sdemaagd Loc: Michigan

So, I still have not upgraded to a FF camera body... :( (Move is delaying large purchases!)

However, in my delay, Sony has come out with the a7/a7R...has anyone had experience with this mirror-less system? I have alpha bodies now, so am concerned also that a lens adapter may affect quality of photo?

The a7 also seems very small/light...I mainly do newborn and wedding photography, with a bit of everything else thrown in...anyone with experience with the a7 think the smallness/light weightedness of this camera will be a setback?

Thank you!!

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Its not as small as you might think, but its smaller than Nikons and Canons full frame bodies. Image quality is very good. The big drawback however is the shortage of lens selection for the E-mount that Sony decided to put on these bodies. They eliminated in-camera vibration control so now you need it in the lens (just like Nikon and Canon use), and the selection of lenses with their OIS system is very limited still. Sure, people will tell you that you can use other lenses via adapters, but why buy a camera just to use adapters? You can literally adapt any lens to any body with adapters these days so that is a minimal advantage. Research them well before making the plunge, knowledge is very valuable.

sdemaagd Loc: Michigan

That's kind of the way I'm leaning...I'm interested in the mirrorless...but I also have alpha bodies now and don't really want to buy new lenses (can't really afford it anyway!)...I'm mainly interested in low light capability; and hopefully any FF body I purchase will be an improvement over what I have now (a300 and a580)...

dfharper1961

Hi,

I have the a850 and the a200, both with battery grips I love the FF of the a850 with my larger fast lenses it's a dream !! But sometimes I want to go light so I picked up the NEX-6. Yes, you can use adapters but if you shoot with long tele's or zooms the setup can get very front heavy. Having said that I like the adapters simply because now I can access prime lens from others systems I could only dream of before. I suggest you go check it out, if possible handle it. If you can take the largest most awkward lense you use on a regular basis and if they will let you see if you like it on the a7r.

Good Luck,

Ronin

RJM Loc: Cardiff, S Wales, UK

I have the Sony A7s and it is superb.

Those thinking mirrorless cameras aren't as good as mirror cameras are deluding themselves. You will be pleasantly surprised.

Even micro four thirds offers excellent image quality and a fantastic selection of lenses. Many pro's have switched and shoot professionally with them.

As to the Sony, it is the FE lenses you need to look out for. More are in the pipeline. You can use crop sensor lenses by changing the camera setting.

I have a voigtlander 15mm on a close focus adapter and it works just great. The thing with it being mirrorless is you can use a multitude of lenses from other systems.

Peekayoh Loc: UK

I use the A7r for Landscapes and Portraits for which it's pretty well unbeatable. I wouldn't recommend it for the uses you've described or for sports although it would be Ok for the Newborns. Basically, the shutter is too slow in a fast moving situation like a Wedding so the A7 would be preferable or the A7s if you want real low light capability.

Having said that, seeing as you don't want to buy new lenses, the obvious choice is the a99 (or the a99ii ?). By the time you've splashed out on the LA-EA4 adapter there won't be a lot in it pricewise, you'll get better AF with the a99 and there's little to choose in IQ between the a99 and a7.

RJM Loc: Cardiff, S Wales, UK

I don't quite get the fact you say the shutter is too slow.

The shutter is very fast! I think you mean the auto focus isn't fast enough?

Yes, it will shoot sports but there are better cameras with faster auto focus.

The auto focus on the little Nikon 1 system makes every camera seem slow by comparison!

sdemaagd Loc: Michigan

Yes, I'm reading about all of Sony's Full Frames...I'm not super concerned about what I use for the newborns; but low-light (higher ISO with not so much noise) and fast auto-focus are my main desires (for the weddings!)...I did hear that it is easy to get dust, etc. that cannot be cleaned/blown off easily yourself (need to send in to get cleaned) on the sensor of the a99...that was making me pause and consider either trying to find a used a900 (or 850), or check out the a7...but if the a7 has slower AF, I don't think I want to go that route!

Peekayoh Loc: UK

I clearly need to compose my posts more carefully.

Certainly the shutter is to a professional specification with speeds up to 1/8,000th with motorized actuation but the shutter lag with the A7R can not be reduced to less than 1/4 in single shot mode. The A7R executes a pre-exposure shutter action which involves closing the shutter with a movement of both blinds. This takes 250ms (or 1/4 second) creating the surprisingly long shutter release lag.

