Sony ups the ante with the A7RVI and FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS

[AlanF]

Sony has officially announced the 66.8MP back-illuminated stacked sensor A7R and their new telephoto lens 100-400mm f/4.5 lens. The lens weighs in at 1.84 kg, which will be about 2 kg with hood. I would be using such a lens most of the time with a 2xTC on it to give a 200-800mm f/9, which would be heavier than the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-f/9, and narrower through the shorter focal lengths.

https://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilce-7rm6/specifications

https://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/camera-lenses/sel100400mc?sku=sel100400mcw.syx

 

[ThomasTH]

That's a truly remarkable camera with a lot of possibilities, from landscape t wildlife to portraits and fashion.

I wonder if it will kill some of the Alpha 1 II sales?

 

[P-visie]

That's a truly remarkable camera with a lot of possibilities, from landscape t wildlife to portraits and fashion.

I wonder if it will kill some of the Alpha 1 II sales?

Maybe, the main difference is the rolling shutter speed: 19.6ms versus 3.8ms for the A1 II (versus 6.3ms for the R5 Mk II).

 

[AlanF]

Jan Wegener, one of the much better YouTubers, has done a review. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNZJjKR0LeI
The main problem is that the detail of the images starts to drop at isos greater than 1600, and is significantly down at iso 6400.

The 100-400/4.5 is pretty long. Slightly longer than the RF 200-800 fully retracted, and some 4.5-5" longer than the RF 100-500.

 

[AlanF]

More info. Rolling shutter, readout time appears to be about 20 µs, more than 3x slower than the 6.3 µs of the R5ii and slower than the good old R5's 16..3 µs. Oops ms. What’s a factor of a 1000 between friends.

 

[neuroanatomist]

More info. Rolling shutter, readout time appears to be about 20 µs, more than 3x slower than the 6.3 µs of the R5ii and slower than the good old R5's 16..3 µs.

You shortened all the readout times by three orders of magnitude. Kudos for use of the Greek letter mu, though. (You’re on a Mac? Correcting Windows-using scientists who type um and uM because there’s no simple Option-m shortcut is a never ending task.)

 

[AlanF]

You shortened all the readout times by three orders of magnitude. Kudos for use of the Greek letter mu, though. (You’re on a Mac? Correcting Windows-using scientists who type um and uM because there’s no simple Option-m shortcut is a never ending task.)

Oops sorry! I actually have a Greek keyboard as well for when I am heavily into equations and thermodynamics. Corrected.

 

[AlanF]

Maybe, the main difference is the rolling shutter speed: 19.6ms versus 3.8ms for the A1 II (versus 6.3ms for the R5 Mk II).

Sorry Pieter, I posted similarly before yours had come up on my screen. Wegener's tests showed that while tracking was very good, acquisition of AF for birds against a background wasn't fast. So, I think Sony has caught up in some ways with the R5 for us birders, but is behind the R5ii because of rolling shutter and poorer recognition, and the details fall off at higher iso whereas the R5ii works better in lower light. I am still amazed by the fast AF acquisition of the R5ii.

 

[P-visie]

Sorry Pieter, I posted similarly before yours had come up on my screen. Wegener's tests showed that while tracking was very good, acquisition of AF for birds against a background wasn't fast. So, I think Sony has caught up in some ways with the R5 for us birders, but is behind the R5ii because of rolling shutter and poorer recognition, and the details fall off at higher iso whereas the R5ii works better in lower light. I am still amazed by the fast AF acquisition of the R5ii.

Hi Alan, no problem, you applied some wishful thinking by increasing the speed by a factor 1000. Let’s hope Canon takes notice for the R5 Mk III and R1 Mk II .

 

[ThomasTH]

Maybe, the main difference is the rolling shutter speed: 19.6ms versus 3.8ms for the A1 II (versus 6.3ms for the R5 Mk II).

Thank you, I actually did not check all of the technical data. I still think that it is a very capable camera. For DGO and the better dynamic range you have to use the mechanical shutter anyway.
For me personally the 67MP would be too much (beside the price ).