Sony finally offers big/fast zooms
- Thread starter ahsanford
- Start date
jrista said:
^2 , but i think we can have an option to prevent the troll his messages from showing up?, I am close to trying it:x
a6300 looks very compelling , also for people already invested in canon ...(or those that considering the eos M)
'new' sensor , slog3, 14stops, 4k(down sampled from 6k), focus peaking , possibly decent af , and 'dirt cheap' at 1000$. To any of the hardcore trolls/fanboys; look on the bright side!, this will make canon give you 4k sooner than later in the new rebels (or 7dII with firmware upgrade), don't Q_Q
I still would have liked it to be 1100/1200$ and have 50-70raw buffer, but I look forward to reviews!
The lenses means sony is trying and is likely to stay committed(for the time being)..., The (intro) prices are (unsurprisingly) high, but that has been the trend ... , I don't expect it to compete with products out for 5-10 years on price.
I am more interested to see how they will handle the high resolution sensors, since they mentioned they were specifically designed for that...,
I also expect a dslr(style) body with the e mount, to give a bit better balance with these big lenses...
Also people saying it goes against the whole idea of getting smaller and lighter , I guess... but there are still some smaller lenses to mount
Upvote
0
I hear this all the time, but it really doesn't stack up.ahsanford said:
Using CIPA figures, an LP-E4N in a 1DX is capable of 1,120 shots and weighs 185g.
4 x NP-FW50 batteries with a Sony A7II is capable of 4x350 shots =1400 shots and weighs 4x42g = 168g.
Sounds like a pretty clear winner for mirrorless.
Real world figures are going to be different to CIPA figures for both the 1DX and the Sony A7II. But I shoot Fuji and my battery is also rated at 350. But I'd average over 400 shots per charge. And if I'm doing a timelapse, it's good for 2,000+. I get bored and pack up before the battery starts showing signs of depletion. Unless I'm doing something precise and spending a lot of time composing via the LCD (which uses a lot of power), battery life is fine. (And composing in liveview would probably use up battery life in a DSLR just as quickly.)
Upvote
0
All works very well for my a7rII using Metabones IV adapter.candc said:
Both upgraded to the latest firmware - 3.0 for a7rII and 0.47 for Metabones IV.
This combo supports AF up to f/8 with extreme precision.
I earlier had some posts showing pictures done using EF 100-400 m2 with ex1.4 extender on a7rII using continious AF mode.
And it works well with many PDAF AF points - almost all of them, while my 1DX can use only central AF point. But now with 1DXm2 this 1dx issue with f/8 focusing is fixed.
The problem with a7rM2 using f/8 Canon lenses though is that it does not work well (very fast) in relatively low light conditions when you need ISO settings above 3200-6400 , in other words when on sensor SNR is not very high which is required for precision AF. For such cases definetly dedicated AF module on 1DX which has higher sensitivity works much better.
Also one should know on-sensor PDAF limitations. I can not work starting from total defocus on long tele lenses The same sometimes observered on 1DX as well. It is beter to do quick manual prefocus. When one get used to this all works instantly, this is just matter of habit. My ef 100-400m2 with ex1.4 focuses accurately on a7rm2 with very low light when camera ISO is going up to ISO 12800.
Upvote
0
Neutral said:
Sounds you get the best of both worlds
, sony sensor combined with canon glass...So you actually get good(reliable) results with continuous af as well?(sorry i did not see your posts/pictures ) , or are you mostly confined to static subjects only ( still really nice to have accurate AF....)
I don't think they will replace DSLR's any time soon for most (wildlife) users (ergonomics alone with long glass), but these last few years we have seen some interesting developments !, Being able to use all those nice canon lenses on sony's with peaking, and now even with (possibly reliable) af.... and maybe even some tracking capabilities...
Upvote
0
Technology involved in thise G-Master line is very interesting and very promising.
Extreme high precison of optic elements manufacturing. Optimized AF mechanics for each lens. For 70-200 this includes two AF groups, front and rear, and also wobbling support for rear AF element to provide smooth continious AF for video.
Design baseline for all is 50 lp/mm.
MTF charts are also very impressive and better than MTF for similar Canon lenses.
