Since I learned you can get a Sony camera converted to B&W only, I've been looking at Sony cameras.
I already own a conversion candidate...but that doesn't stop me from looking. :-)
Speaking of which, there's a sale on Sonys at B&H Photo right now—the stellar deal appears to be an A7 Mark II with a 28–70mm lens and some accessories for less than a grand; or you can choose the more recent A7 Mark III with the same lens. The same split is replicated with the high-res models, where the cheaper A7R Mark III is mirrored by the up-to-date A7R Mark IV (both with no lens but with a card, bag, and extra battery).
But the real dilemma—and a hard choice—seems to be between the top APS-C model, the A6600 (not included in the current sale), and the "standard" full-frame model, the A7 Mark III. The former is more compact and has a "rangefinder style" layout; the latter, which is really still quite compact by today's standards, has the more conventional faux-SLR type of body design.
Deciding between the two would be a hard choice to make I think, whether you're buying yourself or recommending a camera to others.
The Sony A6600 has a larger grip that houses
a bigger battery
For purchase and as a recommendation, I'd personally tend to lean toward the A6600, although I can see how others might do the opposite. I like the ex-NEX line of Sony products, and while I've never owned the A6000 or later cameras, I tested an A6500 at the end of 2017 and liked it. (Of course I have fond memories of my NEX-6 which is now a fossil in digital camera lifetimes.)
I'm resigned to the fact that I'm going to be shooting stills with video cameras for the rest of my life—y'know, you adapt, even if you don't really like it—but in the case of the A6600, all the videocentric improvements and refinements have actually had one effect that stills shooters also really appreciate: namely a bigger, beefier grip and a bigger, better battery. That was done for video shooting I'm sure, but I love a good solid grip and I head out with a single battery nine times out of ten, so there's no harm in having one that lasts longer.
The A6600 in general has been highly refined by this point, and numerous reviews mention the superior finish and apparent build quality of the A6600, and the fact that Sony has revamped the haptics of the buttons, improving their "clickiness," their sound and feel. That's another of those things that shouldn't matter but does to me.
As far as lenses go, it is again a hard choice. Do you prefer Sony's latest G-Master statements, or do you tend to prefer smaller, lighter lenses? Of course they're all the same lensmount and will fit on either the A6600 or A7 Mark III, but most people will tend to match the lens to the sensor. There again, my preference tilts to the A6600. My baseline complement of lenses (for me, not as a recommendation necessarily) is a 35mm angle-of-view equivalent prime and an 85mm-e prime, and I'd love to have one of those beautiful Zeiss 24mm's paired with Sigma's lovely little 56mm ƒ/1.4 DC DN. What a sweet lens that is. They both are.
One thing both cameras have is Sony's Eye-AF focusing, which leads the field and is really a wonder of modern technology. It's a "sufficiently advanced" technology that remains magic. If you shoot people (or want to when the plague years end), it's got to be something you'd want.
There are many great cameras vying to be our "objects of desire." Obviously the list is very different for each of us. The A6600 would rank high on my own list. When I look at it I like pretty much everything I see.
Mike
Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
BOOK of the WEEK
as discussed in this post from last week:
How Not to Diet by Michael Greger
(Links go to Amazon)
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Andrew Young: "I had a Sony A7R Mark II converted to monochrome last year and really enjoy it. I greatly prefer it to color cameras for black and white images. It streamlines the workflow and looks great. I print using the Piezography monochrome inkjet system, so it is 100% B&W from start to finish. Great fun."
Arg: "Let’s face it: mirrorless cameras are only possible, with a pleasant EVF experience, if the sensor is a video device first and foremost. Even if the camera couldn’t record video, its sensor has to output high-quality, high-bitrate, low-latency video. Hooray for video-oriented sensors!"
Greg K.: "This past summer, I switched from Canon to Sony after nearly three decades of film and digital cameras from the former. I initially expected to buy an A6600 and the 200–600mm lens for bird photography, figuring the extra crop factor would often be very useful.
"Despite all the good technology inside of the A6600, after actually handling it in our local camera store, I strongly disliked the ergonomics of the smaller body. Trying to change settings in shooting position required uncomfortable contortions of my hand to reach the dials and I knew I would not enjoy using that camera body. I walked out of the store that day pretty disappointed because I knew my shopping was going to get a lot more expensive (I eventually bought an A7R Mark IV). The full frame Sony bodies fit my hand better than their APS-C bodies but even so, I still added the battery grip to my A7R Mark IV because my hand started to hurt after long days of shooting. Now, perhaps the balance is different if you are going to shoot with smaller lenses (as is more typical for many other types of photography). For me, the APS-C vs. full frame and newer vs. previous generation decisions were rapidly subjugated to handling considerations, which actually simplified my buying process."
Hi Mike,
If you're partial to the Sony A6xxx cameras you might want to check Thom Hogan's website. I don't remember all the particulars, but I recall reading that he doesn't see much difference or improvements in the newer models in the line. I also have an inkling that one of his complaints about Sony is that you can still buy (new) cameras from several generations back. If you're looking for a camera that will immediately have its warranty voided, and if you believe him that there's little difference in old vs new, might as well save some bucks.
I'll be interested to read about your experiences if you go through with this, as I've always had daydreams about converting my old DSLR to infrared but always chickened out because I wasn't sure I would use it enough to justify the cost. A B&W-only camera, however, would be something I could see myself using regularly.
Posted by: ASW | Monday, 21 December 2020 at 05:36 PM
I don't think grinding off the color filter array is the same as the new Leica B/W sensor. So if that is your goal you may be disappointed. Admittedly the Leica is horribly expensive (of course I own a GFX camera so I can't really talk....). My understanding is the sensor on the new M10 and Q2 are specifically designed for B/W and the processor is too. I think the older Leica Monochrom(e)s were basically sensor without the color array. The new ones are definitely different. I would just save your money and get a Q2 Monochrom(e). I have actually used one of the modified cameras briefly (it was a Sony) a friend of mine has. I was thinking of having my original X Pro 1 modified. I could not tell a bit of difference between it and just shooting a color photo and converting it. It's not going to make a difference whether it is a Sony, Nikon, or Olympus. He agreed that if he had to do it again he wouldn't have it done. I did manage to take a few shots with the new M10 Monchrom(e) at a camera store last week. Those I could definitely see a difference on. It was amazing. ISO 25,000 was quite good. But it wasn't just the high ISO, somehow they got the tonality right. Not sure if it's $8,200 amazing though. But if I had the money I would definitely buy one.
Posted by: James | Monday, 21 December 2020 at 06:30 PM
Or you could go this route since you already have some lenses:
https://petapixel.com/2017/02/17/fujifilm-monochrome-cameras-4800-cheaper-leicas/
https://maxmax.com/faq/camera-tech/debayer-study/fuji-monochrome
Posted by: James | Monday, 21 December 2020 at 06:38 PM
Mike, A few months ago, you wrote that you had a Rollei 6008 system. Load some Tri-X and you have a superior B&W system. No need to pay for modifying a Sony camera.
Posted by: Kodachromeguy | Monday, 21 December 2020 at 08:07 PM
You might want to read this:
https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/06/14/unscrambling-the-monochrome-egg-a-bw-camera-only-explanation-by-patrick-clarke/
Is there anything that makes the purpose-built Leica sensor better than a converted one?
The Leica is going to be a more perfect camera since it was made to be monochrome. Typical conversions can have small traces of CFA left typically around the edges or other minor stuff that can be an issue for the pixel peeper types, though not an issue for practical shooting.
Posted by: James | Monday, 21 December 2020 at 08:08 PM
Have you seen the new A7C?
Full-frame, but A6xxx range-finder form factor.
Posted by: DB | Tuesday, 22 December 2020 at 12:08 AM
Thought I would try monochrome-only shooting, so set my Pany S5 to monochrome, but with RAW and JPG files both enabled. So I got a nice monochrome image in the viewfinder, JPG mono files, and regular raw files that I could develop in color or monochrome. I took it out for a walk and enjoyed trying to see everything as a possible monochrome shot. The results? Very nice well-exposed color from the raw files, crappy monochrome JPGs, and a lesson learned that this kind of shooting isn't for me!
[That's the way to know, that's for sure. --Mike]
Posted by: Dick Barbour | Tuesday, 22 December 2020 at 09:58 AM
Greetings Mike, once you decide on which camera to convert to a Monochrome sensor would you consider a short comparison experiment?
Setup up a repeatable series of photographs perhaps indoors to make sure lighting remains the same. Before you send out the camera for conversion take a few images with the camera and use your Photoshop or Lightroom skills and perform your best color to B&W conversion. Then reshot with your converted camera and compare results, I think it would provide huge dividends. I have visited all the sites for monochrome conversions and have yet to see before and after images of cameras converted, yes the results from the converted cameras are superb but have yet to see Photoshop color conversions compared to monochrome sensor results.
Posted by: Peter Komar | Tuesday, 22 December 2020 at 10:36 AM
You tend to prefer focal lengths of less than 100mm, so no gains from the crop sensor in terms of lens reach. You also like playing with different lenses of your preferred focal lengths (damn spell check suggested "fecal" length, so much for AI) and Sony is the most adaptable FF mirrorless out there. Much greater selection of FF lenses, both new and old. 24mp is plenty so I would say A7III. Why III and not II? Handling, AF, and general operational improvements from the previous generation.
Posted by: Keith | Tuesday, 22 December 2020 at 01:30 PM
Mike - if the hard choice is in part b/c of liking the 6600's "rangefinder" body over the "SLR" style of mirrorless- maybe have a look at the full frame A7C if you haven't already.
Posted by: David | Tuesday, 22 December 2020 at 04:01 PM
I have an A7II and find it is more than good enough for anything I use it for. Except for waist-level portrait (vertical) shooting.
The A7C fixes that and had the humpless form factor you prefer.
Well higher speed flash synch would be nice but that will only show up when Sony introduces a global shutter to improve video, which I keep hearing is "soon"
Posted by: hugh crawford | Tuesday, 22 December 2020 at 05:13 PM