expired Sony Alpha A7 III Full Frame Camera (Body Only) $2294.15 @ JB Hi-Fi

990

First post so go a little easy on a young buck, this may be the cheapest (at least that I have seen) for this body and it is usually excluded from the Sony Camera Sales at JB.

I've had one of these since release (Pre-ordered through George's Cameras but was hard to get stock in) and it has been an excellent shooter especially for low-light (I've been shooting nightclubs with this for the past 10 months or so). Was around $3,000 +/- $200 at launch (with JB Hi-Fi being on the higher end of this).

Key Features:

Newly developed full-frame 24.2MP back-illuminated Exmor R™ CMOS image sensor with evolved image processing

Wide ISO range of 100 - 51200 (expandable to ISO 50 – 204800 for still images) and 15-Stop dynamic range at low sensitivities

World class AF system featuring 693 phase-detection AF points covering 93% of image area, 425 contrast AF points and fast and reliable Eye AF

Continuous shooting at up to 10 fps with either mechanical shutter or silent shootingiv and full Auto Focus/Auto Exposure tracking

5-axis optical in-body image stabilisation with a 5.0 stepv shutter speed advantage

High resolution 4K movie shooting with full pixel readout and no pixel binning across full-width of full-frame sensor

The longest rated battery life of any mirrorless camera at 710 shots per charge

Upgraded operability and functionality including addition of joystick for adjusting focus points, dual SD card

Full Specifications available on the product page linked.

Related Stores

JB Hi-Fi
JB Hi-Fi

Comments

  • +17 votes

    only here to see someone commenting "Thanks, bought 10!"

  • +12 votes

    Thanks, bought 100

  •  

    I wonder why the price is going down on these on so many sites. A7siii must be around the corner

    •  

      Quite likely, they haven't had a major full frame release since so would be fitting, although even at original price this has outperformed a lot of others at the same price point.

    • +1 vote

      I guess it is because of Canon EOS RP

      • +3 votes

        The EOS RP was a weak release though IMHO, Cannon didn't even promote it that hard and the reviews haven't been astounding, The EOS R was more of a threat to the Sony Full Frame Mirrorless lineup, will be interesting to see where Cannon go with these in the future given not a bad first offering.

        • +11 votes

          I wouldn't be so sure - the RP is perfectly targeted at the crowd of amateur photog's who want to get in on the full frame action but aren't quiet at the level of caring about sensor dynamic range, IBIS or ISO performance - it's just a decent cheap full frame by a brand they know that's way cheaper than the competition with no glaring issues. The M50 sold like gangbusters despite being obviously flawed in many ways. The entry level crowd is VERY price sensitive.

          The RP is the type of full frame camera your 21yo friend who lives with their parents and has too much disposable income from their weird manager position at Oporto comes home from the store with after telling you they're "like super into photography now".

          • +1 vote

            @stanstho: This reply is perfect, I was more looking at it in terms of a competitor for the A7III or reason they would drop the price, Cannon certainly know how to dominate segments thats for sure.

            • +1 vote

              @hutchdisco: Canon hasn't made a serious pro mirrorless… yet. The high res variant is rumoured to come out next (~50MP 5DS/r equivalent). But then either the 1DX or 5D equivalent is said to follow - those are serious models everyone is waiting for. That is when it will be properly game on for all the manufacturers. And as they all fight to be the mirrorless king, the big winner will be the consumer.

          •  

            @stanstho: The Sony A7m2 is cheaper than the RP so not sure the RP has had that much of an effect on the market. Unless Canon brand name trumps Sony for entry level FF cameras

            • +1 vote

              @qvinto: TBH for the amateur photog who doesn't obsess over spec comparisons and just wants to start their facebook photography business - The Canon brand name and the fat the RP is "new" whilst the A7ii is "old" could definitely give it that edge.

              Honestly just the ability to use EF lenses is pretty major for anyone trying to keep their budget in check - I desperately want a A7 but the lenses in E mount are just so pricey. But the above wanna be photog didn't do enough research to know this anyway but from my perspective I'd love to switch to sony but they make up the profits lost on body by pricing the lenses higher.

              •  

                @stanstho: If you compare new lenses the prices are essentially the same across brands. If you are talking about second hand or DSLR lenses then yes that changes things.

                Saying that Sony, like all other mirrorless manufacturers are definitely ripping us off. How can a mirrorless camera cost as much as a DSLR when it is so much easier to manufacture? There is a reason they are all getting into the mirrorless FF market - massive margins
                Also compare Sigma lenses to the major brands? Again big margins. I don’t think Sony is unique here, look up what the new Eos R lenses cost

                •  

                  @qvinto: TBH this is a huge frustration of mine - Why does an M50 cost $700 and an RP 1800? They're both plastic, both basically the same initials (minus sensor size). These cameras should be far closer in price than they are.

                  The R lenses are insane too. I know they're optically fantastic and I get it - may as well start expensive and see who buys it and make the cheap ones later.

                  Sony is definitely not unique here, I agree.

                •  

                  @qvinto: There's a bit more processing power required to make live view / the EVF not shitty. But less complex yes. EVFs at this point tend to have many advantages over SLRs so there's that. Canon still managed to make the one in the RP and R have a bit of blackout though….

                  The EF lenses are much cheaper, even the L lenses, these are still exceptionally good lenses for less than the Sony's versions, and being the same brand there shouldn't be any autofocus lag unlike converted lenses.

                  The new RF lenses aren't cheap, they're comparable to the FE lenses (or more?). But the new RF lenses are pretty god damn amazing. Just the technical of the mount means they're not quite as limited as the FE mount is. Nikon's new mount also, technically very good.

                  When you're thinking of keeping any new Glass for 15-25 years but replacing a body every 5-7 years this matters. As does being able to use the 15 year old Glass you currently have…..

              •  

                @stanstho:

                Honestly just the ability to use EF lenses is pretty major for anyone trying to keep their budget in check - I desperately want a A7 but the lenses in E mount are just so pricey.

                Yep. This is what has kept me chugging along with my 60D. I keep looking longingly at the A7III but I have a heap of Canon glass (including L glass) which means a Sony switch for me is realistically a $6000-$10000 worth of glass swap. Admittedly for 'newer' Sony glass as my canon stuff is all gen 1/2 stuff or some EF-S with a bit of wear and low resale value.

                The A7III is in most ways better than the R/RP but the RF mount technically has some advantages.

                In my mind the choice is something like RP (~1900 ish no more to pay, I have all the glass / flashes etc) small and portable since I mostly use it or travel. But crappy battery, no IBIS, video mode is basically 1080p and not great at that (though I don't do much video anyway).

                R - A little bit of a pricey body given the downsides (not great video, no IBIS).

                A7III great but more like a $5,000-$8000 proposition vs the $2000-$3000 of sticking with Canon. Which is a bit for a mere hobby photographer.

                60D $0 … so far.

                The body is really the cheap bit. Paying more for every lens on Sony is hard to swallow when they need a bit more image correction (automatically done in JPG) to look as good. But I do like Sony's 'we're not crippling this camera' attitude. Canon is a big FU to their customers with how they cripple their cameras. Part of me is wondering if they're just incapable of cost effectively producing good video processors and part of me knows it's their usual tactics.

                So far I'm going to just keep waiting and seeing, that after all is free.

                •  

                  @afordprefect: I agree entirely - I'm still using a Canon M50 despite my intense full frame lust - I ended up grabbing a Viltrox speed booster for the FF look and throwing a nifty 50 on it to make a $900 full frame equivalent ultra small travel camera.

                  I don't NEED an A7 or an R or any other new FF camera for that matter. It's hype and marketing and they know they've got something to hook us with because they are INCREDIBLE cameras and offer so much in the way of features (the Sony especially).

                  But whenever I ask myself if I truly need to spend another $2k on a body and another $1k on lenses to get a look which is 90% the same as my current setup gives me? If I was making choices rationally there's no way I'd ever swing that.

                  Seconding that: The free option is always better.

    • +2 votes

      Now that you mention it, I did just get invited to a Sony A-series camera event….

      Cant guarantee it means a new one is coming but it is quite the coincidence if there isn't haha

  • -2 votes

    Yeah, this is bloody cheap! You won't find cheaper. Everyone else's selling for just under $2400 atm. The price-drop on this thing has been huge. Perfect DSLR for almost any use case.

  •  

    …i..dont need it… reaches for wallet

  •  

    ….must be a good camera if it costs $2000…..

