Is it just me or is the A7sii Stills pretty sweet?

[Mattias Burling]

Hard to see a difference besides color (which is good for the s I guess). I asked a coworker that isn't really into the media thing, she thought the R because it has more contrast.

[Nikkor]

Here are 4 raws, 28 1.4 @ 2.8 and 50 1.2 @ 2.8, with the D3 and the D800. I focused so the aberrations are the same = focus point is the same.

There is a sandstorm over my place now so there is no direct sunlight, the subject was picked for medium-fine detail (the wild cats in my garden won't hold still  )

https://www.wetransfer.com/downloads/61e154d4c7d570c739ef4545d238f96d20160222140446/b4bd4f2154c342fd1f4306b6256c90e320160222140446/dd4e9a

[Don Kotlos]

At small print sizes both cameras can give excellent results. Hard to distinguish between the two. If you pixel peep the noise patterns are different, finer on the A7rII more filmlike on the A7sII (what you might call "organic" but that is easily matched in post). 

The following two are really the main differences:

- The AF of the A7rii is amazing for moving subjects and eye detection. Really revolutionary. 

- Resolution is great not only if you print large, but also if you only want to carry one lens and crop later. I routinely put just a tiny 35mm and with that resolution it can act like a zoom. 

So unless you print large, don't mind about carrying multiple lenses / zooms and primarily use MF then yes A7sii can be great. 

[64mulford]

How's the autofocus on the a7sii, particularly for photos if using third party lenses via metabones?

[VanWeddings]

1 hour ago, 64mulford said:

How's the autofocus on the a7sii, particularly for photos if using third party lenses via metabones?

tried that myself. not very impressive even after updating the firmware, which made a big difference - it was almost unusable before firmware update. it's ok for still subjects, but if you try to photograph a moving subject with the a7sii, get a sony lens instead.

[mkabi]

On ‎22‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 7:22 AM, Mattias Burling said:

Its the word "better" that Im wondering about. If they are better in that they are sharper and more digital, it would mean that they to my eye are worse.

I've used the D800, D750, A7, A7ii alot. All with high resolution. But Im not so sure I can call them better.

Would be sweet if someone that has both the A7sii/rii could to a stills side by side.

Not of charts, couldnt care less, but of people and objects. Also with wide open lens, soft lens, etc.

Want to see the "feel" if that makes sence.

I know what you are talking about... the cinematic look... its like its already post-processed straight out of the camera, just the way you want it without need of anymore post-intervention.

In my opinion, it has a lot to do with lighting.

More MP or resolution has nothing to do with it, sensor size isn't it either (Well sorta). Its about lighting (ultimately, its always about lighting - the aperture, ISO, shutter speed all affects it, right?)

The pictures with the dog that you posted in the OP, notice that its indoor vs. outdoor, but I know you're going to say that if you did them side by side, you will still prefer the a7sii over the D750. I'm sure, you can replicate it with the right lighting condition.

I have experienced this cinematic look.... phenomena with my 7D.

I was shooting as a second for a wedding, I took over a 1000 pictures... and I will tell you... some of them were bad (lighting was off, I think it was the flicker of the tube lights that F-ed it up), some just ordinary and others extraordinary (amazing like the way you describe it). And, I have to say that some of the pictures were redundant (same scene, same moment, same lens, aperture, ISO - just different lighting by the microsecond) so you can see them side by side (crap vs. ordinary vs. extraordinary) - I will post them up when I get home.

[Garreth Caulfield]

Hey, the one on the left looks like it has slightly higher dynamic range, also a little warmer. Great post, thanks!