Geir Ove: Why so much foucs and testing on this camera? As a DSLR owner, I bought the Pana FZ1000. It got an excellent Review, and is indeed a terrific camera, but DID NOT get all the focus on this site that the Sony got. Why?
...because the Panasonic FZ1000 is a 1" sensor bridge camera, which might make an ok accompaniment to a DSLR for taking on holiday etc., whereas the A7RII is a bit a of a game changer with several world first features and can go toe-to-toe with full frame DSLRs and beat them in some areas.
ArtAlt: It's our own fault. There was this huge chorus of voices asking for "uncompressed" when we really should have asked for "lossless compressed".
"Nikon doesn't offer lossy compression, so we don't know."
Nikon does offer lossy compression actually. It's similar to the first stage of the Sony lossy compression. It is generally free of artifacts but doesn't achieve as high a compression ratio at Sony.
jesus_freak: How much processing power does it take to do compressed lossless RAW? Canon has had this feature for YEARS. Yes, the same Canon everyone vilifies for using 8 year old sensor technology, limited 60fps video, etc.
Compressed lossless RAW isn't exactly state-of-the-art by today's standards, especially given the amount of other innovations Sony is creating.
That's just DPreview speculation. I highly doubt processing power is the issue. The real reason is probably the cost associated with implementing lossless compression and the testing that would have to go into it.
They want to see how popular the uncompressed mode is first, before committing more resources to lossless compression. That's how business works, folks.
timparkin: Gobsmacked at the attitude of posters here. Sony have actually listened and made a change to their cameras because of it. This is fantastic news. If they could offer lossless compressed easily they would have done so. Instead they did what they could to get the fix out quickly for those who need it. The penalty is a slightly larger file size. The good news is these files will probably open quicker because of it! (they don't need to decompress). Celebrate this win and be polite - we might get some more concessions
There's no option for smaller res RAW files with Sony cameras.
BadScience: get your equivalence bingo cards ready
280mm f/6.7 on the Pentax Q ;)
LWanTeD: I'm just here to see what people will complain about next.
You're out by a factor of 2, 42MP * 14-bits per pixel is 75MB...
Also continuous shooting speed should be unaffected but the buffer will fill up faster.
Albert Silver: Is there a single SLR lens capable of resolving 120MP?
It's evidence that lenses don't "resolve" any number of megapixels that's not how it works...
But if the absolute cheapest zoom lens Canon make will provide some contrast at 100% magnification with a 350 megapixel sensor, then you can expect a more expensive prime to do ok on a 120 megapixel sensor.
Sad Joe: Are these the same glass as the Sony / Zeiss BATIS range ? If so strange that on the Sony they are AF but not on Canon or Nikon. Its not like Zeiss could not afford the licence, also it appears to make the BATIS range rather better value for money. Score one for Sony !
@RomanB The Zeiss branded Sony lenses are made by Sony with Zeiss "approval", the Zeiss Batis lenses are nothing to do with Sony and are designed entirely by Zeiss (but made by Cosina).
Yes I'm aware of both of those things thank you.
I was talking about lens performance in the centre of the image circle, I am aware that 120 megapixels is the total count for the whole sensor.
Secondly when it comes to lenses "resolution" is a fairly meaningless concept on its own - what matters is the amount of contrast at a given resolution.
Lenses don't have a single resolution figure - you can't say "this lens resolves 29 megapixels" as there's no hard limit, all that happens is contrast gets lower and lower as the resolution you're measuring it at increases.
SimenO1: Three things:1. 120 Mp is only double the linear resolution as 30 Mp. It should be easy to find primes that make good use of the resolution. Even if you don't make full use of the resolution it should be a plus to get soft edges and fine grained noise in stead of coarse grained noise and stairs edges.
2. Why will it only support 60 of the 96 EF lenses? Will it exclude non USM/STM lenses? Or exclude the smallest aperture lenses? Why?
3. Will it be full frame or APS-H like the 120 Mp surveillance sensor they announced 5 years ago?
@quiquae - the other lenses are the Cinema EOS series which are all super 35.
They could have avoided a lot of confusion by saying "the camera is only compatible with full frame Canon lenses".
Klaus Weber: Did I oversee the information regarding timeline? Next year? 2017? 2018? Without this information this press release seems pretty useless to me...
I have the feeling this is done to tell the people: "PLEASE do not leave, we are working on something really awesome!!" And this much earlier than you could even read on Canon Rumours...
Three years I recon, they've only just released the 5Ds.
Yes, pretty much all of them in the centre.
Even a kit zoom will hit MTF10 at 350 megapixels!
2. It will only support 60 of the 96 EF lenses because the other 36 are EF-S, EF-M or Cinema lenses none of which cover the full 35mm image circle.
3. It will be full frame. APS-H is dead (for DSLRs).
This comment is probably too late to be seen by anyone, but I thought it's worth highlighting the work that's in progress from ProfHankD and myself into removing artifacts directly from the RAW file, which has shown early promise:
ozturert: I see very small differences between A7RII, A7R and 5DSr up to ISO6400. My monitor is HP Z27i, am I missing something or do they really have similar image quality? I was expecting A7RII to be considerably better than Canon.
BSI efficiency gain is measurable, but not noticeable, after all the fill fraction was very good to begin with (compared to cell phone sensors which received a big boost):
BSI in a full frame sensor is about readout speed and being able to put more logic in each pixel.
QE and fill fraction a very good for all of today's sensors meaning noise in the midtones and highlights is pretty much determined by sensor area, which is the same for the A7RII, A7R and 5DSr.
The only differences will be found in extreme shadow noise.
Bhima78: While it is nice that Canon seems to have successfully updated this lens to match the competition, I can't help but wonder who would pay $1,800 for this when the fantastic Sigma 35mm ART is about half that price at $900.
Who's going to buy the Canon 35L II for $1800? Probably a very similar set of people who bought the Nikon 35mm f/1.4 G for $1800 and the Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 for $1600 or the Zeiss 1,4/35 for $1500...
photosincali: I currently shoot Canon but I am not sure why someone would buy this when they can basically by both the 35mm and 50mm art lenses from Sigma. I know some people have the money and just want the brand name but do you really think there would be that big of a difference to justify the price? Maybe I am wrong and it is the greatest lens ever but I just want what works best for the best price, regardless of who makes it.
There's a bit more than 1 reason, I don't know, like, optical performance, weather sealing, CPS, AF performance...
ThePhilips: The "modulo" idea is so obvious, that I think that most makers have already thought about it but put it in the back due to some technical complication.
Otherwise, I prefer the other idea, where pixel's charge data are being read continuously. IOW, sensor sends the data continuously, and the "shutter speed" is just how long the firmware keeps accumulating the data before saying "enough". That removes the overflow completely. And also allows to selectively read more/less from shadows/highlights.
The paper is about the "unwrapping" algorithm and the HDR algorithm, not the camera:
"our work leverages an existing modulo camera(DFPA) to show the effectiveness of UHDR"
It's worth noting that the announcement is regarding a new algorithm for estimating the pixel values when the number of resets is unknown, neither the modulo sensor concept nor the actual hardware are original contributions here.