Sony A7-A7R pre-ordered @ 200% bigger than expected
- Thread starter Dylan777
- Start date
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
I probably shouldn't even wade into this, but I can't help myself.
I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
I don't get interchangeable lenses on a mirrorless. If I want a smaller, fake Leica body I'd want a single, fixed lens moderate zoom (24mm-100mm for example). I'm not going to use a 200mm 2.8 lens on a mirrorless camera, much less a 70-300 or 100-400 zoom. No point. I'd rather pay a little more, get a stellar zoom that I can use under all conditions and save the interchangeable lenses for the DSLR, which is a lot more practical form factor for changing lenses.
I don't get interchangeable prime lenses on a mirrorless. If I have to carry two-three lenses what advantage does a mirrorless have?
I don't get electronic viewfinders for the sake of electronic viewfinders. Maybe the technology will get there someday, but it's not there today. That's one thing I like about Fuji. They found a nice way to blend optical and electronic.
I don't get the price point. These babies aren't cheap. Unless you have money to burn, it seems crazy to invest in an expensive new system to save a few ounces.
I don't get the looks of the Sonys. They are just plain ugly with that viewfinder box slapped on top. I asked awhile back why DSLRs got so big. Most of the respondents said they like their big ole DSLRs (ergonomics was a popular catch phrase). Okay, which is it? You love your big DSLRs but you swoon over these Sonys that can't possibly have big, easy to reach and handle buttons if they are so compact.
I don't get why anyone would risk investing in a system that may or may not be around a decade from now. Say what you will about Nikon and Canon, but I'd rather bet on their systems remaining available for the next decade or so than on any other manufacturer.
Okay. Rant over.
I just don't get mirrorless. Well...I sorta do...I kinda get Fuji mirrorless, but that's about it.
I don't get interchangeable lenses on a mirrorless. If I want a smaller, fake Leica body I'd want a single, fixed lens moderate zoom (24mm-100mm for example). I'm not going to use a 200mm 2.8 lens on a mirrorless camera, much less a 70-300 or 100-400 zoom. No point. I'd rather pay a little more, get a stellar zoom that I can use under all conditions and save the interchangeable lenses for the DSLR, which is a lot more practical form factor for changing lenses.
I don't get interchangeable prime lenses on a mirrorless. If I have to carry two-three lenses what advantage does a mirrorless have?
I don't get electronic viewfinders for the sake of electronic viewfinders. Maybe the technology will get there someday, but it's not there today. That's one thing I like about Fuji. They found a nice way to blend optical and electronic.
I don't get the price point. These babies aren't cheap. Unless you have money to burn, it seems crazy to invest in an expensive new system to save a few ounces.
I don't get the looks of the Sonys. They are just plain ugly with that viewfinder box slapped on top. I asked awhile back why DSLRs got so big. Most of the respondents said they like their big ole DSLRs (ergonomics was a popular catch phrase). Okay, which is it? You love your big DSLRs but you swoon over these Sonys that can't possibly have big, easy to reach and handle buttons if they are so compact.
I don't get why anyone would risk investing in a system that may or may not be around a decade from now. Say what you will about Nikon and Canon, but I'd rather bet on their systems remaining available for the next decade or so than on any other manufacturer.
Okay. Rant over.
Upvote
0
.
How can you possibly expect to win friends and influence people around here if you keep bringing nothing but good sense and rational thinking?
You pretty much nailed my thinking exactly. Thanks for putting it on paper (well, screen).
For me, Canon is satisfying my needs almost completely. If I had a few bucks for the frivolous side, I'd probably go for the Fuji X100S, but certainly not anything with interchangeable lenses. I'm biding my time until the right second camera comes along to replace my T2i, but I'm not in a hurry. I like a lot about the EOS-M, but I'm waiting until the next iteration shows up to decide. If I go that way, I simply add something to my Canon system -- I don't have to go build a whole new system.
For the first time ever I walked through a Whole Foods grocery store today. (And purchased nothing.) Like any sensible old geezer I just shook my head as I looked at all the fashionably dressed, intelligent-appearing people wasting gobs of money on food that can be had for a lot less in many other places. I look at folks who buy what Sony is selling in much the same way.
