Which camera to choose! A7s, A7r, or A7ii?!

[hfac1988]

Hello everyone, 

 

This is my first post here. I'm in the process of moving over from a pentax k5 system over to a sony alpha system. The main reason for the move is the size of the setup, and also the FF advantage.

 

I wouldn't say I'm someone who shoots all the time, but when I use the camera it's quite specific. I need a very lightweight setup as I tend to use it most when I'm backpacking so the smaller and lighter it is, the better. I also like photographing interiors of buildings and architecture at times with a fisheye. Other times, it'll be in the mountains when I'm climbing or going for walks. I very rarely do portraits and stills, but when I'm travelling it's a mixed batch, normally combined with the worst conditions ever. (poor light, lots of dust, crap weather.) I also very rarely shoot videos.

 

I'm set on pairing it up with the FE Zeiss 35mm f2.8, and probably get myself a samyang fisheye in the future. I don't tend to shoot at tele much, and I am very used to using just the k5 with a 31mm f1.8, or a 20-40mm zoom. My zoom = my feet.

 

Now I'm a bit stuck with which camera may be the best for me. I'm working on a rather tight budget so the A7Rii and A7Sii are definitely out of range. I can afford a second handed a7r, a7s or a7ii. I'm very much inclined on the a7s, due to the ability to shoot in extremely low light, which often is why I left my camera behind for dark things when I was on the road and would open up a different avenue of photography for me. And the 12mp size means smaller files to work with as I'm unlikely to ever print in commercial sizes requiring high res. For canvas prints in the house 12mp is plentiful. The low light performance also means I can play with the camera for much longer in the hills, with the k5, it gets dim and photos aren't very useable unless it involves a lot of gear.

 

I've attached a few photos that I've taken on the road that have been my favourites and probably give a good idea what my shooting is like. 

 

Any advise would be much appreciated! 

Thank you

Adrian

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[rdgeorge55]

I will see if I can help.   Firstly, the Pentax K5 is a crop-sensor DSLR, right?  If so, the effective field of view using a FE 35mm f/1.8 will be wider on a full-frame camera like the A7S than with the 31mm f/1.8 on the K5 (31 x 1.5 = 46.5 mm effective field of view).

 

If you backpack a lot, how about a Sony a6300?  It is also an APC crop-sensor.  The kit lens is not that great but there are a number of primes and wide-angle zooms that would work well.  The Sony 10-18mm is well-rated and optically stabilized.  The new Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is highly praised and is not too expensive.  It is not optically stablized.  The Zeiss Touit primes are good, but a bit pricey.

 

A used A7S is a possibility, and great in low light.  It is full frame.  Most folks using this body shoot video, either exclusively or in conjunction with stills.

 

I shoot more stills than video but want strong video performance available.  I now have three bodies:

 

a7R ii

a7S

a6300 

 

plus an RX100 iii 

 

For hiking / skiing / biking I now take the a6300 or the RX100.

 

Be sure and get at least two batteries if not more.  Get the Watson dual charger. 

 

Good luck!

[addicted2light]

Hello and welcome to the forum!

 

My background: I shoot mostly landscapes in the mountains and in the woods (so lots of hiking required), and I use an A7r with adapted glass (usually Contax Zeiss) for this, a Fuji X-T10 for anything handheld or that moves, and finally an Olympus E-M10 for travels (the lenses are super sharp but incredibly small) and bicycle tours. For an idea of what I shoot you can check my portfolio page here:

Portfolios

 

The best all-around solution among the cameras you listed is the A7 II. For static subjects IBIS is much more useful than high ISOs, and you'll get more megapixels to boot (and 24Mp are plenty). Besides, IMO, 12Mp with the mainstream diffusion of 4k (and later 8k) monitors in the next few years will not be enough. So why not future-proof your pictures?

 

But if you are going to use a tripod (and I assume you will, given the kind of subjects you shoot), and don't use long focal lengths (long, in this case, is anything more than 135/180mm) go for the A7r. Its only major faults are, for me:

 

1. the mushy shutter button, without a clear point of detent; not a big deal if you shoot landscape / architecture, but bloody annoying for anything that moves
2. the shutter shock with lenses longer than 135/180mm. Even on a sturdy tripod, you will be forced in using 1/focal length shutter speeds (or in shooting multiple frames and select the un-blurred one).
3. with certain long adapted lenses the relatively small lens mount can generate weird vignetting patterns that are a pain to get rid of (it is something quite rare, but I though it was wort mentioning)
4. this is not a fault per se, because it will depend on your taste. But to get to the colors I want I have to push and bend Sony files quite a lot, compared for example to Olympus or Fuji ones. But the results are ultimately gorgeous
5. again not a fault of the camera per se, but with 36Mp you will struggle oftentimes to have everything in focus without focus-stacking if the frame includes near and far subjects

 

Other than that the A7r is a fantastic landscape / architecture / still-life / anything that doesn't move much camera. 36Mp are something you'll learn to master.

 

And the dynamic range is fantastic, even if at 100% the image gets a bit noisy pretty fast when you start pushing it. From my own test (shooting a grey step card and measuring the white point 0-255 value within Photoshop), the A7r dynamic range is around 11 2/3 stops. That'll give you a lot of latitude.

 

[rdgeorge55]

Addicted2light makes some good points.  The a7 ii with IBIS might be a good choice.  The ergonomics are better than for the a7S or the a7R.

Using a tripod is always a good idea.  Really Right Stuff makes great plates for Sony bodies.  Their plate for my a7R ii has the battery door on the plate and not on the camera!  They also make great ball heads and carbon fiber legs.  Some folks balk at spending much on a tripod relative to the cost of cameras, but a good tripod is a very long-lasting investment, which will serve you for years as your camera bodies come and go.

 

Regarding color - the new sensors appear to provide better color out of the cameras (true for a7R ii and a6300).

[rdgeorge55]

Just checked at B&H site:

 

used a7S    $1,650 to $1,750

used a7R    none listed

 

New a7 ii     $1,498

New a6300 $   998

[VTC]

"...12mp size means smaller files to work with..."  So why not just shoot 100kb files? The point is you'll never regret having lots of data to work with but you will hit your head with a 5# hammer when you butt up against the limits a file can be stretched to. You only need to have a prospective client rave about your image as being perfect for their national campaign but reject it because your preference for dinky files limited its usefulness. 

[markphoto4u]

The influence of advertising is amazing. IMHO 12mp on a full frame sensor is enough megapixels for any size print I have ever printed (up to 13x19). I recently purchased the A7ii and had a metal print made by MagnaChrome in California that is 18 inches high and 6 feet long. I not only did not need more megapixels, but I am very glad I did not let advertisings influence a decision to buy more megapixels. In my opinion anything more than 24 mp on a full frame is good for bragging rights only. And consider this: I stitched together 9 vertical shots to give me the 180 degree pano I was looking for, and ended up with a 505 mp file. Even just stitching 6 frames gives me over 300. This argument that storage is cheap is extremely near sited. I highly recommend you consider the down side of having a larger than needed mp sensor before you freeze up that new computer. Also, if you need billboard size photos or photos 8 or 10 feet high and several feet wide like you see in the mall, I would make sure it is not a medium format size sensor you need to compete on that level.

 

 

markphoto4u

[Gilgenberg]

i switched from A7 to A7S

 

and i am very very happy!

 

it is an awesome camera and i´m very happy about IQ, smaller File size and silent shooting!

 

as the ISO is so much better, IBIS is not necessary  IMOH, maybe except Video and Tele lenses

 

i was looking for a A7II but the size and weight from a IBIS Body was not for me, i like the lightweight and smaller Body of the A7S

 

IQ is very good but yes there is a difference in the possibility of cropping  after shooting, so you have to compose your shot more heedful

 

what is a good thing!

 

also i use Leica glass and the Sensor from the A7S is much better for RF wide angle Lenses, no corner smearing and color cast

 

and i love the silent shooting!

 

also colors are better and battery live, with A7S than with A7 IMOH 

[Guest Peter Kelly]

I'm going to keep my answer very brief: out of those cameras you list the A7S is, to my mind, by far the best and most flexible.

[Zé De Boni]

About the harsh conditions you've described, you should avoid changing lenses as much as you can. Considering that your choice will be full frame and that you use wide angles and fish-eye, a good lens choice is the Sony FE 28mm f/2 and the two converters. You will get 3 lens possibilities including one fish-eye without the need of exposing the sensor while changing them (it is much easier to clean the lenses than the sensor). It is also a lighter pack than with 3 individual lenses (cheaper too). Image quality will not be the highest, for sure, but the camera (or software) can correct much of the lens (and combos) limitations, better if you can close some two stops. Starting from that, you may choose any other better quality primes in the future.

