Hi Folks,
i recently got a Canon 5dM3, and I'm considering selling my 7D and my sigma 10-20 and replacing them with a used Sony a7r or a7ii, both lf which are available for under $1000 at a reputable new/used camera shop I know of.
After reading reviews, I'm wondering if any a7r owners have observed the image quality degradation resulting from "shutter shock" and the lack of sharpness reported as result. I like the smaller grip/weight of it over the a7ii, and the images I've seen from the a7r even on the review sites that mention the issue seem much more detailed and crisp than those from the a7ii (though I know a million factors contribute to that).
Anyone have an a7r that they are disappointed with?
Anyone have an a7ii that they are disappointed with?
Posted by Richard Ditch on December 11, 2015 at 3:46 PM
It makes little sense to me to have a backup camera that is not compatible with the primary camera and lenses. I strongly recommend choosing a single brand and sticking with it. Am I missing something here?
Well, I guess I was thinking about it differently. If I have a back up camera that is a DSLR and similarly bulky as my main camera, I can share lenses between the two. However, if I only use it when I need a "back up" for my 5D3, I might never use it; I'm pretty sure too that if I take a workshop or a trip, I'm not going to want to pack the 7D and the 5D3.
So I was thinking maybe my backup should be a totally different (and intentionally much smaller) system: Sony A7ii or A7r with a single lense (maybe the 35mm prime or the 28-70mm). Maybe my back up would get more use if it was just a different kind of animal. Maybe I would take it along even when space or weight is a premium. If I need a back up, I could settle for having fewer options (limited lenses) because it's more of a fail safe.
Sounds like maybe this is a pretty uncommon thing to do (lots of views and just one reply in several days ;-).
Posted by Richard Ditch on December 11, 2015 at 9:20 PM
Since I started taking photography seriously in the early 1970's I've almost always had two SLR bodies with the same lens mount so they could use the same set of lenses. In the days of film I kept Kodachrome in one body, and B&W negative (Pan X, Tri X, HP 4, etc) in the other body. If a camera needed repair or servicing I could get by with one body and still use all my lenes.
When I switched to digital with a Nikon D70 it still used all my existing Nikkor lenses. I hung on to a film body for a while just in case, but dumped it as soon as I could buy a D200 body. I was still "in business" when the D70 developed issues with a bad solder connection, and later when I cooked the mirror chamber of my D200 (never let a camer with a 600mm lens point too long at the sun) I still could shoot with the lowly D70.
I got rid of the D70 when I found a nice used D300, and I unloaded the D200 when I found a second clean used D300. I just bought a new D7200 and will get rid of one of the D300 bodies soon. But it was great having three cameras last week at Bosque del Apache: I kept the D7200 mounted with a 300/2,8 and 2x, one D300 with a 300/4, and the other D300 with an 18-70. So I never had to change lenses and expose the interior of the camera to the invasive dust of the refuge.
For those times I really want to travel light I found a nice Nikon Coolpix S8000 at a Goodwill store for $30. It has the eqivalent of a 30-300mm lens on a full frame DSLR and does a much better job for random encounters than I ever imagined it could.
Posted by Jeff Martyka on December 14, 2015 at 2:25 AM
I have had an a7r since January 2014. No problems with shutter shock for me. I really like these cameras.
Having been in the oh crap my camera is dead on day 1 of a month long trip please kill me situation...I now have a second body that can use the same glass. I'd agree with Richard that is important. I also find myself shooting both cameras now...especially when I'm doing long exposures.
Why not look at a Canon EOS M3 with the converter from EF-M to EF? Thats under $500 for both items. You can use EF glass and even buy a small EF-M Tamron 18-200 for $500 more to be in that $1000 budget. That gets you a compact travel system and a compact backup for full gear trips. I don't know anything about this camera as I'm not a Canon shooter.
