So Why did you buy the A7/R???

[turtle]

I think this obvious question is worth asking, because it will give an idea as to the pull this camera system has. With the A7R - the big seller - we all think the 36MP has been the big pull, but has it? Me first:

1. Dynamic Range (I am doing a lot of night work and the 5D III banding issue is no longer tolerable. Dfine is standard workflow). I struggled over the A7 or A7R decision and went for the latter when I realised noise would be better controlled after downsampling vs the native 24 MP file of the A7.

2. EVF (I have some eye issues, shoot into the sun a lot, and don't want to be looking at the sun through an optical finder. Dislike rear LCDs for shooting).

3. Lack small, portable colour system (Have 5D III and Monochrom).

4. Resolution (36MP will be a nice boost over 22mp for those 30+ inch prints)

Cost (The pricing of bodies means I can likely remain in the game in future generations. The same cannot be said of Leica M or even Canon. I think their pricing has gone nuts lately and their high MP bodies may have monstrous prices. Hell, even the 5D III sells for about GBP 2400 today!). I may retain one film M, those lenses that work well on the A7R and sell out of Leica M all together. They have not produced any modestly priced M mount cameras and GBP 5000 is the starting point. Its therefore a dead system for me. In this regard, I feel very disappointed in Leica.

 

[iiiNelson]

I bought it because I wanted a relatively affordable system that was small, compact, and gave me IQ above what the other mirrorless systems could offer me. I wanted to be able to buy two bodies and not have to look over my shoulder before I whipped a camera out as well. I'm not getting rid of the M9-P as I still love the color and look I get from it though. I will just use it more for my personal camera - I do still love a rangefinder but I think shooting a mirrorless manually is just as easy.

 

[Ron Pfister]

My motivation: IQ comparable to the D800E in a much smaller package, plus being able to use those of my M-mount lenses that work well with the A7R. As it turns out, I'm so far mostly using SLR-lenses with the A7R (Leica-R and Zeiss C/Y, ZF.2), but the size and weight advantage is absolutely still there. And the focusing experience is *far* better than with the D800E, which was another motivating factor.

 

[Vivek]

The A7R (has)

-a huge shutter lag.

-(is) unlikely to have 14 bit RAW files.

-a shutter that vibrates uncontrollably.

-super expensive Leica lenses are terrible on it.

All this just exceeded my expectations. :thumbs: :ROTFL:

 

[Ron Pfister]

Thanks for your constructive input, Vivek! I had a feeling you wouldn't let us down…

 

[turtle]

Vivek, well you've not answered the question and threaten to derail the thread at the beginning, which isn't very nice of you

 

[Vivek]

Thanks for your constructive input, Vivek! I had a feeling you wouldn't let us down…

How useful are your comments on others' with mischaracterization is for you to ponder.

Vivek, well you've not answered the question and threaten to derail the thread at the beginning, which isn't very nice of you

Turtle, Since you seem to be new to Sony, this comes as a shock.

What I say is all true and within expectations (in fact, exceeds expectations) given the history of NEX and how the E mount evolved to a FF mount- first video cams- several of them and a compact fixed lens cam (RX1) and all the clamoring and expectations for a FF NEX.

Check out a few previous threads on these subjects.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The A7R (has)

-a huge shutter lag.

-(is) unlikely to have 14 bit RAW files.

-a shutter that vibrates uncontrollably.

-super expensive Leica lenses are terrible on it.

All this just exceeded my expectations. :thumbs: :ROTFL:

Hey there are two ways to skin a cat. Buy them both

 

[Guy Mancuso]

The A7R (has)

-a huge shutter lag.

-(is) unlikely to have 14 bit RAW files.

-a shutter that vibrates uncontrollably.

-super expensive Leica lenses are terrible on it.

All this just exceeded my expectations. :thumbs: :ROTFL:

Btw those are all firmware updates. Except the Leica of course

 

[Vivek]

Btw those are all firmware updates. Except the Leica of course

Some are and it will add to the list of far exceeding the expectations.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I don't have a answer to this question and I'm still trying to justify it. I'm just not sure who too. my baseball bat wife or me. LOL

Just kidding she knows I'm nuts.

 

[W.Utsch]

Guy i like to cite you: Because we are "gear sluts"!! Love that expression.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

We most certainly are and I say that with great affection to our members. Lol

 

[Ocean]

I am still waiting to get the A7r. My main interests are:

1) to use Leica R lenses (19/35/60/100APO/180APO)
2) to use Contax G lenses (of course, I am given up the idea of using the wide angle G21 and G28)
3) to use Leica M lenses, mainly fast normal and tele lenses (Zeiss ZM 50/1,5, 135APO)

What I like about A7r are:
1) Compact size
2) EVF manual focus accuracy
3) Sony 36MP sensor

 

[cunim]

I bought the A7r to let me make quasi-MF photos with a small camera. Does it succeed? Not really but nothing else does either (e.g. Leica M240). The A7r is not a bad camera. I enjoy taking pictures with it and have found one lens (the 90mm Apo 'cron) that I love on it. Wish I could find a 50'ish lens that works as well. Sadly, Tim's samples and others from the FE55 don't help any.

This is a great little toy that will be here and gone within a gnat's life span. Interesting how it makes people emotional. That means it must be addressing a needy market. Can't wait to see what it all leads to.

