A6000 or A7's as second body Wedding Kit

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>I have recently sold my Nikon full frame and DX Body and lens and moving to Sony . I used D700 and D300 for weddings along with Full frame primes and 28-70 2.8 Zoom.<br>

I now have A7mk 2 and 55mm 1.8. I have on order Sony 28mm 2.0 , 35mm 1.4 and 90mm 2.8 macro. I was thinking of adding A6000 and use as I did my D300 for the magnification factor on 55mm and 90mm for longer shots during ceremony.</p>

<p>Which body would you suggest and why A7,s or A6000?</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>The only focal length where the A6000 will give you something you don't already have ("more reach") is the 90mm - for all the others, you are stacked so close that the A6000 just gives you a field of view that you have already covered anyway. That's unless you consider 28, 35, (42), (52), 55, (82), 90, (135) to be necessary for "full coverage" (the brackets indicate the "equivalent" focal length with the A6000).<br>

<br />Since you have primes only, I can't imagine how you will manage without a second full frame body. You didn't list the primes you had with your Nikon setup - did you have (and needed) a focal length longer than 90mm?</p>

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>i used 28-70 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 60mm 2.8 micro, 85 1.4 and 180 2.8</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Larry, you listed the lenses you <strong>used</strong> but you did not clearly answer the question regarding "<strong>needed</strong>" - specifically did you '<strong>need</strong>' the reach of the 180/2.8 ? <br /> The answer to this question will largely depend upon whether the Weddings that you typically cover allow you to roam during the Ceremony Proper.</p>

<p>However, if you buy an A6000 - I think that the more important question is can you manage without a lens <em><strong>wider than</strong> </em>(equivalent) 42mm, if your A7 goes down ?</p>

<p>WW</p>

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>Good point William. I can generally roam. I didn't use 180mm during ceremony mostly street photography and engagement shoots.<br>

The 85mm 1.4 was normally used on the D300 to get 127 fv during ceremony. So on A6000 90mm 2.8 would be 130mm fv,<br>

I will also have 16-35mf4 FE in my kit.<br>

so FE lens are those above with the 16-35 also,</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p> I can generally roam.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well then, I think your answer needs to be biased on the scenario of a A7 going down: i.e. If you only had an A6000 to use with that lens cache - would the 16 to 35/4 be suitable to use for <strong>the entire</strong> Wedding whenever you needed wider than 42mm?</p>

<p>Secondly, if it were me and as it seems that you are not adverse to using Primes ONLY - I'd seriously consider adding a 135 Prime and using two A7 Bodies.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>Makes sense. I prefer primes but do not want to use any adapters. I will have to wait on 135FE I guess but I can rent 70-200FE when tele zoom is needed until then. So 2 A7's makes since.</p>

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>Makes sense. I prefer primes but do not want to use any adapters. I will have to wait on 135FE I guess but I can rent 70-200FE when tele zoom is needed until then. So 2 A7's makes sense.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Yes I agree that renting makes sense when a longer FL is necessary as a Wedding coverage is a 'planned' event (or at least should be) and it seems to me that you are good at research and planning.</p>

<p>Also the A7MkII seems to be a very nice piece of kit, so, it would not be unreasonable to suggest that you could crop in post production a little more severely than you otherwise might have to get the equivalent of the required FoV of a longer lens.</p>

<p>Good luck with your choice of the second Sony Body - and also with the Sony gear generally - I now a few who use A7MkII's and they are more than very happy with their choice of that camera.</p>

<p>WW</p>

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>! was thinking of adding the 28mm 2 and 35mm 2.8 but wondering if having 16-35FE4 makes it unnecessary to have both?<br>

Also if purchasing the 35mm 1.4 FE is better than having the 28/2 and 35/2.8 IQ wise?</p>

[andylynn]

35 and 28 are pretty close. I don't know if I'd want to carry both. Which one suits you better?

 

FWIW that 35/1.4 looks like an absolutely fantastic lens. If you want to put your money into a 35 with I.Q. being the

priority, I don't think you'd be making a mistake. The Loxia 35 looks good too but it's not AF.

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>From my research it appears the 35mm 1.4 is gonna be awesome. If I go for that one I would not buy 28/2.0 or 35mm/2.8.<br>

Street photography and wedding/Events are main areas of photography so I will be patient and see whats works best for my style. The size of the 1.4 is my only concern.<br>

I love the small factor of the others.<br>

Thanks for your input.</p>

 

[imagesbymonroe]

<h1 id="title" >Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.4 Wide Angle Leica M Mount Lens - Black </h1>

<h1 >Would I need an adapter for the A7II? If so which is recommended?</h1>

[andylynn]

Anything M mount would require an adapter. It's a good lens, if you don't mind manual focus. If you don't mind manual

focus I'd also take a look at the Zeiss Loxia 35.

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>As far as the bodies are concerned, I would suggest a pair of A7II's. Keep it simple. There is no reason why you can't have a third camera, and that can be whatever you want.</p>

<p>The last wedding I did was a few years ago (I love doing them but they are not my specialty). I used a full-frame sensor and a 70-200mm zoom. I made good use of the top end of that lens and I could not have done that wedding (or the previous one) without it. I honestly don't think you need 300mm, but it did come in handy once, though not at a wedding.</p>

[sebastian_infante]

<p>Hi There!, I'm thinking to switch like you from Nikon to Sony A7 Mk2 to get better accurate focus on low light situation (wedding churchs, party dance, etc) and more, please can you give me some advice ?, the change worth it? (I have many lenses and flashes from nikon to sell if make a choice)<br />Thank you very much</p>

[imagesbymonroe]

<p>Hi Sebastian. you have to decide is it worth it for you. I would recommend you rent A7II and try it at your events first before selling all your Nikon gear.I really loved my Nikon setup it was the size that I didnt like any longer (lol)<br>

It was a 2 year process of educating myself and using Sony mirrorless cameras before I made my move to Sony A7II and Native Sony Zeiss lens. I'm very satisfied for what my shooting style is and would never go back to dslr's again.<br>

Hope this helps.</p>

[sebastian_injander]

<p>Thank you very much Larry!, I'm living in Argentina and here didn't have a rental camera services, because that the switching is very difficult for mi, before try it, my assumption is good about Sony cameras, I use to be an old one (2003 or somthing like that), DSC 707, was my first serious digital camera and love it, then years go by and DSLR came with more and the alphas don't like me, so since then I'm Nikon user now I have D7100 and D7000 with several lenses like a Sigma Art 50 1.4, tamron 17-50 2.8 and 28-75 2.8 constant aperture both and flashes and more, to make a step to full frame I need change all bodies and lenses no matter what brand choose, and there my mind go to Sony to make a change and start from scratch with Native Sony lens like you said, the reviews with 3rd parties are not good. I work making weddings and the reason to need change is make a full frame step (now or soon), better quality image, better noise on low light, and the most powerful reason is focus on low light, the weddings here start 20pm until 5 or 6 am, imagine that, always in the dark. What do you think?, I must wait or make a giant leap jejeje, thank you very much for your advice <br />Sebastian</p>