Sony Sony a7c -- FF in an a6000 body

ggweci

Veteran
Feb 2, 2013
Toronto, Canada
Craig
What a completely pointless exercise. The Sony A7 bodies are already reasonably compact; the problem is lenses - the affordable and reasonably small lenses are generally mediocre, the good lenses are invariably huge and expensive, and a new smaller body will not improve that. I speak as an ex Sony user, both FF and A6000 series.
Not sure what your benchmark is for glass, but Samyang makes a few that fit your criteria and are far from mediocre: 35mm 2.8, 45mm 1.8, and 75mm 1.8 lenses. Their new 35mm 1.8 will also likely fall in line.

Also, if you stretch your budget a bit, and look at the used market, Sony has its own as well like the 35mm 1.8 and 2.8, 55mm 1.8. Also, the 28mm f2 is good enough in the center for many uses.

For zooms, you also have the Tamron selection, which are compact for what they offer.

I’d expect someone willing to spend $1800 on this new body, would also be willing to spend a bit on good quality compact glass.

If not, then FF is not for them and Sony has plenty of nice little APS-C bodies to choose from.
 
Last edited:

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
Lexington, VA
Steve
Some of the smaller lenses are fine. The heavier ones can be better. That is true with the small Olympus primes and the much larger 1.2 primes. The small lenses are less well corrected but are still fine. I have an A7Riii and I haven’t bought G master yet. The small lenses are mostly primes, of course.
 

BrianS

Legend
Jul 7, 2010

$2100 camera and zoom lens, $1800 body only. It will be at my local camera shop.
About $1K more than the EP2+VF2+17/2.8, the last mirrorless camera that I bought new, and $600 less than the Df+50/1.8.

2.36MDot EVF- not much more resolution than my Olympus finder. That is a disappointment, there are much higher resolution EVF's. I'm more interested in using with manual focus lenses and adapters rather than native AF lenses.
 

mnhoj

gee aahrr
Jan 27, 2012
Los Angeles
John
I love it. I've always wanted one.
It's priced way out of my range but I applaud the effort nonetheless.

Create a 7CBudget for $1299 and I could imagine it.
But then again, my RP is doing that for me now.
And I'm hoping that Tamron/Samyang ups their offerings shortly .
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
Lexington, VA
Steve
I love it. I've always wanted one.
It's priced way out of my range but I applaud the effort nonetheless.

Create a 7CBudget for $1299 and I could imagine it.
But then again, my RP is doing that for me now.
And I'm hoping that Tamron/Samyang ups their offerings shortly .
More likely, the price of the A7c will drop and/or used ones will become available. I would be tempted if it dropped enough. I don't use MF lenses or the front dial, so I'm pretty good with this. OTOH, the only real advantage of this one over the A7III is a slightly smaller size and better AF.
 

ggweci

Veteran
Feb 2, 2013
Toronto, Canada
Craig
The A7C is so much "fatter" than it initially looks. That top plate is only partway of the camera's depth. When I watched Kai Wong's video I was surprised at how much the camera keeps on going after the top plate ends.
The silver finish definitely plays with your eyes, making it appear slimmer than it is, but it’s no thicker than the A7iii it’s based off of.

Also, it’s not much thicker than the GX9 or X-Pro3: Compact Camera Meter
 

MoonMind

Hall of Famer
Dec 29, 2013
Switzerland
Matt
I alway forget how bid the xpro series is.
Smartphone post? ;) However, true - and one of the reasons why I opted for the X-E3. The X-Pro2 I held at Photokina felt bigger than my M10 (though much, much lighter). I thought it was a bit counter-intuitive to put a smaller sensor in a bigger, hollow-feeling body. It handles nicely enough, though, much better than any Sony APS-C camera to date, including the A6600. I find that camera somewhat strange, too, because it sports a bigger grip than my A7 II while being considerably smaller and lighter still ... But it feels really comfortable in the hand - not as good as the Z 50, but pretty close, and much better than any A6*** camera before it. That said, I don't mind the A6000's handling - it's quite okay, the camera is extremely small, pretty light, yet feels quite well made.

