[Klaus]

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.

[Kodachrome 25]

What do you think about EVF refresh rate and shutter sound?

[Klaus]

shutter sound ... better don't ask ...


refresh rate - comparatively excellent.

[Brightcolours]

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.

I can't agree with the EVF.... It takes long to turn on when you put the cam to your eye, and it is not at all as agreeable to me as an OVF, also in dim light conditions. Some like the artificial EVFs (you obviously do (always have)) and some really do not like EVFs and prefer OVFs. 

 

The DSLRs do not feel as boxy, the PD AF from DSLRs and their ergonomics have their place. The need to make the camera more compact and therefore the need to remove the mirror only is true for a subset of photographers.

 

The reverse is also true: the better ergonomics and PD AF, and the OVF from DSLRs only are beneficial to a subset of photographers.

[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.

 

e.g

Over/Underexposure:

OVF - no feedback

EVF - full fullback (inc. histogram)

 

DOF-Preview:

OVF - poor feedback

ECF - acceptable feedback

 

White Balance:

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.

[Kodachrome 25]

Thanks. Looking forward to new tests.

[peterottaway]

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.

[Brightcolours]

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.

What matters is how the camera shows the scene. I prefer my camera to show the scene like it is, so I can do my own creative decisions based on what one sees. An EVF shows the scene based on the decisions of the camera manufacturer. 

e.g

Over/Underexposure:

OVF - no feedback

OVF gives the exposure in the metering bar. Over/under exposure is for the photographer to determine.

EVF - full fullback (inc. histogram)

 

DOF-Preview:

OVF - poor feedback

ECF - acceptable feedback

Huh? My OVF gives excellent DOF preview, and the 3D quality an EVF never gives...

White Balance:

EVF - no feedback

OVF - full feedback

My OVF gives me the scene as it is. An EVF shows the scene interpretation of the camera. Not good for a creative person.

Of course, some EVFs are better than others.

 
Other than that the mirror slap induces vibrations that are just not necessary. 

The A7r seems to do just fine with shutter induced vibrations (if one goes by some early user accounts). As do some  MFT cameras with shutter induced vibrations linked with the IBIS. 

 

Now my handheld photography of course never is hindered by mirror slap. If I do things on a tripod, yes, indeed there is never a problem with mirror lock up...

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.

[Klaus]

I reckon we'll never ever agree on this one. 

[Guest]

How does the viewfinder compare to the xe-2 (not 1) or olympus m1 ?

-

(edit: i see you already answered the question abuot shutter; kind of a pity as silent shutters are nice)

 

 I suppose some point in the future you will compare the a7/a7r with wide angle range finder lenses (I hear the a7 is better than the a7r)

 

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.