Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A7rIII


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#1 Frank Sanders

Frank Sanders

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 07:37 AM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)
In December 2015 I published here a proposal for A7rIII. It has become true.

A7r.jpg


  • Figo likes this

#2 ron777

ron777

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 04:23 PM

Hi, I have been waiting for the arrival of the a7r III and I must say that I am disappointed.  The unfortunate hype preceding the above announcement had hinted at the arrival of higher resolution via a larger sensor, and that apparently has not occurred.  And it appears that the ergonomics have not been improved either.  As such, the stated improvements over the a7r II do not appear to reach the level of significance that would tempt me—and I suspect others—to trade in, or otherwise discard our a7r II's in exchange for the newer model.  Of course, this is just my opinion, and others will likely chime in with a different take.  



#3 markfireblade

markfireblade

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 04:39 PM

Not sure why they'd use a larger sensor, surely that would mean a whole range of new lenses to make the most of it?

#4 Ross F22

Ross F22

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 08:04 PM

Did anyone out there recently purchase an A7Rii and now have plans to sell it for the A7Riii?

I purchased an Rii in May (which I'm really happy with), but I wasn't sure deprecation wise what was worse: putting the camera through its paces for the next few years or preordering the A7Riii and selling the A7rii within a few weeks? I feel like the latter will put me on pace to reduce the depreciation hit during latter upgrades.


Any input is appreciated?

#5 ron777

ron777

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 09:36 PM

Larger, meaning, more pixels, rather than physically larger, as in medium format.



#6 tinplater

tinplater

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 270 posts

Posted 25 October 2017 - 11:36 PM

From what I have read today, the new model has significant improvements...two card slots, faster autofocus, touch screen, 10fps.Not tempting me to trade up from A7rII but it seems this body is very much improved for certain folks...ie sports and wedding photographers.



#7 Jaf-Photo

Jaf-Photo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 03:46 PM

Resolution is only a number. A higher number is not always better. 42 megapixels is enough resolution to print large posters. Most people don't print large or at all. Therefore, 42 mp is already more resolution than almost everybody needs.

The other changes are significant. Even if they are evolutionary, they add real functionality and remove actual weaknesses.

I sold off my FE gear 18 months ago. If A7R III had been around, I would have kept the system. It is now a viable system.
  • LiveShots likes this

#8 LiveShots

LiveShots

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 228 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 05:45 PM

Just watched some of Tony & Chelsea’s video on the new camera. They said it now has an option to assign a button to rate an image in camera that will be supported by image software such as CaptureOne... I’m hoping that will make its way to the α9 soon.

#9 holmes4

holmes4

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 93 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 06:31 PM

As an A7ii owner, there are lots of things I like in the A7Riii, and I just placed a preorder for one at Amazon. My list of delighters:

- Many more autofocus points and better autofocus

- Use of the touchscreen to adjust focus center

- Better low-light focusing

- EyeAF (further improved)

- Bigger battery

- Bluetooth connection to phone for geotagging

 

There are many more, but these are what convinced me to upgrade after three years.

 

I will probably also buy the new 24-105 lens.


  • Apollwnios likes this

#10 LiveShots

LiveShots

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 228 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 06:53 PM

You're going to love that battery.

 

I'm tempted on the 24-105 too, it will be a great walk-around lens, I used to have the 18-105 F/4 on my A6xxxx cameras and loved the flexibility of it.



#11 tinplater

tinplater

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 270 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 07:36 PM

You're going to love that battery.

 

I'm tempted on the 24-105 too, it will be a great walk-around lens, I used to have the 18-105 F/4 on my A6xxxx cameras and loved the flexibility of it.

My problem with the 24-105 is the 24-70 2.8 produces such stellar shots that it would be hard to give up the wide aperture just to gain 70-105...



#12 holmes4

holmes4

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 93 posts

Posted 26 October 2017 - 08:58 PM

I have the 24-70 f4 Zeiss. If I had the GM 2.8, I probably wouldn't go for the 24-105, but I think this will give me just the range I want for my travel photos, and initial indications are that it is an excellent performer. I also have the 16-35 Zeiss and love that.



#13 tinplater

tinplater

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 270 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 01:05 AM

I

 

I have the 24-70 f4 Zeiss. If I had the GM 2.8, I probably wouldn't go for the 24-105, but I think this will give me just the range I want for my travel photos, and initial indications are that it is an excellent performer. I also have the 16-35 Zeiss and love that.

