I've switched to Sony twice. Hated it. Now I'm thinking about doing it a third time.

I bought a Sony A7R II in late 2016 with the cheap 50mm Sony has. Thought I'd like it, but I ended up hating it, so I got rid of it. Then last year I did the same with buying the A7R II again, except this time, used it my Canon 24-70 with the Metabones V adapter. Kept it a bit longer this time but still somewhat hated it. The lack of lens profiling made it annoying to use, and the autofocus was slow, the battery life sucks. I ended up getting rid of it for the 5D4.

In comes the A7 III. I'm now thinking about dropping Canon for the new release. Again, I'd be adapting my current Canon lineup. Now that battery life is a bit more competitive, and the *supposedly* the autofocus is faster with adapted lenses, I'm hoping it'll be something I stick with for a period of time. However, having previously gone from a 5DIII to a 5DIV, I'm not sure how I'll feel going back down to 5DIII resolution. I'm spoiled by the 5DIV in that regard. I owned a 5DSR somewhere inbetween, which really spoiled me.

Another camera on my plate of potential choices is the A7R III. I'm not sure what the difference is between the A7III and A7RIII aside from resolution, so that's something I'm looking to narrow down on. Versatility is a priority for me because I do lots of different types of shooting. I prefer portraiture, but my camera ends up being used for everything, landscapes included. I've heard the A7RIII viewfinder is better than the A7III, along with the display screen. That's important because in the past year, despite my young age, I've needed to start wearing glasses and it seems my eyesight is becoming progressively worse.

I'd like some input from you guys!

It sounds like the a7r3 would be the better choice of the two sonys for your use. However the main thing sony offers over canon 5d4 is eye af and higher megapixels. If that is a neccessity to you then switch. Otherwise i dont see why you just dont keep your 5d4

Rent one....

I’d need to rent it for a solid month to know whether or not I’d truly like it, and that’s not exactly an option for me at the moment financially speaking.

I know Sony has truly met the needs and expectations of a lot of users, but I couldn't help but chuckle when seeing your thread title. I enjoy photography as a hobby (I mostly do it for a paycheck) but I am not interested in working with, or around, problems of a system that by most accounts is still being developed as they go.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1493654

^ a new Sony user experiencing focus issues with native lenses

I appreciate Sony and the early adopters pushing the industry forward, but even with some of the legacy constraints of Canon, I prefer knowing that what I am getting is fully evolved.

Why do you want to switch to Sony if you're happy with 5DIV? What is it in 5DIV that you don't like to make you switch to sony?

So many are constantly in search of the holy grail.

Regardless of what system someone is shooting, new hardware from this or that manufacturer and their heads are turned.

"....ooo.....look at that...it does this and that and has all these cool things....it's bigger, better, faster....'...blah, blah, blah.....

For many, this will never stop. I feel sorry for those that are not and will never be satisfied with their hardware and can therefore concentrate on the great enjoyment that can be had from this hobby.

saea501 wrote in post #18586922
So many are constantly in search of the holy grail.

Regardless of what system someone is shooting, new hardware from this or that manufacturer and their heads are turned.

"....ooo.....look at that...it does this and that and has all these cool things....it's bigger, better, faster....'...blah, blah, blah.....

For many, this will never stop. I feel sorry for those that are not and will never be satisfied with their hardware and can therefore concentrate on the great enjoyment that can be had from this hobby.

You've said an important thing there. I've been looking for some new glass recently and going through the sample galleries there is a good representation of Canon bodies of course but many using other bodies through adaptation as well. The best photos always have to do with lighting, subject, composition, etc. and nothing to do with the camera. I'm surprised at how often I look at a page with shots from 5D4s, 1DXII, Sony a7riii or a9s and the best of the page is from a 7D2, 80D, etc. This constant grind and angst about gear just shows how powerful the advertising toolboxes of corporations are. People make huge shows about changing systems only to turn around and post shots that are indistinguishable from their old gear. It's crazy. Buying a new camera because you have the funds and love the gadgetry is one thing but thinking you're going to become a better photographer with it is something else altogether.

OP- Knowing nothing else other than what you've said here I think if there is a financial issue with a 1 month rental you would be wise to be more conservative than considering a switch unless you've found a way to monetize on it.

Op,

Have you gone to a Sony demo?? No charge while you navigate the body.

Sigma adapter with canon glass was extremely responsive when I tested it. Felt equally responsive as my 5d3/4.

Native glass is the logical way to go but the latest af is a great bridge to canon.

Either go bulky or smaller native glass depending what you need. You have two options with Sony. My 5d4 is always large.

I won’t sell my canon for a while. I will experiment with Sony for a while.

It’s aboit what you think ....not others

The GAS is strong with this one as well.

Confucius say: Man with GAS has empty pocket.

FarmerTed1971 wrote in post #18586962
The GAS is strong with this one as well.

