# Sony A7-A7R pre-ordered @ 200% bigger than expected



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

By Sony: “the pre-ordered quantities are almost 200% bigger than expected"

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/from-source-sony-a7-a7r-preorders-200-more-than-expected-from-sony-sony-a7r-review-at-cameralabs/

Ok...let see more prime lenses please 
--------------------------------------------------------

Added: Found some photos: http://www.chipchick.com/2013/11/sony-a7-a7r-sample-photos.html


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2013)

A 'trusted source' says 200% of expectations? That's nice, but mostly meaningless without a baseline number. I just ate 200% of the number of pieces of fruit I expected to eat this morning…two, instead of one.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> A 'trusted source' says 200% of expectations? That's nice, but mostly meaningless without a baseline number. I just ate 200% of the number of pieces of fruit I expected to eat this morning…two, instead of one.



My "trusted source" said, Canon landscape shooters are responsible for this 200% increase ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> My "trusted source" said, Canon landscape shooters are responsible for this 200% increase ;D



Not Nikon shooters? Oh, wait…the Sony a7R has less DR than the D800/D800E. Nevermind.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > My "trusted source" said, Canon landscape shooters are responsible for this 200% increase ;D
> ...


 ;D...do you plan to get one neuro?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> ...do you plan to get one neuro?



No plans to do so, at the present time. I don't do a lot of landscape shooting, and frequently when I do, it's panoramas (where my 18 MP camera is already giving me >80 MP images after stitching and cropping) and/or HDR (almost always with >14 stops of scene DR, so with an a7R, I'd still shoot HDR).


----------



## Woody (Nov 14, 2013)

This fits perfectly into what Thom Hogan calls the Internet Amplification Effect, described in http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/tough-camera-questions.html. The Olympus EM5 is an example. We'll see how the A7/A7r pan out... I suspect they'll go down the same route.

"Beware the Internet amplification effect (IAE). Supposedly the OM-D E-M5 has been a hot, hit camera, but Olympus only sold 250,000 total m4/3 cameras in the first six months of their fiscal year, and that worked out to about 200k Pen-type cameras and about 50,000 E-M5). A camera can appear to be "hot" because loud voices are praising it and others are repeating that message, but the IAE doesn't always translate to sales numbers that change the marketplace."

PS: In comparison, Canon sold about 4 million and Nikon about 3.2 million interchangeable lens cameras in 6 months this year.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 14, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> By Sony: “the pre-ordered quantities are almost 200% bigger than expected"
> 
> http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/from-source-sony-a7-a7r-preorders-200-more-than-expected-from-sony-sony-a7r-review-at-cameralabs/
> 
> Ok...let see more prime lenses please


On that site, a member raised an interesting point ... which I agree with and it is one of the reasons why I am apprehensive about getting any Sony gear:
_"This is my biggest concern, That I’ll get the camera in Dec and then in Feb they’ll release an IBIS version and make all future lenses without IBIS after the 2 already announced. Leaving early adopters with only a couple of IS lenses"_

Note: *IBIS* = *I*n *B*ody *I*mage *S*tabilization


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

Woody said:


> This fits perfectly into what Thom Hogan calls the Internet Amplification Effect, described in http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/tough-camera-questions.html. The Olympus EM5 is an example. We'll see how the A7/A7r pan out... I suspect they'll go down the same route.
> 
> "Beware the Internet amplification effect (IAE). Supposedly the OM-D E-M5 has been a hot, hit camera, but Olympus only sold 250,000 total m4/3 cameras in the first six months of their fiscal year, and that worked out to about 200k Pen-type cameras and about 50,000 E-M5). A camera can appear to be "hot" because loud voices are praising it and others are repeating that message, but the IAE doesn't always translate to sales numbers that change the marketplace."
> 
> PS: In comparison, Canon sold about 4 million and Nikon about 3.2 million interchangeable lens cameras in 6 months this year.


Good information on article. The BIG diff here is Sony brought 35mm sensor into tiny body at reasonable prices. Same body size as omd5 with x3 bigger in sensor.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 14, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> The BIG diff here is Sony brought 35mm sensor into tiny body at reasonable prices.



True, but the OM-D E-M5 is part of an existing ecosystem of small, high quality lenses designed to match up with that small body. A FF sensor in a tiny body with a big lens means the tiny body is at best no real benefit, and more often a hinderance when handling the combination, basically the same as sticking an EOS M behind a 24-70/2.8 or 70-200 lens. 

The appeal of the a7R to Canon shooters is that it works with their existing lenses, and provides a higher resolution sensor with better low ISO DR than any current Canon body. The appeal of the a7R to Nikon shooters is…not much, really. The appeal of the a7R to Sony shooters may be substantial…I bet many of the 350 of them are profoundly interested!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The appeal of the a7R to Sony shooters may be substantial…I bet many of the 350 of them are profoundly interested!


 ;D


----------



## pharp (Nov 14, 2013)

I'm really pleased with this, if for no other reason that we'll finally be able to see if a high quality, reasonably priced FF MILC is a hit. I've been betting for a long time that it would be, but the only opinion that really matters is from those willing to open their wallet!

Kudos to Sony and I hope they sell millions!! Sony should sell a kit with the Metabones EOS-E mount adapter - I'm guessing that'll be a huge part of their initial sales.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > The BIG diff here is Sony brought 35mm sensor into tiny body at reasonable prices.
> ...



LOL...It's hard for people to step out their comfort zone. Regardless what might happen to Sony FF mirrorless cameras in the future, I admired them for bringing wonderful consumer high-end cameras to the market (RX100 II, RX1, and now A7).


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 14, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...


I agree ... but in the case of Sony, there was no choice but to innovate, as they are a loss making company (due to poor product support) ... I would be happy to buy the Sony FF mirrorless camera *if* I know for certain that they will continue with this product without discarding it (and its customers) down the line ... first they said in Camera Stabilization is what they stand for, then they ditch it for this FF mirrorless without in-camera-stabilization, now there is no way to know for sure (given Sony's past) that they will not put in-camera-stabilization in a future model (screwing the early adopters) or continue on to make more image stabilized lenses. I want Sony to succeed and I thy they can, if they don't ditch their customers and provide sustained customer support. At the moment I am not really convinced by the FE lenses (except for the tiniest one), all those lenses look big for a camera of this size, especially the white one. If Sony succeeds in this, it will be good for the industry and we get to benefit from increased competition.


----------



## distant.star (Nov 14, 2013)

.


Woody said:


> PS: In comparison, Canon sold about 4 million and Nikon about 3.2 million interchangeable lens cameras in 6 months this year.



Does this number include all the EOS-M cameras they gave away?


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 14, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> 
> 
> Woody said:
> ...


OK lets deduct those 500 EOS-M cameras, that is still about 4 million interchangeable lens cameras Canon sold in the last 6 months this year


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 14, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > By Sony: “the pre-ordered quantities are almost 200% bigger than expected"
> ...



Still, I doubt that will have much impact on those in the Canon family where for most it would just be an extra body to use for high MP/high DR shots.


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 14, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> By Sony: “the pre-ordered quantities are almost 200% bigger than expected"
> 
> http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/from-source-sony-a7-a7r-preorders-200-more-than-expected-from-sony-sony-a7r-review-at-cameralabs/
> 
> Ok...let see more prime lenses please



It can only be good.

It means sony will be encouraged to invest in the system, and other 3rd party manufacturers will enrich the lens lineup.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 14, 2013)

distant.star said:


> Does this number include all the EOS-M cameras they gave away?



+1

Yes!


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Yes. I agree about long lenses on mirrorless :-\ It doesn't make sense.

The market has clearly devided in segments:
1. DSLR system - Canon & Nikon are still the best choice for photogs
2. Compact high end & mirrorless systems - Sony & Fuji seem to have upper hand

Technology only will get better, faster, smaller and cheaper....the ultimate question is how fast can these companies bring to the market?


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 14, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> distant.star said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...



Sony spent too much time in developing A7 & A7R, they forgot to turn their A7 series from black to white, red, pink etc...that could increase another x300 - x600 times in sale ;D


----------



## unfocused (Nov 14, 2013)

I probably shouldn't even wade into this, but I can't help myself.

I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.

I don't get interchangeable lenses on a mirrorless. If I want a smaller, fake Leica body I'd want a single, fixed lens moderate zoom (24mm-100mm for example). I'm not going to use a 200mm 2.8 lens on a mirrorless camera, much less a 70-300 or 100-400 zoom. No point. I'd rather pay a little more, get a stellar zoom that I can use under all conditions and save the interchangeable lenses for the DSLR, which is a lot more practical form factor for changing lenses. 

I don't get interchangeable prime lenses on a mirrorless. If I have to carry two-three lenses what advantage does a mirrorless have? 

I don't get electronic viewfinders for the sake of electronic viewfinders. Maybe the technology will get there someday, but it's not there today. That's one thing I like about Fuji. They found a nice way to blend optical and electronic.

I don't get the price point. These babies aren't cheap. Unless you have money to burn, it seems crazy to invest in an expensive new system to save a few ounces. 

I don't get the looks of the Sonys. They are just plain ugly with that viewfinder box slapped on top. I asked awhile back why DSLRs got so big. Most of the respondents said they like their big ole DSLRs (ergonomics was a popular catch phrase). Okay, which is it? You love your big DSLRs but you swoon over these Sonys that can't possibly have big, easy to reach and handle buttons if they are so compact.

I don't get why anyone would risk investing in a system that may or may not be around a decade from now. Say what you will about Nikon and Canon, but I'd rather bet on their systems remaining available for the next decade or so than on any other manufacturer.

Okay. Rant over.


----------



## distant.star (Nov 15, 2013)

.
How can you possibly expect to win friends and influence people around here if you keep bringing nothing but good sense and rational thinking?

You pretty much nailed my thinking exactly. Thanks for putting it on paper (well, screen).

For me, Canon is satisfying my needs almost completely. If I had a few bucks for the frivolous side, I'd probably go for the Fuji X100S, but certainly not anything with interchangeable lenses. I'm biding my time until the right second camera comes along to replace my T2i, but I'm not in a hurry. I like a lot about the EOS-M, but I'm waiting until the next iteration shows up to decide. If I go that way, I simply add something to my Canon system -- I don't have to go build a whole new system.

For the first time ever I walked through a Whole Foods grocery store today. (And purchased nothing.) Like any sensible old geezer I just shook my head as I looked at all the fashionably dressed, intelligent-appearing people wasting gobs of money on food that can be had for a lot less in many other places. I look at folks who buy what Sony is selling in much the same way.



unfocused said:


> I probably shouldn't even wade into this, but I can't help myself.
> 
> I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
> 
> I don't get why anyone would risk investing in a system that may or may not be around a decade from now. Say what you will about Nikon and Canon, but I'd rather bet on their systems remaining available for the next decade or so than on any other manufacturer.


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 15, 2013)

We get your rant, that's the source of many debate.

Not to relaunch them here, my Nostradamus moment on future cam market:
Camphones (everyone including cheap and/or low tech soccer moms)
Mirrorless fixed lens zoom -and aspc?- to the proverbial "soccer mom" aka "the new point and shoot"
Mirrorless fixed lens fast prime aka "toy for big boys" aka "the photog purse cam"
DSLR as we know it with the underdogs (sony and such trying) to make room for themsmselves by going the mirrorless road but the top gear still being dominated by classics due to OVF and such.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I probably shouldn't even wade into this, but I can't help myself.
> 
> I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
> 
> ...



As a dad with 2 kids(2.5 & 5yrs), the last thing I want to carry to disneyland is 5D III + 24-70 II. I live 20mins away from Disneyland, Anaheim, California and we have annual passes for our family. I see a lot of dads at disneyland busy taking picture with huge DSLR: 1DX, 5D III, 7D + grip and red ring lenses while the wifes taking care 1-3-4 kids herself :-\

This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s . I know FF mirrorless is not for everyone, but it's for me.

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_a7_v_olympus_om_d_e_m1_v_canon_eos_5d_mk_iii/


----------



## bholliman (Nov 15, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
> 
> I don't get interchangeable lenses on a mirrorless. If I want a smaller, fake Leica body I'd want a single, fixed lens moderate zoom (24mm-100mm for example). I'm not going to use a 200mm 2.8 lens on a mirrorless camera, much less a 70-300 or 100-400 zoom. No point. I'd rather pay a little more, get a stellar zoom that I can use under all conditions and save the interchangeable lenses for the DSLR, which is a lot more practical form factor for changing lenses.



+1 well said!



Dylan777 said:


> This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s



I "get" the RX1 and X100s, there is a need for small, portable cameras with great IQ. The A7 and A7r I really don't get however. If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E). At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s . I know FF mirrorless is not for everyone, but it's for me.
> 
> http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_a7_v_olympus_om_d_e_m1_v_canon_eos_5d_mk_iii/



Interesting pic. How big are your hands? Mine aren't lumberjack type but still large/long and even my old 60d was feeling cramped. What's the feeling from a pure handling purpose (not even ergonomics)


----------



## sanj (Nov 15, 2013)

I am always happy when companies innovate and make interesting stuff. I do not see any reason why we should not appreciate their efforts. Really.


----------



## Cali_PH (Nov 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> I "get" the RX1 and X100s, there is a need for small, portable cameras with great IQ. The A7 and A7r I really don't get however. If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E). At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.



Not sure I want to get into this either but...for what it's worth...if a Canon shooter buys a D800(E), you can't use your Canon glass on it, which of course will normally mean a large investment in new glass. However, there's a selection of existing adapters that fit on the A7 & A7r. There are many videos of people already using Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc. mount lenses on the A7, so with the adapter, you can immediately use your Canon (or other) glass. 

Plus, so many people here have said there's not much difference in 36mp vs. 22mp of the D800 vs. 5DmkIII, largely because Canon's lenses, _in general_ are better at resolving detail. I'm curious to see what that Canon's superior glass can do with that sensor. Of course, using an adapter could nullify any IQ benefit from better glass, time will tell. EDIT - Also, in Australia I believe they're giving away one adapter of choice with these cameras, and there's speculation other places may follow.

However, I do agree with you about being concerned about Sony's history of dropping products and moving on to something else. If this thing sells well though, Sony is more likely to continue to support it.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 15, 2013)

Cali_PH said:


> Not sure I want to get into this either but...for what it's worth...if a Canon shooter buys a D800(E), you can't use your Canon glass on it, which of course will normally mean a large investment in new glass. However, there's a selection of existing adapters that fit on the A7 & A7r. There are many videos of people already using Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc. mount lenses on the A7, so with the adapter, you can immediately use your Canon (or other) glass.


 
I think that people are wrong to expect a fully functioning Canon lens on the Sony camera. You can mount it, and perhaps it will autofocus, but will it focus accurately? Will it track? Which focus points work? How accurate will the exposure be? Can you control the aperture??

Sony will likely not recognize the code that a Canon lens sends to the body in order for the body to know all about the lens and make exposure and focus point selections, or control the aperture. When you put your 85mm f/1.2 lens on the camera, can you set the aperture to f/1.2?? I'm skeptical.

I'd like to see some factual review of how well it works, or if its just a manual operation rather than just claims from someone who has not actually operated one.


----------



## Woody (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Yes. I agree about long lenses on mirrorless :-\ It doesn't make sense.
> 
> The market has clearly devided in segments:
> 1. DSLR system - Canon & Nikon are still the best choice for photogs
> 2. Compact high end & mirrorless systems - Sony & Fuji seem to have upper hand



The Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS lens for mirrorless E-mount weighs 840g, even heavier than Canon EF 70-200 f/4 IS lens. While Sony wide to standard lenses for FF E-mount are lighter than Canon's EF lenses, the weight of their telephoto lenses immediately negates all the so-called mirrorless advantage.

For mirrorless, Sony and Olympus dominates. Fujifilm market share is too small. Remember the Internet Amplification Effect: many folks may claim the Fuji mirrorless cameras are excellent, but the market isn't buying them.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> As a dad with 2 kids(2.5 & 5yrs), the last thing I want to carry to disneyland is 5D III + 24-70 II. I live 20mins away from Disneyland, Anaheim, California and we have annual passes for our family. I see a lot of dads at disneyland busy taking picture with huge DSLR: 1DX, 5D III, 7D + grip and red ring lenses while the wifes taking care 1-3-4 kids herself
> 
> ...
> 
> This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s . I know FF mirrorless is not for everyone, but it's for me.



Mine are 5 yrs and 3 yrs daughters and a 0.5 yrs son. On our last amusement park trip, I took the 1D X, 24-70/2.8L II, and 70-300L. Admittedly, having a second lens is easier with a stroller along. But I had 1-2 of the kids the whole time, with camera+lens on a BR strap so my hands were free. I rode rides, held little hands, wiped soft serve-covered faces, etc. I liked that I had a camera I could count on to track my wife and daughters on the roller coaster while I stayed with the baby, had the high ISO performance to handle my daughters being invited on stage at a musical show in a dark theater (ISO 25,600 for a 1/250 s shutter speed as they danced with the performers), and was able to take pictures of my daughters as we rode Dr. Geyser's raft ride and all got drenched (including the camera). 

That's when I truly appreciate the robustness and functionality of a 1-series body and L-series lenses. I know a FF Pro body is not for everyone, but it's for me.


----------



## eml58 (Nov 15, 2013)

sanj said:


> I am always happy when companies innovate and make interesting stuff. I do not see any reason why we should not appreciate their efforts. Really.



And that's pretty well where i sit, On this particular Camera (the a7r), I've gone from "Interesting development","Could work well as a back up smaller system FF to the 1Dx" "Pre Order" "cancel Pre-Order".

The only real reason I've decided to sit back and wait & see is the reports I'm reading re the a7r and poor focus in low light, even with the Zeiss 55 f/1.8, that's a real need for what I would expect to use this Camera for.


----------



## Cali_PH (Nov 15, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Cali_PH said:
> 
> 
> > Not sure I want to get into this either but...for what it's worth...if a Canon shooter buys a D800(E), you can't use your Canon glass on it, which of course will normally mean a large investment in new glass. However, there's a selection of existing adapters that fit on the A7 & A7r. There are many videos of people already using Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc. mount lenses on the A7, so with the adapter, you can immediately use your Canon (or other) glass.
> ...



I, for one, never said anything about 'fully' functioning' or expecting the same autofocus performance. I'd expect it to be slower at the very least, and wouldn't be surprised if it had other issues as you mention. Here's one of the videos I've seen of someone trying the autofocus with a pre-production version. It's not really a full review, or an extensive test with every Canon lens or anything, but he shows the autofocus with one Canon lens at around 12 minutes. Perhaps some lenses won't focus at all with it, I have no idea. 

Sony A7 & A7R Hands-On Field Test


----------



## Nishi Drew (Nov 15, 2013)

I honestly don't think the loud shutter would be a problem for street photos… the city is noisy, no one can hear my 5DII

And I didn't expect the AF to be stellar, but seems it might be better than the 5DII at least (what isn't?), however I plan to get the Mark 3 soon anyways, and that's another league above of course.

What's this though… UNDER 300 shots per charge, haha I need 3 batteries to match a DSLR?
No way it's lasting through an event, I'm going to be switching more and likely missing shots!
And the slow shutter sync is another factor, I like outdoor strobe shooting.

Now, I do get the temptation of wanting one as a second body, or just general purpose, the A7 is so affordable from start and just thinking about the possible drop in value over time is exciting (well, RX1 is still up there but...).
For what these two cameras are, they're probably really good and would fit the bill with many shooters, but for what I do and even like to do casually, although the smaller size is appreciated, it's not quite there yet. Sony will eventually bring out another camera in the future so I will see how that goes too, by then perhaps AF and battery technology would have improved enough


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> The A7 and A7r I really don't get however. If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E). At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.



Maybe because withthe D800 you have to commit to 100% swapping systems right now. Give up the better Canon video, the Canon 24-70 II and 17 and 24 T&S and 70-300L and MPE, nicer UI, etc. With the A7R you don't. Sure it's a hack and not as nice as a full performance body in one so if Canon drops the ball again for DR maybe you do finally go Nikon, but the A7R at least gives you some time to put that off a bit longer.

A7R is a lot less money than going through a system, swap too.

Who here in Canonland getting the A7R for the DR and such gives about IBIS and whatnot? Who the heck cares?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 15, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I think that people are wrong to expect a fully functioning Canon lens on the Sony camera. You can mount it, and perhaps it will autofocus, but will it focus accurately? Will it track? Which focus points work? How accurate will the exposure be? Can you control the aperture??



Who cares?? (ok, maybe the wildlife guys wanting FF with more reach, but as we said this is just a hold over to see if Canon delivers or not)

If you are a Canon user you are getting it for the MP/DR for landscapes most likely. You are not replacing your 5D3 or 1DX or 7D with this, it's a supplement. A hack to get the DR Canon refuses to deliver to so far.

(ok well everyone would care about the aperture control, but yes the adapter absolutely allows you to control that, it's not an issue; and as for exposure I don't know it shouldn't be able to do it with Canon lenses, but even if it got 00, who cares, it's landscape you are probably doing M mode anyway or could easily enough swap to that, yeah sure it's all a little less convenient at times, as said, it's a hack to get more MP/DR for landscapes using Canon glass, but not that big of a deal and if you can't manage to get to the proper exposure pretty quickly on your own with a digital camera even if the metering isn't working at all then I doubt you even know waht DR or perhaps even MP even are)


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> How can you possibly expect to win friends and influence people around here if you keep bringing nothing but good sense and rational thinking?
> 
> You pretty much nailed my thinking exactly. Thanks for putting it on paper (well, screen).
> ...



Interesting POV ???

5-6yrs ago when I didn't know anything about camera, I thought spending 2-3 hundred dollars on DSLR is a waste.

Then 1st kid showed up. I started with 40D + 50mm f1.4 borrowed through a friend. Love the IQ.

Then the friend told me about 5D II + 50mm f1.4. I thought all cameras are same, so why should I spend more $$$ on FF sensor? I gave a try....felt in love with bokeh. I ended up with 5D III due to 61points AF system.

One day, I was shopping with the wife. I decided you swing by Sony store to check out their latest LED TV. I saw the RX1....I took a few shots with my own SD card. The next thing I know I spent $2800 through BH, follow RX100 II. My 2 cents. Sony makes the BEST high-end compact & mirrorless - PERIOD. Not Nikon, Not Canon

In life...we need to taste diff. things to know what out there.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
> ...



DR is extra thing for me in term of buying Sony camera. Also, I'm not a high MP guy, if I did, I would have order A7 R instead of A7 

Primary reason I want A7: compact body, FF, be able to swap lenses. I don't need all the lenses Sony/Zeiss has to offer. I'm interested in: 14 or 16mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm.


----------



## zlatko (Nov 15, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > I think that people are wrong to expect a fully functioning Canon lens on the Sony camera. You can mount it, and perhaps it will autofocus, but will it focus accurately? Will it track? Which focus points work? How accurate will the exposure be? Can you control the aperture??
> ...



If you are a Canon user, you may be getting an A7/A7r because you would love to have such a small full-frame camera with the option to use some great lenses, such as those from Leica and Zeiss. One's interest in the A7/A7r may have nothing to do with DR. Anyone who has seen Salgado's magnificent Genesis project knows that Canon delivers for landscapes, wildlife, portraits, etc. People who are still "waiting" for Canon to deliver more DR presumably have more demanding applications than Salgado, and yet can't seem to switch to Sony/Nikon. And while Canon is criticized for "refusing" to deliver more DR, it is Nikon and Sony that are failing to deliver video performance to match that of the 5D3 (as per Cameralabs - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7r/).


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s . I know FF mirrorless is not for everyone, but it's for me.
> ...



If you can find a Sony store in your area and give it a try


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > As a dad with 2 kids(2.5 & 5yrs), the last thing I want to carry to disneyland is 5D III + 24-70 II. I live 20mins away from Disneyland, Anaheim, California and we have annual passes for our family. I see a lot of dads at disneyland busy taking picture with huge DSLR: 1DX, 5D III, 7D + grip and red ring lenses while the wifes taking care 1-3-4 kids herself
> ...



1. How many times did you hit the kids with your 1D X + 24-70 and 70-300? ;D

*And*

2. How many advil did you take after that trip? ;D

I would go that route if there is no other choices. Here we have some options to choose, why not use that as our advantage.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

Woody said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes. I agree about long lenses on mirrorless :-\ It doesn't make sense.
> ...



Well, I own one and I do know how Fuji mirrorless performs: http://www.dylanphotography.phanfare.com/6246818


----------



## MLfan3 (Nov 15, 2013)

I could pick it up in this morning on the way to my work place.
Well, it has some issues, froze up many times when I put some F to E mount adapter to use my Nikon AF-S105mm f2.8GEDVR lens.
When it froze up , it refused to do anything , I just had to take out the batter to turn it down.
so, I guess I am returning it , I bought a 7R and 7 kit , with plan to sell one I less liked.

but I think I am done with Sony, Sony is never reliable , I will just wait Samsung, Fuji or Canon or Nikon to come up with soemthing similar with more reliable mount design(the E mount is optimized for APS-C , thus, it is a bit too narrow for the FF sensor).

I think Sony has some interesting ideas but never materializes right , never makes it really mature.
the RX1 was fine cause it was not a system camera , but this one is not, it is , as usual with Sony ,just a impractical toy camera that never works as promised.

I mean Sony should or could also release at least a few more lenses with it, and the FW has a lot of bugs , too many times freezes up , and it takes long time to format a SD card.

Oh and it is not selling well. Sony told me unless pre-ordered it , we would not get it at the launch.
but in reality we could pick it up quite easily this morning here, and I did not pre order it..
Another big issue of that camera is the extremely loud shutter noise.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> 1. How many times did you hit the kids with your 1D X + 24-70 and 70-300? ;D
> 
> And
> 
> ...



None and none. I don't have any problems with my coordination, and I've spent so much time carrying my kids around as they're growing up that even my 1D X + 600/4L IS II doesn't seem like that much of a load...

Choices are good, but we make them based on priorities. Sometimes small size is most important, but often with kids I prioritize AF, frame rate, and high ISO performance. 

Also, are the Sony cameras weather sealed? Beyond water rides at amusement parks, I live in New England. We have this stuff here called weather (well, they call it weathaaah, but since I was born in California and lived there for over 30 years, I know how to use the letter 'R'), that you don't get in CA.  A sunny, 85° day can turn quickly to a 'wicked bad downpoaaah', you're a target in a snowball fight whether or not you're holding a camera, etc.


----------



## bholliman (Nov 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> The A7 and A7r I really don't get however. If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E). At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.





LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Maybe because with the D800 you have to commit to 100% swapping systems right now. Give up the better Canon video, the Canon 24-70 II and 17 and 24 T&S and 70-300L and MPE, nicer UI, etc. With the A7R you don't.
> 
> If you are a Canon user you are getting it for the MP/DR for landscapes most likely. You are not replacing your 5D3 or 1DX or 7D with this, it's a supplement. A hack to get the DR Canon refuses to deliver to so far.



I wasn't trying to advocate switching to Nikon, just making the point that if somebody was determined to chase the MP/DR of the Sony FF sensor, Nikon is probably a better choice than Sony. Until its proven that Canon glass works extremely well with the A7/A7r, I'll remain skeptical.


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 15, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. How many times did you hit the kids with your 1D X + 24-70 and 70-300? ;D
> ...



Yes, they are fully weather sealed.


----------



## J.R. (Nov 15, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



With the adapter and a third party lens mounted?


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 15, 2013)

Well, I do get the "mirrorless thing". It's simple: with an ultracompact MILC like the A7 I get the world's best available FF sensor AND can go "really small and light" whenever I want to. With any Canon-DSLR ... I can't. 

Yes, I want a FF MILC! NOT as a "special purpose second cam" in addition to my existing APS-C DSLR (7D plus assorted EF-S and EF/L lenses from 10mm [=16mm FOV eq.] to 200mm [320mm FOV eq.]) but as a total replacement. I am tired of bulky, noisy, mirror-slapping DSLRs laden with swinging mirrors and submirrors, detached phase-AF units, heavy viewfinder prisms, mechanical shutter units and other opto-mechanical components that need to be precisely manufactured, assembled and adjusted to 1/1000 of a millimetre just to get a sharp picture. I want to fully cash in on the "digital dividend". 

And to be as familiar as possible with my gear which I don't use every single day, I want to run one camera system only at any time. Not two or three different camera systems from differnet makers with different user interfaces and different sets of mutually incompatible lenses and accessories.

My idea of "pure photography" is: make it simple. Purely electronic and digital. No moving, mechanical parts inside. No obstructions in the lightpath, that need to be moved out of the way for every capture. No retro crap. Only the dials and buttons absolutely needed. And ... let me see the scene as closely to how the camera will capture it, not as closely to how my naked eye sees it - to get the latter, all I need to do is open my left eye.  

So here I am, ready for my first "100% digital" camera. Compact and light. With a 36x24mm sensor to have full DOF isolation potential and excellent Hi-ISO IQ [I need 3200 frequently, 6400 rarely, never more]. 

All that Canon [and Nikon] are offering to customers like me is inadequate and only maximizes THEIR profits at my expense. "BUY an APS-C DSLR, BUY another one that is only marginally better, and another one or BUY a FF-DSLR (5D III/D800) now, BUY a 5D IV (D900) in 2015 and maybe - but only maybe, BUY a Canon [or Nikon] FF MILC in 2017. Priced at USD 4000+ of course, since CaNikon "really really need some high margin products". :

Unlike many others, I am not willing to go that route. I want to cut that short and am looking for "small, yet fully competent gear" now. Not in a rush, sicne my 7D is still fully functional, but sooner, so I can wait a little. If the Sony A7R is not there yet, maybe it's the A8R or some other product by somebody else. 

Also unlike many others, I do not need a "chunky camera to hoöld it steady and have a good grip". I'd prefer it to be small and light, when I want to go small and light. And unobtrusive for strreet photography and any other candid situiation. And for those weekend city trips we like to take. And all those nice photo walks with camera and buddies. And when I go mountaineering - I want it to be so small that camera + WA-pancake on it fit into a small pouch attached to my backpack strap up front, ready to take a shot whenever I want to . And for my urban exploration excursions in some industrial ruins, where I need to climb over fences or through broken windows. Large heavy gear is a pain! But inside it is fairly dark, so a small-sensor compact will not cut it. Or for Aunti Mary's 80th birthday party. Or for my niece's wedding. And when I go mountain biking in breathtaking alpine scenery. And and and. 

I know, I cannot go small and light with any camera system, on occasions that demand use of fast/longer focal tele lenses. But in all of those situations listed above I hardly ever use my 70-200/2.8 II or even longer tele lenses. And when I occasionally use one, most of the time it will not be handheld but sit on my tripod. So using an adapter (with tripod ring) and handling bigger lens on a small camera body would be no real issue for me. As I am doing now, I'll just switch to liveview and (touch-) screen control. Maybe there will even be adapters offering full functionality of EF lenses not only for AF but also for in-lens IS. It's just a bit too early to make a call on this. Another "chunky" lens I would love to have is the Canon TS-E 24 II. No matter what cam, I'd always use it on a tripod. It doesn't have AF or IS on a Canon DSLR either. So no problem to use it via adapter on a MILC. No risk of a protruding viewfinder bump getting in the way of max. shift [yes a Nikon problem, not Canon].


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 15, 2013)

So what about the Sony A7/R compared to my needs?

Image quality - check. Excellent. Confirmed by the first reviews already. Best sensor in the industry [no, it is not behind the D800 ]. Highest resolution and best DR ... at least up to ISO 3200. Yes, I do use and need Hi-ISO a fair bit, but only up to 3200, very rarely to 6400. So don't care for 51200 or more. Cudos to Sony for putting that sensor into such a small package!

Lenses? The good: SonyZeiss 24-70 has in-lens IS ("OSS"), CaNikon has not. If the SonyZeiss turns out to be as good as expected, it would be my pick and cover 50% or more of my shooting situations - both in focal length and in max. aperture. And it will still be way smaller, lighter and less obtrusive on an A7/R than the CaNikon behemoths on a 5D III or D800. 

To really "go light" I'd want 3 ultra-compact moderate aperture "pancake" primes. Most of the time I would only carry one lens on me, depending on intended photographic target/shooting situation. 
a) W/A landscape and confined space pancake ... ideally a 18mm/f 4.0 
b) normal view pancake - ideally a Sony FE equivalent to the tiny, "good enough" and dirt cheap Canon EF 40/2.8 [which I have and like]
c) a portrait lens - ideally a compact 85/2.0 WITH stabilizer. Sizewise like a Leica M 

One more thing: I'd love to get these native primes without manual focus ring & gear - so as "purely AF-versions".  Makes 'em smaller, lighter, cheaper and easier to wheatherseal. I am never focusing manually anyways. Sony is not there yet. 1000 USD/Euros for a 55/1.8 are a bad joke. No matter whether it says Zeiss on it or not. But I am confident, Sony will get there fairly soon. 

My biggest area of discomfort: I think the Sony E-mount really is a bit too narrow for FF. In combination with the very short flange distance of 18mm it restricts opportunities to design very good, fast lenses at affordable prices. A mistake they'll not be able to correct. 

Stabilizer: Sony really, really should have continued their strategy of putting a sensor stabilizer into their cameras. Even if it had added a few mm to body size and another 100 bucks or so to price. One of the serious drawbacks in my view on the A7/R. But maybe they'll put an Olympus-style 5-axes stabilizer into the A8/R.  

Autofocus: big question mark. One-Shot probably OK for my needs, even on A7R. Tracking AF likely not yet, even on A7 ... and even for what I expect: people moving at medium speed [not indoor ball sports, not cheetah pursuing impala, no birds in flight or similar]. Unfortunately Sony did not get PD-AF on the A7R sensor. Again, maybe A8R. What I consider "good enough" is exactly what Nikon 1 AF or Oly OMD 1 deliver. Will test it when I can get my hands on an A7/R where I live. 

In terms of fps I am happy with anything between 4 and 6 fps. I ain't no "machine gun Joe". 7D is overkill for my needs in that department. 

Shutter noise: A7/R ... need to test myself ... but almost certainly "fail". This really bothers me a lot. I do a fair bit of shooting at (classical music) concerts, theatres, in churches etc ... and also a bit of street photography. Silent operation when needed is one of the major attractions of a MILC-system to me. Oh well, maybe A8R. Make it a mech-free shutter please. Electronic global shutter. 100% digital camera. 

Battery charge: absolutely disappointing. 200+ shots is not nearly enough. Sony should have added a bit bigger grip to take the regular Alpha battery NP-FM500H with 12 Wh charge. Or a new, better battery. Again, maybe in the the A8/R. 

Flash ... probably fail. While Canon is not quite there either [e.g. no 2nd curtain sync and no zoom-head control in wireless operation, not even with RT-gear; no 430EX-RT, no RT-receivers to enable radio wireless on existing 580/430EX IIs] they are clearly ahead of Nikon and way ahead of where (I believe) Sony is. Probably there are and will be third party triggers available, but they are always a far cry from a good, "native" flash system. I have no intention to buy pockewizards or China-stuff when all this flash functionality could and should by all means be built right into the gear from the start. Sony really needs to step up their flash-game. AH yes, I would also like to have a pop-up flash for fill in the camera. It helps me to go light, without a speedlite, when only a little fill is needed. 

So - in total more question marks at the moment than thumbs up. But I'll check the A7/R out sometime soon. And I am sure my 7D will easily last me another year if need be.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 15, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Lenses? The good: *SonyZeiss 24-70 has in-lens IS* ("OSS"), *CaNikon has not*.



Which lens are you talking about? The 24-70mm Carl Zeiss OSS is an f/4 lens… Why are you comparing it to the Canon and Nikon f/2.8 lenses, and how did you forget about the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L *IS*?


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. How many times did you hit the kids with your 1D X + 24-70 and 70-300? ;D
> ...



I didn't know you from California Neuro  What part of california? city?

I came to US, california when I was 15yrs. I haven't move since. 

I believe A7 series is weather sealed, but I doubt is good as a 1D X. Well, I do agree with you on tracking kid with mirrorless. I'm no expert in photography, but I think I can get a single shot with kid running.

Again, if this camera works out as I planned. I might end up with just one 5D III + 135L + 70-200.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> I didn't know you from California Neuro  What part of california? city?



Mostly the Bay Area (grew up in San Jose, lived in Berkeley while going to Cal), then San Diego for ~7 years before moving to Boston.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 15, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't know you from California Neuro  What part of california? city?
> ...



My 5yrs loves snow. She can spend all day playing with it. I reserved a cabin in Big Bear mt first week of Jan. Hopefully, I can test out my A7 + zeiss 55mm by then :

As you can see the photo below. We went snow tubing together - my left hand was holding the tube she sitting on and my right holding & shooting with 5D III + 24-70 II.

Any plan moving back to sun shine CA?


----------



## sdsr (Nov 15, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> On that site, a member raised an interesting point ... which I agree with and it is one of the reasons why I am apprehensive about getting any Sony gear:
> _"This is my biggest concern, That I’ll get the camera in Dec and then in Feb they’ll release an IBIS version and make all future lenses without IBIS after the 2 already announced. Leaving early adopters with only a couple of IS lenses"_
> 
> Note: *IBIS* = *I*n *B*ody *I*mage *S*tabilization



This is a serious concern, inasmuch as all the Sony & Minolta A-mount lenses one (well, I) might have hoped to use on these cameras were designed without stabilization because Sony's dslrs all have IBIS. Do we know why they dropped it for the A7s? Is it not possible to have FF sensor + IBIS in a body that size? The Olympus OMD EM5 has what was at the time state-of-the-art IBIS and it has the same size body, give or take a few mm, but of course a significantly smaller sensor.


----------



## sdsr (Nov 15, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I probably shouldn't even wade into this, but I can't help myself.
> 
> I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
> 
> ...



You have a point, at least as far as FF mirrorless is concerned: if the point is to go small and light the lenses prevent that from happening unless Sony or whoever comes up with a range of small lenses, which presumably means no fast zooms of any focal length and no primes longer than c. 100mm. Maybe my perspective is odd because I often want to go much longer than that (my "go to" FF lens is 70-300L), but I wonder how appealing such limitations are. If size/weight really matter, m43 makes more sense to me, especially given how surprisingly well the latest models do in combination with the primes and better zooms.

But mirrorless has an appeal that has nothing to do with size. Once you've experienced the accuracy (for still subjects, at any rate, but that seems to be changing) and speed of focus points that almost cover the entire viewfinder/monitor (well, that's true of Olympus and Panasonic - their rivals don't seem to have caught up yet), you feel a bit limited when you return to a FF dslr which, no matter how many focus points it may have, limits them all to a fairly small proportion of the frame. And while I get why many don't like EVFs, not only are they improving simply as viewing devices (among other things, the latest Olympus has a viewfinder that's second only to the 1Dx in magnification, apparently) they make it much easier to control the image you're creating since you can see the effects of changes in exposure etc. while looking through the viewfinder. This may not matter to you, but some of us find it helpful. 

So if Canon's next FF camera were around the size of a 6D or 5DIII, and otherwise performed at least as well as those two, and mirrorless, I would buy one without the slightest hesitation. Maybe noone else would.... (And if sensor technology were to improve in such a way that the difference between FF and m43 shrank further, I wouldn't object to that, either.)


----------



## pharp (Nov 15, 2013)

I'm a little surprised Canon hasn't made a MILC principally 'video' camera, since that seems to be what they're emphasizing now (the OVF is of course worthless). My video guy claims the Panasonic GH is really gaining in that area. I have no use for video. I hope Sony sells ALOT of these, so maybe Canon will take the mirrorless segment seriously and give us a good one (I'm not optimistic). They still have the best overall system. I was really disappointed with the half hearted M - not really awful, but certainly uninspired.


----------



## pharp (Nov 15, 2013)

sdsr said:


> So if Canon's next FF camera were around the size of a 6D or 5DIII, and otherwise performed at least as well as those two, and mirrorless, I would buy one without the slightest hesitation. Maybe no one else would.... (And if sensor technology were to improve in such a way that the difference between FF and m43 shrank further, I wouldn't object to that, either.)



You're not alone. Something a little smaller wouldn't hurt, keep the EF mount.



pharp said:


> I think there is a common misconception that the only reason for making a MILC is to decrease the size - WRONG! As noted by others, there are many good reasons for ditching the mirror/pentaprism - inevitable IMHO. The problem to date, as I see it, there just haven't been any really compelling 'system' cameras available. If canon made a mirrorless 6D - size, etc being the same with a really good EVF - I think it would sell in droves. I'd buy one tommorrow.


----------



## unfocused (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> As a dad with 2 kids(2.5 & 5yrs), the last thing I want to carry to disneyland is 5D III + 24-70 II. I live 20mins away from Disneyland, Anaheim, California and we have annual passes for our family. I see a lot of dads at disneyland busy taking picture with huge DSLR: 1DX, 5D III, 7D + grip and red ring lenses while the wifes taking care 1-3-4 kids herself :-\



Well, that's one reason I bought a Fuji X-20 when we hiked to the bottom of the Grand Canyon in September. I didn't want to be lugging a massive DSLR down and back up. I was very glad I did. I wasn't doing the hike to take pictures, I was doing the hike because I wanted the experience and a small, high quality fixed lens zoom camera was perfect for that purpose.

Disneyland? Same thing. 

I don't need no full frame camera...don't need no 300 mm zoom lens. High quality small sensor fixed lens camera like the Fuji will capture everything I need. It weighs practically nothing. I can put in on "P" and just shoot away. My kids are grown now, but whether its kids or grandkids, I don't need 16 x 24 prints of them with some guy in a Mickey costume.

Part of my point was that a full frame mirrorless interchangeable lens camera is far less practical for those kinds of situations than a good quality compact fixed lens zoom.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 15, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Lenses? The good: *SonyZeiss 24-70 has in-lens IS* ("OSS"), *CaNikon has not*.
> ...



yes, you are right. got that one mixed up, sorry. f/4 it is, the sony zeiss. 
And yes, Canon has a 24-70/4 L IS too. But no FF MILC body to go with it for me. ;-)


----------



## symmar22 (Nov 15, 2013)

It's to admit that Canon hasn't released anything very exciting this year (except maybe the 200-400mm, but how may of us will actually buy it ?), and a few new products on the market is always good to take. IMO all the ranting shows mainly the frustration of some people who cannot accept that these days, creativity is not on the side of the brand they support. The A7R might not be for everyone, but for me it will probably be the camera that finally replaces my 5D2s. 

I'm into architecture and landscape, I've been doing it for years with a 4x5 Linhof, and couldn't care less about AF or frame rate. What I need is a new sensor, and fact is Canon is not able to deliver it. They may in 2015, but I am not holding my breath for a 7000$ 1Dx HD. Until they have something affordable and available (5D4 in 2016 ?), the A7R might be the camera that will fill the void. With the lens adapter it will cost roughly the price of a 5D3, but in my case it will actually be an upgrade (contrary to the 5D3). The size of the camera compared to the lenses is irrelevant on my Gitzos. And it seems it will be a nice companion to my TS-E collection.

Instead of dismissing every technical progress because it doesn't have Canon written on it, I prefer to adapt and use the tools available, WHOEVER makes them.

I could link this to the Nikon Df, it is nice to see something different (if not new). I am sure Canon would have released a retro styled (A-1) digital camera similar to the Df, it would have been the pride of this forum. But as it's Nikon who released it, it can only be worthless.

These days there is much more excitement with Canon who repainted a 100D in white. That is some real exciting new product. Nice move Canon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 15, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> My 5yrs loves snow. She can spend all day playing with it.
> 
> Any plan moving back to sun shine CA?



Our kids love it, too…and usually don't have to go further than the back yard.

We'll likely end up back on the west coast at some point, but we're looking at further north (Humboldt, Portland, Seattle).


----------



## unfocused (Nov 15, 2013)

symmar22 said:


> IMO all the ranting shows mainly the frustration of some people who cannot accept that these days, creativity is not on the side of the brand they support...Instead of dismissing every technical progress because it doesn't have Canon written on it, I prefer to adapt and use the tools available, WHOEVER makes them.
> 
> I could link this to the Nikon Df, it is nice to see something different (if not new). I am sure Canon would have released a retro styled (A-1) digital camera similar to the Df, it would have been the pride of this forum. But as it's Nikon who released it, it can only be worthless.



I don't think you are reading the same forum that I am reading.

Any product that is introduced, you generally have three groups on this forum. 

The "every other brand is better than Canon" people who extol the virtues of every product offered by every other manufacturer and complain bitterly that Canon is behind the times.

The "Canon is always best" group that insists that Canon products are always superior, no matter what.

Finally, the group that falls somewhere in the middle. They prefer Canon for any number of reasons. Are generally satisfied with the product offerings, but are anxiously anticipating the next generation of any product line. They don't get too worked up about new products from competitors, but recognize that technology releases tend to leap frog one another. One product may be ahead for awhile, but then another product comes along and leap frogs over that one. 

One day, they may be highly critical of Canon. The next, they may be ripping into Nikon or Sony.

The vast majority of people on this forum fall into that third group – each with their own personal perspective. Most have a built-in bias towards Canon (this is a Canon forum after all), but try to keep some perspective.


----------



## symmar22 (Nov 15, 2013)

Maybe it's me then, I am a Canon user as well and am not logged on any other brand forum, but I can feel a tendency to defend Canon with sometimes biased arguments.

I do not take for granted they are better or worse than others, they just make photo equipment (among other things). I read a lot of "it's crappy, it's ugly it's a useless stuff" about the Sony camera, I am just pointing out that this is for one a real novelty, and that Canon has not been the most creative lately.

I will take this camera for what it is, a possible upgrade from my 5D2s for architecture and landscape use. IMO we should be happy that other brands (in this case Sony and Metabones) can offer us some alternatives to what Canon is not able to deliver.

Maybe am I a bit too old, but coming from the 4x5 camera systems, where you can use any lens with any camera, I welcome the change that finally allows the same with digital cameras. IMO it is a healthy move from the closed systems big companies have been imposing for pure marketing purposes.

Mirrorless cameras allow almost infinite lens/cameras combinations, this is IMO a good reason to consider them.


----------



## Renaissance (Nov 15, 2013)

New products like the A7 & Nikon DF are great for the market.
It keeps digital photography alive, and it should push Canon to offer competing products soon.
I'm sure they're well aware of the fact that they can no longer sit on old sensor technology, ignore the mirrorless market, and deny experimenting with retro inspired cameras.

I almost bought into the hype of the A7's. The high megapixels allow for more cropping and detail, their images (from nex and Rx1) can look textured and real, but sony's images look sometimes _too_ digital to me. Not saying that it's bad, but I prefer a more canon filmic look. Fuji has their own unique filmic look as well, which is why I am getting more interested in fuji products now. And this is also because I shoot people portraits / fine art / and street photography. Currently, for landscape, (or super detailed work) there is probably no denying that the Sony 36mp sensor is the best. 

Using canon glass on the A7 seems slow and cumbersome, in addition to quirks of the camera's handling (although I have yet to fully shoot it) the camera might get in the way of my shooting style. I need to stay in a flow. Finally, I am not interested in any of Sony's initial native lenses, and by the time their catalogue has better choices by 2015 (according to their tentative road map) the market will have changed drastically by then - we'll definitely see some amazing stuff from Canon and other brands.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 15, 2013)

zlatko said:


> And while Canon is criticized for "refusing" to deliver more DR, it is Nikon and Sony that are failing to deliver video performance to match that of the 5D3.



Which is why you keep your 5D3 for sports and video and buy the A7R for your landscapes. If Canon were update to date with sensors you'd just buy the one Canon but they aren't so you add the A7R.

(also 5D3 only rules for video mostly because of the ML hack, so while Canon engineers did make a camera that delivers video in spades, marketing or someone had it shipped pretty crippled; it is surprising that Sony punts so badly on video though I will add, if anyone should have that down it should be them).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 15, 2013)

bholliman said:


> bholliman said:
> 
> 
> > The A7 and A7r I really don't get however. If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E). At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.
> ...



Some guy was already posting 17mm T&S shift shots with it sharp to the edges.
And by most regards the canon 24-70 II is much sharper at the edges than the nikon 24-70.
As a complete system yeah the Nikon, but for a Canon user that makes a lot less sense to me. Why spend tons and tons more when you could jsut use superior canon lenses onthe same sensor with the A7R instead and still get top canon video and what if canon comes out with high dr stuff in 12 months? the a7r buys you time instead of swapping over right away.


----------



## zlatko (Nov 16, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > And while Canon is criticized for "refusing" to deliver more DR, it is Nikon and Sony that are failing to deliver video performance to match that of the 5D3.
> ...



The A7R will be great for landscapes, and will no doubt provide more detail for very large prints. However, you don't need an A7R for landscapes. Starting in 2008, Salgado used the previous generation 1DS3 to photograph landscapes and other subjects in Algeria, Alaska, Arizona, Brazil, etc. The result is a magnificent book. As early as 2002, Michael Reichmann (Luminous-Landscape.com) favored the original 1DS over the medium format Pentax 67II. So Canon sensors have been up to the task of landscape photography for quite some time. DR is just one of many factors in choosing a landscape camera.

The Camera labs review (http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7r/) of the A7 & A7R is pretty clear on the 5D3 having superior video quality. No Magic Lantern is involved in that conclusion.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 16, 2013)

zlatko said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



Yes, once again nobody said it's impossible to take amazing landscape shots with a 5D3, of course you can, hundreds and thousands and millions of them. THAT SAID, there are tons of shots that you also could have taken that would have worked out with Exmor sensor that either failed totally with the 5D3 or have some noticeable IQ nasties. Maybe some of us, heaven forbid, are excited to get to shoot some of those scenes, stuff nobody could ever pull off well before, well???



> The Camera labs review (http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7r/) of the A7 & A7R is pretty clear on the 5D3 having superior video quality. No Magic Lantern is involved in that conclusion.



Yeah but the advantage becomes smaller then. D800 video is actually more details and with more range, although with some more moire and aliasing than stock 5D3 video. 1DX in cam video is pretty good, better good for sure than any from Nikon or Sony. 5D3 with ML RAW is pretty awesome to say the least. One wonders what on earth canon did to the signal between it arriving for liveview and before compression (it is NOT bad compression that is hurting it as uncompressed out over HDMI doesn't help at all), you almost wonder if they don't call a C-line protecting subroutine that says like GaussianBlur() followed by KillDR() and then, for good measure, a MakeTightGrainIntoDigitalClumpyNoise() ;D since ML RAW proves that the HW is actually producing vastly better quality and clean HDMI proves it is not the compression chip mucking things up. Either marketing had them cripple it or the Digic chip simply stinks at processing video.


----------



## zlatko (Nov 16, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



_"THAT SAID, there are tons of shots that you also could have taken that would have worked out with Exmor sensor that either failed totally with the 5D3 or have some noticeable IQ nasties."_ — That is your theory. It's not supported by actual photos, let alone "tons" of them. And I'm talking about actual photos, not DxO tests. My point — that Canon sensors have been up to the task of landscape photography for years — is proven by actual work by real photographers.

_"Either marketing had them cripple it or the Digic chip simply stinks at processing video."_ — It is amazing that when faced with a review showing Canon's superior video performance, you still come up with a Canon-bashing theory, blaming their marketing and/or their technology.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 16, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Why spend tons and tons more when you could jsut use superior canon lenses onthe same sensor with the A7R instead and still get top canon video and what if canon comes out with high dr stuff in 12 months? the a7r buys you time instead of swapping over right away.


Good point.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 16, 2013)

oO ... Handling seems to have some nasty flaws. Especially the EV-correction wheel being too loose sounds really troublesome, since there is no user fix or workaround for this.

And A7 hybrid AF being less capable than A7R contrast-AF comes rather unexpected too. Lets see what other testers and new owners will find and report.

http://m.dpreview.com/news/2013/11/15/shooting-with-the-sony-alpha-7-and-alpha-7r


----------



## RobertP (Nov 16, 2013)

symmar22 said:


> It's to admit that Canon hasn't released anything very exciting this year (except maybe the 200-400mm, but how may of us will actually buy it ?), and a few new products on the market is always good to take. IMO all the ranting shows mainly the frustration of some people who cannot accept that these days, creativity is not on the side of the brand they support. The A7R might not be for everyone, but for me it will probably be the camera that finally replaces my 5D2s.



The sensor in the 70D is very exciting. Its just not aimed at landscape photographers. Canon may have decided that hobbyist and wedding photographers are a more important market. It is also possible that they have the DR but are saving it for the next gen 1D or 5D.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 16, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> oO ... Handling seems to have some nasty flaws. Especially the EV-correction wheel being too loose sounds really troublesome, since there is no user fix or workaround for this.
> 
> And A7 hybrid AF being less capable than A7R contrast-AF comes rather unexpected too.  Lets see what other testers and new owners will find and report.
> 
> http://m.dpreview.com/news/2013/11/15/shooting-with-the-sony-alpha-7-and-alpha-7r



Interesting ???


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 16, 2013)

zlatko said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



OMG yes we all know you can take amazing landscape shots with a 5D3 and you don't have to own an A7R to take a nice landscape shot but that doesn't mean there are not shots where the A7R wouldn't do a lot better, and that is not some dumb theory we have based on some stupid lab nonsense but from our own countless real world hours in the field, and maybe just maybe given the option some people would rather not pass up some of the shots that push the 5D3 and kind too far? OK? But I guess heaven forbid someone want to take some shots that didn't use to be possible before because they have to become sinners and use a body that doesn't say Canon on it. Apparently even if they still use Canon branded lenses that is not enough for you.

You know people managed to get a few sports shots years ago too so by your logic why should anyone buy a 1DX? Because it says Canon on it? I guess so, because the AF and fps and whatnot are obviously of no worth at all right? No? Well then maybe stop to think it can be the same for landscape stuff too.

Yes we know, and we've said you can take millions of perfectly find landscapes shots with a 5D3, but that doesn't mean that someone might not be able to get something extra out of the A7R compared to the 5D3 at times and if someone wants that what the heck is the big problem? That Canon is not stamped on every last pieces of equipment?




> _"Either marketing had them cripple it or the Digic chip simply stinks at processing video."_ — It is amazing that when faced with a review showing Canon's superior video performance, you still come up with a Canon-bashing theory, blaming their marketing and/or their technology.



Check out the serious video/film forums and you'll see the same comments. Compare clean HDMI out vs ML RAW and tell me there isn't a radically difference in quality even beyond the extra bits to deal with. And maybe if you didn't fanboy so much you wouldn't egg people on to sound like anti-fanboys.


----------



## sdsr (Nov 17, 2013)

zlatko said:


> _"THAT SAID, there are tons of shots that you also could have taken that would have worked out with Exmor sensor that either failed totally with the 5D3 or have some noticeable IQ nasties."_ — That is your theory. It's not supported by actual photos, let alone "tons" of them. And I'm talking about actual photos, not DxO tests. My point — that Canon sensors have been up to the task of landscape photography for years — is proven by actual work by real photographers.



I think you're somewhat missing his point - if some landscapes (or anything else - needn't be landscapes) haven't been captured because of dynamic range extremes, the evidence is either negative (you delete the photo as beyond rescue or don't bother to try taking it in the first place) or photos where you can see that some shadows are too dark or some highlights have been blown to retain shadow detail. You can't count the former, while the latter are a matter of taste - so you can't really count them, either. One may not need to do so often, but there's no question that if you try to recover underexposed portions of photos you'll get less noise in those areas via a Sony sensor in a Nikon or Pentax or Olympus camera than you will, in varying degrees (6D is better than 5DII or III, for instance). Have you never wanted/needed to do this? 

The fact that tons of great landscape etc. photos have been taken with Canons is not a counterargument (there are plenty of great photos which aren't very good from a technical standpoint; if a photo's good enough chances are you don't even think about such things); the photos are great despite, not because of, the technical limitations of the camera, and they wouldn't be worse if they had been taken with a camera with greater DR. The question is whether there would be more good photos if cameras had greater DR. It's hard to see why this question could have a negative answer (except maybe of the when-I-was-a-lad-we-walked-to-school-barefoot sort, i.e. that having to work around limitations makes you take better photos).

If the sensor that Panasonic and Fuji (I think) are working on lives up to its promise, it should blow everything else away, but apparently we won't see it in a camera for another year or so - at which point the focus of DR whining will presumably shift a little.... With luck this silly debate will eventually become obsolete.


----------



## zlatko (Nov 17, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > LetTheRightLensIn said:
> ...



_"Yes we know, and we've said you can take millions of perfectly find landscapes shots with a 5D3, but that doesn't mean that someone might not be able to get something extra out of the A7R compared to the 5D3 at times and if someone wants that what the heck is the big problem?"_ — The "big problem" is that you repeatedly trash Canon for making deficient sensors when that simply isn't true. There is nothing wrong with wanting more from any brand. As I wrote in another thread, photographers can use absolutely more of everything a camera can do, no matter what camera they are using. So go ahead and wish for more DR if that is important to you (or simply buy the brand that offers it). But don't blame Canon for making deficient sensors when their sensors are perfectly good for a wide variety of tasks and meet the standards of some very demanding photographers (for years now). Moreover, photographers have dealt with limited DR ever since photography was invented. In the film era, Ansel Adams wrote about raising underexposed shadows and recovering (or failing to recover) blown highlights — but he didn't blame Kodak when he screwed up. He understood that the sensor (film) would always have limited DR and that exposure was always his responsibility. Indeed, he understood exposure within the DR as a creative/technical decision.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 17, 2013)

This might be interesting to some of you (what I found interesting *starts at 3 minutes and ends at 25 minutes* of the video)
Sony A7 & Sony A7R Hands-on & Tested & Special Launch Event


----------



## spinworkxroy (Nov 17, 2013)

I was a 5D3 user and that was my workhorse camera for everything i shoot and i love that camera.
However, i wanted something smaller and lighter and since i was on FF, i needed it to be FF and I can't afford a Leica.
So in a way, the Sony A7r was what i always wanted.

I spent an hour today with the A7r and the A7 and comparing to the 5D3, the AF is definately not as fast but it's not slow either.
The continuous focusing is no where near the 5D3..it fails quite miserably actually but thankfully what i shoot, i don't use continuous AF. Surprisingly, i find the A7 even slower to focus than the a7r with the same lens.

The EVF is still not as nice to look at compared to the OVF but i guess you get used to it.. IQ however, even SOOC, that's where the 5D3 even with a good prime can't match the A7r. 

Ultimately, if you are looking at something to dethrone the 5D3, this isn't going to do it except in terms of IQ. Everything else, i think the 5D3 is better. 

But for me, it's light, REALLY small in the hands, fantastic IQ even SOOC jpg and it's exactly what i need for what i shoot.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 17, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> I was a 5D3 user and that was my workhorse camera for everything i shoot and i love that camera.
> However, i wanted something smaller and lighter and since i was on FF, i needed it to be FF and I can't afford a Leica.
> So in a way, the Sony A7r was what i always wanted.
> 
> ...


Interesting.


----------



## chilledXpress (Nov 17, 2013)

The DRiarrhea debate... once again hijacking all topics here on CR. MR would be proud!

“Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” ― Mark Twain


----------



## spinworkxroy (Nov 18, 2013)

I'm not that bothered about DR or how many megapixels it has. Honestly, i find 36 a little too many..thankfully there are options to shoot at 15 or 9mp. Even on my 5d3, i'm usually shooting at mRaw. 
However, i must the the raw files from the A7r provide much more detail for editing and it's easier to bring out details than with the 5d3. Even images straight out of camera are rendered much nicer. Maybe it's the lens..but it has a look that i love that the 5d3 doesn't give me unless i edit it alot.

Here's 1 example to took yesterday that is straight out of the camera and direct to facebook. 
I actually shot this from my phone, NFC to the A7r with the 35mm zeiss and uploaded to FB immediately after shooting.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> I was a 5D3 user and that was my workhorse camera for everything i shoot and i love that camera.
> However, i wanted something smaller and lighter and since i was on FF, i needed it to be FF and I can't afford a Leica.
> So in a way, the Sony A7r was what i always wanted.
> 
> ...



REALLY? What lens did tried with?


----------



## 9VIII (Nov 18, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> This might be interesting to some of you (what I found interesting *starts at 3 minutes and ends at 25 minutes* of the video)
> Sony A7 & Sony A7R Hands-on & Tested & Special Launch Event



Woah, the Sony rep at the end of the video said that they will give you a Metabones adapter of your choice with the purchase of a body (no lens).
I know it's been mentioned elsewhere, but it's the first I've heard of it.


----------



## spinworkxroy (Nov 18, 2013)

[quote author=Dylan777]
REALLY? What lens did tried with?
[/quote]

The 35mm f2.8 zeiss...the "default" lens for the A7r


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> [quote author=Dylan777]
> REALLY? What lens did tried with?



The 35mm f2.8 zeiss...the "default" lens for the A7r
[/quote]

Thanks for info. Did you get a chance to play with A7/A7R with Zeiss 55mm? - if yes, do you find this combo still at compact level?


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 18, 2013)

chilledXpress said:


> The DRiarrhea debate... once again hijacking all topics here on CR. MR would be proud!


How dare you call it "hijacking" ... don't you know DR is everything! ... with enough DR in the sensor, you can even put an empty toilet roll tube and take awesome images, coz everything is auto freakin matic! ;D


----------



## spinworkxroy (Nov 18, 2013)

[quote author=Dylan777]
Thanks for info. Did you get a chance to play with A7/A7R with Zeiss 55mm? - if yes, do you find this combo still at compact level?
[/quote]

Unfortunately no, they ONLY had the 35mm lenses on the cameras. They didn't have any other FE lenses to test with. They did however have a whole load of metabones adapters to attach your own lenses and the Sony Amount SLT adapter.
However, i did ask them about the size of the 55 and the 24-70f4 and since they had ALL the A mount lenses on display, ithey were able to give a rough example of their sizes and all i can say..it's about the size of the 17-40 from Canon so it's NOT small at all. the 35mm is the ONLY small compact size lens.

I tried it with the Canon 50mm f1.4 and the metabones mk3...it's soooo slow it's impossible to really use for work..average 2 sec AF.

I also tried the A mount adapter with the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8. This is SUPER fast..like a 5d3 but it's basically the same AF as a99 so it's expected. however, it is soooo front heavy..it's super uncomfortable to hold.


----------



## sdsr (Nov 18, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> I spent an hour today with the A7r and the A7 and comparing to the 5D3, the AF is definately not as fast but it's not slow either.
> The continuous focusing is no where near the 5D3..it fails quite miserably actually but thankfully what i shoot, i don't use continuous AF. Surprisingly, i find the A7 even slower to focus than the a7r with the same lens.
> 
> The EVF is still not as nice to look at compared to the OVF but i guess you get used to it.. IQ however, even SOOC, that's where the 5D3 even with a good prime can't match the A7r.
> ...



Out of curiosity, was this hand-held or on a tripod?


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 18, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> chilledXpress said:
> 
> 
> > The DRiarrhea debate... once again hijacking all topics here on CR. MR would be proud!
> ...



As with the a7 debate, some people are convinced that what's good for them must be good for everybody, otherwise it's just lack of skill. 

Still I can't help thinking that if it was the Canon EOS 7, with its high DR 36mpx sensor, the music here would be somewhat different.

They seem to be brilliant cameras. Of course a first attempt is not quite going to destroy a technology matured over decades, but I believe it's very shortsighted to ignore its potential and the many advantages.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 18, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> [quote author=Dylan777]
> Thanks for info. Did you get a chance to play with A7/A7R with Zeiss 55mm? - if yes, do you find this combo still at compact level?



Unfortunately no, they ONLY had the 35mm lenses on the cameras. They didn't have any other FE lenses to test with. They did however have a whole load of metabones adapters to attach your own lenses and the Sony Amount SLT adapter.
However, i did ask them about the size of the 55 and the 24-70f4 and since they had ALL the A mount lenses on display, ithey were able to give a rough example of their sizes and all i can say..it's about the size of the 17-40 from Canon so it's NOT small at all. the 35mm is the ONLY small compact size lens.

I tried it with the Canon 50mm f1.4 and the metabones mk3...it's soooo slow it's impossible to really use for work..average 2 sec AF.

I also tried the A mount adapter with the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8. This is SUPER fast..like a 5d3 but it's basically the same AF as a99 so it's expected. however, it is soooo front heavy..it's super uncomfortable to hold.
[/quote]

Again...thanks for the info.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 18, 2013)

zlatko said:


> _"Yes we know, and we've said you can take millions of perfectly find landscapes shots with a 5D3, but that doesn't mean that someone might not be able to get something extra out of the A7R compared to the 5D3 at times and if someone wants that what the heck is the big problem?"_ — The "big problem" is that you repeatedly trash Canon for making deficient sensors when that simply isn't true. There is nothing wrong with wanting more from any brand. As I wrote in another thread, photographers can use absolutely more of everything a camera can do, no matter what camera they are using. So go ahead and wish for more DR if that is important to you (or simply buy the brand that offers it). But don't blame Canon for making deficient sensors when their sensors are perfectly good for a wide variety of tasks and meet the standards of some very demanding photographers (for years now). Moreover, photographers have dealt with limited DR ever since photography was invented. In the film era, Ansel Adams wrote about raising underexposed shadows and recovering (or failing to recover) blown highlights — but he didn't blame Kodak when he screwed up. He understood that the sensor (film) would always have limited DR and that exposure was always his responsibility. Indeed, he understood exposure within the DR as a creative/technical decision.



This thread was the A7R. And you jump in try to find every single way possible to minimize the camera or anything it might do for anyone.

Ansel Adams also worked hours in the lab trying to get around DR limitations and trying to come up with chemical baths and so on to as much as he could out of things and I bet you he'd be excited by this A7R. He did try to push tech further ahead.

