The Pros and Cons list about the A7II.
Gordon from CameraLabs (Click here) posted his full A7II review and writes:
I can tell you this though: when the choice was between the A7 and the A7r, I’d have gone for the latter as the former failed to deliver significant benefits in handling. But now with the improved grip, better AF and stabilised sensor, the A7 Mark II has become a much more usable camera, and one I much preferred using to either the A7 or A7r, even with the latter’s extra resolution. Indeed since I’m not a pro video shooter the A7 Mark II has become my favourite in the full-frame Alpha mirrorless series and a model I can easily recommend even with the caveats mentioned above.
I can’t however imagine this will be the only full-frame mirrorless camera from Sony this year, so once again if video or ultra high resolution stills are your priorities, I’d either wait for a new model or snap up one of the originals. It’s also worth mentioning the original A7, which despite being first generation, currently represents great value if you simply want the most affordable entry to full-frame mirrorless photography.
USA/Canada A7II links:
Sony Alpha a7II (Body Only) for $1,698 at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, SonyStore and Sony Store Canada.
Sony Alpha a7II with FE 28-70mm OSS Lens for $1,998 at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, SonyStore.
Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM II Lens for $1,148 at BHphoto.
EU A7II links:
Sony Alpha a7II (Body Only) for 1.799 Euro at Sony Germany, Sony UK, Jessops UK, Sony France, Sony Italy, Sony Spain, Sony Austria, Sony Switzerland, Sony Netherland, Sony Belgium, Sony Portugal, Sony Sweden, Sony Finland, Sony Norway.
Sony Alpha a7II with FE 28-70mm OSS Lens for 2.099 Euro at Amazon Germany, Wex UK, Jessops UK, Verkkokauppa.
Asian/Australia A7II link:
Sony A7II at Sony Store Australia, Digitalrev and Amazon Japan.
A7II Gariz case:
You can get in [shoplink 32354 ebay]Black (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 32396 ebay]Brown (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 32355 ebay]Orange (Click here)[/shoplink] and [shoplink 32356 ebay]Camel (Click here)[/shoplink].
82 Responses
Good to see someone talks about the not existing touchscreen. I don’t actually need “30%”-faster autofocus. If I miss a shot it’s because I can’t get the autofocus-area fast enough to the right place. Touchscreen would be a game changer.
If I’m looking through the viewfinder, taking the camera away from my face to click something and then moving the camera back to my face to look through the viewfinder again is a huge bore. Touchscreens by design have less accurate colours than what is possible with non touch screens. I’d rather see an amazing OLED on the back and have memorable focus points with a dpad
Isn’t it faster to just turn the focus ring?
Why 20 scale instead of 10 scale?
gives more precision, might as well go scale of 100 which is even more accurate, add 5 subjects measured at 20 each, gives a round up 100
MA GOSH
An excellent review, concentrating on the ergonomics, the usability and experience. By now we know about the IQ of the sensor. It’s no surprise that the IBIS isn’t as effective as the Olympus system. Not only does it have a sensor 4 x the area (and hence 4 x the mass), but for the same FoV for pitch and yaw it has to move the sensor twice as fast. So about 8 x the amount of force required.
I do feel that Sony missed an opportunity by not fitting a larger battery in the bigger body. Even the NP-FM500H from the A-mount bodies would increase capacity by about 50% without increasing weight and volume too much.
I’d be better if you could turn off the screen on the back and only have the live-feed to EVF when your eye is near the EVF. As it stands, the LCD is always lit up and there’s always a live-feed even if the EVF isn’t active
Are you saying the A7II still has the same ‘can’t disable LCD screen’ issue that people have been bitching about for over a year and they didn’t do anything about it?
They aren’t incompatible of course.
I am sick of people wanting built in flash. It is absolutely useless, it creates a hole for water to pour into, it usually ends up rusting, it’s impossible to seal and it’s usually on the top of the camera meaning water goes straight into it. The quality of light on a pop up flash is atrocious, the light-source is too small and it’s not powerful enough to turn it into a large light source.
The “it gets you out of a bind” people will no doubt argue, but you might as well carry around a torch. If it “gets you out of a bind” it’s because you’re careless and stupid, if you’re careless and stupid, then your logic is likely inferior to mine.
