Oliver Daniel Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 I was passing through town today, went into the camera shop and played with the original RX10. Loved it, especially the lens. Then I spoke to a friend who does admin for Playstation Network. He said he could get me a 39% discount on the A7R II and Sony RX10 II, but not the FS7!Worst distraction of daily thoughts ever. maxotics 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 The native ISO using Slog-2 on the A7rii will be 3200, won't it? I've tried looking on their website but it doesn't say much. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Heard lower. 800 or 1600 ISO depending on Sony's final production firmware decision. It's not 3200 like the sensitive a7s I believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 It's 800. I don't think they'll change that. Dean 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Great. On the A7 II it was 800 on the pre-production FW but changed to 1600 on the final model. Hope it's 800. Never saw logic in the 3200 choice no matter how hard they tried to explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Heard lower. 800 or 1600 ISO depending on Sony's final production firmware decision. It's not 3200 like the sensitive a7s I believe.It's 800. I don't think they'll change that.That's great news !! Thanks.It would be very tough here in HK to shoot at 3200 during the day even with a VND on top of more ND's As someone who is into photography and interested in video, Sony has just made my ultimate camera. Bye Bye Nikon & NX1. Going to dive into this system. It will be kind of weird leaving Nikon after all these years, but they need to move with the times and get with the program. I'd rather spend my money with an innovative manufacturer who doesn't hold back. I do like the NX1, but for stills I find it very average coming from FF Nikon.The Loxias look amazing as well. Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Daniel Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 As someone who is into photography and interested in video, Sony has just made my ultimate camera. Bye Bye Nikon & NX1. I would actually test the camera before buying it. Also there is a certain Canon 5D Mk IV announcement expected this year. Not expecting much from it, but who knows eh? dahlfors 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I would actually test the camera before buying it. Also there is a certain Canon 5D Mk IV announcement expected this year. Not expecting much from it, but who knows eh? I'll wait for a couple of reviews, but I'm sure it will be pretty similar to their other cameras. I'm no pro either ... it's all just for fun Never used Canon in my life.Internal 4K, 42MP, IBIS, Slog, nice EVF ... light and smallish ... looks like a fun do-it-all cam without too many compromises.ISO 3200 as a base Slog ISO would have annoyed me but looks like thats going to be 800 so all is good.I think part of the reason I want to move over as well is that I really like the look of the images I'm seeing from the Loxia and Batis range of lenses. I used to love my ZM 50/2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oliver Daniel Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 I'll wait for a couple of reviews, but I'm sure it will be pretty similar to their other cameras. I'm no pro either ... it's all just for fun Never used Canon in my life.Internal 4K, 42MP, IBIS, Slog, nice EVF ... light and smallish ... looks like a fun do-it-all cam without too many compromises.ISO 3200 as a base Slog ISO would have annoyed me but looks like thats going to be 800 so all is good.I think part of the reason I want to move over as well is that I really like the look of the images I'm seeing from the Loxia and Batis range of lenses. I used to love my ZM 50/2.Fair enough! If you're doing it on a professional basis like me, everything needs to be tried before the buy. That said, I'm 95% sold on the RX10 II for a powerful shot grabber and quickie productions (in place of the GH3), just need a play first. At the higher end, I've got my eyes on a certain disruptive Australian camera company and their new line.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 It will be interesting to see a comparison between the A7s and A7r: 1 -A7s FF 4K external vs A7r FF 4K internal (Expectations, the A7s would have less artefacts in aliasing/moire/rolling shutter and better lowlight performance and DR and better codec) 2 -A7s s35 4K external vs A7r s35 4K external (A7s s35 4K is upscaled from 2.8K while a7r s35 4K is downscaled from 6K, so it much have significantly more detail and colour and claimed almost non-existing rolling shutter, but probably worse lowlight performance and DR) The interesting one : 3 -A7s FF 4K external vs A7r s35 4K internal + SB (A7s is coming from a 4K window exactly, while a7r is downscaled from 6K, so probably the A7s external 4K FF will have better lowlight performance, higher DR due to larger photosites & stronger ProRes Codec while the a7r will have higher resolution and better colour performance along with significantly less rolling shutter. Both are FF 4K options with S-Log so would be interesting to see how they compare since a7s needs a 2K Shogun while A7r is internal: For FF 4K A7s + Shogun = around 4500$ A7r + SB = around 4000$ You get a lovely Shogun for all your cameras with the A7s choice, Another important test4- -A7s internal 1080p FF and s35 bs A7r internal 1080p FF and a35 (No expectations, the a7r