An unbiased review of A7Mii

[Picsnapr]

Hi All,

I put together my thoughts, and wrote the first ever review of a camera.

 

Please do let me know your feedback on this: http://picsnapr.me/blogs/review-sony-a7mii/

 

Thanks in advance...

[frooting]

You use repeated phrases that are longer than required: "any lens in the world". 

You use sentences with redundant words and cut out important bits like "I" before "recently". I'm not sure whether you've included the word "camera" 2.5% of the time for more hits on google, but I will give you an example: "It’s the first time I’m writing a review of a camera. Recently bought this brand new model of camera, the Sony A7 Mark II (ILCE7M2), one of the most talked about latest offering by any camera company, today." Your first sentence introduces the fact you are talking about a camera. Therefore, it is going to be obvious that a company that makes one of these items is a camera company.

The "brand new model" is not strictly true (it's been available for a few months now), furthermore, a reader is able to determine how "new" a camera is for themselves. Therefore, "Recently bought this brand new model of camera, the Sony A7 Mark II (ILCE7M2), one of the most talked about latest offering by any camera company, today." can be change to "I recently bought a Sony a7ii." If you later demonstrate the quality of the packaging (something readers might care about), you demonstrate it was bought new. The reader is intelligent enough to work out the fact you are talking about a camera.  

 

"But have you seen the sheer bulky size and weight of those monsters? While our mobiles are getting thinner with more power, would you really want the more powerful cameras to be getting thicker and heavier? Now that’s where Sony entered the full-frame market, bringing the future ready technology of mirrorless cameras with the 35mm sensor it always deserved."

Phones over the last few years have gotten heavier; furthermore, DSLRs aren't getting that much heavier; in addition, Leica have made a lightweight full frame camera for years. You're comparing apples with oranges though. DSLRs are completely different, they're more durable, they've got better focusing, and there are far superior flash options to them. 

 

"the camera sensor detects what area is truly in focus and marks it in a color you can choose."

You might want to double check this is true and it's not just software checking for points of contrast.

 

"A well built magnesium alloy weather-proof body"

Fictitious information, it has certain seals but most are poorly introduced (battery door for example). It is most certainly not "proof". 

 

"Excellent ISO performance"

It does not have excellent ISO performance compared to the latest sensors.

 

"Tiltable LCD makes it easy to take pictures from different and difficult angles."

This is just spec sheet stuff. You don't immediately point out the negatives of the tiltable screen compared to others, for example, the overly eager eye sensor that disables the screen. You do mention this down the article but again, too many words and I had lost interest: "it has a tiltable LCD but it is poorly implemented: XYZ".

 

There's loads of points like the above and I'm not going to comment on how each one is erroneous, nor am I going to go through the whole review. 

 

"Ofcourse, as you might’ve guessed, all of the above lenses would neither auto-focus on the camera, nor even electronically communicate with the camera."

It might have been helpful to point out that a better adapter would solve this problem, namely one that has electrical contacts. The same for the pros and cons of EFCS. 

 

The review is verbose, there's too much erroneous information, and it's like a padded out spec sheet searching for google hits. You've structured it a bit like a report, but you've used half English, first and second person, and colloquialisms. I am confused

[Mathias]

Hi All,

I put together my thoughts, and wrote the first ever review of a camera.

 

Please do let me know your feedback on this: http://picsnapr.me/blogs/review-sony-a7mii/

 

Thanks in advance...

Hey Picsnapr

 

Just a hint: you say "But this one doesn’t make any sound on shutter opening, just the screen goes blank, and then makes the usual sound on shutter closing. So don’t expect a helpful audio cue when doing a slow-shutter exposure."

The A7II has an electronic front curtain shutter, you can disable it if you like, its in the menu. Be sure to check out the pros and cons of EFCS.

[Picsnapr]

Hey Picsnapr

 

Just a hint: you say "But this one doesn’t make any sound on shutter opening, just the screen goes blank, and then makes the usual sound on shutter closing. So don’t expect a helpful audio cue when doing a slow-shutter exposure."

The A7II has an electronic front curtain shutter, you can disable it if you like, its in the menu. Be sure to check out the pros and cons of EFCS.

 

Thanks Mathias,

I've amended the text with this discovery

[Picsnapr]

You use repeated phrases that are longer than required: "any lens in the world". 

You use sentences with redundant words and cut out important bits like "I" before "recently". I'm not sure whether you've included the word "camera" 2.5% of the time for more hits on google, but I will give you an example: "It’s the first time I’m writing a review of a camera. Recently bought this brand new model of camera, the Sony A7 Mark II (ILCE7M2), one of the most talked about latest offering by any camera company, today." Your first sentence introduces the fact you are talking about a camera. Therefore, it is going to be obvious that a company that makes one of these items is a camera company.

The "brand new model" is not strictly true (it's been available for a few months now), furthermore, a reader is able to determine how "new" a camera is for themselves. Therefore, "Recently bought this brand new model of camera, the Sony A7 Mark II (ILCE7M2), one of the most talked about latest offering by any camera company, today." can be change to "I recently bought a Sony a7ii." If you later demonstrate the quality of the packaging (something readers might care about), you demonstrate it was bought new. The reader is intelligent enough to work out the fact you are talking about a camera.  

 

"But have you seen the sheer bulky size and weight of those monsters? While our mobiles are getting thinner with more power, would you really want the more powerful cameras to be getting thicker and heavier? Now that’s where Sony entered the full-frame market, bringing the future ready technology of mirrorless cameras with the 35mm sensor it always deserved."

