>>3342334>massively inferior to d800 in every way while not being much cheaperIt's closer in price to the D700, a D800 is like 40% more. Image quality isn't that far off the D800 though and is certainly better than the D700.
Other than that I'm not really seeing many ways the D800 is superior other than battery life, a built in flash, proper weather sealing, USB 3, dual card slots, and a higher resolution. On the other hand the A7 is smaller and lighter, has a slightly higher burst rate, a higher res tilting screen, more AF points (coverage is about the same for PD, but it has CD covering almost to the edge of the frame), and all the advantages that come from an EVF.
I wouldn't say either is overall the better body, it depends on the individual person's needs and either could be a good choice.
>>3342352Nothing wrong with that if you're shooting stationary subjects, you just won't be focusing as fast as with an AF lens. Manual focus won't be hard though as you can use peaking and magnification through the EVF.
If I were you I'd probably go for a 28-35mm, although it's f/2.8 the shorter focal length means you can use a slower shutter speed which makes up for it a bit, plus the deeper depth of field will be easier to focus. I like my Pentax A 28mm, probably the best focus ring I've ever tried (easy to turn and not too much or too little throw).
>>3342354If you're shooting stationary stuff the IS more than makes up for the slower aperture. It's something like 4 stops so effectively f/1.1-1.6 (gonna be less in practice but still better than even an f/2.8).