I am interested in all of them, especially with 85 f/1.4 to replace my Canon EF 85 f/1.2 II as Sony 85 f/1.4 is superior to Canon 85 f/1.2 II in all respects.
I expect all of G-Master to give better IQ on a7rm2 than the similar Canon lenses.
Though my Canon EF24-70 f/2.8 USM II and EF70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II both work very well on a7rm2 giving excellent IQ and very fast and precise AF but I am missing eye AF support available when using native Sony FE glass and definitely better continious AF tracking.
So now I am planning to sell Canon 85 f/1.2 II and replace it with Sony 85 f/1.4 GM to use on a7rII and possibly get the other Sony GM lenses.
Also to replace Canon 1DX with 1DX Mark II to have better performance with tele lenses especially in low light conditions . From different pieces of informatin from different sources I expect that 1DXm2 could have at least one stop better high ISO performance than 1DX and as result 1DXm2 could outperform both a7s and a7r2 at high ISO and again could become low light king.
Currently I get much better IQ from a7r2 compared to 1dx at all ISO range including low light shooting at high ISO.
Also would be interesting to see if Sony release rumored a9 with better AF than new a6300 and this happens before Canon starts shipping 1DXm2. This could force to change my mind regarding getting 1DXm2 instead of 1DX.
Extreme high precison of optic elements manufacturing. Optimized AF mechanics for each lens. For 70-200 this includes two AF groups, front and rear, and also wobbling support for rear AF element to provide smooth continious AF for video.
Design baseline for all is 50 lp/mm.
MTF charts are also very impressive and better than MTF for similar Canon lenses.
I am interested in all of them, especially with 85 f/1.4 to replace my Canon EF 85 f/1.2 II as Sony 85 f/1.4 is superior to Canon 85 f/1.2 II in all respects.
I expect all of G-Master to give better IQ on a7rm2 than the similar Canon lenses.
Though my Canon EF24-70 f/2.8 USM II and EF70-200 f/2.8 IS USM II both work very well on a7rm2 giving excellent IQ and very fast and precise AF but I am missing eye AF support available when using native Sony FE glass and definitely better continious AF tracking.
So now I am planning to sell Canon 85 f/1.2 II and replace it with Sony 85 f/1.4 GM to use on a7rII and possibly get the other Sony GM lenses.
Also to replace Canon 1DX with 1DX Mark II to have better performance with tele lenses especially in low light conditions . From different pieces of informatin from different sources I expect that 1DXm2 could have at least one stop better high ISO performance than 1DX and as result 1DXm2 could outperform both a7s and a7r2 at high ISO and again could become low light king.
Currently I get much better IQ from a7r2 compared to 1dx at all ISO range including low light shooting at high ISO.
Also would be interesting to see if Sony release rumored a9 with better AF than new a6300 and this happens before Canon starts shipping 1DXm2. This could force to change my mind regarding getting 1DXm2 instead of 1DX.
Upvote
0
The prices of these lenses seem ridiculous.
That's quite a stretch.
The 70-200 is tempting. Not sure about the 24-70. But the 85, as mentioned, competes with the Batis. The G-master is substantially heavier and costlier, is slightly faster (although nobody has measured t-stops of either as far as I know), and has arguably prettier bokeh, probably due to its rounded 11-blade aperture (batis is more swirley).
Larsskv said:
That's quite a stretch.
Dylan777 said:
The 70-200 is tempting. Not sure about the 24-70. But the 85, as mentioned, competes with the Batis. The G-master is substantially heavier and costlier, is slightly faster (although nobody has measured t-stops of either as far as I know), and has arguably prettier bokeh, probably due to its rounded 11-blade aperture (batis is more swirley).
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I don't expect the adapted 70-200 will work nearly as well as the sony. The adapted lenses I've put significant time into the A7R2 with (70-200 2.8 IS II, 16-35 f4 IS) work *fine* in a vacuum, but comparing them to native performance is like comparing night and day.
Granted, you're looking at a different camera, but I suspect the alpha is a decent indicator on what to expect from adapted lenses on the a6300.
jrista said:
I suspect it's so much about power (since the elements move fine, but tend to hunt with big glass) as it is the guys at Metabones don't have an arsenal of big glass to develop with.
Upvote
0
Reality Merely Illusion said:Neutral said:
Sounds you get the best of both worlds
So you actually get good(reliable) results with continuous af as well?(sorry i did not see your posts/pictures ) , or are you mostly confined to static subjects only ( still really nice to have accurate AF....)
I don't think they will replace DSLR's any time soon for most (wildlife) users (ergonomics alone with long glass), but these last few years we have seen some interesting developments !, Being able to use all those nice canon lenses on sony's with peaking, and now even with (possibly reliable) af.... and maybe even some tracking capabilities...
I am not the only one here enjoying the best of both worlds)
While I can afford why not to do so?
Life is short and unpredictable and tomorrow may be already late)
As for a7rm2 continuous AF reliability, using Canon glass, it all depends on the lens and number of conditions.
I cannot say that it is 100% reliable.
Metabones does not guarantee reliable continuous AF but it work relatively good using latest Canon glass and latest FW in a7rm2 and Metabones IV adapter.
In addition, a lot depends on the light conditions and relative (not absolute) object speed [(dD/D)/dT not dD/dT ]. If that is more than some threshold than results are not so good.
1DX with dedicated high sensitive AF module combined with good AF tracking algorithms implemented in 1DX FW is almost 100% reliable even in extremely difficult situations.
So far, a7rm2 on sensor PDAF AF cannot compete with 1DX when using canon glass via adaptor.
1DX is much superior in this respect.
In addition, lack of ability to select starting AF point (when using all PDAF area – WIDE mode) is also very limiting factor.
Possibly this might be addressed in rumored Sony A9 pro level body.
However, in spite of all the limitations a7rm2 with long Canon tele-zoom lenses is still very usable.
Here is one example.
This shot was done using a7r2 in AF-C mode with Canon EF 100-400 m2 +1.4 extender via Metabones IV adaptor. A7r2 was set to crop mode so equivalent focal length was 840mm and aperture was f8. Distance to object is around 1km I think or maybe even more.
First image is very small (for number of very obvious reasons) full frame preview and the other one is full size crop (100%) to show level of image details in this shot and this combo quality when using continuous AF object tracking at f/8 and maximum focal length (560mm full frame mode and 840mm in APS-C mode).
Attachments
Upvote
0
DPR did real world test with in typical conditions. They find it not upto the mark. Is a6300 going to have better PDAF than a7rII. Looking at that review I got the impression that even 70D could do a better job in terms of tracking and usability.Neutral said:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5684109129/lucky-number-7-shooting-pro-sports-with-the-sony-a7r-ii
Upvote
0
ritholtz said:
The A7r II is a 42mp beast with a measly 5fps frame rate. It's perfectly fine for non-action stuff, it focuses perfectly well for those circumstances. I've long considered 6fps to be the minimum I would consider for birds and wildlife, and it's still not really good enough. I need more to get the ideal shot. The a6300 has 11.1fps, and an improved PDAF system. Barring focus group weight or lens power draw issues, it should perform a lot better for action shooting than the A7r II, and better than a 70D with 11.1fps.
Upvote
0
ritholtz said:
I fully agree, a7r2 is not for fast sports/actions under low light conditions and erratically moving objects.
This is why I still keep and use my 1DX for that.
But as general walk-around camera a7r2 including low light/high ISO conditions is one of the best options.
For me 1DX and a7r2 are best complements to each other.
As a7r2 has better high ISO performance and IBIS it is much more versatile option for still low light photography.
I can do now hand-held pictures at night using a7r2 at situations where with 1DX I had to use tripod.
Since I got a7s and then a7r2 I do not use any more 1DX for general low light photography as getting better pictures using a7s and a7r2.
1DX is now only for sports/fact actions/events etc. where continuous AF tracking performance under difficult conditions is critical.
As for DPR article - I've seen this before and I think that now it is already a bit outdated for both native glass AF and especially for adapted canon glass as both Sony and Metabones provided new FW upgrades ( 3.0 and 0.47) which improves AF on native Sony glass and Metabones FW upgrade provided very good AF improvements for Canon glass.
Also from what I've seen about new Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 I think that it might have significantly better AF performance (speed and accuracy) compared with A mount 70-200 f/4 which is relatively old lens now
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I think action/sports/wildlife folks will cling to their OVFs and mirrors far longer than the general photography community. They chew through less battery, are more responsive, focus faster, track better, etc. When mirrorless has finally taken over the market from SLRs (many years from now), I still expect highest end SLRs will still be made for the sports sideline and pro wildlife photographers.
If you're an Canon action shooter desperate for a new sensor (I'm not necessarily speaking to you with that statement, Jrista), surely a D500 would be a better call than an A6300, wouldn't it?
Perhaps help me understand, why else would action folks want to pitch their mirrors in 2016? SLRs still clearly outperform mirrorless in servo / action AF needs today, so ditching the mirror for that application seems a huge step back in performance.
- A
Upvote
0
Quote of the year from another site I post on, this time from an A7 proponent, fired up about these new lenses:
"Now we can get down to business and put the fat bulky DSLR’s to pasture. One last thing for me is a dual card slot. That will put Sony at the top."
You heard it here first, folks. All Sony needs is a dual card slot and it's over. Shut down CR, people. This is like Pitchfork finally reaching it's goal.
Please understand that I want mirrorless to succeed, but have no delusions that it is anywhere near fully delivering on its potential. So please don't mistake this post for mockery so much as a 'wow' take on how different parts of the photography world think it is doing.
- A
"Now we can get down to business and put the fat bulky DSLR’s to pasture. One last thing for me is a dual card slot. That will put Sony at the top."
You heard it here first, folks. All Sony needs is a dual card slot and it's over. Shut down CR, people. This is like Pitchfork finally reaching it's goal.
Please understand that I want mirrorless to succeed, but have no delusions that it is anywhere near fully delivering on its potential. So please don't mistake this post for mockery so much as a 'wow' take on how different parts of the photography world think it is doing.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
I agree, people en-masse won't be moving. I"m thinking about my own needs here. I am still not a huge fan of EVFs, but I DO need a smaller kit that I can bring with me on a far more frequent basis, even every day, where I cannot bring my 5D III and huge 600mm f/4 lens. I want an every-day camera, one I wouldn't be ready to kill myself over if someone broke into my car and stole (and, with the 600mm lens, I never leave it anywhere, I always keep it in sight or locked away safely at home...hence the reason I cannot always bring it with me to work or wherever else I go.)
ahsanford said:
I am desperate for a new sensor...but I am also desperate not to lose my existing investment in lenses. A Nikon cannot be adapted to Canon lenses without additional glass...which is a deal breaker. I'd prefer a D500, it just isn't as viable an option as the a6300 and A7r II.
ahsanford said:
Not every action folk will. I do know a lot of people who went to the a6000 though. It's a REALLY tough deal to pass up...has been for over a year. It is jam-packed with features and image quality, and Canon has nothing that even remotely comes close. I don't foresee Canon having anything that is even remotely close for years still, as they just don't have a small, compact, mirrorless ball game at all. Maybe someday they will, but the versatility of the a6000 series makes it very appealing for those who do shoot action and want something smaller and more portable for every day use, without losing access to their Canon lenses. The a6300 should be much more ideal for that last point as well, given the new PDAF capabilities. It probably won't be ideal...but certainly better than dumping a bunch more money on additional Nikon lenses, or switching brands entirely.
Upvote
0
Jrista, I won't quote-reply here, but thanks for your comments.
If Hamburger A is a proper tracking AF SLR with a FF sensor and a 600mm prime, Hamburger B will really suck in comparison (if 600mm is still needed).
The Venn diagram overlap of [tracking AF] + [reach] + [FF sensor IQ] is simply a brutal one to recreate elsewhere. All your best options are a big step down the mountain:
I'm not trying to shoot you down here, but any sensor upside you might see will be absolutely pummeled by what those other systems can't do that your Hamburger A already can.
Perhaps a one-off major spend on a Camera B setup of a D500 and their 200-500 would be more compact, deliver fine IQ and track subjects well. But you clearly have tortured the problem and have a different take on things.
