• out of stock

Sony Alpha A7 III + SD Card $2057.78 Delivered ($1757.78 after Sony CB) @ CameraClix

1110
OZBSPECIAL

EDIT: Out of current stock. Pre-order NOW for the epic price, but will be for next shipment of stock from Sony. I've just checked in with Sony, they've said there's no ETA.

An OzBargain special for you guys! We've got the lowest price on the A7 III ever on OzBargain (please correct me if I'm wrong), and definitely the cheapest at the moment. Plus we're throwing in an SD card too! It's Australian stock and will have all the standard Sony Australia warranties.


Details
  • Add both the Sony A7 III and the card to the cart. (If you can't find the card, search for "OZBSPECIAL".)
  • Apply the code OZBSPECIAL at checkout, to get the SD card for free.

Note: The SD card will be at least a 16GB card. It's from a variety of cards in stock at the moment.

Note 2: We've got a handful of stock across our stores, once out of stock, you can still order but you'll have to wait for the next shipment. Sony says approximately 2 weeks.

Related Stores

CameraClix
CameraClix

Comments

  • +3 votes

    Beat that jbhifi price for sony a7c with lens kit in 2000$ and everyone will jumpin 😂

    • +9 votes

      That was an insane price haha, like properly insane. It was so much below cost, that even I wanted to buy one, and I have an A7R3 at the moment.

      •  

        I was so tempted at that point, even i got a7m3 and many lenses already

      •  

        What's the best deal you can do on an A7C body only or with a lens?
        And while we are there. What are your recommendation for a camera for landscape photography and some occasional astro/milky way shots?
        Could even be a A6400/6600, I like the more compact form factor or anything else. I am not much into video recording. and likely I will never be.

        cheers

      •  

        What's the best deal you can do on an A7C body only or with a lens?
        And while we are there. What are your recommendation for landscape photography and some occasional astro/milky way shots?
        Could even be a A6400/6600, I like the more compact form factor.

        cheers

        •  

          Not huge into astro but my understanding is you want as wide of a focal length as you can get so you don't get light trails. The wider the lens, the longer your shutter can stay open (and the more light you can get in).

          You can shoot astro on pretty much anything though, I've seen some on the Ricoh GR forums shoot astro with one of those.

        • +9 votes

          Just dropped the price on the A7C for you, ets27. Not much in it, to be honest. It's a bit of a strange number at the moment, but I suspect it'll make a whole lot more sense once the A7M4 releases. Honestly, I'd get the A7M3. Cheaper, you get a front dial, and well, it's really the same camera.

          For landscapes and astro, the camera is less important than a good lens. (Once you stop down the lens and put it on a tripod, the sensor size and technology matters less.) You'll won't see a huge benefit going 35mm/full-frame. Personally I'd go for a good but inexpensive body, and then grab a nice sharp wide-angle, perhaps with a low f-stop if you can stretch the budget.

          Start with a number on your budget, pick the best (or best bang-for-buck) lens in a system you like, and spend the remainder on the body.

          •  

            @CameraClix: Well regardless of the budget, I would be keen to get a body to keep for long and gradually build up with lenses.
            Do you also sell Canon? What do you think about the EOS Rp for my purposes?
            I come from an OMD-EM10 but I am not super satisfied, perhaps because the sensor is too small for low light and there is not a massive choice of lenses.. I used to get much better results with my previous entry level canon DSLR.

            •  

              @ets27: The Olympus mirrorless range is excellent at the moment. If you have an original EM10, the current EM10 Mark IV is an entirely different and far improved camera. They started with a small selection, but current MFT lens range is ridiculously large (something like over 70 lenses off the top of my head). What lenses do you own for the Olympus?

              We also sell Canon, got pretty much everything but the R5 in stock.

              •  

                @CameraClix: I have the OMD-EM10 MK2, Oly 12-40 Pro , Oly 12mmF2.0. Do you think I would see improvements with the MK4 in Astro and Milky Way shots?

