Camera Recommendation

[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.

You can use this as a lens buying guide. First the date is incorrect. The Tamron 28-200 is on the list, as is the Tamron 70-180. So this list is "up to date" as of summer of 2020. Second, even though it says lenses for the A7RIV it's still useful for other Sony cameras. I've used it for my A7III. At least it's a starting point.

https://sonyalpha.blog/2019/11/10/which-lenses-to-maximise-the-potential-of-the-sony-a7riv/

I wouldn’t take the order of those as more than indicative. Having spent a long time comparing Sony 24-105/4 reviews to Tamron 28-75/2.8, the distance between them is surprising, maybe due to copy variation. I also find the order of the 90/2.8 and 55/1.8 a bit odd. I have both and most sources agree that the 90mm is an outstanding lens at distances up to 10m.

The MTF tables complied by JohnNEX are a useful guide.

Andrew

It's not 100% accurate I'm sure. But nothing really is. But reviews and this guide are pretty on mark. And my pro friends use it and agree it's accurate.

Is a novice really going to care about absolute sharpness vs handling, flexibility, etc? Sharpness is a bit of a fetish, with diminishing returns.

I'm a novice. And sharpness is important to me. As it should be.

Sharpness matters to a certain threshold. The OP is considering 24MP cameras and the blog talks about resolving 61MP sensors.

Regardless, sharpness should not be the only optical quality you consider in a lens. For example, a sharp lens could have awful chromatic aberrations, distortions, or other issues. And people routinely make weight/price vs sharpness tradeoffs.

 

[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.

A7C + Tamron 28-200mm + Samyang 35mm 2.8 + Samyang 18mm 2.8

That covers a lot.

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.

Thank you

 

[Tristimulus]

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.

You can use this as a lens buying guide. First the date is incorrect. The Tamron 28-200 is on the list, as is the Tamron 70-180. So this list is "up to date" as of summer of 2020. Second, even though it says lenses for the A7RIV it's still useful for other Sony cameras. I've used it for my A7III. At least it's a starting point.

https://sonyalpha.blog/2019/11/10/which-lenses-to-maximise-the-potential-of-the-sony-a7riv/

I wouldn’t take the order of those as more than indicative. Having spent a long time comparing Sony 24-105/4 reviews to Tamron 28-75/2.8, the distance between them is surprising, maybe due to copy variation. I also find the order of the 90/2.8 and 55/1.8 a bit odd. I have both and most sources agree that the 90mm is an outstanding lens at distances up to 10m.

The MTF tables complied by JohnNEX are a useful guide.

Andrew

It's not 100% accurate I'm sure. But nothing really is. But reviews and this guide are pretty on mark. And my pro friends use it and agree it's accurate.

Is a novice really going to care about absolute sharpness vs handling, flexibility, etc? Sharpness is a bit of a fetish, with diminishing returns.

I'm a novice. And sharpness is important to me. As it should be.

Novices are often obsessed with sharpness and extreme corner sharpness seems to be especially highly valued. Well - sharpness is easy to measure and easy to comment. Not so with the more subtle qualities which more seasoned ones like to appreciate.

Sharpness matters to a certain threshold. The OP is considering 24MP cameras and the blog talks about resolving 61MP sensors.

Depends upon how the files are used. In my case where the images are shown on screen or projected and never printed large (40x60 inches or larger) the 24MP deliver all the resolution I will ever need.

But that little extra sharpness and those extra pixels are very tempting to the majority. But then want is something entirely different than need...

Regardless, sharpness should not be the only optical quality you consider in a lens. For example, a sharp lens could have awful chromatic aberrations, distortions, or other issues. And people routinely make weight/price vs sharpness tradeoffs.

Very often mechanical quality is not considered either. Would rather have a lens that focus fast and precise and stays collimated after years of use than the low priced version where the center sharpness might be a bit better.

Personally bulk and weight matter a lot more than sharpness only and I kind of regret not getting the 28-60 kit lens with the A7c. In many ways a perfect lens, but not made for pixel peepers. ;-)

 

[john_name_taken]

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?

A7C was announced about 5 months ago. It has better autofocus (but keep in mind that A7III AF is very good) and better video capabilities than the A7III. I pair the Tamron 28-200 with my A7R3, and it's my walk-around lens.

The A7C is smaller than the A7III and features a weaker rangefinder EVF, 1 card slot, and weaker physical controls in exchange for size. But it also features the amazing new Sony AF. It's a good option for right-eyed shooters who don't plan on using huge lenses for things like birds.

A friend of mine took his a7c to an air show, and he paired the camera with 100-400GM and 600GM. I’d seen him taking BIF with a7c+600+1.4 x :-D a7c AF is much better than a7iii.