| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/11/2014 06:17:19 PM · #76 |
Originally posted by Garry:
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by rooum:
Originally posted by Garry:
In simple terms, what're the main differences between
A7
A7R
A7S |
Pretty much sensor size. The A7R has a huge 36m or something sensor and no AA filter, similar to the Nikon D800e. more geared towards landscapes perhaps. The A7S is at the other end, still Full Frame but only a 12m sensor, which sound small these days but it has been designed for amazing low light, high ISO, to an amazing level. It also has very high end video capabilities. The cheaper A7 is kind of inbetween, with a 24m sensor. It also has a slightly lesser build quality. What Sony has done has come out with three cameras designed for different uses. I wouldn't want to use a A7R for a wedding, that big sensor effects lots of things. The A7S would be perfect for a wedding though. |
To expand on this, it's really not sensor size (they're all double cine / full frame), but rather pixel pitch.
The A7 has the mid-size pixels, the A7R has smaller pixel sites (More noise, more detail), the A7S has the largest pixel sites (Lower resolution, but CRAZY high ISO performance.) |
SOUNDS like the A7 is a happy middle of the road. Question is, does the performance suffer because of that? Is it "inferior" to the other two? Since it's the cheapest of the three, what quality (picture or build) compromises had to be made?
|
The A7 is a perfectly capable and, in my opinion so far, pretty great camera and it's only really inferior to the other when you want to play in those niche areas the others are designed for. If I want to print the best, high resolution image to a very large size then it is not going have the detail and quality of the A7R and likewise if I want to shoot in the lowest light possible then it won't perform as well at high ISO as the A7S. For 90% of the time I'm sure it's fine for most uses. The differing amount of pixels in each camera also effects other things as well. the 36M of the A7R, like other similar sensors, mean that camera shake etc is more noticeable so you may need to keep to higher shutter speeds. Also, it can show up the limitations of lenses more- using wider third party M mount lenses are more of a problem for example, less so on the A7 and less pixels on the A7S means it's not a problem. As to build- I've only used the A7 and it's a good solid camera as it should be for the price but I think the other two tend to be all metal as opposed to mostly metal. I can't quite remember the details. |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 06:28:48 PM · #77 |
Originally posted by rooum:
As to build- I've only used the A7 and it's a good solid camera as it should be for the price but I think the other two tend to be all metal as opposed to mostly metal. I can't quite remember the details. |
A7 is magnesium/plastic composite, 7r and 7s are all-magnesium. |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 06:30:34 PM · #78 |
Originally posted by Garry:
Regarding pixels, I always thought bigger was better. Wasn't that one of the many drawing points of FF? |
Think of these sensors as frames of 35m film with different ISO ratings, and you trade off increased sensitivity for increased noise. The physical size of the three frames/sensors is the same, but you can pack into the same area more smaller and less-sensitive pixels, or fewer larger and more-sensitive pixels. |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 06:34:02 PM · #79 |
Saying that though, it's not a perfect camera of course. I have a short list of niggles about it. Some of which can surely be rectified by a firmware update I'd have thought. If Sony were good at that sort of thing which I don't thing it is yet. Unlike Fuji who are great at listening to people and constantly updating firmware. Some of the things I'm not keen on...
- Shutter sound. As I said, it's loud. Nice sound but annoyingly loud unlike the Fuji's. The A7 is better than the A7R as you can switch to an electric front shutter which silences the first part of the loud double click. The A7S can be completely silent if needed which is one of the attractions for me. I don't think a firmware update could rectify this though.
- Auto ISO is dumb. There is no way to set minimum shutter speed or tailor it to a lens. I quickly learnt to shoot in Manual as opposed to Aperture Priority to get round this.
- A really annoying thing is not being able to assign a button to briefly turn on the back screen monitor. If you are using the viewfinder you have to head back into the menus to switch on the screen just to review a photo. Very silly.
- Not being able to program in the focal lengths of lenses when using third party manual focus lenses. On the Fuji or Nikon you could do this which at least tells you what lens you are using when in Lightoom or similar even if it doesn't record the aperture.
Message edited by author 2014-12-11 18:41:30. |
|
|
|
12/11/2014 06:35:18 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by rooum:
As to build- I've only used the A7 and it's a good solid camera as it should be for the price but I think the other two tend to be all metal as opposed to mostly metal. I can't quite remember the details. |
A7 is magnesium/plastic composite, 7r and 7s are all-magnesium. |
Yea, that's it. As it is, the A7 does feel solid enough for me and has a good weight to it though. |
|
|
|
12/16/2014 10:59:18 PM · #81 |
| Sony A7 series promotion going on now. Trade in any "working" DSLR or mirrorless camera and get 15% credit towards A7, A7r, A7s in addition to the value of your trade in. I don't think it applies to the new A7-II. Now may be the time. Sony promotion |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 12:25:03 AM · #82 |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 02:45:07 AM · #83 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Sony A7 series promotion going on now. Trade in any "working" DSLR or mirrorless camera and get 15% credit towards A7, A7r, A7s in addition to the value of your trade in. I don't think it applies to the new A7-II. Now may be the time. Sony promotion |
Your link is to a pdf..do you know where to go to see that trade-in special on the Sony website, I can't find it. |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 03:57:49 AM · #84 |
I concur:
Having had several Canon bodies I have a reasonable amount of Canon glass.