                Well let's say the budget for the new body would be $2,000 R5 probably too much

                • +1 vote

                  @ets27: Send me a PM. I'll walk you through the whole thing and we'll figure out what you need.

            •  

              @ets27: Save a bit more for the R6 mate, you won't regret it (if you're going Canon).

              Otherwise get the cheaper body and invest in the Sigma 14 f/1.8 (on adapter) for Milky Way landscape (just read your post about astro).

        •  

          "You'll won't see a huge benefit going 35mm/full-frame."

          Sorry for Milky way shots that simply isn't true, especially if you want a good single shot astro shot (not stacking) you really will see a massive difference with FF.. (I use a7m3 and a6600)… I changed from Olympus about a year ago and even bigger difference between m43 and FF for astro photography..

          For lens the best option ATM by far is the Sony 14mm f1.8, lovely lens…

          •  

            @joele: That's what I thought…. and that's why I want to upgrade from MFT to FF or A6400-600.
            Looks like you were in my same boat and you went in the direction I would like to follow. Can you tell me more about your findings? cheers

            •  

              @ets27: If you want to stay in the MFT system and reuse your lens, consider the later model MFT cameras with higher resolution. Yours have 16mp, the newer OMD have 20mp. Also consider the ones with pixel shift features like the OMD EM1 II or Lumix G9, which capture 4 raw images, effectively giving you 4 times the resolution and improves SNR. A faster aperture certainly helps, but even F2.8 is good enough for astro, so your 12mm F2 should be usable.

            •  

              @ets27: Not sure what more to say, the a7m3 is a great camera I have zero regrets, huge range of lenses available from Sony, the 3rd party lenses from Tamron are really good too and Sigma. Though some of the Sigma FE lenses are just adapted DSLR lenses and not redesigned for the shorter register distance (but more and more are coming out from Sigma too).

              So you shoot landscape and astro? as I said the Sony 14/1.8 is great but not cheap. In the meantime something like the Tamron 17-28mm is good enough for UWA landscape and Astro (I used it for a long time, though mostly using primes now).. If you want a more normal range your cheaper options are the Tamron 28-75mm and new Sigma 28-70mm.. The Tamron is sharper in the center and the Sigma is less sharp in the center but more even across the frame.. When I say less sharp it is not bad by any means, we are nit picking here.. The sigma is also super small for a FF 2.8 zoom.

              You will notice a huge step up from the old 20mp sensor in m43 to the 24mp in the a7iii.. You just have so much more latitude to pull out detail (much more DR) in landscape shots and Astro you can comfortably use ISO 5000 and not get a messy soup as crop sensors would give.

              I honestly only use my a6600 with the Sony GM 100-400, it is my birding/wildlife super telephoto combo and those two stay permanently attached..

              Any specific questions?

          • +2 votes

            @joele: The 14mm is an incredible lens, and at that size it's pretty amazing. That and the FE 24/1.4. drool It's so good to see Sony releasing small, no-compromise primes.

            •  

              @CameraClix: Hey CameraClix, yeah stunning lens, so impressed, glad I pre-ordered it (the gamble paid off).. I don't have the 24/1.4 but do have the 20/1.8 and the 35/1.4 they are both amazing optically and pretty decent size/weight for what they are.

        •  

          ets27 - even cheaper (sub 2k) price for you - https://www.digidirect.com.au/sony-alpha-a7-iii-mirrorless-d...

          •  

            @joele: yeah that is really tempting …thnks!
            But isn;t it the same as the post above?

            •  

              @ets27: Sorry I'm blind this deal is actually better than digidirect after rebate… oops

              • +1 vote

                @joele: Ah right! I was trying to understand if it was a different version :)

                •  

                  @ets27: Samyang 24 mm F1.8 is one of latest Astro lenses out there.. very sharp, very light and unbelievably cheap for the quality glass you're getting.

    •  

      Come on that was insane. No one can do that again

  •  

    Are there ever deals on A7R3 anymore?

  •  

    A7R4 getting more tempting as the weeks go on, seems much cheaper these days.

