This topic is in the 2023 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2023Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
p.9 #1Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
gunmetal wrote:
In my case I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 less because of this business decision.Fair. But now you're going to shoot fast primes on APSC? Seems like you could shoot equivalent full frame (f2, f2.8) and never have an issue with unsightly bokeh with the efcs. No?Been shooting my A7RIV in APS-C mode for a long time for portraits, love using my Batis 135mm at 202mm.
At ISO 100 an f 2 lens wide open will need 1/4,000ss on a “sunny 16” day, FF or APS-C it doesn’t matter. f2.8 needs 1/2,000 and a f1.4 lens, like my 35 & 50 GM, needs 1/8,000. The issue starts to appear at 1/1,000ss, so it remains- The slightly added DOF is not going to change the distant (bad) bokeh I feelBut shooting in APSC mode on a full frame camera isn't the same in terms of DOF as shooting on an APSC sensor (It's just a crop on the existing full frame image). My point was that by using the 6700 you're effectively stopping the lenses down in regards to DOF. I think. 
. I mean if you have a F1.8 FF lens on the 6700, you're getting the DOF/Bokeh of about F2.8, right? My line of thinking is that any negative effects would be significantly reduced because of the greater depth of field. But maybe it still would make it look wonky?!?! Anyhow, I'm not trying to be a nutjob (it just comes easy) and I respect your opinion and decision.No, this is not correct. By shooting in APS-C mode on a full-frame camera you get exactly the same depth of field as you would with an APS-C camera with the same lens and aperture. The increase in depth of field compared to full-frame at the same aperture is because you would need to use a 1.5x longer focal length lens on the full-frame camera to get the same field of view.Not if you keep subject magnification the same. In other words, if you're shooting a 50mm 1.8 on a FF and then switch to APSC mode, you would need to move back or have the subject move away in order to get the same subject magnification. As a result your DOF would be similar to a 2.8. No?
No.
Magnification is the ratio of the size of the image on the sensor to the actual size of the subject. It is not the size relative to the size of the sensor.
You should look at the concept of "Equivalence": http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/
ilkka_nissila wrote
gunmetal wrote
SpecFoto wrote
gunmetal wrote
SpecFoto wrote
And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.In my case I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 less because of this business decision.
At ISO 100 an f 2 lens wide open will need 1/4,000ss on a “sunny 16” day, FF or APS-C it doesn’t matter. f2.8 needs 1/2,000 and a f1.4 lens, like my 35 & 50 GM, needs 1/8,000. The issue starts to appear at 1/1,000ss, so it remains- The slightly added DOF is not going to change the distant (bad) bokeh I feel
. I mean if you have a F1.8 FF lens on the 6700, you're getting the DOF/Bokeh of about F2.8, right? My line of thinking is that any negative effects would be significantly reduced because of the greater depth of field. But maybe it still would make it look wonky?!?! Anyhow, I'm not trying to be a nutjob (it just comes easy) and I respect your opinion and decision.No.
Magnification is the ratio of the size of the image on the sensor to the actual size of the subject. It is not the size relative to the size of the sensor.
You should look at the concept of "Equivalence": http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/
Sep 05, 2023 at 03:36 PM
p.9 #2Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
wind30 wrote:
? Isn’t the way to make a strong subject to remove distracting stuff from the frame?
Half moon bokeh looks weird to me and distracting…..
I guess some people tend to forget we don't always have complete control over the composition but still want to take that picture, so large aperture is very helpful in creating that much needed separation...
Anyways, EFCS bokeh is one thing but 1/4000s max EFCS SS is another. Ironically for a "travel" cam, I see stoping down as the only way of reliably capturing non-distorted photos of my kids running around on the beach in full sun
...
? Isn’t the way to make a strong subject to remove distracting stuff from the frame? Half moon bokeh looks weird to me and distracting…..
I guess some people tend to forget we don't always have complete control over the composition but still want to take that picture, so large aperture is very helpful in creating that much needed separation...
Anyways, EFCS bokeh is one thing but 1/4000s max EFCS SS is another. Ironically for a "travel" cam, I see stoping down as the only way of reliably capturing non-distorted photos of my kids running around on the beach in full sun
...Sep 05, 2023 at 04:36 PM
p.9 #3Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
The subject of the photo is what should draw one’s eyes…not the out of focus background. If one looking at photos zeros in on the bikes, that tells me a lot about that person.It's very rarely one element that makes or breaks a given artwork, but all the little pieces that impact the overall impression. You can say the same thing with a slight change in aperture, shutter speed, noise level, resolution, color choice, change in pose, slight positioning of elements, and so forth.For me, the subject is the most important element in the photo. The out of focus background doesn’t even get noticed if the subject is strong. A weak subject might invite the viewer to start wandering into other aspects of the image.? Isn’t the way to make a strong subject to remove distracting stuff from the frame?
Half moon bokeh looks weird to me and distracting…..That’s one overly used method…but many times the surrounding environment adds to the image and provides actual context for the image. The total blurred out background shot could be taken anywhere…even your living room.
Overused forced bokeh looks boring to me.
I did not mean removing distractions by blurring it…. I meant it in the most general sense, anything distracting should be minimised.
When u are planning to shoot wide open, the intention is already there to blur the background and it does not help if u end up with half moon bokeh.
wind30 wrote
chez wrote
Eruditass wrote
chez wrote
Eruditass wrote
But that is the only way those poor YouTubers can survive! But well at least it helps gets the word out, and while it doesn't ruin photos, I do wish I knew about it earlier. While certainly not a common occurrence, it sucks because I can't go back and capture certain photos. Barely perceptible is a good qualifier for the average person/consumer of photos: on a forum where people closely analyze bokeh particularly in the transition zone and its level of structure, I'm not so sure.? Isn’t the way to make a strong subject to remove distracting stuff from the frame? Half moon bokeh looks weird to me and distracting…..
Overused forced bokeh looks boring to me.
I did not mean removing distractions by blurring it…. I meant it in the most general sense, anything distracting should be minimised.
When u are planning to shoot wide open, the intention is already there to blur the background and it does not help if u end up with half moon bokeh.
Sep 05, 2023 at 05:47 PM
p.9 #4Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
'EFCS Bokeh' deserves popularising, to be granted a place in the vocabulary. We can use it to disparage all bokeh that shows this undesirable (and often straight up ugly) effect, even on normal cameras or settings (as some lenses certainly do).
Sep 05, 2023 at 05:52 PM
p.9 #5Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
The corporate investors and management might think differently than you. At the end Sony’s responsibility is to its investors and not its customers or the market or the photography community. Sony has done what they think is the best tradeoff to meet their responsibilities. No camera is perfect. They made tradeoffs to price the A7CR $1000 USD below the A7RV. If I want all the features, like I do, I bought the A7RV. I can now buy it for much less and the only thing I have to compromise is size and weight. We all have to decide what is important to us.I mean not everything is about the money for the customer. Many are happy to pay more for more features.
I am not interested in a large camera. I don't care about what features it has. I am also not interested in a small camera, if it lacks the basic features that has been in digital cameras for decades (like a mechanical shutter). So Sony's strategy didn't work on me. Now they got zero sales instead of one.Given the poll in another thread shows 35% of the members that voted will be purchasing either the A7c or A7cr…I’m not sure Sony will miss your potential sale. 😊And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
Actually @chez, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
jaygould wrote
swldstn wrote
jaygould wrote
Not everything is about the money. Some people just want a small camera that can do it all. Would save me from owning multiple camera bodies. Unfortunately this camera isn't it because it doesn't have a mechanical shutter.Earlier quote
I bought the A7RV. I can now buy it for much less and the only thing I have to compromise is size and weight. We all have to decide what is important to us.I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
Actually @chez, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
Sep 05, 2023 at 08:28 PM
p.9 #6Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
SpecFoto wrote:
I mean not everything is about the money for the customer. Many are happy to pay more for more features.
I am not interested in a large camera. I don't care about what features it has. I am also not interested in a small camera, if it lacks the basic features that has been in digital cameras for decades (like a mechanical shutter). So Sony's strategy didn't work on me. Now they got zero sales instead of one.Given the poll in another thread shows 35% of the members that voted will be purchasing either the A7c or A7cr…I’m not sure Sony will miss your potential sale. 😊And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need...Show more →
I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years.
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
jaygould wrote
swldstn wrote
The corporate investors and management might think differently than you. At the end Sony’s responsibility is to its investors and not its customers or the market or the photography community. Sony has done what they think is the best tradeoff to meet their responsibilities. No camera is perfect. They made tradeoffs to price the A7CR $1000 USD below the A7RV. If I want all the features, like I do, I bought the A7RV. I can now buy it for much less and the only thing I have to compromise is size and weight. We all have to decide what is important to us.Earlier quote
I bought the A7RV. I can now buy it for much less and the only thing I have to compromise is size and weight. We all have to decide what is important to us.I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years.
Sep 05, 2023 at 09:30 PM
p.9 #7Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
lensfan wrote:
I am not interested in a large camera. I don't care about what features it has. I am also not interested in a small camera, if it lacks the basic features that has been in digital cameras for decades (like a mechanical shutter). So Sony's strategy didn't work on me. Now they got zero sales instead of one.Given the poll in another thread shows 35% of the members that voted will be purchasing either the A7c or A7cr…I’m not sure Sony will miss your potential sale. 😊And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years.
Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
jaygould wrote
I mean not everything is about the money for the customer. Many are happy to pay more for more features.I am not interested in a large camera. I don't care about what features it has. I am also not interested in a small camera, if it lacks the basic features that has been in digital cameras for decades (like a mechanical shutter). So Sony's strategy didn't work on me. Now they got zero sales instead of one.
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships"
...Sep 06, 2023 at 07:43 AM
p.9 #8Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
Isn't it funny how folks are complaining about weird bokeh pattern with EFCS but an older manual lens with weird looking bokeh is considered "character". 
Sep 06, 2023 at 12:48 PM
p.9 #9Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
j4nu wrote:
And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...
Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
Given the poll in another thread shows 35% of the members that voted will be purchasing either the A7c or A7cr…I’m not sure Sony will miss your potential sale. 😊I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.
Sep 06, 2023 at 01:09 PM
p.9 #10Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.
Well, I think there's a clear line between unrealistic expectations and lackluster support.
Sony didn't have to and chose not to provide software updates to their flagship, that were introduced in newer entry-level models. Even though this would most probably be a negligible cost to them as the whole current gen is built on the same base platform (similar cpu, etc.). The same way I can choose not to buy Sony stuff anymore .
Anyways, A1 is actually not the worst example in Sony's line-up, so there's that ...
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...Well, I think there's a clear line between unrealistic expectations and lackluster support.
Sony didn't have to and chose not to provide software updates to their flagship, that were introduced in newer entry-level models. Even though this would most probably be a negligible cost to them as the whole current gen is built on the same base platform (similar cpu, etc.). The same way I can choose not to buy Sony stuff anymore
.Anyways, A1 is actually not the worst example in Sony's line-up, so there's that
...Sep 06, 2023 at 02:30 PM
p.9 #11Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.
I think there is an Aesop's Fable about this.
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...I think there is an Aesop's Fable about this.
Sep 06, 2023 at 02:36 PM
p.9 #13Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
dclark wrote:
Magnification is the ratio of the size of the image on the sensor to the actual size of the subject. It is not the size relative to the size of the sensor.
False. There are multiple/infinite ways of defining magnification. As far as I have seen camera manufacturers universally use the crop factor when publishing magnifications for their small sensor compact cameras. Look up the specs for any of them.
Magnification is the ratio of the size of the image on the sensor to the actual size of the subject. It is not the size relative to the size of the sensor.
False. There are multiple/infinite ways of defining magnification. As far as I have seen camera manufacturers universally use the crop factor when publishing magnifications for their small sensor compact cameras. Look up the specs for any of them.
Sep 06, 2023 at 03:13 PM
p.9 #14Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
That’s what feeds this place
chez wrote:
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.
chez wrote:
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...Sep 06, 2023 at 04:41 PM
p.9 #15Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.
If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
SpecFoto wrote
And 65% of the people who voted in that thread decided NOT to buy the camera. Many who commented said it was because of missing features that they felt SHOULD have been in the cameras at the prices being charged. In my case I voted no because of the lack of the mechanical shutter.I want my 2nd smaller body to have a mechanical shutter. I shoot portraits with fast primes wide open in sunny conditions (I live in the desert) and long ago found out the EFCS in my A7RIV degraded the look. I have shot only with the mechanical shutter since when doing portraits, as it works best for me. Also at times I use high power OCF and I need the fastest flash sync shutter speed I can get. The A6700 is 1/200 vs 1/160 for the A7C new bodies.
Doesn’t mean that for 95% of others the lack of a mechanical shutter will be an issue, but for me it is, and people here need to quit dismissing it as a real issue just because it doesn't affect them.
So I decided to buy an A6700 instead. How is it that a brand new 2023 $1,400 body can have a full mechanical shutter but a $3,000 high res 2023 camera cannot? Doesn't make business sense to me and Sony got $1,600 from me less because of this business decision.
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.
Sep 06, 2023 at 04:56 PM
p.9 #16Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
swldstn wrote:
Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.Actually @chez@@@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.
Solution, buy only when you are better than your current equipment.
chez wrote
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
chez wrote
If that 35% is really true, that’s a huge percentage of people purchasing the camera. I would think the majority of people that voted no, they would have voted no irregardless of what features the camera had. They already have their gear and have no interest in more cameras.Well, you should be happy to have saved $1600…I don’t get your angst here if the $1400 camera meets your needs. Seems to me you would be throwing away $1600 on the A7cr if the a6700 fits your needs.
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...Solution, buy only when you are better than your current equipment.
Sep 06, 2023 at 05:02 PM
p.9 #17Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.Solution, buy only when you are better than your current equipment.
I already do that. The A1s are better at BIF, Wildlife, and Sports. Now they do events as well.
The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
swldstn wrote
chez wrote
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
SpecFoto wrote
Actually @chez@@@@@@, I was planning on getting the A7CR to replace my A7RIV, but the lack of a mechanical shutter killed that. In a previous post I mentioned I use the mechanical shutter for all my portrait photos and the reasons why. I would like to now use Sony for my travels, in lieu of my 11 year use of my Olympus M4/3 gear for travel, as I love the 61MP. I am 7 weeks into a 10 week trip to Thailand and my first go at overseas travel with my Sony gear. It has performed beautifully, but I need to cut some weight from the kit. Ideally I would have a A7RC (with mechanical shutter) and the A6700 as my 2nd/backup body. So no, an A6700 does not cover all my needs.By now adding the A6700 I will travel with it and the A7RIV on my next trip. Maybe in a couple of years Sony will add a mechanical shutter to V2 of the A7CR, and I will be first in line to buy it.
...I already do that. The A1s are better at BIF, Wildlife, and Sports. Now they do events as well.
The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
Sep 06, 2023 at 05:55 PM
p.9 #18Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
swldstn wrote:
Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.Solution, buy only when you are better than your current equipment.I already do that. The A1s are better at BIF, Wildlife, and Sports. Now they do events as well.
The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
Budgeting?
chez wrote
swldstn wrote
chez wrote
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. ...The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
Budgeting?
Sep 06, 2023 at 06:14 PM
p.9 #19Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
swldstn wrote:
Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.Solution, buy only when you are better than your current equipment.I already do that. The A1s are better at BIF, Wildlife, and Sports. Now they do events as well.
The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
Do you really think the A1 could not everything you want. Surely it can do landscapes, events and portraits. It can also be used for travel with an A7r2 or 3 for backup. Too me, it looks like you just like buying new gear.
chez wrote
swldstn wrote
chez wrote
j4nu wrote
lensfan wrote
I hope we will just get A1 II with all the perks from A1 and A7R5 and that would be it for years. ...The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
Do you really think the A1 could not everything you want. Surely it can do landscapes, events and portraits. It can also be used for travel with an A7r2 or 3 for backup. Too me, it looks like you just like buying new gear.
Sep 06, 2023 at 06:41 PM
p.9 #20Mark Galer's Video on EFCS On-or-Off
chez wrote:
...Yep, and a year later the A7r6 will emerge with some new features that will once again start the angst from the people that purchased the A2. It never fails…someone ( many ) are never happy with every new camera release.If we liked every camera I know I would not be able to afford to eat. I’m sure my wife hopes I only like one or two at most every three years. Currently have too many cameras and lenses and need to fix that. Problem is that if Sony made the perfect camera great for BIF, Wildlife, Landscapes, Architecture, Portraits, Travel, and Events I would only own two. Currently have 3x that many.Solution, buy only when you are better than your current equipment.I already do that. The A1s are better at BIF, Wildlife, and Sports. Now they do events as well.
The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?Do you really think the A1 could not everything you want. Surely it can do landscapes, events and portraits. It can also be used for travel with an A7r2 or 3 for backup. Too me, it looks like you just like buying new gear.
The A1 is a great camera and mine has a 200-600 and battery grip welded to it so it does not go traveling. Also don’t like to take a $6500 body on a trip. Like using bodies that cot $2000 or less. Just me on that. I enjoy the A7RV for landscape and architecture with the nice resolution and full mechanical shutter. Sure I own too much gear but not any fast cars or fancy boats to pour money into. Retired now
swldstn wrote
chez wrote
swldstn wrote
chez wrote
j4nu wrote
Yes, in 2 years for 2k $ more and will be supported as well and as long as all other Sony "flagships" ...The A7IV was great for travel and events,
The A7RV better for landscape, architecture, and portraits.
The A7C was better for travel because is ver potable
Now we have the A7C II and/or A7CR which I think will replace the A7 IV for travel if I can live with one card slot.
My son is the videographer with the A7SIII
Trying to see if an A6700 fits in as the second camera for travel.
What could I improve on?
The A1 is a great camera and mine has a 200-600 and battery grip welded to it so it does not go traveling. Also don’t like to take a $6500 body on a trip. Like using bodies that cot $2000 or less. Just me on that. I enjoy the A7RV for landscape and architecture with the nice resolution and full mechanical shutter. Sure I own too much gear but not any fast cars or fancy boats to pour money into. Retired now
Sep 06, 2023 at 06:49 PM