for today only $1693 in store or $1692 online
Sony Alpha A7 Mark II Mirrorless Camera Body- $1692 Delivered Online or $1693 in Store @ Videopro
340
Lsomethingnew on 26/03/2016 - 13:23 videopro.com.au (968 clicks)
Last edited 26/03/2016 - 13:31 by 1 other user
Last edited 26/03/2016 - 13:31 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
Disingenuous. CameraSky sell grey imports with their own warranty - https://www.camerasky.com.au/warranty-information Videopro is authorised Sony dealer and manufacturer's warranty is provided.
If it was a Canon or Nikon I would agree, but grey or not Sony support is poor.
Everyone has different expectations and experiences regarding service. Empirical stats on failure rates, service completion times would be the only way to know for sure. There appear to be a lot of anecdotal gripes on the net (eg. Matt Granger). On the other hand, my experience is: one Sony (agent) service on a Bravia LCD, which was over 4 years out of warranty (new tuner for $128 total) and I got a loan TV. I also have some very old (15yrs+) gear (DSC-75 camera, MiniDisc, PS2, Walkman) which still functions perfectly. Sony products have been reliable enough for me to keep purchasing them.
@LP400: I had an issue with my a6000 hotshoe Sony took their sweet time and said a turnaround of 4 to 6 weeks, that not good I confer that Matt Granger experience is common regarding Sony Australia's camera support, it is indeed very poor.
That's a HK/Chinese import so not fair to neg. Plus that doesn't include $36 postage
The item may be the same but the warranty isn't, and the warranty still forms what you are paying for (i.e. the product)
So it's technically a different "product"
Different warranties = different deals mate it's not complicated.
Ok camera but unless you really want a full frame the Sony A6300 Looks a lot better.
Can you be more specific in regard the Sony A6300 looking better?
It's a lot more versatile , smaller, far better autofocus , better battery life, 4k video. Built in flash. Can use nex lens that are cheaper. Image quality not far off in good light and will be few hundred dollars cheaper in a few weeks . though comes down to what you want to use it for.
thanks great info, will look for the A6300 then, don't really need full frame. cheers.
Good light.
How often do you find yourself in a position where light is an issue?
Maybe dinners with friends, maybe a night out on the town… or maybe your kid's on-stage appearance? That's where you wished you had full frame that will give you that extra edge and capture that low light shot.And how many times have you seen wonderful portraits with great bokeh (background isolation) but still didn't get "flat face". 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4 on a FF is != to 50mm 1.4 or 85mm 1.4 on a crop. Then you wished you had gone for the FF instead of a crop.
Once you go FF, there's no turning back!
You would be surprised . Even with f1.4 lenses and high ISO light can be an issue. And once you crank up the ISO you lose a lot of dynamic range and color. A lot of people prefer not to shoot with flash.
But everyone shoots differently. If you dont mind the flash look in your photos and the intrusion that it causes then go for it.EDIT: oops, wrong camera :)
@zeomega: it might also be where you wished to have the thousands of dollars to pay for ff Sony lenses…
Unless you need the fast auto focus from A6000/A6300, otherwise full frame are always better. Also A6300 does not have a headphone jack and in-body stabilisation which would be horrors for video recording.
Again it depends what you want it for. Sony lenses are stabilised so video won't be that bad and also is 4k , does slow motion and few other feature, also like I said full frame Sony lense are very expensive, it all depends on your needs . Looking forward to Sony putting the a6300 focusing tech in the next a7 or a9.?
I was convinced Sony had stabilization in the body of the a6300 , that's a deal breaker for me, want my next body to have it in body.
@swings: consider the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 II it's got ur OIS and a fixed 24-200mm 2.8 and built in nd filters too! Gary fong likes it.
@swings: Certainly do mate. My first DSLR was the Pentax K-x (an entry-level camera) and then I upgraded to their prosumer K-5 after a few months. I personally really like Pentax's cameras because they're a more compact size than the other offerings. Plus, they have plenty of legacy glass you can use. :)
when is the sony a6300 released?
A few weeks ago
does it use NEX mount?
how is sony warranty assistance for camera? read a while ago bad comments, but not sure were mostly about professional support.Yeah it's e mount but the lens won't cover all of the sensor. So only be using middle bit of sensor so have to zoom in on image and loose bit of quality.
You don't lose quality. He image quality is the same. Just the image is cropped. Big difference.
I was asking cause I use legacy lens, which should be full frame 35mm; this camera is full frame (bare with me if I'm not correct);
my understanding was that legacy lens will work without crop on a full frame.
(now I use on a crop sensor and I don't use the full lens)
When you get a manual mount adapter, it will correctly set the lens distance away from sensor to cover full frame. Just make sure you get them for EF mount.
@hippo2s:thanks to confirm. EF mount and NEX mount are the same, correct? never had Sony before, but have some NEX adapter from previous lens purchases.
A7 Series are e mount full frame, call EF mount or FE mount? physicall the same mount.
Warranty is like other Sony consumer…send to service centre, wait, chase, wait. like other brands. not worse or any better.
