24-70 CZ vs 16-50 SSM, A99 vs A77?

Quite the quandary.  I'd buy the 77 and Gary Friedman's book to learn photography.

Maybe you will find love and grow into fancy lenses and the a99.

if you are demanding and shooting for a career right away there remains the question of what do you use to edit on?

I don't think one needs pro lenses early on.

You must decide what in you budget will make you happy.

I don't remember my 19 yr olds asking questions like this, Dad was stupid and so ungroovy.  Wait the words like hip cool and groovy made me unlarge or something.

--
Retired forensic photographer.
London, Ontario, Canada.

Interesting to know what you see as limitations for you of the Nex-7. What is your experience with photography and equipment? And what is the field of photography you want to do? Without knowing it is hard to make a suggestion.

May I make a remark?

Regarding the title. When you go into macro your set will look different from the set for portrait, both will differ from the set for landscape, urban photography, studio, hiking, sports, birding, etcetera etcetera. These choices are fundamental. Also what quality you see. If in your eyes the Nex-7 kit-lens is good, why going to CZ straight away? That might be an investment in the same, where you can also use the money for a more versatile set.

Without such questions answered it is have a base for a worthwile suggestion. When this is something you have to answer for yourself, I would say do not invest in expensive equipment. It took me a couple of years to find out what my "ideal" set is, for general purpose and hiking combined with the quality I want/see combioned with number of lenses I carry around combined with the ideal reach of zooms.

Peter

Well, the above is a good start cause you have clarified to yourself atleast you are going to stick with Sony?

The next you-yourself have to figure out whether you want crop or FF. Only you can decide this...

From my very limited experience of digital cameras, I can only humbly suggest this... once you decide which brand-system, then "buy the very best glass you can afford" - camera sensor tech gets outdated before most get to the end of the shutter life of the camera body, but one tends to hang onto the lenses...

If you plan on FF later down the path, keep in mind lens compatibility, FL, optical quality etc...

As for the computer, again only you know how useful a new one will be for you...

All the best with your new purchase - I'm sure you'll make the right decision for yourself...

Cheers

Rajeev

I am independent ad it's not about coolness

Yes, I consider A77 but then I think about the upgrading and it will cost more. Like, why not just get A99? It would save at least $1300.
And I use Light Room only.

You can always get the A77 master it and then sell it when ready for the upgrade. IMO

Limited choice of accessories. My experience is mostly events photography (some video). I guess with time when I have better skills and get some equipment I will also do studio sessions.

I know but you know I feel like I'm ready for next level. I know I can use CZ on nex-7 but using adapter but I am sure I can get better quality without adapter

I understand there is no such thing as "ideal set"... I guess I should rephrase it. What is financially wise set (considering the fact that upgrade will cost extra money)?

Sony is kind of a "golden middle" right now (technology/quality)

FF giving wider view and crop being cheaper.... I guess FF but again, crop is cheaper(I don't really need extra magnification)

I know! This is a huge factor! It may sound stupid but maybe if I get A99 with CZ and do my best to improve my skill I will get some kind of a job or start freelancing (which will help me to buy new macbook later)

Thank you But I just need advices from people who have real experience (who make money)

You can buy an A99 and use  a non FF 18-135  Sony lens, this gives very nice pictures, very sharp and amazing colors.

Yes! But upgrade will cost extra money and more time wasted (getting used to first and then second camera)
I will invest in some courses and there is a person who is ready to hire me (for free haha) as an assistant (kinda fair since I get real experience and maybe make some connections)

Go for the A99 and CZ2470.

--
Emmanuel
"A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger." - King Solomon

Congrats on the apprenticeship.

Not to be negative but the suggestion from G6 was a very good suggestion.  Your response back indicates you already have your mind set on full frame so why are you asking this question?  If you want the A99 and that is what you feel will make you happy, then don't waste money getting the A77.  Also, just so you know, the one thing you will find about photography is it is going to cost you money.  No matter what you get now, it is going to cost you money later.  Get what makes you happy now.  That would be my best advice to you.  Good luck with your quest.

