How much upgrade is too much??

I can certainly tell you about my experiences with both the A7II and A7III. When I got the A7II I had been shooting with an A77II. I was pretty happy with the A77II because it would do 12 frames per second and made some nice photos. I shoot sports and landscapes and it did pretty well with both. The big thing I noticed with the full frame A7II was the huge amount of dynamic range and improved low light performance compared to the aps-c A77II but it could only shoot 5 frames per second. With the A7II I could take photos in difficult lighting situations with either intensely bright areas and shadows and get really good photos in post processing. The A7III, which I have had for a year, is quite a bit like the A7II with no weaknesses. It has very fast autofocus, 10 frames per second, even more dynamic range and better low light performance.

The bottom line is I have taken a lot of good photos with the A7II. It surprised me how it made getting decent photos possible in less than ideal conditions. It was also the sharpest camera I had owned. It was noticeable.

You can't go wrong with either the A7II or the A7III. Both should be an improvement compared to your A3000. The only downside of the A7II for me was the slow 5 frames per second for photographing sports.

One more thing you need to think about. Sony FE lenses are not inexpensive. The 28-70mm kit lens is pretty good and inexpensive but most other lenses will cost you from 500 to 2500 dollars each.

First up, I’m glad you’re enjoying your photography. It’s a great hobby that in my case given me over 40 years of enjoyment.... and I’m still learning.

I have two questions for you. What is it you expect FF to provide that your A6000 doesn’t now? And secondly, what do you photograph now or want to photograph that causes you to consider a change to format? Have you considered that you will need FF lenses as your current APS-C lenses will only function in crop mode. And lenses on FF can get very expensive.

Both your A6000 and the A7, A7ii and iii are all still 24Mp. Main improvements are to a stop or two low light performance and a little better dynamic range. These differences may not be significantly different for you unless you photograph in low light conditions. Of course the M2 and M3 both have IBIS and the M3 much improved AF over both the M2 and your A6000. But your lenses probably have OSS now so IBIS won’t do much for you unless you shoot with legacy lenses that don’t have OSS built in. AF improvements certainly help if you shoot action like kids at play and sport. Even then, your techniques need to be excellent to get sharp shots and you need to know how to set up your camera for such shots and have suitable lenses for the action too.

I’m not saying all this to discourage an upgrade. It’s great when it has a real purpose. But a major error in newer photographers is the belief that gear upgrades add some magic to your photos. This is rarely the case I’m afraid. In my own case, I reverted from an A7 back to an A6300 because I didn’t get from the upgrade from my own A6000 that I expected. In fact I got some very disappointing focus problems. Now 3 years later and a lot more experience shooting with mirrorless, I recently returned to FF but with an A7RII. It’s 42Mp sensor was a real upgrade and I’m very happy this time around. Still dealing with huge image files isn’t for everyone but since I am predominantly a landscape, travel, flowers and wildlife shooter, those extra pixels are great for when I need to crop.

Unless you have your handling and techniques fully learned perhaps joining a camera club and learning from the experienced members or doing some of the many on-line tutorials first may provide more benefits at this point.

RCIS719 said:

I got into SLR photography about 3 years ago, with the purchase of my Sony A6000. It's been a great camera, but I want to make the upgrade to a full frame camera, staying with Sony. My original thought was to "save my pennies" and get the a7III, with the thought that I would not need to upgrade for quite some time. My other option is to go with the a7II, which, honestly, I probably wouldn't need to upgrade from for a while either. I am totally fine with purchasing either open box or used versions of either camera. I am merely a hobbyist, though a passionate one, but I still have so much to learn. My question is, would the a7III just be overkill for me, as a hobbyist, and a fairly new one at that? Is it out of my league, and no need to purchase a camera of that magnitude?

Having said that, regardless of which ff I go with, I will need new lenses. I shoot wide (10-18mm), but will also need a telephoto, to 300mm would be nice; recommendations for both?

Click to expand...

If this is just for a hobby and you have a lot of growth ahead of you then no. I mean yes the A73 if you want to stick with Sony would be great. You have a lot of room to hone your skill. Yes the camera will be updated with the A7 IV and V it will not end.

If you are open to more and keep in mind the only advantage to mirrorless is a small camera body. If you get into the F 2.8 zooms and F 1.4 primes you are not saving any money or camera bag space. In that way I would say dive in deep to the Nikon D850 you have way more accessories out there since Nikon and Canon for that matter have been in the camera business way longer than Sony.

Nikon and Canon have also entered the full frame mirrorless game.

I think if you are sticking to photography overkill here is good you have so much to learn.

IF you really want compact or smaller mirrorless options Fuji and Micro 4/3's

If you are stuck with full frame for whatever reason you have more options other than Sony.

IF video is important I would say Sony or Panasonic even.

Panasonic, Nikon, Canon and Sony all have or will have a mirrorless full frame camera solution

*What is important are all the accessories and the system as a whole. Don't get fixated on the camera body and the lens. there is more to making a photo and for some it matters for you maybe not. It is good to know the whole playing field.

If you do not have the time then do what you like.

Keep in mind when you sell camera gear you lose a lot of money on resale it holds little vaule vs what you paid new. Point is not to buy something twice and for you I think as i said overkill is good here.

Foto4x4 said:

I have two questions for you. What is it you expect FF to provide that your A6000 doesn’t now? And secondly, what do you photograph now or want to photograph that causes you to consider a change to format? Have you considered that you will need FF lenses as your current APS-C lenses will only function in crop mode. And lenses on FF can get very expensive.

Click to expand...

Very good questions indeed, Foto4x4. I feel that I loose a lot of detail with the APS-C. I mostly enjoy shooting landscape, and I do a lot of B&W. When I look at my photos for post processing, it is sometimes difficult to discern details in the background. Having said that, it’s possible it is either the lense I am using, or the photography skills that I haven’t quite nacked yet, but I still feel my set up could be better. I feel with the larger sensor of the full frame, combined with the broader dynamic range those cameras offer, I would have the detail I am seeking. Am I wrong?

Point taken regarding the lenses, and well understood, which is why I haven’t upgraded just yet. I will be trading in my a6000, and all the lenses and filters that I have along with it, when I do upgrade, to put towards the new system, and since this will be a hefty investment, I’d like to do so before they are worth only a trivial amount. It may already be too late for that.

If you are looking for more detail in your landscapes, maybe look at an A7R2 instead of the A7III.

Regardless, I don't buy into the "this camera is too much for me" mentality. Every good camera is easy to use once you learn it. The A7III is no different.

I would explore different avenues if possible. For example the Sigma 1.4 primes are excellent. The 16mm version would work well to get more details from your landscapes if you aren't using it already. However if you want zooms you might as well move up to full frame.

Thanks for your reply. Based on your desire for more detail, and especially for landscapes, I agree with sportyaccordy that you should consider one of the 42Mp bodies. He’s suggested a A7RII and that is the model I recently purchased. I got a lightly used one for a very good price. I note you said in your opening post that your not averse to buying used. I buy about 80% of my gear used. I’m selective and this has paid off good dividends as I have frequently upgraded gear so by buying used I can resell with a lower loss, often none at all.

Back to the A7RII. You should be able to find one for about 2/3rds the price of a new A7III and only a little more than an A7II. While the A7III and A7RIII both have newer AF improvements, faster frame rates and the toggle button for focus points, and some other minor improvements the sensor in the A7RII will provide pretty much identical image quality as the M3 and noticeably more detail that you’re looking for than the A7III. It is certainly a much bigger upgrade in IQ in my opinion. It will deliver better dynamic range and high ISO performance. I do recommend you look at either the R2 or R3.

--
Quote: “If your pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.”, Robert Capa

PS to my last post. I meant to mention that I am very happy with my R2. One must remember that when released, it was a huge upgrade to the A7R and DPReview gave it 90%, the same score as the R3. Despite the improvements, the R2 remains a great camera and is more than enough for my needs. New models don’t magically make old ones worse. The R3 just does some things better.

I went from a Sony A77 Mii to Sony A7ii, and loving it. I did catch my A7 Mii on sale for $999 and it cam with the stock 28-70mm lens. I am also a "serious hobbyist" as well. Maybe if I did photography for a living, i may have justified the cost of the A7iii. I know here in Cincinnati, there is a big dealer show this month. Looking to catch the battery grip on sale, hopefully. I can say that this camera sucks the battery juice, but thats why I carry 6 of them.

To add to this, you can adapt lenses very easily to the A7RII. There are tons of great Canon EF mount lenses you can adapt.

JeffGM said:

I can certainly tell you about my experiences with both the A7II and A7III. When I got the A7II I had been shooting with an A77II. I was pretty happy with the A77II because it would do 12 frames per second and made some nice photos. I shoot sports and landscapes and it did pretty well with both. The big thing I noticed with the full frame A7II was the huge amount of dynamic range and improved low light performance compared to the aps-c A77II but it could only shoot 5 frames per second. With the A7II I could take photos in difficult lighting situations with either intensely bright areas and shadows and get really good photos in post processing. The A7III, which I have had for a year, is quite a bit like the A7II with no weaknesses. It has very fast autofocus, 10 frames per second, even more dynamic range and better low light performance.

The bottom line is I have taken a lot of good photos with the A7II. It surprised me how it made getting decent photos possible in less than ideal conditions. It was also the sharpest camera I had owned. It was noticeable.

You can't go wrong with either the A7II or the A7III. Both should be an improvement compared to your A3000

Click to expand...

I meant A6000. Nothing like proof reading.

JeffGM said:

. The only downside of the A7II for me was the slow 5 frames per second for photographing sports.

One more thing you need to think about. Sony FE lenses are not inexpensive. The 28-70mm kit lens is pretty good and inexpensive but most other lenses will cost you from 500 to 2500 dollars each.

Click to expand...

I almost hate to admit I also have the A7RIII. A few months ago, when I bought it, I may have had more money than sense. When I compare the A7III to the A7RIII the difference in images quality is subtle. Yes, you can crop in more the the R model but for most purposes you will find that both the A7II and A7III will give you very sharp photos. I think the A7III is the best all around camera you can get right now, especially for the price.

It's funny you and Foto both suggested the A7RII, vs the A7II, as I was comparing all the A7 cameras this morning, to see the differences, and what is best for what, as I didn't know. After doing so, I am now considering the A7RII, because of the 42mps, the more than 399 AF points, and the significantly greater DR. Ill still have to do some comparison, and decide it the bit of increased cost is worth it for me.

In terms of lenses, I would then only really immediately need a wide angle, preferably 16mm (my current go to lens is my 10-18mm); again, not opposed at all to purchasing used. I do like to have a long lens in my bag, but for the short term, I do have an old cannon/Vivitar 300mm (by old, I mean circa 1974), perhaps I can use it on anything I decide on, with an adapter?? I am told it is really good glass (it might even be a Komine lens, if Im not mistaken). Until I again save my pennies for something else.

So, now, all that said, what's the best used option? Open box item at BestBuy? Used at Adorama, or B&H? Local camera shop? I don't think I would feel comfortable purchasing used from the general public or ebay, only because you don't know if the items have been inspected.

sportyaccordy said:

If you are looking for more detail in your landscapes, maybe look at an A7R2 instead of the A7III.

Click to expand...

100% agree, the A7rII is great for landscapes, so is the A7r, but not so much if you need good AF.

sportyaccordy said:

Regardless, I don't buy into the "this camera is too much for me" mentality. Every good camera is easy to use once you learn it. The A7III is no different.

Click to expand...

the only time I'd recommend against it is if all you do is shoot snapshots once in a while, APS-C is a better option for less technical pursuits.

I have had decent luck with Ebay for bodies. My A7RII was an Ebay purchase.

Lens wise, it's more your budget than anything, though outside of the manual focus Samyang 14 it seems like $500 is the bare minimum for something covering ~16mm. ~500g seems to be the minumum as well. Something to consider though is the A7R2 has sweep panorama mode. It has its limitations but if you learn to work around them you can get some great shots.

Don't mess with A7ii - A7iii or A7rii and you can concentrate on makeing better photos instead of blaming the camera

What is your viewing medium for photos? You will find more details while peeping and you can crop strongly with the R model (e.g. make 300mm from a 200mm lens) - but printed in "normal" sizes or viewed on a 4k display you will hardly see a difference. A7iii has incredible eye AF, large battery and a few other nice things which makes it a better and longer lasting alround (family?) camera.

For landscape - 1635F4 or the 1228 zoom. I own the 1635Z, stopped down as sharp as the GM (weaker corners at 35mm, the rest is VERY good) and great Zeiss contrast. Small, light.

24105 is also great for landscape - sharp through the range.

The perfect long lens would be the 100400GM - but when you think about a few hundred bucks between bodies that's probably not for you (and me ). 70-300 should also be good. For landscape check out longer Contax/Zeiss manual primes or other legacy lenses - stopped down these are supersharp. But AF is not on par Good teles are expensive and big. What do you use now?

I use the 24240 for family/ alround and tele stuff- but that's no landscape lens.