 

[jfirneno]

I just bouught the A7R last night as the next step in the process of evaluating the two new Sony full frames. A couple of weeks ago I rented the A7. I was pretty satisfied with the performance in the areas that I thought were question marks (low light AF and high ISO noise). But recently I read several threads by folks who had tried both cameras saying that the CDAF of the A7R was actually more accurate than the A7 AF in low light. Since I couldn't get enough proof one way or the other on this question I decided to answer it myself. I'll compare my results with the A7R to what I found with the A7. If it's the same or better than the A7 I'll keep it. If it's worse I'll trade it in for the A7. Either way I think these two cameras are pretty exciting new products. I think the end of the DSLR is now about three years away. I expect the real Canon and Nikon mirrorless cameras will appear in 2015.

 

[fmueller]

I bought it because it's about the same size and weight as a good quality m43 with a whole lot more resolution and finer gradation of tones. I've taken numerous pictures with my very excellent OMD-EM5 and often wished for just a little bit more from its sensor.

It will take my Canon TS/E lenses. Architectural shots always seem to have a better feel with higher resolution. (See: technical camera, Phase One...)

It's EVF, focus peaking, and all things to do with manual focusing are superior to anything I've ever used.

It is way cheaper than a Leica in every category and superior in performance in almost every way.

I wish my Leica were invisible----my Sony is. I like that the Sony gear costs less. And it's not because I'm unwilling to spend money on my avocation.

If my Leica gets damaged and needs a serious service, it will cost an arm and a leg to get repaired and be out of service for months. Excepting a CLA, my Sony costs less than a Leica servicing.... See above.

I got a little spooked by all this shutter shake thing and then I thought about it and looked at some of my results to understand what this camera can do. I will shoot around it. I realized that some reviewers are searching mightily to find the warts, it attracts attention (and subscriptions?) Maintain a reasonable perspective and take pictures!

Higher resolution cameras make you work a little harder to realize their potential. I don't mind the extra work.

Sony has hit home runs with its 35 and 55 native lenses. That bodes well for future lens development.

We live in a wonderful time of affordable high quality camera gear.




Fred

www.fredmuellerphotography.com

 

[thomas]

I am about to buy one.

Main motivation: My beloved old school MFDB is ISO50 only. 36MP with really good ISO800 (and even above) for a such a low price is a very good addition to my kit.
I am planing to use it for nodal point stitching with a ZM Planar 2.0/50mm lens and for flat stitching with a Canon 24 TSE.
I don't think I will buy more lenses for this camera (but am planing to use my Contax 645 lenses on it... just for fun, of course).

 

[kit laughlin]

I used the A7r yesterday; I did not find the shutter lag objectionable, and wondered whether how much of the sounds occur after the exposure is made. Was it Vivek who cited some shutter lag stats; I could not find these when posting this. If someone knows these, perhaps they could be linked here.

I grew up on shooting dance and theatre professionally using a pair of Nikon F Photomic head bodies (during dress rehearsals; those bodies had serious shutter sounds), and with effective film speeds being a fraction of what they are now, you had to anticipate the still points in constantly moving performances to 'freeze' the action (top of a kick, for example). And the body learns this in time. Now, it may be that the A7r has much more significant shutter lag than the Nikon F2, of course, and I may not be remembering accurately.

I am inclining to the A7, for the quieter shutter and its electronic first curtain, faster flash sync, and the fact that 24MP is enough for my present needs. I welcome jfirneno's impressions of both in these regards. The difference in price is not a consideration; I seem to recall that I paid $5,500 for a D3s only a few years ago!

 

[turtle]

The reason I asked the question was because I figured that Sony had done just what a previous member mentioned, which is used this platform to pull in people otherwise committed to other platforms. Some have modern Nikon lenses and some old Canon FD... a bit of Leica glass and the list goes on. However, with 36 MP, light weight and various other features, they have managed to tap into the customer base of other manufacturers. With the A7, they have punched right into the 6D/D610 market, with same price, lower bulk. Should they follow though and improve upon the 7 series camera, they may snag these customers for good. At the moment, I do not see that Nikon or Canon is doing anything to retain the same people.

Sure the Alpha 7 cameras have some flaws, but lets not pretend other systems don't. I can sit here and tell every that my Leica MM shoots 'perfect frames' all day long between f5.6 and F11 with any of my lenses. But it has no EVF. The metering is not great. It costs a fortune, it locks up periodically, highlight clipping is a constant worry and the list goes on.

Vivek has been very vocal in his disappointment, but this is not the complete story. Understanding that disappointment is all the more difficult because he has still not responded to the original post despite three or more posts.

Most photographers worth their salt have always had to work around issues with their camera systems, whether it be weight, dynamic range, cost. bulk, corner sharpness or some other issue. Sony has their own mix of issues, but what is clear is that they offer a different formula to what is out there now. I'll make my own mind up further down the road, but right now I am much more interested on what is good about the system that will give me forwards momentum that I cannot find elsewhere, rather than to whine about imperfections. I mean, the D800 had green cast and left focus issues, the 5D III had DR deficiencies and was too damn expensive, the 24-70 II was too expensive and made of plastic, the Leica 50 Lux asph was unavailable for years, the D600 had oil issues... oh, and some view cameras wobbled at full extension, some had limited bellows mobility when compressed... the list goes on: its nothing new so get over it! Magic bullet chasing and being a gear head that professes to be one camera short of greatness are the same thing.

For me, personally, Sony has got my full attention. If they keep moving in this direction... a direction which has pulled them right into the mainstream, interesting things might happen. Money making corporations are not stupid, or at least not for long. Sony DSLR were fringe, but the A7s have brought them right into the kit bags of the users of the big names from what I can see. Some are hopping up from M4/3, some are committed to Nikon or Canon FF. This is something big from an industry perspective, I think... and whatever happens, I am sure the A7R will produce some spectacular images for me if I do my part.

Its still not as exciting as the Panasonic GM-1 though