# Sony A7R: Potential Gamechanger?



## cgw

No camera warmongering intended. Worth a look:

LensRentals.com - Sony A7R: A Rising Tide Lifts All the Boats?


----------



## rexbobcat

If it was $500 cheaper I think it would be.


----------



## slow231

cheaper price would always help it's impact.  but being a FF camera i don't think the price is at all too high.  i'd really love to get my hands on one for some testing.


----------



## Derrel

It looks like a nice try on Sony's part, but they missed on several fronts. Launching an "expensive" (there's that word again!) camera with an all-new lens mount and basically, no real lens choices was the first huge mistake. Simply HUGE. Sony really screwed the pooch on that. Without a real in-place lens lineup, the kind of customer who might want an A7 or A7R is left without any roadmap, no dream list, no wishbook material, just promises from Sony. The promise of a lens lineup in a year to 18 months just is not adequate for a camera launch, when that camera uses a BRAND-NEW, single-company lens mount.

Lens prices for the system are also pretty high. A $799 35mm f/2.8 prime lens is expensive, and although it *is undoubtedly* a fine, fine lens, it's also cursed with a slow, 1960's-era max aperture of f/2.8, not f/1.4, not even f/1.8. As a status symbol, a 35mm f/2.8 lens falls flat, even with the Zeiss by Cosina sticker on the side of the barrel.

Sony does have some amazing new in-camera image processing routines that eliminate CA and help to mitigate diffraction, plus the new sensor technology with the high-tech microlens arrays, so the camera with its native, profiled lenses offers OUTSTANDING imaging performance. Simply outstanding imaging performance, as long as the lens is high-quality AND is in *the list of profiled lenses designed specifically for the sensor.* The adapted lens performance really tails off as the light rays hitting off-center just do not cut the mustard, so it once again shows the system is built around using Sony's non-existent lenses...the ones they have promised to deliver, sometime in the future.

The *battery life* on these cameras *is horrible*, very poor consumer-level at best. And* the shutter* on one of them is *God-awful loud*. As in really,really,really loud.Wedding camera? Uhhh, no, not when every shot sounds like an aluminum baseball bat hitting one out of the park.  Not sure why Sony built a high-tech camera with *one of the loudest shutters possible.* The focusing system seems to be average to good, from what I have read. Not sure what the term "game-changer" really is supposed to mean...it's a vague term, with no real set definition. Does that mean will it be a sales hit for Sony? Will Cosina rake in the big bucks assembling a tsunami of lenses that the Zeiss brand is slapped onto with that cool blue sticker? Will it convince the other camera makers to go mirrorless and FF with noisy shutters and 400-shot batteries? Will it encourage Canon and Nikon to create a BRAND-NEW lens mount that no third party is making lenses for? Will the other cameras makers launch an untried concept and launch with two bodies, a zoom lens or two, and a couple of out of reach primes, like a $1,000 normal lens and an $800 semi-normal/pseudo-wide-angle 35mm f/2.8? Who knows!!!!

It's hard to say what impact the Sony A7 and A7R will have, especially since Sony's head man says he likes to, "*Come up with something totally different every six months.*" When it costs $1000 + $799 US dollars to buy a normal lens, and a semi-wide in a brand-new mount that only two bodies can use...I do not see this as being a "game-changer" in terms of sales, or adoption, but I DO SEE IT as a game-changer in the way Sony has made AMAZING in-camera CA and in-camera diffraction elimination possible through amazing new signal processing and amazing new microlens array design advances. I see *the underlying technology in image processing/optics/hardware as being this camera's legacy*. I think it will be a sales failure, but a technological milestone. I expect that if they put a decent shutter in it, one quieter than a hay baler, and a decent battery that's better than a P&S's battery, in Version 2.0, that the camera might gain quite a following, at least in terms of a Sony product. It's one thing to read the test reports of somebody like Lensrentals' Roger Cicala, who's buying with the power of a large company, with almost unlimited gear-buying resources and a price-is-no-object, we'll buy the $1,000 normal lenses and the $799 slow wide-angles, because-we-can-rent-them-and-make-them-pay-for-themselves. I think this camera's second versions might have a chance.


----------



## slow231

I do agree that the biggest hurdle to adaption is the fact that it relies on a whole new system. it's hard to invest that much money on future promises.  but that said, any FF mirrorless will essentially require a new lens series anyways to really take advantage of the mirrorless distance and size. so that issue really just comes with the territory when developing such a camera.  i think "game changer" refers to the idea that there may well be a whole new series that will be developed around or for this format (and for this camera to be viable there kind of has to be).

personally love the idea of smaller lighter camera + gear without the need to compromise on anything.  i kinda hope this does gather traction and takes off.


----------



## robbins.photo

Gamechanger.. hmm..nope.  This is a gamechanger:

Y! SPORTS


----------



## robbins.photo

slow231 said:


> I do agree that the biggest hurdle to adaption is the fact that it relies on a whole new system. it's hard to invest that much money on future promises. but that said, any FF mirrorless will essentially require a new lens series anyways to really take advantage of the mirrorless distance and size. so that issue really just comes with the territory when developing such a camera. i think "game changer" refers to the idea that there may well be a whole new series that will be developed around or for this format (and for this camera to be viable there kind of has to be).
> 
> personally love the idea of smaller lighter camera + gear without the need to compromise on anything. i kinda hope this does gather traction and takes off.



Would love to see it myself at some point, but I think were still a long way off - what a lot of reviewers fail to mention or consider is the lag inherint in an EVF system.  Sure if i'm firing of one or two frames I probably wouldn't notice myself.  But since I'm often firing multiple frames per second sometimes for several seconds that sort of thing is a big deal to me personally.

I think this might be a step in the right direction at least in some regards, but I'm not likely to invest in something like this for quite some time to come.  Don't need to blow a couple of grand just so the beta machine in the garage that had to be replaced in less than 6  months by VHS can have some more company.. lol.


