Interesting insights into the new Sony A7R II and RX sensor technology

[Gregormannschaft]

I never really use the Canon for video anymore...maybe timelapse. The only annoying thing is having one camera thats good for stills and one for video. I end up taking the Sony A7s everywhere, which gets some great videos and OK stills. Would love to have one that does both and make holidays that little bit easier. Maybe I'm being petty.

[Zigmars Zilgalvis]

Andrew, remember when GH4 came out there was talk about 4K8bit->2K10bit conversion possibility. As i recall codec engineer from GoPro tuned in and said it's legit.

Did you ever try that and did it worked? Can this be applied to A7rII footage you think?

[Paul Ning]

I never really use the Canon for video anymore...maybe timelapse. The only annoying thing is having one camera thats good for stills and one for video. I end up taking the Sony A7s everywhere, which gets some great videos and OK stills. Would love to have one that does both and make holidays that little bit easier. Maybe I'm being petty.

It is really a head scratching question because A7RII seems almost covering all the functions that 5D mark III can do (timelapse can be handled by a remote shutter, right?).
What you gain from A7RII should be almost the double pixels (42MP vs 22.3MP) that is good for making 8K timelapse video, the internal 4K video, flap monitor for easier composition and smaller body, etc. However, the weight won't make a big different when A7RII attaches an AF adapter to use Canon EF lenses. And also, the flash system is still a myth for Sony while Canon is till maturer comparatively. If you use flash not much, exchanging 5DmkIII to Sony A7RII won't be bothering. Otherwise there is still some ground to keep Canon 5DmkIII.

However, A7RII matches with A7s would give you a mighty solution of taking 4K video in "A + B camera" work flow(especially when you use ProRes or Shogun 4K RAW on A7S). That may change your direction of video and doing timelapse. For myself, I really don't mind to use both bodies in Sony. That's easier to manage single system then duo. 

[Gregormannschaft]

It is really a head scratching question because A7RII seems almost covering all the functions that 5D mark III can do (timelapse can be handled by a remote shutter, right?).What you gain from A7RII should be almost the double pixels (42MP vs 22.3MP) that is good for making 8K timelapse video, the internal 4K video, flap monitor for easier composition and smaller body, etc. However, the weight won't make a big different when A7RII attaches an AF adapter to use Canon EF lenses. And also, the flash system is still a myth for Sony while Canon is till maturer comparatively. If you use flash not much, exchanging 5DmkIII to Sony A7RII won't be bothering. Otherwise there is still some ground to keep Canon 5DmkIII.

However, A7RII matches with A7s would give you a mighty solution of taking 4K video in "A + B camera" work flow(especially when you use ProRes or Shogun 4K RAW on A7S). That may change your direction of video and doing timelapse. For myself, I really don't mind to use both bodies in Sony. That's easier to manage single system then duo. 

​Good breakdown.

I'd love to have both the A7rII and A7s but funds wouldn't run that far, more looking for an all in one solution that would allow me to take one camera away on vacations that can make good stills and video. I know from a professional point of view that sounds a bit silly, but it's relatively important for me.

Regarding form factor, I love looking at the Sony A7 series, but handling them is another matter all together. I kind of miss the ergonomics of the 5D whenever I use the Sony. Although big, i could grab the thing with one hand and never worry about it falling out accidentally. The A7 is just, well, uncomfortable in comparison. But it's no big deal really.

At the end of the day I've just got to congratulate Sony on creating a camera that comes close to doing both stills and video so well in one package. I'm sure I'm not the only one looking to switch over to their systems entirely. 

[Jimbo]

Thanks for the awesome information as always, Andrew.

I do wholeheartedly disagree that the GH5 needs to be Super 35, though. Panasonic should stick to their guns and their strengths of a small hybrid with incredible video controls, features (like anamorphic mode that nobody else currently offers) and reliability. The smaller sensor and its better heat dissipation allows best-in-class battery life and limitless recording time which are paramount features for someone who uses the GH4 for their business like me.

The GH line has matured beautifully over the years and I don't think "bigger is better" on the sensor front. I would say a Super 35 sensor (or m43 sensor with 8 or 12mp) would make sense in an AF100 successor though.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love better lowlight capability and more DOF options in my GH camera, but not at the sacrifice of the aforementioned positives. This new Sony is a beast, no doubt, but it's probably still going to be quirky in places. However, I'm really watching Sony's progress with interest because on this trajectory the A7s II will probably be impossible to resist adding to the arsenal.

 

[IronFilm]

Spoiler Alert!

Now, you may rename your site to alfahd.

alpha4k ;-) 

[The Chris]

It is really a head scratching question because A7RII seems almost covering all the functions that 5D mark III can do (timelapse can be handled by a remote shutter, right?).What you gain from A7RII should be almost the double pixels (42MP vs 22.3MP) that is good for making 8K timelapse video, the internal 4K video, flap monitor for easier composition and smaller body, etc. However, the weight won't make a big different when A7RII attaches an AF adapter to use Canon EF lenses. And also, the flash system is still a myth for Sony while Canon is till maturer comparatively. If you use flash not much, exchanging 5DmkIII to Sony A7RII won't be bothering. Otherwise there is still some ground to keep Canon 5DmkIII.

