I'm not a professional photographer, but I might be making a gradual progression in that direction - weddings being my primary focus.

 

I currently own a 5DM3 and an A7S, I haven't had the A7S long but I'm already amounting (emounting?) a few lenses - most of which MF only lenses, the 55mm 1.8 being the only exception.

 

The A7S goes with me everywhere (in particular street photography), the 5DM3 is literally gathering dust (I took down the ceiling in the kitchen, dust everywhere!). But I've only been taking it out lately to play with the big white Canon 200mm f2 lens.

 

I think if Sony gave us an e-mount workhorse that could balance the weaknesses of the A7S, I might be ready to say goodbye to Canon.

 

 

I've read that the A6000 and A7S may be a good wedding combination, and whilst I don't know a lot about the A6000 - I have a feeling I should wait for something like the A9 to be announced before I make any leaps.

 

 

Any thoughts on the matter would be interesting.

The portfolio of an pro photographer, counts much more and is more important, as his tools in use!

The portfolio of an pro photographer, counts much more and is more important, as his tools in use!

 

More important to whom?

 

Doesn't matter how good your portfolio is, if your memory card goes wrong during a wedding - you'd be pretty relieved to have had a second slot memory card backing it up as you went.

 

I suspect the 'pro photographer' uses a camera that works for them rather than against them.

 

I often like to shoot at wide open apertures with narrow depth of field on moving subjects - a camera with good C-AF and burst rate will be a lot more useful to me.

 

 

I mean thinking about it, Bravo if you are the guy who has an amazing portfolio and shoots something like the world Cup football with a manual focus telephoto lens on an A7S. But that's more pain then I care to bare.

I know brain death photographer, who putting black tape over the name SONY, but using adapted LEICA M glasses with their Sony camera!

What do pro photographers use? There's your answer. I doubt the A9 will be the messiah you're looking for.

Maybe a Hasselblad with a digital back?

What do pro photographers use? There's your answer. I doubt the A9 will be the messiah you're looking for.

Maybe a Hasselblad with a digital back?

 

I personally use the Canon 5dM3 for weddings and events, but I prefer the A7S for every day shooting.

 

Since I like the A7S so much, it'd be nice if I could stick to one mount and share lenses between cameras.

I agree, it makes sense but can you make it work for you?

I agree, it makes sense but can you make it work for you?

 

I guess I'll have to try, not on somebody's wedding day.. but.. since I've just received the 55mm 1.8 so soon I'll start to get a better idea of how capable the A7S AF is.

 

I suppose I should try having something printed, see how 12MP holds up.

Hi Dan, if you are going to do weddings then I would imagine prints are going to be high on the agenda, you definitely need to try it out first. Your subject will be pretty much static, I should imagine most AF systems would cope fine with that.

I have no AF lenses for my A7 whatsoever but then I take snaps of objects,landscapes,stuff that doesn't move much and if in doubt go wide and up the f stop.

 

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

 

 

I mean thinking about it, Bravo if you are the guy who has an amazing

portfolio and shoots something like the world Cup football with a manual

focus telephoto lens on an A7S. But that's more pain then I care to bare.   

    

 

The OP clearly states that wedding work is the primary

concern. Whuzzat gotta do with World Cup Football ? 

   

`  

I personally use the Canon 5dM3 for weddings and events, but I prefer the A7S for every day shooting.

 

Since I like the A7S so much, it'd be nice if I could stick to one mount and share lenses between cameras.

  

 I realize the adapter doesn't provide highly useful AF, but is there anything else

about a Metabones EOS-on-Sony adapter that's problematic ? Using one would

come pretty damnt close to putting both cameras on a common lens mount. If I

had the spare sheckels for an A7S I'd be using it almost exclusively with my old

EOS and F-mount lenses ... unless there's some barrier I haven't heard about ?

   

 

`  

Most prints will be small with weddings and I'm sorry but you don't need two card slots to keep pictures safe. Shoot on smaller cards if you're really worried. Have two of everything. Get an a7ii as a second camera and rock out.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am a part time professional, shooting weddings and portraits.. My main camera is the a99 and my backup is the a7.  I do not  feel comfortable with the a7 series as my main camera yet, but there is not much more that is needed for it to take over.  The a7 seies makes an awesome backup due to the ability to swap lens formats.  It's great to have the abiliti to use low light lenses like the voigtlander 35 1.2 and the 21mm 1.8 for low light reception photos.  Plus with the LA-EA4 I can swap it out in a pinch is my a99 went down for some reason.  

