Get your Sony A7II from amazon through the link below: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00P... In this video I compare Sony Alpha A7M2 with its predecessors, the A7 and A7R. Enjoy! -TDD
Been waiting for this video! Great Video! I can't make my mind up, the a7 mark ii or the a7r? I'm doing general shooting nothing low light but I'll be using metabones adapter with lenses
Hi. In the end you mentioned "the low light gem" talking about the A7R - How about the A7II? How is it performing in low light situations? As far as iknow ISO is does not go as high up like on the A7 series. Did you make any experience with that? Thank you.
I have never used a camera before the A7 ii that allowed me to reliably take hand held shots at 1/20. Before I went digital, I used to shoot mostly manual film cameras from the 1970s and early 1980s, so the weight feels natural to me. I also have an original A7, while a good camera, always felt fragile in my hands, this feels substantial.
I wonder if the extra size and metal body have been introduced in order to allow in-camera 4K compression (metal for heatsinking, space for processing) on the future a7sII model?
I never really use the AF on my Sony a6000, but theres a person selling the Sony a7 with 4000 Shutter Actuation. Its cheaper than what I got the a6000. Should i return my a6000 and then get a7? Note: Ive been using Canon FD 50mm f1.8 on my a6000.
Great review mate :) im new to dslr world and thunk i need everyday camera small and good quality Have canon 70D is good camera but lack of image quality ... So i change my way to have 2 machines will buy sony soon but what camera on a budget sony a7 or sony a7ii (many of my lens are m42 old style lens carl zeiss) (do u sell sony a7 ) but i was thinking maybe save for 7ii cuz of the stabilisation on an old lens ... Not much money pls help
If you have IS lenses, I belief the A7R is still the best value of all the A7 line up, including the overpriced A7RII, and the well priced A7. DSLR's such as 5D and D810 do not have in camera IS either. The A7II is the worst deal, I think, since it costs $800 more than the A7, that has the same sensor. The A7R and A7II cost almost the same, but IQ is better on the A7R, which goes head to head with the A7RII, despite the huge price difference. If you don't have IS lenses, and do mostly hand held, then you need the mark II options with IS. For video, go for the S series mark II. Conclusion: A7R is still the best pick.
Giutubo Spatubo ... I was at Best buy in salt lake. I got to play with all the A7 cameras. By far the best camera was the mark iii! It is superior over the A9. But the best in my opinion is the A7ii. It feels, looks, and sounds the best. Paper and reviews only go so far.... When the feel and look into each view finder... It speaks volumes... Experience Trump's word of mouth.
The only reason I would get the mk2 is the stabilisation, if you ask me, the mk2 i ugly compared to the mk1. Maybe it has better ergonomics for some, but the mk1 looks sharper. Also, they made you drop the original battery grip, which is not a cheap add on btw. Also why make a new grip and not make it fit 3 batteries like the a99 does - this system needs it. Also they could make an official charger that fits 2, or even 3 batteries. The all-metal body should have been there on the mk1, so I am not really impressed. The A9 might not even have a grip, who knows. Also, no thouchscreen? Come on Sony, its 2015, my fridge has a touchscreen - no touchscreen doesnt mean its a pro camera, DSLRs dont have it beacuse they have been outdated for a while. It should also flip forward in some way. Since there is no joystick on the back, switching AF points is a pain, also browsing the app shop. Since there is an IR sensor located by the viewfinder, they could have made that one dual use - for remotes. And even bundle a 20$ remote, everyone needs it. I hope the R mk2 doesnt just get the resolution (or even the rumoured 46MP). They need a better shutter, to eliminate shutter shake (yes, even on tripods - which sucks). And yeah, the stabilisation will make the 36mp usable handheld. Prime lenses? Where are they? OK the 35 and 55 are awesome. Where are the 24 and the 85? Where are the cheaper Sony primes with OSS? I dont see the big deal with these lenses, since they are basically converting old DSLR lens designs for this system. We need more lenses like the 35 2.8 and the 55 1.8. I have the 55, and it is the best lens I ever used, period. The Zeiss kit is a bit overpriced, and it performes just like the f4 zooms from other companies, I would rather get the 70-200, which is much more usable when you need range, and I would use the 55 60% of the time, the 35 30% of the time. Zeiss bokkeh ftw!! You can get a used A7, in mint condition for less that a 1000euros, probably with a cool add on, like the grip, or the external charger. This is super cool, since it is as new as it was a year ago - still better than most cameras with FF sensors. And at that price - its a steal. The only problem is the autofocus, and that probably sucks on the mk2 as well, dont believe the lies. My A7 focuses right about 80% of the time in good light. In bad light, I dont trust the AF system, I just go manual. You dont need 150 AF points that work just ok, you need only 15 that work 100% of the time. And the contrast detect is a joke if you ask me. So much room for improvement...
