Camera Recommendation

[cpharm86]

I’m a Canon owner so I’m not well versed with Sony bodies. My daughter is looking for a full frame mirrorless body and a versatile walk around lens. Her budget is around $3,000 with body and lens.
I gave her a couple of Canon options namely the Canon R and the R6. The R6 with a lens though would exceed her budget.

I told her that Sony is a good option. I’m looking please for a recommendation with Sony within her budget.

She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery.

Thank you,

Pete

**I could put this on the “Camera, Lens and System Buying Advice" forum but thought I would start from the Sony forum.

 

[ZilverHaylide]

I’m a Canon owner so I’m not well versed with Sony bodies. My daughter is looking for a full frame mirrorless body and a versatile walk around lens. Her budget is around $3,000 with body and lens.
I gave her a couple of Canon options namely the Canon R and the R6. The R6 with a lens though would exceed her budget.

I told her that Sony is a good option. I’m looking please for a recommendation with Sony within her budget.

She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery.

Thank you,

Pete

**I could put this on the “Camera, Lens and System Buying Advice" forum but thought I would start from the Sony forum.

I'm sure the Canon R is serviceable, but as a first-generation mirrorless, undoubtedly has a variety of quirks and areas where it falls short. (It wasn't until gen 3 that Sony produced a full frame that solved many of their earlier short-comings).

If interested in Sony (and as an A7Riv owner, I think Sony is a good choice, for a variety of reasons including lens choices now, not two or three years down the road, as will be the case with the Canon RF mount), then maybe look at the A7iii, which is still a very capable camera, even if several years old.

However, if she doesn't need it right now, many people expect Sony to replace it later this year with an A7iv, which will probably have some significant advances. (And as a side effect, even if you don't care about them, will cause prices on the "iii" to drop, probably by several hundred dollars).

But I have to ask: Does your daughter really need full-frame? How big does she want to print? You said "She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery." The first three of those, and even the fourth if she doesn't print big, can be more than adequately served by APS-C, or even MFT cameras, at lower cost, and smaller size and weight than full-frame, which means that the camera is more likely to be brought along rather than left at home. Maybe look at something like the Fuji X-S10? (Probably stay away, though, from the Fuji 16-80 and 18-135mm zooms, which aren't very good optically. I'd choose the Fuji 18-55 for a small zoom, and maybe supplement it with a longer zoom if she has kids doing sports). Or for Sony, maybe the A6600 camera? Either of those is appreciably smaller than full frame will be, especially once you include a lens or two.

 

[mcslsk]

A7M3 with Tamron 2875f2.8 - "if" she really want's/needs FF (don't wait for the a7IV - will not match her budget with lens). Otherwise a6400 with either E18135 (best reach) or or E1655f2.8 (or Tamron 1770f2.8).

 

[Tristimulus]

For a fun to use camera take a look at the A7c.

Just spend some time to set up the camera properly and it is pretty much grab and go.

Terrific sticky auto focus and very good out of camera JPGs makes the camera a goid candidate for those wanting good pictures in a snap - or go for RAW if that is the name of the game. Fully articulating screen and handy size.

For most 24MP is more than needed (want is something else) anyway...

No - did not say get the A7c. Take a look at it. Might be that... ;-)

 

[swoe]

A7c seems nice for 2100 usd.

BHphoto has the a7c with 28-60 kit lens coupled with a think tank bag, sd card and extra (third party) battery.

The kit lens is apparently quite good too, unlike past sony kit stuff.

 

[AZheaven]

Sony A7III (at 3 years old still a great camera) with either the Tamron 28-200, or Tamron 28-75 f2.8. Both are excellent lenses and should keep her under the $3K budget. There is also the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 to consider. And I'm hearing good things about the Sony 28-60.

My walk around lens is the Sony 24-105 f4. But that may put you above budget.

 

[ahaslett]

Sony A7R3 with Tamron 28-75/2.8 is a small amount over budget but will cover all of the use cases.

If you factor in memory cards, spare batteries etc then maybe you want to buy a used body.

Andrew

 

[cpharm86]

I’m a Canon owner so I’m not well versed with Sony bodies. My daughter is looking for a full frame mirrorless body and a versatile walk around lens. Her budget is around $3,000 with body and lens.
I gave her a couple of Canon options namely the Canon R and the R6. The R6 with a lens though would exceed her budget.

I told her that Sony is a good option. I’m looking please for a recommendation with Sony within her budget.

She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery.

