Please can someone help me? what am i missing?

So i have made a decision....

I am selling my Canon setup and going to get a Sony camera.
I have been looking at moving away from motorsports (although i would like to still do a little) and focus (excuse the pun) more on my street photography and portraits.
when i was comparing the A6000 and the A7 (not the R or S or II or anything like that) a lot of the revies say the a6k is actually better performing in AF speed, and fps wise. Also performs well in low light.

I guess the only real benefit to the A7 is that it is full frame and has mic inputs. Is it really worth the extra money? (about twice the cost here)

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17800347
So i have made a decision....

I am selling my Canon setup and going to get a Sony camera.
I have been looking at moving away from motorsports (although i would like to still do a little) and focus (excuse the pun) more on my street photography and portraits.
when i was comparing the A6000 and the A7 (not the R or S or II or anything like that) a lot of the revies say the a6k is actually better performing in AF speed, and fps wise. Also performs well in low light.

I guess the only real benefit to the A7 is that it is full frame and has mic inputs. Is it really worth the extra money? (about twice the cost here)

The a6000 definitely has the better AF system, particularly for tracking. That said, I find that even the contrast only AF on my a7S is more than up to the task for most subjects, it's very fast and rarely misses.

Whether it's "worth it or not" depends entirely on who you ask. IMO, yes, it's worth it because of the added flexibility you can get with full frame (more adaptable lens choices, more color depth, sharper images, better high ISO handling, more DR, etc).

Thanks for the reply!

the only reason i am thinking of the AF is that i do have a local drag and drifting track i am resident shooter at and would hate to give that up. I do get clos and i mean CLOSE to the action (used to use 24mm on my 1D3)

But like i say my priority is good quality shots. mainly street and starting on portrait.
I'm not a pro, nor do i aspire to be any more. i could class myself as a enthusiast that appreciates taking time to get the shot.

if you wouldnt mind having a look at my shots on my facebook (facebook.com/ufpuk) you can see how i do with my 1D3.

Looking at snapsort any of the sony's will be an improvement.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17800347
So i have made a decision....

I am selling my Canon setup and going to get a Sony camera.
I have been looking at moving away from motorsports (although i would like to still do a little) and focus (excuse the pun) more on my street photography and portraits.
when i was comparing the A6000 and the A7 (not the R or S or II or anything like that) a lot of the revies say the a6k is actually better performing in AF speed, and fps wise. Also performs well in low light.

I guess the only real benefit to the A7 is that it is full frame and has mic inputs. Is it really worth the extra money? (about twice the cost here)

I'll give it six months before you flog all your gear again.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17800454
Thanks for the reply!

the only reason i am thinking of the AF is that i do have a local drag and drifting track i am resident shooter at and would hate to give that up. I do get clos and i mean CLOSE to the action (used to use 24mm on my 1D3)

But like i say my priority is good quality shots. mainly street and starting on portrait.
I'm not a pro, nor do i aspire to be any more. i could class myself as a enthusiast that appreciates taking time to get the shot.

if you wouldnt mind having a look at my shots on my facebook (facebook.com/ufpuk) you can see how i do with my 1D3.

Looking at snapsort any of the sony's will be an improvement.

Great shots! I'm not sure how well it would do for that, I only know what I've read, the a7R and a7S are the only a7 cameras I have expereince with and both use a very dumbed down AF system compared to the a7. As I said though, my a7S doesn't give me any issues with what I shoot (though the only AF lens I have right now is the 28mm). Here's a few action shots with my a7S, I don't use AF-C, I just use single point AF and focus right before snapping the shutter when I shoot movement.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wPxN​8R

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wyoK​1G

john crossley wrote in post #17800477
I'll give it six months before you flog all your gear again.

I sold all my Canon gear a year ago, haven't regretted it for a moment.

I really don't get why it's so hard for people to accept that for a lot of shooters mirrorless (particularly the a7 line) is just better. For me there hasn't been a downside, and there are plenty of other guys in the a7 lounge with similar stories.

john crossley wrote in post #17800477
I'll give it six months before you flog all your gear again.

why do you say that?

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #17800489
I sold all my Canon gear a year ago, haven't regretted it for a moment.

I really don't get why it's so hard for people to accept that for a lot of shooters mirrorless (particularly the a7 line) is just better. For me there hasn't been a downside, and there are plenty of other guys in the a7 lounge with similar stories.

I absolutely agree. Who really cares what you shoot with if you are getting the results you want? In my case I sold all my Canon gear, went mirrorless and made a return to Canon DSLRs within six months. For my purpose the mirrorless systems just aren't there yet but the day they are I could well be back. No need to fear new tech and why be loyal to a particular company? It isn't as if they act in the consumer's best interest. Unless that consumer also happens to be a shareholder.