    • +4 votes

      Sorry, I just had a chat with the boss and I'm going to tempt you some more. $4,067, then $500 Sony CB, makes it $3,567 for an A7R4.

  •  

    do a deal on Canon R. Myer is selling them off $1900, beat that lol

  •  

    Dang, I was hoping for a deal on the A7C.

    Any chances we can get a deal? 😜

    • +1 vote

      Nothing like the JB Hifi special unfortunately, I missed out too lol

  •  

    Everyone wants the A7C because of the flip out screen. Any word if Sony will drop prices soon? Any new models being released that will lead to lower prices on these models?

    •  

      No idea, even Sony Australia don't get told of new releases until the day before (strange but true). Personally I do expect the A7M4 to drop end of the year though, or early 2022.

    • +1 vote

      There is also no guarantee the a7m4 will have a flip out screen like the a7c does.. Maybe it will, personally I like flip out screens but many people also hate them so meh.. Note the flagship a1 that came out after the a7c does NOT have a flip out screen like the a7c..

      •  

        For photography I find a tilting screen is more convenient than a flip-out screen. But for video it's no contest, flip out screen is so much better.

        • +1 vote

          as I said each to their own, I prefer flip out for photography too as I often flip it around fully to have no screen and not have my face/nose making the screen oily.. lol.. Though that also just proves I don't use the rear screen much so hence don't care overly…

  •  

    What is the difference between iii and c version? Is iii too old?

    •  

      Same camera in a different body. You also get a flip screen on the A7C vs a tilt on the A7M3.

      • +2 votes

        Technically correct but incorrect.

        • A7C uses Sony's latest AF AI Algorithm from the A7S III. The AF is more confident and less 'stuttery' with a tonne of moving subjects.
        • EVF has a smaller magnification
        • 2 SD Card slots on the body
        • No recording limit past 29:59 minutes
        •  

          I stand corrected. I've really only looked at it from a photography standpoint, and that recording limit + AF makes it like a mini A7S3.

        • +3 votes

          The A7C only has one SD card slot (A73 has 2 card slots). We might be agreeing, but the way it's written sounds like the A7C has the better config.

          • +1 vote

            @frowny: One other difference is just their ergonomics - this is just my opinion, but having the EVF be extra-small and up in the corner of the rear of the body looks comfortable; the A7C also has a smaller grip, is missing the joystick on the rear, and a couple of the assignable custom function buttons. So if you're only shooting video, the A7C might be better, but if you're doing any appreciable amount of photography work I'd personally stick to the A7III.

            •  

              @JS1: The EVF also has no eyecup making it hard to use sometimes. The sensor can also fail to switch to the EVF in sunny conditions (I assume this is probably because too much ambient light is getting in and it doesn't realise you've brought the EVF to your face?). Also missing a front dial.

              I switched anyway because I like the form factor + AF improvements but those two flaws really stand out for me going from A7III > A7C.

              •  

                @eecan: A7C might have better AF but also it needs better light to do that. In other words, A7iii low light performance is better than A7C (refer to the comparison in DXOmark). I think in better light both cameras perform extremely fast in autofocus so the benefit of newer autofocus abilities of A7C would be minimal. But in low light A7iii would perform much better (so no, A7C is definitely not a mini A7siii, that's a very very wrong statement).
                But they both use same sensor so the sensor performance (image quality, colour science) would be pretty similar.
                Get A7C: if you like flip screen and lighter body and don't mind compromised view finder and low light capabilities
                Get A7iii: if you want fully capable camera with proper view finder

                I don't even understand the existence of A7C apart from the flip screen. Everything else A7iii does equally or better.

                •  

                  @npnp: They intended for the A7C to be more of a vlogger's camera, hence the flip screen and lighter weight for holding out at arm's length.

                •  

                  @npnp: A7c seems to be the camera for scuba diving, I use my A7iii and the dive housing is huge
                  However the A7c housing with the kit lens is the same size as Sony apsc line up which is much smaller.

