Previous page Next page

Sony SLT-A77 II First Impressions Review

May 2014 | By Richard Butler, Jeff Keller
Buy on Amazon.com From $1,198.00


Based on a pre-production SLT-A77 II running firmware 1.00

Sony has announced the SLT-A77 II which, as the name implies, is an overhaul of its semi-pro APS-C camera from 2011. The camera itself looks interesting, but so do some of the things it could be taken to signify.

Sony is not a company that could ever be accused of not trying. Eight years on from buying Konica Minolta's camera business, Sony has produced over forty interchangeable lens cameras based on at least three fundamental design approaches: conventional DSLRs, the fixed-mirror SLT system and the mirrorless E-mount models. Those cameras have continued to get better and the company has recently hit a particularly good run of form.

This success in terms of making very good, as well as very innovative, cameras starts to make sense of what has at times looked like a 'try lots of things, see what sticks' approach. The question is: once one of the designs really delivers on its promise, does it make sense to continue the other technologies in parallel?

Clearly Sony believes it does. Despite the leaps and bounds being made with the E-mount Alphas, both in terms of the on-sensor phase detection autofocus of the a6000 and the full frame sensors shoehorned into the A7 triplets, it has continued to develop its SLT cameras. The A77 Mark II features a new autofocus sensor, and it's much more than a refreshed version of an existing design. Instead the A77 II is built around the AF module with the most focus points of any camera on the market (79), covering an extremely wide area of the frame. It's also rated to work in lighting as low as -2EV. That doesn't necessarily make it quite as sophisticated at pro-grade DSLRs, since they have more cross and diagonal sensor elements, but it looks very impressive for a camera in this part of the market.

The autofocus capability combines with the camera's ability to shoot images at 12 frames per second to offer a compelling feature set. The A77 II also benefits from the autofocus tracking advances that have been included on recent Sony cameras, which use information from the main image sensor to identify and follow a given target.

Beyond that autofocus sensor, the A77 II gains an updated 24MP sensor (presumed to be a version of the sensor from the a6000, but without the on-chip sensor phase detection design) and all the benefits that the company introduced with its Bionz X processor. This means it gains three features: context-sensitive noise reduction, diffraction reduction technology and more-sophisticated sharpening.

Sony SLT-A77 II key specifications:

  • 24MP CMOS Sensor with gapless, offset microlenses
  • 12fps continuous shooting with autofocus (up to 60 JPEGs)
  • 79 point AF module with 15 cross-type AF points, covering 40% of frame
  • Increased control over AF behavior
  • 1080p60 movies with autofocus
  • Audio level monitoring during movie shooting
  • 2.4M dot OLED viewfinder
  • Pull-out three-hinge tilt/swivel 1.23m dot White Magic LCD screen
  • Built-in Wi-Fi with NFC
  • 1/8000th maximum shutter speed, shutter rated for 150,000 actuations
  • ISO 100 - 25,600 (Extendable down to 50, and up to 51,200 with multi-image combination)
  • Auto ISO customization
  • Optional, profile-based correction of vignetting, chromatic aberrations and geometric distortion
  • Top panel LCD
  • Stereo microphone and external mic socket
  • AF Micro Adjust

Focus advances

Although Sony stresses that the A77 II shouldn't be compared to pro-grade cameras (not least because it's much less expensive), it is starting to gain the kinds of paper specifications that suggest it could punch considerably above its weight. For instance, the improvements to the A77 II's autofocus system extend a long way beyond the focus sensor itself.

The Mark II gains a range of subject identifying technologies that Sony has introduced in recent models. As such, it offers Eye-AF, rather than just face detection. It also gains the most advanced version of 'Lock-On AF' that we've yet seen, which will use or allow you to specify an off-center starting AF point (previously most Sonys assumed your subject was the thing at the center of the frame, when you started tracking).

Unlike the A99, which used its on-sensor phase detection elements to track a subject's movement when it was between the focus sensor's focus points, the A77 II uses the focus points adjacent to the currently active point. In addition, the A77 II becomes the first Sony that lets you determine how doggedly the camera should stick with the current focus point - an option you'd usually only expect to find on very high level models. Better still, it lets you specify different values for video and stills shooting.

On top of this, the camera has an A99-style distance limiter that lets you specify the approximate range of focus distance over which you expect your subject to travel, to prevent the camera being distracted by near or distant subjects. Also added is an option to prioritise release or focus in continuous shooting, giving much greater control over the camera's continuous focus and shooting behavior. Overall, the A77 II represents a major step forward for Sony autofocus control.

What's in a name?

Interestingly, Sony's marketing implies that it is moving away from the 'Single Lens Translucent' name for the A77 II, instead adopting the phrase 'Translucent mirror DSLR.' This is a slightly unfortunate phrase to use, semantically, but only because the mirror is actually semi-transparent (translucence implies a diffuse image): the camera has all the elements implied by the term 'DSLR.'

The technology remains the same as before: a fixed, semi-transparent mirror redirects a portion of the light up to a dedicated autofocus sensor, while the majority passes through to the main imaging sensor. The light lost to the AF sensor has a slight cost in terms of high ISO image quality, but avoids the complexity of multiple moving mirrors, with the benefit that autofocus remains available at all times, including during video shooting.

SLT-A77 II vs. SLT-A77 key differences

 

Sony SLT-A77 II

Sony SLT-A77
Sensor New 24MP APS-C CMOS 24MP APS-C CMOS
Body construction Magnesium Alloy/Plastic Magnesium Alloy/Plastic
Viewfinder 2.4m dot OLED TruFinder 2.4m dot OLED TruFinder
Rear LCD 1.23m dot RGBW LCD 920k dot RGB LCD
AF Sensor 79 points (15 cross-type) 19 points (11 cross-type)
GPS No Yes
Wi-Fi Yes No
LCD Articulation Triple hinged (hinge/tilt/swivel) Triple hinged (hinge/tilt/swivel)
Custom settings recall on mode dial 3 1
Hotshoe type ISO standard with Multi-Interface connections Minolta-style
Maximum shooting rate 12fps 12fps
Maximum shutter speed 1/8000th 1/8000th
Video 1080p60 AVCHD 2.0 1080p60 AVCHD 2.0


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2014 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
235
I own it
80
I want it
9
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 673
1234
Miguel Rodríguez

Wow, the noise at 1600 looks terrible... Fuji and Olympus are way better:

http://pliki.optyczne.pl/Sony_A77mkII/16_50/DSC08305.JPG

Anyways at this time the is too much speculation, so let's wait a bit.

2 upvotes
Vitruvius

Sony has far less in-camera noise reduction than Oly. What you gain with Sony and lose with Oly is the dynamic range. Check DXO Mark. I take my A77 RAW files into lightroom and I can selectively reduce the noise as I want and still retain far more information. But if you want out-of-camera JPEGs then Oly is the easier workflow solution.

3 upvotes
Polytropia

No 4K? How do they expect to compete?

1 upvote
OBI656

4K for $1200.00 ? Right ...

2 upvotes
EthanP99

for aps-c cameras:

Canon, no 4k?

Nikon, no 4k?

Pentax, no 4k?

Fuji, no 4k?

How will they ever compete!

Sony already has several 4k cameras, including the fs700 (aps-c)

22 upvotes
The Davinator

Dont need 4k for still shots.

5 upvotes
tabloid

Stills are 4K equivalent.

1 upvote
12345ccr

What is there to compete with?

0 upvotes
naththo

And how can video card cope with 4K nowaday, most video card are STILL not able to work well with 4K video in full screen, they still sluggish. Its a long way off. Plus 4K is over kill for hard drive space, it is utterly stupid. 1920 x 1080 is enough to me for video thats it.

0 upvotes
Polytropia

GH-4 is what they have to compete with. If I was buying a sub-$2000 non-DSLR (i.e. EVF-based) like the A-77, E-M1, GH-4, then I would have a real hard time going any direction but GH-4.

Tabloid is right, stills are 4K-equivalent. But what you're all not considering is that 4K is stills. I.e., GH-4 gives you freaking 30 FPS of 8-megapixel stills. Just think about that for a second!

Panasonic is the only company who understands the future. And has been for a long time. The only future they didn't foresee (but should have) was Fukushima, but lesson learned.

0 upvotes
nicolasrao

Panasonic has and now even in the FZ-1000 a good travel camera. Utility with quality.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Vitruvius

4k for $1k in camera recording is available on the FZ1000. Not APS-C but low light stills performance seems almost as good as any APS-C on the market. Otherwise try Sony RX-10.

1 upvote
OBI656

I am always amazed how many people is bashing new cameras design by qualified engineers with many, many years of experience in camera design.

Non of these critics on the other hand can show some outstanding photography-portfolio beside some louse photos of sunset taken with $3000.00 lenses and latest DSLR cameras.

28 upvotes
Leandros S

...and yet these engineers try to sell to those inept fools who dare buy $3000 lenses. I wonder why.

1 upvote
xMichaelx

Engineers rarely design; they take a designer's (or a design team's) work and try to make it happen, with some back and forth.

Also, these great designers you worship also have us New Coke, the Pinto, and the Zune.

By your seriously flawed and poorly thought-out "logic", EVERY product is a great product. You can't possibly believe that.

3 upvotes
Antonlm

At its inception, the Zune was 10x the mp3 player the ipod was. Had the largest HD at the time and was cheaper. 15 bucks a month subscription to their music store and you got 10 songs free monthly.

6 upvotes
OBI656

xMichaelx, when I say : "new cameras design by qualified engineers..." Yes, new cameras design by qualified engineers from concept and inside camera function, element layout and camera internal conceptuality.
You may have in mind most likely industrial design which belongs to collaboration in between Industrial designers and those I have named in first place, qualified camera engineers.

0 upvotes
Leandros S

@Antonim: Since when is 15 bucks for ten songs a good deal?

0 upvotes
Antonlm

I did not say that 15 bucks for 10 songs was a good deal.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Polytropia

You're really going to defend the Zune? What are you smoking?

It was in NO way "10x the mp3 player the ipod was". By what metric did you judge that?

