Who’s the winner in the battle between Sony’s 42.4MP fullframe cameras?
Here’s a look at how the A-mount Sony a99 II and E-mount Sony a7R II fullframe cameras compare depending on the way you shoot and the lenses you may already own.
OBJECTIVE: Sports Photography or Birds in Flight
WINNER: Sony a99 II
Sony a99 II’s Hybrid Phase Detection AF system with 79-point dedicated AF sensor working in tandem with a 399-point on-chip focus system and its 12 FPS with continuous AF and tracking gives a99 II a BIG edge for action. Besides, when shooting with a massive 500-600mm lens the weight savings of the lighter E-mount body is rather negligible and the slightly larger size of the a99 II camera body is actually a plus since it makes it more grip-able when shooting with big glass.
OBJECTIVE: Landscape Photography
WINNER: Sony a7R II
For maximum resolution when shooting landscapes, I’d rather not shoot through a translucent mirror if I can avoid it. Image quality loss from translucent mirror is about the same as using a high-quality UV filter (you’d be much worse off slapping a $15 UV filter over your lens.) You also don’t need lightning fast AF or 12 FPS when shooting landscapes. Unless you have another compelling reason for choosing the larger a99 II body, save yourself half a pound and go with a7RII. Your shoulders will thank you!
OBJECTIVE: Portrait Photography
Sony a7RII and a99 II are both great choices for portrait photography each offering great lenses for portraits. I’d give the FE 24-70mm 2.8 G Master a slight edge over either 24-70mm 2.8 ZA, and the FE 85mm 1.4 GM and 90mm 2.8 Macro are a substantial upgrade over the A-mount 85mm 1.4 ZA and 100mm 2.8 Macro. But A-mount gets points for the incredible 135mm 1.8 ZA that is thus far not available in E-mount. So I call this a push or a Win for both sides.
OBJECTIVE: Using Adapted Lenses
WINNER: Sony a7R II
Because of its thin 18mm Focal Flange Distance, Sony a7RII allows you to adapt virtually any fullframe lens. The same cannot be said for a99 II since A-mount has a 44.5mm Focal Flange Distance that makes it far less viable for using adapted lenses. (Read More: Guide to Understanding Flange Focal Distance)
OBJECTIVE: Using Minolta AF Lenses
WINNER: Sony a99 II
Sony a99 II is the clear winner if you’ve got lots of Minolta AF lenses (or screw drive Sony A-mount glass). While Sony’s LA-EA4 adapter will allow AF with screw drive lenses on E-mount bodies, LA-EA4 uses the rather antiquated AF system from a65 which is not nearly the speed or coverage you get from a99’s Hybrid AF that combines a dedicated 79-point PDAF + 399-point on sensor PDAF system.
OBJECTIVE: Using E-mount Lenses
WINNER: Sony a7R II
If you’ve got lots of E-mount glass stick to Sony a7RII. While Sony E-mount’s thinner bodies allow you to use of A-mount glass on E-mount cameras, the reverse is NOT true. You can’t use E-mount lenses on A-mount cameras.
OBJECTIVE: Battery Life
WINNER: Sony a99 II
Bigger Camera. Bigger Battery. Longer Battery Life. Sony a99 II uses larger Sony NP-FM500H InfoLithium Batteries that have double the battery life. Then again, carrying a couple spare NP-FW50 Lithium-Ion Rechargeable Batteries which weigh a fraction of the half pound difference in weight between the bodies.
OBJECTIVE: Lowest Noise at High ISOs
WINNER: Sony a7R II (Barely)
Sony a7R II wins by just a hair. Far too much is made of light loss from Sony a99 II’s translucent mirror. That does NOT, I repeat, NOT mean images shot on a99 II are 30% noisier than a7RII. That’s not how it works. Light loss is roughly 1/3 stop which means noise is roughly the same for a99 II at ISO 5000 as a7RII at ISO 6400. With this back-illuminated senior, there is no visible difference in noise from 1/3 stop.
OBJECTIVE: Low Light AF
WINNER: Sony a99 II
Sony a99 II’s Sensitivity to -4 EV @ f/2.8 AF is not merely best for Sony – it’s best in class – beating Canon 5DM4 by a full stop.
