Looking to upgrade from the A65

[Driven Media Works]

Hi everyone,

 

I've had my A65 for a couple of years now and i think i am ready for an upgrade, but i'm unsure of which way to go. I'd like to get some opinions about other users' experiences to better educate myself on the camera options as i can't rent them locally to test them out.

 

Right now, my gear includes the aforementioned A65, and the two lenses i usually use are the Sony 70-200 SSM 2.8 and the DT 18-55. I occasionally use an old Minolta Maxxam 50, and also have a beer can and a DT55-300 that rarely gets used anymore. I didn't really know much about camera specs when i purchased the body or the two DT lenses.

 

I shoot mostly drag racing, most of which is during the day, but sometimes i need to shoot at night and the A65 definitely shows its weakness there. I also use the camera for everything else like vacation stuff, family get togethers and anything else that catches my eye around the yard. I do occasionally shoot some still car features as well.

 

The two guys i often shoot with at the track have a 5DIII and a D4S and their stuff is generally better than mine, though not always. I think we're on the same level when it comes to technique, so it would seem to me that the better quality is because of the gear, especially with the low-light shots, which i would expect from full-frame bodies. I've had the opportunity to shoot a couple of races with the A6000 and the 70-200 F4 lens, as well as the little kit lens. I do like the small size and weight of the A6000 quite a bit, and it does seem marginally better in low-light situations. I'm not entirely convinced that it is stupendously better than what i have, though.

 

That said, what i have been considering is the A77II, the A6300, and the A7II or perhaps a used A7R. I also like the Nikon D500 and the Fuji XT-1, but i think the more cost effective way to go is to stay with the Sony stuff. Obviously the A77II has the A-mount so i wouldn't have to get into new lenses or adaptors. It seems like the full frames are better in low light, but i think the adaptors knock that down a bit, which might negate any benefits unless i go to e-mount lenses. I also think i need a 16-35 and a 24-70 type of lenses for what i do, especially when using a crop sensor.

 

One last thing, i love my flip screen. I consider it a huge advantage over what they have and it allows me to get some great low- and high-angle shots that they can't. I really can't understand why all cameras don't have them. I've read and watched a lot of camera reviews on the cameras i'm considering. but i'm still largely undecided about what i need.

 

 

Thanks,

 

Steve

 

 

[duncanfoxphoto]

You can buy into e-mount cameras, but coming from an SLT design, you're going to notice that autofocus in low light is much much slower, even with native lenses. Your current lenses would be adaptable, but you might have to buy an LA-EA2/LA-EA4 for the older ones (like the beercan) that have screw drive.

 

What I would suggest is if you want to keep your current lineup of lenses and not spend too much money, get an a77ii, which is an SLT crop just like your current camera, but a little newer with a bit more oomph. If the rumors are correct and a-mount isn't dead, we could be looking at a new a99 series camera later this year, but those are in the much higher price range and would likely be 3-6k.

[Golem]

Having had an a65 for all of three days ... low light high ISO is

a make-or-break with me ... I hear you and feel you about the

night scenes. The a77-II would greatly improve that. 

  

As to the 16-35 and 24-70, if you go for full frame that's a good

outfit, but if you stay with crop frame like the a77-II, you could

put that whole range into a single zoom. It's the smaller format

that facilitates designing lenses with amazing specifications.

[Colorado]

You seem to be heavy on the APSC sensor cameras and I have to say if you continue to compare high ISO noise to your friends "Full" sized sensor cameras you will always fall short. So if this is important to you replace your setup with the A7II or Nikon D750. I have had the A65 and still have the A77II the high ISO noise is better but it still does not compare to my A7rII. As far as focus performance the A77II performers better in all cases then the A7RII but in bright light it can be close. As far as APSC lowlight performance the A6300 would be your best bet. All the cameras I mentioned are right around 24 MP and you would have to pixel peep to see any difference in normal lighting conditions. So it would really come down to feature set and form factor preferences.

[Driven Media Works]

I've definitely been looking at the full-frame Alphas, i just haven't decided if the 5FPS that they offer is acceptable yet. I could probably deal with it, as i don't do a ton of multi-frame action shots—it ends up being too much to go through at the end of the day—it 8-10 fps is nice if you happen to be expecting something big to happen. The A7RII is definitely out of my price range, which is why i was looking at the A7II or a used A7R. I would think the 5-axis stabilization would be better than anything the A7R has to offer, but not having experience with either, i am just speculating. 

