First FF: Sony A7III or Nikon D780

Planning to build a FF system. Currently use a bridge Pana FZ200. Its at end of life - LCD is more or less gone, dial mode not functioning properly etc.

Had been planning for last few years but somehow nothing interested me till Sony A7III and Nikon D780 were launched. Both are good enough cameras to build a system around it and should ideally last half a decade or more. Since I do not have existing lenses so I can buy either one. Am well aware of DSLR and mirrorless(pros and cons).

- D780 is more pro grade. Though A7III will more or less match or exceed in some cases its build quality and lens options are way better

- Nikon or Canon mirrorless don't interest me (the ones I can afford). The ones I like is way beyond my budget plus the mirrorless lens will be costlier compared to Sony. Pretty sure that they will catch up with Sony in few years but till that time its going to be costlier.

- I would even be okay with a A7II. But believe its now EOL for that model and hence make no sense to buy one now and not having support in a couple of years

- I have looked at the lenses that I would want to acquire and the DSLR options for Nikon will be much cheaper compared to mirrorless options of Sony.

- Assuming a pro grade body would last at least 7-10 years and the proven lens collection will continue at least for a decade more as lot of professional are still tied up to Nikon and Canon DSLRs

I am leaning towards D780 even though I would want to build a mirrorless system which will be the future. The sole reason being lesser costs in the near future and better pro grade body which will last longer than current mirrorless options available in the same price range.

Not interested in Nikon or Canon mirrorless at this point in time purely due to costs and lens options. Sony has matured quite a lot and there are lot of third party options as well. But when compared to Nikon DSLR system its still pricier.

Need your thoughts on should I go mirrorless or the last of one of best DSLRs in market now. Head says to go with Sony but heart says Nikon (due to pro grade body and better lens options). Though I lean more towards Sony somehow I believe from cost perspective Nikon DSLR would set me up good for more than 5 years. In longer run I may go with Nikon mirrorless so that I stay in the eco system. Jumping ship to Sony or Canon may not wise as DSLRs may be on their last leg and not fetch much.

Regards,

NibedK

What do you shoot, which lenses are you looking at?

Sundre said:

What do you shoot, which lenses are you looking at?

Click to expand...

Landscapes and tele (birds, wildlife etc.). This is purely based on types of photos I have taken over the last 5 years. Portraits and street photography always have cheaper prime options irrespective of brands. I am not much into this currently but am not too worried as these lenses are much cheaper as they are mostly primes

For my non professional use I "got rid of" my D850 for a Z7. My points + for ML were:

- AF points distributed on the entire area of the sensor and not just in the middle

- AF system on the sensor (no lens calibration)

- IBIS

- weight

- IMO a better selection of lenses good enough for a high resolution sensor without breaking the bank or my back.

- silent shooting

Then later, after going trough a Z5, Z6 and Z6II, got rid of entire Nikon arsenal and landed with a Sony A7III with a bunch of Tamron lenses.

I would have loved a D780 as an option when I was changing from my old D750 to D850. But today I can't see a point entering in a DSLR system from scratch.

And selection of good e-mount lenses is enormous.

nibedk said:

Sundre said:

What do you shoot, which lenses are you looking at?

Click to expand...

Landscapes and tele (birds, wildlife etc.).

Click to expand...

nikon doesn't have anything comparable to the sony 200-600, so it's not clear where you think that you are seeing better lens options with a dslr.

if you into shooting bif, later-model milc bodies are a much better option than dslrs, because of things like bird eyeaf and never any need for focus adjustment.

the a7iii came out in 2018, and while it's an xlnt camera, it does not have sony real-time tracking and there isn't any bird eyeaf; you'd be much further ahead by spending an additional $500 for an a7iv.

you could also spend $2k for a used sony a9, it doesn't have bird eyeaf but since it has a stacked sensor the tracking is much better, it has a true blackout-free evf, it'll shoot 20fps with electronic shutter and very little rolling shutter, etc.

Buying a Nikon D780 is buying the past. There is no future in it. Any lenses you buy for it may be usable in the next camera you get, but only with an adapter. Accessories and repairs will become harder and harder to get. Don’t do it to yourself.