Thank you,

Pete

**I could put this on the “Camera, Lens and System Buying Advice" forum but thought I would start from the Sony forum.

I'm sure the Canon R is serviceable, but as a first-generation mirrorless, undoubtedly has a variety of quirks and areas where it falls short. (It wasn't until gen 3 that Sony produced a full frame that solved many of their earlier short-comings).

If interested in Sony (and as an A7Riv owner, I think Sony is a good choice, for a variety of reasons including lens choices now, not two or three years down the road, as will be the case with the Canon RF mount), then maybe look at the A7iii, which is still a very capable camera, even if several years old.

However, if she doesn't need it right now, many people expect Sony to replace it later this year with an A7iv, which will probably have some significant advances. (And as a side effect, even if you don't care about them, will cause prices on the "iii" to drop, probably by several hundred dollars).

But I have to ask: Does your daughter really need full-frame? How big does she want to print? You said "She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery." The first three of those, and even the fourth if she doesn't print big, can be more than adequately served by APS-C, or even MFT cameras, at lower cost, and smaller size and weight than full-frame, which means that the camera is more likely to be brought along rather than left at home. Maybe look at something like the Fuji X-S10? (Probably stay away, though, from the Fuji 16-80 and 18-135mm zooms, which aren't very good optically. I'd choose the Fuji 18-55 for a small zoom, and maybe supplement it with a longer zoom if she has kids doing sports). Or for Sony, maybe the A6600 camera? Either of those is appreciably smaller than full frame will be, especially once you include a lens or two.

Thank you for taking the time for all these options. I will review them for her. Good points.

 

[cpharm86]

For a fun to use camera take a look at the A7c.

Just spend some time to set up the camera properly and it is pretty much grab and go.

Terrific sticky auto focus and very good out of camera JPGs makes the camera a goid candidate for those wanting good pictures in a snap - or go for RAW if that is the name of the game. Fully articulating screen and handy size.

For most 24MP is more than needed (want is something else) anyway...

No - did not say get the A7c. Take a look at it. Might be that... ;-)

Thank you for these options. Not knowing much about the Sony line I will take a look at this option.

 

[cpharm86]

Thank you everyone for the advice. I will take a look at the similar recommendations along with the lens choices. I appreciate the suggestions.

 

[BrentSchumer]

I’m a Canon owner so I’m not well versed with Sony bodies. My daughter is looking for a full frame mirrorless body and a versatile walk around lens. Her budget is around $3,000 with body and lens.
I gave her a couple of Canon options namely the Canon R and the R6. The R6 with a lens though would exceed her budget.

I told her that Sony is a good option. I’m looking please for a recommendation with Sony within her budget.

She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery.

Thank you,

Pete

**I could put this on the “Camera, Lens and System Buying Advice" forum but thought I would start from the Sony forum.

A7III or A7C + 28-200mm. Super versatile and way below budget. The 28-200mm is far brighter and sharper than conventional super-zooms, making it perfect for travel.

You could use the rest of the budget to buy a supplemental prime lens of her choice later for portraits/low light. Let her use the zoom first and then decide if she wants say a 35mm f1.8, 65mm F2, 85mm F1.8, etc.

 

[cpharm86]

I’m a Canon owner so I’m not well versed with Sony bodies. My daughter is looking for a full frame mirrorless body and a versatile walk around lens. Her budget is around $3,000 with body and lens.
I gave her a couple of Canon options namely the Canon R and the R6. The R6 with a lens though would exceed her budget.

I told her that Sony is a good option. I’m looking please for a recommendation with Sony within her budget.

She shoots for fun, family, vacations, scenery.

Thank you,

Pete

**I could put this on the “Camera, Lens and System Buying Advice" forum but thought I would start from the Sony forum.

A7III or A7C + 28-200mm. Super versatile and way below budget. The 28-200mm is far brighter and sharper than conventional super-zooms, making it perfect for travel.

You could use the rest of the budget to buy a supplemental prime lens of her choice later for portraits/low light. Let her use the zoom first and then decide if she wants say a 35mm f1.8, 65mm F2, 85mm F1.8, etc.

Thank you for the advice. I see the recommendations have the A7iii and A7C in common. When was the A7C announced? I’m not familiar with that body. Good option with the 28-200. Would this be the Tamron?

