Sony a7rii ( ILCE-7RM2 )

Posted on
Page
of 3
/ 3
Last Next
  • Not sure if anyone else has one of these, I'm basically thinking about getting one as I'm fortunate enough to be able to receive a discount on the body and lens.

    The body I'm set on... it's going to be the a7r2 model:

    What I'm not yet decided on is the lens.

    I want a full-frame prime, and there's so much debate about it. There are three to choose from:

    This seems to be a choice between:

    • weight
    • does it have an aperture ring
    • roundness of bokeh
    • extreme sharpness
    • speed

    Here's the side-by-side comparison of those:
    https://www.dpreview.com/products/compar­e/side-by-side?products=sony_zeiss_fe_55­_1p8_za&products=sony_fe_50_1p4_za&produ­cts=sony_fe_35_1p4_za&sortDir=ascending

    I can only afford 1 lens, and can only get the discount once... so in some ways going expensive makes sense, but actually the Sonnar weighs the least... I'm leaning towards the Sonnar but could afford any.

  • So you don't want a free Nikon D80 with 50mm lens?

  • I shoot a Sony A7r (v1) with Canon glass. The only real issue I have is I lose an f-stop due to the metabones adapter. Normally I just keep a 17-35 f/2.8L on it, but also use 50 f/1.4L and 70->200 f/2.8L .

    I really whole heartily recommend the camera. If I was rich enough I'd trade mine in for the v2, as they fixed some issues I have (mainly autofocus).

    Re: the lenses, that's really a choice between a 35mm and a ~50. I find I shoot more ~35mm than 50 (hence the lens that lives on my camera)

  • Having got used to an aperture ring on all
    My lenses I would be loath to get a lens without.

  • I'm leaning towards the Sonnar but could afford any.

    Then I would get the Planar. Normally it wouldn't bother me the slightly wider aperture (especially when you are paying a bit more for it) , but the Sonar seems a bit flat compared to the Planar. For me, the weight would be less of an issue than having that nagging feeling that the other lens would take better pictures.

  • no, but I do... where?

  • I would totally without a doubt go for the 35mm 1.4. It's a brilliant lens. I love that focal length, not sure what kind of photography you're into, but i do street, documentary and portrait. I like using 35mm and 85mm they cover all the focal lengths i need.

    But there is a way to get two lenses. Sigma's 35mm 1.4 ART Sony version. Along with the Canon and Nikon versions It has attained legendary status by now i think, I've had a go with it and it's an incredible lens, it beats or matches any other lens at that focal length. Crucially you can pick it up new under a grand and second hand for about 600/ 700. That would free you up to get a second lens maybe?

    https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sigma-3­5mm-f1-4-dg-hsm/5

    https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sigma/Sig­ma-35mm-F14-DG-HSM-A-Sony

    I just got a Sony A7 II, i wish, wish i could afford for the A7R II. Good luck!

  • Metabones speedbooster will give you an extra stop!

    http://www.metabones.com/products/detail­s/MB_SPEF-E-BT3

    I just got the A7 II, and they're improved on the A7 so so much, they've fixed the issues everyone had with the A7, the ergonomics are so, so much better. And the autofocus is just ... out of this world, plus it's got that glorious 5 axis, in body stabilisation.

  • heh yeah sorry that's what I meant. I'm really considering the 2, but it's a large chunk of change to drop. I got the v1 for 50% on release due to a (mistake) deal Sony did for their staff.

    If they did a trade in for 50% off, I'd do it for the v2

  • Great camera, nice lenses!
    I've used the A7R2 a lot and train students to use our A7S2 cameras weekly (they do A LOT of video:-)
    For stills and video the A7R2 is brilliant, we use only use the A7S2 cameras because their main purpose is video in ambient to low light conditions, where it is great.

    Echoing what @lazysuperhero said, depends what type of shooting you prefer.
    If street and doc are your thing the 35 is pretty darn perfect.
    Out of the 50's I've been very impressed with the Sonnar, I haven't used the Planar though I have used it on film and found out there's a good reason it's famous:-)

    We send our kits out with a Metabones Sony-Canon EF adapter for use with Canon primes and EF cinema primes. That covers pretty much every sensible request.