will totally depend on how they downsample to HD. The A7s offers the cleanest internal FF HD image in that range, let's see if the A7R will match that sharpness either in FF and/or S35. Doubt it) I think overall if the a7s will still beat the A7r in terms of overall video performance when it comes to DR and lowlight performance and the stronger codecs when using external recorders, while the A7r will beat the A7s in some ways only in s35 mode (Sharpness, colour depth, rolling shutter) but still have worse DR and lowlight performance so recording 4K s35 internally + SB will be the temporary better FF 4K solution for those who don't want external recorders, for those who are fine with them. the a7r will probably still be better. Taking the best of both worlds for videographers would be an A7s with the new A7r II body improvements (LCD/EVF/buttons), plus IBIS, improved 12mp sensor with internal 4K XAVC-S. I highly believe this camera is coming soon, though not very very soon. About the last quarter of 2015. *About IBIS, in all the In camera stabilization tests I've seen, and I've been researching that heavily, on the A7 II the performance is simply not high enough to be used on reliable video work due the weird artefacts that appear unpredicteably that ruin the footage, especially most visible on wide angles vs telephotos where it appears to show less artefacfs. As far as my eyes can see, an A7 (s/rii/r) plus a stabilized Canon or Sony lens is the much better solution for flawless IS with no artefacfs. I am yet to see a single video where an artefact doesn't appear in an in-camera stabilization test. None. It's still useful if one wants to experiment with vintage lenses with IS and working on personal or non-demanding jobs, otherwise, I'll use Optical IS thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 *About IBIS, in all the In camera stabilization tests I've seen, and I've been researching that heavily, on the A7 II the performance is simply not high enough to be used on reliable video work due the weird artefacts that appear unpredicteably that ruin the footage, especially most visible on wide angles vs telephotos where it appears to show less artefacfs. As far as my eyes can see, an A7 (s/rii/r) plus a stabilized Canon or Sony lens is the much better solution for flawless IS with no artefacfs. I am yet to see a single video where an artefact doesn't appear in an in-camera stabilization test. None. It's still useful if one wants to experiment with vintage lenses with IS and working on personal or non-demanding jobs, otherwise, I'll use Optical IS thank you.Absolutely! Even on Olympus footage, I see this weird...how to describe it...warping, undulating effect when walking around with a wide angle lens. It makes me physically ill to look at. And if the A7R II IBIS is jerkier than Olympus', as the A7 II samples I've seen indicate, then it'll be completely unusable below 40mm and inadvisable below 85. IBIS sounds great in theory. Stabilization on every lens I own! But in the end, if it doesn't produce good results, it's just padding out the spec sheet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Yes the Em1 footage I've seen is better, though absolutely inferior to Optical Image Stabilization. A7 MKII, horrible to be honest for video.The artefacts are most visible as a weird parallax effect where parts of the frame freeze and others move, even vibrate, and sometimes a violent correction occurs as if a robot was operating the camera. I would never use it for anything outside family parties/travelling and non-critical shooting just for fun, otherwise, I'll put an IS lens and be safe. To this point based on what I am seeing, Nikon and Canon made the right decision and were 100% right when they said optical image stabilization is better than sensor stabilization as it allows more fluid results without errors and allows for each stabilization system to be designed for each specific lens.I've never, ever, in 10 years, had a single artefact from any kind of optical image stabilization, zero. On Sony video camcorders too, no artefacts since the first implementation ever made. But with Sensor stabilization, it needs a long time for it to be as good, perhaps it will get there but not now, not by a long shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 To this point based on what I am seeing, Nikon and Canon made the right decision and were 100% right when they said optical image stabilization is better than sensor stabilization as it allows more fluid results without errors and allows for each stabilization system to be designed for each specific lens.And Panasonic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Well actually, and Sony!Sony always been Optical IS until very recently, they still produce and sell lenses with IS, in fact even their newest Zeiss Batis 85mm 1.8 has Optical Image Stabilization. And many of their E-mount lenses. (Btw have you seen how the images look on that lens (Batis 85mm) and it has OIS! A dream) My point is IBIS is not a substitute for OIS and don't get fooled into thinking it's just as good and go sell your IS glass, bug all manual glass and buy an A7 thinking it will work without image issues, it won't. It's a good option to have in the camera for non-critical work (work where your output will be viewed by a non-critical audience not a client), but it's certainly nota as important or effective as it's hyped to be. I wouldn't base a camera decision based on it, and I don't care much about it