Previous page Next page

ISO Accuracy

The actual sensitivity of each indicated ISO is measured using the same shots as are used to measure ISO noise levels, we simply compare the exposure for each shot to the metered light level (using a calibrated Sekonic L-358), middle gray matched. We estimate the accuracy of these results to be +/- 1/6 EV (the margin of error given in the ISO specifications). In our tests we found that measured ISOs from the a7R match the marked ISOs within 1/6 stop accuracy, meaning ISO 100 indicated = ISO 100 measured.

Noise and Noise Reduction (JPEG)

This is our standard studio scene comparison shot taken from exactly the same tripod position. Lighting: daylight simulation, >98% CRI. Crops are 100%. Ambient temperature was approximately 22°C (~72°F).

Note: this page features our new interactive noise comparison widget. By default, we show you the default noise reduction settings of the camera tested, and three other models of the same class. You can select from all available NR options, and from other cameras. The 'tricolor' patches beneath the familiar gray/black/portrait images are taken from the same test chart, and show how noise impacts upon blue, green and red areas of a scene.

The a7R's JPEG noise is in-step with the Nikon D800 and Canon EOS 5D Mark III through about ISO 3200. At that point, the two DSLRs start to break away, with the a7R remaining very low. If you look at the color patches, you'll see why: Sony is pouring on the noise reduction. The only time any obvious noise shows up on the a7R is in the blue patch at the top ISO of 25600.

The camera's context-aware noise reduction does a reasonable job of protecting detail in the crop of the Queen's head, up until ISO 800. There's then a drop in detail as noise reduction it ratcheted up, and there's a further drop in detail at ISO 12,800 - at which point it's all pretty smudged.

Adobe Camera Raw noise (ACR 8.3, noise reduction set to zero)

Here we look at the RAW files processed through Adobe Camera Raw (in this case version 8.3). Images are brightness matched and processed with all noise reduction options set to zero. Adobe does a degree of noise reduction even when the user-controlled NR is turned off.

The amount of NR applied 'under the hood' is not high, but it does vary by camera (Adobe is attempting to normalize output across different sensors), so inevitably we are still looking at a balance of noise and noise reduction, rather than pure noise levels. However, the use of the most popular third-party RAW converter is intended to give a photographically relevant result, rather than simply comparing sensor performance in an abstract manner.

The a7R manages to keep noise levels down throughout its ISO range compared to both the Nikon D800 and Canon EOS 5D Mark III. The fact that the D800 has more noise than the a7R hints that Sony may be applying noise reduction to the Raw images. If you look at the crops, you'll see that the a7R's color noise appears to be 'smudged', unlike on the D800, which has a grainier appearance.

Previous page Next page
520
I own it
606
I want it
127
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 805
12345
alexela
By alexela (7 months ago)

Hey all. Question, is there adapter for A7R to nikon that allow to use AF?
Trying the web search, but found only canon and minolta version with AF.
Please help. Got New sony and old nikon 50 lens, love it and want to use it meanwhile.

Thanks in advance! )
Alexei

0 upvotes
bajanexile
By bajanexile (7 months ago)

Anyone that is truly interested in what the new Sony Alpha 7R has to offer the genuine Photographer might want to look at the first in a series of Test Shots using the inexpensive FotoDiox Canon FD to Sony NEX Adapter and a Canon FD 70-210mm f/4 Zoom from the 1980's. This is just such a versatile high quality photographic tool:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bajanexile/12811334873/in/photostream/lightbox/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/bajanexile/12798399743/in/photostream/lightbox/

The lens is excellent on the Sony Alpha 7R Camera Body.

Steve

0 upvotes
Average User
By Average User (7 months ago)

I would like to hear from a few who have migrated from the Sony Nex 7 to the new 7r. I have the Nex 7 and also D3200 and D600 Nikons, all 24 mp cameras.
Among these I would always use the Nex 7 in good outdoor light because it always nails the focus. By way of example, at the zoo, I can always photo animals and get clear images with clear hair and skin textures, whereas the Nikons are more hit and miss.
I am wondering especially if the focus on the new cameras is as good as it is on the Nex 7 and also how you would compare the low light performance and especially the low light focus of the 7r?
Also, I have some really excellent lenses for my D600, so I am also wondering what adapter to use for my nikon lenses and whether the adapter results in full functionality, or there are elements of the focus or other functions that are lost or have to be done manually?

0 upvotes
F8minnow
By F8minnow (7 months ago)

Why do reviews of the A7/A7r fail to mention the lack of a correctly working reflective light meter in the viewfinder?

Thanks

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3626724

0 upvotes
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

Because it is silly issue that doesn't effect the usage of the camera one iota.

6 upvotes
123Mike
By 123Mike (7 months ago)

Too expensive. Going for A6000 instead.

0 upvotes
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

That's a good choice too. I would like both! :-)

1 upvote
Just Ed
By Just Ed (7 months ago)

It seems the best thing the a7 and a7r have going for them is the sensor. The rest of the package from Sony seems quite lacking in terms of implementation.

The aSony isn't going to make me change from Nikon or Canon.

0 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

Not sure what you mean. It's a nice body to hold. It;s controls are fully customizable and function in a satisfyingly solid manner. If you have concerns about the rear dial moving you can lock it.

It's a superb camera - a real beauty.

3 upvotes
Max Savin
By Max Savin (7 months ago)

For pre G lensed any simple adapter will do. For G lenses the metabones Nikon-g adapter is needed. There is no auto focus for either. For Canon lenses there is the metabons canon type three adapter which gives you full auto focus and IS functions. Better ISO performance and getting rid of the terrible menu of the nx7 plus the full frame sensor are the big improvements. The focus seems to be right on. I sold my nx7 after getting an a7 and have also aquired an a7r. Haven't used my Canon or Nikon bodies since getting the Sonys and my Leica M8 is now a paper weight.

1 upvote
refillable
By refillable (7 months ago)

Great Job Sony On the Image Quality! But It seems that the compact body adds extra issues that are rarely seen on bigger DSLRs such as slow booting and small buffer size. I believe it's because of the smaller processor that are inside this cramped body camera. I can't wait for next gen Sony Bigger body SLTs! Alpha 77 has done well for 2 years, we are looking for a successor!

1 upvote
RStyga
By RStyga (7 months ago)

So, is there a straight response to the question: how does A7/A7R perform in the frame periphery with WA Voigtlander M39/M lenses?

0 upvotes
dead eyes open
By dead eyes open (7 months ago)

I have the 75 f2.5 and the 35 1.7, they are perfect on the A7r.
I also had the 21mm f4 and the 25mm f4.5 and they were not great performers, vignetting was not to bad, but the colour fringing was terrible!
Worked well in B&W though…
I've since sold those two and replaced them with the 21mm f1.8 asph, brilliant!

0 upvotes
jonak2
By jonak2 (7 months ago)

Is there an app for time lapse photography that would work with this camera?

0 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (7 months ago)

https://www.playmemoriescameraapps.com/portal/usbdetail.php?eid=IS9104-NPIA09014_00-000003

0 upvotes
jonak2
By jonak2 (6 months ago)

Thanks !!

0 upvotes
Rawmeister
By Rawmeister (7 months ago)

The 70-200 FE.
First Sony said available in Feb.
Now its Mid April.
Might even actually see one in the stores by fall.

What a cheapo way to introduce a new sytem.
Hold back the 70-200. Just brilliant. Sheesh.

Ya - I know - the adapter for the existing 70-200 models.
Well if i wanted to pay a bundle more AND have my body to look like it belonged in a Flintstones movie, I'd buy it. So, no.

1 upvote
Heaven is for real
By Heaven is for real (7 months ago)

Mid April? are you on Planet Mars?

4 upvotes
Kendunn
By Kendunn (7 months ago)

Does it come with a Memory Stick or is that sold separately?

0 upvotes
sunilkumar
By sunilkumar (7 months ago)

would anyone want this camera with wood finish may be named as Hasselblad. who cares .. hasselblad will create one...

1 upvote
papa natas
By papa natas (7 months ago)

Hey, why accept the wood finish version when we can go for the alligator skin with golden engraved initials? Owner's retina ID, multiple languages spoken greetings,...any other menu ideas?

1 upvote
HFLM
By HFLM (7 months ago)

Some analysis of the raw compression:
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140214_1-SonyA7-artifacts-star-trails.html
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140212_2-SonyA7-RawDigger-posterization.html
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=4847
Together with the shutter shock issue another (small) problem. However, I wouldn't see that as a big problem since for pictures of stars at night I would go for the Canon 6d. Nevertheless good to know. Doesn't change the fact that the camera performs well in many other situations.

1 upvote
munro harrap
By munro harrap (7 months ago)

I was put off Olympus and Fuji's little machines for the same reason as the NEX sony equivalent s- the lenses. If you bother to look at downloadable samples you can see why everyone is trading theirs in. (Look at the LCE and Park cameras sites) These zoom lenses need enormous correction at wide-angle. This correction destroys the border resolution, and my concern for full-frame mirrorless is that the same will apply for wide-angle lenses. AS there is no mirror these lenses are cheaper and easier to design and make (yes Leitz!), but as mentioned here, they are being underdesigned to maximise profits and photographers suffer as a result. You are not paying less, for the new Sony A7 lenses you are overpayingl. On paper the tests pass muster, just (see Photozone.de or the Optix Pro site), but notably the squished mashed appearance of the photographs themselves (the only thing that counts) escapes tests, but not our eyes.Or can I not see for the tears?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
photog4u
By photog4u (7 months ago)

BALDERDASH! I don’t who you are and I have no knowledge of your work but here are two very well respected and published professional photographers whose work and ART produced with the a7R has not been, in the least bit, affected by your ridiculous assertions.
Trey Radcliff: http://www.stuckincustoms.com/
Brian Smith: http://briansmith.com/blog/
I suggest you spend less time pouring over downloaded internet samples and pick up an a7R and shoot with it. If you have even the slightest bit of talent, you will be extremely pleased with your results.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
21 upvotes
Heaven is for real
By Heaven is for real (7 months ago)

Another clueless Sony basher...well, you don't know what you are missing...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

Thanks for sharing your concerns Mr. Harrap!! You do know that the new Sony-Zeiss 35 and 55 mm lenses are rated as excellent, so you get what you pay for. The comment for the 55 mm is "truly superb test results..........it comes very close indeed to the astounding (but $4000) Zeiss Otus 55 F1.4"
Why do you say that the zoom lenses need enormous correction at wide angles? I can use any Canon, Nikon etc. zoom, so do these lenses need enormous correction at wide angles? If they don't, why should future Sony/Zeiss lenses need such "enormous" correction. It's just a size selection choice by Sony.
I haven't seen any sign of the squished mashed appearance on my shots (either in Photoshop or Lightroom) so I assume you are just trying to stir people up.
Buy an a7/r and go and use it.

4 upvotes
Rawmeister
By Rawmeister (7 months ago)

I agree with your astute assertions.
Understanding the business is key to understanding the camera.
This is where so many pundits fail in their analysis of a system.

1 upvote
Max Savin
By Max Savin (7 months ago)

Munro please don't buy one, I would have to sell mine if you did.

1 upvote
Fri13
By Fri13 (7 months ago)

I really wanted to have A7R (or A7) but I couldn't buy it for its flaws. I ended up to more expensive Olympus E-M1 kit and spend even more to get more lenses. I would have got cheaper with either A7 cameras but when can't have same level native lenses and same level usability, I don't want to miss shots because gear is just on my way or limiting me.

Nice to see that it has worth for someone.

2 upvotes
CartersImages
By CartersImages (7 months ago)

Yeah, only because everything I have is Sony, so if Sony come out with something better for less than $1500 there's no big deal. I upgraded from Minolta to Sony A100 then A700 Then A77 and haven't yet spent over $1500 for a camera.

0 upvotes
tanmancs
By tanmancs (7 months ago)

Does your E-M1 has a shuttle shock problem? Mine does. I wonder if the A7/R has this problem too.

0 upvotes
Fri13
By Fri13 (7 months ago)

No, not any kind. Before I paid my camera, I made good tests in store as I am allowed to do.

And A7/A7R can have the shutter shcok problem as well, if you believe some peoples claims (I don't). But there are so much ***** what you can even cut with knife, what makes it so difficult to actually find out truth unless you really know what you are searching and you are allowed to do good tests (Like I was in store own studio with tripod etc) before paying for camera.

All what I did was find out what situations were the problems reported, make notes and designed the test setup. And this because I knew people who didn't have the shutter shock problem so that it isn't design flaw in E-M1 but just bad unit so I can find out the one what doesn't have. And the ordered unit was such (non-faulty) so...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

That's a bad mistake Fri13. The a7r has much better image quality than the E-M1

3 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

I'm always curious about this lens thing. Wouldn't you miss shots by continually changing lenses? I feel that someone who knows what they're doing uses 1 or 2 lenses and may have a couple more for fringe possibilities.

I guess I wonder about the need for lots of lenses and why you would settle for a sensor 1/4 the size to attain more of them?

1 upvote
CartersImages
By CartersImages (7 months ago)

I am impressed with Sony's new a7R Full-Frame, and I have been using Sony cameras since Minolta, Currently using the A77. I've noticed the ISO struggles still exist and the Auto Focus problems has improved since the Sony A100, I just need Wifi and better lens options. Pairing my A77 with a Carl Zeiss 28mm f1.4 has paid for itself 100 times over. The a7 is not scratched off of my shopping list though. I cant make money if I keep spending money.

0 upvotes
startowa13
By startowa13 (7 months ago)

Wait there is Carl Zeiss 28mm f1.4 A-mount-able? Is it m42?

0 upvotes
Simon Young
By Simon Young (7 months ago)

I am a Canon 1DX user. But I really like the small form factor of A7(R). I struggled for a long time before I got the A7R with both the FE 55mm as well as the FE 24-70 F4 lens last week. It takes me a week to re-learn the habit how to shoot with the A7R. Once I used to it, I really like this camera as expected, but there's several 'but'

Quality:
Superb resolution & sharp in static shot and raw image, color is good and AWB usually correct. But miss every dynamic moment...

Auto-focus:
Under bright outdoor environment, these lens is in perfect auto-focus condition. Unfortunately, indoor with moderate light doesn't work well. The only way I can focus accurately is to set the focus point to center with S/M focus area... don't know whether it's due to slow lens motor or poor contrast detection algorithm. But when my daughter is running around at A7R simply miss every precious moment.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Simon Young
By Simon Young (7 months ago)

Shutter:
Many friends complain about the shutter shaking and noise problem. But I don't use a tripod and really like how it shakes and sounds. Well, I prefer an EFC if Sony can implement it in firmware with existing sensor. Auto ISO is weired too...

EVF:
Slaggy in low light condition... stuck for 1s per focus... The demo unit in Sony Store doesn't behave like this (1/3s is acceptable) even in low light condition. Poor eyecap too... too hard... and cannot find a hollow rubber replacement, very uncomfortable using with eye-glasses

Simon

Comment edited 48 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

Just did some copy work on a tripod and copy stand and saw no signs of shutter shake - sharp as a razor.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
WKoplitz
By WKoplitz (7 months ago)

So why didn't they leave the low pass filter off the a7?

0 upvotes
Alex Moscow
By Alex Moscow (7 months ago)

Is this the end on mirror-stuffed, big-bodied heavy weighters?
The only thing is left: to prove new Sony lenses are up to the expectations

0 upvotes
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

No it isn't. I have an a7 and a Canon 7D. If I want to use a large telephoto I use the 7D. If I need great tracking I use the 7D. For most other photography I use the a7. I haven't decided which is best for close up work but I am leaning to the a7.

2 upvotes
briny
By briny (7 months ago)

Are the A7 and A7r weather-sealed or not? Many review sites, including this one, make that claim, but I can't see where it says so in the specs list at sony.com.

0 upvotes
Heaven is for real
By Heaven is for real (7 months ago)

It is...see 3:40 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUJc83wV6iA

Comment edited 58 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Seansprague
By Seansprague (7 months ago)

I was glad to hear from somebody that the Sony a7 will take those Canon and Nikon FF lenses. I hadn't realized, thanks for letting me know. It might come in useful for some kinds of hi-res work in that case. Great. Do you need special adapters?

0 upvotes
Heaven is for real
By Heaven is for real (7 months ago)

Here is a guide http://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-lens-mount-adapters/

1 upvote
Seansprague
By Seansprague (7 months ago)

If you are a professional travelling photojournalist like myself, then micro 4/3s make most sense. I can carry three small panny bodies, five superb lenses, flash and audio equipment all in one average sized camera bag and not do my shoulders in - and results are great. Clients never complain. Who really needs more than 16 MP for magazine work, besides they'll come out with 24 MP 4/3s soon anyway, I imagine, in case that matters. My FF Canons and all their heavy expensive lenses and older Nikons stay at home most of the time these days. Anybody want to buy them off me?

3 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (7 months ago)

No, thanks.

1 upvote
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

While a perfectly valid point of view, I'm struggling to see any link between your comment and this review, you don't even mention the camera being reviewed, wouldn't this be better on a 4/3 thread somewhere?

4 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

It belongs here. He's saying the smaller footprint of the A7's are nice, but the extra portability of m43 in relation to IQ is more useful. FF is overkill.

Essentially, the kind of debate you have endlessly in mirrorless forums (m43 is enough! APS-C mirrorless is enough!).

0 upvotes
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

Where does he say the small footprint of the A7 is nice?

3 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

Context. He's already a mirrorless and FF DSLR user. The fact he's here (mirrorless FF should be of some interest to him) and when he says m43 makes "more" sense (more than what? Mirrorless FF) Then he goes on and on about how small m43 is so we know size is an issue for him, so much so in fact that he's willing to give up FF DSLR and the A7(R) is apparently not good enough in that department and he doesn't need more MPs anyway.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

OK, so I'm fairly new around here, I gather you have to know him somewhat to know the relevance of what he's saying.

2 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

Never heard of him. But his argument is often made by others. His post did say a lot about him and I just read between the lines when he didn't specifically spell out what he meant.

If he shows up again, he can hopefully confirm it all!

0 upvotes
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

Seansprague you should write this in the m4/3 forum or do you feel the need to spread the m4/3 gospel to us non-converts?
I must be different to most people. I just take a couple of lenses with me when I am out taking photographs since I know the general subjects I am after.
I can't imagine travelling with five lenses, three bodies, flash and audio equipment. (surely as a professional you take a light tripod with you for optimum composition and exposure flexibility).
However, if I was a professional travelling photographer taking once in a lifetime images, I would want the very high quality images and better aspect ratio available from full frame digital cameras whatever the weight, so m4/3 wouldn't match my requirements. I guess you don't crop much or require high ISO for your work.

2 upvotes
TN Args
By TN Args (7 months ago)

Came out at the right time, just as I was changing my main system for something more compact, and I nearly went for it.

Then I realized what a mistake it would be because, by the time you assemble a system, it's not compact or light at all. It's actually a mirage caused by too many photos of just the body and the new 35mm.

The various operational criticisms that followed were just the icing on the cake of non-purchase.

1 upvote
Disintegrator
By Disintegrator (7 months ago)

Just one question - have you had the camera (yes, assembled) in your hands?

0 upvotes
Overmars
By Overmars (7 months ago)

You're right. It would be a mistake to purchase a mirage.

1 upvote
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (7 months ago)

The 55/1.8 is the same size as the Olympus 75/1.8 and the 35/2.8 is the same size as the Olympus 17/1.8. Boohoo.

1 upvote
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

a 55mm and a 150mm equivalent lens are not anywhere near the same. I don't want to think about what a telephoto FE prime will be like. Probably a monster like the FE 70-200 f4 zoom.

Lumix 25mm and the new Zuiko 25mm are more like the FE lens, similar FOV and speed. Much smaller too.

If you want to (nearly) match the FE lens in the bokeh department, you need one of those Voightländer f0.95. You gain a super fast lens that, combined with IBIS, will shoot in much darker conditions and/or in low ISO.

2 upvotes
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

That's true, but as seansprague says in the thread above, who needs more than 16MP anyway, and you know what? The great thing about having the A7R and 36Mp + emount compatibility is you can have smaller e-mount lenses AND 16Mp with no AA filter, all the amazing low light capability, DR and colour depth and an APS-C size sensor area to play with.

3 upvotes
cheddargav
By cheddargav (7 months ago)

Hey TN Args,
I confess to having the same thought as you regarding the A7: then I tried one, with the lenses, then I looked at all the small lens options out there, and realised I was wrong.
Regards

0 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

@jonath -I need more than 16mp. The poster you refer to has specific needs and probably uses jpegs for quick uploads. For me the incredible resolution of this camera is a huge plus. Really beautiful.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (6 months ago)

Just got to first messages, and your common sense about using aps-c lenses on a7r totally makes sense...truly. Maybe you should post these thoughts, we need to read again.
Thanks

0 upvotes
Apollwnios
By Apollwnios (7 months ago)

SONY A7R
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3679/12571747564_3d6dc745ea_k.jpg
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5504/12570438035_3db517b5d9_b.jpg
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7342/12444130703_7c1ee0f123_b.jpg

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (7 months ago)

What's that supposed to be?

0 upvotes
lylejk
By lylejk (7 months ago)

And I thought My VLUX-1 was expensive. lol

Just hope I can find a replacement battery for my VLUX-1 soon. :)

0 upvotes
munro harrap
By munro harrap (7 months ago)

Do you realize it costs as much as a Nikon D800? Have you got it figured too that the lenses are only just emerging and in size rival Nikon and Canon, and if you want to use the NEX or other lenses with an adaptor you have an awkward unfriendly and without AF (possibly), VERY expensive package on your hands. Of course, great to be able to stick your Nikkors on it, but pointless and absurd, since it is far too slow to use. This Sony takes ITs pictures- the shutter lag is so great that YOU cannot take YOUR pictures using either of these lovely new Alpha A7 and A7R machines. Yes, same problem with detail-smearing slow 5D MkII and MkIII, but if your subjects do not move you'll be OK.

They decided to make a SLOOOWW camera, so you be slow to buy it. It was their choice and they should be ashamed. Full autofocus 0.359/362 secs; manual focus lag is 0.261 secs , prefocussed lag is a scandalous 0.163 secs, down from 0.007 secs on their first mirrorless APS-C machine DSC-R1 (2005).

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (7 months ago)

So true I took like 5000 pictures now with my A7r and just realised that IT just took ITs own pictures all the time. There's nothing in the SD card I wanted to shoot myself. The shutter shake was so bad I accidenly take selfies instead of a pictures of landscapes or my models. Shutter lag is so great the sun already set when I want to take a pictures in the afternoon.

I'll give it back and trade it in for a NIKON D800...or a 2005 DSC-R1...

NOOOOOOOOOT

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
10 upvotes
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

I bought my a7 in December and am still waiting for it to finish taking its first photo. I am just an average photographer and 80% of my photos are of my two daughters, who do not sit still, and this camera has done a great job of capturing them. If you can't take great pics with this camera, then you shouldn't be a photographer.

5 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (7 months ago)

Funny how people need to spew trash on the internet to make then feel better about their choices....

1 upvote
ageha
By ageha (7 months ago)

Oh my, you got it wrong. You don't need an adapter for NEX lenses.

0 upvotes
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

Is there an echo on these comments? Am sure you've said all this before.

0 upvotes
cheddargav
By cheddargav (7 months ago)

Munro Munro Munro, *shakes head*
I was going to reply to all this but it would be like trying to get reason out of a politician, so I'll pass.
Oh, btw, you're wrong on basically everything.
Regards

0 upvotes
Babka08
By Babka08 (7 months ago)

Why all the talk of Nikon and Canon comparisons? This Sony seems more like a rangefinder competitor, no? Probably shake in your boots, Leica. But the whole EVF thing still isn't fully baked so not quite yet...

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
ageha
By ageha (7 months ago)

The Sony isn't a rangefinder.

0 upvotes
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

I've got to say that this evf is pretty well baked. Much better than the other NEX evf - which I hated. It's very very good.

0 upvotes
Seansprague
By Seansprague (7 months ago)

Problem I have with this new camera: body too small for the large and heavy lenses which a pro would want to use, so why not go for a bigger FF body and system, such as the Canons or Nikons? And another thing, too bad Sony don't make bodies which will take the Canon and/or Nikon lenses already in existence. And for that matter, too bad that Canon and Nikon (and all the rest) didn't settle on a standard lens mount long ago. I have Canon and Nikon systems sitting idle because now I prefer micro four thirds. At least Lumix and Olympus lenses are compatible.

0 upvotes
Heaven is for real
By Heaven is for real (7 months ago)

"too bad Sony don't make bodies which will take the Canon and/or Nikon lenses already in existence" well you don't what you are talking about. A7/r can use any lens in the market.

So many Canon, Leica, Nikons etc pros are already using this camera with their huge lens without any problems.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
11 upvotes
quezra
By quezra (7 months ago)

"why not go for a bigger FF body and system" ... that's the A99.

1 upvote
dktrdktr4
By dktrdktr4 (7 months ago)

To my way of thinking, a camera body is just something you attach to the rear of a lens to help you focus; set the exposure and preserve the resulting image. Since I have an embarrassing number of huge and very heavy Canon FD lenses, the small size of the body is not a negative at all - especially since it can make my digitally useless collection usable again. The only issue I am still concerned with is:" which adapter should I purchase for maximum usability of my vintage FD glass?"

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
bajanexile
By bajanexile (7 months ago)

The whole point of the Sony Alpha 7 and 7R is that both can accept just about any quality lens ever made. It is an extremely good Camera System but not one that will suit everyone. See:
http://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-lens-mount-adapters/

If you want a DSLR of comparable IQ, then you need to be looking at the Nikon D800E which uses the identical Sony Sensor. Compare the difference in Price and weight plus Legacy Lenses will not work as well on the D800E. These two cameras, with quality Glass and excellent photographic technique, can produce stunning images.

Steve

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (7 months ago)

Problem is I have with other FF cameras the body is too big for small high quality lenses. hmmmmm

1 upvote
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

I'm a pro and I hate using big heavy lenses. I'm a very happy camper with the a7r.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (7 months ago)

1/FL is of course not enough for modern sensors, but just enough with good stabilization. That is why they should have implemented IBIS - no point having a compact camera if you need to lug a tripod for it.

1 upvote
mantegna
By mantegna (7 months ago)

You do realise how big IBIS would be for a full frame sensor? It has to cope with the sensor moving 1cm in any direction?

1 upvote
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

A tripod is more than a couple of cubic centimetres.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

I have yet to use a tripod with my a7 and I have done a tone of low light photography with it. Including using a 85mm and 135mm. Go out and use the camera for a couple of days, without any bias, then come back and make some educated comments. Till then your just make idiotic assumptions. I shot a photo hand held last night at f2.8, iso 6400, and shutter 1/20. Not every photo with these settings turn out sharp but it can be done.

2 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (7 months ago)

People might wonder why others have migrated to smaller systems (the mirror-less) from more competent (for action, etc) DSLR systems. Owning and using a DSLR, you probably wouldn't be persuaded to use a mirror-less, except out of curiosity. But if you use a mirror-less for a week, it's amazing how attractive the lighter weight of the system becomes. So much so that many people learn to live with the shortcomings. I see many migrating to mirror-less from large DSLR's, but I run into few migrating back.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

I still like DSLRs, the ergonomics, the feel, the usually better performance. It's not often practical to carry it all, but at home or on special occasions outdoors, I feel it's worth it.

Just the 2 cents from someone with both mirrorless and DSLRs.

1 upvote
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

I think it totally up to user preference like you are both saying. I went from the a700 to the a55 and really enjoyed the smaller size. After that I went back to a larger camera, the a77 and was never really excited about it. Sold it and got the nex6 and was very happy with it. I have the a7 now but I might compliment it with the a6000 if the focusing is really good. Depending on what I am shooting I can just take one or or the other with me. As photographers we should be pretty stoked on all the options we have.

2 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (7 months ago)

@Bluevellet: when I shoot my E-P5 against my D7000 I get annoyed by how slow and inaccurately the Nikon focuses. It is a total pain. And the 2x2 controls of the Olympus are unbeatable. I ended up selling my D7000 because it was too frustrating to focus with it. The Olympus nails focus instantly 100% of the time. The Nikon was slow and nailed focus perhaps 30% of the time.

When I shoot my A7 against my 6D, I notice the enormous gap in ergonomics. The Sony has 3 control dials plus an exposure comp dial. The exposure comp on the Canon is a horrible task, and you can't do it in manual. I hated the ergonomics of the Canon and I sold it. The A7 is way better.

0 upvotes
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

Mike, didn't you just comment on how people write to justify their decisions? Actually you were a little less polite than that!
Why do you feel the need to trash other cameras compared to the model you bought? You hate the Nikon D7000 and you hate the Canon 6D - both fine high performing cameras.
For me, buying a camera is a big deal so I try it out before I buy it and then learn how to use it. I did this with my Canon 7D and my Sony a7.
P.S. Setting exposure compensation on a Canon DSLR is a piece of cake and I never heard that you can't nail focus using any modern Nikon (or Canon) DSLR. In fact focussing and tracking is a major strength of high performing DSLRs - certainly compared to an E-P5

1 upvote
Gerald A Naus
By Gerald A Naus (7 months ago)

I have a Nikon D4, Canon 1D4 & 1DS3. I got the sony a7R when it was first released. It proved itself on a trip to France, those times when I didn't feel like carrying around 30 lbs of gear. For me it could not replace a pro DSLR, but it's great for.walking around - when going to dinner I prefer not.having my two.think tanks with me.