Certainly not any of these:
• battery life
• reliability
• good looks
• quality of software
• customer service
• music selection

Zune failed hard on all those and they wanted to bill your credit for $180 per year! What a joke!

0 upvotes
nicolasrao

Designers and engineers do a great job and are constantly improving and proving More's law. Every enthusiast like me knows that it is not the engineer who decides what is going where... or they would put the best they can into every model...it's the marketing guys who call the shots...guys please don't go shoot the piano player...he is the one who keeps the mood going...even a simple fact like a square format using the maximum a circular lens can afford is not put to use for e.g. Not engineers folks..market trends and marketing heads decide.

1 upvote
gmke

I am NOT interested in this camera because of some Sony snake oil. Here we have the world's premiere maker of photo sensors building a defect into a camera design that seriously hampers deep ISO. The claim is that the "translucent" mirror only steals 1/3 of an f-stop. Go to the SLT-A77 jpeg noise page and choose the Oly E-M5, Nikon D5100, and Panasonic G3 for comparison, all at normal or standard noise reductions. Note that the noises at ISO-3200 on the E-M5 and D5100 are very well controlled. Then drop the ISO back to 800 and notice how noisy the A77 getup is. Roughly speaking, one might conclude that the translucent mirror makes the A77 as bad as the four thirds sensor in the Panasonic G3. That's a two stop drop, not 1/3. These observations make it very difficult to care about improvements in the AF system.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
OBI656

You are funny ...

12 upvotes
gmke

Funny odd or funny haha? Or both? Any answer is good. No prob. I think your point in the other post is well taken. The possession of a great camera does not a great photographer make, nor does the sole availability of an average camera rule out the capture of an awesome shot. One example, I sucked up a smidgen of pride and got a pocket camera, Canon's SX-280HS, that we took on our last vacation. We came home with some very nice shots, counter to what I expected. Peering into the details was a bit of a surprise too. I often thought, I wouldn't have shot this one THAT way, even though the result was very satisfying. It seems backward, shoot and think. Think and shoot is more comfortable to me. The funny thing in the camera market, and with camera journalism, is the game played. That and the fact that you have to fork over quite a bit of money. My priorities are not universal. Although I do not need deep ISO all the time, I am keen to get as much as possible at any given price point.

1 upvote
VirtualMirage

First, you are not comparing sensor sensitivity as much as you are really comparing JPEG processing capability. I'll admit that compared to the current cameras, the A77's JPEG processing is not the best. The A77II has a much improved JPEG processing algorithm that should help improve image quality. But since I shoot only RAW, it doesn't really affect me either way.

Second, go back to those other cameras and look at their EXIF information using identical ISOs. You will see the shutter speed varies which will add to the discrepancy in sensor sensitivity. This gives as around 1/3-1/2 of extra advantage to the other cameras that are shooting at a slower shutter speed than the A77 at the same ISO.

Lastly, it isn't a 2 stop difference between them when you factor the above. Just look at the other review sites that do a better job at equalizing the playing field.

4 upvotes
123Mike

It has nothing to do with "jpeg". It has to do with more noise combined with poor in-camera denoising algorithms. But, times have moved on, and things have gotten better. I'm sure the A77ii will be better both in terms of initial noise and denoising. I have an A6000 and I see see that the denoising algorithm is better.
People should stop calling it "jpeg engine". It's so silly. The jpeg part is just plain old run-of-the-mill compression algorithm. It is all about the pixels that go in *before* the jpeg compression algorithm. Who came up with that anyway? "jpeg engine". Good grief. The jpeg algorithm hasn't changes in, what, 20+ years?

2 upvotes
VirtualMirage

123Mike, the reason people call it a JPEG engine or JPEG processing is because when saving an image as JPEG, the image processor is applying certain techniques that only get applied to images being saved as JPEGs (they do not get applied to the RAW). So while JPEG compression is a standard, the work done to those images that is exclusive to just the images that get saved as JPEGs are not.

To just call it image processing or processing engine can mislead those that are not informed to think that the same work and processing is being done to every image regardless if it is JPEG or RAW. Calling it JPEG engine or JPEG processing let's individuals know of specific processing steps that are exclusive to images being saved as JPEG (lens correction, DRO, area specific noise reduction, etc.).

2 upvotes
Fri13

It is again the same problem as with "dynamic range" or "micro contrast" what are just meaningless terms for actual technical information. The correct ones are "Exposure Range", "Contrast" (need to understand its meaning by content) and then "A/D processor" what is responsible to register photons hitting to sensor pixels based ISO algorithm. And there the "dynamic range" comes to play what gets changes by the uses ISO level by boosting the electricity output for the sensor, without affecting the Exposure Range.

The A/D chip process all the data and is responsible to as well store the digital data as RAW file, JPEG file or Video file and apply different settings and manipulate data following them.
The JPEG can be saved in different look, but with a same algorithm and different compression and other JPEG feature.

The "JPEG engine" is just a mumbo jumbo for those who doesn't get the technology or doesn't care how it works.

1 upvote
nicolasrao

If Sony had a better noise reduction system, their camera's would have out sold most Canikon cameras long ago. It is their weak link.They have excellent designs, lenses etc. Fixed mirror is not new, the Canon Pelix had it decades ago..it did not succeed then for the same reason it may not succeed now..light transmission. Otherwise the list of advantages that a camera without a moving mirror has, is too long to elucidate here. I started using SLR's in the late 70's late even then but none of us ever took a shot at 1/15 second as the mirror vibration was present during the entire exposure. Even 1/8 second had vibration for only half the exposure making it superior on tripod of course. I could write a page on mirror woes...but enough.

0 upvotes
Vitruvius

It is about 1/3 of a stop. See 8:30 here for tests.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al1BI82nV9A
No snake oil, only poor in camera compression. Hope my new A77ii is better.

0 upvotes
plasnu

It seems like rather minor update for SONY, but it's much better than adding countless useless marketing gimmick sometimes Sony have done to their cameras. Good job.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
lehill

In Specifications, Autofocus section it lists PDAF, focus point modes and others including "Contrast Detect (sensor)". Is that true?

1 upvote
ZTJ

One of the claims on this new camera is significant improvement in AF accuracy. Perhaps, at least in single AF mode, it finalizes with contrast like the mirrorless hybrid AF cameras do?

Or perhaps it's nothing more than a botched copy/paste job.

1 upvote
Underdog 3000

Looks like a great camera down to 1 EV.
Too bad its HUGE

0 upvotes
austin design

Huge?! -- what utter nonsense. It's a DSLR. If you prefer some compact camera to keep in your purse, fine, but don't fault this camera for being precisely what it's meant to be.

7 upvotes
William Koehler

HUGE - compared to what?

http://camerasize.com/compare/#153,31

1 upvote
Peiasdf

You have the wrong image up for VF comparison.

0 upvotes
PhotoLouP

This may be a good replacement for my A580--I have Sony dSlrs and Samsung NX series. Both are very capable, but different. For the Sony, some things that are extremely important to me:

1. Battery compatibility. Finally the right battery!
2. Flash--rarely need these days with the current sensors. I learned on ASA 64 slide film so anything above ISO 400 is bonus.
3. AF--will see how well it does for action/wildlife.
4. Articulated screen--years ago was a skeptic, but love it now that I have learned to use it.
5. Weather sealed--finally!

Misses

1. Two card slots, still want to write raw to one and jpeg to the other.
2. Price--could have WAF if under 1K, that is the limit for me.

Questions

1. Need to see how the camera works with manual lenses. I love the A580 focus check feature.
2. Smile detect--seems like a dumb feature, but it really is incredible on the A580 for family situations. Sometimes these "non pro" features are surprising.

Look forward to more details!

4 upvotes
alexpaynter

I am struggling to see why this is better than an a6000. I am assuming it has the same processor, same sensor, same autofocus etc.

It has a bulkier body which some may find easier to hold.

0 upvotes
Thoughts

More A moutn lenses to choose from?

5 upvotes
Eleson

Not the same autofocus. These are based on a separate , dedicated AF chip and module, not on the sensor. Allowing it to be larger and basically better.

6 upvotes
Xentrax

Why does A6000 claim 92% AF coverage then? A77-II has much less AF coverage area.

I don't know how well AF sensors in the corners perform compared to center one, but still A77-II does not give an option as it does not have any corner sensors at all, at least press release does not mention it.

Besides that A6000 AF system does not really need calibration, while separate AF sensor plate in A77-II will have to be adjusted at the authorized service center. Otherwise, as factory calibration is not very good, one has to introduce microadjustments for every particular lens.

0 upvotes
Eleson

The coverage is smaller, but the the practical difference is small. On sensor AF sensors are small to not disturb the image capturing. Having a separate AF module allows for larger sensors and much better low light capabilities. Cross sensors are better at locking on to different types of targets, that have contrasting lines in different directions.
Larger sensors make it easier to lock on to subjects, and that allows for tracking of subjects.

Yes , separate sensor module means that there is a risk for alignment issues, but saying that factory calibration is poor is pushing it, and yes the a77ii have micro-calibration for 30(?) lenses, but on my a77 the sensor is spot on.

I would bet that this is more sensitive on a traditional DSLR, as the AF relies on 2 moving mirrors instead of one fixed. Yes, two. One semitransparent that direct half of the light to the OVF, and lets half of thru to the AF mirror, attached to the main mirror. That second mirror directs light to the AF module.

3 upvotes
Wolfgang Fieger

More and better body controls?
Better view finder?

1 upvote
Lucas_

IMO those are OK! I'm glad Sony kept the excellent form factor (ergonomics) and buttons/dials arrangement. The EVF is also the same, best in industry for this level of camera.
I really think Sony did a fantastic job in not changing what was already great. The price also seems quite reasonable too!

1 upvote
Gaëtan Lehmann

Some nice things:
* no more useless non customizable help "?" button!
* enhanced AF
* better frame coverage
* more AF points
* low light
* distance range
* some customizations possible
* wifi
* tethering
* enhanced LCD display
* auto ISO in M mode (?)

Some new bad things:
* GPS is gone
* really good AF assist lamp is gone
* must press the button to turn the dial, really?

Still some bad things from the A77:
* no exposure compensation display on the top lcd

And still many good things:
* triple hinge LCD - this thing is incredibly useful!
* AF in live view as good as in the viewfinder
* high quality viewfinder
* excellent ergonomy
* high quality case
* 1/8000 max shutter speed
* 1/250 sync speed
* very low latency shutter release
* up to 12 fps
* level display

And some unknown:
* less noise in low light in th VF?
* faster switch between the viewfinder and the rear display?
* fixed the very poor flash performance of the A77?

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
17 upvotes
Ivo Tonev

Very well put!
Exactly my thoughts, and I cannot seem to justify the GPS and AF assist lamp been dropped.

1 upvote
Polytropia

Maybe it doesn't need to focus anymore. And who cares where you were.

0 upvotes
steve_hoge

OK, are any shooters out there really using Memory Stick media? I wonder if they'd have had room for GPS hardware if they'd left out the MS slot...

0 upvotes
thebustos

The card slot is SD or memory stick, so just one slot.

1 upvote
whitebird

Still using MS HG Pro media here. Very fast and reliable (most important thing really) if not compatible with so many other devices.

2 upvotes
Ron Poelman

Perhaps,
but one $5 adapter, two Micro SD cards,
equals one immense Memory Stick slot;
this is a problem ?

1 upvote
Spectro

I was impressed the a77 have an IR AF assist light, similar to the one found on speedlights (better then the regular bulb). So they gone from best AF assist light to lesser, with a pop up flash. Having none is the worst. To think of it my A7 doesn't have any AF assist nor a pop up. I manually focus with that camera more anyways. Even that I get some misses.

2 upvotes
ZoomZoom Diva

The question becomes is this FINALLY the camera that is worth getting to replace my antique Konica-Minolta 7D... and it will be good to see a full review to see if it is a significant step forward from the A77 regular model.

I'm one of the odd ducks who actually is interested in Sony for the on body stabilization and that I can continue to use my existing lenses.

3 upvotes
Wolfgang Fieger

Do yourself a favour and do the upgrade. I used the 7d in former days, loved it, and still take it out once in a while. But even compared with the A700 it already felt, well very outdated. Image quality is still very good in good light, but avoid anything above ISO 800...
AF speed is lame compared to the usefull quickness and responsiveness of the new models.
And the monitor is just lurky....

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Yoggie

Can GPS data be transferred from a cell phone via WiFi/NFC to the A77ii? I realize we probably wont know for sure until a full test, but if it can then I wont be as worried about the lack of GPS on the camera.

0 upvotes
maximuscr

It's possible the other way round or afterwards on your pc with several geotagger apps like this one:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tappytaps.android.geotagphotospro&hl=de

1 upvote
Yoggie

That is an option, but I prefer the method of having the GPS data added to the RAW picture at time of capture. It is way easier for the user if the process is fully automated.

4 upvotes
Michael Foran

For that matter, would the WiFi be able to triangulate coordinates from multiple WiFi sources?

0 upvotes
Eleson

There is room for a playmemories App to do that.

0 upvotes
braisim

I have to say I don't understand why GPS has been replaced with WiFi/NFC. I am an A77 owner and I do find the GPS useful. Frankly I struggle to see what real benefit WiFi would give me. The best quality images from the A77 measure some 24 MB. So I can transfer this to my phone (after having set all of that up on my smartphone) and then post it on flickr or facebook. And then have that transfer take 10 minutes as I'm in an area without 3G let alone 4G and then have my carrier charge me for all of that data transfer, because I'm abroad. And then have my smartphone battery last only 6 hours instead of a full day. I don't see the point. On a camera like this, unless one wants to use remote control (which seems like a pretty niche activity) I don't see the value of WiFi/NFC. Please educate me.

8 upvotes
Eleson

remote Control.

9 upvotes
laughingor

wifi does not required to connect via mobile data. it is an internal link between camera and other wifi devices(tab, phone, laptop). I always use it to share few photos taken of the days. instead all photos, so don't worry about battery drain.

1 upvote
BarnET

In my area WiFi hotspots are common. And an tablet is easier to carry as my 15.6 inch laptop.
You have some solid arguments that do not apply to the larger public.

2 upvotes
photogalleryonline

Its handy when tranferring to ipad for editing and yes upload to facebook, but i agree total waste of time on a smart phone, when i travel OS i take ipad and pocket wifi and buy a sim car OS, that way i can keep up to date with friends and family they can keep up to date with my pics and also it gives me back up on the ipad if the camera or SD card fails or gets stolen. ....provided you don't keep your ipad with your camera gear. Interested in when you use GPS I find it totally useless, slows the whole camera down and sucks battery power, I have an A77 and a 6D and I leave both wifi and gps (on the canon off) and the gps off on the A77, only turn on the wifi on the canon when i need to suck images off it...its is more convenient and quicker than apples stupid sd card reader

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe

> but i agree total waste of time on a smart phone

I've used my smartphone as a remote screen / shutter for my GX7 loads of times, it's a very nice feature to have.

0 upvotes
braisim

I guess I'm never in a situation when I would find remote control useful. Maybe for group photos it might be nice, but then there is always the self-timer or maybe the Sony accessory remote can do this too? I like to tag my holiday photos with location info when on holiday so I find GPS useful for that. I can get a day or so of casual shooting out of the battery so I don't find this a problem and I always have a spare. Sometimes I bring a notebook PC with me on holiday to copy photos onto the hard drive but a cable works just fine for this. Everyone's phot needs are different but I find for me that GPS is more useful than WiFi.

1 upvote
straylightrun

Then don't buy the a77 and get a camera with GPS. Problem solved.

0 upvotes
Artpt

Consider the phone connectivity as useful for securing the camera on an elevated monopod for another perspective....it is a bit of luck, but there are some great shots overhead...using a light camera helps of course....

0 upvotes
steve_hoge

Remote control is a compelling rationale for WiFi - image transfer, not so much. For that there's always EyeFi.

0 upvotes
Lucas_

I rarely use the gps on my 3 cameras, it sucks too much battery!

0 upvotes
austin design

straylightrun, you mean A77II, not A77. And, FYI, commenting on a camera's design -- whether we like it and why -- is what this section is all about. So kudos to the OP for sharing his entirely germane opinion.

1 upvote
Eleson

@dpr. with image quality being toss between the different cameras and sensor sizes, I think it would be helpful to exdend the testing with controlled AF performance tests, split up in video/stills and viewfinder/liveview or something like that.

The differences are much bigger in the AF area than they are in image quality itself.
Testing that could also also drive the (mirrorless) market in the AF area and highlight those who do it well.

The world is more than shooting sleeping cats in the dark. :)

4 upvotes
Treeshade

Could this be the long-awaited D400 (D9300) and EOS 7D mk2 ?
( No. Those who want a D400/7D2 are often too heavily invested into the lens system to switch.)

0 upvotes
Eleson

Maybe true, but it is a benchmark that they need to beat for sports/action/wildlife.
How long are people willing to wait if they fear that the offer will be late and not up to par, but still more expensive?

5 upvotes
Marvol

I'm afraid Treeshade is right though. CaNikon don't need to do anything to beat this Sony. People who have a D400 or 7D are very unlikely to switch - and don't CaNikon know it.

Regardless, as I've said earlier, Canon are going to add GPS and Nikon will have half a stop cleaner ISO 12800 so their cameras will be trumpeted as better because of that anyway.

0 upvotes
Eleson

True, but try shooting BIF on a tripod using LCD with Canikon. :)
There are simply stuff that is unique for every brand, so it'll find its users.

4 upvotes
MarshallG

If it took Canon EF mount lenses with full compatibility... then it would give Canon one heck of a challenge.

2 upvotes
WBateman

As a Nikon user, I find the A77 MkII announcement to be completely demoralizing. The best Nikon can do in a crop sensor is 6 fps at 24 mp, and the buffer on that is still slow. So how can Sony come out with twice the frame rate at the same resolution, with more autofocus points, at presumably a price very similar to the D7100 that I have? If Nikon released this camera, it would be the D300 follow-up and would be priced around the $2,000 range. I'm on a tight budget and wouldn't be able to replace all my third-party lenses with Sony mounts if I decided to switch over, so it is very frustrating for me.

12 upvotes
ric63

The speed is achieved due the the Sony being an SLT not SLR. It has no moving mirror to contend with so this is where the speed advantage lays.

1 upvote
Eleson

@bateman.
That the situation some will need to think about. Does the technology I'm invested in have architecture to ever give me the performance I already can get elsewhere at a lower cost.
And for those who stay, some will feel like they just have to bend over and take it, and can't do anything about it.

I'm not saying 'switch' , but i am saying like the choice you make.

2 upvotes
Vitruvius

@ WBateman - Exactly why I switched from Canon EOS to Sony about a year ago. Sold my Canon lenses for one good Sony lens and will rebuild from there. Canon and Nikon are sitting high and mighty on their "we serve pros" perch and I am happy to see SOMEBODY make them actually try to innovate again.

0 upvotes
sunnycal

Same cRaw? No lossless comressed (or uncompressed) raw?

0 upvotes
Marvol

Yes.
No.

Having gotten that out of the way, please do show us some of your pictures that were RUINED because of Sony's compressed RAW.

15 upvotes
Deliverator

"RawDigger: detecting posterization in SONY cRAW/ARW2 files"

http://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/sony-craw-arw2-posterization-detection

4 upvotes
Vitruvius

That RawDigger article is awesome! Thanks you very much. I always wondered why my Sony RAW files were not as clean as I expected. Would be nice if they offered a true RAW output mode as an option and perhaps disable the 12fps feature in that mode as a trade off.

0 upvotes
Boss of Sony

Is this camera better than Canon 70d or Pentax K3? Can someone help me? I have no idea.

0 upvotes
macclesfieldman

Difficult question - in some respects, the old A77 was better than the 70D. I prefered the A77 over the Canon, but it is also a matter of taste.