Tired of carrying my 5D ii with battery grip I decided to buy an A7s.
I also purchased a Metabones adapter so that all of my Canon lenses fit.
All I can say is Superb!
On those days that you look at the camera and say " not sure I want to lug that thing about, I'll use my iPhone"
You now just grab it and go.
May not have improved my ability but defiantly changed my outlook on taking the thing with me.
The A7s was my choice but I think the A7r would be absolutely fine as well. |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 05:10:12 AM · #85 |
| For those street photographers out there who are thinking about buying the A7 after only shooting with a APS-C sized sensor, you might find the difrence in depth of field changes what focal lengh you normaly shoot with. I nearly always used a 35mm on the Fuji Xpro but with the Sony the 50mm is harder to use when you want everything in focus, on the street that's a lot of the time, I'm much more at ease now with 35mm on a FF camera, but it took some getting used to. |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 09:13:05 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by Garry:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Sony A7 series promotion going on now. Trade in any "working" DSLR or mirrorless camera and get 15% credit towards A7, A7r, A7s in addition to the value of your trade in. I don't think it applies to the new A7-II. Now may be the time. Sony promotion |
Your link is to a pdf..do you know where to go to see that trade-in special on the Sony website, I can't find it. |
Click "Begin Tradein" at the bottom of the PDF to be redirected to the website. It seems to be a B&H promotion, BTW... |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 09:53:51 AM · #87 |
Originally posted by Guyzy:
I concur:
Having had several Canon bodies I have a reasonable amount of Canon glass.
Tired of carrying my 5D ii with battery grip I decided to buy an A7s.
I also purchased a Metabones adapter so that all of my Canon lenses fit.
All I can say is Superb!
On those days that you look at the camera and say " not sure I want to lug that thing about, I'll use my iPhone"
You now just grab it and go.
May not have improved my ability but defiantly changed my outlook on taking the thing with me.
The A7s was my choice but I think the A7r would be absolutely fine as well. |
curious, how well does the adapter work? do you maintain full control of he lens such as AF and aperture control? |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 12:21:07 PM · #88 |
Originally posted by Mike:
curious, how well does the adapter work? do you maintain full control of he lens such as AF and aperture control? |
We bought the adaptor, it worked great on the 16-35mm, not so well on the 100mm Macro. With that one, the focus was really jumpy. But electronically, it all connected. In the end we made an executive decision not to go with the adaptor and sent it back to B&H. Why? Size and weight. The whole purpose of this exercise was to downsize, and body + adaptor + 16-35mm was just getting too bulky and heavy. We might have kept the adaptor and the 100mm macro, but the focus was kind of squirrely so I had to go MF on that.
Meanwhile, once I realized how astonishingly sharp and detailed that sensor is, I realized that the 24-70mm Zeiss optic focuses close enough that I can easily crop to 1:1 and still have great quality, so... |
|
|
|
12/17/2014 07:41:54 PM · #89 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Garry:
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Sony A7 series promotion going on now. Trade in any "working" DSLR or mirrorless camera and get 15% credit towards A7, A7r, A7s in addition to the value of your trade in. I don't think it applies to the new A7-II. Now may be the time. Sony promotion |
Your link is to a pdf..do you know where to go to see that trade-in special on the Sony website, I can't find it. |
Click "Begin Tradein" at the bottom of the PDF to be redirected to the website. It seems to be a B&H promotion, BTW... |
Actually, Adorama is having the very same promotion but you can also trade in a lens, or your DSLR. Adorama Sony Series 7 promotion Looks like after all is said and done with a purchase the A7 will cost below a grand. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 01:00:30 AM · #90 |
One of these would take 7-8 lbs out of my "lightweight" backpacking setup, maybe get me closer to "ultralight"...
How do they do in low light/stars? Like this...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/66222453@N05/14948322538/
Bear - did you move back to California? |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 05:19:04 AM · #91 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The whole purpose of this exercise was to downsize, and body + adaptor + 16-35mm was just getting too bulky and heavy. |
I'm curious. Wouldn't the glass weight depend mainly on the sensor size?
edit to clarify: why would a full frame mirrorless lens be any lighter than an equivalent DSLR lens?