                • +1 vote

                  @npnp:

                  A7C might have better AF but also it needs better light to do that.

                  A7C has Real Time Tracking while the A7III does not, it only has Real-time Eye AF. The A7C is also rated for better AF in low light.at -4.0 EV vs -3.0 EV for the A7 III.

                  so no, A7C is definitely not a mini A7siii, that's a very very wrong statement

                  Who said it was a mini A7S III?

                  But they both use same sensor so the sensor performance (image quality, colour science) would be pretty similar.

                  Would agree with this but just note that A7C has the updated colour science.

  • +1 vote

    Oh my.

    I've been pondering a move to FF from M4/3. I've been reading up on all the FF options and which system to go with…

    At risk of starting a fanboy war, what would be your recommendation for the best value to performance, and my priority is minimising size and weight.

    I always thought Sony lenses are very expensive but took a look recently and it wasn't too bad..

    This is also a 2018 camera (but repeatedly still comes up as best mirrorless camera in 2021), are there newer better options?

    •  

      There's no real bad FF camera on the market at the moment, but I've sent you a PM if you'd like to discuss it more.

      •  

        Op is absolutely correct. Also applies across different systems. There are features that some can do better than others. It's good to have competition. Having owned various Sony, Canon, Olympus and Lumix cameras and lens, they all have pros and cons to suit different use cases and budgets. I have yet to own a Nikon or Fujifilm but will hope to have them some day when the right bargain comes along ;-)

    • +2 votes

      If you're looking for value, there isn't much better than the Sony E-Mount system, Tamron, Sigma, Samyang, Laowa, Zeiss, Kamlan and Sirui all competing to make good lenses at good prices.

    • +1 vote

      Tamron lenses are the best value bet at the moment.

      The 28-200mm is very appealing and versatile.

      • +1 vote

        Tamron and Samyang make best and budget friendly lenses for Sony. Get Tamron 28-200 with Samyang 24 mm F1.8 astro lens (released very recently), you are all set.

    •  

      For a new user that's not already locked in to any ecosystem I don't think anything really competes with the A7 III + Tamron/Sigma options at that price level.

    • +2 votes

      I agree the a7m3 (a7iii) is the best value in my humble opinion. For native mirrorless full frame lenses Sony mount is ahead. So many options, recent Sony lenses are not more expensive than Canikon mirrorless natives, in fact sometimes better value (give or take).. Tamron has a great range for Sony too which are cheaper but still great image quality and Sigma are releasing more all the time (though Sigma will cover nikon and canon too).

      I did that same as you, left m43 and went to Sony with the a7m3 about a year ago and have zero regrets or jealousy of other systems.. ;-)

      Newer options are the a7c (though it is worse in some ways too that would stop me considering it) the a7Rm4 is better if you want super high resolution, the A7Sm3 is great but more for video people. For general photography use I think the a7m3 is still the best value option unless you need the 60mp of the R series (many don't). The A7 mark 4 will be announced around September, but new camera will be less discounted etc..

      •  

        Obviously everyone will weigh the portability/IQ trade off differently, but as an MFT user with quite a few lenses, I'm keen to know the thoughts of those who have defected to FF. I've always hesitated from going FF because I think once you have three or more lenses, the inherent size of FF lenses will make for a much bulkier carry. If you have just one travel zoom on a body, then portability isn't wildly different, but I'd always want at least one or two primes in the bag too.

        •  

          I mostly shoot primes, no travel zooms at all.. It doesn't overly bother me, there is still a weight and size advantage for mirrorless FF vs DSLR FF which I had before Olympus. As to m4/3 well the Sony 20/1.8 is bigger than the 12/2 on Olympus for sure, but it is a much better lens/system.

          The Sony 35/1.4 is pretty decent size too, and weighs in at 520gm which is heavier than the m4/3 equivalent but compared to the canon 35/1.4 on DSLR FF well that weighs more than 200gm more at 760gm.

