Shooting the Sony a7 III around the Pacific Northwest: Sample gallery updated

@aarif Well said. It seems that many of the posters from the A7iii sensor article who claimed the sensor wasn't anything special are now here complaining that the photos aren't anything special. Were they expecting a quantum leap in imaging? As you rightly stated this camera is more about the whole package for a great price.

That's perhaps because Sony's the company that's putting most new and exciting stuff on the market.
I'm all for competition, but at this point in time I only see one company really innovating (and actually launching real products).
Others are struggling to keep up and Canikon is dead in the water.

@ Tommi

Care to read all his other comments?

For test shots these are actually comparable to the regular photos I see posted by most forum members.

Carey has a good eye...by far the best at DP, I don't what you are complaining about.

@Hiroshi
You have misunderstood what this site is. It's NOT an online portfolio for the journalists who work here, who incidentally are all 'real photographers'.

The galleries are there to show what the camera can do, not the photographer. Shooting test shots - in fact testing of any kind - demands as an objective approach as possible.

I feel that DPR staff makes a damn good job at showing what a camera or lens can do.

Maybe you don't understand what they their self-imposed task is...?

They are not in the business of showing of their skills but rather making as congruent as possible small specific-tasks portfolios so those of us who know what to look for can see if "it is there" or "it isn't".

I, for one, am extremely grateful that, on several instances and on account of their continued efforts, I've been able to see things that fell under those 2 categories...many times contradicting, through their hardcore "to the point" samples, the "facts of the masses".

There are at least a half-dozen shots here that would look fine on any coffee-house wall --the fact that they don't meet your taste requirements is irrelevant to me.

If you need to see a 'great photo' in order to understand the potential of a camera and lens then you need to improve your own skills and knowledge. The purpose of these galleries is to illustrate various aspects of image quality across a range of common usage cases. This is not an easy thing to do in itself, and is not something you can do whilst also applying your own personal artistic sensibilities. I have no doubt that all of the DPR staff are capable of producing excellent work if that was their remit, but it would be of little value in a camera review context. I think they do a great job generally.

Well said, Jonby.

may I ask what you expected to see from this camera? Pictures of Sydney Opera House, perhaps? The Hanging Gardens of Babylon? Herds of wildebeest sweeping majestically...?

I think the main problem is that most readers see the name and think it's a girl and therefore = not a real photographer. We still live in the Middle Ages in many ways... 😉

Magnar W: That's too crude for stripes on a textured area, such as the images where the model's face and hair are affected. In many cases, something as simple as the GIMP despeckle or destripe filters can suffice.

Unfortunately, the repairs really need to be done on raw data. Interpolation and lens-correction transformations spread the defect in ways that are not fully repairable.

RawTherapee uses a table of PDAF positions and a simple pattern recognizer to identify pixels to repair; KARWY-SR uses a slightly fancier pattern recognizer so it doesn't need a PDAF position table. RawTherapee repairs using its "bad pixel" interpolation logic; KARWY-SR repairs using very crude texture synthesis with shaped noise. Not surprisingly, RawTherapee and KARWY-SR both make better-quality repairs than is feasible with Photoshop... and KARWY-SR actually produces a modified compressed ARW2 raw file so you can use whatever postprocessing tools after that and not have problems.

i think that it's wonderful that you created the KARWY-SR solution, for those rare times that we need it.

i can see how the photoshop solution might be slightly lossy, it sounds like the KARWY-SR should be better in that respect.

Actually, the kit zoom looks more than decent as a no-brainer one-lens choice. Dyxum reviewers like it 4.09/5 overall: http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/Sony-FE-28-70mm-F3.5%E2%80%935.6-OSS_lens724.html -- the general conclusion is that it's fairly well-made and optically good in the center, but the edges not so much.

