The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

Tom Green said:
So do you want to know about the a7II or A7III? IMO they are going to be two very different cameras.

Massive improvements in the a7iii over A7ii in terms of AF by the looks of it. Addition of 4K video. Dual card slots etc.

So its almost a new camera. More 'baby A9' than 'next a7II'
Click to expand...

Hi Tom, yes I realise it’s a bit vague. Obviously no one has the A73 yet so can’t give a comparison.

I’ll clarify. What I was asking is

If you have used a A72 to shoot weddings what problems have you had? Do you ‘think’ those problems will be resolved with the A73? Is the A73 in your opinion going to be as good for weddings as they predict?

My interest is mainly with regards to silent shooting.

Hope that’s clearer, cheers
 
gremlin16 said:
Hi Tom, yes I realise it’s a bit vague. Obviously no one has the A73 yet so can’t give a comparison.

I’ll clarify. What I was asking is

If you have used a A72 to shoot weddings what problems have you had? Do you ‘think’ those problems will be resolved with the A73? Is the A73 in your opinion going to be as good for weddings as they predict?

My interest is mainly with regards to silent shooting.

Hope that’s clearer, cheers
Click to expand...

Well the a7ii doesn't have silent shutter and assuming the AF of the a7iii is somewhere around the a7Rii standard then it will significantly outperform the a7ii. So on both counts the a7iii a clear winner for weddings. Add in dual slots, the Z battery and joystick AF and it's a slam dunk.
 
ukaskew said:
Well the a7ii doesn't have silent shutter and assuming the AF of the a7iii is somewhere around the a7Rii standard then it will significantly outperform the a7ii. So on both counts the a7iii a clear winner for weddings. Add in dual slots, the Z battery and joystick AF and it's a slam dunk.
Click to expand...

However his interest is mainly silent shooting, the a73 isn' going to touch an a9 there and there will be distortion.
 
twist said:
However his interest is mainly silent shooting, the a73 isn' going to touch an a9 there and there will be distortion.
Click to expand...

Is it any different to the a7RII system? I shoot 60-70% of 12 hour wedding days with silent shutter and I've noticed 5 shots max that have had distortion and I've only had a few incredibly minor banding issues. Much better than the Fuji X-T2 I had before.
 
ukaskew said:
Is it any different to the a7RII system? I shoot 60-70% of 12 hour wedding days with silent shutter and I've noticed 5 shots max that have had distortion and I've only had a few incredibly minor banding issues. Much better than the Fuji X-T2 I had before.
Click to expand...

I used A7rii silent at a wedding last year and apart from one issue I was lucky to get no banding.
Also shot weddings with xt2 but never bothered with silent shutter as it’s so quiet anyway you won’t be noticed.
 
Bloody hell - having doubts over selling the A7II. Don't know whether to ditch my D750 idea and stick with A7II for now or not. Lens cost wise, Nikon makes more sense but seeing all these D750 owners lusting over Sony is making me question it. :facepalm::facepalm:

The big elephant in the room is that I need a camera and lens system that will work for weddings - focusing heavily on getting into them now.
 
simonbarker said:
Forget the camera, get rid of that bloody awful software.
Click to expand...

what's wrong with it?

while I agree I can generally get better results out of capture one, LR6 is still a better well-rounded overall software. It does pretty much everything I need to do without having to use 2-3 other things.
 
Tom Green said:
Bloody hell - having doubts over selling the A7II. Don't know whether to ditch my D750 idea and stick with A7II for now or not. Lens cost wise, Nikon makes more sense but seeing all these D750 owners lusting over Sony is making me question it. :facepalm::facepalm:

The big elephant in the room is that I need a camera and lens system that will work for weddings - focusing heavily on getting into them now.
Click to expand...

I am deciding between keeping D750 or selling up for an A7iii. I’m not 100% sure what I will gain apart from less gas, so if anyone has reasons what the A7iii offers over the D750 for my prime use of equestrian photography please list the reasons below lol!
 
Tom Green said:
Bloody hell - having doubts over selling the A7II. Don't know whether to ditch my D750 idea and stick with A7II for now or not. Lens cost wise, Nikon makes more sense but seeing all these D750 owners lusting over Sony is making me question it. :facepalm::facepalm:

The big elephant in the room is that I need a camera and lens system that will work for weddings - focusing heavily on getting into them now.
Click to expand...

Forget everyone else.
D750 is awesome. And you can get 2 for the price of an a7iii.
 
Eye-AF, Face Detect and a EVF can be seen as big advantages of the Sony A7 III over say a Nikon D750 for weddings but it’s not a must.
Plenty of photographers shoot non-mirrorless.
Sometimes it all comes down to your technique etc.
Features like Eye-AF, Face Detect, EVF, silent shutter can all make getting the results easier though.

With all the rumours of a Nikon mirrorless, what impact would it have to resale values of existing Nikon bodies or lenses is anybodies guess.

I have a friend who’s been shooting weddings with the A7 and A7 II and he’s fine with the results, a good photographer works with his tools and limitations.
Personally I prefer having all the latest functions and features to make taking photos easier and less stressful. Some may say that takes the fun away.
 
Last edited:
Riz_Guru said:
Eye-AF, Face Detect and a EVF can be seen as big advantages of the Sony A7 III over say a Nikon D750 for weddings but it’s not a must.
Plenty of photographers shoot non-mirrorless.
Sometimes it all comes down to your technique etc.
Features like Eye-AF, Face Detect, EVF, silent shutter can all make getting the results easier though.
Click to expand...


Agree on this.

Continuous eye af for fast primes is awesome and for me, hard to give up.
Much less important though when shooting zooms at 2.8

@Tom Green remember it’s the cost of a system not just a camera. You can get used Nikon gear at attractive prices.
D750 low use £1000
Tamron 24-70 f2.8 £400
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 £700
Nikon 50mm f1.4 £270
 
Tom Green said:
Bloody hell - having doubts over selling the A7II. Don't know whether to ditch my D750 idea and stick with A7II for now or not. Lens cost wise, Nikon makes more sense but seeing all these D750 owners lusting over Sony is making me question it. :facepalm::facepalm:

The big elephant in the room is that I need a camera and lens system that will work for weddings - focusing heavily on getting into them now.
Click to expand...
You still not bought the D750 yet? ;)

JJ! said:
I am deciding between keeping D750 or selling up for an A7iii. I’m not 100% sure what I will gain apart from less gas, so if anyone has reasons what the A7iii offers over the D750 for my prime use of equestrian photography please list the reasons below lol!
Click to expand...
I personally think the D750 is the better option for you as you’ll be using the 70-200mm f2.8 most of the time. The D750 is better balanced and has a better grip for this. Plus there’s no risk of making the horses look like zebras with the pinstripes ;)
 
And this is the problem with Sony, the overall cost of the system isn’t cheap at all. So buying and then realising it’s not for you could lose you a small fortune if you buy new.
I’ve been fortunate that my last two big kit changes Sony to Fuji and now back to Sony didn’t lose me much at all. (Was lucky).
 
There is no doubt you can build a D750 system for so much cheaper. I mean if I sold my D750, 70-200, 50mm and few extra bits I’m looking at 2k. That just buys me the A7iii.
 
JJ! said:
There is no doubt you can build a D750 system for so much cheaper. I mean if I sold my D750, 70-200, 50mm and few extra bits I’m looking at 2k. That just buys me the A7iii.
Click to expand...
And a used Sony 70-200mm f2.8 isn’t much shy of £2k :(
 
snerkler said:
You still not bought the D750 yet? ;)

I personally think the D750 is the better option for you as you’ll be using the 70-200mm f2.8 most of the time. The D750 is better balanced and has a better grip for this. Plus there’s no risk of making the horses look like zebras with the pinstripes ;)
Click to expand...

The Sony 70-200 is heavier than I thought! Guessing the balance on the A7 is a little off.
 
JJ! said:
The Sony 70-200 is heavier than I thought! Guessing the balance on the A7 is a little off.
Click to expand...
Why how heavy did you think it’d be? ;)
 
JJ! said:
There is no doubt you can build a D750 system for so much cheaper. I mean if I sold my D750, 70-200, 50mm and few extra bits I’m looking at 2k. That just buys me the A7iii.
Click to expand...

So it’s hard to justify. Unless you are confident the Sony gear will improve your photography, hit rate etc.

But getting new gear is fun. And you deserve to treat yourself :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top