Well lots of discussion, but the first two lenses for the A7R have been amazing, so maybe like the 5D2 (may mine RIP) the overhype and the under hype will meet on the Sony. Also, the 24-70 F/4 lense is coming January 24, so will be the first test of a real zoom on this body. I can’t wait. In the meantime, it is shaping up as the A7R is great for stills and high resolution (1.5 fps isn’t fast) while the A7 is a better general purpose camera with faster auto focus and frame rate for sports. A tossup as to which to get in my mind right now đ
The 5D Mk II disappointed a lot of people when it was released because of what it didnât do. What most of those people missed was it did something really well and really inexpensively. It produced movie-quality HDMI video through excellent lenses for a small fraction of the price of the other methods available for producing movie-quality HDMI video. It didnât do it gracefully. There were all kinds of problems and constraints, but they could largely be worked around. A whole industry sprang up to help people work around those constraints and problems.
The A7R gives us something we donât have, too. Itâs arguably the highest resolving camera (it may be slightly higher resolving than the D800e since it really has no AA filter, but maybe itâs a tie). Itâs small and mirrorless, which some people really want. (Notice I donât say YOU really wanted it, but there are definitely some people who do.) And it costs $2,300. A Nikon D800e is $600 more even on special. A Canon 5D III is $1,000 more. A Leica M is $4,600 more. Let me put the good points in a list like the one above:
- Small.
- Relatively inexpensive.
- Incredible resolution.
- Easily adaptable to other lens mounts.
via LensRentals.com – Photo/video thoughts from the largest rental house.