3 upvotes
Gerald A Naus
By Gerald A Naus (7 months ago)

I got it for my fiancée, she shot with it when I was dragging around the big bodies. It's since been stolen along with the 1Ds3. We will get a replacement though.

1 upvote
DBRman
By DBRman (7 months ago)

I own an A7R and I have been using it with the lenses I have for my Leica M9. The size of these lenses make them a good match although they are far heavier than the Zeiss FE lenses. I have tried some of my f2.8 zoom lenses I use on my D4 but, as others have said, it seems completely stupid and inappropriate to use a massive heavy zoom with the A7R. As I am manually focusing (without problems) I agree with the point made in the review that to get the best out of this camera you need to treat it as if it was a medium format body. The 36 Mpixels sensor is unforgiving. I love the IQ and the colours. So far so good.

5 upvotes
oventurini
By oventurini (7 months ago)

Excellent! I was wondering how the A7R compares to the M9? Are the sensors in the same league and leave it to the quality of the lenses you use?
I want to use it like you with a M lens.

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (7 months ago)

Finally read...well, listened to voice over, cannot read because of limited sight. Amazed how much bickering amongst brands, rather than actually asking questions. I just hope a helpful, knowledgable person can assist me in making up my mind if i can operate the sony a7 from my previous post.
Gary

0 upvotes
Galbertson
By Galbertson (7 months ago)

Curious if my limited eyesight might keep me from a7/a7r. These error messages that supposedly randomly pop up could be beyond my eyesight to read...my center target view is totally gone. If faced with error, might it stop me in my tracks as to knowing what to?
Gary

0 upvotes
ski542002
By ski542002 (7 months ago)

Interesting camera, but very specialized for ultra-high image quality. Low light focusing issues, and shutter vibration make this camera a one-horse pony for the shooter that knows how to mitigate these issues. Not optimized for handheld shooting. I am very surprised that a mirrorless camera, with no mirror-slap to worry about, would have such huge vibration issues coming from a shutter. The M240 is about the same size and doesn't have these issues. I don't shoot Nikon (Canon & Leica), but I've heard the same vibration issues to a lesser degree with the D800.

6 upvotes
photog4u
By photog4u (7 months ago)

Your assessment sounds like its coming from someone who's been pouring over the forums and not actually shooting the camera. Try shooting with it, if you have even the slightest bit of talent you will be extremely pleased with your results, handheld or otherwise. If you're a novice then yes, there are better choices for you.

13 upvotes
Just Ed
By Just Ed (7 months ago)

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2014/20140123_2-SonyA7R-shutterVibration-CallForAction.html

0 upvotes
photog4u
By photog4u (7 months ago)

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/a7r-shutter-virbation-is-a-non-issue-test-by-ferrell-mccollough/

7 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (7 months ago)

DSLRs have vibration issues no matter what is done to mitigate them. Shooting through a very long lens (telescope) of 1300mm, I could not get a sharp image, locking up the mirror, timer release. But a m4/3rds Panasonic G1 had no problem, even though the lens was functioning as (effectively) even longer owing to the 4/3 format.
As long as shutters are large and mechanical, it will cost a lot of money to mitigate vibration.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

I believe that the vibration issue is the extra step of closing the shutter just before an exposure that is necessary on some mirrorless cameras. In the case of the EM-1, problems are reported at shutter speeds in the 1/100 sec range.
DSLRs can have vibration problems at certain fairly slow shutter speeds but these can generally be overcome by avoiding shutter speeds in the ~1/15 sec range, raising the mirror a few seconds before the exposure and using a wireless remote. I use an 800 mm lens (400 x2) on a Canon 7D for moon shots and don't see a problem. Certainly, 1300mm is an extreme telephoto that requires a very sturdy tripod with perhaps some additional damping of the lens using a separate support. There are many articles explaining how to do this.
The electronic front curtain of the a7 should get rid of any vibration problems. The a7R seems not to have any major problems.

1 upvote
probert500
By probert500 (7 months ago)

I like the phrase "one horse pony" but I don't know what it means. The shutter shake thing is way overblown - it's a tack sharp monster.

0 upvotes
Rbrt
By Rbrt (7 months ago)

Why oh why is it that, while file sizes continue to go up, camera makers are stuck in USB 2.0 mode?

2 upvotes
NumberOne
By NumberOne (7 months ago)

Maybe because the «Micro USB 3.0» is not micro/small at all!? ;)
...Or (maybe) just because most of us prefer using an external 'card reader/writer' when it comes to file handling...
Just saying... :)

3 upvotes
Rbrt
By Rbrt (7 months ago)

Most of us? Is this the royal we speaking? I think room could be found if there was a will to do so - don't you, hmmmmm? ;-p

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Camley
By Camley (7 months ago)

It's better to download images using the WiFi connection. No need to either remove the card or plug into the camera.

1 upvote
pbailey4
By pbailey4 (7 months ago)

I am afraid that as long as it has a Sony name on it then it will remain 2nd division. Contax, Pentax, Minolta, Leica, Olympus all produced outstanding 35mm film camera systems aimed at the highest end of the professional markets with little or no commercial success. Its all about brand. And yes I have used one and most of the range as part of my work - its a fine camera.

1 upvote
dynaxx
By dynaxx (7 months ago)

I am struggling to understand your point ; all of the camera manufacturers you have listed enjoyed long periods of profitability and acclaim while they were making 35mm film systems. It is arguable that the "highest end of the professional markets" would have wanted a larger format film that 35mm ( which both Contax and Pentax provided for film and, later, for digital photography ). I would guess that most of the Minolta/Olympus profits from film SLR's came from sales to enthusiasts.

Yes, brand is important but I don't see that Sony lost the allegiance of the Konica/Minolta clan by changing the name on the camera and their dogged support of the Minolta AF mount and Minolta accessories has since earned them justified loyalty.

You should glory in the fact that a company best known for consumer electronics can overtake the old guard camera makers because of superior technology, well spent R&D and, most significantly, leveraging the Minolta heritage. Premier league and champions elect !

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

think Pentax is a much better brand than Minolta or Olympus. really sorry for them. Pentax used to mean high quality at low price (or German quality at Japanese price dozens of years ago). Minolta and Olympus mean low price and low quality.

Pentax was one of main forces that crushed German makers. Pentax people were heros that Germans admired and copied. now it seems that it's their turn to go.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
psilore
By psilore (7 months ago)

"It's all about brand" >> Congratulations, you are every manufacturer/advertiser's dream.
I acknowledge brands have some degree of appeal, almost no one is 100% immune from this.
I guess it's somewhat justifiable, since certain brands have earned their prestige consistently cranking out excellent products through decades.
That said, we should always try to be brand agnostic and not let the name misguide or interfere with our judgement.
Is *this product actually good? If the answer is yes, they can stick a Fisher-Price label on it. I'll buy it anyway.
(*this = whatever)
Needless to say, brand loyalty makes sense if you're committed to a specific system, already own a bag a nice lenses, love a certain blend of features such as jpeg color rendition/UI/ergonomics.
Otherwise, drooling over a name is just pointless and somewhat childish.
When did camera manufacturers turned us into Pavlov's dogs?

3 upvotes
cknapp61
By cknapp61 (7 months ago)

In the 70's and 80's I do not recall many pro photographers (newspaper, weddings, sports) using Pentax, Minolta, or other non-Canikon cameras.