  •  

    hi OP,
    Nice find

    5-axis optical in-body image stabilisation does this make a big difference in photos?
    &
    What lens do you use for night photography in pubs.

    •  

      The in-body stabilisation is more for handheld video work but this is definitely a huge step up for doing video from a camera without IBIS.

      In regards to the lens, the venue gets fairly packed so I shoot using a Samyang 14mm F2.8 AF UMC II, but this is an extremely wide angle lens and is fairly venue specific so may not suit others.

      •  

        Thanks Op,
        I think you should also put in the orginal post about using gift cards from entertainment/woolworths.
        even after spending $70 on entertainment card will give you $50 back from the price of camera after applying the discount.

    • +4 votes

      Get a fast wide angle. Sony lenses are expensive though. Something like the 16-35mm f/4 might be fine but preferably a f/2.8.

      If you are looking for cheap option maybe get a prime like this https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1413345-REG/rokinon_i...

      This is why I prefer Micro Four Thirds. It has much cheaper lenses, I don't care about razor thin depth of field that most FF people are after.

      • +2 votes

        There are more third party options around now, the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 is a great all around option and costs way less than the G master

    • +3 votes

      Not op but the ibis helps in two ways

      1. Allows you to use lenses that aren’t stabilized by without constantly getting blurry results.

      2. Allows you to use longer exposers and thus better low light performance before it gets blurry.

    • +1 vote

      The IBIS will allow you to use lower shutter speeds hand held, but keep in mind it won't help if your subject is moving around. It's going to be handy for photography because of that.

  • +4 votes

    At this price you're basically stealing.

  • +1 vote

    Wow great price. I picked one up for $2250 at the Sony shop so feeling good about that

  •  

    This, Z6 or Canons EOS offering?

    • +2 votes

      Personally I would say DYOR on this one, advantages/disadvantages to all of the above but for the price and feature set I found the Sony a clear winner for my needs. Very important to note if you have lenses already that can easily be adapted or work natively (and well, again DYOR as AF can be off with adapters) with any of these it is a huge cost saver with a new setup.

      2 quick things that got me over the line with the Sony offering was the dual SD and the 10fps continuous shooting.

      •  

        Cheers for the advice.. New to the mirrorless and Sony seem to have a good base
        Do you think the A7S III is going to make this redundant or will the price be a lot higher?

        • +3 votes

          A7iii will still be relevant. Different user base imo. And it'll least be $1k-$1.5k more. Spend it on glass

        •  

          Very likely for a more premium market, but who knows with Sony.
          I very much doubt it would make the camera redundant however especially not at this price point, more likely to hurt the A7RIII or A9 possibly (which I would imagine have updates coming in the pipeline).

    • +1 vote

      It is hard to beat the Sony unless you have old Nikon or Canon lenses. Generally Sony has the best IQ and AF. Although the Canon lenses perform quite well on the Sony with a sigma adopter if you keep the FPS low.

  •  

    Great price for great camera !

  • +2 votes

    This or 2X Samsung Galaxy S10s?

  •  

    Now I just need Tamron to release the 17-28mm F2.8 lens into the market for sale.

  •  

    Argh GH5 shooter and tempted to get this for stills…

  •  

    Buy 10 and sell on Gumtree for a profit

  •  

    Wondering how much for a lenses.

  • -2 votes

    last minute push for even more market share! Good price for technically fantastic but very uninspiring camera (YMMV)
    pressure from Canon R, Canon RP, Nikon Z6 (my favourite) and Fuji X-T3

    Nikon Z, Sony and Fuji and fanboy

    • +1 vote

      What do you think is inspiring?

      • +1 vote

        Leica. lololz

        • +2 votes

          I have 2 Sony FF bodies and they are excellent ,but ergonomics, grip, buttons ,menu…. well it feels more like a computer than a camera, just does not inspire me to get out and shoot.
          Nikon Z6 changed it and I am selling my Sony's.
          You might think that I am picky, but ergonomics makes huge difference to me…

          •  

            @radissimo: I started on crop with a Pentax K-x, moved to a K-5 and now shoot with their FF K-1 body. I've tried bodies from Canon and Nikon and honestly, the Pentax bodies had way better ergonomics. Have held a Sony A7iii before and didn't mind it. I'd be interested to see what an A7iii with a pancake lens from Pentax like the 43mm limited would be like.

            •  

              @Munki: I know what you talking about, K-1 has fantastic ergonomics and built like a tank, I have 43mm Limited as well and planning to test it on A7RII, Nikon Z6 and fuji x-pro2 with speedbooster, (my favourite focal lenght)

              •  

                @radissimo: Let me know if it adapts well! I kind of switch between the 43mm to the 77mm. Was never a fan of the 43 on the K-5, but it's such a great focal length on FF! My 31mm gets neglected the most now (used to be glued to the K-5).

                •  

                  @Munki: I had the 31/43/77 limited and used them them on the A7s2 for a while. Worked ok but the appeal wore off pretty quickly. The Sony AF lenses give me so many more usable shots that I sold the limiteds and don't really miss them. The silver machined bodies were very nice but the IQ of the lenses certainly show their age

                  •  

                    @qvinto: Yeah? Hmm I haven't pixel peeped with the trio on my K-1, but still find pictures taken with them to be good. I definitely appreciate the quicker AF with the newer lenses though.

                    •  

                      @Munki: The iq is definitely not that bad. It is more the manual focus. If you mostly do landscapes it is not a big deal but if you photograph people or moving subjects, then the Sony AF lenses with tracking are just so much more easier to get good shots with

                      Still all the Sony lenses are bigger and heavier than the limitless so that is also a factor

                      For landscapes, don’t bother changing cameras or lenses. Also the K-1 has nicer, more solid build than any of the Sony bodies

    •  

      The X-T3 is an APS-C camera, why would there be any pressure from that when it's not even in the same ball park?

      •  

        the enthusiast looking for great picture quality might decide between those two
        x-T3- smaller,smaller high quality lenses, better EVF, better video,better ergonomics incl. menus

      •  

        When I got my camera I was deciding between X-T2 and A7ii, I ended up going with the X-T2 and it wasn't to do with cost (other than maybe the price of Sony lenses came into the equation). Not regretting going with the Fuji.

  • +2 votes

    If anyone has the sony amex offer on their card, they would be better off seeking a price match at a sony store/kiosk.

  •  

    Take it to DigiDirect and ask for a better offer. Normally they are very flexible and quite keen to beat JB.

    •  

      Sony is also doing 10% off their full frame lenses when you buy a full frame body from DigiDirect. Might be worth asking DigiDirect to price match.

  •  

    Great price, great camera. I love mine :)

  •  

    What's the best 1 lens one would buy for this? I've got a RX100 that I shoot with these days and like to keep things compact but with a little kid now, need something that's fast but still a bit easier to carry.

    •  

      tamron 2875 f2.8 or sony 24-105f4

    •  

      either a small prime like the 35mm f/2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 for an all-rounder

    •  

      I would also consider the 28mm f/2 lens. It's very compact, only 200 grams and quite a good budget lens. Otherwise the Tamron 28-75 2.8 is also quite versatile, but just depends on the weight and bulk you're willing to carry around.

    • +2 votes

      Don't buy this camera if you only want one lens. The price you are paying is also because you can change lenses.

    •  

      It really won't make a difference, unless you are a baller and 2 grand doesn't mean much. And if it doesn't, yes, just get this one. A nice lens for this will easily be over a grand too.

      BTW, Best 1 lens, IMO = Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 GM Lens. It's a 3 grand lens though.

      •  

        I think a much more useful general lens would be the Tamron 28-70 2.8. A 16mm superwide zoom is pretty specialised and difficult to get good composition with unless you are a niche landscape photographer. A 28-70 2.8 is more versatile (portraits, low light, some moderate zoom)

        • -2 votes

          I agree in general, but the OP is basically an iPhone photographer but has money to spend. (nothing wrong with that lol) He already thinks he needs an a7iii, therefore a crazy-good GM lens, something that an iphone could never match, i believe is the better lens. lol

  •  

    Looks like they are on back order - possibly delivery will be in May

  •  

    This is a great price for a great camera. The savings on the body can go towards the Tamron 2875 f/2.8 which is a stellar lens.

  •  

    It hurts Canon and Nikon so much…….

  •  

    Can't wait for the A7 V in 2023 so I can pick up one of these around [checks crystal ball] $800.

  •  

    If you’re a Sony X member, you might want to wait until Monday for this. 😉

  • Top