VERY Tempted but a little scared....

dexter75 wrote in post #17721515
Good points but thousands of dollars locked into a system doesn't mean much when you can get an adapter and use lenses you currently own on an A7x body.

The a7rII was the first camera where using adapted lenses for professional work is actually reasonable, as AF with adapted lenses doesn't really work with the older bodies. The a7rII is only a month old. It's too early to say what the impact that camera will have on getting more people to transition over the mirrorless. That said, I would say that this forum is a very good sample of the overall prosumer (which again includes professionals and consumers) market. And anecdotally, we can tell by the number of people popping over the a7 section of the forum that a lot of people have been switching since the a7rII dropped. Seriously, there used to be about 5 of us posting regularly there. Nowadays I take a break from the forum for a couple of hours and find 40+ unread posts in the lounge thread.

dexter75 wrote in post #17721515
The reason most pros still continue to use Canon (and Nikon) is because mirrorless cameras have still not even matched DSLRs in many areas let alone passed them. Look at the top Canon cameras. True weather sealing, dual image processors, dual memory card slots, true lossless RAW files, better ergonomics (Smaller means more cramped and isn't better for many) excellent battery life, fast burst rates etc...these are all things you cannot get in a Sony A7x body as of now but the A7rii is priced the same as a high end DSLR.

Most of those features are lacking in the 6D too....and you find it capable enough for your work right? I know plenty of wedding photographers using the 6D (including my old second shooter), and its perfectly capable. Same story for the a7 cameras.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17722037
Point me to an 85/1.4, 50/1.4, 135/2, etc. with VR...

True that this would be important for for some ... but it's just not a big deal for me and certainly wouldn't be one of my key buying factors.

I'll end up adding a FF mirrorless camera with EVF to my system at some point, but I'm just hoping it will be a Nikon (please Nikon???). I definitely won't buy the Sony as long as there is no adapter for my Nikon lenses that gives AF capability. Also, if the adapter were available and I purchased right now, it would be as a companion to my DSLR, not a replacement. That could change in a few years though as technology improves.

Bob_A wrote in post #17722044
True for some ... but it's just not a big deal for me so certainly wouldn't be one of my key buying factors.

Fair enough, and true of me also (which is why I'm not rushing to get an a7Sii, I'm very happy with my a7S as it is), but to deny it's advantages is just doing the entire photography industry a disservice imo.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17722047
Fair enough, and true of me also (which is why I'm not rushing to get an a7Sii, I'm very happy with my a7S as it is), but to deny it's advantages is just doing the entire photography industry a disservice imo.

I agree. There is nothing wrong with the camera and there are some advantages depending on your needs or how you shoot. For some it can completely replace their DSLR kit, for others it's a great companion and then there's the segment where it makes no sense to purchase one.

My first SLR was an Oly OM-1MD, which was by far my favorite camera to shoot with, so I'm all for moving towards a smaller form factor.

mystik610 wrote in post #17722038
Most of those features are lacking in the 6D too....and you find it capable enough for your work right? I know plenty of wedding photographers using the 6D (including my old second shooter), and its perfectly capable. Same story for the a7 cameras.

True, but I am working with stationary models under studio lights most the time. Things like weather sealing, Fast AF, high FPS and dual card slots are not a necessity for me, even when I do shoot natural light. Im mostly just after resolution and detail which is why I choose the 6D, will be adding a 5Ds shortly.

dexter75 wrote in post #17722124
True, but I am working with stationary models under studio lights most the time. Things like weather sealing, Fast AF, high FPS and dual card slots are not a necessity for me, even when I do shoot natural light. Im mostly just after resolution and detail which is why I choose the 6D, will be adding a 5Ds shortly.

And they aren't necessary for a lot of other people in the prosumer market (including professionals) that the a7 cameras are target to either. The a7 cameras are not optimized to shoot sports, but neither are the 6D and 5DS, and its folly to constantly weigh their value proposition against the needs of sports photographers. If you don't need super-fast AF, FPS, etc etc then cameras like the a7rII bring a lot to the table, just as the 6D and 5Ds do. Hard to at least acknowledge that.

I'm not close to wanting to move away from Canon, but my cousin's son bought a Sony A7-something and it was very nice.

If I were looking at my first camera, it would get some very serious consideration...