2 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (7 months ago)

to @Yabokkie , you write "Minolta and Olympus mean low price and low quality" ; the facts tell a different story.

Can you explain why Leica, then the pre-eminent camera maker, chose such a low quality camera/lens manufacturer ( Minolta ) in the 70's ahead of Canikon/Pentax to make the "R" series and collaborate on the superb CLE, the world's first "M" mount camera ?

I've just seen a Minolta CLE on Ebay.uk for £1,434 which you may think is a "low price" for a used 34 year old film camera but not according to my budget. And on Ebay, a snip, from Hong Kong ; a used Minolta 600mm telephoto lens for US$ 7,649 that was made in the 1980's. You may have forgotten that John Glen took a Minolta camera into space. I'll leave an Olympus aficionado to do the rest.

Please give me your list of German camera makers that were "crushed" by Pentax.

By the way, the name "Pentax" was stolen from Zeiss Ikon by Asahi when all German patents were annulled after they ( Germany, not Japan ) lost WW II !

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Ranford Stealth
By Ranford Stealth (7 months ago)

@dynaxx...do NOT hold your breath. And keep your English/What the?? Dictionary close at hand ;-)

1 upvote
dynaxx
By dynaxx (7 months ago)

yes Ranford, a worthless clogger-up of the forums - doesn't know his Takumar from Tele-Tessar as my old Mum used to say ... cheers

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

> why Leica, then the pre-eminent camera maker, chose such a low quality camera/lens manufacturer

Leica or Zeiss never have a choice but have to use third-class Japanese makers for good ones won't work for them. third-class Japanese is still beter than German though.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
dktrdktr4
By dktrdktr4 (7 months ago)

To me, having a Sony brand name is not a minus. So long as Canon doesn't offer a digital body that is usable with my huge collection of FD and FL lenses, I will not buy so much as a lens cap from them.

0 upvotes
Ranford Stealth
By Ranford Stealth (7 months ago)

@dynaxx...I dont want to say I told you so But... ;-)

0 upvotes
ChristophBarthold
By ChristophBarthold (7 months ago)

@dynax - i'm with you. yabokki is known to type faster than the speed of his thoughts would seem to allow. But for the sake of historical accuracy, Asahi did pay Zeiss (Jena) for the complete rights to the name Pentax. If Zeiss Ikon (the camera making west german part of Zeiss) were indeed "crushed" by the Spotmatic or wether Zeiss at the time never managed to come up with a coherent product strategy in the slr market is something that can be reasonably debated. I'm inclined to lay the blame on the doorsteps of Zeiss management. But then again, Zeiss was always an optics company first and foremost. Making cameras was a sideline to ensure a steady demand for their lenses.

1 upvote
dynaxx
By dynaxx (7 months ago)

Your knowledge of the Asahi Optical Co. is more complete than mine @Christoph and your post is interesting.

I got my information from Wikipaedia that says "The name "Pentax" was originally a registered trademark of the East German VEB Zeiss Ikon (from "Pentaprism" and "Contax") but, as all Germans patents were annulled with the country's defeat, the name "Pentax" was taken by the Asahi Optical company in 1957.

"Taken" implies that is was not purchased, to me at least.

However, Cameraquest says "Asahi bought the trademarked "Pentax" name from the East German camera manufacturer VEB Zeiss Ikon in Dresden about 1954." so I accept your historical account.

0 upvotes
PhotoKhan
By PhotoKhan (7 months ago)

Gotta love all the insecure comparisons with other cameras in this "Comments" section.

This a UNIQUE (...and, seemingly, excellent) camera.

If you need it, buy one. If not, enjoy your cameras, give it a rest and celebrate the innovation.

20 upvotes
Gsxr Freakk
By Gsxr Freakk (7 months ago)

Well said well said

3 upvotes
Ryan_Valiente
By Ryan_Valiente (7 months ago)

well well said said

0 upvotes
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (7 months ago)

said well said well

2 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (7 months ago)

Sell waid sell waid

1 upvote
Ranford Stealth
By Ranford Stealth (7 months ago)

But what would the trolls and dipsticks do with their time? Go out and take pictures? That's crazy talk!

6 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (7 months ago)

say what

1 upvote
aftab
By aftab (7 months ago)

a7R is an excellent camera. But, shaking up the market? That sounds a bit too out of touch with reality. None of the latest cameras, including big guns like 5DIII, D800, 1D X or D4, has shaken up the market. Camera market is virtually same as they were few years ago. a7R even doesn't count.

1 upvote
straylightrun
By straylightrun (7 months ago)

What's it like living under a rock?

19 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

shake heads, not the market.

1 upvote
Jaythomasni
By Jaythomasni (7 months ago)

need a slap on that head..the yellow fur makes it over heated..like a FF sensor. shooting RAW video...its all RAW ideas inside..

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (7 months ago)

If by that you mean the upper end is still dominated by Nikon and Canon, you'd be right.

0 upvotes
Mk82
By Mk82 (7 months ago)

Only few person really needs the features what top models offer. And those people are not hanging around on dpreview forums talking about it but they are on field working and getting the prizes once a year in special events, what are not hold trough Internet.

Lets look back, lets say 50 years. Since then the only real factor for great photo has been the photographer itself.
The photographer choose the correct tool to given situation. He isn't brand believer or promote the manufacturer or lens when he is discussing about taken photos with other top photographers. They talk about the stories how they got to place, how they ended up to situation and what they saw
The four crucial technical informations are enough.

1) Shutter speed
2) Aperture
3) ISO
4) Focal Length

In last 50 years, photographers have taken from good to awesome photos with gear what is "inferior" to current top models.

Some Dpreview fans believe camera takes the great photo, like mouth say nice compliments.

2 upvotes
luigibozi
By luigibozi (7 months ago)

As nobody says Nikon D600/D800, I am finally happy that I can read two reviews for two different cameras: Sony A7 and Sony A7R. DPR finally accepted the real facts.

2 upvotes
Just Ed
By Just Ed (7 months ago)

Have looked at the camera twice (don't own one) and just can not imagine using it with a lens like the Canon L 100-400 or 400 DO or even the 70-200 f 2.8 (also Canon), just too small for that.

The evf flickered in both shops I tried it at (don't own it). Both had fluorescent lights and one also had a fair amount of daylight coming in from the store windows. Am presuming the evf reacted either to the low(ish) light level or to the source. While it did focus "fairly" quick under those conditions I can not image using it for bifs or indoor sports. It might however make a nice carry around camera with a decent compact lens for scenics and general photography.

An interesting design deserving of recognition, but the thing that bothers me is how the for profit mags and reviews are all hyping the A7/A7r with such similar superlatives. That doesn't mean it's bad, it just means that I don't trust the impartiality of the reviews. The latter is not focused at DPR.

0 upvotes
pew pew
By pew pew (7 months ago)

you defeat the purpose of the a7r if you are using big lenses, the idea of the a7r is to have a FF in a small package, the camera have good reviews because it takes stunning pictures, which was the ultimate goal.

3 upvotes
rockjon
By rockjon (7 months ago)

Though, you do have the option to mount larger lenses if you want. However, you'll probably end up holding the camera by heavily supporting the lens rather than the body. Even for the 70-200 f4.0 FE mount lens, it already looks a bit big for the body.

I think ideally the camera in terms of size and ergonomic terms works best with probably lenses that fall with in the 24-85mm range. It would seem a bit unwieldy with long telephotos or fast (f2.8) zooms.

Sony does have the option of making slightly larger style bodies like the Sony A3000 to improve handling with larger lenses but I think that would slightly defeat the purpose of having the A7/A7r type cameras.

4 upvotes
Just Ed
By Just Ed (7 months ago)

I agree rockjon.

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (7 months ago)

Pick the right camera for the job. If you're going to be using very large lenses like the 100-400L or 400 DO, use a DSLR. For street shooting where you want something with a less noticeable visual profile, use an A7.

As for "hyping the A7/A7r", I think it's fairly justified because we finally have something FF that breaks from the ubiquitous DSLR mold. After all, you can only get so excited over the bazillionth new DSLR. Woohoo, another DSLR! With more focus points! And new buttons/knobs! Groan. Yes, DSLRs are great, but it's about time we have something different.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Just Ed
By Just Ed (7 months ago)

By, I agree with your overall sentiment. You rather made my point about the size of the A7/A7r it doesn't appeal as much to the long lens using DSLR user. It may however cause Canon and Nikon to step up their game. That works for me!

1 upvote
Mk82
By Mk82 (7 months ago)

Few weeks ago I was doing new full camera gear shopping.
In final runs Sony A7 and A7R camera to compete with the main choice.

It was a A7 vs a A7R vs a E-M1.

If I would have just been driving around with a car, walking to locations to shoot landscape where nothing is moving and I have "all the time in the world". A7 or A7R would be good choice. But even then the weight and size what the lenses would have gained E-M1 would come up in many situations.

As I found out, not even the tests in dpreview show otherwise, A7 and A7R had hard time to proof they offer superior IQ and flexibility than E-M1.

When I toke E-M1 and A7 to field trip side by side, E-M1 came winner in controls and flexibility. It was no brainer how "clumsy" the A7 was, causing almost more missed shots than there were situations and while E-M1 nailed almost every time the jackpot.

Now my friend who owns A7 is so jealous about E-M1 that he is considering to swap own to it in store.

1 upvote
munro harrap
By munro harrap (7 months ago)

Well, as long as you accept the long shutter lag times (Imaging-Resource figures-Dpreview dont do them), and can imagine bracing your left thumb often against a screen that can't reverse for its own protection and has no cover, up to 800 ISO its a useable machine you can put any lens you like on- whereas the Nikon wont do third-party lenses with adaptors.

Personally I feel that were I without my Nikon, I would still hesitate, despite the "any lens can work option" because the noise goes through the roof at 1600 ISO (see snap of kid warming feet-there is a lot of noise even on the feet), and because it obviously does not fit the grip of hands that use cameras, so I would wait until Sony review their design and equal the D800's high ISO image quality.

Judging by the fact that the A900 and then the A850 had the same high ISO noise problems as this brand-new model, we might have a very long wait.

Good low iso image quality- but all cameras since 1999 have that

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (7 months ago)

I have tried this cam at Sony shop and didn't notice any lag. Maybe it is there, but not that slow. For me at least.

2 upvotes
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

I own an A7R and I agree that the shutter is slow and it certainly isn't perfect in Mk1 form - you definitely have to 'learn to use it'.

That said, a little patience provides a tool that takes amazing pictures and has an addictive quality to it - you know how amazing it can be and it makes you take more shots as a result.

I really don't agree about hi-iso noise though - the picture you refer to looks to me like an OOC JPEG. I'd suggest you download one of the many available RAW sample files from some of the other sites you mention (like imaging-resource). Hi-iso noise handling in my experience is truly astonishing, at 6400 shots are highly usable - lack of AA filter gives huge 'sharpening range' too, RAW files are a post-processors dream IMHO - so much latitude and flexibility.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
helmuto
By helmuto (7 months ago)

Picture quality of A7R is really exciting. I started to sell all of my other photographic equipment, so that I can afford more of the FE Zeiss lenses.

Currently I am using LA EA4 with Zeiss F2 24mm prime lens.

I think many of the angry Nikon/Canon users see the coming shift, that within the next years the photographic landscape will change, with Sony becoming one of the leaders.

7 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (7 months ago)

Canikon position will remain intact, but they may finally embrace mirrorless. They've holding on DSLR for too long already.

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

the forerunners in the mirrorless market are less capable makers, lower performers who escaped to a hide-out with no real solution (though Pana has been doing great with fast-readout CDAF).

Canon and Nikon won't do it for they are not light in weight or shallow in depth. but Canon is or will be the first who enters mirrorless with a real solution, as good and better than the mirror box we have been using for half a century.

dual-pixel AF.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Jonath
By Jonath (7 months ago)

But Canon already have a mirrorless solution, so you mean they're going to try again, mark II? Lets face it their first attempt didn't exactly set the world on fire.

1 upvote
CFynn
By CFynn (7 months ago)

Why all the complaining?

I have a D800E and I know about all the things it will do better than the A7/A7r - but I can certainly also see the attraction and value of the Sony cameras.

For some types of photography, I know I would prefer to use a camera like the A7r.

If you don't like the camera, and never intend to buy one, just move on and stop moaning. There are plenty of other choices out there that will be much better for you - but I'm sure this camera will be the most suitable camera available for a few others.

Congratulations to Sony for providing a new full frame choice that is well thought out and different from the other full frame cameras out there.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
29 upvotes
Douglas F Watt
By Douglas F Watt (7 months ago)

Hi CFynn

Nice post and agree with all your points.

But if you took away moaning and grousing, people who post on the blogosphere would only have trolling, hachet-jobbing, and passing gas. It would take all the fun out of the brand wars nonsense on DPR! You're clearly just a killjoy. :-)

2 upvotes
Max Savin
By Max Savin (7 months ago)

I just came back from shoot with my A7r with a Leica 21mm Super Elmar lens. Yesterday I was fooling around with a Canon 70-200 F4 L IS/Metabones 3. Today a Nikon 105 f2.5 AI. Spectacular! I note that every negative comment comes from someone who does not own one, will never own one and haven't even seen or held one. By the way, the shutter noise on this camera is way less than the noise from my 1DSmk3 or D800. And best of all so is the weight. Picture quality superb! So stop whinning

16 upvotes
Overmars
By Overmars (7 months ago)

This is what I love reading about!
I recently bought the A7 and was looking at a lens to buy (happened to be a Nikon). But what about the adaptor? And yep, Metabones seems to be the main choice.
But not only am I learning about Sony, but other camera manufacturers too. That's a win, win!

The possibilities are virtually endless and very exciting.

2 upvotes
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

Yes it is true about increasing your lens knowledge when owning one of these cameras. I find myself overwhelmed with the lens choices sometimes. I'm a cheapo so I oil finding cheap sharp primes. I got an old 135mm f4 minolta lens for 6 bucks on ebay that is very sharp and well built. Normally I'm not that cheap on lenses though... :-)

2 upvotes
McJ
By McJ (7 months ago)

double post

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (7 months ago)

I love all the comparisons to the D800 in the comments here (and to some extent in the reviews), but here's the thing:

The A7/R are not competing with the D800, nor 5D III. They are already very competent cameras and if they are what you are after I am sure a friendly retailer will be able to help you get your fix.

Fact is the A7/R don't have any natural competitors, they offer us something that we've never had before. So the comparisons are largely meaningless. We don't usually compare a D800 to a 1DX now do we? Why? They are both full frames right? Yeah but they are in a different class, that is why most of the time we don't compare them.

But when we find something that defies comparison due to being something completely new, we tend to grasp onto whatever we see as closest, but that doesn't really work does it?

I mean when the iPhone came out I saw lots of comparisons to this and that, Windows Mobile, Nokia E70, Palm Centro, BlackBerry etc. But it couldn't be directly compared because it was something new.

