philip_pj Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Technically and (more so) in real world results, a7r is significantly stronger. Color, DR, ISO. Check for yourself, as an adjunct to commentary from people with leanings one way or another:
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A7-II-versus-Sony-A7R___996_917
I use the 24mp sensor (RX1, a99) along with a7r, results from the 36mp are noticeably better in terms of sparkle, richness, presence. All are good and the a7r is best/cleanest, easy to see upon RAW file opening. 24mp is as you say often good enough, but if you need to crop, or want better image quality, high res is a better option. Whatever lens you use, results will be better. See the FE thread (or my uploads from here) for examples, as the proof is in the pudding.
Sony say IBIS was first introduced on the a7 series (9 months earlier than a7rII) because it is an entry level camera series, designed for users with lower skill levels - who presumably need stabilization to a greater extent. IBIS sounds great but may not go the distance...Sony say they left it off the RX1 series to guarantee better image quality, a tolerance issue. I've *never* seen shutter shock at any s/s in hand held a7r imagery, over several thousands of images, I find it an easier camera to hold still than the RX1 (grip, heft). Nor is the mount a problem IF you use small-medium lenses and handle cameras with due care.
Maybe one way to see it is: if you favor sports sedans and have good driving skills get the a7r, if you need more weight/stabilization and like doodads, get a luxo sedan (II series). a7r is more of an enthusiast's camera, great for fine manual focus lenses. Ergo? Good enough, certainly, even for street work. I adapt to small things, like photographers have done forever. So that is the contrarian view, the other side of the coin regarding your choices. Always good to have both sides of a debate, right? cheers.
|