OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,793
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I'd expect it to be a stunner priced at £2200!! Lol
Looking at the lens I thought that was a misprint that should read 2200lbs.
-
Important: the Server Hamster is in need of a bit of TLC so the site will be off line for a while on Friday morning, the 17th
The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!
- Thread starter woof woof
- Start date
Looking at the lens I thought that was a misprint that should read 2200lbs.
- Messages
- 8,063
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
I was playing with a Sony A7 II yesterday brough the images home with me on the Card and quite impress... I even manage to get some good pictures in C-AF and I though this camera wasn't good at it?
Anyway I am thinking between these 2. A7II or the A7R... But I can't see what the big difference is... apart from A7R got more MP and the A7II got the 5 Axis IS
Anyway I am thinking between these 2. A7II or the A7R... But I can't see what the big difference is... apart from A7R got more MP and the A7II got the 5 Axis IS
They are okay at CAF in decent light, in tricky light not so much and in comparison to something like a D700/750 etc they are poor.
Besides those two things, its the ergonomics.
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,793
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
The A7 has electronic first curtain shutter which may make it slightly quieter and may make shutter shake less of an issue. The A7II has in body IS.
If you check the specifications on one of the many review sites you should be able to find the differences. To be honest my reason for choosing the A7 was that the 12mp of my 5D seemed enough so I thought I'd be happy with 24mp and that 36mp wouldn't do a whole lot extra for me apart from clog up my computer.
StephenM
I know a Blithering Idiot
- Messages
- 4,989
- Name
- Stephen
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I thought - and I stress this, as I haven't checked - that the a7 and a7r also differed in how their autofocus actually worked, with the a7 being the better performer.
My own preference for the a7r stems from my normally using a large format camera and looking to get all the detail I can get for my type of photography. Nothing else actually mattered very much to me. As far as the file sizes go, they are miniscule compared to my scans from 5"x4" film.
For most people, from what I've seen of preferences expressed on forums, the a7II would be the better bet assuming it does have better autofocus performance (I hate autofocus and always use manual) and the image stabilisation, since a lot of people hate tripods as much as I hate autofocus. And there are situations where tripods can't be used.
My own preference for the a7r stems from my normally using a large format camera and looking to get all the detail I can get for my type of photography. Nothing else actually mattered very much to me. As far as the file sizes go, they are miniscule compared to my scans from 5"x4" film.
For most people, from what I've seen of preferences expressed on forums, the a7II would be the better bet assuming it does have better autofocus performance (I hate autofocus and always use manual) and the image stabilisation, since a lot of people hate tripods as much as I hate autofocus
. And there are situations where tripods can't be used.I thought - and I stress this, as I haven't checked - that the a7 and a7r also differed in how their autofocus actually worked, with the a7 being the better performer.
My own preference for the a7r stems from my normally using a large format camera and looking to get all the detail I can get for my type of photography. Nothing else actually mattered very much to me. As far as the file sizes go, they are miniscule compared to my scans from 5"x4" film.
For most people, from what I've seen of preferences expressed on forums, the a7II would be the better bet assuming it does have better autofocus performance (I hate autofocus and always use manual) and the image stabilisation, since a lot of people hate tripods as much as I hate autofocus
The A7 has on sensor phase detection pixels. The A7r doesn't.
- Messages
- 7,597
- Name
- Riz
- Edit My Images
- No
Having had a play with the new A7 II, it feels good but not sure about the increase in size/weight ..... I like my A7 and haven't really found anything major to want to make me change and don't see the A7 II a big step up and the IQ is not worlds apart when compared to the A7.
I am still hoping Sony build the rumoured A9 series with true Pro level features ideally with better AF / Tracking, IBIS, A7S type high ISO sensor (24mp), high FPS, True weather sealing and better battery life.
I am still hoping Sony build the rumoured A9 series with true Pro level features ideally with better AF / Tracking, IBIS, A7S type high ISO sensor (24mp), high FPS, True weather sealing and better battery life.
You wont be getting A7s ISO performance with 24mp.
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
My guess is they will for the A9. I don't like the build and style of the a7/s/r and much prefer a7ii, it feels much more robust and of higher quality. Comparing to fujis Xt1 the construction and design feels on par. I'd buy an a7ii today but feel it's to close for news on a new model. Wish they'd pull their finger out.
Last edited:
Perhaps eventually but I think you're looking at years down the road certainly not any time soon. The thing is people are already talking about FF sensor performance being at its limit and its only going to be down to camera image processing.
- Messages
- 7,597
- Name
- Riz
- Edit My Images
- No
Your right, perhaps once the A9 series is out I can decide.... I am just suffering from GAS.
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think thats necessarily true. The Sony 24 and 36mp sensors have been around a while now. I find it hard to believe Sony havent made progress. The A7s shows they like to experiment and aren't afraid to push boundaries.