I think so... it will most likely have the IBIS and everything else the a6000 has (maybe even better AF), weather sealing, hopefully better buffering, and perhaps an option for a battery grip
My main gripe with the A7 is the lack of the better Auto ISO of the A7 ii, and the lack of AF-A for street photography that the A6000 has. I wish Sony could offer that through a firmware update. Maybe wait for the A7iii?
Full frame vs crop sensor. Size. A6000 better autofocus a7 better in low light and better zoom kit but with less range. In bright light and I so 100 not a huge difference.
A6300 is too pricey. with same price you get the A7. I would get the A7, unless you want to mostly shoot action. Then I would get the A6000 or A6300 that have a better and faster AF than the A7. A6000 is smaller. I like the A7 with 24-70 f4. pricey zoom but way better than the Sony Zeiss 16-70mm for the A6000 / A6300. I do not know about Canon. I was a Nikon shooter. A6000 is grainy at ISO 1600 and above. A7 is better for high ISO.
I know this is a really old video but I recently had an opportunity to get an a7 for only $200 or an a7ii for $800 is it really worth th $600 difference? Please answer if you see this I'm desperate !
The A7 is probably the *ideal* out of the Alpha series for wildlife. 1.) It's color saturation. 2.) It's AF speed and strength. I myself am into nature/wildlife photography and after months of research I had my heart set on the A7 due to it's abilities. Best of luck!
Wesam Saka But, do remember the A7ii does have slightly quicker AF speed than the A7, so it depends on it you plan on shooting moving objects or still. Either still should be great for wildlife. :-)
+Derpyre thank you very much for this. Honestly I borrowed a7ii from borrow lens.com for 10 days. I used it extensively and I think it is a great camera. I love the dynamic range and the image quality. However, I wasn't so impressed with the autofocus. I think Nikon cameras have a way more advanced autofocus system.
It isn’t the size, but the ergonomics. Mobile phones went into a smaller is better cycle, only to go back to bigger phones because that ultimately provides superior ergonomics.
Just bought the MarkII (check out my test footage). Definitely worth the price difference. The improvements really become necessary as you use the camera.
what is this fascination with holding a camera with 1 hand. Are we getting that lazy? how about a hands-free camera? I understand the weight issue on professional cameras but holding a camera correctly is more about camera shake that aids in sharper images.
I meant it as some kind of joke, I'm aware that doing so would be both useless, and stupid. I'm also aware that the 16-50mm is a lens for an APS-C sized sensor. It would crop the image...blah, blah, blah. Currently using an A6000 with a Sony Zeiss 16-70mm by the way...
your title says sony a7ii vs a7 your reviewing the a7ii vs a7r
fuckkk, thnak you i was so fucking confused. not even going to watch this no more
Great in-depth video probably one of the most comprehensive ones out there so far. Thanks for making it.
Been waiting for this video! Great Video! I can't make my mind up, the a7 mark ii or the a7r? I'm doing general shooting nothing low light but I'll be using metabones adapter with lenses
Is image stabilization (in general) always active? Or something that kicks in when shooting slower than 1/focal length?
great and informative. been shopping and think this video was the best so far...
Hi. In the end you mentioned "the low light gem" talking about the A7R - How about the A7II? How is it performing in low light situations? As far as iknow ISO is does not go as high up like on the A7 series. Did you make any experience with that? Thank you.
Thanks for the informative info. I'm late to the game with Sony, but I like the A7R from what I've seen so far.
Any idea when the A7R gets replaced? I would think the A7R (II) would get updated with all of this.
Nice video! What lens are you using on the a7 is that a full frame 10-18? And is the screen bigger on the a7ii than the a7? Thanks!
I have never used a camera before the A7 ii that allowed me to reliably take hand held shots at 1/20. Before I went digital, I used to shoot mostly manual film cameras from the 1970s and early 1980s, so the weight feels natural to me. I also have an original A7, while a good camera, always felt fragile in my hands, this feels substantial.
I wonder if the extra size and metal body have been introduced in order to allow in-camera 4K compression (metal for heatsinking, space for processing) on the future a7sII model?
How works the sony 10-18 on full frame?