Message edited by author 2014-12-18 08:04:00. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 08:30:20 AM · #92 |
Originally posted by mitalapo:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The whole purpose of this exercise was to downsize, and body + adaptor + 16-35mm was just getting too bulky and heavy. |
I'm curious. Wouldn't the glass weight depend mainly on the sensor size?
edit to clarify: why would a full frame mirrorless lens be any lighter than an equivalent DSLR lens? |
Mirrorless are smaller, so lenses must be smaller too, to give balance. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 08:46:42 AM · #93 |
Originally posted by mpeters:
One of these would take 7-8 lbs out of my "lightweight" backpacking setup, maybe get me closer to "ultralight"...
How do they do in low light/stars? Like this...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/66222453@N05/14948322538/
Bear - did you move back to California? |
No, we go out there every couple years to visit my sister in the Bay area and spend some time at Big Sur.
So far I'm extremely satisfied with the low light performance of the a7r, but as I understand it both the other models are better yet. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 08:56:47 AM · #94 |
Originally posted by mitalapo:
I'm curious. Wouldn't the glass weight depend mainly on the sensor size?
edit to clarify: why would a full frame mirrorless lens be any lighter than an equivalent DSLR lens? |
It would SEEM so, wouldn't it? But have you ever noticed, back in the old days, how much smaller lenses were on the rangefinder cameras than they were on the SLRs? The reason has to do with the distance from the film/sensor plane to the rear element of the lens. SLR cameras have a deep "mirror box" to allow the viewing/focusing mirror to flip up out of the way during the exposure. This requires a much more complex optical arrangement, especially with wide-angle lenses, to "project" the image the extra distance to the film plane. These lenses are called "retrofocus" lenses, technically. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 08:59:55 AM · #95 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Originally posted by mitalapo:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The whole purpose of this exercise was to downsize, and body + adaptor + 16-35mm was just getting too bulky and heavy. |
I'm curious. Wouldn't the glass weight depend mainly on the sensor size?
edit to clarify: why would a full frame mirrorless lens be any lighter than an equivalent DSLR lens? |
Mirrorless are smaller, so lenses must be smaller too, to give balance. |
I don't know. See for example: Sony 16-35mm F4 weighting ~0.5kg vs. Canon 16-35mm F4 weighting ~0.6kg, which is a pretty small difference attributable to the number of elements. But maybe you are right in that mirrorless vendors will try harder to make ligher lenses. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 09:03:46 AM · #96 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by mitalapo:
I'm curious. Wouldn't the glass weight depend mainly on the sensor size?
edit to clarify: why would a full frame mirrorless lens be any lighter than an equivalent DSLR lens? |
It would SEEM so, wouldn't it? But have you ever noticed, back in the old days, how much smaller lenses were on the rangefinder cameras than they were on the SLRs? The reason has to do with the distance from the film/sensor plane to the rear element of the lens. SLR cameras have a deep "mirror box" to allow the viewing/focusing mirror to flip up out of the way during the exposure. This requires a much more complex optical arrangement, especially with wide-angle lenses, to "project" the image the extra distance to the film plane. These lenses are called "retrofocus" lenses, technically. |
I see. This may explain the difference in number of elements between the 16-35mm F4 Sony and Cannon above, but it all sums up to a 20% weight difference. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 09:25:29 AM · #97 |
Originally posted by mitalapo:
I don't know. See for example: Sony 16-35mm F4 weighting ~0.5kg vs. Canon 16-35mm F4 weighting ~0.6kg, which is a pretty small difference attributable to the number of elements. But maybe you are right in that mirrorless vendors will try harder to make ligher lenses. |
I knew i have seen such analysis before :-)
//www.thephoblographer.com/2014/09/22/isnt-point-mirrorless-camera-systems-lighter-lenses
|
|
|
|
12/18/2014 10:51:12 AM · #98 |
I'm definitely intrigued...
I could swap my Canon kit for one of these, but I have some reservations about the lens adapters, the flash system and, if I decided to go all in for Sony lenses, the availability and price of those lenses. I'm also not sure which one I'd choose. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 11:30:05 AM · #99 |
Originally posted by mitalapo:
This may explain the difference in number of elements between the 16-35mm F4 Sony and Cannon above, but it all sums up to a 20% weight difference. |
It's not just weight, it's BULK. Plus, I was using the f/2.8 Canon, which is quite a bit bigger than the f/4.0 version. Anyway, when you factor in the 20% weight difference and the MUCH lighter body, you have a substantially lighter package, and the optical performance is stellar. |
|
|
|
12/18/2014 12:30:44 PM · #100 |
Might be able to use a lighter tripod/head combo and still keep steady, too.
I know the tripod I have wouldn't support a DSLR and full frame 2.8 zoom quite as easily as it supports my Fuji. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/01/2025 08:29:08 PM EDT.