The portfolio of an pro photographer, counts much more and is more important, as his tools in use!

I shoot + 20 weddings for a major studio in Toronto andever  since I switched to the a99 2+ years ago (from the Canon 5DII) and now to the a7II (just got it a month ago, still testing it out), I have more fun shooting weddings these days. Yes, arguably, a pro should be able to work with any equipment but it should have to be fun as well

Edited April 11, 201510 yr by Diogenes

I am a part time professional, shooting weddings and portraits.. My main camera is the a99 and my backup is the a7.  I do not  feel comfortable with the a7 series as my main camera yet, but there is not much more that is needed for it to take over.  The a7 seies makes an awesome backup due to the ability to swap lens formats.  It's great to have the abiliti to use low light lenses like the voigtlander 35 1.2 and the 21mm 1.8 for low light reception photos.  Plus with the LA-EA4 I can swap it out in a pinch is my a99 went down for some reason.  

I use an LA EA4 adapter and the only alpha lens that doesn't work on the a7II is my Tamron 70-200f2.8 (the cheaper one, not the one with the ultrasonic motor). It's too bad because this Tamron is a very sharp lens.

I use an LA EA4 adapter and the only alpha lens that doesn't

work on the a7II is my Tamron 70-200f2.8 (the cheaper one,

not the one with the ultrasonic motor). It's too bad because

this Tamron is a very sharp lens.

  

"Doesn't work" ? 

  

Like light doesn't shine in one end and out the other ?

 

Different users mean different things using the same

words, but there is a Metabones A-lens onto E-body

glassless mirrorless adapter, with FF clearance and a

ring to control the iris ... not marked in particular stops

nor with auto-iris action. Soooo ... it's usefulness very

much depends on how YOU meant your words. 

  

`  

"Doesn't work" ? 

  

Like light doesn't shine in one end and out the other ?

 

Different users mean different things using the same

words, but there is a Metabones A-lens onto E-body

glassless mirrorless adapter, with FF clearance and a

ring to control the iris ... not marked in particular stops

nor with auto-iris action. Soooo ... it's usefulness very

much depends on how YOU meant your words. 

  

`  

I mean the auto  focusing doesn't come on. I can see the image and I can manually focus. I've talked to other LAEA4 users and they have confirmed that some, lenses won't focus. I have 2 Minolta 35-105s that don't focus but my 28-105 will. I'd rather sell this lens and use the money towards the FE 70-200 and start building my FE lens set. I've also been shooting video... the FE lenses will allow for 5-axis IBIS. As a matter of fact, I'm contemplating selling my alpha units... not in a rush but if the right buyer comes along who'll take the whole set...

Edited April 12, 201510 yr by Diogenes

Look up, what an JASON LANIER, as pro photographer has to state about this matter!  He has an very nice YouTube video about - 10 reasons why I switched to Sony - !

I'd say weddings (and other portrait work) is one area where Sony falls short compared to the Canon and Nikons. There's just not as much support for flashes and other lighting related products as those two. As for the FE system. I think it can be integrated into your wedding workflow especially for those candid shots at a reception for instance. There are people shooting with film and rangefinders still so skill is a large factor in choosing gear but for most I think a DSLR of some sort is still the "king" of most types of pro photography for now. 

 

With all that said I don't own a DSLR and am pretty firmly in the FE system. It works for what I do in personal projects/event stuff but I'm not a full-time pro either.

Look up, what an JASON LANIER, as pro photographer has to state about this matter!  He has an very nice YouTube video about - 10 reasons why I switched to Sony - !

This one?  

Dan - start looking closely at your Sony files or read my blog. 

 

I chose the D810 when I became frustrated with Sony.  I don't miss anything about the Sony.  The extra weight and size of my Nikon system pays for itself with every shot. 

 

https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not a professional photographer, but I might be making a gradual progression in that direction - weddings being my primary focus.

 

I currently own a 5DM3 and an A7S, I haven't had the A7S long but I'm already amounting (emounting?) a few lenses - most of which MF only lenses, the 55mm 1.8 being the only exception.

 

The A7S goes with me everywhere (in particular street photography), the 5DM3 is literally gathering dust (I took down the ceiling in the kitchen, dust everywhere!). But I've only been taking it out lately to play with the big white Canon 200mm f2 lens.

 

I think if Sony gave us an e-mount workhorse that could balance the weaknesses of the A7S, I might be ready to say goodbye to Canon.

