RedDog Steve: What I Need To Know - is if the lens mount has been improved at all from the binding scratchy tightness of the original ?
really? first I read of that. This true?
Sdaniella: whilst a WA lens like 24mm can still include a subject along with plenty of background landscape context in close shots, the 35mm tends to be too narrow/long, and the subject fills the fov (much like the longish "normal" 50mm does).your semi-wide AF test with a fast lense is very limited in what you deem "low light" (indoors with artificial ambient lighting), as shown by the indoor handholdable portrait shots of sitting lady with ceiling lights (=high contrast lighting = easy shadows for AF (PDAF or CDAF)) and ditto, sitting man in street (city street lights).
far more shooters will have either slower lenses or longer tele (for night lit or indoor sports) or both (slower+tele) ... and the ultimate AF testing belongs here, and NOT neglected (avoided in your examples)
if you are going to even appeal to serious shooters wrt AF, try subjects moving towards you at least, in the same lighting you used for your static examples above, albeit w/lenses used for those situations: slow+long
evilmagicnut: I understand the intent of this article to demonstrate effectiveness of C-AF of the A7RII in low light and in that capacity I'm convinced there is promise.Don't take this as a critique but a request for more data. As I investigate mirrorless systems from Sony, Samsung, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic what I'm really interested in is will they C-AF and subject track in moderate to good light with F2.8 zooms / slower zooms? After all, is it really reasonable to shoot action in low light anyways? Same question with S-AF in low to moderate light. Too many times I've tried mirrorless systems and discovered focus hunting, unusable focus tracking, or occasional focus confirm misses. This is the data I can't extract reliably from reviews these days. For some reason reviewers (and not necessarily here) don't want to fess up when an AF system is garbage.
AKH: I have been following Dpreview for around 15 years now and I don't like how it has changed over time. It is like the reviewers have become sort of fan-boys in their reviews. Just a few years ago the reviews were much more objective and balanced in my opinion.
Also I'd say that I never had any focusing issues with my D810 with fast primes down to f/1.4 and the new f/1.8 series from Nikon. Didn't even have to fine tune any of my lenses which was not the case with my previous camera the D800.
? A general observation posted under an article about low light auto focus?
"It is like the reviewers have become sort of fan-boys in their reviews."
this isn't a product review - wake up.
dpreview is critical of mishaps manufactures make and those are clearly outlined in the pros and cons
IMO it is refreshing to see some excitement about ALL brands and the developments they make.
If you want to be negative and the typical "everything wrong with xyz" there are THOUSANDS of other websites for that.
Photography and the gear used to acomplish ones goals needs to be fun. Nothing wrong with that.
Matt: It seems like you moved much faster with the Nikon and even faster with the Canon. Maybe for that reason there was no footage of you moving the Sony camera in and out.
You are also testing the AF drive speed of the lens and not the AF ability of the camera.
This latest test seems a bit ridiculous. This Sony camera seems like a great choice for many, including the cats 'n kids and landscape shooter as long as you dont need un-neutered raw support or an overly strong body (or god forbid, prefer optical viewfinder).
But you are trying a bit too hard with those latest "tests"
@Stu 5 - "real world" is full of variables. Don't imply that they did this test in a virtual matrix. Its real world. If funny how they show the competition in a positive light but also highlight how well the A7R2 does....but people still complain.
@zlatko - Native Canon and Nikon 35mm lenses are poor vs the used Sigma sample - sure they might focus faster but if the picture quality drops WAY below the Sony there is no point.
Look - what dpreview did was perfectly fair. At the end of the day the quality of the picture matters. They were trying to help by using a better lens.
Hans von der Crone: Only one thing needed for me to make the complete switch: is the iso3200 performance same or better than Nikon d750?
tinypic or links to the dpreview gallery
no need to help him though - the existing dpreview article demonstrates the advantages of downsampling.
dpreview will shortly - hang tight
remember thats a LOT of resolution advantage over the D750 I shoot. If you look at Dpreviews article on the original Nikon D800 downsampled to a7s you could see how well the extra resolution helped with noise.
neil holmes: This camera will be better still when there are more native FE lenses (as there should be soon).
It works well with Canon lenses I am sure and I am happy as it is with Canon lenses on my A7 and A7s in particular .
Cannon AF lenses should be much better used for AF on the A7Rii again, it would still better to use native FE where possible (Canon manual focus lenses are great on any A7 camera).
Sports shooters for instance will want longer native fast lenses.I suspect a native 135 f2 or so lens will be coming soon and that will make a big difference.A 200 2.8 prime or zoom in FE mount will also be what many would look forward to.Might be a while before there is a 300 2.8 that can use eye AF though!
You do know that very very few Canon FF lenses can resolve 5DR resolution right? Toss out the junk in the Canon line up and you would be surprised how average their "system" is.
And while a 200 2.8 and 300mm 2.8 would be great...you do realize how few of those even Canon / Nikon sell right? Not always worth investing in for Sony if the return isn't there.
their tests were great and well explained.
your ideas are nit picky.
Downsampled to the same resolution - the a7R2 is vastly superior to my Nikon D750.
King Penguin: Now if they had a range of low cost compact primes at 16mm, 20mm, 35mm & 50mm such as the excellent Nikkor AFD range it would make it M43 size without the M43 1/4 sized sensor compromise......
what low cost FF 16mm Nikon lens are you referring to?
be proud dpreview
privatepolicy418: Can anyone tell me how Capture One compares with DXO Optics Pro 8? I am debating whether or not I should switch over from DXO. Thanks!
try the demo
Leandros S: Will you also be serving drinks throughout the flight?
Lassoni: Very expensive price. Adobe lightroom costs like 150 or something? What makes this any better?
rarufu: Capture One has one of the best demosaicing Algorithmus (Close to Amaze) & the best adaptive denoising algorithms & an phantastic analogue (colors) look at default settings.IT is far ahead of lightroom.While phase one team concentrated at processing algorithms, Adobe introduced gimmicks like gradient filters and face recognition.Fuji X demosaicing have also been always better.C1 is from my point of view the best raw converter on the market.
couldn't agree more - its a quality program through and through
worth every Penny. Sony was smart to partner with them and their dedication to Fuji X-trans is admirable.