[Golem]

Yes, IBIS is worth more than the IQ difference between the  

a7-II basic and its a7R-II high-rez/low-noise sibling. This is

cuz in most real world action photo ops, IBIS is right there

working hard to improve your shots, while the potential IQ

advantage of the "R" version over the basic version is only

just that: Potential ... not actually available in the context of  

action photos.  

  

Do you choose to believe the mythology that the high-rez of

the "R" version demands premium lenses, and that it makes

lesser lenses perform even worse than such lenses would

perform on a lower rez camera ? [Clearly I do NOT]. Well IF   

you buy into that, then thaz one more reason to choose the

basic a7-II rather than the "R". Your shooting context would

favor zoom lenses in daytime, with their "less than prime" IQ

and you would be well off with fast primes at night, where a

lack of DoF and some minor focus error renders your fast

primes no sharper than a zoom lens [zoom used at daytime

f/stops]. Acoarst your fast prime is FAST, which allows you

to avoid extreme high ISO and also helps with focusing. But

the "legendary" IQ attributed to primes does not happen in

less than ideal conditions. All of this renders the "R" version

merely a pointless expense. For that price, IMNSHO you'd

benefit more from the "S" version.

[Gilgenberg]

i would  recommend the A7S and LA/EA4

 

coming from A77 and now having this setup i´m very happy with it       and enjoying the much better IQ, noise and EVF

 

the LA/EA4 has the AF system from the A77, so AF performance should be the same or better than your current setup wit your A mount lenses

 

i would say you have more than 4 - 6 stop´s advantage with the noise performance from the "S", so it is close to IBIS

 

the A7RII will have both, but like you said it is very expensive   

 

and with A7S you have only 12MP RAW files !

 

you can more easy store and edit, for me it is an big advantage, but you have to compose your shot´s better,  because you can not crop so much (also not bad....  )

 

A7S has excellent dynamic and colors, so IQ is really great

 

only the FF sensor and the shutter do not have better than 5Frames/s

[Gilgenberg]

P.S.

 

to be more precise i think

 

the LA/EA2 has the AF engine from the A77

 

and the LE/EA4 has the AF engine from the A99

 

and... of course the processor is in the body 

[Golem]

Are you sure the body is involved ? All the LAEA2/4 hasta

do is reflect two light beams to two sensors and choose to

spin the AF shaft, or the in-lens motor, one direction or the

other until the two signals are read as being in-phase. 

 

While I really have no idea what's in that boxy appendage

on the adapter other than a motor and shaft, I notice that

the LAEA1/3 has a similar box, slightly smaller, and as we

know, no motor or shaft. My guestimate is that the smaller

box handles the processing. If the body handled that, then

the LAEA1/3 could be just a tubular adapter with a simple

pass-thru from the rear contacts to the front contacts. So,

if the smaller box is doing the processing, I'd figger that

the bigger box also does it ... plus room for the motor.  

  

OTOH a sign of some involvement by the body is that the

body seems to deal with the AF Micro Adjustment for the

LAEA2/4. Yet ... maybe the appendage does that, and the

body's menu system just allows the user to communicate

corrections to a processor in the appendage, which is left

to operate all on its own once it has stored the corrections.

 

Just observing, pondering, guessing, and thinking out loud.

Not about to take a hammer to my adapters to look inside :-)

[Snowfun]

Worth waiting to see whether the (soon - sic - to be announced) 5d4 meets some or all of your requirements?

Particularly if the chap you shoot with is willing to share a lens or two...

[Colorado]

If you are considering any used equipment I would suggest the A99. Still a great camera and it will fit all your existing glass. I have seen it for less then 1K for what seemed to be a low mileage unit. I feel the A99 would be a far better choice then the A7 or A7r with adaptors.

[Driven Media Works]

I have considered the A99, but it's getting long in the tooth at this point. I have two more events to shoot this year and then won't really need my gear until March. 5DIV will be way out of my price range, but the D750 could be doable. Didn't even know about that camera. I've thought about the A7S as well, but leaned more towards the A7II with the updates.

[Driven Media Works]

Just wanted to come back in here with an update. I rented the A6300 this past weekend and wanted to provide my feedback. Shooting the drag racing at night did not provide the improvement i wanted, even on a well-lit track like we were at. This was with using the 70-200 F4 Sony lens, which things should improve with a 2.8, but that's what i had to work with.

 

The daylight use was what really surprised me. I had read lots of review and watched plenty of them that talked about overheating issues, but it all seemed to be when shooting video. On a sunny 87-degree day, i noticed the overheating icon show up after about 20 minutes of use. Within the hour, it shut off completely. This just won't do in my line of work, as i am often outside in the sun for most of the day, and i certainly wouldn't want to buy a new camera and have to work around something like that.

 

I was lucky enough to be able to try out a Nikon D750, which is a full-frame camera, along with some choice Nikon lenses. Image quality was better as one might expect, as was low-light performance. From a control standpoint, the layout was not what i would call intuitive, and i often had issues locating the necessary functions. I was very excited at the fact that it has a flip screen, but it didn't seem to focus well in live view mode, especially when i was just manhandling the camera like i normally do with my A65—score a point for the old A65. The other thing i found very annoying, but probably something i might learn to deal with in time, is the fact that there is no sensor to take you off of live-view mode like the Sony's have. I often forgot it was in LV mode and i'd like through the viewfinder only to see a black screen. Point 2 to the Sony. 

 

For the last day, i was offered a Canon 7D to use, along with Canon's 100-400 and 70-200 2.8. The control layout seemed to be more familiar, which is perhaps due to me having used a Sony 60D for several years. I was really surprised at how good the photos started coming out, though. Right from the get go, IQ was far better than what i have been using. Could partially be the glass, but i think the camera probably deserves a bit of praise, too. I'll have a 7D Mark II to play with next month at the final race of the year. I still haven't decided which way to go yet, but i really don't need to buy anything until next February so i have some time to think about it.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

If it hadn't been for the night shots, I would have recommended the A77II, hands down. But you would be working with high ISO noise. You could fix it in DxO but it requires manual fine-tuning of each photo.

 

If you go the A6000/A6300 route, you would need a native telezoom to make use of their autofocus capabilities.

 

I don't know your budget but if you're willing to spend some, the A6300 with FE 70-300 should sort you out.

[Driven Media Works]

If the A6300 overheats when shooting outside in the sun, it's a waste of money for me and i won't be able to do my job. Looking at the specs between the A77II and the 7Dmark II, they're very similar, but i'm still wondering is the Canon glass is just that much better.

[Gilgenberg]

i would vote for nikon glass

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

If you shoot stlls or 1080p video, you should have no heat issues. There are many good suggestions in this thread and it's your choice what feels right. But I would caution against using adapted telephoto lenses. You'll be struggling all the way.

 

If the A6300 overheats when shooting outside in the sun, it's a waste of money for me and i won't be able to do my job. Looking at the specs between the A77II and the 7Dmark II, they're very similar, but i'm still wondering is the Canon glass is just that much better.

[Golem]

.......................

 

I was lucky enough to be able to try out a Nikon D750 .......... but it

didn't seem to focus well in live view mode, especially when i was

just manhandling the camera like i normally do with my A65—score

a point for the old A65. The other thing i found very annoying, but

probably something i might learn to deal with in time, is the fact that

there is no sensor to take you off of live-view mode like the Sony's

have. I often forgot it was in LV mode and i'd like through the

viewfinder only to see a black screen. Point 2 to the Sony. 

 

.....................

  

didn't seem to focus well in live view mode  

  

Don't ignore the fact that the D750 is an actual SLR, while the

A-65 is really a live-view camera [aka "mirrorless"] disguised

as an SLR ... in body shape only, including a faux pentaprism.

  

So the Sony, via it's beam splitter, is feeding image to its SLR-

type AF sensors while simultaneously operating as a live view

dedicated camera in all other aspects of its operation [iOW all

operations except AF]. The D750, in live view, is the opposite

situation. Having no beam splitter, when its SLR view system

is collapsed out of the way to allow it to operate as a  live view

camera, it's SLR-type AF system is ALSO collapsed out of the

way. So, because it's primarily an SLR, it is then relying for its

AF operation on its typically feeble on-the-image-sensor AF, a

purely contrast-detection system ... 100% accurate but, sadly,  

of very leisurely AF "speed".

  

    

no sensor to take you off of live-view mode like the Sony's

have.  

   

As explained above, the A-65 is an actual live view camera in

a faux SLR body shape. Therefor it doesn't really have such a

view switching sensor as you describe. No switching sensor is

needed to take you off of live-view mode cuz you never ever

quit live view mode on a full-time live view camera. The whole

purpose of the switching sensor on the A-65 is simply whether

the live view is piped to the mini-screen for the eyepiece, or to

the 3-inch rear screen for naked-eye viewing.

