Sony A7 III for Disney Alaskan Cruise? Lenses?

ofcabbagesandkings

DIS Veteran
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Hi Everyone! I'm not on this board very much as my only camera is a Sony RX 100 pocket camera I got about four years ago (I think it's version III) It's pretty great for travel, especially at WDW when I don't want to have something bulky to carry. But we're going on a DCL cruise to Alaska in 2019, and 70mm is just not going to be enough range. Since I'm comfortable with Sony's menus and still want something lightweight, I'm considering the A7. I'm thinking of buying just the body and getting the Sony 70mm-300mm lens (this one). Will that be enough reach for shots of eagles, whales, etc? Not really hoping for bears since we are going in May, but we might stop to see the bears in Grouse mountain. And then I can bring the RX 100 for mid-range shots. Will I wish I had a wider lens? The Sony 12-24mm looks amazing but $$$ but maybe I can rent it. Also, I want the telephoto lens for getting my husband when he surfs. I don't think I will need it much in low light, even though it would be nice to have something that could shoot sunset surf sessions.

Thanks!
 
Just so you know, wildlife in Alaska can be hit or miss. When we cruised, we had rain nearly all day every day that we were in port. (had a couple clear days at sea and the glaciers). So a few seals, whales and eagle but not nearly as much wildlife shooting as I was anticipating. On the other hand, wide angle was absolutely critical for Alaska to capture the breath taking vistas.

Anyway, I can recommend the 12-24, my review here:
https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/02/07/sony-12-24mm-f4-g-lens-review/

My general set-up guide for the Sony A7iii here:
https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/04/09/customizing-sony-a7iii/
 
Just so you know, wildlife in Alaska can be hit or miss. When we cruised, we had rain nearly all day every day that we were in port. (had a couple clear days at sea and the glaciers). So a few seals, whales and eagle but not nearly as much wildlife shooting as I was anticipating. On the other hand, wide angle was absolutely critical for Alaska to capture the breath taking vistas.

Anyway, I can recommend the 12-24, my review here:
https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/02/07/sony-12-24mm-f4-g-lens-review/

My general set-up guide for the Sony A7iii here:
https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/04/09/customizing-sony-a7iii/

Thanks so much just saw your post! The 12-24 looks so awesome especially since I would like to be able to shoot some good quality video as well. It’s funny that you mention leaving the kit lens behind for travel because that was my impulse too, maybe just bringing the point and shoot for that zoom range or even leaving that behind and bringing a 50/55 prime for indoors. Do you have a weather cover you like for this camera?
 
I'd just throw in a possibility that you'll want to reach out occasionally to more distant birds or wildlife, or even more distant landscape, and you might find the Sony APS-C 24MP sensor's crop to be an advantage with regards to using with the FE70-300mm lens over the A7III's 24MP full-frame sensor. Consider the Sony A6300 or A6500 for that use as an option.
Full frame will have advantages for the wide photography, and in very low light conditions - all things to keep in mind - though even the APS-C bodies do quite well in a variety of such conditions and quite a bit better than your RX pocket cam. If light is good and it's daytime, your current RX may still be fine for general scenic shots - so deciding between the A7III and an ultrawide lens like the 12-24mm or an APS-C crop cam like the A6300/6500 and the FE70-300mm G would come down to whether you're more likely to want to shoot wide and close landscapes, or want more distant reach and wildlife, birds, and whales.
 


To supplement what Zackidawg said: there is an argument to be made sometimes for multiple cameras, just like multiple lenses.
A Sony A7iii with the 12-24, while also having on a strap a Sony A6300 with 70-300, would let you cover both your extreme wide situations and telephoto situations, without changing lenses.

But assuming you don't want to rent/buy a second body: 300mm on full frame is long enough for basic wildlife shooting in Alaska. If you really want to capture award-winning type wildlife images, you'll probably want something longer. (maybe put the 300mm on an A6300, or go with the 100-400mm behemoth). But if you go on a whale watching cruise, you'll get close enough for good images with a 300mm. You may not get great images of eagles with "only" 300mm.

For wildlife (especially birds), telephoto is one of those things where more is always better. But how much is "enough" really depends on what you're hoping to capture. If you want high resolution closeups of eagles in flight, you need something very long.

No, I don't have a particular weather cover in mind for the A7iii. The weather resistance is better than the reputation but I'd cover it in really bad rain.
 
