Reading mode: Light Dark

Just want to confirm, A7III vs A7RIII

Go to last post
T

TGM1234

Leading Member
Messages
602
Reaction score
232
Location
Indianapolis, US
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?

Thank you!

Tom
 
TGM1234 said:
I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).
Click to expand...
Yep.
TGM1234 said:
2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.
Click to expand...
Yep.
TGM1234 said:
3) Better high ISO performance.
Click to expand...
Maybe slightly - not much until you get into insanely high numbers. Even then the difference is probably negligible if you downsample the A7RIII to 24mp like the A7III.
TGM1234 said:
Anything I am missing?
Click to expand...
There are many other differences between models, but they probably won't matter to a sports shooter. This is a pretty exhaustive comparison.
 
TGM1234 said:
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?

Thank you!

Tom
Click to expand...
 
TGM1234 said:
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?

Thank you!

Tom
Click to expand...
 
diness said:
TGM1234 said:
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?

Thank you!

Tom
Click to expand...
If you shoot sports 90% of the time, the only thing you should pay the extra cost for is the A9. That should definitely be a consideration unless it’s out of reach.
Click to expand...
Ditto, if sports is your thing then the A9 needs to be at the top of your list. (The A7iii is the poor mans A9). And note that at least in the US the current $1000 rebate on the A9 expires this Saturday May 18.
 
Had the A7iii and then sold it and purchased the A9. It all depends on budget. The A7iii is not what I would call a poor man's A9, but rather an A9 for those whose budgets cannot stretch to an A9. Most of the features in an affordable price.
 
Kansas Ron said:
Had the A7iii and then sold it and purchased the A9. It all depends on budget. The A7iii is not what I would call a poor man's A9, but rather an A9 for those whose budgets cannot stretch to an A9. Most of the features in an affordable price.
Click to expand...
Not sure if you meant to reply to someone else. I never called an A7III a poor man’s A9.

But I agree with you. The A7III is a fine all around camera. Especially if budget is a concern.

If sports is your primary interest though, and it’s in your budget. A9 all the way.
 
Last edited:
TGM1234 said:
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?
Click to expand...
One thing I would add is smaller file sizes. In March, I shot a 4 day tournament with the a7iii and came home with more than 7000 pics and more than 300 gb taken up on my laptop’s hard drive. I’m glad the files weren’t any larger than they were.

I have no problem calling the a7iii the “poor man’s a9”. As a representative of the poor men, I couldn’t afford the a9 when I bought the a7iii. But the a7iii meets all of my needs right now.

With that $1000 rebate though, If you can afford the a9 now, I’d seriously consider it.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the feedback, much appreciated! Very helpfull!

A little more context...

I am currently coming from Canon (1DX) and I am ready to jump into the A9 but am hesitant to do so until I know it can handle the abuse (not intentionally) that I will likely give it. I routinely shoot outdoor sports and while I do my best to protect my gear, sometimes it get wet, cold, dropped, etc. and I am betting that, among other things, the A9 II will be better than the A9 in this regard.

My thoughts was that for $1700 used and a MC-11 I can go out and shoot a A7III and get used to Sony system for a year before the A9 II comes out and then go all in (and sell the A7III). I know some will not like the "wait for the next best camera" mindset but in this case I can continue to use my 1DX and slowly start to prep for the A9 II which I imagine will be out within a year.

So to frame the question another way, would you jump into the A9 now when one has a perfectly functioning Canon system or baby step (A7III) into it and take a big leap (A9 II) in a year? More succinctly, what would you do if you weren't in a hurry?

I would love to hear your thoughts.

Best,

Tom
 
TGM1234 said:
Thank you for the feedback, much appreciated! Very helpfull!

A little more context...

I am currently coming from Canon (1DX) and I am ready to jump into the A9 but am hesitant to do so until I know it can handle the abuse (not intentionally) that I will likely give it. I routinely shoot outdoor sports and while I do my best to protect my gear, sometimes it get wet, cold, dropped, etc. and I am betting that, among other things, the A9 II will be better than the A9 in this regard.

My thoughts was that for $1700 used and a MC-11 I can go out and shoot a A7III and get used to Sony system for a year before the A9 II comes out and then go all in (and sell the A7III). I know some will not like the "wait for the next best camera" mindset but in this case I can continue to use my 1DX and slowly start to prep for the A9 II which I imagine will be out within a year.

So to frame the question another way, would you jump into the A9 now when one has a perfectly functioning Canon system or baby step (A7III) into it and take a big leap (A9 II) in a year? More succinctly, what would you do if you weren't in a hurry?

I would love to hear your thoughts.

Best,

Tom
Click to expand...
Hello Tom,

I think I recognize you from the Canon forums.

I also came from Canon.

If you mainly intend to adapt your Canon lenses. I think the A9 would be a better choice. That being said, I don’t think it will be as good as the 1DX with native EF glass.

I still use my EF 400mm f4 DO II and MC-11 on my A9. It works pretty well. But not quite native performance though. I think it’s weak point is when you have to make big changes in focus distance. But if you’re already in the ballpark, it works quite well.

For around the same price as an A9, you can get a used A7III and a Sony 100-400GM. If you shoot in low light often, perhaps the A7III with Sony 70-200GM.

Use that A7III/70-200 combo for close action to get your toes wet in the Sony pond. And continue to use the 1DX/supertelephoto for distant subjects.

That way, when you transition to Sony, you can keep the 70-200 f2.8. Which is a great lens. I would say on par with the excellent EF 70-200 f2.8 II. Sell the A7III and get an A9II. Or keep the A7III as a second body.

I think if you really want to get a feel for what the Sony system is capable of. I think a Sony body with native Sony glass is your best bet.
 
That comment was made earlier in this, I wasn't referring to you. LOL
 
Thank you, this is very helpfull.

I really like the point that I need to have a Sony (A7III or A9) with Sony glass to really get a feel for the Sony system.

Until next Fall (when the sun starts to go down early) I will likely use a 100-400 so now you have my on the hunt for a good price on a A7III or an A9 with the Sony 100-400. I put a couple of offers in on Greentoe and also am watching eBay closely.

Thanks again,

Tom
 
I decided on the A73 to replace my Nikon D850

I replaced a Nikon 24-70, 70-200 F2.8 zoom with the Sony 24-105 F 4.0

I did have a few Nikon F 1.4 primes, but I ended up with Batis Primes for the Sony I like.

The EVF on the Sony A7riii is better, more MP, an additional custom function button that I wish the A73 had like the R version.

It was not enough reason to get the R version of the a73

I am still interested to see what Sony does with the A7S iii rumor
 
TGM1234 said:
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

4) Better 4K by full pixel readout

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?

Thank you!

Tom
Click to expand...
I just added one to reinforce your choice.
 
I use both in the real world i can hardly tell of the differences technically, but to stick with your questions then the A7III does beat the R with your requirements but probably only see it in a lab.


I seem to take the R3 out more because of the ability to crop higher, which enables me to go out with a wide lens then crop in and keep more resolution.
Both are excellent cameras
Just also consider with the R you can use APS-C mode and get a little more reach if its critical at 18meg
And pixel shift is only on the R3 i think, but ive yet to have success with this feature, when i compare it with the G9s 80meg mode which just seems to work well...

pros and cons to both, but your needs tell me A73
 
TGM1234 said:
Hi,

I am thinking about purchasing a A7III over the A7RIII for three reasons and I want to make sure I am not missing anything. I shoot sports 90% of the time and of those shoots, 50% are in lower light (>1600 ISO). My understanding is that for my situation the A7III makes the most sense for three reasons:

1) Cheaper (a universal reason).

2) Better auto focus system - e.g. more focus points.

3) Better high ISO performance.

For my situation am I thinking about this correctly? Anything I am missing?

Thank you!

Tom
Click to expand...
fourth reason can be:

4) Speed - buffer/file size handling and camera operation? Not an expert here but others can chime in who have experience both cameras.
 
Not 2 weeks after I bought the A7iii, Sony had $200. off the A7Riii PLUS a $600. trade in value for my Nikon D7200. $800. off total. I was beginning to regret my decision on the A7iii until I watched a comparison from The Slanted Lens on the Nikon D850, Sony A7Riii and A7iii. I had made the correct decision by going with the A7iii by far.

 
Kansas Ron said:
Had the A7iii and then sold it and purchased the A9. It all depends on budget. The A7iii is not what I would call a poor man's A9, but rather an A9 for those whose budgets cannot stretch to an A9. Most of the features in an affordable price.
Click to expand...
Well "Most of the features in an affordable price" is what I call a poor mans whatever so I dont see what the distinction is. I own and regularly shoot with an A7iii and think it is a perfectly fine camera and feel the term poor mans A9 is perfectly appropriate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top