Art and Photography

Anyone waiting for their A7 iii?

  • Last Updated:
  • Jun 18th, 2018 1:50 pm
Tags:
Deal Addict
Oct 8, 2007
1096 posts
160 upvotes
Bedford
I struggle with switching from Nikon to Sony every day now. I have put together a great Nikon kit ( D7100, D600, Nikon 17-55 2.8, Nikon 105 VR, Tamron 70-200 VC 2.8 and Nikon 1.8G ) that costs about 1/3 rd of the current Sony equivalents. I use a Lumix G7 as an interim 4K video solution and the D7100 for static video. A Sirui video monopod was the best video investment I ever made.

When shooting paid events/weddings, nobody has every asked me what type of gear I shoot. To be honest, they still kinda expect to see big ass DSLRs.

As an experiment this morning, I took a D3300 that I paid $180 for, put on a 70-200 and speedlight. The D3300 is smaller than a A7 iii. Anyway, pictures were excellent. The body actually felt too small and unbalanced. I wonder if the Sony kit loaded up with pro glass and speedlights would feel the same way....


Anyway, I would love to replace everything with Sony, but will be shooting Nikon this summer anyway.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 12, 2003
2795 posts
48 upvotes
Markham
Hey Andy. The MC11 adapter. What limitations and deficiencies are you finding on it. If I want F1.2 lens, should I get Canon 50mm 1.2 with adapter or go for Sony native lens? I dont have Canon 50mm 1.2 so will have to buy it. I dont think theres a F1.2 Sony is there?
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 12, 2003
2795 posts
48 upvotes
Markham
rebel_rfd wrote:
Jun 2nd, 2018 9:02 am

If you find you use the 70-200 range often, I would just sell the Canon at some point soon and get the Sony version, assuming you have the 2.8.
The Sony 70-200 GM is crazy sharper and offers a lot more practical uses. It has a slot in the lens hood you can use for quick access to the polarizer you might be using. It also lets you just remove the tripod foot instead of the full collar. Also you can map custom buttons to the three custom focus hold buttons on the lens. I also found it lighter than the Canon 70-200 Mark 2.
Post pics of your setup or whatever you want please.

Btw Sony 70-200 2.8 sharper than Canon? It's not the body that's enabling this? Cuz Canon 70-200 2.8 mk 2 is beast.
Member
Jul 12, 2010
410 posts
61 upvotes
chinaboy1021 wrote:
Jun 2nd, 2018 7:56 pm
Hey Andy. The MC11 adapter. What limitations and deficiencies are you finding on it. If I want F1.2 lens, should I get Canon 50mm 1.2 with adapter or go for Sony native lens? I dont have Canon 50mm 1.2 so will have to buy it. I dont think theres a F1.2 Sony is there?
It's works like wide area focus, just can't use like the face or eye AF features. would say like 10% of the time it kind of bugs out and hunts a lot for focus. Like its not a problem if you doing stills and like photo shoot... But like events type of usage for stills you can't spend the off chance of missing a key moment due to hunting for focus. And video it just depends on the style like interview stuff MC11 works great but anything with movement and stuff I wouldn't auto focus with adapted lens vs native sony... But since I got it for like 220 all in I;m quite happy with it as a previous canon user switching to sony saves me a lot of time and money trying to sell off gear and reacquire the sony counter parts at like triple the price since I use to just buy used everything. Sony I have to pay premium brand new prices with flipping taxes :(
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 12, 2003
2795 posts
48 upvotes
Markham
Still eagerly waitingggggg. Put a deposit with Aden too.

Been deciding on lenses. A lot of high end stuff to choose from.

Decided on:
85mm Sony 1.8
70-200mm 2.8 GM

Then wide angle. Not really sure...
Deal Addict
Aug 4, 2008
3458 posts
769 upvotes
Toronto
chinaboy1021 wrote:
Jun 6th, 2018 12:54 pm
Still eagerly waitingggggg. Put a deposit with Aden too.

Been deciding on lenses. A lot of high end stuff to choose from.

Decided on:
85mm Sony 1.8
70-200mm 2.8 GM

Then wide angle. Not really sure...
Why the 85, if you are getting the 70-200?

The 135 Batis is better if you want something for street/portraits.

70-200 is good for compression landscapes and portraits but heavy to lug around all day.

