Anyone here switch from Canon to Sony A7r for landscape?

[Oneand0]

My main focus is landscape photography. I sell my photos once in a while and this is just a hobby for me. I also like to shoot action and video, but now strictly use my 7D II for that. If I purchased a Sony A7r, it would only replace my Canon 6D.

Eventually I would switch over to all Sony E lenses to bring into the field. The ease of packing a smaller backpack on long hikes, with a camera and lenses that are twice as light, if not more, is what I am after. I know about the larger MP and DR that comes with it and I will take it, but it's not the game changer here. I am extremely pleased with Canon 6D colors and quality. My largest print requested has been 30x40, so more MP really isn't needed for the most part. It's all about the comfort I would get and sparing my back as I get older. I'm so pleased with the 6D that I am scared to switch over and try the Sony.

If you have switched, have you noticed a bit of a difference from colors changing in your work comparing a raw image? Kind of like seeing colors from a Nikon compared to Canon!
Are you shooting with Sony lenses now and how would you compare it to the Canon glass?
Are you generally happy, or very happy with the change?

Thank you in advanced.

 

[3kramd5]

I use mine with EF lenses in studio and landscape environments. If I know that's all I will be shooting, it's great. If I just grab a camera for general purpose my 5D gets the nod, and I don't hesitate to use it for landscapes.

I find the Sony a bit tedious to use, but the resolution with and ability to use it with canon glass makes it a fairly easy buy.

I suggest renting one first. At the Sony rate, they'll likely have a version 2 in the not to distant future.

 

[donsullivan]

I had been a 5D3 shooter for the last few years and added an a7R to the bag along with a few FE lenses back in the spring. I occasionally used the FE lenses but mostly used the Metabones adapter and my Canon EF glass on the 7R. My primary reason for the purchase was a desire for the higher resolution for landscape shooting since Canon doesn't have anything to offer in that space.

I too would encourage you to rent one for a week before you pull the trigger since the spec sheet does not tell the whole story of the a7R. I found it to be very slow at nearly everything it does, especially autofocus. It's also got without a doubt the loudest shutter mechanism I have ever heard in my life. I found it good for stationery subjects like architecture or landscapes but completely unacceptable for anything in motion

The overall image quality was quite good (when it was on a tripod) but after about 8 months I could no longer put up with all of the compromises and constraints. I got tired of missing focus and the overall slow performance. I ended up giving up and selling off all my Canon and Sony gear and migrating over to Nikon (D750 & D810) since the 7R wasn't cutting it and Canon didn't have anything to offer that met my current needs.

 

[sdsr]

I like the a7 series a lot (I have a7r and am currently trying an a7s) for the usual reasons given by those who like them (but perhaps mostly because I very much like using old MF lenses, and they're easier to use with mirrorless cameras than anything else), though I've kept Canon as well (for now, anyway). You will likely love the image quality and, provided you stick with slow or immobile subjects, find the focus performance just fine (no need for AFMA doesn't hurt). Colors are a bit different from Canon's, but at least as good - but, I tend to think, this isn't really an issue since you can tweak color easily enough with software. The two primes are superb, better than the closest Canon equivalents. I've not used any of the zooms; from what I've read the 16-35 f4 may be even slightly better than the recent Canon, but I doubt that's true of the others.

But my main reason for replying is to question your premise. We're still dealing with FF cameras here, so the lenses, esp. the zooms, are going to be much the same size as the Canon equivalents you're using. And if you're using f/2/8 zooms and want to keep doing so, well, there's no sign of such things showing up via Sony itself. Nor are there any very fast primes yet. In other words, the main weight saving will be the difference in body weights. Depending on what lenses you use, that difference may end up being relatively trivial - if you stick with the two primes, yes, it's a nice light compact set-up, but otherwise.... You may end up needing reasons in addition to saving your back to justify the addition/switch (resolution, low ISO noise, IBIS if you get the a7II - maybe a forthcoming a7rII or a9? - ability to attach just about any lens, etc.).

 

[eml58]

I use the 1Dx & 5DMK III, primarily the 1Dx.

Bought into the a7r around a year ago, mainly because of the 36MP Sony Sensor, but also looking for the smaller unit/weight factor.

Recently completed a 6 week Holiday around mostly Asia, primarily Japan, Bagged the 1Dx, my 5 Zeiss Lenses, and decided to give the a7r a real trial compared with the 1Dx.

The a7r form factor is interesting and at times a plus, but the more I used it the less important this became, I just prefer the 1Dx in hand, even the 5DMK III.

The EVF on the a7r, it's a PIA, some will get used to it as they will compromise, but there's no way the current EVF cameras can compare to the OVF of the Canon/Nikon etc, the latency of the image in the viewfinder is just.....awful, always waiting for the Image to refresh, real Pain.

