DXO gives the A7R3 a 100

Neutral

EOS RP
Oct 19, 2012
342
17
What is interesting is that though per DXO a7r3 high ISO performance is only slightly better than of a7r2 and basically should not be practically noticeable.
But in reality a7r3 better high ISO performance is much more pronounced visually and noise pattern also looks more natural.
In addition to all a7r3 improvements over a7r2 this is very enticing.
Should be great for high ISO low light shooting combined with DXO Prime NR which for less blotchy noise pattern should give better results.
Here are several snapshots from DPR using low light scene and image size normalized to the lowest res camera in comparison.
 

Attachments

  • a7r2 vs 1DXm2  ISO12800 low light.JPG
    a7r2 vs 1DXm2 ISO12800 low light.JPG
    165.8 KB · Views: 133
  • a7r2 vs 1DXm2  ISO25600 low light.JPG
    a7r2 vs 1DXm2 ISO25600 low light.JPG
    187.1 KB · Views: 137
  • a7r2 vs 1DXm2  ISO51200 low light.JPG
    a7r2 vs 1DXm2 ISO51200 low light.JPG
    207.6 KB · Views: 135

sanj

EOS R5
Jan 22, 2012
3,706
572
rjbray01 said:
Even the best electronic viewfinders don't hold a candle to optical - no comparison. Personally I know I won't consider switching until I can hardly tell the difference.

Could not disagree more.
 

MickDK

5D3
Apr 28, 2014
45
7
Denmark
rjbray01 said:
Even the best electronic viewfinders don't hold a candle to optical - no comparison. Personally I know I won't consider switching until I can hardly tell the difference.
That's may have been the case before but the A9 and the A7R3 (which I own) are so much improved that even my did-hard Canon friend was immediately impressed when he tried my A7R3. I suggest that you go check the A9 (or A7R3) and see for youself.
 

turtle

EOS M50
Sep 27, 2014
38
0
Sure, the DSLRs you mention have face detect, but their effectiveness in use is not competitive with the likes of the A7R III or A9. These latest Sony cameras have stunning face detect and eye detect that works to such a standard that it transforms how many people use the cameras with moving subjects. In the worst possible light, the best DSLRs retain a clear edge with AF acquisition and tracking, however. One gets to choose the best fit.

privatebydesign said:
jolyonralph said:
So, for wildlife and sports photogs, the EVF is currently not the best solution, but for *everyone else* it's far better.

I took the A7RII out the other day on a portrait shoot, with a single lens, (FE 55mm 1.8 ), something I'd usually take the 5DSR and 24-70 2.8 II (and a bag of other lenses) to do.

Came away extraordinarily happy with the results. The question is, do I really want to go back to a camera that doesn't have face detect focus?
 

rocksubculture

EOS M50
Jul 6, 2013
37
1
rjbray01 said:
Even the best electronic viewfinders don't hold a candle to optical - no comparison. Personally I know I won't consider switching until I can hardly tell the difference.

Late last year I literally sold all of my Canon gear because of my experience using a camera with an EVF on vacation. It made the OVF on my Canon bodies seem like ancient technology.

If you haven't tried a new camera with an EVF you really owe it to yourself to try it out... for me, it was a game changer. And I'm not a fanboy of any particular brand - I've shot Canon seriously beginning with the 5DII (after many years and many iterations of the Rebel bodies). Over the past six years or so I've owned at least three serious Canon bodies at any given time (5DII, III, IV, 1DX, 6D, 5DSR).

I went to Italy for a few weeks last year and didn't want to drag my heavy Canon gear all over the country so I decided to buy a Fuji X100F just for the trip (having owned earlier iterations previously and enjoyed the interface)...

The EVF technology has come so far in such a short period of time.

I absolutely loved using the camera, and the EVF was really a remarkable thing to experience - "seeing" your photo before you take and and adjusting as needed before pushing the shutter button, rather than chimping.

And even though the Fuji is APS-C (and half the megapixels I was used to with the 5DSR), I found the images not only comparable (if not needing to crop) but the JPEGs were remarkable. It changed all my notions about gear and photography.

I sold every Canon camera I had and bought most of the Fuji lens line-up and a few XT2s.

My wife has always shot Sony, and with the A7RIII, I bought my second Sony body (I had an A7S long ago for low light but didn't like it for a variety of reasons and sold it).

The A7RIII is amazing. The eye detect is phenomenal for portrait work. I spent two full days on a shoot in LA a few months ago and it enabled me to work faster and with more precision with wide aperture lenses.

And it is also incredible for sports, with it's super fast focus and tracking.

For me, I love Sony for action and portraits and Fuji more for "creating images", if that makes sense, though both are really great for everything (I've used both systems for everything).

I still love Canon (though I own zero Canon products at this point) and enjoy reading these forums. And while they still do great in terms of overall marketshare, I've found talking to people - other pro and semi-pro photographers - that there is definitely a shift happening at a certain level. Not mass consumer and hobbyists maybe, but like at my local camera shop, every single person that works there shoots either Sony or Fuji. And when I run into other photographers at events and such, I'm surprised how many are switching from Canon and Nikon to mirrorless (Sony, Fuji, and Olympus, in that order) for weight, benefits of mirrorless, and other reasons.