IamJF said:

Don't mess with A7ii - A7iii or A7rii and you can concentrate on makeing better photos instead of blaming the camera

Click to expand...

Oh make no mistake, I am always humble to the fact that there is room for improvement to be made by the photographer (aka me) for sure. Even when I have taken the very best shot, I feel like the detail is somewhat lacking.

IamJF said:

What is your viewing medium for photos? You will find more details while peeping and you can crop strongly with the R model (e.g. make 300mm from a 200mm lens) - but printed in "normal" sizes or viewed on a 4k display you will hardly see a difference. A7iii has incredible eye AF, large battery and a few other nice things which makes it a better and longer lasting alround (family?) camera.

Click to expand...

I view/edit my photos on my iMac, in Lightroom. Sometimes, that is where they simply collect, and sometimes I have large prints made to hang in my house, or if people (family/friends) have requested them for theirs.

IamJF said:

For landscape - 1635F4 or the 1228 zoom. I own the 1635Z, stopped down as sharp as the GM (weaker corners at 35mm, the rest is VERY good) and great Zeiss contrast. Small, light.

24105 is also great for landscape - sharp through the range.

The perfect long lens would be the 100400GM - but when you think about a few hundred bucks between bodies that's probably not for you (and me ). 70-300 should also be good. For landscape check out longer Contax/Zeiss manual primes or other legacy lenses - stopped down these are supersharp. But AF is not on par Good teles are expensive and big. What do you use now?

Click to expand...

My go-to lens is my 10-18mm, which I love, as I mostly do landscape/architecture. For telephoto, as for wildlife, and when I am coerced into portraiture, I use a 55-210mm. Its a pretty good lens, and seems to produce crisp shots in both of those situations. I would prefer something a tad longer, but honestly, the larger price tag for such a thing wouldn't be justified for the amount that I would use it.

I was just looking at lenses on Adorama, and saw the Sony FE 16-35mm... and it's price tag, but there has to be some comparable glass out there less then 2K. Again, I would look for a solid used lense before taking on brand new.

IamJF said:

I use the 24240 for family/ alround and tele stuff- but that's no landscape lens.

Click to expand...

There is a 1635F4Z zoom and you should be able to get it <1000,-. It's for sure a great step up from the 10-24 APS-C zoom!

Also if you are ok with the 55-210 the 70-300 will be a big step up! Maybe you can get it used for a good price. Also has a good magnification rate for semi-macro shots.

I would choose the A7iii as alround body but if you ONLY do landscape and resolution is everything the A7rii delivers. But A7iii with the new lenses will make a good difference too.

And I would also take the 85/1.8 or 55/1.8 (or even 50/1.8 if you won't spend a lot). You have a FF camera then - buy one lens where you can achieve this shallow dof look and make this incredible low light photos.

IamJF said:

And I would also take the 85/1.8 or 55/1.8 (or even 50/1.8 if you won't spend a lot). You have a FF camera then - buy one lens where you can achieve this shallow dof look and make this incredible low light photos.

Click to expand...

I do have a 50mm/1.8 lens for my a6000, but didn't think I'd be able to use it on a FF. I planned to trade it in with the rest of my equipment.

RCIS719 said:

IamJF said:

And I would also take the 85/1.8 or 55/1.8 (or even 50/1.8 if you won't spend a lot). You have a FF camera then - buy one lens where you can achieve this shallow dof look and make this incredible low light photos.

Click to expand...

I do have a 50mm/1.8 lens for my a6000, but didn't think I'd be able to use it on a FF. I planned to trade it in with the rest of my equipment.

Click to expand...

You probably have the SEL50F18 not the SEL50F18F which is the FF 50.

Btw if you are mostly into landscapes, even a mkI A7 or A7r will do. After all, landscapes require you to sit, think, put down your expensive tripod, focus at the area of interest (mostly HF or infinity) which can be done with MF lenses too and wait for the opportune moment and light to take a photo. You don't need IBIS (mkII) or excellent AF (mkIII), neither fast lenses as you will be shooting F8+. So save your money and buy a great tripod and some nice FF MF lenses. With a tripod alone you will see much difference over the fuzzy backgrounds you get with your A6k.

If you think your preferences in the future would change, i.e. you will be shooting moving models or kids parties and you will certainly need fast Eye-AF, AF tracking etc, then yes, consider the newest model but to get the best out of it you will also need the best glass you can buy ($$$).