The Menu system, the system in general, is Ok, but I found frustrating, and Manual Focus on the a7r is an absolute bummer. But it's something given time you could adapt to, it's just a menu system after all, doesn't necessarily impact on Image quality.

The Metabones latest Mk III adaptor to use Canon Lenses (Read in my case Zeiss), works, but I'm not convinced use of an adaptor, any adaptor, doesn't detract in Image Quality.

The Zeiss 35f/2 Lens is very very good, the Zeiss 24-70f/4 is Ok, maybe good, but the f/4 in low light is a killer.

The Sensor is excellent & in my opinion somewhat better than the current crop of Canon Sensors, others will disagree and that's fine, I would simply like the a7r sensor in my 5DMK III and I'de be a Happy Camper.

After this last 6 weeks I gave the a7r to my eldest Lad, he needs a general Camera, non specific, good at most things and the sensor quality he doesn't even think about.

Another suggestion already made may be worth looking at, if your not too committed to Canon in the Lens department, look at Nikon, the D750 & D810 are I believe currently a viable alternative in my view, certainly right at this moment as good or better than Canon's 5DMK III & 6D, that will of course likely change mid next year, but it's not a guarantee.

I'll just wait out Canon for a high MP Body in 2015 as I'm extensively committed to Canon L Lenses & Canon mount Zeiss Lenses, my advice along with others would be see if you can rent an a7r for a couple weeks, I'm just not convinced at this point hat Sony have a Camera that can compete with either Canon or Nikon, Sensors absolutely, Camera Bodies not yet, Lenses certainly not now & not for a very long time, the adaptors are not the answer.

 

[Omni Images]

I have a 5DII and a 1D4, I use the 1D4 in vertical with a manfrotto 303+ pano head and mostly stitch the pano images together, and print them out at just under 60" long ...
I also use a Linhof 617s 120 film camera, and usually take both with me.
I'm thinking of going to medium format... checking out the new Pentax 645Z .. but after consideration thinking maybe best to go with a second hand Phase One and perhaps a P45+ back .. or use the back on a technical camera such as an Apha, Arca Swiss or Cambo etc
I am looking for a bigger file size to be able to print single shots that can't be stitched to print out at a large size.
I'm not seeing anything in the Sony that takes my fancy... and thinking really meduim format is the way to go .. not just more pixels on a 35mm FF size sensor. So even if Canon does release one I may not use it for really serious work ... but I am keen for one ... and I think the reason the new lenses coming out now with higher IQ is in readyness for a larger MP sensor size ... no point a body with high MP and and a lens that is still hard pressed to resolve 15- 20mp

 

[Oneand0]

First, thank you for all the responses and time.

I have to say this is definitely not what I thought I would hear, but everything I read I am taking into consideration. So far I'm gathering that I should rent it, with a lens or two that I think I would start out with, and see how I feel about it. I understand the faster glass, even made for the Sony, is still going to have the same type of weight to it that a Canon EF lens will with same speed! Good point!

I'm guessing I will rent it and reply to this post after I am done using it, later this month to share my views.

 

[Omni Images]

Grafax, I have been doing a lot of digging to work out my next medium format move .. I decided to go that way after seeing the Pentax 645Z and the price ! Rather than wait for a large MP body from Canon.
The other big boys in that field start at like 28K AU$ upwards of 35K for the latest Phase One backs .. but ohhh an IQ280 ... 80 mp .. and the glass to handle all that detail have you seen the latest tilt shift offering from Schneider-Kreuznach ? OMG what a lens ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNNZ_-6GE4M&index=10&list=PL7BC102DAC4F38E91
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHPXC4TWPAE&list=PL7BC102DAC4F38E91
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iQezcYtkTE&index=6&list=PL7BC102DAC4F38E91

Anyway ... I've also been on some medium format forums and asking questions ... seems the Pentax is not as great as it first may seem IQ wise .... plenty of pros and cons either way... but I'm leaning towards a second hand P45+ back ... they are Kodak ccd sensors compared to the newer Sony cmos in the Pentax and the newer IQ 1 and 2 series backs .. the ccd's are still good at low iso (fine for landscape tripod work) and the P backs are larger sensors than the Pentax that are not true full size medium format sensor, some of the others are a little smaller too than full MF size.
The Linhof is still producing excellent quality scans that I can easily enlarge to print at 60" and 70" long panos.
This is what I am looking for a larger MP camera for .. to be able to enlarge a single shot to those sorts of sizes, where I can't stitch them together where there is perhaps some sort of movement, such as moving waves perhaps.
Though having said that, I am seeing a number of images that are stitched medium format images ...
The Linhof 617s is not a technical camera as such .. they are in a field of their own with "movements" like a tilt shift lens ... so a body like that with a digital back, may be my next move .. you can use it like a normal medium format camera, or use the movements for Architectural work .. though I'm not in that field I like to take shots like that, you can also use it to extend or shorten depth of field too.
So a technical camera could be a really versitile body to match with a digi back .. and of course you can use say Schneider-Kreuznach lenses, as I have on the Linhof.

