SONY A7 and A7R
Discussion
Hey guys, I'm a bit confused by these mirror less cams.
From what I understand their main selling point is that they're small and lightweight, but by the time you've added lenses to them they become big again.
And are the LCD screens good enough to view in bright light compared to a proper viewfinder?
Does it feel odd framing using the LCD rather than a viewfinder?
From what I understand their main selling point is that they're small and lightweight, but by the time you've added lenses to them they become big again.
And are the LCD screens good enough to view in bright light compared to a proper viewfinder?
Does it feel odd framing using the LCD rather than a viewfinder?
mojitomax said:
Hey guys, I'm a bit confused by these mirror less cams.
From what I understand their main selling point is that they're small and lightweight, but by the time you've added lenses to them they become big again.
And are the LCD screens good enough to view in bright light compared to a proper viewfinder?
Does it feel odd framing using the LCD rather than a viewfinder?
They are generally smaller, but particuarly for the Sony a7 models, physics are never going to allow the lens to be small as they are full frame cameras. Having said that, my a7 and 55mm 1.8 is still appreciably smaller and lighter than my old D600 and 50mm 1.8. Other benefits include forgetting about focus issues and back-focussing lenses etc, and you get 100% AF coverage.From what I understand their main selling point is that they're small and lightweight, but by the time you've added lenses to them they become big again.
And are the LCD screens good enough to view in bright light compared to a proper viewfinder?
Does it feel odd framing using the LCD rather than a viewfinder?
What is fast becoming the main selling point is more so that mirrorless cameras will accept pretty much any lens from any system via an adaptor (very few people are actually using Sony lenses with the a7), and the EVF allows zebra striping, focus peaking, digital zoom, and a genuine live preview of your image. DSLRs will never be able to do this.
The EVF is a love or hate thing, it does everything mentioned above for manual focussing, it offers 100% coverage, gains up when shooting at night and you can display pretty much all the info you could ever need on it. However some have issue with the lag (which is nearly non-existent on the a7, but obviously an OVF is perfect in that respect)
As with everything you need to weigh up the pros and cons, neither is inherently 'better' than the other, but mirrorless is still young and is advancing at an incredible rate.
I've got one of these for holiday snaps and personal stuff and have to say, I love it.
I've binned the kit lens and got the 24-70 F4 and 55 F1.8 Zeiss lenses and they are superb.
One of the best features really is the EVF, personaly coming from a video background this really is a step forward for me and I would put money on all DSLR's having these in a few years.
Can't really find any down sides at the moment, for the size, weight and cost it really is a good bit of kit.
I've binned the kit lens and got the 24-70 F4 and 55 F1.8 Zeiss lenses and they are superb.
One of the best features really is the EVF, personaly coming from a video background this really is a step forward for me and I would put money on all DSLR's having these in a few years.
Can't really find any down sides at the moment, for the size, weight and cost it really is a good bit of kit.
ukaskew said:
They are generally smaller, but particuarly for the Sony a7 models, physics are never going to allow the lens to be small as they are full frame cameras. Having said that, my a7 and 55mm 1.8 is still appreciably smaller and lighter than my old D600 and 50mm 1.8. Other benefits include forgetting about focus issues and back-focussing lenses etc, and you get 100% AF coverage.
What is fast becoming the main selling point is more so that mirrorless cameras will accept pretty much any lens from any system via an adaptor (very few people are actually using Sony lenses with the a7), and the EVF allows zebra striping, focus peaking, digital zoom, and a genuine live preview of your image. DSLRs will never be able to do this.
The EVF is a love or hate thing, it does everything mentioned above for manual focussing, it offers 100% coverage, gains up when shooting at night and you can display pretty much all the info you could ever need on it. However some have issue with the lag (which is nearly non-existent on the a7, but obviously an OVF is perfect in that respect)
As with everything you need to weigh up the pros and cons, neither is inherently 'better' than the other, but mirrorless is still young and is advancing at an incredible rate.
Thanks. Excellent info. Looks like I'll have to keep an eye on these in the future What is fast becoming the main selling point is more so that mirrorless cameras will accept pretty much any lens from any system via an adaptor (very few people are actually using Sony lenses with the a7), and the EVF allows zebra striping, focus peaking, digital zoom, and a genuine live preview of your image. DSLRs will never be able to do this.
The EVF is a love or hate thing, it does everything mentioned above for manual focussing, it offers 100% coverage, gains up when shooting at night and you can display pretty much all the info you could ever need on it. However some have issue with the lag (which is nearly non-existent on the a7, but obviously an OVF is perfect in that respect)
As with everything you need to weigh up the pros and cons, neither is inherently 'better' than the other, but mirrorless is still young and is advancing at an incredible rate.
Otispunkmeyer said:
If you have an A7 for holiday snaps.... what on earth do you use when you're doing serious photography?!
I don't do serious photography, I just get carried away with buying kit 
I've wanted a good camera for a while and the A7 for me is a fantastic travel camera (to be fair that is underselling it, it really is as good as a D800)
Cameras we use at work are D800's and the old D3's.
after a good while of liking the idea of getting one of these then going off of it I have finally decided to order an A7r to replace my 5d mk2. Im going down the old lens route as I dont use Autofocus with a bunch of Canon fd lenses (still on the search for a 35mm tilt shift) and an adapter.
Got a second hand one for a bargain price and selling my 5d mk2, 24-105mm and various accesories should cover most of the price! looking forward to using it.
Got a second hand one for a bargain price and selling my 5d mk2, 24-105mm and various accesories should cover most of the price! looking forward to using it.
I was thinking about the Sony cam whilst on my trek.
Are mirror less cameras essentially bridge cameras with interchangeable lenses and better modern optics?
I ask this not in jest but I use an aging Minolta a2 bridge at work. It has an LCD screen and an evf. I used to use it as my main cam. Always used the evf. Felt like a dslr.
I suppose in theory the new mirror less cameras are like this in principle are they not?
Are mirror less cameras essentially bridge cameras with interchangeable lenses and better modern optics?
I ask this not in jest but I use an aging Minolta a2 bridge at work. It has an LCD screen and an evf. I used to use it as my main cam. Always used the evf. Felt like a dslr.
I suppose in theory the new mirror less cameras are like this in principle are they not?
mojitomax said:
I was thinking about the Sony cam whilst on my trek.
Are mirror less cameras essentially bridge cameras with interchangeable lenses and better modern optics?
I ask this not in jest but I use an aging Minolta a2 bridge at work. It has an LCD screen and an evf. I used to use it as my main cam. Always used the evf. Felt like a dslr.
I suppose in theory the new mirror less cameras are like this in principle are they not?
Mirrorless cameras are what killed the bridge camera. Where a bridge camera is just a compact camera inside a DSLR-style body, a mirrorless is the reverse - it's a DSLR in a compact body.Are mirror less cameras essentially bridge cameras with interchangeable lenses and better modern optics?
I ask this not in jest but I use an aging Minolta a2 bridge at work. It has an LCD screen and an evf. I used to use it as my main cam. Always used the evf. Felt like a dslr.
I suppose in theory the new mirror less cameras are like this in principle are they not?
Image quality-wise there is no comparison. A DSLR and a mirrorless camera are essentially indistinguishable with bridge cameras (and most compact cameras) trailing a long way behind.
The compromises of a mirrorless camera are mostly limited to handling. They only offer an electronic viewfinder, which a lot of people dislike, and most don't offer phase-detect autofocus, which is the fastest and best for tracking moving objects. A bridge camera shares both of these weaknesses though, They also typically have worse battery life (which is mostly an issue for pro- use) and often cost more and have less available accessories than an equivalent DSLR.
The main advantage over a DSLR is size and weight (although this is also dependant on lens choice) but there are also a few more minor ones. Firstly they are very easy to adapt to lenses from other manufacturers, particularly vintage manual focus ones. Secondly the EVF is a big plus point for some people - Live exposure preview, focussing aids and other tricks that are impossible with an optical viewfinder can be very helpful. Finally, the autofocus system (although worst for tracking) is more accurate for static subjects and offers 100% coverage, rather than just a limited number of points.
Mirrorless cameras are a very good choice for a lot of people. They are not perfect but then nothing is. All you can do is decide which set of compromises suits you best.
I'm interested in one of these, or the newish Nikon. Considered the Pentax 645z too until I found out how many, many $ it costs, so unlikely!
I'm coming from a large format (5" by 4") and roll film background but color work is now almost stupidly difficult what with needing to source film and find a good processor and print shop. So, how large a print could the Sony/Nikon give at a display or sale-able level, e.g. for landscapes, but ones which might feature elements with fine detail like buildings, fences etc.
I'm coming from a large format (5" by 4") and roll film background but color work is now almost stupidly difficult what with needing to source film and find a good processor and print shop. So, how large a print could the Sony/Nikon give at a display or sale-able level, e.g. for landscapes, but ones which might feature elements with fine detail like buildings, fences etc.
Thanks for that reply - sounds good. I'm adding a Gigapan head sometime in the next few months so the multiple exposures/stitching will help add to that capacity, but I do want to be able to move around and react quickly at times too, when not tethered and 'tripoded', but worry about the quality difference from the 5"x 4', or 6cm by 17cm pictures I grew up with.
BillPeart said:
I'm interested in one of these, or the newish Nikon. Considered the Pentax 645z too until I found out how many, many $ it costs, so unlikely!
I'm coming from a large format (5" by 4") and roll film background but color work is now almost stupidly difficult what with needing to source film and find a good processor and print shop. So, how large a print could the Sony/Nikon give at a display or sale-able level, e.g. for landscapes, but ones which might feature elements with fine detail like buildings, fences etc.
I recently used some images of trucks I took with the 7r at a trade show - they were 3m across and looked superb! I'm coming from a large format (5" by 4") and roll film background but color work is now almost stupidly difficult what with needing to source film and find a good processor and print shop. So, how large a print could the Sony/Nikon give at a display or sale-able level, e.g. for landscapes, but ones which might feature elements with fine detail like buildings, fences etc.
well I received my A7r a few days a go, due to weather I haven't had a chance to use it properly yet but it seems very nice so far. Got a bunch of Canon fd lenses and a mount to go along with it too and the performance of these lenses (of which the most expensive was £150) is staggering even the cheapo Tokina 25-50mm f/4 that was under £20 works very well.
All in all, used A7r, Canon 20mm f/2.8, Tokina 25-50mm F/4, Canon 135mm F/3.5, Canon 70-210mm F/4, Canon 300mm F/5.6 and 2 spare batteries all for under £1450 Not bad!
Now on the lookout for a canon fd 35mm Tilt shift!
All in all, used A7r, Canon 20mm f/2.8, Tokina 25-50mm F/4, Canon 135mm F/3.5, Canon 70-210mm F/4, Canon 300mm F/5.6 and 2 spare batteries all for under £1450 Not bad!
Now on the lookout for a canon fd 35mm Tilt shift!
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff