Which to buy used Sony a7s or a7r ii

[amsh89es335]

I need help figuring out the difference in quality, pros and cons of a7s vs a7r ii for 4k  and 1080p 60fps with an external recorder. 

[Andrew Reid]

External recorder go for A7S.

A7R II is all about internal 4K codec... and 5 axis but that isn't more effective than what you get already with Canon IS lenses on the A7S.

[DBounce]

External recorder go for A7S.

A7R II is all about internal 4K codec... and 5 axis but that isn't more effective than what you get already with Canon IS lenses on the A7S.

Well I have to disagree... Sort of... The a7rii is just as much about 42mp images as anything else. So if the goal is an all around camera, then the clear choice is the A7rii.

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Yeah, I'd say it depends on your priorities. If you love to crop, use lenses without IS handheld, and regularly print 24x36 and larger, the A7RII is for you. If you prefer cleaner low-light images, take long video clips that can't be paused for overheating, and don't mind an external recorder, the A7S is becoming a pretty good value. 

Always decide what you want out of a new purchase first. Then, and only then, should you start perusing cameras to find one that fits your wish list.

[richg101]

Anyone looking at the A7R2 for video primarily, and sinking £2500 into it is mad.  If you want the best camera for stills with interesting manual focus lenses like rangefinder glass then the a7r2 is it, period.  The raw files I'm seeing from my A7R2 are astounding.  The best image I've seen.  it also shoots video.   

 

The image from the a7s internal 1080p is as good as the 4k image from the A7R2.  the a7s is now less than half the price of the a7r2.  if video is your primary purpose for the camera, a7s cant be beat.  

[Andrew Reid]

Anyone looking at the A7R2 for video primarily, and sinking £2500 into it is mad.  If you want the best camera for stills with interesting manual focus lenses like rangefinder glass then the a7r2 is it, period.  The raw files I'm seeing from my A7R2 are astounding.  The best image I've seen.  it also shoots video.

Rich is quite right.

Sure video is nice on the A7R II but...

1 - I still think the codec pisses over colour somehow

2 - The ergonomics are naff

3 - The screen is useless under bright sunlight

4 - The AF is extremely hit and miss

5 -  For video it is going to be an expensive obsolete brick in under 6 months when the A7S II comes out.

I have bought mine now so no going back. But I'm not enjoying it quite as much as I'd thought. Hot pixels all over the show. Cybershot ergonomics. Reliability is iffy, the heat issues... But then I am spoilt with the 1D C which is a rock sized diamond that happens to shoot 4K video.

However... Sony Flagship vs Canon flagship. No excuses!?

Just bought the Canon 24-70mm F4 IS. Cost me 635 euros used (perfect condition) vs 999 for the Sony FE 24-70mm F4 yet I can use it on both bodies.

Similar size, not much heavier. Stabilisation is better than the flitty IBIS of the A7RII as it is ultrasonic. Sharpness is as the $2000 Canon 24-70mm F2.8 but it cost me far less. I can lose that one stop, and gain the low weight / size / stabilisation / lower price. The look is cinematic and for stills, AF is simply unmatched.

I am extremely reluctant to build my FE lens collection due to the Canon lenses.

For stills the A7R II gives me too many AF misses, too much hunting. The A7R II's body is too small for my hands, the 1D C is the right shape and size, like a glove or that feeling it is an extension of your arm. I can see the screen in daylight, which helps. The OVF is useless for video of course but for stills it gives me less eye strain than the EVF on the A7R II and of course a better image. I get much higher confidence using the manual focus assist (zoomed) for video on the 1D C too, which is critical for 4K video.

I wish Sony would make a big A99 style pro version of the A7R II but keep the E-mount.

A7R II is amazing but it just doesn't feel like a pro camera yet.

[Don Kotlos]

Hot pixels all over the show.

During video? At what ISOs? 

[wolf33d]

Interesting feedback Andrew.

when I read this it makes me want to wait the 5D4 but 2016 is far... I will be in Cuba in December already.

for 50% photo / 50 video (landscape, portrait, travel video) would you recommend the a7RII or D750 + RX100IV ?

