A7 still a good option for landscape/architecture?

I'm currently considering a move to FF (from my current Nikon D5200).

My primary criteria are lowest weight (for hiking) and lowest cost for the best IQ possible. I shoot only raw, and print up to A3. My subjects are landscape and architecture and I rarely shoot in poor light, so I don't think that I need to be too bothered about image stabilisation, and I am ok to manual focus. I'm assuming that in reasonable level lighting, I can hand hold the A7 and maintain a reasonable shutter speed/aperture for low ISO and good depth of field on a landscape (without the need for extra stops afforded by IS).

The A7 is currently representing a significant bargain. I can get a new A7 + the 28-70 Sony kit lens for less than the price of the entry level D610 body alone (and far less than a D750 body).

I would then look to add one or two wide primes - perhaps the Samyang, or something else? Are there 3rd party options (Sigma?) in wide prime or wide zoom range that will also offer autofocus compatibility with the A7? I know that there are adapters that permit to mount older Canon (and others?) to E-mount.

Any thoughts and experience very much appreciated.

Only you can know what the balance between IQ, size and cost is for you. Personally, I would get an Olympus EM1 with the 12-40 to fit what you describe.

However my two options going out to shoot what you describe would be:





The used A7R has a better sensor than the A7 and the Canon 24mm TSE is a landscape and architecture lens. The DP1M has resolution and micro contrast to match the larger kit but of course it has poor DR and is noisy over ISO 100.

There are other differences.

Andrew

--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin

I use the A7 for backpacking it's great. Hardly I have used it with the 28-70 and 28 f2. I prefer using the 28 f2 for those trips. Just picked up the sel10-18 on the used market for $530 but haven't backpacked with it yet. Have only used it so far in my kitchen to document the remodeling I'm doing and it's looks great so far. Can't wait to backpack with it.

Golfhacker27 said:

I'm currently considering a move to FF (from my current Nikon D5200).

My primary criteria are lowest weight (for hiking) and lowest cost for the best IQ possible. I shoot only raw, and print up to A3. My subjects are landscape and architecture and I rarely shoot in poor light, so I don't think that I need to be too bothered about image stabilisation, and I am ok to manual focus. I'm assuming that in reasonable level lighting, I can hand hold the A7 and maintain a reasonable shutter speed/aperture for low ISO and good depth of field on a landscape (without the need for extra stops afforded by IS).

The A7 is currently representing a significant bargain. I can get a new A7 + the 28-70 Sony kit lens for less than the price of the entry level D610 body alone (and far less than a D750 body).

I would then look to add one or two wide primes - perhaps the Samyang, or something else? Are there 3rd party options (Sigma?) in wide prime or wide zoom range that will also offer autofocus compatibility with the A7? I know that there are adapters that permit to mount older Canon (and others?) to E-mount.

Any thoughts and experience very much appreciated.

Click to expand...

Forget the FE 28-70 kit lens. The corners and edges never get sharp no matter how far you stop down so not so hot for landscape.

Sony has not opened up PDAF on the A7 yet, so AF will be slow for adapted EF lenses.

That said you can use AF adapters and I have had pretty good luck with the Viltrox EF adapter on the A7R but you are better off with metabones IV. The entire Chinese adapter thing is irritating.Some are bad, some are good, long time to ship etc.

One of the best LS lenses ever is the Canon EF IS 16-35 and it is superb but its a big heavy lens. I just tested that lens with my A7R and I think its the best WA zoom I have ever used.

If you go the Canon EF AF route then two bargains are the Canon 40mm F2.8 STM which is tiny and very sharp and the 50mm F1.8II or STM. The 50mm F1.8 needs to be stopped down to F2 at least. Both of those can be had for about $100 each.

Other than that we will have the Sigma MC-11 soon , but it is designed to work with Sigma Art lenses. I own an A7R and Sigma told me that the adapted lenses will work like any normal E mount lens with all functions, but Art lenses are very heavy. Nobody knows yet if the MC-11 will work with Canon or other manuf lenses. Supposedly its a learning adapter to work with Art lenses. Keeping my fingers crossed.

