves nothing, though it is nice to see the A77II get its proper recognition of performance.
It proves that a-mount is dead but only in the minds of paranoid bloggers.
That’s right, fight the future.
And the a6000 tested just as high, while doing ‘better’ than the A77ii and 7D Mark II at high ISO.
And?
a77, hahahhahahahha
I have no clue who writes this blog, but makes himself look more and more like an idiot with posts like these
And you make yourself a troll making a comment like this and not even saying what in the post is not good ?!?
A-mount is not dead, but Sony will be the death of Canon for sure 😉
Yea, because look at all those sony cameras on the sidelines of professional sporting / corp events lol
because these old nuts professional sports photographer are lazy to learn new technologies and sony doesn’t have the sports lens needed to shoot sports. but there is a rumor of G series 300mm f/4 coming out
You need only look at the sales data from the various big sources to see that Canon and Nikon are very much on top of the APS DSLR market. As for the PRO market they are typically entrenched in a system they also know that the “DXO” differences often mean nothing in real life use
Yeah, because they make the majority of the market.
considering Canon are rumoured to be using Sony’s sensors in their next generation of cameras, it is likely that this is not going to be the case. Not sure about the sense of Sony sensors selling to Canon.
It looks like that’s the case. The A-Mount is growing, the E-Mount is growing much faster, the alpha mount system doing very well.
Attached is a PPT from the A77II presentation provided by Gavin. It clearly demonstrates Sony Alpha system (A & E Mounts) expanding massively since 2011.
Only reason it’s dying is because of Internet chatter. I say it’s dying because it will be a self fulfilling prophecy, people think it’s dead, then they won’t buy it, then it won’t sell and Sony will cut it off. It’s already started long ago.
What did DPR (who incidentally really rather hate Sony, maybe amazon doesn’t make as much profit on Sony?) do for the A77 II? A half a$$ed preview and then ‘couldn’t’ review it because there was no equivalent of a 35mm f1.4 to compare to a 1DX… WHAT!? I kid you not.
Canon 7D II comes out and there have countless articles about it and you can’t even buy it yet.
Believe it or not places like DPR have a LOT of sway in the market, they are owned by a company that sells the products they talk about and ‘review’. It’s sad, but A-Mount is going away because people ‘think’ it is going away.
I and some other posters suggested he use the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. He claimed it wasn’t available for A-Mount even though it was in stock at B&H and available for rent at lensrentals. He also said that either way it had to be an f/1.4 to do a proper comparison.
I do also think that the death of A-mount will be a self fulfilling prophecy. Before the A77ii came out, I remember seeing people asking about SLTs in the beginners forum and being told that Sony was abandoning the A-mount by A-mount users.
Of course. Add to that the inertia of brand recognition, i.e. companies resting on their laurels; people trying to rationalize their purchase by screwing others; and a bunch of uneducated sellers; and there you have it.
True, I can’t tell you how many people get turned away by a mount complainers on here. I was going to invest then I heard the complaints. E – mount for me. I actually don’t want a mount to go away, either.
So, who’s the King of APS-C again? 😛
It’s sad that the A77 II is the best rounded crop camera on the market yet gets no attention whatsoever.
that’s easy if you are looking at DXO it is the Nikon D7100/D5300. From a sales perspective I fancy both Canon and Nikon APS will be far ahead. From a feature set I will take the A7711 any day.
In montreal, there is an average of 1 canonist per week jumping ship to something else… kinda funny to see that exodus. no wants to buy a 4000$ 5dmkIV….
Wow…at that rate, Sony will overtake Canon in a million years.
Sony is doing terrible job selling a77 II with such a superb specs. Given the quality of SAL1650 lens, the camera should be a top seller.
Thanks for giving the a77M2 some love Andrea. I really like this camera and think it is quite an improvement over the already excellent a77 (except the questionable move of not including a built-in GPS). I shoot faster and longer at sporting events and cleaner in low light now. Sony’s execution really stunk on this one. Instead of really promoting the strengths of this camera they treat it like a poor stepchild and as a consequence it doesn’t gain the market share it should and due recognition in the community of photographers. I really can’t figure Sony out sometimes. Do they want to lose money?
Minolta heritage, that’s why!
At the moment I think they don’t really want to bring lots of people into a-mount, so they don’t advertise it. Existing A-mount users will all know the camera exists and have the chance to upgrade their bodies.
And this matches with all the latest rumors and comments from sony. E-mount for new users and a-mount only for existing ones. As soon as Sony has a matching E-mount sports and wildlife body (supposedly next year) I’m sure they will advertise it.
I’m totally fine with all that, but certain a-mount users seem to have a problem with not getting new entry level bodies that they wouldn’t buy anyways.
It’s not that they are not avertsing A-mount. They haven’t been advertising anything to speak of.
That depends on how many believe in dxomark. For a lot of photographers…DXOmark is meaningless. They invest in a whole system, not a sensor.
And?
Trust me, we’ve all heard the ‘system’ argument. I have yet to see an actual definition of that.
The final output other than low ISO DR between the Canon and the Sony will be on a level playing field. For some the far wider lens choice for Canon including off brand makers will be critical Canon has native mount lenses from 8mm-1200mm { 1920mm on Canon APS} including some weird and wonderful options such as zoom macro lenses ! TS lenses and so on.How long did we have to wait for the Sigma 18-35mm { my new favorite lens on my A772 }
For pro users Canon have a superb worldwide network set up, Sony is just starting to roll this out. I can’t speak for other markets as I do not know the prices but here in the UK and most EU countries Sony’s high end gear can be very pricey . For the sport wildlife shooters the Sony 300mm F2.8 mkII is a £1000 more than the Canon 300mm f2.8 mkII .The Sony 500mm F4 is £3000 more than the Canon 500mm F4 in fact it is £1000 more than the Canon 600mm F4!
Can’t disagree with anything. However, (1) I wasn’t discussing pricing (you can make any brand look bad with the proper cherry picking) and (2) what is that supposed to mean for Sony users?
Well Canon EOS system is very full featured. They have more lenses, flashes, studio equipment, easily rentals, first and third party support. In Australia it take moments to get a quote to get a 5D3 serviced but Sony has no concept of this for my A7. Right now I can buy a full frame 50mm f1.4 for Canon from a number of local shops but would struggle to find any A-Mount glass.
Currently I’m trying to find a wireless flash trigger that supports Sony TTL via the new hot shoe. Answer no one makes one.
It is more expansive, indeed. The question is whether one would/should care.
It depends on what type of photography your doing. If you want to shoot a wedding the native and third party lighting solutions have a lot to be desired. I’m generally very happy with my A7 but I keep hitting walls which other companies dont.
I agree about the servicing. I wanted to go see a Sony certified repair shop in Sydney but couldn’t find one. I ended up finding someone who was a Canikon repairer.
What good is a huge lens selection to a company like Sony with a small market share. That would be too much of strain. I would prefer the basics to be looked after more than having a niche lens available to buy.
As was reported, Sony should have changed the body to look a little different since everything was redone from the ground up. They only have so many marketing dollars. You want to try and do their marketing calculus for them? They have some very smart people trying to figure out what to market and how. I wouldn’t want a go at it.
A mount will be dead in few years whereas Canon has been dead for years now lol
Canon is dead???!! Are you for real?
Dude you’re out of your mind. SLT is growing at between 10 to 15% per year, and Sony’s about to launch a new SLT that out does every DSLR developed to date, which will propel it skyward for the next 18 months.
I’ll leave you with a chart from last years sales. Notice the A-Mount sales were higher then E-Mount last year.
That’s not surprising, all APS-C SLTs have been consistently better than their Canikon counterparts. Sony still gave them zero marketing, produced a half-assed A99 and focused on mirrorless.
They had a very promising technology in SLT in 2010, but then, only a couple of years later, discovered what they believe to be an even more promising tech in OSPDAF (well… actually Fuji did first). That’s why they put OSPDAF in A99 instead of developing proper AF, but it doesn’t quite work with A-Mount. Now, they made A6000 and A7, and they seem to believe they can replace ALL SLR mounts with fast-focusing mirrorless, making SLT unnecessary in their eyes.
I don’t think they developed A77-II AF for this camera only, it’ll probably find its way into an A99-II, but after that Sony will make a FF A9 with A6000-type AF and market it as a full-fledged replacement for DSLR.
Only time will tell if they are visionaries in this… or terribly wrong.
The usual doom and gloom. Except for the marketing, that I agree with.
Not really. Sony seem to be very confident in what they are doing, and they’ve proven to make very smart decisions. This one looks weird to me, but on the off-chance they’re right and they’ll be actually able to produce DSLR-quality mirrorless (and lenses), I’ll move to E-Mount, no prob.
I just need a fast-tracking full frame EVF-based camera with fast native lenses. If Sony manages to produce that in mirrorless, kudos to them. Maybe guys like LotusEater and abortabort will turn out to be right after all.
Agreed. I just don’t think they want to replace SLTs, at least not for the near future.
“That’s not surprising, all APS-C SLTs have been consistently better than their Canikon counterparts”
That is simply not true , especially with regard to image quality where the Nikon models were and are still ahead
Nikon models have exactly the same Sony sensors.
So, slightly better ISO due to the absence of transculent mirror, but that’s it.
Nope the 24mp APS sensor used in the D7100/d5300 is a Nikon design and Toshiba built sensor
Thanks, didn’t know that. So, is it better than Sony’s?
Just a wee bit better but better is better lol
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-SLT-Alpha-77-II-versus-Nikon-D5300___953_919
Regardless, “a wee better IQ” doesn’t make an overall better camera.
Unless image quality is the most important factor in your options list. My point was in respect to your suggestion that APS-C SLTs are consistently better than Canon and Nikon. “Better” camera is very much a matter of opinion and use personally I chose the A772 lol
The Nikon sensor was even further ahead of the A77
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-SLT-Alpha-77-II-versus-Nikon-D5300-versus-Sony-SLT-Alpha-77___953_919_734
but was it not a later sensor?
So what are we talking about, a tenth of a stop better?
Toshiba nonsense again. It’s Sony 24 MP sensor made in Toshiba factory. Sony and Toshiba often share resources like that. It was fabbed in Toshiba factory, but that doesn’t make it Toshiba or Nikon sensor.
The proof of that was posted years ago. Stop lying, asshole
I say good for them. I hope they work our a super fast mirror-less focusing system for full frame cameras. The a-mount lens system will never be dead as long as people want a professional-sized camera with all the knobs, displays and grips that go with it. I think it’d be cool if they came out with a blazing fast a9 that works natively with both a and e-mount lenses- and maybe one body for “pros” who need that, and one body for shooters that don’t. Half of the a-mount doomsayers’ problem is refusing to acknowledge where we are headed– that technology is changing and morphing– and that where we are headed doesn’t necessarily mean the end of the a-mount. It will most likely mean hybrid systems and other creative ways that use a-mount glass. Too much crying too little thinking.