Personally, most of the lenses I use are old manual lenses with average cost well under $100 (actually, my 200+ lenses averaged about $25 each)... and they can even autofocus using the TechArt Pro LM-EA7. Even adding the LM-EA7 cost, I'd still have a bag full of lenses for a total cost of $550. This is the real advantage of mirrorless: to make effective use of lenses in any mount. That said, I also have a $1500 Sony STF 100mm -- because there is no other lens that can do what it can do: perfectly apodized bokeh with fast autofocus.

Actually, thee are people like myself who will be getting the A7III as their first semi-professional camera so the kit lens is very important.

To that, I’ll just say “NO”.

Enjoy

It’s most a most enlightening moment when one realizes others have different needs and wants than oneself.

I agree. As someone who shoots both APS-C and Full frame...there is a difference. But I am the only person that can see it and on a 4k screen with full resolution files. Many people who argue for full frame don't understand that most of the benefit in today's mediums is to only themselves.

but if you are in lowlight situation you will see that very easily even not on 4K screen. Thats the time you really need FF. APS-C is barely usable at 3200 ISO in poor lit gyms. This would mean around 800 ISO quality output on FF at 3200. This means I can easilypush full frame to 6400 ISO to have higher shutter speed and much better quality.

You would think full frame has the advantage but it is only if they are from the same generation. I prefer my a6500 over my a7ii for low light because at 6400 iso the a7ii color shifts in the shadows. Something not frequently mentioned

Yes... do we expect something less in 2018?

But what pictures can't show is how great the eye AF, even with the Canon lenses, among other things.

They smell like wet D.C. the stench of dirty politics, and drug infested poverty polished off with gorgeous museums and falic monuments (Actually havent looked to see if they were blossoms in DC but I go there for the massive festival). Really, theyre beautiful to see but they dont really have a scent.

Oh boy, millennial dumbness coming to the forefront.

The images are of The Quad at the University of Washington in Seattle, Washington. Your D.C. reference is Washington DC (District of Columbia) which is 2,321 miles east of Seattle. At least get the correct location and continental coastline correct.

And to MrBrightSide, Richard Murdey is correct, there is not much of a smell to the flowers.

No problem, switching brands is part of the hobby, actually a hobby within the hobby

I would not switch but add. Building a whole Sony lens lineup is very expensive. Pick the lens or two you really want from Sony but keep the Canon for filling gaps. Just a thought.

Yes, sensor reflection ruined many of my shots with the A7. Other then that IBIS, EyeAF and Battery life are truly legitimate reasons to upgrade from A7 and secondhand prices reflect this.

I haven't had a problem with sensor reflection. Would love the battery, slots, and ergonomics of the new body though. A7Rii will probably be the best value used in the next year.

Work with the sensor reflections, not against this flaw. That' s what I do. I often shoot night scenes.

Very good point too.

If you are referring to Canon I think it's very unlikely judging from recent releases that Canon will release a camera that "matches or exceeds" the new Sony cameras. That's why people change to Sony.

You see, my Sony doesn't need a garage. - just a good camera bag like a Hadley small...

I have Canon glass, if it turns out that it will mate with this sony, I might switch at some point.

I think it likely that the Sony mirrorless system is now mature enough to 'match or exceed' the Canon offering, especially on price. In other words, your new 'Merc' might not be as good as you hope.

It’s a scenario guys - no mention of Canon by me! But no one has given a cogent reason in such a scenario why any more than a small minority would switch.....which is the point I think and the problem Sony has.....

Keeping with your car analogy, it's like the new vehicle's specs far exceeding the Merc's e.g. having a top speed of 250 mph as against, say, 150 mph. However, as impressive as it is, it's something you will never use. Stick with the Merc - a highly reliable marque :-)

I don't see any Mercedes, just lots and lots and lots of boring Ford sedans and occasionally a Lincoln here and there,.all work extremely tired designs. This new BMW sure looks more exciting.

Keep the car, keep the caravan, keep the camera
And get this for travel and high iso.
Its luxury don’t rationalize- just enjoy.

