Sony a7r2 thread

Caporegime
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Posts
25,063
Location
Lorville - Hurston
Just got announced in new York yesterday where I am at at the moment.

It has 42mp sensor with same ergonomics and af system and stabilisation as the a72.

To boot it does 4k recording on the body
 
They've added a minimum shutter speed when using auto ISO, and apparently there is fast AF wuth Canon lenses via the metabones adapter. I'll believe that when I see it.

DPreview:

Sony says the on-sensor phase-detection AF can be used with A-mount lenses using the simpler LA-E3 adapter, rather than the LA-E4 that had an SLT mechanism built in. At the press launch in New York we even got a glimpse of the a7R II autofocusing Canon EF lenses using a Metabones electronic adapter. Focus appeared to be on par with OVF focus on a native Canon body, and the AF experience itself didn't appear to be limited simply because you're using a third party lens (full coverage and tracking are available).

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/89...r-ii-has-42-4mp-on-full-frame-bsi-cmos-sensor
 
Last edited:
^^^
It would be cool if Sony reversed engineered other camera's PDAF algorithms like Sigma, Tamron etc. so it could natively focus those lenses with just a simple adaptor. THAT would be a game changer.
 
Arggggh. I currently have the A7R but this newer version seems to pretty much fix all the minor gripes I have with it (shutter vibration, shutter release position, minimum shutter speed on auto ISO). I'm going to hold off until early next year I guess and hope for a decent price drop.
 
Looks an awesome camera on paper and I'm tempted , the price puts me off a bit though

I was thinking of giving up with the top of the range gear and selling up but id like one of these
 
Looks great and definitely has got my attention but it's priced way out of my budget as a hobbyist. Got a 5D3 a few years back not long after it came out and other than it being a bit large it'll keep me going for long enough. If I started using the same lenses on one of these I'd imagine it would be quite large too. Love what Sony are doing though, can only benefit the consumer.
 
This is very impressive to say the least. Incredible in fact. Waaaay out of my prive range and it's questionable whether this is actually needed, unless you are blowing up prints 6ft wide.

There will always be a market for this though. I read somewhere once that ATi/Nvidias top of the line GFX cards account for 5% of their sales, put 90 odd precent of their income (something like that anyway).

I love that the boundaries and technology are constantly being stretched.

Might pick one of these up in 5 years or so (by which time they would have produced a 100 megapixel sensor) and this is considered 'old' ;)
 
yeah compared to other forums. Guess it shows the interest and type of people here. Which is odd being a technology forum. Perhaps D.P's mirror-less hate is contagious. ;)

I don't hate mirorrless, I love my epm-2 and I am very excited for future mirrorless cameras from Nikon.
I just don't see them as a big deal. There are more exciting technologies out there and the whole mirrorlesss "craze" is largely a myth because mirrorless sales dropped more than DSLRs in the last quarter for example, so DSLRs are now a bigger share of the interchangeable lens camera market.
Nikon and canon don't need to worry yet, they each have around 35-40% of the total ILC market, and canon barely has a mirrorless.

Dropping the mirror will happen for no other reason than it makes the cameras way cheaper to produce which is critical in a declining market to ensure profit margins remaining survivable. That is Sony's biggest weapon, not that their cameras are smaller, or they get better frame rates, or their lenses are mysteriously smaller (they aren't), the real killer is Sony can sell an A7R for less than a Nikon D810 and still make a higher profit. Good job the D810 still sales very well.

I think there are more destructive technologies out there. Canon and nikon are now both pushing DO lenses into the mainstream. The Nikon 300mm PF is utterly mind blowing, one of the most exciting game changing products in years and far more important to many people than a missing mirror in their camera. The size and weight savings far out weigh (no pun intended), simply dropping the mirror. Look how small Canon S1 is or Nikon FM2 film body with their complete mirrors.

there are rumours of a Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 PF lens that could be lighter than the Sony 24-70mm f/4.0 So why would you choose a Sony A7 body when you could use a Nikon DSLR with a lens a stop faster and an overall lighter setup?

DO/PF technology is going to be much harder for Sony to get into. Nikon has only just entered the market due to the technological barriers. In the future Canon and Nikon may offer a lens like a 70-200mm f/4.0 that weighs something like 380g (based on the nikkor 300mm PF) while the Sony is 850g.



And it is not as if the Sony S7 bodies are particularly light when the A72 was released I did some calculations and found that the Nikon D750 was lighter when you added the necessary batteries to keep up with the Nikon. And the D750 is way more comfortable to hold with a bigger lens.The D750 is also Nikon's first attempt at making a serious FF camera with a slightly lighter body, much more weight is there to be removed. There are rumours that Nikon DF replacement might come in at around 650g by increased use of composite materials, removing the screw-drive AF motor could save 70-100g in itself. We could quite easily see a DSLR with full OVF that is lighter than the A72/AVR2.


I look forward to a FF mirrorless Nikon with a selection of PF tele lenses
 
I am very excited for future mirrorless cameras from Nikon.
I'm not. Nikon does very little to excite me these days. I've pretty much stopped paying attention to them since I got my D810's. Yes my D810's are exceptional camera's, but they are what the D800/E should have been in the first place all those years ago.
I think Nikon went downhill about the time of the DF. They announced a new strategy to offer less features and charge more for them. Hence why Nikons performance in the market has nose dived.

Just did a quick google. Seems this guy has a similar view to me and probably has a similar prognosis.
http://www.eoshd.com/2014/09/market-dslrs-shrinking-dramatically-canon-nikon-blame/

Frankly the sun is setting on DSLR's, and you seem to think everything is ok as your enjoying the last of the golden hour.
It will be interesting to revisit this thread in a couple of years. You can tell me why Nikon isn't about to do a Kodak. Canon on the other hand has a diversified business model. They feasibly feasibly invest suitable sums in R&D but I don't see them doing so going by current trends.

Edit:

If Nikon posted their charts, the arrows would be pointing downwards.
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-says-that-despite-the-digital-camera-market-crisis-they-are-still-selling-more-and-more-premium-cameras
 
Last edited:
I'm not. Nikon does very little to excite me these days. I've pretty much stopped paying attention to them since I got my D810's. Yes my D810's are exceptional camera's, but they are what the D800/E should have been in the first place all those years ago.
I think Nikon went downhill about the time of the DF.
I know you hate the DF but many people love it, it has a huge cult following and has had very healthy sales.

They announced a new strategy to offer less features and charge more for them. Hence why Nikons performance in the market has nose dived.
Which cameras have less features?
It is no secret that Nikon's strategy is to increase the average sell price of their camera, that is simple logic given the market. Declining sales means to create the same profit you need to have higher valued items that can have a larger profit margin. This is why Nikon has produced a lot of FF camera in recent years to temp people to upgrade form the $1000 DX camera to a $2000+ FX camera. The other thing Nikon is doing is lowering manufacturing costs, internal designs are getting simpler, there is greater part re-use and production is more commonly begin made in china and Thailand plants. The next step for Nikon will be to transition their low end DX camera to mirrorless.

Just did a quick google. Seems this guy has a similar view to me and probably has a similar prognosis.
http://www.eoshd.com/2014/09/market-dslrs-shrinking-dramatically-canon-nikon-blame/

Don't agree with that article at all and frankly, it is just opinionated and outdated. The fact is DSLR sales have dropped less than mirrorless sales. If you want to blame a camera type for a declining camera market (which is a ridiculous things to do), then you would have to blame mirror-less. Camera sales have dropped for a number of reasons: global financial crisis, market saturation, smart phones, and the simple fact is there is little reason to upgrade because sensor and AF performance on todays DSLRs are phenomenal. There is little technological reason to upgrade.

Frankly the sun is setting on DSLR's, and you seem to think everything is ok as your enjoying the last of the golden hour.
Yes, the sun is setting on DSLRs, canon and Nikon will drop the mirror when the rest of the technology has caught up. If they can product a D5/1DX successor without a mirrors that all the pros at the next Olympics would be impressed with then we will see a wholesale change in the lineup. We aren't there yet, slowly getting closer but still a big performance gap. In the mean time they will continue to produce outstanding cameras.

It will be interesting to revisit this thread in a couple of years. You can tell me why Nikon isn't about to do a Kodak. Canon on the other hand has a diversified business model. They feasibly feasibly invest suitable sums in R&D but I don't see them doing so going by current trends.

Edit:

If Nikon posted their charts, the arrows would be pointing downwards.
http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sony-says-that-despite-the-digital-camera-market-crisis-they-are-still-selling-more-and-more-premium-cameras

As is said above, Kodak's issues are well renowned and the company is a typical text book example in an MBA class.

Nikon is very different, and much healthier They do have a huge reliance on imaging which does put them at risk in a declining market but that also forces them to concentrate on making successful imaging products, not failures.

funnily enough Sony is much more at risk of going under. Their entire business is making huge losses and is really struggling to keep things under control. their imaging department is also no where near ad healthy as Nikon or Canons'.



If the fact that Nikon and Canon still sell cameras with mirrors was a problem then they wouldn't have 35-40% market share each and Sony wouldn't be stuck at the same 10% they have been for the last decade.
 
I know you hate the DF but many people love it, it has a huge cult following and has had very healthy sales.


Which cameras have less features?
DF. Perhaps it has a cult following. If it does it's a small one. Last I heard retailers were disappointed with it's sales compared to D800's etc.

