Sony A7RIII in stock! Links…

4 Comments

1. Steve what inspired you with the a7riii? Leaving rangfinder because of your eyes failing only? We have the a7ii a7s a6000 of course bought bec of your reviews and bunch of lenses. I dont know why but when I look at the pic it doesnt inspire me like the M9. I fail also in focusing sometimes bec my eyes are of unlike before. Is it because of the aa filter results why the pics seem flat ir something? A7riii doesnt have it right? Before spending i want to understand how can the a7iii inspire me personally or I should just give up and go for the M10 which is so expensive compared to a7riii.

   • I have owned an A7 series camera since they launched so I have always had one. The A7rII was my most used camera for nearly three years. Technically, and quite the fact, is that the Sony A7RII (and now III especially) beat the pants off any Leica for IQ while offering a superb EVF, great battery life, blazing fast speed (in the II and A9) huge DR and fantastic low light. In other words, there is nothing a Leica beats a Sony at besides design and build/feel. I have shot the Leica M, SL and Sony camera side by side for years and the Sony’s are not flatter than Leica shots, it all depends on the lens you use, how you process the RAW file, etc. Use a 50 Lux on a Sony and Leica and you will get nicer color from the Sony today (with the III and A9) as well as more versatility. In some cases, some Leica lenses perform better on a Sony, it’s true. The problem I see is that Leica (these days) keeps upping their prices, charging the same high money when other cameras are now out that can beat them in all areas besides the name tag, design and of course the RF (which no Sony will ever have). But for the money, a Sony is a much better camera as you save thousands, have more versatility, have better low light capabilities, have much more dynamic range and lens options (you can use Sony, Nikon, Canon, Leica lenses, etc) as well as professional video quality and features.

     As for inspiration, I have stated many times that Sony’s are not “inspirational” cameras, and that truly does matter! This is why I own a Hasselblad X1D. That is my fave camera of all time, period. That camera delivers the inspiration to me more than any Sony or Leica can. So my Sony’s are for when I NEED THE shots or video and my X1D is for my more passionate and artistic side.

     The Leica M9 was amazing for its time as nothing else out there was like it. There were no real mirrorless cameras yet so Leica could charge that and sell a ton as they were 100% unique and it was still at the start of Leica’s entry to digital really. Today not so much as most see the cost of Leica today, is not warranted on some of the items.

     The Leica 75 Noctilux, IMO, is ridiculous in price and a slap in the face to most Leica fans. The output from it looks similar to many much less expensive Chinese f/0.95 lenses for color and sharpness. $13k for this 75mm f/1.2 is absurd, especially today. I have yet to see any kind of magical shot taken with it, quite the opposite in fact. I’d pay $3500 max for it. But that’s me, some will and have bought it already. For me, an X1D and a couple of lenses is a much better buy.

     Now, with all of that said, I love Leica. I love the M10, the SL and like the CL and Q as well. But even if they were the same cost as an A9 or A7RIII, the Sony would still be the better cameras in all ways besides…design, which is gorgeous with the Leica and not so much with the Sony. I think the standout Leica product is the Q, even today. Price is right, quality is superb, lens is great, and it delivers a unique yet not antique experience. If I were to buy a Leica today, it would be the Q.

     With a Sony use great lenses like the Zeiss Batis or Loxia line or the Voigtlander 40 1.2 or 35 f/3.5 (my reviews are all here and the IQ is gorgeous from these lenses) with your Sony and it will not leave you wanting for IQ.

     At the end of the day, if design and the name inspire you, then the M10 would be a better buy for you as inspiration helps drive you to create. Sony’s are not inspirational IMO : ) If you want to save money, have a camera that will deliver every time no matter the lighting or situation, and one where the RF will never go out of alignment (the M10 will require RF alignment probably every year if you want critical focus capability) and it will deliver 1500+ images on a charge then the Sony truly can’t be beat in full frame mirrorless.

     I love them all, and still have a soft spot for the SL with M lenses but have lost my true passion for the M due to my eyesight and the fact that I have now seen 2-3 out in the wild with rangefinders that were out of alignment AND one that broke while I guy snapped a shot (shutter failed, had to be sent in for an 8 week repair). For the cost these sell for, this should not still be happening with the M10.

     I feel Leica’s digital peak was with the M8 and M9 because there was simply nothing else like them. Mirrorless really did not exist in any kind of good way yet and all we had were the big Nikon and Canon’s, then the early Micro 4/3 which were slow and awful in performance.

     So with all of this intense competition today, I feel it is much tougher for Leica.

     But if you go with an M10 I am sure you will love it. It’s a beautiful camera and capable and yes, it can inspire you to use it. At the end of the day, that may be more important than all of the other things Sony brings to the table, for some.

     Good luck with your decision.

2. I missed the A7R III review here, can you provide a link please. Thank you.

   • Search tool works fantastic. There have been several posts, image samples, videos and reports on the A7RIII here:

     http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/?s=sony+a7rIII

     With more to come. Thanks

Comments are closed.