This camera is tempting me to jump to full-frame. I know many have called it a "baby A9", but I keep seeing it as a grown-up version of my a6500!

i have A6500, what's wrong with it
for pics that done right in ISO 100/200 it is simply stunning

I bet even pixel peeping one can't see difference with A7 III assume same quality lens

Gato - yes you are probably right about me spending too much time online. It gives me a break during long photo-editing sessions. Sorry if I missed your joke - it can sometimes be difficult to recognise whether someone is joking or just being plain stupid, as I'm sure you must realise.

Absolutely, nothing wrong with having resolution at hand if you need it and know what is needed to extract it.

@Honestly, shooting a 45mp camera hand-held is a crap-shoot.
I think you don't have this kind of camera.
I have, and I can't agree with that ...

You're correct, but that's only half-truth. A camera isn't just a sensor. For example, I also find eye AF and 10 FPS as very helpful features offered by this camera, especially for the price asked. A sample gallery will not showcase them.

Bigger mirrorless is the answer. Holding the Sony by the lens is exactly what I did with their 70-200, but that's a shoot-position, not a carry position. The DSLR bodies are just less fatiguing for the pro and this is why the Sony remains a great enthusiast camera. The less rugged build and lack of sealing is evidence that Sony was not targeting the pro market at all. The newest Sony failed the rain test and stopped working after the battery compartment flooded.

Get the grip. Then you have the best of both worlds.

the grip doesn't make the gap between the lens and the main grip all of a sudden magically bigger.
if Sony is serious about pro business, they'll have to look at ergo design.

I'm not a prosumer. I shoot for money. So do many of my friends. You make my point: The Sony is an enthusiast/prosumer system. They do not have a fully pro body in their lineup yet. I assume it will come.
But you're not going to get working professionals to get behind a new system based on ONE body, especially when they have 30K or more already invested in perfectly fine gear. My Nikon D850 is better than the Canon stuff and most aren't switching to Canon either. Do you really think they'd bother with a Sony? The Sony is a perfectly fine prosumer machine. It's a great camera. But google up comments on the ergonomics and you'll see that the pro world isn't buying. The grip doesn't really fix much and it's actually the only way I ever shot with the Sony. It's uncomfortable compared to the Nikon.

Too funny. When you can no longer troll the specs, go after the subjective "ergonomics" instead. And using your "pro" "friends" is a lame argument.

Ergonomics is important. I have big hands and when I took a look at Sony's offerings, the camera just didn't fit in my hands. My 5DM3 fits like a glove.

The Sony does take clean images. I'm looking forward to seeing what Canon does with their "pro" mirrorless camera.

As mentioned above, the Sony takes nice photos, but there's nothing "lame" in my statement nor is it an "argument." I shoot product for catalogue, but when I do shoot handheld, I want a camera that fits in my hands. You can't just lie about the physics here unless you have tiny hands. Been to an NBA game or boxing match lately? How many Sony's do you see? My friend shoots for HBO and he NEVER sees a Sony. It's split closely between Canon and Nikon, but generally more Canon. Sony can certainly crack the pro market and I hope they do, but it really hasn't happened yet. The highest MP camera today, combined with the best AF and DR is a D850. Period. And I have yet to even hear of a single pro (except in the magical world of the web) thinking the Sony is a good handling camera. But if you like the Sony, GREAT! I love my little Ricoh GRII and that's not a camera a lot of people even know exists. Doesn't bother me!

Now we have mirrorless in all shapes and sizes - pick the one you like :)
Done.

@ MrHollywood wrote: "but when I do shoot handheld, I want a camera that fits in my hands."

I mostly use my cameras outdoor, low and high, and can walk all day even with the A7rIII and GM 100-400 mm held with my right hand, switching to the left hand technique when shooting. I really appreciate not having a bulkier and heavier DSLR when carrying my camera around like this. With smaller lenses, the camera grip is hust fine, never eve thøught of this as a problem.

My guess is that this is mostly what people are used with, then they think that changing habbits will be almost impossible.

