Good price for full frame mirror less camera. Old model still clicks good pictures
Sony Alpha A7 Full Frame Mirrorless Camera with 28-70mm Lens $1359.15 + Bonus $150 EFTPOS Gift Card @ JB Hi-Fi
70
Lthing on 21/07/2017 - 12:55 jbhifi.com.au (314 clicks)
Last edited 21/07/2017 - 13:04 by 1 other user
Last edited 21/07/2017 - 13:04 by 1 other user
Related Stores
closed Comments
This camera is very old now… sensor not treat for ff.
It has a better sensor than the new released Canon 6D mark II :D
whats wrong with the sensor? Its exactly the same as the A7 Mk II.
Low light is too shit imho … and i have an a7mk2 as well.
What lens are you using? If find it's pretty good. Not as good as the A7s of course (https://petapixel.com/2015/07/04/this-is-how-good-the-sony-a…), but still quite capable of providing good detail/low noise shots in low light…. just don't expect it to pull out detail at extreme high ISO settings. Maybe stick at 3200 or below. Plenty of sample photos out there: http://sample-images.com/sony-a7-low-light.html
Depends on what lens you are using and what you are comparing with i guess.
I find photos are generaly good upto about iso 6400.
Best soultion to low light photography is a tripod though.
@PlasticSpaceman: i only use the zeiss 50mm … great lens… ill be keeping that once i sell the body soon. Hoping the mk3 will at least improve the iso … only useable up to 3200 isnt good enough for ff imho and even 3200 is not great. Mk3 should have same af as a9 apparently so should be killer.
I guess I'm too old school. In my film days I used to use PanF (ISO 50) and Kodachrome (ISO 25 or 64) - yep used a tripod a lot. When doing band/stage photography or car racing I'd maybe push something from 400 ISO to 800 or maybe 1600 but that would be max. Being able to go to 3200 without major issues is amazing for me. :-)
If you really need the high ISO to get usable images then I'd consider forking out for the A7s. Keep in mind that with even a camera like the A7r/rII etc they have a base ISO (where you get the highest dynamic range) and as you increase the ISO the dynamic range decreases. So if you want the most dynamic range you need to find out what that base ISO is and go for 100 ISO or so whatever the camera is you are using…
FYI I consider zoom lenses a crutch as well - I prefer to use a prime and my legs. And don't get me started on autofocus or image stabilisation. :-)
I got mine in…. feb 2014. Wow - doesn't seem that long ago. Definitely a good camera - I consider myself an ok photographer, but suspect I don't use 95% of the features of this thing. OK, the autofocus is beaten by the a6000, but whatever. Real photographers run on manual focus & exposure anyhow…. lol
The 'kit' lens isn't too bad either - not amazing of course, but good enough for most purposes. Good entry into full frame, and can put the money you save towards some good lenses….
Eftpos gift card T&Cs suggests it does not apply to products sold at a discount?
How is this camera compared to Nikon D610 ?
The Sony goes to 11.
There are 3 A7 models and these are mkI models. There are mkII models released already but are over 3K.
A7 - a general purpose DSLR
A7S - lower resolution than the other two but larger area of sensor to capture one pixel which makes it more sensitive, good for low-light photo/video.
A7R - higher resolution model good for landscapes and architecture
There are feature differences between each model and you should read further into
http://cameradecision.com/compare/Nikon-D610-vs-Sony-Alpha-7
Both can take great photos. Which is best depends on the photographer - their requirements and preferences.
Thanks guys.
I already have a D610 and D7k, was thinking to purchase A7 but then I'll have two different systems. Pretty happy with Nikon for now
I was happy with Nikon as well, and if you're still happy with their kit then definitely stay with them.
Personally I got a camera with back focus issues that were a total pain. I wanted to go to full frame with my next camera, and was able to get the A7 for less than the Nikon D600 - the older version of your D610 - which at the time a number of people were having oil spot issues that Nikon were denying was an issue (finally they started taking them in and cleaning and/or replacing with the D610). With my issues with focus and the complaints about oil spots combined with the poor way Nikon were handling it at the time, I decided to make the jump - ran with lens adapters as I slowly sold off my Nikon kit. Was a little sad, but hey - I have the camera kit to take photos, not because I like to collect shiny things. ;-)
@PlasticSpaceman: Good work there and completely agree with nikon's back focussing issues . Most of the D7000's have that issue and D610 has been fine. My dad is into the camera repair business from last 35 years so he looks after my cameras.
I had a mirrorless too but hated it for battery life. Nikon D610 one charge does more that 2000+ shots and the mirrorless I had will give up at 300-400 shots.
what's the battery like on A7 ?@codename47: Battery life is pretty ordinary, but you can tweak things to make it a little better (for example keep the wireless off when not using it). Some other hints here: http://timfordphoto.com/sony-a7-battery-saving-tips/. On the flip side when I got my A7 I got a 'bonus' battery grip which holds two batteries so that can help. I rarely use that though as one battery will normally last a standard session, and I always make sure I have a spare on hand. I have never been in a position where I have had to stop shooting because I have run out of power - and switching batteries is quick to do. It was inconvenient to make the change, but I have never regretted it.
Speaking of which, the nice thing is the smaller APS-C cameras (eg I have an A5000) use the same lenses AND batteries. So at a pinch I can always pull the battery out of that and use it as well.
So yes, mirrorless is definitely not perfect. The Sony interface is not as intuitive compared to Nikon and Canon, and battery life is an issue compared to a DSLR. I was willing to cope with that to gain things like a smaller/lighter body, focus peaking, built in wireless (I think your D610 still needs that stupid WU-1b thing that used to suck power out of my old Nikon like a heated towel rail), simple/cheap adapters allowing access to pretty much any lens out there, and native Zeiss glass (yes, Nikon make some great lenses, and yes you can get some Zeiss lenses with Nikon mounts, but still…). Pre DSLR I used Contax, and I was bitten bad by the Zeiss bug. :-)
@PlasticSpaceman:You summarized everything pretty nicely. Nothing is perfect. I might give mirrorless another go and see how I go with it this time.
I have 6 lenses with Nikon Body so not really willing to swap systems but would get small fuji kind of mirrorless camera that I can sneak in my bag everyday.My Dad still loves his old non digital cameras, the lenses were so nice back then.
@codename47: I try not to get too attached to my camera gear, and think of it as a means to an end. Selling 6 lenses would be a pain, but (like I did) you can make do with adapters for a while. Personally I still think the APS-C Sony cameras are the pick of the bunch (generally smaller and a huge array of lens adapters out there - if your dad repairs cameras, you'll probably be able to borrow all sorts of weird lenses from him to play with), as much as the likes of Fuji are pretty dang good.
If you're looking for something small to throw in your bag, that can give you better pictures than your mobile, then I'd probably look at something that doesn't have an interchangeable lens. Fuji, Sony, Canon all make good cameras there. I also like the 'rugged' cameras that can survive in the bag without issues as well as can be used in the pool/rain/etc without an issue. Good to give the kids as well, without worrying it will be dropped and broken. :-)
@PlasticSpaceman: Agreed on fixed lens. I remember there was one Fuji fixed lens camera that I really like. I might have to start looking into it.
thanks for great advise!!
only downside to this camera might be the autofocus speed. from what i understand - quite a bit slower than the a6000 so may not suit shooting kids or animals