What is the slowest shutter speed (with a normal focal length 35-50) you've been able to achieve with the mkII and still have a sharp image?
I never really use the AF on my Sony a6000, but theres a person selling the Sony a7 with 4000 Shutter Actuation. Its cheaper than what I got the a6000. Should i return my a6000 and then get a7?
Note: Ive been using Canon FD 50mm f1.8 on my a6000.
Really good review. Thanks!
you revewing A7II vs A7 or A7II vs A7R ?
Great review mate :) im new to dslr world and thunk i need everyday camera small and good quality
Have canon 70D is good camera but lack of image quality ...
So i change my way to have 2 machines will buy sony soon but what camera on a budget sony a7 or sony a7ii (many of my lens are m42 old style lens carl zeiss) (do u sell sony a7 ) but i was thinking maybe save for 7ii cuz of the stabilisation on an old lens ...
Not much money pls help
Thank you very much for doing this, considering the time that I'm rewatching this the price is right for now...
Terrific review.
Can you please high light and compare with Sony nex 7 vs Sony a7ii . Thanking you, Keith.
Excellent and very informative video. Thanks.
If you have IS lenses, I belief the A7R is still the best value of all the A7 line up, including the overpriced A7RII, and the well priced A7. DSLR's such as 5D and D810 do not have in camera IS either. The A7II is the worst deal, I think, since it costs $800 more than the A7, that has the same sensor. The A7R and A7II cost almost the same, but IQ is better on the A7R, which goes head to head with the A7RII, despite the huge price difference. If you don't have IS lenses, and do mostly hand held, then you need the mark II options with IS. For video, go for the S series mark II. Conclusion: A7R is still the best pick.
Giutubo Spatubo ... I was at Best buy in salt lake. I got to play with all the A7 cameras. By far the best camera was the mark iii! It is superior over the A9. But the best in my opinion is the A7ii. It feels, looks, and sounds the best. Paper and reviews only go so far.... When the feel and look into each view finder... It speaks volumes... Experience Trump's word of mouth.
The only reason I would get the mk2 is the stabilisation, if you ask me, the mk2 i ugly compared to the mk1. Maybe it has better ergonomics for some, but the mk1 looks sharper. Also, they made you drop the original battery grip, which is not a cheap add on btw. Also why make a new grip and not make it fit 3 batteries like the a99 does - this system needs it. Also they could make an official charger that fits 2, or even 3 batteries. The all-metal body should have been there on the mk1, so I am not really impressed.
The A9 might not even have a grip, who knows.
Also, no thouchscreen? Come on Sony, its 2015, my fridge has a touchscreen - no touchscreen doesnt mean its a pro camera, DSLRs dont have it beacuse they have been outdated for a while. It should also flip forward in some way. Since there is no joystick on the back, switching AF points is a pain, also browsing the app shop.
Since there is an IR sensor located by the viewfinder, they could have made that one dual use - for remotes. And even bundle a 20$ remote, everyone needs it.
I hope the R mk2 doesnt just get the resolution (or even the rumoured 46MP). They need a better shutter, to eliminate shutter shake (yes, even on tripods - which sucks). And yeah, the stabilisation will make the 36mp usable handheld.
Prime lenses? Where are they? OK the 35 and 55 are awesome. Where are the 24 and the 85? Where are the cheaper Sony primes with OSS? I dont see the big deal with these lenses, since they are basically converting old DSLR lens designs for this system. We need more lenses like the 35 2.8 and the 55 1.8. I have the 55, and it is the best lens I ever used, period.
The Zeiss kit is a bit overpriced, and it performes just like the f4 zooms from other companies, I would rather get the 70-200, which is much more usable when you need range, and I would use the 55 60% of the time, the 35 30% of the time. Zeiss bokkeh ftw!!
You can get a used A7, in mint condition for less that a 1000euros, probably with a cool add on, like the grip, or the external charger. This is super cool, since it is as new as it was a year ago - still better than most cameras with FF sensors. And at that price - its a steal. The only problem is the autofocus, and that probably sucks on the mk2 as well, dont believe the lies. My A7 focuses right about 80% of the time in good light. In bad light, I dont trust the AF system, I just go manual. You dont need 150 AF points that work just ok, you need only 15 that work 100% of the time. And the contrast detect is a joke if you ask me.
So much room for improvement...
agree on the AF being a joke
really nice work man are you in photography business..
Is the original A7 still a good buy new at $800 in 2018 for someone getting into FF?
If you have money for fe lens yes it is.
