A99’s are scarce, should I go A7 with adaptor?

The original A7 is much less than ideal for A-mount. It only has very slow contrast-detect AF with the LA-EA3 and 5 adapters, and it lacks sensor stabilization. It is really a body for native FE OSS lenses.

While I haven't used the A7, I tried several of the older E-mount APS-C bodies with A-mount adapters and would not recommend that experience.

The A7II adds 5-axis Steady Shot like the A99II and can use its on-sensor phase-detect with the LA-EA3 and 5. The A7II seems to have the most optimized version of that old sensor.

The A7RII has a much better sensor (same as the A99II and A7RIII) including better phase-detect.

The LA-EA4 often worked better than the LA-EA3 and 5 on the A7II and A7RII. I might pick up another LA-EA4 to use with my A7RIV because even though the LA-EA5 supports all the fancy new AF features the old discrete phase module still works better in many situations.

Edited by QuietOC - 07 October 2021 at 15:21

It seems the A7r2 is the first camera with passable AF with LA-EA3 and DSLR lenses. The LA-EA4 will work better - it is an option, indeed. I still think the A7r2 still is the best option, the sensor is better and the native AF is better with IBIS. If you only want to use your A-mount lenses with LA-EA4, the A7r is a good option with a good sensor without the IBIS. The A7 and A7 mark 2 have an older sensor but is fine in any other respect. (mark 2 has IBIS)

Sony probably sold more A7's and A7 owners are more likely to update (being early adopters) compared to late A-mount owners.

Frozenpixels wrote: Hey folks, total amateur here, can I ask what your impressions are of the A7? I’ve noticed lots of A7s for sale but virtually no used a850/900’s or a99’s and I want to get into a full frame. I located a used 99 but it needs repair. As I have nearly a dozen Minolta lenses I want to play with. I think I can use an e-a lens adaptor with decent success? There’s a real abundance of A7’s and e lenses in my area and I have to ask why. (Vs no used a mount FF cams) Do people not like them?

My impressions of the A7? Meh. Poor battery life, expensive native lenses, poor performing adapted lenses, no IBIS, lackluster EVF, so so build and layout, with a sensor about the same as the a850 sensor. The one good thing I can say for it is the rear screen is better than the one on the a850 but not as good as the one on the a99. The poor battery performance is on par with the a99. No one has been able to explain to my satisfaction why the battery performance of the a99 is so poor.
As to the lack of full frame A-Mount on the secondary market? As someone who suffered the Olympus move to mirrorless and hated the adapted experience. For A-mount, I stocked up on New old stock bodies when it became clear no new was coming. To avoid having to switch suddenly and expensively should something happen. I suspect others who felt E-Mount "not ready for primetime" did the same.

Edited by LAbernethy - 07 October 2021 at 17:32

addy landzaat wrote: Re. battery life (CIPA): A7: 340 A99: 500 (better then the A7...)

Let's file that in the "Fiction" department.
The a99 has a quarter of the run time of the a850 and half the a77/a77ii. Is it longer lasting than the A7? Yes, but not by that much. That's why the grip for it holds two batteries plus the one in camera where the a77 and a99ii just have the two in the grip.

I found the a850 excellent. The a77 and a77ii adequate. The a99 poor. I thought it was THAT camera and bought a second; nope, it's the design. I bought the grip but it just weighs a ton.

Wētāpunga wrote: Based purely on my experience with the a7R, unless you're going to use the a7 purely as a digital back, on a tripod, with your A-mount lenses, I'd try to get a 2nd or 3rd generation A7 camera instead. They have IBIS stabilisation, better sensors, and their AF-system won't be the limit on using E-mount lenses later if you wished.

That was my impression when I surveyed the market for an A7xx. The original A7 looked like the closest thing in size and style to an old-fashioned mechanical SLR with a decent digital capability and a good range of small, affordable (non-Sony) wide primes. I may still get one for retro appeal, for those occasions when I'm happy with the same low-light and low-shutter-speed limitations I had in film days.

But coming from the A58 and wanting to use lots of Minolta lenses, the original A7 is just too limited for general use and too much of a backward step. I went for the A7Rii which I picked up new earlier this year for around the same price s/h examples were being offered, and it's a brilliant camera. The LA-EA4 stays on it quite a lot of the time now (I won't bother with LA-EA3 or 5 since I have so few SSM lenses) and I though I didn't initially like the big knobbly base that stops the camera sitting level, I've grown to like it as both a convenient hand-hold and a good place for a tripod.

Yes, there are significant AF mode limitations with the LA-EA4 compared with native FE lenses, but once you get carried away with these issues you'll end up with an LA-EA5 and one of the very few expensive new cameras that support it.