coody: Why can't it be designed better from the beginning but has to go through the firmware updating? Can the firmware perfectly resolve the flaw? Usually the more firmware updating has, the more problems the product has.
I see it as a way to meet production deadlines, expanding camera capabilities with a limited annual budget by stretching it across multiple years, as well as keeping a single camera model viable longer. Also, on the plus side, it gives Fuji free advertising.
chrisfromalaska: Geez I wish Sony would poach the Fuji development team, a published lens roadmap with future lenses outlined, regular firmware updates to improve functionality, fix customer usability complaints and most notably add new features instead of flooding the market with new body after new body (except for A-mount, sorry) that addresses some complaints and creates others (still waiting for the stinkin level for the A6000).
Kudos to Fuji for making a great camera even better and not giving current owners the finger (known as "The Sony") by releasing the X-T2 instead. Bring out a higher MP sensor and better video and I'll buy a Fuji.
FYI, not Sony hater, I've been in on the E-mount from almost day 1. I'd like to see this kind of update for the A6000, but more likely I'll be selling it and getting the A6100.
I was just thinking to myself earlier today that I would like to see Sony spend less time, effort, and money releasing cameras so frequently and, instead, invest that by keeping current models relevant longer with firmware updates that introduce new/updated features, performance improvements, and bug fixes. At least with the higher end models that usually have longer life cycles. Of course, for me, that would apply to the A-mount. ;-)
Dervast: Hi all, since I am new to this new game. What is the pro difference between for example the Tamron 28-70 2.8 for sony bodies. IT does not have this pro tag but what other differences are?
As others have said, there is no 28-70 by Tamron. Secondly, If you are looking for Sony mount, then you are out of luck with Tokina. Unless they change their tune, Tokina announced in the past that they have no plans to release these lenses in Sony mount. They are a very small company and are mainly focusing on just Nikon and Canon.
As for the differences between the Tamron model and the Tokina model, the Tokina's tend to have a heavier, tougher build to them. They are very solid lenses, but not light.
The Tamron you can override focus without having to move a ring or flip a switch. With the Tokina, you have to move the ring back to do MF.
As for the Pro name, it is mainly just a name. Tamron doesn't call their models Pros because that is not their naming convention. But some of their lenses are certainly at or near pro levels.
Tamron has an excellent 6 year warranty with fast turn around.
Saying that, and I love Tamron lenses, my experience with their 24-70mm wasn't that good.
FencerPTS: Editorial question: why is in-body stabilization a green while in-lens stabilization a red? This seems more a design choice rather than a benefit.AF: Are there any dual-cross sensors? Are the sensors rated for exposure, e.g. -3 EV?What happened to the ISO and DR charts?Noise invariance: is there a way to quantify and compare the noise level at each push? Can this be done for alternate ISO values besides 100?IS performance: Was this test measured or was it subjective; is there a quantified standard of acceptability, e.g. lp/mm?
I love my viewfinder. The LCD stays shut most of the time. I can access everything from the viewfinder.
The A77II has many buttons, almost all of them can be customized. With the improved button feel, with a little practice, you can quickly change ISO, exposure compensation, white balance, shooting speed, etc. with a quick button press and spin of the rotary wheels.
The two rotary dials by the thumb and finger can be used to quickly adjust shutter speed or aperture, depending on the shooting mode you are in. They can also be customized as to how they function (ie, flip the functionality of the two).
You also have a custom function menu if you wish to do things via the display. This can be brought up by pressing the Fn button. It overlays across what you see, so you don't lose site of the subject. Here you can layout your most preferred options so you can quickly make your changes without having to hunt through the menus.
Very rarely do I have to use the full menus.
The last dual cross AF sensor point I have seen on a Sony APS-C camera was the A77 and it was only for the center for lenses F/2.8 or faster.
Having said that, the A77II has 15 cross type AF points and the central AF point (which is a cross type as well) is F/2.8 sensitive for fast lenses.
The AF is rated to work as low as -2EV without an AF assist lamp. With the last firmware update, low light focusing was improved upon and users are claiming even better low light focusing than before. What this amounts to in EVs is unknown since no official word was released nor measurements taken.
Kabe Luna: What happens if someone walks behind the camera in close proximity? Will that trigger a release? Or, if in bulb mode, will it close the shutter and end the exposure?
That's one sensitive proximity sensor. The eye sensor on my A77 and A77II are not that sensitive. 1 to a few inches, sure, but I don't think 6".
It's the eye proximity sensor that is being tripped for this to work. For someone walking by to trip that, you will need to be around an inch or so away from the proximity sensor.
I don't know about you, but if someone was walking that close to the camera, they would be risking tripping over a tripod leg or running into the camera.
exapixel: I probably missed it in the review, but does this Sony has a lossless RAW file output option? If not, does it exhibit the same artifacts along vertical edges in high-contrast regions as do the E-mount cameras with only lossy RAW?
@Rishi: Thank you for seeing both sides of the coin on here. It is true that one can be their worst enemy when looking for problems, or especially ones you get lost in it and forget to see everything else that is good in the product. I am not that person.
I very much love my A77II and do feel it is the best camera I have owned so far. But it isn't perfect. My only suggestion of improvement is something I have been asking for from the very beginning when they got rid of uncompressed RAW back in 2011.
When people ask with concerns about compressed RAW or experience, I will give them my answer based on my experience. I see nothing wrong with that and I don't feel I should have to be quiet because some people don't want to hear it. But don't let that detract from enjoying the camera.
@TBCass: Continued...As for feeling sorry for "people" like me, that was half hearted at best and rude. It implies something that I and like minded people are not and presents itself as if you think you are better than others. Well, you are not and a comment as such doesn't belong here.
@TBCass: I never stated you thought the camera is perfect, but you certainly seem to prefer to turn a blind eye to flaws in a product and expect everyone else should do the same.
You make it sound like I am unhappy with my A77II, far from it. If I wasn't happy with it, I wouldn't own it. This little flaw is one of the very few chinks in this camera's armor. Not too shabby.
I am not a negative person and generally find myself as fairly positive. But I present myself as an optimistic realist.
As for trying hard to find things that are wrong, I didn't seek this out, it found me. It reared its head during one of my everyday shoots. Curious why it happened, I decided to seek answers online. When no one had answers, or cared, I decided to perform experiments of my own to figure out if it is a defective sensor or a design issue. DPR later confirmed the problem with other models. So what is wrong with making this known? If no one says anything, then nothing will ever get fixed.
@TBCass: Just because some choose to live life where ignorance is bliss doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just because it doesn't affect you doesn't mean it doesn't affect others.
As for obsessiveness, it really isn't the case. I spend more time enjoying my camera than I do nitpicking it. My work and experiments have already been done, it doesn't take much work to reference it when others (including DPR) ask about the effects of compressed RAW.
The A77II isn't flawless and shouldn't be put on a pedestal, but it is still an excellent camera nonetheless. It's still by far the best camera I have owned so far and congratulate Sony on the number of improvements made over the very good A77. I only ask for one simple request, one I have asked for since 2011, and I feel I shouldn't have to quiet down because someone else just doesn't care.
@pixelpushing: I only shoot raw and all my examples were from raw files edited in Lightroom. I even took the same files and worked them in Capture One as well as Sony's editor to make sure it wasn't an editor problem.
As an A77II owner who has owned it since June of last year, why would I lie? I am very happy with my camera, I would just be happier for a proper explanation as to the flaws I have found and the reintroduction of uncompressed RAW.
So, better yet, prove me wrong. I at least put the work in to show what can happen. How much work did you put into it to say that it isn't? Or are you just couch judging?
Nope, some of them didn't take much editing to show the problems. Now the examples I posted in the past I pushed further to make the problems easier to see for those that don't have very good monitors, which I even mentioned.
As mentioned before the problem is noticeable in high contrast scenes, close to black and white. The easiest example, take a black sheet of paper and cut a square in it. Place it on a window that gets a lot of light that has a screen. Focus on the screen and expose miso for the black and screen, this should cause the background to be bright, near blown out but not. Just minor tinkering to a photo like this quick reproduce a colored mesh pattern on the black in horizontal fashion across the image, matching the screen in the cutout. Blacks will start pushing to different colors quickly too. My gallery had examples of this. Put the lens cap on and do the same exposure or even and you get no such discoloration nor patterns. The A77 in a similar test does not do this.
Without getting into the details and showing examples like they did in past reviews, DPR did mention throughout the review that they noticed some of the shortcomings brought on by Sony's compressed RAW. So, yes, it shares the same weak link.
In response to Hipo84, just because you never experienced them doesn't mean they don't exist. I think the impact is more noticeable on the cameras that are shooting in 14-bit than the ones that shoot in 12-bit. The A77 is 12-bit only and the A99 is only 14-bit in single shot mode.
With my A77II, I've been able to produce anomalies in specific situations that I was unable to reproduce with my A77. These characteristics, in my mind, are possibly attributed to the compression done on the 14-bit images. Don't think of it as the same kind of compression that is done to JPEGs, where image quality goes to mush. It is usually noticeable when pushing/pulling an exposure, causing harsh color shifts in the blacks, banding, etc. in high contrast areas.
josseee: "significant improvements in image quality" does this mean the optical formula was changed? I doubt that, since the elements info looks the same as previous version, the length and weight also looks more or less the same (VII seems to be 2 grams lighter) Anyway, since my old 24-70 is already deadly sharp as it is and my only concern about "not so great" bokeh in some situations seems to be unresolved, I will skip this one...Still good to see that sony is giving something to the A mount crowd
I mentioned other lenses that are available in A-mount. Both Sigma and Tamron make Sony mount lenses, Canon does not. So my lenses apply, yours does not.
1) Not a Sony mount lens, so doesn't even apply.2) You mention the older model. Are you saying that the newer, sharper Canon model has worse bokeh? I see a trade-off here if that is the case.
Yeah, with the bokeh I don't see there being any change. But to be honest, I haven't really found a 24-70 F/2.8 that excelled in that department. The Sigma and the Tamron weren't terrible, but I've certainly seen better from other lenses (both zoom and prime). It's almost like trying to find a unicorn.
As far as I know, the optical formula is the same. The coatings are supposed to have been improved, with the inclusion of the new nano coatings Sony has been putting on their newer G lenses.
Now could it be that despite the same optical formula that higher quality glass was used and/or better machining and calibration tolerances have been used to improve image quality?
That might be a possibility.
RichRMA: There have been a lot of posts in forums attempting to link resolution with sharpness.For those struggling with the idea of resolution not being inextricably linked to sharpness, this review provides an example. Go to the studio scene, dial-in an Olympus or Panasonic camera and look (RAWs) at the lower right-hand side of the page. You'll clearly see that although the Sony image isn't very sharp (lens issues I'd guess) it out-resolves the 16MP Olympus and Panasonic sensors. This is why sharpness and resolution are not joined at the hip.
Yeah, it appears very much to be a lens issue (possibly decentered). If you look in the top left and middle left side, it is sharper there compared to its right sided counterparts.
fuego6: Bah... typical Adobe minor adjustment features that should just have been made available in an incremental update. How about allowing floating toolbars (like the rest of the CC package)? How about beefing up the library function? How about speeding up the export option (takes FOREVER to export photos)?
See Ya LR... I'm out!
Your card is "down-market" from the one I am looking at, yes. But yours is newer than what I am currently using, which is a Geforce GTX 560 Ti overclocked.
AMD GPUs tend to do better than Nvidia GPUs when it comes to working with GPU accelerated applications like photo and video editors, but they are very power hungry. Nvidia's latest cards are much more efficient and consume about 1/3 to 1/2 of what the AMD equivalents do when under load. Since I leave my machine on 24/7 and have it do work in the background, I am trying to be more mindful of the heat and power consumption, hence leaning more toward Nvidia.
Doing more reading, it doesn't appear there are much in the way of limitations as to what cards are and are not supported, so long as they are Direct X 10 and OpenGL 3.3 capable. Because if this, I may finally pull the trigger and order a GTX 970 or possibly a GTX 980 in the next week or two.