since when I want IS I'll use an IS lens and I advice everyone working fof critical jobs to do the same. Watch footage, tests, and try for your self to get my point. I don't see a loss from the lack of IBIS on the A7s after seeing the A7II results, I wouldn't use it anyway. Maybe it will reach that point with technology improvement, as EVFs did, but not yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Well actually, and Sony!Sony always been Optical IS until very recently, they still produce and sell lenses with IS, in fact even their newest Zeiss Batis 85mm 1.8 has Optical Image Stabilization. And many of their E-mount lenses. (Btw have you seen how the images look on that lens (Batis 85mm) and it has OIS! A dream) My point is IBIS is not a substitute for OIS and don't get fooled into thinking it's just as good and go sell your IS glass, bug all manual glass and buy an A7 thinking it will work without image issues, it won't. It's a good option to have in the camera for non-critical work (work where your output will be viewed by a non-critical audience not a client), but it's certainly nota as important or effective as it's hyped to be. I wouldn't base a camera decision based on it, and I don't care much about it since when I want IS I'll use an IS lens and I advice everyone working fof critical jobs to do the same. Watch footage, tests, and try for your self to get my point. I don't see a loss from the lack of IBIS on the A7s after seeing the A7II results, I wouldn't use it anyway. Maybe it will reach that point with technology improvement, as EVFs did, but not yet. Well actually, they used IBIS in their Alpha SLTs as well, but you have a point. I think people just want IS on all their lenses now, including the primes, and most I.S. lenses tend to be zooms. Canon's actually way ahead in that regard, and it seems Panasonic is only now catching on to what they figured out 3 years ago. And let's add the important caveat that this is all only in regard to video. I'm not sure how the new Sony FF IBIS does for stills, but I'm told it's pretty great. And I remember a topic from the Micro Four Thirds forum about why people chose the system. You'd think the most popular answer would be size and weight or the excellent lens library, but the overwhelming majority said they stayed in it for Olympus' 5-Axis stabilization. It had increased their hit rate by so much and allowed them to do tripod-esque exposures with nothing but the camera that they'd never go without it again. So certainly for the stills people there's still a place for IBIS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted June 28, 2015 Super Members Share Posted June 28, 2015 The IBIS in the E-M5 I had was way better than the stabilization in any lens or camcorder I've ever come across. So imo IS isn't better than IBIS, it's just that Sony didn't implement it that well. TheRenaissanceMan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 The IBIS in the E-M5 I had was way better than the stabilization in any lens or camcorder I've ever come across. So imo IS isn't better than IBIS, it's just that Sony didn't implement it that well.Fair enough! I haven't actually used Olympus' IS, so I appreciate the clarification. I still wouldn't use it for anything wider than 35mm equivalent. I've seen some gnarly parallax shifting artifacts in video samples with the 12mm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 It's better on the Olympus, the artefacts are more rare than the Sony A7 implementation, but still, the artefacts are there and do exist in many test videos which for me disqualifies it for normal use, if the behaviour was an expected, predictable one, we could find ways to get around it or fix it in post but the problem is that it's a random one, we can't see what's going to happen and where. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 It's better on the Olympus, the artefacts are more rare than the Sony A7 implementation, but still, the artefacts are there and do exist in many test videos which for me disqualifies it for normal use, if the behaviour was an expected, predictable one, we could find ways to get around it or fix it in post but the problem is that it's a random one, we can't see what's going to happen and where. This is one of the videos that showed me Olympus' stabilization in video isn't all it's cracked up to be. The longer shots look great, as do most where the shooter is standing in one place, but moving around at the wide angle gets nauseating--which sucks, considering I almost always use a wide angle when I'm shooting handheld. Check out the section from 1:50 to 2:00 where he's walking down the stairs. Barf city. https://vimeo.com/79312157 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Members Mattias Burling Posted June 29, 2015 Super Members Share Posted June 29, 2015 This is one of the videos that showed me Olympus' stabilization in video isn't all it's cracked up to be. The longer shots look great, as do most where the shooter is standing in one place, but moving around at the wide angle gets nauseating--which sucks, considering I almost always use a wide angle when I'm shooting handheld. Check out the section from 1:50 to 2:00 where he's walking down the stairs. Barf city. https://vimeo.com/79312157But what lens stabilization or in camera stabilization are you comparing to that allows you to get smooth video while walking downs stairs?I know of no such lens or camera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.