Should I buy a Sony A7 II? Advice please

[anonymous-user]

Hi all,

I've got a Nikon D7000 which is a few years old now, and a load of nice Nikon glass, but I never use it anymore. I've really enjoyed taking some fantastic photos with it over the years, but I became a little frustrated with the size of it, and not taking it everywhere I wanted.

I also found the low light capabilities not great and the bokeh not great, both I presume due to the crop sensor and it's limited abilities.

I bought a Sony RX100 mk1 and loved it. Then bought an RX100 mk3 and loved it even more. I found the image quality excellent and the sensor really impressed me. Especially in low light.

I shoot mostly street scenes, architecture, night time street photos, city landscape. That kind of thing.

Been eying up an RX1 or RX1 Mk2, but I'm concerned that I would find the fixed 35mm lens restrictive, especially since most of my shots are wide and 35mm might be too tight.

So now I'm looking at buying an A7 Mk2 as it still seems really compact, but I get to finally enjoy full frame!

Plus I can stick the 28mm F2 on it and it'll be great for my needs I think, but I'll have other lens options as well.

Any thoughts?

Anything else I should consider other than the A7 range?

Thanks

[anonymous-user]

RobDickinson said:

If you want better low light and shallow dof plus the compact mirror less format then your choice is Sony.

The a7 mk2 is pretty decent too. Go for it.

Thanks Rob.

In short, yes, I would love better low light capability for my shooting handheld at nights or in darker places. Would also love to have the option of a shallow DoF for when portrait type stuff suits me.

[anonymous-user]

strummerville said:

Sorry to hijack, but I too have an RX100 Mk1 which I have owned since 2013 and am very pleased with it. I am thinking of the mandatory upgrade, (to a Mk4) - is there a discernible image quality difference between the Mk1 and Mk3?

The two biggest benefits I believe are the pop up viewfinder and wider max aperture at full zoom.

No problem with the hijack, the more the merrier!

My honest experience on going from a mk1 to mk3:

The EVF is really good, there's no denying that, but to be honest I had gotten that used to using the screen that I rarely used it. It wouldn't bother me if it wasn't there, but it's nice to have.

The tilting screen was more important to me than the EVF. It was handy.

Also more important to me was the built in wifi. That was worth the upgrade to me. I have always had iPhones and always have a few good photo tweaking apps on them, and I like to send my images easily to my phone, quickly tweak them for sharpness and saturdation and then upload to Facebook, send to friends, upload to Flickr etc. Being able to send photos wirelessly was a great thing for me. Although I appreciate this is a pointless feature for those that like to put an SD card in their Mac and use lighteoom etc.

The sensor, being a new design, was a little better than the mk1, but you would only notice in a couple of photos here and there in low light or whatever. The difference is marginal.

The lens is a big improvement though. Now that it's 2.8 at zoom it actually allows for portraits with a half decent amount of bokeh for a small camera. Maximum zoom at 2.8 gives nicer portraits than before.

It's worth the upgrade in my opinion.

[anonymous-user]

toohuge said:

The bokeh quality is determined by the lens....

Are you hoping for improved bokeh or a shallower depth of field?

What lenses do you have for the Nikon?

The FF depth of field argument seems to be an area for debate...

https://fstoppers.com/education/smaller-sensor-siz...

Edited by toohuge on Tuesday 10th April 11:12

Sorry, my bad. I have confused my question slightly by saying bokeh and depth of field.

I'm strictly talking about shallow depth of field, which is what I like for some shots and would like more of if possible. Or at least like the option of.

Nikon lenses I have:

18-200 VR
17-55 2.8
11-16 2.8
50mm 1.8
And a kit lens.

The 50mm does give fairly shallow DOF, but on the crop sensor you really have to be at a bit of distance to get people in the frame.

[anonymous-user]

Update...

I've sold all my Nikon gear

Put it all up for sale as a package on Sunday night and it was gone by Monday evening.

So that's it, I no longer own a single piece of DSLR or Nikon stuff for the first time in 15 years!


I bought a Sony A7 Mk2 today, complete with the Sony 28mm F2, which is apparently a really decent lens.

Seen as how over 90% of my photos have been at 25-30mm equivalent over the last few years, I think I'll be pretty happy with that lens, but the only other one I think I'll be looking for is an 85mm 1.4 or 1.8 for portraits.

I see Sigma have just this month released a range of 8 lenses from their 'Art' collection to fit the Sony E Mount, and their 85mm 1.4 is £700 which is fairly pricy but not out of the way.

I'll also be considering other 85mm lenses.

There seems to be somewhat of a big surge in lenses being released for the Sony E mount system, so hopefully if I do fancy other lenses there will be plenty to choose from.

But for the moment, I'm keeping it simple, just the A7 II and the 28mm and see how I get on.

[anonymous-user]

theboss said:

Sounds like a good setup. I wouldn't mind something similar as a travel camera in terms of small size but full frame advantage combined with a fast wide angle lens. Something like the RX1Rii or Leica Q would be very good but seems too expensive when you can do what you've done for substantially less and still have the added versatility. What was the combined cost of the A7ii and 28mm lens? I have 85mm f/1.4 and 70-200mm f/2.8 both from Canon on a full frame 5DS and portraits are exceptional with both. I should think the Art 85mm will be exceptional. I nearly bought it myself but then got swayed by the new canon L alternative.

I actually purchased secondhand locally. By chance a local photographer was selling his A7 II.

The camera and lens were bought by him brand new 8 months ago and barely used. He had it as a backup body for his A7R III.

I paid £1100 for the body and the 28mm.

I've looked and looked at the RX1R II, (it would have to be a Mk2 for the Wifi etc) nearly bought one several times, but the fact the lens is 35mm stopped me along with the price, which would easily be the thick end of £2000 secondhand.

Don't get me wrong, I think the RX1R Mk1 and 2 are incredible pieces of equipment and if I didn't care about money, I would have one as well just for the hell of it, but once I really started weighing things up it immediately made sense to buy a A7 II instead.

Still very compact, full frame, wifi etc, but with the ability to swap lenses and enjoy an 85mm 1.4 for example if required.

I just don't think the 35mm on the RX1 would have been wide enough for my usual photos, and I would have been stuck with it.

I enjoy taking a lot of photos travelling, and used my Nikon DSLR a lot, but just got tired of it's sheer size, especially with the 18-200mm VR that mostly lived on it.

I stopping taking it in favour of my RX100 iii which I love, but still couldn't shake off wanting some Sony full-frame goodness in my life.

So yeah, I'm very happy now that I've got 28mm, full frame, in something that genuinely is a lot more compact and capable than my DSLR gear.

[anonymous-user]

RobDickinson said:

The rx1 is silly over priced when you compare to the a7 range

Yep.

It's a thing of beauty and a bit of a marvel, but the pricing is just ridiculous when you realise what the A7 cameras give you for the money and how good they are.