The A7C looks like a well spec'd mid-range camera in a remarkably small body; FWIW, it may be somewhat thicker than the A6600, more like an A7 II in that respect, but that doesn't mean it'll feel uncomfortable in the hand. It's 15% lighter than the A7 II, and the A6000-type grip is actually surprisingly well shaped to hold and handle. And the small size and reduced weight, still including the beefy battery, is very intriguing and appealing.

What I find increasingly counter-intuitive is the choice of EVF. I mean, even the A6400 has a better solution, similar panel with 0.7x magnification and 23mm eyepoint (the same values as the A6000 - but that camera has a lower resolution). A7C: 0.59x with, wait for it, 20mm eyepoint! For me as a glasses wearer, this sounds like bad news: The worst EVF in a camera I still own is in the GX9, 0.7x magnification, but really insufficient 17.5mm eyepoint; it's bearable, but far from satisfactory - in fact, not a camera I'd recommend if your main reason to choose it *is* the EVF. Still, it's just about usable. More interestingly, the Canon G1X III's finder seems really small, but still has 0.62x magnification (5% more) and a 22mm eyepoint, and it's high-quality, though a bit dim (which I discovered when using the much, much better Z 50) - so, the A7C is probably still usable, but too small to be enjoyable for quite a lot of people, including me. Pity. Especially since one or two millimeters (0.1") of additional heigth wouldn't have made that much of a difference to the body's dimensions, but a big enough difference to the quality of the EVF.

I'm not interested in a camera at that price point that doesn't offer a really good EVF. I think this is a really marginal choice by Sony - design over functionality. Always irritating.

M.
 

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
Jan 19, 2015
Smartphone post? ;) However, true - and one of the reasons why I opted for the X-E3. The X-Pro2 I held at Photokina felt bigger than my M10 (though much, much lighter). I thought it was a bit counter-intuitive to put a smaller sensor in a bigger, hollow-feeling body. It handles nicely enough, though, much better than any Sony APS-C camera to date, including the A6600. I find that camera somewhat strange, too, because it sports a bigger grip than my A7 II while being considerably smaller and lighter still ... But it feels really comfortable in the hand - not as good as the Z 50, but pretty close, and much better than any A6*** camera before it. That said, I don't mind the A6000's handling - it's quite okay, the camera is extremely small, pretty light, yet feels quite well made.

The A7C looks like a well spec'd mid-range camera in a remarkably small body; FWIW, it may be somewhat thicker than the A6600, more like an A7 II in that respect, but that doesn't mean it'll feel uncomfortable in the hand. It's 15% lighter than the A7 II, and the A6000-type grip is actually surprisingly well shaped to hold and handle. And the small size and reduced weight, still including the beefy battery, is very intriguing and appealing.

What I find increasingly counter-intuitive is the choice of EVF. I mean, even the A6400 has a better solution, similar panel with 0.7x magnification and 23mm eyepoint (the same values as the A6000 - but that camera has a lower resolution). A7C: 0.59x with, wait for it, 20mm eyepoint! For me as a glasses wearer, this sounds like bad news: The worst EVF in a camera I still own is in the GX9, 0.7x magnification, but really insufficient 17.5mm eyepoint; it's bearable, but far from satisfactory - in fact, not a camera I'd recommend if your main reason to choose it *is* the EVF. Still, it's just about usable. More interestingly, the Canon G1X III's finder seems really small, but still has 0.62x magnification (5% more) and a 22mm eyepoint, and it's high-quality, though a bit dim (which I discovered when using the much, much better Z 50) - so, the A7C is probably still usable, but too small to be enjoyable for quite a lot of people, including me. Pity. Especially since one or two millimeters (0.1") of additional heigth wouldn't have made that much of a difference to the body's dimensions, but a big enough difference to the quality of the EVF.

I'm not interested in a camera at that price point that doesn't offer a really good EVF. I think this is a really marginal choice by Sony - design over functionality. Always irritating.

M.
Some very amusing (to me) but true observations there. You pretty much hit the nail on the head describing the Fuji to the Leica difference. And as for the Sony design, to think teams of people were likley paid gazillions for design choices like that.
 