>a professional-sized camera with all the knobs, displays and grips that go with it
They can easily make an FE body like that. “Make it bigger”, unlike smaller, isn’t a problem. Nothing prevents them from making larger FE lenses either.
Currently, Sony have 4 product lines (2 mounts x 2 sensor sizes) and limited resources. If they manage to figure out the mirrorless AF, I don’t think there will be any new A-Mount products anymore. You’ll still be able to use existing gear, of course, like Olympus 4/3 DSLR. But that’s pretty much the ‘end of the A-Mount’ in my book.
Think about the economics behind the situation for a second and quit panicking. Do you know how many hundred million dollars Sony has invested in its a-mount lens lineup, production and development? They have a portfolio of great lenses… WHY would they simply abandon such a valuable asset that takes (relatively) little money to keep current? That makes no sense no matter how you look at it.
There’s a reason Sony isn’t developing E-mount zooms with f/2.8 apertures– it’s because they already have that covered with their a-mount glass.
What do you think is more cost effective? Redesigning from the ground up a whole new range of larger, fast lenses for the E-mount– or using the current (overall excellent) a-mount glass that already exists for that purpose? This isn’t a Sony conspiracy forum is it? I’m betting Sony will bring out a hybrid camera with maybe a couple body styles (for professionals or casual shooters) that will allow Sony customers to pick the lens they want to use with the new mirror-less sensors they are developing. If you want smaller, more portable, not as fast then buy the E-mount glass and attach it. You want larger, heavier, faster? Then attach an a-mount lens to your camera. Good grief.
>If you want smaller, more portable, not as fast then buy the E-mount glass and attach it. You want larger, heavier, faster? Then attach an a-mount lens to your camera.
Right, that’s why Sony announced 35mm f/1.4 Zeiss for FE and not A-Mount.
The picture doesn’t look quite so happy if you include the Nikon APS models even with regard to the Canon the A7711 has better DR up to about 400ISO after that the Canon is a little ahead. Noise , is neck and neck same with color etc
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Sony-SLT-Alpha-77-II-versus-Nikon-D5300___977_953_919
More importantly the Canon will probably sell 20 for every 1 A77II
Have a look at any country and check the big retailers BCN etc the A77II barely makes it onto the charts. Below are a couple to get you started
Japan , not in the top 80 cameras:
http://dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking
Amazon on the DSLR only list it creeps in at 40th spot
http://www.amazon.com/Digital-SLRs-Cameras-Photo/b/ref=cpv_lv_dslr?ie=UTF8&node=3017941&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-leftnav&pf_rd_r=0CDEP4JRJ2DN48VCQJT2&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1958833162&pf_rd_i=502394
Who cares about how many Japanese buy it. So long as I have one in my camera bag along side my A900.
It’s a very efficient tool for doing a job. I’m the one making the money using it not Amazon.
If you want the system to have any longevity you better care, not who but how many or more preciously how few are buying it. The facts are that Sony’s share of the DSLR market has nose dived
Funny, because that’s not what a typical Canikon user would say, given that their cameras are updated in 4 to 6 year time increments. A good tool is a good tool is a good tool, right? Come on….
Not to mention the fact that the DSLR market itself has also nosedived….
Get your facts straight. Sony doesn’t produce a DSLR. They sell SLT cameras which are very different, and the SLT market is growing +10 to 15% per year.
The A-Mount is almost thirty years old, and its still growing.
And the picture is a sales slide from the A77II launch demonstrating what every one else knows, which is SLT, and mirror-less cameras sales are growing, and DSLR aren’t.
Good God not that graph again that graph shows the whole market not Sony’s share of it. This has been explained here dozens of times.
Instead of looking at fantasy figures take a peek at any website in any country listing camera sales the A772 barely registers just as with the A99 etc. SLT literally almost killed the A mount Sony’s share of the DSLR market has bombed
Here are a couple just to get you started:
Japan BCN { covers all Japanese major retailers} the A7711 doesn’t even make it onto the top 80 list.
http://dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking
Maybe the good ole US of A they love DSLR’S dont they ?
At Amazon on the DSLR list it pops in at 34th spot
http://www.amazon.com/Digital-SLRs-Cameras-Photo/b/ref=amb_link_358884302_22?ie=UTF8&node=3017941&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-leftnav&pf_rd_r=1ESJNEBVWM11SAS2NJ27&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1958833162&pf_rd_i=502394
Maybe B&H will be selling boatloads of them
NOPE its barely in the top 40 on the DSLR list
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/DSLR-Cameras/ci/6222/N/4288586280
UK
Nope they dont like it either
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/14335821/ref=pd_ts_zgc_ce_14335821_morl?pf_rd_p=428021747&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-right-4&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_i=14335821&pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_r=0YWP88C3KT5XFBDF5CY8#1
Germany
Sorry same old same old
http://www.pixmania.de/foto/digitalkamera/spiegelreflexkamera/xx-xx-xx-xx-topsellers-desc-1-10-page-1661-s.html
Mirrorless cameras have one major advantage compared to DLSR’s namely size , the A77 11 is a trully excellent camera and I love mine but it is firmly in the DSLR size category in fact compared to Pentax the other DSLR make with IS it is pretty bulky and compared to mirrorless it is huge
LOL that graph is looking at the whole market not Sony’s share of it which has been explained here dozens of times . SLT almost single- handedly killed off the A-mount . Instead of making up imaginary data from misread graphs look at any actual retail data SLT is a tiny bit player in the market any and all markets
But as with most abusive fanboys I doubt that reality will dent your delusions. You keep on pretending that SLT is doing just dandy , of cousre you cannot look at any retail data from anywhere on the globe or it may make you cry
Only an EXTREMELY narrow minded person would suggest that because one camera performs better in a few circumstances (sensor performance) than another camera that it is the superior camera… And only a complete and utter IDIOT would actually take that advice to heart. I could easily point out things the 7D Mark II does better than the A77II but does that make it the logical/superior choice? NO. There are things the A77II does better than the 7D Mark II and vice versa. In fact, I’d assert there are things the A77II can do that the 7D Mark II can’t, and vice versa. A sane and rational person understands this and chooses the tool that’s the best fit for them. Others jump in this circle, grab a bottle of lube, and join in the dynamic range circle jerk.
A sane and rational person doesn’t start insulting everyone with their first comment. Anyway, it’d be interesting to hear what’s so good about the 7D2. You know, except the sensor.
I didn’t insult everyone with the first comment. Unless you’re asserting that everyone says that camera A is better than camera B because of sensor performance… and also that being “narrow minded” is an insult.
As for what’s so good about the 7D2… go read a damn review on the thing. They’re everywhere and it’s universally praised as being EXCEPTIONAL for sports and wildlife.
I thought you said that you could “could easily point out things the 7D Mark II does better than the A77II”. Sports would probably be the only thing the 7D is better at and that is the definition of “few circumstances”.
Well… obviously you think the A77II is better for wildlife (it isn’t if all else is equal). Also, the anti-flicker tech in the 7D2 makes it a better candidate for many for indoor performances with… you guessed it… FLICKERING LIGHTS! Also, seeing as how the sensor performance (yes, ALL categories) of the 7D2 is equal to or better than the A77II at higher ISO’s (which you’ll be using for indoor lighting) then it’s almost definitely the better choice. Unless of course you own Sony/Minolta glass and then it’s not (see… that’s where the sane/rational part comes in). And etc. etc. etc… Again… put down the lube and go read a few reviews.
You still didn’t manage to provide any real points except slightly better ISO and etc. etc. etc. Just look at the most basic comparison, the Sony is lighter, has a better sensor, IBIS, swivel LCD, wifi. The 7D2 has a GPS and a longer battery life, yet costs 50% more. I also don’t see why it would be any better for sports or wildlife.
ummm… top of the line AF performance? That’s why. And IBIS is great for shorter focal lengths. Not so much for longer focal lengths. Some don’t like a swivel LCD (I do, actually) so that’s a personal preference thing. Also, no one in their right mind will regularly shoot sports and wildlife using the back LCD so whether it swivels or not is immaterial a lot of the time. And if you compare the same picture out of both cameras, sure, the A77II might be a little better when it comes to major post-processing (and indistinguishable when it comes to minor post processing) but the 7D Mark II will simply capture more of those difficult shots that the A77II will miss – and I don’t care how good a cameras DR is, it’s worthless on a missed shot.
I’m going to bed. Enjoy the circle Vlad.
Have you compared that top AF performance between the two? And IBIS is great, because every lens benefits from it. I’d also guess that there are plenty of people shooting video, landscapes and in studio than there sports/wildlife shooters, so the swivel LCD will actually be a great convenience to many. Frankly, still not a single valid point, certainly not the ridiculous assumption that people will be missing shots with the a77. Go to bed.
Well, you surely like Canon. Then this forum is not well suited for you unless you want to compare it with Sony for its advantages. IMHO
Still can’t restrain yourself from insults, can you, jb?
Nothing really the A77II Is lighter has better ergonomics is 12fps, comes equipped with the best APS-C standard zoom available (SAL1650), and costs about a thousand bucks less.
Canon has just doesn’t have what it takes to compete with Sony’s newest SLTs. The A77II is the best APS-C DSLR camera you can buy.
If SAR rumour are correct, a FF 12fps, 36mp SLT is coming shortly, and Canon’s 5D MK IV won’t have a chance.
Of course the photography world will never know about it, cause Sony doesn’t spend time promoting or money on advertising their cameras.
“A77II has better ergonomics” – totally agreed. Sadly – noone outside of long-term Sony shooters does. Read some reviews. They almost universally complain about Sony ergonomics. But I so very much wish Nikon or Canon would some out with such an optimal body… especially in a grip shape (which works wonderfully for both: shooting with a viewfinder and shooting tilted while using swively LCD).
I guess nobody voted for you. Poor baby maybe you can go to the Canon rumour forum, and cry with the other 7D users.
Yeah, you would actually have a leg to stand on if the test scores were even sort of close. But Canon’s sensor performance in the 7D mk II is 5 years behind the sensor in the a77 mk II (even disregarding SLT tech)– and since it’ll probably be 2019 before the 7D mk III is out, I’d say this sensor test, by itself, is actually a really big deal. How’s the 7D mk II going to look in 2017 when every other high end APS-C is shooting 4K video, not using a ridiculous flappy mirror to focus, and acheiving DR and IQ leagues beyond the 7D mk II? Are they going to cut the price in 1/3? Not Canon. The 7D MK I was a phenomenal camera and it’s a shame Canon didn’t have the ability to put a better sensor in the 7D mk II. In fact, they really didn’t improve on their 5 year old mk I. I was hoping for a camera that would continue the 7D’s legacy. It’s too bad.