It is no secret that Nikon's strategy is to increase the average sell price of their camera, that is simple logic given the market. Declining sales means to create the same profit you need to have higher valued items that can have a larger profit margin. This is why Nikon has produced a lot of FF camera in recent years to temp people to upgrade form the $1000 DX camera to a $2000+ FX camera. The other thing Nikon is doing is lowering manufacturing costs, internal designs are getting simpler, there is greater part re-use and production is more commonly begin made in china and Thailand plants. The next step for Nikon will be to transition their low end DX camera to mirrorless.
Well their business is nosediving. Their stock value has cratered. They are restructuring in an effort to turn things around. Their strategy was flawed. You can't increase pricing without decreasing demand. To jack up demand again, you need to increase the desirability of your product. i.e. make it BETTER. As a company you actually have to get off your backside and innovate something that adds value. I can't believe my D810 still has the same AF system as the D300? Seriously Nikon.. update the damn thing already.. at minimum make them all cross-type!

The fact is DSLR sales have dropped less than mirrorless sales.
Where are you getting this from? The graphs I've seen show DSLR shipments decreasing year on year at an alarming rate, while mirrorless has remained almost flat.



Nikon is very different, and much healthier They do have a huge reliance on imaging which does put them at risk in a declining market but that also forces them to concentrate on making successful imaging products, not failures.

Nikon is declining much faster than Canon for example. Clearly their products are not very successful right now.
http://petapixel.com/2014/05/18/nikons-financial-woes-relentless-prompt-restructuring/

funnily enough Sony is much more at risk of going under. Their entire business is making huge losses and is really struggling to keep things under control. their imaging department is also no where near ad healthy as Nikon or Canons'.

Yes right now, but Sony's camera sales are growing, not shrinking like Nikon and Canon's.
Sony as a whole is still fragile, but it's been innovating like crazy. Apparently they should be back to profit soon.
http://www.cnet.com/news/sony-says-good-times-ahead-as-it-forecasts-profit-for-next-year/

If the fact that Nikon and Canon still sell cameras with mirrors was a problem then they wouldn't have 35-40% market share each and Sony wouldn't be stuck at the same 10% they have been for the last decade.


"Mirrorless sales in the USA are rising, with sales values up 16.5% over the past year, says market researcher NPD Group. Sony highlighted the figures while celebrating its own success: with the success of the a7 series helping it generate 66% more revenue from mirrorless sales over the last twelve months."

"DSLR sales values fell 15% over the same period."

"Looking at trade body CIPA's most recent shipment data to the Americas (CIPA's grouping that also includes South America and Canada), tells a similar story. Shipments of DSLRs in the twelve months to April 2015 fell 19% by volume and 9% by value, compared to the previous year, while mirrorless grew 36% by volume and 50% by value, over the same period.

This leaves shipments of mirrorless cameras making up 16% of ILC shipments by volume: still some way behind the 26% figure they represent in the rest of the world over the same period. This suggests there's still room for growth, unlike Europe, where volumes have contracted slightly (amidst sharply dropping DSLR figures)."

That's pretty impressive. Imagine what something with the spec's of the a7rii would do?
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6223902518/sony-rides-wave-of-us-mirrorless-sales-surge


Edit:
"Shipments of DSLRs in the twelve months to April 2015 fell 19% by volume and 9% by value, compared to the previous year, while mirrorless grew 36% by volume and 50% by value, over the same period."
If this isn't indicative of a changing tide, I don't know what else to say.
 
Last edited:
I think with recent DSLRs they've got to the point where they perform very well and people keep them for longer than thay may have done in the past. The innovation curve has levelled off in recent times and perhaps people are happy to keep what they've got?

In my case i have a 2 year old D7100. It performs incredibly well. I have no need to upgrade it any time soon. The D7200 which has replaced it is not worth the upgrade and for me the only Nikon body i'd consider upgrading to would be a FF and probably the D750, but i'd be shelling out £1000 for (apparently) 10% better image quality, a bit better low light performance and better results at high IS0. For me and what i do, it's simply not worth it for the cost involved.

Until proper leaps in design and the tech are made i think in general, DSLR owners who want to stick with the format, will keep what they've got for longer, especially as even the entry level Nikon cameras with their 24MP sensors can produce amazing results.
 
Last edited:
^^^
I agree, there isn't much need to upgrade considering there hasn't been any leaps in technological advancements. Especially if your are not a professional who's competing with other pro's in particularly varied and demanding environments.

I am seeing those leaps coming from Sony though. 5 axis stabilisation. I can't imagine being able to shoot fast F1.4 primes that are stabilised. Wide coverage of on sensor PDAF points (hopefully they sensitive in low light and perform). Backside illuminated sensor should easily give a stop better ISO. SILENT shutter option would be a HUGE deal to me.

Personally I'm thinking of selling up, and going with 2x A7rii's. I can get a wide angle, a Zeiss 35mm F1.4 and a 85mm F1.8 and I'm good to go. Just need to wait and see if the camera performs. It can have all the spec's in the world.. but if it takes me twice as long to change my focus point.. it's a no go for me.
 
Back
Top Bottom