7 upvotes
topstuff

If you use the back screen of the camera a lot ( live view) then the Sony is much, much better because the autofocus is much faster - this is because the Sony does not have a mirror flapping around unlike the Canon and Pentax. This also means that autofocus on video is also much better.

10 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic

It is very different. Most refined classic DSLR experience, which is also highly enjoyable, is I think one in the Pentax K-3. I believe Pentax makes best DSLRs and delivers top-notch DSLR experience, bar none.

One step below that classic and highly polished experience, and more towards the gadget level that appeases hordes, is the 70D. If you have canon lenses, maybe a good choice. But I think its OVF and usability is rather lacking, albeit there is enough gadgetry inside to keep you occupied for months.

A77 is different than both. I frankly do not understand the appeal of this line of cameras from Sony, because it is not built to provide any special aesthetic experience. A cacophony of technologies without a certain aim. I think Sony has lost the idea what matters in photography after a rather nice A100 camera, perhaps because most of it was designed directly by the ex-Minolta team.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Eleson

"A cacophony of technologies without a certain aim. "

I would disagee on that.
The a77 is a long reach (APS-C 24MP) hi speed sports/BIF/action shooter:
- Hi fps rate.
- Good to great AF system.
- Low latency as you don't have to wait for mirror to flip up before the shot.
- Allowing you to use all of this even when you shoot using the LCD,
making low angle shots much easier, and BIF using LCD on a tripod,
to name a few examples.
- AF-D to set min and max focus range to never be disturbed by ostacles passing by again.

Couple this with the 70-400, 70-200, or the 300 mm lenses and you'll be second to none.

But it is not your "Let's-shoot-a-black-cat-in-the-dark-and-count-hairs" camera.

17 upvotes
ric63

Sony hit the nail on the head years ago with it's take on live view by using a second image sensor and not lifting the mirror which was and still is so old fashioned on some other cameras. The SLT is a great evolution and innovation that other manufactures seem reluctant to do. Sony tries all sorts of new an innovative things. Some are good some are not, but they keep on trying.

11 upvotes
tbcass

"Sony has lost the idea what matters in photography after a rather nice A100 camera, perhaps because most of it was designed directly by the ex-Minolta team."

As a former A100 owner and presently an A77/65 owner I can say with complete confidence the newer cameras are much much much better cameras in every possible way. I don't know what kind of "special aesthetic experience" you are looking for (religious experience maybe?). Me I just want to take photos and let them provide the aesthetics.

5 upvotes
ric63

Agree TB.
Any new Sony I look forward to :-)

2 upvotes
nicolasrao

I shoot birds and other moving things..If the Fps and focus tracking work..I think the other details in the image processing can be worked out easily, actions written etc. It's is the particular frame with the best action point I am interested in...if that works, that is all that is needed...GPS, WiFi I have been shooting before all this was even expected or foreseen. Keep tabs where you have been that is GPS. How can one forget where a photograph was taken?After 45+ years I can almost re-live every frame.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
devonsmith11

If you like EVF, action shooting with fast frame rates and good buffer, live view shooting in multi angles,decent video,built in shake reduction, A mount lens availability in your area, go for Sony. If you shoot against elements, prefer OVF, shake reduction, low light shooting, fast frame rates with good buffer and K-mount lens availability in your area, go for Pentax. If you shoot loads of HQ video with autofocus, shoot low light, prefer OVF and you have loads of Canon glass, go for 70d.

0 upvotes
srados

I hate electronic viewfinder.When I look into, my eye focus on the grid on the screen...from what the screen was made off. #1 reason that keeps me away from Sony.

3 upvotes
JosephScha

With 1.2M element (I know, only 300,000 RGBW pixels) I think it is possible that you would not be able to focus on the grid on the screen. Your objection may be from seeing less resolute viewfinders.

6 upvotes
K E Hoffman

There is no grid with the Sony A77 EVF.. you get more of that with some OVF textures that makes it work was a rear projection screen. IT took me a while to try the EVF and upgrade from my A700 to A77 but now I would never go back to the limited OVF system.

19 upvotes
brendon1000

You should give EVFs a second change. They are getting better and better with every iteration. I HATED the EVF on my A55 when I moved from the beautiful pentaprism viewfinder on my A700.

I don't love the EVF but I don't hate it either. I no longer go wow when looking at FF viewfinders anymore and I have gotten accustomed to the advantages of the EVF . Shooting with an OVF camera now seems wrong somehow to me.

8 upvotes
Marvol

For me the cutoff lies between the EVF of the A57 and that of the A65/NEX-6.

I accidentally got sent an A57 when I bought the A65, and that EVF I hated. It still looks like an EVF - low res, tearing, the lot.

But the higher-specced EVF in the 6-lines is absolutely gorgeous and I'm never going back to OVF.

4 upvotes
WildBill in MN

I didn't know how well I'd like the EVF, but it is now an indispensable tool. I would not go back. With it, I can do a better job of leveling the camera, getting the proper exposure by seeing a live histogram, seeing directly what will be in the image, previewing white balance, out-of-focus highlights, etc.

If the grid or any of the tools bother you, it is a simple user preference to turn one, some, or all off.

If I really like looking at things through nice glass, I'll take binoculars any day over any glass viewfinder on the planet.

4 upvotes
ric63

You REALLY need to look into a modern OLED EVF on these Newer Sony. You can comment back here after doing so. I'm sure you will be impressed. There are no grids, lines or anything they are just wow!

4 upvotes
tbcass

I used OVFs for 35 years and now EVFs. I will never go back because the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.

5 upvotes
ric63

We agree on so many things Cass.
Even my A700 is ridiculous now compared to RX10 EVF.
JUst wish they put the NEX6/A77 OLED into it :-(

2 upvotes
peevee1

"I hate electronic viewfinder.When I look into, my eye focus on the grid on the screen...from what the screen was made off. "

Poor thing. Did you dictate this message to your secretary because you cannot work on a computer monitor?

0 upvotes
srados

Computer screen is good 60 cm away from my eyes, at 40 cm I can focus on grid.Also I could see grid on any Sony TV set from 3-4 meters...and it is only Sony! Also I do work on Wacom Cintiq monitor and monitor grid irritates me...No I did not dictate this to my secretary, if I have one I would...To only good thing about loosing 20/20 vision is this is becoming less and less an issue.But if you ask me would I buy camera with EVF answer will still be NO.

0 upvotes
tbcass

To each his own.

0 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost

Impressive specs, lower launch price than the a77.

12 upvotes
Lucas_

I applaud Sony for this new version of the A77! I had an A77 for a bit over one year before changing to FF with the A99, and loved it. As the reviewer said, Sony kept all the good features the camera had and improved on the ones that needed some upgrade in a quite ingenious way. I just hope a similar treatment is done on the A99 when the time comes ( maybe to show at Photokina..? )

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
8 upvotes
Prognathous

They didn't keep all the good features. They removed several features, with the most important ones being the AF Assist and the GPS. The switch to the new hotshoe was already debated during the A99 launch and remains very much questionable with the A77 MkII.

8 upvotes
leonche64

With the higher sensitivity of the sensor, the AF lamp is unneeded. In other words, situations where it would have been activated on the 77 because the light was too low to focus, the II can focus in those situations. Below that threshold, like on the 77, the flash is needed anyway. I think the loss of GPS was a result of 2 things. The Sony survey we got last year that asked how much we used it, and the the number of add on units that Canikon sell. I don't think they are big movers in this segment of the market. The new hotshoe was absolutely necessary. The old hotshoe was for flash only. At present, the new does flash, remote audio, spot light, and in the future will provide an interface between camera bodies that will allow for integrated photo options, and many other things. That is progress man.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Prognathous

Leon, as I wrote before, the flash is not a good replacement for the AF Assist lamp as it's very distracting and far less effective (as it does not project patterned light). It's really a terrible option if you're shooting using ambient light you don't want to blind your subjects with the flash.

As for the hotshoe, it was possible to extend the old shoe with additional contacts, but a far simpler solution would be to just change the protocol when a new flash or device is detected. USB uses only 4 contacts, and there's no doubt that it's more than enough to handle any communication required. The real reason Sony changed the shoe is because they gave up trying to educate Canon and Nikon users who kept pointing to it as a disadvantage compared to their beloved ISO shoe, not knowing that it is in fact a far superior solution.

http://keppler.popphoto.com/blog/2007/01/shoe_fetish.html

2 upvotes
leonche64

I understand your point, but if I understand the review, it means that the camera will focus in the same darkened environmental conditions without the lamp that the 77 couldn't, so it was not needed. If I misunderstood, and it is just that strobe light effect that my A7D had, then it is boo boo.

1 upvote
ABracken

I'l wait for the hasselblad version!

16 upvotes
kcccc

And I can make a wooden grip for you if that's what you want :)

7 upvotes
William Koehler

...and then complain you can't afford it.

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey

Is there a fundamental issue which means on-sensor PD is worse than the off-sensor variety? Otherwise you'd think SLT's days are somewhat numbered...

2 upvotes
abortabort

Yes. The sensors on a dedicated PDAF are much bigger and as such more accurate as well as being more sensitive. There is a reason why on sensor PDAF shuts off at certain light levels. Also those cameras use CDAF for focus, the PDAF are 'assist' points. For a camera with PDAF lenses these are not enough. The 70D with all it's PDAF points doesn't really perform better than the original A77, which had very average (and near lowest in class) dedicated PDAF. Though the extra spread of the 70D OSPDAF does have some advantages.

1 upvote
Prognathous

abortabort, if there's one thing traditional PDAF isn't (compared to anything on sensor) it's accurate. As an A77 owner I can't wait for Sony to switch to on-sensor PDAF. The tradeoff between performance and accuracy is much better balanced with this technology.

1 upvote
WildBill in MN

Regarding the accuracy of a separate focus sensor, one must keep in mind that it can be calibrated. The light path must be exactly the same length from the lens to the focus sensor as it is from the lens to the image sensor. The a77 has microadjust because of that, but I found it better to get the body calibrated, and then use microadjust if even necessary.

0 upvotes
peevee1

"Yes. The sensors on a dedicated PDAF are much bigger and as such more accurate"

Bigger sensor cannot be more accurate. The sensor needs to be the size of a pixel to provide the pixel-level accuracy.
All those separate PDAFs are not accurate anyway, only 1 point working at f/2.8? How is it going to be accurate for a f/1.4 lens? f/1.2 like the one Canon, Fuji, Pana have?
And all that sensor adjustment, which works on certain focus distance but does not work on others, on a certain FL (for zooms) but off on others... It is simply an outdated film-era technology when you could not read data from film in real time.

0 upvotes
William Koehler

A handy specification to include would be maximum video clip length(time).

0 upvotes
brendon1000

Most cameras can record a max of 29 minutes video to avoid the higher taxes dedicated video cameras attract.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe

Some companies only apply that limit to European models (eg. Panasonic) and models sold outside the EU have no clip length limit.

0 upvotes
tbcass

I don't think there is a limit. With AVCHD there is a 2GB limit per file but when the camera reaches 2GB it saves that file and without interruption immediately starts recording another file. These files can then be easily combined with a photo editor.

3 upvotes
William Koehler

Some cameras stop at 2 GB, others at 4 GB, others at 29 minutes 50 seconds, and others like the Panasonic cameras at 45 minutes, 2 hours, and unlimited (GH1/2/3/4).

0 upvotes
Michael Ma

Sometimes GPS comes in handy when trying to remember exactly where you took it.

I think people are oversensitive to private data that no one would ever care about. OK, so you went to Yosemite National Park and a TGIF for a company dinner. Guess what, no one cares.

9 upvotes
Martin Brossman

I am disappointed they took off the GPS. I use it with my A77. Impressed with other additions.

5 upvotes
PiscesNH69

totally agree! I was just on vacation for three weeks and GPS helped a lot knowing where the pics came from.

3 upvotes
Dave Oddie

I use GPS on my A77 all the time. It is never off. With Lightroom it is very useful to see where photos were taken and if anyone ever travels extensively it is a boon.

Why do Sony do this type of thing?

WiFi to a phone is no substitute as even if the phone can tag the photos or use an app store GPS data for later manual addition most smart phones battery life is not up to the task of long term use.

5 upvotes
srados

By PiscesNH69 (2 hours ago)

totally agree! I was just on vacation for three weeks and GPS helped a lot knowing where the pics came from.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unless you took 6 month trip around the world so you need to remember, THAN I will find GPS useful.Technology in these devices is underused by ordinary 30-40 year old.I do not use GPS I still use my brain to remember.Also you can look at the image and remember, don't you?

5 upvotes
Timbukto

Or what if you take pictures of your children, and many years from now they reflect upon any one of those pictures and have the thought...boy wouldn't it be cool to visit that *exact* location again? I have GPS on my 6D and I'm glad its there. Sometimes useful technology is useful.

I wasn't born in a hospital, but in a house in Los Angeles near the Dodger Stadium. And I moved *a lot* as a child through various apartments, condos, and homes and various schools. Had technology been capable of recording GPS with pictures, I would know a lot more about my own childhood than I do now.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
K E Hoffman

The trick is get an app the creates GPX files.. and sync the clocks on your camera and phone. There is at least one plug in that will read the file find the shots that match the time and batch GEOTAG the, and I know my phone GPS is a lot better at locking on even in some buildings than the camera GPS. I liked knowing it was there.. but won't missed it and on a shoot like a vacation .. would set up the GEOTAGGING plug in.

1 upvote
Jabba23

@Timbukto are you saying that you take such a memorable picture and you or your kids can't even recall where that place is?

0 upvotes
Timbukto

No I do not know the actual geographical locations of much of my childhood as I did not grow up in the same house or go to the same schools and moved quite a bit. Even if I were to ask my father, I doubt he'd have the best memory of each location! Yet a photo record with GPS coordinates would instantly and easily identify a lot. GPS is not only for you to remember what happened last week, it is for you to remember things 30+ years ago. Or if these pictures interest grandchildren 60 years past and so on. I actually have a very good memory of many *pictures* of myself taken by my father when I was very young, had I also had the ability to see geotagging on each of these pictures, it would be even more interesting. I don't see how anyone who is not a complete narcissist not see the potential value of GPS or geotagging.
Not every picture has to be a 'landmark' picture or be about what happened last week. Not everywhere you go needs to be a 'franchise', or every memory a commodity.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ric63

To be honest if someone can't remember where they took there photos then they may have a bit of a problem.
I have had GPS on many cameras and switch it off the moment I get it.
The only thing I thought it might be good for was constructing a world map with some points where I have been, but I can do that without the GPS function. To me anyway it's a croc of----------

1 upvote
contadorfan

PaintshopProx6 does a good job of geotagging photos if you decided afterwards you'd like to add a geotag. I think other PP software do also. I never use GPS in camera because of the battery drain issue, but find that I can easily use PP software if I really feel compelled to add GPS coordinates. Sometimes I can remember the location precisely. Other times, no, but exact precision isn't necessary -- town name is good enough.

0 upvotes
William Koehler

They added Wifi, they took away GPS. I imagine they did what they did because they figured out what most people will actually pay for and the eternal battery life/CIPA #pictures taken tradeoff.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

I can't believe the key differences table above does not include the new "standard-style" hot shoe! The old A77 had the proprietary Sony slot-style hot shoe. WTF?

6 upvotes
antares103

Why would we not expect the new style hotshoe? Sony has not made a Minolta style hotshoe since the A99 was introduced (at least)

1 upvote
Prognathous

The table also fails to mention the removal of the AF Assist lamp and 3D Sweep Panorama mode.

2 upvotes
Scottelly

The "key differences" table is SUPPOSED to identify the DIFFERENCES, of which the hot shoe for the flash is one. They should have listed the removal of the 3D Sweep Panorama mode and the lack of the AF Assist lamp too. If there are things that shouldn't be listed in that table, such as stuff that is not different, like the viewfinder and the video mode, and there is stuff that should be listed, such as the issues I just mentioned and things like the locking mode dial. I see they have edited the chart now . . . or I was mistaken and the information was there, when I read it, but I missed it. It's difficult to tell with these "live" articles! ;)

2 upvotes
ric63

WTF?
No panorama?

0 upvotes
tbcass

Yes it does Panorama just not 3D panorama, a rather useless gimmick.

5 upvotes
new boyz

I have no complaint about using pre flash as focus assist. When focus lamp is needed, you're doing flash photography anyway. Serves as red eye reduction mechanism as well.

0 upvotes
Tonio Loewald

Speaking as someone who virtually never uses flash and sometimes needs a focus-assist light, I have to disagree.

6 upvotes
SteveY80

My ring flash doesn't have a focus assist lamp, making one on the camera useful occasionally.

The biggest issue, though, is that using the flash generally doesn't work that well. At least that's my experience of this feature on the A57.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

I have a serious complaint about it. They should include an infra-red-only bean projector and NOT have pre-flash for every use of a flash for shooting in auto-focus. Why? Because at a party, like a wedding, someone often wants to get candid shots, and they CAN do this, if there is no warding to the people that someone is taking their photo, until the flash goes off. Then it is too late, and the moment is captured. That alone is a good reason for NOT requiring a "pre-flash" for shooting in auto-focus mode in really dim light. Other reasons abound . . . such as when someone is trying to capture photos of animals in the dark. Yes, some animals don't care, and some animals see infra-red light, so they might be startled by infra-red light beams anyway, but many animals would run off, if there is a series of flashes fired for the camera to focus, making it useless to shoot the photo. Another reasons is: using the flash is likely to draw more power from the battery.

5 upvotes
abortabort

You only need the assist beam when there isn't enough light to focus. Being that the new AF system can focus down to much lower light levels this is unlikely to be any difference between A77 with assist beam and A77 II without (except the advantage of not having to use the assist beam of course).

1 upvote
K E Hoffman

Not sure how someone would get a AF lamp to work with the RING FLASH blocking it.. The reality is that a lot of the newer lenses with the wider aperture's people want.. with the hood along with hands often blocked the AF light.. So if it were in a good position I like it.. but this may be more annoying and more reliable.

2 upvotes
Prognathous

abortabort, I'm sure the new AF systems does work in really low light, but only when the subject is high contrast test pattern. It'll be a completely different matter when the subject is of the more common (breathing) sort, where the pattern projected by the AF Assist lamp makes a world of a difference. I can tell you from experience that it does when you approach lower "supported" EVs with other cameras, including the original A77.

0 upvotes
Andy Crowe

@Scottelly Don't most pro grade flash guns have a built-in IR flash assist bulb? Wouldn't a wedding photographer be using one of these?

0 upvotes
Scottelly

Andy I use a radio remote and light the whole room with flash, and I've seen other photographers shooting weddings this way too, but I still need to focus, and frankly, the flash popping up would be a hindrance (maybe not even work for me). At least this camera should focus better in low light, without the assist beam. Sometimes people want to use the on-camera flash to capture a candid moment though, but a pre-flash is going to kill that moment. I'm talking about using this camera in all sorts of situations, not just a specific type of shooting. There are SOME situations where this new "feature" is not a problem or where it is actually an advantage, but I don't like it at all.

0 upvotes
maxeythecat

Sorry but GPS belongs in your car, not your camera. ' Nuff said.

6 upvotes
Photoworks

Sure ... but what if you have a really bad memory and forget where the Grand Canyon or Eiffel Tower is located? I was recently looking at some images I shot of the Colosseum and, for a minute, I thought it may have been in New York. Thankfully I was able to resolve this conundrum by making use of the all important GPS data.

7 upvotes
Ben Ramsey

Sorry, but the Sony name belongs on your Walkman, not on your camera.

Hey look, I can say absurd things too. Some like it and find it useful (as Sony also did before), so why does it 'not belong'?

6 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer

There are places in the world--not many--that are not as instantly recognizable as the Grand Canyon or Eiffel Tower. So, for those rare occasions, GPS might be useful. Even if you don't use it, its hard to see what harm it causes, unless you're concerned the folks from Area 57 are tracking your photos.

