Sony A73 vs A7R2

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
124
Lexington, Virginia
Steve
I returned my used A7R2 for various reasons and decided I’m going to get a new one. However, I can now look at the A73 for only $200 more. My thoughts are:

A7R2:
1. I think I would enjoy the higher resolution. I like detailed images and crop space.
2. It is a bit cheaper.
3. Not too worried about file size. I upgrade my system every few years and storage is cheap.
4. The A7R2 would nicely complement my 24 mp Fuji XH1
5. No blazing action AF here for the occasional opportunity.

A73:
1. Not a big action shooter, but I do have a 15 month old granddaughter. The eye focus is very tempting. I think the A7R2 has eye focus as well but it’s not as fast and the Fuji is just ok with face detect. The focus advantages of the A73 are mostly driven by this little girl, but she has considerable influence with me.
2. The Fuji XH1 with IBIS and an XE3 produce excellent 24 mp images.
3. Although the XH1 is good in low light, it seems like the A73 is the champ. I love shooting at night, especially when I travel. OTOH, the fast FE primes are big and pricey and i’ve been looking at smaller 2.8 primes. I can stick the 35 1.4 on the Fuji and that’s two stops recovered. I have also read that the A7R2 is no slouch in lowlight either.
4. I’ve read the ergonomics are better on the A73 relative to the R2 and I do like a joystick.

Of course, both Fuji and Sony have lousy touch screens, although the A7R2 has no touchy capability.

So you see my problem. The A7R2 gives me some extra hi Rez capabilities in my kit. But if the A73 had enough advantages I could sell the XH1, buy a fast lens, and keep the Fuji stuff as a a lightweight kit with the XE3. So, it’s really a kit decision. The A7R2 and XH1 kit with good 24 mp and hi Rez capability or the A73 with perhaps “essential on occasion” superior AF and great 24 mp capabilities. Not a video guy as you can tell, but the nod there would go to the A73.

Thanks for reading. It helps just to write it all down, although I’m happy to read some comments.
 
Last edited:

jyc860923

Veteran
Aug 29, 2018
104
Shenyang, China
贾一川
To me it's worth buying the a7III, you already listed the reasons, if you don't care about the absolutely best AF capabilities of the A9 and newer APS-C a6100/6400/6600, then the a7III is the next best thing, or the most balanced one.

I guess you could choose either a7III or a7RII, but buying that older model only for the higher resolution seems like half measure to me, do you want to be reminded of the other choice you could've made every time the AF fails to catch up?

Besides the a7III has really clean high ISO.
 
Oct 20, 2012
104
The Netherlands
Ad Dieleman
I own the A7Rm2 and really the only advantages I see over the A7m3 are its 42 MP resolution and lower price. If you absolutely want that high resolution, I'd go for an A7Rm3 and otherwise the A7m3 may be the best choice.
 

TraamisVOS

Hall of Famer
Nov 29, 2010
124
Melbourne, Australia
Resolution isn't a priority for me because higher resolution doesn't always mean better IQ. And I really don't need to print a billboard-sized photo. For me personally, I'd go for the latest A7, it's a solid performer with excellent IQ, it does everything I will ever need from a full frame camera AND it produces excellent video.

If we're talking about higher resolution on a medium format camera, that's different. The sensor is bigger, there is actual physical space (ie. larger sensor photosites) for higher resolution and IQ. I'd want that.
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
124
Lexington, Virginia
Steve
You know, the A7Rm3 is now down to $2500 vs $2000 for A7m3. And the Mark IV is only a thousand more! This is a rabbit hole even Alice should avoid. :p The upside of all this is that they are offering older bodies like the A7Rm2, which is still an amazing camera. I did notice at B&H that the original A7 (new) is on backorder. Either they are finally running out or they are selling out. Sony seems to really be running the A7 line (and I guess AX000 line) like the RX100 line.
 

rayvonn

All-Pro
Jan 19, 2015
124
If you're into using legacy lenses, then the A7RII looks like the one, I mean surely the used price will tumble down with the release of the IV.
 
Oct 20, 2012
104
The Netherlands
Ad Dieleman
Wasn't there some kind of problem with legacy lenses not originally designed to resolve the high level of resolution from these ultra high res sensors?
Mainly rangefinder wide-angle lenses present problems, excessive field curvature and color shift towards edges and corners. A lot of legacy lenses for SLRs do just fine; my Zeiss Contax 2.8/28 is excellent, also into the corners, and for instance the Minolta MD 4/17 isn't super-sharp but holds up well across the frame. A good legacy lens can give excellent performance on the 42 MP sensor of my A7Rm2. SLR lenses needed to clear the mirror box and so their ray angles on the sensor aren't as oblique as wide-angle lenses for an rangefinder camera where the glass elements sometimes almost touch the film plane/sensor. I had the Minolta M-Rokkor 2/40 for a short time, but sold it because it needed stopping down to f/8 to perform acceptably across the frame. The Zeiss Loxia 2/35 is a rangefinder design, tweaked for the sensor toppings of a Sony FF camera, and it shows: at f/2 image quality is not very good and it needs stopping down to f/8 to get really sharp across the whole frame. But stopped down a bit, oh my, it's gorgeous.
 

rayvonn

All-Pro
Jan 19, 2015
124
Wasn't there some kind of problem with legacy lenses not originally designed to resolve the high level of resolution from these ultra high res sensors?
Yes, apparently. Not that I've had any experience. Wouldn't bother me so much. A FF body to be used for my Takumar and Nikkor AI-S lenses which are just sitting there doing nothing.....it's about the fun isn't it.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom