New Gear : Sony a7R II (Part 2 of 2)
I' m just a few weeks late with the January blog, but for good reason. Last month, I got the Sony super- sharp 135mm f/1. 8 lens. I was also looking at which mirrorless camera body to complete my purchase; Sony' s A 7 III and A 7 R III were in the running. Then I went ahead and bought the A 7 R II. So, why the sudden change from my previous choices?
The three factors that convinced me, especially considering the A 7 R II is five years old, are:
1. The price- even used from B & H Photo, the A 7 R II was $ 1, 1000 cheaper than the A 7 R III and $500 less than a “new” A 7 III. It simply came down to what I could afford without breaking the bank.
2. NO LOW PASS FILTER! At least with the A 7 R II and III, there isn' t one. This will deliver a much sharper image, from what I' ve read. My Nikon D 800 has a low pass filter, so choosing the A 7 R II was a clear decision. I look forward to comparing the images to see the difference- maybe in the next blog.
3. Shutter count- although it wasn' t listed on the B & H Photo website (which is rare), I had to take a chance and hope for a lower shutter count, trusting that the previous owner took care of the camera body. The one I bought was listed as a 9 +. I wasn' t disappointed with either the condition of the camera or the shutter count, which I checked through shuttercounter. com after it arrived; the count is shown below.
I' m sure there are additional key features I used as deciding points, like Sony' s fantastic focusing system. The high resolution- both the AR 7 III and the A 7 R III- are quite comparable, but at the same time, they are different. Some features it lacks include a second memory card port, which, by the way, is UHS- I and not the faster UHS- II found in its predecessors. I can live with that. The number of images per battery charge is roughly 290 versus 650 from the A 7 R III. Since I no longer shoot fast action events, that wasn' t a deal breaker either. I' m happy with my first mirrorless camera. I posted a link below to show a more detailed look at the two.
The 3 factors that won me over, especially with the fact the A7R II is 5 years old are.
The price, even at “used” from B&H Photo, the A7R II was $1000 cheaper than the A7R III, and $500 less than a “new” A7 III. So simply it came down to what I could afford without breaking the bank.
NO LOW PASS FILTER!! at least with the A7R II & III, there isn’t one, This will yield a much sharper image; well from what I’ve read. My Nikon D800 has a low pass filter, so getting the A7R II was another clear choice. I look forward to comparing the images to see the difference. maybe the next blog.
Shutter count, though this was not listed on the B&H Photo web site ( rarely is if not at all) I just had to roll the dice and hope for a lower shutter count and the previous owner had taken care of the camera body, the one I bought was listed as a 9+. I was not disappointed on either, the condition of the camera or the shutter count as I was able to check it through shuttercounter.com when it arrived; the count is shown below.
I am sure there are a few more key features I used as deciding points, such as Sony’s amazing focusing system, The high resolution, both the AR7III and the A7RIII are really not that different in comparison but at the same time, they are. Some things it lacks are a second memory card port, which by the way is a UHS-I and not the faster USH-II found in its predecessors, I can deal with that. The images per battery charge is approximately 290 vs the 650 you’d get from the A7R III, since I no longer shoot fast action events anymore, that wasn’t a deal breaker either. I’m happy with my first mirrorless camera, I posted a link below to show a more detailed look at the 2.