How can you possibly expect to win friends and influence people around here if you keep bringing nothing but good sense and rational thinking?
You pretty much nailed my thinking exactly. Thanks for putting it on paper (well, screen).
For me, Canon is satisfying my needs almost completely. If I had a few bucks for the frivolous side, I'd probably go for the Fuji X100S, but certainly not anything with interchangeable lenses. I'm biding my time until the right second camera comes along to replace my T2i, but I'm not in a hurry. I like a lot about the EOS-M, but I'm waiting until the next iteration shows up to decide. If I go that way, I simply add something to my Canon system -- I don't have to go build a whole new system.
For the first time ever I walked through a Whole Foods grocery store today. (And purchased nothing.) Like any sensible old geezer I just shook my head as I looked at all the fashionably dressed, intelligent-appearing people wasting gobs of money on food that can be had for a lot less in many other places. I look at folks who buy what Sony is selling in much the same way.
unfocused said:
Upvote
0
We get your rant, that's the source of many debate.
Not to relaunch them here, my Nostradamus moment on future cam market:
Camphones (everyone including cheap and/or low tech soccer moms)
Mirrorless fixed lens zoom -and aspc?- to the proverbial "soccer mom" aka "the new point and shoot"
Mirrorless fixed lens fast prime aka "toy for big boys" aka "the photog purse cam"
DSLR as we know it with the underdogs (sony and such trying) to make room for themsmselves by going the mirrorless road but the top gear still being dominated by classics due to OVF and such.
Not to relaunch them here, my Nostradamus moment on future cam market:
Camphones (everyone including cheap and/or low tech soccer moms)
Mirrorless fixed lens zoom -and aspc?- to the proverbial "soccer mom" aka "the new point and shoot"
Mirrorless fixed lens fast prime aka "toy for big boys" aka "the photog purse cam"
DSLR as we know it with the underdogs (sony and such trying) to make room for themsmselves by going the mirrorless road but the top gear still being dominated by classics due to OVF and such.
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
As a dad with 2 kids(2.5 & 5yrs), the last thing I want to carry to disneyland is 5D III + 24-70 II. I live 20mins away from Disneyland, Anaheim, California and we have annual passes for our family. I see a lot of dads at disneyland busy taking picture with huge DSLR: 1DX, 5D III, 7D + grip and red ring lenses while the wifes taking care 1-3-4 kids herself :-\
This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s
. I know FF mirrorless is not for everyone, but it's for me.http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_a7_v_olympus_om_d_e_m1_v_canon_eos_5d_mk_iii/
Attachments
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
+1 well said!
Dylan777 said:
I "get" the RX1 and X100s, there is a need for small, portable cameras with great IQ. The A7 and A7r I really don't get however. If you just want 30+ MP and/or greater DR than Canon offers, buy a D800(E). At least you will have a large selection of lenses available and know the manufacturer won't abandon you by moving on to a new lens mount or IBIS in a few months.
Upvote
0
Dylan777 said:This is when I truely appreciate the body size of my RX1 and X100s
http://www.photographyblog.com/news/sony_a7_v_olympus_om_d_e_m1_v_canon_eos_5d_mk_iii/
Interesting pic. How big are your hands? Mine aren't lumberjack type but still large/long and even my old 60d was feeling cramped. What's the feeling from a pure handling purpose (not even ergonomics)
Upvote
0
bholliman said:
Not sure I want to get into this either but...for what it's worth...if a Canon shooter buys a D800(E), you can't use your Canon glass on it, which of course will normally mean a large investment in new glass. However, there's a selection of existing adapters that fit on the A7 & A7r. There are many videos of people already using Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc. mount lenses on the A7, so with the adapter, you can immediately use your Canon (or other) glass.
Plus, so many people here have said there's not much difference in 36mp vs. 22mp of the D800 vs. 5DmkIII, largely because Canon's lenses, in general are better at resolving detail. I'm curious to see what that Canon's superior glass can do with that sensor. Of course, using an adapter could nullify any IQ benefit from better glass, time will tell. EDIT - Also, in Australia I believe they're giving away one adapter of choice with these cameras, and there's speculation other places may follow.