For wide angle, either go with the 12-24 of the 16-35 GM. The f/4 is pretty meh. Only drawback to the 12-24 is you can't use any screw on filters.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 12, 2003
2795 posts
48 upvotes
Markham
Thanks for the feedback. You ask a great question. I just did some research on the Batis 135. Batis is sooo sexy in design, as with G lens. Going with the 85mm because it's small and cheap. The priority is getting the 70-200mm 2.8 (I used this lens 90% of the times on my Canon) - so I'm set on spending on it. Therefore, not much money left for other lenses. I have a 900 dollar gift card for Best Buy so the 85mm 1.8 is they have.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 12, 2003
2795 posts
48 upvotes
Markham
rebel_rfd wrote:
Jun 6th, 2018 4:00 pm
Why the 85, if you are getting the 70-200?

The 135 Batis is better if you want something for street/portraits.

70-200 is good for compression landscapes and portraits but heavy to lug around all day.

For wide angle, either go with the 12-24 of the 16-35 GM. The f/4 is pretty meh. Only drawback to the 12-24 is you can't use any screw on filters.
Do you want to post some photos of your lens collection?
Member
Jul 12, 2010
410 posts
61 upvotes
Did you sell all your canon already?? Man you're dropping alot at once .. isn't the 70-200 like 3k after taxes. so like 7k just to swap to sony at the start... I wish I could but since I just do it as a hobby. I;m just going to slowly migrate over my kit to sony over time. Like the 55mm gets amazing reviews but I can't see myself dropping like 1200 for a 55mm f1.8 just cuz its IQ and sharpness its amazing. Its like 20% better for 10 times the price of a 50 f1.8 canon... Boy do I hate sony lens prices hehe... Just ranting / Jk. Looking forwarded for some 3rd party releases now that sony is more mainstream.
[OP]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jun 12, 2003
2795 posts
48 upvotes
Markham
Yea. All my gear is 10 year sold (including Canon lenses). Went to Henrys to test the 80D. It's the exact same as the 50D to me despite reading reviews of new features etc. Then tried a Sony A7R ii just for shits and giggles. Suddenly realized "Wow this is better and cool". So F it. Couldn't get myself to pay for $1200 for 80D considering it's the same bloody thing to me, which was a disappointment.

I sold my Canon 70-200L and 17-40L in 1 day on Kijiji. Priced it 30% lower than what other sellers are asking for. Why? Because they're obsolete. It's not the glass that's obsolete but the Canon bodies that is technology from a previous era.

I went out to shoot with my 50D and 60mm Macro along with Fuji X100 (1st gen) today. Had a lot of fun. Gear for hobby means nothing, just have fun.

But what Jason Lanier (youtuber) said made sense. You can get photos with the A7 (with better low light performance which is typical for natural light anyways) that you can't get with a DSLR. So it expands the hobby from a visual stimulation perspective.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 26, 2007
3728 posts
338 upvotes
yeah don't listen to the buffon that is Lanier

for ff i have zeiss 25 & 85, zony 55
for aps-c i have the zony 24 & 16-70, zeiss 12

i don't utilize them all as much as i wish i could but these glass will hold their value well and should outlive many bodies

i agree with the other poster, I thought 55 was going to be my main, turns out it's the 16-70...I know it's not even comparable at all...one is a baby otus and the other is a travel all-arounder

G-Master doesn't make any sense unless you're some award winning pro or have all the money in the world...supposedly they're built with next-gen sensors in mind that can resolve like 100MP but only the lab guys at Sony really knows the truth
my only experience was the 100-400mm...phenomenal build quality...clinically sharp images...but I can't take out a mortgage for a hobby
Russell wrote:
Sep 10th, 2011 12:29 pm
We come here looking for deals. We use the savings on the things we buy to justify buying more things, thus filling our homes with tons of unnecessary consumer products. Such is the key to happiness.

Deal Addict
Aug 4, 2008
3458 posts
769 upvotes
Toronto
chinaboy1021 wrote:
Jun 6th, 2018 11:07 pm

Do you want to post some photos of your lens collection?
Sorry, I keep reading this as a troll post. Are you asking for me to put pics up of my lenses or samples from each lens?
rXGveK1.jpg

chinaboy1021 wrote:
Jun 7th, 2018 12:45 am
Yea. All my gear is 10 year sold (including Canon lenses). Went to Henrys to test the 80D. It's the exact same as the 50D to me despite reading reviews of new features etc. Then tried a Sony A7R ii just for shits and giggles. Suddenly realized "Wow this is better and cool". So F it. Couldn't get myself to pay for $1200 for 80D considering it's the same bloody thing to me, which was a disappointment.

