Sony A7/A7r Full Frame Mirrorless

[AC016]

@AC016....does the Fuji XT1 have better IQ than the Sony A7?

A7 or A7R? Obviously, the Sony will win out on resolution since both the A7 & A7R have more megapixels. In regards to noise/high ISO and dynamic range, i could not say since i have not researched it. However, i have researched the X-Pro1 against FF cameras and the X-Pro1 handles noise very, very well compared to some FF cameras. Though, you really have to pixel peep. I think the difference would not be night & day. As we all know, APS-C sensors and FF sensors, in regards to IQ, are getting closer and closer as the years go by. When you throw in a X-Trans sensor, things get even more interesting. I think the question should be: is a full frame camera going to give you soooo much more in IQ to warrant thousands of dollars more? In my opinion (unless you are a pro making butt loads of money) would be no. People are using the X-T1 as we speak to put food on the table.

 

[Vincent]

As we all know, APS-C sensors and FF sensors, in regards to IQ, are getting closer and closer as the years go by.

I seem to have missed your references for that. I agree that a D3300 will make incredible pictures, something we might not have expected from an entry model 3 years ago. Actually in normal circumstances the top level does not do noticeably better in picture quality for normal use. (there are other arguments for them obviously) When you put it to the extreme, FF is still king, and physically APS-C does not have the same properties or same possibilities, that is physical, it might be more and more irrelevant for the normal use, it is not for the extreme use. The A7s is proving that.

I agree with your example if you use a long telephoto lens, but my brief experience was with a mere 24-70mm f2.8 zoom lens plus the adapter. Comparing the handling when using this focal length (which is my mostly used lens with a FX camera), the camera and lens combination did not work out to my liking. Only the smaller primes worked out better when it comes to ergonomics.

A picture says more then a 1000 words:


I agree that hand holding this kind of combination does not convince. The idea is that with this camera you use it with a small lens or you have the time to set it up on a tripod and use a remote.
Small camera with pancake is really the trick for street and events, the bigger lenses can be used with the small camera, but you have to assume the look. Alone in the wild it is easy to assume.

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

Come on Vincent....I don't have $50,000 for a lens? lol

 

[gqtuazon]

A picture says more then a 1000 words:

I agree that hand holding this kind of combination does not convince. The idea is that with this camera you use it with a small lens or you have the time to set it up on a tripod and use a remote.
Small camera with pancake is really the trick for street and events, the bigger lenses can be used with the small camera, but you have to assume the look. Alone in the wild it is easy to assume.

Vincent - I think you are preaching to the choir. I am not disagreeing with you since I already had first hand experience. I am simply stating that these small bodies are not for me since I like to use my f2.8 zoom lenses. If Nikon would make a Mirrorless in a D8XX body, that would be my ideal. I can't live without my dedicated push buttons. The MILC has their limitations, advantages and disadvantages. As a Nikon shooter, the menu and configuration are another drawback with Sony or any other brands. Some are ok with it but that is their choice.

 

[wornish]

Most modern cameras are more than good enough for most "professionals" when used to their full capabilities. This thread is turning into DPReview and a feature shoot out. It's only at the extreme limits that any differences are visible and even then you have to pixel peep or print posters. It boils down to personal preferences, ease of use and how much you have already invested in glass.

 

[Marcel]

Most modern cameras are more than good enough for most "professionals" when used to their full capabilities. This thread is turning into DPReview and a feature shoot out. It's only at the extreme limits that any differences are visible and even then you have to pixel peep or print posters. It boils down to personal preferences, ease of use and how much you have already invested in glass.

I agree 100%. And a shot of dog poop will just look like dog poop whichever camera you use to produce it. Some people should invest more into travel to get to places to shoot then just buying the latest and have no money left to go out and shoot with it...

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

I believe Sony makes the sensors for the Nikon D800e's, but I might be mistaken....or one or more of the D8xxx's. I think I read that the Sony A7r has the same sensor as the 800e. Both 36 mp's. Sony is really setting the pace for mirrorless, and their movie making is second to none.

 

[hrstrat57]

30+ year A mount shooter here, just switched back to Nikon.

I shot E mount A7 quite a bit. Nice camera, great handling ( I of course am extremely comfortable navigating Sony menus )

If purchasing I would have added the vertical grip to increase grab for my medium sized hands.
I also owned a NEX 6 (aps-c) and used it with LA EA2 adapter which allowed used of my huge Maxxum glass kit.
Made up the mind to go full frame ruled out the A7 series because I would be unable to invest in E mount glass and the camera does not have the usual Sony SSS built in so the A mount glass with adapter, whilst producing fantastic images has no image stabilization.......

I also considered the A99 and the A900 (love that one) but ultimately it was the Nikon AF that won me over. It is simply intoxicating IHMO. Thus I sold off a huge bunch of my Sony/ Maxxum A mount gear and all my NEX gear to fund the switch which is nearly complete. I will add a pair of flash guns a as yet unknown brand 70-200 f2.8 AF and a Nikon 28 Ai MF and be done for now.

