New Sony A7R Mark II

[fido]

LastLight said:

Don't tempt me! Can't tell you how many reviews I read and the want bumps they caused.

Bump. A new A7RII has arrived with small 28 f/2 lens. I'm just going to enjoy the cameras now and avoid lusting after gear! Now wondering whether to dispose of the EOS M2 or my Leica 35 FLE (one of my fave lens) ..

Edited by fido on Tuesday 27th October 09:29

[LastLight]

I reckon you'll like it! The biggest issue I can find is with the pitiful battery life. I have 3 now.

I was out with the Canon 5DS yesterday and after struggling a bit with metering again (I find the Sony way easier in difficult light, sans filters and the Canon's processor doesn't seem up to the job of handling files quickly, so I'm getting very used to and bored with 'Busy' warnings) got in the groove and again benefitted from the larger viewfinder etc. My dodgy eyes. So mine does have to go back on FleaBay as I can't justify both. Sad, as I wish I could keep the both. The Sony is going on holiday this week though as it will be way easier to carry in a small bag with the 50mm mounted.

Oh, and I'd keep the lens - it should work superbly on the Sony!

[RobDickinson]

Have you seen lensrentals latest blog post? They can now optically test sony lenses (they need power and aperture control). So no longer need an actual sony body to test.

Seems sony do some lens correction on the raw data, distortion and edge sharpening etc. Upshot is the lenses are ok but not as good as they had looked before (in general).

[fido]

RobDickinson said:

Seems sony do some lens correction on the raw data, distortion and edge sharpening etc. Upshot is the lenses are ok but not as good as they had looked before (in general).

I can't speak for their other lenses or previous models - but the 28 f/2 is performing as expected. A bit softer around the edges at f/2 and better at f/2.8 but still way better than any non-Leica 28mm lens I've owned for a fraction of the price. Distortion is definitely not corrected for in RAW!
Anyway, 8/10 pleased with camera after playing around with it yesterday - purchased as an interchangeable lens RX1R with on-board IS - but not expecting it to be a DSLR or video camera.

[StuH]

RobDickinson said:

Have you seen lensrentals latest blog post? They can now optically test sony lenses (they need power and aperture control). So no longer need an actual sony body to test.

Seems sony do some lens correction on the raw data, distortion and edge sharpening etc. Upshot is the lenses are ok but not as good as they had looked before (in general).

Interesting. Although if there's a better lens out there than the Distagon 35mm f1/4 I'd be impressed! None of my Canon glass was ever this good.

[RobDickinson]

Here's the link. First test was the 35s

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mou...

Canons new 35 mk2 is probably the best 35 but only by a whisker over the sigma art.

[StuH]

RobDickinson said:

Here's the link. First test was the 35s

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mou...

Canons new 35 mk2 is probably the best 35 but only by a whisker over the sigma art.

I've not seen a direct A/B review but just reading the forums I get the impression that the Distagon beats out the Art. I've not seen much on the Canon - must be good?

[RobDickinson]

Its good but its a lot more than the sigma.

1st party lenses are important to some though (working professionals with CPS membership etc) so many will buy it.

Also know people who have had issues with the art ( specifically internal fogging etc)

[Andy M]

I own the Sony Zeiss 35mm (both the f2.8 and the f1.4 - attached to an A7r2) and the Sigma Art (attached to a D800e).

The Sony is the superior lens.

[RobDickinson]

How? In what respect?

Have you read anything I have posted?

[theboyfold]

RobDickinson said:

Here's the link. First test was the 35s

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/sony-e-mou...

Canons new 35 mk2 is probably the best 35 but only by a whisker over the sigma art.

I find it strange that something as artistic as a lens, can be reviewed in such a cold and scientific way. To me it misses what would make me buy a lens, it's all about the look and feel of the rendered image, and how it handles. Not a bunch of meaningless (in my eyes) graphs.

Not having a pop at you for posting it, I just find it totally alien.

[RobDickinson]

theboyfold said:

I find it strange that something as artistic as a lens, can be reviewed in such a cold and scientific way. To me it misses what would make me buy a lens, it's all about the look and feel of the rendered image, and how it handles. Not a bunch of meaningless (in my eyes) graphs.

Not having a pop at you for posting it, I just find it totally alien.

There are several quantifiable aspects of a lens. Measuring and comparing them can help you choose the right one for your artistic vision.

We cant quantify every aspect, there is no measure as such for bokeh but most reviews give good examples so you can see what you are getting.

lensrental though is quite a limited view of lens quality - sharpness, astigmatism, decentering, overall consistency of the build etc.

Its driven by their rental and repair business and they are (as far as I know) the only place on the internet that have large quantities of every lens and the gear and ability to perform these tests on 10+ examples

I never take only 1 review or test of a lens , always look at resulting images, and several reviews to get a balanced feel. But lens rental is very consistent and unbiased which makes it an awesome resource.

If what they test is not why you buy a lens then feel free to ignore it.

But my point stands, Sony cook the raws out of their cameras to make their lenses look better. This IMO is a terrible decision.

[Andy M]

RobDickinson said:

How? In what respect?

Have you read anything I have posted?

To answer the final question first, no I haven't

To the first two: the Sigma is superior at f1.4 but in all other respects (corner sharpness, distortion, bokeh, tonality, overall sharpness) the Sony Zeiss is superior.

Both are relatively poor with CA when wide open and up to f2, and the Sony Zeiss feels overly large when attached to an A7-sized body.

DxO and Lens Rental tests are great, but I prefer to rely on what my eye sees first hand.

[LastLight]

The 'same' lens from a company can vary enormously which is why the likes of Lens Rentals, Alpa, Cambo and Linhof test and reject lenses from noted companies like Canon, Nikon, Schneider and Rodenstock, keeping those that measure up. Minor inconsistencies in manufacture, transit damage etc. can lead to disappointment. One reason why most Leica lenses, even from yesteryear are so good, being hand made and individually tested and certified (though it doesn't stop the cameras from having all sorts of problems!)

Some large format makers badge lenses or add 'selected' to those they sell - I have a 'Linhof Selected' Apo Digitar which is wonderful.

But I'd agree that technical quality is only part of the story, or the reason for choice - I had the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4; very, very good, but I didn't like the images as much as those from the Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f1.5. They just look different, especially wide open. So it was sold on. Ditto for the Noctilux f0.95 which, sadly, I had to sell. There's just something different about these sort of lenses which some of us like the look of. I'd love to try the Canon 85mm f1.2 some day.

Edited by LastLight on Wednesday 4th November 21:26

[V8Wagon]

fido said:

LastLight said:

Don't tempt me! Can't tell you how many reviews I read and the want bumps they caused.

Bump. A new A7RII has arrived with small 28 f/2 lens. I'm just going to enjoy the cameras now and avoid lusting after gear! Now wondering whether to dispose of the EOS M2 or my Leica 35 FLE (one of my fave lens) ..

Edited by fido on Tuesday 27th October 09:29

If you decide to ditch the M2 give me a shout, I've fancied upgrading my M for a while

[LastLight]

V8Wagon said:

fido said:

LastLight said:

Don't tempt me! Can't tell you how many reviews I read and the want bumps they caused.

Bump. A new A7RII has arrived with small 28 f/2 lens. I'm just going to enjoy the cameras now and avoid lusting after gear! Now wondering whether to dispose of the EOS M2 or my Leica 35 FLE (one of my fave lens) ..

Edited by fido on Tuesday 27th October 09:29

If you decide to ditch the M2 give me a shout, I've fancied upgrading my M for a while

On a related note, my A7R Mark 2 and the Sony Battery grip are back on EBay at a reduced start price of £2000. If anyone is after such - new cost c.£2900, grip used twice and both mint - I'd sell outside of EBay for £1900 (so a saving of £1000) as the fees would cover that. Though both have strengths and drawbacks for me I've decided to stick with the Canon (for now!).

[ukaskew]

Major bumpage but I’ve finally picked one of these up, giving it a good hammering at the moment before deciding whether to use it for my winter weddings.

So far I’m pretty astounded. Eye AF in a darkish room for a children’s party is a bit of a game changer for the way I tend to shoot, it’s unnervingly accurate in conditions where I wouldn’t even bother trying usually. I’ve shot with a lot of gear over the years but this has been the first genuine wow moment for me for a long long time. I’d say outperforming a D750 with similar glass (only just mind) in challenging conditions.

I’m coming from a Fuji X-T2 which is no slouch itself and has been hugely impressive in low light, ISO6400 and 12800 shots delivered to clients no problem.

Only issue with the Sony so far is getting colours right in post. Fuji RAW files are fantastic to work with and Auto WB seemed to be nailed on regardless. I’ve so far shot with the a7RII in a forest, out in bright sunlight and in a dark room and it’s all over the place in terms of getting a consistent look from the processing.

[Beggarall]

Sony A7R M3 announced - will wait for the reviews but looks like a bigger battery, dual card slots, improved menu and better low light autofocus (to name but a few). I suppose the camera makers need to keep upgrading their kit but its quite an expensive replacement.

[GetCarter]

Beggarall said:

Sony A7R M3 announced - will wait for the reviews but looks like a bigger battery, dual card slots, improved menu and better low light autofocus (to name but a few). I suppose the camera makers need to keep upgrading their kit but its quite an expensive replacement.

Looks good, but as you say an expensive upgrade!

I have the mk2 and it's pretty damned good in low light, though it can spend too long on a search for focus. I took this hand held (.5 sec/ iso 250 before sunrise this morning). I'd never dream of .5 sec handheld with a mirror SLR! - I was leaning up against a tree to be fair.

I took some at 6400 iso which ended up at 50th sec, but preferred the low noise 250 iso.

Edited by GetCarter on Monday 30th October 14:08

[RobDickinson]

Beggarall said:

Sony A7R M3 announced - will wait for the reviews but looks like a bigger battery, dual card slots, improved menu and better low light autofocus (to name but a few). I suppose the camera makers need to keep upgrading their kit but its quite an expensive replacement.

The mark 3 looks a decent refresh but hardly much of an upgrade. You would choose one new over the mk2 but I cant see many people rushing to get the mk3 if they already have the mk2 unless they need the faster shooting/af.

For me I doubt I would notice the difference, Id certainly notice the change in battery and lack of apps.