Received an email from Digidirect, very good price for local stocks.
some highlights (after discount and gift card):
A7 body $902.3
A7II body $1356.35
A7RII body $2978.30
RX100 V $1145
FE 16-35/f4 $1191
FE 35/f2.8 $577.6
Do you mind sharing some of those magic shots?
Shot entirely on my A7ii. Do show an Ozbargainer a bit of LIKE if you liked what you saw. Thanks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8dTnIDQ5a8
I have a a7II. Just waiting on an a7RII. Yes it does take amazing shots with zeiss lens or g Master lenses. Much more xo.pact than other dslr and takes images equal and if not better than canon 5D markIV.
You can see example here. All of them are taken on a sony A7II.
Why downvote him?
He was asked to share his clips, so he did.
I think it's a good video, makes me want to buy that camera.
wow.
Nothing wrong with your shots. Well maybe a bit heavy on the post processing, especially the saturation…but that's a matter of taste. And drop the fake lens blur if it's going to be that obvious. Anyway I have no desire to rubbish what is clearly good competent photography which you should be congratulated for. And I am certainly not going to downvote you.
BUT…
I have shot with various DSLR - mostly Canon 600D, 700D, Nikon D70, D200, D90, D7100, D7200. I think the D70 and D200 would struggle due to low light capability being 10 years old but otherwise I don't see a shot there that couldn't have been taken with any one of those other cameras.
If by impact you mean saturation or contrast, that is what post processing is for…or if you want it right out of camera use picture controls.
Blaze the dog? No fake blur? Really? You're shooting f/1.8 in that light? And you've managed to get the entire snout and eyes in focus at f/1.8? Did you use an ND filter? And what's that bit of sharp hair poking out from his neck in this one? (look under his chin).
https://500px.com/photo/192412997/blaze-the-dog-3-by-bruno-m…
But the kicker is your lens is the FE 24-70mm F4, so you haven't taken that at f/1.8. In fact your EXIF says ƒ/4/1/1000s/ISO 250.
The intention wasn't to rubbish your work. You can take the advice or leave it. They're your photos. Just don't assume everyone you talk to has no photography knowledge.
Hello, that shot was taken with the Zeiss 24-70mm at 70mm, F4.0, iso250, 1/1000. Was not the 85mm F1.8. No ND filter, just a CRL Polarising filter to cut glare from water..
What you might be assuming wrong is that that background is far! and using the 70mm side of the lens at F4.0, it compresses the background. You should know that since you have "photography knowledge"
"And what's that bit of sharp hair poking out from his neck in this one? (look under his chin)." Thats the whiskers he has from his nose area, not a fur hair.
I don't use fake blur….. why would I even do that? I don't use photoshop either. That bokeh (blur) is original from the lens, I just added some saturation, decrease highlights and increased shadows…..
A bit offensive of your comment. I don't do destructive editing. Only colour, and balancing exposure.
And I don't assume no one has photographic knowledge. Im not a snob. In fact I'm the opposite. But I don't accept people who are rude.
if you want the RAW unedited file, just send me your email and I'll let the photo prove you wrong. :)
oh and to add: I have the following lenses:
- 24-70mm f4,
- 16-35mm f4,
- 35mm f2.8 (don't have anymore)
- 55mm f1.8,
- 85mm f1.8 and
- 70-200mm f4.
So all those photos on the 500pix website could have been any of the 6 lenses mentioned above and the aerials were a DJI aircraft.
Hmmm…The question is can I be bothered with deconvolution software? It'd settle things once and for all. I'd either owe you an apology, or you me… Real lens blur doesn't deconvolve the same way with the same algorithms.
…or do I just let it go. I was being genuine when I said I do mostly like your photos.
Cooks Terrace… I used to PG there until I totally mangled myself up in an accident in Port Kembla, there ain't no recovering from titanium implants.
Back on topic, while I definitely prefer the form factor of the a7 series, for some reason I've never achieved the same keep rate as I did with the 5D3, and I sure bitched about the 5D3 specs over on dpreview… but I found it just captured the moment better. I also find the Canon glass a little more appealing… Haven't been a fan of any Zeiss specially the 24-70mm, even the 55mm and the 16-35mm was ~ on par with my Canon 17-40mm, better in some areas, worse in others.
I recently purchased the 90mm macro, and it's OK but focus is junk even compared to the Canon 60D + 100mm L.
https://500px.com/rpro (WARNING: some over saturation, HDR, and extreme pp)
@Bruno28: Hows the 70-200f4? I'm contemplating between the 70-200f4 and 70-300f4.5-5.6. Either go for longer reach or constant aperture?
I noticed the 70-300 doesn't have a tripod collar either which is why I'm leaning towards the 70-200 but I don't know…GM series are way out of my price range
well like I said, I didn't add blur, and would never do that. I Just take photos, colour correct them and crop if needed. nothing else. Nothing destructively.
Like I said if you want the original RAW file to settle this, I'm more than happy to send to you. The a7II and Zeiss lens does some amazing things.
@KitchenSink: When I was looking for a telephoto, I did a lot of research. I chose the 70-200mm f4. and its a great lens. Its really well made and does not protrude out when zooming in like the 70-300mm.
Mate, you've got better editing skills than most of the popular vloggers out there!
Nice work!
Hey Lozza6, Thanks for the kind words. Trying to make some neat videos. Hopefully one day I too will also get some youtube love. haha.
Thanks Lozza6 :)
Hey bro that looks really good, is that videoing? or are they shots that you stitched together? (real question).
Moving subjects, and stills, so id say both.
A bit heavy on the fading in and out effect though
I liked it :D.
Hey Duram, I shot it all using video and a couple of stills. My youtube video was a combination of both. The camera is amazing for video recording and that is my prime purpose. A lot of film makers are using the Sony A7 serious because they are just so great for filming. They are equally great for photos as well
Just waiting on a 90% discount and I'll be able to afford that A9
Random banding machine.
The random banding machine is a very poor performer (strongly suggest not purchasing for this feature).. you can't even see the banding even when it supposedly is around…
@syousef:
I don't have the A9 myself but I know a person that does and we tried to get it to band and no matter what we did we could not… I've also read online many professionals have tried as well and not managed to… perhaps this A9 unit needs replacing… Also IF you ever do run into banding it's super simple to fix by disabling silent shooting… I shoot with A7rii which is prone to banding with some light frequencies but it's only ever around if using silent shooting mode so not the end of the world and still one of the best camera's around I think if you not after high MP count…
Perhaps you're talking about using the mechanical shutter instead of the electronic shutter when you say "disabling silent shooting"? If so you're taking quite a hit on the FPS which is one of the key advantages of the camera.
I don't know what settings he was using and his attitude doesn't impress me, but some of his reviews including this one have been useful. Because he was trying to compare with DSLR, he did shoot with other cameras in the same conditions and locations on that soccer shoot and they had no issues. Mechanical shutter is mentioned in the video comments. There's also suspicion about the mixed lighting being the cause but for some of the shots that doesn't seem as likely as it would require different lights to be pulsing with the same timing.
I'm not a pro and I don't shoot Sony MILC, mainly due to the silly lens prices that I can't justify when compared to my Nikon or Canon DSLR. All I do know is if I paid that much for a camera and my photos were coming back ruined, I'd be extremely annoyed.
A7r ii at that price is very sweet indeed.
Thanks for posting
wow I just bought the Fe 16-35 for 1300 during the ebay 15% off…
Thanks to eBay stores' price jacking tricks.
I just realised they are factoring in the cashback in the promo…so its roughly the same for me..no biggie
Worth mentioning the new FE 85mm f1.8 is included. Killer lens with almost identical performance to the batis which is more then twice it's price.
i'd definitely pick this up if there was a cashback combo
It was already $6xx-700 during eBay sales. Already 1/3rd the cost of the overpriced Batis.
Really?
Equal to a batis?
I owned the 50mm 1.8, its coating was destroyed by normal usage and alcohol wipes..
I bought the 55mm 1.8 zeiss instead and my gosh is it good.
If the 50mm 1.8 is similar to the 85mm 1.8 id expect the build quality to be full of plastic. IQ wise the 50mm wasnt atrocious but it wasn't outstanding either
This is paired with an a7ii
Can't comment on durability but I've owned the 50mm f1.8 and this 85mm is miles ahead. It's weather-resistance, has blazing fast internal auto-focus capabilities and is incredibly sharp wide-open. The only thing it misses out on is in-lens stabilisation. Check out the reviews, think you would be surprised.
Thanks for your comment! I will check it out when I have the chance at a Sony kiosk!
The 85/1.8 is easily equal to the Batis. The Batis is just a Tamron designed lens with a $800 blue badge on the side.
There are hints that a new A7III will be released at the end of the year. So that's why the prices are lower now.
I heard its just a slower A9 basically. Same/similar sensor as the A9, better AF then the A7ii but not shooting as fast as the A9. Don't know what else…maybe a touch screen since the a6500 had it?
But can't wait to see the newer mark 3. Been holding off on upgrading to the A7rii
Yeah it won't be as fast as A9. Cause then it would just kill the a9. But it probably will be the upgrades phase detector that cover almost all of the sensor. Possibly the touch to focus and the joystick and better larger battery like the a9.