The sony mount is called E-mount. But there are different E-mount lenses- those designed for Full frame, and those designed for the much smaller sensor APS-c
Lenses for full frame cameras have to be much sharper around the edges and not have light drop off ie vignetting. This is because the full frame sensor uses all of the lens.
Lenses for APS-c (ie NEX in sony range) are designed for the much smaller sensor. They are much smaller and cheaper lenses to make. If you put a wide angle NEX lens on a full frame camera you will get massive light drop off akin to looking through a telescope
No the final image quality will not be the same as you will have to crop it.
I thought the camera detects there is an e mount and will automatically do crop size / less pixel adjustment in body, you don't need to crop in image editing.
I'm not sure it doesn't on my a7s. Will have to check but again you would be getting like a 10mp image.
Georges currently having a 10% off a7 mark II $1661, not sure about delivery charge.
http://www.georges.com.au/index.php/digital-slr-cameras/sony…
Just got confused with the name, I said that is cheap then realised I was after a7s II. I guess that wont be on sale for a while.
why so expensive? you don't need an expensive camera to take good photos
No just expensive lenses…
It's too expensive. Bought A7 (1st version) 1.5 year ago for around $1200. It came with kit lens and adapter. Sold the lens and adapter for $750. Know that A7 m2 is much better but I don't think I will change body for long time as performance/price.
The A7 II is a strange camera. Its not particularly cheap and its not particularly good. No 4K video, No fabulous low light ability, Not really great as a stills camera.
Its brothers are class leading however.
1. A7sII is particularly strong in 4K and low light ability. But it is too expensive IMO However I think it is able to be justified for filmographers who need its fabulous low light abilities.2 A7 R II Is a fantastic high res stills camera
However with all Full Frame sonys you have the following problems.
1 Very overpriced lenses and a very limited range
2 Terrible ergonomics including the convoluted menu system
3 No touch screen (very important for video)
4 Overheating
5 Battery LifeThe A6300 in australia is a very decent camera , yet it is probably overpriced, especially if you factor into it the price of sony lenses
But it does a lot of things much better than the A7 II.1 Great Autofocus (not perfect though)
2 Records 4K internally
3 very decent low light capabilities (but not up to A7S II capabilities)
4 With the metabones smart adapter you can use canon lenses with full functionality- auto focus, metering etcThe perfect camera would be a A7S II with the ergonomics of the panasonics GH4.
I recently bought a panasonic G7 as an interim camera . Great 4K great autofocus for stills. Touch screen autofocus for video. Good cheap MFT lenses available. Try leederville or get Teds to price match, video pro arent bad with price either. Paid $699 including quite sharp kit lens.
Oh yeah, sounds you've got crap skills for photography ;)
No, quite the opposite. razorack999 knows what he wanted. He wanted a camera that can shoot 4K video, have decent selection of lenses available. He did not want to overspend on things he does not need/want.
It is the person behind the camera that's most important. You can give me a 5D Mark III (or A7 RII or Nikon D5) and one of my friends who is a pro photographer a G7, he will take better photos and videos than me every time. Will buying a Canon 1DX + a great L lens transform me into a super duper photographer? No, most definitely not.
Camera bodies, new gen models come out every year or every 2 years.
No but if you want to shoot pro video you never use autofocus.
razorack999 sounds like a videographer, not a photographer. Razor should not cheap out and buy himself/herself a real video camera. :)
The A7II is a camera competing with Nikon's D610 or even the D750. The A7II is a solid camera so ignore the videographers and their needs.
You're also buying into the Sony EF mount system to BTW.
But be forewarned Sony has very poor and slow after sales service (They outsource their servicing) if your Sony camera breaks down in and out of warranty in Australia.@jerum3030: I have a decent stills camera - Nikon D3s - but it has very limited video. Which i wanted.
So I bought a black magic pocket camera when they had the great deal last year. It has fantastic dynamic range and lovely color. BUT it is a pain ergonomically. I was also very tempted to buy the A7s when the AUD was high and the sony rebate was around and could have bought it for $1800- imo that was great value. The replacement the A7s ii is now $4000 = a very different value proposition.
As I was wanting to supplement the Black magic - something with 4K and better ergonomics I was sorely tempted by the A6300. But it has its problems . Digging through the menu system is a pain (panasonic touch screen is fantastic) The GH4 can give pro results and is touch screen. But the rumored update is around the corner . The G7 gives similar quality to the GH4 so I figure buying a mature camera (no price hype) for $600 in the interim will do me fine for the moment. By the way it has excellent stills capability and great lens selection. I would recommend over the sony system
Ed
No log profile video on the g7 :(
Log on the GH4 is having problems.
Got my hopes up for a moment, but still waiting for a deal on the A7SII :)
I agree even the old A7s price is still nuts, I can a new Nikon D810 with change with what Sony are charging.
Yeah, I'd take either too… I'm not holding my breath though, they know we want that sweet sweet low-light video and there's not much competition :)
I'm not interested in video at all, just the low light photography.
reactor on 26/03/2016 - 14:12 Comment score below threshold.