Random Photographer
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 321
- Reaction score
- 165
Goodbye AF :'(. But for $500 New + a couple of FD Manual focus lenses, I couldn't resist. Should be the same sensor, no? (albeit without the Nikon tweaks)
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
From D750 to A7
- Thread starter Random Photographer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nikon d750 sony a7
Stewart McKInlay
Forum Enthusiast
I hope you have kept the D750. The A7 is for sure a good picture taking device. The user experience not the image quality would be the niggle for me. The D750 is one of the finest cameras in the world, I am surprised at your move. Good luck with your new toy.
ImageAmateur
Veteran Member
Great deal, enjoy. On Amazon, A7 with 28-70 lens USD1,298. Just USD100 more than a D7200 body only.
So for non sports and wildlife folks, a very fine deal.
ArtAlt
Senior Member
OIY VEY.
They are different tools. I don't think one replaces the other.
Shooting a concert in low light you might be better off with an iPhone than an A7.
Shooting manual focus on a D750, or a stint at Guantanamo, that would be a tough call for me
Ok, well maybe I'm exaggerating just a little. A7 focus peaking brings back the pleasure of a manual focus lens, and many of them have a quirky beauty. D750 seems like it locks on focus instantly, always.... unless the subject is out side the AF portion of the panel.
I would toss a little A7 into my backpack on a day where I don't have a planned shoot. I carry my Nikon DSLR only for planned shoots.
Push comes to shove, the D750 gets more IQ out of that sensor than the A7 does, but either can be wonderful.
The lossy compression of the A7 RAW files will probably cost you more sleep than IQ.
Probably ;-)
ComPas
Well-known member
Right. And say hello for long row of additional batteries
I've replaced the A7II + 70-200 with D750 + 70-200 VRII and Sigma 150 for action/macro work
The A7s left with FD 35/2 and Bokina 90 and Zeiss 55/1.8 for anything else .
The Nikon has clear advantage with AF and working with CLS.
The A7s is stand-alone tool which out of competition for low light and manual lens with peaking.
The sensor is the same but handling is different, Sony RAW is limited and not actually "RAW" . It's compressed and you can do nothing with that
Random Photographer
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 321
- Reaction score
- 165
Well I tend to buy things and later realize that it may be a bit too much for my needs. I currently don't shoot for extended periods of time, nor do I shoot sports. Sure the D750 had a bit more "horsepower", but I'd rather drive a nice little sports car than drive a beefy truck for now
. As for ergonomics, the D750 was great. No lie. But EVFs are the future. Being able to zoom in and MF on the finest details with a VF is an experience that made the incredibly dim (relatively) OVF of the D750 seem ancient. "Your way is yours, and my way is mine".
Random Photographer
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 321
- Reaction score
- 165
Right. And say hello for long row of additional batteries
I've replaced the A7II + 70-200 with D750 + 70-200 VRII and Sigma 150 for action/macro work
The A7s left with FD 35/2 and Bokina 90 and Zeiss 55/1.8 for anything else .
The Nikon has clear advantage with AF and working with CLS.
The A7s is stand-alone tool which out of competition for low light and manual lens with peaking.
The sensor is the same but handling is different, Sony RAW is limited and not actually "RAW" . It's compressed and you can do nothing with that
sgoldswo
Veteran Member
No, not the same sensor. The D750 has better dynamic range and better high ISO results. Check DXOmark and run a comparison.
I ended up selling my A7 to fund a D750. I later purchased an A7 II to get for video. By far the better camera is the D750. The A7 has size on its size, but that's it. Re the EVF I agree it has some advantages, but after shooting solidly with EVF cameras for a year in 2012-13 and still keeping mirrorless cameras alongside DSLRs after that, I much prefer OVFs for the lack of lag and the clean representation of the scene.
DuxX
Senior Member
EVF is the last thing I would ever wish for. Running pixels and lag and nasty image noise stopping me to even think about "modern" way. But that is my opinion of course. I wish you luck with your new camera
Regards
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Dusko Jovic / DuxX /
Regards
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Dusko Jovic / DuxX /
Last edited:
aspalmat
Forum Enthusiast
I have a 750 and just bought a A6000, and then a A7.
I agree the image quality is better with the 750, but not by that much. Honestly, we are getting to the point where all of these camera's have image quality that's "good enough".
I will still use the 750 for indoor sports where focus and high iso are important. Otherwise, I'm going to be using the A7. After using the A7, the 750 feels like a brick in my hand.
There is a time and place for all of them.
I agree the image quality is better with the 750, but not by that much. Honestly, we are getting to the point where all of these camera's have image quality that's "good enough".
I will still use the 750 for indoor sports where focus and high iso are important. Otherwise, I'm going to be using the A7. After using the A7, the 750 feels like a brick in my hand.
There is a time and place for all of them.
michaeladawson
Forum Pro
Right. And say hello for long row of additional batteries
I've replaced the A7II + 70-200 with D750 + 70-200 VRII and Sigma 150 for action/macro work
The A7s left with FD 35/2 and Bokina 90 and Zeiss 55/1.8 for anything else .
The Nikon has clear advantage with AF and working with CLS.
The A7s is stand-alone tool which out of competition for low light and manual lens with peaking.
The sensor is the same but handling is different, Sony RAW is limited and not actually "RAW" . It's compressed and you can do nothing with that
rendra
Well-known member
Same sensor manufacturing (Sony).. different image processor that makes big difference imo.
N
neil holmes
Guest
sgoldswo
Veteran Member
If the D750 "feels like a brick in your hand" compared to the A7 that must be the most significant 300g known to man...
Seriously, there's a big difference in the output at high ISO or in contrasty conditions. If you don't realise it yet, try taking both cameras with you on a bright day or in low light.
Random Photographer
Forum Enthusiast
- Messages
- 321
- Reaction score
- 165
Yeah, I only look at the image, and not the label of the file. Again there are numerous threads about the differences. If you aren't diagnosed with OCD, or like to underexpose everything by 5 stops, you'll see no difference. I have both, and plenty of other cameras. Neither once did I ask my self, "hmm lemme check the number of bits of the raw file" before analyzing IQ. More is better, true. But insinuating that IQ can only taken seriously if its 14 bit is as dumb as saying real photographs are only taken by glass plate, large format photographers.You can't be much of a "sticker" for IQ if 11-bit lossy compressed RAW files are OK with you.The 11 (or is it 12 bit?) RAW is something that I am/was worried about, as I'm a stickler for IQ.Right. And say hello for long row of additional batteries
I've replaced the A7II + 70-200 with D750 + 70-200 VRII and Sigma 150 for action/macro work
The A7s left with FD 35/2 and Bokina 90 and Zeiss 55/1.8 for anything else .
The Nikon has clear advantage with AF and working with CLS.
The A7s is stand-alone tool which out of competition for low light and manual lens with peaking.
The sensor is the same but handling is different, Sony RAW is limited and not actually "RAW" . It's compressed and you can do nothing with that
--
Regards,
ComPas
I doubt it will.
--
Mike Dawson
DuxX
Senior Member
I think that all that thing about weight and size is highly overrated. A7II is somewhat heavier than the previous model. It is just 200gr less heavy than D750. Logically these 200 g shouldn't be a problem for any healthy person. + if you add here weight of adapter because most of A7 users need that thing, you are reaching the same weight like D750.
Then we come to the optics and optics should be the same size and weight because it is designed for the same sensor size, right?
So basically, we don't get nothing much if we put approximately the same sized optics on 200gr lighter body or not depends of adapter, right?
One more thing... If you use bigger and heavier optics it is much better balanced if you have slightly bigger and heavier body on the other side. Especially bigger so you can have more comfortable grip.
Regards
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Dusko Jovic / DuxX /
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum