Thinking about upgrading to full-frame

H

High Lander

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7
Edit My Images
No
Hi people

Thanks for having me in your forum

I mostly shoot clinical photography for my aesthetic laser business, and some promotional stuff. I run an old Nikon D7000 with a DX 18-55mm kit lens. This is crop frame APS-C system (obvs). I am by no stretch of the imagination a particularly good photographer...

It's time to up my game in the quality of my pics and I have decided on a pre-used Sony A7R III. I am still struggling with lens choice. I feel a primary is preferable to a zoom, and due to my workflow I don't really want to be swapping lenses around. Checking through Lightroom metadata, and experimenting with focal lengths on my current setup, 28mm seems to be the optimum lens choice. But that's on a crop frame system.

I am confused as to whether this translates to a 28mm Sony FE lens, or one with more magnification like a 35mm?

Please advise the noob

TYIA, Aaron
 
Last edited:
How close do you need to be to your 'subject' ?
28mm on full frame (ff) is wide.
35mm slightly narrower
50mm narrower... sort of...

I took these a while ago to demonstrate the spaces on the lenses. 15mm, 28mm, 50mm, 105mm


But if your subject(s) are small, you might want to look more to a 50mm or a macro lens.
If they are people, some find the 85mm or 100mm gives nicer results (you are further away from the person though)
If you are using the 28mm mostly on the current camera, then try the 35mm or 50mm.

If you have the option, perhaps go to a store and try the lenses on the camera and take a few pics in the store with a sales person or some other object as the subject. It should give you an idea.
Or see if there is a meet going on nearby with people with the lenses you are thinking of, to get their opinion/try the lenses...

Or if the store has a swap policy, you could buy one... if it doesn't suit, return it and swap for the other... worth asking?
 
The deal is 28 x 1.5 = 42, but you can +/- that to get a ballpark - so yes, a 35 or a 50 depending which side you want to sway to.

But it seems to me on brief acquaintance that your existing camera is capable enough and your time & effort might be better spent on studying lighting, exposure & compositional technique?

Might we see some of your existing results, to get a reference?

And I could warn you that a lot of the guys on here are shopaholics, so build that bias into what they tell you ...
 
Last edited:
28mm on APS-C is a x1.5 "crop" so is the equiv of 42mm on FF.

If the Sony A7RIII is the way you're going... I have the Sony 28mm f2, 35mm f1.8 and f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 and they're all nice lenses. I don't know how close you need to be or what magnification you require but I'd guess that you don't need to focus too closely if your existing kit is good enough in this regard so maybe a 35 or 50/55mm may be a good option?
 
28mm on a crop sensor equates to 42 on Full Frame. Get a 35mm and crop a bit. The A7riii has plenty of pixels in your favour.
 
What’s wrong with the quality from your existing setup?
 
Do know that dynamic range is always worthwhile, but the number of megapixels can be a false lure ...

The Sony you mentioned is smaller & quite possibly more uncomfortable in the hand than the Nikon you have already. The viewfinder experience is also different - with it being electronic, you are at one remove from reality in the direct sense, whilst being a whole step closer to the effect of your set exposure - though the last assumes ambient lighting rather than anything transient like flash.
 
I moved from a nikon d7000 to a Sony A7ii and for me it was a worthwhile upgrade and the riii is even better.
I had no issues with the ergonomics or electronic viewfinder etc.
My main lens then and still is a 24-105mm.
As I also shoot wildlife I did find the AF slow on the A7ii so upgraded to an A9.
The AF on the A7iii/riii is a lot better than the A7ii so unless shooting very fast moving subjects shouldn't be an issue for you....
 
Last edited:
Mintchocs said:
What’s wrong with the quality from your existing setup?
Click to expand...
Cheap glass and an eleven year old body. Significantly outperformed by my Phone 11 Pro Max and my daughter's iPhone 12. I could upgrade the glass but that's just throwing money away.

droj said:
The Sony you mentioned is smaller & quite possibly more uncomfortable in the hand than the Nikon you have already. The viewfinder experience is also different - with it being electronic, you are at one remove from reality in the direct sense, whilst being a whole step closer to the effect of your set exposure - though the last assumes ambient lighting rather than anything transient like flash.
Click to expand...
Due the peculiarities of my setup, I shoot without natural daylight and with continuous lighting. The WYSIWYG element of mirrorless is very appealing. Thanks for the comfort comment, I will look at getting a grip if need be

trevorbray said:
28mm on a crop sensor equates to 42 on Full Frame. Get a 35mm and crop a bit. The A7riii has plenty of pixels in your favour.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I might need to start cropping routinely as part of my workflow, but I can handle that. Feedback from all has been very useful, thanks for your interest and advice. I'll get the A7R III second hand and couple it with a 35mm primary - probably the Sony F1.8, and develop my glass collection from there
 
OK, I'm going to suggest an A7III rather than the rIII, and a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 or a Tamron 28-70 f2.8. That will give you a choice of focal lengths to let you frame up, at the same time good light gathering compared to typical zooms.

As an alternative lens you could also consider the Samyang 45 f1.8, which will be close to your 28mm, nicely cost effective and can be a decent performer. Avoid the Sony 50 f1.8 - the optics are good but the AF is extremely poor.
 
Go smaller!
 
High Lander said:
Cheap glass and an eleven year old body. Significantly outperformed by my Phone 11 Pro Max and my daughter's iPhone 12. I could upgrade the glass but that's just throwing money away.
Click to expand...
If you believe that an iPhone is outperforming your camera, it’s not your camera at fault, it’s your judgement.

Sorry to be blunt, but any critical viewing of the iphones output shows it for what it is, an AI approximation of a photograph.

If the iPhone’s output suits your taste, stick with the phone, you’ll never recreate the mess it’s making with a camera (unless you plan to get only half good at PP).

OTOH, get a decent lens for your current camera (which will at least improve things a bit) and put some effort into learning the craft.
 
High Lander said:
Hi people

Thanks for having me in your forum

I mostly shoot clinical photography for my aesthetic laser business, and some promotional stuff. I run an old Nikon D7000 with a DX 18-55mm kit lens. This is crop frame APS-C system (obvs). I am by no stretch of the imagination a particularly good photographer...

It's time to up my game in the quality of my pics and I have decided on a pre-used Sony A7R III. I am still struggling with lens choice. I feel a primary is preferable to a zoom, and due to my workflow I don't really want to be swapping lenses around. Checking through Lightroom metadata, and experimenting with focal lengths on my current setup, 28mm seems to be the optimum lens choice. But that's on a crop frame system.

I am confused as to whether this translates to a 28mm Sony FE lens, or one with more magnification like a 35mm?

Please advise the noob

TYIA, Aaron
Click to expand...
I have an a7R3 for sale if you are still looking ;)
 
High Lander said:
Cheap glass and an eleven year old body. Significantly outperformed by my Phone 11 Pro Max and my daughter's iPhone 12.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised to read that. In what way are the iPhones outperforming the Nikon? Are you finding the images sharper or do they exhibit more pleasing colour or texture?

Or ... is it that the greater depth of field is giving more pleasing results? If so, that's because the iPhone lenses have a focal length in the region of 5-6mm and this gives extremely wide depth of field. A more conventional camera will struggle to come close to this. The nearest would be a compact or bridge camera with a 2/3rds sensor.
 
Phil V said:
If you believe that an iPhone is outperforming your camera, it’s not your camera at fault, it’s your judgement.

Sorry to be blunt, but any critical viewing of the iphones output shows it for what it is, an AI approximation of a photograph.

If the iPhone’s output suits your taste, stick with the phone, you’ll never recreate the mess it’s making with a camera (unless you plan to get only half good at PP).

OTOH, get a decent lens for your current camera (which will at least improve things a bit) and put some effort into learning the craft.
Click to expand...

Mrs WW and her mates are constantly sending each other smartphone pictures and they can look really lovely on the phone or even on a tablet but when I look at them on my pc the shortcomings are often easily visible.
 
droj said:
Ffordes have several - https://www.ffordes.com/c/414/sony?p=3&q=414
Click to expand...
Yup, and they're about half an hour drive away!

woof woof said:
Mrs WW and her mates are constantly sending each other smartphone pictures and they can look really lovely on the phone or even on a tablet but when I look at them on my pc the shortcomings are often easily visible.
Click to expand...
I run a 27" 5k iMac. D7000 autofocus is really hit or miss is half the issue. I tried a 35mm primary and it was worse. Also getting lots of random white balance issues, but that might be my 5 year old LED lighting which needs upgraded also

Not sure why people are trying to talk me out of upgrading an 11 year camera body for professional use, but I appreciate your comments none the less! ;)
 
WB issues can be expected and the way around this is to set the WB to suit the lighting or to shoot raw and correct it later. Focus issues are more serious and could be either user error or a genuine issue.

If you could describe the focus problems more precisely that could help people to understand the issue you're having and suggest a way forward as if this is user error or a focus mode selection issue a new camera might not help you. Maybe you could also post an example showing the issue?
 
High Lander said:
Not sure why people are trying to talk me out of upgrading an 11 year camera body for professional use
Click to expand...
Welcome to Talk Photography.
People on here usually like nothing better than spending other people's money :) but stepping back a little, I think there is some concern that just buying a FF camera really isn't going to make much difference to your photos unless you address some other non-camera related issues. Taking a guess I wonder if you are trying to photograph small(ish) details and you might be better off with a macro lens rather than something like a 35mm?
 
D7000 AF has been an issue since it was released, in particular with the 35mm 1.8G lens for some reason (which is a shame as it's a really nice lens). When the stars align, the D7000 does produce some lovely images though. I upgraded from mine earlier this year to an old D3S and I'm pleased with it.
 
sirch said:
Welcome to Talk Photography.
People on here usually like nothing better than spending other people's money :) but stepping back a little, I think there is some concern that just buying a FF camera really isn't going to make much difference to your photos unless you address some other non-camera related issues. Taking a guess I wonder if you are trying to photograph small(ish) details and you might be better off with a macro lens rather than something like a 35mm?
Click to expand...
Thank you! Well I take photos of bit of humans - sometimes small bits, sometimes largish bits. They always look better zoomed out a bit. Context is everything. Please see below

ancient_mariner said:
OK, I'm going to suggest an A7III rather than the rIII, and a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 or a Tamron 28-70 f2.8. That will give you a choice of focal lengths to let you frame up, at the same time good light gathering compared to typical zooms.

As an alternative lens you could also consider the Samyang 45 f1.8, which will be close to your 28mm, nicely cost effective and can be a decent performer. Avoid the Sony 50 f1.8 - the optics are good but the AF is extremely poor.
Click to expand...
I've been using a zoom the last few years, but really want a faster lens for more separation. I'm not interested in video, I have a PXW-Z150 for that, and the A7R3 just seems like a much better camera for stills than the A73 for about the same price

HLC_0924.jpg
 
I doubt there's anything wrong with your camera, but a better lens would make quite a difference. A smaller aperture will increase the depth of field (I'm sure you know that, but just in case) in order to get both eyes in focus, but if not; focus on the nearest eye.

I think your biggest problem is using continuous lighting - bin it and use daylight. However, if you want to control the light better, learn to use off-camera flash.

A crop sensor camera is fine unless you want to print really big pictures or crop in closely. Of course, it's your money so get what you want, but remember full-frame lenses are much more expensive and for good reason.
 
I'm focusing on the blemish, not her eyes

I run class IV lasers, the blinds need to be closed for that. Also, daylight changes all the time, and I work at night sometimes, especially in winter - so I need reference lighting conditions that are pretty much the same regardless of time of day or what the weather is doing. I use these pictures clinically to assess effectiveness of interventions, as well as for promotional stuff

Yes, a crop sensor probably would be fine - but for work stuff my policy is usually to get premium gear. I'd like to get into landscapes in my own time and my kid has started a Higher Photography course so I'm sure she'll be wanting to borrow it sometimes too
 
for my pennies worth you say Quote " I run a 27" 5k iMac."Unquote, So i would have thought a camera capable of shooting in 4K at least will produce better results. You don't want video so a stills like this hand held from my hanycam are not good enough? hand held no editing or special lighting. No worries about mm length either.DSC00177.JPG
Maybe just maybe worth looking at the one I have the Sony FDR-AX53. I used to have a panasonic camcorder and thought that was good but this new one blows it out of the water. No need to buy different lenses either so save a few bob. all I say is don't dismiss without at least trying it.

Or just grab a screen shot from a frame as an alternative from using the stills capabilities of this camcorder
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsRGwqtL66M&ab_channel=Bazza1041
 
Last edited:
Aha! I was right off the mark there huh wasn't I (pun intended)? :facepalm:

I'd still use flash and not continuous lights though - you'd get better results (sharper too).
 
High Lander said:
Not sure why people are trying to talk me out of upgrading an 11 year camera body for professional use, but I appreciate your comments none the less! ;)
Click to expand...
Cos you didn’t mention professional use; but you did say you preferred the images from an iPhone.

So even if you later mentioned professional use, I’d still say that learning will do you more use than a new camera if you think an iPhone can outperform that camera ;)
 
High Lander said:
I've been using a zoom the last few years, but really want a faster lens for more separation. I'm not interested in video, I have a PXW-Z150 for that, and the A7R3 just seems like a much better camera for stills than the A73 for about the same price
Click to expand...

Now we have a slightly better idea of what you want to do.

My feeling is that *for this kind of work* the it doesn't matter whether you use the A7III or IIIr - unless you're printing really large then it won't be spotted - however if you plan to do landscapes & stuff with it then I'd consider the IIIr if you're shooting with top end primes.

As for which lenses, now we've seen your example I'd look for the sony 35 f1.8 and the Sony 85 f1.8 - not too expensive and very good. There are nicer lenses for portraiture, but that's apparently not what you're doing. They would both give you control over depth of field & be lower-light friendly. If the both Sony lenses were a little pricy for your budget then I'd again recommend the Samyang 45 f1.8 paired with the Sony 85 f1.8.
 
Phil V said:
Cos you didn’t mention professional use; but you did say you preferred the images from an iPhone.

So even if you later mentioned professional use, I’d still say that learning will do you more use than a new camera if you think an iPhone can outperform that camera ;)
Click to expand...
I mentioned it in my post at the top of the thread. On a personal note, I find your contributions really quite unfriendly and uniquely unhelpful. I think I'm going to find somewhere else to talk about photography...

Goodbye
 
High Lander said:
I mentioned it in my post at the top of the thread. On a personal note, I find your contributions really quite unfriendly and uniquely unhelpful. I think I'm going to find somewhere else to talk about photography...

Goodbye
Click to expand...

That's a shame. Mostly because Phil was right and offered excellent advice.
 
High Lander said:
I mentioned it in my post at the top of the thread. On a personal note, I find your contributions really quite unfriendly and uniquely unhelpful. I think I'm going to find somewhere else to talk about photography...

Goodbye
Click to expand...
That’s a shame; hopefully next time someone gives you good advice you’ll be open to it :)
 
Some people just can't be helped. :facepalm:
 
And now he's deleted his original post so the thread no longer makes sense... :(
 
That was a pity - I'm sure it can be 'undeleted'.
 
As mentioned it is a shame when folk don't stay long enough to both learn & contribute.

@Cobra I think to ensure this thread keeps its meaning the OP contents need restoring ?

Edit.... another ditto ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top