Very impressed by Sony A7 II

[The_Traveler]

Yes, I like the M5 very much but the ergonomics of changing aperture and focal point in a big hurry didn't work for me.
I have some minor loss of mobility in my right thumb joint from surgery years ago and perhaps my problem with the ergonomics is due to that.
Be that as it may, the dial placement on the A7 where both ec and aperture are changed by thumbwheels works better for me.

The M5 and lenses are slightly smaller and I will keep them in my bag to use the 70-200 and 90 mm equivalents. That is a perfect second body that can function almost as well if needed.

TBH, it is difficult for me to think of a reason that someone coming into photography now would used the conventional dslr except for price point. The E-M1 and 2 or 3 good lenses will be close to 3500.

 

[PropilotBW]

Yes, I like the M5 very much but the ergonomics of changing aperture and focal point in a big hurry didn't work for me.
I have some minor loss of mobility in my right thumb joint from surgery years ago and perhaps my problem with the ergonomics is due to that.
Be that as it may, the dial placement on the A7 where both ec and aperture are changed by thumbwheels works better for me.

The M5 and lenses are slightly smaller and I will keep them in my bag to use the 70-200 and 90 mm equivalents. That is a perfect second body that can function almost as well if needed.

TBH, it is difficult for me to think of a reason that someone coming into photography now would used the conventional dslr except for price point. The E-M1 and 2 or 3 good lenses will be close to 3500.

Thanks for the response. I just sold my Nikon D5100 over the weekend. I am now camera-less with Nikon lenses that will be sold soon too. I am switching to mirrorless for size and portability. I am not in a hurry to buy a new camera. I want to wait until a newer model OM-D comes out. I almost pulled the trigger on the E-M10 this past weekend at the $699 price point with 2 kit lenses but glad I didn't. Although it would have been a great deal, I didn't want to rush into buying a new camera. I want to make sure it's the right choice, since I don't flip equipment very often.
I was just surprised to see you got rid of the E-M1 since you were praising it's qualities not too long ago.

 

[The_Traveler]

I had rented the E-M1 and enjoyed using it but the improvement over the OMD 5 was small and not worth trading in the OMD and paying the difference.
Except for the occasional lens, I am set for a while now, I think.

 

[cooltouch]

I'm curious -- did you try the A7 II out for its frame rate on a continuous setting? I tried out an A7 at a local camera shop a few months ago and was put off by its quite slow frame rate, but even worse was the way it blacked out the viewfinder between frames. That made it unusable for some types of photography I do -- motorsports, mostly. I was also not terribly impressed with the resolution of the viewfinder. I guess I'm just too used to optical. I kept trying to get it to focus on various subjects, thinking it wasn't getting the focus right, when it finally dawned on me that what I was seeing was the resolution limits of the viewfinder and that the image itself would most likely be quite sharp (no card in the camera so I couldn't tell for sure).

I really wanted an FF camera, but I also really wanted a mirrorless that I could use my legacy lenses with, so I ended up buying a NEX 7. I guess if I need that FF look I can alway give the Lens Turbo or Metabones a try. I have been quite happy with my NEX, btw. It does a great job with the old lenses, but it has taken some getting used to. Really like that 10fps frame rate, though.

Anyway, my impression of the A7 (and A7r as a result, since it suffers from the same flaws) was that it is not quite there yet for a useful all-around camera. Great for certain things: portraits, landscapes. But not for action photography. I reasoned that Sony would be hard at work improving this shortcoming in their top-of-the-line FF mirrorless cameras. Perhaps the A7 II is a positive step in this direction?

 

[The_Traveler]

I'm curious -- did you try the A7 II out for its frame rate on a continuous setting? I tried out an A7 at a local camera shop a few months ago and was put off by its quite slow frame rate, but even worse was the way it blacked out the viewfinder between frames. That made it unusable for some types of photography I do -- motorsports, mostly. I was also not terribly impressed with the resolution of the viewfinder. I guess I'm just too used to optical. I kept trying to get it to focus on various subjects, thinking it wasn't getting the focus right, when it finally dawned on me that what I was seeing was the resolution limits of the viewfinder and that the image itself would most likely be quite sharp (no card in the camera so I couldn't tell for sure).

Anyway, my impression of the A7 (and A7r as a result, since it suffers from the same flaws) was that it is not quite there yet for a useful all-around camera. Great for certain things: portraits, landscapes. But not for action photography. I reasoned that Sony would be hard at work improving this shortcoming in their top-of-the-line FF mirrorless cameras. Perhaps the A7 II is a positive step in this direction?

The things that are important for you are relatively unimportant for me since I'm not an 'all around' kind of photographer
I shoot mostly street, and travel when I can, so an enormous high frame rate isn't important for me.
The EVF resolution is 1024x768 which is adequate for me; I don't spend a huge amount of time looking through the VF. I frame and press the button.