However, I do agree with you about being concerned about Sony's history of dropping products and moving on to something else. If this thing sells well though, Sony is more likely to continue to support it.
Upvote
0
Cali_PH said:
I think that people are wrong to expect a fully functioning Canon lens on the Sony camera. You can mount it, and perhaps it will autofocus, but will it focus accurately? Will it track? Which focus points work? How accurate will the exposure be? Can you control the aperture??
Sony will likely not recognize the code that a Canon lens sends to the body in order for the body to know all about the lens and make exposure and focus point selections, or control the aperture. When you put your 85mm f/1.2 lens on the camera, can you set the aperture to f/1.2?? I'm skeptical.
I'd like to see some factual review of how well it works, or if its just a manual operation rather than just claims from someone who has not actually operated one.
Upvote
0
Dylan777 said:
The Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS lens for mirrorless E-mount weighs 840g, even heavier than Canon EF 70-200 f/4 IS lens. While Sony wide to standard lenses for FF E-mount are lighter than Canon's EF lenses, the weight of their telephoto lenses immediately negates all the so-called mirrorless advantage.
For mirrorless, Sony and Olympus dominates. Fujifilm market share is too small. Remember the Internet Amplification Effect: many folks may claim the Fuji mirrorless cameras are excellent, but the market isn't buying them.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Dylan777 said:
Mine are 5 yrs and 3 yrs daughters and a 0.5 yrs son. On our last amusement park trip, I took the 1D X, 24-70/2.8L II, and 70-300L. Admittedly, having a second lens is easier with a stroller along. But I had 1-2 of the kids the whole time, with camera+lens on a BR strap so my hands were free. I rode rides, held little hands, wiped soft serve-covered faces, etc. I liked that I had a camera I could count on to track my wife and daughters on the roller coaster while I stayed with the baby, had the high ISO performance to handle my daughters being invited on stage at a musical show in a dark theater (ISO 25,600 for a 1/250 s shutter speed as they danced with the performers), and was able to take pictures of my daughters as we rode Dr. Geyser's raft ride and all got drenched (including the camera).
That's when I truly appreciate the robustness and functionality of a 1-series body and L-series lenses. I know a FF Pro body is not for everyone, but it's for me.
Upvote
0
sanj said:
And that's pretty well where i sit, On this particular Camera (the a7r), I've gone from "Interesting development","Could work well as a back up smaller system FF to the 1Dx" "Pre Order" "cancel Pre-Order".
The only real reason I've decided to sit back and wait & see is the reports I'm reading re the a7r and poor focus in low light, even with the Zeiss 55 f/1.8, that's a real need for what I would expect to use this Camera for.
Upvote
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I, for one, never said anything about 'fully' functioning' or expecting the same autofocus performance. I'd expect it to be slower at the very least, and wouldn't be surprised if it had other issues as you mention. Here's one of the videos I've seen of someone trying the autofocus with a pre-production version. It's not really a full review, or an extensive test with every Canon lens or anything, but he shows the autofocus with one Canon lens at around 12 minutes. Perhaps some lenses won't focus at all with it, I have no idea.
Sony A7 & A7R Hands-On Field Test
Upvote
0
I honestly don't think the loud shutter would be a problem for street photos… the city is noisy, no one can hear my 5DII
And I didn't expect the AF to be stellar, but seems it might be better than the 5DII at least (what isn't?), however I plan to get the Mark 3 soon anyways, and that's another league above of course.
What's this though… UNDER 300 shots per charge, haha I need 3 batteries to match a DSLR?
No way it's lasting through an event, I'm going to be switching more and likely missing shots!
And the slow shutter sync is another factor, I like outdoor strobe shooting.
Now, I do get the temptation of wanting one as a second body, or just general purpose, the A7 is so affordable from start and just thinking about the possible drop in value over time is exciting (well, RX1 is still up there but...).
For what these two cameras are, they're probably really good and would fit the bill with many shooters, but for what I do and even like to do casually, although the smaller size is appreciated, it's not quite there yet. Sony will eventually bring out another camera in the future so I will see how that goes too, by then perhaps AF and battery technology would have improved enough
And I didn't expect the AF to be stellar, but seems it might be better than the 5DII at least (what isn't?), however I plan to get the Mark 3 soon anyways, and that's another league above of course.
