oselimg: 42 million pixels and 50 million pixels respectively and more than 3K price tags some people still compare the jpeg engines. Internet forums have produced incredible amount of "experts"
Thats how an "expert" should comment on a forum...
For me by far the most impressive thing on A7R2 is the JPEG engine!Better than nikon and better than Canon, showing more detail and less noise, impressive, beating D750 by at least 1 stop, comparing the ISO 102400 vs 51200 for example, JPEG.With eletronic shutter it goes beyond but seems to introduce some artifacslike the blue eye distortion on the king.http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7rii&attr13_1=nikon_d810&attr13_2=nikon_d750&attr13_3=canon_eos5dsr&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr171_0=on&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.38505126514394483&y=-1.0372976030569863
crazyryoga: The D810 still looks sharper on my monitor, especially on the corners.
Barney, on this situationhttp://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7rii&attr13_1=nikon_d810&attr13_2=nikon_d750&attr13_3=sony_a7s&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=51200&attr16_1=51200&attr16_2=51200&attr16_3=51200&attr171_0=on&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.09903264812575573&y=-1.0093243014871565When changing a7r2 to E-shutter it performs much better, maybe theres an error here?
Nevermess: I have compared RAW to D810 and still think that D810 produce better high ISO. At first glance it looks more noisy, but D810 preserves details much better.
And normalized comparison RAW comparison to D750:
For me d750 shows better results.
change the A7r2 to eletronic shutter, maybe there's something wrong with the comparison tool, but with eletronic shutter is much better in this situation on a7r2, even bettering the D750.
AngularJS: The 5ds is a clear winner for in-studio use: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7rii&attr13_1=sony_a7r&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=sony_a7s&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&attr171_0=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=-0.8584411229224265&y=0.1805708753773435
Talking about the diferences beteween the images that trys to prove your clear conclusion...Based in what aspect you got there?
J A C S: Very similar at high ISO but slightly worse than the D750 and the A7S with better resolution. If you push it really hard, the A7S wins over those two with a lower magenta cast.
Well, jpeg NR from A7r2 is the best of all in the vadims case:Very interesting.
Why???Thats the clear unscientific answer that nobody understands.
canonpro: The noise control is really impressive, not quite 645z or A7S yet, but very close, which is freaking amazing that they could increase the MP and still keep the noise down.All and all, it the A7RII looks pretty amazing, till you see the horrible banding issues. (makes the 5DS not so bad, although the A7S and 645Z show none).
Copy and Paste to see the side by side banding issues im talking about:http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=sony_a7rii&attr13_1=pentax_645z&attr13_2=canon_eos5dsr&attr13_3=sony_a7s&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr15_2=raw&attr15_3=raw&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&attr171_0=off&normalization=compare&widget=1&x=-0.6258321316733072&y=0.35758175105485224
Jorginho: Grrrr....what a xxxxx remark on AF tracking. Man! Read your own reviews please before coming up with this.
From the G7 review:Conclusion - Pros◾Solid image quality in both Raw and JPEG◾4K (UHD) video◾Built-in Wi-Fi with comprehensive set of features◾4K Photo mode with clever pre-burst option for grabbing stills from video◾In-camera Raw conversion for post-shot re-processing◾Super-fast focus for single AF acquisitions◾Impressive continuous AF and tracking with 6 frame per second shooting◾Well-proportioned hand grip◾Extensive external controls
I truely hate it when a reviewer simply equates a whole system on a point where there is exactly the oppiste the case: DFD tech in Panasonic trakcs focus really well.
You should read again and search for the II after the E-M10 on the second line of the second pasted text, or notice that on the first line they are talking about the first iteration.
I don't understand why it didnt took a gold award, really, not by my standards, but yours, the so little cons doesnt make this camera a limitation by any means to take great photographs, menu system, bad continuous af and better handling with adapter, no 4k video.Great little camera, very tempting!I really dont care for more mpx for m4/3. Faster af, better dynamic range and high iso.
Marcelobtp: All three lenses should have been the same focal lenght, same aperture and possibly from their own brand.And another test could have been made with the same lens on all of the bodys...Why?Sony with their own 35mm at 1.4 at the same distance will have more area in focus than a 50mm so possibly less chance of a noticeable out focus shots.Using their own lens ant the others a 3d party lens can be problematic because almost always 3d party lenses does not focus with the same speed or reliability as the in house lenses from each brand.
Yes, thats what i meant but not everyone knows that. =P
All three lenses should have been the same focal lenght, same aperture and possibly from their own brand.And another test could have been made with the same lens on all of the bodys...Why?Sony with their own 35mm at 1.4 at the same distance will have more area in focus than a 50mm so possibly less chance of a noticeable out focus shots.Using their own lens ant the others a 3d party lens can be problematic because almost always 3d party lenses does not focus with the same speed or reliability as the in house lenses from each brand.
For me these files are looking better than rx100IV.
groucher: Interesting samples but I have to ask - why so much CA in some modern lenses? Optically (i.e. ignoring their autofocus and VR capabilities) some of the lenses in this test are nowhere near as good as my 40 to 55 year old pre-AI Nikkors. We seem to be going backwards although I suppose it's possible to mess around with PT Tools to reduce the problem.
Its a mixture of compromises and higher megapixel count.The higher the resolution higher, the magnification of lens aberrations and distorsions.If they want to design a lens today they need to think what are the problems that can be easily correct in PP without destroing the main characteristics of the lens wich the public that will buy the lens want.Other than that, is good to remember that on print you will not notice that as bad as on a monitor, i dont really know the science about it, but i know thats true. 50 years ago you printed much more, take that same lens and put on a very high mpx like this and disable the auto CA correction, the diferences will not be this high. Either way CA was not correctable like this in the past so they needed it be corrected better than today standards
The thing that most standout here was the lenses!This lenses have very nice qualities! Not so surprised about resolution nothing that i care too much seeing on a monitor(4k).Colors i cant really judge but looks like we are seeing better skin tones out of the camera.Good to see.
You guys are being very gentle in the wifi section, you don't even talk about the impossibility to start recording a movie from the phone...Anyways, consistency for me is more important than many features that doesn't work as it should, it seems that the wifi implementation is consistent...
ttran88: Off topic but Rishi, how's the EVF? From the specs it seems to be bigger and better than the already great XT1 EVF?
I'm all with Rishi here, the resolution should have been bumped up, 0.78x is too big to it, if you want to compete with dslrs you should have the EVF at the same or better level of "definition".I guess the next iteration with a bigger or better battery and EVF will be the one i was waiting for! thrilled!
Miki Nemeth: If you have ever tested the Sony A5100 AF-C mode with its brilliant touch-to-focus operability, then these improvements are straightforward steps further. I wonder when Sony is including touch-to-focus operation to all of its cameras? Since I've been using A5100, I'd be really hesitant to step back to a non-touch operation.
@Zeisschen this is not true at all.I'm just waiting for the moment we will look at the evf and use your thumb on the screen to quickly move the AF points.It will be very effective, maybe, in a near future we would not even have physical buttons(dials remain) on the back of the camera,Just a big Oled that adapt to the curvature of thumb rest and so.
This is almost like a revolution. This camera will be a Mark in history of photography and cameras in general. One thing, we need to see with objects moving too, in the use cases shown the IBIS is probably helping the af tracking compensating the movements of the camera, it can be completely diferent with moving objects and the camera steady, either way, i'm already Very impressed!
Thats funny, I thought canon would be the one to get the most out of this sensor, the d810 looks much better with the OTUS and the Canon just a hair better, this acctualy proves that the 85 from canon is sharper than the nikon one and the dilutes even more the diference between these 2 sensors.