First impression. Slightly bigger than expected. VERY boxy. Feels technical, not organic in your hand.
The thing that is as expensive as Gold-pressed Latinum (aka the Zeiss lens) feels just like any Sony NEX lens.
However, the viewfinder of the A7r is downright AWESOME (in-room in dim lighting). If anyone thinks that DSLRs are here to stay ... have a look.
In-room AF is Okay without being stellar.
What do you think about EVF refresh rate and shutter sound?
shutter sound ... better don't ask ...
refresh rate - comparatively excellent.
12-05-2013, 10:54 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-05-2013, 10:55 AM by Klaus.)
The image as seen in an OVF has less qualitative overlap with the final result compared an EVF and the final result is all that matters. Not a hole in a camera.
OVF - no feedback
EVF - full fullback (inc. histogram)
OVF - poor feedback
ECF - acceptable feedback
EVF - no feedback
OVF - full feedback
Of course, some EVFs are better than others.
Other than that the mirror slap induces vibrations that are just not necessary.
As far as the A7r as a whole is concerned. No, it is not the last word in the game (of course).
It lacks PD-AF and an electronic shutter.
Whether you like the boxy layout - I can live with it but I would prefer something more elegant. But that's just a matter of taste and style.
So yes, the A7r will not replace your "average" EOS 5D III ... yet. The A7r II could.
That said I question the concept of a tiny full format mirrorless camera. Long tele lenses are just way too big in comparison to the camera.
Thanks. Looking forward to new tests.
There needs to be some care taken when looking at EVF vs OVF.You need to compare $1000 camera to $1000, $2000 camera to $ 2000 etc. Often in the past too many comparisons have been low cost EVF camera to a top of the line OVF where the OVF assembly probably costs almost a much as the low end camera.