What is lame with your statement, is that youbstart talking about how many Sony cameras you have spotted at a boxing match, and adding other possible "problems" when your first conservative argument isn't that well recieved.

Gee - Logic implieas that you cant make a statement without knowing the variables going into it:
YOU ALL dont have hands the same SIZE or SHAPE.
So what is this thread changing into?
Something pointless

cbphoto123: I don' t judge cameras by holding them in my hand for some minutes in a shop. Some cameras takes weeks to be used with, not because ergonomics are bad, rather simply because they are different from what I am used with.

Contd.

Every manufacturer making DSLRs and mirrorless cameras today puts their shutter release in the same place and at the same angle EXCEPT ONE. And guess who that is? That's right - Canon.

http://j.mp/2scJ4Oe

Which is the system you use, which is why when you switch to Sony 'your finger is 2cm from where it wants to be.' As I've said to you before when I wrote you some long replies on 'ergonomics' based on my prototyping experiences as a designer: what most people are talking about is size and PRIOR LEARNING.

It's interesting that you are critical of the placement of the shutter release on Sony cameras but don't criticise any other camera maker despite them having it in the same position. The Olympus camera that you praise being a case in point. It's shutter release is also 'about 2 cm further back from where ones index finger wants to comfortably be'.

@Mr. Hollywood
'The Sony's hurt my hands and I don't see them making serious headway against Canon and Nikon.'

I guess you never used a Nikon Film camera then because that would also have 'hurt your hand'. The A9 is almost exactly the size and weight of a Nikon F3 (It's very slightly shorter in body) The A9 and grip is also almost exactly the height of the Nikon F4 and MD4 motor drive (remember them?)

'Nor do I see Nikon or Canon about to solve the mirrorless puzzle either because the smaller size if the culprit.'

Interestingly for most of the existence of 35mm (FF) cameras they've been about the same size as Sony mirrorless. It's only very recently that they've become as large as they have.

Professionals appeared to have no problem with that size in the film era, which suggests much of the talk about tiny size and 'hurting hands' is product fetishisation and brand dislike more than anything.

Olympus is a GREAT example of a beautifully designed smaller body. All of these Sony defenders should just look at forums. It's not like complaints about Sony ergonomics are rare! It's been a common complaint for YEARS. And let's NOT forget that the Nikon STILL bests the IQ of the Sony, has superior WB and color, pro build and weather sealing, etc. Go ahead and watch the shootouts on youtube by pro's. The #1 issue with Sony is the handling. Let's stop pretending that just a few people feel otherwise. The Nikon D850 is the #1 selling camera and the newest Sony isn't even selling as well as OLDER Nikon bodies.

@CBphoto
Cherry picking? You're reposting images I already linked to.

You said about the Sony:

"and the shutter release sitting about 2cm further back from where ones index finger wants to comfortably be whilst shooting is a simple reality that Sony has still not fixed."

I uploaded pictures of the D850, X-H1, K1, EM1 to show that the Sony button is in exactly the same position on all these cameras.

If you're now claiming that the D850 has its shutter button in 'almost the identical position' of the 5D4, then it follows that D850, 5D4 and A7rIII all have their shutter button in the same position. So where are you getting this '2cm back' figure you're claiming?

@Hollywood
Sony ergonomics became a complaint from people when Sony started beating Nikon and Canon cameras in tests. No-one ever mentioned it before. Not really surprising as product design is the same all over the world, and relies on the same software, applications, the same prototyping routines, the same manufacturing processes and the same user testing. All cameras on the market are more similar than dissimilar.

Usability testing has shown time and again that the biggest obstacle to discovering features on a new system or product is expectation and prior learning.

