Photoclubalpha

Staking of multiple video and creation of a mosaic is a better process to get very large picture of the moon, but, the A7R II is still a very fast an quick option to take simple picture at low shutter without the vibration problem of the previous A7R.

Picture : ISO 500, 1/100, silent shutter :



LINK: http://www.pbase.com/nadeauf/image/1611 ... iginal.jpg

This is a 95% Full moon, so the contrast is very bad because of too much light in the front, but still decent.

Regards,

Frank

Currently doesn't have SD card compatible for the maximum 4K rate, but with the reduced 60Mbps 4K video the quality is still decent.

Two pictures grabed with Lightroom from the Video using handled old Nikon 300mm F2.8. I was using the focus peaking with the 4x zoom in the viewfinder when filming and the stabilization of the A7R II (when set to 300mm) worked really good :


LINK: http://www.pbase.com/nadeauf/image/1611 ... iginal.jpg


LINK: http://www.pbase.com/nadeauf/image/1611 ... iginal.jpg
Regards,

Frank

Great to hear from you, Frank. Thanks for the A7Rii real world experiences - very useful

Also, nobody really mention that, but there is a copyright and and author section now in the config to set both to be injected directly in the EXIF of RAW and jpeg image (I have not validated for the Movie).

I have not saw that on my other A7 bodies (probably I'm not at the last firmware and this has been added recently ... ).

Regards,

Frank

Canon shooters/ Nikon shooters keep criticizing Sony's colour and I cannot see why Sony images are blamed for

I wouldn't say either Canon or Nikon are perfect either.
This looks good to me.

Mike

Today dpreview tests published in the studio for Sony A7RII Well, where is super low-noise matrix? For fun, compared to Nikon D750 (The price of two times lower), with A7II - virtually the same (again, it is worth 2 times cheaper). Well, look at how much difference with A77II - Yes, but not in 3 times the cost. Sony now how to roll out advertising.




And more fun:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/compari ... /index.htm

I didn't expect reduced noise performance v other lower pixel sensors
I think Sony are playing to the "can't have enough" pixels crowd honestly I don't even push 24mp so it's a complete non interest for me (and as far as I can see there is no way to shoot at reduced raw sizes which would be a pain)

The price of the camera is £2600 it's far beyond sensible but some people will pay it if you took £1000 off the camera I'd still not consider it. A7II is better value and has IBIS but honestly a sub £1000 is required to get any attention then of course I have to get an adapter and then lots of batteries, probably a grip. It's not grabbing me at all

The full (..) review is now up http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2015/10/2 ... ilpatrick/
Interesting in general, specially on how Sony handle the mount imperfection tolerance...

David, you announced a review on the SAL 28f2, in the meanwhile, do you think it is an outstanding lens? I read about the big distortion (software-corrected in camera or PC), and I'm actually more tempted by a 24mm (I find the Batis too big) or a 21mm (the Loxia seems really interesting)

Best

Interesting comment about APS lenses. I finally bought the r II a couple of weeks ago when the price at the local dealer went down from list of AUD 4499 to AUD 3772 and having been having a play with it since. Although not had the chance to take it away for a couple of days for some heavy duty work.

I have gradually accumulated a travel kit of the 16-35,24-70,70-200 plus the 90 macro as prices came down or at sales. However I find that I more enjoy using some of my APS lenses as a casual walk around kit. Lenses like the 16-50 / 2.8 that i got with my A77 is a good fit as is even my older 16-80 - either I got a decent copy or I'm not seeing all the problems some experts insist that the lens has.

Subjectively the r II is producing cleaner results than my Nex 7 did and is a damn sight more comfortable to use. But then again at this price it should be.

I have dusted off my Contax G primes, however so far I am still tossing up as to whether to go for one of the cheaper manual focus adapters or give the AF adapter a little more development time.

My thanks to David on the a7RII review; especially since I will be buying this camera soon.

As usual, I find David’s thoughts far more interesting and informative than the vast majority of ‘I’m-rehashing-the-same-data-sheet-like-everyone-else’ reviews.

Bruce

Pako - the 28mm f/2 has lots of distortion for a fixed focal length, but it's not as extreme as the correction applied to for example the 24-240mm or the little 16-50mm for APS-C. I find it one of the best lenses I've got and it compares well with what I was out using today - Tamron 35mm f/1.8 and 45mm f/1.8 primes.

One point I guess I do not make in the review is how much I shoot at ISO 800 - even sunny day stuff. It's as good as a NEX-7 at 100!

David

David Kilpatrick wrote:........... find it one of the best lenses I've got and it compares well with what I was out using today - Tamron 35mm f/1.8 and 45mm f/1.8 primes.
.................
David

David! Can You bring more information about the Tamron lenses (35mm, 45mm)? May be the pictures or at least short review? Thank you!
PS. Please!

Remember, I'm testing them in Canon EF mount using a Commlite adaptor. Even, they function really well on the A7RII - just the occasional communication glitch (common even with Canon lenses).

They are very fast focusing, quite large, and well made along the same line as current Sigma ART lenses.
They are £579 in the UK, each, and I wouldn't buy one although I like the results produced. My reason is simple, I have a Canon 40mm f/2.8 STM lens which cost me £95 and works extremely well with the Commlite. It's just as sharp, not much worse for bokeh, a quarter of the size and weight, takes small filters, and it has less longitudinal CA. In fact, it's the colour bokeh issue which bothers me most with the Tamrons - defocused edges in front of and behind the subject acquire colour casts I can not remove.

I've been doing some shots with my Sigma 70mm f/2.8 macro, which I had not used at all on the A7RII before this week, and apart from getting unexpectedly perfect focus with the LA-AE4 I'm surprised to see almost zero colour bokeh issue. The 45mm Tamron is better than the 35mm across the frame wide open, but I'm sure that the CZ 55mm f/1.8 at about the same current street price is a better deal. Biggest difference, the close focus. The Tamrons have really excellent close focus, the CZ 55mm is rubbish in this respect.

Thank you, David! Very useful information !
I have to say - real look at the lenses. I watch with great interest in the development of Tamron, I use Tamron 70-300 USD. That why any new lens from Tamron it caused such interest.
Thank you again!