8 upvotes
Scottelly

WRONG. I have dozens of photos that I have NO IDEA where I was, when I shot them. But it would be nice to be able to identify the location some day, when/if I publish those photos in a book or something. Many of these "pro-sumer" cameras are used by people to shoot photos on vacation. After 6 or 7 vacations, it's nice to be able to look at the map and pick the photos of places by location. This is easily done by programs that can map the locations of where photos were shot . . . like iPhoto and Aperture. Even Google's Picasa does this, I believe. There are other reasons, but that is just a start. You can turn off the GPS if you're afraid it is going to drain your battery, but from my own experience with a Sony A55, which was known for having terrible battery life, because its battery was so tiny, the GPS does NOT draw a lot of power. I was able to shoot hundreds of photos with that camera, and if I shot a lot in a few hours I could shoot over 1,000 per charge. (RAW+JPG)

7 upvotes
SteveY80

A natural history internet circle I belong to asks that the location where pictures were taken be included with any images submitted.

A year after taking the shot, I'm not necessarily going to remember the location of a butterfly I snapped while walking in the countryside. The sky behind a bird in flight doesn't generally contain any famous landmarks to use as a reference for its location.

If nothing else a GPS would save some detective work, like having to look through landscape shots taken on the same day to work out where I was.

11 upvotes
Antony John

Once upon a time one used to use something called pencil and paper to make notes where one took a photograph.
Not only could one record the location but also pertinent information about the subject - perhaps things like atmospheric conditions.
Now a recording facility on a camera would be a good idea for the same purpose.
BTW, As for 'Area 57' I assume everyone knows that when one turns off one's mobile it doesn't mean that it's actually shut down just because the screen goes blank?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
T3

"Sorry but GPS belongs in your car, not your camera"...so says the guy who doesn't own a smart phone, and who still lives in the year 2005, LOL!

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
1 upvote
braisim

I have to say I don;t understand why GPS has been replaced with WiFi/NFC. I am an A77 owner and I do find the GPS useful. Frankly I struggle to see what real benefit WiFi would give me. The best quality images from the A77 measure some 24 MB. So I can transfer this to my phone (after having set all of that up on my smartphone) and then post it on flickr or facebook. And then have that transfer take 10 minutes as I'm in an area without 3G let alone 4G and then have my carrier charge me for all of that data transfer, because I'm abroad. And then have my smartphone battery last only 6 hours instead of a full day. I don't see the point. On a camera like this, unless one wants to use remote control (which seems like a pretty niche activity) I don;t see the value of WiFI/NFC. Please educate me.

2 upvotes
ZoomZoom Diva

The NFC is tempting to be as an easy way to communicate with my LG Smartphone. I also don't take pictures where GPS matters much as they are generally of events and historic sites.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

Dear braisim, if you really don't understand the advantage of having the ability to wirelessly control the camera as well as transfer the photos (or preview versions of the photos) to a remote device, maybe you need to think a little about the ways people use their cameras. Here is just one example:

A photographer who shoots small birds with a long lens usually uses a blind, but can not take the blind everywhere that she shoots, so she buys a very long telephoto lens. Still, the birds she shoots are very wary. She got the new Sony A77 with Wi-Fi, and she was able to set up her camera and move far away and control the camera via wi-fi with her smartphone, controlling where the camera focuses and when it shoots photos. Another photographer uses a series of cameras to photograph races remotely, using an iPad. Another photographer uses the wi-fi for shooting from very high positions, where the screen on the back of the camera is too far away to see well. These are all valid scenarios.

3 upvotes
zubs

I don't care for GPS data on a photo. Not a show stopper. Main thing is image quality.

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Scottelly

Do you know that the GPS can be turned off? Many people WANT the GPS feature. Why not include it? It's not like it can be put in there with an upgrade later! They put GPS in little point-and-shoot cameras and lesser A-series cameras, like the A65. Why WOULDN'T the include it in this high-end camera?!?

8 upvotes
T3

Yeah, well, people like yourself used to say the same thing about EXIF data in digital photos. "I don't need no stinking digital photos that have all the image data embedded in it! My film photos ain't got it, so I don't see the point of it!" LOL.

1 upvote
Claudio Galli

Who cares if you don't care?
Claudio

1 upvote
nicolasrao

I have no practical experience of GPS and battery drain, on the other hand I positively know that Wifi and 3g-4g etc drain your phone battery visibly... something that can be seen and verified simply by toggling on/off for a short while... big difference. Not so with GPS. Try it on your phone..it will show.. the same applies to camera too and yes Geo tagging nature shots are very useful with hardly any price tag...why not. I only commented on this earlier as I find it one of the less important specs for a quality and autofocus minded person. Image quality and speed of focus cannot be put on the same value plane as GPS or WiFI for that matter.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Gesture

These cameras are so refined, full-featured, technolgically advanced. What's the "end game" of the modern camera?

2 upvotes
William Koehler

There is no end game. It is the treadmill all of them walk. If there were an end game, then the cameras would become commodities and at least half the manufacturers would go out of business.

3 upvotes
Scottelly

It will be completely automated, following you around and doing your bidding, based on your thoughts, which will be read by a series of sensors implanted under your skin and projected via ultra-wi-fi through a chip in the back of your neck to the cam-bot drone, which follows you around. The drone will be able to "fly" under water and far away from you. There is more, but I don't want to write a book here.

3 upvotes
nicolasrao

Art, creativity and knowledge of photography be damned. I might as well have been brain dead these past 45 + years clicking a button.
Ha ha! You got it right there.
Takes all the pleasure of knowing what you are doing and getting there by learning smart. Camera's should be under your command not expected to do everything by themselves duh!

0 upvotes
Sergey Borachev

With an IBIS, advanced AF features, and continuous viewing in the viewfinder, this looks like the perfect camera to use the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8.

11 upvotes
Scottelly

They took away the GPS?!? WTF?!?

Though I am glad they have made a new, updated version of the A77, I can't understand Sony. I won't buy it without GPS. I will get the old one instead . . . or I'll get a Nikon D5300. I don't really need the speed shooting capability, and until I see that Sony is committed to this line of cameras by making three or four new, kick-ass lenses for them, I will stay away from their newest cameras. The mirrorless cameras don't have two of the features I have come to expect from Sony - in-camera image stabilization and GPS, and now Sony drops GPS from their newest A77! I think they dropped the ball too.

I was thinking Sony should make one of these without an anti-aliasing filter. Hopefully they will make an A79 with that and GPS . . . and a bigger buffer . . . and two memory card slots (fast ones - maybe UHS2).

I wonder how fast the memory card slot in this camera is.

5 upvotes
RichRMA

They swapped it for "wifi." Because God knows, you HAVE to get those 24mp raws onto a smart phone immediately!!!

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
10 upvotes
Photoworks

Seriously? Who has time to wait for WiFi data transfers. I want my camera to incorporate a smart phone so that my images appear instantaneously on my Twit-ter account.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

I think the main reason for wi-fi is the ability to control the camera via smart phones and tablets. Cameras should be able to transfer compressed JPEG images that are down-sized to your choice of small, medium, or large "preview" images, so the wi-fi can transfer them at a reasonable speed for reviewing on a tablet or other computer screen during a photo shoot.

2 upvotes
PaulDavis

I use the wifi on my a7 way more than I have ever used gps so if they to put one or the other they made the right choice. Seems like they could fit both in though. It's always disturbing when they remove a feature that was in a previous version.

1 upvote
camcom12

Totally agree...no GPS, no sale. GPS 'was' one of the defining features of this line of cameras.

5 upvotes
Dave Oddie

"Totally agree...no GPS, no sale. GPS 'was' one of the defining features of this line of cameras."

Same here. May have been tempted to upgrade but not now.

They lost me from the compact mirrorless area with Nex minus IBIS (another feature I won't do without having used it) and now they just lost another potential sale.

This is par for the course with Sony though who have done it before. Debates used to rage about what was missing from the A2xx/A3xx/4xx/5xx cameras compared to what the old A100 had.

Why don't they understand "upgrade" does not mean removing useful features from a camera?

2 upvotes
abortabort

Cool, so I guess you will buy the 'other' DSLR type cameras with IBIS and GPS then?

2 upvotes
leonche64

If something has to go in order to hit a price point, GPS was the logical choice. Wifi gives you a lot more functions than just GPS, and may be able to via an app of some sort. Much like the old hot shoe was just for flash, while the new one has many additional functions.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

This camera is $400 more than the old A77. NOTHING had to go in order to make it. GPS and wi-fi fit just fine in some of the smallest cameras Sony makes, so they would both fit in the A77 just fine. The A65 is MUCH smaller than the A77, and it has GPS. You don't think they could fit both in the A77? You would have to be on crack to believe they HAD to delete GPS from this camera. They didn't. This is just corporate stupidity. Sony suffers from it, just like Nikon and Canon and Sigma and just about every other company does . . . unfortunately. Presumably Sony has seen the acceptance of their mirrorless cameras, which do not have GPS, as an indication that people don't care about GPS. Let's hope they don't also make a decision to remove image stabilization, which is missing from their mirrorless cameras too. What I can't figure out is how they put GPS in cameras that cost $300, but leave it out of cameras that cost over $1,000. It just doesn't make sense.

0 upvotes
steve_hoge

GPS is important to me...seems like in this day and age they could at least incorporate it into a very compact purpose-built hot-shoe accessory with in-camera firmware support.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
nicolasrao

@Scottelly..Regarding your point about transfer of images.. I see the point of instant transfer to a largish tablet or iPad when seated inside a hide for hours on a nature shoot. It would be something invaluable. Like taking a tethered shot in a studio. But can any camera really do that in real life... would be fantastic!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
DaytonR

Interesting camera , it seems Sony is hell bent on removing GPS from its cameras - sad ....

12 upvotes
Photoworks

Yes, so very sad. What is the world coming to?

Comment edited 10 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
abortabort

Wow, honestly people will always find something to complain about. Want GPS and don't want any of the other new features... Buy an A77. Really, really simple.