@everydaygetaway, those shots look great, can't wait to do some more skate shooting.

My main gripe is that although the 1D3 is pretty much bulletproof and built like a brick ***t house it is crazy heavy so really takes it out of me shooting for a whole day. although i have used black rapid etc.

How do you find the battery life?
At a car show i generally take around 1500 shots so might need a few spare batteries!

nqjudo wrote in post #17800501
I absolutely agree. Who really cares what you shoot with if you are getting the results you want? In my case I sold all my Canon gear, went mirrorless and made a return to Canon DSLRs within six months. For my purpose the mirrorless systems just aren't there yet but the day they are I could well be back. No need to fear new tech and why be loyal to a particular company? It isn't as if they act in the consumer's best interest. Unless that consumer also happens to be a shareholder.

I'm just getting past the poser stage and focusing more on what i want to shoot and get the shots regardless of the kit i use. The only issue is that i worry when applying for media people won't take me seriously turning up with an a6k lol!

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17800504
@everydaygetaway, those shots look great, can't wait to do some more skate shooting.

My main gripe is that although the 1D3 is pretty much bulletproof and built like a brick ***t house it is crazy heavy so really takes it out of me shooting for a whole day. although i have used black rapid etc.

How do you find the battery life?
At a car show i generally take around 1500 shots so might need a few spare batteries!

I find it's great, but you sort of have to change your shooting style a bit coming from a DSLR. If you turn the camera off after each shot you take or each series of shots you take then flip it back on right before the next shot(s) you can get a lot more than the advertised 300 I've found. I always used to toss a spare battery into my pocket when I went out with just the camera and lens for a day, I don't anymore because I realized that I've literally never had to use it, even on outings where I took hundreds of shots I still came home with around 50% or more battery life.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17800512
I'm just getting past the poser stage and focusing more on what i want to shoot and get the shots regardless of the kit i use. The only issue is that i worry when applying for media people won't take me seriously turning up with an a6k lol!

Your shots will speak for themselves, I don't think anyone worth your time will judge you based on the camera you're using.

It sounds promising. I do love the low ISO performance of the a7s but don't think I need quite that much and the a6k AF will take prcidence. It feels strange that I'm thinking of going to such a small camera from such a big one! But yet it performs better, doesn't compute in my little mind...


But then again the 1D3 is old lol!

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17801446
It sounds promising. I do love the low ISO performance of the a7s but don't think I need quite that much and the a6k AF will take prcidence. It feels strange that I'm thinking of going to such a small camera from such a big one! But yet it performs better, doesn't compute in my little mind...


But then again the 1D3 is old lol!

exactly.

1D3 - 6.1 x 6.2 x 3.1" (156 x 157 x 80mm) 47.6 oz (1349g

5D - 6.0 x 4.6 x 3.0" (152 x 116.4 x 76.4mm) 33.5 oz (950g)

6D - .7 x 4.4 x 2.8" (144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2mm) 26.6 oz (755g)

so the 6D is almost twice as heavy as what you are lugging around. Despite the masses complaining about it's AF, I have no complaints. The next version will likely have the current 5D focus system.

I just bought a 100D / SL1 for some video work and it is so freaking small that large lenses (even the 24-105) just do not feel right. Having to contort my hands to change settings, even in just an hour or so taking snapshots of my kids was harder on my hands than working a 5 hour event with my 6D in hand the entire time.

there are some very real and important reasons one would switch to Sony, but i don't think size is at the top of the list.

what lenses are you going to be hauling around with it?

You mean half as heavy?

And I will more than likely be looking at a simple 16-70 and a 55 or 35 prime. Might get a tele but doubt I will use it that much so still pretty compact and lightweight.

urbanfreestyle wrote in post #17800347
So i have made a decision....

I am selling my Canon setup and going to get a Sony camera.
I have been looking at moving away from motorsports (although i would like to still do a little) and focus (excuse the pun) more on my street photography and portraits.
when i was comparing the A6000 and the A7 (not the R or S or II or anything like that) a lot of the revies say the a6k is actually better performing in AF speed, and fps wise. Also performs well in low light.

I guess the only real benefit to the A7 is that it is full frame and has mic inputs. Is it really worth the extra money? (about twice the cost here)

Heya,

You can add a Sony to your line up, and adapt it to what you already have and slowly see if it works for you.

I want to add an A7S to my line up when I can afford it. That camera has all the abilities that I want in a good full frame.

Sony has the sensor for what your'e looking to do, portrait & street. Particularly if shooting in natural light only, where having the option of piercing the veil (low light shooting) is of high importance, and being able to shoot in really low light with depth of field thanks to massive ISO ability, is super nice.

Very best,