Why did I choose the A7III?
Updated: Jan 28, 2021
Firstly, if you're coming here from my Instagram story let me know and I'll invite you to my wedding because you're a real G and I love you.
Now that’s out of the way down to business. Way back in 2016 I was looking at cameras to get for my photography degree and looking at the prices they were stupidly expensive, but I
got a Canon 760D with an 18-135mm lens.
It was advertised as a 'beginners' camera and that’s all I was so I thought "yea that one" not really doing enough of my own research. I had no idea about sensor types and sizes which the canon being an APS-C has a smaller sensor than my new Sony. Don’t get me wrong it is possible to get some great shots with a cropped sensor camera however with the way my work is going I thought it was about time I made the step up and got a full-frame camera.
So…Why the Sony?
Unlike the first time around I did HOURS of research before spending almost all of the money gifted… sorry ‘loaned’ to me by the government, thank you SFE <3. One advantage of the Sony is it is a mirrorless setup meaning it sadly doesn’t have the heavenly satisfaction of a ‘click-clack’ when taking every photo, however, it means there is less maintenance further down the line and less things to go wrong. Another advantage of mirrorless is the size difference, admittedly getting a 70-200mm lens has offset the difference quite massively however for general day to day shooting it puts much less stress on the wrists which if you don’t think about you clearly haven’t spent 8 hours on a shoot before. The megapixels are the same in both at 24MP but with the full frame it just gives me a much bigger file to play with in Lightroom which is never a bad thing. Yes, the menu system in the Sony after setting it up today is a rather large pain but once you get the buttons doing what you want them to do you don’t really have to look at them again. With that said if your shoots have to be fast paced like fashion shoots in a studio maybe the Sony wouldn’t be the best choice for you. The lens selection for my canon is SO much larger than that of the Sony but this is just about how much longer Canon have had the EF lens mount system over the relatively new Sony FE (EF & FE how convenient) Sony are dedicated now to creating top quality glass for their market leading mirrorless cameras. I think I saw a statistic saying the alpha Sony series alone sold more than Nikon and Canon combined in the same year which is pretty mad considering Sony are the new comers to the photography scene in comparison.
One thing I don’t do a lot of right now is videography, we did a module on it but we don’t talk about the grade I got in that, but in the future, it is something that I will have to wrap my head around as an added bonus for clients which can lead to more work. The Sony does both 4k at 30fps and 1080p 120fps for the juicy slow-motion shots. For most videography work 30fps is more than enough, typically films in the cinema are shot at 24fps, and it still has the capability for good quality slow-motion which I will probably find a use for at some point. An added bonus to the Sony is its 5-axis stabilisation for both video and photo. I like to think that I have a steady hand when I shoot photos at 1/60th of a second or so but now I could drop that to ¼ or even 1 second exposure time and be confident that I will have a clear shot in darker environments. Speaking of dark environments the low light ability of the Sony is unmatched by Canon or Nikon. I used to be scared to up my ISO above 6400 because the quality would drop so much but now shooting at 12800 still gives me workable RAW files. The Sony even goes up to 204800 ISO which is basically night vision so we can just say I have super-powers.
What lenses did I get?
If you follow me on Instagram, which if you don’t why not? @samuel_shepherd_, you may have already seen a glimpse of them, but we’ll start with the smaller one. My 24-70mm f/4. I know what you might already be thinking “Ew only f/4 why am I listening to this peasant?” well let me explain. Okay yes it isn’t a f/2.8 or f/1.4 but for what I shoot which is mainly architecture and sports they aren’t done in low light environments and for architecture especially it's shot on tripod with a decent exposure time and higher f-stop anyway, so I don’t need to spend over £1k on the f/2.8 GM lens Sony offer. I could’ve gone wider than 24mm, but I still wanted a versatile lens that could handle most of the stuff that I throw at it day to day and I just feel like it’s a solid lens with great build quality. I can see it being my workhorse lens in the future which won’t let me down.
Now, the bad boy lens, the 70-200mm f/4 G. This thing is massive, but I am also a sport photographer, and this is going to be its sole purpose, almost. It can still be a great landscape lens in the right environment such as the peak district which is convenient because I live 5 minutes away from it. When the weather brightens up, I will definitely be dragging myself off the bike and go for a hike around the local peaks to see what it is made of. Maybe I’ll get up in time for some crisp & frosty sunrise missions before sunrise becomes too early for a student.
Before I log off, I have another reason as to why I bought the Sony over the 5D III or the R5 and that is because the Sony just looks better to me. As with architecture I’m drawn to the neat angles found on lots of modern building and this camera reciprocates that design so well and I can see this camera taking me to some great places in the future.