          But that all said comparing say the 20/1.8 to 12/2 isn't really fair, as if like me you have primes for ultimate IQ and also for option of shallower DOF then these lenses/systems aren't comparable directly like that as the 20/1.8 is going to give you way more DOF control on a FF body than the 12/2 can give on m4/3, then obviously say for landscape I find the FF sensor offers me huge advantages in DR.

          As for zooms the Tamron 17-28/2.8 weighs 420g it effectively replaced my Panasonic 8-18 2.8-4 which weighed 315gm, so yeah weight went up, but didn't break my back.

  •  

    Any deal on A7R4 ?

    •  

      Just dropped the price down to $4,076, $3,567 after Sony cashback. Do it ;)

      •  
        •  

          Looks like they've changed their price since your comment. They're more expensive at $4,078. Also I made a typo yesterday, I meant to say $4,067 sorry.

          I know it's relatively not much compared to the whole cost, but we're working with really small margins here.

  •  

    Does this camera really take much better photos than the iPhone Max Pro $2250 phone?

    • +5 votes

      for simple photos without much bokeh and not pixel peeping it's hard to distinguish the difference in some scenarios, but for creating crispy clean images with beautiful bokeh phones still don't come close. It's hands down better. plus low light scenarios phones still suck.

    • +1 vote

      Basically any modern camera does. Videos on the other hand…

      Sensor size is very important. On most phones they're the size of a small fingernail, on a camera like this it is similar to a stamp. So a lot more light and detail is recorded accurately.

      • +1 vote

        Just to expand on that; the iPhone 12 Max Pro's main camera has pixels that are 1.7 micrometers across, for a total sensor size of about 6.8mm x 5.1mm.

        A Sony A7 III has twice as many pixels, but even still has pixels that are 5.9 micrometers across, with a total sensor size of about 35.6mm x 23.8mm.

        That gives the Sony A7 III 12x more area per pixel to capture light.

    • +3 votes

      For a person without photographic experience to post on instagram? Probably not. The iPhone and its processing will likely even produce better images for a lot of people than just an A7III on auto with no post. For someone with the skillset to get the most out of either camera, definitely.

      It's also experiential. I can't for the life of me take a photo I am truly happy with on the phone, it doesn't put me in the right mindset. With a camera however I am in the zone and able to properly compose images how I like.

    • -1 vote

      Lol. Is this even a serious question.. Why don't people realise the simple physics? No comparison between full frame sensor vs mobile phone sensors no matter how expensive the smartphone is. Lol

    • +5 votes

      Some great replies here, but to chip in with my 2c, it depends.

      The Sony is a better camera by far, but does it take better photos (for you)? It depends on what your end goal is.

      For happy snaps, the iPhone will look better, almost every single time. If you want to do photography and editing, the A7III will give you a very nice RAW file, which has far more data to play with and help you achieve your end result easier. It's the difference between getting a takeaway meal, and cooking at home. One will be pretty good with the least amount of effort, and the other will depend on your skills. Editing iPhone photos are also like trying to modify a takeaway meal, you can definitely improve it, but there's less range of what you can do simply due to less data (even in phone RAW files).

      • +3 votes

        That might be the best analogy I've heard about phone versus actual cameras.

        • +1 vote

          As I always said (mid-drumstick) to my parents when they accused me of thinking KFC was better than my Mum's amazing Malaysian cooking: "not better….different!"

      • +1 vote

        Hah, I like the analogy!

    • -1 vote

      For someone asking this question…No.

      For a photographer…Yes

  •  

    The place to put the code in was difficult to find on mobile, not in the cart, but after clicking checkout, then creating an account and logging into it. It's at the top of the first checkout screen, hidden under a dropdown arrow that you specifically have to press that is labelled review order.

    •  

      My apologies, I'll look into it and see if we can make it easier. I just checked your order and see that we've already refunded you the difference. Let me know if there's anything else I can do!

      • +2 votes

        I called up and talked to your rep after I realised, was very good service thank you.

  • +1 vote

    Any chance doing a deal for Canon R6 body only? :)

    • +1 vote

      I've dropped the price down to $3,488.70 for you. Pricing is really, really, really close to current cost.

  •  

    thank you. Simply the best price around (https://www.digidirect.com.au/sony-alpha-a7-iii-mirrorless-d... is the next runner up ).
    When the A IV launches , its price point would be pretty much be around the $3.5k mark . Being a pretty capable model, I reckon the A7 iii's price would not drop too much.
    Snapped one of these for the inventory an hour ago . Thank you :)

  •  

    I am very interested, how fast can you post this out?

  •  

    @OP, what lens do you recommend? I know that might be like asking how long is a piece of string but my partner is an architect wanting to shoot some of her work and I'm a hobby drone/iPhone photographer who can frame a shot but has never used a real camera like this before… I guess I'm looking for an allrounder lens that won't break the bank?

    •  

      Sony 24-105mm f4 is a pretty decent all rounder.. It is hard though as different people have different ideas of what they need even in an allrounder..

    •  

      I'm assuming you'd want a wide zoom lens but I'm not sure what type of photos you're after.

      Without breaking the bank I'd say your best option is the Sony 16-35mm f/4. Range is decent enough for a wide zoom lens. You'd ideally be shooting from a tripod so f/4 won't really be an issue (you also won't be shooting wide open anyway for architectural photos)

      Another alternative is the Tamron 17-28 f/2.8. Less range but faster lens. However 17mm may not be wide enough for interior shots.

    •  

      easy way to find out what you need is from the results that someone else's photo. if you like that look, try to see what lens they use.

      not saying copying, but it is a good starting point.

    •  

      currydubs has hit the mark here. The Sony 16-35/4 Zeiss would be my choice. It's a fantastic lens with great character (if you care about that), and ridiculously flare resistant. If you're doing more interior work, try to play with a 16mm lens first, because you may find a wider lens is needed for tight spaces. (But that's where the string comes in, it depends on the kind of shot you want. There's always stitching as well.)

  •  

    Any upcoming specials on Nikon z6ii?

  •  

    Is this great for videos?

    •  

      It's an excellent hybrid camera, but the answer depends on your needs.

  • +1 vote

    What happened. Says $2099 for me now.

    • +1 vote

      Give me a sec, I'll check in with the team.

    • +3 votes

      Our team updated the pricing as we're almost out of stock, I've told them no (lol), and we'll continue the current pricing, but orders will soon be pre-order for the next shipment of stock.

  • +1 vote

    $2099 now with the discount code?? And SONY cashback will end in 5 days, what if receiving it later than the date if out of stock from cameraclix?

    • +2 votes

      Give me a sec, I'll check in with the team.

    • +2 votes

      Corrected now, but orders will soon be pre-order only for the next shipment of stock.

    • +2 votes

      The Sony T&Cs say you have till 15 July to submit your claim but your camera/lens must be purchased before 30 June. You also need to be able to provide the serial number ("an image of the Eligible Product serial number") - sometimes you get the serial on the receipt/invoice, sometimes you don't (you'll have to wait for the physical product to arrive). Sony online should be able to price match as well as an alternative. Not sure about CB then.

  • +1 vote

    Damn, a lens kit would sweeten this deal like hell. This is not the one geared toward videographers/vloggers, right?

    •  

      Depends on what you want. This is currently the ultimate bang-for-buck hybrid camera (photos and video). Vlogging-wise, a ZV1 would perhaps be a better choice, and for more serious video-centric cameras, well… there's a lot out there. A7S3, S1H, BlackMagic range, R5, and so on. In the same range, the video-orientated body is the Sony A7S3 which also happens to be the cheapest amongst our competitors at the moment. ;)

    •  

      This is not the one geared toward videographers/vloggers, right?

      No. That's the a7Siii.

      The kit lens is not that great, but if you want a kit lens, buy this body and message me. I will sell you my 28-70 which has been on my camera for 5 shots or less, in the original box for $200.

      •  

        I mean this one is a nice hybrid camera. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles of the A7SIII, but I don't think if you're looking to do some vlogging you need a $5k camera.