A7 II or A7 + $400?

[meeker]

Yeah, I'm pretty set on the A7II - will order one when they're back in stock, along with a nice novoflex NEX/LEM adapter. I'm in two minds about picking up the kit lens for an extra $300 though. $300 that could go towards a nice 55mm f1.8 sonnar.

 

[goo0h]

a nice 55mm f1.8 sonnar.

so, do folks still lean towards the 55/1.8, or is the Loxia 50/2 worth considering?

I myself already have the ZM 50/2, though it's needing a CLA. Still, have to admit that when manually focusing the 55/1.8 it's kinda cool how the camera automatically goes into focus assist mode.

 

[Paolo Bonello]

Will there be an A7sII?

 

[Huss]

Also, the A7ii suffers from sensor reflections far less than the A7.

 

[craygc]

Given I just picked myself up an A7II that pretty much tells my voting preference...

One of the dislikes I have had about the Sony E mount cameras (also have a 5N) has been the lack of range control around shutter speeds minimums when using auto ISO. In comparison, I really like the TAv mode of the Ricoh GR that allows you to set aperture and shutter speed and have auto ISO adjust. I can now do the same with the A7II as it allows you to select auto ISO when in "M" mode.

 

[burancap]

My II and 28-70 kit is "out for delivery."

Looking forward to it.

 

[taemo]

I'd like to know this too. i've only shot with the A7s, which is supposed to sound better than the A7(r), but it was still like a bomb going off.

from what I recall when I played with a A7II earlier this year, it sounds identical as the A7.
The R is definitely the loudest.

now in terms of A7II vs A7, I would go for a used A7 and use the money somewhere else.
But if you want to use longer lens, 75mm and longer, then IBIS may be beneficial but not really required unless you shoot in low light condition.
I used my A7 with a 135mm 2.8 AIS, 200mm 4 AIS and a FD 100-300 with good success and planning to also use them on my M240.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

Have both.
- II is bigger, heavier, feels more massive in the hands
- IBIS really works
- Other improvements seem minor.

You probably know whether IBIS will help you. If you like the A7, or the A6000-size cameras, go hold the A7 II in your hands before deciding.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

so, do folks still lean towards the 55/1.8, or is the Loxia 50/2 worth considering?

I myself already have the ZM 50/2, though it's needing a CLA. Still, have to admit that when manually focusing the 55/1.8 it's kinda cool how the camera automatically goes into focus assist mode.

Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 is a great lens by any measure and works perfectly with current cameras. It's a win in my book.

What would show us that the Loxia is better? If you are going to go manual focus, there are a lot of lenses to choose from.

 

[sevo]

I can now do the same with the A7II as it allows you to select auto ISO when in "M" mode.

The A7 already did that...

 

[uhoh7]

Worse in what way? Each A7 has its advantages and you choose the one that fits what you want to do.

Sry did not see this earlier.

The A7r vignettes alot, shifts color alot and the FC or smear seemed worse than A7.

I liked the plain A7 much better, but it still became a shelf queen because of the thick sensor cover. Not only did the M wides and 35s shoot poorly, so did the SLR lenses I tried. They were better than the A7r, but when I compared the files to M9, my Jaw dropped and I just found one. I still shot some long lenses on the A7. But then the Kolari mod appeared and I jumped on it, getting one of the first.

That mod does alot more for the A7 than the A7r, I think. It removes the AA filter. So the improvement is pretty striking. Now I use the camera very often.

I would not trade my A7.mod for the A7r2, although that camera does not vignette or shift color much. Now if I was made of money, I would mod the r2 and the s2. And also buy an SL and 007. And get one of those Rx1r2s too. 🙂

 

[Michael Markey]

Very happy with both my A7s and A7r2.
I use M lenses 28 ,40 ,50,90 and 135.
Pentax 24,50 and 120
Canon 70-200/2.8L and a Zeiss/Contax 85/1.4 on both bodies.
I never had or rather never noticed any issues with either lens/body combination.

 

[dp13]

Also very happy going on fifth year with a7. A close focus adapter like the Voigtlander VM-E is recommended if using legacy / rangefinder lenses.
I use M lenses at 21, 28, 35, 50, and 85.
I use Sony FE 55/1.8 and 16-35/4.
I use Batis 85/1.8.

I also have version III of the Metabones Canon EF to Sony E adapter that I sometimes use with Canon 24/2.8 IS, 70-200/4 IS, and 100/2 though I've experimented with many of my Canon lenses.

The newer models are heavier and bigger and I wanted/want the smallest lightest full frame body.

 

[Wenge]

A7 + 24/2.8 Nikon ais, w/adapter, also gives great results on the cheap.

 

[bayernfan]

the A7III release is imminant. i'm holding out till that camera starts shipping, then I think i'll grab a minty original A7 in the $400 to $500 price range.

 

[peterm1]

I was looking into something of this sort maybe 6 months ago asking myself much the same question. I can only recount the key factors which affected MY deliberations (you may have different concerns from me and arrive at a different outcome)

In short I decided that the base model, A7 was not the way to go. it is a more entry level camera that has a plastic body and more importantly lacks the more advanced focus system of later cameras. If I were to buy a Sony A system camera I think that eventually I would also be tempted to buy a third party AF adapter for either Leica M system glass or maybe even Nikon glass. I understand that these require or at least benefit from greatly, the higher performing AF system found on the A7II. I understand that this cameras uses a hybrid AF system which is a combination of phase and contrast detect AF - a step up on the A7 model (and the A7s and A7R). So this is a big thing for me.

Also the A7II was advertised as the first full frame camera to have five-axis image stabilisation. That is a further significant advantage - I believe that the A7 only supports those Sony lenses that have their own inbuilt stabilization. As I do not really propose buying much if any native Sony glass I do not like this option.

In the end I did not go down the Sony path as an opportunity came up to purchase an even more expensive camera 🙂🙁 - a Leica Q. I fell in love with the idea of a camera that looks and feels like a Leica M but is mated to a superb lens and has AF. Not sure its totally right for me as I would like a longer lens but thats my trade off. I still think one day I will get a Sony A7 X??????

 

[raid]

Bill Pierce has a Sony A7R IV that he seems to like. I may or may not get such a camera one day. I have many M lenses and lenses in M mount, and using an adapter with each lens on a SONY may not be as good as using such lenses with Leica cameras.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

In short I decided that the base model, A7 was not the way to go. it is a more entry level camera that has a plastic body and more importantly lacks the more advanced focus system of later cameras.

Couple of quick comments:

1. The A7 is a terrific FF body for camera-scanning. Cheap now, good 24MPx sensor, the bells/whistles it doesn't have make no difference for this use. The focus aids are terrific (focus magnification, peaking).

2. But for shooting, the later models have better ergonomics, IBIS, lots of nice goodies. I have A7ii and A7Rii and love them both.

 

[newst]

Raid,

One additional capability that the Sony can provide is auto-focus for your M lenses. The Techart Pro adapter is far from perfect, but it performs basic functions well. I have read that with the later A7 bodies, III and IV, it can perform eye autofocus. I cannot say from personal experience since I haven't bought a digital camera since I bought the A7II.

I have read that Fotodiox is selling an unlicensed copy of the Techart for a lower price than the Techart.