OBJECTIVE: Street Photography
WINNER: Sony a7R II
Weighing in at 22.05 oz, Sony a7RII is nearly half a pound lighter than the 29.92 oz Sony a99 II. Plus a7RII is thinner and smaller for a stealthier appearance on the street so it won’t attract as much attention from the people you want to photograph…or thieves…
OBJECTIVE: Street Photography with a Fast 35mm Lens
WINNER: Sony RX1R II
Sorry, a99 II and a7RII, but Sony RX1R II was MADE FOR THIS!!! What? You forgot there was a third Sony camera rocking this 42.4 mp sensor??? If 35mm is the perfect focal length of you, you won’t find a higher quality 35mm F/2 lens than the Zeiss lens built-into RX1R cameras.
PRICE AND AVAILABILITY:
Sony a99 II ($3,198.00 – Available for Pre-Order)
Sony a7R II ($3,198.00 – Available Now)
Sony RX1R II ($3,898.00 – Available Now)
And the Winner Is….
Sony shooters who will soon be able to shoot with Sony’s top-of-the-line 42.4MP back-illuminated sensor in both A-Mount and E-Mount…or even in fixed lens RX1R II if you prefer.
67 thoughts on “Sony a99 II -vs- a7R II 42.4MP Showdown”
Very good review I agree with all the pros and cons . Also for photographing humming birds my A6300 wirh a 90 mm macro lens or the 55to 210 mm is far better than the A7Rii I also like the little pocket size RX100iv for a camera I can have with me all the time .. For me the RX1 with the 35mm lens is too expensively for a fixed lens one purpose camera . If money was no object. I would buy a Leica! For black and white street photography ……I love the A mount 135mm f1.8 and would like the 99 simply to use with that lens
If you want everything the A7rii can do less the 42mp. and for 1400 vs. 2800…get the A6500…its a little beast at 11 fps 4k vid., amazing if you use sony, zeiss or even sigma apsc lenses. New touch screen and IS in camera.
I am guessing that low light will also favor the A7Rii due to the small loss of light of the A99.
In any case, it took Sony themselves to bring out a camera to challenge the A7Rii since Canon’s IV is a joke in comparison. 🙂
I will get an A6300 for when I need the extra reach and fps since I have many e mount lenses which I love like 85mm GM 1.4 and 35mm 1.4
Great outline of where each one shines, including the RX1R. 🙂
I’ve got the A99ii on pre-order to supplant the A99 I’ve been holding onto.
Been hedging my lens lineup, making sure that all lenses I am getting now are HSM/SSM types when possible, so that they can operate on A-mount or E/FE-mount. But it’s good to know that Minolta screw-driven lenses will be remain active with the new A99II.
Sticking to the newer SSM or SAM lenses whenever possible is a smart plan.
You should read http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/, because many of your winning factors relate to size and weight, sayign the ar7 is smaller and lighter, which when you factor in lens physics, they are actually the same, so the a7 really doesnt have an advantage in that regard making the a99 better
Camera sales tell an entirely different story. Sony sells more a7 series cameras in a week than a99 sold in years.
I was hoping to see a “winner” from your comparison. I do mostly portraits and occasional sports. So which system would you recommend for someone who has not invested in Sony mounts yet? I don’t care for adapted lens or street photography.
If you are not already invested in Sony, I’d advise E-mount since it has much better upside for the long term (and better lenses now…)
Your point is valid but I would also say that it depend a lot on your shooting style. The a99mII is definitively the better choice for those who want to shoot things that move, e.g., wildlife and sports. a7 series cameras are poor performers in that category and the a99mII promises to be a rival to the top performing cameras in that category.
That just proves that most people are not that discerning. I would rather have the A99ii any day. The A7 series are nice, but just not up to heavy professional use. I looked hard at them, and know a few guys who bought them, and eventually sold them. Main complaints are well known, poor AF and battery life. And yes I will be buying two when they become available in my country.
A couple questions about the a992, does anyone know-
Will there be a small RAW? 42 is too much for some jobs.
Will an APS-C lens auto crop if mounted?
Does EYE-AF work with all lenses?
