Sony A7RII

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by Whtrbt7, Aug 23, 2015.

  1. Whtrbt7

    Whtrbt7 Mu-43 Regular

    195
    Jan 7, 2014
    So I don't see anyone here talking about the Sony A7RII. I just did a search and it showed up with nada so I guess I'm going to start this thread. So 42MP, IBIS, 399PDAF, 5FPS burst, silent shutter, and ISO up to 102,400 but pretty clean to about 2,400.

    What does everyone think? How about people using this camera with the new Zeiss Batis line of lenses? Does this camera feel as wonky as the original A7R? How does this compare with M43 gear? Part of me is drooling over the specs and the new Batis lenses but the other part of me is thinking about the added weight over M43 gear, the DOF advantages/disadvantages at different FLs, and possible low light shooting opportunities this would give over M43 gear. The other thing to consider are the ergonomics of the A7 line vs top end M43 models.
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  2. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    If I had more money than sense, I would definitely try it with the two Batis lenses, 25/2 and 85/1.8, and a heavy solid tripod of course.
     
  3. ex machina

    ex machina Mu-43 Top Veteran

    806
    Jan 3, 2014
    Northern Virgnia
    I do a lot of low-light shooting, so I'm intrigued by the performance in this area but dismayed by the price tag.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  4. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    If I wanted to spend thousands on a camera body and be forced into a limited range of overpriced glass, I'd probably go Leica M.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 5, 2013
    Dan
    Isn't the A7s the one you want if low light is your priority?
     
  7. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    When you down-rez the A7RII file to 12MP like the A7S is natively, you get a very good looking file. However you get the benefit of IBIS, PDAF/CDAF points, etc. of the A7RII.
     
  8. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    To the OP, I agree that it is a great looking camera, but there are a couple things that would prevent me from getting one:

    • The price. There's no way I can justify spending $3k+ for a single camera body. Hell, I got BOTH of my GH4's and my 12-35 f/2.8 for less than the cost of an A7RII.
    • The lenses. When I first got in to photography, I bought a Sony NEX-6. After learning some about photography, I realized all of the issues with Sony's lens portfolio, which is why I switched to m43. The lens selection is definitely limited in terms of native AF lenses, and if you do find one they're typically far more expensive than an equivalent FF DSLR lens.
    • The ergonomics. Things like size/weight of the lenses when traveling, the lack of a touch screen, etc., all seem minor until you use a camera system that works so well. That's one of the main reasons I LOVE m43 so much.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Whtrbt7

    Whtrbt7 Mu-43 Regular

    195
    Jan 7, 2014
    So I guess I'm resurrecting the thread again since I have some time before my next project. For many, price will definitely be a preventative measure to owning such a camera as the A7RII. I shoot for my job and also for fun (I guess since I shoot technically for work and shoot portraiture/family/wedding/people for fun). The cash outlay isn't so much a problem but I always wonder if the gear is worth the money.

    Make no mistake, the move to M43 for me was for size advantages and also better photo quality than most DSLRs. The A7RII is getting closer to the size of my old Canon 5DIII especially with Batis glass and some of the faster lenses. I have smaller hands so the E-M1 is more my size. Sony's lens lineup for FE glass is also ridiculously small so there is a lot less flexibility in choosing native lenses. I also feel that the line is overpriced compared to Canikon but more in line with Leica pricing. I would only really consider the A7RII if the photo quality coming out of it is consistently better than the E-M1. I mean that over the course of 10-20k shots and comparing the number of keepers, it would have to be higher for me to consider a switch. I also don't want to haul around 2 systems since I don't see any benefit to doing that for a system camera.

    M43 ergonomics are currently king for me since it is crazy customizable. I'm not much of a touchscreen user since I access most functions without looking at a screen or chimping. IBIS is a necessity for me in low light shooting even though shooting people requires a decently fast shutter speed. IBIS actually allows me to take better quality photos at even 1/60s since I don't have to have awesome shot discipline for those shots. One thing that I do enjoy for the 42.5mm/1.2 lens, is that the DOF is thicker than my 85mm/1.2 wide open and exhibits much less chromatic aberration at the same shooting distance. The weakness of the M43 system is in medium wide lens DOF in the 24mm-35mm FF range where I want thinner DOF for environmental portraits. The 12/2 and the 15/1.7 just don't cut it for me. The 17/1.8 is actually pretty decent in that range but really, I kind of want a 12/0.95 for the M43 system. The Sony A7RII with Batis lenses fill in those holes for me from what it looks like but I don't think I can really tell how well the system will perform without owning it/ renting it.

    Ok, this post is falling into the tl;dr region so I'll stop for now.
     
  10. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    That's an expensive hole filled. Wouldn't a traditional DSLR, one of the smaller ones like a Nikon d5500 and a used lens or two work just as well for a LOT less?

    Just curious why an a7rii if not an entire platform migration.
     
  11. Lcrunyon

    Lcrunyon Mu-43 Top Veteran

    768
    Jun 4, 2014
    Maryland
    Loren
    If I did ever get another camera system to compliment my :mu43: kit, it would be mirrorless full frame. That wouldn't be any time soon, for sure, so who knows what the market would look like by then.