I think even if you buy the a7ii you could sell for same price you bought when the newer a7iii comes out.
Anyone have a translation for this?
upprice up price.
Your believe is total disbelieve. All down price on AF Lenses.
You made me really lol. Thank you.
The prices quoted here are after Sony cash back
Damn, tempted by the price of the E-Mount 18-105mm lens:
http://www.digidirect.com.au/camera_lenses/mirrorless_lenses…
Great lens, go for it.
Need a mount to use with canon lenses?
Sure do. I recommend the Sigma Adaptor
Yes, you do need the Metabone adapter, or sell your Canon lenses and buy Sony ones :)
what about sony a9 camera price?
Still way too expensive to justify
Yeah its expensive but its suppose to compete with the Nikons D5 and Canon's 1DXm2, aimed mostly at sports photographers.
A9 in much cheaper than both.
At this rate, the a72 might be 1100 new or lower next year lol. I thought I would want a full frame, but the extra weight for ibis, the added low light performance and shallow dof aren't all that attractive.
Last Saturday they have 10% off on eBay and eBay had a further 15% off.
Digidirect had the prices matching the website sale prices, but after the 15% eBay code started, they amended the listings and bumped the prices up 10%.
Is it really that much lighter than an dslr? Heard there was some af issues on this model
It certainly is if you carry it around all day. Which model and what issue? Are you saying the a7 in general have issue? I am not aware of it and have a few cameras myself.
If its just the body with a small prime, then yes heaps lighter. When you start adding the big lenses then probably not so much lighter…
I have a canon 70d with tamron 24-70.. thing is beast to carry around. I need aomething lighter
A7/A9 are the full frame sensors.
A6000/A6300/A65000 have APS-C sensors like the 70D. These are much smaller than the A7/A9. Try them in store if you can and see for yourself. There's other mirrorless cameras from Fuji, Olympus that are good.
If you like zooms, stick to m43 or fuji. Sony apsc zooms mean you have no f/2.8 fast standard zoom.
There's part of me that wants to sell my canon stuff and go sony.
Exactly the same to me.
I did it two years ago and haven't looked back. Depends how heavily you're invested in another brand, might no be worth the switch if you lose too much dollaroos. Only thing that I was skeptical about was the weather sealing - depends which model you're after and if you need it. I don't shoot in the rain but like the peace of mind in terms of moisture and what not
I got the Sony thinking to replace my Nikon. I still haven't yet though — simply because of my Nikon glass. I find Sony's lens range still relatively limited. They do have some great lenses, but gosh, they're $$$.
damn, scratch that, the sony equivalent of my 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is 1000 dollar more
The reason why Sony reduce the A7II's price is because Canon is announcing the 6DII in few days. edit: Canon just announced the 6DII.
Er, no. It's because the a7III is coming. Normal for the price to drop at the end of a products life cycle (and drop further after discoutinued).
In that case, they will reduce the price for old models only after the new model comes out, not before.
I thought it was a perfect storm of timing, eofy, Canon 6dii together.
I just bought from them on Sunday at only 10% :'( so bummed out, would have bought another lens with that savings.
Price Protección CC?
No :/ I called them and person on the phone wasn't much help so I went to the store after and person in charge happily redid the transaction with the new price :D ! Super thankful for great service.
Hmm i like the best of both worlds of photos and video… replacing a heavy 70d… this or a6300/6500?… then rheres the mounts so useless af… :(
Use APSC and you like video, take the A6500. Want better image quality, take the A7II.
What's the advantage of full frame mirrorless? Okay the body is slightly thinner, but you still need a big arse lens to match the full frame sensor.
EVF.
What you see is what you get.
You don't need to take 3 shots to get the exposure right.
You can take one shot and that's it.
Focus assist in the EVF too (zoom in a point in your sensor and help you nail pin point sharpness for manual focus)
A full frame has a 35mm sensor that has a much larger surface area than the sensor on a camera such as the a6000. Even though it may have the same MP count, the individual photosensors are much larger in a FF sensor. Thus generally the image quality is better in a FF camera. It will generaly have better low light capability as well as reduced noise. You do need to have good lenses to make use of this resolving power.
The FF camera lenses will also have a true focal length. Thus a 35mm lens on a FF will have a true 35mm focal length. On a croped sensor camera, a 35mm lens has an equivalent FL of approx 52-55mm depending on crop ratio (1.5 for sony). Thus if you shoot a lot of wide angle or landscape photos then FF is a better option.
I went from a canon full frame ( longtime canon user) to a sony ff and it is a lot lighter and easier to carry around. I use a lot of legacy manual focus prime lenses such as FD lenses which are small and very easy to carry. Sony also has some good primes (CZ 35mm/f2.8). My old canon now feels like a old box in comparison.
