Nature & Travel Photography by Justin Reznick

I’m about to leave for Nepal to go trekking for a month and won’t be blogging about the new camera until I return. It will hopefully be waiting for me when I arrive home!

I’ve been scouring the internet for details to the most important questions for landscape photographers. With the help of Michael Bolognesi and Achim Sieger we’ve accumulated some important facts.

As the camera is a huge draw for Canon landscape photographers (Nikon users have the stellar sensor in the D800), the big question is how does the camera perform with Canon glass, most specifically, the Canon 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses? A Dutch magazine reports that the tilt shift lenses work perfectly on the A7r with the Metabones Mark III adapter. The magazine article can be found here:

http://www.pf.nl/19555/hands-on-sony-alpha-7r-metabones-adapter-eos-lenzen/

The Metabones Adapter Mark III can be purchased here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/983747-REG/metabones_mb_ef_e_bm3_canon_ef_to_e_mount_nex.html

In addition, an L-Bracket for the Mark III adapter will hopefully be in the works from:

http://hejnarphoto.com/ebay/products/metabones2%20spacer.html

Achim is working with him to see if it’s possible. Using the L-Bracket with the Metabones adapter would be fantastic option.

Reports of the Canon 17-40mm f/4L IS and Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II are coming in as well, and both can be used with the camera.

Another reason other than tilt shift lenses that Canon landscape photographers have not made the jump to the Nikon D800 is the nearly unusable live view of the D800. It has a green tint screen, does not give an accurate representation of the image, makes manual focus extremely challenging due to interpolation, and has trouble focusing in many situations. The Canon Mark III is the polar opposite with phenomenal live view. So what does the Sony A7r bring to the table in regards to live view? Achim shared with me this article from Matt Kloskowski discussing live view on the A7r:

http://www.mattk.com/2013/11/01/my-two-favorite-features-on-the-new-sony-a7r/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=my-two-favorite-features-on-the-new-sony-a7r

Matt is a fan and provides confidence that the live view will deliver. He discusses focus peaking as well which should be standard on all DSLRs, yet is missing from the Mark III and D800. Matt also mentions diffraction reduction, which could be a fantastic feature but will need to be put to the test when the camera arrives.

Before I wrap this up, I wanted to make an argument for Nikon shooters out there. If you own the D800 or D800E or are in the market for one, why would this camera interest you? Here are 5 points to consider:

1) It’s half the weight

2) It has competent live view (and since landscape photographers use live view almost exclusively, this feature cannot be understated)

3) It can still be used with your excellent Nikon glass via an adapter!

4) It would make an excellent backup body. Same great image quality, less weight!

5) It’s more affordable (if you are debating between purchasing the two cameras)

Is the image quality better than the D800E? According to JPEG results the answer is yes, but the real test is RAW so that is yet to be seen. Want to see the A7r paired with the incredible Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G wide angle lens? Check out Gordon Laing’s review where he tests the camera with the Nikon lens: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A7r/index.shtml
Exciting times ahead!

It’s simple really, don’t subscribe. I love Lightroom and Photoshop. They are a part of my workflow on every image that I create. Fortunately, Lightroom will stay independent of Adobe’s new subscription based model, and I look forward to purchasing and using each new version that is released.

As for Photoshop… plenty has been written on the negative aspects of Adobe’s new delivery method. I need to highlight just a few to make my point.

1) You are looking at an 80 – 100 percent price increase, depending on your normal Photoshop upgrade path. That is unreasonable by any accounts for an extremely expensive product to begin with! It is so sad that Adobe is claiming a cheaper price (with the assumption that you buy the standalone product at full price as opposed to most who upgrade at a reduced price, normally during a promotion).

2) What happens to your files if you no longer want to shoot and process for a couple of years? What happens when you go on a 6 month trip? I put Netflix on hold while I’m out-of-town, can I do the same with Photoshop?

3) Adobe claims regular updates but in reality, there has been very few changes since Photoshop CS4! Each edition has minor revisions. Why would this be any different? Why would I believe that all of sudden Photoshop is going to take off with radical new changes? The program is so robust, it’s extremely difficult to improve.

Photoshop CS6 is a fantastic product. It does everything I want it to do. I plan on using it for years to come. The new Photoshop CC may be tempting in a few years when the feature set grows, but the current upgrades or so minor, I would hesitate to upgrade at this point even if it where a standalone product. I think part of the reason Adobe is going this route is the monopoly they have on the industry. If there was a viable competitor, photographers would flock to it. I hope Google and the talented team at Nik Software are paying attention. If they could come to market in 12 – 18 months with a Photoshop clone (for photographers), price it at $149 – $199, there will be a market for it. If Apple could expand Aperture to have a complex layer and masking system, people would get excited. Adobe needs a competitor and they just left themselves wide open!