 

 

I've read that the A6000 and A7S may be a good wedding combination, and whilst I don't know a lot about the A6000 - I have a feeling I should wait for something like the A9 to be announced before I make any leaps.

 

 

Any thoughts on the matter would be interesting.

It's been a while since I watched jasons video, and I don't want to go through the pain of watching it again. His voice and nature is annoying. I recall that he used fiction to promote sony cameras. He claimed that canon (or nikon? I don't remember which) could not set a white balance using kelvin. This is rubbish. 

 

He also complained about top models not including all the features of previous models, such as pop up flash. This is extremely illogical. Pop up flashes create new problems (they're harder to seal) and most professional photographers aren't as disorganised as him. The light source is far too small to give a decent quality photograph. Some of his points in the video I agreed with and I agree with the general idea that top models should include functions from lesser models (GPS for example with the 5d mk 3) but pop up flash has got to be the worst example. There's other points he makes about the sony's features and pretends like they don't exist in other cameras. Yet he won't state how useful redundancy is or other great features for professional work. 

 

You can get around some of this, but it's not a perfect solution. These cameras are't great for wedding work in my opinion (there's no 70-200 2.8), and even if there were suitable lenses and flashes, redundancy and a non painful grip after hours of use, you might as well just use a bigger camera. Jason is overweight, he looks about 30% bodyfat and if he lost some weight, he'd not struggle to pick up heavier cameras.

 

A cameras ergonomics are subjective, and your style of photography might differ to the point these are perfect for you. Without fully knowing all the work you do, it is a safer bet to say do not buy these cameras. For what I do, these are much closer to perfect. I also hate doing wedding photography.

 

This post is likely going to get flooded by fanboys or people with such blind hatred they cannot be unbiased either way. You might be a photographer that is comfortable using manual lenses, even in tough situations. This changes things dramatically. My advice is to rent the camera 

Sony haptics are very nice.  Even I'll admit to that.  But if high IQ is your goal then Sony isn't the right choice.  The other problem is that all of the time spent with a Sony won't help you much when you finally decide to trade up to professional gear.  At 5 months in to Nikon, I still struggle with some settings on the camera especially in relation to flash and other EV settings.  But even when I am off 3-4 stops in some areas the Nikon has the dynamic range to pull and push the file into realization.  The Sony could manage a stop and a 1/3 sometimes depending on the composition. 

To Max, looks like we may be getting 14 bit raw soon with a firmware update i hope, check sonyrumours etc for info.

`

 

It's entirely possible that the Sony system is never

going to be, was never intended to be, a professional

tool kit. That doesn't mean Sony is inferior, it's

just differently purposed ... maybe, it depends upon

what clients the professional serves as to what tool

kit fits the work. But there's [gasp!] MORE !

 

Part of this situation is dependent on what work any

given user does for his living. Another part involves

the skill set of working photographers. The major

skill most important is, acoarst, acquiring clients

and running the bidnez end of things. In second place

is how well you can actually produce.

 

Marketing, client relations, and office chores have

not changed much over time. The ability to actually

produce has greatly declined in terms user skills,

but as long as you have the important bidnez skills

you can be in almost any bidnez you want. If you have

the bidnez skills, and you choose the photography

bidnez, but are rather short on the basic ability to

produce, you have the good fortune that this ability

is now, to a great degree, built into the photo gear.

 

The result is that we have photo peeps in the photo

bidnez who are quite dependent on small scale robotic

devices. If these photobiz peeps had more big spender

clients, they could hire some very skilled help, but

most clients are not high rollers. So, the robotic

devices are expected to stand in for the very skilled

[but unaffordable] help.

 

Now all management types will frequently, constantly

for some, grouse about their employees. And thaz very

easy to see around here ... users grousing about robots.

Quite often, skilled workers grouse about managers ...

that managers who cannot actually do the jobs that the

skilled workers are performing are on their case all

the time, asking the impossible, etc etc. It's really

a good thing that the photobots cannot resent their

bosses, call in sick, jump ship, sabotage the company,

etc etc ... cuz the bosses of these photobots are no

better than the typical manager, the bidnez guy with

little or no clue about his employees's real work and

their job skills.

 

If you hire Mr. Sony to do Mr. Nikon's job and then

abuse Mr. Sony cuz you are clueless about his skill

set, you have a deficiency in your HR skills. It's not

Mr. Sony's fault if HR misrepresented the job duties,

and Mr. Manager knew too little about the actual job

functions to properly interview Mr. Sony. Hopefully

Mr. Sony will call in sick and spend the day looking

for a position that really suits his best skills.

 

`