I think thats where many here on this forum give an unfair negative to the sony system. This forum was considered to be a canon forum for quite a while and canon was king here. Now we still have the same user base with all their canon gear saying how expensive it is to switch over to sony and how its not worth it. And for most people it really isnt. In fact its expensive to switch to any system. But if your looking at your first camera system then sony should be very high on the list.
As I see it if the 6d that i use now suits me well then an a7rII would suit me even better if I was upgrading.

dexter75 wrote in post #17722124
True, but I am working with stationary models under studio lights most the time. Things like weather sealing, Fast AF, high FPS and dual card slots are not a necessity for me, even when I do shoot natural light. Im mostly just after resolution and detail which is why I choose the 6D, will be adding a 5Ds shortly.

dexter your kinda all over the place. Your posting how the a7 series cant do sports and wildlife and how the battery wont last on an all day shoot so its a terrible system and now your talking about how you use a 6d and shoot models. If thats the case then the a7 series should be a great option. And all the negatives that you say the a7 series has are really negated in a studio environment. It just makes no sense for you to dislike a camera that does better in studio environment than the 6d.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17713068
HAHA! Thanks for the heads up! I had the 5DII for a bit but wasn't that impressed. It's a good camera but just... i don't know. felt something was lacking.

If you're just a little scared I would suggest maybe not jumping totally into the water. Maybe, instead, just get your feet wet. Hang on to your Canon gear and buy the new setup. If you like it more than the Canon, sell the Canon stuff. If not, sell the new one.

Looking at your gear list I would bet that you would agree that the 5D Mark II is MUCH better than the 350D. How do I know? I have both.

While the 1D III that you have has 45 focus points (compared to the 5D Mark II's 9) and 2 card slots (5D, only 1) I really see very little significant differences between the 2. Maybe the 1D is a bit bigger as well. What was lacking for you with the 5D Mark II?

There is an adapter in the works, and I can't wait. I have the 14-24, and would love the full electronic information.

Not a huge deal because the dumb adapter I have does aperture control.

Wouldn't mind the 85/1.8g either, however with access to a good set of canon AF lenses, there isn't a huge draw for Nikon stuff.

mystik610 wrote in post #17722198
And they aren't necessary for a lot of other people in the prosumer market (including professionals) that the a7 cameras are target to either. The a7 cameras are not optimized to shoot sports, but neither are the 6D and 5DS, and its folly to constantly weigh their value proposition against the needs of sports photographers. If you don't need super-fast AF, FPS, etc etc then cameras like the a7rII bring a lot to the table, just as the 6D and 5Ds do. Hard to at least acknowledge that.

True but the A7rii is a pro camera and was labeled a "DSLR killer" and many fanboys have proclaimed it better than any DSLR ever made. Im sorry but thats just not the case. As Ive already pointed out, it seriously lacks important features that many pro shooters would need in their main body. So when people already into the Canon system (or any other system really) bring up they are considering a switch to Sony and ask for pros and cons, there are those of us who have made the switch and bring up areas the Sony cameras are lacking. Things they may not think about like the very poor battery life, lack of weather sealing, only 1 card slot etc...because even though I may not need it, they might.

elitejp wrote in post #17722378
dexter your kinda all over the place. Your posting how the a7 series cant do sports and wildlife and how the battery wont last on an all day shoot so its a terrible system and now your talking about how you use a 6d and shoot models. If thats the case then the a7 series should be a great option. And all the negatives that you say the a7 series has are really negated in a studio environment. It just makes no sense for you to dislike a camera that does better in studio environment than the 6d.

Sorry but thats incorrect. I had an A7 and Sony 24-70 f/4 and my t5i and 18-135 kit lens produced better, sharper photos under the same studio lighting setup. I posted comparison shots in another thread here. My 6D and 85 f/1.8 runs circles around the A7 I had but thanks for trying to tell me the A7 does better.

dexter75 wrote in post #17722417
Sorry but thats incorrect. I had an A7 and Sony 24-70 f/4 and my t5i and 18-135 kit lens produced better, sharper photos under the same studio lighting setup. I posted comparison shots in another thread here. My 6D and 85 f/1.8 runs circles around the A7 I had but thanks for trying to tell me the A7 does better.

Because it does...

You used what is regarded as the softest FE lens and tried it for like 2 days before saying it was worthless and continuing to bash it on the internet. I'm sorry your buyers remorse is so heavy that you still can't let it go, but any issues you had with the system are your fault for not doing the research before you bought it.

Also, why on earth would you buy the a7 and not the a7R based on what you shoot? They're like $300 apart from each other...

dexter75 wrote in post #17722401
True but the A7rii is a pro camera and was labeled a "DSLR killer" and many fanboys have proclaimed it better than any DSLR ever made. Im sorry but thats just not the case. As Ive already pointed out, it seriously lacks important features that many pro shooters would need in their main body. So when people already into the Canon system (or any other system really) bring up they are considering a switch to Sony and ask for pros and cons, there are those of us who have made the switch and bring up areas the Sony cameras are lacking. Things they may not think about like the very poor battery life, lack of weather sealing, only 1 card slot etc...because even though I may not need it, they might.

Eh the whole "DSLR killer" thing is mindless fanboy babble. You have a little of that on both sides, but I don't think anyone in favor of mirrorless cameras said anything like that in this thread. Typically in a discussion about mirrorless camera's, it isn't the mirrorless guys that are spewing mindless fanboy babble