To put that even more plainly: the assumptions and prejudice an individual brings to the encounter.

https://fstoppers.com/gear/real-world-comparison-between-sony-a7r-iii-nikon-d850-and-canon-5d-mark-iv-216480

OVERALL the Nikon wins most tests against the new Sony, so what are you all talking about? Why are you making stuff up? No one's saying the Sony isn't great. It's the best HYBRID choice for now. But the Nikon D850 is the best still camera for now. And I guess nobody has actually tried the new Sony with its noticeable shutter lag. Did you folks know that the Sony has THREE times more lag? Did you know it has a tiny buffer? Do you know that the rear screen has much less resolution? Do you know that rain may kill it? Do you know that it has 70% fewer lens options? And Nikon's flash and AF system is still superior. Make no mistake, Sony is coming on strong. But Nikon has the best camera out there and more on the way while Canon still OWNS the pro market. Sony has a long way to go. It takes a LOT of years to catch up.

Mrhollywood: Enjoy your cameras. Go on and tell us what is wrong with what you don't use yourself! I am sure we have a lot to learn from you! Actually, I am satisfied with my Sony FF mirrorless cameras, which I use in pretty rough climate. Cold, snow, rain ... and surprise! They do what I expect them to do, without missing a frame. Strange, and hard to believe, isn't it? :-)

I own more Sony gear than you do, but it's video. I don't waste time with hybrid video because I need better quality, which Sony and RED system can deliver. When I want the best still quality I use D850. When I want the best travel camera, then the Sony gets my vote. Different tools for different jobs. But please stop the fanboyism. Sony has yet to crack the pro market and they have no current camera that can do it. They don't have the flash system, the lenses, the weatherproofing and so much else, plus a LINEUP of such camera like Canon and Nikon have. Sony has nothing to match a D5 and D850 combo or D500 and D4s combo for that matter. And Canon shoots 14 FPS with probably the best P&J model going. Sony has to have a SYSTEM if they want to catch a majority of the pro market.

@CBphoto
You told us that the Sony shutter button was 'about 2cm' behind the 5D4 shutter button and Sony 'needed to fix it'.

Then you claimed that the D850 and 5D4 have their shutter button in 'almost the identical position.'

Well here is the picture of the D850 and the Sony A7rIII - also in the identical position, so explain how the Sony shutter button is 'about 2cm' behind the 5D4 but D850's button is not.

http://j.mp/2scJ4Oe

Try to do it without making an insulting remark to me as well.

cbphoto123: Who knows? Have been using Leica, Nikon, Mamiya and Hasselblad medium format, and Sinar large format, and other cameras for work for years. I now use Sony, and they do what I expect them to do for news, reportage etc., also when working in arctic climate. I am not interested in a DSLR, since I want a compact system, and I find the EVF helpful for a lot of situations, like quick and precise MF, low lift work, etc.

Again, if the Sony does the job for you, GREAT! But don't be a fanboy and unrealistic about how it stacks up against pro bodies. Every camera I own has limitations. Some effect me and some don't, but I'm aware of them. My little Ricoh GRII is the best pock camera I've ever used. At 28mm I'd put it's relative sharpness right up there with my D850! But it's a VERY limited camera and I know it. One of the best shooters I know won't touch Sony because of the flash system. Another stays away due to ergonomics. For more still it's the lack of pro build, shallow buffer and so on. Some folks will pass on the D850, because a D4s is exactly what suits them. We can agree on limitations, but there are facts at work and Sony (and other brands) seem to want to pretend that Sony facts don't matter. It's like Trump sold them the Sony! ;-)

Pro cameras? A lot of cameras can be used to successfully earned for a living. High end Canon and Nikon cameras are not needed for most professional work.

No one is born with a camera in their hand - there is absolutely nothing ergonomic about a camera to the person who hasn't seen one before. Most of these arguments are involving learned behavior. Don't want to learn something new? Fine.

Complete nonsense. Ergonomics have to do with a specific area of design and science. You can learn to chop would with a sharp handled axe, but it's obvious that a design sculpted for the hand or MOST hands will work better. This silly notion that ergonomics can't be pinned down is crazy. The industry-wide response and experience is that Nikon and Canon have cameras that are easier on the hands. There's science behind that view as well. Claiming otherwise is cuckoo.