That said if you want to go light then get the Sony FE 28mm F2, 35mm F2.8, 55mm F1.8 lenses.

If you want to go cheap then get an LAEA4 adapter and use Minolta/A-mount lenses.

I climb with the 7R and I find a telephoto is good to have to get the distant snow peaks, sometimes with climbers on them. So, I take the 24-240 (with OSS) for an all-in-one lens and to minimize lens changes. I also take the Voigtlander Heliar 15 mm f/4.5 for Milky Way shots when I'm in camp.

I've got the 28-70, and only use it when I don't care about the best results. It's a fine lens, in that you get an image, but that's it.

My 16-50 kit produces better images by far, but the 24-70 Z is much better than either, but it's not worth the price.

Honestly, my next camera for landscape will be a pentax.

daveco2 said:

I climb with the 7R and I find a telephoto is good to have to get the distant snow peaks, sometimes with climbers on them. So, I take the 24-240 (with OSS) for an all-in-one lens and to minimize lens changes. I also take the Voigtlander Heliar 15 mm f/4.5 for Milky Way shots when I'm in camp.

Click to expand...

You actually climb with 24_240?! Ouch... I thought even 28-70 was a bit too much, if not in a pack. And then it's a pain to get it out.

Is that you on vertical rock? Good going.

By climbing, I mean glacier/ice travel, about 50 deg max incline. I take shots when I can stop and get my pack off. If it's really exposed, I'll reach for the RX100IV.




Pequenyo Alpamayo, Bolivia

onever said:

daveco2 said:

I climb with the 7R and I find a telephoto is good to have to get the distant snow peaks, sometimes with climbers on them. So, I take the 24-240 (with OSS) for an all-in-one lens and to minimize lens changes. I also take the Voigtlander Heliar 15 mm f/4.5 for Milky Way shots when I'm in camp.

Click to expand...

You actually climb with 24_240?! Ouch... I thought even 28-70 was a bit too much, if not in a pack. And then it's a pain to get it out.

Click to expand...

The original A7 with an adapted manual focus lens is the best price to picture quality value around.

Everythingis1 said:

The original A7 with an adapted manual focus lens is the best price to picture quality value around.

Click to expand...

I agree.

And frankly, I strongly disagree with those who condemn the 28-70mm kit lens.

If one has never owned a full-frame camera, the kit lens is one of the great bargains, along with the A7 body. It's the cheapest way to determine what focal lengths you should buy as primes or zooms.

Perhaps I have very low standards, but as a hiking combo, I think the A7/28-70 has a lot to offer. Yes, the corners are not spectacular, but if you are checking out the corners of an image, the subject of the photo must be pretty lacking.












Panorama jpeg with the kit lens

The above were with the 28-70 on a recent trip to Boulder, CO. And below, it's not bad for kids and animals, too (yes, that's a tame Arctic wolf)







While these were all shot on my A7II, we know it's basically the same sensor as in the A7. Hence, I think that even if you plan to buy better primes for landscapes and architecture, the kit zoom is a worthwhile investment. And if you decide to sell the A7 to move up the A7 food chain, chances are you will sell it to a newcomer to Sony FF who will be easier to sell to, with the kit lens.

Mordi

I agree with you on the kit zoom as well. If you use it from 33-64ish @5.6 it produces some admirable results.

daveco2 said:

Is that you on vertical rock? Good going.

By climbing, I mean glacier/ice travel, about 50 deg max incline. I take shots when I can stop and get my pack off. If it's really exposed, I'll reach for the RX100IV.


Pequenyo Alpamayo, Bolivia

Click to expand...

Wow, beautiful! South America is Terra Incognita for me so far, but its definitely on the list. The problem with the list is, it keeps growing :-D

But back to the original topic, A7 is great for these kind of things. I usually have 35f2.8 on it and 28-70 in the pack. Would be great to add CV15 to the kit for wide vistas, but I had good success with just sticking 35's shots together.

Mordi said:

Everythingis1 said:

The original A7 with an adapted manual focus lens is the best price to picture quality value around.

Click to expand...

I agree.

And frankly, I strongly disagree with those who condemn the 28-70mm kit lens.

If one has never owned a full-frame camera, the kit lens is one of the great bargains, along with the A7 body. It's the cheapest way to determine what focal lengths you should buy as primes or zooms.

Perhaps I have very low standards, but as a hiking combo, I think the A7/28-70 has a lot to offer. Yes, the corners are not spectacular, but if you are checking out the corners of an image, the subject of the photo must be pretty lacking.












Panorama jpeg with the kit lens

The above were with the 28-70 on a recent trip to Boulder, CO. And below, it's not bad for kids and animals, too (yes, that's a tame Arctic wolf)







While these were all shot on my A7II, we know it's basically the same sensor as in the A7. Hence, I think that even if you plan to buy better primes for landscapes and architecture, the kit zoom is a worthwhile investment. And if you decide to sell the A7 to move up the A7 food chain, chances are you will sell it to a newcomer to Sony FF who will be easier to sell to, with the kit lens.

Mordi

Click to expand...

Nice shots Mordi! Like you, I believe the FE28-70 is a good kit lens.

Thanks to all for the comments and feedback.

Regarding the 28-70 lens, the deals that I am looking at offer the A7 + 28-70 for only 150 euros more than the A7 body. So it's a bit of a no-brainer:

• it gives me a basic walk-round zoom for minimal money. There is a very limited choice of options for such zooms from Sony and they command silly prices. Even the 24-70 second-hand is a stupid price (and has somewhat average reviews)
• it also gives me IS and fast AF when I want to grab a shot in the street. Whereas an adapted non-Sony (I was considering a used Canon or Canon-mount Sigma 24-70 or 24-105) will give me slower AF and no(?) IS
• opinion is very mixed on the 28-70. I did read one review where the tester tried 3 different examples and found a lot of variety in IQ. So, like most budget lenses, it may be a bit of lottery in getting a good or poor example
• per the comment from Mordi, it will make selling the A7 a more attractive 'kit'
• I could just sell the 28-70. Used items going for 250 euros locally (profit!)
• I actually suspect that my wife will fall in love with the A7, and she will be happy with the 28-70

So back to my search, the 28-70 will serve for a time, whilst I fill my needs at the wide end. From continued searching, my first item may be an adaptor for the Canon EF lens range. Primarily because there is a lot of choice (new and used). And the adaptors offer some connectivity (esp aperture control).

Yes.

i made the move to FF back in December last year and got a fairly decent used A7 body. coming from both sony's APSC a-mount and e-mount bodies (A55, A3500, nex 5N) and having a few old k-mount lenses from my old pentax K7, i never really considered buying FE lenses. prior to getting the A7 i was already adapting old manual lenses on the e-mount, particularly those on the ultra wide and zoom lenses using cheap manual a-mount adapters from china since i dont need AF on landscapes and architectural shots. 2 months back i managed to get a used LA-EA1 adapter and to use it on the A7 i have to removed the back baffle/cover and it now works similar to an LA-EA3 although i still cant AF with Minolta screw driven lenses ( i get exif data and Aperture control)..

I currently use a minolta 11-18 uwa lens which i got in mint condition almost 2 years ago for roughly just $200.00 and it is currently serving me well (usable as a full frame lens from 14mm onwards), the primes i have a few that i always carry with me (rokkor 50 1.4 and the much lighter Carl Zeiss Jenna tessar 50 2.0). on ocassion i would bring along a helios 44-m lust for the swirly bokeh.

in the long zooms, i am fully covered with a Minolta beercan 70-210, minolta 100-300 and if i need much longer zoom i can also use the much older takumar 400mm prime although i only bring the minolta 100-300 during holidays as both the beercan and the takumar 400 weighs a lot.

if ever i decide to go buy an FE lens my 1st priority might be the FE 16-35 since my main subjects are mostly landscapes/architecture.

Golfhacker27 said:

Thanks to all for the comments and feedback.