 

[ZilverHaylide]

Two big things to consider: will she ever want to use the camera for selfies, or for vlogging where she is on camera, filming herself? Either one means she needs a rear LCD with the ability to face forward. (Unless she buys a separate portable monitor, and most people don't want the complexity or expense). Any fully-articulated screen such as on the Fuji X-S10 will face forward, but many tilt screens will not (for instance, I think (but am not sure) that the Sony A6400 allows that, but the better (in some respects) A6600 does not).

 

[cpharm86]

Two big things to consider: will she ever want to use the camera for selfies, or for vlogging where she is on camera, filming herself? Either one means she needs a rear LCD with the ability to face forward. (Unless she buys a separate portable monitor, and most people don't want the complexity or expense). Any fully-articulated screen such as on the Fuji X-S10 will face forward, but many tilt screens will not (for instance, I think (but am not sure) that the Sony A6400 allows that, but the better (in some respects) A6600 does not).

Thanks for the tip. That is something I need to ask her.

 

[ahaslett]

Two big things to consider: will she ever want to use the camera for selfies, or for vlogging where she is on camera, filming herself? Either one means she needs a rear LCD with the ability to face forward. (Unless she buys a separate portable monitor, and most people don't want the complexity or expense). Any fully-articulated screen such as on the Fuji X-S10 will face forward, but many tilt screens will not (for instance, I think (but am not sure) that the Sony A6400 allows that, but the better (in some respects) A6600 does not).

Thanks for the tip. That is something I need to ask her.

You might like to think what the key features are that are within the budget. For example why is FF required? Is the kit going to be a mix of stills and video? Is subject isolation or shooting in low light going to be important a lot of the time? Does landscape mean that higher resolution than 24Mpix is beneficial? What range of expansion to compression is required and therefore what focal lengths?

If you list the critical requirements, then matching budget to kit will be easier. Another consideration is upgrade path, as the photographic skills and vision expand.

Andrew

 

[Craig Gillette]

For Sony ff, it's hard not to suggest the A7iii or A7c and the Tamron 28-200. Theses are the current 24 mp bodies. The A7iii as noted, is due to be replaced but Sony sometimes is hard to predict as to what and when a "new" body will be or when it arrives. The A7c has the most recent focus system so is a little ahead of the A7iii in that way but is smaller and has some other "compromises" to be smaller.

The A7R series are higher resolution, pixel count, but unless making larger prints or serious landscaping, etc., you won't get the benefit of the large files, just use up file space, etc. The A7S series are aimed at low light and video. The A9s are speed demons for high rate action, nature, sports, etc.

It's typical of the forum that if one suggests they "want" ff, there will be those who argue strenuously for other sensor sizes. With at least some justification, as sensor sizes go up, so do sizes, weights and prices, generally speaking. OTOH, as sensor sizes go down, so does low light performance (and price to some extent, weight and bulk). OTOH, if ne suggests they want "aps--c" there will be strenuous arguments as to why ff is the only possible choice for a real photographer.

The same sort of discussion surrounds the Tamron 28-200. It is, indeed, a standout lens. There will be those who argue a 24-70/2.8 (and other lenses to supplement it) is the best/only choice. They'll work their way up to the ghastly expensive Sony GM, then the Sigma, at about half the price of the Sony (a tremendous buy!), then the Tamron 28-75/2.8, which is almost as good, perhaps as good optically, then side leaps to the Sony 24-105/4, then to the tremendous usability, focal length range, starts at f2.8, 28-200 which can replace, for many the f2.8 zooms or the 24-105/4. OK, so it's not going to replace the Sony GM lenses but short of having a really definitive need for one of the others, it's a tremendous ly flexible and very reasonably priced lens.

 

[Tristimulus]

For Sony ff, it's hard not to suggest the A7iii or A7c and the Tamron 28-200. Theses are the current 24 mp bodies. The A7iii as noted, is due to be replaced but Sony sometimes is hard to predict as to what and when a "new" body will be or when it arrives. The A7c has the most recent focus system so is a little ahead of the A7iii in that way but is smaller and has some other "compromises" to be smaller.

The A7R series are higher resolution, pixel count, but unless making larger prints or serious landscaping, etc., you won't get the benefit of the large files, just use up file space, etc. The A7S series are aimed at low light and video. The A9s are speed demons for high rate action, nature, sports, etc.

It's typical of the forum that if one suggests they "want" ff, there will be those who argue strenuously for other sensor sizes. With at least some justification, as sensor sizes go up, so do sizes, weights and prices, generally speaking. OTOH, as sensor sizes go down, so does low light performance (and price to some extent, weight and bulk). OTOH, if ne suggests they want "aps--c" there will be strenuous arguments as to why ff is the only possible choice for a real photographer.

