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!

  • Recently, there has been an increased activity from spammers, which may result in you receiving unwanted private messages. We are working hard to limit this activity.

A7r, A7r2 - and why I'm keeping both ...

V

Vivek

Guest
I think this is better than worrying about what Canon does or does not do. :) :thumbup:
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Robert Capa: “If your photos aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.” Well, these images were all shot within about 2 feet. :grin:









A7r2 + FE 90/2.8 Macro G OSS, @ f/2.8, ISO 320, 1/2000 s with AF. :loco: :facesmack:
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
The last two nights I had a visitor of Hummingbird killing fame. http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/56050-a7r2-steadyshot-observation.html

Here she is, our Praying Mantis, looking straight at me, being busy all evening snacking on insects. I captured some of that on 4K video. :scry:



A7r2 + Leica Telyt-APO-R 280/4 + Extension Rings.

If one can't get close enough, well, then one needs different tools.
I was almost at the close focus distance, but could get any closer - computer table, book shelves in the way.
But I wanted more magnification - so my extension rings came in handy. :D
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I first noticed the Mantis on the window screen and managed to get a couple of manual focus shots in.



A7r2 + FE 90/2.8 Macro G OSS
 

Barry Haines

New member
Robert Capa: “If your photos aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.” Well, these images were all shot within about 2 feet. :grin:
KH really excellent work....mind you don't get too close and step on a landmine...That praying mantis looks like it's considering you for it's next meal :eek:
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
KH really excellent work....mind you don't get to close and step on a landmine...That praying mantis looks like it's considering you for it's next meal :eek:
Many Thanks Barry. You got that right.

When my son Malte and I were trying to document a Mantis feeding on the Hummingbird it had killed we were at a distance of about a foot and clearly could see her munching on the dead bird.
When the Mantis noticed us she looked straight at us, first at one, then the other before taking off. It sure looked like she sized us up for her next meal. :shocked:
BTW, they are also excellent on the wings.

Indeed, one has to be careful around here.
Just last week a jogger got badly mauled by a bear about 2.5 miles out of town on a hiking trail.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
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
 
Last edited:
V

Vivek

Guest
Louis, It would be like preaching to the preacher if I suggest anything. :LOL:

I have pretty much what you have (cameras) and I have decided not to get the A7II or the A7rII (size being one reason, also I do not need SSS/IBIS).

I am starting to like the APS-C cams again and look forward to the A6000 successor. I am hoping that it will have a swivel LCD, a BSI sensor and a silent shutter mode.

The A7r at the moment is unused. I have not decided what to do with it yet although I am itching to convert it to monochrome.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
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 you 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

Many thanks LouisB. That's a great question.
Only you can answer it for yourself, of course.
I obviously made my choice and keep both. Why?

Well, I would like to answer that question in some level of detail and need more time to do that appropriately.
So, please, bear with me for now. Thanks for your patience.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I am starting to like the APS-C cams again and look forward to the A6000 successor. I am hoping that it will have a swivel LCD, a BSI sensor and a silent shutter mode.
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.

Many thanks LouisB. That's a great question.
Only you can answer it for yourself, of course.
I obviously made my choice and keep both. Why?

Well, I would like to answer that question in some level of detail and need more time to do that appropriately.
So, please, bear with me for now. Thanks for your patience.
I'll look forward to reading about it K-H

LouisB
 

chiquita

Member
I had the A7R and traded it for the A7RII. I was disappointed with it first off, the raw files appear rather flat and my normal post processing needed tweaking. I'd say that for me, the only thing that I like is the shutter and thus the prices seems rather expensive. The old 7R fit my hand better and I prefer the shutter button placement. I haven't noticed much af improvement either so I'm on the fence, I think I prefer the 7R.
 

Wayne Fox

Workshop Member
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.
I have the a7r and have had the a7r2 for a while. after losing several images to the shutter blur using my 70-200 nikon, as well as some other random softness issues from possible shutter blur, the a7r was relegated to a scout camera when looking for places to shoot with my MF gear.

while I haven't been able to shoot with the a7r2 much due to some personal reasons, I think the back illuminated sensor, electronic first curtain and IBIS as well as improved ergonomics and other features puts the a7r2 into a different league than the a7r. So while you are right investing in glass and not bodies is a good guide, in this case I would say the upgrade is substantial enough to consider it.
 
Last edited:

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
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. :)
 
Top