Regarding the 28-70 lens, the deals that I am looking at offer the A7 + 28-70 for only 150 euros more than the A7 body. So it's a bit of a no-brainer:

• it gives me a basic walk-round zoom for minimal money. There is a very limited choice of options for such zooms from Sony and they command silly prices. Even the 24-70 second-hand is a stupid price (and has somewhat average reviews)

Click to expand...

Sony FF is the wrong system if you are looking for high quality cheap native lenses.

IMO the 28-70 kit lens is not worthy. I sold mine PDQ, and the 24-70 F4 is really what should be the kit lens.

With the LAEA4 and A-mount lenses you can set up a decent cheap zoom lens kit for about $600. 19mm-210mm.

Golfhacker27 said:

• it also gives me IS and fast AF when I want to grab a shot in the street. Whereas an adapted non-Sony (I was considering a used Canon or Canon-mount Sigma 24-70 or 24-105) will give me slower AF and no(?) IS

Click to expand...

The problem with an adapted EF lens on the A7 is that Sony has not opened up PDAF yet, and nobody knows if they will, so AF will be too slow with an adapted lens unless the adapter is an LAEA4, which has its own PDAF system.

The Sigma 24-105mm Art lens on the MC-11 should act like a native lens with PDAF and AFC or at least that is what Sigma told me, but I would wait until they are released and read some feedback.

I have an A7R and a viltrox adapter and lens IS works, and face detect works but its only AFS.

Golfhacker27 said:

• opinion is very mixed on the 28-70. I did read one review where the tester tried 3 different examples and found a lot of variety in IQ. So, like most budget lenses, it may be a bit of lottery in getting a good or poor example

Click to expand...

I am of the opinion that Sony QC standards are very low.

Warrenpeas sample of the kit lens below looks like he got a good one. Supposedly there are some ringers out there, but the one I had was no good. I would not buy this lens in a kit. I would buy it stand alone and new and then return until you get a good one.

QC is iffy with Sony lenses and you need to buy and return until you get a good one unless you are not picky. Especially look out for decentered lenses.

Golfhacker27 said:

• per the comment from Mordi, it will make selling the A7 a more attractive 'kit'
• I could just sell the 28-70. Used items going for 250 euros locally (profit!)
• I actually suspect that my wife will fall in love with the A7, and she will be happy with the 28-70

Click to expand...

I think it makes a better people lens that landscape unless you get one of the good one. It will get you started. Mine was very sharp in the center, with somewhat low contrast, but the corners and edges never got sharp even stopped all the way down. Even in crop mode the corners never got sharp.

Golfhacker27 said:

So back to my search, the 28-70 will serve for a time, whilst I fill my needs at the wide end. From continued searching, my first item may be an adaptor for the Canon EF lens range. Primarily because there is a lot of choice (new and used). And the adaptors offer some connectivity (esp aperture control).

Click to expand...

Although a MBIV is the best adapter, since you will have an A7 I would say if you get an EF adapter, get a Techart III or Saker Falcon as they have a hyped up AF system that is faster. And keep in mind that AF still will not be as fast or as accurate. Also not all EF lenses work with all adapters. Nobody knows yet if the MC-11 adapter will AF a Canon lens.

The Canon 40mm STM (great lens BTW) works fine on the Commlite but the Canon 50mm STM or Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 dont work.

The Canon 40mm STM and 50mm STM both work on the Viltrox adapter but the Tamron 28-75mm doesnt work.

IMO if you are going to adapt lenses to it, but a used A7II. Its a much better more well rounded camera and PDAF will be open for adapted lenses.

It's quite interesting to notice that while the OP asked if the A7 is still a good option, many of the answers has gone to lengths writing about the virtues of this or that lens without adressing the original question. Maybe it shows something about the preoccupation (obsession?) with minute differencies between lenses which is seen on this forum at present.

--
"Good photos is not about fancy gear. It's about how you see as a photographer and about being ressourceful with whatever gear you have." (Alfred Eisenstadt, Life photographer)

The a7 is still and will continue to be a great camera I had an a7ii and a7Rii before I picked up the a7. I use the a7 more than the other two combined. I surprised myself!