Confucius say: Man with GAS has empty pocket.

Eye af on demand by activating it by pushing a button is a powerful tool.

Nothing is perfect but tools are as good as the operator. “Better” tools simply makes a skilled photographer even better in many ways.

Sony eye focus is better than my 5d4. I will be having fun testing it myself.

I will not be selling my canon gear anytime soon though.

Confucius was not around when the Sony eye AF became a potent technology or when their glass lineup evolved with even more glass from 3rd party sigma

monty28428 wrote in post #18586820
Rent one....

.

quadwing wrote in post #18586832
I’d need to rent it for a solid month to know whether or not I’d truly like it, and that’s not exactly an option for me at the moment financially speaking.

.

nqjudo wrote in post #18586934
OP- Knowing nothing else other than what you've said here I think if there is a financial issue with a 1 month rental you would be wise to be more conservative than considering a switch unless you've found a way to monetize on it.

.
I'm with the OP on this issue.

Some people suggest a rental as an economical way of testing out a camera or a lens to see if it works for them. I have always considered this to be foolish advice.

Why? . Two reasons:

1: .. As the OP said, for many of us, it takes weeks and weeks of using a piece of gear to figure out if it is something that will work for you or not. . I have had my 6D for over 7 weeks now, and run thousands upon thousands of images through it in that time, and I still am not familiar with the camera enough to know if it will meet my needs long-term.

2: .. Renting is not economical at all. . Rental rates are preposterously expensive. . Much unlike renting a car or a piece of heavy equipment, or even a home or an apartment, the rental rate for camera gear is actually a significant percentage of the gear's total value. . One can buy a piece of gear used, use it for a few months, and then sell it, often for a little more than one paid for it, so that the shipping and PayPal fees are recovered. . So you can basically "rent" the gear for a long period of time and have it cost you nothing (except the 'loss' of the principle for a period of time - but you get that back so who cares?)


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18586989
.

.

.
I'm with the OP on this issue.

Some people suggest a rental as an economical way of testing out a camera or a lens to see if it works for them. I have always considered this to be foolish advice.

Why? . Two reasons:

1: .. As the OP said, for many of us, it takes weeks and weeks of using a piece of gear to figure out if it is something that will work for you or not. . I have had my 6D for over 7 weeks now, and run thousands upon thousands of images through it in that time, and I still am not familiar with the camera enough to know if it will meet my needs long-term.

2: .. Renting is not economical at all. . Rental rates are preposterously expensive. . Much unlike renting a car or a piece of heavy equipment, or even a home or an apartment, the rental rate for camera gear is actually a significant percentage of the gear's total value. . One can buy a piece of gear used, use it for a few months, and then sell it, often for a little more than one paid for it, so that the shipping and PayPal fees are recovered. . So you can basically "rent" the gear for a long period of time and have it cost you nothing (except the 'loss' of the principle for a period of time - but you get that back so who cares?)

.

locally I can rent for a long period of time. I can use the cost of the rental as a credit to buy the actual camera !! it’s a total win-win .

I think he can tell immediately if you like or dislike the camera body .

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18586989
.

.

.
I'm with the OP on this issue.

Some people suggest a rental as an economical way of testing out a camera or a lens to see if it works for them. I have always considered this to be foolish advice.

Why? . Two reasons:

1: .. As the OP said, for many of us, it takes weeks and weeks of using a piece of gear to figure out if it is something that will work for you or not. . I have had my 6D for over 7 weeks now, and run thousands upon thousands of images through it in that time, and I still am not familiar with the camera enough to know if it will meet my needs long-term.

2: .. Renting is not economical at all. . Rental rates are preposterously expensive. . Much unlike renting a car or a piece of heavy equipment, or even a home or an apartment, the rental rate for camera gear is actually a significant percentage of the gear's total value. . One can buy a piece of gear used, use it for a few months, and then sell it, often for a little more than one paid for it, so that the shipping and PayPal fees are recovered. . So you can basically "rent" the gear for a long period of time and have it cost you nothing (except the 'loss' of the principle for a period of time - but you get that back so who cares?)

.

Tom - I think you misread me. I said the OP should NOT rent as he/she previously stated there were financial issues with doing so. For me, this also brings into question the rationale behind a potentially costly switch.

nqjudo wrote in post #18586998
Tom - I think you misread me. I said the OP should NOT rent as he/she previously stated there were financial issues with doing so. For me, this also brings into question the rationale behind a potentially costly switch.

.
I didn't misread you. . I totally 'get' that you were suggesting NOT to rent the camera. .But the reason that you suggested it seemed to be because you thought that if the (mere) cost of a month's rental was a stretch financially, then the purchase price is something that the OP may not be able to wisely afford.

My post was to counter that by making the point that rental rates are enormously huge sums of money paid for nothing, and whilst one may wisely buy a camera outright, renting a camera to try it out is financial foolishness.

.