(Grey market D750 is 1399$ brand new....)

what annoys me the most with D750 is that if I get 35/50/85mm G lens I basically can't use it for video as it is not stabilized...

Otherwise I love the idea to have HFR, sharp 1080p on Nikon for DoF and the RX100 for 4K / anything wide. 

Ideal would be 5D4 and rx100 (I prefer canon lenses and canon ergonomics over Nikon..) but 5D4 will be more expensive than a7rii...

what do you think?

[Nikkor]

The canon primes aren't stabilized either, right? You could get the tamron 24-70 2.8 and the nikon, or the new nikon zoom. But those are huge.

Anyway, you sound like you are going to regret it once something better comes along, but if you go for the nikon you will loose 500$ after selling it, Sony prices seem to be less stable and you also would be buying into the expensive early price.

[wolf33d]

The canon primes aren't stabilized either, right? You could get the tamron 24-70 2.8 and the nikon, or the new nikon zoom. But those are huge.

Anyway, you sound like you are going to regret it once something better comes along, but if you go for the nikon you will loose 500$ after selling it, Sony prices seem to be less stable and you also would be buying into the expensive early price.

Indeed. Except the Canon 35mm f/2 IS, great lens, super light, super quality and IS. Great for video. Also I said the 5D4 would be ideal because of Canon ergonomics that I prefer and it will most probably have 4K (unlike Nikon bodies now) and Dual Pixel AF (this is huge for me for travel video). 

For the Tamron 24-70, I had the 5D3 before with this setup and did not like it. I prefer primes. 
Your idea of buying the Nikon D750, with let's say used lenses and sell it in one year if the 5D4 is amazing is good though. It's true that buying an A7RII now means selling it for 1000 less in one year when A7R mark VI is out.... 

[Xavier Plagaro Mussard]

If you don't want to use half your trolley/bank account on photo equipment, becoming a robbery-candidate all over Cuba, get a Panasonic FZ1000, three extra batteries and a way to unload your pictures/footage. 

[Andrew Reid]

The canon primes aren't stabilized either, right?

24mm F2.8 IS

28mm F2.8 iS

35mm F2.0 IS

100mm F2.8 Macro IS

200mm F2.0 IS

300mm F2.8 IS

And a few others but oddly no 50mm or 85mm yet.

Ultrasonic IS on the above lenses is very good, better than IS on the Sigma or Tamron zooms.

[amsh89es335]

Does anyone in know the pros and cons of buybuying the a7s used vs grey market on eBay? 

[wolf33d]

Yes. 

Used pros:
Price (vs new) / warranty if recent and with receipt (almost never the case on ebay..)
Used cons:
Never know how it was used by the previous user, so it is a bit of a gamble

Grey market pros:
Price also, the camera is brand new you are the first user
Grey market cons: 
No warranty except going through the dealer himself

I would take grey market over used for same price. 

If you don't want to use half your trolley/bank account on photo equipment, becoming a robbery-candidate all over Cuba, get a Panasonic FZ1000, three extra batteries and a way to unload your pictures/footage. 

I need something better for the pictures though (that is why A7RII fits the bill, as well as D750 + RX100IV). 
Another idea is D5500 (450$ grey market!!!!) which is 95% as capable as D750 for video and photo + RX100IV with the idea in mind to re sell it either right after the trip or in a year or so. 

I did exactly this (D5500) for my july trip in the rockies. Got a Sigma 10-20mm for landscapes at 250$CAD on eBay, sold it with auction 2 weeks after and it went for 350CAD$, made a 100$ profit without asking anything ....  

 

[maxmizer]

 

Just bought the Canon 24-70mm F4 IS. Cost me 635 euros used (perfect condition) vs 999 for the Sony FE 24-70mm F4 yet I can use it on both bodies.

for EUR 700 in Italy I bought the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L !!!

[Andrew Reid]

Yeah but the 24-70 F2.8 is absolutely enormous and has no stabilisation on a Canon body.

[wobba]

Rich is quite right.

Sure video is nice on the A7R II but...