It's rich that you are on this crusade against the Sony ergonomics when you spent years defending your beloved Nikon Df which has probably the worst ergo of any camera in the modern era.

Sorry that I loved the Df. But it was never as comfortable in the hand as my other DSLRs. I just enjoyed using it because it felt more like old film cameras I once owned.
I never considered it a professional tool and only used it on one job.
So YES, we can agree that the Sony ergonomics are poor. You can get past them if you choose to and then you have a truly wonderful camera. I prefer the D850 as a more complete package and system. Sony, being the new kid on the block, has a lot of owners desperate for some sort of street credibility. It's really weird and exactly how the Sony defenders sound. Nikon and Canon have earned their credibility (if that matters to you) by designing cameras since 1948 and 1936. At this point, Sony has just come out with two cameras that are impressive, but not worldbeaters. They're technically competitive. Great, but they need a LOT more work and history before most serious shooters will switch. Many shooters will ADD a Sony, but keep their pro gear.

@CBphoto
Man, you really try people's patience.

I DIDN'T SAY THE CANON AND SONY SHUTTER BOTTON WAS IN THE SAME POSITION.

I said Sony followed Nikon, Pentax, Fuji and Olympus in the placement of their button (and control wheel incidentally) WHICH WAS IN A DIFFERENT POSITION TO CANON.

I said THE OPPOSITE of what you are saying.

+++++++

You then said that THE NIKON AND CANON BUTTONS WERE IN 'ALMOST THE IDENTICAL POSITION'.

SINCE I DEMONSTRATED THAT SONY FOLLOWS NIKON IN BUTTON PLACEMENT, WHEN YOU CLAIMED THAT THE NIKON AND CANON BUTTONS WERE IN 'AN IDENTICAL POSITION' YOU WERE DE FACTO CLAIMING THAT THE SONY AND CANON BUTTONS WERE ALSO IN THE SAME POSITION.

THIS CONTRADICTED YOUR EARLIER CLAIM THAT THE SONY BUTTON WAS 'ABOUT 2CM AWAY FROM WHERE IT SHOULD BE'.

@Hollywood
"Complete nonsense. Ergonomics have to do with a specific area of design and science. "

And Psychology. And yet when I posted - referencing my experience of prototyping and usability testing (I am a designer) you ignored my post.

"The industry-wide response and experience is that Nikon and Canon have cameras that are easier on the hands. There's science behind that view as well. Claiming otherwise is cuckoo."

The fact that you lump Canon with Nikon shows that you actually haven't thought about these cameras in design terms at all. I'll give you an example of three areas where Canon designers made different design choices to Nikon - and everyone else:

Contd.

Contd.
1. On switch. Nikon cameras use a switch around the shutter button, which is a version of the old mechanical shutter locking collar from the film era. It means that the Camera can be turned on single-handedly with the shooting hand as you raise the camera to the eye or remove it from a bag.

Canon has their on-switch elsewhere on the body and ALL Canon DSLRs require two hands to turn on. The Nikon implementation is considered superior from a design perspective as there is no advantage to needing two hands to turn the camera on, only disadvantages.

(This is how design works. There are some instances where it is advantageous to use a routine that requires two hands - an industrial guillotine for example, where one handed operation could involve you injuring your other hand). Sony uses the Nikon convention.

Contd.

Contd.
2. Control wheels. Despite having invented the control wheel with the T90 camera, Canon's implementation of it is sub-optimal. The front wheel is placed behind the shutter release - again unlike Nikon, which positions it beneath the shutter release, and there is no rear thumbwheel at all. Instead Canon relies on a large wheel on the back of the camera for thumbwheel functionality.

In both cases accessing the control wheels means more radial hand movement. The rear wheel especially - and it has to made very large to enable it to function as the thumb is not naturally near it. Sony (and everyone else) follows the Nikon convention.

Contd.

Contd.

3. AV/TV for aperture and shutter numbers. I first encountered this convention when I was a Canon user with the A1. This is an example of a design trope that relies on prior learning, which is considered sub-optimal in design terms.