I’d rather keep the body small and have some decent wireless flashes that are triggered by radio. I’ve heard people say “you can trigger flashes with the pop up flash!” We’re in 2015, the camera has wifi already, there’s no reason it cannot communicate with a flash like the 600ex-rt. Light as a triggering method is archaic, stupid and useless (doesn’t work behind walls or in bright sunlight and bright sunlight is when you need the most flash).
Please stop giving cameras negative points because they don’t include a pop up flash. This applies to all brands, not just Sony
Give this man a medal!
I could not agree more. The pop up flash is useless. This camera is by far my favorite also.
I’VE BEEN asking for radio flash communication built in forever, where is this!
The added bulk of a flash commander like the 600ex-rt commander, Voeloon 810-RT, yongnuo yn600ex-rt etc could be completely negated if Sony thought about it and played their cards right with an in camera app. They’ve already got the hardware. In my opinion, if flash control was open-source, companies like profoto and broncolour could eventually phase out the need for a hot-shoe flash system and they could work with sony and other companies. ETTL (I like manual flash but I accept ETTL is loved by many) and HSS would no longer be such a problem for third party manufacturers to implement.
The profoto b1 has a ridiculously large commander that is currently only available for nikon and canon cameras. It causes profoto loss of sales but if they could work with other companies freely, it could be so much better. I understand sony, canon etc doesn’t want to say “here’s the code to trigger your flashes” and then some other company steps on their turf, but they could license this code or do something better than what is currently available.
They could also save money by making their speedlights lithium based, like the ving flashes. Some days you might not want to use a flash and you could use that same battery in your camera. This integration would save development costs, and it would save space in the camera bag. Charging 32AA batteries and spare camera batteries is not fun. A flash commander might not be very heavy nor are different spare batteries, but together the weights are noticeable and if these weights were negated, it would be far superior to what the DSLR competition offers
Yeah that’s it…rely on MORE 3rd party products!!!
The fact is…you chumps can’t fire your flash remotely like everybody else.
I understand the limitations of the pop-up flash…but this little flash can be used as a trigger for remote flashes.
Better than relying on third party sensors. 🙂
I think he misunderstood me when I said “like the 600ex-rt”, when I said “like” I meant “like”, for example, a sony version of it. It wouldn’t have to be a third party flash. That said, most professional photographers rely on third party flashes anyway, it’s nothing new.
My argument regarding pop up flash applies to all brands anyway so I’m not sure why he’s pursuing the sony-hatred course. The 5dmk3 received hate for not having a pop-up flash (dpreview) and countless others have too
Your argument: Cling to archaic technology, you cannot fire the current available flash (without mounting a flash) so add something to fire it and inevitably make the body bigger.
My argument: add nothing (hardware already exists in the camera) to fire flashes & invent a new lithium based wifi triggered flash. Fire old flashes by mounting a flash to the hot shoe. Therefore ultimately allowing better integration with third parties and better integration with native flashes.
“rely on MORE 3rd party products”
Canon, sony, nikon etc do not offer lights comparable to broncolor or profoto, so obviously people are going to rely on 3rd party products
Whoa , chill
Just read the good and bad points then skip that freakin built in Flash if you don’t use it.
Why would you care about camera score !
This a camera review not a football game
Whoa, chill. Why do you care about me caring about them caring? Stop caring so much, hypocrite
Why does it bother you what they say though?
Eventually a company will implement a pop up flash because of negative reviews. That camera will be inferior
Hmm..
You are right , my bad
I thought I was helping you in your treatment
When a company gets repetitive negative comments about a product for not having a certain feature, they often think about adding that feature into a new product(s).
There’ll be a point in time when the a7 cameras and the canon 5d cameras, etc, might implement a pop-up flash purely because of negative reviews.
Ultimately it effects my experience because that camera will be unusable as I’ll be out and about somewhere, water (water is effected by gravity) will land on the top of the camera, go into the camera and destroy the camera. Of course this affects me. If you can turn the clouds upside down and have water go in another direction that might cure the problem but I cannot help but think it seems like a lot of trouble when it’s fine to not have a pop-up flash to begin with.
Why make a camera body bigger purely to make it inferior?
If your argument is that I shouldn’t reply to reviews, you’re entitled to that. I at least have reasons behind not wanting a pop-up flash. However, it seems highly hypocritical to criticise me for commenting on what someone has said when you yourself are commenting on what I have said.