(1) Yes (Compressed and Uncompressed Raw)
Brian, I always appreciate your website and your insight. I think your point that the A7 series sells more day than A99 year, consider that the a99 was a sub par performer in its field. I passed on it altogether, it just wasn’t as good as the its competitors, especially in AF, and was not a compelling reason to upgrade from an A900 or A77II. It was very disappointing, whereas the A7 series has had many features that showed real innovation. I need the better AF speed the SLT systems offer, and use the A77II for most of my work. The a99II offers a substantial reason to stay with the A system, leading all competitors (at least on paper) in speed, af, and image quality. As an A series shooter I will be happy to take a7 series technology hand-me-downs, as long as we get them.
For all the reasons you mention, I’d say this release is a defining moment for A-mount. Sony a99 II beats the DSLR competition at any price. Given it’s specs and price, there’s no reason it shouldn’t outsell the top-selling fullframe mirrorless a7RII.
Brian, great comparison, only one nit. 30% light loss of the translucent mirror is 1/2 a stop, not 1/3 of a stop. Other than that a good and fair comparison.
And to answer Rob’s question above, the A99ii has a compressed raw option to get smaller files, but no smaller raw with less pixels. Re. APS-C lenses it can be set to auto crop, but it can also be set it shows the full frame (with vignette and all). It can also manually crop FF lenses to APS-C.
Don’t know about eye-AF.
Thanks Pieter, DxO tests measured light loss from the a99 translucent mirror as 1/3 stop. I suspect that Sony’s claim of 30% is on the high side just to be safe. Even if it were 1/2 stop, the difference in noise with this sensor is negligible.
Brian, you have been very helpful!
My main concern I have is the battery life. I shoot mainly in the water, whether it is marine life or surfing. That being said, I don’t have to capability of switching batteries whenever I need to…camera dies and I’m done shooting.
I shoot with a Canon T5i right now, so I realize I am getting a huge upgrade any way I look at it, other than battery life. Other reviews I read though, say that I will only get 440 shots within the battery life of the T5i, while in reality I get 1000+ shooting in RAW with ease while in the water for 2-4 hours and still have charge left. These reviews also say that the Sony A7Rii will get 290 shots.
In your opinion, how long do you think I would have in the water on a full battery charge and how many shots do you think I could realistically get while shooting in RAW?
Also, if you were to get the A7Rii or the A99ii for marine life and surfing mainly, which would you choose? Thanks for all your help.
That really depends on your shooting style. On my last shoot, I shot over 800 shots using a single a7RII battery (I should have looked how much juice was left I just know it wasn’t to the low-battery warning). On the other hand, pixel peepers who zoom in and review every single photo will burn the battery a LOT faster. That said, a99II is probably double the battery life. Bigger battery = longer battery life.
Tether Tools has $100 solution to Sony battery life. It’s a battery relay system that allows showing with an external battery and ability to change the battery without power interruption. uses a dummy battery in the camera. A pocket size battery will keep camera going all day.
Yup, we wrote about Tether Tools Case Relay Camera Power System (here)
Very excited about this camera. A99II. If was enough for me to move from Canon which I felt was really dragging its feet and holding back features/technology.
I have been so tempted by everything Sony has been throwing into their mirrorless systems but just couldn’t bring myself to lose the build-size and faster AF on DSLRs. The A99II answered that. And not just barely. It’s crazy how much they’ve built into this camera and really shows that Canon and Nikon need to wake up. Competition is good. And I LOVE both of those companies and have owned both systems. But, they’ve gotta start acknowledging times are different. There’s WAY more competition. Fuji and Olympus are also making strides.
I’ve now moved 100% to the A mount and couldn’t be any more thrilled with having access to AF Zeiss lenses. And I must admit to being way more happy with the A99 (MKI) that I bought as a backup than I thought I would. The in-body IS is so amazing to get since it works with every lens. And that’s even the cheap Minolta lens that cost 50 bucks! Pretty sweet.
I DO have concerns of course. I know the A mount lens selection is already pretty big but I hope that doesn’t mean Sony doesn’t keep bringing advancements over in that department too. I’m sure sales of the A99II will drive that one way or the other.
Either way, appreciate the coverage and comparison.
Yup, a99 II is a great camera that represents the most tech Sony has ever put into A-mount. You’re totally right, the best way to encourage future A-mount lens and camera development in by purchasing this bad boy!
Thank you Brian for a timely review and comparison. Your comment regarding landscape shooting does give me slight pause only because I am invested in A mount for 25 plus years and I shoot mosty nature, ie-close up, landscape and wildlife. I am cerain that the new A99II will be a much better image maker than my A77 and A900. Your insight into Sony is very helpful.
Sony a99 II is without question the best A-mount camera EVER! It’s beats any DSLR from Canikon – but due to it’s SLT mirror, it can’t quite match the image quality of a7RII. Second place ain’t bad…
“Second place” only if a slight difference in DXO scores was the only metric. By every other measure the a7rII is second place, by a considerable margin.
Image quality, lens quality and limitless lens compatibility are tops on my list.
For me, the best solution is having both. A99ii for action, A7Rii for quality. Any alpha mount lens should work with La-ea adapters. Most serious photographers have 2 bodies anyway. Why not have the best of both worlds?
While IQ performance is high up there, for me there is also AF performance for action (particularly in dim light), FPS, quality telephotos, robustness and weather resistance, battery life, ergonomics (particularly when balancing long lenses), and accessible external controls. Of zero importance to me is the ability to adapt lens (which always sounds better in theory than it seems to work in practice).
Just so educational reading these sensible pro and con points of view .
Brian, I’m totally on the fence about this camera, could you recommend a 24-70 zoom? DXO didn’t give either Mark II lenses- 24-70 or 16-35 that good of scores, and the megapixel count was pretty low considering sensor size. Wanna like this and buy into it, just a bit concerned on lens quality. Currently own D750 and D7200
I personally think the 24-70 2.8 ZA is one of those lenses that’s much better than it’s DxO rating. There’ no category in DxO scores for “look” and image quality is lovely for everything from portraits to landscapes to architecture. I highly recommend!
Thanks Brian for responding so quickly! That gives me a bit more confidence as I am emerging out of Graphic Design(20 yrs experience) and into Photography as a living(eventually…hopefully). My website below, under photography tab- commercial shows some of the work I’ve done over the last 2 years. My nikon/lenses have served me well, but Sony has really interested me for many reasons(portability, resolution, quality, EVF). I was going to pull the trigger on the A7rii with new 24-70 GM, but then I saw the reports on this…and well I am reconsidering 🙂 Issue is am outdoors for 95% of my shooting, and then sometimes 2 days in the BC, so battery life is kinda going to be an issue, that I’ll have to deal with in a major way. A99ii seems better on the battery thing(although doesn’t seem like you can charge via USB), and focus system seems WAY better than A7rii which would help with some of the action that I do. (also might start shooting for a running/hydration brand)
Tom, you can read enough stuff to make your head spin right off of your body! lol I just moved over from Canon to go all in on A Mount and the A99II and let me assure you that it’s an amazing camera and A Mount glass hasn’t given me one moment of pause in this transition. Other that having to manually adjust focus for each of my lenses they have equalled or bested my Canon glass (despite what I’d read on various internet sites). And I’ll tell you, it can’t be overstated the many wonderful focusing modes with the Sony. It just leaves everyone else in the dust. Eye AF is a revolution to portrait shooters like me. And manual focus with focus peaking when that’s not possible. I have been able to more reliably able nail focus with my Sony A99 and A99II vs all of my other Canon and Nikon bodies when it comes to portrait work. And if my initial shooting is proving correct, the 12 FPS with all of those focus points is gonna make this a rock solid sports and action camera too. And make no mistake. Having access to Zeiss AF glass is something special. The Zeiss 85 1.4 has become my favorite lens…possibly ever. It provides such a unique combo of color and contrast. And the out of focus bits are quite nice too. Also the Zeiss 135 1.8 (which I don’t own yet) appears to have the same magic according to all of the Sony users. Either way. Count me as a super happy A99II user. I’ve been very impressed with the results and consider myself a pretty picky person!
Tom, I also meant to mention I have the Ver 1 of the Zeiss 24-70 and it is a beautiful lens that I’m completely happy with!
Once again, thanks for the info! Yeah, my head is spinning for sure. 🙂 I’ve read too much, and spent way too much time deliberating. Will give the 24-70 SSM II a go, the 24 F2 Zeiss for low light and night shots and still debating on 70-200 tammy since I’m on a budget.(sony 70-200 is too much right no most likely). This will get me started, and maybe more primes that you listed next year when have more cash to spend.
Cheers, Have a great New Year!