TV stands for 'time value' which in turn refers to shutter speed, which is the more generally used term. A test subject who had learned about aperture and shutter speed or had experience with using a Nikon camera would be looking for the letters S and A here.

Before you say 'everybody knows what TV and AV stands for' I can assure you they don't and good design practice relies on prior learning (or reading the manual) as little as possible.

Users either learn what these symbols mean from an instructive source such as a manual or a friend or they deduce the function by comparing them against other symbols on the dial. AV might stand for aperture but TV has no obvious discoverability in and off itself and is an example of poor design.

Contd.

Contd.

These are three examples of how a Canon camera is different to a Nikon and in each case the Sony duplicates the design strategy of the Nikon, yet people like Mr. Hollywood will talk about Canon and Nikon as if they are the same in design terms and Sony is somewhere else.

It is seen from what I have written that in these three design conventions the A7rIII is closer to the D850 than the 5D4. The 5D4's similarity is essentially size-related.

As mentioned above, the mimicking of Nikon dial and button placement is really not the key issue. It's the size of the Sony, which renders the entire affair uncomfortable.
This is hardly and uncommon view as it's mentioned in almost every comparison test. When THAT MANY PEOPLE make such a comment, it's clear that Sony's intention is to prioritize the smaller size over ergonomics. That's a SOLID design choice because there are certainly plenty of shooters who also prioritize such a choice. That's why I also own smaller cameras in addition to my pro bodies. But the smaller size does present a comfort issue for extended usage and this is well established if you know enough people working in the profession. But then you can simply google it and you'll read it as well. Not many complaints about the D810 or D850 handling as Nikon has prioritized it above all else. Sony made their choice and so did you. If you're happy, great!

@Mr. Hollywood
Are you relatively new to photography? Did you use Nikon in the film era? I'm very curious as to where this size fetishism originates. I can tell you until recently no-ever talked to me about the size of cameras - it was a non issue. The only camera I ever remembering anyone complaining about was the Mamiya RB67. We just got on with it.

The D810 is a great camera technically, but in terms of design it's pretty much a disaster area. There's no correlation between what it is and its size and shape.

Here's some of my shooting history: Starting in my 20's I was working large format Deardorf 8X10 and doing processing and retouching in a commercial studio and lab. That was more than 30 years ago. Following that I did all sorts of commercial work, mainly for catalogue. Before DSLR's few people really had much care about ergonomics, though most professionals I worked with felt that Nikon started to get things right with the F5. Before that you just did the best you could. There's no fetishism with ergonomics, though advances in that tech is rather new. You seem to want to "wish away" ergonomics as a pseudo science or something where there's no consensus. It's just not the case, which is why we now have standards in ergonomic design. I've been trying out the Fuji X100f over the last few days, and along with my Ricoh GRII, there's no natural way for it to fit in the hand. I can operate it perfectly, yet the contoured hand-sized D850 with grip is far nicer in spite of the weight and size.

Ask yourself a simple question: Which feels better in the hand when throwing?...a baseball, softball or ping-pong ball. Assume they all weigh the same.

@Mr. H
I've told you twice I work as a designer for a living - I know that people skim posts but not sure how you've got to the position that I want to '"wish away" ergonomics as a pseudo science'. My concern is that most discourse on this issue is actually fractured by subjective preference and prior learning rather than any meaningful discussion about variations in design strategies - which exist in camera design but are minimal.

The D850 is a beautiful camera to look at and feels very nice in the hand. It's too heavy and I do not like the feel of plastic rocker switch that Nikon has used for a long while but it's well designed. I don't even think Canon cameras are badly designed - despite the three points I picked out above, what I take issue with is people dismissing Sony cameras for 'poor ergonomics' when they aren't actually making any ergonomic arguments.

@Mr. H
"Ask yourself a simple question: Which feels better in the hand when throwing?...a baseball, softball or ping-pong ball."

You're talking about 3 completely different things. To make a design argument they have to be the same. Pick out 3 different baseball designs, not 3 different type of ball.

Here's something for you to consider. Phones used to be shaped to fit the hand - even mobile phones (cell phones). Now they're flat sheets of glass. Do you read about how unergonomic they are or how people can't hold them comfortably? No. Even though people drop them regularly because they are in fact extremely poorly designed in terms of ergonomics people do not complain. Why?

LOL. So you're a designer, but you obviously need to study up on ergonomics. The answer is BASEBALL. The baseball is sized in such a way as to allow average joints to exert pressure ideally for throwing. Ergonomic basics are established on very simple aspects of human anatomy. The GRIP area of professional DSLRs is roughly standardized for a REASON. It may not matter to you, or you may choose to disregard it, but fact remains that most people find the Sony less comfortable in the hand. At this point all you're doing is defending your purchase and fanboyism while ignoring facts. I think we're done here as you're clinging to something patently untrue and provably so. An A7rIII may be in my future as a travel cam with a small prime. It's just another tool and I can afford whatever I want, thus I have no brand loyalty. If Sony starts building pro bodies that best Nikon is some way significant to me, I'll simply buy Sony. For now Sony has no such camera.

@Hollywood
"LOL. So you're a designer, but you obviously need to study up on ergonomics."

PM your contact details and when you're in the UK I'll bring you into a design studio and you can tell me and all the other professional designers what we don't know and how you can do it much better.

You can sit down in front of a computer and we'll set you a design task - or you can bring in your own project and go through all of the design iterations and show us all 'the facts' you know and we don't know. Deal?

By the way I've never even seen a baseball, let alone held one. Most people in the world haven't.

"By the way I've never even seen a baseball, let alone held one. Most people in the world haven't."

LOL...never saw a baseball? How about a tennis racket? Or the steering wheel of a car?

As I accurately stated, the size of pro DSLRs is fairly standardized. The handling characteristics have been studied and advanced for many. Sony has pursued compact design over ergonomics, which is hardly new. Both Nikon and Ricoh put great sensors into much smaller bodies, which are also less than wonderful in the hands.

Pro DSLRs are sized the way they are for a reason. They are rugged and weatherproofed for a reason. Sony has yet to make a true pro body.

Rob

The A7rIII/A9 and grip is exactly the same size as an F3 and MD4.

See you in the studio.

Yup...had the F3 back in 1985.

Happy to see you comparing the ergonomics of the Sony to a 30 year old design. Hello, Sony? The 80's wants its camera back.

And no, the F3 was awful to hold compared to modern DSLRs. Not even close. We've gone beyond designing cameras like Legos.

Rob

That's a pretty hilarious post. It's "more likely that Nikon and Canon will drop out?"
LOL! Canon and Nikon OWN the pro photography market. Canon is field testing their mirrorless unit right now and Nikon will release theirs probably before 2019.
Canon and Nikon are what people think of when someone talks photography. Sony has a huge battle on their hands to accomplish the same and it's a tougher road because they don't have a pro body out.
Could Sony become the #1 still camera company? Sure they could, but it's rather unlikely. They're not blowing anyone away beyond making a great travel camera.

This debate was over when you compared the Sony models to an F3, The Nikon F3 was like holding a brick. I think the Sony is better, but not by much. Plus the F3 switches felt much better than the delicate Sony.

Rob

@ MrHollywood: What is hillarious, is your conservative view on the camera marked. A view that fits those 50 years + age men who have grown up with Canon and Nikon. Also, your understanding of professionals seems a bit old fashioned, like no pros can survive without using the most expensive large bricks from C/N - if they don't use even larger format cameras. Modern cameras are not mechanical products, they are electronic products.

Professional photography is about earning for a living, and in the higher leagues even more about content and communication, and about satisfyng clients. Not about satisfying your own ego! Who knows, maybe you need such a large gamera with the "right" logo to feel like a real photographer? LOL!

Sony has both a pro body and a semi pro body. I don't understand why you would try to pretend these cameras don't exist.