[shoplink 42630]
[/shoplink]
Sony keeps winning all kind of different Dpreview awards. Today the Sony A7II got selected as the best camera of the year in the $1200-2000 price range:
Unlike the Samsung and the Panasonic, the [shoplink 42630]Sony a7 II[/shoplink] brings a full-frame sensor to the party while still maintaining a relatively small form factor (at the expense of larger lenses, of course). The in-body image stabilization is excellent, and the phase detection AF system ensures swift, accurate autofocus. The a7 II’s sensor is superb too, both in terms of resolution and dynamic range. And the recent addition of an uncompressed Raw option makes it all the more powerful photographic tool.
Sony A7II store price check at [shopcountry 42630].
And I have the strong feeling the A7rII will win the upcoming $2,000+ competition 😉
79 Responses
Impressive sony has been cleaning up on DPs reviews and recommendations. And hear I was hating on DP for not giving sony the respect it’s due with sluggish reviews and obvious bias against EVF.
Easily the best mirrorless, but definitely not the best ‘camera in $1200-$2000 range’.
Come on, you can pick a D750 for that money.
It’s rediculous how they keep comparing DSLR and A7x in the same category, like they are comparable products.
The D750 is not that great; plastic body, point and shoot shutter no IBIS. Has a great sensor though.
You can’t directly compare mirrorless to DSLR. If you did, even D610 would be so much better than A7RII, let alone those ones.
Mirrorless have their own features like pseudo-compactness and video, which are apparently important for some people, but outside of their comfort zone (unhurried photography) mirrorless lose hands down.
Biggest issue I have with the D750 besides the cheap shutter and body is focusing with manual lenses. Needs a focus magnifier just like the D800 and live view focusing is almost useless. For the price the A7RII is a much better value and a more versatile photographic tool.
Yes, once again, unhurried photogrpahy. Manual focus etc. That’s where mirrorless makes sense.
Quite frankly, this unhurried photography stuff you keep spouting has been b*llocks for years now. Even if mirrorless cannot compete against DSLR in all areas when it comes to AF, it is hardly the case that mirrorless it only suitable for shooting things that move slower than a tortoise.
To be fair I had a play with a Canon m3 last week. AF would struggle with a dead tortoise… On the other hand I’d put the a6000 up there with my old a77 any day of the week.
http://assets.flitetest.com/article_images/full/turtle-snail-color2-jpg_1373098667.jpg
Doesn’t it do that in liveview?
To nail focus in the studio with a fast lens, the OVF combined with a right angle magnifier is best. Looking at the LCD screen is OK but not as clear and precise. On the other hand the EVF of the A7 series works flawlessly in combination with focus zoom. That’s why I traded my D800 for an A7R with 35mm F2.8 even swap. The D750 is no better than the D800 in that respect.
when was the last time u handled a mirrorless?
For dslr that the point, they are all almost the same since 5 years. If you are happy with great for you. a7 ii is fukin amazing, with the 55mm sony zeiss my best combo ever. Adn i come from nikon, i own pretty damn good lenses 24mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8g, 14-24 24-70 2.8… But this one really worth the price! ill wait 2-3 years with that one. the true is that sport phography apart, the dslr is much better. U can do pics that u can t with your dslr because of the tilt camera, u can create easier because u really know what u ll get after that. I just needed 30 secs with one a7 on my hands to get that. Bye bye d800e/d810 bullshit.
55 zeiss – easily the best pictures I’ve seen ever. If Sony ever makes a DSLR-quality mirrorless, I’ll 100% buy this one.
But there is no native 24-70 f/2.8 for FE.
> the true is that sport phography apart
Reportage is not limited to sports. It’s only unhurried photography (landscapes, posed portraits etc…) where mirrorless is directly comparable to DSLRs, because you can afford to use adapters and even manual focus.
“Tilt camera” – you mean tiltable screen? A99’s fully articulating screen is much better.
Can’t say I’ve ever had a problem using my a7ii for street photography…
People were able to shoot all kinds of stuff with film cameras too.
I though your point was that you can’t use a mirrorless for anything that isn’t stationary?
Of course it’s possible to shoot anything with a mirrorless. You can even find some amazing reportage shots on a smartphone on Flickr… My point was, mirrorless is a step back in performance if you don’t care about compactness, it’s not designed for it.
What you are saying is utter bunk. A7rII or A7II with 2.0 firmware focus as fast as D750, and focus better in low light.
The problem with DSLRs is the dreaded AF fine tuning. The AF is just not accurate. Plus manual focusing on a DSLR is a pain. It’s dinosaur technology.
With LA-EA3 and A-mount lenses too?
Yes i mean tiltable screen. I know that a99 s is better but it s good enough for me, even if i d like this one. THe only thing that i miss on the a7 ii is the silent shutter. I got mine, a new one with cashback at 1350 euros5 months ago, i m very pleased of it. ANd i m the kind that can buy/sell a lot in short time.