Hows the 4k and HD video performance in super35 mode compared to the a99ii and the a7rii and a7sii using clear zoom for apsc lenses? I really looking to upgrade from a77mki to either the a7rii or the a7sii but the laea4 adapters for A mount lenses only give 15af points and cant use the sensor af points for video. So when the a99ii was announced i was excited. I mostly care about video auto focus, iso performance, dynamic range in slog2-3 and the memory buffer. I noticed the a99ii can only take UHS-1 cards? Is okay for 4k? I know video auto focus is limited to f3.5 but how smart is the a99ii with its auto shutter and iso during P mode when af is turned on?
That’s a whole lot of questions masquerading as one.
First off, don’t buy an a7SII if you plan to shoot video with APS-C lenses.
Native lenses will ALWAYS perform better for video than adapter glass, so if you want to shoot 4K video with A-mount lenses go with Sony a99 II.
Sony cameras can use UHS-II cards but you only get UHS-I speed, so it’s best to go with the fastest SDXC UHS-1 (Class 10/U3) cards when shooting 4K.
Thanks for the reply! Sorry for the too much questioning but i really couldn’t decide spending so much money on a new camera when i already spent too much on A mount lenses.
Do you know how many Sony a99ii units were only made? I heard they only made a limited supply and most websites say 1-2 month delivery.
The demand for Sony a99 II is quite high and Sony is cranking them out as quickly as they can. Current orders will be filled first – which I’m sure you will agree is the only fair thing to do.
Thank you Brian, for all your helpful words. I am a Canon user at the moment, looking to upgrade. I couldn’t decided between the new 5d mark iv, or go across to Sony 7rii or now the a99ii. I do mainly weddings, and sport with a little portraiture. Can you advise me as to which camera you would suggest? Thank you.
Either will be fine for wedding and portraits, so the answer depends how much sports you shoot. If 5 fps and the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS Lens with Sony FE teleconverters give you the range you need – go with a7RII. If sports is you main emphasis and you need longer glass or 12 fps go with a99 II.
Hi Brian. With respect, I would like to amplify a bit on what you said. I cannot endorse the a7RII for anyone who is considering any amount of sports photography. Sports photography is all about your AF system being able to nail focus instantaneously and continuously. The a99II does this spectacularly in all conditions because of its advanced AF system. The a7RII is going to struggle nailing focus, particularly as the quality of the ambient light deteriorates. Because so much of sports photography occurs in less than stellar lighting conditions (e.g., basketball courts, night shooting, poor weather conditions, etc.) the a7RII’s tendency to hunt for focus under those conditions instead of just nailing it like the a99II does is going to be a huge drawback. It’s no fun missing the decisive moment because your camera’s AF system is pumping back and forth trying to find focus.
Thank you, both comments are very helpful, I work with sport as much as I do weddings so I am trying to fit both categories. If I chose the a99 II I am worried about the quality of the lenses and / or the lack of newer lenses. What would you suggest as the best lenses for the camera? Thank you again.
Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 ZA SSM II & 70-200mm f/2.8 II are great A-mount lenses for weddings. You might also want one or two fast lenses like the Sony 24mm f/2 CZ, 50mm f/1.4 CZ, 85mm f/1.4 ZA or 135mm f/1.8 CZ.
For sports, the Sony 300mm f/2.8 G II is a great lens – but not cheap…
As I said, I am not a weddings guy, so I will defer to the real Brian on that one. In general though, I don’t think the issue with a-mount is quality, so much as it is with the extent of the inventory. The quality is very high in Sony a-mount lenses with many cross-branded Zeiss selections to choose from. And in the a-mount community, there are rumblings that Sony will be expanding its a-mount lens lineup. But, for now, if you are coming from Canon or Nikon and are used to the breadth of their lineups, you might find yourself dissatisfied with Sony. Also, Sony lenses tend to be relatively expensive so look at the cost to equip yourself before you choose. As a sports shooter, I own and use extensively the following lenses: SAL70200G2 (f2.8); SAL70400G2 (f4-5.6); SAL300F28G2 (f2.8). For the 70-200mm and the 300mm I also own an SAL14TC (1.4X teleconverter). IMHO (biased) opinion, all are pretty great. But if you want to find that 400mm f4 prime in the Sony lineup, you will be out of luck for the time being.
