DannyBurkPhoto Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I think that you and I are viewing this from the same point of view, so I'll throw in my thoughts. I'm strictly MF and shoot mainly landscape and flower closeup work. I've had an A7R2 since late 2015; when the "3" came out, I decided not to get it since it didn't have increased resolution.
A month ago, I decided to get the 3 after all. Many of the other features sounded nice, such as the improved EVF, better battery life, touch screen (really nice to select focus point) and although limited in usability, pixel shift. Another factor was that I was keeping a 5DSR sitting in the closet as a backup, and I wanted to sell it before it lost more value, and then turn the A7R2 into the backup. Other features of the 3, such as improved AF and frame rate, are useless to me and I basically ignore them.
Now that I have it, I like it a lot, and the features I've mentioned above (plus other minor points, such as a much better menu) are all nice to have. If I hadn't wanted to sell the Canon, I probably wouldn't have upgraded. All this to say...if the features I've mentioned sound like something that's important to you, get the 3. If you want to save quite a bit of $$ and omit a few niceties, the 2 will produce images that are just as good. Honestly, for the way that you and I shoot, there isn't a huge difference between them.
One more point. I agree regarding above comments on 21mm choices. Unless there's a reason why you prefer the C/Y rendering, the Loxia is certainly the better lens technically, and far lighter and easier to store in a bag too. I had a 21 ZE and replaced it with a Loxia when I bought the A7R2. I'm very happy with that choice and wouldn't go back.
|