4 upvotes
Scottelly

NO. It's NOT really really simple. The thing is people out there with A77 cameras and A65 cameras would LIKE to be able to upgrade to the new camera, which has the standard hot shoe, which they wish they had, but they won't do it, because they love the GPS feature. Sony is STUPID for not including GPS in this camera. THAT is what is really simple.

3 upvotes
photogalleryonline

Does it allow manual control of the Iris (Apetrure) during Video shooting? How does the 12 fps work compared to the A77 which had some terrible blackout (image review) while shooting at speed thus impossible to track/pan anything at speed?

1 upvote
SteveY80

Whether there's still a slideshow when shooting at faster speeds is definitely one of the things I want to know.

I've been looking at various hand-on tests, and despite them talking about the high burst speed, none have made it clear whether this old SLT problem has been solved.

1 upvote
Scottelly

Have you ever used a Sony SLT camera? I had an A55, and at 10 fps it did not suffer "black-out" at all. It may have had a little lag, which meant you would have to lead the subject a little, but try shooting with a Canon 1Dx. I don't think you can even see through the viewfinder at all.

The A77 that I shot with didn't seem to have any "black-out" problem either. This mystery "black-out problem" seems to be a bunch of malarkey! Stop spreading rumors, unless you have first-hand experience with one of these cameras, and you can explain exactly what it does.

4 upvotes
pheanix

The real question is, have you ever used an OVF camera to know the difference? I've used both and there IS a slide show effect when using fast burst and attempting to track with the A77 (I own one and the A700). It's only a mystery in your mind.

2 upvotes
photogalleryonline

Mate I have a A77, D300s a 6D and recently OMD, all cameras could shoot faster than the A77 consistently, the OMD got binned because its AF sucks in low light, but try shooting A77 at even as slow as 3fps in jpeg mode and its stuffed at 1.5 secs while the write speed catches up, all while you are watching this slow slide show of the images you shot, not looking at what you are shooting, don't get me wrong I love this camera but its not a sportsmens tool, its a great travel camera and thats what I use it for. The Nikon is awesome at sport, will shoot 3fps non stop until you run out of card or battery...neither of which will happen for min 500 shots.

1 upvote
Scottelly

If you can only shoot for 1.5 secs at 3 fps then there is something wrong with your A77. That camera has a large buffer for shooting raw which has a huge capacity for shooting JPEGs. I have shot with them, and I had NO PROBLEM shooting a lot more than 6 frames or even twice that, and I was normally shooting at about 8 fps, which is what the A77 shoots at when in M mode. I was shooting in RAW mode too! Here is a gallery of photos that PROVES that even the A65 can do a lot better than what you were talking about. (I was testing the focus ability, while shooting fast in dim light.) Just look at the EXIF data on these photos after downloading them, and you will see the time is the same for the first half-dozen, and the next second for the rest. This proves how fast the camera shoots and that you DON'T get stopped after shooting for just a few frames. The A77 is of course better, with a deeper buffer. Shooting raw at 12 fps is another matter.

http://ffphotos.zenfolio.com/sonya65

0 upvotes
Deliverator

Perhaps the slide show effect is the product of leaving image review on in the finder when shooting in burst mode? It's easy to see how this could be forgotten, and obvious how this would be a problem.

0 upvotes
peevee1

"How does the 12 fps work compared to the A77 which had some terrible blackout (image review) while shooting at speed thus impossible to track/pan anything at speed?"

If image review (which is not the same as blackout at all) is presented to you at 12fps, it is the same as using 12fps viewfinder with zero lag (because it offers to you the actual results of your tracking after the shots were taken, eliminating the difference between what you see in VF - no matter OVF or EVF - and what you actually get in your pictures).

0 upvotes
gwbert

My A77 has done over 50k sports images (RAW only) in last 12 months, mainly motor sport & aerobatics. Mainly pan & track activity. Has been excellent, & the features that let me use old glass easily in manual mode have been a god-send with big, old, telephotos. No criticism of write-speed from me IF you get fast cards. Class 10 isn't good enough - write-speed must be rated at 40+ to make most of body.

0 upvotes
igor_s

Is the A77II's IBIS configurable for work with non-chipped lenses of different FL?

0 upvotes
Axion

I don't believe that it is technically possible: the amount sensor movement required is partly determined by the focal length (similar to the movement we see through the VF with wide vs. tele lens).

0 upvotes
igor_s

In Pentax SLRs you can set the lens FL via the menu. I assume the camera will apply a different amount of sensor shift depending on your setting. You can play with it to achieve the best results with every lens. In any case that is better than nothing. The A77 will lock at default 50 mm which makes its IBIS almost useless already for a 100 mm lens.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Eleson

All a-mount lens must report a lens-id back to the camera.
3rd party with licenses get their own lens-id in the database, others resort to reusing a lens-id, preferrably a lens with similar focal length.

2 upvotes
EinsteinsGhost

I have used adapted lenses on my a55 via chipped adapters, which in turn is useful for IBIS (and the lens FL shows up in EXIF as well). I do like the Pentax solution better... allow users to plug in the FL, although, they would have to remember doing that every time.

0 upvotes
igor_s

What adapter model did you use? I mean, it should be programmable for FL.

0 upvotes
Deliverator

It seems to me the SLT cameras should be better when it comes to vibrations from mirror slap. Does anyone have any insight to offer on this?

0 upvotes
K E Hoffman

There is no mirror slap.. mirror never moves..

7 upvotes
John-Nguyen

Oh no, I really dont want my image goes throu anything other than my len.

1 upvote
Scottelly

Compare the images in tests or do tests for yourself. The A77 compares favorably against the Nikon D5200. The Nikon D5300 and D7100 both have the missing anti-aliasing filter, so they are slightly sharper, but it is difficult to tell a difference. As far as the light traveling through another piece of glass, even if it is a mirror, the results in the photos prove that it does not matter.

7 upvotes
Dave Oddie

There have been tests done I believe that show mirror slap can be an issue with traditional DLSR's but not the SLT's.

The other bonus is the electronic first curtain shutter.

That reduces the chance of shutter vibrations affecting the results which can apparently effect the 36mp A7 which does not have this feature.

0 upvotes
Timbukto

It really is about time Dpreview stops focusing on making the same old everything looks exactly the same when resized to print studio shots, and do more tests on both autofocus and both mirror slap/shutter shock. Yes we get the point, all camera's are about the same at high ISO (or start to cheat at the ISO game).

The fact that they are so enamored with Fuji's baked in NR and inflated ISO scores seems to indicate to expect more of the same pointless ISO comparisons.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Deliverator

Yes, I realize there is no mirror slap in an SLT. My thinking this should improve sharpness when compared to DSLRs.

I too would like to see more testing on AF performance (speed, accuracy), though I do find the high ISO tests to be informative for comparison purposes.

0 upvotes
Marco Fisico

I wish they would have added a touch screen. An OLED back screen. A phone app to remotely control your camera. The ability to PC tether and it would be interesting if they released a battery grip that had an additional SD card slot.

1 upvote
TrojMacReady

Both PC tethering and control through a remote (phone, tablet) app will be possible IIRC.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Scottelly

They have put a different back screen, which is even BETTER than an OLED back screen. Read about it. It has white pixels as well as red, green, and blue pixels. This makes it brighter and apparently it appears sharper. I'm looking forward to seeing the difference at the Sony store near me.

0 upvotes
theprehistorian

Are there any decent lenses for these things? I have recollections of most of the standard primes being a bit below par compared with similar from Canikon...

0 upvotes
antares103

Yeah, I think they only have those hack Zeiss branded lenses.

10 upvotes
Frank_BR

.

Comment edited 57 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
7 upvotes
Charrick

Try the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art. It's second only to the Zeiss Otus in image quality (but cheaper and has autofocus, thus making it a better buy for most people), and better than anything Canon or Nikon have at that focal length (although this lens is also for those systems).

2 upvotes
TrojMacReady

And as a bonus it will be stabilized, just lik every prime (or lens in general).

Comment edited 9 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
theprehistorian

Ah yes, good point. I forgot those new Siggies are available for a-mount. I have to say this is an interesting camera - I suppose its high ISO performance will make it or break it, given that you're sure as hell going to find yourself needing higher sensitivities than on comparable cameras. (It'd better be good or you'll just buy a Pentax K3 won't you!)

0 upvotes
Olymore

I believe the fixed mirror loses one third of a stop. Hardly an onerous amount which is not going to make much difference to your ISO settings.

3 upvotes
Scottelly

Of course there are. The Sony 16-80mm f3.5-4.5 is a reference lens . . . the best in its class. The Sony 28-75mm f2.8 is spectacular! It produces image quality as good or better than the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L II or the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 G. Sony also has the amazing 24-70mm f2.8, which beats the Canon and Nikon competitors. What Sony needs to do is put their 36 MP sensor in the A99 body and call it the A99 II. They need to make an A79 with all the features of the A77, but with more buffer memory, two UHS2 memory card slots, built-in GPS, and a sensor with no anti-aliasing filter. 14 fps and 4K video capabilities would be nice too.

I'd like to see more new lenses for these babies too, like a kick-ass 600mm f4 or a class-leading 800mm f5.6 (not that I'll ever have the money to buy one).

BTW, I forgot to include the 16-50mm f2.8 - that lens is amazing! It's incredibly sharp, and it's one of the few Sony lenses that is weather sealed.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Emacs23

@scottelly fanboy detected
No test so far confirms this Sony Zeiss branded lens is better than Nikon or Canon. All test shows it is slightly behind the Nikon and Canon trounces them all. Just don't bee blind or stupid.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

Thank you for making your comment Emacs23. I am correct about what I said . . . except where the new Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L II is concerned. THAT is the new king of the 24-70mm f2.8 lenses, from what I can tell. Just take a look at how sharp they all are:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1181/cat/83
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1121/cat/13
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/143/cat/11
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1494/cat/11

Here are some other people's opinions:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/860184

BTW, I AM indeed a Sony fanboy, becauase they make awesome stuff . . . though I am upset with them for taking out the GPS from the new A77 and not putting GPS or in-body stabilization in their mirrorless cameras. I'm also upset that they have not been introducing more, better lenses for the SLT cameras. I will get an A65 and possibly an A77, eventually.