1 - I still think the codec pisses over colour somehow

2 - The ergonomics are naff

3 - The screen is useless under bright sunlight

4 - The AF is extremely hit and miss

5 -  For video it is going to be an expensive obsolete brick in under 6 months when the A7S II comes out.

I have bought mine now so no going back. But I'm not enjoying it quite as much as I'd thought. Hot pixels all over the show. Cybershot ergonomics. Reliability is iffy, the heat issues... But then I am spoilt with the 1D C which is a rock sized diamond that happens to shoot 4K video.

However... Sony Flagship vs Canon flagship. No excuses!?

Just bought the Canon 24-70mm F4 IS. Cost me 635 euros used (perfect condition) vs 999 for the Sony FE 24-70mm F4 yet I can use it on both bodies.

Similar size, not much heavier. Stabilisation is better than the flitty IBIS of the A7RII as it is ultrasonic. Sharpness is as the $2000 Canon 24-70mm F2.8 but it cost me far less. I can lose that one stop, and gain the low weight / size / stabilisation / lower price. The look is cinematic and for stills, AF is simply unmatched.

I am extremely reluctant to build my FE lens collection due to the Canon lenses.

For stills the A7R II gives me too many AF misses, too much hunting. The A7R II's body is too small for my hands, the 1D C is the right shape and size, like a glove or that feeling it is an extension of your arm. I can see the screen in daylight, which helps. The OVF is useless for video of course but for stills it gives me less eye strain than the EVF on the A7R II and of course a better image. I get much higher confidence using the manual focus assist (zoomed) for video on the 1D C too, which is critical for 4K video.

I wish Sony would make a big A99 style pro version of the A7R II but keep the E-mount.

A7R II is amazing but it just doesn't feel like a pro camera yet.

You would expect the 1DC to be better.  A lot better.  It's 2.5x the price (and 2.5x heavier) than the A7RII.  I don't think it justifies the extra cost (and weight).

Besides, the OP was asking for advice on the A7S vs A7RII.  In my view, the latter.  Internal 4K, IBIS and high res stills swing it for me.

[amsh89es335]

Any one have an idea when sony will annouce a A7s mk ii?

[IronFilm]

"Christmas"

 

Or early next year. 

[Asmundma]

I posted my heat testing results on DVXuser (mine was the camera that turned off without warning).

Further testing yesterday with an external power supply and a cable battery adapter, and there's no difference in overheating. Again around 27 minutes in S35 and about 48 mins (with a 1min break at 29mins) in FF. I did notice that in S35 4K mode, that it did sometimes overheat without first getting a temperature warning icon.

And testing with USB power wasn't enough to to keep the camera on.

Anyone looking at the A7R2 for video primarily, and sinking £2500 into it is mad.  If you want the best camera for stills with interesting manual focus lenses like rangefinder glass then the a7r2 is it, period.  The raw files I'm seeing from my A7R2 are astounding.  The best image I've seen.  it also shoots video.   

 

The image from the a7s internal 1080p is as good as the 4k image from the A7R2.  the a7s is now less than half the price of the a7r2.  if video is your primary purpose for the camera, a7s cant be beat.  

I have both cameras, A7s with ShoGun and now A7r2. Obviously 1080p on A7s is not as detailed as 4k on A7r2. the A7r2 is a much more practical package the a7s with ShoGun. If you are mainly in one location, the external recorder works, but moving around and taking shorter clips, its a hassle. And with FE lenses, you get better stabilisation then with Canon lenses mounted on A7r2. I use the 24-70 if I want to be compact, but my new favourite is the FE 28-135. You will then have a video range from 28 to 200mm by using FF and S35.  And found out it also take very good still images !   Even for video I would pick A7r2 today over A7s (only better for high ISO), however I guess A7s2 will be even better for video (maybe higher frame rates). But if you want to shoot stills as well - no doubt a7r2 !!! 

you can look at 4k video here : https://youtu.be/PbyDqby-oqY  

and some stills here : https://asmundma.smugmug.com/Photography/A7r2-test/i-qHfjcfB/A