Should it stay or should it go?

[twist]

Aye, I took a quick look at it on the comparing site and size\weight wise beats the 5D3 hands down, but size and weight is why I'm getting rid of the 5D3, I could use my 60D but I've found its not so much the size of the body its the lens that makes it hefty.

Then you should only be looking at M43 IMO. OR perhaps Fuji, depending on what you shoot.

 

[JohnN]

I am pretty much, but you never know whats round the corner.

 

[woof woof]

Aye, I took a quick look at it on the comparing site and size\weight wise beats the 5D3 hands down, but size and weight is why I'm getting rid of the 5D3, I could use my 60D but I've found its not so much the size of the body its the lens that makes it hefty.

I only have two AF lenses for my A7. I have the kit zoom and the 55mm f1.8.

The kit zoom is, for a kit zoom, a quality thing IMVHO and it's quite compact too and personally I'd double check before taking anyones word as gospel when they say that A7 series lenses are the size of DSLR lenses. The specs are available on line and with a bit of Googling you should be able to compare dimensions and weights with any lens out there. The kit lens I have hardly extends at all and it is (from memory) more compact than the Canon and Nikon kit lenses I've owned in the past and it's only a smidgin longer than my MFT 14-42mm when extended. Hardly gargantuan. The 55mm f1.8 is a quality lens and it's about the same width and length as the Minolta 50mm + adapter mounted on my A7 in the pictures I posted, again it's hardly gargantuan and it's reported to be one of the sharpest lenses ever tested by a well known review site.

I'd also personally double check what's going on when told that other sensors perform better. If we're talking Canon then it's likely that the Sony chips in the A7 series have more dynamic range at lower ISO's and although some report better higher ISO performance with Canon there are also reports that Canon achieve this with cooked raws and lost or smeared detail. Believe what you will, after checking the usual review / test sites. Differences between Nikon and Sony performance may be closer but personally I'd possibly view differences between all of this lot as insignificant - except the dynamic range advantage against the Canon's which I personally feel matters to me. The usual review and test sites will have the info you need to make an informed decision.

There are also criticisms of A7 series bodies and lenses on cost. I think that the bodies are well priced and that although some of the lenses may initially look expensive they're actually quality pieces of kit and once you stop comparing them to cheaper but rather ho-hum Canon or Nikon lenses and compare them to kit of comparable quality the prices start to look a little more reasonable.

Personally I think that the biggest valid criticism of the A7 line is the range of native lenses currently available. If you are seriously thinking about buying into the A7 series you should take a look at what's available and the road map of what's coming and see if you like what you see. If you don't there's plenty of choice these days.

 

[JohnN]

I don't doubt its a very good system, but perhaps for me the choice isn't there yet - plus I'd read that the AF speeds left a little to be desired, but then thats true of m43 (well not really - CAF is rubbish but SAF is very quick, just of limited use on randomly moving subjects).

Quality comes with price - the pro m43 are outstanding, better than the Canon lenses I've used for the most part, even the kit lens is very good - but the cost doesn't have to be stupidly high.

Anyway I'm happy that you're happy - perhaps one day I'll get a hands on, but for now it more than my lifes worth to buy into yet another system - I wouldn't make it to the end of the day before my wife killed me

 

[woof woof]

I have MFT but none of the pro series lenses. I have a couple of kit zooms and the 20mm f1.7, 25mm f1.8 and 45mm f1.8. I'd say that all are good enough but the build quality is nowhere near that of the A7 lenses. Not that it matters as I've never broken a lens, yet. Gotta remember though that some modern lenses deliver their good performance with the help of in camera cooking... but maybe Canon and Nikon do that too these days. Personally I think it's perfectly ok as it's the final result that matters.

I used to have a Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 and that was an outstanding lens.

I'm not so sure that the best MFT or indeed other CSC's cameras have rubbish CAF. It's not something I'm bothered about but from the reviews I've seen on line some of the newer bodies are very good and only really beaten by the very best top of the line DSLR's.