And there is nothing wrong with trying to push Canon to catch up.
Why don't you just sell all your stuff and go back to the D30? You don't need that 5D3 AF that people pushed for do you? You don't need more than a couple MP? You don't need clean high ISO right? More fps? All garbage right and all those who pushed for 1 series AF in a smaller body were fools right? So dump all your euqipment and go back to the D30 and maybe sell your lenses as well, after all you can find thousands of examples of awesome photos on the net taken with nothing more than the 18-55 IS kit lens.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 18, 2013)

chilledXpress said:


> The DRiarrhea debate... once again hijacking all topics here on CR. MR would be proud!
> 
> “Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” ― Mark Twain



Right so simply stating why the A7R might be cool for a Canon uses us hijacking the topic but the first half dozen responders who had nothing to say other than to the bash the OP and the sales, that was all cool. Riiight.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 18, 2013)

9VIII said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > This might be interesting to some of you (what I found interesting *starts at 3 minutes and ends at 25 minutes* of the video)
> ...



pretty awesome!!

edit: someone said it might be for Australia only though


----------



## spinworkxroy (Nov 19, 2013)

sdsr said:


> Out of curiosity, was this hand-held or on a tripod?



This was shot handheld.
There is a problem with a camera being this light and resolution this high.

It's VERY hard to get it steady like a dslr which has weight. Because it's so light, you will sway a little and with the resolution so high, any slight movement will result in blur. And because the lens is so small also you can't really hold onto it like a dslr lens either.

Another thing i noticed is the usual "rule" of shutter speed = focal range does NOT apply here..it simply doesn't work. 
with the 35mm lens, almost 50% of the time, my shots were blur. i had to increase the shutter speed to at least 2xfocal range before i start getting more keepers. Unfortunately if you shoot in Av mode, the camera will still automatically set it to 1/60 or lower speed...similar to a Canon...but unless you have super steady chef hands..your shots are going to be blur like mine was almost all the time 

As for the DR..i didn't bother about that..I never had an issue with the 5D3 DR. To me, if you had to push the DR so much for a photo, you're probably shooting it wrong in the first place. 

I also can't comment on the A7R DR SOOC because it has all those DR enhancement and god knows what else turned on or off..i didn't really know how to play around witht he menu system yet and instead of fooling around with it, i'd rather shoot with what little time i had with it.


----------



## zlatko (Nov 19, 2013)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > _"Yes we know, and we've said you can take millions of perfectly find landscapes shots with a 5D3, but that doesn't mean that someone might not be able to get something extra out of the A7R compared to the 5D3 at times and if someone wants that what the heck is the big problem?"_ — The "big problem" is that you repeatedly trash Canon for making deficient sensors when that simply isn't true. There is nothing wrong with wanting more from any brand. As I wrote in another thread, photographers can use absolutely more of everything a camera can do, no matter what camera they are using. So go ahead and wish for more DR if that is important to you (or simply buy the brand that offers it). But don't blame Canon for making deficient sensors when their sensors are perfectly good for a wide variety of tasks and meet the standards of some very demanding photographers (for years now). Moreover, photographers have dealt with limited DR ever since photography was invented. In the film era, Ansel Adams wrote about raising underexposed shadows and recovering (or failing to recover) blown highlights — but he didn't blame Kodak when he screwed up. He understood that the sensor (film) would always have limited DR and that exposure was always his responsibility. Indeed, he understood exposure within the DR as a creative/technical decision.
> ...



Bashing Canon for making deficient sensors is not exactly "pushing Canon to catch up". You're just misleading people to think that Canon makes deficient sensors.

And you're twisting my words again. I haven't tried to find ways to "minimize" the A7/A7r. On the contrary, I think the A7/A7r is a *great* idea. I would love to use an A7/A7r and would love to see similar cameras from other manufacturers. As I've written before, it is *amazing* to see the introduction of such a small full-frame system camera with AF. That said, I don't think the A7/A7r should be used as another excuse to bash Canon sensors. That's what you're doing. The sensor is just one part of the A7/A7r and I'm sure it's good. But it doesn't mean Canon makes deficient sensors. For some photographers, the big attraction of the A7/A7r will be that it's so amazingly small and can use almost any lens. They're *not* looking to Sony to salvage their landscape photos until Canon makes a sensor with more DR. Canon already makes great sensors and photographers are doing great work with them. But apparently there are some sensor critics who can't seem to deal with dynamic range and eagerly look to Sony to save tons of photos for them.

Of course I value the 5D3 AF and all of the other engineering achievements that we put to good use. Don't imagine that they were brought about by anonymous "pushing" on a rumor forum. I'm sure Canon gets direct feedback from very skilled photographers and takes that into account when they prioritize research & development. I'm not saying photographers can't use more DR or anything else. As I've written before, photographers can use improvements in absolutely *everything* a camera system can do, whether it's DR, AF, highest shutter speed, ergonomics, durability, responsiveness, battery life, battery size, viewfinder, wi-fi, flash, radio control, customizations, shutter blackout, frame rate, high & low ISO, auto ISO, lens quality, lens size, weather sealing, etc., etc., etc. *Anything* you can think of can be improved, and any such improvement can certainly be put to good use. However, I reject this constant effort to convince people that Canon sensors are deficient just because photographers sometimes fail to expose a landscape properly or don't know how to deal with dynamic range.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 19, 2013)

All sensors in current canon DSLRs are deficient. Both, APS-C and "full frame 36X24".
They are significantly sub-par compared to sensors found in competitors cameras. They lack 25% to 50% in resolution and at the same time they lack up to 2 EV of dynamic range, dependung on ISO setting.

Canon's sensors are as deficient today as a car engine would be that delivers only half of the acceleration at half the fuel efficiency of competitors engines.

Canon has only gotten away with this up to now, because
* real life differences are mitigated by best jpg engine and
* all other parameters of their DSLRs, especially user interface - are fully competitive and
* most importantly, because many customers are "locked in" by their high investments in not-deficient canon lenses and system components (speedlites). 

Canon is in a dangerous spot today: better sensors can be had now in smaller packages and can be combined with canon lenses. If sony gets its act together, and manages to quickly improve their defivient Mirrorless ff cameras (af, battery charge, EVF) and canon continues to ignore mirrorless or only delivers half-assed products, they could quickly become obsolete. Nokia and blackberry should serve as warning examples.


----------



## zlatko (Nov 19, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> All sensors in current canon DSLRs are deficient. Both, APS-C and "full frame 36X24".
> They are significantly sub-par compared to sensors found in competitors cameras. They lack 25% to 50% in resolution and at the same time they lack up to 2 EV of dynamic range, dependung on ISO setting.
> 
> Canon's sensors are as deficient today as a car engine would be that delivers only half of the acceleration at half the fuel efficiency of competitors engines.
> ...



Nonsense — from the sensors being "deficient" to customers being "locked in". The sensors perform amazingly well in a wide range of applications. Canon sensors long ago met the quality threshold of very demanding professionals as well as millions of amateurs. Of course the sensors can be improved — *everything* can be improved — every detail of every camera system can be improved. But calling the sensors "deficient" is nonsense. Canon sensors are described as "deficient" primarily by a few anonymous critics on internet forums. They typically point to DxO tests in support of their claims, not to any real photography.

As for being "locked in" — switching brands is easier than ever. One no longer has to go to the camera shop and get 50% or less of the resale value. Nor does one have to advertise in the newspaper classifieds and hope a willing buyer might notice. With so many online resources for selling used gear, a system switch can be accomplished very quickly. It's easy to recover nearly the full cash value of one's gear and apply it toward comparable gear from another brand. If dynamic range and resolution are so important to someone, and makes a substantial difference to their photography, then being "locked in" is just a sorry, empty excuse for continuing to bash Canon on forums.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 20, 2013)

zlatko said:


> Nonsense — from the sensors being "deficient" to customers being "locked in". The sensors perform amazingly well in a wide range of applications. Canon sensors long ago met the quality threshold of very demanding professionals as well as millions of amateurs. Of course the sensors can be improved — *everything* can be improved — every detail of every camera system can be improved. But calling the sensors "deficient" is nonsense. Canon sensors are described as "deficient" primarily by a few anonymous critics on internet forums. They typically point to DxO tests in support of their claims, not to any real photography.
> 
> As for being "locked in" — switching brands is easier than ever. One no longer has to go to the camera shop and get 50% or less of the resale value. Nor does one have to advertise in the newspaper classifieds and hope a willing buyer might notice. With so many online resources for selling used gear, a system switch can be accomplished very quickly. It's easy to recover nearly the full cash value of one's gear and apply it toward comparable gear from another brand. If dynamic range and resolution are so important to someone, and makes a substantial difference to their photography, then being "locked in" is just a sorry, empty excuse for continuing to bash Canon on forums.


Well said! ... I use both Canon & Nikon DSLR's and this BS about better/lesser DR in sensor is nothing more than incompetent photographers trying to make excuses for lack of skill. Also, being "tied into a particular system" is another BS argument, because more people buy Canon as their first DSLR then Nikon & Sony combined ... these first time DSLR users do not have any prior investment in Canon gear, yet more people buy a Canon DSLR.


----------



## drjlo (Nov 22, 2013)

spinworkxroy said:


> I tried it with the Canon 50mm f1.4 and the metabones mk3...it's soooo slow it's impossible to really use for work..average 2 sec AF.
> 
> I also tried the A mount adapter with the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8. This is SUPER fast..like a 5d3 but it's basically the same AF as a99 so it's expected. however, it is soooo front heavy..it's super uncomfortable to hold.



That's disappointng to hear about Canon lens being slow with adapter and how big the Zeiss FE 55 mm is. If the former was faster or the latter smaller, I would be SO much more excited :'(


----------