What's this though… UNDER 300 shots per charge, haha I need 3 batteries to match a DSLR?
No way it's lasting through an event, I'm going to be switching more and likely missing shots!
And the slow shutter sync is another factor, I like outdoor strobe shooting.
Now, I do get the temptation of wanting one as a second body, or just general purpose, the A7 is so affordable from start and just thinking about the possible drop in value over time is exciting (well, RX1 is still up there but...).
For what these two cameras are, they're probably really good and would fit the bill with many shooters, but for what I do and even like to do casually, although the smaller size is appreciated, it's not quite there yet. Sony will eventually bring out another camera in the future so I will see how that goes too, by then perhaps AF and battery technology would have improved enough
Upvote
0
bholliman said:
Maybe because withthe D800 you have to commit to 100% swapping systems right now. Give up the better Canon video, the Canon 24-70 II and 17 and 24 T&S and 70-300L and MPE, nicer UI, etc. With the A7R you don't. Sure it's a hack and not as nice as a full performance body in one so if Canon drops the ball again for DR maybe you do finally go Nikon, but the A7R at least gives you some time to put that off a bit longer.
A7R is a lot less money than going through a system, swap too.
Who here in Canonland getting the A7R for the DR and such gives about IBIS and whatnot? Who the heck cares?
Upvote
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
Who cares?? (ok, maybe the wildlife guys wanting FF with more reach, but as we said this is just a hold over to see if Canon delivers or not)
If you are a Canon user you are getting it for the MP/DR for landscapes most likely. You are not replacing your 5D3 or 1DX or 7D with this, it's a supplement. A hack to get the DR Canon refuses to deliver to so far.
(ok well everyone would care about the aperture control, but yes the adapter absolutely allows you to control that, it's not an issue; and as for exposure I don't know it shouldn't be able to do it with Canon lenses, but even if it got 00, who cares, it's landscape you are probably doing M mode anyway or could easily enough swap to that, yeah sure it's all a little less convenient at times, as said, it's a hack to get more MP/DR for landscapes using Canon glass, but not that big of a deal and if you can't manage to get to the proper exposure pretty quickly on your own with a digital camera even if the metering isn't working at all then I doubt you even know waht DR or perhaps even MP even are)
Upvote
0
distant.star said:
Interesting POV ???
5-6yrs ago when I didn't know anything about camera, I thought spending 2-3 hundred dollars on DSLR is a waste.
Then 1st kid showed up. I started with 40D + 50mm f1.4 borrowed through a friend. Love the IQ.
Then the friend told me about 5D II + 50mm f1.4. I thought all cameras are same, so why should I spend more $$$ on FF sensor? I gave a try....felt in love with bokeh. I ended up with 5D III due to 61points AF system.
One day, I was shopping with the wife. I decided you swing by Sony store to check out their latest LED TV. I saw the RX1....I took a few shots with my own SD card. The next thing I know I spent $2800 through BH, follow RX100 II. My 2 cents. Sony makes the BEST high-end compact & mirrorless - PERIOD. Not Nikon, Not Canon
In life...we need to taste diff. things to know what out there.
Upvote
0
bholliman said:
DR is extra thing for me in term of buying Sony camera. Also, I'm not a high MP guy, if I did, I would have order A7 R instead of A7
Primary reason I want A7: compact body, FF, be able to swap lenses. I don't need all the lenses Sony/Zeiss has to offer. I'm interested in: 14 or 16mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm.
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:
If you are a Canon user, you may be getting an A7/A7r because you would love to have such a small full-frame camera with the option to use some great lenses, such as those from Leica and Zeiss. One's interest in the A7/A7r may have nothing to do with DR. Anyone who has seen Salgado's magnificent Genesis project knows that Canon delivers for landscapes, wildlife, portraits, etc. People who are still "waiting" for Canon to deliver more DR presumably have more demanding applications than Salgado, and yet can't seem to switch to Sony/Nikon. And while Canon is criticized for "refusing" to deliver more DR, it is Nikon and Sony that are failing to deliver video performance to match that of the 5D3 (as per Cameralabs - http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7r/).
Upvote
0
Similar threads