However, A7RII matches with A7s would give you a mighty solution of taking 4K video in "A + B camera" work flow(especially when you use ProRes or Shogun 4K RAW on A7S). That may change your direction of video and doing timelapse. For myself, I really don't mind to use both bodies in Sony. That's easier to manage single system then duo. 

​Phottix Odin solves the A7's flash issues, its a brilliant transmitter/receiver and flash setup, can do HSS and TTL. There aren't as many options as Canon and I'm far from an advanced strobist, but the Phottix has served my OCF needs well for product, real estate and the occasional portrait.

I would choose the A7rII over the 5d3 + A7s (I've owned both) if you're doing stills and video. The MP bump and DR improvement will be significant, the A7rII will easily outclass the other two - even at sky high ISO's because when you downsample to anything close to 12mp noise will be dramatically reduced. The 5d3's AF will still be better for event and sports shooters, it has a much better battery life and its a more ergonomic friendly body. But that's pretty much it on the stills side.

For video its still unknown as we have just one A7rII sample, and obviously it wont hit the crazy ISO's the A7s does. But the upper range of the A7s is pretty useless because of the noise outside of ENG type stuff. IQ is good on my A5100 to 6400, I'm betting 25,600 will be as good or better on the A7rII - and it'll be 4k recorded internally. The 5-axis can replace a gimbal/slider/dolly in many shooting situations and all lenses are stabilized, giving you an advantage over every other 4k camera available.

For me its the total package that makes the A7rII so appealing. I've enjoyed using the A7s and NX1 (which replaced my 5d3), but I just sold both to consolidate to the A7rII. I held off getting a Shogun and got a NX1 instead, but I'm tired of transcoding and I'm not leaving Mac. Now I get 4k internal and the 1080p downscaled from the S35 4k should be as good or better than when I getting right now. So the A7rII saved me the expense of a shogun (don't do heavy grading or green screen) and a gimbal as there's no need for me to get a half-baked Nebula for my occasional walking shots or walking tours of homes for real estate videos.

If we get the A7sII with the new body, 5-axis, internal 4k and so on, I'll be buying one of those too. Till then the A7rII is going to be my workhorse with the A5100 as a stills backup. Everyone's needs are different, but this ticks almost every box for me. The only thing I'll miss from the A7s is the full sensor readout in FF, but I think we'll see a A7sII so for now I can live with that.

[The Chris]

There was another interview just posted on Dpreview with the same Sony people:

http://***URL removed***/articles/0717419525/interview-kimio-maki-of-sony-the-customer-s-voice-is-the-most-important-data-for-me

Lots of the same info, though one little nugget about the upcoming lenses, "We have already made a 35mm F1.4 and 90mm macro - both were based on customer’s requirements, and also we have a full F4 zoom lineup, so our next lenses will be at the upper end of the lineup."

Just what the "upper end of the lineup" means is the question.

[Andrew Reid]

Thanks for the awesome information as always, Andrew.

I do wholeheartedly disagree that the GH5 needs to be Super 35, though. Panasonic should stick to their guns and their strengths of a small hybrid with incredible video controls, features (like anamorphic mode that nobody else currently offers) and reliability. The smaller sensor and its better heat dissipation allows best-in-class battery life and limitless recording time which are paramount features for someone who uses the GH4 for their business like me.

The GH line has matured beautifully over the years and I don't think "bigger is better" on the sensor front. I would say a Super 35 sensor (or m43 sensor with 8 or 12mp) would make sense in an AF100 successor though.

​Well Digital Bolex with tiny sensor does look great. It proves that a film like dynamic range (13+ stops), global shutter, etc. can be done with a smaller chip.

But they need to give us the choice.

Would Canon and Nikon be anywhere near as successful if they had never launched their digital full frame ranges and stuck to crop formats?

It doesn't help that Micro Four Thirds is a non-standard as far as cinematography goes, either. It's not Super 16mm so out go most of those lenses (vignetting) and it's not Super 35mm so you miss out on the corners of your Cookes, etc. It's a very creative camera for adapting these lenses, yes... but not optimal.

2.3x crop is not my favourite look from my full frame lenses.

There's always Speed Booster but if Panasonic did S35 we could use that for full frame... important thing is we'd have the choice.

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Just remember, we haven't tried it yet or shot with it or compared how the image aesthetic looks. 

Don't sell or buy anything based on it yet wait until you see. 

A side note: Canon and Sony took different approaches. Canon decided to separate their video and stills line-ups while Sony decided to go hybrid as much as possible. 

Canon thinks for videographers a C100 camcorder (2999$) is a better option than a video-shooting 5D. It's a strategy and an opinion, I don't know whether it will be successful or beneficial to videographers in the long run or not. 

Canon are going for specialist devices that are built to do what they do perfectly, a high resolution (highest) stills option, a sports/journalism workhorse, a video workehorse (C line), a Cinema workhorse like the C300II, 

Their next 5D mk IV is going to be as close to a hybrid as they'll get. 

[agachart]

​Well Digital Bolex with tiny sensor does look great. It proves that a film like dynamic range (13+ stops), global shutter, etc. can be done with a smaller chip.

But they need to give us the choice.

Would Canon and Nikon be anywhere near as successful if they had never launched their digital full frame ranges and stuck to crop formats?

It doesn't help that Micro Four Thirds is a non-standard as far as cinematography goes, either. It's not Super 16mm so out go most of those lenses (vignetting) and it's not Super 35mm so you miss out on the corners of your Cookes, etc. It's a very creative camera for adapting these lenses, yes... but not optimal.

2.3x crop is not my favourite look from my full frame lenses.

There's always Speed Booster but if Panasonic did S35 we could use that for full frame... important thing is we'd have the choice.

​thanks Andrew,for this topic,

but i total disagree that the GH5 needs to be Super 35,they had varicam 35 now,if user want s35 format may panasonic build machine with Varicam 35 image sensor.

i think GH4 was incomplete machine with 2.3 crop factor(readout 8.3mp on total 16mp that look ugly),if new m4/3 machine released as least 1.86 crop factor like GH2

i bet it'll be favorite hybrid camera again.

 

[BrorSvensson]

Newbie question: The shogun can record 4k raw right? Does that mean that every camera that does uncompressed 4k out of hdmi and record 4k raw with it?

[Mattias Burling]

Newbie question: The shogun can record 4k raw right? Does that mean that every camera that does uncompressed 4k out of hdmi and record 4k raw with it?

I wasn't aware the Shogun already got its Raw update?

Either way the answer is no.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

2.3x crop is not my favourite look from my full frame lenses.

​Then why the hell are you using full frame lenses on a 2.3x crop? 

But they need to give us the choice.

​Are you kidding? We have far, for more choice right now than we've ever had. It used to be the GH2 or shit. Nothing in-between. Now there's compelling options from Sony, Nikon, Blackmagic, Panasonic, the Digital Bolex people--hell, even Samsung and Olympus! You have every imaginable sensor size to choose from. Why force Panasonic to step in line with the rest?

[Andrew Reid]

​Then why the hell are you using full frame lenses on a 2.3x crop?

​I'm not but that is how a lot of people use the GH4 with SLR / DSLR glass.

Universal facts are your problem, not mine.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

​I'm not but that is how a lot of people use the GH4 with SLR / DSLR glass.

Universal facts are your problem, not mine.

​Cute. 

But you have a point--a disporportionate number of people seem to like using FF glass on a way smaller format because...I don't know. Flexibility, maybe. The beauty of paring down my gear to only m4/3 and s16 means I can build one consistent set of lenses that gives excellent results on all my cameras and balances well with those bodies. Why you'd put huge Canon lenses not designed for the format on a GH4 is lost on me. 

(Besides maybe the Sigma 18-35. That I get. )

[DigitalEd]

So it says a cropped image will only be 15 MPs  would it not be around 21 MPs why only 15? What is the crop factor on this? I would like the 15MP better for cropped if that is true if i shoot sports with it.

Can it be set to shoot RAW 12bit in cropped? for stills to reduce file size?

Is it E or A mount lens i did not see that listed.

I would hope the high ISO is much cleaner then the a6000 more like a Nikon D750 or A7S. Any real word on that yet?

[TheRenaissanceMan]

I would hope the high ISO is much cleaner then the a6000 more like a Nikon D750 or A7S. Any real word on that yet?

​Pixel-level noise will probably be more similar to the D810 than the A7S, although downsizing will help.

[Andrew Reid]

So it says a cropped image will only be 15 MPs  would it not be around 21 MPs why only 15? What is the crop factor on this? I would like the 15MP better for cropped if that is true if i shoot sports with it.

Can it be set to shoot RAW 12bit in cropped? for stills to reduce file size?

Is it E or A mount lens i did not see that listed.

I would hope the high ISO is much cleaner then the a6000 more like a Nikon D750 or A7S. Any real word on that yet?

​Full frame is considered 1.0x crop (no crop factor) in 35mm photography terms.

That's the crop factor we use most often. (Cinematographers would consider Super 35mm a 1.0x crop though).

Super 35mm and APS-C are around the same crop factor over full frame - 1.5x for Sony. Canon APS-C is 1.6x.

A 16:9 aspect ratio 1.5x crop of 42MP is 15MP.

Plenty enough to do 4K which is just 8MP.

E-mount of course. All Alpha 7 series cameras are full frame mirrorless, how did you miss that!? Full frame A mount is the A99 SLT camera.

High ISO will likely be on par with D750 and better than the A6000. Will have the info in my review when I buy the camera.

[Andrew Reid]

​Pixel-level noise will probably be more similar to the D810 than the A7S, although downsizing will help.

​Downsizing will help get it close to the A7S actually.

I expect it to match it until ISO 6400.

42MP from BSI copper sensor downscaled to 12MP in Photoshop is going to make for great ISO 3200 results vs the A7S on older sensor technology at native 12MP.

The new sensor has been engineered to beat the D810's sensor. That has the older Sony chip.