Sony A7/A7r Full Frame Mirrorless

S

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
I was just wondering if anyone has bought either one of these cameras. They both compare very favorably to the D610 (A7) and the D800e (A7r). The only thing is that they're much lighter and don't have the number of lenses available as of yet. Just wondered since I haven't seen anyone post about these cameras. If you have one or the other, please post some images and let us peep a bit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
I actually tried the A7 with an adapter plus their Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 just so that I can have a feel on the handling. With zero knowledge on how to operate the Sony controls, I found it very frustrating since most of the controls requires going through the menu first.

The combo that I tried was a little awkward since it was not balanced at all (obviously). Limited AF points didn't also work for me and one of the sellers didn't have a lot of experience to teach me about the camera. So it was a no deal for me. Their video features were good though and I like the focus peak and tiltable LCD screen.
 
S

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
I actually tried the A7 with an adapter plus their Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 just so that I can have a feel on the handling. With zero knowledge on how to operate the Sony controls, I found it very frustrating since most of the controls requires going through the menu first.

The combo that I tried was a little awkward since it was not balanced at all (obviously). Limited AF points didn't also work for me and one of the sellers didn't have a lot of experience to teach me about the camera. So it was a no deal for me. Their video features were good though and I like the focus peak and tiltable LCD screen.
Click to expand...

Did you like the viewfinder? I'm sure you probably didn't have a chance to compare IQ, so overall, if you'd had more time, what do you think? I have a chance to get the A7 for a good price with a kit lens. Just wondering, as the Fuji XT1 seems to be taking great images. The problem with that is the Fuji's movie mode sucks, I hear.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
sonicbuffalo said:
Did you like the viewfinder? I'm sure you probably didn't have a chance to compare IQ, so overall, if you'd had more time, what do you think? I have a chance to get the A7 for a good price with a kit lens. Just wondering, as the Fuji XT1 seems to be taking great images. The problem with that is the Fuji's movie mode sucks, I hear.
Click to expand...

The view finder is ok. The system is just not for me. I like my readily available controls with Nikon and going deep into the menu didn't cut it for me. It is ok for leisure type photography or video and not for fast phased photography that I normally do.
I know someone who is selling one actually that comes with a Zeiss 50mm f2
With Metabones A7 plus lens is being advertised for $2k. I already have too many toys and not enough time to play with. It will just collect dust if I buy another camera.
 
W

wornish

Senior Member
From what I have read the IQ is good but the A7r has a very loud shutter and suffers from shutter shock in certain circumstances.

The latest A7s which has a 12 MP sensor is apparently the best low light camera available can go from ISO 100 to 102400 !! and it works.
The Sony A7s: 1st Look…Testing the limits. | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

Sony do seem to be setting the pace in new camera technology right now but I will wait to see how things evolve.
Nikon is still the one for me.
 
Last edited:
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
wornish said:
From what I have read the IQ is good but the A7r has a very loud shutter and suffers from shutter shock in certain circumstances.

The latest A7s which has a 12 MP sensor is apparently the best low light camera available can go from ISO 100 to 102400 !! and it works.
The Sony A7s: 1st Look…Testing the limits. | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

Sony do seem to be setting the pace in new camera technology right now but I will wait to see how things evolve.
Nikon is still the one for me.
Click to expand...

I thought the A7s was 36mp...?
 
Marcel

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
wornish said:
The A7 and A7R are both 36MP but the latest A7s is only 12MP its sensor is specifically designed for low light.
It can take pictures of black cats in a cellar at midnight apparently.
Click to expand...

Thanks, sorry for my confusion. I didn't realize there was an R and an S model.
 
V

Vincent

Senior Member
wornish said:
The A7 and A7R are both 36MP but the latest A7s is only 12MP its sensor is specifically designed for low light.
It can take pictures of black cats in a cellar at midnight apparently.
Click to expand...

Now I have been looking into this system:
A7 24Mpix to be the allrounder.
A7r 36 Mpix, same DXO score as the D800! The high resolution monster.
A7s 12 Mpix, The darkness monster and full info 4K video on FF (with external storage though), the big pixel solution.
=> btw does anyone have a site (I found it on snapsort but did not believe their numbers) where you can see the size of pixels on the sensors? Calculation that worked for the Hasselblad 60Mpix = 6 Micometer; brings the A7s to 8.5 Micrometer. Why would you have bigger pixels then the Hasselblad? (Snapsort did bring Airy Disks and diffusion better in my knowledge)

The main advantages of this A7 series are multiple:
- lightest and smallest FF around
- performance that can follow (beat) the best FF
- relatively low price for performance
- you can work with about any lens (if you accept to do some things manually)

This does not make them the thing to have:
- AF is notoriously random (and lenses with it are limited, Canon lenses can AF, but not very well)
- battery life is limited
- it outperforms on some things, but not by much and at the price of some other oddities (menu is one of them).
- less sturdy (A7 only) and less weather proof

So conclusion:
You need to shoot in low light with a lot of action: you need to put the money down for a D4s.
Low light less action, some nostalgia: buy a Df so you keep some modern features
High resolution: put the money down for a D810
You want to use your old (e.g. Leica mount Nikkor) lenses manually on a high performing system that is very portable and not too expensive, the old fashioned way: Yes the Sony A7 series will do the job better then anything else (model depending on your requirement).