I had the 24-70 f4 and the 2.8 version is like having a bag full of 2.8 primes in the 24-70 range.I feel I can probably equal the 24-105 by simply cropping the amazing images possible with the 70mm 2.8.



#14 felixeter

felixeter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 01:27 AM

Pretty disappointed by this honestly.

As someone who works primarily in the landscape and makes large prints all of these improvements seem less important than a sensor improvement. 

It's strange making a high resolution camera faster - no sports or event photographer I know has any use to churn out 42 mp at a rapid rate - the data use is excessive! The improvements seem nice, but hardly something that would make me want to trade in my current camera...I've had no problem getting the images I want out of it - if I can't get higher quality images then meh. 



#15 felixeter

felixeter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 01:30 AM

Resolution is only a number. A higher number is not always better. 42 megapixels is enough resolution to print large posters. Most people don't print large or at all. Therefore, 42 mp is already more resolution than almost everybody needs.

The other changes are significant. Even if they are evolutionary, they add real functionality and remove actual weaknesses.

I sold off my FE gear 18 months ago. If A7R III had been around, I would have kept the system. It is now a viable system.

Only a number, or for some - the most important number.

If you're regularly printing 24x36 up to 40x60, it is nice to have. The other changes are significant for a pretty small subset of people that usually don't need high resolution - imo. When I was a working photojournalist I would have appreciated those changes, but I would not be wanting anything near a 42 mp camera for daily event work. Way overkill and resource intensive. So in that respect - the A9 would be the preferred solution.



#16 Jaf-Photo

Jaf-Photo

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 06:32 AM

If you have special needs, buy special equipment.

If all you need is the highest resolution, then there are orher cameras for you.

For everyone else, having a high-res camera that is also fast, is golden.

Only a number, or for some - the most important number.
If you're regularly printing 24x36 up to 40x60, it is nice to have. The other changes are significant for a pretty small subset of people that usually don't need high resolution - imo. When I was a working photojournalist I would have appreciated those changes, but I would not be wanting anything near a 42 mp camera for daily event work. Way overkill and resource intensive. So in that respect - the A9 would be the preferred solution.



#17 marcopetrosino

marcopetrosino

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 27 October 2017 - 07:52 AM

Global shutter or Rolling shutter?

Inviato dal mio Mi A1 utilizzando Tapatalk

#18 Username

Username

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 707 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 02:52 AM

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

For everyone else, having a high-res camera that is also fast, is golden.
 

 

Amen. I do nothing in a hurry, photographically, but 10 fps is 

a great asset for still images. The complaints and nay saying 

are from users who only see the most obvious, well promoted 

application for the features built into their gear. 



#19 felixeter

felixeter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 12:55 PM

If you have special needs, buy special equipment.

If all you need is the highest resolution, then there are orher cameras for you.

For everyone else, having a high-res camera that is also fast, is golden.
 

Yes, and until this point - the A7RII was the special equipment for highly portable, high resolution imagery. There are other cameras with high resolution, but none so portable and cost effective. The X1d obviously is worth consideration but the cost and limited lens line up are legitimate barriers. 

 

Nothing wrong with criticizing it for morphing in to something else and failing to build on what made it successful, which was largely the high IQ in the compact set up. The A7RIII still obviously has this, but it doesn't improve on the key point. Having a high res camera that is also fast is not a bad thing, but with Sony's treatment of the various lines it would have made sense to make it a higher res camera, at the cost of speed. Resolution is part of it's name. This is a disappointing release for those of us who spend long hours walking and shooting and don't like to carry alot but do like to print large. 



#20 felixeter

felixeter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 28 October 2017 - 12:57 PM

Amen. I do nothing in a hurry, photographically, but 10 fps is 

a great asset for still images. The complaints and nay saying 

are from users who only see the most obvious, well promoted 

application for the features built into their gear. 

Or it's from people who use the gear constantly and would like other improvements in terms of the imaging itself. To imply that users don't understand or appreciate the other feature updates is silly. I make my living with this camera. I get why the new one is better. I also get that for me, and many other users I know, these features will make little practical difference, and are not compelling enough to update - because the main reason we bought in to the camera line to begin with has been mostly ignored for this current update. 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 
x

New Members Welcome!

Not yet registered? Really?

Registration is free and takes only a few minutes.

After the free registration you can discuss with members from all over the world, put questions and present your images.

We are looking forward to you!

Admin Andreas und Sony Alpha Forum Team

Register now! X