    I haven't found the lack of aperture ring to be an issue myself, the front and rear dials feel naturally intuitive enough if you've used a Canon or Nikon SLR in the last 20 years.

    Not a fan of the Sony menus, though they haven't been a deal breaker.

    Hope that's of any use.

  • if you are shooting prime then have you considered RX1 r 2?

  • Really lovely camera, but for the price, wouldn't the A7R II be just as good (if not better) and more versatile?

  • oh I didnt know it was more expensive .. in that case A7R makes more sense. Zeiss makes some of the best lenses, I am currently loving my biogon 35 f/2.

  • heh yeah sorry that's what I meant. I'm really considering the 2, but it's a large chunk of change to drop. I got the v1 for 50% on release due to a (mistake) deal Sony did for their staff.

    Ah man if you can somehow swing it, i strongly recommend it. I been keeping an eye on ebay lately and the A7II goes for around 900 Second hand, low shutter count and good con, seen a few go for 850. Seen A7 go for around 500/600 So you might get a good price for it.

    In the end i managed to get a Buy Now Pay later credit thing and bought it brand new from Jessops for 1250, which seems to be the standard price with all online retailers.

  • Another compare point:
    https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/S­ide-by-side/Sony-FE-Carl-Zeiss-Sonnar-T-­STAR-55mm-F18-on-Sony-A7R-II-versus-Sony­-FE-Carl-Zeiss-Plannar-T-STAR-50mm-F14-Z­A-on-Sony-A7R-II-versus-Sony-FE-Carl-Zei­ss-Distagon-T-STAR-35mm-F14-ZA-on-Sony-A­7R-II__1252_1035_1725_1035_1518_1035

    Sonnar beats Plannar beats Distagon.

    But honestly, the DxOMarks are so close it's basically irrelevant.

    Sonnar is winning in my mind solely because of weight and nothing else.

    I mainly do architecture, landscape, and then portraits in low-light and close-ups under artificial light.

    The Plannar looks to be insanely sharp... but again, for the extra 500gm carried around all day is that really that much of a difference?

  • The camera is really well balanced with the Sonnar on, not heavy or big at all. The smaller I can make my kit the further I tend to travel...

  • I would get the Sonnar because you get a bit more focal length (which helps with the bokeh anyway) and it's rare you ever get to go down to 1.4 unless you're doing night time photography or something.

  • I had the 55 1.8 lens when i had the sony a7ii. Sharpest lens i ever used..

  • has this been resolved yet?

  • I'm going to get the Sony a7rii with the Sonnar lens.

    The Sonnar wins because:

    • Advantages of Planar design lend themselves to video which I'm less concerned about
    • Planar wins on SLR bodies because Sonnar glass tends to extends into the sensor chamber and so Sonnar is not as suitable for SLR but is in many ways more suitable for mirrorless (smaller lens for similar quality)
    • Sonnar only has a design disadvantage in relation to things that a lens designer can use to achieve a variety of goals... hence Planar traditionally wins because it permits more configurations and not because it is better
    • I'm more convinced by the bokeh and retro look of the Sonnar over the extra sharpness of the Planar (even though the Planar should in theory produce rounder bokeh due to the 11 blade aperture)
    • The Sonnar weighs less and I care about that

    The Distagon I ruled out as it's really there just for the wide angle, which does make it suitable for distance, video, etc... but doesn't bring much other advantages.

  • Did you get the A7Rii? If you're not in a hurry then maybe wait for the A9 when it comes out in June.

  • I'll be shooting stills over video and typically not sports/fast-action, the a7rii is still the far better camera for that.

    Besides, the price is almost double and the discount and wait time I'd get will be far less attractive.

  • Fair enough, I just find the only bad thing with the A series were the batteries and this newer version which apparently doubles the pervious gen was quite appealing. But as you're getting this on a discount you can just get a few more batteries on the side and save yourself a few quid over the A9.

  • And knowing sony they probably have the A9R around the corner as well. :/

  • Probably, but that will just drop the price of the a7rii even more. Which I'm fine with.

    I'm not in the market for the most expensive camera, just seeking to take a leap forward with what I'm using to upper-mid range. The a9 series look like it's pure pro focused.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Sony a7rii ( ILCE-7RM2 )

Posted by Avatar for Velocio @Velocio

Actions