1 upvote
fabio riccardi

To Richard Butler:

If you want fast autofocus in not so good light, you need a mirror of some sort.

The mirror, flipping or not, allows to use large, dedicated phase detection sensors, which work much more reliably in low light situations.

Comment edited 54 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Cheng Bao

What's your point? SLT is a kind of mirror.
And also, SLT or SLR, there is only a small part of light will be used on AF, the major part (~70%) of light have to be used on view finder, evf or optical.

w/o mirrors, all light could be used as AF and view finder in same time in theory, so in the end, on sensor af will be better than standalone AF

0 upvotes
Frank_BR

Sony claims that A77II auto-focuses down to -2EV, which is much better than most of the competition with flipping mirror.

4 upvotes
BarnET

The Panasonic gx7 I own actually focusses better in low light then my DSLR. -4ev. However tracking with contrast based systems is still terrible.

4 upvotes
peevee1

"The mirror, flipping or not, allows to use large, dedicated phase detection sensors"

If they are that large, the focus they provide cannot be pixel-perfect.

0 upvotes
Frank_BR

Three cameras, same price: $ 1199

Sony A77II: 12fps
Nikon D7100: 6fps
Canon 70D: 7fps

SLT rules, flipping mirror sucks!

6 upvotes
Cheng Bao

Pentax K-3: 8.3 fps
and D7100 can achieve 7.1 fps on 1.3x (over 1.5x sensor) crop mode

1 upvote
Juck

Umm, no Frank. Let's wait to see how well the AF tracking algorithm works before we get all excited. 12 FPS means ZIP if half the shots are OOF.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Frank_BR

The maximum fps depends on mechanical limits of the mirror- shutter system, not on the performance of the AF system.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Scottelly

Canon 1Dx is a full-frame camera and it has a flipping mirror. It shoots at 14 fps.

But it costs more than five times the price of the A77 II.

What is the limit? Huh?

The Nikon V3 shoots 18 MP photos at 20 fps while tracking subjects, and it can shoot 18 MP photos at up to 60 fps without tracking. Mirrors suck!

2 upvotes
Frank_BR

Canon 1Dx shoots at 12 fps in high speed mode.
To achieve 14 fps the mirror must be locked up.

5 upvotes
RedFox88

you are talking prices instead of classes. The a77 is along side the old d300s and 7D both are on the verge of being replaced but will cost a bit more than the a77. sony has been trying to tempt buyers with low prices on cameras for quite some time now without huge gains. Low prices and high quality, high performance rarely go together.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

The fact is these camera makers have been using old technology, making huge profits, for a long time now. The "new" Nikon D5300 is barely an upgrade. The so-called upgraded D7100, while better than the old D7000, has a sensor that is about the same as the old Sony A77 sensor from years ago. It is crippled by a tiny buffer, which is smaller than the much older, cheaper Sony A77. That is indeed PATHETIC . . . but Nikon knows that they are not offering anything better, so their customers will buy it. I am surprised more people do not buy the Sony A77, but I guess it comes down to marketing, which is something Sony seems to be dropping the ball on. For just a $300 million investment Sony could build 300 new stores across the World. Instead they are closing down their stores. Stupid. I will not buy a camera I can't see first, and Sony can not get into camera shops, because they use strong-arm tactics to try and force dealers to sell other Sony products, like televisions!

0 upvotes
Dimit

I say Sony gives exams for its SLT technology.
It's an excellent evolution vs A77,wouldn't consider it as a revolution though.To stand over competition from Canicon (60D,7100) needs a bit more..a bit..

2 upvotes
Stephan Def

waiting for some hard data.

1 upvote
DaddyG

12fps in jpeg. Anyone know what does it does in RAW & buffer size? thx

0 upvotes
ET2

12 fps in raw (25 or 28 frames buffer - seen different numbers on different sites)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady

26 RAW at 12 fps, 28 RAW at 8 fps.

5 upvotes
Scottelly

So they DID increase the buffer size! Yay!

Now . . . did they increase the memory card slot write speed to UHS104 cards? (That's what people seem to call the fastest UHS-1 cards.) I'll choke if they put a couple of UHS2 card slots in this thing. That would be AWESOME.

0 upvotes
ImageAmateur

Well the Nikon D7100 does plenty JPEG continuous but only about 7 frames RAW buffer...

Lol.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Donnie G

I think Sony's SLT A77 II will be as good as any of the other enthusiast DSLRs out there, especially if the new AF module can deliver on the performance promised by the camera's 12fps burst rate. The problem is that the enthusiast DSLR market is over saturated with really good cameras from all of the DSLR makers. So, other than keeping the Sony SLT fans loyal to the brand, I don't see how the A77 II is going to attract enough attention to take marketshare from the other camera makers. What Sony really needs is a high end professional model that strengthens their brand identity by making them stand out from the crowd, similar to what the Pentax 645Z will do for that brand. And no, the SLT A99 is not it. Still, I think it's great that fans of EVF equipped cameras have a camera to choose that offers all of the advantages of a traditional DSLR. Nice update Sony!

1 upvote
Scottelly

The A99 II could be it. If Sony were to put the 36 MP sensor in that, increase the shooting speed in manual to full 10 fps, add wi-fi, bigger buffer, and upgraded auto-focusing capabilities, like this new A77 II has, it would kick-so much ass that just about EVERYONE would want to shoot with it. Where Sony REALLY needs to push is their line of lenses. They need to make a few kick-ass super-telephotos and tilt-shift lenses.

I would like to know why you think the A99 is not a high-end DSLR competitor. It's fully weather sealed. It has a full-frame sensor. It is 24 megapixel with excellent image quality as good as anything Canon has to offer and better than anything from Nikon except the D800 and D800e (matching the D600/610 and D3x). It has better high-ISO performance than the D800 and shoots faster than anything else under $5,000. In fact, it shoots faster than any full frame camera that captures 24 megapixels or more. It is the ONLY full frame camera with a fold-out screen.

1 upvote
igor_s

I can not figure out why Sony refuses to add the on-chip PDAF feature to its A-mount models. For now, it seems the only way to make the AF ultimately correct while enough fast (like on the A6000). Now I see again that cr----- AF microadjust which means that the user won't be able to shoot reliably with fast lenses. If one needs 12 fps with tracking he can use the SLT system. But in a different situatuion he may be interested in the ultimate reliability of the AF system. Will see how fast the A77II's conventional CDAF system is.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
pew pew

A mount lenses would not work in a mirrorless camera, the only solution would be to make a slt with the E mount, but still theres room for mirrorless and dslr \slt because they are better with moving objects.

0 upvotes
igor_s

Why won't the A-mount lenses work in a mirrorless camera? The Canon 70D has the on-chip PDAF detectors and uses the same EF/EFS lenses adapted for the standalone PDAF detector.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
1 upvote
TrojMacReady

Even with a dedicated STM lens, the 70D is about 5 times slower to focus than the old A77. With the non optimized lenses that difference can grow even further.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
igor_s

For me, the only question is, whether the on-chip PDAF would be faster than the CDAF (btw, does the A77II really have at least CDAF?)

If it would, Sony should have added it. I do not care about the SLT in this respect.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Scottelly

TrojMacReady I think you are mistaken. I have not used the 70 D yet, but I have seen it demonstrated, and it appears to focus VERY quickly, like as fast as my A55 could focus.

As far as using A-mount lenses on the mirrorless bodies goes . . .

YES YOU CAN.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1008166-REG/sony_laea4_a_mount_to_e_mount_lens.html

2 upvotes
TrojMacReady

Controlled measurements done by IR showed over 0.6 seconds with an STM lens in LV mode. Not what I would call fast when an A77 takes little over 0.1 seconds for the same exercise. But it is faster than previous iterations which could take 1 to several seconds to focus.

2 upvotes
Scottelly

One of the main reasons I switched to Sony was the fast focusing, while shooting with the fold-out screen. What matters is real-world use. Canon seems to have fixed their slow live-view focusing. Unfortunately Nikon has not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beXzpeixvhE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGktCLL6-Lo

From what I see in those tests, it appears that low light focusing speed is an issue with the Canon. I KNOW from using my Sony A55 that low-light focusing is NOT an issue on the Sony SLT cameras.

1 upvote
Jurka

AVCHD is sooo yesterday...

2 upvotes
pew pew

now its AVCHD2 and its pretty decent, look at videos from the a6000 they look identical to the nikon 5300.

5 upvotes
Henrik Herranen

Hmh.
I know I sound like a broken record, but how is sensor size not worthy to be on the list of "Key specifications"? Isn't that pretty much the #1 specification of a camera without a fixed lens, even much more important than the number of megapixels?

Really, please, don't assume everyone remembers the sensor size of every camera series of every manufacturer. Yes, some of the nerds know (almost) all of them by heart, but not everyone, not by a long shot..

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
DStudio

It must take a lot of effort to look slightly down the page at the first chart in the article, or at the full specifications that immediately follow it on the next page.

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
forpetessake

APS-C sensor size isn't something to boast about. If it's an FF camera that information will be shown prominently at the top, otherwise it will be buried somewhere.

2 upvotes
Scottelly

I agree. If "Top panel LCD" deserves to be on the list then "Sensor size - APS-C (1.5 x crop factor)" does too.

0 upvotes
Hawaii-geek

No two(2) card slots?

1 upvote
samhain

Do hobbyists/enthusiasts really need 2 slots? That's more of a pro feature me thinks...

1 upvote
antares103

Sony's implementation of 2 card slots has been rather pointless anyway. I would love to see it happen.

0 upvotes
BarnET

I had a card failure or 2. These things happen and all your shots are gone. Dual SD is a must at this level both the k3 and d7100 have it.

1 upvote
Eleson

Yes, two slots. One SD and one Memorystick.

0 upvotes
Scottelly

Two multi-card slots would be better. The one slot they have now is a multi-card slot. Why not just put in another one like that?

1 upvote
Total comments: 673
1234