A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
deathvalleydave
Heirophant
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:35 am

A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by deathvalleydave »

I would like to get people's thoughts on if I made this move, which is mainly being thought about due to Sony possibly dropping the OVF from their Full Frame line.

I currently use with A900:

Sigma 12-24
CZ 24-70
Sony 70-300G

I would get with 7D:

Sigma 8-16
Canon 17-55 2.8
The New Tamron 70-300

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the 7D would have the edge with the Sigma 8-16 (rated 'Highly Recommended' over at Photozone) and the new Tamron 70-300 (because it would be an effective 480mm on the 7D), but the standard zoom range would not due to stiff competition with the CZ 24-70 (I think only the Nikon 24-70 is the only other standard zoom that has greater resolution than the CZ 24-70).

I also do not want to pay more for 36mp cameras and lenses they will require. Therefore, if I wanted to switch systems from Sony to Canon - because I don't trust Sony on where they are going with SLT and EVF's, and wanted to pick Canon, but not their full frame line (because I want to start using a 'lesser' camera and try to get great IQ results also), what would be your brutally honest answer to my questions, as Sony DSLR users?

Thanks in advance for any input here...
redsim74
Oligarch
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 11:50 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by redsim74 »

Personally, I think it sounds a bit drastic at this stage - though you haven't mentioned a time frame.

If the A900 is meeting your needs now I'd probably wait a bit. It's not likely to lose much in the way of value, and we'll likely be seeing new models later in the year from all the mounts.

The 7D seems a great camera and would likely meet your needs if you are determined to go back to APS-C. I'd just be concerned you're looking for "any way out" over Sony's current direction, which never seems a good way to make a decision.

FYI, I was looking to replace my A700 with the A77 but decided against it, so I've not jump on the SLT wagon myself as yet.
David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 5985
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by David Kilpatrick »

I think you would be losing out. You would first of all be swapping the 12mm for a 14mm equivalent or a bit less, especially if you use ACR lens correction - the 8-16mm is a better lens than the 12-24mm for consistent sharpness across the frame, but it has a little more distortion and loses a little more of its angle when corrected.

The Canon 17-55mm would be a very bad choice (I see someone is selling one off s/h on the MPA's forum - it is not a lens professionals keep very long). It is not very sharp, it's big, and it lacks a decent wide angle end - 27.2mm equivalent, not close to 24mm. You need a Canon lens going from 15mm.

The Tamron would be a good choice, I have one here and I reckon it's a better lens than the SAL 70-300mm G, not to mention a much neater design and better build feel. However, be warned, my review sample on Sony has terminal back focus (HUGE) on some bodies.

I've used the 7D twice for periods. It is not a camera I would ever buy, it has the twitchiest AF ever made and the AF module covers far too much of the frame - things really close to the edges can end up getting focused on. It also has very high noise levels, concealed by processing, which make Sony noise levels seem minimal. Red image detail is colour-blurred to a real extreme with the 7D. It would be a very poor substitute for an Alpha 900 if you value the quality of colour rendering and contrast range within the image.

David
Heidfirst
Oligarch
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:07 am

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by Heidfirst »

deathvalleydave wrote:
and the new Tamron 70-300 (because it would be an effective 480mm on the 7D
it stays a 70-300mm on crop. the fov changes but you can already get that by either cropping from an A900 ff file or shooting your A900 in crop mode.

If you are happy with the results that you are getting with the A900 i would keep it.
However, if the 7D can do something now that is important to you that the A900 can't (e.g. I suspect that once you get used to it & have it dialled in the 7D AF is better for sport etc. than the A900's AF) then maybe consider a change.

Bear in mind that a few years down the line I expect that all but a few bodies from all manufacturers will be EVF rather than OVF so jumping to Canon may just put that off a bit rather than avoid it completely..
deathvalleydave
Heirophant
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:35 am

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by deathvalleydave »

Thank you all for the input - this makes me feel better about keeping my A900, and my A900 overall as an investment.

Please don't write back suggesting that I get a 2nd A900 body - because that's something I prefer not to do because I'm just an enthusiast, and I guess now I'd rather take my chances and see what the future holds. I'm at least happy that Sony solved the 'ghosting' on the A55 - which was a microscopic non-issue at best, and I'm sure newer Sony models will have better chroma noise characteristics from the A900.

So far, my CZ 24-70 has probably kept the A900 with me, and the A900's OVF can be a collector's item.

Is it possible that Sony might have a hybrid type viewfinder up their sleeves? i.e. what happened to those old rumors of a 70% EVF coupled with 30% OVF? Or, did I misinterpret that from that time? I'm just wondering if they can impove the resolution of an EVF by including some natural light? Or, is that impossible? Surely, it will be very interesting to see what the A900 replacement(s) will be!

Thanks again - Dave
lonewolf16x9
Heirophant
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 9:45 pm
Location: Carlisle Cumbria
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by lonewolf16x9 »

David hit the nail on the preverbial head, I owned a 7D for a couple of months last summer and the image uality is gritty to say the least, hidden as David says by processing, I too had AF problems with it, the D7000 I had was better but had it's own problems, the A850 is in a different league.
Bottom line is you would miss the image quality of your 900, keep it with your CZ 24-70 it's a classic combination that has currently few if Any Peers...
Second body wise, I'm getting one soonish because mines been away at Sony for five weeks for a supposed five day repair, I'm paranoid about being left without a Camera, your mileage may vary there and another body is a huge investment.
As for the future we'll have to wait and see, if Sony do drop OVF Completely then I'd expect prices for A850-900 to rise a little so you have time to decide I'd say.
I would hope that the EVF in the A99 or whatever would be superior in lag/startup times over the A77 if not in actual specs, if they take the very expensive Viewfinder out of the equation they may bring Full Frame (Hate the term!) prices down to almost D400 expected RRP, Or within a couple of hundred GBP/Dollars of that, which could be significant leverage for some people, I would expect the price of a Nikon/Canon FF Gripless body to be much higher, the price needs to be right. Unfortunately thats not Sony's forte...
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd
www.exaggeratedperspectives.co.uk
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

I've tried a 7d it was quite nice (as far as I can like Canon) I'd say a decent choice for sports and wildlife shooters not my cup of tea though but I'm not a fan of the 1.6x crop factor (esp for WA)

I'd say it's overdue for a replacement very soon.
On the Tamron SP 70-300mm VC USD I've heard it's a good lens and well priced not used it myself but I'm chewing tele zoom options currently too.
User avatar
Jasper_D
Heirophant
Posts: 76
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:28 pm
Location: Lausanne - Switzerland
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by Jasper_D »

I was asking myself the question of what the change would bring to you, compared with the high IQ out of your actual setup? Nothing except a built in 1.6TC, for all I can see, especially no better quality at all, IMO.

If I were you, I´d keep what you have while you don´t know exactly where Sony is heading; it´s still fully functional isn´t it?
I´m doing the same right now, unknown future so I am a bit worried. Not too much though, I have extended Sony warranty until April 2014, but I hope my gear will hold on much longer, especially as I´m already cutting on usage by investing into the upcoming Fuji X-Pro1; it will replace the A900 for my street photography, about 50%, so should keep my A900 (and even A100) running quite a bit longer, hopefully long enough. :?

Like you however, I´m keeping the wallet tightly closed on new Sony investments, until such time I see progress and renewed confidence in the products. If not, when my A900 breaks, if Sony has nothing to offer by then, I´ll most probably switch to a Nikon for the remaining FF part. What I´m not spending right now goes straight into the piggy bag for when that time comes, if ever.
User avatar
[SiC]
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:16 am
Location: Hammarö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by [SiC] »

bfitzgerald wrote:On the Tamron SP 70-300mm VC USD I've heard it's a good lens and well priced not used it myself but I'm chewing tele zoom options currently too.
I have one for my A700 and like it a lot. Had two dirt cheap Sigmas before - fuzzy at 300mm, quite some CA and finally the AF gears broke down...
I miss the macro mode of the Sigmas though.

/Z!
Sony A700, A580, Nex-5t, KM D7D & VC-7D, M Dynax 500si
KM 17-35 F2.8-4 D, M 50 F1.7 RS, M 135 F2.8, M 28-100 F3.5-5.6 D, M 100-200 F4.5, T 70-300 F4-5.6 Di USD, S 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM, S 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Sony hvl-f42s, Minolta 3600 HS D
Sony Z1C & Z2
User avatar
Greg Beetham
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6117
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by Greg Beetham »

I wouldn’t go from a FF A900 with the lenses mentioned to an APS-C 7D unless you had some specialized purpose in mind that only the 7D can do but I can’t think of what that might be offhand. I looked at the A900 a few times myself as a good scenic/general purpose camera but the cost of it plus upgrading lenses put me off, besides to be really useful these days a camera needs a flip-up flash for WL and Sony didn’t put one on the camera so that put me off as well.
But otoh if I had lashed out and bought one and some expensive glass for it I don’t think I’d be in a hurry to part with it, not for an APS-C camera at least.
Greg

Ps I've often thought of getting a Sigma 70-300APO just for that quality glass and only using it MF.
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

[SiC] wrote:
bfitzgerald wrote:On the Tamron SP 70-300mm VC USD I've heard it's a good lens and well priced not used it myself but I'm chewing tele zoom options currently too.
I have one for my A700 and like it a lot. Had two dirt cheap Sigmas before - fuzzy at 300mm, quite some CA and finally the AF gears broke down...
I miss the macro mode of the Sigmas though.

/Z!

Interesting is it decent at 300mm without stopping it right down?
The problem I have now is for F mount I've quite a lot of choice for a decent (but not fast) tele zoom.
User avatar
[SiC]
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:16 am
Location: Hammarö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by [SiC] »

bfitzgerald wrote:Interesting is it decent at 300mm without stopping it right down?
The problem I have now is for F mount I've quite a lot of choice for a decent (but not fast) tele zoom.
The Tamron? It is very good on my A700, no need stopping down at all... It has some small edge CA in extreme conditions but I have had good luck removing it in RawTherapee. Maybe the Nikon will remove it in camera? Or is it only for jpeg...

Maybe I can find a sample if you want? Didn't have a good one online.

/Z!
Sony A700, A580, Nex-5t, KM D7D & VC-7D, M Dynax 500si
KM 17-35 F2.8-4 D, M 50 F1.7 RS, M 135 F2.8, M 28-100 F3.5-5.6 D, M 100-200 F4.5, T 70-300 F4-5.6 Di USD, S 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM, S 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Sony hvl-f42s, Minolta 3600 HS D
Sony Z1C & Z2
User avatar
[SiC]
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:16 am
Location: Hammarö, Sweden
Contact:

Re: A900 for Canon 7D - Would I be crazy?

Unread post by [SiC] »

Sony A700, A580, Nex-5t, KM D7D & VC-7D, M Dynax 500si
KM 17-35 F2.8-4 D, M 50 F1.7 RS, M 135 F2.8, M 28-100 F3.5-5.6 D, M 100-200 F4.5, T 70-300 F4-5.6 Di USD, S 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM, S 18-70 F3.5-5.6
Sony hvl-f42s, Minolta 3600 HS D
Sony Z1C & Z2
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests