The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

A7r - and why I'm not keeping it.

fotografz

Well-known member
I'm not keeping the A7R either.

Eventually.

I've come to the conclusion that at the exponential rate of advancement with digital cameras, sinking more than $2,000 to $3,000 into a body is a fool's errand, or a rich man's indulgence.

These cameras have the life-span of a Mayfly ... I don't even have the A7R in hand yet, and there are rumors of a 54 meg revolutionary new sensor on the horizon ... and a new "organic sensor" ... and a sensor that exposes each pixel differently.

It's the two edged Chinese saying ... "May you live in interesting times." ... only "time" is now "wormhole" compressed. It only takes a couple of years at most to become a Luddite if you keep a camera longer than that ;)

Of course, the one brand that seems immune to this is Leica. My S2 is proof that I don't do as I say :ROTFL: However, honestly, that one exception I can justify by earnings with it, and that it does so much of what I have to do with lighting etc.. The CS leaf-shutter lenses made that possible. The MM is an anomaly also (kind of a longer term commitment to the B&W fetish). Can't make the same case for the M240, like Chuck, I can't make the leap to a luxury item that promises to go directly from cool, to on life-support in one step.

All the other stuff ...meh, the differences are hair-splitting ... smaller is better in general, and lenses are the real fun of all this. If I were a landscape shooter, I'm sure I could find something to bolt to this camera ... and even if the lens were larger, the body is not, so some "lug around" savings are realized anyway.

The next steps promise to be a doozy ... next gen EVF will come to fruition, sensor design will solve the niggles, DR will not even be an issue, and so on ... and prices will continue on a downward trend ... FF 36 meg will be less than $2K real soon.

- Marc
 

RVB

Member
I'm not keeping the A7R either.

Eventually.

I've come to the conclusion that at the exponential rate of advancement with digital cameras, sinking more than $2,000 to $3,000 into a body is a fool's errand, or a rich man's indulgence.


- Marc
Marc,this is the voice of reason,I think it makes more sense to buy glass,the right glass holds is value..and also creates the signature of the image.

Rob
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Question is just how much more do we need? That's why I'm not waiting. I'll go out and shoot with it and if I need to side or upgrade, well I sold my 5D3 for £120 less than I bought it a year ago and I made far more than that using it so....
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Question is just how much more do we need? That's why I'm not waiting. I'll go out and shoot with it and if I need to side or upgrade, well I sold my 5D3 for £120 less than I bought it a year ago and I made far more than that using it so....
I don't mean just resolution Ben. The whole "new-tech" package keeps rapidly evolving and improving pretty much across the board on all brands ... you sold your Canons for some reason, and I'll bet a dollar to a donut that this A7R "breakthrough" will go bye-bye sooner than we think.

The digital "Camera Revolution V1.0" has matured a lot, the downsizing mirror-less, "Camera Revolution V2.0" is just beginning.

Still camera EVFs are relatively new, and have improved a lot in a very short amount of time ... yet will most likely improve beyond our imaginings in the next few years.

Same with sensors ... not just pixel count but quality of pixels. Leica once said they could not make a digital M because of the lens distance to sensor, then Epson did it, so Leica then made the flawed M8 ... then the M9, now the M240 with a thinner IR filter (which effects color) to allow M wides to be used ... where the A7R has side issues with M WAs in some cases, but little or no IR color issues. That is bound to change in both cases.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Honestly, it feels like we are in a perpetual beta testing vortex ... cameras come out, flaws are discovered, fixes come in over time, and by the time it settles down, it starts all over again.

That is why I am loath to pay a premium for a ride on this Merry-Go-Round anymore ... it is exhausting and expensive. I didn't upgrade my S2, didn't upgrade my M to M240 for the first time ever, kept one A900 and only did one A99 because it was under $3K, and same for the A7R for $2,300 + the FF SLT adapter at $350. Fortunately, the ZA lenses I got have increased in new price to the point I can sell them for close to what I paid for them or more.

Of course this is just the science part of photography ... obviously, no one has to participate at all, and I doubt their photography will suffer all that much. Yet this whole size thing is pretty seductive. MFD users flocked to the D800 not just because of 36 meg, but that it was in a much smaller package.

- Marc
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Same with sensors ... not just pixel count but quality of pixels. Leica once said they could not make a digital M because of the lens distance to sensor, then Epson did it, so Leica then made the flawed M8 ... then the M9, now the M240 with a thinner IR filter (which effects color) to allow M wides to be used ... where the A7R has side issues with M WAs in some cases, but little or no IR color issues. That is bound to change in both cases.