 

If I managed to explain all this half decently, then it should be

plain why the D750, nor any other actual SLR, would have a 

view-switching sensor such as found on the A-65 and most

other full-time live view cameras.   

    

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++  

   

FWIW, my main cameras are full-time live view, and when on

occasion I do use an SLR in its live view mode, by mere force

of habit, I expect to just move my eye up from the rear screen

to the eyepiece and immediately see the same image as is on

the screen ... and when all I see is darkness, I remain puzzled

for a few seconds before it occurs to me to bail out of live view

[Driven Media Works]

That is a great explanation of the live view on the 750. Makes complete sense. 

 

I'm not really looking to adapt any lenses except for maybe my A mount glass on an e mount camera. More than likely i'll just switch altogether.

 

I've thought lately of picking up an A77II to get me by until Sony rolls out some more equipment. It's expandable 51K ISO has got to be better than my 16,000 on my A65, and the focusing system certainly is better.

 

That said, if Sony is truly moving away from A mount, then maybe it's time to sell the 70-200 G 2.8 while the money is still good on it. The rest of my gear isn't worth much.

[wedge]

 sell the 70-200 G 2.8

 

G1 or G2?  and how much do you want for it?

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

DMW, if you are thinking of Canon 7D, you should definitely try the A77II first. IQ is better and AF is at least on par. And you could keep shooting your 70-200.

 

Now is not a great time to sell good A Mount lenses. Prices have been pushed down by the uncertainty of that mount and the hype for A7 cameras. If Sony starts releasing A Mount gear again, prices may bounce back.

[Golem]

............................  

Now is not a great time to sell good A Mount lenses. Prices have

been pushed down by the uncertainty of that mount and the hype

for A7 cameras. If Sony starts releasing A Mount gear again,

prices may bounce back.

  

That is true, but also true is that in a market value game,

you also have the possibility that values will continue to

fall and never be better than they are today. It's just the

"Heads I win, tails you lose" gamble, aka "Damned if you

do, damned if you don't". 

   

   

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 

    

  

I take a 2-channel approach. If I'll never have use for the

stuff, sell it at whatever it brings without speculating about

future value. But OTOH if I still get some use from it, or I

feel I will likely use it somewhat over time, then I just keep

it cuz the $$ it will bring is unimpressive anyway. 

  

The 2nd "channel" does mean old stuff accumulates after

it finally goes toadally obsolete. So you hafta weigh small

market value against small amount of future utility. This

leads to another 2-channel approach: What if the value is

well above negligible or minimal, so it makes no sense to

let the item just "wither on the vine", as I would allow with  

low value items ?

  

Clearly the 2 "channels" for a higher value item are to bail

out at current value and avoid possible falling value, or to

speculate on future trends. My approach, which is may be

peculiar to my own personality, but maybe could work well

for some other folk, is to find a reeeally impressive bargain

on something I've been considering acquiring. Then I feel

better about the bail out value when selling the older high

value item to partially cover the cost of the new gear.

  

Example: I recently bought [retail, brand new] a FF Nikon

with 10X zoom and misc goodies, as a bundle. Beats me

why it was offered at only 65% of its normal discount price

but I saved about $800 ... which is now mentally "banked"

in my photo gear finances. Sooner or later I'll hafta take a

beating on something I'll be selling. But I am comforted by

my "Win some, lose some" approach over the long run.   

    

If all your purchases are well researched and you always

narrowly focus on your holy grail, serendipity will seldom

work in your favor. My watch list is NOT narrowly focused,

so serendipity occasionally favors me. YMMV.

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

The 70-200 is a quality lens and the cost of buying a different lens of similar quality is at least twice the current used price.

 

I do sell photo gear regularly to avoid hoarding, but not A Mount lenses, they're a buyers' market atm.

 

Compare also the cost of buying say Canon 7D2 with a 70-200 L with buying A77II and using the Sony lens.

[Driven Media Works]

G1 and not sure i want to sell it yet.

[Golem]

..............

 

I do sell photo gear regularly to avoid hoarding, but

not A Mount lenses, they're a buyers' market atm.

.............

 

If they fall further, I'm gonna get me a couple more,

especially an early version 20/2.8 Maxxum lens :-)