Although to be fair, to look at the actual test data rather than the overall ratings, it would appear that the 7DII actually outperforms the A77II by at least as significant of a margin at higher ISOs as the A77II outperforms the 7DII at lower ISOs. While I know it’s tempting to declare the winner to be the camera with the highest scores in each category, in the real world, highest possible image quality is sometimes only obtained at higher ISOs depending on the situation, and I suspect most people don’t shoot everything at ISO 100 most of the time.
Still though, an impressive performance from both cameras.
To get a score you have to average numbers. Most people, all things equal, shoot at the lowest ISO in order to get the highest DR. So you can say that in one area the Canon performs better, but I say an average score is pretty fair– it’s not a skewed average. And if pushed, I’d probably make the case that the Sony has the more useful ISO advantage. But whatever, it sucks that the 7D didn’t at least bring some competition, because since Sony makes almost all of Nikon’s important sensors, no one is yet testing the capabilities of Sonikon. 😉
I agree, an average would be nice. Unfortunately, DxO doesn’t average. They HEAVILY weight towards low ISO. Like… SUPER HEAVILY.
I did not know that, though it makes sense. All ISO settings, save for a few cameras, are useless over 3200, maybe 6400. But they all crank up to 51,200.
Well… useless is an opinion based on desired output quality, and it differs for everyone. The cut-off point is also highly predicated on how close the viewing distance is relative to NORMAL 🙂 lol
Ironically, my standards have gone down over time and I attribute it to purchasing a printer. Once I started printing my images and looking at them (even large prints) from a NORMAL distance (as opposed to my face glued to the monitor at 1:1 magnification), I realized that high ISO’s are unbelievably usable on today’s cameras. Especially once NR is applied to a minimal level (I think most people apply too much NR because the standard is to apply it at 1:1 which results in too much detail smearing when really, it’s probably better applied at a lower magnification). TOO MUCH pixel peeping, not enough pictures in photography 🙂
I get what you’re saying, but I think the more useful number to know would be the average ISO that most photos are shot at and make a comparison of sensor performance within that range. An average of the S/N range of a camera is really an imaginary number that tells you a little, but not much specific about a camera. And then of course, photos are shot at different ISOs for different reasons, so averaging that number is not really going to tell you much either. I suppose, basically, comparing based on averages is a very poor methodology in this case.
That’s a major problem with DxO and many who rely on its data to determine which CAMERA (rather than sensor) is “best”. DxO places an extremely high emphasis on low ISO performance and weights their scores accordingly. If someone is smart enough to look at the actual data as opposed to DxO’s interpretation of it, the differences are very minimal and in favor of one sensor at one extreme and in favor of the other at the other extreme. Most also overlook the fact to see the differences between sensors, you’d have to push RAW files to a large degree. Out of camera raws and NORMAL processing results in basically indistinguishable results. DxO is for those who wish to push their raw files to an extreme.
For me my choice is easy. I gave up using a OVF camera except in the studio. I prefer using the EVF and I love focus peaking. So my apsc camera is an a77II. I love being able to compose, adjust and review pics in the EVF. I rarely use the LCD and I don’t when outside at all. I have said goodbye to exposure bracketing three years ago. The a77II focus system is very good. My shots of high school football this season have never been better and even though there are two other photographers shooting Canon the Coach after called my shots fantastic not inferior. It is the output that matters and then it is a matter of shooting style. Shoot what you want I don’t care.
Try split prism focusing screen. It’s much better than focus peaking. By far more accurate (though you need some bright lenses for that – difference isn’t huge with f/3.5-5.6 lenses).
Mirrorless bodies will always out perform Translucent mirror bodies in every catagory but AF.
SLT is finally seeing it’s last year or two. If Sony releases one more generation of 77s and 99s…I certain that will be the end of that road.
On sensor phase detect, I suspect with render SLT useless.
Large, empty mirror boxes will render A Mount useless in the next few years too.
A mount lenses will eventually only be supported as “legacy” lenses with adapters on E Mount.
Wait till Sony builds really nice PRO E mount bodies!
Admin, any A-mount body rumors at all?? 0?
There is a rumor, that the A77 II is better than the Canon 7 D II ^^
A77II just came out. A99 only came out couple years ago. They’re not going to replace a flagship phone in 2 years. What else A mount body do you want?
This. Should be CP+2015. OR a Pro E-mount A9.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/patent-this-could-be-the-next-a-mount-mirrorless-sensor-and-design/
I like how cameras are compared as if they are your favoite sports teams. Nice hobby, nothing wrong with that especially on a gear site. More fun than fantasy football.
Exactly. Except lately it has been mostly one Sony team against another Sony team. That’s not a healthy situation for any club… errr… manufacturer 🙂
very strong smell on sarcarism from admin 😀 but it is funny to read that low light iso on A77II, it was also laughable, not because it lose to 7DII but after so many many years that score still far behind to 5DMKII. Really that APSC King just simply no way to threat a dinosour FF in low light ISO 😀
The “sports-high ISO” test DxO does is probably their most misleading and least worth paying attention to. It matters, sure, but it’s very technical and not very real life. It measures the sensor’s RAW output at a given ISO, but tech has already moved so far in the direction of excellent high ISO image processing that I think a better measure would be a perceptible ISO rating, like they do for rating a lens’ resolving power of MP.
A great example is the D600 and the new D750 coming in perfectly even in the sports-high ISO test. But in the real world, as in, the images that professionals use, keep and edit, the D750 is probably 2 stops better than the D600. There are reviews that go on and on about this with pictures for proof.
This comparo/test is bound to generate incredible amount of drama – have your popcorn ready. The way I see it, at least based on initial reviews, 7DM2 looks to be a fine, no-risk update for the Canon camp and has some rather worthy improvements (look at the weather sealing, for instance). Just like A77M2 (which I own and like quite a bit) was for the Sony users.
While one can argue to death about this being apples/oranges comparison and really a short-sighted match, the one thing here is rather striking is PRICE. With current discounts on A77M2 coming at literally HALF the cost of 7DM2 this is really incredible.
Precisely, it is striking. Sony really is managing some exceptionally cheap bodies.
You make a great point and it’s totally reasonable. That almost never happens here. plus one!
maybe Sony should advertise the A77 ii as a cheaper alternative to the 7Dii`s wifi adapter 😉 .. that way Canonians might feel less offended how anyone dare to compare the A77ii to the 7Dii directly..
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081826-REG/canon_5754b009_wft_e7a_wireless_file_transmitter.html/prm/alsVwDtl
Sony made some good new A mount cameras back when they still used to make new A mount cameras.
Like back in May, when they released the a77 mkII?
speaking of a-mount being dead.. 😉 any news on the fe-mount G 90 macro or the 35 1.4 yet?
A camera can have the best sensor in the world, but it’s nothing without good lens options. Bhphoto shows 32 Sony A-Mount lenses (APS-C and FF) and 135 Canon EF (&EF-S) lenses. Just saying…
And how many of those will you ever purchase in your life?
The A-mount has top-of-the-line primes from 24mm to 135mm. It has arguably the best AF SLR standard lens on the market, and the fastest 135mm prime. It also has an excellent 16-35 zoom, IMO better than both of canon’s 16-35mm options. There are options up to 500mm for sports (though a bit on the expensive side). And there is a sea of old minolta lenses that can not only AF on an A77ii but take advantage of IBIS.
The only glaring gaps in Sony’s lens system is >500mm super-teles and TS. And the former can be partly remedied by the Sony tele adapters. Does your line of work absolutely require a tilt-shift? If so, then get a TSE 17mm, and use it with the A7r…
There’re many more gaps… 8mm fisheye, 14mm, 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4, 70-200 f/4, 28-300, longer than 400mm zoom, new 35mm, 85mm SSM, 135mm SSM, 400mm f/4, long macro, any f/1.2 lenses.
Decent mid-level lenses – not everybody can buy super-expensive Zeiss.
Almost all Sony lenses lack weather-resistance.
That’s why god created Sigma and Tamron.
I’m not sure it was god. More like the devil. IMHO.
Well, I’m still waiting for the 50mm Art for my a99… Apparently God wants the Sony users to struggle more than the Nikon and Canon fans 🙂
I find weather resistance to be a bit overrated. However, Sony’s gear is very resistant, even if they don’t care to advertise. Check these articles:
http://www.swiatobrazu.pl/sony_dslr_a900_at_dakar_rally.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/antarctica-2009-worked.shtml
Sony basically doesn’t have any mid-range lenses and tons of holes in high-end range.
Yeah, if Sony would just bring out that 17-40 f/4 I might take there lenses seriously. 😉
Canon’s 17-40 f/4 is among the most popular lenses for reportage.
how many focal lengths a non professional user need in their life time? I do shoot weddings and professional jobs but I only need less than 15 different lenses in my bag, are you saying you need more than that?
I shoot weddings and more than 4 (at most!) lenses is actually a large hindrance. You have 15 in your bag? Good for you man, you must be younger than me. 🙂
I shoot weddings, individual and family portraits. I use 4 lenses. A Sigma 12-24mm HSM, a Sony 35mm f1.4, a Zeiss 85mm f 1.4 and a Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GI. I don’t need any more than that for my a99 and a77II. Very happy with the setup.
You’re “just saying…” not a helluvalot actually, Leung. Some subscribe to the idea of quality over quantity, which Sony is pretty well focused on. They try really hard and do a great job with their lenses (usually), bc they know they don’t have the R&D dollars to remake the same lens 4 years later (as other manufactures sometimes do). I’m not saying that Sony doesn’t have a couple holes to fill, but, IMHO, one really only needs 1 great wide zoom, 1 or 2 great standard zooms, 1-2 good tele zooms (depending on what you’re into), and 8 to 10 great primes (figuring the bug enthusiasts, birders, etc., it could be a hair more) at the VERY most. You could easily argue that neither Canon or Nikon have those bases covered. So, that said, the total doesn’t quite come to 135 does it? If you’re into a weird lens fetish– then buy the inferior camera and delight in whatever weird issht you do. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
You’ve forgotten the TS lenses buddy. I also wasn’t be so sure about the lens quality, at least if you compare top a-mount lenses (a99 body) to the same top Nikon lenses (d600 body – pretty much same sensor), the a-mount glass won’t look like a winner.
Nobody has forgotten the TS lenses. The problem is the argument about more lenses and what it actually means. As to a-mount glass, do compare it to Nikon and come back.
Vlad! How you’re doing? We haven’t talked for a while 🙂
A 70-200 is kind of important for me (portraits) so here you go: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-70-200mm-F28-G-ED-VR-II-on-Nikon-D610-versus-Sony-70-200mm-F2-8-G-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99___406_915_246_831
Pretty much every Sony-Zeiss prime is not as good as a corresponding Nikon lens (and usually more expensive), except of the 135mm one (that one is a gem). But most disappointing the situations when Sigma announces a nice lens and it’s either not available at all for the A-mount (like 120-300 APO and the new 150-600 Sport) or will be available in a few years after the Canon/Nikon variants release (the 50 mm Art).