You'll want to confirm the usage of your lenses with the M3. On my Sony systems I can put my FF lenses on an APS-C NEX-7 and they work fine (at 1.5x). I can also go the other way with APS-C lenses and put the FF mirrorless in crop mode or in some cases still use them as FF lenses since they use the same mount. I don't know that you could do that with any EF-M glass...or even that you'd want to do that.
Thanks, Jeff. I think I'll keep my 7d as the backup. I liked the idea of someing more compact, but additional glass does kinda cancel that out. Throwing the 7d body in a bag for back up is easy enough, and it uses the same batteries and charger too. I do have a canon s90 that shoots raw and is pocketable if I really need to go light.
Discussion
5 repliesi recently got a Canon 5dM3, and I'm considering selling my 7D and my sigma 10-20 and replacing them with a used Sony a7r or a7ii, both lf which are available for under $1000 at a reputable new/used camera shop I know of.
After reading reviews, I'm wondering if any a7r owners have observed the image quality degradation resulting from "shutter shock" and the lack of sharpness reported as result. I like the smaller grip/weight of it over the a7ii, and the images I've seen from the a7r even on the review sites that mention the issue seem much more detailed and crisp than those from the a7ii (though I know a million factors contribute to that).
Anyone have an a7r that they are disappointed with?
Anyone have an a7ii that they are disappointed with?
Well, I guess I was thinking about it differently. If I have a back up camera that is a DSLR and similarly bulky as my main camera, I can share lenses between the two. However, if I only use it when I need a "back up" for my 5D3, I might never use it; I'm pretty sure too that if I take a workshop or a trip, I'm not going to want to pack the 7D and the 5D3.
So I was thinking maybe my backup should be a totally different (and intentionally much smaller) system: Sony A7ii or A7r with a single lense (maybe the 35mm prime or the 28-70mm). Maybe my back up would get more use if it was just a different kind of animal. Maybe I would take it along even when space or weight is a premium. If I need a back up, I could settle for having fewer options (limited lenses) because it's more of a fail safe.
Sounds like maybe this is a pretty uncommon thing to do (lots of views and just one reply in several days ;-).
When I switched to digital with a Nikon D70 it still used all my existing Nikkor lenses. I hung on to a film body for a while just in case, but dumped it as soon as I could buy a D200 body. I was still "in business" when the D70 developed issues with a bad solder connection, and later when I cooked the mirror chamber of my D200 (never let a camer with a 600mm lens point too long at the sun) I still could shoot with the lowly D70.
I got rid of the D70 when I found a nice used D300, and I unloaded the D200 when I found a second clean used D300. I just bought a new D7200 and will get rid of one of the D300 bodies soon. But it was great having three cameras last week at Bosque del Apache: I kept the D7200 mounted with a 300/2,8 and 2x, one D300 with a 300/4, and the other D300 with an 18-70. So I never had to change lenses and expose the interior of the camera to the invasive dust of the refuge.
For those times I really want to travel light I found a nice Nikon Coolpix S8000 at a Goodwill store for $30. It has the eqivalent of a 30-300mm lens on a full frame DSLR and does a much better job for random encounters than I ever imagined it could.
Having been in the oh crap my camera is dead on day 1 of a month long trip please kill me situation...I now have a second body that can use the same glass. I'd agree with Richard that is important. I also find myself shooting both cameras now...especially when I'm doing long exposures.
Why not look at a Canon EOS M3 with the converter from EF-M to EF? Thats under $500 for both items. You can use EF glass and even buy a small EF-M Tamron 18-200 for $500 more to be in that $1000 budget. That gets you a compact travel system and a compact backup for full gear trips. I don't know anything about this camera as I'm not a Canon shooter.
You'll want to confirm the usage of your lenses with the M3. On my Sony systems I can put my FF lenses on an APS-C NEX-7 and they work fine (at 1.5x). I can also go the other way with APS-C lenses and put the FF mirrorless in crop mode or in some cases still use them as FF lenses since they use the same mount. I don't know that you could do that with any EF-M glass...or even that you'd want to do that.
Thanks for bringing me back to earth!!