----------



## cgw

Shutter sound comparison: Sony A7R v The Rest | Tobinators


----------



## Derrel

Exactly my point. A very obnoxious, intrusive shutter sound. Loud, long, slow, and clattery. Decibels are not a simple progression. The Olympus's shutter noise is approximately *one-fifteenth* as loud as that of the Sony. So, is a shutter fifteen times louder than a competing mirrorless model a good thing? It's as loud as a big, honking Canon 1D-series with its flapping, high-speed mirror. And yet, the Sony has no mirror. Huh.

To me, the Sony's shutter sounds somewhat like a ponderous, vintage, cloth focal plane medium format SLR's shutter. But hey...great optics...interesting design...and best of all it's made by SONY. It's a nifty concept. If it took a lens mount that had some lenses, it might even sell well.

Noise Comparisons

It will be interesting to see what happens. Maybe it'll take the world by storm, the way Sony's a900 and a850 models did. Ot maybe it'll be a big sales hit, like the a99 was, with dozens of people buying it every day, all across Japan. It's just hard to know. The Fred Miranda cult of pixel-peeping landscapers with tens of thousands of dollars' worth of Leica M-series lenses might like it. People who can afford a $4,000 50mm lens might like it as a powerful statement of luxury and prestige. The sheer MTF 50 scores would earn the possessor of such a camera/lens combo high status in the measurebator's clubs.


----------



## minicoop1985

If the Hasselblad Lunar and Stellar have a market... 

I wasn't aware this was a different mount. Well then.


----------



## vipgraphx

Derrel, I'm with you on this. I have been so close to pulling the trigger and getting this but, when I look at the cost of lenses for this it really starts to lose my interest. Since I am in the market for a new camera I thought about going back to full frame. After testing out the NEX 6 I thought it really showed potential and with the A7 would be sweet. But once again I would really have to dump some money into lenses and I just can't see doing that as a prosumer hobbiest.

The shutter sound does not bother me but I can see if you were using this for a wedding and in a church you might disturb the mass.


----------



## Derrel

Vipgraphics,

Here's a cheap Sony A7R outfit for you.


Sony Alpha a7R Digital Camera ILCE7R/B 


A7R  $2,298.00


Sony A7, A7R Full-Frame Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Compact: First Look from Adorama Learning Center


Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f/2.8  $799.99
Zeiss Sonnar 55mm f/1.8  $999.99
Zeiss Vario Tessar 24-70/2.8  $1,199.99
Sony 70-200 G 2.8 SSM II  $2,999.00


$8298, (well, less four cents)


----------



## vipgraphx

Yeah cool good looking out. At that price I may just pick it up....looks like they are in stock ready to ship and could have it in just a few days.

Perhaps I can take out a nice personal loan at 30% interest so I jump on this sale prices right now.


----------



## gsgary

Derrel said:


> Vipgraphics,
> 
> Here's a cheap Sony A7R outfit for you.
> 
> 
> Sony Alpha a7R Digital Camera ILCE7R/B
> 
> 
> A7R  $2,298.00
> 
> 
> Sony A7, A7R Full-Frame Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Compact: First Look from Adorama Learning Center
> 
> 
> Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f/2.8  $799.99
> Zeiss Sonnar 55mm f/1.8  $999.99
> Zeiss Vario Tessar 24-70/2.8  $1,199.99
> Sony 70-200 G 2.8 SSM II  $2,999.00
> 
> 
> $8298, (well, less four cents)



And you dont even get a mains charger just a USB charger one of our club members bought the 7r and was well pissed off but she has the Rx100r so has a mains charger 

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## robbins.photo

Derrel said:


> Exactly my point. A very obnoxious, intrusive shutter sound. Loud, long, slow, and clattery. Decibels are not a simple progression. The Olympus's shutter noise is approximately *one-fifteenth* as loud as that of the Sony. So, is a shutter fifteen times louder than a competing mirrorless model a good thing? It's as loud as a big, honking Canon 1D-series with its flapping, high-speed mirror. And yet, the Sony has no mirror. Huh.
> 
> To me, the Sony's shutter sounds somewhat like a ponderous, vintage, cloth focal plane medium format SLR's shutter. But hey...great optics...interesting design...and best of all it's made by SONY. It's a nifty concept. If it took a lens mount that had some lenses, it might even sell well.
> 
> Noise Comparisons
> 
> It will be interesting to see what happens. Maybe it'll take the world by storm, the way Sony's a900 and a850 models did. Ot maybe it'll be a big sales hit, like the a99 was, with dozens of people buying it every day, all across Japan. It's just hard to know. The Fred Miranda cult of pixel-peeping landscapers with tens of thousands of dollars' worth of Leica M-series lenses might like it. People who can afford a $4,000 50mm lens might like it as a powerful statement of luxury and prestige. The sheer MTF 50 scores would earn the possessor of such a camera/lens combo high status in the measurebator's clubs.



So does the Sony make noise when your backing up too?  Just curious.. lol


----------



## Overread

I'm surprised they didn't hold back on its launch, cram even more features into it and then launch with a larger line up of lenses that they can bring to market at the same time. I know market oversaturation is a concern but with cameras you need a couple of varied lenses to draw in different market groups. 

I agree that this is likely going to be one of those cameras that comes out; makes some waves because of its new innovations and in-camera editing and sensor; but doesn't actually sell that well. Hopefully Sony know this and are planning to phase this new line in; making sure that each release is strong so that when they do have a good lens line up they've also got a past history of good reviews on the line to entice people in.

That said they could end up with a Sigma situation - high spec camera which fails to sell and simply ends up very niche market. That's ok for sigma as the lenses for their camera are simply the same design with a different mount as their Canon/Nikon offerings. For Sony offering high end lenses in a single unique mount its a much bigger risk. 

I think Sony do realise that to get a slice of the pie they've got to bring more to the table than just a good camera; they've got to push the limits to really stand out against the giants.


----------



## cgw

Ongoing tests of the A7r with Sony and adapted lenses here:

SOUNDIMAGEPLUS

Shutter noise isn't apparently a deal-breaking issue for him.


----------



## robbins.photo

cgw said:


> Ongoing tests of the A7r with Sony and adapted lenses here:
> 
> SOUNDIMAGEPLUS
> 
> Shutter noise isn't apparently a deal-breaking issue for him.



Gosh, lets see here - very first quote from this site - "I stumbled into a Nikon forum by mistake and there was more testosterone flying about than in a pile of jockstraps on a changing room floor. God did I feel a wimp buying a Sony A7 "

Oh yes, I'm certain we can rely on a nice, unbiased view from this reviewer.  rotfl.  Apparently your not the only one carrying around a boulder sized chip on your shoulder about Nikon.  Well setting that aside, lets face facts.  The A7 may prove to be something worthwhile if they can address a few of the obvious shortcomings (like the shutter noise) and produce some additional lenses for it.  For right now though, I doubt there are enough diehard Nikon haters to put them over the top on sales, and frankly at the moment until they have a few lenses available it's a pretty sizeable and pretty risky investment.


----------



## cgw

robbins.photo said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ongoing tests of the A7r with Sony and adapted lenses here:
> 
> SOUNDIMAGEPLUS
> 
> Shutter noise isn't apparently a deal-breaking issue for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gosh, lets see here - very first quote from this site - "I stumbled into a Nikon forum by mistake and there was more testosterone flying about than in a pile of jockstraps on a changing room floor. God did I feel a wimp buying a Sony A7 "
> 
> Oh yes, I'm certain we can rely on a nice, unbiased view from this reviewer. rotfl. Apparently your not the only one carrying around a boulder sized chip on your shoulder about Nikon. Well setting that aside, lets face facts. The A7 may prove to be something worthwhile if they can address a few of the obvious shortcomings (like the shutter noise) and produce some additional lenses for it. For right now though, I doubt there are enough diehard Nikon haters to put them over the top on sales, and frankly at the moment until they have a few lenses available it's a pretty sizeable and pretty risky investment.
Click to expand...


Have you shot an A7r? BTW what's this got to do with Nikon? It's the Sony board.


----------



## robbins.photo

cgw said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ongoing tests of the A7r with Sony and adapted lenses here:
> 
> SOUNDIMAGEPLUS
> 
> Shutter noise isn't apparently a deal-breaking issue for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gosh, lets see here - very first quote from this site - "I stumbled into a Nikon forum by mistake and there was more testosterone flying about than in a pile of jockstraps on a changing room floor. God did I feel a wimp buying a Sony A7 "
> 
> Oh yes, I'm certain we can rely on a nice, unbiased view from this reviewer. rotfl. Apparently your not the only one carrying around a boulder sized chip on your shoulder about Nikon. Well setting that aside, lets face facts. The A7 may prove to be something worthwhile if they can address a few of the obvious shortcomings (like the shutter noise) and produce some additional lenses for it. For right now though, I doubt there are enough diehard Nikon haters to put them over the top on sales, and frankly at the moment until they have a few lenses available it's a pretty sizeable and pretty risky investment.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Have you shot an A7r? BTW what's this got to do with Nikon? It's the Sony board.
Click to expand...


Where did I ever say I'd shot an A7r?  As to the quote, found it interesting that right out of the gate, indeed much of the first page, is covered with the same Nikon hating screed I generally see you engage in - merely pointing out that when I look for reviews or thoughts on camera equipment, no matter who the manufacturer might be, the one thing I absolutely avoid like the plague is a hater.

Haters like that are beyond reason - and as such you cannot expect a reasonable evaluation from them on anything.  When I look for reviews I prefer somebody who is far less over the top and emotional because I'm looking for honesty, both good and bad.  I can't expect a religious zealot to give me a complete picture.  The folks who's opinions I trust about cameras are the ones who will say, you know what, I shoot mostlly Nikon but I have shot Pentax too and they are a great camera.  Or you know what, I prefer Canon but the latest offering from Sony is worth a look.

Last thing in the world I'd trust is opinions from people who say, you know what, I drank the koolaid and hate all other cameras.. now, let me tell you about the only brand worth owning.  Sorry, pass.


----------



## Derrel

robbins.photo said:
			
		

> >>SNIP>>>Last thing in the world I'd trust is opinions from people who say, you know what, I drank the koolaid and hate all other cameras.. now, let me tell you about the only brand worth owning.  Sorry, pass.






Here's an illustration of a typical Sony buyer's indoctrination ritual... [attachment: Sony Buyer indoctrination ritual.jpg]


----------



## DiskoJoe

I keep hearing lots of people keep making comments about sony making new lenses for this camera. This camera can use a large variety of lenses in existence already. Thats the whole beauty of E-mount with any manufacturer and not just this camera.


----------



## Derrel

DiskoJoe said:


> I keep hearing lots of people keep making comments about sony making new lenses for this camera. This camera can use a large variety of lenses in existence already. Thats the whole beauty of E-mount with any manufacturer and not just this camera.



The same is true of many other cameras...

The camera has a BRAND-NEW lens mount, which is used by two cameras--the new A7 and A7R. Earlier Sony lens work in crop-mode. The A7 and A7R can be used with lens adapters, but as the Lensrentals.com testing shows, the image quality is good in the center of the field, but is all over the map across the frame, with very inconsistent optical performance. DSC00080_YB31_26_1_3D.jpg

"_In the second image, shot at f/4, the increased depth of  field seems to make up for the tilt affecting the corners. But if you look carefully there is still a significant difference in the numbers for vertical and horizontal resolutions, particularly in the middle third of the lens. Astigmatism in the lens could cause something like this, too, but this is a lens we know doesnt have much astigmatism.__So we can take away that the resolution in the center of the Canon lens adapted to the A7R is awesome. The corners are very good, but not spectacular. Why the difference between center and corners? Could be adapter. Could be sensor microsensors. Could be chromatic aberration. Could be something done during in-camera processing of raw images (these are raw shots, so no jpg conversion is taking place). In other words, I dont know. But as with all unexpected results, we repeated the test and it was consistent._"

In other words, the adapted lens provides wonky results....the top of the field is good, but the bottom is not as good. The center is awesome, the corners only very good. Keep in mind--the A7 an a7R has ALL-NEW Sony-specific chromatic aberration reduction routines, anti-vingetting routines, all-new anti-diffraction image data processing, and all-new selective noise and sharpening routines designed to process the image and determine what is "noise" and what is "data", and this is ALL dependent upon the camera relating to specific lens profiles. The A7 and A7R's incredible resolution numbers are probably based in large part on these new image-processing techniques; adapted lenses will not have this stuff done to their images.