Yes, I don’t think anybody would need all 135 random lenses, but when you’re looking for either specialized lenses (TS, 5:1 macro, 800mm, etc) or just exceptional quality portrait glass like the 200mm f/2 – Sony leaves no choice… IMO it’s better when you have redundant choices than no choice at all. Thanks to the A7 platform and a ton of random adapters the dreams come true though.
For a 70-200, get a Tamron – Tamron 70-200/2.8 USD is better than 70-200G and Nikon 70-200/2.8 VRII, and comes in A-Mount. http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-70-200mm-F2-8-G-on-Sony-SLT-Alpha-99-versus-Tamron-SP-70-200mm-F28-Di-VC-USD-Nikon-versus-Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-70-200mm-F28-G-ED-VR-II___246_831_1028_0_406_0
I have one on my A77II, it’s phenominally sharp.
That’s exactly what I’ve got. The only thing I’m missing is the optical stabilization when I shoot it on the a7r. On the a99 it works flawlessly.
Fine! You? 🙂
See, the problem is that the argument for more lenses is presented as though it matters for everyone. When, in reality, having TS and super long lenses will allow to satisfy more photographers with different requirements. These are different things. The majority will be fine without specialized glass, so then, how much does it matter? Now, Sony also lacks many cheaper alternatives, but that is also different from not having lenses. Add to that the fact that Sony’s lens lineup is not a secret, so people are aware of what they are getting themselves into and it is not really as clearcut as “more is better”.
I am not a huge fan of DXO’s lens scores. Just look at how much the following tells you about the lenses:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-58mm-F14G-on-Nikon-D610-versus-Sony-50mm-F14-on-Sony-Alpha-850-versus-AF-S-Nikkor-50mm-f-1.4G-on-Nikon-D610___1254_915_1022_604_199_915
Prefer photo zone (which is hardly in love with Sony) ,but there are no direct comparisons.
I’m a big fan of photozone too. What do you think about lenscore.org? I like the idea of comparing all lenses on one sensor, and they claim it’s a 200Mpx one (kind of a digital back). I’m not sure how reliable are their tests though…
First time I see those. Interesting!
There are TS lenses for A-mount. From Schneider and Samyang (sadly: there’s no middle ground, it’s either uber-high end or low-end).
BHphoto is repeating lenses and Canon has plenty of IS/nonIS versions. Take out those and you’ll end up below 80. So, it is pretty clear what is going on, Sony is missing most of the cheaper options, as well as some specialized lenses. And the question is – are you going to use all of those?
so what? Canon users don’t care, Canon doesn’t care. 7D2 may still sell hot.
and it beats the A77II where it really matters, SPORT.
And sport is where it really matters?
Do you think they designed these cameras for architecture photography?
I know, Canon users never care about their image quality.
They only care if they got a Canon logo on their equipment.
Sounds like Apple fanboys lol
Boom goes the dynamite! 🙂 Ranked at #105 on the sensor list. Not even up to the task of matching their new Sony-derived Powershot G7, nor the Sony a33 (at #97), nor the Nikon D5000 (at #91), and, well, just about any APS-C camera released during that last 2-3 years by anyone– except Canon. Say senor ratings don’t matter, fine, but don’t tell me you’re happy about the brand new successor to probably the best digital APS-C camera (ever) starting its next 5 year run at number 105 (and priced like it’s a hundred rankings better). I was hoping for a great 7D mk II. Might have bought one (since I have some Canon glass) if it was a significant improvement over the aged, and classic, 7D. But those numbers (justify them how you’d like) are downright embarrassing.
Not surprising Sony sensor is better than Canon.
But if you compare the sale between those camera, you know a-mount is dying.
A77 ii <- good camera, many nice feature, reasonable price, but poor sale.
But don't worry, a-mount die, Sony sensor will still live in e-mount & Nikon body. 😛
But where are you going to live?
“poor sales” part is mostly Sony’s own fault. They didn’t even gave it for the reviews (eg. dPreview) not to mention that there wasn’t any advertisement campagin for that camera. Most of people assume it’s just a small upgrade from A77 and ignore it (when in fact Sony basically changed everything inside of a body).
Admin is trolling? Sure, look at that…
lol 😉
The interesting thing here to me is that when both the original 7D (16 mpx) and Sony’s original offering at this level, the Alpha 700 (12 mpx), were brought out in the same year, 2007, DXO gave them the same overall rating: 66. (The Nikon D300, which used the same Sony sensor used by the A700, and came out the same year, was sensor-rated by DXO a tick better: 67.)
In the intervening seven years Canon has moved its sensor rating no further than four points, to 70, little more than half a stop, while Sony has achieved a sensor rating of 82, sixteen points higher, a good two stops higher.
The price on Canon’s offering seven years ago was hundreds of dollars higher than the Sony; the gap between the two offerings today is still greater, still more hundreds of dollars greater.
Seven years ago, the 7D did offer a considerably better AF system. In spite of the fact that Canon installed its most professional AF system in the 7D Mk II, Sony’s advances in AF have very nearly, perhaps entirely, closed the AF gap.
“Sony’s advances in AF have very nearly, perhaps entirely, closed the AF gap.” – no, they didn’t. Not against 7D mkII at least. I had a chance to compare it and pretty much everyone else who did agree that 7D is WAY better.
The 7D had a 18MP sensor and was announced 5 years ago, long after the A700. The direct competitor of the A700 was the 40D, both released in 2007.
Canon makes really good cameras, but they should wise up like nikon and buy their sensors from Sony.
Tried both….wouldn’t touch the 7D II if you paid me after that.
This overall score is pretty lame. I cannot believe this sensor is new. How many older nikon and Sony cameras beat this score. Not impressive for their new aps-c top of the heap camera. As a user of canon camera, please canon put a Sony sensor in any new canon camera.
I dumped all my Canon gear for Sony a-mount about 5 minutes after I tried out an A77 mk2 at the camera store. Thanks DXO for affirming I made the right choice.
Let’s talk in 5 years and see if you’ll still be so happy about that. Cause I for one don’t even know if Sony will have any bodies to offer for the A-mount in 5 years time while I’m very sure Canon will.
Back off troll. Its obvious that you’re paid to spout off this BS.
The A-Mount is 30 years old, and has a massive user base. It will be here 30 years from now long after you’re retired.
Still, the D7100 shows better measurements despite being older then the Sony and Canon. The overall score is useless.
People should learn to understand DxO! This is a sensor test and it says: this Sony has a better sensor than this Canon. That’s all!
This doesn’t mean a better camera!(!!!!!!!!)
Those two models are made for different types of photography! The Canon is a fast shooter, made for sports, wild life etc; a77mkII is a general purpose camera.
I had the luck to test them both yesterday at the store – a brand new Canon and the Sony. They still don’t sell the Canon because they’re waiting for the kit lenses but they gave me one to try it.
I must say that The Canon beats the s*it out of the Sony. Although I have a7 and a6000 and I love em both, the a77 is nowhere close to the Canon – it just feels like a toy that looks like DSLR! Worse battery life, awful viewfinder, smaller buffer and it locks the aperture in burst mode; it’s generally sluggish and slow. Canon just doesn’t stop, it’s just like a smaller version of 1Dx. It’s a real DSLR made for speed, durability and reliability – NOT for a better IQ! Shooting with Canon is an orgasm. The Sony feels like a newer technology, because of the tilting screen, the wifi etc, but it’s not a better camera, period!
And the lenses for Canon are sharper and better. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 beats even the Nikon’s 70-200.
Stop reading numbers and lab tests – they could be totally misleading. The real experience is something totally different!
and? until now we have 300v2 70-400v2, 18-55v2, a77v2 sertainly a 99v2. What new? nothing… The last real new lenses are the 50f1.4 and 500f4… I’m waiting for somthing more big…
The E munth is very interesting with his a7s! very great improvment!
So Canon has a bad camera again… so what? it doesnt mean that sony isnt killing the AMOUNT.
If it was only about sensor, Canon would be dead. A look at their latest financials shows they aren’t and they won’t be that soon. But A-mount looks dead for me or will die sooner or later. It doesn’t make sense for Sony to support two mounts. If others had a 1.2/85, a 8-15 zoom or a TS 17 I would jump ship within a heartbeat. But at the end of the day lenses matter more to me than sensors.
Since Sony sells way more APS-C and full frame sensors than it uses, this has absolutely nothing to do with the A-mount. Nobody ever said Sony sensors are dead, there’s just an argument that the A-mount may have limited life…
Sony already took A-mount to the back of the barn and shot a big hole through its head so yes, A-mount is dead as dead. Future A-mount camera are just carryovers from E/FE-mount developments and A-mount won’t have more lenses.
Why did you delete my post? Because I disagree?
I’ll say it again: a-mount is not dead but 7DmkII is a better DSLR form a77mkII, PERIOD! And I’m a Sony fanboy!
I tested em both yesterday, and the Sony fell behind in overall shooting experience. The Canon is faster, reliable, better AF, durable – it just doesn’t stop. The ergonomics are better, and it feels smooth and natural in the hand. The Sony was sluggish, laggy viewfinder, the burst mode locks the aperture, smaller buffer size and the battery life is awful! It looks like DSLR but it doesn’t act and feel like one. The Canon is built for sport, wild life and faster shooting, the Sony is general purpose tourist camera. A-mount lenses are nowhere close to the Canon ones in terms of quality and variety.
DxO only compare sensors and that’s all. Don’t judge a camera by it’s lab tests! In real life it’s totally different experience!
RAW buffer is pretty similar (28 vs 31) and for half the price and offering much better DR at low ISO, Wifi and LV abilities, the A77II is a steal.
Canon – 31 shots buffer size @ 14bit
Sony – 25 shots buffer size @ 12bit (@ locked aperture only)
it is 14 bit on a77 too
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Sony/SLT-Alpha-77-II—Specifications
LoL seriously? The Canon has less Content but the bigger Container. Very nice….
No thanks.
No, the A77II was already tested at 26 RAW @ 12 fps and 28 RAW @ 8fps besides the fact that the official specs also list both those numbers.
And again you’re ignoring the fact that at 8fps (which is considered burst too…) you have aperture control.
And those extra 2 bits do nothing for the Canon, since they can only be useful with an extremely low noise floor (read noise, not to be confused with shot noise), which the Canon does not have. Well, other than marketing of course.
They advertise 12fps not 8! And they’re not telling you the limitations.
The Canon is not limited by ANYTHING!
If the two extra bits do nothing, why then everyone is so excited about some lab test that show 2bits difference in IQ? It’s funny, isn’t it?