 

[Jay Vee]

I'm curious -- did you try the A7 II out for its frame rate on a continuous setting? I tried out an A7 at a local camera shop a few months ago and was put off by its quite slow frame rate, but even worse was the way it blacked out the viewfinder between frames. That made it unusable for some types of photography I do -- motorsports, mostly. I was also not terribly impressed with the resolution of the viewfinder. I guess I'm just too used to optical. I kept trying to get it to focus on various subjects, thinking it wasn't getting the focus right, when it finally dawned on me that what I was seeing was the resolution limits of the viewfinder and that the image itself would most likely be quite sharp (no card in the camera so I couldn't tell for sure).

I really wanted an FF camera, but I also really wanted a mirrorless that I could use my legacy lenses with, so I ended up buying a NEX 7. I guess if I need that FF look I can alway give the Lens Turbo or Metabones a try. I have been quite happy with my NEX, btw. It does a great job with the old lenses, but it has taken some getting used to. Really like that 10fps frame rate, though.

Anyway, my impression of the A7 (and A7r as a result, since it suffers from the same flaws) was that it is not quite there yet for a useful all-around camera. Great for certain things: portraits, landscapes. But not for action photography. I reasoned that Sony would be hard at work improving this shortcoming in their top-of-the-line FF mirrorless cameras. Perhaps the A7 II is a positive step in this direction?

I don't have the a7ii but on my a7 the fps is about 4-5 fps with AF-S and drive mode on continuous with speed priority. It's slower with AF-C with maybe 2-3 fps. This may have been improved in the mk2 though but not sure. To reduce the blackout I have it set to no review but there is still a split second of it. Not an issue to me but can be for continous fast action photography. Here's a youtube video of someone using the a7ii for shooting basketball. It looks like it did ok but the small pictures makes it hard to tell how good the focus is.



I see the OVF vs EFS as a personal preference. If you're coming from a OVF you may not like EVFs that much but many people who switched say they've gotten use to the tradeoffs after awhile. I came from cameras with no VF at all so I've gotten use to the EVF very quickly and can't live without it now. I use my NEX-5r that doesn't have one as backup and out of habit I still constantly bring it up to my eye.

While the NEX7 is still a very capable camera I can't help but think the current a6000 would be the better camera for your type of photography. The AF speed and AF tracking is on a whole'nother level. Almost dslr-like. Couple that with 11fps and you have a great action camera.

 

[sashbar]

Thanks for the response. I just sold my Nikon D5100 over the weekend. I am now camera-less with Nikon lenses that will be sold soon too. I am switching to mirrorless for size and portability. I am not in a hurry to buy a new camera. I want to wait until a newer model OM-D comes out. I almost pulled the trigger on the E-M10 this past weekend at the $699 price point with 2 kit lenses but glad I didn't. Although it would have been a great deal, I didn't want to rush into buying a new camera. I want to make sure it's the right choice, since I don't flip equipment very often.
I was just surprised to see you got rid of the E-M1 since you were praising it's qualities not too long ago.

Look at FUJI X as well. I also had D5100 and while I really like this baby Nikon ( still have it and the lenses), FUJI X system that I switched to is so superior, it is not even funny. Especially the lenses. It is more compact and what is important , with 4/3 you are switching to an arguably more limiting sensor, whereas with FUJII X-Trans you are upgrading in this department as well. You keep your familiar DoF and get better low light performance, better JPEGS, better white balance etc etc - and all of that in a smaller lense/body. But that of course depends on how compact do you want your system to be. If size really matters, then difference in size between smthng like XT-1 and D5100 will be probably not big enough.

PS Sorry for high jacking the thread, I just realised it is about A7, not about selecting a mirrorless

 

[gsgary]

I had a play with my friends A7 mk2 last night and prefer the feel of my A7 I dont like the position of the shutter button on the new A7

 

[greybeard]

The ergonomics work great for me, focus is fast enough for street shooting.
and I think I will go with the Zeiss 24-70 f4 for my basic lens.
Most important for me, it fits my hands better and there are two rear thumb wheels for adjusting EC and A.
Images look great.
Just need to look at it again to answer some questions and I'll probably push the button.

bingo.

i screwed up buying my 7100 in a way, i looked at my purpose for the camera without contemplating how it felt in my hands and how much i actually LIKED it. It was like buying a practical necessity not a WANT.
Not to say i regret the purchase, but for now on i am buying what I LIKE that feels good and RIGHT to me not off just specs and use.

photography is a personal thing and having a camera that doesn't "fit " right really kills that. If this camera FITS you , then hell yeah go for it as the right fit will only improve your experience AND effect your photos and creativity.

Cameras are in many ways are like a musical instrument. If it feels awkward it will slow you down, lessen enjoyment, and hamper the performance.