Now i only use prime lenses and i don’t need a lot, i d like to get the zeiss 85mm and the 25mm ( but i m less impressed by this one).
Weird comment. D750 has the possibility to tilt the screen, too. D810 is in an other class of cameras and certainly not bullshit. I would go so far and say it is the photographer and not the tool, if you aren’t able to get professional results with a D750 or D810. By the way, we use the Sony for professional shooting, too.
i m really tired of that kind of comment! af is useless on the tilt screen? Creativity is th emost important thing and the a7 ii is offering far away than the d750 which is a very good camera. You re not a photographer or u have never handle one a7 series… I won t answer you don t bother you. d810 is a fix of the d800. If you are ready to pay full charge on that… Nikon is dying and i know why…Very sad. I have waited for them a long time but i don t regret my move to sony. Maybe i ll be happy in one year or two to use their lenses on my next sony .
For your information, we are using the A7ii and D750 and D810 professionally, so I know what I am talking about. For the shots we need to take from the floor or above our heads with tilt screen (rare), I never had problems so far with LV even if it is easier to do with a mirrorless, of course. D810 is more than a fix. A great camera! If you are not able taking great photographs with it, I can’t help you. A7rii is a much newer camera, so it would be sad if it were inferior. Sony still has only 11% market share, since about 20 years I guess? Nikon about 33%. So it still takes some time until Nikon dies, if at all. But even if this happens, I just switch to another brand, Sony very likely as I already invested in this brand.
“when was the last time u handled a mirrorless?”
Never…you know how trolls are 😉
No way I agree with you on the 610. AF sucks and shoots at 4000 of a sec. Stills and video is superior on the a7RII.
Plastic body? Magnesium alloy and composites at front. Using Sony and Nikon in parallel, I can only say good things about the D750. A great camera with great AF.
The lens is hanging off a plastic front, not a good compromise especially when using longer lenses. The lens mount and sensor should both be locked in X Y& Z alignment using a more rigid material. And there is no excuse for the cheap shutter. Not impressed.
Not a problem so far. Many many wildlife shooters used it with 400/2.8 and similar lenses without problems. It is not a simple plastic, but a composite which can be specifically designed. I already have 20000 shots with a 70-200/2.8 and no issues. I think the wobble mount of the original A7 is a bigger issue.
What you described sir would be called a A-mount camera with stronger mount!
Say What?
What matters is the mirrorbox for dlsr. As this picture suggests, the sony probably has plastic mirrorbox as well. Nikon only attaches mount ring onto metal on single number series. But as far as I concern, these plastic bodies do fine keeping a heavy lens such as 70-200/2.8 on it without cracking the mount. Even if you cracked it somehow, the plastic mount ensured that at least your lens won’t suffer too much. A completely metal mount means damage to both.
Agreed. I own both and prefer the 750, but that’s my subjective opinion. Only plastic it has is on top. AF is sluggish on the a7ii in not so poorly lit areas. Let’s see how it is with the update. However, I much prefer the a7RII which has nothing to do with this article. Specs mean nothing if you can’t get the shot and yes, my lens cap is off ????
For under 2000$ you can only get the D750 body. I think DPR is using the kit price to categorize these cameras, otherwise nikon 1 v3 should not be in the 800-1200$ group where Sony A7 (around 1000$ for the body) clearly belongs to.
DPreview uses the MSRP (body only), which is $2300 for the D750 and $1700 for the Sony A7 II. B&H still sells the A7 II at that price whereas the D750 is currently on offer for $1900 (an offer that ends today). These constantly changing offers from various vendors make grouping by price an imprecise science.
However, in this case, I think the D750 is clearly a bit more expensive than the A7 II, regardless which vendor and offer you look at. And whether you draw the line at $2000 MSRP or at $1800 street price doesn’t matter, both are arbitrary cut-offs. Thus any grouping will exclude some very valid comparisons. There simply is no way around it.
The fact that a particular camera meets your particular requirements does not automatically make it a better product.
They ARE comparable products – it is up to individual buyers to decide what camera suits their needs.
In this case, dpreview’s statement that A7II is the best one in this price range is also meaningless.
To an extent, but you have to assume they are judging based on what camera is best for the majority of buyers shopping in that price band.
I can’t honestly argue with you, you just make sense every time. Those lotuses you’re eating must be really good.
So? What makes the D750 better?
A7II FTW!
I’d actually say they are close with different pros and cons. But the d750 has a faster burst rate, dual cards slots, much longer battery life, better overall AF system, and most importantly, superior IQ.
D750 not in that price range retail. It’s not listed in the roundup.
Whether you’re right, or wrong, is of no importance and neither is the choice of DPReview. I really can’t see why anyone is bothered about such things.