You’re confusing RAW bit depth and measured color depth. Completely different things. A 12 bit RAW file can easily hold true 24 bit colors already. And I didn’t say 2 bits can’t make a difference, they can. But only if they aren’t filled with read noise, which in the case of the Canon, they are.
And does Canon tell you those 2 extra RAW bits have been useless since they introduced them years ago due to the limitations of their senors? No.
I’ll repeat: if the two bits are useless, why is everyone so excited about some bits measurement in a lab? Or they only matter when suit one’s opinion?
I’m not confused about anything – it’s just numbers that don’t mean anything – my point exactly! Thank you!
Are you capable of reading? The 2 extra RAW *storage* bits on the –>CANON<– are useless due to the high read noise of Canon sensors at low ISO. Not in general, not in terms of *measured* bits.
Most other recent sensors can benefit at low ISO from 2 extra bits due to lower read noise.
You keep proving to be confused, especially since you claim that these numbers don't mean anything. Anyone who's ever exploited the DR of their cameras, should know that there's quite some practical value to these numbers. Which is not the same as saying that these numbers are all we should know or need. For example because Canon actually tends to be flattered in the results, since the practical impact of noise patterns (banding in particular), can't be calculated (thus not represented).
“Most other recent sensors can benefit at low ISO from 2 extra bits.”
On paper! In real world, you won’t even tell the difference!
Nonsense and pixel peeping. Numbers in a lab. Marketing bullshit.
Have you tried the 7DmkII? No.
Please stop!
No, in practise too. But keep proving that you have no idea what you’re talking about.
I’ve always exploited the maximum DR out of my cameras through near “ISO-less” shooting.
And your assumptions are hurting your thinking too. I have direct access to 2 MKII’s at work and have given one a nice spin.
But you’re right in one area, 14 bits RAW on CANON cameras is indeed marketing BS. 😉
“14 bits RAW on CANON cameras is indeed marketing BS. ;)”
I completely agree!!! Just like this DxO test!
So you’ve tested 7DmkII? And you still think that the a77mkII is the better DSLR? Well that’s either unhonest or biased. I even struggle to say: it’s a matter of personal preference, because the shooting experience with the Canon is waaaay better than the Sony, despite all the numbers and lab BS.
What do you think about the laggy viewfinder and the poor battery life on the Sony? Any lab tests about that? ;-P
“So you’ve tested 7DmkII? And you still think that the a77mkII is the better DSLR? Well that’s either unhonest or biased.”
Once again you have proven incapable of reading. Nowhere did I say that the A77II is the better camera. I said it’s a steal for half the price and has its own set of merits that the Canon cannot match. For my personal use, it is the better deal. The A77II battery lasts me plenty and I’ve always carried a spare for every camera. Batteries can fail.
Just countering the irrational nonsense.
” Nowhere did I say that the A77II is the better camera. I said it’s a steal for half the price”
Great! I’m glad we cleared that out!
I hope everyone reads it!
Peace!
Glad I cleared it out for you again, altough it was pretty clear from the start. For many, the A77II makes the better camera, because not everyone is like you. It’s that simple.
That almost deserved an exclamation mark of 50 too.
Most of us here know what the Sony shooting experience is like, but thanks for your ridiculously marred interpretation. I also shoot Canon and Nikon. And the very last thing I’d call the a77 mk II is “laggy.” Ever try shooting in live view with a D800 or 5D mk III?
Get on DxO and compare some lenses from Sony/Zeiss before puking all over the message boards. I have plenty of Nikon, Canon, Sony and m4/3 glass– and with go-to lenses, there are rarely any big standouts from anyone. If anything, it’s been the 3rd party manufacturers that’ve been killing it, not Sony, Canon or Nikon. Nikon’s 12-24 wide angle is a good example of stellar performance that was unmatched for a long while. Canon has their 50mm 1.2 that photogs cream over. Sony has an incredible 135mm lens that isn’t really bested by anyone. But overall, 98% of the focal lengths you want to shoot at have great lenses by all 3 manufacturers.
Saying the a77 mk II is a tourist camera outs you as a completely biased individual with little experience, just as you calling the a77 mk II “laggy” outs you as either someone who has never shot with Sony before, or is a bit slow to learn a new camera interface.
I’ve tested em both yesterday! The viewfinder starts to struggle once the camera is pointed at a low light place, and such experience is not something one would expect from a DSLR!
I have both a7 and a6000, and I love them. I’m not biased.
a77mkII is not the better DSLR, period. It’s like a glorified mirrorless camera! It’s more like a toy full of gizmos. I’ve tried em both with 70-200s. Have you?! OR you just don’t like the fact that i’m bashing your favorite toy?!
FYI Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II even beats the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 II at all focal lengths in sharpness!
You are a bit dense. You say the Canon is this revolutionary product that leaves the Sony in the dust. Many of us have shot with a 7D and a a65/77– the older versions are almost like the new cameras. Not much changed. You say Sony glass is crap compared to Canon. You’re wrong. You say the a77 is a tourist camera. You’re wrong again. The Canon 70-200 f/2.8 II is probably the most over-priced over-worshipped Canon lens made. You call me a Sony fanboy when you’ve got a load of Canon dripping out your mouth. I spend 90% of my time shooting with BMD video cameras and I do all paid photo work with Nikon. Your ignorance and arrogance is disgusting.
“You say the Canon is this revolutionary product that leaves the Sony in the dust.”
I’ve never said that!
“You say Sony glass is crap compared to Canon.”
I’ve never said that!
“You call me a Sony fanboy”
I’ve never said that!
You’re emotionally attached to an object child! You’re putting words in my mouth which I have never said only to create easy-to-counter artificial arguments.
—
“Many of us have shot with a 7D and a a65/77– the older versions are almost like the new cameras. Not much changed.”
You’re right – the new a77mkII still lags when you change the aperture and move focus points… not much changed indeed.
*facepalm*
The Canon sensor still sucks, that hasn’t changed either.
Did you notice how bad the Canon sensor sucked?
I also have tried the 7DII, love its optical viewfinder with transparent OLED overlay. You guys have to see it!
It’s amazing! I was skeptic about the Canon, because I’m a Sony fanboy but the real life experience is sooooo different from some lab tests.
The Canon sensor sucks in real life too.
The sensor will still suck in the Canon.
I would swap A77mkII EVF to 7D mk II OVF any time, night or day!
But the sensor will still suck in the Canon.
And it only does 10fps.
I somehow doubt that the difference is as visible as it seems according to DXO’s numbers. It’s an indication… But I think it’s better to wait for comparison pictures. And as said before… Once the sensor produces good enough looking images… There’s more to improve and develop.
I don’t doubt the difference in low ISO DR will be visible, as it always has been.
Have you seen the images from the 70D? Same sensor, slight tweaks. My guess is the 70D is a pretty good indicator of what the 7D will produce. There’s probably some better high ISO NR in the 7D mk II but aside from that there’s only so much you can do with a sensor.
This means you can now see some studio comparison RAW images of the A77 MII at DPR.
At 12800 ISO RAW, the Canon 7D II simply leaves the rest in the dust – Nikon D7100, A6000, A77 II. Up to 6400 ISO things are just about the same. Just.
Anything above 6400 ISO on an APS-C sensor *is* dust. I would never go beyond 6400 ISO on a crop sensor camera. What kind of photography do you do?
Full Frame fetish. Nice to meet you too.
is that why you need completely weatherseald cameras and lenses? 😉
Good to see that the sensor from my old and rusty A57 still performes better (except for iso) than the aps-C flagship from Canon…
A77II is fat and ugly. I don’t want to use it.
Are you confusing cameras with your mother?
Well, Ok, Dxo says it’s way better. However, when I go on Flickr, I don’t see a whole different world between Sony-sensored cameras and Canon cameras. I have an A6000 and a Nex6, so none can say I’m a Canon fan, but seriously, I’m sure I would be glad to have a Canon as well. As long as someone can take stunning pictures with it (and there are a tons of people who are able to do it with Canon’s DSLR), then I’m inclined to say that if I don’t get great results, the problem is not the camera, but me.
One last thing: DXO is measuring extreme case. In real life, the difference in DR is not so great. Of course, if you compare side by side the exact same picture taken both with a Nikon D7100 and a 7DMkII, you may find some differences, but who does that ? Isn’t a picture supposed to be unique ? I’ve never found myself saying: this picture would have been so great with such camera. I rather like it, or not, and if I like it, then I like it as it is.
Quality of a product says nothing about its survivability in the market. VHS won from Video2000 despite Video2000 being better.
According to the actual DXO measurements, the DR is better at ISO 200 and below, Canon is better between ISO 1600 and 6400. S/N is a tiny bit better on the Canon side. Still, both trail the D7100 in almost all aspects (sensor, not other things like buffer size). As soon as you go to high shutter speeds and need to rise ISO, the advantage of the Sony isn’t there anymore and it boils down to lenses, AF-system, buffer, etc. I can imagine the Canon to be quite good there. If you are shooting a lot at base ISO, the A77 is a nice camera. Nevertheless, it is a bit disappointing that Canon sensors are not performing better, even though they don’t need to account for light loss due to the translucent mirror.
All I see from this test chart is that both APS-C cameras have the ISO performance of a micro four thirds camera. Unimpressed.
Not realy: Canon 1082, Sony 1013 (near identical ) Olympus OM-D E-M1 757. How does that looks to you.
Both in colordepth and Dynamic Range the Sony trumps the m43 too. Indeed I’m not impressed by the m43
Petapixel posted some BS article on how Canon is inferior to m4/3 and now people copy&paste without giving it a thought. Cause you know – bashing Canon gives you an upvotes.
Obviously you don’t know the rules:
1) Micro 4/3 is superior to all cameras with smaller sensors, including Nikon V1 and Sony 1″, because sensor size truly makes a difference.
2) Micro 4/3 is equal to cameras with larger sensors, including 135 and APS, because sensor size really doesn’t make a difference.
Don’t be a troll. The cheap and two years old E-PL5 has an ISO score of 889, that’s less than a quarter of a stop difference with these new APS-C cameras. One would expect a full stop difference on a new APS-C camera.
Why not put the D5300 data next to the two? There’s room.
Mirrorless is the future.
Been hearing that tired refrain for seven years. About time they start showing instead of just sloganeering. Guess someone forgot to tell the consumers that slogan.
Yep. Sony still lags behind the competition in terms of ISO performance.
Miserable defeat. After all these years latest and greatest Sony sensor in it’s A-mount camera is still worse than 5 years old Canon. I’m speechless.
You probably missed that this is the 7D Mark II which is new, not 5 years old. There is no significant difference in ISO performance. There is significant difference in all other aspects in favor of the A77 Mark II.
