# A7 / A7R Reviewed by Thom Hogan



## J.R. (Mar 11, 2014)

Thom Hogan has completed his review of the A7 / A7R. This bit of his review stands out for me - 



> Image Quality: Okay, we are now in one area where I know I’m going to get a lot of blowback: image quality. The number one thing I heard the fanboys all rejoicing about when the A7r was announced was this: “Yes! D800E quality in a smaller, lighter, less expensive body.” No, the A7r produces less than D800E quality in a less expensive body. If you want a free lunch, I suggest you try the local rescue mission.
> 
> The difference isn’t actually easy to describe because it involves what’s going on behind the covers. But let me lay out the basics: the D800E will shoot 14-bit raw files with no underlying artifacts and fully recoverable data. The A7r will shoot 11-bit raw files with potential posterization issues in the data. The same is true of the A7 versus a D610, too.
> 
> ...



Full review here ... http://www.sansmirror.com/cameras/a-note-about-camera-reviews/sony-nex-camera-reviews/sony-a7-and-a7r-review.html

So basically ... no, I'm not considering the A7R any longer. 8)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 11, 2014)

But...but...it has oodles and oodles of DR. And DxO gave it a very high score. It simply *must* be a better camera than anything made by Canon. You se , it is really about QE, FWC, and noise. All this lossy RAW file compression and posterization can kiss my posterior. 

Plus, the D800E is just an antiquated mirrorslapper anyway.


----------



## J.R. (Mar 11, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> But...but...it has oodles and oodles of DR. And DxO gave it a very high score. It simply *must* be a better camera than anything made by Canon. You se , it is really about QE, FWC, and noise. All this lossy RAW file compression and posterization can kiss my posterior.
> 
> Plus, the D800E is just an antiquated mirrorslapper anyway.



Indeed ... another reason why DxO scores are plain simple bull which needs to be ignored. They only take into account the sensor regardless of what the camera does to what is captured! 

But then you've made my day with your post above ;D The ABC brigade does exactly that!


----------



## drjlo (Mar 11, 2014)

It's a nice review to balance against the initial head-over-heels reviews, but to me, he is writing as a Nikon D800E devotee, trying his best to pick at the A7r (and by doing so, everything else including Canon). His conclusion is:

"The D800E, after two years on the market, still clearly produces the highest quality images I’ve seen out of camera other than Medium Format ones, and it does so clearly. It’s the best all-around camera I know of at the moment."

I might give D800E kudos as the best landscape-on-tripod camera but best "all-around camera"? ???


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 11, 2014)

drjlo said:


> I might give D800E kudos as the best landscape-on-tripod camera but best "all-around camera"? ???



+1


----------



## J.R. (Mar 11, 2014)

drjlo said:


> It's a nice review to balance against the initial head-over-heels reviews, but to me, he is writing as a Nikon D800E devotee, trying his best to pick at the A7r (and by doing so, everything else including Canon). His conclusion is:
> 
> "The D800E, after two years on the market, still clearly produces the highest quality images I’ve seen out of camera other than Medium Format ones, and it does so clearly. It’s the best all-around camera I know of at the moment."
> 
> I might give D800E kudos as the best landscape-on-tripod camera but best "all-around camera"? ???



Yup ... Thom Hogan is a Nikon devotee and I couldn't get my head around the "best all-around camera" either.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 11, 2014)

J.R. said:


> drjlo said:
> 
> 
> > It's a nice review to balance against the initial head-over-heels reviews, but to me, he is writing as a Nikon D800E devotee, trying his best to pick at the A7r (and by doing so, everything else including Canon). His conclusion is:
> ...



I had read part of his Df review earlier and was about defend him here on its basis. Then I decided to finish reading the whole Df review. Not much to defend, unfortunately.
While he complains about the ergonomics, a lot, he ends up giving a 'recommended' rating. So, yeah...
It is unfortunate when people with the power to influence lose credibility due to bias or other conflicts of interest.


----------



## sdsr (Mar 11, 2014)

I'm sure I haven't tested my A7r as thoroughly as Mr. Hogan did his, and my experience with the D800e is limited to a week's rental with a couple of (high end) lenses (mostly the latest Nikon 85mm 1.4), and thus perhaps doesn't count, but I'm tempted to suggest that one reason why he finds it hard to describe the differences in image quality between the two is that the flaws he singles out in the A7r are either trivial or simply don't show up in most "normal" use (though I probably shouldn't use that term - for all I know, my use isn't "normal"). This is merely anecdotal and doesn't prove anything, but speaking just personally, after I returned the Nikon and looked at the images I took with it I sensed no camera/lens envy/remorse, but after trying both Sony A7s I promptly bought an A7r (it doesn't hurt that, as Hogan concedes, the two Sony FE primes are "stunningly good," but at the time I made my decision I had used nothing but adapted Canon lenses).

Aside from that, it seems a bit odd that he decided to evaluate the A7s in terms of whether they could be considered "the best all-around" camera, surpassing his beloved D800e (itself an odd choice for the title, as others have pointed out). The structure of his review suggests he's rather missing the point. I haven't read any of Sony's publicity stuff, but I wonder how many people genuinely interested in these cameras in the first place, or who know and like these cameras, would suggest that they are contenders for such a title in the first place? No-one would recommend them for very fast performance, let alone herons-catching-fish, for instance, and whether they would be a good recommendation to anyone at all as the only camera they need own would depend entirely on how they like to use their cameras; for a lot of people they would be a terrible choice. (I'm surprised that Mr. Hogan doesn't seem to acknowledge that some people prefer EVFs.)

As we all know, nothing's perfect, so you compromise. If you really care about noise, you get a 6D and forego the AF etc. advantages of a 5DIII; if you really care about herons-catching-fish you forego a degree of resolution; if you want maximum versatility in a small, light system, you buy into Micro 4/3 and accept the (decreasing) disadvantages of a smaller sensor. And so on. For my part, while the A7s aren't as versatile as any of the cameras I've mentioned, I greatly appreciate the ability to get images of such high quality and detail so easily out of body/lens combinations this small/light.


----------



## gjones5252 (Mar 12, 2014)

Yeah this seems to be a blind nikon fanboy. Rogers reviews are for the most part unbiased and I think that his take on this contradicts the other gentleman's opinions with fact. Sony may use all those compression but it's not affecting sharpness. I still am considering the a7r. Just want canon to release their version. 

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/12/sony-a7r-a-rising-tide-lifts-all-the-boats


----------



## Dylan777 (Mar 12, 2014)

J.R. said:


> So basically ... no, I'm not considering the A7R any longer. 8)



For me...I'll stand by for Zeiss FE UWA for my A7R  

It small to carry around and produces HIGH quality images.


----------