Hi Everyone! I'm not on this board very much as my only camera is a Sony RX 100 pocket camera I got about four years ago (I think it's version III) It's pretty great for travel, especially at WDW when I don't want to have something bulky to carry. But we're going on a DCL cruise to Alaska in 2019, and 70mm is just not going to be enough range. Since I'm comfortable with Sony's menus and still want something lightweight, I'm considering the A7. I'm thinking of buying just the body and getting the Sony 70mm-300mm lens (this one). Will that be enough reach for shots of eagles, whales, etc? Not really hoping for bears since we are going in May, but we might stop to see the bears in Grouse mountain. And then I can bring the RX 100 for mid-range shots. Will I wish I had a wider lens? The Sony 12-24mm looks amazing but $$$ but maybe I can rent it. Also, I want the telephoto lens for getting my husband when he surfs. I don't think I will need it much in low light, even though it would be nice to have something that could shoot sunset surf sessions.

Thanks!

I don't know about Sony but when I go to Alaska I take a Canon mirrorless, wide angle lens (22mm f/2) and 100-400 for the wildlife
(and surfing on the east coast )

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

Untitled by c w, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Wow gorgeous shot @bob100 ! I looked at the Canons too, there are so many options there and they seem to have more lenses. My last SLR which shot on actual film was a Canon, but that was ages ago! Where do you surf on the East Coast? The Cape by any chance? I'm more comfortable with Sony since my last 2 P&S have been Sony cameras and I'm somewhat familiar with their menus even though everyone seems to hate them.

To answer points @havoc315 brought up, I have booked a small whale watching cruise in Juneau and would love a fast shutter speed and focus to get the whales. When we went whale watching in Hawaii a few years ago I didn't get any good shots but that was as much because the wildlife wasn't doing much more than spouting or putting up the occasional tail fluke. Probably will be the same in Alaska but if we happen to get super lucky I want to be ready. Eagles, if they're close enough, great, if not I'll be ok. I would like to shoot wide landscapes for sure.

And, @zackiedawg, I thought about the crop sensor but I really want a camera that can take decent portraits in low light indoors. I hate using flash and avoid it whenever possible. The RX is not too bad at darker indoor shots except noise does start to creep in at high ISOs.

Thanks everyone so much for your input, I really appreciate it!
 


And, @zackiedawg, I thought about the crop sensor but I really want a camera that can take decent portraits in low light indoors. I hate using flash and avoid it whenever possible. The RX is not too bad at darker indoor shots except noise does start to creep in at high ISOs.

Just as an FYI, I've got an RX10 and an A6300 - the low light on the A6300 is significantly above the RX...while not a match for full-frame, it's still quite usable at pretty high ISOs...pair with a fast prime and you won't need a flash for much...properly exposed you would be almost noise-free at ISO1,600 and minimal at ISO 3,200. I'd rate a good 2 to 2 1/2 stops over the RX's noise threshhold, but probably about 1 1/2 to 2 stops below full frame...with the caveat of course being your own tolerance to noise, processing software and style, etc. I'd be more than happy to whip out a bunch of low light portrait samples at this point, except that's one thing I most DEFINITELY am not...a portrait photographer. I shoot almost anything, except people!
My thinking was along the lines of what Havoc elaborated - I was suggesting the APS-C body paired almost exclusively with the long lenses for telephoto/wildlife needs...I hadn't really considered any other types of specialized photography like portrait work. I think it would still work fine for that use, compared to the RX...but if you need one camera body to cover a wide mix of photography and full frame sensors will be more beneficial for 80% of it, with the one exception being some wildlife shooting, then that certainly makes sense to consider the camera that will best suit the primary shooting need. I'm primarily a wildlife and bird photographer, so for me APS-C made lots of sense...if I shot primarily portrait or landscape, I'd certainly be a bigger fan of full-frame!
 
Maybe a bit late, but I'd get an A7R or Z7 for Alaska - you can crop down to a still reasonable picture. And no, 300mm isn't enough for wildlife spotting, and particularly birds in flight, on full frame, so either a crop sensor or a high resolution sensor running cropped would be advantageous, where 300mm becomes reasonable. And get the newest body you can afford, the focusing performance is much better and for wildlife the DSLR is still king for a reason - they move and the DSLR focuses faster.

Alaska is one of the few places where my D500's focusing system is really tested, and where I haul out teleconverters to get me to 600mm on a crop body, to give you some sort of idea. :)

And Alaksa is, yes, one of the places where wide angle can go really wide, as wide as possible. The middle lengths are much less useful there.

Given the choice of a telephoto zoom for that trip, either adapted or native, I'd highly recommend the new Nikon 70-300 AF-P FX lens - it focuses instantly, easily as fast as an exotic telephoto.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top