Sony a7 iii - looks to be a game changer

[gambit57]

Sure, I'd be willing. Gotta give me some time though. I mostly use the camera for vacations and my next one isn't until September. I may do one in the summer though. That said, I'm coming from a D750 just like you, although I'd say I'm considerably less experienced so I'd bring the more newbie and more of a travel/family photo person rather than landscape, wildlife, portrait, etc (the more traditional pro or hardcore enthusiast categories).

 

I messed around with the settings a little last night. It's matching expectations set after I borrowed an A6000. Menu system is atrocious, but once you set it up, that my favorites menu setting and ability to set so many custom buttons means it's not a big deal. If you own it. If you rent, then it's a STEEP learning curve and I wouldn't recommend renting a Sony unless you tack on a lot of extra time to play with and get used to it. Assuming the dynamic range matches the D750 (and I've read it should beat it), I've got no regrets so far. Sony clearly has no photographers on their engineering/design team, but that's what you have to live with to get their incredible sensors in a mirrorless body size.

[havoc315]

Sure, I'd be willing. Gotta give me some time though. I mostly use the camera for vacations and my next one isn't until September. I may do one in the summer though. That said, I'm coming from a D750 just like you, although I'd say I'm considerably less experienced so I'd bring the more newbie and more of a travel/family photo person rather than landscape, wildlife, portrait, etc (the more traditional pro or hardcore enthusiast categories).

 

I messed around with the settings a little last night. It's matching expectations set after I borrowed an A6000. Menu system is atrocious, but once you set it up, that my favorites menu setting and ability to set so many custom buttons means it's not a big deal. If you own it. If you rent, then it's a STEEP learning curve and I wouldn't recommend renting a Sony unless you tack on a lot of extra time to play with and get used to it. Assuming the dynamic range matches the D750 (and I've read it should beat it), I've got no regrets so far. Sony clearly has no photographers on their engineering/design team, but that's what you have to live with to get their incredible sensors in a mirrorless body size.

 

Agree with all that.... where can I email you a bit of a survey? Feel free to email me at picklepiephoto@gmail.com

 

I don't think you will notice any significant IQ improvement over the D750 except maybe at very high ISO . But I doubt it will be an IQ downgrade at all. Still, the Sony raw files behave a bit differently than the Nikon raw files from the D750. The dynamic range is there, but I don't like pushing/pulling shadows or highlights in lightroom at +/- 100 on the Sony files, while I routinely did it with the Nikon files. It's just a difference in how the data reacts to adjustment. In other words, where on the D750 I might just lift shadows +100, on the Sony, I'm more likely to lift the shadows +90 and then lift the exposure a bit overall).

[pierces]

Well, that didn't take too long.

 

 

Links.

 

Wasabi power NP-FZ100 replacement batteries are available for pre-order.

 

Two battery kit with charger as well.

 

 

Sure glad I ordered my OEM extras two weeks ago....

 

 

Dave

[gambit57]

Agree with all that.... where can I email you a bit of a survey? Feel free to email me at picklepiephoto@gmail.com

 

I don't think you will notice any significant IQ improvement over the D750 except maybe at very high ISO . But I doubt it will be an IQ downgrade at all. Still, the Sony raw files behave a bit differently than the Nikon raw files from the D750. The dynamic range is there, but I don't like pushing/pulling shadows or highlights in lightroom at +/- 100 on the Sony files, while I routinely did it with the Nikon files. It's just a difference in how the data reacts to adjustment. In other words, where on the D750 I might just lift shadows +100, on the Sony, I'm more likely to lift the shadows +90 and then lift the exposure a bit overall).

 

Interesting. As long as there's no decrease, I'm ok. The D750 can see in the dark. At this point, sensors have gotten pretty ridiculous. If I can get usable images at even a stop better than the D750, I'll be really happy.

 

I primarily got the Sony for the size and autofocus. Wasn't thrilled with the autofocus on the D750, but didn't want to go crop with the D500 or really stay at a the dslr size. I'm not big. Smaller isn't uncomfortable to me.

 

Well, that didn't take too long.

 

 

Links.

 

Wasabi power NP-FZ100 replacement batteries are available for pre-order.

 

Two battery kit with charger as well.

 

 

Sure glad I ordered my OEM extras two weeks ago....

 

 

Dave

 

Excellent! I ordered screen protectors last night, but held off on the charger and extra batteries because I didn't like the (realistically) one option on Amazon for external chargers and no aftermarket at all for batteries. I wonder what took so long as the A7Riii uses the same battery and doesn't the A9 as well? Those have been out a decent amount of time. Been happy with my Wasabi battery kit for my GoPro.

[pierces]

Excellent! I ordered screen protectors last night, but held off on the charger and extra batteries because I didn't like the (realistically) one option on Amazon for external chargers and no aftermarket at all for batteries. I wonder what took so long as the A7Riii uses the same battery and doesn't the A9 as well? Those have been out a decent amount of time. Been happy with my Wasabi battery kit for my GoPro.

 

I ordered one of the chargers with my OEM batteries and it charged them just fine. The indicator lights are red while charging and go green when the batteries are full and it drops to a trickle. It took about six hours plugged into a generic Anker multi-port charger..

 

I imagine the delay was a licensing issue or a reverse engineering of the info-Lithium technology. It took a fair amount of time for the NPFW50 clones to show up..

 

Dave

[zackiedawg]

I ordered one of the chargers with my OEM batteries and it charged them just fine. The indicator lights are red while charging and go green when the batteries are full and it drops to a trickle. It took about six hours plugged into a generic Anker multi-port charger..

 

Do the clone batteries in this case report the InfoLithium information to the battery remaining meter with full %, or just the little battery bar?

Most of the third-party batteries I've used, whether for the A580 or the A6300, lose the percent remaining meter - not the end of the world, but annoying. Sony shooters get spoiled by having that ability which I find much more useful than 4 little LED bars.

[pierces]

Do the clone batteries in this case report the InfoLithium information to the battery remaining meter with full %, or just the little battery bar?

Most of the third-party batteries I've used, whether for the A580 or the A6300, lose the percent remaining meter - not the end of the world, but annoying. Sony shooters get spoiled by having that ability which I find much more useful than 4 little LED bars.

 

Both my Wasabi and Vivitar NP-FW50s show percentage left. I had a pair of real cheapos that came with a charger that did not. They also self-discharged at a rapid rate leading me to believe they were NiCd and not Lithium.

 

The Wasabi and Vivitar units seem to work exactly like the OEM.

 

 

Dave

[pierces]

Amazon cancelled my A7III body order.

 

Dave

[havoc315]

Amazon cancelled my A7III body order.

 

Dave

 

..... that's odd? any explanation?

[pierces]

..... that's odd? any explanation?

 

 

Yeah...I asked them to.

 

 

'CAUSE B&H HAD STOCK AT 3:11 AM THIS MORNING!

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

 

Anyone need a "like new" 28-70 kit lens?

 

 

Dave

[pierces]

Manual is now available for download:

 

https://docs.sony.com/release//Manual_4732950111.pdf

 

Light reading for the weekend.

 

Dave

[gambit57]

What lenses did you have with the Nikon D750?

 

Finished your survey, although a bit more time may fine tune my answers. Just got lens and been playing with the camera for a couple nights now. Hoping to go on a hike this weekend. Still, nothing was a real surprise.

 

With the D750, I have the 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II, and 50mm f/1.4 D. Had a few more DX lenses back in the day, but the only memorable one was the 18-200mm VR. I loved that lens. Yes, it didn't match the IQ or low light performance, but as a travel lens, it was awesome. And if I'm honest, I'm really just a travel photographer.

 

The Wasabi and Vivitar units seem to work exactly like the OEM.

 

Just wanted to say that on my GoPro, the Wasabi has the little black tags to help you pull the battery out of the GoPro facing the opposite way from stock. Makes it much harder to grab as the door is in the way. Otherwise, they act just like stock. Not a huge deal, but a tiny change that could make a huge difference in perception.

[zackiedawg]

Both my Wasabi and Vivitar NP-FW50s show percentage left. I had a pair of real cheapos that came with a charger that did not. They also self-discharged at a rapid rate leading me to believe they were NiCd and not Lithium.

 

The Wasabi and Vivitar units seem to work exactly like the OEM.

 

 

Dave

 

I have an unknown brand extra battery for my A580/A68 cameras - a friend who sold his camera and didn't need it gave it to me - it seems to hold a charge about the same as factory, but doesn't report the %. It's not Wasabi. That same friend has a few replacement FW50s he uses - called something like BM...those don't report % either, though when I looked up that brand, they claim their newer ones have the proper chips to show % remaining...so maybe it's becoming more common with the 3rd parties now.

[havoc315]

Yeah...I asked them to.

 

 

'CAUSE B&H HAD STOCK AT 3:11 AM THIS MORNING!

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

 

Anyone need a "like new" 28-70 kit lens?

 

 

Dave

 

lol, congrats!

 

You may as well keep the 28-70 until you get your 24-105.

[havoc315]

Finished your survey, although a bit more time may fine tune my answers. Just got lens and been playing with the camera for a couple nights now. Hoping to go on a hike this weekend. Still, nothing was a real surprise.

 

 

Received... great answers. 2 interviews done... 2 to go...

[pierces]

You may as well keep the 28-70 until you get your 24-105.

 

 

That's the plan.

 

Sort of considering selling the 18-105 too but maybe I'll keep it as the alternate body lens when the (future) telephoto is on the "big" camera.