Pretty sure that DSLR should be re-defined to “Dead Single Lens Reflex” :-(

Whatever you buy, get a mirrorless. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, OM, … I’d recommend Sony - there are lots of options. There is a healthy used market. There are new lenses and bodies coming out. It’s a live eco-system.

The Nikon is a reasonable option, although most serious landscapers would get a used D800 or D850.

You could put together a Nikon DSLR kit buying used reasonably cheaply, expecting it would be worth much less than you paid for it in five years and you would need to buy a whole new kit to get modern performance.

I know that lenses last longer than bodies and cost more, but it seems odd to buy an A7iii. A used A7iv would be my suggestion - enough resolution for landscape and better AF for wildlife. You could start with a Sony 200-600 G and a Tamron 28-75/2.8 G2 as your core kit, plus a tripod for landscape. Discounts on the 200-600 G come along reasonably frequently.

Andrew
--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post

The A7IV is $500 more. If it is not affordable now it's better to go without a camera and save for a few months more than either of these two options. The IV is the true 10 year camera. I can't imagine being stuck with a dslr for the next 10 years.

Edit: this was a reply to the OP.

blse59 said:

The A7IV is $500 more. If it is not affordable now it's better to go without a camera and save for a few months more than either of these two options. The IV is the true 10 year camera. I can't imagine being stuck with a dslr for the next 10 years.

Edit: this was a reply to the OP.

Click to expand...

It seems however that we agree.

blse59 said:

The A7IV is $500 more. If it is not affordable now it's better to go without a camera and save for a few months more than either of these two options. The IV is the true 10 year camera. I can't imagine being stuck with a dslr for the next 10 years.

Edit: this was a reply to the OP.

Click to expand...

A bit more if you purchase 2-3 CFE-A cards. It is unfortunate that the D780 doesn't offer much more than the D500/D750 did. I'm a Nikon shooter rolling with an A7C and some nice f2.8 Tamron glass for now. It is quirky, but strikes a nice balance and value.

For paid work I can't see not going with Canon. Waiting to see what Nikon releases on the 25th. They aren't even trying to hype up the release, which worries me; for them.

Another vote for Sony A7III

I used to own an a7 III. I now own an a7c, and I have to say that the difference between previous gen auto focus and current gen auto focus is night and day. a7 III was best in class when it came out but there was a huge step function when tracking got good with the a7c and after. I would personally not settle for less than an a7 IV or a7c at this point.

Most has already been said. I'll add a few of my ideas.

1. Idk where you are located but the D780 costs more than an A7III. Many have said to add another 500$ and get the A7IV. Well, if money is tight I'd say get it from the used market - either the A7III or A7IV. You'll find out if the A7III can do the job of tracking birds good enough or not - then you can sell it and get the A7IV.

2. The lens selection is quite big for Sony.

Tamron 35-150 Might not be long enough for birds, but a good walkaround lens and often times the only lens you'll need

Tamron 50-400

Tamron 150-500

Sigma 150-600

Sigma 60-600

Sony 100-400 (takes extenders too)

Sony 200-600 (takes extenders too)

3. I get the DSLR appeal. You can always buy a cheap used Nikon crop body if you feel like shooting through a mirror. Something like a D7100. At the end of the day, if it's a hobby, it better feel good and have some fun too.

Personally at the minimum I'd be looking at the gen IV Sony bodies (A7IV, A7R4)

They are just a big step ahead in almost every way.

As far as the D780 it is a great camera and I hate terms like "obsolete" or "dead system" but it doesn't seem like a good idea to buy into a system with no future development potential.

Also I know you want to go FF but APS-C has got to the point where you can build a system from it too. Only issue there is it's not hard to end up with an APS-C system that costs like 90% of an equivalent FF system. But that is worth a look just for due diligence.

But yea my TL;DR- skip the A7III & D780, look at either FE gen IV bodies or APS-C (Sony or Fuji).

sportyaccordy said:

Personally at the minimum I'd be looking at the gen IV Sony bodies (A7IV, A7R4)

They are just a big step ahead in almost every way.

As far as the D780 it is a great camera and I hate terms like "obsolete" or "dead system" but it doesn't seem like a good idea to buy into a system with no future development potential.

Also I know you want to go FF but APS-C has got to the point where you can build a system from it too. Only issue there is it's not hard to end up with an APS-C system that costs like 90% of an equivalent FF system. But that is worth a look just for due diligence.

