# If you have faith in dxomark, sony did good



## jaomul (Oct 31, 2013)

Sony Alpha 7R review: Highest ever full-frame image quality? - DxOMark

Not sure how reliable they are, but many base their opinions on them


----------



## TheFantasticG (Oct 31, 2013)

IBTL....

Regardless, A7 would be great but all the Sony gear I have touched I just hate the menu systems. If I just wanted some to put on auto and never move it from there I might consider it. The only time I read DxO at all is when I'm considering a new body and/or lens. Otherwise I couldn't give two shats less about DxO.


----------



## Kolia (Oct 31, 2013)

Menu layout is just a habit to take.

Nikon' sand Canon's don't make sense to me either...


----------



## Derrel (Oct 31, 2013)

According to a lengthy technical explanation posted a week or so ago on The Online Photographer blog, Sony has developed some new in-camera diffraction reduction software processing; that would be almost a necessity, due to the short flange to film distance (FFD) the new Sony uses. According to a Sony spokesman at last weeks big New York photo show, Sony also has some new data analysis and noise-reduction routines that are a first in the imaging industry. Combining those two imaging processes WOULD, to me, seem like a perfectly logical way to coax much better image quality out of the sensor.

We saw a similar thing with the Nikon D3x and the Sony Alpha A850 and A900, all of which used the same sensor; exactly HOW the image data is processed, and the quality of the electronics, is a big,big part of total image quality. In the D3x-A900-A850 trio, Nikon was able to get substantially better overall image quality out of the same sensor...the sensor that Sony had built and sold to Nikon for the D3x. 

Combine a great sensor with high-grade lenses that are design-optimized for a new format (and NOT just adapted lens designs that might be 10,15,210 years old), and then add specialized software processing and specialized noise reducing software, and BOOM! VERY high image quality. I think there might howewver, be some image qualirty issues using OLDER, adapted lenses on the new Sony A7 series bodies, due to the short FFD.


----------



## jaomul (Oct 31, 2013)

Derrel said:


> According to a lengthy technical explanation posted a week or so ago on The Online Photographer blog, Sony has developed some new in-camera diffraction reduction software processing; that would be almost a necessity, due to the short flange to film distance (FFD) the new Sony uses. According to a Sony spokesman at last weeks big New York photo show, Sony also has some new data analysis and noise-reduction routines that are a first in the imaging industry. Combining those two imaging processes WOULD, to me, seem like a perfectly logical way to coax much better image quality out of the sensor.
> 
> We saw a similar thing with the Nikon D3x and the Sony Alpha A850 and A900, all of which used the same sensor; exactly HOW the image data is processed, and the quality of the electronics, is a big,big part of total image quality. In the D3x-A900-A850 trio, Nikon was able to get substantially better overall image quality out of the same sensor...the sensor that Sony had built and sold to Nikon for the D3x.
> 
> Combine a great sensor with high-grade lenses that are design-optimized for a new format (and NOT just adapted lens designs that might be 10,15,210 years old), and then add specialized software processing and specialized noise reducing software, and BOOM! VERY high image quality. I think there might howewver, be some image qualirty issues using OLDER, adapted lenses on the new Sony A7 series bodies, due to the short FFD.



One of the big draws to this camera seems to be the ability to use other brand lenses (from what i am reading on other forums). I am not in a position to buy one of these and if I was (from what you are saying about older lenses) I may re-think. It looks like a fine camera but the specs of the new lenses released seem very over priced. A d800 is more expensive but you would (almost) make the saving when combined with a 50mm lens. I do know it is smaller etc so it is obviously down to personnel preference. it is interesting though


----------



## cosmonaut (Oct 31, 2013)

I find DXO marks to be accurate. Sony is on a roll.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 31, 2013)

cosmonaut said:


> I find DXO marks to be accurate. Sony is on a roll.



I too find DxO Mark's test results to be accurate--based on my use and ownership of a bunch of different camera models the staff at DxO Mark have tested. And since the A7r uses basically the same SOny sensor that's in the Nikon D800 and D800e, the fact that the A7r's sensor scores are neck and neck with those of the D800 and D800e makes sense.

And yes, the lenses for these two new Sony models *are* high-priced. The Zeiss-branded lenses especially, like the 35mm f/2.8 for $799...THAT'S an expensive and somewhat slow 35mm prime....I mean, man, a 35mm f/2.8? God...Nikon and Canon updated 35mm primes up to f/2 back in the 1970's...a 35mm f/2.8 hearkens back to the early 1960's.


----------



## Stevepwns (Oct 31, 2013)

yeah I hope their next iteration (if there is one) of the A mount is just as much of an improvement.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Nov 1, 2013)

I'm quite impressed with Sony lately. The whole SLT thing is a pretty neat idea. This is going to be incredible, I'm sure. If I had the disposable income, this would definitely be vying for my money.


----------



## cosmonaut (Nov 3, 2013)

It won't be to much longer and ISO is just going to be another number.


----------



## Nervine (Nov 4, 2013)

Agreed Cosmonaut. Sony is moving in the right direction. Can't wait to see new A mount stuff to come.


----------