I am certain a nice kit of A7/A7r with a good selection of glass would be fun but to do it right it is also out of my price range.....and nothing AF like a pro range Nikon. Sony has quite a bit of work to do to catch up/match Nikon AF system.

 

[hrstrat57]

further for those interested in this gear Welcome to dyxum - Home of the alpha system photographer and TalkEmount.com - Sony Alpha E-Mount News, Rumors, and Discussion Forums are great forums to learn and discuss all Sony/Minolta A mount and E mount gear. Both are equally as friendly and helpful as Nikonites. Dyxum has an amazing library in a sub forum with member reviews of nearly the entire history of A mount and E mount glass. No comments are allowed in the sub forum and members take the reviews very/very seriously and do a great job overall.

Good luck!

 

[hrstrat57]

Vincent - I think you are preaching to the choir. I am not disagreeing with you since I already had first hand experience. I am simply stating that these small bodies are not for me since I like to use my f2.8 zoom lenses. If Nikon would make a Mirrorless in a D8XX body, that would be my ideal. I can't live without my dedicated push buttons. They MILC has their limitations, advantages and disadvantages. As a Nikon shooter, the menu and configuration are another drawback with Sony or any other brands. Some are ok with it but that is their choice.

I actually used my beercan on my NEX 6 quite a bit and was surprised at how well it handled. Shifting the balance point from right to left hand obviously required but I was able to get used to it. I actually came to like the EVF a bit too, the ability to view the image you just shot right thru the viewfinder is very helpful. The EVH is the A99 is magnificent!

Again, the lack of SSS in the E mount bodies and the limited AF capability (compared to Nikon ) was the reason for the switch. While I came to appreciate the EVH I decided to go Nikon to maintain the old school OVF and upgrade my capability to shoot AF.

I will not be able to replace my Maxxum glass, I had some real high end stuff but for me the switch was worth it. Also agree Glenn, tho I have handled Minolta/ Sony gear for years and thus navigate the cameras easily the Nikon pro layout found on my D300 and D700 is also much better for fast handling and easy on the fly changes.....

 

[Pretzel]

I agree 100%. And a shot of dog poop will just look like dog poop whichever camera you use to produce it. Some people should invest more into travel to get to places to shoot then just buying the latest and have no money left to go out and shoot with it...

Wait... you shoot pics of dog poo? Is there a market for that?

I GOTTA MAKE FRIENDS WITH PEOPLE THAT OWN DOGS!!!

Ok, sorry... derailment will stop, please continue with your topic.

 

[gqtuazon]

30+ year A mount shooter here, just switched back to Nikon.

I shot E mount A7 quite a bit. Nice camera, great handling ( I of course am extremely comfortable navigating Sony menus )

Made up the mind to go full frame ruled out the A7 series because I would be unable to invest in E mount glass and the camera does not have the usual Sony SSS built in so the A mount glass with adapter, whilst producing fantastic images has no image stabilization.......

I appreciate your feedback especially with your extensive background with Sony / Minolta.

What is SSS? If the A99 lacked the image stabilization, the same can be said with the Nikon bodies. However, I do understand that it was the better AF that even made you switch to Nikon.

I will not be able to replace my Maxxum glass, I had some real high end stuff but for me the switch was worth it. Also agree Glenn, tho I have handled Minolta/ Sony gear for years and thus navigate the cameras easily the Nikon pro layout found on my D300 and D700 is also much better for fast handling and easy on the fly changes.....

One of my fellow "gear head" but is a much more and better photographer with twice as much Nikon equipment that I have plus several Sony NEX, Fuji, Panasonic GH3 and all of the great Zeiss and Pana fast zooms and primes, asked me to try the "other" systems, which I did but didn't quite warm-up with them. He does a lot of videos, so he preached on how much better his GH3 and NEX-5n when it comes to video compared to his D800E. One particular feature is the "focus peak". Everything is doable if you dedicate a tripod for it. I've seen his work especially with Zeiss primes which is why I really wanted to get one. Being uncomfortable with the handling, lack of experience with the Sony system menu and mediocre AF system, made my decision to "skip" it. Again, this was just my expression and I am glad that you have similar experience with my impression since I was not trying to put down Sony.

 

[hrstrat57]

I appreciate your feedback especially with your extensive background with Sony / Minolta.

What is SSS? If the A99 lacked the image stabilization, the same can be said with the Nikon bodies. However, I do understand that it was the better AF that even made you switch to Nikon.




One of my fellow "gear head" but is a much more and better photographer with twice as much Nikon equipment that I have plus several Sony NEX, Fuji, Panasonic GH3 and all of the great Zeiss and Pana fast zooms and primes, asked me to try the "other" systems, which I did but didn't quite warm-up with them. He does a lot of videos, so he preached on how much better his GH3 and NEX-5n when it comes to video compared to his D800E. One particular feature is the "focus peak". Everything is doable if you dedicate a tripod for it. I've seen his work especially with Zeiss primes which is why I really wanted to get one. Being uncomfortable with the handling, lack of experience with the Sony system menu and mediocre AF system, made my decision to "skip" it. Again, this was just my expression and I am glad that you have similar experience with my impression since I was not trying to put down Sony.