- A
If Hamburger A is a proper tracking AF SLR with a FF sensor and a 600mm prime, Hamburger B will really suck in comparison (if 600mm is still needed).
The Venn diagram overlap of [tracking AF] + [reach] + [FF sensor IQ] is simply a brutal one to recreate elsewhere. All your best options are a big step down the mountain:
- Fuji + their new 100-400 --> I question their tracking AF but that could work
- Sony crop (A6300) + a native long lens --> the glass isn't nearly as good
- Sony crop (A6300) + a great Canon long lens --> cool new AF system notwithstanding, can it drive the big glass quickly and accurately?
- m43 + 300mm prime --> fine, but you'll be handcuffed ISO-wise and the sensors simply aren't as good
I'm not trying to shoot you down here, but any sensor upside you might see will be absolutely pummeled by what those other systems can't do that your Hamburger A already can.
Perhaps a one-off major spend on a Camera B setup of a D500 and their 200-500 would be more compact, deliver fine IQ and track subjects well. But you clearly have tortured the problem and have a different take on things.
- A
Upvote
0
jrista said:
11.1 fps is better than 7 yes....,
When I sold my 7d to a good friend of mine (for a friendly price), I was looking to add something else,
At the time the 70d looked like an good option, but mirrorless looked compelling as well....
Im a sucker for buffer, and consider it the only downside on the 1mkiv (It would have approached perfection for me if it had 50-60-70raw)
So after crunching some numbers I ended up adding an olympus ( lol..., I would have never thought that).
Sorry to bore some of you with some numbers ,
But some math did the trick for me.... ,
70d: 6.74 frames/s for 14 shots, then it slow down to 1.27 frames/sec (95mb UHS-I card).
em1:9.9 frames/s for 50 shots then slows to approx 3 (also 95mb UHS-I card).
Situation 1 : Suppose 2 seconds of action
70d =13.48(14) shots => 100% shots in focus =>14 usable if 70%
em1=19.8(20) shots => 70% shots in focus =>14 usable, needs 49%
I supposed: 70% in focus for the 70d(10 shots), where the em1 needed 49% to match it.
now the 'best' case for the em1.
situation 2 :5 seconds of action
70d = (6.74*2) + (1.27*3) = 17.29(17) shots 100% in focus =17 usable shots 53% in focus
em1 = 9.9*5 = 49.5 (50 shots) 34% in focus =17 usable ,needs 18% in focus to match
For raw+jpg the numbers would be
(6.74*1+0.87*4) = 10 shots if 100% in focus , if 60% in focus
(9.90*3.5+1.5*1.3)= 37 shots needs 27% in focus, needs 17% in focus....
Based on these numbers I though ah well why not try it ..., being skeptic and expecting terrible results I was easily impressed by the focus speed (static) and tracking capabilities(in decent light) of this little thing..., few tests on easy subjects like cars/cyclists/dogs/birds(against sky) I easily achieved between 70 and high 80's% in focus.
In my view fact is compared to entry/mid level DSLR's from nikon/canon the (top) mirrorless doesn't need to match the AF performance to get the same number of keepers , Higher frame rates and (much) deeper buffers ( especially when considering RAW) can make up for some of the lower 'hit rates'....
No it will not replace a DSLR(any time soon) for difficult tracking situations(some issues:viewfinder blackout , lower light tracking capabilities , lack of raw acquisition speed.. and the matter of 'trust'
), for the time being I stick with DSLR for wildlife photography as main camera..., but the a6300 seems to (partially) address the viewfinder blackout.I can see how something like a sony a6300 can be a great addition/option to some (canon) shooters,
11 fps and a 50% bigger buffer compared to a 70d allows for some lower hit rate on the a6300 to still get similar number of shots in focus... It will be interesting to see how well it performs with canon glass (i don't want sony glass), and I might be tempted to get it instead of the em-1 (would be nice not having to manual focus some glass...)
don't misunderstand me for saying it us just as good or that it equals it, because that is not what I'm saying. I am just trying to restate some obvious thoughts which I think some of the 'defenders' sometimes overlook
.
Upvote
0
