Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Sony Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Sony Cameras 
Thread started 22 Mar 2018 (Thursday) 11:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

How well does the A7RIII complement the A9?

 
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Mar 22, 2018 11:24 |  #1

I shoot with an A9 as my main camera. My backup is an a6500 that mainly stays in the bag except when I bring it out for some gimbal video work. I've been contemplating replacing the a6500 with an A7RIII since it came out. But I'm not sure it's worth it. I know I would have a use for the A7RIII in my line of work, but is the bump in image quality worth the price of admission? The largest MP camera I've ever owned is the A9, and I've never owned or shot on a camera without an AA filter.

For those who own both, or have owned / shot on both: Will the boosted IQ, resolution, and lack of an AA filter make me go to the A7RIII in certain situations, or is the A9 good enough that I won't see many real world benefits to the A7RIII? For anyone who doesn't know, I shoot events, weddings, portraits, and am getting more into video.

P.S. Do not recommend the A7III lol. The a6500 is a great "sit in the bag" backup, as the a7III most likely would be. This is specifically about IQ and resolution.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,536 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2289
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Mar 22, 2018 12:48 |  #2

I went from crops to 6D to 5d3 to 5d4 now a7R3

I’ve gone from cheap glass all the way up to 200/2 and shot plenty on 300 2.8 IS II and 400 2.8 IS V1

The bump from 23mp to 30 was very noticeable. The difference between 30mp to 42mp is outstanding

There is much more of a gain going from 24mp to 42mp than from a decent lens to the best lens. No question about it if you have the a9 the R3 is what you need.


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
Post edited 2 months ago by Jarvis Creative Studios.
     
Mar 22, 2018 16:22 |  #3

Talley wrote in post #18591709 (external link)
I went from crops to 6D to 5d3 to 5d4 now a7R3

I’ve gone from cheap glass all the way up to 200/2 and shot plenty on 300 2.8 IS II and 400 2.8 IS V1

The bump from 23mp to 30 was very noticeable. The difference between 30mp to 42mp is outstanding

There is much more of a gain going from 24mp to 42mp than from a decent lens to the best lens. No question about it if you have the a9 the R3 is what you need.

Good to hear. Do you think the gain may have been even more for you going from 30mp Canon to 42mp Sony? While Canon is great they don't offer the best IQ.

I noticed a significant jump in IQ going from the 22mp 5d3 to the 24mp a9.

I've seen videos on the IQ difference between the A9 and R3, and while better, I've never seen anything that seems to merit a $2000 price increase over the a6500. In good light I can't tell a difference between the a6500 and a9 files, but I haven't done a serious comparison.

And yet I'm still very intrigued by the R3....

I'm mainly looking to cut the crop factor, and wondering if the IQ boost is worth the $1300 extra over the a7iii and $2000 upgrade over the a6500.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Higgs ­ Boson
Goldmember
1,953 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Texas Hill Country
     
Mar 24, 2018 06:19 |  #4

i have both and can tell the difference in the RIII files vs the 9. I only use the 9 for action now, or basically anything the R3 can't handle, which isn't much.


A9 | A7R3 | 25 | 55 | 85

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Mar 24, 2018 11:36 |  #5

Higgs Boson wrote in post #18592849 (external link)
i have both and can tell the difference in the RIII files vs the 9. I only use the 9 for action now, or basically anything the R3 can't handle, which isn't much.

How big is the difference? If you could pick only one camera which one would you pick? Also what do you shoot?


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
10,536 posts
Gallery: 40 photos
Likes: 2289
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Mar 24, 2018 15:24 |  #6

The only real benefit the a9 has is 20fps and no blackout.

This was my major decision and went with the R.


My entire hobby of gear lust has temporarily been shifted into overload. Please be patient while my mind tries to get back onto the road to recovery. We do apologize for any inconvenience this may cause....
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,412 posts
Likes: 342
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Mar 24, 2018 20:39 |  #7

Talley wrote in post #18593157 (external link)
The only real benefit the a9 has is 20fps and no blackout.

This was my major decision and went with the R.

You forgot AF both tracking and basically the entire field of view. Eye AF is also snappier.

Whether top AF is important for you...only you can judge, but to dismiss it as benefit of the A9 is totally wrong.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,644 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 6823
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
Post edited 1 month ago by mystik610. (4 edits in all)
     
Mar 31, 2018 06:53 |  #8

Jared I'm a little late to your thread, but as you know, I swapped the a9 for an a7rIII. The main reason I did so was because for things like weddings, 42mp is very handy for cropping in post because if you're anything like me, compositions in the field are not always perfect when there's a lot going on and sometimes I have to crop aggressively in post. Also, since I primarily shoot primes, I do like the ability to quickly hit the crop mode button and have usable images with a longer FOV. 35 1.4 can crop to a near 50 1.8 equivalent.....85mm 1.4 can quickly crop to a 135mm f2 near equivalent....135 1.8 can crop to a near 200 f2.8 equivalent

a9 focuses better in low light though and I miss that about the camera. It also works better with adapted glass. I'm actually looking to add the RIII eventually for the AF system.

Outside of the resolution, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the a9 and a7rIII files though. I'm actually in the midst of processing a bunch of a9 and a7rIII files right now, since Travis shot a wedding with me using a9. A9 AA filter is pretty minimal. Processing a9 files next to a7rIII/II files, I can't immediately tell the difference without digging through the EXIF. I only notice the difference if I crop files aggressively.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - Sony 50 1.8 - Sony 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jarvis ­ Creative ­ Studios
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,337 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Aug 2013
Location: Houston, Texas
     
Apr 01, 2018 21:59 |  #9

mystik610 wrote in post #18597500 (external link)
Jared I'm a little late to your thread, but as you know, I swapped the a9 for an a7rIII. The main reason I did so was because for things like weddings, 42mp is very handy for cropping in post because if you're anything like me, compositions in the field are not always perfect when there's a lot going on and sometimes I have to crop aggressively in post. Also, since I primarily shoot primes, I do like the ability to quickly hit the crop mode button and have usable images with a longer FOV. 35 1.4 can crop to a near 50 1.8 equivalent.....85mm 1.4 can quickly crop to a 135mm f2 near equivalent....135 1.8 can crop to a near 200 f2.8 equivalent

a9 focuses better in low light though and I miss that about the camera. It also works better with adapted glass. I'm actually looking to add the RIII eventually for the AF system.

Outside of the resolution, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the a9 and a7rIII files though. I'm actually in the midst of processing a bunch of a9 and a7rIII files right now, since Travis shot a wedding with me using a9. A9 AA filter is pretty minimal. Processing a9 files next to a7rIII/II files, I can't immediately tell the difference without digging through the EXIF. I only notice the difference if I crop files aggressively.

Thank you for the input. Very helpful. Honestly It gives me a headache thinking about editing a whole wedding with 42MP files haha. I would definitely be keeping the a9 around as my main camera. I think for now I'm just going to ride with what I have, as I really don't use a backup very often, and I think if I went to a two camera setup I would have to force myself to do so.


WEBSITE (external link)
flickr (external link)
Sony HX90V || Sony RX100V || Sony a6500 || Sony a9 || Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS || Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM || Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA || Sony Sonnar T* FE 55mm f1.8 ZA || Sony FE 70-200 f/2.8 GM OSS || Godox speedlights and strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,644 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 6823
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Apr 02, 2018 05:54 |  #10

Jarvis Creative Studios wrote in post #18598526 (external link)
Thank you for the input. Very helpful. Honestly It gives me a headache thinking about editing a whole wedding with 42MP files haha. I would definitely be keeping the a9 around as my main camera. I think for now I'm just going to ride with what I have, as I really don't use a backup very often, and I think if I went to a two camera setup I would have to force myself to do so.

Oh yeah processing large batches 42mp is a pain...particularly since I'm using capture one which is a resource hog. I'm getting computer GAS lol.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀII - RX1ʀII - α7ʀIII
Zeiss Loxia 21 - Canon 24-70 2.8LII - Sony/Zeiss 35 f1.4 ZA - Sony 50 1.8 - Sony 85GM - Sigma 135 f1.8 ART

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheShutterMonkey
Member
166 posts
Gallery: 142 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 990
Joined Jul 2016
Post edited 1 month ago by TheShutterMonkey.
     
Apr 17, 2018 19:48 |  #11

Talley wrote in post #18593157 (external link)
The only real benefit the a9 has is 20fps and no blackout.

This was my major decision and went with the R.

you forgot little to zero rolling shutters and little to no banding ;-)a

and while 1/32000 shutter speed is overkill... it's still nice to know that you can go faster than 1/8000. I've only shot it over 1/8000 once, and it was just for giggles

this was taken a 1/32000, you can see the details in the tire (no, it wasn't parked, this was during a practice lap)

IMAGE: https://farm1.staticflickr.com/784/41476993101_89f7519622_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/26cb​r1H  (external link) Shot at shutter speed of 1/32000 with Sony a9 (external link) by Ken (external link), on Flickr



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

916 views & 6 likes for this thread
How well does the A7RIII complement the A9?
FORUMS Sony Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Sony Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is eyecancu
907 guests, 448 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.