Anyway, not trying to be a troll or anything, just sharing my own experience. I think competition is great because it forces new advancements and competition in pricing, so it's good for everyone IMO. Plus cameras from all major companies these days are all great, but there are enough differences to give people some options to choose what best suits them. But I really love the EVF on the newer cameras (and no, they weren't this good even a few years ago).
 

bhf3737

---
CR Pro
Sep 9, 2015
618
1,239
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
rocksubculture said:
...
The EVF technology has come so far in such a short period of time.

I absolutely loved using the camera, and the EVF was really a remarkable thing to experience - "seeing" your photo before you take and and adjusting as needed before pushing the shutter button, rather than chimping.
...

My impression has been exactly opposite with the electronic viewfinder. I took both Fujifilm's XT2 +23mm f1.4 and Canon's 5DSR + 24-70mm f/4 to my trip to Japan last summer. XT2 was supposed to be my night shot warrior but I couldn't get even a dozen of merely usable night landscape or long fireworks shots with XT2 out of hundreds using its native lenses. On the contrary, 5DSR and f/4 lens combo, in spite of its reputation of being weak with high ISO, was rock solid and could always nail the exposure and focus. And still in those scenarios EVF lag was not an issue. I assume that taking picture of moving objects in low light using the current EVF technology could be an absolute nightmare.
My only use case for XT2 now is shooting music performances is absolute silence and nothing else.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,076
356
Vancouver, BC
bhf3737 said:
rocksubculture said:
...
The EVF technology has come so far in such a short period of time.

I absolutely loved using the camera, and the EVF was really a remarkable thing to experience - "seeing" your photo before you take and and adjusting as needed before pushing the shutter button, rather than chimping.
...

My impression has been exactly opposite with the electronic viewfinder. I took both Fujifilm's XT2 +23mm f1.4 and Canon's 5DSR + 24-70mm f/4 to my trip to Japan last summer. XT2 was supposed to be my night shot worrier but I coundn't get even a dozen of merely usable night landscape or long fireworks shots with XT2 out of hundreds using its native lenses. On the contrary, 5DSR and f/4 lens combo, in spite of its reputation of being weak with high ISO, was rock solid and could always nail the exposure and focus. And still in those scenarios EVF lag was not an issue. I assume that taking picture of moving objects in low light using the current EVF technology could be an absolute nightmare.
My only use case for XT2 now is shooting music performances is absolute silence and nothing else.

I've borrowed a friend's A7RII + 70-200/2.8, and in my extremely limited shooting in low light, I found that I didn't like EVF with flash photography at all.

1. It was really, really terrible for flash photography in low light (for example, room lit by fireplace), especially without AF assist.

In my case, I was using one and two off-camera flashes with a remote trigger. The AF assist beam is a no go, because the red light makes my cat behave differently. Here the AF was unable to lock at all; I ended up turn on the lights a little to give the camera help, whereas my 6DII + 70-200/2.8 autofocuses just fine. The EVF isn't WYSIWYG at all, obviously -- especially since one flash had a 1/4 CTO and the other flash was rigged with a honeycomb.

2. Inferior for photos of my wife in my home studio, with proper lighting + strobes

There just wasn't any benefit to EVF, and it wasn't as natural to use. Since you don't get EVF preview, you need to look at your shots anyways, and adjust your lighting or exposure accordingly.

On the downside, it chewed through a battery at a stupid crazy alarming rate. Between shooting my cat for a bit, and my wife for a bit, the battery went from full to 25%! If it had been my 6DII or 80D, I'm positive the battery would have still been at full bars.

One thing worth mentioning, I guess, cat photography involves looking through the EVF and being patient, so maybe that wears out the battery a whole lot more/quickly.
 

bwud

EOS RP
Sep 3, 2014
305
10
Talys said:
bhf3737 said:
rocksubculture said:
...
The EVF technology has come so far in such a short period of time.

I absolutely loved using the camera, and the EVF was really a remarkable thing to experience - "seeing" your photo before you take and and adjusting as needed before pushing the shutter button, rather than chimping.
...

My impression has been exactly opposite with the electronic viewfinder. I took both Fujifilm's XT2 +23mm f1.4 and Canon's 5DSR + 24-70mm f/4 to my trip to Japan last summer. XT2 was supposed to be my night shot worrier but I coundn't get even a dozen of merely usable night landscape or long fireworks shots with XT2 out of hundreds using its native lenses. On the contrary, 5DSR and f/4 lens combo, in spite of its reputation of being weak with high ISO, was rock solid and could always nail the exposure and focus. And still in those scenarios EVF lag was not an issue. I assume that taking picture of moving objects in low light using the current EVF technology could be an absolute nightmare.
My only use case for XT2 now is shooting music performances is absolute silence and nothing else.

I've borrowed a friend's A7RII + 70-200/2.8, and in my extremely limited shooting in low light, I found that I didn't like EVF with flash photography at all.

1. It was really, really terrible for flash photography in low light (for example, room lit by fireplace), especially without AF assist.

That isn’t part and parcel to the EVF, however. Maybe DPAF will be better in low light than masked OSPDAF pixels, regardless of EVF tech.

Regarding WYSIWYG, you can get there, to an extent, with modeling lamps.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,076
356
Vancouver, BC
bwud said:
Talys said:
I've borrowed a friend's A7RII + 70-200/2.8, and in my extremely limited shooting in low light, I found that I didn't like EVF with flash photography at all.

1. It was really, really terrible for flash photography in low light (for example, room lit by fireplace), especially without AF assist.

That isn’t part and parcel to the EVF, however. Maybe DPAF will be better in low light than masked OSPDAF pixels, regardless of EVF tech.

Regarding WYSIWYG, you can get there, to an extent, with modeling lamps.

For flash photography, I almost exclusively use the viewfinder, so DPAF is not relevant. I'm comparing the optical autofocus with the pixel detection on mirrorless (I don't want to get abbreviations of the tech wrong, so I'm not using them :D).

Regarding modeling lamps, this is true if you have the luxury of using a studio strobe. And I'd argue that in that case, who cares about EVF or OVF... just look at what you're shooting :) But a lot of times, especially for portable setups and animal photography (where you have to quickly move your lighting), you're not going to want to have either the bulk or the power cables of a strobe.

I think that when I began studio photography, almost everything was studio strobe. It was so much easier with modeling lights, not running out of batteries, being able to power everything from wee to blinding, etc. I invested what I thought at the time was a fortune in Elinchrom stuff. Now, I hardly use it at all. I still like them for huge softboxes (anything over 4 ft), but almost everything I do is with flashes/speedlights, and I just move stuff a little this way or that if I have to.

Part of it is also that it's hard to gel strobes, especially if the strobe is in a softbox. On the other hand, with a flash, it's dead easy to gel it, and then add light modifiers, softbox or otherwise.

But anyways, sorry, totally off topic :)
 

bwud

EOS RP
Sep 3, 2014
305
10
Talys said:
bwud said:
Talys said:
I've borrowed a friend's A7RII + 70-200/2.8, and in my extremely limited shooting in low light, I found that I didn't like EVF with flash photography at all.

1. It was really, really terrible for flash photography in low light (for example, room lit by fireplace), especially without AF assist.

That isn’t part and parcel to the EVF, however. Maybe DPAF will be better in low light than masked OSPDAF pixels, regardless of EVF tech.

Regarding WYSIWYG, you can get there, to an extent, with modeling lamps.

For flash photography, I almost exclusively use the viewfinder, so DPAF is not relevant. I'm comparing the optical autofocus with the pixel detection on mirrorless (I don't want to get abbreviations of the tech wrong, so I'm not using them :D).

My mistake, I thought this was a canon mirrorless thread. Whoops!

It’s not relevant to OVF shooting, but my assumption is that a canon mirrorless ILC camera will use DPAF to acquire focus rather than masked pixels like found in the Sony system.

And yes, for speedlites the exposure preview mode doesn’t do any good and is in fact a drawback: it’s dark. With my A7Rii I always had to fumble through the menus to turn it off (and since there is no OVF I’m not exactly clear on what that means... it’s doing *something*). Fortunately A7Riii lets me assign a button to toggle it on and off.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,076
356
Vancouver, BC
Neutral said:
What is interesting is that though per DXO a7r3 high ISO performance is only slightly better than of a7r2 and basically should not be practically noticeable.
But in reality a7r3 better high ISO performance is much more pronounced visually and noise pattern also looks more natural.
In addition to all a7r3 improvements over a7r2 this is very enticing.

Given the price difference -- and what people seem to ask for used a7r2's, it makes no sense to buy the 2, as far as I'm concerned. The 3 has a WAY better EVF, better buffer, and answers to a bunch of other annoying things about the 2.

If I were interested in that style of camera and already had *something* I was happying using, I'd wait for 2019 for a7r4 to be released, lol. :D
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,835
1,124
Talys said:
Neutral said:
What is interesting is that though per DXO a7r3 high ISO performance is only slightly better than of a7r2 and basically should not be practically noticeable.
But in reality a7r3 better high ISO performance is much more pronounced visually and noise pattern also looks more natural.
In addition to all a7r3 improvements over a7r2 this is very enticing.

Given the price difference -- and what people seem to ask for used a7r2's, it makes no sense to buy the 2, as far as I'm concerned. The 3 has a WAY better EVF, better buffer, and answers to a bunch of other annoying things about the 2.

If I were interested in that style of camera and already had *something* I was happying using, I'd wait for 2019 for a7r4 to be released, lol. :D
Whaaat? Wouldn't you wait until 2020 or 2021 for the A7R5????????? I am shocked ;D
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,818
36
A great sensor with a terrible user interface.

Too bad DXO does not rate usability :eek:
 
<-- start Taboola -->