“I thought I was helping you in your treatment”
You shouldn’t care about people or things that don’t affect you. My argument here is that my former argument had substance and a reason. Yours is based on self pro-claimed dunning-kruger rhetoric
Why should I read all this !
Anyway , i apologize if I did anything wrong to you.
Just keep smashing those pop up flashes
Good point, let me simplify it for you…
Don’t argue with people that have twice your IQ
You’re making the mistake of thinking Sony actually read the comments here. Given they consist almost entirely of people bemoaning the demise of A mount, people bagging Sony and complaining about no updates and the incoherent ramblings of a few obviously mentally unstable people, I doubt they waste their time. I agree with you about built in flashes, I just don’t think commenting here will make any difference.
straw man fallacy
You obviously don’t know what a straw man fallacy actually is. Nice try though.
Misrepresentation of someone’s argument, often caricatured.
“You’re making the mistake of thinking Sony…”
I did not think that, nice try though
“You’re making the mistake of thinking Sony actually read the comments here.”
I did not think that. This is a misrepresentation of my argument and it’s the catalyst to an abysmal post of yours.
“Given they consist almost entirely of people bemoaning the demise of A mount”
This is vastly off topic and petitio principii.
“people bagging Sony and complaining about no updates and the incoherent ramblings of a few obviously mentally unstable people, I doubt they waste their time.”
Red herring; straw man, argument from false premise and argumentum ad ignorantiam.
“I agree with you about built in flashes”
You don’t even grasp the points I make so it’s impossible for you to consciously agree or disagree
That’s still not misrepresenting your argument. And it’s still not a straw man fallacy. You know, for a guy who seems to primarily come here to argue with everyone and everything in a rude and condescending way you’re really not all that bright. It’s always amusing to watch someone whose obvious arrogance far outreaches their ability.
Relax, noob.
I don’t agree. I used to think the same way as you, but I changed my mind.
Using the build in flash as your primary light source is not always the best idea. But depending on the look you’r after it might be nice once in a while. (See Terry Richardson or Ellen von Unwerth.)
But that’s not my main use case. I constantly use the build in flash outdoors as a fill. (I usually set it to -3 EV.) And it gives me fantastic results. It is barely noticeable if you see the pictures. But the deep eye-shadows are gone, and it adds a tiny reflection in the eyes. It reduces harsh contrasts especially in direct sunlight.
Thing is: The closer the light source for the fill-light is to the lens, the smaller it can be. (See ‘Light, Science and Magic’.)
On my RX1 the flash doesn’t take to much room and because of the leaf shutter it is quite effective and useful. I can even overpower the sun…
If you use the build in flash in automatic mode, I agree, it is useless. If you know what you are doing, it can be brilliant.
https://www.change.org/p/kazuo-hirai-enable-uncompressed-or-lossless-compression-raw-files-on-the-a7-cameras-and-future-f-e-mount-cameras
Guys 21 are missing….do something useful before trolling! ,)
Kazuo Hirai and Shigeki Ishizuka are waiting on this letter 😉
If it comes great, but honestly I couldn’t care less. I’m finding the compressed files more of an advantage rather than a disadvantage. I’m not a landscaper though, so MMMV.
How are they an advantage (the file sizes are not significantly smaller than nikon)?
Half the size they could be, that’s a huge saving over my Canon files that are twice the size they should be.
“Half the size they could be”
That’s not true. You can have non lossy compressed. Have you shot a nikon camera side-by-side to the a7 and compared file sizes?
Canon don’t know what they are doing with data
Ok, put it this way. When you shoot these files, at the rate of two thousand images a day and you’re out on the road for 4 or 5 days, the Sony files are a huge plus. Same goes for AVCHD over XAVC-S. Go shoot over extended periods and you will see the wisdom in compression. Chasing absolute quality is fine & dandy if you’re vacation snapping from the turn-out, but when on the road, on an actual job, none give a crap as long as the job gets done and reproduces well. I think there are two camps at play here, the realists and the hobbyists who like to run around with OTUS glass playing at Ansel Adams…………
Ignoring the subjective nonsense, sony’s compression algorithms are poor. It is possible to create a file that contains more usable data while keeping the file size equally small or even smaller.
“the Sony files are a huge plus”
They are not.
What makes you think the algorithms gives optimal compression, file size and image quality? Why do you have blind faith in sony’s lossy compressed?
“when on the road, on an actual job”
The sensor captures data, we are talking about the data coming from that sensor. We are not comparing photographers skills. We are talking about compression, 1’s and 0’s, stop making it about subjective nonsense
“Go shoot over extended periods and you will see the wisdom in compression”
Just to clarify, I don’t doubt how great compression is, I doubt sony’s lossy compression algorithms
I don’t, because I have yet to find compression artifacts on my RX1, NEX 7 and RX100. However, I do understand they exist and that they can happen in particular areas of a photograph, especially those that have much post processing done to them.
Now, the compression formula used is really clever because even if it was 10% (which is A LOT) of Sony users that found Sony’s compression to be detrimental, it would still mean that 90% do not and therefore Sony may not feel like it is necessary to accommodate the needs of the 10% (which, still, it is A LOT…likely to be the 1% that notices this or has their work been hindered by it)
Now, many of us can push our files to the limits, and some of us NEED to be able to do so. Why would Sony not offer an option for RAW: Typical Sony RAW and Uncompressed RAW(come on, it would still be somewhat compressed)
The problem with photography is that a digital camera has been given the name “camera” and a film camera has been given the name “camera”. The truth is that a digital camera is closer to a computer than it is a film camera. Unfortunately, because they’re both “cameras” and because photographers are artistic, they struggle to separate the subjective from the objective.
Digital cameras capture 1’s and 0’s.
You can either design something to capture 1’s and 0’s efficiently or you can design something so it captures the 1’s and 0’s less efficiently.
Sony’s reasons for something are simple:
Cost to license superior algorithm
Development time for superior algorithm
Processor load to process said algorithm
Battery drain to power processor to process said algorithm
Sony have simply gone with what is financially viable for them.
I’d like choice and I’d like a faster more efficient processor but that isn’t possible when new camera models are being thrown out every few minutes
Problem with photography is its been infiltrated with science nerds and pixel peepers!
You’d prefer camera sensors were designed by artists that knew nothing about science and objective discussion? Nice
Of course not, but I prefer it when camera designers listen to photographers rather than pixel peeping hobbyists. Thank you Sony!!!!!
For the rest of the wingers, go buy the Nikon D810. Choice is a wonderful thing yaknows!
I’m happy with my hassleblad and I was hardly winging, I was giving an objective argument, you’re resorting to fallacious nonsense
Dunning-kruger
I prefer Banksy’s working method the other dude has no idea about the artist process IMHO.
Photography was invented by a scientist you moron.
Science is and always has been a part of photography. These days, add computer skills to the mix in place of darkroom chemistry skills. An artist is able to use a modern camera, which is full of very sophisticated hardware and software because nerds designed it. Do you honestly think a room full of poetry grads are going to design a digital camera?
As for pixel peepers, YOU’RE STILL NOT GETTING IT. Lossy compression is irreversible, but you’re totally at liberty to compress uncompressed files if you’re short of disk space. Please, try to put your thinking cap on for 5 minutes and quit with the typical bible thumping anti-science claptrap.
Who actually invented the photography process? Answer that correctly and send you the winning lotto numbers…………..
What photography process? Each process is different. Thomas Wedgwood is thought to have been the first photographer but he failed miserably.
Nicéphore Niépce, a scientist, was the first man to create a reliable photograph
Twas me, the Jewish kid. Go look at my shroud…………..sheesh!
He invented science to perplex the likes of you.
So, it works, the cameras are cheaper than chips. What do you actually want here, a three grand payed upgrade option? You’d actual cough-up for that? If so, I have a bridge to sell you!
That is not possible. Are you saying that a different “algorithm” raw file, let’s say a 20MB file can remain 20MB but it can also contain more data?
It is possible… I’ll make this simple because people are stupid/ignorant, etc. Consider data like a spring, a coil. Consider a 100CM spring. Lossy compression presses this spring and the spring takes up less space, it becomes a 50CM spring. In the process, bits of this spring are “lost”, the wire is literally gone, not to be seen again, the data is “lost”.
Lossless compression using the same “force” of compression might make the spring 60CM in size but parts of this spring are not “lost” like before.
Now imagine someone creates a better method of compression, they’re able to apply more force to the spring and the spring becomes 40CM in size.
Look at all the different video formats we’ve had lately. You need only look at a video decoder or encoder to see many current formats.
JPG, JPG-XR, PNG, Tiff, BMP etc are all different formats for images. Raw files do not rely on these standards as such. The compression for a raw file can be different from camera to camera, and if you compare the algorithm of the a7 to the a99 (also a sony camera) it uses different algorithms.
