Interesting thread.
But I would like to see a debate about whether it is worth upgrading from a A7R to the A7RII.
I'm still weighing it up in my mind. My feeling has always been I should invest in glass and not bodies.
For example, for the price of an A7R II upgrade (assuming some cash back on my A7R) I could purchase both the 16-35 and the 70-200.
On the other hand, better metering, better continuous focus, better viewfinder, better low light performance.
But would I really enjoy more glass or a better body?
Decisions, decisions.
LouisB
Vivek, interesting, I have had similar thoughts since making the connection between owning the 70-200 and a A6000 and using the crop factor to bump it up to a reasonable wildlife lens. Or at least good enough for the backyard birding and local foxes that I enjoy snapping. Also it would a good way of adding extra ooomph to the 90/2.8 for macro work.
I'll look forward to reading about it K-H
LouisB
Thanks LouisB.
As part of the issues you raised I got curious about when I bought cameras and what happened to them?
Here we go.
P&S
2002: Canon PowerShot G3
2003: -
2004: -
2005: -
2006: Canon PowerShot SD800 IS
FF, APS-C, MFT cameras with interchangeable lenses
2007: NIKON D40, D200,D300
2008: NIKON D3
2009: Leica M9
2010: -
2011: -
2012: SONY NEX-5N, NEX-7, NIKON D800E
2013: Olympus E-M5, E-M1, SONY ILCE-7R
2015: Olympus E-M5MarkII, SONY ILCE-7RM2
At present the
G3 is dysfunctional, my daughter has the
SD800 IS but uses her iPhone, my son has the
D300,
D3 and cameras of his own.
My wife occasionally uses the
D40. I still use
D40, D200, M9, NEX-5N, NEX-7, D800E, E-M5, E-M1, ILCE-7R=A7r, E-M5MarkII, and
ILCE-7RM2=A7r2.
I also use an iPhone and even have used an iPad to snap pictures.
As you well know, from an expense point of view it is one thing to buy P&S cameras, it is quite another when one begins to acquire interchangeable lens cameras.
Of course, I agree with your feeling that one should invest in glass and not bodies. And so I did.
At first I paid attention to Nikkor lenses, got some DX lenses for the APS-C sensor cameras D40, D200, D300.
The AF-S Nikkor 18-200/3.5-5.6 G lens lives on the D40 and never comes off.
That system gives pretty useable results with its 6 MP sensor.
I got 1 or 2 more DX lenses before I focused on FX lenses, such as the 17-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8. All very nice.
Of course, Nikon also has some legendary lenses such as the Noct-Nikkor 58/1.2 and the 28/1.4, Nikon's first lenses with aspherical elements.
Other Nikkor lenses that standout for me are the 14-24/2.8 and AF-S 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR as well as several primes in addition to the already mentioned ones.
Of course, my Nikkor lenses can and are being used via adapters on my Sony and Olympus cameras, so I find them a good investment indeed.
Next, in 2009 a friend told me about his childhood experience with his father's Leica rangefinder camera, a very different camera and experience.
So, I ordered an M9, had to wait several months, and was buying lenses from KEH without being able to use them, that was a good move in hindsight anyway.
Eventually my M9 showed up, the first rangefinder I ever saw and touched, had a blast using it.
But it took me several months to figure out that the frame selector at the front of the camera didn't work and had to be repaired.
Anyway, that's how I learned about M and V (for Visoflex) lenses and how to use the latter with adapted short focus mounts even on my Nikon cameras.
An adapted Tele-Elmar 135/4 became a favorite lens on my D3, a 560/5.6 telyt on my D300. I also used these lenses a lot on my M9 via a Visoflex.
At that time I never thought I would ever get into R lenses as they were part of a discontinued Leica product line and very costly.
But Doug Herr's bird images with their incredible IQ, shot with an APO-Telyt-R 280/4, were absolutely stunning and made a great impression on me.
Although I got some nice shots with my V telyts eventually their chromatic aberrations and other optical deficiencies were too recognizable for me and I needed better lenses.
So I bought some of the generally agreed upon, very best R lenses - but again didn't have a camera yet that could use them.
I also didn't want to modify the R lenses for use on my Nikon cameras.
Eventually the Sony NEX-7 was announced, but again I had to wait several months for before one arrived.
So I got a readily available NEX-5N, indeed a fine camera, to tie me over until the NEX-7 showed up.
I finally had 2 APS-C cameras for use with my M, V, and R lenses. But no FF camera yet for the R lenses.
So, when finally the FF Sony A7r was announced I had to get one, especially for my Leica R lenses.
Despite a major issue with the A7r - shutter shock under certain conditions - getting it was an excellent move in hindsight!
I also got interested in Olympus cameras with their superbly working IBIS that I take full advantage of.
So, the A7r2 finally offered the functionality I was after, FF, IBIS, and capable of using my Nikkor and Leica lenses - I had to buy one and I did. :thumbs:
After having used an A7r for almost 2 years and an A7r2 extensively for more than a month, I am happy having and continuing to use both. No regrets! None!
Thus far I have bought the following native lenses FE 35/2.8, 55/1.8 and 90/2.8 MACRO OSS G. I also have the FE Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 50/0.95 II lens.
LouisB, as you well know, the 90/2.8 lens is a game changer, certainly in my mind.
It is incredibly sharp, offers image stabilization, and works superbly well on the A7r2 with Eye AF.
When used on the A7r, it also brings its own OSS to bear on an otherwise not image stabilized camera.
That makes the 90/2.8 lens particularly useful on the A7r in handheld mode.
Therefore, I do not hesitate to use that combination.
For macro shots, however, I prefer to use the
90/2.8 MACRO OSS G lens on the
A7r2.
Reason being, then one gets truly 5-axis IBIS, X and Y stabilization being relatively most important.
For infinity focus shots their stabilization contributions go to zero.
Looking at the time line of my camera purchases, I have the feeling that I possibly can happily live with the A7r2 for awhile and skip the next generation.
I would expect the A7r3 to offer more evolutionary rather than revolutionary new features, similarly as the D810 compares to the D800/E.
Given the necessary care, both cameras are capable of delivering excellent results.
Decisions, decisions, decisions, ... , only you know what's most important for you.
Getting the A7r2 and a lens or two of your choice certainly would be optimal.
That's it for now.
Next I will discuss a bit more how I get along with either camera and post more images from both, using various lenses.
