Sony announces Alpha 7 II full-frame mirrorless camera with 5-axis IS

@Cameracist: in terms of M43 equivalence Sony has:
8-17mm f/2
12-35mm f/2
35-100mm f/2
14-70mm f/2
17mm f/1.4
27mm f/0.9
Zeiss Loxia 25mm f/1
Mitakon 25mm f/0.42

And announced for 2015:
14mm f/1
17mm f/0.7
42.5mm f/0.7
45mm f/1.4 macro
Zeiss Loxia 17mm f/1

So I really don't see the problem compared to M43. And this is coming from a M43 shooter.

The lens problem is a quantity issue. Naturally, the system is only one year old, but it still competes with fully mature FF DLSR's. I bought a nikon for this reason first and foremost (better AF, better build and an OVF were also reasons but less so).

And Sony has a bit of catch 22 in terms of lens design. Removing the mirror box doesn't make lenses small automatically, Sony has to compromize lens specs to make them small (relatively speaking) but that makes the lenses less impressive compared to the speed of FF DSLR lenses. If Sony tries to compete on speed, the lenses get bloated and people complain there too.

And mike9999 as a m43 shooter, ha ha, that's funny. I'm a Sony man too because I still have an A100 around somewhere.

Kodacolor: Yes, next they will be shrinking the size of the sensor! Seriously, I am sure that you understand that Sony is developing a brand new line of full frame mirrorless cameras available at a reasonable price. IMHO this shows the real benefits of this camera design - all the IQ advantages of FF in a small package.

Even more importantly it is an APS-C / FF hybrid camera so you can use APS-C telephotos in crop mode and FF wide angle in FF mode if you don't want to carry large FF telephoto lenses.

It is true. "Clear sky" pictures are showing banding :(

There is NO RAW on A7 cameras.

You can see them in Nikon RAWs too, if you know what to look for. Don't pixel peep so much maybe?

Many feature films are shot with Red cameras with 5:1 raw compression. DCP cinema distribution files are more compressed. DTV and Bluray are around 50:1. 4K mirrorless video even worse.

Sony has 2:1 compression, let's keep this in perspective. It's
harmless for 99.999% of shots.

In the grand scheme of things batteries are cheaper than say if they changed the lens mount. I don't think any one would complain of a new style battery if it would double their shot life.

So what mount did Sony change then?

I definitely agree that these mirrorless cameras need bigger batteries. Mirrorless bodies consume more power, and yet these cameras have smaller capacity batteries than their DSLR counterparts. The NP-FM500H battery for the Sony A77 SLT has a capacity of 1650mAH while the capacity of the NP-FW50 battery for the A7 is only 1020mAh. It doesn't make any sense. Larger power consumption devices need larger capacity batteries, not the other way around. And it makes even less sense to keep using a smaller battery if the camera now has a deeper grip that can accommodate a larger battery. So I'm right there with you, TheDevil. Bigger battery, please!

@quezra - I think it's inevitable that mirrorless cameras will move to larger batteries. Inevitable. It happened with DSLRs. It'll happen with mirrorless. And it's an even more pressing issue with mirrorless, because of their higher power consumption. Higher shooting capacity will be used as a selling point. As soon as one mirorless manufacturer starts touting higher shooting capacity in their new camera (by switching to a higher capacity battery), other mirrorless manufacturers will follow. Then it becomes a market pressure issue. So it's going to happen, sooner or later. Plus, I think it will happen (larger batteries, higher shooting capacity) as more and more people turn to mirrorless cameras as DSLR replacements. Right now, I use both DSLR and mirrorless, because DSLRs still have much better battery life. Mirrorless can't compete there. Mirrorless manufacturers will eventually want to close this shooting capacity gap. And they'll do it by finally upping the battery size.

Samsung and Panasonic already offer "higher" end batteries in their flagships. Samsung offered a new battery just for the NX1 (different from NX30 at least), and its rating was a "whopping" 500 shots on 1860 mAh. I don't know that much pressure will come from the other makers, whose lower end cameras are all very small and some already have split battery lines (and therefore even more unlikely to split further).

It wouldn't be a bad thing of course, but I am just pointing out that 2 batteries is just as nice way to get more than you generally need for a whole day's shooting.

I've several Panasonic M4/3 bodies. Only two of these share the same battery. One of few irritating issues with the Lumix M4/3 cameras. I also have and have had several Sony DSLR's (and a single SLT). They all share batteries.
I think it's for the better to have only a few battery lines as Sony have chosen. The company could of course use the DSLR batteries in some of the "Nex'es"

Why does it have to be about "dramatic improvement" that "others notice"? Why can't it be about improvements that only the user notices? I think those kinds of improvements are just as important.

Ramping up production can also take a little time. Time needed to build supplies so they can start selling the Camera in other markets. Plus maybe by the time we get it over here the Japanese will have any kinks worked out and we get the updated firmware.

It isn't available in Japan either. It will be available in December and the rest of the world in January.

Obviously, the Sony A7 II isn't going to just be limited to Japan. That's more like something that Canon would do with their mirrorless, LOL!

www.amazon.co.jp is taking pre-order @$1567 USD based on the rate as following:

https://www.google.com/search?q=jpy+to+usd&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=sb

BTW: A7-2 is $500 more than A7 in Japan as A7 body is $1086 USD in Japan amazon. A7 body is $1498 USD in The US amazon.

P.S.
No ideal about SONY's pricing structure worldwide. Also Canon G1X-2 and G7X are much cheaper in Japan.

Interesting.

US/EU pre-orders now available... ready to get excited now?

It is good news, but I like to see SONY puts IBIS to its APS-C sensor as there are 40 NEX lenses (including 3nd party), and 25 have no IBIS.

Also, CES is only 40 days away.

A touch of envy?

no envy..its called canikon snobbism ;)

at least Canikon fanboys admit to love a camera like this, but wait for one from their own brand of course. One or two years ago those people had never even considered a mirrorless. This A7II seems to be the first FF mirrorless that could beat a FF DSLR in every single way, and that's just the start..

I still don't consider a Mirrorless yet, I don't see any advantage except of weight and (mabye) noise. Size doesn't seem to be an advantage for me, a camera is a tool not a toy like you Sonyfanboys are wearing.

If you grow up you will notice that there is more than a body around a system. A professional support, an array of lenses and a line which will be there in 20 years, still. The sensors are good, the rest is crap for amateur use. What do I want with a camera for 300-400 shots and an internal accu-loadingsystem via USB?

This is a quite nice second camera for churches and lowlight but nothing serious for photographers.

So a short lens register allowing a wide range of legacy lenses is not an advantage? Or having full proper image preview in the viewfinder? Or a lot more exposure information? Or focus peaking and zoom in the EVF for manual focussing?

Eventually DSLRs will be relegated to a niche market, expecially when features like fully electronic silent global shutters appear (no DSLR can ever be truly silent). There's also a lot of mileage in hybrid AF when an intelligent system can combine CAF and PAF.

There are also cost avantages in getting rid of all those moving parts and precision setup issues required by a DSLR.

Much of this is to come, but the direction is clear and the majority of innovation is not in the mirrorless domain. It will become the dominant systems camera technology.

Nothing a couple of spare (cheap compatible) batteries won't solve. I do wonder if those who obsess about "only" 250-300 shots on a battery recall when you had to change films every 36 exposures.

Also, you are confusing pricing with costs. Very different things. The latter is about how much it costs to make something; the former is charging what the market will bear. Apple manage to produce iPhones very cheaply, but can price them high. In an event, the cheapest FF camera around is the Sony A7 as I suspect it costs less to manufacture than any FF DSLR.

As for stone age focusing, there's a time and a place. For fine art, architectural, landscape and video, manual focus (with appropriate assists, like magnifying) is not only practical, but often preferable.

PAF is excellent on action photography of course, but hybrid focus is catching up fast and can do things PAF alone can't. Also, CAF is ultimately more accurate.

Oh no, I woke up the mirrorless-haters ;)

Full of fear, with close eyes and no clue they are going down on the sinking SLR-ship. They enjoy pressing the DOF-Preview button and checking their results on the LCD after each shot because they had no idea how the result would be. If the shot isn't sharp they need to calibrate their lenses to the inaccurate AF system. They are so "busy shooting" and "looking professional", they don't even have the time for a 5 seconds battery change after 300-400shots.

Coming from an A7, shooting on a DSLR seems like last century. The whole shooting workflow is that bad and slow, 0,05 seconds AF speed advantage (if any is left with the latest generation) doesn't matter at all. By the way, the internal charging is just an option, and a good one. I can charge my camera 3 times with my little powerbank or my laptop in the middle of nowhere. Try doing that with an AC-charger...

Zoran, you got what a powerbank is, did you? A laptop was just another example of a USB source. You might as well use a car, an airplane or in your case, a carriage...
We all know you don't like Sony, please go back to the Canon vs. Nikon arena. They must be nice companies because they give you bigger batteries and free AC-charger, obviously the last two reasons to buy their neandertal cameras...

But it's not just a mirror is it? It's a high precision mechanical device which has to be carefully managed and damped so as not to vibrate the camera yet it has to be moved and returned in a few tens of milliseconds. I has to be exquisitely well aligned to the image plane, PAF sensors, viewfinder and it has to remain in this state for a hundred thousand operations or more. If you want 100% frame coverage, it's even more sensitive.

Indeed, it's known on top pro cameras that this is a very expensive, manual process. Even then, you need micro-adjustment for each lens and camera combination.

Then it needs to be combined with a precision ground focus screen, an expensive pentaprism (unless you cheap out on a penta-mirror) plus more optics for the eyepiece.

In contrast, the electronic components of an EVF are cheap, and getting cheaper. Alignment of the single sensor is trivially easy and the whole thing uses a completely closed-loop, self correcting AF system.

@vscd

nb. there are lots of articles on this, try this one for size

https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

nb. also consider the history of technology. We have seen electronic components taking over the role of mechanical ones as the former becomes cheaper and easier. Think how flash storage has replaced mechanical storage for all but the large capacity HDDs (and that's only cost per unit storage, performance wise SSDs are vastly superior). Think that flash memory has replaced tapes in video cameras. Electronic doorchimes vs electromagnetic ones. That digital multimeters have replaced analogue ones. Where electronics is capable of a job, it normally ends up replacing mechanical versions, usually much more cheaply and reliably.

VSCD

I see I see, you still struggle finding reasons why a DSLR is better. From what I read above you got your mirrorless "knowledge" from discussions here in forums But you have not even tried an A7s in the store? It doesn't look like it otherwise you would have an idea of what the difference between live view on a DSLR and in an EVF on a mirrorless means. Finally you come up with a 7000$ D4S body that might be half way comparable to what an A7s can do, but at 3 times the price, weight and size....

To be fair to VSCD, there will always be a niche for DSLRS, at least for the forseeable future. People love their Rolex watches, even if they cost multiples of something that will do the same functional job. Indeed, possibly because they pay so much more. There's a psychological aspect to photography, almost a sensuous attachment.

But the writing is on the wall. Some are in denial (I recall the same thing over auto-focus, digital photography and much else). We might not be there yet, but it's not so far away. Meanwhile I suspect engineers at Canon and Nikon are working some long hours.

DSLR are going to be replaced the same way film was. New technology have supplanted old not because it did everything better, on the contrary, it did a lot of it BAD... When digital came along it was terrible, when the iphone came it only had 2G, when SLR replaced rangefinders it introduced a lot of lag, etc etc... New technology imposes itself only because what brings to the table, and the market decides.

Having said that, the A7 is crap. Look at the specs, sure, it looks like a professional equipment well priced. Look at the implementation and sucks, it looks like an overpriced toy.

1/60 shutter speed on auto
Shutter button lacks any sort of feedback and steps.
The way apps were implemented is a joke.
It is slooooowwwwwww waking up.
PASM modes don't recall the last settings.
Battery hungry.
... I could go on

To be fair, it takes great pictures, but compared to the other cameras I have it get a lot less use... So at the end it produces less and frustrates more.

So you bought the first generation that has some flaws, let's call most of them firmware issues.
Did you update your firmware btw? Sounds like your're still on 1.0
What's the problem with the Apps? And do any DSLR even have apps?

Calling anything else than a DSLR a "toy" und their users "fanboys" seems to satisfy you a lot. I'll leave you alone with that "opinion". You don't even have to be convinced by the new technology and jump brand or anything, just keep your DSLR until the end of your life, no problem at all!
New customers without any investment in any system have to be convinced to buy the bigger and more expensive cameras in the future. But that's not your or my problem, it's just Canikon's. Happy life!