Nov 11, 2011
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
Absolutely.....they figured out a long time ago that tiny new "improvements" is the way to sell cameras. And you need to have a new camera every six months, or the buyer might buy something else that is newer and shinier.
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
Lexington, VA
Steve
Smartphone post? ;) However, true - and one of the reasons why I opted for the X-E3. The X-Pro2 I held at Photokina felt bigger than my M10 (though much, much lighter). I thought it was a bit counter-intuitive to put a smaller sensor in a bigger, hollow-feeling body. It handles nicely enough, though, much better than any Sony APS-C camera to date, including the A6600. I find that camera somewhat strange, too, because it sports a bigger grip than my A7 II while being considerably smaller and lighter still ... But it feels really comfortable in the hand - not as good as the Z 50, but pretty close, and much better than any A6*** camera before it. That said, I don't mind the A6000's handling - it's quite okay, the camera is extremely small, pretty light, yet feels quite well made.

The A7C looks like a well spec'd mid-range camera in a remarkably small body; FWIW, it may be somewhat thicker than the A6600, more like an A7 II in that respect, but that doesn't mean it'll feel uncomfortable in the hand. It's 15% lighter than the A7 II, and the A6000-type grip is actually surprisingly well shaped to hold and handle. And the small size and reduced weight, still including the beefy battery, is very intriguing and appealing.

What I find increasingly counter-intuitive is the choice of EVF. I mean, even the A6400 has a better solution, similar panel with 0.7x magnification and 23mm eyepoint (the same values as the A6000 - but that camera has a lower resolution). A7C: 0.59x with, wait for it, 20mm eyepoint! For me as a glasses wearer, this sounds like bad news: The worst EVF in a camera I still own is in the GX9, 0.7x magnification, but really insufficient 17.5mm eyepoint; it's bearable, but far from satisfactory - in fact, not a camera I'd recommend if your main reason to choose it *is* the EVF. Still, it's just about usable. More interestingly, the Canon G1X III's finder seems really small, but still has 0.62x magnification (5% more) and a 22mm eyepoint, and it's high-quality, though a bit dim (which I discovered when using the much, much better Z 50) - so, the A7C is probably still usable, but too small to be enjoyable for quite a lot of people, including me. Pity. Especially since one or two millimeters (0.1") of additional heigth wouldn't have made that much of a difference to the body's dimensions, but a big enough difference to the quality of the EVF.

I'm not interested in a camera at that price point that doesn't offer a really good EVF. I think this is a really marginal choice by Sony - design over functionality. Always irritating.

M.
I suspect that these folks are given a price point. They spend most of the money on the body, processor, sensor, etc., and they do what they can with the EVF, LCD, dials, buttons, etc. The alternative might have been to make a polycarbonate body and then include nicer controls. The problem is that people go nuts about that. They may also believe that this is a camera that will be mainly used with the LCD and the AF tracking. This makes the EVF and lack of joystick secondary considerations. As the improvements become increasingly video-centric, these features drop in relative importance.
 

MoonMind

Hall of Famer
Dec 29, 2013
Switzerland
Matt
I suspect that these folks are given a price point. They spend most of the money on the body, processor, sensor, etc., and they do what they can with the EVF, LCD, dials, buttons, etc. The alternative might have been to make a polycarbonate body and then include nicer controls. The problem is that people go nuts about that. They may also believe that this is a camera that will be mainly used with the LCD and the AF tracking. This makes the EVF and lack of joystick secondary considerations. As the improvements become increasingly video-centric, these features drop in relative importance.
Quite plausible - but it wouldn't have cost them to adjust dimensions and reach into their stash of A6400 viewfinders, of all things - why develop a new, inferior unit if you have perfectly working ones ready? This isn't a smart move any way you look at it.

For me, it actually simplifies things: I'll try to go hands on with the camera, but set my expectations rather low - and I'll most probably pass on it even though it first appeared to be what I hoped for; I'm not paying that kind of money for a camera that doesn't satisfy me completely; if I wanted that, I'd stick with the Sony A7 II - a good camera with some increasingly obvious weak spots (to which it is entitled, being as old as it is). By the time Sony figure out another "improvement", I'll have moved on. Sigma can speed this up, btw. - if they get around to releasing Z mount versions of their mirrorless lenses, my E/FE stuff will either get converted or sold. Still, the A7C seems special enough to make me reconsider - but a mediocre or even sub-par EVF is a show-stopper for me, especially since not everything about the camera is convincing anyway (I'm used to a different kind of I.B.I.S. by now in that class - and a full set o controls) ...

M.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom