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!
A backup that sits does not do me much good but a backup with slightly different functions that can be a faster AF cam is very useful to me. The Oly simply is not in the cards and you need to try the A7 with a FE lens as it's pretty darn good. Now will it function faster than a D4 designed for sports no but that's not what I do either. The A7 is perfectly capable of doing runway but it needs FE glass to be more effective. But we won't know that till the lens hits the streets if its better than the Sony 4 adapter and a zoom G lens. We can only assume it will.My take on this stuff is likely a bit different from others as my needs/desires are different.
I am perfectly happy shooting with the Olympus E-M1 for anything where autofocus and speed, or LONG telephoto reach, are required. To my eye, the E-M1 is a far more sophisticated camera system, with many more options, than the A7/A7r is at present. The FourThirds and Micro-FourThirds lenses I've got are great quality. Files out of the E-M1 up to ISO 6400 are near identical to the A7 files. And the whole system, lens by lens, is just that much lighter, tighter, easier to carry than FF. As well as more ergonomic, more responsive, etc etc.
I bought the Sony A7 specifically to use with my Leica R lenses with, along with a few of my favorite older Nikkors. I went with the A7 on the notion that it would give an easier compatibility ride for these old lenses than the A7r does, and it saved me a thousand dollars since I got a deal on the body. I wanted a FF sensor for these lenses as I believe that their very specific design intent is only expressed best on the format they were designed for ... Leica is like that. I'll never buy a Sony/Zeiss lens for this camera, and I'll only ever use manual focus, manual or aperture priority exposure mode, etc.
So ... If I want a backup of something, I'll simply buy another of the same body in the same system I want to backup. To me, there's NO point to calling it a backup unless that's what you're doing: the point of a backup is that you have an identical replacement in case your primary goes down. In the case of the E-M1, I'll buy another E-M1. In the case of the A7, I *might* buy an A7r simply because the two bodies work identically, use identical power and accessories, and I get the option of the higher Mpixel sensor, everything else the same (modulo the shutter difference)—as it seems to be a proven thing that the Leica R lenses work just as well on the A7r as they do on the A7.
Right now I'm completing my lens kit for the A7, the lens kit for the E-M1 is already complete. The 19mm should be here tomorrow and I have a line on a Summicron-R 35mm f/2 that I might push the button on today. That will mean I finally have a complete set of lenses from 19mm to 180mm, all top notch, most designed by the same person. I like that.
A garage sale of other equipment I no longer use/want is going up to help empty my equipment closet's excess within a week, as these two cameras, the Hasselblads, and the Polaroids are the equipment base for the photography I want to be doing for the next while. I have several book ideas to start working on, it's time to stop mucking about with equipment and get back to doing photography ...
G
Different perspectives, that's all. I fully expect most things I buy as "backup" to sit on the shelf for most of the time I own them. I only buy backups to ... back up ... essential equipment I cannot do without. ;-)A backup that sits does not do me much good but a backup with slightly different functions that can be a faster AF cam is very useful to me. ... you need to try the A7 with a FE lens as it's pretty darn good. ...
Mikal, I do not know how the A7 does with its' dual AF solution … but I don't think the A7R has the over-all speed needed for true AFC Tracking like you are looking for.T - thanks for the info. Since I shoot primarily center weight focus, I do not want the camera choosing the subject of my photo for me. However, if it can still track faster than my a900 when the subject is coming towards me, it may be worth getting, although I would want a vertical grip.
I shoot swimming photos of my son and his teammates. Since the a900 AF-C is pretty useless, I have become accustomed to shooting a bit in front of the subjects. Here are three photos: the first two were with the a900 and 70-200/2.8G and the third was with the a900 and R 50/1.4 focused about 10 feet in front of the starting block. All three are heavily cropped.
ivanbreaststroke1 by MikalWGrass, on Flickr
alkfly1 by MikalWGrass, on Flickr
backstart4 by MikalWGrass, on Flickr
Guy, how did the A mount 70-200/2.8G work on the A7 or A7R and would the E mount 70-200/4 give you better picture quality or would it just be better because the adapter mounts won't rock, the lens is designed for the body, and the carrying weight is less?
Marc and Guy, I hear you both when you say it is tough to nail focus in low light when the material is all white or black and there is no contrast. Are you guys getting more keepers with the new system than you did before with your previous systems or is it all just a matter of ergonomics and the cameras assisting your eyes?
I searched far and wide, maybe not far and wide enough, but I have yet to see someone shoot sports with either the A7 or the A7R. Maybe there is a reason but I also think the increased contrast in athletics would make the camera a breeze to shoot in those situations.
Sorry for rambling. Thanks for your posts and insights.