Would you buy apsc lenses, even when not own your A6500?
I do this with my a7c and 10.6 MP files, and have no regrets. About to put a post on this now...
No, I would not purchase APS-C lens. My APS-C is left over from my E setup.
I also occasionally enjoy using my E 16-55mm f.2.8 G with my A7C (makes a nice combo and zoom range with f/2.8).
Have not tried the 16-55 or other APSC lenses with the A7Riii, but maybe will for the hay of it. However, when using the full frame camera, I save the FF RAW files at 42mpxl and the JPEG files at 18mpxl, as I generally don't use the JPEG files for printing, so there is little point in saving 42mpxl JPEGS. Can you print from 18mpxl files? Sure, even full frame.
One of things I didn't like about the 20 MP A5000 was how it could alias with sharp lenses. The larger pixels in the A7RII and A7RIII show more aliasing. I believe the A7C like the A7III, A7II, and original A7 have an optical low pass filter to reduce aliasing.
I have a Sigma Quattro, which has an APS-C sensor with some very good lenses, such as the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 and Sigma EX 70-200mm F2.8. Using the MC-11 I've tried them on my A7rIII and the results are excellent. It wasn't too long ago that 18mp was considered pretty decent so I have no problem with doing this. You can print to very large sizes with good quality lenses on 18mp so shoot away and enjoy those lenses on the A7RIII, why wouldn't you if you already own them?
Be honest... do you REALLY miss the 8MP? The output on this lens is OUTSTANDING, even on the FF sensors. The 1655/2.8 really is the smallest GM zoom.
I do the same with the A7C. The IQ of these top end apsc zooms is exceptional. I really don't miss the FF experience with these lenses.
The A5000 has a low pass filter as do all you listed except the A7R ii and ii.
Then you haven't used the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 in crop mode. Why would I not use a lens this good, with this speed and range if I already own it and use it on another camera? on my A7RIII 18mp with this lens is more than good enough for very large prints.
If the image is acceptable (I think it is with the 70-350), then the weight savings is worth the extra work i have to do to get a decent frame. Also you get a free full frame 70-150 lens with the 70-350 as it covers the entire sensor in the that focal range.
Difficult but not impossible, I haven't used the Sigma 100-400, so that's something I need to check.
Why? Because Sigma 28-70/2.8 is better in every respect.
I don't think the image quality is acceptable at the long end. Not on a large monitor or large print anyway. I wanted to use this lens to shoot birds, but the feather rendering is mushy.
Weight and aperture is a common trade off, not specific to APS-C. You get lighter lens, which collects less light, and worse optically. Is that an acceptable price to pay for saving a pound of weight? In my view, it's not.then the weight savings is worth the extra work i have to do to get a decent frame. Also you get a free full frame 70-150 lens with the 70-350 as it covers the entire sensor in the that focal range.
Well there's 2 major flaws in that claim, firstly I don't own that lens and secondly it's not better in the F1.8 respect, I also very much doubt it's as well corrected either.