If you are going to try to compare to something, it would have to be the Leica M's, not a D800 or whatever. Think of the D800 and it's ilk as a desktop computer, a workhorse for getting shiz done. Now think of the A7/R as a shiny new smartphone, super cool, but when you compare it to the workhorse it could NEVER replace it right? I mean there are so many things it can't do that the big powerful desktop can do... it's a 'toy' for rich people with more money than sense right?

Yep, now is a time to stand up and proudly condemn the A7/R in the same way you said they would have to prise your Window Mobile, or Palm or Nokia from your cold dead hands and how a smartphone would never be anything more than a gimmick.

Remember that iPhone didn't even have apps. No 3G. No GPS. Battery life was terrible. Couldn't video call... and all the rest.

Now go back to condemning then for not having 30 years worth of accumulated lenses and short battery life. (even though they have 30 years of accumulated lenses).

12 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

A7R, image quality is good, everything else not.

5 upvotes
Just Ed
By Just Ed (7 months ago)

Yabokkie hit the nail right on the head.
Am so tired of the pulps pushing stuff
as innovative when it is just cripple ware.

2 upvotes
McJ
By McJ (7 months ago)

@abortabort

That doesn't make any sense at all. Mirrorless isn't a different camera class, it's just a different technology just as CDAF and PDAF are two ways to achive AF. I don't see why the A7R should be judged differently to dslr's, but it certainly is in this review.

The A7R and D800 have the same sensor and sell for the same price (in my region). Of course they are compared. And the D800 is better in every way except size, weight and lens adaptability.

2 upvotes
CraigD13
By CraigD13 (7 months ago)

@abortabort I think you're making people's point for them. "size, weight and lens adaptability" are precisely the reasons people may buy the 7R instead of the D800.

3 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (7 months ago)

I don't think A7r is competing FF DSLR, but A7R Mark II probably will.

1 upvote
abortabort
By abortabort (7 months ago)

@ MJC - Price and being 'a camera' does not make them the same class. Yes they both have a sensor and a lens mount, some buttons and take photos but that is where the similarities end.

Going back to my comparison, if you looked at an inexpensive notebook vs an iPad: They both have a processor, a screen, an operating system and can both browse the web and look at documents. But they aren't the same class of device. Yes if you had say $500 and didn't have either you might weigh up between the two, after all you want something that can browse the web and look at documents, but that does not make them in the same class. Same price yes. You might even choose the laptop because it 'does more' and that's fine as well. But that doesn't mean it was designed to compete against each other.

I can also buy two very different class of cars for the same price. I have to weight up what my needs are, as an individual, but that doesn't mean those two cars are competing in the same segment, as what you are weighing up are whether you are going to choose a car from one class or another.

Last example: I have $500 and I want a nice watch, but I also want an iPad. I can only buy one. Does that mean that iPads are competing against watches too? What if I want a decent suit? Or a piece of artwork, or a night away in a luxury hotel? Are all these things competing in the same class or are they competing for my dollars as a personal choice?

0 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (7 months ago)

@ yabookie - people said the same thing about iPads, 'cool but why would you not just buy a laptop that does more?'. 'it's a toy for people with more money than sense'. I bet more than a few of the naysayers in this very thread are guilty of saying that, but now either own an iPad, or another tablet that has been brought out since that actually compete in that 'class'. Same with the modernisation of smartphones.

You sir dis' every Mirrorless that comes along with your DoF calculator... but when this came out you couldn't do that any more, so the best you can say is it isn't as good as a D800. Well done.

0 upvotes
McJ
By McJ (7 months ago)

It's about journalistic integrity on dpr. Does the gold award have any meaning? Can I trust that a camera with gold is at least on par with other cameras? In this case we cannot.

The dpr reviewer obviously likes the idea of full frame mirrorless and awarded the camera based on that criteria only. The performance (speed of operation) is on par with an $9 compact from 10 years ago.

As for different classes, are you saying that because this is the only full frame mirrorless, you cannot compare it to anything else? It exists in a vacuum? So by extension all the Sigma foveon sensor cameras should have gold because the sensor is unique? Likewise with the Fuji xtrans?

1 upvote
photog4u
By photog4u (7 months ago)

Shaking Up The Industry? Hell YES!:
Seems to me that the outstanding features and performance of the OM-D E-M1 allowed it to score 84 Gold despite its tiny M4/3 16mp sensor…I do agree with this assessment BTW. That said; my impression is that that this site, for some strange reason, doesn’t score Sony’s new e-mount FF cams (and RX FF for that matter) similarly. It’s almost like their saying “Don’t get cocky Sony; you’ll never be taken as seriously as Nikinon, no matter how innovative you are.” Scores are always 2-4 points lower than they should be IMO, especially when you consider the complete lack of innovation from the industry’s one and two… Con’t:

13 upvotes
photog4u
By photog4u (7 months ago)

Con’t –Shaking Up The Industry? Hell YES!:
Yes I agree, AF, battery life and a few other niggles should and most likely will, be sorted with the next version or firmware or both but certainly as with the OM-D’s off sets, doesn’t Sony’s FE deserve the same consideration and sliding scale scoring curve? The A7R is innovative and MOST importantly produces amazing photographs that many pundits say is the best available, rivaled only by Medium Format. This site should stop coddling and pandering to Nikon and Canon and give these amazing FE cameras the scores they deserve; 87 Gold for the A7R and 82 Silver for the A7. By raising the bar, this site might just be able to influence One and Two to start innovating again.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Clueless Wanderer
By Clueless Wanderer (7 months ago)

Had my eyes on a D800 for a while (funds not there yet) Then along came this A7r to draw my attention. It was looking like a real contender until.. The 1/160 flash sync speed is a deal killer for me.

Comment edited 14 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Just a Photographer
By Just a Photographer (7 months ago)

How can you call the A7r a contender to the D800E?
This Sony camera lacks support of lenses.

6 upvotes
Clueless Wanderer
By Clueless Wanderer (7 months ago)

I would only need manual focus and lens adapters of all kinds are a plenty on ebay.
For work that requires auto focus, my existing D700 is more than adequate.

For me right now, a new camera is all about the megapixels. I've managed to stretch those 12mp (D700) pretty damn far, but would like to print larger.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Zeisschen
By Zeisschen (7 months ago)

The A7 supports far more lenses than any other camera. Not lacking anything ;)
Btw 25 lenses are native, but 20 of them only in crop mode...

9 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (7 months ago)

You can take any Nikon lens and use it on the A7/R.

8 upvotes
Everlast66
By Everlast66 (7 months ago)

Being the FF camera with the shortest registration distance it can mount virtually every existing lens out there.
Even RF lenses as its registrartion distance is smaller than leica

4 upvotes
Everlast66
By Everlast66 (7 months ago)

There might be some issues with wider lenses made for film, but the A7/r is still your best bet to make them work.

3 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (7 months ago)

Of course the native-mount full frame lenses are limited - after all it is a brand new system. The first couple of primes are impressive. Sony (and Zeiss) just need to work hard to fill out the line with good lenses as soon as possible - the way Fuji has been doing for their X-mount

Meanwhile, as others have pointed out, there is a vast array of excellent choices for those willing to use lens adapters.

4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (7 months ago)

why should anyone use native lenses?

1 upvote
PaulDavis
By PaulDavis (7 months ago)

Because the native primes are excellent lenses. The 55mm is better than any other 55mm ever made besides the zeiss Otis, according to DXO.

5 upvotes
Total comments: 805
12345