Sensor is 5 years old. And yes – difference isn’t significant in numbers alone (though Canon still got an edge), but if you go to see samples – it’s clear from ISO 400 up and from ISO 3200 it’s a huge difference in both: chroma and lumi noise, but even the noise structure itself is by far nicer and more pleasing than the one in A77 mk II (which was always a problem for Sony – nothing changed since A500/550).
Tell me, which Canon APS-C camera had a 20MP sensor with dual pixel technology 5 years ago? Or even 3?
And since I also own the A500, I can safely say you’re clueless. The A500 matched up fine with the competition at the time (D300S, which was about double the price, Canon 40D), in RAW performance. The only thing that has changed, is a 0.4-0.5 EV pentalty due to the SLT mirror. But that being said, even with the beamsplitter in place, the A77II totally spanks older cameras, such as the A500.
Yea, I owned A550 too, and at the day of release it had as bad noise structure as A77 does today when comparing to it’s peers. And yes – I am talking about RAW structure. Yes, A550 was a huge leap for Sony in terms of noise structure, but it still lagged.
“at the day of release it had as bad noise structure”
Nonsense, unless you were maybe using an older Lightroom/ACR version that were known to totally botch up ARW files. Using a level playing field (for example DCRAW), the A550 files were every bit as good as those from the competition, with lower shadow noise than the Nikons at high ISO and less hot pixels in deep shadows than either Nikon or Canon cameras. And that’sstill easily verifiable today.
I would love to see whether that is true. However, since the 7D mark II RAWs aren’t supported yet by LR, I can’t do a valid comparison where I can equalize resolution. I think you’re overstating facts by saying that the 7D II looks much better. They are very close, and probably close to identical when adjusted for print size or equalized resolution.
Canon Fanboy detected. Mirrorless is the future of photography and Sony is doing great this work.
You new here? I’m not shooting with Canon or am their fanboy. But I’m not Sony fanboy either.
You are not shooting with Canon but you say “A-mount camera is still worse than 5 years old Canon”. I think you are not objective. Canon 7D or 7D Mark II are not a bad cameras but Sony is a hipster in this market and always working on new-good things. There is too much to say but my English not good, sorry 🙂
“You are not shooting with Canon but you say “A-mount camera is still worse than 5 years old Canon”.” – Only people shooting Canon are allowed to say that?
” I think you are not objective.” – you are free to think whatever you prefer.
“but Canon is always producing same cameras.” – Unlike Sony which got horrible tendency to randomly disappear some cameras from it’s lineup.
“Sony is a hipster in this market and always working on new-good things.” – wait, what? Hipster brand is Fuji. And hipsters are “always working on new-good things”? what? O_o I don’t understand anything from that sentence… sorry ~_~
Mirrorless, Sony Fanboy detected.
See how that works?
What still holds Canon a bit above the water are the many lenses they’ve developed through the years. Sony is young on this business, but is relentlessly building its solid base of advanced camera bodies and amazing sensors ( which all others are now buying… even Canon ). Nevertheless, Sony and Sony/Zeiss lenses are now also accelerating their lenses offers and setting new standards. IMHO it’s just a matter of time.
Overall score of the recently-released A77 II is 82 compared to 70 for the just-released 7D II. I think you misunderstand.
No, I just read more from these tests than just an overall score.
BS….You sound like a Canon marketeer!!!
Read the rest of his posts and you’ll see a distinct pattern.
Check and compare dynamic range curves also. Now basically all current APS-C sensors are very similar. Canon lacks only when base ISO DR is compared.
Yawn
Its so easy to reel figures from dxomark, I’m guilty of it myself. in reality though they don’t give you much info at all. Its good to go on dpreview from time to time view images in studio conditions and compare things for yourself.
But as others have mentioned I fail to see why this proofs that amount is dead or not.
True, but what it does prove is that in a synthetic test the a-mount can trounce the competition. Haven’t used the 7Dii but I was very impressed with the a77ii compared to the a77…
Actually the thinks, that “make” photo, are lenses. Sensors are good in every current cammera
Sony A-Mount is dead see what new lenses were release ….
I own a Nikon D5300.
Comparing RAW photos with the Canon 7D mk2, I can tell you that the Canon’s output is a little cleaner. So when DXOmark gives the D5300 1338 ISO points and the Canon 7D mk2 only 1082 ISO points – I know that something is NOT right with their testing method.
People, please always perform your own tests, with original RAW files and your own way of processing. Do not put much trust on any of those benchmark websites.
If anyone from DXOmark is reading this: I’m disappointed, as your numbers fool people, and do not correspond to the real output. Your integrity has now been jeopardized.
Interesting stuff. One certainly has to read such assessments with a grain of salt. The bias on hi-res alone is quite probelmatic in the first place – e.g.: I don’t know anybody who would not consider the Sony A7S as a very capable camera.
@ Eric: are you sure you have compared more or less the same lens. I always find it diffcult to compare different systems since I usually have fairly different lenses for my systems.
Lenses do affect the overall look of the image, but the noise floor at different ISOs is in the realm of the sensor, not the lens. You can also check out the RAW files that DPreview has posted and see for yourself.
I tested them both at different ISOs, both in good light and dark environment. Canon 7D mk2 RAW output is slightly better than D5300 – that’s for sure.
Lenses affect noise performance directly through transmission differences (and at large apertures through possible vignetting). Two different lenses often yield 2 different T stops and practically every camera compensates under the hood for different transmission values (read more or less boost of the signal), to achieve a given scene brightness with a given physical exposure (shutterspeed and F stop).
In practise this means that, unless you use the exact same lens, noise differences can easily swing up to half a stop in either direction, depending on T stops. DXOmark takes T stops out of the equation for their noise measurements (no lens).
Not to mention the fact that in order to make any valuable comparison between two cameras, you’d have to have the exact same amount of light in the scene and the same physical exposure, to take ISO differences (rated vs measured) of different makers and cameras out of the equation too, which again, DXOmark does as well.
Finally, DXOmark looks at binary data, not converted data which is usually treated differently depending on camera maker and software (converter) maker. Patterns also play an important role in how noise is perceived, which obviously cannot be measured, as it’s at least in part subjective too.
@eric. Important to note that the A77-ii is not winning on high ISO, its winning on dynamic range, resolution and color depth, so high ISO is not really the issue here.
Unfortunately, the internet loves comparisons based on the easiest measurements, but they are rarely the most important. Pick up an A77 and work with their files in DxO/LR, and you will start to see what the results really mean. You can lift shadow detail like nothing else on the A77, and the highlight rolloff ability in post is certainly better than many.
Agreed. For under $1000.00 there is nothing that matches this little wonder.
The fan boys are really grasping at straws now; oh say it’s not so, Canon sensors don’t really suck that bad do they? Poo hoo
Dxomark do really hate canon sensors.
I would prefer to compare real image samples. A6000 gives better IQ than A77II.
Truth be said, Canon isn’t helping.
DXOmark are not guilty of Canon using shitty old ADC in their sensors
Canon sensor just under perform in controlled testing, simple as that. Perhaps a generation or two behind the current state of the art. No hate involved.
you are an idiot admin…
the high iso performance is better..
and who buys a action camera for landscape shots has not clue either.
yoz are just another moron who wants clicks for his webpage because he has no skills for a real job.
0.095 EV better at a single data point (…), with a margin of measuring error that is 0.33 EV. Yawn.
show me some of your images … you idiot are unaable to make a decent image with a 40000$ hasselblad. LOL.. that´s your problem….
Canon users can tell the difference. They can See the Impossible.
If you want to comment, make it polite and contructive, at least Admin has put in efforts to maintain this site.
The administrator must stop posting factual information that causes fan boys to go into a downward spiral of depression and insanity.
where can i get a 600mm f4 or 400mm f2.8 for that great sony a-hole? rotfl….
Well, my Minolta 600/4 and 400/4.5 are wonderful lenses on the a77 mk2. I don’t think there is a 400/2.8, but after using the f/4.5 and its light weight, not sure I’d want the big beast.
yeah ….. keep on lying to yourself.
IS? you have heard about that?
You mean that feature that’s built into all A-Mount DSLR/SLT bodies?
In-body IS you imbecile, have you ever heard about that?
Yeah, I have it on my Tokina 11-16 ultra wide, which no other camera has. In fact, just about every lens I out on my Sony Alpha has IS… because its in the camera.
And yes, before you say in-lens is better than in-camera, its only true for tele, The lower you go, the less the difference (but the higher you go, the more likely you are to be on a tripod anyway). I know this because I shoot both Panasonic and Olympus m43 for my small format walk-arounds, and the major difference between the two is where the IS is…. everything else is pretty much equal.
Sham, even for teles IS works very well, I have a Sigma 150 f2.8 OS HSM macro+ 1.4x TC = 210mm f4 and my A99’s IS always outperforms the OS.
Where can you get a decent sensor for a Canon camera? One that doesn’t relies on +10 year old 500nm process and has an automagical instagram filter for the shadows? It’s 2015 almost, Samsung is already on 65nm process and Canon is still on the same old 12 year old 500nm process. It’s embarrassing really. Great cameras, great lenses, with ScotchChrome 3200 like sensors by now.
The red herring argument, mention some $13,000 niche lens that you could never afford or have a use for on a $1000 dollar body and claim that a camera which has been proven to be inferior is somehow better for that reason. Admit id Canon sensor suck. End of story.
Tony Northrup stated yesterday live on his YouTube channel the Canon 7D2 sensor has surpassed Sony’s A6000 sensor as the best APS-C sensor. He used a slide show comparing images from both to back up his claim. Not sure DxO results agree with the Northrup’s claim.
well for most idiots it would be more important what ken rockwell has to say.. that´s their line of intelligence….
I actually respect Northrup, he’s a good communicator and he looks like a sound guy. But his argument is almost irrelevant. People who buy APS-C prefer mirrorless much more than they used to, and the belief that ‘a physically bigger camera is better’ is a dying concept.
The main issue for the 7D2 is that it isn’t as good as it should have been given the wait – its too close to APS-C mirrorless, and beaten by things like the A77-ii, which it should really have killed completely with no room for argument. On many points it actually loses to the A77 and isn’t enough of a magnet to bring jumpers back into the fold, or bring new people into the fold.
If you can’t get good results with the 7D2, A77II, A6000, etc. then perhaps it’s time to stop buying equipment. Take the time to learn about your equipment, learn photography, lighting, composition, etc. People in SAR and in many other forums often get too fixated on the equipment. Photography is a craft and tools are just one part of that craft.
He isn’t the only one to come to that conclusion. But again: you need to look at the samples, not arbitrary DXO numbers.
https://twitter.com/tonynorthrup “Re-comparing the 7D2 and a6000 with no processing, a6000 is clearly better. Will wait for Adobe Camera Raw, though. “
The Sony A77 was already a much better camera than the Canon 7D, let alone the A77II vs 7DII, that’s a no-brainer!
for someone with a brain illness like yourself it´s sure a no brainer.
people who make a living from wildlife and action photography.. well you will see which camera they will buy…
lol.. sony fanboys and morons who daydream…. you have to love the internet.
