We all agree that Sony isn't shit anymore, right? We've come to terms with it?
I'd agree. I have an a7r, and I fucking love it. Insane dynamic range, and I use all my canon glass on it. I try to convert as many people as I can to sony. Pic related, sony a7r, with canon 24-70 L ii
I like DXOmark, unlike most of /p/ but for cameras they only measure the sensor. So all you can say if you agree with dxo is that the Sony sensor is the best. So if you put that sensor in another camera it would be just as good, which is what happens all the time. Given a nearly identical sensor Nikon even manages to get a higher score (if that is all that matters to you) than sony.
I really haven't heard any credible person saying sony sensor are bad or that it can't produce better images than almost anything else. What I have heard is that the battery life sucks, the menus are awful and the ergonomics are at best "usable" but not better than most other cameras.
Sony makes great sensors and they are making money at it which is an accomplishment for sony. They make a big percentage of the sensor in a bunch of dedicated cameras and embedded devices. They are even making their sensor manufacturing into a separate company.
They can make great sensors. The jury is still out on whether they can make great cameras.
>the shilling is real though. see: jason lanier
>we all agree it isn't shit right?
>no, because there's a handful of cameras that are better than them at a couple things
Uh. It has been no secret that Sony makes a lot of the sensors in Nikon's cameras for quite a while now. Notice how the D810 is right there behind it.
>Sony is the best *sensor* manufacturer
Is more accurate, because cameras with bloated, clunky and unintuitive menu systems, as well as shit battery life, are hardly the best. Kudos to them on all they have done for the camera world though.
A camera is much much more than a sensor.
We have all agreed for quite some time that Sony sensors aren't shit, but it's pretty obvious that Nikon, Fuji, and Pentax have been doing actual cameras better than Sony for quite a long time. The A7r2 is great, but other than that...
even the a6000 is a reason to NOT like Nikon, because they abandoned the mount so quickly.
Great sensor =/= Great camera.
Usability ranks so much higher for working professionals than whether you can get an extra stop of DR, or if your ISO performance is 50 points better than a different camera.
From all that I've seen, Sony menus are almost as bad as Fuji, but the controls are much worse. They are some of the least user friendly systems on the market right now.
Add in the battery life issues, which aren't necessarily bad for studio use, but terrible for sports or journalist work, and the Sony cameras fall way behind in the curve.
I love my photos too. This thread was posted about equipment, so I talked about the equipment I love.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SONY Camera Model ILCE-7R Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh) Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 24 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 4912 Image Height 7360 Number of Bits Per Component 16, 16, 16 Compression Scheme Uncompressed Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Data Arrangement Chunky Format Image Created 2015:12:30 10:21:23 Exposure Time 25 sec F-Number f/5.0 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 500 Lens Aperture f/5.0 Brightness -6.0 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Light Source Daylight Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 24.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 592 Image Height 1024 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Normal Sharpness Normal
You can tell yourself that. And to some extent it's true. You can't take a shitty photographer, give them a nikon d810 and think they're going to take great photos. But you can certainly outgrow cameras capabilities. If you think differently go use a 5-year-old Nikon Coolpix and tell me gear doesn't matter. I'm not saying that the equipment is an answer to every photographer's problem, but it can help.
>why isn't the d750 on this list?
It is a flat score. Obviously many cameras do not fit into the top 8 positions.
>Does it share a sensor with something else?
Sensor is only the part of the deal. D810 shares sensor with A7r I but is ahead of it in many aspects.
It's also ahead in terms of ergonomics, menu systems, and battery life.
What the A7R II does have going for it is the sensor and the new AF, as well as those adapters. But the sensor doesn't matter if you already have a D810 which has a terrific sensor too, the AF will not matter as much if you don't need to acquire focus that quickly, and the adapters only matter if you have a real use for mounting old/foreign glass to that particular body.
Meanwhile, the A7R II does suffer from attrocious battery life (about 300 shots, vs 1200 in the D810 and other similar D-SLR's), and meh ergonomics/menu. Those things alone are a dealbreaker when alternatives exist.
In other words, the A7R II is not the best camera in the world, all things considered. Neither is the D810, or any other camera.
>tfw started shooting with their DSLRs 5 years ago
>"does it have playstation built in, anon? hahaha"
>everyone bullies me because of my camera brand of choice
>every argument ends with "canon has L lenses"
>spend more time on 'chans
>start fapping to animus, traps, femboys, post in gore threads constantly
>more and more socially anxious
>put my finger up my ass for the first time
>masterbate and photograph myself very often
>fast forward few months of anal play, one of my DSLRs dies
>decided to shoot film while I save for a new one
>manual primes on a smaller body feel great
>being a filmfag becomes a life changing experience
>notice mirrorless sonys getting better and better
>buy one instead, it's better than filmfagging
>get a qt gf
>she's a huge canikon fanboi, convert her to sony after a year
>get a well paid job
>upgrade to foolframe mirrorless master race
>my life is complete
>no more hatred for canon plebs, just pure disdain
>shooting street snapshits with a foolframe camera and manual lenses
>rarely post them online because I shoot for myself
>think before snapshit because muh filmfag experience
>travel a lot
>laugh at gearfags gearfagging on the internets
Their arbitrary measurements fail objective and scientific scrutiny. Therefore, best to not use them at all.
I can't say much about Sony's cameras, but I sure as hell can say that DxOMark is poison if you want actual answers to actual questions.
Maybe this would be a better representation of dynamic range then?