Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

   

Switch to another brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Switch to another brand.

I think you're confusing disappointment with a new release with general dissatisfaction - which isn't the case. I'll happily use my A7RII and Rx1RII for years to come, as they are still the best solution. I have no complaints with those cameras, but it's not silly to hope for improvement when they release something new. Maybe next go around. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, but the A7R2 should be good enough for you still?

 

I think some people are probably disappointed that Sony didn't up the ante in terms of resolution. Some people, probably most, will be happy about the increased speed. I personally think Sony is focusing on the right thing which is usability. I think they've been too focused on the spec sheet previously.

 

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.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't quite get the obsession some people have with resolution. Yes, there are certain tasks for which no resolution is "too much". But there's a tradeoff for a given sensor size between resolution and noise, and I definitely prefer the approach Sony is taking. For others, the Pixel Shift feature may do what they want or perhaps a medium format camera would be better.

 

On Facebook there's a guy griping that Sony should have instead issued a free firmware update to the A7Rii with a bunch of the new features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't quite get the obsession some people have with resolution. Yes, there are certain tasks for which no resolution is "too much". But there's a tradeoff for a given sensor size between resolution and noise, and I definitely prefer the approach Sony is taking. For others, the Pixel Shift feature may do what they want or perhaps a medium format camera would be better.

 

On Facebook there's a guy griping that Sony should have instead issued a free firmware update to the A7Rii with a bunch of the new features.

I didn't care when I was a photojournalist and the largest my image would be was across a magazine spread. Now I make large print pieces where 30 to 60 inches is normal. It's not an obsession, but resolution is quite important in some uses. Some of us still print things and don't just want high DR for website pictures. Medium Format isn't necessarily better because of it's diminished practicality. The X1d gives you a slight bump in IQ but comes with various tradeoffs. The 100 mp versions are bulky and even more cost prohibitive. The A7RII made a new type of photography possible - a portable, very high IQ imaging machine. The 2 greatest strengths of the system (to me) were being able to walk long distances with light equipment and finally, at the same time, make high resolution images. You can't explore the same way when you're carrying a hasselblad rig that always needs to be on a tripod, for example. Plus there's the cost.

 

I'm not saying the updates look bad, it's just that when you build a camera focusing on resolution (it is in the name) it's not unreasonable to be disappointed when the update doesn't focus on that one thing it does better than any other comparable system.  

Share this post


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

×