5 years ago your point would have been valid. SonyAlpha buyers then were buying in because they believed that Sony was the only DSLR company that was actually innovating.
Now that is all coming home. The A7 series has been a turning point, and the one thing we know about Sony Camera Division is that is they are relentless on innovation.
Canon has legacy and glass but is still plodding along with keep-up releases as if nothing has changed in the market. Would you bet on them having the same market share 5 years from now, given that Sony is bringing out things like A7, RX and A6000, and have cornered the sensor market for full frame irrespective of brand? That’s far less clear.
Its not just Sony either. Its Panasonic, Olympus and even small outfits like Black Magic Design for the niche things that the Mk3 used to be top on. Canon have already lost the DSLR video base, and I bet stills is being eaten into, because there are less and less users that are single brand… and once you are no longer single brand, you are more likely to jump ship.
I work at a electronics shop and when people come in they always want canon or nikon. I show them the sony and 9 times out of ten they leave with a sony. All people need is information, Canons name brand wont last long if they keep doing things the way they are doing them. Sony at one point was king of tv’s but look what happened, Anyone can be dethroned.
feel bad that you don´t have a good job….
anyway people are easily persuaded… wow… what a new concept .
It’s clear for everyone to see that. Look at how easily persuaded Canon fanboys are. Who needs to allocate budget to R&D when you have a large base of brainwashed cognitive dissonant drones that always queue to buy the same old relabelled crap? The writing is on the wall already. Everyone has been dumping Canon gear left and right, and yet some people seem to think brand loyalism is some kind of religion, missing entirely the fact that they are behaving like mindless hordes of idiots suffering from what could probably be described as a consumerist strain of Stockholm syndrom.
Get a clue, and while you’re at it, try and get some manners since you clearly had no education. Frikin Canon talibans
Some of these comments, including yours, are too rude, in my opinion. Isn’t it possible to bring forward arguments instead of accusations?
I don’t feel bad that you do not have a good life.
A77II spanks the 7DII. It’s no contest…a complete spank-a-thon.
Let’s wait for real life tests in dim light of sport events using long lenses. At base ISO, Sony is better of course (read DXO conclusion), but not so above ISO 400, for example. Calling it a no contest is silly. I’m no Canon fan, won’t buy it, but before reliable reviews are out there, I would wait a little before making comments like this.
I feel bad for the Canon users. They’re forced to twice as much for a dated camera that doesn’t even have a EVF, focus peaking or any of the countless features Sony has managed cram into the A77II.
They’d be better off buying a camera at an antique shop.
In this case they would buy the A77II, which is clearly superior in every way. Unless you’re a total Canon fan boy then you will settle for third best.
Let’s wait and see. I like the Sony sensors in my cameras, but this sounds like blind patriotism.
Yep, I must be brain-ill to answer this, however with 40+ years of photographing landscapes, wildlife, super macros, studio portrait, events, … I learned a few things. One of them was to get the best tool for the job, instead of fanboyism on “old traditional gear”.
They are both about to get spanked by the NX1. Not that anyone will care or buy.
Dream on.
I agree.
lol well done Ufupuw the perfect storm of being completely wrong and being abusive about it. Think about for just a second , I know its difficult but you are suggesting that Sony presumably from the kindness of their loss making hearts gave over the manufacture and most of the profits of their biggest customers, biggest selling range of cameras.
The actual data supports the statement that the D7100 sensor is made by Toshiba
https://chipworks.secure.force.com/catalog/ProductDetails?sku=TOS-5105&viewState=DetailView
http://www.scoop.it/t/digital-cinema-tools/?tag=Toshiba+5105+%28HEZ1%29+sensor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikon_D5200
Fannboys, that doesn’t prove shit. It just mean the Sony 24 MP sensor was fabbed in Toshiba facility — Sony and Toshiba share resources like that.
Try again asshole. You are wrong. It’s same Sony sensor fabbed by Toshiba
I can see from the comments that some Canon users are a bit butt-hurt over the Dxo result.
i bet you know shit about DXO.. get some infos first… then you don´t look like a monkey:
canon user are may upset by the idiots out here… agreed.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/dxomark_sensor_for_benchmarking_cameras2.shtml
And yet canon still outsells Sony by a huge margin. But don’t worry flamers, I’m sure the pro canon photographers will take time out of their day to read your posts, haha
It’s just sad that “pro Canon photographers” have to make due with such inferior image quality.
Only that inferiority is mostly focused around base ISO and dynamic range. The further you go – the better Canon sensor is in relation to Sony’s APS-C sensors.
Yes, when you say it that way it seem to make the Canon sensors suck much less than they really do.
retardRap… canon beats sony sensors at high iso in noise and dynamic range.probelm is idiot fanboys have no clue but too much trime trolling the internet.
so go fym.
skli83 , Sony A7S. I rest my case.
No offense, but this SAR post completely misses the point. The a-mount isn’t dead because Sony hasn’t made some good bodies or lenses for it. The a-mount is dead because of Sony’s disinterest and lack of support for it. A-mount fans such as myself have always pointed out Sony needed to market its merits better.
Anyway, frankly, I think it’s too late. Sony has foot-dragged too long and that ship has sailed. I’ve pretty much moved on (though I still hold onto my a-mount gear for now).
Well if you read the Interviews from days ago Sony reps said it themselves that E mount is selling so well that they delayed some of the A mount development.
One think I like about the Canon is it has GPS! (like the original A77 had)….
It’s also getting some good reviews including ISO which some are rating it better than the A6000? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4RDZ66FpMo)… Interesting how testing differs…
Look forward to Sony including GPS in future camera’s it’s a very important feature for some (myself included)… I can’t purchase the A77II purely due the the lack of GPS (and no I’m not digging up my old GPS tracker or phone apps to log GPS… not going to happen especially with multipul camera body shoots)
Not sure what he’s comparing because while the 7DII shots are cleaner, it’s also clear that there’s a lot of NR smoothing going on (text and labels have nearly disappeared in the the smudging, even the original 7D gives more detail in his comparison). It’salmost as if we’re looking at RAW vs Jpeg or Jpeg vs Jpeg. Not exactly useful for RAW shooters.
7DII processing on this image has too much noise reduction, i can’t understand how he doesn’t spotted it in this images, even looking to the screen behind them i can spot it very well. DXo measurements says that high iso performance is the best of the bunch, so i guess something went wrong in this processing.
DXO noise graphs are about the same between the A6000, D7100 and 7DmkII (possibly a tiny benefit for the A6000), DR graphs at high ISO swing either way, depending which data point you’re looking at.
You should check his new update.
Tony Northrup @tonynorthrup 5 hours ago
Re-comparing the 7D2 and a6000 with no processing, a6000 is clearly better.
I don’t think he is lying–he just was mistaken–but Sony works in partnership with Toshiba on various fronts.
The DR on the 7DII is worse than my 3 year old olympus camera. How can this be? Canon has to be drunk.
they are using old sensors
The EM1 DR is even better than that of the A77II according to the measurements.
It’s not. I shot the A77II next to the EP5 (I own same sensor as EM1). Well, A77II had the better DR. shot a wedding outside to compare.
http://home.comcast.net/~nikond70/Charts/PDR.htm (Em5 vs. D7100, which is better sensor-wise than A77ii), or sensorgen.info or DXO show it otherwise (not taking base ISO onto account, which is higher for Olympus). If that’s indeed the case, it would mean that those differences are not observed, or even observed differently in real life. But why then argue at all about the differences here, if it doesn’t translate into real life?
The whole issue is overrated.
What if the sensor performs the same as a 5 year old sensor. I have 5 year old photos in my portfolio, should I throw them all away now? People have been taking digital photos for more than a decade, shall we get rid of them because there is a new sensor?
Of course it’s nice to buy a newer and better technology with your money. After all, Canon is charging a huge premium for this camera. Still, this whole looking-at-a-single-number-to-evaluate-something attitude is wrong on all levels. What this Canon can achieve at base ISO, much worse than what other manufacturers do, is still good enough for every single meaningful scenario. This is not a camera you would use for taking architectural photos. This is an action camera with very good AF, possibly the best weathersealing in the market right now and very decent continious drive. Noone has the right to shoot inside a building and push the shadows, only to complain about the banding in the shadows. It’s not the right tool for that.
Let me put it this way. I shoot at concerts. There was a concert last week where 90% of my photos ended up being shot at iso6400. This was the first time I shot a concert with that camera (A7) and I discovered something I haven’t read in any review: An aspect of the low light performance.
Surely, the camera has lower noise than all my previous cameras; Nex 7, 5n and the original 5 before them. Yet, what struck me was not the noise performance, it was the dynamic range and the colors. With the original 5, I would (and did) shoot iso6400 at concerts. I would convert all of them to black and white because the colors were terrible. They looked like an infant colored them with a crayon. Not with the A7.
At that moment, I wouldn’t care about the base ISO performance of the camera. What mattered to me was the performance at ISO6400. Same story with the 7D II. The people who need it will buy it because I’m sure it meets their needs, even with its lousy performance at base ISO (which is actually still good enough for everything).
PS. I’d buy the A77 II too.
Its not down to any single number. Its more down to the fact that the 7DII looks like too little too late, and is decidedly old fashioned. It barely competes on technology, when it should be well ahead.
Cost is another factor that Canon seems to be in denial about. An A7 body competes with a 7Dii on price(!). If I was looking to upgrade a 7D with 3-4 lenses, I would certainly be looking at selling up anf going with the A7 because it changes my game as well as the point upgrade that the D7iII gives.
The market has changed on cost, feature set and form factor, and Canon is looking exposed because it has too few of any of them on offer.
show us some of your photos moron… you need anything but a smartphone for your selfies… give us a break.
I can hear that nerve being hit from here.
Ouch!
Imagine you’re right beside a race track and it’s raining. You need:
1) A tele-zoom with a serious reach (at least 500mm in full frame)
2) Weather sealing
3) A very good AF, covering your whole frame with very good tracking
4) 10fps
5) Image stabilization
Your competitive A7 has NONE of these. You have nothing. Canon has the 7Dm2 with 100-400L IS.
‘Kay. that must be why Canon are acting so unconcerned 🙂
Seriously though. We’d be back to the A77ii, right? Or are we doing this at night, in which case you’ve probably got me by a fraction of a stop in noise.
hey, you brought up the A7 :). Yes, A77m2 would do well in that scenario with the Sony 70-400 G. I’m not sure which would be better last year though, A77 or 7D, both Mark I. Probably Canon.
