Douglas F Watt: It's a shame that Sony inverted their parameter description on AF tracking to mislead almost everyone into believing that a setting of 5 would make for LEAST jumpy, when in fact it is MOST jumpy. So I have to wonder what the DPR would have said about the camera if the reviewers had had early access to Sony's own set of AF parameter recommendations available (but well hidden?) at: http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-gb/Learnmore/4d_focus/a77/.
I also think that the JPEGs would fare significantly better if high ISO NR is set to low, and at this price point, it is probably the best all-around APS-C body.
And here's what they say about tracking AF duration of 1:
"Setting AF Track Duration to 1 (Low) enhances tracking performance on the intended subject. When shooting a swimmer's butterfly stroke or breast stroke, for example, selecting a high AF Track Duration setting could result in focus switching from the swimmer to the background if the composition is unchanged and the swimmer goes underwater. Also, setting Focus Area to Expanded Flexible Spot, which features a narrow area of focus and great capability to focus accurately on a subject, is effective."
It really should be called "AF lability" because that's what the low and high numbers mean, low and high AF lability. It's counter intuitive and Sony could be criticized for their strange description of this, but the more time you spent on a setting of 5, the more subject tracking is jumpy and unreliable.
Thanks for responding. If that's true, why did you shoot largely at 5? At that setting, the AF system prioritizes newly appearing objects. Here's what their own documentation states about that setting:
"When shooting a subject that could appear at an unexpected time, as when it emerges from shade, or when shooting various subjects quickly, one after another, each with different framing, setting AF Track Duration to 5 (High) is recommended. With a high AF Track Duration setting, however, the camera starts tracking an object as soon as it enters the focus area, although it may be a different distance away from the camera than the main subject. So be aware that such a setting can increase the risk of losing main subject focus to the background or another subject, against your intention"
I had all kinds of problems with what you described in the review, with AF tracking set to 5, when I set it to 1, many of those disappeared, esp. if I used a more restricted set of AF points.
It's a shame that Sony inverted their parameter description on AF tracking to mislead almost everyone into believing that a setting of 5 would make for LEAST jumpy, when in fact it is MOST jumpy. So I have to wonder what the DPR would have said about the camera if the reviewers had had early access to Sony's own set of AF parameter recommendations available (but well hidden?) at: http://www.sony.net/Products/di/en-gb/Learnmore/4d_focus/a77/.
ASAphoto: And yet DPReview has yet to review the Sony A77ii, despite the assertions I've seen from DPReview on their forums that they are "working" on said review. A year later and nothing. A continued slap in the face to devoted A-mount photographers like myself if you ask me. Ridiculous.
Perhaps even more telling is the fact that when they talk about APS-C cameras such as the Nikon 7100/7200 and the Canon 7DM2, they don't mention the A77M2 as its competition or as any kind of competition. It's as though alpha mount as already died in view of DPR.
Ok, who ever wrote the copy for these pictures, don't quit your day job to do standup.
Douglas F Watt: How does it get to be so big at just slightly wider (11mm vs the 12mm of the Nikon), while the Nikon is 2.8 and it's f4? Don't get that one . . . .
Obviously, my mistake missing the Nikon being only 14mm. And of course that is a big difference with this lens. Disadvantages of rushing . . .
lacikuss: Is this the Sony Sensor?
Rumor has it . . .
En Trance: I have always loved and praised the Rebel Line. I am excited about the T6. What I see and do not like is Canon's Tear Down Approach. Why waste money/cost on carrying two models? I don't want the one with less features. Is that too hard to understand? I am also wondering about the size of the new camera. I really did not like the physical size of the Rebel line. Doesn't look like a change. Also, in my opinion, the Rebel Line is underpriced. I am confident that professional quality pictures can be produced with the new Rebel T6. Why can I buy that for $800.00? They will be in the Pawn Shops for $450 in a few weeks. Sad.
true. but it's also 2 years old. So let's see what sony does in 2015 . . .