As the A6300 is a nice option, I can tell you that the Rokkinon's 12mm f/2 and 8mm f/3.5 Fish-eye do a great job.

[Zé De Boni]

Reflecting a little more on your use description, I would not risk an expensive camera in those backpack, crap weather, lots of dust conditions. Even if it is second hand, an expensive camera means more expensive service and parts (usually). Any accident and you will have to replace it with another expensive body.

I endorse every word that rdgeorge55 wrote. I just would add that for the price of an used A7S or R you may get one A6300 plus 1 A6000 bodies. You don't need to buy both at once, but it is wise to have a backup camera.The A6000 is a great option and bargain now. Do you really need the champion low light performance? The A6000 is already OK for general conditions and the A6300 promises an upgrade.

The kit 16-50 lens will solve at least 60% of your needs. Considering that you will not make large prints, its optical defects won't be critical, as long as you use in body or software corrections. It is optically stabilized, very compact and cheap. It saves a lot of space in your bag.

Then you may choose the primes suited for your more careful work.

[Golem]

"...12mp size means smaller files to work with..."  So why not just shoot 100kb files?

The point is you'll never regret having lots of data to work with but you will hit your

head with a 5# hammer when you butt up against the limits a file can be stretched to.

You only need to have a prospective client rave about your image as being perfect

for their national campaign but reject it because your preference for dinky files

limited its usefulness.  

  

Client ? What client ?

 

And why 5# ?  Why not 9# ? More is better, right ?

I mean, you only need to have a "prospective client"  

laugh at your dinky little hammer .... 

  

Acoarst [i'm showing some prejudice here, but that

doesn't make me wrong .... ] K5 shooters generally

do NOT HAVE clients. Nor does anyone involved in

National Advertising Campaigns query denizens of 

forums such as this to help them choose a camera.

  

OK ... WHAT IF ... so what if there might be a client. 

  

He is the same buyer who was buying 12MP images

five years ago. He doesn't read Pop Photo, and he

doesn't peep pixels. But he does know that "Nobody

sees any difference at 55mph". National Advertising

Campaign ... indeed ! Prospective [PROSPECTIVE,   

LOL] clients raving about some image and suddenly

deciding it's perfect for fame and fortune ? You have

never dealt with AEs and ADs it seems. 

[Golem]

TWIMC: Artistic Directors and Account Execs.

[hfac1988]

Thanks for the advise here people, I've read the forum but got caught up by stuff and work everytime I tried to type a reply!

 

I've ended up going for a used a7s that came with the zeiss 35mm f2.8 and just took it out for a night and had a quick go with it on a tripod, and handheld in the morning. I have to say, the more I read about the cameras the more the 7s suited me, and a play in a shop meant the decision was easily made. Luckily one came at a decent price with a lens  (used, limited budget) so I've swapped systems rather quickly!

 

I do see the point of having an a7r, but as a few have pointed out, unless I'm printing, or advertising, which I don't, and don't intend to (My money making tool is definitely not going to be photography), it may be a bit of an overkill. And in reality, if I want a high-res shot, like a panorama, I'll most likely stitch it together. IBIS, as I have experienced from using the K5, did not really make a huge difference when I compared it with other cameras whilst I was handling my friends'. 

 

Thank you peeps, much appreciated.

 

The 7s hopefully will allow me to use it a bit more when I'm travelling, especially in dim conditions and the low light ability has a great appeal.

 

I'll probably get myself a fuji x30 at some point for times when I really don't want to "risk" a camera body, but IMHO, cameras are bought to be used and not pampered, only to be well taken care of.

 

I

[Golem]

Great snag. Congradzulations !

 

IMNSHO fate has led you down

the preferred path.

[RightAngle]

Congratulations on the purchase.
I would like to chime in n the usefulness of the 36MP, as it is certainly much more than a marketing gimmick. Specifically in your case, same as in mine, they provide for the ability to crop. You can use that 35mm Zeiss as a 35-50mm zoom, while having equal or better resolution than your old K5 across that range. Rather useful for someone who wants to carry less. There's also no need to stick with the usual ratio, one can crop around to 1:1 or 16:9 or whatever while still retaining plenty of resolution. Lastly, for printing purposes, 12MP is hardly that much and the 13x19 size mentioned is rather small (although that is ultimately subjective). As for storage space and computer speed, the bigger file will certainly be more troublesome, but hardly such an issue - consider the size of the file your K-5 gave you and then compare.