Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

For the last year+ I have been using the Leica Q3 as my only camera. As much as I love the camera I feel like the one focal length (28mm) is still somewhat limiting as I find myself often cropping to 50mm and losing much of the MP, so I'm looking to buy a Sony camera next to it with more focal length options.

After looking into the possible cameras within my budget I landed on the A7CR, A7RV or A7CII.
In this case the A7RV would be a second hand model as the new price is out of my budget.

My main usage is travel, family, landscape and some portrait. (Hobby, non professional)

I'm planning to pair it with the Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G.

My main struggle deciding is:

  1. While I do favor the size/weight and capabilities of the A7CR the viewfinder and display are a huge downgrade from my Q3, I'm not sure how much this would bother me.
  2. Is the 61mp on the A7CR and A7RV too high for the lens I plan to pair it with. (even though I may pick up the 35 or 50 GM down the line, but that wouldn't be soon).
  3. While the A7RV has everything I'm looking for, I'm not sure if the weight is worth it for travel. Currently I have only used a X100V and Q3 for travel and these are both significantly lighter than the A7RV + 24-50 f2.8 G.
  4. Is 61mp too much to pair with a non GM lens and would the Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G optically be able to reach the same qualities as the lens on my Q3?

My main (pretty much only) use will be for photography and not video.

I may eventually sell the Q3 if the Sony camera replaces this.

Please help me out :) Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For my big hands the A7Cx series is too small to hold comfortably.  I thought I would really like the original A7C until I found one in a store display and was able to actually hold it.  It took all of 30 seconds to decide it wasn't for me and I bought my A7RIV instead.  For me the EVF resolution wasn't that big of a deal "to me".

My A7RIV really isn't all that much bigger than the A7C but it is bigger enough that it is infinitely more useable for me.

My 2 main lenses are 24-105 G and 12-24/4 G lenses.  The clarity, sharpness and resolution of the G lenses are incredible and the 20" x 30" prints I have made are incredibly sharp right to the edges.  I don't believe there is anything gained in the sharpness of the 12-24/2.8 GM lens.  The main advantage of the 12-24/2.8 GM lens is the extra F stop of light but at the expense of size, weight and $$$$.  I considered buying the 12-24/2.8 GM lens (because it was a GM lens so must be better), I am SO HAPPY I went with the F4 G lens instead.

For portraits I picked up a Samyang 80mm/1.4 AF lens which is incredibly sharp and the shallow depth of field at F1.4 is narrower than I ever use.  I usually shoot portraits around F2 so I don't get blurry noses and blurry ears that F1.4 gives me.

One of the great things about ILC (Interchangeable Lens Cameras) is you can have different lenses for different purposes.  I would suggest that you  consider the Sony 20-70/4 lens and add something like a 28mm/1.8 lens incase you need more light (which I have never needed) or a shallow DOF at your preferred focal length.  I was very hesitant about the F4 minimum aperture of my lenses when I bought them... I no longer have any question they were the right choice "for me".

Edited by MikeInOr
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why people think the resolution is too high for certain lenses. I shoot an A1 and often use old Minolta A-Mount. I don't own a GM lens. I actually only own 2 Sony lenses, a 24-105 and 200-600. Everything else is a Samyang, Tamron, or A-Mount. I think you'd have to be cropping the holy crap out of an image for it to show up. 

Sony A1, Minolta A-Mount 80-200/2.8 APO HS G. 

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!

Link to the shot on Flickr if you'd like to zoom in. 

https://flic.kr/p/2q5uj48

Edited by Cameratose
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I find that gear is very particular to the user. I have both the A7Cii and A7CR and love to use them with the 24 f2.5 and 40 F2.8 due to the size however due to the choice to shoot a range of genres I have larger lenses which remove the benefit of the small bodies. My advice is to buy something to cover what you do the most and the lens you want to use the most. There are always so many variables at play and often there simply is no right answer. Whatever you decide, I hope you enjoy it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  
    • I'm pretty confident OP made up his mind in the past 14 months.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...