Oh you're so smart and wise. Read your own comments on "Canikon's" and judge your age. My problem is not the new system but the ones who judge on professional equipment just on every "new" product on the market. Why can't you just live in coexistence? What's the problem with the guys from Sony or Fuji? Why do you think you're superiour to everything. Why do you hate the DSLRs so much? It's because of the smaller size of the body you have to compensate? Why does this brand-spam doesn't come from Pentax Users? Why do Olympususer live in freedom with Nikon/Canon?

You just tell bull. Which DSLR is more Expensive? In fact, away from commercials the expensive cams are X-T1, Om-E5 or A7. Not the "big" D7100 or Canon 70D. Not even the D610.

But I agree with you... it's useless to discuss with you, you have your "opinion" and this will last. But I guess you didn't shoot any good picture today with your toy. End of transmission.

All three have the SAME shutter. Each use it differently depending what the sensor is capable of but the A7S is 'capable' of being the same 'clattering' shutter as the A7R.... because they are the same shutter.

@abourtabourt
You just made that up. It's well known that all three had different shutters.

With silent shutter off, the A7S was still quieter than the A7, which in turn with EFC off was still quieter than the A7R.

That's a stupid suggestion. You have a fixed image circle from the lens. You make the sensor to capture as much of that in the aspect ratio must common in the industry.

Why waste expensive sensor pixels when you can do everything by cropping in Photoshop (& using your brain before you frame your shot).

4:3 is close to the 1932 Academy format before widescreen cinemas got popular and superseded in in the 50s, and is the aspect ratio for NTSC SDTV. The world has moved on, and it is an outdated relic that inexplicably lingers in low-end compact point and shoots (which are dying, eaten alive by smartphones) and the ill-advised m43 format.

3:2 is much closer to the golden mean, to the 21st Century 16:9 standard for televisions and most computer monitors, and to the human eyes' natural field of view. Sony would be astonishingly dumb if they downgraded from 3:2 to 4:3.

Vignes brings up a valid point in that Sony is competing against itself by offering 2 distinctly different camera systems to exactly the same customer at exactly the same price points, but share nothing else of value to that customer other than their Sony branding. IMO, this conflict of interest is the biggest obstacle to Sony becoming a successful, (as in profitable), camera manufacturer. I'm just curious as to how this drama will play out for Sony, and I imagine that the big 2 are just as curious as I am. I don't know whether it will be the mirrorless E mount or the A mount SLT, but one of those systems is going to have to die or move way upmarket away from the enthusiast consumer space and take on the big 2 as the tool of choice for professionals. Personally, I don't see that tool of choice thing working out for Sony. :)

abortabort, I used to be a Minolta user during the film days. Minolta makes very good SLR bodies. One of Sony's intentions for acquiring Minolta Camera dev was the M mount. M mount is A mount now plus they start their DSLR business with the already committed Minolta users. I was glad with that as I can continue using my Minolta gears with Sony Alpha DSLR. What opened my eyes was when they introduced the NEX – E mount. The development of the NEX was fast with many new models release etc. you can see the DSLR development is slow. We complain that Canon is slow to update but if you see Sony’s high end DSLR, the update cycle is slow. Sony believes that the A/M mount user would be happy to buy a lens adaptor for their MILC and continue with Sony. For me, I move on and went for a different system maker. I like what Sony does but I can’t keep dumping a particular system. I bet if Canon/Nikon were to do the same, they would upset many more than Sony/Minolta users and it would be a disaster.

"but share nothing else of value to that customer other than their Sony branding."

Correction. Flash guns, audio and video recording accessoires, A mount glass with the SLT adapter.

This camera works pretty easily with EF long glass. A lot of older lenses there are not stabilized and this now offers it for less than the price of upgrading them.

Video.

The OP makes no sense at all.

Sounds like someone is trying to justify a little too hard why they dont' have IBIS

If you ever get used to having all your existing primes stabilized, you just never wanna go back.

@vscd
That really depends on the IBIS you are talking about vs. what optical stabilization you are talking about. For example, I find it infinitely easier to get a sharp photo at low shutter speeds using my EM-10's IBIS with the Panasonic 100-300 lens, instead of using the mega OIS available on the lens.

Not so concerned with the aesthetics of a camera (my A7r is not very attractive to me), but rather the ergonomics and technical aspects that allow the camera to not get in the way of trying to take an image. I don't know how you define the 'soul" of a camera.

I get what he's trying to say actually. Some cameras, while not having the best specifications, have a certain something about them which makes the enjoyable to shoot with. It is, however, premature to judge this camera to that end unless you've actually picked it up in your hands and shot with it.

Fuji fanboys may want an emo camera but personally I prefer mine to just get on with the job

Cameras don't have emotions or soul. That includes the XT1. All those things (emotion, soul, joy, etc) are supplied exclusively by the user. Stop kidding yourself.

As an example, my Pany GX7 is not particularly attractive to me, but I enjoy using it because the buttons are in function places, the EVF is more than good enough, the menu system seems to make sense, and it has useful features for me.

On the contrary my A7r looks pretty sexy to me (reminds me of my FE2/FM3A days), but the buttons are not in the most useful spots, the menu system is right down there in the dirt with Oly's, and the feature set/implementation is not quite there to make it enjoyable to use on a regular basis - I find I have to fight the camera to get what I want out of it. I keep it because it's small, light and is capable of excellent images.

Cam too cold? Maybe someone will build a heated grip for it. My motorcycle has two of those, one for each hand.

Just remember, some people (and companies) only "see impossible." Other companies just do it.

@falconeyes

What are you on about? With the a7m2, they both work together for more effective stabilisation than just one system.

It is confirmed and already demonstrated with legacy glass in video.

EVF do have their limitations but I found that once I got used to it I really liked it.

Nope, A7ii and a Nikon to E adaptor is smaller and lighter than a standard DSLR by a fair bit. Also on A7ii they added the beefier grip that some people felt was missing on the A7. Also it’s a weather sealed metal frame. If what you want is just a larger metal frame so it will look like cameras you’re used to, that will add weight.

jhinkey, does EVF substitute an OVF? the Nikon has an OVF.

This is a great example of "Correlation does not imply causation"! Gonna add this to my classroom examples :D

It is mostly a joke, but shows that offering IBIS may not mean success. Those offering in the past did not see any increase in adoption rates. Canikon marketing won in the end. Marketing DSLRs with IBIS didn't save Sony or Olympus. Neither makes them anymore. If a format does well in the future it won't be due to IBIS, IMHO.

You're confusing correlation with causation IBIS has not *caused* this so-called "jinxed DSLR sales". It's merely a correlation. Correlation does not imply causation. In other words, a correlation between two variables does not necessarily imply that one causes the other. For example, "Since the 1950s, both the atmospheric CO2 level and obesity levels have increased sharply. Hence, atmospheric CO2 causes obesity." Obviously, that's false, just like you implying that the inclusion of IBIS caused Sony and Olympus to "no longer make DSLRs!" LOL. Nice try.

@GoneMirrorless - your conclusions are flawed. First of all, with Sony and Oly DSLR, they were both going against heavily entrenched Canon and Nikon DSLR...and Oly was further hampered by using a smaller sensor. I don't think Sony or Oly ever really stood a chance in the DSLR segment. But now they are in a different camera segment: mirrorless. So they will attract people who want the characteristic aspects of mirrorless, and they'll have the ADDITIONAL benefit of IBIS. In the DSLR segment, IBIS alone was not enough of a draw. But today, IBIS and mirrorless *combined* are a much better and more compelling draw, which is further enhanced by the fact that Canon and Nikon's mirrorless offerings are so poor and non-competitive!

Hello topstuff,
A fast 35 mm is already in the works - the Sony lens roadmap for 2015 shows a full-frame Zeiss 35 1.4 (Distagon, IIRC).
There's also the manual-focus Loxia 35 2.0.
Honestly, I think the 35 1.4 will be too expensive and large - I'd personally prefer the current (very compact) 35 2.8.
I'm also very excited by the A7 II - I use a NEX-6 and always wanted to upgrade to an A7; now I have an even better option. And it will also drive down the prices for second hand A7's, if I want to go that route.

So choice is a bad thing now? Ok got it.

I don't remember I give any shopping instruction. Seems like my comment hit you a bit hard. If it's not problem to you,than buy it! From your respond I wouldn't say so.

Btw,battery life on all mirorless cameras (including this 2014. sony's marvel too) is way too poor for spending few weeks up to a month on travel.
In places with a lots of sand and wind,ocean salted air,rare electricity plug.... I would rather bring a non-mirorless camera with me. No matter weather sealing they have and kilos of cheap batteries in my pocket.
For me,mirorless are still city slickers. As I'm not, they have to improve for me to consider one of them.

Have a nice shooting!