Then you're a better man than me Gunga Din. Apart from the shutter lag, acquiring focus by contrast detection, normally seems to take around 1/4 second with an FE or E lens, but can take half to one second in low light or with a low contrast subject. All that makes little difference to me as I mainly use MF lenses or the PDAF equipped LE-AE4 adapter with A-mount lens and I don't use the camera to shoot fast moving subjects.

I wouldn't know, the tiny sensor rules it out for any application I might have. TBH, I don't know why Nikon produced the camera in the first place but I suppose it's a decent upgrade from a P&S.

Peekayoh Loc: UK

The A7 fares better than the A7r; shutter lag is minimal and the hybrid AF is faster. Unfortunately, in low light situations, OSPDAF tends not to kick in and you're stuck with the relatively slow CDAF. If you want reliably fast AF, you need the LA-EA4 adapter and an A-mount lens or an a99.

Dust is more of an issue with the mirrorless camera, I guess because the Sensor is more exposed; there again that makes it easier to clean. Nonetheless, the Sensor of the a99 is no harder to clean than any other DSLR either by blower or wet cleaning methods.

A900? I wouldn't recommend it unless your budget mandates it. Not that the a900 isn't a fine camera, it provides very detailed and easily worked Raw files more than adequate for a Wedding. I just prefer the higher IQ and additional information provided by the EVF equipped a99 or a7 + LA-EA4.

RJM Loc: Cardiff, S Wales, UK

I haven't used the A7/A7R as I didn't buy as I heard there were issues.

My remarks were in relation to the A7s.

As you can read from the review of Steve HUFF, (who has used most cameras out there) link below, the A7s is a different beast from the A7/A7R. The auto focus is much faster and the low light performance beats any camera out there. He says at the moment, as for sports shooting, it's main drawback is that it's limited by the lack of FE lenses.

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/07/01/the-sony-a7s-digital-camera-review-wow-period/


As to the Nikon 1 system, it sounds like you have never used it. You seem dismissive of anything that is not full frame.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

It seems to me, that from where you are at now that the new A77 II would make the most sense ( step up) for you ??

Newsbob Loc: SF Bay Area

My main camera is a Canon 5DM3. I love it. A friend who works at Sony convinced me to buy the A7, based mainly on PopPhotography naming the A7R as camera of the year. Plus I got my friend's employee discount.

I am very disappointed with the camera. It shoots fine in bright conditions. At higher ISO, it gets noisy, certainly much, much noisier than the Canon.

Also, I am frustrated by the slow release of the FE lenses, which is what the A7 uses. They have several mid-range zooms, including the kit 24-70, and a Zeiss version, which is much more expensive. There is only one telephoto zoom, 70-200mm which costs $1,500 and is as heavy as a Canon lens. There is no wide angle zoom yet.

There are a number of primes, if you need them, but they are also very expensive.

Since I shoot primarily while traveling, I need zoom lenses, so the Sony A7 is of no use, even though it is so much lighter than the Canon.

I have also had difficulty with the EVF. It is sometimes difficult to see details, such as people's expressions, when using the small viewfinder (at least, I'm having that problem.) Also, since it's electronic, and it wants to let you review the shots you've just taken, it is sometimes difficult to shoot a series of photos, since the review doesn't let you see real life. There are workarounds, but I prefer a live viewfinder to an electronic one.

Bottom line, it's a very good, high quality camera which has the advantage of being much lighter than an equivalent DSLR, but it has disadvantages as well, and for now at least, a lack of zoom lenses.

countryman60951 Loc: Bourbonnais, Il

I have purchased the a7R with 55mm prime lens, for mostly landscape work. SO far I like it. My biggest complaint is the lack of zoom lenses. I plan on next year of purchasing the 70 to 200 "G" lens. and should cover most of my applications. I am not partial to brands since I have had a Nikon and currently own 2 Canons. They all serve certain purposes for me. The Sony a7R is my first full frame camera and at least with the current lens I have with it allows me to crop heavily if I need to. As with any camera brand there are pluses and minuses in all of them. With the Sony it is lack of lens choices but I purchased it on the fact they were going to add more lens to the line up. For IQ it is great, ruggedly built and lighter than a DSLR. Would I part with my Canon 7D, no. Good camera and serves it purpose well.

AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

I remember the first time I picked up a Canon 1DSII and shot a few frames in the camera store. It felt so solid. I knew I had to get one and I did, which I later sold to get the 5DII and then the 5DIII. I,for one, like the weight and solid feel of the bigger bodies. The weight gives you an added steadiness. I would think that shooting with the Sony A7 is quite the opposite although it is a lot of camera in a little body. Depends on how you want to use it. Maybe good for street photography as they don't stand out and are mini.