After devouring every post and piece of info here on GetDPI and a sneak peak elsewhere ( OK, I admit I strayed. ..lol), I'm extremely impressed by what I've heard and seen for the most part but am stricken by the fact that some are basing their assesment and their wholesale move to this system ( in some cases) by the performance of a few lenses, most notably the Sony 55 and 35 FE lenses.
This is most definitely not a criticism nor the rule, but I recall not too long ago when cameras like the D800 would be assessed on a far wider criteria of performance,..namely performance characteristics with a wide variety of lenses of various focal lengths. Sure the Sony may ultimately prove superior even in this regard and the image quality so far is quite astonishing, so maybe I'm being too conservative and can't see its full potential as a complete system just yet.
This is aside from what I presume will be good support of this system in the future with a fairly complete line of lenses that potentially can take advantage of these cameras superior optical properties, but so far the discussion has primarily on its two primary lenses (the 35 and 55 FE). Are my perceptions and concerns warranted or am I not seeing the forest through the trees (or is that trees through the forest?).
I guess another way to put this is it too premature to consider investing in this system as one's primary system when such a small percentage of its potential hasn't yet been fully evaluated yet, regardless of how well its performed so far with its two principally released lenses...and yes I realize how good the kit zoom appears to be. Just some observations.
Dave (D&A)
Dave, I think it all depends on level of experience, and where one may be in their photographic trek. Photographers like Guy know exactly what they are doing and how to over-come almost any short-coming with very precise choices that fit their need. Hard earned skill has a lot to do with making such a decision.
Then there is the cost/value equation. A 24 meg FF camera at $1,700, with lenses that are 1/2 the price of a "systems" camera, not to mention 1/2 the size/weight, will fit a lot of photographer's requirements. Three FEs (35, 55, 24-70) fit 85% of my "real world" needs with the 55 being 50 to 60% of that.
However, I can't quite make the swap to an A7/A7R only system quite yet ... but it wouldn't be due to lack of lenses that work on the camera. It is due to functions.
For example, my principle two "Pro" cameras are the Leica S2 and Sony A99.
Both cameras parallel shoot to two cards :thumbs:. The A99 features in-body stabilization; has most of the features of the A7/A7R and some it does not; is faster focusing; and is easier to use with existing dedicated flash systems. The S2 is CCD which I like; and features one thing I cannot give up yet: Superb Leica leaf shutter lenses that sync to 1/1,000, and access to any Hasselblad H leaf-shutter lens available at rental houses most anywhere.
Oddly, the A7R can serve to back-up both these cameras in an emergency, while taking up almost no space in the bag.
If and when someone (be it Sony or another), delivers a camera that is 1) smaller, 2) is stabilized or the lenses are, 3) is as fast to auto focus as current DSLRs, 4) features some form of redundancy capture (be it 2 cards, or WiFi, or whatever), and 5) features high sync speed however it is accomplished ... then I'm all in.
It is a race against time. It is more likely that my needs will change as I relinquish more and more "Pro" work, than all my above requirements will be filled. Without the type of paying gigs I do, and certain types of S2 work, I'd do the same as Guy did.
If the stabilized FE 24-70/4 ZA due in Feb/14 is as good as the other FEs, I may winnow down a lot of gear and move in that direction anyway.
- Marc
