Gallery posted: Sony a7 II firmware 2.0 uncompressed Raw samples

That's such lousy. Canon has small, medium, default RAW option. Come on Sony do the same thing as what Canon done.

Nov 24, 2015permalink

David2553

What's the point of complaining about RII with 42Mp. If you like 24 MP go for A7II, 12 MP go for A7sII. I think Sony's point is pretty obvious

Nov 23, 2015permalink

chriscotec

I bought an A7RII, knowing that 42Mp was twice the resolution I needed for my workflow. The point was that it could use my armoury of Canon L series lenses. At the time the A7II could not do this with good AF, and fast native Sony lenses were (still are) not widely available. I really like my A7RII but, until all of its strengths are available in a body with half the resolution, I can't move to Sony for a workhorse camera. This firmware update has spiked my interest in the A7II. The A7SII is not the answer either, (doesn't have the A7RIIs Canon compatibility and its resolution is too low for some still work). Bring on the A7III !

Dec 2, 2015permalink

SwedishPhoto

I understand your issue. But i honestly still don't understand why you knowingly bought such an expensive 42MP camera if it's not really what you need. Then again, you might have tons of cash, meaning buying an A7RII doesn't matter that much to your economy :P

Either way, i hope it eventually works out for you.

Dec 13, 2015permalink

Angrymagpie

Dear DPReview team, are we going to get some sort of review (or updated review of the A7II) about how the AF from adapted lenses is like?

Nov 23, 2015*permalink

Derek Dean

Some beautiful photos, thanks.

Nov 23, 2015permalink

Kiril Karaatanasov

Nice!

Can you DPreview guys do some AF tests with adapters - LA-EA3, Canon adapters, Contax G adapter (techart III)?

Nov 22, 2015permalink

justmeMN

It's about time that DPR had an article about a Sony camera. You have been completely ignoring that brand. :-)

Nov 22, 2015permalink

EthanP99

Yeah, Canon and Nikon have been developing really interesting stuff in the past 6 months... oh wait.

Nov 22, 2015permalink

roustabout66

Yes, some of their new lenses are really interesting.

Nov 22, 2015permalink

brownie314

Yes. They have been all over the Nikon d400 and d620 bodies that just came out. I thought they would never shut up about it.

Nov 24, 2015permalink

AbrasiveReducer

Its not DPRs fault that the companies that make the cameras most people use are not cranking out new models as fast as Sony.

Nov 24, 2015permalink

AksCT

It would be helpful to see a side-by-side comparison of compressed and uncompressed version of the same scene, and difference image (subtraction)

Nov 22, 2015permalink

Rob

What Sony needs to improve more than anything else are the egregious ergonomic issues, not image quality issues. The menu system is a confusing mess, the customizable buttons missing very important options (such as Super 35 mode, video modes), the M1-M4 custom settings stored only on SD card thus will get erased when you reformat the cards, the lack of orientation-linked AF points or direct control over AF points, the lack of touchscreen for instant AF point selection and/or firing shutter--all of those are far more important--at least for me.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

SirSeth

I don't agree--for me. Ok, maybe a little on the menu system, but my take on that is that all camera manufacturers should take a page from the Google and Apple play book on UI because they are all in the dark ages.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

DarnGoodPhotos

Leica is the only one so far to rethink menu structure on their T.

Nov 23, 2015permalink

brownie314

Pentax Ricoh did a good job on the gr.

Nov 24, 2015permalink

plasnu

ACR conversion looks horrible.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

In what way?

Did you change defaults?

Nov 22, 2015permalink

TheEmrys

I hate it. If the image matters to me, I use Capture 1. Colors are much better.

Nov 23, 2015permalink

ACR profile is just shocking compare to other software does better job usually Capture One with less posterisation. The ACR shows more posterisation which is not good in some ACR DCP profile. If you were using Adobe Standard usually you won't see problem but if you go to camera standard other than that, you will end up with that problem. Posterisation could also be blamed by the profile twist both invariant and variant.

Nov 24, 2015permalink

Jeff Greenberg

> hobby or amateur would like to see smaller MP instead of 42M

Really? 42mp allows one to zoom 2x or more post shooting.
Its like 2x teleconverter without teleconverter issues...

Nov 21, 2015*permalink

badi

it is not without teleconverter issues... only that you don't have to change the lens, but rest of the issues are there :)

Nov 23, 2015permalink

Jeff Greenberg

Being what??
(other than post-shoot zooming too much = IQ reduction)

Nov 23, 2015*permalink

exfidevivo

Jeff, et. al.
I just tried to shoot RAW with the 2.0 firmware upgrade and Zoom was not available on my a7M2 in any mode, even manual. If anyone knows why or has a workaround I'd be grateful.

Feb 2, 2016permalink

badi

i don't think it is a "digital zoom function" anywhere, it's just that you *can* crop in post how much you want.

Feb 2, 2016permalink

RJD79

myself i am much more einterested in the PDAF improvements. any impressions on that?

Nov 21, 2015permalink

marc petzold

I'm quite wondering what Sony would release as the cat out of the bag into Fall/Winter 2016 season when the A7R III would come out...maybe. :-)

Nov 21, 2015permalink

surlezi

I'm more interested in the A7III. It seems it won't be here before Xmax, but should in early 2016.

It could have the pros of the A7RII plus those of the A7II . That is to say :
- great AF, great IQ in RAW and jpeg, IBIS
- 10+ fps burst mode with AF
- great overall rapidity (in reviewing, accessing menus etc.).

Not having to handle 42Mpxels files could make it a much better camera than the A7RII, just like the A7 was a faster camera than the A7R, and with a better AF too (but because it has PDAF+CDAF).

Nov 21, 2015*permalink

Exactly my thinking, it will be faster than the A7R II in every way I suspect. A 'better' camera? That will depend really on needs. Anyone who thinks the RII is the fastest we are going to get needs to realise this is the resolution model.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

marc petzold

Maybe Sony would take a longer tooth now after so many innovations this year and a A7R III would come as early as 2017...perhaps.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

24MP is more than enough for FF sensor imo really. 42MP is like wow is a lot. Probably okay for serious photography into very extra large print. But most people like us as a hobby or amateur would like to see smaller MP instead of 42MP in newer Sony FF next time with raw lossless compressed not uncompressed please as it take up too much space.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

I have to admit, I have the RII for everything BUT the 42MP.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

marc petzold

Exactly my thoughts about this. Perhaps i am tempted to get a A7S II in some couple years when it's being cheap 2nd hand...but i have my doubts that it'll survive 10+ years and perfectly working just like the original 5D...in terms of build quality and electronics...well...time will tell...then.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

badi

"Maybe Sony would take a longer tooth"

i agree, actually i think they quite needed the fast iterations as what they added to the cameras were difference that really attracted pros and enthusiasts to their cameras. For many the new models are just great, so it is just easier and more profitable for sony to make the product cycle longer.
However a new generation is needed to improve the ergonomics ... than they can wait for 3 years before generations :)

Nov 23, 2015permalink

surlezi

It depends if they consider that they're competing with other camera makers, or if they intend to "make" the camera market.

Id est are they trying to push consumers to regularly change their camera, just like people change their phone. Not because it's useless, but because there are better/newer products that are better advertised.
In this case they will go on releasing on a yearly (or one year and a half) basis, no matter what. I think this is their strategy.

Nov 23, 2015permalink

DKE10

Same holds true for Corel AfterShot Pro 2. No issue in PS & LR.

Nov 21, 2015*permalink

DKE10

Uncompressed A7 II RAW files won't open in DXO Optics Pro 10. The ones I downloaded and testshots I shot myself!

Nov 21, 2015permalink

TheEmrys

Needs an update.

Nov 23, 2015permalink

J Alan Paul

How are they getting that kind of quality out of the ISO 8000 images? I swear my A7ii with the old and new firmware doesn't look that good at ISO 1000. I've pushed a few files up to 3200 and 4000, but all I get are smeared details and ugly noise patterns.

I'm shooting in raw, processing in Lightroom CC2015 and Photoshop CC2015.

Am I missing something?

My D600's files hold up much better at 6400 than my A7ii does at 3200. I love this camera but I've learned that I can't shoot it that high. I'm trying to justify leaving nikon for Sony, but I consistently get better images out of my Nikon. It's a bummer because of how much I enjoy having the Sony with me at all times and not my bulky Nikons.

It doesn't make sense to see those night city images at an ISO that high looking that detailed. Is there something wrong with my camera?

I'm using an la-ea4 with a Minolta 24-50, 28-135, and 70-210. Also have adapted a few of my Nikon lenses to it as well, including my 85 1.8, and Tokina 16-28 2.8.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

huyzer

It most likely has to do with your Detail setting under the Develop module. Before purchasing my a7S II, I was doing research on image quality. I did not like what I saw. So I downloaded some RAW files to see if it was user settings that gave the funky, stroke-like, watery pattern I disliked. I'm used to my Nikon D800 files too. So what I found out was that it definitely was the settings under Detail. Mess with those and then you may begin to like your Sony files. Oh, also, under Camera Calibration, the different Process years have a massive effect too. As a side note, the newer years are good at reducing noise, at the major detriment to the natural lip colors. The newer Process years deaden the lips of everyone and makes them look grey/ghoulish/cadavers.

Nov 21, 2015*permalink

J Alan Paul

Thank you for the response!

I will give that another look, but I have tried all the different combinations of sharpening and noise reduction, messing with details, masking and everything else. I've even skipped the lightroom detailing and done some sharpening and noise reduction in PS using anything from Nik to Noiseless. It feels like everything I do to the files just makes them fall apart a little more.

As far as the processes, I use the 2012 but have loaded in some other Camera profiles for Sony that seems to have helped a little with retaining natural colors. I don't have any problems at normal ISO ranges up to about 800. The images look fantastic and I can definitely push them a bit.

My main gripe is when I see images like what is posted here at ISO 8000 and find myself befuddled as to why I can't get those kind of results. I don't shoot there often, but I'd like to be able to if the need arises.

Just a little background on me... I'm a professional shooter that has been doing commercial, editorial, and artistic landscape shooting for the last 4 years using Nikon bodies. I wanted a smaller setup I could take with me everywhere and still get images that I can print at 40 or more inches on the long edge. I've done many 40x60's with my D600's, and I figured I *should* be able to do the same with this Sony seeing as it uses the same sensor. I'm a little reluctant to try that with the some of the files I have processed from this camera.

I'd love to just go up to the A7rii, but I'm working on getting married and it's just not in the budget right now.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

huyzer

Mr. J Alan Paul,

You know what might be a good test is this. Download the RAW file that DPreview provides, of the 8,000 ISO image that you are amazed by. Take a look at their settings and set your LightRoom settings exactly like it, and see what you get. Flip back and forth between the layers (yours and theirs, and possibly the JPEG they have here - though, not sure if that would suffer from compression on their server's automated process?).

Also, duplicate the XML file of one of your images that have the bad "smeared details and ugly noise patterns", and then rename it the same as the RAW file downloaded from here. After re-opening that RAW, adjust exposure accordingly, but then take a look at the details and noise.

Regards,
Huy

Nov 21, 2015permalink

J Alan Paul

Huy,

Thank you again for the response... That is a fantastic idea! I actually never thought about doing that. I'm currently doing a family thing this weekend but when I get back I am going to do as you suggested. I'd love to find out that it's either something I'm doing wrong or just not seeing with these files.

I want to love this camera and I am oh so close to doing so. I have an a6000 which I loved, but I missed full frame and wanted more... so this was the next logical step. I've only had it for a month and I am beginning to trust it more. This last week I had several assignments for a business publication and I decided to leave the Nikon kit at the office and did 4 environmental CEO portraits using the A7ii, a pair of speedlights and some minolta lenses. Those came out beautifully, and it was so nice not hauling my large bag on location for once.

Now if I could just figure out how to get the best from some other situations, the Nikons may get sold!

Nov 21, 2015permalink

huyzer

Hello,

Sounds good. Have fun with family this weekend. Looking forward to your tests and conclusions afterwards.

I'm finding I'm not liking the pause between a single shot till the next. I'll be keeping my D800 for critical, photographic endeavors. But for a slow, methodical, low-light candids, I'm loving the a7S II.

Talk to you later,
Huy

Nov 21, 2015permalink

It is also worth trying a different RAW converter as I feel LR does a terrible job of Sony files in general.

Another thing to note, using the LA-EA4 does lose you about half a stop, but the camera will compensate so exposure is the same (in other words ISO of the sensor will be bumped up about half a stop over what it 'says' it is at).

Also worth noting, for all the ISO-less talk if you are underexposing in order to keep ISO values down that will cause your shots to look worse (noisier) than if you expose them at a higher ISO (and therefore properly). I think you will be surprised what it can do if exposed correctly in terms of noise.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

J Alan Paul:

It more that likely has something to do with the fact that the ISO 8000 night time skyline photos are are shot with the optically best SonyZeiss lens.

But try checking the development settings too.

Yes, optically better lenses help with higher ISOs. Cue the arguments.

I used ACR 9.11 in Photoshop CS6.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

Alex Permit

Mr. J Alan Paul,

Please post your results here when you are done, thanks.