- Messages
- 7,597
- Name
- Riz
- Edit My Images
- No
A Sony A9 with the following specifications would be good....
A9
24mp CMOS without AA Filter, -3/4-EV AF
7-11fps
Updated 5-axis IBIS
Dual SD card slots
Better battery life
Advanced A6000 4D AF Tracking System
Professional Magnesium weather sealed body
Updated OLED EVF
Updated OLED Rear Touchscreen
WiFi, NFC and GPS
4K and HD Video Recording (slog etc)
Sound could go down the same route as the A7.... and created A9, A9R and A9S
A9
24mp CMOS without AA Filter, -3/4-EV AF
7-11fps
Updated 5-axis IBIS
Dual SD card slots
Better battery life
Advanced A6000 4D AF Tracking System
Professional Magnesium weather sealed body
Updated OLED EVF
Updated OLED Rear Touchscreen
WiFi, NFC and GPS
4K and HD Video Recording (slog etc)
Sound could go down the same route as the A7.... and created A9, A9R and A9S
Of course they have made progress, but I think you're wrong if you think the A9 (if its 24mp) is going to have the same ISO performance as an A7s. Look at what Nikon did with Sonys 24MP sensor, its the same sensor but Nikons image processing is better so the files are cleaner, which is exactly what Im talking about.
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
I didn't say the A9 could have a 24mp sensor. If they're going to move forward on a7s tech it would be to produce the same or better iso performance in a sensor somewhere between the current 12 and 24 sensors, which would appeal to more photographers. For some the lower res of the A7s is the only factor putting them off. Of course if they do manage it with a 24mp sensor, that would be something else. A9s?
Last edited:
My comments were based on Rizvans comments. The A7s isn't technically a stills camera, its primarily aimed at the video crowd and thats why 12mp is more than enough, video shooters would rather have the killer high ISO and other features over MP. For still shooters they can either put up with 12mp advantages or go with one of their other models. The A7ii sensor isn't an improvement on the older A7 sensor and thats 24mp and a couple years down the line (again enforcing my point about image processing), theres no way the A9 with a 24mp count would have the A7s ISO performance.
Like I said, you cant have everything.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
Tell me why so many photographers have bought one then? Iso performance matters just as much for photographers as it does videographers. A sensor that can produce clean noise free images in any light and at a large resolution is one of if not the main factor in sensor advancement. It comes up quite alot with dslr users that want to switch to a lighter ff system. They're attracted to the iso performance of the a7s but put off by the resolution (me too). Do the same trick with an 18mp sensor, now we're talking. This would suit such a broad range of applications. For photographers the A7s is quite niche but it has its star attraction.
Last edited:
Did I say they haven't? I said its marketed primarily for video, what the end consumer does with it is up to them. I know people who shoot stills want the best possible ISO performance at given resolution but what Im saying to you is that you cannot have everything. Ive been through enough cameras and systems to know that. The reason the A7s is so clean is because it has low MP!
If the A7s is 'quite niche' how is it FE mounts best selling camera. Obviously a lot of people are using it as its marketed and they really don't need higher MP also realising increasing MP means increasing noise levels. Sony has already offered 3 various MP sensor cameras, how many do you want?!
And it seems you are forgetting I actually own an A7s so I do realise how important high ISO is for stills or I wouldnt have bought it!
Last edited:
- Messages
- 3,657
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If you compare the latest Sony 24 meg sensor in the Nikon D750 its at worst 1/3 stop behind the A7s (according to DXO) so its really not difficult to bridge that very small gap.
- Messages
- 3,657
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A third stop? Not according to my eyes.
It is according to scientific testing though. Once downsampled to 12 MP I suspect the D750 would be a lot closer too.
Proof is right there in the studio photos and Ive also had a D750 alongside to compare against.
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
Again with current sensors this is the case. Can't you see the broader appeal in a higher mp sensor with higher iso performance? I'm sure if Sony had the option to go larger without sacrificing performance they would have. 12mp is a compromise based on the tech available at the time. Pros will adopt a system that can do everything very well, much in the same way they did with the 5d3(excellent for video and stills and with good res). I do feel Sony can produce the next 5d3, but not based on a 12mp sensor.
Last edited:
Of course I can, cant you understand you cant have everything in 1 camera and if it works for you it wont for others.
- Messages
- 3,657
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Of course there'll be a high iso higher MP sensor - why wouldn't there be? Technology moves on all the time and High iso is improving all the time. As stated its barely even a 1/3 stop away, not even that once downsampled. Give it two years and we will have that sensor.
Again, when did I say it wasn't?! Please let me refer you to this comment "Perhaps eventually but I think you're looking at years down the road certainly not any time soon."
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
I've no idea why the 5d3 did so well then. Surely all those people that bought one didnt want all that top notch functionality all rolled into one single body.