Do you think sony will maybe release a true successor to the nex-7 ? Because i loved the design... Like an a7000 and with 4k
I think so... it will most likely have the IBIS and everything else the a6000 has (maybe even better AF), weather sealing, hopefully better buffering, and perhaps an option for a battery grip
My main gripe with the A7 is the lack of the better Auto ISO of the A7 ii, and the lack of AF-A for street photography that the A6000 has. I wish Sony could offer that through a firmware update. Maybe wait for the A7iii?
should I get the m7 or the 6300? which is the main differences?
Full frame vs crop sensor. Size. A6000 better autofocus a7 better in low light and better zoom kit but with less range. In bright light and I so 100 not a huge difference.
+stefano giovannini if you had to go with the A7, 6300, or yhe canon 80d which would you go with?
A6300 is too pricey. with same price you get the A7. I would get the A7, unless you want to mostly shoot action. Then I would get the A6000 or A6300 that have a better and faster AF than the A7. A6000 is smaller. I like the A7 with 24-70 f4. pricey zoom but way better than the Sony Zeiss 16-70mm for the A6000 / A6300. I do not know about Canon. I was a Nikon shooter. A6000 is grainy at ISO 1600 and above. A7 is better for high ISO.
Whats that about the missing AF-A?
I have an A77ii, never used it. I use backbutton focusing with AF-C, works like a charme.
I know this is a really old video but I recently had an opportunity to get an a7 for only $200 or an a7ii for $800 is it really worth th $600 difference? Please answer if you see this I'm desperate
!
No it isn't.
your voice.. im in love..
12.10:
A7 has hybrid AF, A7R does not ***
Can these cameras be a good option for wildlife. I heard that the autofocus is not as a good as sdlr ? Thank you
The A7 is probably the *ideal* out of the Alpha series for wildlife.
1.) It's color saturation.
2.) It's AF speed and strength.
I myself am into nature/wildlife photography and after months of research I had my heart set on the A7 due to it's abilities.
Best of luck!
+Derpyre thank you ;)
+Derpyre thank you ;)
Wesam Saka But, do remember the A7ii does have slightly quicker AF speed than the A7, so it depends on it you plan on shooting moving objects or still. Either still should be great for wildlife. :-)
+Derpyre thank you very much for this. Honestly I borrowed a7ii from borrow lens.com for 10 days. I used it extensively and I think it is a great camera. I love the dynamic range and the image quality. However, I wasn't so impressed with the autofocus. I think Nikon cameras have a way more advanced autofocus system.
For big hands, the A7ii is the way to go.
I wish you could've kept the names on top of the screen while reviewing because I am lost
The tittle is wrong. You are comparing A7ii vs A7r, not with the A7
what is the different in lents between a7 Vs A99
a7 uses e mount lenses, a99 uses a mount lenses
great!
It isn’t the size, but the ergonomics. Mobile phones went into a smaller is better cycle, only to go back to bigger phones because that ultimately provides superior ergonomics.
idk if i like your voice lol
Sounds just like Charlie Sheen!
I like mark2 it has a great lens ... thanks for all this information about sony
As a Big Hand owner: Mark I is more comfortable. It just is.
Just bought the MarkII (check out my test footage). Definitely worth the price difference. The improvements really become necessary as you use the camera.
what is this fascination with holding a camera with 1 hand. Are we getting that lazy? how about a hands-free camera? I understand the weight issue on professional cameras but holding a camera correctly is more about camera shake that aids in sharper images.
is there a fake A7? why do you always say "original?". That's why there is a 1, 2 and 3.
Doesn't look very sturdy . . .
the noise level of the video is really high =p
I should buy the A7 Mk11 and put my 16-50mm power zoom kit lens on it...
Buy a full frame camera and use a cheap APS-C kit lens? Why waste your money?
I meant it as some kind of joke, I'm aware that doing so would be both useless, and stupid. I'm also aware that the 16-50mm is a lens for an APS-C sized sensor. It would crop the image...blah, blah, blah. Currently using an A6000 with a Sony Zeiss 16-70mm by the way...
Tek Byte sorry, I didn't know you were being sarcastic
+Ken Cheng are you american? americans tend to not understand sarcasm
XenatR yes, I'm American but what you don't understand is, there's a difference between good sense of humour and clever sarcasm. You have neither
lol you said a "quick" comparison. 27 minutes... not quick
360p, really?
UA-cam posts up the 360 while it processes higher resolutions. Wait and refresh the page to get 1080. You a noob here?
Fix the F*ing title man da fak!