 

Looks like my road to full-frame has a few miles left to travel.

 

Dave

[havoc315]

That's the plan.

 

Sort of considering selling the 18-105 too but maybe I'll keep it as the alternate body lens when the (future) telephoto is on the "big" camera.

 

Looks like my road to full-frame has a few miles left to travel.

 

Dave

 

I got rid of all my aps-c lenses. But depends how you plan to use it. For me, it's relegated to pure backup duty, and maybe 2nd telephoto body, so I'll use the full frame lenses on it.

[pierces]

I got rid of all my aps-c lenses. But depends how you plan to use it. For me, it's relegated to pure backup duty, and maybe 2nd telephoto body, so I'll use the full frame lenses on it.

 

When out and about specifically for photos, I always take a second camera with a complimentary lens mounted. That's why my 4-year-old A6000 ended up taking about 25% of the shots on my last cruise. In that context, the 18-105 would do well for days when the A7 is on telephoto duty.

 

I will not be buying any mainstream APS-C lenses in the future. I might pick up some fun stuff like the Laowa 9mm Zero-D or maybe trade in the 18-105 on the smaller 18-135 but my plans for the near future all involve FF lenses.

 

Dave

[gambit57]

Congrats, Dave! I'm loving the A7iii so far. Will take some time to get dialed in, but that's to be expected.

 

On a sad note, my 24-70 has a slight ding on it. Probably going to have to exchange it. Might be out for a while unless I can convince them to send me a replacement first before I send back the damaged one. Anyone know how Adorama's customer service is?

 

Peak Design sent me my replacement backpack first, but a $300 backpack is a lot different than a $2200 lens.

[pierces]

Soon I will be the owner of an FE 28-70 kit zoom. Because I didn't expect to own one, I didn't do any research on it prior to ordering. I guess, technically, I didn't order one since it's just in the box with the camera that I did order.

 

Here's what I found:

 

The people who reviewed this lens and posted real-world images of real things that you would take real pictures of found it to be a capable, not perfect, kit zoom. It has very good central sharpness with some softening towards the edges, some flare and minor vignetting. Surprisingly, they all agreed that while it wasn't as good as the alternatives that cost three to four times as much, it was perfectly capable of delivering excellent images in the hands of a capable photographer.

 

People that reviewed this lens and posted pictures of bookcases, CD collections and brick walls with 200% crops showing corner softness did not like this lens. Surprisingly they all suggested buying one of the alternatives that cost three to four times as much because it was impossible to produce a tack sharp picture of a bookcase, CD collection or brick wall with it.

 

In today's world where we have the technology to assess the optical quality of lenses in microscopic detail, we tend to forget that in the end, it's the picture that matters. Some of the most iconic photos from the last century were taken with cameras and lenses that would be pure crap in the eyes of today's desk chair "experts".

 

The 16-50 PZ kit lens for APS-C received much the same negative assessment while I found it to be a capable, not perfect, compact travel lens. So, based on what I saw, I'm going to give this lens a chance and post my impressions and samples of my own. Who knows, it may be worth keeping as a compact alternative. Especially for the ridiculous $200 I ended up paying for it.

 

To be continued...

 

 

Dave

[havoc315]

Soon I will be the owner of an FE 28-70 kit zoom. Because I didn't expect to own one, I didn't do any research on it prior to ordering. I guess, technically, I didn't order one since it's just in the box with the camera that I did order.

 

Here's what I found:

 

The people who reviewed this lens and posted real-world images of real things that you would take real pictures of found it to be a capable, not perfect, kit zoom. It has very good central sharpness with some softening towards the edges, some flare and minor vignetting. Surprisingly, they all agreed that while it wasn't as good as the alternatives that cost three to four times as much, it was perfectly capable of delivering excellent images in the hands of a capable photographer.

 

People that reviewed this lens and posted pictures of bookcases, CD collections and brick walls with 200% crops showing corner softness did not like this lens. Surprisingly they all suggested buying one of the alternatives that cost three to four times as much because it was impossible to produce a tack sharp picture of a bookcase, CD collection or brick wall with it.

 

In today's world where we have the technology to assess the optical quality of lenses in microscopic detail, we tend to forget that in the end, it's the picture that matters. Some of the most iconic photos from the last century were taken with cameras and lenses that would be pure crap in the eyes of today's desk chair "experts".

 

The 16-50 PZ kit lens for APS-C received much the same negative assessment while I found it to be a capable, not perfect, compact travel lens. So, based on what I saw, I'm going to give this lens a chance and post my impressions and samples of my own. Who knows, it may be worth keeping as a compact alternative. Especially for the ridiculous $200 I ended up paying for it.

 

To be continued...

 

 

Dave

 

Excellent points.... but I really didn’t like the 16-50.

 

But here’s the thing...

