Jump to content

Sony: entry level body with 36x24mm sensor - A7 or something else?


Recommended Posts

Is the A7 good enough, and cheap enough, to remain as Sony's entry level camera with a 36x24mm sensor? Or do you think that they should/could release a new model that would sell for less?

 

I'm thinking that maybe the magic number is $500. The problem is whether or not it makes sense. If you were a manufacturer, you'd rather sell 1,000 units at $1,000 each than 2,000 units at $500 each. Or would you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The A7 was Sony's "toe in the water," and lacks most of the features which made subsequent models a hit. The A7m2 would be the least expensive version I would recommend, and is probably available used, in good condition, for $500 or so. The resolution is 24 MP, and has an anti-aliasing filter.

 

The most important feature the A7m2 added is in-body image stabilization (IBIS). It also allows an electronic first shutter to eliminate shutter shake. The placement of controls and size of the grip greatly improve ergonomics compared to the A7.

 

Battery life is poor - about 300 images or 3 hours, whichever is less. Spare batteries cost $59, and it's a good idea to have 2 or more spares. Third-party batteries tend to be have less capacity and poor service life. My originals are in good shape after 4 years and many charges.

 

It makes more sense for Sony to offer small APS-C cameras for entry-level, which are more feature-rich than the A7.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also allows an electronic first shutter to eliminate shutter shake.

Which the A7 also offered (but not the A7R).

 

The A7m2 would be the least expensive version I would recommend, and is probably available used, in good condition, for $500 or so.

Would be my recommendation too (IBIS, improved AF, better ergonomics, more robust body). Though a cursory glance at ebay doesn't reveal many at a $500 price point - the lower limit seems to be around $700.

 

I believe we are a ways away from any FX camera that's priced new at $500.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The A7iii sells for $2K (at B&H and is currently backordered). Until the highly anticipated FF mirrorless cameras from N and C have been introduced and start shipping in volume, I don't see why Sony would reduce the price on their FF offering below $2K. I anticipate lower prices in the future due to the anticipated 3 way competition.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the A7 good enough, and cheap enough, to remain as Sony's entry level camera with a 36x24mm sensor? Or do you think that they should/could release a new model that would sell for less?

 

I'm thinking that maybe the magic number is $500. The problem is whether or not it makes sense. If you were a manufacturer, you'd rather sell 1,000 units at $1,000 each than 2,000 units at $500 each. Or would you?

 

Why would Sony want to sell the A7 for anything less? Is there another FF camera out there that cost $1000 with a lens brand new? I would certainly want to sell 1000 units at $1000 rather than 2000 at $500. It cost less to make thus higher profit. In today market and you want a brand new FF camera for $500 I don't think most people would think that as a realistic expectation. In the future may be. Currently the bottom line APS-C camera is selling for at least $300 or more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the goal of offering an "entry level camera with FF sensor"? - Considering the rest of Sony's portfolio it can't be "making something we can sell with a small profit", there must(!) be more.

Classic entry camera purposes:

  • Hooking somebody into your system, to sell overpriced premium enthusiast bodies and lenses later.
  • Making your brand known, gathering market share.
  • Establishing the base for your (service) supply chain.

I am not sure how to look at entry FF cameras. - A common approach seems to hook customers via smaller sensors first?

Looking at the big picture from the customer POV: The true FF entry bodies aren't getting made anymore; AFAIK Canon discontinued the 5D, 6D, 5D II etc. a while ago. Same about their Nikon counterparts. Only late comers like Pentax and Sony Alpha are still pushing out their first FF cameras.

 

Each of us might define "entry level" differently. My criteria: Holds lens, takes (some) pictures and doesn't cost arms & legs, to get you going. Sony might have a tough stand intruding that market with new stuff that beats 25 years of EOS catering 3rd party gear bang for the buck wise. OTOH I am sure they tried to make their A6500 with the goal to blow that stuff straight out of the water.

 

Good enough etc.: I never shot anything A7 but watched and read reviews. - I believe it caters a nieche market by now. - The amount of landscaping shutterbugs entirely happy to finally have "something FF, to cobble between their tripods and heritage glass" seems finite to me. There might be others who figured out they want to do something else the A7 does well in a big enough scale to justify getting a dedicated one. - Everybody else might recall "poor people can't afford crappy products", save a few extra pennies and buy a later, greater and that way more versatile and more capable A7 incarnation instead.

 

If you start out in another system, it doesn't look like a big issue for Sony. Adapters exist and their regular state of the art enthusiast camera seems competitive enough to lure you over and once you are there some G-master & Zeiss glass will most likely promise to make it shine brighter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...