DingoSeanIf you're doing mostly photo... the A7ii kinda sucks for sports. tracking AF is inconsistent as hell on mirrorless cameras - especially when you stop down (which you inevitably have to do when it's bright out or if you want deeper depth of field)
Reason? On a DSLR, the camera focuses with the diaphragm WIDE OPEN so as to make it far easier to focus, but with mirrorless cameras (and i'm quite sure the A7 does this as well) the diaphragm closes up in order to meter, and therefore, leads to obnoxiously slow AF. If you're using manual focus lenses all the time, or are always shooting wide open on fast primes, then whatever, but as somebody who really enjoys having AF when I'm shooting sports photography due to the higher amount of in-focus shots I get, I'd highly recommend a DSLR since you shoot skiing and cycling and shit. Landscapes and portraiture? yeah, you can use the A7 for that stuff, but it's not the best for street photography or sports. (Even the Fuji's - renowned for being awesome, small, street photography and general use stills cameras - have very obnoxious AF - even the newer x100t's and AT-1's have much slower and more inaccurate AF as compared to their DSLR counterparts)
unless you pre-focus and are shooting at f8 to deepen your depth of field, it will be difficult to use even with manual focus (so in that situation you might as well not be shooting digital anyway)
With that said, the 7D seems totally fine for what you're doing already, and I get the annoyances with the low light performance and whatnot, but in all honesty, you're not going to be getting a whole lot more from an A7 unless you're only doing video. It will not be as good for sports photography at all - there's a good reason sports photographers still all use DSLR's - and it's not because Canon and Nikon own the market or because they have worn their hands into the magnesium bodies with brand loyalty or something..
The recommendation from me might have be the 7D2. It does have better low light performance than the 7Di. It's not by much, but you can get at least another stop or perhaps more out of it before noise becomes an issue (shooting at 3200 doesn't seem to look too bad on them, nor the 70D which has the same sensor)... but on top of that, it's AF performance is fucking DOPE and at 10fps/1080p60? It's basically a poor-man's 1Dx with the same resolution and noise performance of the 6D... The 7D2 is badass. ALSO, you wouldn't have to go through the bullshit of finding new lenses - you can just pick up where you left off - and that's nice.
For video purposes, I'd want to say Sony/Nikon would possibly be better mostly because of uncompressed and non-upscaled 1080 like what canon does, but Nikon unfortunately doesn't have the FPS speed on any of their mid-range cameras that Canon provides (The D7200 or whatever gets like 7fps, but until you get a D700/D3/D4, you won't get an extremely worthwhile camera to have that shoots 8+fps - even with canon you can get a 1Dmk2n for like 250$ and that will shoot 8.5 or something with an awesome 1.3x crop sensor). The D750 would be a solid option with 6fps, uncompressed 1080p60, a flip screen, full frame, dual card slot and awesome AF performance, but then you'd be switching systems - which not everyone wants to do (besides me apparently?). The Sensor in the D750 is also the same sensor as the 24megapixel A7's (whichever model that is) so the image characteristics are more-less the same as those. The 36 megapixel A7's share sensors with the D800 and D810, and their resolution is off the charts (and they have great noise performance I understand?) but again... the AF for sports stills is useless - i'd probably just MF all day instead of bothering with wack ass AF that mirrorless cams provide for sports subject tracking.
Thanks for all of that, really appreciate it. Gonna try to respond intelligently and ask some worthwhile questions here but we'll see how coherent I am...
I know the focus on the A7II sucks (although it is supposed to be better than on the OG A7) but that's really not what I'm getting it for. I'm envisioning the A7II as more of an #art camera. It's smaller and lighter so I'd use it to shoot skiing and climbing and biking, mostly touring and set shots as well as a lot of landscape, lifestyle stuff. The kind of "sports photography I'm envisioning is set shots where I will definitely be able to pre-focus and the A7II's 5FPS will be plenty.
I would keep the 7D for more run and gun, event type situations where I need the fast focus and higher FPS.
Yeah, I would love a 7DII but
I don't think it really complements my kit, I would keep my current 7d and use it like I said above, and I don't think the 7DII is that much better for that? I don't really mind the lack of FPS on my current 7D, I don't really need the lowlight for shooting the events I would use it for, and the AF is plenty fast for me ATM, so really I'm looking to diversify my quiver if that makes sense?
So really, current 7D for run and gun, event coverage type stuff and A7II for more thoughtful stuff.
I guess part of this is really me wanting to branch out in what I do a little, I love the way I've been shooting, usually tight and low and wide in well light conditions, and I'll keep the 7d so that I can still do that, but I also want to play around stylistically and get a little low light action and a different look and feel so that's why I would get the A7II.
It seems to me that those sort of complement each other? Maybe? I don't know, I've been shooting, skiing, editing or writing for 18 hours straight now so I'm a little loopy....