SSS I believe stands for super steady shot and was developed by Minolta for the 5D/7D. All Sony A mount bodies have it. consider it the equiv of in camera VR or IS. Sony does it in camera vs in the lens, thus all lenses are SSS which make the Top of the line Maxxum lenses so coveted.

for E mount Sony has shifted to OSS or in lens anti shake similar to Nikon/canon. Thus to have OSS for Sony E mount one need to invest in new glass.

using the LA-EA2 or LA-EA4 allows me to use my A mount lenses but with no vibration reduction.

 

[hrstrat57]

To be clear again the A99 and all A mount bodies have SSS. Sony IMHO is thus trapped between 2 alternate systems. This was also a small factor in my decision to move. I was already headed down the pathway of buying into the 2 Sony different systems!! I am certain E mount will evolve to be a killer system but I decided to bail while I could still get top money for my gear.

 

[Vincent]

I tried the system in the local Sony center, did some AF on the a7S with the Zeiss 35mm. If you are used to a AF-S 50mm f1,8 on Nikon, you have trouble not to start laughing.

If Nikon would make a Mirrorless in a D8XX body, that would be my ideal. I can't live without my dedicated push buttons.

I´m trying to understand, you would have an empty shell so it fits your hand? Sony tried this with the A3000 and A3500, I do not understand it and I think very few do. On top of that the A3000 seems to have some bad design choices.

I agree 100%. And a shot of dog poop will just look like dog poop whichever camera you use to produce it. Some people should invest more into travel to get to places to shoot then just buying the latest and have no money left to go out and shoot with it...

Clearly you only get pictures by going out and shoot, some seem to forget this. For most pictures you do not need the latest developments, very few pictures are at the limit of the technology of 3 years ago. However when you miss that shot that you could have done with the newest technology, ... you have to grow up and take it as a man and that is very hard to do.

 

[Vincent]

From an other thread:

I think it's getting harder out htere to sell DSLR's in general, especially in Europe, Sony is doing well with it's A7 range, quite a lot of my Landscaping buddies have switched over to this model coupled with the new A77II for critters, it all seems to work very well.
Nikon need to go back to the old ways of the mechanical linkage for the aperture in live view, on all their bodies. Everyone that I have spoken to that has changed brand states this as the biggie, the fact that you can see the exposure change in live view on the back screen, models below the D800 can't do this, so they are looking at Canon but then buyiing A7R's,
Been quite tempted myself but the other half would marmalize me!
I'd like a DF type camera with the D610 sensor but with an electronic A7R type viewfinder etc, then it could look just like an FM2N

A good example: Landscaping = you are alone, focus on infinity on your one wide angle lens, waiting for the clouds to be where you want them .... you have time to set up your set. Why would you need more then a small cheap A7R, you do not.

Late edit: I do see Nikon D800 second hand going at the same price as A7R + adaptor. Choice is clearly D800 for me, but .. that is me.

 

[Vincent]

From an other thread again:

... I didnt see the footage but yesterday I shot a wedding and the videographer we work with sold his c100 for the sony a7s (also has 5DIII). he was shooting iso 40000. yea, 4 zeros there. my friend (shoots D4/D4s) who was downloading the photage to laptop was in awe. again, I didnt see it but I trust his word. ...

First remark video is not stills (so video does not deliver a lot of info on usable stills).
But it seems to be in line with the expectations from the tests, it is mainly between 16000 ISO and 51200 ISO that the A7s outperforms the D4s or Df. (I still doubt that you get a lot of useful things but some seem to be OK for 80000 and exceptionally 102400 ISO).
However:
1) that is only doing a bit more then doubling your shutter speed (or 5* for the very optimistic; = 1 to 2.5 stops gain)
2) I have been scanning the pictures taken with the A7s, I'm convinced less then 5% is taken above ISO16000. Maybe that is habit, something like I always go out with a tripod also with the A7s, so why do ultra high ISO? It seems more to me this is normal, but it also means you will not have a lot less shots having another high ISO camera.

 

[Panza]

Was looking at mirrorless cameras for a high quality everyday camera when I'm not at paid events. After a lot of searching and testing I landed on a Sony A7 with a 55mm f1.8. Time will tell if I prefer it over the D610's 50mm f1.8. Until then, it was a lightweight hoot. Hope mine will arrive in the mail soon. : )!

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

Welcome to the A7 Club! I love mine!

 

[Panza]

Welcome to the A7 Club! I love mine!

Thank you thank you. I see you already have two lenses for the A7. I was afraid about landing with the 28-70 kit lens as I had heard sub-par reviews about it (but then again, I loved using the 18-105 kit lens included with the D7000). The 24-70 F4 seems promising, but after experiencing the 24-70 F2.8 from the Nikon series I wonder if my standards will ever be the same again. Should post some sample pictures with both lenses on this thread. : )! I'll take some with the 55 as well.