maggiemae Loc: North Carolina

So, I dont want to spark a big brand debate or anything. Recently I was thinking about moving to full frame and did a lot of research on older model nikon fx cameras. Specifically the D700 and D750, since I have a Nikon already and a few nikon lenses. However, after more extensive research, taking into consideration budget, quality, longevity, etc. And have decided to take the plunge and switch to mirrorless. Most specifically the a7Rii. I feel that camera has the biggest bang for the buck. Of course it will still take a bit of saving up on my part so the exact model will be determined by how much prices drop when I have the money to pull the trigger. The Sigma art line seems to have some excellent lenses at great prices for this line as well. If anybody on here uses this camera, what do you like about it, what do you dislike about it? What are your favorite lenses on itand what type of photography do you do? TIA!

LEWHITE7747 Loc: 33773

I would seriously thing about going to the 7Riii. It is the camera that put sony on the map. It is the best sony for the money. Please compare the 2 again. I have a Sigma 24-104 f/4 art lens. Very sharp and versatile.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Not a Sony user but many people love them. I just want to say good for you for being open minded. I’m sure you will love it.

We are in a golden age of interchange lens cameras. Any one of them when handled correctly is capable of delivering stellar results.

Ourspolair

I am a long-time Nikon lover, but have an a&c on order... smaller body than the a7ii.

User ID

If not the a7R3, skip the a7R2 and decide between the two very attractively priced non-R options. The a7-2 is a steal and the a7-3 is worth the reasonable extra $$.

I use both the a7-2 and a7-3. The “R” versions each represent an exercise increasing MP count, but the a7R2 does not offer enough increase to justify its $$ increase over the a7-2. 42MP represents a 33% gain in resolution over 24MP. It’s just not worth the extra $$. I don’t dismiss what higher resolution can provide for some uses. But 33% doesn’t accomplish much. The a7R3 offers a larger more useful increase but the $$ is steep.

Can’t say much about lenses. I use a whole collection of adapted lenses and keep my actual purchase of real FE lenses minimal. Mine are most certainly not at all prestigious: 24-70/4.0 and 28/2.0 do all I need in native Sony lenses.

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Though I didn’t need it, the 28-70 sorta fell in my lap and I’ve come to appreciate its lack of weight, and the images are as good as the the other two lenses. The savings this lens offers can afford you the $$ difference to get a III body instead of a II. Saving $$ on optics to afford a better camera is considered sacrilegious by the vociferous “Glass” worshippers here at UHH. I’ll assume you have read their misinformation in various other threads.

The 28-70 is sooooo cheap when it’s bundled, and so damnt good at its job, that the only REAL sacrilege would be in your turning it down.

w00dy4012 Loc: Thalia, East Virginia

I shoot both the a7iii and a7riii. The a7rii is a good camera, but the newer ones are so much better, if for just the sensors and battery life and nothing else. If the riii breaks your budget, I would recommend the a7iii. I don't know if there is a noticeable difference in 8 mpx. A used a7iii in nice condition should cost +/- $1000.

ELNikkor

Save for the Z7II with Z lenses. Don't use any lens with a non-Z mount + adapter or you may as well have gotten a D850. Stick with Nikon.

BLA

wait and watch threw next month. Lot of great savings on most all cameras, at least last year. Really good buys. You may even be able to get what you want!!

maggiemae Loc: North Carolina

Thanks to everybody for the advice. I will continue to research as I am no where near ready to purchase. You have all given me so great suggestions. There are soooo many optuons it can be confusing.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

I would agree with those who argue for the A7R3 over the A7R2. There really is a generational shift between the two. If you do not need the 42mp of the A7R3 (great for landscape and architecture) you also should consider the A73 with 24mp. This is the camera I have been using for over 2.5 years. I considered the A7R3 but founf the A73 more practical.

The best and most versatile general purpose lens for all the models is the Sony 24-105mm. This still is my main travel lens because it is so good, even though I own several very good primes. I think that is a great lens to start with. It has great quality, an impressive focal range, and does a lot of things really well. You then could decide what other needs you have for a lens--faster, longer, wider, macro, etc.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

A7m3 is down $300 right now in anticipation of the Mark 4...

LEWHITE7747 Loc: 33773

I agree if money is an issue the A7lll is the best bang for the buck. Do you really need all those megapixels in the R series?

spraguead Loc: Boston, MA

looked into switching from my D750 to the Sony line. Specs and staying ahead of the curve were the major factors getting me motivated. But, decided to put it on hold for now. Cost upgrade is just too much to do right now.

If I sold all my Nikon equipment, and replaced it with Sony, I would still need to shell out $4,000+. The Sony lenses are just so expensive, and unlike Nikon, there is not nearly as much available in the resale market.

If I was starting from scratch, or if I had the need for less a range of glass, I would probably grab a used a7III and just accept the lens prices.

my focus group of one.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Congratulations! I sounds like you have done exactly what you should have done - researched the topic. You have decided on the camera that's best for you. Enjoy it!

WarpedWeaver

I don't own a Sony camera but I know you have picked an excellent system. I hope it turns out to be exactly what you need for your photographic adventures.