Thank you, please can you help me, sadly my budget can’t stretch to getting the sony 24-70 f/2.8 and the Sony 70-200 f/2.8, because I do both sport and weddings I am needing the full breadth of focal length. Do you know how the Tamron 150-600 would work on the A99ii, or do you have any other suggestions of lenses that I should be considering?
i have never used this lens so am really limited in what I can say. The DXOMark scores (this lens on other cameras) are higher than what I would expect and user reviews show that people are really happy with their purchase, and that counts for a lot. It should work great on the a99II, but you should know that as a non-Sony branded lens, it will not be able to use one of the a99II’s signature features which is hybrid autofocus. It will still focus great. Without hybrid AF you will be using phase detection AF, which is the standard AF technology used by every other sports camera. My larger concern about this lens is the maximum aperture: f5 on the short end and f6.3 as you go longer. That’s going to limit the utility of the lens when you are shooting sports in other than bright, well-lighted conditions. To get an acceptable shutter speed, you will have to really crank up the ISOs, and that of course negatively impacts image quality. For me, I would be inclined to give up some length for speed (i.e. larger max aperture). Your lens will be more versatile (work better in more situations) and an a99II will produce such good images, you can crop hard in post to get that same telephoto effect. The only other lens which I suggest you take a look at in the Sony lineup is the SAL70300G2. It’s a bit more expensive but the max aperture is a bit faster. You lose quite a bit on the long end, but gain some on the short end which enhances versatility. It’s a G series lens (Sony’s higher end a-mount optics) and it will be able to use the hybrid AF system. I would also consider the Sigma and Tamron f2.8 70-200mm offerings. This is a standard sports lens length-speed combo, and probably will work better at your weddings where low light is also a problem. They will be less heavy for handheld shooting, less obtrusive, and shoot wider which I think would be advantageous in weddings (as well as for catching those action shots that happen right in front of you at sports events).
+1 on the Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM II or even the Sony 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G II.
All the 150-600mm lenses on the market are okay for the money but not great and massive overkill for a wedding – unless you’re a Private Investigator…
Hmm, I shoot weddings, portraits, live events and products. Landscapes for fun. Currently have an A99 and A7 with Le-ea4 adapter. My kit consists of Minolta and Sigma A-mount glass. I also offer large prints and albums to my clients. I am currently suffering from lack of AF performance and end up shooting more images than would be necessary covering myself with MF. Do I upgrade to the A99ii, get better focus on softer glass or the A7Rii and get sharper glass with lesser AF and buffer? Thanks for the discussion!
Yea, that’s pretty much right. Sony FE lenses are a huge step forward from Minolta lens designs. I’d expect an LSI processor for faster buffering in all future Sony cameras but for now it’s just in a99 II, a6500 and RX100 V.
So where are the RAW images?
As you can see in the dateline, this was posted September 27, 2016 – before a99 II was in production. Subsequent third-party tests have confirmed my breakdowns.
How about hot pixels from long exposures (1 to 3 minutes) with an ISO of 3200 on the a99II? I have a side interest in astrophotography as well as general photography (landscapes, portraits, wildlife).
Long Exposure NR is designed to fix those.
Thanks Brian for this very good comparison article. I am currently considering the A9 or A99II and on searching for a suitable comparison, came across this article.
Have you any plans to have a similar comparison for the A9 and A99II? If yes do have an approximate time table?
I hadn’t thought of that, but I could put that together fairly quickly if it would help
Here ya go, Malcolm: Sony Fullframe Flagship Showdown a9 -vs- a99 II
Brian looking for input for the next camera purchase. Currently have a a6300 (emount) and an older a77 (amount). obviously both APSc cameras– looking to upgrade from the a77, and my head is literally spinning from trying to choose between my options… looking between the a7r3, the a99ii and the a9, which would be the better choice for mostly sports and action photography, with the occasional portrait sessions and even more occasional wedding/event? Sports/action varies between brightly lit but fast horse sports, outdoor swim, and then horribly lit indoor swim and some gym sports. I have glass to support both systems, but yes, heavily invested in crop, but I can move towards FF, albeit slowly. Current glass consists of
Emount- 55-210, sigma Art 30, sony 35/1.8, Rokinon 12mm/1.8 and the Sony FE 1.8/85
Amount- Sigma DG 2.8/28-70, Sony DT 4.5-5.6 55-300, and the monster but favorite workhorse on my a77 90% of the time Sigma DG EX 2.8/70-200
Hello Christine, everything you’re saying tells me that Sony a9 is the camera for you!