The problem is that to press this spring harder, you need more force and more force comes in the form of a processor. A more powerful same generation processor typically requires more current and this means the battery is drained faster. Processors get developed to be more efficient.
I see sony’s reason for their compression methods, it’s cheap for them (they don’t have to pay licensing for better compression methods) and it’s less of a battery drain than their other algorithms. However, the argument was that “half the size they could be” and this is strictly not true
You are being a jerk ANTON……..
and you’re not? you keep blathering on about nonsense. Just compress your damn files if you can’t afford disk space, but any pro who actually has a job can afford memory cards and disk/cloud space, but what they can’t do is reverse lossy compression. please just try to understand this stuff before you go gobbing off.
Ah, he’s another Brit (probably the same Brit) who likes to harp on about this issue no doubt. They shoot nothing, show nothing but talk a big game. Whatever.
Lara Jade, David Bailey, Wedgwood
“I’ll make this simple because people are stupid/ignorant” – Them are fighting words. Better get ready to be flamed.
See, now you have an alternate point of view. Accept it or carry on moaning to yourself, its your choice!
^ This is true.
Canon algorithms might also be bad. Regardless, the files can remain the same size and contain more data
Ok, again, you’re not getting this are you. IT DON’T AFFECT ANYTHING I DO, THEREFORE I DON’T GIVE A CRAP. YMMV, but again, I don’t give a crap. GO BUY A D810 if you don’t like it, SIMPLE Unless you are to stupid to see that point. I’ll take the SMALLER SONY CAMERA with SMALLER FILES…………
I get what you are saying, but I am saying that the files can still be smaller and higher quality. Why not have both? That’s all I’m saying.
Why would I buy a d810? I’ve got a medium format hassleblad I’m happy with. I’m not arguing against what someone is or is not happy with, I am saying that objectively speaking, more data is more data. Do you understand?
“Unless you are to stupid to see that point”
Too
“Unless you are to stupid to see that point”
Too
————————————–
Really, grammar policing now, and you still wonder why you cannot comprehend what Sony have done and why you’re the only person this really pisses-off? Try a joint or two, then get out and shoot something interesting maybe FFS!
You sound angry, calm down
Objectivity, arguments, insults… Yes, “more data is more data”. Yes, there might be better algorithms. Now what? Most users simply don’t care about such a minor issue, hence why Sony isn’t addressing it. And that has everything to see with photography and not science. Simple enough? So, what were you arguing for again?
I just asked a question, what are the advantages? I wasn’t arguing for anything you idiot
Imbecile.
Why only A7 cameras of today and F (E)? Isn’t that too selfish?
ANY SONY CAMERA!!!
If it can shoot RAW, let there be uncompressed RAW.
Thanks for watching for their own interest…
Which camera has a 20/20 image quality? Sony 24mp FF cameras only give way to the 36mp sensors if MP can be said to increase IQ or MF sensors and that certainly doesn’t mean they are 10% “behind”…
And IS “not as effective as Olympus” is a negative? How about none at all? Would that make it a better cam because the score wouldn’t have a comparative to another camera?
Poor way of measuring a camera’s worth. Very poor. Spolied brats.
I have no clue what you’re asking. Makes no sense.
Noob.
I think this is the best review out there so far on the A7ii. Both fair and comprehensive.
One other mild criticism I also have on the camera is that while Sony has done a good job upgrading the hardware and ergonomics, they have done very little about dealing with some of the well flagged irritations in the firmware. These include – lack of minimum shutter speed for auto-iso, no shutter delay with bracketing, no one shutter press bracketing, no intervalometer – but I am sure there are others.
I don’t think anyone does no shutter delay with bracketing. I couldn’t agree more, it’s seriously irritating. I actually would use this feature. It boggles my mind why it isn’t there.
Speaking of which, there are some other software related upgrades. I think there should be more panoramic options. Sony’s Pano absolutely kills the shutter life. Sometimes I just want to take two freaking pictures and have the camera stitch them together. Why is this so hard? My 300 buck Oly does that.
To my knowledge yes
If has an AA filter still. My mom doesn’t approve so I don’t either. Until that is removed it’s a big no no. If I can send in the 5 axis and get a free kit to remove it that would be fine. Until that and dual card slots it’s just a fancy picture on my monitor.