Nov 23, 2015permalink

brendon1000

Very happy Sony updated my camera. Though I still haven't bothered with uncompressed raw yet as the file sizes are too big. But I like using Canon lenses on my camera.

The lenses do fail from time to time but when it works it focuses very fast. Even indoors

Nov 21, 2015permalink

If it is anything like the A7R II, try using it in AF-C rather than AF-S, even for static subjects I find this the fastest and most consistent focus method for adapted lenses.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

brendon1000

Good point. I was getting crappy results with AF-S but then I tried AF-C and I was impressed

Nov 22, 2015permalink

Much stronger colour, and those ISO 8000 skyline shots look real good.

That too way too long.

It would be nice to see real world shots of the same basic scene taken at the different bit depths. The Seattle skyline should be easy to do that way.

Now Sony, how about the same improvement for the A99 and A77II.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

straylightrun

In your dreams. Amount is dead.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

Sony just released a new A mount body in Europe.

And you'll note I picked two bodies still for sale new by Sony.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

Hrm I have seen no difference in saturation I noticed, still same high saturation, unusually high in green in particular which is also same issue problem with my old A7 but it is the LR/ACR fault for having bad camera profile on green usually. Huelight profile seems to reduce green a bit which is better what I wanted but it is not perfect profile though. RAW uncompressed only fix was the edge artifacts and bit better noise in shadow that's about it, no difference in colours I'm afraid, still same high saturation. Most people imo would still use raw compressed these day usually in older camera with smaller MP like 24MP or less. That one A7RII is more noticeable problem with rather large MP and new BSI-CMOS sensor, different behaviour than old CMOS sensor.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

Dirk Nuary

Sony is started to protect and comfy their camera users.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

photomedium

...after tiger-mothering them for 10 years.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

Rooru S

Sadly, that's only true for E-mount users.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

ProfHankD

Wouldn't it have made more sense to stick the A7II on a tripod and shoot the exact same scene using compressed and uncompressed raw, then show the difference?

I was away at a conference (SC15), but now that I'm back, I will be upgrading my A7II and doing the side-by-side tests. Might also rework KARWY to generate an uncompressed Sony raw rather than DNG when it repairs artifacts in a compressed raw....

Nov 21, 2015permalink

nboyer

I gotta admit, I really can't warm up to the new format for the sample images gallery.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

aftab

Looks like there is focus issues with Canon 50mm/1.2 ( image 13 and 15).

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Dan Bracaglia

It's not a focus issue, rather the lens is just quite soft wide open.

Nov 20, 2015permalink

aftab

Look at image 15. Focus seems to be at the front part of the jacket collar which is sharper than face. Of course, it is possible that photographer has focused on the collar, not on the face.

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Dan Bracaglia

Exactly, the photographer just mixed focus on what should have been the face.

Nov 20, 2015permalink

TheEmrys

Makes me wonder why you (the corporate, dpr) wouldshoot a 50/1.2 wide open. Or any Canon lens, really.

Never been a fan of the f/1.2's. Between wide open softnness and the ease to miss focus, it always seem more gimmick than function for closer up photography. At distances, its highly useful.

Nov 21, 2015permalink

aftab

I see 8 people have liked Dan's response to my comment. I am sure more will come. That's how the blindness goes. Why would the photographer focus on the collar, not on face? Makes any sense?

Nov 21, 2015*permalink

meanwhile

"Exactly, the photographer just mixed focus on what should have been the face."

Bloody photographers, aye Dan?

Nov 21, 2015*permalink

Snikt228

Any comparisons of uncompressed and compressed RAW? Did it make any sizable difference?

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Barney Britton

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6144418951/what-difference-does-it-make-sony-uncompressed-raw

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Bernard Carns

Thanks for the link Barney.

But it's not a "hot" link?

It has to be cut and pasted?

Hmmm.

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Sisung

DPR never allows live linking in comments? Protects against bots and other online riffraff.

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Dan Bracaglia

here's a 'hot' link just for you, Bernard: Hot link

Nov 20, 2015*permalink

Bernard Carns

Thanks Dan.

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Combatmedic870

Did that really just happen!? You couldn't copy and paste??? 😫

Nov 20, 2015permalink

Bernard Carns

@combat....

It did not happen.

I copied and pasted.

Verified that it was correct.

Then I made the post.

:-)

Nov 20, 2015permalink

RPJG

You don't even have to copy/paste... just right-click and select "Go to...".

At least, that's true of Chrome.

Nov 21, 2015permalink