WillWeaverRVA: EDIT: Never mind. The acronym "ILC" is confusing, though, as it's typically taken to mean "interchangeable lens compact" (i.e. a mirrorless camera) and not what it's supposed to mean here: "interchangeable lens camera".
Term "Mirrorless" is not going to fade away, regardless if mirrorless fanboys want it to or not.
CameraLabTester: What Sony should really IMPROVE is the public awareness of their MOUNT SYSTEM.
Walk in NEW customers wouldn't know their A's from their E's.
Sony used to have it clear - with nexes and Alphas, but since someone popped with that stupid idea of officially naming nexes Alphas - even Sony's own management gets confused by what is what (see: infamous comment about mirrorless and SLTs being fully interchangable), not to mention customers. And the fact that they make A3000 - e-mount camera looking exactly like A-mount cameras - doesn't help them at all.
tecnoworld: I hope they'll test the new improved AF against the samsung nx1 and the top performer Nikon D750.
Also note that AF tests in perfect light are vastly different to focusing in worse situations.
le_alain: A firmware update for the A7, to have A7II improva AF will be welcome.
Sure they are not. But sometimes they got these moments of brilliance - like this one here. :)
Hans von der Crone: Very much considering this one instead of the 7DII.
Good for you, but both of these are completly irrevelant to anything discoussed here.
abi170845: Look at that pathetic slow lens attached to the 7Dmk2. Where are the pro efs lenses?
As much I love this camera when I tested it out yesterday at my local dealer. Come on Canon, where is the Tough, Weather Sealed non pumping EFS 2.8 zoom like those from Fuji! I would not want to use my EF L lenses on the APSC camera.
Please canon stop producing same old Rebels and double digit APSC and re do all the EFS lenses. 60mm Macro? ancieeent!
Hardly "too big" (though recently mirrorless boys call everything that's used with DSLRs "too big", so I won't get into an argument on that) or "too expensive". Often they're comparable in prices with lenses for mirrorless cameras while at the same time offer much more bang for the buck and better long-term investment.As for the odd focal lengths - that's true in some cases - like 24-70 - but usually FF focal lenghs work very well in APS-C. Sure, they got a different field of view, but still work lovely. Oh, and let me add - using FF lens on APS-C body tends to have an added benefit on minimizing issues with corner sharpness or vignetting.
aris14: Heavily overpriced.
Said by the guy shooting with Panasonic. Priceless.
Mirrorless Crusader: Canikon still doesn't get it - the future of digital photography is MIRRORLESS! Not ugly black clunky leviathans!
We already been going through this back in a firm era. Rangefinders and all of the other small cameras with 35mm film were suppose to crush SLRs.... and we all know how it ended. Meanwhile these days we got only one 35mm mirrorless bayonet which you can't even call a "system" with the pathetic lens line-up it got.
rob asnong: With the latest firmware, the Sony A77 MkII surpasses all competitors:
Sony's own fault. They didn't gave A77 mkII to almost any of the big websites reviewing cameras, so here are the results - we're months after the release, firmware 2.0 released, yet you hardly can find a decent review of a camera. No wonder sales suck. Even if it's the best camera on the APS-C market - noone will ever know.
Yea, just buy full frame lenses. It's future-proof investment. Regardless of the system.Though it's amusing to read comment like that mentioning Fuji which poor users are permanently stuck in convincing themselves that APS-C is be-all-end-all of sensor formats.
Peter Bendheim: For the Sony fanboys this review must be like being in a starved lion pack dropped in the middle of a herd of buck - free lunch, a real banquet, something to get those claws into.
At least they got some lenses to shoot with...
maboleth: Dpreview said that autofocus was lighting fast. But how precise is it, compared to 7D? In my three years of experience, 7D can miss a focus quite often. It depends on the lens, true, but as much as I love this camera, I can't say I'm in love with its AF, far from it. I learned to use it well, but that's that.
So how precise is 7D MK2? If AF is much better, it's totally worth the price in my opinion.
A lot depends on how familiar you are with the AF and it's internal workings. Knowledge really makes a huge difference between "can miss a focus quite often" and "is great".
jonny1976: canon has no clue how to improve iq after 5 years. they should begin thinking a plan b, probbly buying sensor from other side.is not so strange that in cons and pro nothing has been said about iq. simply 3 stops behind sony sensor, color depth is a joke, with inaccurate tonality, skin tone fleshy as always. tons of hours of pp to obtain a neutral look.they still have a plethora of people buying for af and lens line up, but iq they are at micro third level, and panasonic gh4 trash away any canon for video output.than we have then ikon the excellent pentax, the sony....