The same sort of discussion surrounds the Tamron 28-200. It is, indeed, a standout lens. There will be those who argue a 24-70/2.8 (and other lenses to supplement it) is the best/only choice. They'll work their way up to the ghastly expensive Sony GM, then the Sigma, at about half the price of the Sony (a tremendous buy!), then the Tamron 28-75/2.8, which is almost as good, perhaps as good optically, then side leaps to the Sony 24-105/4, then to the tremendous usability, focal length range, starts at f2.8, 28-200 which can replace, for many the f2.8 zooms or the 24-105/4. OK, so it's not going to replace the Sony GM lenses but short of having a really definitive need for one of the others, it's a tremendous ly flexible and very reasonably priced lens.

If weight and bulk matter then the 28-60mm might be worth considering. Super compact and good optics. A fine travel lens for ordinary photography.

When travelling light bulk and weight can be a terrible enemy...

 

[ZilverHaylide]

For Sony ff, it's hard not to suggest the A7iii or A7c and the Tamron 28-200. Theses are the current 24 mp bodies. The A7iii as noted, is due to be replaced but Sony sometimes is hard to predict as to what and when a "new" body will be or when it arrives. The A7c has the most recent focus system so is a little ahead of the A7iii in that way but is smaller and has some other "compromises" to be smaller.

The A7R series are higher resolution, pixel count, but unless making larger prints or serious landscaping, etc., you won't get the benefit of the large files, just use up file space, etc. The A7S series are aimed at low light and video. The A9s are speed demons for high rate action, nature, sports, etc.

It's typical of the forum that if one suggests they "want" ff, there will be those who argue strenuously for other sensor sizes. With at least some justification, as sensor sizes go up, so do sizes, weights and prices, generally speaking. OTOH, as sensor sizes go down, so does low light performance (and price to some extent, weight and bulk). OTOH, if ne suggests they want "aps--c" there will be strenuous arguments as to why ff is the only possible choice for a real photographer.

Yes, funny that both should occur. On the other hand, many of us don't really know, until in long-after retrospect, which format really would have been the best choice (that is, made the most sense) for us, all things considered (size, weight, cost, convenience, results). And then things are further muddled by the human tendency to rationalize our past decisions, and by capitalism's desire to sell us something, the sale of which is profitable to the seller but not necessarily the best answer to our needs.

The same sort of discussion surrounds the Tamron 28-200. It is, indeed, a standout lens. There will be those who argue a 24-70/2.8 (and other lenses to supplement it) is the best/only choice. They'll work their way up to the ghastly expensive Sony GM, then the Sigma, at about half the price of the Sony (a tremendous buy!), then the Tamron 28-75/2.8, which is almost as good, perhaps as good optically, then side leaps to the Sony 24-105/4, then to the tremendous usability, focal length range, starts at f2.8, 28-200 which can replace, for many the f2.8 zooms or the 24-105/4. OK, so it's not going to replace the Sony GM lenses but short of having a really definitive need for one of the others, it's a tremendous ly flexible and very reasonably priced lens.

No doubt about it, the Tamron 28-200 is, at the same time:

1) not nearly as good optically as some of the higher-end glass.

2) much more versatile than some of the higher-end glass, and based on their uses, more than good enough optically for many and probably most people.

 

[Craig Gillette]

I've got the A6400 and 18-135. I'm running numbers on the A7Riv and a range of lenses anticipating an "upgrade.". The A6400 and 18-135 weighs about 2 ounces more than the A7Riv body alone. The A7c and 28-200 costs $1200 some dollars more.

There's a lot to be said for careful considerations of the various alternatives. Just noting that there can be a fair amount of dogmatic posturing and/or second guessing that can add to the confusion or noise level when someone is looking for suggestions. Part of the problem is there are so many good cameras and good reasons for a wide range of choices.

 

[BrentSchumer]

Two big things to consider: will she ever want to use the camera for selfies, or for vlogging where she is on camera, filming herself? Either one means she needs a rear LCD with the ability to face forward. (Unless she buys a separate portable monitor, and most people don't want the complexity or expense). Any fully-articulated screen such as on the Fuji X-S10 will face forward, but many tilt screens will not (for instance, I think (but am not sure) that the Sony A6400 allows that, but the better (in some respects) A6600 does not).

Thanks for the tip. That is something I need to ask her.

The A6600 can absolutely flip up. This raises a good point: confirm important considerations with your own sleuthing before using them for buying decisions.