But yea my TL;DR- skip the A7III & D780, look at either FE gen IV bodies or APS-C (Sony or Fuji).

Click to expand...

I have an A7Riv and I'm entirely happy with it - my other camera is an OM1. I'd say the A7iv is a more balanced body across the uses that OP intends, especially the improved AF.

Andrew

nibedk said:

Planning to build a FF system. Currently use a bridge Pana FZ200. Its at end of life - LCD is more or less gone, dial mode not functioning properly etc.

Had been planning for last few years but somehow nothing interested me till Sony A7III and Nikon D780 were launched. Both are good enough cameras to build a system around it and should ideally last half a decade or more. Since I do not have existing lenses so I can buy either one. Am well aware of DSLR and mirrorless(pros and cons).

• D780 is more pro grade. Though A7III will more or less match or exceed in some cases its build quality and lens options are way better
• Nikon or Canon mirrorless don't interest me (the ones I can afford). The ones I like is way beyond my budget plus the mirrorless lens will be costlier compared to Sony. Pretty sure that they will catch up with Sony in few years but till that time its going to be costlier.
• I would even be okay with a A7II. But believe its now EOL for that model and hence make no sense to buy one now and not having support in a couple of years
• I have looked at the lenses that I would want to acquire and the DSLR options for Nikon will be much cheaper compared to mirrorless options of Sony.
• Assuming a pro grade body would last at least 7-10 years and the proven lens collection will continue at least for a decade more as lot of professional are still tied up to Nikon and Canon DSLRs

I am leaning towards D780 even though I would want to build a mirrorless system which will be the future. The sole reason being lesser costs in the near future and better pro grade body which will last longer than current mirrorless options available in the same price range.

Not interested in Nikon or Canon mirrorless at this point in time purely due to costs and lens options. Sony has matured quite a lot and there are lot of third party options as well. But when compared to Nikon DSLR system its still pricier.

Need your thoughts on should I go mirrorless or the last of one of best DSLRs in market now. Head says to go with Sony but heart says Nikon (due to pro grade body and better lens options). Though I lean more towards Sony somehow I believe from cost perspective Nikon DSLR would set me up good for more than 5 years. In longer run I may go with Nikon mirrorless so that I stay in the eco system. Jumping ship to Sony or Canon may not wise as DSLRs may be on their last leg and not fetch much.

Regards,

NibedK

Click to expand...

I use a Pentax DSLR (KP) and a Sony a7r iii. I like both. That said, I don’t know that I would buy a new Nikon DSLR. I might if cash was a big issue but a used d750 or d500 and older used glass seems more prudent. The gear is good and it worked well for people when that was the pinnacle of camera tech. I probably wouldn’t buy any new gear in Nikon DSLR’s as they have moved on. I doubt their commitment to DSLR’s. I might buy more Pentax gear new as that system is only DSLR oriented and while product release is slow it’s likely to continue and it doesn’t compete with itself internally for resources.

The f mount ecosystem is rich in selection and the prices are more reasonable these days. But this only works if you don’t mind buying used gear and if you don’t have tech envy. You also have to have a thick skin and not mind being labeled a Luddite for continuing to use what many think is outdated tech.

MILC man said:

nibedk said:

Sundre said:

What do you shoot, which lenses are you looking at?

Click to expand...

Landscapes and tele (birds, wildlife etc.).

Click to expand...

nikon doesn't have anything comparable to the sony 200-600, so it's not clear where you think that you are seeing better lens options with a dslr.

if you into shooting bif, later-model milc bodies are a much better option than dslrs, because of things like bird eyeaf and never any need for focus adjustment.

the a7iii came out in 2018, and while it's an xlnt camera, it does not have sony real-time tracking and there isn't any bird eyeaf; you'd be much further ahead by spending an additional $500 for an a7iv.

you could also spend $2k for a used sony a9, it doesn't have bird eyeaf but since it has a stacked sensor the tracking is much better, it has a true blackout-free evf, it'll shoot 20fps with electronic shutter and very little rolling shutter, etc.

Click to expand...

TBH I want to start with least investment. The two bodies I mentioned are the ones I can afford now. The D780 and the A7III are priced equally with the Nikon one being slightly cheaper. The D850 and A7IV are considerably costlier (am based out of India) and with the money saved I can get a good prime lens.

