Sony's New a7RII Camera Delivers World's First Back-Illuminated FF Sensor

[psolberg]

Even if Canon/Nikon stay behind with their beastly lenses and cameras that need a sherpa to carry, along with the Medium format monsters, and sony never makes it there. I doubt most people would even factor that anymore that we factor the complete lack of medium format gear from the big two. It just doesn't matter anymore. This is a disruption. Legacy is just legacy.

Is it? This is what MILCs vs. dSLRs looks like:

This is what a real disruption looks like:

Can you spot the difference? :

the problem with your rationale is that the camera industry is down across the board so you cannot compared things properly as you have two disruptions: mirrorless and smart phones.

Read Thom Hogan's interesting takes on this subject as he does make some much better analysis than your charts there.

Sony's bet is on the disruption that basically anybody but canon/nikon see: DSLRs will continue to become niche and their lens systems will go with it. The smartphone disruption will ALSO hurt mirrorless vendors. In fact EVERYBODY making cameras will feel it.

The question is not what happens today or just last year. To be honest, EVFs have to advance a bit more, and lens systems have to grow in mirrorless. But that is the trend and it is the disadvantage of DSLRs with their bulky costly designs full of moving parts and film era roots.

Lastly, do not use the past to predict the future. That is foolish. Look at the present: people are buying less cameras and the industry is hurting. Sony bets that when the ashes settle, they will have a completing system for people who want to get more from a smart phone (which is a sony sensor anyway). They think they will want APS-C and Full frame mirrorless with modern optics designed for the new age. Canon Nikon? who knows. Maybe they hope people will go back to buying rebels or whatever. Either way, disruption is taking place, like it or not. Maybe sony is wrong and people will re-embrace DSLRs and their old lens systems. But again, we're at this inflection point where DSLRs will need to prove their relevancy and that hasn't happened before: the film to digital transition was on the capture medium (film vs electronic). The mounts, mirrors, OVFs all stayed the same. This time, everything changes including the mounts.

It's amusing when someone's words from just minutes ago come back to mock them...

yeah keep it on topic buddy. just saying. keep it on topic (read topic).

1) Stocks and investment advise and hypothetical returns on canon/sony stocks, which is the topic that was going out of control is what I commented on. My suggestion is you read what I said because I'm not touching stocks, so there is that.

2) I'm discussion this camera and sony's disruptions in mirrorles to the establishment in reply to a post addressed to me. I could have not replied yes, but I deemed it on topic because many are addressing the strenght of the canon system as a rationale to avoid the sony camera in topic. My point to that is made above and it is very much on topic. At least to a degree that is far more on topic than arguing who would have made more money investing 100 bucks in a stock. That is ridiculously OT.


If you cannot see the difference feel free to argue but I won't reply because that is as useful as the stock investment scenario. 8)

 

[Dylan777]

I might be the only one on CR site to have a7rII on pre-order tomorrow

I might as well get 4K monitor for it

I am close to your situation Dylan... Last week, I just got myself a Samsung 970Q monitor... love it, ofcourse had to upgrade my perfectly fine GTX 460 to a 960 to support 4k... but I will hold off on a pre-order.... I want to see real-life results and reviews. I am happy to note you got a new body to replace the one lost plus the 85mm Go get em Tiger!

will put my pre-order in today. It's 9AM westcoast, still can't place pre-order through BH yet ???

My PC is ready for 4K, my monitor is not :-[

 

[zlatko]

I don't need to know the stock price to know that I definitely don't want Canon to copy some of Sony's "innovations", like the shutter shake of the original A7R or the mediocre lens mount of the original A7, or the non-ergonomic shutter release position on both of those cameras. That was not the sort of innovation that inspired confidence. But the A7RII looks great — certainly a big step forward. The 4k video sample on Sony's web sit looks fantastic. It's a relief to see that Sony is learning from its past mistakes.

 

[Loswr]

That is ridiculously OT.

As are vague discussions about 'the future of mirrorless and dSLRs'. MILCs aren't disruptive technology, it's just a slight modification of form factor. Lightfield cameras could be a disruptive technology, time will tell. Oh no, what have I done, did I just go further OT?

Regarding the stock discussion, as I suggested - stop participating or complain to the person who first brought it up.