How does it get to be so big at just slightly wider (11mm vs the 12mm of the Nikon), while the Nikon is 2.8 and it's f4? Don't get that one . . . .
well, that may characterize the A99ii
No argument that the A 77ii is underpriced, but $1500 underpriced? At that price point it would be competing against fairly serious, professional bodies and full frame sensors?
Your post is a bit surprising – you are complaining that Canon is not charging more for the camera? I'm not sure I get that. If the Sony A 77ii is going for only $900, what do you think a reasonable price might be for something aimed a notch from semipro/prosumer? Really believe that a higher price relative to competing cameras is the best way to ensure resale value?
I actually had the same question (because of the pixel count), but when I saw that they've got the same 1.6 crop factor, that rules out a Sony sensor. It will be interesting to see whether or not this new sensor improves the DR of their previous sensors. That's been their greatest weakness and it's hard to believe that Canon would up the pixel count and not address this issue, but will have to wait until formal testing to know that.
Despite all these new images for several cameras, there are STILL no studio images for the A77ii JPEGs?? And, as you guys admit, there might be better lenses than the Sony 50 1.8? Any chance of those being shot before 2015?
In terms of competition, it is curious that DPR left out the Sony A99, which admittedly is an aging camera at this point, but still, to not even mention it is a significant omission. Roughly one stop poorer in ISO, not as good AF, probably not as good in several other ways, but great EVF (if you like shooting with those), full time live view, and a few other pluses. Curious that DPR doesn't even see it in the race so to speak. Hope they give more attention to the A99ii (out in 1st or 2nd Q of 2015?)
JeanPierre Thibaudeau: 1,000 posts!What do I win?lolGreetings to all!
You are today's BIG WINNER!!!
You get a free lifetime supply of crabby, whinny bloggers going 24/7, unlimited brand wars, and a few pithy comments.
Pritzl: I have looked really hard and I really cannot see the advantage for any of these cameras (maybe the NX-1, but a tiny one at that) at 12800 ISO. They all look to be about the same. If there is a difference, it's one that requires a loupe and someone far more nit-picky than me.
It doesn't matter much anyway, as they're all a smudgy mess at that ISO anyway.
With the new prime NR program in Optics Pro, 12800 is looking more and more usable, at least for some web printing and smaller print work. I just started using it, and it's making me rethink low light shooting.
Iloveaircraftnoise: I was mucking around with A77 at my local camera store....The EVF doesn't refresh quickly enough in certain situations..In late afternoon / dusk shooting I imagine it will be even worse..I also noticed that depending on how you roll your eye around the viewfinder the four corners tend to distort & get fuzzy... If Sony used their imagination & made the A77's with an OVF I would buy it straight away..... I imagine it would be much cheaper than the big two price gougers offerings....
Exactly . .
Peiasdf: Page 9, who is that new DPReview video girl in that fishmonger photo?
Also, lets have a 7D2, NX-1 and A77 II shootout. Winner gets the losers' battery.
You mean that only the first of those three choices is for people who REALLY know that they want: an overpriced and out of date camera body that can't shoot good video and that rests on the laurels of a brand name in decline??
I'm glad that Canon is checking the right boxes for you. And although it may seem that DPR is giving Canon the back of their hand, I think a silver award is fair, simply from the standpoint of the competition. Competition is actually tougher than your post would suggest, particularly the NX1 and the A 77ii. I was particularly stunned to see how soft the video was on the 7Dii, with all this time for Canon to tweak resolution and to implement some version of full frame sampling. Three years ago or even just two years ago this would be a gold award camera hands down. But the goalposts keep moving, and it isn't simply Canon's poor dynamic range performance, it's just that they have not improved as much as the competition has improved. There's still the great Canon ecosystem and lens groups – I think still their strongest draw. But compared to both the NX1 and the A 77ii, where that Canon ecosystem is clearly way stronger, the camera body is a disappointment, esp. for $1800.