What are you on about Karl, is the Canon 5d3 as clean as the A7s? Because I thought we were talking about MP vs ISO and why 1 combination wont work for everyone and thats why Sony is giving us options. Every decent camera sells pretty well, not just the 5D3.
Last edited:
People can whinge as much as they like but the facts are you have 3 various MP models to choose from in FE so theres no reason to whinge, or there are other manufacturers to look at. Buy the camera that suits what you shoot, each model has its pros and cons but don't expect one camera to have it all. Alternatively wait a couple years for technology to move on and perhaps then you will find an acceptable camera, but I highly doubt it as you will always want more.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
Of course it isn't lol. But at the time the 5d3 proved a very good point that you CAN have everything. Sony have surpassed Canons sensor tech by a long way. If Sony are serious and really want to make their mark in ff mirrorless then they need an e mount camera that will do what the 5d3 did for Canon. There's no doubt that in under 5 years dslr sales will disappear. Mirrorless is the way forward and when Canikon eventually step up, Sony have only themselves to blame for missing the boat.
No, you cant because its big and has poor DR compared to SoNikons so…. no, you cant have everything with the 5D. And you are talking about years away, I live in the present, if Canikon make a better camera for my purposes then Ill buy it. Switching systems for me has never been an issue.
Last edited:
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,793
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
The whole mega ISO and mega pixel count thing doesn't totally pass me by buy it almost does
Years ago I used to shoot a lot at gigs with a Nikon SLR and ISO 1600 film and an f4 lens. If I looked at the pictures today I'd see noise and motion blur and a whole load of poor stuff but at the time no one ever complained, not ever, not once, no one.
These days we can get much better results but I think that perhaps some people (and not necessarily the folks in this thread but just some people generally) seem to want a camera that pushes the envelope of what's possible in every way and is capable of capturing an image in any situation which will look perfect the size of a barn but personally I think that the first decision should be how big do I want my image and how will it be viewed and then how will I capture the image and what kit and settings do I need. Given that many people will only produce A3 or larger prints very infrequently and the messiness may very well not show up in smaller prints / images even at ISO 6400+ maybe some people are going for massive overkill and abilities which will rarely if ever be used for real world shots.
That's just my view though, shoot and be happy and don't obsess
Years ago I used to shoot a lot at gigs with a Nikon SLR and ISO 1600 film and an f4 lens. If I looked at the pictures today I'd see noise and motion blur and a whole load of poor stuff but at the time no one ever complained, not ever, not once, no one.
These days we can get much better results but I think that perhaps some people (and not necessarily the folks in this thread but just some people generally) seem to want a camera that pushes the envelope of what's possible in every way and is capable of capturing an image in any situation which will look perfect the size of a barn but personally I think that the first decision should be how big do I want my image and how will it be viewed and then how will I capture the image and what kit and settings do I need. Given that many people will only produce A3 or larger prints very infrequently and the messiness may very well not show up in smaller prints / images even at ISO 6400+ maybe some people are going for massive overkill and abilities which will rarely if ever be used for real world shots.
That's just my view though, shoot and be happy and don't obsess
- Messages
- 3,512
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The perfect camera doesn't exist for everybody as we all have different needs, even when it does we as humans will still want more. Just buy the camera which suits your needs now and change if something better comes along.
- Messages
- 365
- Name
- Karl
- Edit My Images
- No
Ok so what happens to the pro videographer that shoots stills, Are you saying they should buy two cameras? that might fine for some but I think given the choice they'd rather buy one. Anyway I'm just speculating, I look forward to new tech. I hope the next a?/.. does squish the a7s because you'll all be wanting to upgrade to it lol
- Messages
- 3,657
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I feel thats a little unfair Sony continue to innovate in this area and have no fewer than 4 Full frame options in this market segment. If anyone its Canikon that have missed the boat. As of today canikon have 'zero' 'useful' prescence in the mirrorless market. Bit like Sony in the DSLR market!
Back on topic I agree with woof woof above. High iso of todays ff sensors is perfectly acceptable for even the most demanding of situations. Whilst the A7s is 'better' at high iso than other cameras it doesnt mean other cameras are poor.
- Messages
- 3,512
- Name
- Simon
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nope.
You cant live life on "what if" you still get people on about the D400 etc..........., how long have they been doing this? Move with the times and if a better camera comes out and you want it, just buy it. Simples really.
As you know, I looked at the A7 when selling my Fuji XT1 but it wasn't suitable for my needs so I bought a D750.
Ok so what happens to the pro videographer that shoots stills, Are you saying they should buy two cameras? that might fine for some but I think given the choice they'd rather buy one. Anyway I'm just speculating, I look forward to new tech. I hope the next a?/.. does squish the a7s because you'll all be wanting to upgrade to it lol
No, Im saying they should have realistic expectations and compromise.