I had even considered A7II but its not available in this part of the globe now. I am open to third party lenses over a native tele (they being considerably costlier than 3 party ones - in some cases almost double the price). A Sigma 150-600 for either mount will suffice my needs. Assuming it will be easier to sell off lenses and buy a native when I can afford.

My current bridge cam lasted me around 10 years (is still working). Before that I had a Sony A100 which last me for 5 years. I wanted to move to FF but ended buying a bridge because the FF which I could have afforded at that time didn't interest me. Then came the ML brigade and nothing impressed me till the A7III came along which was somewhat mature compared to good DSLRs. I regret not picking up either a good DSLR or ML all these years and COVID didn't help. I don't have GAS and just want to build a system which will keep the hobbyist in me happy. But don't want to end up being penny wise and pound foolish.

nibedk said:

MILC man said:

nibedk said:

Sundre said:

What do you shoot, which lenses are you looking at?

Click to expand...

Landscapes and tele (birds, wildlife etc.).

Click to expand...

nikon doesn't have anything comparable to the sony 200-600, so it's not clear where you think that you are seeing better lens options with a dslr.

if you into shooting bif, later-model milc bodies are a much better option than dslrs, because of things like bird eyeaf and never any need for focus adjustment.

the a7iii came out in 2018, and while it's an xlnt camera, it does not have sony real-time tracking and there isn't any bird eyeaf; you'd be much further ahead by spending an additional $500 for an a7iv.

you could also spend $2k for a used sony a9, it doesn't have bird eyeaf but since it has a stacked sensor the tracking is much better, it has a true blackout-free evf, it'll shoot 20fps with electronic shutter and very little rolling shutter, etc.

Click to expand...

TBH I want to start with least investment. The two bodies I mentioned are the ones I can afford now. The D780 and the A7III are priced equally with the Nikon one being slightly cheaper. The D850 and A7IV are considerably costlier (am based out of India) and with the money saved I can get a good prime lens.

I had even considered A7II but its not available in this part of the globe now. I am open to third party lenses over a native tele (they being considerably costlier than 3 party ones - in some cases almost double the price). A Sigma 150-600 for either mount will suffice my needs. Assuming it will be easier to sell off lenses and buy a native when I can afford.

My current bridge cam lasted me around 10 years (is still working). Before that I had a Sony A100 which last me for 5 years. I wanted to move to FF but ended buying a bridge because the FF which I could have afforded at that time didn't interest me. Then came the ML brigade and nothing impressed me till the A7III came along which was somewhat mature compared to good DSLRs. I regret not picking up either a good DSLR or ML all these years and COVID didn't help. I don't have GAS and just want to build a system which will keep the hobbyist in me happy. But don't want to end up being penny wise and pound foolish.

Click to expand...

Don't worry, DPreview forums can sometimes be a bit like "what, you don't have an extra $5,000 to spend?" Just buy the A7iii and enjoy it, it's a perfectly capable camera.

Speaking as a former Nikon D750 user and current Sony A7riiia user I vote the Sony. Other people have mentioned pros such as IBIS which I agree with but the biggest difference I have noticed in favor of mirrorless is the focusing. The number of focus points is a big benefit as is the accuracy. My D750 struggled in this department and even AF fine tune never really sorted it out. I never liked focus and recompose. My a7riii hits the mark perfectly as long as I am in the right AF mode. Accuracy is pretty much perfect and eye AF works really well. My images turn out way sharper and my keeper rate skyrocketed moving to mirrorless. I can shoot telephoto lenses wide open all day long and focus is perfect. My D750 struggled frequently here. Also, the range of third party quality lenses is big plus for the system. Some of my favorite lenses for the system are :

• Tamron 2.8 zooms (all of them)
• Sigma 85mm 1.4 DG DN
• Samyang 135mm 1.8 (holy moly, can't beat this for the price. Absolutely gorgeous images)
• Sony 35mm 1.4 gm (my favorite focal length so I splurged on the best)
• Sony 40mm 2.5 (tiny and super sharp and great AF)

Good luck with your choice. Sure you will be happy either way.

I would go for Sony it will cover for future expansion/upgrades. The D780 is a solid camera but I doubt there will be longevity in support and new products for the F mount line.