Necessity is the mother of invention.
This is pure history and it is good to have that as a reminder too! :thumbup:
 
V

Vivek

Guest
One thing is for sure: when I die I'm keeping nothing ... :rolleyes:

:chug:
I hope that will day will not come for a longtime, Bart. :)

Us photo nuts are all passionate about gear. So, this sort of stuff is totally expected.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Marc,this is the voice of reason,I think it makes more sense to buy glass,the right glass holds is value..and also creates the signature of the image.

Rob
Yeah, for me (and obviously others), lenses have once again become the driver. All I cared about when I got my hands on the A7R was whether my Leica M50/0.95 would work on it and whether I could focus it well ... It did, and I could. Done.

The already obvious part of this for me was use of the array of ZA lenses I already have ... and frankly would be hard pressed to buy today if starting from scratch ($2,000 for a ZA 16-35/2.8? Really?).

- Marc
 

fotografz

Well-known member
One thing is for sure: when I die I'm keeping nothing ... :rolleyes:

:chug:
Depends on your beliefs ;)

I've decided the Egyptian Pharaohs had the right idea about the Big Sleep :sleep006:, and have made arrangements accordingly.

Hey, ya never know. :loco:

"Well now, don't you have the face of an Angel? Could you move over a bit into that better light ... there ya go ... snap, snap".

- Marc
 

Ron Pfister

Member
The whole "new-tech" package keeps rapidly evolving and improving pretty much across the board on all brands ... you sold your Canons for some reason, and I'll bet a dollar to a donut that this A7R "breakthrough" will go bye-bye sooner than we think.
…snip...
Of course this is just the science part of photography ... obviously, no one has to participate at all, and I doubt their photography will suffer all that much. Yet this whole size thing is pretty seductive. MFD users flocked to the D800 not just because of 36 meg, but that it was in a much smaller package.
You raise some interesting points. For my part, I've started to look at digital camera bodies as something like a tech camera with a film holder attached, and what primarily interests me is the quality of the ground glass and that of the film. Regarding other features, I am very willing to compromise.

For me, the long-term investment is in the glass, but I expect that my current 36MP bodies (D800E and A7R) will stay with me for a good long time. The reason I feel this way is three-fold:

1.) I don't have a need for more than 36MP for what I do
2.) The next step up in pixel density already on the horizon (~54MP FF) will likely still produce a gain in image detail with the lenses that I own, judging from the results obtained with the NEX-7. Anything beyond that will likely place such demands on lenses that gains will only be visible with few of my lenses, while I expect a higher MP count would mainly magnify the flaws of the rest of them.
3.) With the increase in pixel count, demands on shooting technique will increase to a point where any gains in convenience brought about by a more compact camera body will be more than off-set by the size and weight of the required support equipment (tripod and head).

I think 36MP FF is a good stage of the game to become a (perhaps temporary) neo-luddite... ;)
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
What ? Smeared edges with a wide angle doesn t matter ? It sure does . Every professional I ve worked with has stressed the importance of using the entire frame . Look at Alex Webbs work ..how to you layer a composition without concern over the entire frame ?

We aren t talking about the outside boarder ...Jono was speaking to the outside 1/4th of the frame ..most off center compositions use this area . Most street shooting is done with 24-35MM lenses at distances of 6-10 FT . My number one reason for losing an image is clipping an edge .

Its not the same as landscape ,of course , but at 36MPs you have to picky because you will see the difference .
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Even if Leica M lenses do not exist, it is not the end of the world for photography. Historically, Leica were not good at making wide angle lenses. The first ones were from Schneider and Zeiss. They were very poor at making zooms. The first zoom lenses came from Minolta and Angenieux.
 

Ron Pfister

Member
I agree Roger. I should add that I'm not looking for the perfect hi-res body for M-mount glass. I'm happy to use the M-mount glass that I own that works well on the A7R (I have yet to test which ones do). The others I simply won't use. I have no issue at all with using SLR-lenses on the A7R. And I'm curious about what FE-lenses Zeiss will reveal in due course… :)
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I don't mean just resolution Ben. The whole "new-tech" package keeps rapidly evolving and improving pretty much across the board on all brands ... you sold your Canons for some reason, and I'll bet a dollar to a donut that this A7R "breakthrough" will go bye-bye sooner than we think.

