Sony a7 II - pictures and discussions

units were shipped out.

anyone with the new a7II please post your pictures and thoughts.

thanks.

Ooooh... A7 II, not 2 A7's.. sorry about that..

mine shipped today so I'll have it tomorrow...

jacobsen1 wrote in post #17325686
mine shipped today so I'll have it tomorrow...

Woo! I'm excited for you!

jacobsen1 wrote in post #17325686
mine shipped today so I'll have it tomorrow...

Looking forward to a sensor reflection update; hope that issue is put to rest.

I've decided I cannot trust my a7R in low-light scenes with artificial light sources just out of of the frame: I get awful flares. I guess it's just a metabones thing. The same scenarios on the 5D III do not produce the same offensive flare. I hate having a camera I can't trust in certain scenarios.

don't make us hate you even if it's a joke

a7II review by thecamerastore


https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=eD-Vx9dcp-U

David Arbogast wrote in post #17325838
Looking forward to a sensor reflection update; hope that issue is put to rest.

I've decided I cannot trust my a7R in low-light scenes with artificial light sources just out of of the frame: I get awful flares. I guess it's just a metabones thing. The same scenarios on the 5D III do not produce the same offensive flare. I hate having a camera I can't trust in certain scenarios.

did Jacob got you thinking? :P

I also thought it had bad flare.. didn't think of it much, just thinking it was lens.

If I understand correctly, it's mainly been the a7 that's had a bad sensor reflection issue. I think the bad flares I was referring to are caused by the metabones adapter, but I'm not certain.

I had been planning to use my a7R for an interior architecture photo-shoot (last night), but the day before I did some tests comparing the TS-E 24 II on 5D III and a7R and was dismayed by the comparison. The 5D III image was simply way better because that bloom of light coming from out-of-frame light sources. It's weird: if the lights are fully in the frame, I have no issues. It's only when the lights are just out of frame. That's why I think it's that internal reflection issue that has plagued the Metabones adapters. Version IV was supposed to fix that, but I don't see any difference between III and IV.

DTBaan wrote in post #17325857
don't make us hate you even if it's a joke

a7II review by thecamerastore

They make the absolute best camera review videos, in my opinion. I subscribe to their channel and watch every review, even of stuff I have no interest in. Great combination of humor, personality, and helpful information.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17326259
If I understand correctly, it's mainly been the a7 that's had a bad sensor reflection issue. I think the bad flares I was referring to are caused by the metabones adapter, but I'm not certain.

I had been planning to use my a7R for an interior architecture photo-shoot (last night), but the day before I did some tests comparing the TS-E 24 II on 5D III and a7R and was dismayed by the comparison. The 5D III image was simply way better because that bloom of light coming from out-of-frame light sources. It's weird: if the lights are fully in the frame, I have no issues. It's only when the lights are just out of frame. That's why I think it's that internal reflection issue that has plagued the Metabones adapters. Version IV was supposed to fix that, but I don't see any difference between III and IV.

It has to be your metabone adapter because I am using a Metabone III with my A7R and I have no light leak, flair or bloom.

David Arbogast wrote in post #17326264
They make the absolute best camera review videos, in my opinion. I subscribe to their channel and watch every review, even of stuff I have no interest in. Great combination of humor, personality, and helpful information.

Seconded. I love Digital Rev too, but TCSTV is far more informative, though even they don't test things the way I'd like to see sometimes.

it's here. In a scene I can easily make have sensor flare with the a6000 and a7, the a7r/a7s/a7II DO NOT HAVE FLARE!!!
This is with the 16-35mm.

So I'm excited about that. Low light AF around the house seems almost as good as the a7s. Hard to tell because I have to swap lenses to compare. The grip is nice. Although the dial in front of the shutter nikon style isn't perfect. If they'd put the dial behind the shutter canon style it'd be perfect for me. Now the shutter is super comfortable to use but I feel like I'm reaching a bit for the front dial. Yes this is better since I use the shutter a TON more than the front dial but it's worth mentioning. It's also a lot heavier... Not a big deal in terms of holding it or weight in my hand but part of my move to mirrorless (and from fuji to sony) has been to save some weight. I'm giving back quite a bit there now... It's 100g heavier than the a7s which is 20%. Not a deal breaker as I said and I'm sure that's thanks to the IBIS. I'm not a huge IBIS or OSS guy in general as I just shoot above 1/125th because I shoot people. Or I'm shooting arch/landscapes and I'm on a tripod. That said, 1/10th with the 55mm was perfectly sharp. I'll report back with more info as I have more time to shoot with it. It's been a crazy day/week...

thanks for your report. that's good news about the flare

hopefully it's a keeper for you. I was afraid of it being more heavy.. the a7 were nice because they are small and light weight. it's obviously that it will be a bit bigger in size and weight because of the IBIS. looking forward to your shots.

How is the iso from 100-400 compared to the original a7, a7r, and canon 5d/6d
I haven't seen much in iso performance review... I'm sure more to come