>>3581649>Only viable for older sensors. ccd and older canon cmos.This is not true.
>>3581651This is much closer to true.
It's about whether or not the sensor is ISO invariant. Modern Sony sensors are ISO invariant, which means there's not actually any electrical/physical process that changes the ISO--it literally *is* just shooting at the base ISO and adjusting the brightness of the captured image in post.
However, modern Canon sensors are *not* ISO invariant. So if you shoot the newest Canon sensor off the line at ISO 100 and increase the brightness to ISO800 equivalent, it's going to look like shit compared to something actually shot at ISO800, since the sensor pipeline actually records the light differently depending on the ISO setting.
>>3581553>Oh? What do you have to menu dive for?Not the guy you're responding to, but here's a short list of things that I have to menu dive for on an A7II that are completely ridiculous and make it nigh-unusable:
1. Whether to have the rear LCD or viewfinder active, for when the automatic face-on-the-viewfinder detection sensor doesn't detect properly
2. Changing your autofocus point. You can assign a button to "start changing your autofocus point", but it's a little screwy (you hit that button, then you have to hit another button before it actually starts moving for some reason). And ideally, you should be able to just set it so you can hit a direction key and it moves your AF point, since selecting AF point is a pretty fundamental thing to do in photography and even Rebel/D3x00 class cameras can do that.
3. Switch between manual AF point and eye-detect AF if eye-detect fails or if you just want to focus on something other than an eyeball for a shot.
Some or all of these may be fixed in the mark III and IV A7 platforms, but I felt burned so hard by the usability of the A7II that I really don't want to spend more on a newer Sony model.