 

[unfocused]

I don't have unlimited funds, so as long of the system continues to advance at a pace faster than my bank account, I see no reason to worry about whose technology is five steps ahead in a 5,000 mile march.

Same for me, alas, it might be different for people deciding what system to invest in ... and not everybody around CR is a Canon shooter of decades stocking a zoo of Canon-only gear.

And, to give the local fanbois the maximum amount of concession I can muster, Canon definitely isn't the clear and only choice these days for a lot of applications - including general-purpose shooting which is probably a large segment of the digital camera market. If you take the mid-term perspective into account with what we *know* Canon offers (and not what is rumored to be in their drawers), my advice to newbie purchasers would shift further away from Canon atm unless you want to use something only Magic Lantern can offer.

I would disagree about the advice (not that anyone ever asks me), but mostly from this perspective: To me, Canon and Nikon are "safe" recommendations. They've been in business for about a century and have weathered all the ups and downs of the market. The same with the SLR form factor.

It's a little like the old saying, "No one ever got fired for recommending IBM." No one ever lost a friend for recommending Canon or Nikon. I just have less confidence in the staying power and commitment of the other players.

 

[psolberg]

That is ridiculously OT.

As are vague discussions about 'the future of mirrorless and dSLRs'. MILCs aren't disruptive technology, it's just a slight modification of form factor. Lightfield cameras could be a disruptive technology, time will tell. Oh no, what have I done, did I just go further OT?

Regarding the stock discussion, as I suggested - stop participating or complain to the person who first brought it up.

You're not OT at all. You make valid points many are asking about the sony camera. We can agree to disagree on how much disruption "form factor" brings. I care more about this model and future ones:

1) the plus and cons of EVFs and how their evolution will lead to new advances and mix the benefits of LV overlays with OVF convenience.

2) Legacy EF lenses will require an adapter to work properly which means new lenses, or deal with adapter issues. AF performance of legacy lenses vs Modern lenses designed for hybrid systems. Contrary to your assertion, it isn't just about form factor: PD systems and lenses work hand in hand. You're moving the PD sensor closer to the lens and in a different position which so far has proven problematic for adapter makers dealing with on-sensor PD hybrid systems. I hope this changes because I was not impressed with adapting legacy glass on any mirrorless body so far in regards to AF performance compared to the same lens on a DSLR.

3) AF system shift to 100% on-sensor and no longer constrained to a separate component bounded by the area limits DSLRs have yet to overcome. Sony touts this as a major plus and I agree. AF area coverage for FF DSLR bodies has struggled for years. This is regardless of form factor.

4) Cost and QA issues around high precision of moving parts such as shutter, and mirror no longer play a part which will enable FPS we can only dream on today with moving parts and unsurpassed reliability. This means today you have to spend 6K on a camera that goes more than 10fps full frame because it must have high prevision parts that can do this for years. Mirrorless: way less complex = more affordable and theoretically faster.

5) practical silent shutters and lack of mirror slap for events where the noise of a DSLR will get you kicked out or at least told to back off.

Keep in mind canon can also go this way. So I suspect that once/if they do, people will hail mirrorless as the second coming of jesus. Just like everybody argued MP didn't matter, until canon shipped the 5DS, suddenly that is ALL that matters. Not saying it is you, but fanboys will be fanboys. So honestly, I know 90% of the haters here will sing praises to a canon branded camera just like this. This is canon rumors after all. The hive of the canon fanatic

 

[zlatko]

Keep in mind canon can also go this way. So I suspect that once/if they do, people will hail mirrorless as the second coming of jesus. Just like everybody argued MP didn't matter, until canon shipped the 5DS, suddenly that is ALL that matters. Not saying it is you, but fanboys will be fanboys. So honestly, I know 90% of the haters here will sing praises to a canon branded camera just like this. This is canon rumors after all. The hive of the canon fanatic

You're just making stuff up. Classic — and transparent — straw man argument. Who says that MP is "ALL that matters"? No one. No one says that ever. It seems you have to make stuff up to attack some imaginary "fanboys".

Some people have always wanted more MP (and some got more MP via medium format). Those people may now be excited that Canon offers a higher MP option in a DSLR body. That's not the same as saying high MP is "ALL that matters". Not even close.

Many Canon users would like to see Canon build a high end FF mirrorless. Many own and use mirrorless cameras already. But some also realize that current and past mirrorless cameras have had some significant shortcomings (EVF lag, shutter shake, poor ergonomics, too few lens options, etc.). If and when Canon makes a high end mirrorless, I hope it's every bit as good, fast, robust and system-rich as Canon's current high end cameras.

 

[bdunbar79]

I have an on-topic question regarding this camera. Well, two questions:

1. Will the back-illumination only really help at high ISO?

2. Why can't mirrorless camera designers improve AF precision and accuracy to the level of say, the 5D3 or 1Dx?

Thanks.

 

[psolberg]

Keep in mind canon can also go this way. So I suspect that once/if they do, people will hail mirrorless as the second coming of jesus. Just like everybody argued MP didn't matter, until canon shipped the 5DS, suddenly that is ALL that matters. Not saying it is you, but fanboys will be fanboys. So honestly, I know 90% of the haters here will sing praises to a canon branded camera just like this. This is canon rumors after all. The hive of the canon fanatic

You're just making stuff up. Classic — and transparent — straw man argument. Who says that MP is "ALL that matters"? No one. No one says that ever. It seems you have to make stuff up to attack some imaginary "fanboys".

Sadly, the level of fanboysm here is not something I need to make up. But there was a bit of tongue in cheek on my part there I know some of you are cool headed. I acknowledged as much.

 

[psolberg]

I have an on-topic question regarding this camera. Well, two questions:

1. Will the back-illumination only really help at high ISO?

2. Why can't mirrorless camera designers improve AF precision and accuracy to the level of say, the 5D3 or 1Dx?

Thanks.

1) The naysayers say...NAY (surprised?). I'll wait for the samples. Nobody has made such sensor. I suspect it will be the cleanest looking high resolution sensor in the market but I'm sure that will be tested to death.

2) with what lens? because if you use it with a 50L vs a 600L or even a vanilla 70-200L, you'll realize the lens matters more than the camera for fast action. I don't think sony is in the market for this game (yet). But their new on sensor wide area 399 point system does send the right signals. I imagine if they wanted to produce a lens with the AF speed of a high end Nikkor or Canon they could. But this is the wrong camera: 5fps, high MP, weird ergonomics on long glass anyway.

The problem with adapters is that these legacy lenses are designed for DSLR focusing systems and it is not as easy to get them to focus on on-sensor hybrid systems as it first seems. You know this. LV focusing is a joke in today's DSLRs no matter how advanced they are compared to PD viewfinder AF.

 

[unfocused]

...the problem with your rationale is that the camera industry is down across the board so you cannot compared things properly as you have two disruptions: mirrorless and smart phones.

Read Thom Hogan's interesting takes on this subject as he does make some much better analysis than your charts there.

Always good advice. Thom Hogan is one of the more thoughtful and pragmatic bloggers.

...The question is not what happens today or just last year. To be honest, EVFs have to advance a bit more, and lens systems have to grow in mirrorless. But that is the trend and it is the disadvantage of DSLRs with their bulky costly designs full of moving parts and film era roots.

While this sounds reasonable, I have to wonder if the DSLR design is all that more costly than mirrorless. It's one of those internet statements that mirrorless advocates love to use, because it sound logical. But do we really know what the relative costs might be?

If you look at the relative cost of DSLRs to mirrorless of comparable quality, it seems DSLRs have the price advantage. My guess is that currently EVFs are more expensive to produce at a quality level that comes close to mirrors. Electronic is not always cheaper than mechanical and it's very possible that the cost of the mirror box will remain less expensive than EVFs, even after the technology improves. So, what many people assume to be inevitable, may not be.

The smartphone disruption will ALSO hurt mirrorless vendors. In fact EVERYBODY making cameras will feel it.

Sony's bet is on the disruption that basically anybody but canon/nikon see: DSLRs will continue to become niche and their lens systems will go with it...

...do not use the past to predict the future. That is foolish. Look at the present: people are buying less cameras and the industry is hurting.

While you shouldn't use the past to predict the future. It's never a good idea to ignore the past either. Especially when it comes to evaluating a company's ability to adapt.

I happen to have lived long enough to remember the SLR boom of the 1960s and 70s, when Pentax was the world's most popular consumer SLR. When the bubble burst, it was Canon and Nikon who were able to continue to prosper. Why? Because they were niche marketers with a strong base. Nikon was stronger, but Canon relentlessly pursued the market eventually overtaking their rival.