Still, my point stands. 7Dm2 is a tool for a specific job and should not be compared according to Dxo’s scores.
Me being me, I’d buy the Sony every single time but if I were shooting sports exclusively, maybe I would go with Canon. Their lens lineup is simply better.
A77ii
Nuff said
I agree, the main reason making pros buy Canon over Sony is Canon’s image (not image quality, the company image) is stronger than Sony’s.
Apart from the lens lineup, pro service and availability. The cards may turn sooner than Canon expects them to.
Well, as nikon and sony user, but more than that, as an enthusiast photographer.
DXo really has something against canon, but not in the scientific tests. The words they choose to talk about canon products are lame. Read the reviews and is easy to spot.
First, a camera is a camera, not a sensor. Usability must not be forgotten too.
Second, every camera needs a lens to work at its best, canon has some of the best lens on market, this is undeniable.
Third, DXo rating lacks information and highlights some facts as the only ones you should pay attention, missleading.
This camera has 65 cross-type AF-sensors in a DX body, covers a very wide area of the viewfinder; The AF-works better than d7100, for sure, about A77II or A6000, i have not seen any review that really can show it.
So, if you can’t focus well image quality doesn’t matter. This camera is aimed to wildlife and sports photographers, who don’t want or don’t have money to spend on top end camera.
This camera as DXO shows has better High ISO Dynamic Range and noise performance than sony and nikon. This seems to be forgotten by many people. The High ISO performance is key for the public aimed for canon.
This camera is a winner for people who knows what they want.
If i haven’t a camera today this would be on my top list without a doubt.
So Symbian is alive and doing well, just because the Nokia 808 runs Symbian and there isn’t a single Android or WP smartphone with a better camera? Interesting…
A77-2 is a wonder camera! It is as close to an ideal camera as anything can be. Really, the more I use it the more I am feeling it IS the best DSLR/SLT I’ve ever had in my hands. This camera is really fantastic!
I just got one. I compared shots taken with my A65 and Tamron 16-300mm with shots taken with my A77ii and the same lens. I was completely blown away by the difference. The A77ii is a huge improvement over the A65/77.
And the competition, for that matter.
Yes, really right now there is no batter cropped camera then A77, With the competition lagging far behind.
all verry nice…. Sony swahses with many models ( and always you will be
on the right side like a hunter in forest NOT TAKE FIRST you see….) the
market, but ( the same bulshit goes in Canon, Nikon,….) do they realy think,
i have a tree in my garden, that has 100€ Leaves in masses?
You get with 199,- Sony A3000 impressiv Stuf..no way.
and then you warp all in a bigger House—– hm? On the other side
how big was the Pile of Benjamin Franklins in front of Dxo-department?
i do not belive that bullshit.. and yes i work daily with Sony F5… and yes
it is a bit to….
So now is confirmed. The only thing that is dead is Sony Alpha marketing department.
Yup. I see Canon ads for compact cameras to DSLRs everywhere on TV, magazines, billboards, etc… I have yet to see a single Sony camera ad. No A-mount, E-mount, compact, video cam, etc… It’s like Sony believes that all they need to do is create good products and people will automatically know about them. I’ve talked to many non camera folks, and most people don’t even know that Sony makes still cameras. Even Olympus (a tiny company) has more ads than Sony.
Sony is likely looking at year over year sales charts to plot strategy, not DXO charts.
Their neglect of A mount isn’t due to an issue of quality of A mount but is due to the growth opportunity they see with E mount.
As for Canon, pretty depressing performance for such a big product. They should buy Sony sensors like (almost) everyone else.
YEAH Sonyalpharumors you busted DxOmark: Due to the huge traffic on our website, we apologize for this inconvenience. Please come back later to visit us.:-D
“Re-comparing the 7D2 and a6000 with no processing, a6000 is clearly better. Will wait for Adobe Camera Raw, though. ” https://twitter.com/tonynorthrup
Tony Gaythrob roflrofl
and yet Canon isn’t losing billions every year like Sony. They are obviously doing something right.
http://money.cnn.com/2014/10/30/technology/sony/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Love trolling, eh!?
Sony is making money in Imaging/Camera business. Don’t try to fool us – we aren’t that ignorant some might think!!
Not trying to fool anyone, that’s why I supplied the link. Imaging is doing well but not much else. Maybe they will rebuild as soon as they hit rock bottom like Apple did.
The mobile division isn’t doing well and the lost is almost all invenory writedowns for the mobile division. They need a rethink of their mobile strategy.
In case people were too lazy to read DXOMarks conclusion:
“On paper, the Canon EOS 7D Mk II looks to be a solid choice for sports and action photographers, but its sensor performance is somewhat behind the best in class, at least at low ISOs. Relatively high noise, less discriminating color, and below-average DR at base ISO all continue to hold back Canon sensors against rivals, but that’s not the case at higher sensitivities. In fact, when light levels fall, the Canon EOS 7D Mk II performs competitively, even surpassing rivals slightly. If Canon could only address performance at base and low ISO, the EOS 7D Mk II would make a thoroughly convincing all-round choice, but in this category the Sony A77 II looks to be the more compelling option.”
It will be interesting to see a comparison in the field in non-optimal light (sports events).
The Dude at sonyalphablog.com got it dead on. The A-Mount is evolving unlike its competition, and Canon/Nikon really can’t compete against the Alpha system.
Sony’s multiple business units are developing newer technologies at a rate neither Canon/Nikon can match, and its only a matter of time when the technical advantage lies solely in Sony’s court.
The A-Mount will be a MILC within the next year or two, and the ISO deficit will be eliminated once and for all.
I’m starting to think the MILC for A mount may be a real possibility. Make sense, but what are the chances we’ll see it early next year?
I bet the new sensors have all the wiring already onboard to make this happen there is an article on another new Sony A-Mount blog explain how they’ll accomplish it.
sonyalphablog.com
Are you the author of sonyalphablog.com?
No. I just happened across the sight last night looking for A99II news.
I have never looked at a photo and commented that the DXO mark must have been high on that one …
DXO mark always seems to rate Canon’s low, but they seem to be the only ones making money !
DxO Tests are to be taken with a grain of salt. Even a Sony NEX-5T has better scores than the 7D II. I love Sony, I’m a Sony shooter, but these tests are very theoretical.
http://ilovehatephoto.com/
LOL.))) Sensor is not everything about the camera and the system.)))
Look on lenses a-mount lenses and roadmap.)) Than on canon ef mount.))
Sure Admin, I have somthing to say:
A-mount is LONG DEAD & COLD…. and comparing a bad Canon camera against a prehistoric A-mount camera will not change this fact.
Now, prove me wrong by posting a rumored spec on a new A-mount camera… if you can.
Saiman , there you go, a rumored spec on a new A-mount camera proving you wrong:
sonyalphablog.com/2014/11/sonys-milc-a-mount-may-arrive-sooner-than-you-think/
Thank you for sharing an old old rumor.
It is a rumor from SAR 18 month ago.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/patent-this-could-be-the-next-a-mount-mirrorless-sensor-and-design/
Sony has change their strategy in A-mount since last year.
DSLR shape mirrorless camera will be in E-mount, because it can attach Cankon lens with adapter.
Really!!! You got something on paper saying anything different.
Didn’t think so.
“Prehistoric” were you born a moron or did you take lessons.
A modern A-Mount is EVF equipped, has focus peaking, lock on flexible AF, the world’s fastest AF system, is made of magnesium (so its a feather weight), 12 fps,
The A77II can lock onto an eyeball when your taking a portrait. A fraking eyeball. Plus its heads up disply/EVF can do stuff Canon users only dream of.
And is Sony currently has a 7% share of the world’s SLR market. Its a huge chunk, and if you saw the A77II launch presentation you’d know its growing. Not explosive E-Mount growth, but a nice year on year increase.
The A-Mount is evolving, and will be a MILC soon enough in which case we’ll laugh at the Canon users operating Antiques
Sony fanboys are like none other. 7% of a a market that only 4 brands ocuby is terrible.
And no I’m not a canon user.
Apple is only fourth place has a paltry 13.7% of the PC market, and no one considers it a failure.
Sony is between 7.1%, and 7.7% of the SLR market, and it’s the only SLR manufacturer currently experiencing growth.
In fact Sony’s SLT is seeing steady growth, and its Mirror-less cameras are showing explosive growth.
Sony’s likely going to transition the A-Mount to mirror-less soon, and I wouldn’t be surprised if this happen next year.
http://sonyalphablog.com/2014/11/sonys-milc-a-mount-may-arrive-sooner-than-you-think/
The computer market has more players though, so being 4th there isn’t as bad as in the camera market.
Apple also do well at the higher end consumer market where per unit profits are better
Do you have any actual data that shows Sony has 7-7.7% of the data or is that plucked from the air. The data for Japan posted here in Feb showed Sony had less than 5% of the SLR market and that is in Japan their home market.
Looking at the information on the various retailer sites it does not look like Sony SLT is doing at all well
Are you serious? 7-7.7% is actually North American figures. I wouldn’t use Japanese sales data if my life depended on it. Sony is Approx 10% India, 10.1% in the EU, and that’s all of the figures available on the internet.
Maybe you can do your own research, and add something useful for once.
Now quit wasting my time.
Let the Canon fanboys rage!!! (and troll)…
Side by side raw on ISO 6400 or above the Canon will be cleaner or much cleaner, since Dxo pretty much almost always mark Base ISO performance as the most important aspect of sensor quality, Canon is always marked bad. However the 7DII is not a good camera in my opinion. Just for a small amount of dollars we have the A99, 6D and the D610 which will best whatever is there on the APSC world in terms of IQ.
So it doesn’t matter that they use crap ADC or whatever.
IMHO the a6000 is excellent already. So excellent that it beats it’s bigger cousin.
50% of my photos are at 100 ISO.
at 6400 or above, there is no clean, just different amount of shit.
This just means Canon is even “deader” than A-mount
I’m starting to get tired with your argument.
Was your ‘50% of my photos are at 100 ISO.’ really relevant to in this case? In What heck of a way was this statement relevant? Ask a wedding or interior photographer that uses APSC cameras. High ISO does matter.
And I also would elaborate that ‘6400 or above is just different amount of shit’ claim. What I saw on the existing 7DII samples is that ISO 6400 is usable and pretty much better than every other APSC cameras out there.
Nonetheless there is no denial that this camera is not a good buy. There is no meaningful benefit of paying around $400 more for this against the A77II, the D7100 and the K-3, or heck the 70D.
Oh, come on, just add the α6000 to that comparison and you’ll see which Sony technology A-Mount users are really buying with an α77 II: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EOS-7D-Mark-II-versus-Sony-SLT-Alpha-77-II-versus-Sony-A6000___977_953_942
Hulk has CPR solution for Dying-mount: SMASH mirror of light blockage! Smash!