--
Robb
http://www.rqifineart.com
_________________________________________
http://fmphoto.smugmug.com/photos/271414859_PD2m2-S.jpg
'Dancing through life......those who don't try, never look foolish'
NPS Member
NAPP/WPPI/NANPA Member
WSSA Member #76

I'd get the A77 + 16-50 + Friedmans book/Maybe LR4/more glass/flash.

The A99 is a nice camera but since you are just starting and the budget only allows one lens in addition I'd go with the A77. Even most pros wouldn't be limited by the A77 in any way.

Would be interesting to know how the NEX-7 is limiting you though. It is a very poweful tool and offers you the fantastic world of mf lenses which is a lot of fun.

The A99 might be flavour of the month at the moment because it has just been released, but it is expensive. It will also only have a lifespan of two or three years before Sony replaces it with a shiny new model.

Save yourself a bunch of cash and get the A77 + 16-50mm f2.8 instead. There is plenty of quality in the A77 to keep you more than happy whilst you learn the ins and outs of DSLR photography.

Wait for the next generation of hardware before deciding on whether, or not, to jump to full frame.

This my opinion. your budget is 2300 dollars.... the A99 with CZ 24-70 f/2.8 will cost you almost 5,000 dollars.. So why even consider it.? You are not financially ready for it.

ON the other hand, the A77 with Kit ( 16-50 f/2.8 ) will bring you 12 FF per sec, and an outrageously fun and feature packed camera. at a price right now at 1699. leaving with an excess of 600 to save toward a FF camera down the road...And with this purchase you have upped your game considerably... in my 50 years of shooting and 20 of that in digital, I can tell you that the A77 is the absolute best camera Ive ever owned... and the 15-50 f/2.8 is brilliant and In my opinion would be designated a " G" series Lens if it was Full Frame.. the camera and the lens fall into the weather resistant scheme design. If you were my grandson this is what I would suggest. You will be in the  high end game right away and don't have to wait in order to get the money ( an additional 2700 dollars ) and how long will it take you to get that.?

as far as the two lenses.. the CZ is not worth the extra 1300 dollars IMO. the 16-50 2.8 is short on the long end but still an extremely brilliant lens. @ 16 mm (24 mm in 35 mm trim ) its wide enough to do in door shots at 2.8. I use mine all the time.

Bottom line, given the money you have, I would jump on the A77 and 16-50 f/2.8 and be in the game in the next week. perfect for the holidays... You can use that extra 600 for  a nice flash HVL-58 no need for an adapter, and possibly the Vertical grip... Its nice to have an extra battery " In the camera " if you decide to do stills and movies at the same time, with no need to switch out batteries in the middle of a movie.

--
Bill aka EO

You didn't say anything about types of photography or shooting conditions. The a77 gives you must faster shooting (more frames per second) and effectively makes lenses be more telephoto, and makes macro photography more convenient. The a99 gives you several stops better low-light performance for when you shoot in dim rooms without a flash. If you were trying to shoot indoor sports or night rock concerts or something you'd want to get the a99 and a bright telephoto lens. If you do landscapes, need to hike or travel with the camera, or want a faster burst mode, the a77 could be a better fit for you.

I didn't even mention money in the pros and cons above, if you start doing professional work you can earn more money for all of the inevitable equipment upgrades that you are sure to need. If you're really in doubt about it, then the safer choice is the less expensive body, even if it becomes a back-up body for you in a future year.

--
Jeremy Birn

As for me, I invested on good lenses - 16-50,24-70cz,70-200g and eventually the 70-400G for my A57. Lenses are here to stay or a lifetime investments. I also have the 16-105,28-75 and 70-300G. The 28-75 and 70-300G by the way are for sale.

--
Emmanuel
"A gentle answer turns away wrath, But a harsh word stirs up anger." - King Solomon

The A77 is a terrific camera and the 16-50 is a great starting point. At current price levels with the ongoing US sale the A77 body is $1,700 cheaper than the A99 body. You could get some nice glass for the difference and start building up your kit. The A99 price will likely drop in the future while the A77 has had it's first drop already. Bodies are expendable, lenses tend to hold their value much better so that's where my money is. If you're not earning money with it or don't know what else to do with your money there is little objective reason to go with an FF body.