By all means read about what each person thinks are pros and cons, but a camera is only ‘best’ when it suits a particular person. Anything else is window dressing and, literally in this case, not worth the paper it’s written on!
They should be compared. Differences should be noted, but they belong in competition with each other.
But yes, the d750 should have been included, and it’s probably the winner in the price category.
Hell yeah!
Ridiculous – each other camera in this list got higher rating… except A7 mk 1.
IBIS the rest fail 🙂
Or it got best overall full frame in that price range and the NX1 got best overall sub fullframe.
What’s the best camera bellow $1200 ?
Stickers push it over the edge.
My Hello Kitty cam is better than your MLP – it’s more compact, more pink, and even the WB is shifted towards pink! Let the HOLY WAR begin!!!!!!! 🙂
Whoah, 6! stickers…
The A7 mark 1 😉
That is like saying the size of the sensor is all that matters, because the A7 is pretty much a piece of ….
Th A7 II is an unfortunate child born first which was shortly to be overshadowed by it’s more glamorous sibling, even though they shared much of the DNA. Despite the A7 II having lead the way, it is probably condemned to be forever outshone. It will probably grow old, bitter and twisted, resentful of what might have been…
Nope, it has the smartest resolution of all Mark II cameras. The 12 mp PDAF-less sensor of the A7sII doesn’t leave much room for cropping, and the 42 mp sensor of the A7rII is overkill for 99% of people.
^^ what he said!
but the price difference matters too
A7II introduced the revised body & groundbreaking IBIS. It probably makes Sony more money than the R version. The highly vocal minority of SAR may have skewed your perspective.
tsup with the new lens roadmap?
No, it’s not saying this …
A7II is a great camera. I just wish it didn’t have that mother fkig AA filter and dualies. But that’s it:)
Yep – that’s why I used my A7 as a guinea pig and had the AA filter removed by a company that does IR conversions. Damn sharp as a tack and oddly better WB now. I want to do it to my a7ii but I can’t seem to bring myself to break my warranty…
Which company did it, and how much did it cost?
A company called “Life Pixel” – they’re really good. It did cost about 350 to have done but the results from testing were worth it. Way more detail and sharpness now. I’d have gone the a7r or rii or d800e route for no AA filter but I just don’t want enormous files that take up my drives and slow retouching down.
Without an AA filter, isnt the potential for moire dependent on the number of pixels density ? If yes, at which pixel density does the moire tends to appears ?
Honestly sensors and camera software have progressed over the years to the point of – I’ve never spotted any. I believe it’s more likely to show up in higher resolution models with smaller pixels – but even then, not often. From what I gather the only time you’d notice is even maybe is if you’re a fashion photog shooting intricately patterned clothing. I tried to find it – shot things that it could show up on – nada.
Was that expensive?
Congrats to Sony and the a7ii…. But…
Huh? Dpreview named the a7ii over other cameras that they gave better scores and gold awards too.
I think the dpreview editors are a little tooooo enamored with mirrorless.
I’m not dissing the a7ii, just the inconsistency of dpreview. How do you score the d610 at 87% and gold, while scoring the a7ii as 82% silver, and then conclude the a7ii “wins.”
Guess as a Mets fan, I’m going to brag that the Mets won the World Series, though they were outscored in 4 out of 5 games.
If it was just a case of giving the award to the camera they scored the highest, then there wouldn’t be really much point in doing the awards in the first place.
As I said earlier, they are probably giving awards to cameras which they think will suit the biggest majority of buyers shopping in that particular price bracket.
“Best for….” Creates more nuance and discussion. But for “best overall” one would expect the winner to be the highest scoring, or at least very close to it. If the a7ii is really the best overall camera under $2,000, then didn’t they mess up by failing to give it a gold award?
The Sony a7ii was reviewed this year and the nikon d610 was 3 years ago… Provably if the d610 was reviewed now would not receive an 87% score and a gold medal! That’s the reason why
if a7II has latest version firmware before review, it will achieve better score and gold awards too.
I see it a little differently. The score and medal is more about raw specs and everything else, whereas this particular award is more about value.
In this value criteria, you can have things like price being a larger factor, but also firmware updates being a value factor. For example the recent firmware upgraded the value of the A7ii by a ton.
I’m definitely looking forward to adapting some decent F1,4 Sigma Art primes into my collection.
If only Sony gives us the option of 1080p full pixel readout in aps-c mode, A7II would be more than an amazing camera for the price.
That sounds the same as the Russian govt would say Putin is a president of the year.
Good point. Standards improve each year after all.
Except autofocus. A 99 is much better.
No. They say it is the best allround fullframe. They elected other cams in their category like the GH4, NX1 and I think Canon 7D MarkII.
Love my sony A7ii, incredible but i am using it more them my 5D3 every day.