 

[Skulls]

...so more MP really isn't needed for the most part. It's all about the comfort I would get and sparing my back as I get older. I'm so pleased with the 6D that I am scared to switch over and try the Sony.

I used to have a7 with 35mm f/2.8 for street. The less weight is always welcome but there is another price you pay - the overall experience. You may spare your back but you won't spare your nerves. The small form factor is only half the story and it's not necessarily a benefit. The controls are clustered and getting use to them is taking way longer than what one would think. Items in the menus are scattered and not intuitively arranged. There is no shortcut for format, you have to go to the menu to delete multiple files; when you delete a single shot there is a loading bar "deleting"... that's how fast it is. And that's a7 with smaller file size and 12bit only!
Battery life - it's a disaster. The official specs sheet says 350 shots but they skip the part "with live view only" - having the camera set to switch from the EVF to LV automatically with the proximity sensor will give you about 250 shots. The batteries are very expensive. And for a product, jammed with tech. gimmicks, it is definitely missing a touch screen. The EVF is laggy and, for some reason(aesthetics may be), it's in the middle which makes it quite uncomfortable.
So, in a more philosophical approach, the less weight is more.

 

[Omni Images]

Here's what's getting me off lately, something like these.

 

[Rupp1]

I use the 1Dx & 5DMK III, primarily the 1Dx.

Bought into the a7r around a year ago, mainly because of the 36MP Sony Sensor, but also looking for the smaller unit/weight factor.

The a7r form factor is interesting and at times a plus, but the more I used it the less important this became, I just prefer the 1Dx in hand, even the 5DMK III.

The EVF on the a7r, it's a PIA, some will get used to it as they will compromise, but there's no way the current EVF cameras can compare to the OVF of the Canon/Nikon etc, the latency of the image in the viewfinder is just.....awful, always waiting for the Image to refresh, real Pain.

The Menu system, the system in general, is Ok, but I found frustrating, and Manual Focus on the a7r is an absolute bummer. But it's something given time you could adapt to, it's just a menu system after all, doesn't necessarily impact on Image quality.

The Metabones latest Mk III adaptor to use Canon Lenses (Read in my case Zeiss), works, but I'm not convinced use of an adaptor, any adaptor, doesn't detract in Image Quality.

I would simply like the a7r sensor in my 5DMK III and I'de be a Happy Camper.

After this last 6 weeks I gave the a7r to my eldest Lad,

I'll just wait out Canon for a high MP Body in 2015 as I'm extensively committed to Canon L Lenses & Canon mount Zeiss Lenses, my advice along with others would be see if you can rent an a7r for a couple weeks, I'm just not convinced at this point hat Sony have a Camera that can compete with either Canon or Nikon, Sensors absolutely, Camera Bodies not yet, Lenses certainly not now & not for a very long time, the adaptors are not the answer.

Note: I took some liberty shortening the quote.

I too am a Canon shooter. I now use a 1Dx, having sold most of my earlier bodies. About 8 months ago, I bought an A7r, for the sensor and for the size. I couldn't agree more with the opinions stated above. The form factor is interesting to carry, but harder for me to use (my hands aren't that big, but the camera is small).

I'd actually prefer a rangefinder to the EVF viewfinder, which I find to be a PIA. The camera is slow and loud; it is a problem for anything but landscape. The Metabones is just OK, and Canon L glass is heavy enough that the size of the Sony is a disadvantage. Tripod only-slow, considered shooting only.

I like the 55mm FE lens, but the 35mm is mediocre (and required some glue on the shade), and I returned the telephoto zoom because I could not get a sharp picture with it. There are more native lenses now, but I'd rent the A72 rather than the R to see if I liked it.

I too am considering making a gift of the Sony to a relative. The a7r strikes me as an enthusiasts toy (which is why I tried it), but it ain't gonna cut it for serious use as a carry camera.

I like the 1Dx, but there are times I want as good an image as I can get, with perhaps a little less weight (and a back up camera). My big question is whether to buy a 5D III now, or whether to wait for a successor camera (perhaps a 5D with the a7r sensor ;-) ). Is this just the wrong time to get a 5D III? Are the recent deals just due to the season, or is the camera on the way out?