The anti-diffraction and the new intelligent noise reduction analysis on RAW data files is some cutting-edge new stuff. I think the diffraction elimination stuff is exciting!


----------



## minicoop1985

Derrel said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >>SNIP>>>Last thing in the world I'd trust is opinions from people who say, you know what, I drank the koolaid and hate all other cameras.. now, let me tell you about the only brand worth owning.  Sorry, pass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 62568
> 
> Here's an illustration of a typical Sony buyer's indoctrination ritual... [attachment: Sony Buyer indoctrination ritual.jpg]
Click to expand...


I remember my wife's indoctrination ceremony. Back in those days, it was done with a hypnotist and lots and lots of tequila. And a hedgehog.

I wouldn't trust anyone who only talks about their one camera brand either. Besides, we all know Hasselblad is the best thing that has ever existed ever anyway. 

I just realized that the above sounds less like the intended satire when I think about how much I talk about my Hassie, but really, I do love that thing. I proposed. It said "Click KA SHUNK" which doesn't legally count as consent.


----------



## Derrel

This article explains part of Sony's philosophy.

&#39;Every six months I want to do something new&#39; Kimio Maki of Sony: Digital Photography Review


----------



## gsgary

robbins.photo said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ongoing tests of the A7r with Sony and adapted lenses here:
> 
> SOUNDIMAGEPLUS
> 
> Shutter noise isn't apparently a deal-breaking issue for him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gosh, lets see here - very first quote from this site - "I stumbled into a Nikon forum by mistake and there was more testosterone flying about than in a pile of jockstraps on a changing room floor. God did I feel a wimp buying a Sony A7 "
> 
> Oh yes, I'm certain we can rely on a nice, unbiased view from this reviewer.  rotfl.  Apparently your not the only one carrying around a boulder sized chip on your shoulder about Nikon.  Well setting that aside, lets face facts.  The A7 may prove to be something worthwhile if they can address a few of the obvious shortcomings (like the shutter noise) and produce some additional lenses for it.  For right now though, I doubt there are enough diehard Nikon haters to put them over the top on sales, and frankly at the moment until they have a few lenses available it's a pretty sizeable and pretty risky investment.
Click to expand...


Rubbish most Leica lenses will work on the A7 have you seen how many different Leica lenses there are


----------



## Derrel

cgw said:


> Ongoing tests of the A7r with Sony and adapted lenses here:
> 
> SOUNDIMAGEPLUS
> 
> Shutter noise isn't apparently a deal-breaking issue for him.



Yeah...funny thing how "ongoing tests" of this camera system are starting to reveal some very significant image quality problems. Seems like that loud, obnoxious shutter in the A7R is causing vibration issues with longer lenses, in the 1/2 to 1/100 second range of shutter speeds...according to highly-skilled, critical evaluators...people like Lloyd Chambers, for example. And the blogger you linked us to...now that he's not quite so enthralled by his new toys, he's found a serious image quality issue with the Sony 28-70 OSS zoom lens.

Maybe that loud, obnoxious mechanical shutter's actually an "issue"...because as Lloyd CHambers wrote, its vibration is reducing the detail rendered from 36MP nominally, to around 24MP in ACTUAL resolution when tripod-mounted. So, yeah, maybe this camera WILL be a game-changer: users will start clamping on 24- to 26-ounce blocks onto the baseplates of their Sony A7R cameras as counterweight to prevent shutter slap from ruining A7R photos shot off of tripods. There might be a huge aftermarket demand for elegantly engineered, *pound-and-a-half of lead* blocks for the Sony A7R market! Sweet!

Google this string: Sony A7R shutter vibration problem


The shutter vibration issue explained by Joseph Holmes. | sonyalpharumors
"Lloyd Chambers at *DigLloyd.com*, and two more of us (including myself), in separate series of carefully done experiments, have found consistent, clear and certain proof of a serious issue with the camera bouncing too much during exposures at various speeds, typically 1/100th of a second being the worst. The shutter shake seems, if anything, to be worse than when the same lens is connected to a Canon 5D II with full mirror slap. The motion is primarily in the direction of the shutter: up and down with a horizontal image and side to side with a vertical image (see samples below)."

"Further, Mike and I have shown that attaching a certain amount of weight to the camera can solve the problem completely. We are building 24-ounce weights (including the weight of a small, Arca-Swiss type screw-knob clamp, the L-plate and a metal block) to connect to the base of the camera when using longer lenses, especially when they are not native lenses with the camera connected directly to the tripod. I tested a 26-ounce weight, screwed to the bottom of the camera for horizontal exposures and found it highly effective. Mike tested *a 24-ounce metal weight screwed directly to the base of the camera* and it was highly effective for both horizontal and vertical camera position."

"Notice that of all the samples published on the web, there have been few, if any, longer lens captures, and the method of connection to the tripod and use of adapters can have a big impact on the result."

SOUNDIMAGEPLUS: Something odd with the Sony FE 28-70mm lens
SOUNDIMAGEPLUS: Sony FE 28-70mm Edge Softness Problems - Is this the answer?

The Sony 28-70mm f/.3.5~5.6 OSS zoom lens seems to have a wonky OSS result:  HORRIBLE edge degradation of the image quality when the OSS system is set to ON, but better edges when the OSS is switched OFF. Weird...the OSS system in this lens seems to ruin images edges when it's ON.

Sounds to me like some serious engineering issues need to be worked out on this gamechanger. Just screw a 24-ounce metal block underneath the camera for all longer-lens,tripod-based work! Problem solved! And the OSS? Who knows if it's just a problem with the 28-70 OSS, or if it's an issue with other OSS lenses...I suppose time will tell.

This Sony A7R issue is one of the lessons of "annointing" a brand-new, unproven system as "the next big thing".


----------



## vipgraphx

One thing about new tech is that it is new tech. We may have to choose our style of shooting with a camera like this. Having it for about a day now I really have not been able to really test it with Christmas and all. I am having to learn how to make adjustments  and what not so I can't really chime in on what those lens reviews that darrel has supplied links to.

I think that all across the internet there pixel peepers and it gets sooo crazy how everyone wants things so so sooooooo perfect. When the D800 came out there was so much talk about that and how you would have to upgrade computer and lenses and the files sizes the list goes on and on. Now folks love that same camera and nothing has changed. They have just learned how to use that camera. 

This new A7 and A7r has different techknowledgey and like I said we may have to change things a bit.. Perhaps these lenses camera are to light and cause camera shake I will admit that when using the NEX 6 and doing the braketing that Shot one was clear, shot 2 was a little blurry and shot three was even more blurry even when using the timer. So if this new Sony A7 does the same then yes this could be a huge problem for someone like me who shoots HDR or actually anyone. 

I will start testing more in depth tonight/ tomorrow compared to the D7100 and see where we are at from my point of view. I will admit I have had some problems thus far trying to figure things out and am hoping its a learning curve because this camera really does have some very very cool features but, what are features if image quality sucks!


----------



## cgw

A much-needed reality check:

LensRentals.com - A Bit of A7R Sanity


----------



## Derrel

cgw said:


> A much-needed reality check:
> 
> LensRentals.com - A Bit of A7R Sanity



Additional "reality check" by one of the web's most-influential mirrorless camera bloggers, Austin-based professional commercial photographer Kirk Tuck. He basically gave the camera of the year award to the new Olympus EM-1...because the Sony A7 and A7R suck so badly...The Visual Science Lab.: The VSL Five Star Award of the Year goes to a camera I don't (currently) own. The Olympus OMD EM-1

Kirk Tuck's Visual Science Lab blog is one of the web's best resources for PRACTICAL, hands-on mirrorless camera, associated lens, and photography insights, tips, and evaluations as they relate to REAL-WORLD shooting. Kirk's the kind of guy not given to fanboy-fawning....like some people. Here's a portion of what he wrote this week, in the Year-end camera award column...

"My first thoughts were that this camera would be a wonderful partner to the Sony a99 I already own while adding more resolution, sharpness and more lens flexibility at a much lower initial price. In fact, I had liquidated my cropped frame Sony cameras and lenses in anticipation. And then the day came. I was supposed to be in the Samsung booth but before the show started I walked over to the Sony pavilion and played with the product. It was then that my whole plan began to fall apart like wet cardboard box. 

My first impression was *the sheer noise and intensity of the shutter*. Prescient I think since we are now finding that this Howitzer inspired shutter also causes a profound lack of sharpness with longer lenses at certain shutter speeds. *The feel of the body was off*. The *focusing much slower than that of the $600 Panasonic G6* in an adjacent display area. But the whole impression was that Sony checked the boxes they thought the power users would want (horsepower) but forgot to engineer in any élan when it comes to tactile luxury.* Both the A7 cameras feel somewhat like Russian cold war manufacturing discovered plastics*.  (_edit: from time to time the blog has visitors from other forums. Many of them have reading issues with anything that is not written in a very literal fashion. I feel duty bound to add to the above that I have spent many hours with the A7 and A7r in addition to time spent at a trade show.... I also have ready access to both cameras for testing and re-testing. ed.)_


Now, let's admit that there are a number of _great divides_ in the cult of the camera world. There are the linear rationalists and on the other side of the tug-o-war rope are the artists. One group loves metrics and provable performance while the other loves the feel and the user experience. No question which side I come down on. *A camera can have all the rational stuff under the hood and still be a totally loser to operate.  That would be the a7r. *


Bottom line? I just can't bear the thought of buying that camera. What do I gain? A few more megapixels over my a99? But do I even get that if *the recoil of the Howitzer shutter smudges away all of the sensor gains? I get a Borg camera that is ready to assimilate all the lenses but in order to use it I must bow to fully manual implementations and still understand that fluid use may be a crap shoot.*

*The people who love that camera are the ones who are willing to put it on a thousand dollar Gitzo tripod and then weight down the whole assemblage with bean bags*. Well, I don't know about you but I spend a lot of time shooting hand held and shooting on the very edge of what might be possible. Just not going to happen with the A7r. *You'll need some time to get it to focus*. You'll need some time to stabilize the system before initiation and *you'll need a lot of time to work with the files to get the same color you can get out of the Olympus product used in an almost cavalier mode. *


I won't belabor the whole point. I read a post on Luminous-Landscape.com by *a respected fashion photographer who wanted to buy the A7r based on the hype and went into a store to try one. He ended up walking out with an EM-1 and I'm pretty sure I would too.* In his estimation and based on three "real world" tests he ran the EM-1 didn't just handle better in a direct comparison, it also trounced the more expensive camera (discernibly) in image quality and it was far ahead on usability. "

Uggggg--what a scathing indictment of the A7 and A7R, from the kind of influential mirrorless camera USER, Sony a99 owner and, and mirrorless camera ADVOCATE that could really help a camera succeed...Kirk Tuck basically pans the Sony A7 and A7R. And he goes on additionally, to derscribe how poorly the cameras have been designed by Sony.


----------



## vipgraphx

I am gathering that all the issues with the blurred images are a7r only because of the double clicking shutter but not a problem with the a7. 

The shutter sound and being to loud or annoying is relative, to me its not that loud its not that much louder than the D7100 unless you need to shoot in a church or library I don't see this being a deal breaker on not to get the camera.

Focusing to me is pretty damn fast, but I don't have all those other cameras to compare to either and the EYE AF is pretty dead on with quick response time.