- Marc
I didn't get it for the resolution Marc. It was for a smaller and lighter camera (due to disability) with more DR for my commercial work. Yes the EVF's will get better, yada, yada. I shot my 5Dc's for 7 years without feeling the need to upgrade, only upgrading to the 5D3 which I bought when my original 5D died. Only sold that because I'm no longer shooting the kind of stuff I bought it for. Honestly I don't think it's a lot of premium, in the new year it will be even cheaper. My dealer gave me a free (large) sling bag and a free sony battery with mine, methinks dealer margins are huge on this camera. The price new is still £800 less than the 5D3 was when new. That's a huge price dip for what it is. I would say that the pricing of this sony will soon prove to be extremely disruptive in the marketplace and seen as extremely cheap.

Yes it's expensive compared to what it will be, yes it's expensive compared to what the next years will bring. For me however it was the right time. The DSLR paradigm no longer works or makes sense for my specific usage and the camera was bought new for the same price I sold my DSLR for 2nd hand even with a big scratch on the front. I think the time was right.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
What ? Smeared edges with a wide angle doesn t matter ? It sure does .
My take is that it depends on the image. If the smearing affects the quality of the image then I'd by that it matters... If it doesn't, for instance night time street photography, then maybe the vignetting/ smearing matters less in an image where the corners might just be a nighttime sky or bokeh effects anyway.

Generally I agree that corner performance matters for some... It's not anything I normally look at though for what I do - but I'm not a professional although I've sold a few pictures at professional prices.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
You raise some interesting points. For my part, I've started to look at digital camera bodies as something like a tech camera with a film holder attached, and what primarily interests me is the quality of the ground glass and that of the film. Regarding other features, I am very willing to compromise.

For me, the long-term investment is in the glass, but I expect that my current 36MP bodies (D800E and A7R) will stay with me for a good long time. The reason I feel this way is three-fold:

1.) I don't have a need for more than 36MP for what I do
2.) The next step up in pixel density already on the horizon (~54MP FF) will likely still produce a gain in image detail with the lenses that I own, judging from the results obtained with the NEX-7. Anything beyond that will likely place such demands on lenses that gains will only be visible with few of my lenses, while I expect a higher MP count would mainly magnify the flaws of the rest of them.
3.) With the increase in pixel count, demands on shooting technique will increase to a point where any gains in convenience brought about by a more compact camera body will be more than off-set by the size and weight of the required support equipment (tripod and head).

I think 36MP FF is a good stage of the game to become a (perhaps temporary) neo-luddite... ;)
I think we tend to evaluate based on what we think we know now, not what may well be coming.

Think about it. It wasn't all that long ago that CA and distortion was either a labor intense post task, or impossible to correct. Now every CPU lens is specifically programed into software for one click fixes. Heck, even Leica who touted the S lenses as near perfect, and poo-pooed those who relied on software, now has software lens profiles for each.

Again, it isn't just meg count, it is how the sensors themselves are evolving to solve existing issues ... plus the whole camera package itself is being re-invented.

I do agree that some cameras tend to have more staying power. I feel that way about my S2. It was a ground up design with no baggage to carry forward ... so it remains one of the simplest cameras to use with IQ driven by the lenses ... for my current applications for a camera like that, it is more than enough.

I can't think of a 35mm camera I would say the same thing about ... even though my 24 meg A99 does its' job just fine, 54 meg while retaining nex gen IBIS would pique my interest ... as long as it isn't over $3K, give or take. ;)

- Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I don't mean just resolution Ben. The whole "new-tech" package keeps rapidly evolving and improving pretty much across the board on all brands ... you sold your Canons for some reason, and I'll bet a dollar to a donut that this A7R "breakthrough" will go bye-bye sooner than we think.

The digital "Camera Revolution V1.0" has matured a lot, the downsizing mirror-less, "Camera Revolution V2.0" is just beginning.

Still camera EVFs are relatively new, and have improved a lot in a very short amount of time ... yet will most likely improve beyond our imaginings in the next few years.

Same with sensors ... not just pixel count but quality of pixels. Leica once said they could not make a digital M because of the lens distance to sensor, then Epson did it, so Leica then made the flawed M8 ... then the M9, now the M240 with a thinner IR filter (which effects color) to allow M wides to be used ... where the A7R has side issues with M WAs in some cases, but little or no IR color issues. That is bound to change in both cases.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

Honestly, it feels like we are in a perpetual beta testing vortex ... cameras come out, flaws are discovered, fixes come in over time, and by the time it settles down, it starts all over again.

That is why I am loath to pay a premium for a ride on this Merry-Go-Round anymore ... it is exhausting and expensive. I didn't upgrade my S2, didn't upgrade my M to M240 for the first time ever, kept one A900 and only did one A99 because it was under $3K, and same for the A7R for $2,300 + the FF SLT adapter at $350. Fortunately, the ZA lenses I got have increased in new price to the point I can sell them for close to what I paid for them or more.

