PHOTO ANTHEMS BLOG: Sony A7R

Showing posts with label Sony A7R. Show all posts

22 November 2013

Mind Set: Why I'm Opting for Fuji Over Sony Right Now

“I must have a prodigious amount of mind; it takes me as much as a week, sometimes, to make it up!”

― Mark Twain

I already teach, mentor, and coach photography and sometimes its cool to let people into my thinking process on what decisions I might make concerning photo related matters. In light of my recent post on the break-out game-changers in the soon to be released Sony A7 and A7R, I have chosen (after a few agonizing weeks) to curb my excitement on that system for a bit. Am I waiting to see what bugs they might need to work out? Not at all. This Sony system is the first camera that I have been totally convinced, sight-unseen, that I want in my bag. I've been waiting on it since Sony introduced the RX-1 and also, I've seen enough sample images to know I don't need to "try it out" first. The price point for both cameras are definitely doable considering the A7R is a thousand dollars less than my 36MP D800E when it first retailed and Sony also makes the sensor for it.

But here's where I had to hold my horses for a bit. I'm particular in how I shoot and my style dictates a priority on wide-angle and wide-aperture. So for now, lenses are the main reason I'm holding off. Sony has 2 lenses that will debut with the cameras in December and another one in Feb '15. The 35mm 2.8, the 55mm 1.8, and the 24-70 f/4. While the focal lengths are right up my alley, none of them give me the 1.4 that I so crave. Depth of field has been a signature and fave of mine for quite some time. I've already had to lament the sale of my Canon 85 1.2 last year, which I am still trying to get over. Nikon gives me 1.4 glass and I've been happy with that. Dammit, I'm not going 1.8 for my fastest glass. I'm not giving up any more aperture real estate for anybody. I'm a 1.4-man and that's just my prerogative. You dig? I know 1.8 is close to a 1.4. We are still talking a 2/3rds stop less. Not even a whole stop, I know. But I ain't doing it. I'm not giving up any more depth of field. Just ain't happening. I like my 1.4 glass and that's that.

I'm wanting to go small for my next excursion which I'll get into later on. When I choose gear, I'm making my choices against traveling criterion. Love my D800E, but this is an experiment. My next trip will be more documentary in nature than just fine art, (which I think I'll still be able to accomplish without as much resolution). The Sony system would be perfect with the right glass. In their defense, I would be able to use my current Nikon glass with an adapter. They handle Canon lenses with an adapter a little better than Nikon lenses, but I'm not up for adapters so much. Well, I make that statement with one exception, and that's Leica glass. Give me a 50 Summilux and a 35 Summicron and I'd be good with that on a A7R. Sony will support just about any lens manufacturer's glass with the right adapter. But NAH...I'll wait. If the 24-70 was at least 2.8, I'd probably still jump. But nope. It ain't. So I'm gonna practice patience and wait for what I want...the right Full Frame E-Mount glass or Leica glass.

So what am I opting for instead? Fujifilm...(which I have no clue why they don't drop the "film" part and just go with FUJI!) just released a new system themselves. The X-E2 was released yesterday and is a slight step up from its predecessor the X-E1. I like the rangefinder feel, which is going to make me more comfortable with the Leica M when I finally get it. I like the faster Auto Focus and despite the DX sensor size, I'm excited about Fuji's new X-Trans Sensor upgrade. For what I'm looking for, this will suite me. I'm getting it as a kit with the 18-55. Yes...anybody who knows me believes I hate that format, but this is not true. That's a nice focal range, though I might prefer a 16-50mm zoom. What I hate is Canon's 18-55mm crap plastic lens. The Fuji is a metal barreled marvel with a max f/stop of 2.8 to 4 on the far end. I can deal with that quality and speed. On top of that, I'm getting the 35mm 1.4 and with that, I can breath. So initially, I had resolved to just go with my 24-70 Tamron and my Nikon 50mm 1.4. Well, these two Fuji lenses give me that same format for a DX sensor camera. And I'm cool with that. I get a much smaller package, less expense than risking my big stuff, same focal range and speed, in a bad ass camera system. What more could I ask?

26 October 2013

The Right Tool... The Gear Loyalty Debate

"A camera is a tool for learning how to see without a camera."

~ Dorothea Lange

Yesterday, I was at B&C Camera listening to my buddy Rob, talk to a customer about cameras when presented with an inquiry about Canon cameras and Nikon gear. BTW, Rob spends more time at the camera shop than I do, so if you're lucky enough to catch him, he'll steer you right. Anyhoo... What was Rob's reply? "I don't concern myself with those questions. The cameras are tools. I primarily shoot Nikon, but my brother shoots Canon. But I will also shoot Canon, or Sony, or whatever I think I need to get the shot I want. I don't have an loyalties like that." Part of that is paraphrased, but that's the gist of his point as I can recall.

There are die-hard Chevy and Ford owners here in America. I'm sure you've been driving down the road at some point and see a Chevy truck with a sticker of a "Calvin"-looking figure urinating on a Ford logo (Right, Taylor!)...or vis versa. Ninety-Five percent of photographers are the same exact way. BUT MUCH WORSE! And to an extent, I understand there's a bona fide reason for it. Unlike auto owners, there's a significant investment in their gear that makes it difficult to switch brands. Yes, a car is a significant purchase. However, if you got tired of your Hyundai and wanted to switch to a Toyota, its a matter of choice for the next time you are ready to buy a car. Photographers have an additional consideration when the thought crosses their mind to switch camera manufacturers... Compatibility.

Anonymous model,
©2013 Terrell Neasley

Buying a camera is not the most significant purchase you will make. Its where it all begins, sure. But lenses are where the magic happens. On average, I would bet that a photog will spend about 3 times as much in lenses as they do a camera, especially if you are full-frame. On the flip side, you will spend more upgrading cameras then you probably will spend upgrading lenses. While I was Canon, my 5D MkII and my 7D bodies were maybe $3500 combined and that represented about a quarter of the value of my lenses. And this is where the hard part comes in. I made the decision to switch brands because my needs changed and the Nikon D800E served my purposes better than the upgrade to the MkII, the new 5D MkIII. Canon makes excellent products, so don't get me wrong. I was Canon for about 10 years. Love 'em. But what did that mean for me? I had to dump my significant investment in Canon lenses because they were not compatible with the Nikon body. I couldn't take my Canon lenses and use them on my new Nikon D800E. Not only that, my peripheral gear didn't work either. I had 5 Canon flashes. I had a Canon Intervalometer. I had radio triggers that only fit Canon gear. That gave me a new challenge. I had to find a way to sell my Canon gear for Nikon equivalents which aren't always doable. My Canon 85mm f/1.2L was the love of my life. Nikon doesn't make a 85 f/1.2! And then I found out AFTER I bought it that I didn't need the Nikon intervalometer, because the D800E has one BUILT-IN! So now I have an over-priced cable release.

Art Models, Alethea and Emma
©2013 Terrell Neasley

“People, there's no such thing as, THE BEST CAMERA BRAND, but yes there will always be THE BEST CAMERA AT ANY GIVEN TIME. Technology will change, but not art.”

― Ashraf Saharudin

So what's my point in all this? Well, its simple. The camera is a TOOL! Lenses and other camera accessories are tools as well. Unless you own stock in your camera brand, or they are paying you to use their gear, or you are dating/married to the daughter/son of a brand executive, why limit yourself? The right tool for the right job. Most guys have heard that said before who have grown up with their dads working the family car or adding the fixing a hole in the roof. And that's the same belief I carry with my gear. Yes, I own and work primarily with a Nikon camera and system. Last year, I was a 10-year Canon veteran. But as I mentioned in my last post about Sony, the A7R might be better suited for my travel work. And if I have a job tomorrow that requires low-light work, I might rent a Canon 5D Mark III because of its superior abilities in shooting at night. THAT's an option. Yes, the Nikon D4 is likely the best possible option out there for that, but its also a larger system and maybe I don't wanna be concerned with the extra weight. Regardless, its an option. I like options.

So here's the deal. Pick the right tool out of your tool box for the job, based on the results you are trying to achieve. I've talked before on picking your system of choice. Well, let me add this, if I didn't speak on it already. Make your selection based on the features that will best deliver the results you wish to achieve. That's how you choose a camera. There is no such thing as a "starter camera". Get what you need that will accomplish the job and fit your budget and make the system with will accommodate 60% of your work your primary system. Then rent the rest. I've even known some who refuse to commit either way. They don't own anything. When they get a gig, they rent what they need for that assignment. Now granted, this individual shoots primarily medium format high resolution images. So rather than invest $50 grand into a system, he just rents what he needs, adds the rental cost into the invoice, and pockets the profits. I'm not that extreme. I have to have something on hand at all times. Even if its just a point and shoot. I've done a pro gig for a client with a Canon Powershot S100, which shoots RAW. It was the right piece of gear for the job. And that's what's key.

22 October 2013

Game Changer...The Newest Sony Line

In my last post, I discussed some concepts in the evolution of photography and the transitions to come. This is another aspect of that change. Anyone who's paid attention to camera gear has, by now heard of the new Sony A7 & the A7R. These are the latest Mirrorless Cameras to be introduced and the first ones outside of Leica to incorporate Full Frame sensors. What's the significance of all this, you might ask? Well, its like this...

To date, camera manufacturers have integrated large and heavy camera bodies into their lines every since the first Single Lens Reflex or SLR was introduced in 1948. All this means is that your eye in the viewfinder was seeing exactly what the lens is seeing. Prior to this, it was impossible as the viewfinder was located either just above the lens (Twin Lens Reflex) or to the side of the lens (rangefinders). So there was no way to view the subject the same way it was being captured on the film. While there have been medium format SLRs, the SLR has been primarily the purview of the 35mm format systems. To be an SLR, there has to be only one optical view for both the lens and the viewfinder, which is accomplished with two revolutionary features built into cameras...a mirror that pops up and down, and a penta-prism (penta-mirror in some cases). However there was a trade-off. Incorporating those two engineered components required an increase in the size of the camera. This increase also added to the weight. Weight was considered a viable trade-off because of the added stability when the camera is hand-held as well as the camera becoming more durable with stronger housings and shells.

And this has been the case for years. If you want the best of images, the SLR was your answer. As of the last 15 years, the Digital SLR, or DSLR has been king. At of the turn of the century, as more digital cameras were becoming lighter, we saw more and more female photographers entering the industry. The best cameras used to be suited for the large hands of men who also had the stamina to handle the weight. Aluminum alloys became the norm for frames. Polycarbonate shells (thermoplastic polymers) added reasonable strength without the weight for many of the consumer model cameras. Weight became less problematic to a degree, but you still had to contend with the large mirror box housing which has a tendency to be noisy, cause vibrations (requiring the mirror lock-up feature), as well as putting restrictions on frame rate. Sony was first to come up with the SLT, Single Lens Translucent mirror design, but it never really became the game-changer.

There have been several new technologies that have come on the market in the last few years, which is another sign that the industry is ready for a new paradigm. Canon's Dual-Pixel Auto Focus system introduced in the EOS 70D was called a game-changer. Sony has introduced a lens to take pics without the camera with their QX system! But even Sony hasn't been the leader in mirrorless tech. That would instead be Olympus and Panasonic who have opted to combine technologies with their Mico Four-Thirds system sensors. And good Lord, they have caught on. The Olympus OMD-EM-5 hit the market to great fanfare just last year. A few months ago the introduced the OMD-EM-1. Nikon entered the market about 18 months ago with the Nikon 1 system. They havn't been as successful as Olympus who has chosen to forego their large DSLR line and put all their bank on the 4/3rds system. Canon was the industry lagger in this field and basically chose to BS with the EOS-M, which has really tanked. Rumor as it that they will try to make a comeback with a new version. Fujifilm is the other favorite contender with the X-series and the fixed lens X100s model.

Sony has come out blazing with 3 additional lines not including its DSLRs. The NEX-system has been absolutely killer. With several models, they all include DX-size sensors like what you have in the Nikon D7000 DSLR. Then they came out with a fixed lens Cybershot R-Line which introduced their first full frame sensor in a compact camera. And now they have announced the A7 and the A7R which comes out this December. The A7 is 24MP and the A7R is 36MP...just like my Nikon D800E, and it has the Antialias filter removed... just like my Nikon D800E, but at HALF the weight. And guess who made the sensor for my 36MP Nikon D800E... Yes, Sony.

Game changer? Yeah, I'd say so. I don't see Olympus abandoning their Micro 4/3rds systems in the near future, but I'm of the impression that Canon and Nikon are giving some serious looks to their R&D department heads. Is the Sony A7/A7R a DSLR-killer? Not quite yet. There are still necessities the mirrorless systems can't quite accommodate just yet. If you're a sports guy and need the frames per second, the DSLR is for you. If you're an avid outdoorsman needing the zoom beyond 300mm...DSLR. Or if you work much in extreme temperatures and harsh environmental conditions...DSLR. Wanna shoot WIDE open, like f/1.4...DSLR. But I would imagine those lenses are coming for the mirrorless systems. I'm sure speed will pick up. And the A7R is already weather sealed. Outside of those things, you can stay traditional, or give mirrorless a look, because it can pretty much hold its own in anything else. I know getting the Leica gear I want isn't as practical for my travel purposes at the moment. The A7R, however just might meet that need for now, however. Do I leave my D800E at home? I'm still thinking on that one.

Pages