 

Everything you said is true. But by the logic, it’s the reason to just stick to good smart phones.

As the photography technology advances, you get the very good 4x6 or web image out of any lens —- and any camera.

So yes — the cheaper lens can produce very good real world photos. And so can a cheaper camera.

More and more — enthusiast photography is about things that only matter to the photo enthusiast.

 

But it is very much diminishing returns. A lens that costs five times as much will not produce photos that are five times better.

 

Anyway, eventually I’ll test the 28-70. But it’s always been my understanding that it’s a perfectly capable kit lens.

[gambit57]

I'm in the boat that doesn't like the 16-50 PZ. That's the kit lens on the A6000, right?

 

It takes acceptable photos. However, it doesn't beat my iPhone. A lens has to be able to create photos that surpass what I can take with an iPhone, otherwise, what's the point of carrying an extra camera and gear?

[pierces]

Most people who dislike the 16-50 formed their opinion by hearsay and the aforementioned 200% corner crops on a blog. I came to appreciate its compactness and found that if you work within it's limitations, it can produce far better than 4x6 web shots. Quite honestly, these look much better on my 1440p monitor than they do in reduced resolution posts.

 

Here's an example of why I like it. Limited luggage on a business trip. Lens and camera fit into coat pocket. Not using a phone, so I could fire the flash while standing under an overhang and illuminate the falling snow. (Won the company's Chicago Sights photo contest with a 20x24 of this one.)

 

Walkabout on a shore excursion with an ultrawide on the other camera. Compact lens and camera fit in waist pack and I shot this at 50mm as wide open as it would go. Soft corners don't matter much if you're not shooting something flat.

 

 

Family event with no desire to carry my DSLR (still using the A77 back then) but with the 16-50 on the NEX-7, I was able to catch this impromptu smooch between my grandson and niece. Again, I'll point out that compact and handy in every case will trump large, perfect and sitting eight miles away at home.

 

 

The oil bottle wall at the Radiator Springs Racers ride at Disney's California Adventure. Day at Disney when riding a bunch of rides is no place for big gear.

 

 

Morning deck walk to get fancy coffee from the Diamond Lounge. Little camera with little lens in cargo shorts pocket.

 

 

I don't disagree with any of your points and you opinions are not without value. However, shooting with less expensive equipment doesn't mean you can't get great shots and face it, a lot of people can't afford top notch gear. If everybody could afford it and it was the only way to get a good picture, that's all they would sell. I don't embrace the 16-50's imperfections, I just may be a little less critical of them and willing to work through them. Because I will use a reviled lens on a lowly APS-C camera to shoot because it's convenient doesn't mean I won't love using an expensive G lens on full-frame when the situation permits. As for shooting with a phone, I don't shoot much with my phone because it is fumbly, not because the Pixel's camera isn't rather incredible. (Though I'm getting better at it and don't carry as P&S at all anymore.) As good as my phone is, in dim light or trying to isolate an object with focus, it doesn't hold a candle (low light pun) to an APS-C Alpha with the kit zoom.

 

I am so looking forward to shooting with my A7 III and the 24-105G but no matter how much I love it, it will not fit in my cargo pants pocket, (at least not pants I would wear) and the picture I take will always be better than the one I didn't.

 

I really didn't mean to run on this much...sorry about that. :)

 

 

 

Dave

[gambit57]

I didn't think you ran on at all. Lovely photos, and matched perfectly with your argument. I don't disagree. It falls into the "you can make incredible photos with any camera" argument. Provided you've got the skill lol. Particularly for travel, I actually still recommend the a6000 and kit lens to most people I know.

 

I dunno about the corner cropping you're talking about. I don't pixel peep like that or read blogs that focus on that (dpreview?) I've certainly got what I consider to be very beautiful pictures that I took with the a6000 and kit lens. It's just that I hit those limitations annoyingly early and to me, while INCREDIBLY light and compact compared to a full frame DSLR, it still wasn't pants pocketable. Still had a very small camera bag for it. Everyone's got different values and what they consider to be good "bang for the buck". To me, while I still like the a6000 body a lot, the kit lens doesn't hit a bang for the buck sweet spot in my own personal value system. I fully agree that it's a great option for many other people. I don't have a problem with kit lenses in general. I actually like and specifically bought the Nikon kit lens (vs getting it in a package) for its size, affordability, and abilities (albeit limited also).

[pierces]

Isn't reasonable, measured discourse awesome?

 

And yeah, dpreview. Which is pretty much the opposite of that.

 

The "great pictures with any camera" truism does have one big caveat that you stated more clearly than I did. While every camera and lens combo has a bang for the buck compnent, with a compromise solution like the 16-50 zoom the photographer needs to provide a larger proportion of the "bang".

 

And who knows? After a few weeks with the A7 III, I may end up buying those big cargo pants I alluded to previously. :D

 

Dave