Of course this is just the science part of photography ... obviously, no one has to participate at all, and I doubt their photography will suffer all that much. Yet this whole size thing is pretty seductive. MFD users flocked to the D800 not just because of 36 meg, but that it was in a much smaller package.

- Marc

Marc I agree and than also disagree . The S2 you did not play the guniea pig role when it first came out but waited 3 years until that guniea pig stage was over and so did I. I refused to buy it back than even if it was free but today it held up to be a viable working Pro system. So yes even though I did not buy yet I would if I had the cash. Now not many cams can last this long in the market most are gone now from that time period. Now I agree sometimes we are throwing money on a product only to be replaced by another. Even the M8 in hindsight was a big waste of money given the crap I know for sure I went through but we may have never seen a M9 either come out in a shorter time frame than normal.

I totally get the I am a beta tester comment and believe me I am one of them in a big way. Is it always fun but just imagine if you bought the S on release everyday you would be cursing Leica for a fresh lens to come out. I'm reviewing it again in January but this time I have a much better non beta feeling on it since now it is a system that is viable.

Let's face it we are beta tester because products get replaced every 6 months and sometimes we just have no choice to be one. I turned 57 today and **** I'm still willing to play the game just to see what kind of edge something brings me. But I agree with you that as we got older we are maybe just a little less likely to jump on a new tech. We all know this will be followed up by something more refined in 6 months. It comes down to you want to play the game or not and that won't change with emerging tech. Like you I'm not likely to jump as fast anymore but I'm still willing to do it. We're sluts let's face it. Lol
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Case in point I'm going to go play golf. I had a perfectly viable driver that I hit 260 yards almost always in the center of the fairway. Had it 6 months , what did I do traded it yesterday for a updated driver with new tech to gain a extra 10-20 yards. Its a vicious circle that you can apply in almost anything. Okay I'm off for the day, peace out and wish me that extra 10 yards to the old geezer. LOL

Ps don't tell my wife. I loaned out my baseball helmet to a friend. Lol
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I didn't get it for the resolution Marc. It was for a smaller and lighter camera (due to disability) with more DR for my commercial work. Yes the EVF's will get better, yada, yada. I shot my 5Dc's for 7 years without feeling the need to upgrade, only upgrading to the 5D3 which I bought when my original 5D died. Only sold that because I'm no longer shooting the kind of stuff I bought it for. Honestly I don't think it's a lot of premium, in the new year it will be even cheaper. My dealer gave me a free (large) sling bag and a free sony battery with mine, methinks dealer margins are huge on this camera. The price new is still £800 less than the 5D3 was when new. That's a huge price dip for what it is. I would say that the pricing of this sony will soon prove to be extremely disruptive in the marketplace and seen as extremely cheap.

Yes it's expensive compared to what it will be, yes it's expensive compared to what the next years will bring. For me however it was the right time. The DSLR paradigm no longer works or makes sense for my specific usage and the camera was bought new for the same price I sold my DSLR for 2nd hand even with a big scratch on the front. I think the time was right.
Agreed. It is the "Mighty Mouse" for $2,300 that is the attraction ... which is exactly my point. If this camera were $7,000, I think the Sony size revolution would be over in a few days :ROTFL:

How long it will suffice for each photographer is a matter of personal preference. I'm also tending to keep cameras longer now days. Yet, if Sony drops a 54 meg super-sensor into a slightly smaller A99 SLT type camera with an even better EVF and nex gen IBIS for $2,500 or so ... I'll pay attention. The A99 will go to back-up status, and the A900 will go bye-bye (Maybe :)).

As of now, Canon and Nikon have completely fallen off my radar ... that part of the Merry-Go-Round has evaporated.

-Marc
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I have to be frank that I went for the A7r more for the superior build than the extra megapixels of the A7. It wasn't until I saw the superior tonality of the A7r that I knew I had an extra 'plus' to push me over the edge. I was still mid being astounded at the resolution gains of the 5D3 over my 12 megapixel 5Dc to be honest. Can't see 54 megapixels really exciting me much, the lens catchup for even the A7r's resolution would be brutal had I bothered to play it (I'm not, character over lp/mm for this man). I've resisted my bosses drive for more megapixels in our studio MF camera for long enough. There reaches a point where you lose more than you gain for all the 'ooooh wow' effect. IMO that is.
 
Top