Back to full frame -- A7RII vs. D810

I bought a GH4 last August intending to do 4k video after flooding my old D800. Found out I prefer photography. After using the GH4 for a year (Nauticam system), I find that most of the time I take stills. Currently, I shoot underwater every day. I'm based in Thailand and I work on a day boat where I shoot, and sell images to, tourists trying out scuba diving for the first time, doing courses, or just fun diving on our boat. You can see some of my stills at www.andreiv.com to give you an idea of what I like to shoot.

I'm 90% convinced that I should get a full frame camera again to address some of the shortcomings of the GH4. For the past couple of months, I've been mulling about whether to go with a D810 or A7RII setup. I would probably buy two bodies down the line -- one to stay inside the housing, and one as a backup/for topside use.

I'm hoping for some wise guidance to sway my decision. I've highlighted questions in bold/italics. Please also correct any mistaken assumptions I have.

1. Gear I Currently Own

• Panasonic GH4; Nauticam GH4 Housing; Panasonic 8mm Fisheye (w/ Zen 100mm glass dome); Panasonic 7-14mmF4 (w/ Zen 170mm glass dome); Panasonic 14-42mmPZ (w/ 35mm port); Olympus 60mm macro; Nauticam SMC and Inon +6 Diopter.
• Nauticam D800 housing; Sigma 15mm lens (Nikon Mount) (w/ Nauticam 8.5" Acrylic dome -- needs new acrylic element).; Nikon 16-35mmF4 (w/ port extension for use with 8.5" dome); Nauticam port for Nikon 105mm macro. But no body or 105mm macro -- both were lost in the flood.
• Nauticam 45* Magnifying Viewfinder
• Nauticam Flip Adaptor
• 4x Sea & Sea YS-D2 strobes with CM Diffusers; Retra LSD Prime Snoot
• 2x Archon 5000 Lumen Video Lights

2. Limitations of Current GH4 Setup Driving Desire to Upgrade (in order of importance, roughly)

• No ability to use a large dome with the 8mm fisheye for split shots. (Action) split shots are hard with the Zen 100mm dome.
• 8mm fisheye is too wide at times for environmental portraits of divers. Ideally, I would like a fisheye (zoom) option that covers the 180* to 100* or even 80* FOV range. Or at least a wide angle option with less corner distortion.
• Distortion on the 7-14mm in Zen 170mm dome is unpleasant, especially the way it stretches objects towards the corners at 14mm, so I don't like shooting with the lens. Looking back at my old pictures with the Nikon 16-35mmF4 doesn't show the same problem. Is this because of actual distortion of the lens, or perspective distortion because 7mm is so wide?
• Not able to use teleconverters (to limit the field of view of the 8mm fisheye, primarily)
• Unreliable subject tracking in AF-C for focus & recompose technique. I miss the D800's 3D tracking for macro/fish portraits.
• Limited depth of field control for topside images
• Limited ability to track/shoot wildlife topside
• Limited manual wide balancing for wide angle ambient light video. I find the video looks a bit brittle, the colors artificial, and the water column too purple.
• Noise in ambient-light 4k wide angle video (manually white balanced) at ISO 400+; ISO 800 barely usable.
• Can't quickly zoom to 1:1 on the focus point in image playback in order to judge focus?
• Limited ability to kill the ambient light for shots with black backgrounds (because max flash sync is 1/250, min ISO is 200 and diffraction is an issue past F11--with F22 being a hard limit on m4/3 lenses)
• Olympus 60mm macro has too tight a field of view, focus is slow. I haven't tried the Panasonic 45mm or 30mm macro options, but suspect the working distance is too limiting compared to full-frame macro options?