    Currently, I don't plan to, though. I'd rather wait and see how those really fast primes Oly is planning to make will mitigate the advantages of a full frame sensor, not to mention how the E-M1 Mk II evolves. I definitely prefer having just one system (two bodies) between my wife and I, especially if those primes increase the range of types of images Olympus can produce.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. bigboysdad

    bigboysdad Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 25, 2013
    Sydney/ London
    Very well put. We seem to be comparing the A7 with M43 and obviously there's the mirrorless similarity. However, if going down this route, I wonder why anyone wouldn't consider the D750. It doesn't seem to be more costly than the new A7. Yes its a bit bigger than the A7, but not neccessarily when you combine the lenses on them. I wouldn't consider the new A7 to be small either. And the lenses available for the D750 would surely blow the Sony out of the water. I suppose there's the weight difference, but would that be a deal breaker when comparing the two?
     
  13. Lcrunyon

    Lcrunyon Mu-43 Top Veteran

    768
    Jun 4, 2014
    Maryland
    Loren
    I've never used the Sony, so this is more of a general statement - but I've gotten used to the way mirrorless shoots, and I prefer it to DSLRs. There are other advantages to mirrorless besides compactness.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. bigboysdad

    bigboysdad Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 25, 2013
    Sydney/ London
    Yes, the A7 certainly does seem to be the FF camera of choice amongst a lot of m43 users here.
     
  15. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Honestly, I've shot a 5DII (same size as the mark I) and I owned a selection of L glass (17-40/4.0, 24-105/4.0, 100-400, 35/1.4, 135/2.0, and Sigma's 50/1.4). It was and is a wonderful system. Something like the D750 is slightly smaller/lighter, but the glass remains large and heavy, and most of the time very expensive. Yes, there are more cheap options in DSLR FF land, but the really excellent glass (i.e. Sigma's ART series or Canon's L 35/1.4, etc.), particularly the newest iterations, are not far off Sony's FE pricing. I've also owned and used some excellent 50's, and the FE55/1.8 is by far my favourite, and extremely sharp wide open. The only really 'bulky' FE lens, relative to DSLR counterparts, is the FE 35/1.4, which is also a bit too pricey for my blood.

    For travel, it's really no contest. The A7 series is more compact, has better IQ than the canon, has acceptable autofocus (I don't do sports) and acceptable lens sizes and weights for wideangle to short telephoto - the Batis 25/2.0 is a lightweight 325 grams, and the 85/1.5 is only 50 grams heavier than Canon's 85/1.8, which is considered a lightweight lens, and optically much, much better wide open, and the 55/1.8, 35/2.8 and 16-35/4.0 are all excellent lenses that perform very well and are largely at least a bit smaller and lighter than equivalent quality DSLR counterparts, and are often quite a bit smaller. The E-M1 handles all my telephoto needs, but I will stick with Sony for landscape and wide. As stated above, mirrorless has some pretty nice advantages. Besides, if I want to shoot Nikon or Canon glass, I suspect we'll have very good AF capable adapters available (Metabones mk IV is a very good start for a lot of lenses) within the next few years, and there's always the full range of A-mount if size and weight isn't a concern.

    Bottom line for me is that the FE system Í've assembled packs down small enough to be ideal for travel and complements my E-M1 system very nicely indeed. The mk II fixes almost everything I don't like about the original, but is currently too expensive relative to the real gains it would bring my style of photography. I figure I'll see what the prices are like in a year or so.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  16. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I moved to u43 from Canon FF (5d mk ii) and despite having zero regrets, I do linger in camera shops playing with the A7 range. The appeal of a body not much bigger than the E-M1 but with a sensor four times the area does have its allure - but in real-world test after real-world test the differences turn out to be much smaller than we imagine. This one from Steve Huff isn't unusual:

    MIRRORLESS BATTLE! Micro 4/3 vs APS-C vs Full Frame!

    Now I'm not saying that FF doesn't have IQ advantages - it clearly does, but the overall photographic result is the combination of lots of other factors and u43 can hold its own in many shooting conditions. So, my take-home is this... when I find a situation where u43 seriously inhibits me, then I'll go and try the A7. However, the investment needed will be enormous and I'll end up running two systems since I really can't see u43 being displaced for the majority of what I'll continue to do.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. Zee

    Zee Mu-43 Top Veteran

    The only problem with the FE system is that there is not much 3rd party support. If Sigma started releasing their Art lenses in FE mount, I'd seriously consider adding an A7 (somethingorother) to to complement my E-M1.

    That says a lot form someone who truly dislikes Sony as a company...

    Z...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Every time I get the itch to think about switching to FF I just go to the camera store and pick up a 600/4 lens in one hand (my dominate hand btw) and my 50-200 w/EC-14 (580mm) in the other.......itch is gone
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  19. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    My 'problem' is that I shoot more landscapes than I do telephoto, and that I've gotten to play with the frankly really wonderful A7r files - they print up fantastically and the oodles of resolution make the large prints I like making from time to time very easy indeed. And I'm happy to take the 150 or so additional grams of weight (difference between an A7R with a Sony FE 55/1.8 and an E-M1 with a n O25/1.8) for the wonderful rendering of the Sony/Zeiss. I still quibble about getting the FE24-70/4.0 (almost exactly the size and weight of the 12-40/2.8), but the E-M1's IBIS and overall better AF and handling has restrained me until now. Plus I like shooting adapted glass at the 'intended' focal length :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. bikerhiker

    bikerhiker Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 24, 2013
    Canada
    David
    It really depends on what do you mean by better than E-M1 in regards to photo quality. If you are printing really big all the time, like the smallest print size would be 24x36" to begin with and do a lot of 40x60 canvas prints, then yes a full frame high resolution camera will allow you to produce better quality prints. And if you are willing to carry the glass to achieve that, then all the better. I think the E-M1 II will bridge the gap closer for large size printing and possibly better improved AF performance. In regards to shallower DOF, full frame cameras has this advantage. It's easier to go wide and shallow all at the same time with full frame.