Now if you’d said, resolution, tethering speed, 10 FPS with strobe for portraits, product, landscape or architecture, I’d say Sony a7R III all day every day.
But Sony a9 will excel an everything you mentioned except for those “occasional portrait sessions” and it will do just fine at those.
I’m NOY knocking A-mount since a900 is the camera that got me to switch to Sony, but the numbers simply aren’t there to support the R&D Sony’s investing n E-mount. Sooner or later you’ll need to bite the bullet and fully make the switch. I say sooner….
ha..my bank account will hate me for that decision….LOL….the only reason I was really considering the a99ii was even though it would be for a short time, and less than ideal, I could still pull off using the current lenses while I waited to earn up enough or lost another limb/kidney/child to pay for the 70-200mm for the emount….
I am renting the 70-200 for use on the 6300 starting tomorrow, and again, I know less than ideal conditions since its a FF lens on a crop body, but still wanted to kick it around for a bit to help with decision making…
Thoughts on the buzz that Amount is not dead and with the a99ii they are moving towards creating a dual system world of products?
Sorry about that…like I said, if you’d had different priorities, I might have sent you towards a7R III.
I’m not saying A-mount is dead, but…Sony sells a hundred times more E-mount than A-mount, so while Sony may keep A-mount alive, the future is clearly E-mount.
Bad advice. You don’t buy numbers. You buy a camera. The a99II is a fabulous camera and is a bargain compared to the a9 (which reportedly hasn’t sold well because it is so expensive). If you can’t take the best photos you have ever taken with the a99II, you need to hang it up as a photographer.
And, notwithstanding the mantra that the doubters continue to repeat, Sony again has recently restated its commitment to a-mount.
Mirrorless is a fad. You can always join the crowd later. Christine should save her money and get max use out of her a-mount lenses by buying the a99II. She wont regret it.
I agree that a99 II is a very good camera. Certainly the best A-mount camera ever made. However you are incorrect when you say a9 hasn’t sold well. It’s far outsold it’s Canon 1DX2 and Nikon D5 competition. It’s also sold far more than a99 II even though it’s been in the market less time.
I’m not so sure, about the a9 sales numbers but I don’t have access to Sony’s unit sales numbers. Maybe you do?
In any event, my point is that this is not a numbers game. It is a price game, however, according to Christine’s comments. If she buys an a99II, she will not only have a terrific camera, but she will save herself $1000 and be able to use her a-mount lenses natively. It’s a win, win, win.
P.S. When you damn the a99II with faint praise (best a-mount ever) you are really demonstrating your mirrorless bias. No other camera out there at any price (save the new Nikon d850) matches its combination of speed AF accuracy and sensor resolution/quality). If you can’t take great sports photos with the a99II, you won’t be doing any better with the a9.
I own all three cameras and I know the strengths of each. If I were to compare D850 to ANY camera is would be a7R III. DxO agrees – giving each a 100 point score.
You are missing the point Brian. Christine asked what was the best camera for her, You responded with what you think is the best camera.
When people start quoting DXO sensor scores they kind of lose me. The IQ of these cameras is largely, if not wholly imperceptible. I would defy you or anyone to look at side by side photos of the same scene from any of these cameras and reliably identify which camera shot which photos.
Other things come into play here, but the most important factor is the functionality of the particular camera for the particular use case. I’m am mainly a sports photographer. The Sony a99II is the best camera I have ever used for sports photgraphy both functionally and ergonomically. Paired with a SAL300f28Z the photos I am getting from this camera are ultra sharp, shot after shot. If you were able to argue that the a9 has some sort of functional advantage over the a99II I would have listened to you. But instead you are just arguing sales numbers and DXO numbers.
Maybe the a9 is a better camera in your opinion. Good for you! But as I understand it, your forte is portraiture. Is the a9 really so much better that you can objectively recommend that Christine (who apparently IS a sports photographer) pass on the a99II, spend $1000 more on an a9 AND lose native use of her existing a-mount lenses?
The first sign of mirrorless evangelism is a loss of objectivity. And, p.s., if you don’t see the d850 as Nikon’s response to the capability of the a99II which did not exist in Nikon’s system before the d850, you are missing the forest.