2. Things I Like About the GH4

• Size/weight of the system
• Being able to compose with either back lcd or EVF w/ Nauticam 45* viewfinder
• Exposure/white balance preview in EVF/lcd along with focus peaking and zebras. I love being able to see what the background exposure will look like before I take the shot, letting me focus on composition and waiting for the peak of the action
• Accurate contrast-detect focusing -- no issues with PDAF mis-alignment
• 8mm fisheye sharpness, close focusing ability inside the Zen100 dome for CFWA/WAM
• optical flash triggering & TTL with ys-d2 strobes using internal pop-up flash
• battery life sufficient for 3+ dives without switching batteries

So with that background in mind, let's talk about how the D810 and A7RII would or would not address my wants.

3. Shared advantages of D810, A7RII

• Full frame sensor -- better noise, dynamic range, color depth, depth of field control
• Can use a fisheye zoom to cover at least part of the 180*-100* FOV range, though both options seem problematic? D810 can use the Tokina 10+17 + 1.4TC for most flexibility, or the Sigma 15mm + 1.4x TC for a tighter field of view and better image quality than the Tokina. The A7RII with the metabones adapter can use the Canon 8-15mm + 1.4x TC in full frame or APS-C crop mode for ultimate flexibility and better image quality than the d810 w/ the Tokina 10-17 + TC, though you lose a bit of reach at the long end.
• Both can use the above fisheye solution with a large dome like the Nauticam 8.5" acrylic or 230mm glass dome for easier split shots
• Both have native 16-35mmF4 wide angle option that offer a more versatile field of view range than the 7-14mm on the GH4. Image quality is similar between the two?
• Both gain at least 2 stops of ambient light control over the GH4 (for black backgrounds) because they have base ISO 100 and lenses can be closed down to at least F32. D810 gains 3 stops (base ISO 64, 1/320 flash sync)
• Both can use teleconverters -- Nikon natively, A7RII on Canon lenses
• Both have macro options (90mm on Sony, 105mm Nikon) that have a slightly wider field of view and better working distance than the Olympus 60mm

4. Nikon D810 Advantages

• COST. I can convert my existing, D800 housing for $650, the camera body itself is $800 cheaper than the Sony, I already own all the lenses/ports except the Tokina 10-17 and Kenko 1.4x TC. Overall investment around $4000.
• Best flexibility controlling ambient light underwater (base ISO 64, 1/320 flash sync)
• Slightly better DR at ISO <200.
• Better subject tracking in AF-C 3d tracking mode
• Slightly longer reach using Tokina 10-17mm + 1.4xTC vs A7RII with Canon 8-15 + 1.4xTC
• Can shoot 6 frames/second in DX mode vs only 5 for A7RII (with native lenses - 3 with Canon lenses)
• Can be used to shoot wildlife topside (better autofocus, many longer lenses)
• More rugged, better weather-sealing than Sony
• Has a 60mm macro option for fish portraits
• Excellent battery life that will last at least 3 dives
• Pop-up flash allowing optical flash triggering with TTL
• Great ergonomics topside -- the camera just feels right in my hands
• Better selection of native lenses, primes and zooms, at more reasonable prices than the Sony primes

5. Nikon D810 Concerns

• No 4K video; video white balance for 1080p underwater poor. Would need to keep GH4 system if I want 4k video (undecided).
• AF-S less accurate than Sony/Panasonic because it's off-sensor PDAF
• No electronic viewfinder; no focus peaking; no live exposure preview; no zebras; have to review LCD after each shot for exposure
• No ability to shoot at arm's length using back LCD; must have face against the viewfinder.
• Unacceptable image quality with the Tokina 10-17 + 1.4x TC?
• System is about 2kg heavier than Sony, 3kg heavier than Panasonic.

6. Sony A7RII Advantages

• Great 4k video, both in full frame and APS-C crop, great versatility (it's essentially both a full frame and APS-C camera in one). No need to keep the GH4 system.
• Widest AF-point coverage; complete frame covered when shooting in APS-C mode?
• Accurate AF because PDAF points are on sensor and used in conjunction with contrast detection
• Full viewfinder image when shooting in APS-C mode;
• Better DR/Noise at ISO 200+, where most wide angle shots will be taken
• EVF with focus peaking, live exposure preview, zebras
• Able to shoot/compose at arm's length using back LCD
• Only 1-2kg heavier than Panasonic; lighter than Nikon.
• Can use adapted Nikonos water-contact lenses for best image quality, smaller size
• Can adapt pretty much any lens (great for things like Canon tilt-shift lenses, unusual lenses like the Venus Laowa 15mm 1:1 Macro Lens)
• Has wifi, can be controlled over wifi

7. Sony A7RII Concerns

• COST. Would have to invest about $10k for body, housing, adaptors, ports, zoom gears, 8-15mm lens, teleconverter and 16-35mm lens. That's $6000 more than the D810 system. Could recover maybe $3500 of that from selling the D800 items I have. Cold also recover $5000 or so from resale of GH4 system.
• Subject tracking no better than the GH4 (in other words, not reliable enough to use, unlike Nikon's 3d tracking)
• No native fisheye option. Not clear how well the Canon 8-15 + metabones adaptor would work as substitute. Sony 28mmF2 + fisheye converter lens is bulky and heavy, not as good image quality as the Canon 8-15 behind a dome? Sony 28mmF2 in flat port with Nauticam WWL-1 seems to have good IQ, and a FOV roughly equivalent to the Sigma 15mm + 1.4x TC? However, that option doesn't allow for a large dome port for split shots.
• No native 50mm or 60mm macro lens for fish portraits
• The white balance for ambient light video is just as problematic as the GH4 and requires red filters
• Not great for wildlife topside (lack of lenses, evf, slower FPS).
• No pop-up flash -- need Nauticam flash trigger or electric sync cables; no option for TTL
• Battery life may not be sufficient to last 3 dives, requiring switching batteries on the boat
• Weather sealing is not as good as Nikon's / the GH4
• Ergonomics are not as good topside as the D810

8 Wildhorse Contestants

• I could just stick with the GH4 and buy the WWL-1 to use in conjunction with the 14-42PZ as fisheye-zoom of sorts. This would cover the 130/120* to roughly 80* field of view, eliminating the need for the 7-14mm, which I dislike? Cheap option-- only $1200 investment. BUT this wouldn't address the lack of a bigger dome port for split shots, noisy 4k video, purple white balance, limited depth control topside, limited wildlife shooting ability. Can anyone thing of some solutions, especially for using a bigger dome on the GH4?
• Go with an APS-C option like the Nikon D7200 or Canon 7DII to avoid the lack of a native fisheye zoom on full-frame. But does a dedicated APS-C camera really offer any advantage? -- after all, both the D810 and A7RII can be shot in APS-C crop mode with comperable image quality, and once entire system costs are computed, there is a minimal cost saving in going with the D7200 or Canon 7DII over the full frame bodies.

I thought about going to the A7II or A7RII instead of my D810 (that I already had and use a good bit), when I sold my D800. Like you, I considered just updating my housing to work with the D810, but all in (assuming your D800 housing is in good condition), I don't think it saves you much money in the long run and not every button/function works with a converted housing.

Ultimately cost was the determining factor as selling all my stuff from the D800 then buying the A7R II and lenses was (my best guess) about $5000 more than just getting a NA-D810 housing, since I already had all the ports/lenses/etc from using my D800. A Sony rig would be starting from scratch

I have a couple comments after taking my D810 to the Maldives a couple months ago, taking it on all 31 or 32 dives offered (I forget the exact number, and doesn't matter anyway).

>> AF-S less accurate?

Hard to say, as I haven't used the Sony personally. I used AF-C and the Group-Area AF a good bit with really good success! It tracks a lot better than the D800, especially when subjects are coming towards the camera.

>>No ability to shoot using LCD?

You can shoot in Live View with the LCD.

>>IQ with Tokina & TC

I used this combo (with 20mm extension and Zen 170mm dome) a couple times with the D800...IQ was quite good. I ended up getting the Sigma 15mm FE and I am very happy with it. I can, and have used a 1.4 TC with it as well.

>> Cant quickly zoom 1:1

Yes, you can. Just has to be set up in the menu. Very easy to do.

For me, the biggest negative of the D810 is the size/weight. It's a huge issue that I have to plan for on every trip, especially when flying to SE Asia with 7KG carry-on limits that some carriers enforce quite strictly. I have never been on a dive and thought "sure wish I had an inferior, smaller, camera" (not saying the A7II/RII is inferior..just making a point) though...the D810 is simply amazing. I wish someday to be 1/2 as good as my camera

HTH,

.

Thanks CamelToad! Good to know you can quickly zoom to 1:1 magnification in playback on the D810 -- I don't recall ever setting this up on my d800. So can you do it with just one button click? Or is it more involved than that? Will it automatically shift the viewpoint so you're looking at the area under the focus point that was used to focus the image rather than the image center?

Re: upgrading d800 housing to d810 -- I've been told that all the buttons work except for the new "i" button, bracketting button, and the fn/preview button. None of those seem particularly critical to my shooting. Price wise, I would save about $1000 by converting the housing vs. selling it second hand and getting a new D810 housing. The A7RII housing is about $1000 cheaper than the D810 housing, so it would be a wash vs a converted d800 housing price wise.

I know that you can shoot the D810 in live view mode, but the CDAF is quite slow, no? Certainly not something you would want to use for anything other than static shots/static subjects. With the A7RII, there's no penalty for using the lcd and holding the camera out at arm's length (something I do often with my GH4). You still see all the same information and the autofocus is just as capable.

If you liked the Tokina + 1.4x TC on your D800, what makes you prefer using the Sigma currently?

I thought about going to the A7II or A7RII instead of my D810 (that I already had and use a good bit), when I sold my D800. Like you, I considered just updating my housing to work with the D810, but all in (assuming your D800 housing is in good condition), I don't think it saves you much money in the long run and not every button/function works with a converted housing.

 

Ultimately cost was the determining factor as selling all my stuff from the D800 then buying the A7R II and lenses was (my best guess) about $5000 more than just getting a NA-D810 housing, since I already had all the ports/lenses/etc from using my D800. A Sony rig would be starting from scratch

 

I have a couple comments after taking my D810 to the Maldives a couple months ago, taking it on all 31 or 32 dives offered (I forget the exact number, and doesn't matter anyway).

 

>> AF-S less accurate?

Hard to say, as I haven't used the Sony personally. I used AF-C and the Group-Area AF a good bit with really good success! It tracks a lot better than the D800, especially when subjects are coming towards the camera.

 

>>No ability to shoot using LCD?

You can shoot in Live View with the LCD.

 

>>IQ with Tokina & TC

I used this combo (with 20mm extension and Zen 170mm dome) a couple times with the D800...IQ was quite good. I ended up getting the Sigma 15mm FE and I am very happy with it. I can, and have used a 1.4 TC with it as well.

 

>> Cant quickly zoom 1:1

Yes, you can. Just has to be set up in the menu. Very easy to do.

 

For me, the biggest negative of the D810 is the size/weight. It's a huge issue that I have to plan for on every trip, especially when flying to SE Asia with 7KG carry-on limits that some carriers enforce quite strictly. I have never been on a dive and thought "sure wish I had an inferior, smaller, camera" (not saying the A7II/RII is inferior..just making a point) though...the D810 is simply amazing. I wish someday to be 1/2 as good as my camera

 

HTH,

 

.

1:1 setup is pretty easy...here's the path for the D810. Once set, just press the center button of the multi selector when reviewing an image. It goes right to the focus point.

Menu -> Custom Settings Menu -> f Controls -> f2 Multi Selector center button -> Playback Mode -> Zoom on/off -> Low, 1:1, or high

Yeah, Live View i would only use for macro and a non-moving subject, good point! I forgot about that, sorry. I have the 45-degree external viewfinder so I only use Live when doing video (which isn't often).

I am not sure I prefer the Sigma to be honest. I think I got better sun rays with the Tokina. Probably I fell into the "must have a FX lens" when I bought my D800 stuff, but I don't recall exactly the reason I went that route now.

Best,

James

The D810 has zebras...(but no peaking). You could add an external monitor like the SmallHD which will give you peaking, false color etc. if you wish.

I would avoid using the 10-17mm in any form with the D810. The D800/D810 will out resolve it significantly. In addition, you can only use it around 16mm without vignetting, so you gain no advantage over the Sigma. The Sigma 15mm is great!

I have yet to find an EVF that is as good as an optical VF. For focus critical applications, this is important.

Lenses are the biggest single issue (for me) with Sony mirrorless. The lack of a decent fisheye is a huge negative for underwater use. This is, for me, a deal breaker.

The Sony 90mm macro is a great lens and pretty much sorts out the fish portrait issue.

For stills, the D810's AF is quicker and more accurate then the Sony's. This may not be the case for video, although I don't use AF for video underwater anyway!

The D810 is massively more bulks and cumbersome. It is also, in my opinion, still easier to use and will produce stunning still images!

Nice to have these choices!

Adam

Adam, have you shot the Tokina 10-17mm on the D810 with a teleconverter or in DX mode? Shouldn't that open up the majority of the zoom range? (e.g. 11-17mm with the 1.4x tc would be equivalent to about 15-24mm, so no vignetting).

A fisheye zoom that can cover the 180*-110/100* field of view range is a pretty non-negotiable requirement for me. If you're saying the 10-17mm is so bad on the D810 with a teleconverter that it's not worth using, is there any alternative? The Sigma 15mm with a teleconverter?

The A7RII at least can use an adapted Canon 8-15mm fisheye zoom + teleconverter, so if that's much more viable than the Tokina 10-17 + TC on the D810, that pretty much makes the decision for me.

As I understood 3 key points are important for you:

#1: trouble-less covering the 130-80° range

#2: great AF for moving objects

#3: 4k video.

#1 & 3 speaks for keeping the GH4 and adding WWL-1 + 14-42PZ combo. Meanwhile you can ditch the 7-14 + the dome to help finances. The a7rII also has great 4k, however I have IQ concerns

about a dome + any WA zoom options. For splits, you can custom order a special adapter, I recall at unterwasserkamera.at they also take special orders, ask them if they can fit a superdome on your

NA-GH4

#2: opposite of the above, need the nikon setup or APS-c dslr, pretty bad for video.

Question is which is more important for you? In case the wwl-1 can be combined with the sony 28-70, the a7rII would also make sense.

Regarding the WWL-1 one thing should be kept in mind: its a semi-fisheye, not rectilinear.

To reframe in those terms, Tamas, my priorities are:

#1: trouble-less covering the 130-80° range

#2: option to use fisheye with a large (170mm+) dome for split shots

#3: better image quality for topside -- i.e. full frame sensor; good lens selection

#4: great 4k video w/ low noise underwater/ability to get good color

#5 great AF for moving objects

#1 could be addressed by the WWL-1 + 14-42PZ combo. I am indeed currently trying to sell my 7-14 and 170mm zen dome and pick up the WWL. I realize it's not rectilinear, but actually prefer the fisheye look so long as the main subject (especially people) isn't too distorted. By 130*, the fisheye look gets a little toned down. Even more so by 100 degrees. I imagine that at 80degrees with the WWL-1 + 14-42PZ combo you wouldn't really notice that it's a fisheye and not rectilinear anymore? Does anyone have any images of that combo at longer focal lengths?

However, the GH4 can't address #3, 4, and 5. And can't address #2 without a custom dome -- which is why I was looking to go back to a full frame system.

The D810 gets me #2, #3 and #5. Definitely not #4. Question is whether I can get trouble-free coverage of the 130-80* field of view with a combination of the Tokina 10-17 fisheye + 1.4x TC (180*-108*) and the Nikon 16-35F4 (107*-63*).

The A7RII gets me #3 for sure. For the rest:

1. For #1: Could I cover the field of view from 130-80* with the Canon 8-15 + metabones adapter + 1.4x TC (gets me 180*-124* in full frame mode, 158*-80* in APS-C crop mode) + the Sony 16-35F4 (107*-63*). What specific concerns do you have about the dome + WA zoom options? I'm personally quite happy with the image quality on the Nikon 16-35mmF4 + Nauticam 8.5" dome at F11, and the new Sea & Sea Internal Conversion lenses should only improve that.
   
2. For #2: How trouble free is an adapter 8-15mm on the A7Rii?
   
3. For #4: The video quality should be as good as the gh4 for resolution, better for noise. Only remaining question is the white balancing underwater. I'm guessing it's no worse than the GH4, but also not any better?
   
4. For #5: I guess the answer is no, no better at tracking moving subjects using lock-on autofocus than the GH4.
   

Nauticam hasn't indicated that the 28-70 can be combined with the WWL-1, though that would be amazing if it could. Does anyone know if the 28-70 extends during zoom, and how much?

The A7RII gets me #3 for sure. For the rest:

1. For #1: Could I cover the field of view from 130-80* with the Canon 8-15 + metabones adapter + 1.4x TC (gets me 180*-124* in full frame mode, 158*-80* in APS-C crop mode) + the Sony 16-35F4 (107*-63*). What specific concerns do you have about the dome + WA zoom options? I'm personally quite happy with the image quality on the Nikon 16-35mmF4 + Nauticam 8.5" dome at F11, and the new Sea & Sea Internal Conversion lenses should only improve that.
2. For #2: How trouble free is an adapter 8-15mm on the A7Rii?
3. For #4: The video quality should be as good as the gh4 for resolution, better for noise. Only remaining question is the white balancing underwater. I'm guessing it's no worse than the GH4, but also not any better?
4. For #5: I guess the answer is no, no better at tracking moving subjects using lock-on autofocus than the GH4.

Nauticam hasn't indicated that the 28-70 can be combined with the WWL-1, though that would be amazing if it could. Does anyone know if the 28-70 extends during zoom, and how much?

The 28-70 moves very little wile zooming in theory, it should match the wwl-1! However, it is not a stellar lens .

The 8-15 with metabones should be work, however CA/software distortion correction has to be done in post.

Indeed, video quality - especially in s35 mode - should be better than the GH4. AWB might be of an issue, Sony has a bad reputation in this department. You probably

have to get some filters...

On reading your GH4 list of 'issues' - I feel your pain.

I'm really not happy with the colour rendition from mine, even with MWB. There must be something that can be fixed using a LUT / standard preset to get rid of the Purple tint.

(Alas all the playing in FCPX using 3rd party tools I can't figure it out)

Isn't there a 140mm dome for the 8mm - would that help with the spilt shots?

I think, to be honest swapping out to another system won't solve your issues, yes the ones listed, but then you will end up with a another list for the camera you choose.

From a rumour going around, the GH5 prototype is currently in the same body as the GH4 - so might be worth waiting till there is news of that - as if so, some things (ISO, color etc) might just be a camera upgrade away.

Another thing, which you haven't mentioned, which is another annoyance for me is lack of IS on the 7-14mm - using a FF camera with those not so wide lenses will have IS.

On reading your GH4 list of 'issues' - I feel your pain.

 

I'm really not happy with the colour rendition from mine, even with MWB. There must be something that can be fixed using a LUT / standard preset to get rid of the Purple tint.

(Alas all the playing in FCPX using 3rd party tools I can't figure it out)

 

Glad I'm not the only one that thinks the MWB turns blue water too purple. I'm not that experienced with color correction in post, so not sure what can be done to rescue it, if anything. One thing I noticed but didn't get to play around is the "tint" setting in the color profiles. Perhaps moving that more towards green would help with the purples.

Isn't there a 140mm dome for the 8mm - would that help with the spilt shots?

As fas as I know, the 140mm is n120 only, not n85. Which means having to use an n85 to n120 adapter, which would (I'm guessing, haven't actually tried this combo) place the 8mm too far back and lead to the corners being cut off. Same issue with any of the other n120 domes (like the 230mm) -- they need the n85-n120 adapter.

 

I think, to be honest swapping out to another system won't solve your issues, yes the ones listed, but then you will end up with a another list for the camera you choose.

 

From a rumour going around, the GH5 prototype is currently in the same body as the GH4 - so might be worth waiting till there is news of that - as if so, some things (ISO, color etc) might just be a camera upgrade away.

A GH5 in the GH4 body would be nice for keeping the same housing. If it inherits the LX100's white balance, it would also improve on that score (Does anyone know if the GX8 inhereted the LX100's white balance?) But I'd be very surprised if the GH5 shows more than marginal improvements in noise performance. Sensor technology has been pretty stagnant for the past 3-4 years -- the GH4 is basically the same sensor as the EM-5 and the A7RII isn't a huge improvement over the 3 year old D800. If a gh5 came out today, I think I would still prefer a full frame body because of lens selection options, larger domes, and more capable sensor.

If I was inclined to wait, I'd actually be more interested to see what Canon comes up with with the 1DC II or Nikon with the D5. But I'm using the camera every day and those annoyances (especially the inability to shoot splits and have a tighter field of view than 180*) are costing me sales. So I'd like to address them now, not next year.

 

Another thing, which you haven't mentioned, which is another annoyance for me is lack of IS on the 7-14mm - using a FF camera with those not so wide lenses will have IS.

I think I'm going to end up with the A7RII with the Canon 8-15mm + 1.4TC and the Sony 16-35mmf4. I will try to write a review about how well it performs underwater. And hopefully I won't discover too many nags

The 10-17mm is (to put it bluntly) not a great lens. When you put it onto a 36MP camera, these flaws really start to show. I have used it with the D800 (once) an dwell not do so again!

You could shoot it in DX mode, but viewfinder framing is not great, and you are reduced to using a 36MP camera at 16MP! You would be better off with a D7200...

The Sigma 15mm is a great lens and can be used with a TC if you wish. Why do you want to use the 10-17mm?

I would be wary about the 8-15mm with the converter on the A7II until we find out more about its AF. It may be fine, it may be not so good....

Adam

The 10-17mm is (to put it bluntly) not a great lens. When you put it onto a 36MP camera, these flaws really start to show. I have used it with the D800 (once) an dwell not do so again!

 

You could shoot it in DX mode, but viewfinder framing is not great, and you are reduced to using a 36MP camera at 16MP! You would be better off with a D7200...

 

The Sigma 15mm is a great lens and can be used with a TC if you wish. Why do you want to use the 10-17mm?

 

I would be wary about the 8-15mm with the converter on the A7II until we find out more about its AF. It may be fine, it may be not so good....

 

Adam

Hmm.. yes, I can understand the 10-17mm not being great optically. And I'd prefer not to have to shoot in DX mode on the D810 because of the viewfinder framing limitations (which are absent with the A7RII's evf).

I was looking at a fisheye zoom vs just a Sigma 15 + TC because for the work I do, I need the versatility to shoot split shots, people portraits (individuals and groups), critters and reefscapes on the same dive. A 180 degree fisheye is a too wide for some of these shots from what I've discovered. The Sigma + TC might be too narrow for split shots and reefscapes -- I'm not sure, I haven't had a 124* fisheye before to really judge. I figured the 8-15 with a teleconverter would give me the flexibility since I can shoot anywhere between 180* and 124* in full frame mode and 156* to 80* in APS-C crop mode.