I'm not using the past to predict the future, but I'm not about to close my eyes to their track record either.

Sony bets that when the ashes settle, they will have a completing system for people who want to get more from a smart phone (which is a sony sensor anyway).

Or maybe, Sony is just trying to extend the boom a little longer before they abandon the market, because their real interest is in electronics and selling sensors to phone manufacturers. Are they really committed to a mature market that will contract in the coming years? If you are willing to bet your money on that, so be it. But, it seems more people are betting their money on Canon and Nikon and that's not an irrational decision.

...We're at this inflection point where DSLRs will need to prove their relevancy and that hasn't happened before...

Actually it has. Mirrorless is not new. (See Leica). SLRs ended up being the preferred form factor. Will that remain true in the future? Who knows. But, I am willing to bet that if Electronic Viewfinders ultimately replace mirrors, it won't necessarily make a lot of difference to we DLSR niche buyers. Our cameras may look a little different, but probably not all that much and they'll still use all our legacy lenses.

 

[Keith_Reeder]

Sadly, the level of fanboysm here is not something I need to make up.

The only fanboys on here are the ones who come in to bang on and on and on about how good Sony/Nikon/insert camera brand of choice are compared to dying, inept, useless Canon...

Those of us who disagree with those fanboys do so not because we're Canon fanboys, but - simply - because Canon does what we need it to do, and generally really, really well, too.

A nuance doubtless lost on you.

So off you go - twist that into something that I didn't actualy write, like you've being doing to everyone else throughout the thread...

 

[Dylan777]

I have an on-topic question regarding this camera. Well, two questions:

1. Will the back-illumination only really help at high ISO?

2. Why can't mirrorless camera designers improve AF precision and accuracy to the level of say, the 5D3 or 1Dx?

Thanks.

1. I have shot few hundred photos with A6000 with my FE 55mm. For tracking moving subject, keeper rate is really high. Not 1Dx level yet, but I can easily get 8-9 on full burst @ 11fps. The only concern I have is in camera buffer.

2. For portrait, non tracking shooting, I'm much prefer mirrorless(a7s) over my 1Dx. Eye and face focus is dead on.

My 2cents: FF mirrorless native lenses will play a bigger factor. I will order EF adaptor and Sony A-mount for my a7rII and see how AF works.

Note: A-mount 135mm is a super lens.

 

[Loswr]

...the problem with your rationale is that the camera industry is down across the board so you cannot compared things properly as you have two disruptions: mirrorless and smart phones.

Read Thom Hogan's interesting takes on this subject as he does make some much better analysis than your charts there.

Always good advice. Thom Hogan is one of the more thoughtful and pragmatic bloggers.

...The question is not what happens today or just last year. To be honest, EVFs have to advance a bit more, and lens systems have to grow in mirrorless. But that is the trend and it is the disadvantage of DSLRs with their bulky costly designs full of moving parts and film era roots.

While this sounds reasonable, I have to wonder if the DSLR design is all that more costly than mirrorless. It's one of those internet statements that mirrorless advocates love to use, because it sound logical. But do we really know what the relative costs might be?

If you look at the relative cost of DSLRs to mirrorless of comparable quality, it seems DSLRs have the price advantage. My guess is that currently EVFs are more expensive to produce at a quality level that comes close to mirrors. Electronic is not always cheaper than mechanical and it's very possible that the cost of the mirror box will remain less expensive than EVFs, even after the technology improves. So, what many people assume to be inevitable, may not be.

The smartphone disruption will ALSO hurt mirrorless vendors. In fact EVERYBODY making cameras will feel it.

Sony's bet is on the disruption that basically anybody but canon/nikon see: DSLRs will continue to become niche and their lens systems will go with it...

...do not use the past to predict the future. That is foolish. Look at the present: people are buying less cameras and the industry is hurting.

While you shouldn't use the past to predict the future. It's never a good idea to ignore the past either. Especially when it comes to evaluating a company's ability to adapt.

I happen to have lived long enough to remember the SLR boom of the 1960s and 70s, when Pentax was the world's most popular consumer SLR. When the bubble burst, it was Canon and Nikon who were able to continue to prosper. Why? Because they were niche marketers with a strong base. Nikon was stronger, but Canon relentlessly pursued the market eventually overtaking their rival.

I'm not using the past to predict the future, but I'm not about to close my eyes to their track record either.

Sony bets that when the ashes settle, they will have a completing system for people who want to get more from a smart phone (which is a sony sensor anyway).

Or maybe, Sony is just trying to extend the boom a little longer before they abandon the market, because their real interest is in electronics and selling sensors to phone manufacturers. Are they really committed to a mature market that will contract in the coming years? If you are willing to bet your money on that, so be it. But, it seems more people are betting their money on Canon and Nikon and that's not an irrational decision.

...We're at this inflection point where DSLRs will need to prove their relevancy and that hasn't happened before...

Actually it has. Mirrorless is not new. (See Leica). SLRs ended up being the preferred form factor. Will that remain true in the future? Who knows. But, I am willing to bet that if Electronic Viewfinders ultimately replace mirrors, it won't necessarily make a lot of difference to we DLSR niche buyers. Our cameras may look a little different, but probably not all that much and they'll still use all our legacy lenses.

I have to disagree just on the general principle that your post is simply to cogent to fit in here.

 

[bdunbar79]

Oh, I was thinking more along the lines of contrast and phase detection AF in DSLR's vs. mirrorless cameras. Thanks for the responses.

 

[SwnSng]

Is it really so hard to accept that some photographers like Canon and some photographers like Sony?

Use the camera system you like to use and let other's use the camera system they like to use.

There is no need to insult or degrade photographers who may have a different opinion from your opinion.

I do not understand how some people here can get so spun up and take things so personally.

But then if we all acted mature, CR would lose a lot of its entertainment value. LoL

It's the classic human condition: make yourself feel better by cutting someone else down. I love the competition and I'm hoping the 5DMKIV answers back in some way.

 

[psolberg]

Sadly, the level of fanboysm here is not something I need to make up.

The only fanboys on here are the ones who come in to bang on and on and on about how good Sony/Nikon/insert camera brand of choice are compared to dying, inept, useless Canon...

Those of us who disagree with those fanboys do so not because we're Canon fanboys, but - simply - because Canon does what we need it to do, and generally really, really well, too.

A nuance doubtless lost on you.

So off you go - twist that into something that I didn't actualy write, like you've being doing to everyone else throughout the thread...

: uh okay? and... I'd add that just because some are critical of canon, does not make the criticism unfair or necessarily sony fanboysm. "A nuance doubtless lost on you".

But I will go on indeed

 

[bmwzimmer]

WOW, 16 Pages

Well I'm not going to get too excited about this camera simply because it is not going to improve my photography where any normal person would notice....

I picked up a NX500 because it had a Back Side Illuminated APS-C sensor BUT the ISO is pretty much the same as other modern sensors.

The NX500 has over 200 Contrast Detect AF points and over 150 Cross type sensors BUT the AF performance is terrible compared to my 6D. It's passable but seriously not even close to the lowly 6D's center point.

The only good thing about the NX500 is its pocketable size when mated with the 30mm f/2 or the excellent pancake lens.

 

[LOALTD]

who gives a crap about stock prices.

Canon does. Sony does.

good. I'm not sony. I'm not canon. 8) I don't work for either. those of you that do, go talk about stocks somewhere that matters. I thought this was a photography board and not an investor board?

It's the internet, and an open discussion forum. If you find the content irrelevant to you, feel free to not read on it. Also feel free to not further side track the discussion by repeatedly commenting on it.

FWIW, I did not bring it up in this thread, but I did want to correct a factual inaccuracy about what was posted. Are you also opposed to truth as well?

Finally, if you can't imagine how stocks are relevant to a discussion of camera gear, consider a once-popular maker of camera gear and supplies: Kodak.

It doesn't matter to me personally how a company's financials are, I buy what fits my needs best.


But since you wanted to go there...


Sony stock is up 86% over the past year.


Canon is up 4%.


Stock market as a whole is up 8%.


Pretty poor performance from Canon.


If you take it over 5 years, Canon is down 14%.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

So where they are many stops behind and where big strides are possible by the laws of physics, still not a peep about improvements and then for SNR for high ISO where unless they went to something that worked perfectly without needing a CFA there isn't really any room by the laws of physics to make giant strides since Canon already does so well there, they talk about making all the improvements. Hmm.

Not complaining if they push SNR a bit higher though. Any bit helps there.