Thanks for the review. Are u using A7II? I am currently using A6000 and it was great for day time pics. In low light, it struggles to focus and pics are not great unless you are using a flash. My friend has Cannon DSLR and it focus fine and takes better pics during nights. Day times are similar.
I started taking pics from Mobiles which have improved a lot in recent times.
Can you advise if Sony full frame mirrorless also struggle in less lights?
Curious to know the same too. Looking to jump from a Nikon dslr system to Sony
if you want good low light you need A7Rii
i have a6000, have bought the a6500 as my upgrade since it's smaller and more portable for travel.
you need good fast lens to shoot low light, like the sel24f18z
This may sound strange but there is a lot of light even when when it appears dark to your eyes. The key is to let the maximum amount of light into the camera by using a lens with a wide aperture (low F number, usually <2.0 often refer to as a fast lens) AND leave the aperture open for longer (slower shutter speed). Camera factors such as overall sensor size (bigger sensors have less noise) and individual photo-sensor size (bigger is better). This is why the a7 is generally better than the a6000 for low light (a7= full frame sensor which is much bigger than the crop sensor on a6000) and why the a7S (12.2 MP) is better than the a7/A7R (24-36 MP) for low light- The A7S has the same overall sensor size as the a7/a7R but the individual photosensor are much much larger.
Having said all of this - Please DO NOT go buy a A7/A7R. By far the most effective (and the cheapest) way to improve night time shooting is to purchase a simple tripod which will allow you to leave your shutter open for much much longer while the camera is held steady. Honestly, this is the singular thing that improved my night time shooting. I have several tripods but my mini tripod was dirt cheap ($50) and is always in my camera bag. I dont usually consider taking serious photos at night without a tripod.
Gaggy - phone camera are improving all the time but cannot match my camera photos. I also use my phone camera a lot and it takes descent pictures for online use etc but the difference in image quality is very noticeably when you do prints or put the pictures on a big screen. The a6000 is great camera and IMHO class leading. The A7 also struggles in low light (compared with my cannon full-frame DSLR) but i use a tripod and dont use autofocus that much so less of an issue for me.
As for me I use a sony A7. I bought it because I go hiking a lot (need something portable) and do landscape photography (prefer full frame). A7 is the cheapest, smallest and lightest full-frame camera that I could buy. For me, great photos are about (1) personal creativity >>> (2) High quality lenses >>> (3) actual camera (yes - I consider the camera the least important). I dont really see the point of spending so much more to buy cameras like the a7II/a7R when there are so many cheaper ways to improve photos. For example, I was taking great photos back in the old days (and still do now) with my 35mm film camera that had no digital feature at all! (we actually had to process film in a dark room!). So you can take great photos with even the most basic camera- no a7RII needed:) Don't fall for the marketing spin !!!
Also remember that a camera will depreciate 30% as soon as you open the box. Whereas good lenses will hold value very well with minimal depreciation. I personally spend most of my money on high-quality lenses (often bought for second had from ebay/gumtree).
I shot Nikon FF (D810 with the usual pro lens combos) and very happy with the results, but not the weight. Recently got a micro four thirds (EM5 MK2 with the 12-40), very happy with the compactness but disappointed with the IQ, especially in low light situations, and the EVF lags when panning moving objects. (Massive zoom advantage when using the 40-150, though in no way 2.8.)
I'm sure a FF mirrorless can outperform a M43, but it's like winding back to DSLR territory, hence the hesitation.
The D810 is a fabulous camera. I very much doubt you will get that IQ with a full-frame mirrorless (and I am a Sony A7 user). I know what you mean about the weight though - I had a canon full-frame and i ditched it for the more portable a7.
I have used A7, A7ii, A5000 etc with lenses 50mm1.8, 55mm1.8,24-70f4, 10-18f4, 24-70f2.8 with lea4 adaptor, 70-200f2.8 with a lea4 adaptor.
Camera wise A7ii is far better than A7, Lens wise 55mm1.8, 24-70f2.8 and 70-200f2.8 is the best, use the 70-200f2.8 where you can even with the lea4 adaptor its super sharp and focus fast, but heavy. If you are taking landscape or sky 10-18f4 is will give you amazing pictures. from my experience 24-70f4 never comes close to any of the other lenses. 50mm1.8 is an oke every day lens if you just want a lightweight compact cheap prime.
i have also tried a6000, a6300, a6500 - the a6500 is fast as lightning :)
The a7ii is getting ridiculously cheap, and it is such an amazing camera. Paired up with my 55 mm 1.8. It creates magic