Just a comparison chart that seems to explain the low light performance best (higher general DXO scores do better at low ISO, but generally small pixels do worse afterwards):
DXO.jpg

The story I got: Do you want to take a picture of a black ninja holding a black cat in a dark closet, well if you can do it at ISO 16000 the D4S and the Df do well, but the A7s starts to beat them and keeps that level up to 51200K. Put a Leica Noctilux on the A7s and you will still be able to take pictures of the financial darkness you put yourself into. D4s does a bit better in low ISO and the DF is the low light champion till ISO 3200.
 
Last edited:
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
This is just my opinion with regards to the milc, the light weight idea is nice if you only use a small prime lens.

Using other zoom lenses makes it awkward to use and negates the idea of a compact and light weight. For non-Sony lenses you'll lose the AF capability unless MF works well with your eyes. In this case, as pointed out, the Df makes a better choice for stills.
 
V

Vincent

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
... the light weight idea is nice if you only use a small prime lens.
... non-Sony lenses you'll lose the AF capability ...
Click to expand...

Now my reasoning is still that you will probably get most successful shots with the D4s, the Df will do somewhat better in evening scenes in places where people go around, the A7s might have an advantage in a range where light is so low that you would have to focus manually anyway.
The other alternative for the A7s use is if you want to use it like a Leica.

I'm still fan of the A7s, when it will be traded second hand at half the current price that is though. If I can get a Df at that time around that price, I might go Df, more practical. The D4s I consider out of my league. I will use my D7000 normally which performs better at ISO 100-200, and only go for the A7s when I need high ISO (for me that is a twilight forest stake-out). The weight matters since I probably want 3 bodies (1 fixed on a target, 1 for movement, 1 macro) and want to remain extremely mobile.
 
S

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
gqtuazon said:
This is just my opinion with regards to the milc, the light weight idea is nice if you only use a small prime lens.

Using other zoom lenses makes it awkward to use and negates the idea of a compact and light weight. For non-Sony lenses you'll lose the AF capability unless MF works well with your eyes. In this case, as pointed out, the Df makes a better choice for stills.
Click to expand...

Glen....I'm thinking the same thing....why buy a small mirrorless when you have to put a large lens on it....then the advantage goes away! But....for the price...don't know, thinking about it.
@Vincent....you're hilarious!
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
sonicbuffalo said:
I was just wondering if anyone has bought either one of these cameras. They both compare very favorably to the D610 (A7) and the D800e (A7r). The only thing is that they're much lighter and don't have the number of lenses available as of yet. Just wondered since I haven't seen anyone post about these cameras. If you have one or the other, please post some images and let us peep a bit.
Click to expand...

There used to be a forum dedicated to the Sony FF mirrorless cameras, but it no longer exists. It was founded by the same guy who founded Fuji X Forum. I think one reason why he closed the forum, was because the A7 was not all that popular and it had it's gripes.

All in all, i think Sony has a great camera, despite the need for some tweaks. Let's keep in mind that Sony makes the bulk of it's earnings selling life insurance. Their electronics division is more of a "hobby" for them and they have been told many times to just dump it.

The A7 has four dials, two on the top deck & front/back dials. There is plenty of manual control. Of course if you are to pick up a camera from a different manufacturer that you have never used before, you will be somewhat lost. That is a given. It does not mean to say that just because you get lost or frustrated, that the system is no good. I had the same experience with Fuji. But now, i can operate my cameras in my sleep.

The camera (A7) has 25 focus points for CDAF coverage and 117 focus ponits for PDAF coverage. How many more focus points do you need?? Granted the A7R does not have the hybrid AF system, which is a mystery to me, but i think the camera has sufficient focus points nonetheless.

Loud shutter? Okay, but many other cameras have "loud" shutters. If you want a silent shutter, get a camera with a leaf shutter. You won't even know that you have taken a photo.

Once again, speeds & feeds are being put ahead of what actually comes out of the camera. Seems like everyone wants the worlds fastest super-car; yet, all they will do is go to the corner store to get milk.

Is the Sony A7/A7R half baked? To some degree, yes. But there is no perfect camera. It comes down to choosing the right tool for what you are going to do. If i were given an A7, i would gladly accept it and use it to it's fullest potential.

Don't be so worried about the speeds & feeds. Be more concerned by what you can get out of the camera.
 
AC016

AC016

Senior Member
sonicbuffalo said:
Glen....I'm thinking the same thing....why buy a small mirrorless when you have to put a large lens on it....then the advantage goes away! But....for the price...don't know, thinking about it.
@Vincent....you're hilarious!
Click to expand...

You can say the same about DSLRs. When i had a D7100, i had a 400mm prime. When i put that on my D7100, talk about out of balance. So what should i have done, bought a bigger camera? Lightweight & compactness are advantages, but not the only ones. Overall, it is still going to be more compact/lightweight then a DSLR setup.
 
G

gqtuazon

Gear Head
AC016 said:
You can say the same about DSLRs. When i had a D7100, i had a 400mm prime. When i put that on my D7100, talk about out of balance. So what should i have done, bought a bigger camera? Lightweight & compactness are advantages, but not the only ones. Overall, it is still going to be more compact/lightweight then a DSLR setup.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Top