"canon has no clue how to improve iq after 5 years" - but... they just did improve the image quality.
Marvol: If Dual Pixel AF is so great, why does Canon still need to bother with a mirror box?
Essentially it's like building a steam locomotive that ALSO has a diesel engine. From a simple perspective of efficiency and design unity, something is not quite right.
DPAF is nice to keep the dinosaur that is a DSLR alive for a bit longer, but it does not increase its final verdict vis-a-vis the faster improving (and cheaper to make) mirrorless cameras.
Ego, man. It's all about ego.
mpgxsvcd: I find it very interesting that Canon basically has a stranglehold on the Astrophotography world when their dynamic range is at such a HUGE disadvantage to other competitors. However, the fact that we stack multiple RAW images to remove the noise puts the Canon cameras on a more even playing field for Astronomy.
The stacking process relies on the fact that the noise is random and the signal(Light coming into the lens) is consistent. This means that we can easily isolate and remove the random read noise that plagues the Canon cameras in single exposure shots. We also use dark frames to further identify the noise that is present if there is no signal.
No, it can't. Besides - they produce JPGs which are inferior on their own, with Canon and proper stacking software you can get every bit of information from the sensor with absolutely no losses. This easily compensates for any issues with dynamic range. Though even that is debatable - Dynamic Range that people complain about is at a basic ISO. Once it comes to higher sensitivities Canon either catches up, or goes ahead of competitors, especially compared to Panasonic (it's not that easy against Nikon).
mpgxsvcd: It is remarkable that despite all of the valid issues that Dpreview and its readers have pointed out the owners of Canon cameras continue to produce impressive results.
Does this mean that Canon camera owners have to work harder to get great images? Does it mean they have to avoid difficult situations more than other camera owners would have to? Or does it simply mean that they don’t find themselves in situations that often where the disadvantages of their camera are relevant?
Or it simply means that the "issues" dPreview lists are nowhere near as relevant to the actual photography as people try to picture it in order to convince those shooting with Canon into their bandwagon (what's the latest trend? I guess: mirrorless)
AKH: I think the A7 is an interesting choice and IQ can be good from it. Price is also low with the kit lens, but besides that, the other lenses are quite expensive and will lighten your wallet considerably if you want to go for the best IQ.
Another thing that makes me a little hesitant are the lossy compressed 12 bit raw files which in certain circumstances can produce artifacts. Why is Sony not willing to offer lossless raw?
Also AF in dim light is apparently not very good as far as I can read on different blogs. Can anyone confirm that AF is not very good in dim light - is it Fuji X100 first generation bad or much better than that?
Anyway, prices are so low now with the kit lens and the Sony cashback campaign, that I'm considering this camera very seriously despite these issues.
@Zorak - no need to lecture me. I've been shooting with focus peaking for 3 years now. First impression is great, but once you familiarize yourself with it, and the initial hype wears off - you can quite clearly see that it's inferior to the split-prism matte screen in terms of accuracy.As for the lenses - fair enough on the zooms side, totally forgot about these new lenses. Still they're missing primes, and using "Every lens in the world" is not an excuse as you need adapters for them which is rather laughable for anyone serious about his photography.And you can doubt whatever you want. It doesn't change the facts.
Radilo Breitlack: A thing I really would enjoy is a full frame Merrill sensor in a mirrorless Ricoh / Pentax accepting all that valuable ancient pentaxian glassware in a k-mount.....one keeps dreaming
That would be one waste of a sensor.
ashokvashisht: 6 Sony, 4 Nikon's and 2 Canons in the list. The world of full frame is changing ? :)
Zeisschen - yes, you are emotional, otherwise you'd notice that I haven't commented anything about the quality of cameras - and reminded it to you in my previous post, but you still refuse to acknowledge it and insist that I am "hating" on Sony.
Marcin 3M: Here where I live Sony lenses are more expensive than its Nikon or Canon competitors. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Sony's lenses IQ usually falls behind N/C, while some kind of lenses are simply unavailable (t/s is only third party lens).But I have to agree, that Sony' offer is more and more tempting, especially for newcomers.
Only in the m4/3 world.