The feel of the body is also relative. IF you are looking for this camera to fill like a D800 huge hunk of metal, then you will be very disappointed. IF you are tired of having a huge FF camera that is heavier than a new born baby then yes this feels quite good in the hand. It does have some weight on it. I would say hold the NEX 6 and shoot with it then hold the a7 or a7r and shoot with it and you will notice and hopefully appreciate the build quality over the NEX 6....but yes its not a D800 or canon FF camera...its different exactly whats is was made for.


I can only speak for myself and say that after reviewing all the good and bad info out there I had to test it out myself and so far my personal opinion that will not weigh much in the professional world is that this camera kicks a$$. image quality to me is top notch. I think the NEX 6 had a better look to the metal like the texture like you see on the nikons and I wish they would have left that same texture on the A7 but eehhhh oh well.

there are many pros and cons and that write up is one mans opinion if you look how many bad reviews vs good reviews I think the good out weighs the bad and one thing for sure that on the internet usally 90% of the time when it comes to reviews and feed back is that you more people will take the time to write anything wrong that they don't like about a product while the other bunch are busy using the product they bought and love...just saying.

Food for thought blur issue that some folks are having...maybe just maybe its because the lenses are on with adapters rather than directly to the camera could this have any impact??? check out this video and see how freemen sharp this guys photos are with sony lens 

Look at :47 and after he is using a long sony g lens and the sony adapter and his shots are tack sharp...







*PS......I wanted to add that those that are experiencing problems with blur on some of those reviews, They used a wood block or weight and it fixed that issue but this is also interesting that the battery grip with two batteries also fixes that same problem and its more noticeable at 1/100sec...If a simple weight under the camera solves this problem, than its a weight balance issue, not a camera issue.

*I would rather have the grip than a block of wood because it would serve two purposes. Something that I would want to get anyways for shooting portraits.


----------



## brunerww

Congratulations on making up your own mind, vipgraphx.  And thank you for sharing your first-hand experience with the camera.

Happy New Year!

Bill


----------



## JustJazzie

vipgraphx said:


> One thing about new tech is that it is new tech. We may have to choose our style of shooting with a camera like this. Having it for about a day now I really have not been able to really test it with Christmas and all. I am having to learn how to make adjustments  and what not so I can't really chime in on what those lens reviews that darrel has supplied links to.  I think that all across the internet there pixel peepers and it gets sooo crazy how everyone wants things so so sooooooo perfect. When the D800 came out there was so much talk about that and how you would have to upgrade computer and lenses and the files sizes the list goes on and on. Now folks love that same camera and nothing has changed. They have just learned how to use that camera.  This new A7 and A7r has different techknowledgey and like I said we may have to change things a bit.. Perhaps these lenses camera are to light and cause camera shake I will admit that when using the NEX 6 and doing the braketing that Shot one was clear, shot 2 was a little blurry and shot three was even more blurry even when using the timer. So if this new Sony A7 does the same then yes this could be a huge problem for someone like me who shoots HDR or actually anyone.  I will start testing more in depth tonight/ tomorrow compared to the D7100 and see where we are at from my point of view. I will admit I have had some problems thus far trying to figure things out and am hoping its a learning curve because this camera really does have some very very cool features but, what are features if image quality sucks!


  This might be a dumb question, but on the HDR shot you used a self timer for, did you turn off steady shot? I posted a few weeks ago about some AWEFUL "phantom camera shake" and that fixed the problem!   Crystal clear shots after that. You probably already knew that, but I didn't, I guess I missed it in the manual.


----------



## vipgraphx

On the HDR shot I did , mini did not take off steady shot. I remember reading your post about it but, it slipped my mind. 
Doesn't seem to have effected anything in that shot being turned on.


----------



## gsgary

It's a very nice looking camera it is causing a bit of a storm on the Leica forum, my friend is thinking of keeping his M9 and getting the Sony because lost of Leica lenses will fit with an adapter


----------



## vipgraphx

They make adapters for canon and nikon lenses too.


----------



## gsgary

vipgraphx said:


> They make adapters for canon and nikon lenses too.



So i could use my 300F2.8L ?


----------



## vipgraphx

Yes check this out,

Metabones Canon EF Lens to Sony NEX Camera Lens MB_EF-E-BM3 B&H

it will work on the A7 since the NEX and A7 have the same mounts.


----------



## gsgary

Its a bit pricey

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## vipgraphx

yeah but its cheaper than buying a whole new lens....plus if you have other canon lenses you can use this adapter on those...


----------



## gsgary

My friend at the club ha just ordered the 55mm for her A7R i think she has a Pentax adapter for it

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## DiskoJoe

vipgraphx said:


> They make adapters for canon and nikon lenses too.



They make dozens of adaptors. Thats why I couldnt understand why everybody was getting all puffy about the lens offerings. You can use a sea of awesome glass on this thing. E-mount is a perfect options for many classic lens that are smaller then modern mount sizes.


----------



## DiskoJoe

vipgraphx said:


> Yes check this out,
> 
> Metabones Canon EF Lens to Sony NEX Camera Lens MB_EF-E-BM3 B&H
> 
> it will work on the A7 since the NEX and A7 have the same mounts.



Any emount lens will work on it from any brand, emount is emount.


----------



## vipgraphx

check this out folks if you have time...its kinds long


----------



## gsgary

You should see an image on another forum it looks wonderful with the greatest 50mm on the market, someone has used a Leica 50mm Noctilux F0.95


----------



## slow231

vipgraphx said:


> check this out folks if you have time...its kinds long


thanks for all the updates vipgraphx.  I've been following them closely as these are cameras I am very interested in.  I got the chance to check the 7 and 7r at the sony store yesterday.  Also had the chance to try the zeiss 35 2.8.  The camera is nice, and as expected very small in comparison to a FF dslr.  The auto focusing seemed sufficient (in good light), and the EVF was pretty usable (focus peaking for MF was nice). I didn't get too familiar with the menu functioning but this shouldn't be an issue considering how customizable everything is suppose to be. overall the camera is probably capable of doing the vast majority of what i need for non-client work. The 35 is a very nice lens (zeiss's are always nice), but the 2.8 is kind of disappointing for a prime.  i think overall that is probably my biggest gripe with the system, the somewhat lack luster premium lenses available/planned for it.  f4 for the 24-70 and 70-200 is kind of a show stopper for me, i shoot those nikon variants almost primarily at 2.8.  the smaller size and weight is definitely welcome, but for my uses that advantage alone isn't THAT huge of a deal until you get into sizes that are truly pocketable (I don't think any ILC systems honestly fall in that category). in the end unless we're talking about very near pocketable sizing (and i already have and use a very nice point and shoot a lot), i don't think i'm ready to jump ship unless there are absolutely 0 compromises.


----------



## vipgraphx

Slow - I completely understand where your coming from, This decision to buy sony was really hard for me because I am a Nikon guy!! Everyone has different ideas of a perfect camera and what brand name to use and I totally respect that. I wanted to kinda do some food for thought on what you said in your last post. Nikons holy trinity are all 2.8's 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. In reality Sony is not any different with their lens except that the the 35 mm is a prime lens and is 2.8 vs 1.8 or  1.4, I used to use the 35 mm 1.8 nikon and honestly really never ever would I use 1.8. I would use 2.8 and usually higher because of the small DOF. Now this starts to make sense if you look at the sony 35mm starting at 2.8 as its supposed to be tack sharp at 2.8

I really feel that SONY is going to be big in this market and once they release more lenses I think folks will be really happy but, I also understand what you are saying. Personally if I did not sell my D700 I would not even consider getting another camera right now because the IQ on that camera was soooo top quality, it was fast and accurate. The best Nikon camera I have owned. Even compared to the D7100 I tested out I thought it was somewhat better in many ways. 

But I sold it because it just was not fun lugging it around with all the other glass. When we would go on vacation I would be so tired and my back hurting I have a herniated L7 and L5 S1. I suppose I could have easily just kept it and got a point and shoot but, I know me no point and shoot would have ever compared and made me happy. 


Now that I have been in the market and been able to play with different cameras, the features of the SONY's is just superior to NIKON. The Focus peaking, DMF, Eye AF, the EVF in these new SONY's is really close to looking through and optical VF and the fact that you can see your blur, exposure and iso right then and there and nail the shot before you take is in my book very very very cool.  These are things now from trying and testing that I would WANT to have in any camera from this point on.

Now I am no SONY fan boy just very impressed with the IQ of these cameras and the features. I still am not sure if this camera either of the two a7 or a7r are really a replacement for a professional photographer. The fact that you can use adapters and use are your lenses with equal or better image quality now hhhmmmm thats quite interesting and maybe is a replacement However somewhere in the back of my mind I am not sure if I should have just stayed NIKON and waited this out until more direct fit SONY lenses are available and to see how things played out......

I can only hope that SONY will release some fantastic glass all I really need is a nice prime which I think the 55 1.8 zeiss will be fine and a nice ultra wide lens. All the other lenses beyond that I don't have a need for but maybe an 85mm other than that I would be set. 

Things to think about and food for thought.


----------



## gsgary

vipgraphx said:


> Slow - I completely understand where your coming from, This decision to buy sony was really hard for me because I am a Nikon guy!! Everyone has different ideas of a perfect camera and what brand name to use and I totally respect that. I wanted to kinda do some food for thought on what you said in your last post. Nikons holy trinity are all 2.8's 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. In reality Sony is not any different with their lens except that the the 35 mm is a prime lens and is 2.8 vs 1.8 or  1.4, I used to use the 35 mm 1.8 nikon and honestly really never ever would I use 1.8. I would use 2.8 and usually higher because of the small DOF. Now this starts to make sense if you look at the sony 35mm starting at 2.8 as its supposed to be tack sharp at 2.8
> 
> I really feel that SONY is going to be big in this market and once they release more lenses I think folks will be really happy but, I also understand what you are saying. Personally if I did not sell my D700 I would not even consider getting another camera right now because the IQ on that camera was soooo top quality, it was fast and accurate. The best Nikon camera I have owned. Even compared to the D7100 I tested out I thought it was somewhat better in many ways.
> 
> But I sold it because it just was not fun lugging it around with all the other glass. When we would go on vacation I would be so tired and my back hurting I have a herniated L7 and L5 S1. I suppose I could have easily just kept it and got a point and shoot but, I know me no point and shoot would have ever compared and made me happy.
> 
> 
> Now that I have been in the market and been able to play with different cameras, the features of the SONY's is just superior to NIKON. The Focus peaking, DMF, Eye AF, the EVF in these new SONY's is really close to looking through and optical VF and the fact that you can see your blur, exposure and iso right then and there and nail the shot before you take is in my book very very very cool.  These are things now from trying and testing that I would WANT to have in any camera from this point on.
> 
> Now I am no SONY fan boy just very impressed with the IQ of these cameras and the features. I still am not sure if this camera either of the two a7 or a7r are really a replacement for a professional photographer. The fact that you can use adapters and use are your lenses with equal or better image quality now hhhmmmm thats quite interesting and maybe is a replacement However somewhere in the back of my mind I am not sure if I should have just stayed NIKON and waited this out until more direct fit SONY lenses are available and to see how things played out......
> 
> I can only hope that SONY will release some fantastic glass all I really need is a nice prime which I think the 55 1.8 zeiss will be fine and a nice ultra wide lens. All the other lenses beyond that I don't have a need for but maybe an 85mm other than that I would be set.
> 
> Things to think about and food for thought.



Lots on Leica forum say the Noctilux 50F0.95 is a good match for the A7 

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## gsgary

gsgary said:


> vipgraphx said:
> 
> 
> 
> Slow - I completely understand where your coming from, This decision to buy sony was really hard for me because I am a Nikon guy!! Everyone has different ideas of a perfect camera and what brand name to use and I totally respect that. I wanted to kinda do some food for thought on what you said in your last post. Nikons holy trinity are all 2.8's 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. In reality Sony is not any different with their lens except that the the 35 mm is a prime lens and is 2.8 vs 1.8 or  1.4, I used to use the 35 mm 1.8 nikon and honestly really never ever would I use 1.8. I would use 2.8 and usually higher because of the small DOF. Now this starts to make sense if you look at the sony 35mm starting at 2.8 as its supposed to be tack sharp at 2.8
> 
> I really feel that SONY is going to be big in this market and once they release more lenses I think folks will be really happy but, I also understand what you are saying. Personally if I did not sell my D700 I would not even consider getting another camera right now because the IQ on that camera was soooo top quality, it was fast and accurate. The best Nikon camera I have owned. Even compared to the D7100 I tested out I thought it was somewhat better in many ways.
> 
> But I sold it because it just was not fun lugging it around with all the other glass. When we would go on vacation I would be so tired and my back hurting I have a herniated L7 and L5 S1. I suppose I could have easily just kept it and got a point and shoot but, I know me no point and shoot would have ever compared and made me happy.
> 
> 
> Now that I have been in the market and been able to play with different cameras, the features of the SONY's is just superior to NIKON. The Focus peaking, DMF, Eye AF, the EVF in these new SONY's is really close to looking through and optical VF and the fact that you can see your blur, exposure and iso right then and there and nail the shot before you take is in my book very very very cool.  These are things now from trying and testing that I would WANT to have in any camera from this point on.
> 
> Now I am no SONY fan boy just very impressed with the IQ of these cameras and the features. I still am not sure if this camera either of the two a7 or a7r are really a replacement for a professional photographer. The fact that you can use adapters and use are your lenses with equal or better image quality now hhhmmmm thats quite interesting and maybe is a replacement However somewhere in the back of my mind I am not sure if I should have just stayed NIKON and waited this out until more direct fit SONY lenses are available and to see how things played out......
> 
> I can only hope that SONY will release some fantastic glass all I really need is a nice prime which I think the 55 1.8 zeiss will be fine and a nice ultra wide lens. All the other lenses beyond that I don't have a need for but maybe an 85mm other than that I would be set.
> 
> Things to think about and food for thought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lots on Leica forum say the Noctilux 50F0.95 is a good match for the A7, one problem i did see when i had a play with the A7r was when stopping the lens down to F8/F11 the viewfinder got quiet dark which could be a problem when using studio lights, not sure if there is a way round it
> 
> Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...




Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## vipgraphx

That lieca lens is way to much $$$ for me...way out of my league thats for sure. 

You can manually adjust the VF when need be...maybe that would help out not sure though. If I stop down to that number I am usually shooting HDR and most of the time everything is in focus so that really would not have to much effect on me.


----------



## gsgary

vipgraphx said:


> That lieca lens is way to much $$$ for me...way out of my league thats for sure.
> 
> You can manually adjust the VF when need be...maybe that would help out not sure though. If I stop down to that number I am usually shooting HDR and most of the time everything is in focus so that really would not have to much effect on me.



Too much for me but we can dream, i have not long bought a lens that could work very nice, the new Voigtlander 50mm F1.5 asph m mount not seen any examples yet

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## DiskoJoe

vipgraphx said:


> That lieca lens is way to much $$$ for me...way out of my league thats for sure.
> 
> You can manually adjust the VF when need be...maybe that would help out not sure though. If I stop down to that number I am usually shooting HDR and most of the time everything is in focus so that really would not have to much effect on me.



Here's the poor mans hyper prime. 

SLR Magic Noktor 50mm f/0.95 HyperPrime Lens for Micro Four Thirds Cameras SLR-5095MFT


----------



## DiskoJoe

Apparently even fake leica lenses are expensive

New Leica Noctilux M 50mm F0 95 Coffee Mug Cup Germany Design Camera Lens Leitz | eBay


----------



## gsgary

Search flickr for someone called Lies thru a lens

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## DiskoJoe

gsgary said:


> Search flickr for someone called Lies thru a lens
> 
> Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2



Are we supposed to be discovering something besides hot ladies?


----------



## gsgary

DiskoJoe said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Search flickr for someone called Lies thru a lens
> 
> Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are we supposed to be discovering something besides hot ladies?
Click to expand...


They are all straight out of the camera

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## photofree

Perhaps this thread is why Sony is offering a $300 trade in on ANY camera towards a new a7 or r.

profound thinking about stuff


----------



## bigal1000

I owned 2 Sony cameras I sent them both back,I just cannot warm up to thier products at all,but that is just me and my opinion .........


----------



## vipgraphx

I can say from experience that the a7 is a very fine camera however I don't see it as a professional body replacement for studio work or weddings.  It's a great camera for professional landscape work and  some portrait work when time is not of the essence. Image quality wise both a7 and a7r will hold there own to any other dslr put on the market!!


----------



## Derrel

Read Thom Hogan's less-than-glowing review of the way Sony compromises its raw data by using highly-loss 11-bit data. Yeah, you read right: highly lossy, and ELEVEN bit data.

Sony A7 and A7r Review | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan

And check out this shot to see how awful this can look: RawDigger: detecting posterization in SONY cRAW/ARW2 files | RawDigger


----------



## jfrabat

Derrel said:


> Read Thom Hogan's less-than-glowing review of the way Sony compromises its raw data by using highly-loss 11-bit data. Yeah, you read right: highly lossy, and ELEVEN bit data.
> 
> Sony A7 and A7r Review | Sans Mirror ? mirrorless, interchangeable lens cameras | Thom Hogan
> 
> And check out this shot to see how awful this can look: RawDigger: detecting posterization in SONY cRAW/ARW2 files | RawDigger



Can't say I have seen this in my shots, and I have been using the A77 for a few years now...


----------



## vipgraphx

Yeah I have read that before and I really don't  think that anyone would ever suffer from that. I mean if you are going to print 100% cropped in all the time with blown up images which I don't think the majority of photographers will do. I think many of the reviewers out there just bit pick things and search for any little thing to point out so they have something to right about. Most of these new cameras from every manufacture are really good with great IQ. 

I have seen superb images with sony, nikon and canon.


----------