I sold my Canon 70-200L and 17-40L in 1 day on Kijiji. Priced it 30% lower than what other sellers are asking for. Why? Because they're obsolete. It's not the glass that's obsolete but the Canon bodies that is technology from a previous era.

I went out to shoot with my 50D and 60mm Macro along with Fuji X100 (1st gen) today. Had a lot of fun. Gear for hobby means nothing, just have fun.

But what Jason Lanier (youtuber) said made sense. You can get photos with the A7 (with better low light performance which is typical for natural light anyways) that you can't get with a DSLR. So it expands the hobby from a visual stimulation perspective.
To an extent, I mean you can always learn to better expose for your pictures using dSLR and not depend on dynamic range recovery in post.

I jumped to Sony since I needed more out of Canon for landscapes and when I compared the price of a Canon 5D4 which was 2 years older and a A7R3 and its feature set it didn't make sense. Canon's answer to landscape/cityscapers/timelapsers is the 6D2 which doesn't really cut it in 2018.

I had just bought the 70-200 IS II when I decided to sell off my brand new 6D2, so returned the lens, sold the 6D2, traded the grip into Adorama, sold the 16-35 Mark 3 and 24-70 Mark 2 and jumped to Sony.

Since the A7III didn't exist when I jumped, the R3 does allow me to go into crop mode when I felt limited by the 70mm on the 24-70 GM and not lose out on megapixels.

This I shot off a roof, no tripod, 16-35 GM on the R3.
DSC00598.jpg
twitchyzero wrote:
Jun 7th, 2018 2:15 am
yeah don't listen to the buffon that is Lanier. AGREED

for ff i have zeiss 25 & 85, zony 55
for aps-c i have the zony 24 & 16-70, zeiss 12

i don't utilize them all as much as i wish i could but these glass will hold their value well and should outlive many bodies

i agree with the other poster, I thought 55 was going to be my main, turns out it's the 16-70...I know it's not even comparable at all...one is a baby otus and the other is a travel all-arounder

G-Master doesn't make any sense unless you're some award winning pro or have all the money in the world...supposedly they're built with next-gen sensors in mind that can resolve like 100MP but only the lab guys at Sony really knows the truth
my only experience was the 100-400mm...phenomenal build quality...clinically sharp images...but I can't take out a mortgage for a hobby
G Master isn't that much more than the Canon/Nikon variants (especially when compared to Nikon). Additionally Sony is giving you IS in all its GM lenses due to IBIS. Only the Canon 70-200 IS II is image stabilized, the 16-35 Mark 3 and 24-70 Mark 2 are not.
If you compare the price of the recent Canon 16-35 Mark 3 to the Sony 16-35 GM they aren't too far off. The 24-70 Mark 2 is a bit older and Canon Rumors show the new 70-200 IS Mark 3 is on its way out this year and priced closer to the 70-200 GM.

G Master is meant for the Pros, but I always feel limited by primes and hate swapping lenses on mirrorless due to dust issues with no mirror. Also I do a lot of low light stuff, so need the 2.8 and coupled with IBIS, I can get away with a lot without a tripod.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Sep 26, 2007
3728 posts
338 upvotes


love love luvv my a6k5
best sweet spot camera imho...gets much more usage than my a7R ii
the 4k performance really hangs up there with the best
would only give it up for a next-gen 33MP+ APS-C preferably with 8K videos...and we know that probably aint happening until 2020
Russell wrote:
Sep 10th, 2011 12:29 pm
We come here looking for deals. We use the savings on the things we buy to justify buying more things, thus filling our homes with tons of unnecessary consumer products. Such is the key to happiness.

Deal Addict
Aug 4, 2008
3458 posts
769 upvotes
Toronto
twitchyzero wrote:
Jun 9th, 2018 3:10 am


love love luvv my a6k5
best sweet spot camera imho...gets much more usage than my a7R ii
the 4k performance really hangs up there with the best
would only give it up for a next-gen 33MP+ APS-C preferably with 8K videos...and we know that probably aint happening until 2020
It's hard to justify buying a a6500 at this point in time, unless they were under $1K.

Rumors say the a6700/7000 might also use the same battery as the current a7/a9 series.
Newbie
Jun 4, 2018
1 posts
Yea I agree with you. The best camera is the one you have.

Top