Phones over the last few years have gotten heavier; furthermore, DSLRs aren't getting that much heavier; in addition, Leica have made a lightweight full frame camera for years. You're comparing apples with oranges though. DSLRs are completely different, they're more durable, they've got better focusing, and there are far superior flash options to them. 

 

"the camera sensor detects what area is truly in focus and marks it in a color you can choose."

You might want to double check this is true and it's not just software checking for points of contrast.

 

"A well built magnesium alloy weather-proof body"

Fictitious information, it has certain seals but most are poorly introduced (battery door for example). It is most certainly not "proof". 

 

"Excellent ISO performance"

It does not have excellent ISO performance compared to the latest sensors.

 

"Tiltable LCD makes it easy to take pictures from different and difficult angles."

This is just spec sheet stuff. You don't immediately point out the negatives of the tiltable screen compared to others, for example, the overly eager eye sensor that disables the screen. You do mention this down the article but again, too many words and I had lost interest: "it has a tiltable LCD but it is poorly implemented: XYZ".

 

There's loads of points like the above and I'm not going to comment on how each one is erroneous, nor am I going to go through the whole review. 

 

"Ofcourse, as you might’ve guessed, all of the above lenses would neither auto-focus on the camera, nor even electronically communicate with the camera."

It might have been helpful to point out that a better adapter would solve this problem, namely one that has electrical contacts. The same for the pros and cons of EFCS. 

 

The review is verbose, there's too much erroneous information, and it's like a padded out spec sheet searching for google hits. You've structured it a bit like a report, but you've used half English, first and second person, and colloquialisms. I am confused

 

Thanks for taking your time to give a detailed feedback. Yes, I do agree on most of your points, and disagree on a few.

Have amended the text a little bit with the learning. Ofcourse, not being a native English speaker, there could be a few not so perfect English in my writing.

Moreover, I've intentionally wanted to make the review more 'subjective' than objective 'professional' review, like the way most high-flying (or paid) reviewers do.

[Snowfun]

I think it's great that people feel motivated to write down their own subjective opinions about whatever it is.

 

The thread has started me thinking - how many people actually take web based reviews into account when making purchasing decisions? (I know, for example that I over paid (slightly) for a Zeiss 70-210 C/Y zoom because I didn't read any reviews or product info prior to buying. It was, of course, only pennies but still careless!)

 

If "we" do read reviews with the hope & expectation of learning and thus being in a position to make informed choices then whose reviews should we read? Rockwell? Huff? Etc?

 

But credit to OP for writing thoughts down.

Tim

[frootingy]

Thanks for taking your time to give a detailed feedback. Yes, I do agree on most of your points, and disagree on a few.

Have amended the text a little bit with the learning. Ofcourse, not being a native English speaker, there could be a few not so perfect English in my writing.

Moreover, I've intentionally wanted to make the review more 'subjective' than objective 'professional' review, like the way most high-flying (or paid) reviewers do.

 

Subjective is fine but it looks contradictory to pad out a spec sheet, have a pseudo-formal structure and invoke fictitious information to make a point. There's a difference between a biased review and a professional one. I really wanted to be polite and give helpful information, but it's interesting you like PenGun's troll post. In future I'll know just to say "shit review; poorly worded; incorrect information; inexperienced photographer that doesn't know how to use the camera properly".

 

What a great display of intellect on these forums.

 

 

 

I think it's great that people feel motivated to write down their own subjective opinions about whatever it is.

 

The thread has started me thinking - how many people actually take web based reviews into account when making purchasing decisions? (I know, for example that I over paid (slightly) for a Zeiss 70-210 C/Y zoom because I didn't read any reviews or product info prior to buying. It was, of course, only pennies but still careless!)

 

If "we" do read reviews with the hope & expectation of learning and thus being in a position to make informed choices then whose reviews should we read? Rockwell? Huff? Etc?

 

But credit to OP for writing thoughts down.

Tim

 

 

In my opinion, it is silly not to try something instead of simply relying on a review. Huff seems to state every product is great; rockwell means well but he doesn't rely on the objective enough. Measuring the art of photography with subjective methods is fine, but there are certain objective truths to digital cameras. 

 

Personally I think the best method of buying something is to read the spec sheet (I can't wait for PenGun to quote this out of context), check a few cameras, make a list of the ones that have the features you want, and from there try them out

[Guest all8]

In my opinion, it is silly not to try something instead of simply relying on a review. Huff seems to state every product is great; rockwell means well but he doesn't rely on the objective enough. Measuring the art of photography with subjective methods is fine, but there are certain objective truths to digital cameras. 

 

I think your feedback was pretty good. Steve Huff make a point of not writing reviews for stuff he does not like, so the overall feeling tends to be positive, which may not be a reflection of the reality of the products he receives/buys. His writing is quite good ... and Mr Rockwell is blunt and sarcastic, which many people have trouble understanding, however he is often uncomfortable accurate in his assessment ... which is more useful that those reviewers who get Beta products or paid gigs on the side.

[Golem]

OK. I read the thread, and I tried to read the review.
 
What I managed to read of the review shows that it is
rambling and unreadable. There is very little problem
from the fact that English is NOT your native tongue,
verrrry little. I suspect that you do not write any better 
in your native tongue.
 
Kudos for the attempt. It's good to try something that
you've never done before. Sadly, you demonstrate a  
lack of any talent for writing. Its not a lack of skill but a
lack of talent. Maybe you are a fine photographer and
a talented musician, or a great cook, or whatever. Do
what your talents call you to do. Writing is not it.
 
This is not a personality flaw. Very few people have a
talent for writing. You have plenty of company, and I
must repeat ... no problem about no writing talent. We
all have talents, and we all have inabilities. Better to
follow where our talents lead us.  
 
`