The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

The purist in me thinks that a Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art should be designed for the system with its registration distance and sensor glass thickness but the realist in my thinks that even if Sigma don't do any of that I wouldn't care for real world images but the realist in me also thinks that others would endlessly nit pick and pixel peep at 400% and say that it was a load of sh!t. So all in all I hope Sigma do the job properly and design lenses specifically for the system.
 
Your right its a belter of a lens, I remember back in day just having that on my Nikon D600, made a great travel kit. It does sound like Sigma are going to be re-designing glass though rather than just swapping mount.

It's why I don't see any reason whatsoever to ditch the d700 and 35, it's an amazing combo, something about the lower mp sensors I really love including the original 5d. I rarely do any pp with this combo. VFM is ridiculous.
 
The purist in me thinks that a Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art should be designed for the system with its registration distance and sensor glass thickness but the realist in my thinks that even if Sigma don't do any of that I wouldn't care for real world images but the realist in me also thinks that others would endlessly nit pick and pixel peep at 400% and say that it was a load of sh!t. So all in all I hope Sigma do the job properly and design lenses specifically for the system.

There's more to a lens than sharpness, redesign it and it may lose its rendering character.
 
It's why I don't see any reason whatsoever to ditch the d700 and 35, it's an amazing combo, something about the lower mp sensors I really love including the original 5d. I rarely do any pp with this combo. VFM is ridiculous.

a friend of mine still has his d700. i was with him when he bought it for something like £1700 from jessops in something like 2009?? he's looked after it and its never let him down. a low light monster too
 
There's more to a lens than sharpness, redesign it and it may lose its rendering character.

Not that I mentioned sharpness but as you did I don't see why that's a given. The look of the lens may be affected / unaffected. But people will say it's sh!t if there's any excuse and I do think that simply whapping a different lens mount on would be a risk.
 
Oh but you did "nitpick at 400%". You wouldn't be inspecting character at 400%.

Not really, if it's good it's good. The ART has built a name for itself and Sigma. Most who have used it say it's fantastic.
 
a friend of mine still has his d700. i was with him when he bought it for something like £1700 from jessops in something like 2009?? he's looked after it and its never let him down. a low light monster too

Old DSLR's can be a bargain but I don't care :D I loved my 20D and then 5D but the thought of carrying a FF DSLR and larger lens combo around now would stop me from carrying it around. The reason I went to CSC's with MFT was to reduce the bulk, weight and look at the geek / P**** with the camera effect and get back to more of a 35mm film experience and that's before thinking about losing the advantages that the EVF systems bring which I didn't think about at the time but now wouldn't be without.
 
Old DSLR's can be a bargain but I don't care :D I loved my 20D and then 5D but the thought of carrying a FF DSLR and larger lens combo around now would stop me from carrying it around. The reason I went to CSC's with MFT was to reduce the bulk, weight and look at the geek / P**** with the camera effect and get back to more of a 35mm film experience and that's before thinking about losing the advantages that the EVF systems bring which I didn't think about at the time but now wouldn't be without.

they have certainly moved on a bit since the 20d
 
Oh but you did "nitpick at 400%". You wouldn't be inspecting character at 400%.

Not really, if it's good it's good. The ART has built a name for itself and Sigma. Most who have used it say it's fantastic.

I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about the nit picking pixel peepers that infest forums and paraphrase what others say wrongly.

There are a number of articles about the effect sensor glass thickness has and I'm sure the seeds have taken root in peoples minds now. Not that it would bother me too much but the internet is a different animal. Although I have a very technical background I do try to pull back and look at the whole picture and so for the only internet panic I can think of that's bothered me is shutter shock which can be a factor even in a whole image viewed normally. Black spots, ghost images, sensor reflections, light leaks and the like so far and touch wood haven't bothered me.
 
Last edited:
they have certainly moved on a bit since the 20d
Yup. They're mostly probably got even bigger and fatter.

My problem with DSLR's was never image quality. Even the 20D which I used for over 7 years was an ok camera IQ wise, the only real issues being high ISO performance and noise when boosting the shadows.
 
I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about the nit picking pixel peepers that infest forums and paraphrase what others say wrongly.

There are a number of articles about the effect sensor glass thickness has and I'm sure the seeds have taken root in peoples minds now. Not that it would bother me too much but the internet is a different animal. Although I have a very technical background I do try to pull back and look at the whole picture and so for the only internet panic I can think of that's bothered my is shutter shock which can be a factor even in a whole image viewed normally. Black spots, ghost images, sensor reflections, light leaks and the like so far and touch wood haven't bothered me.

It's in your post, you don't like someone paraphrasing you but you bang on about 'internet people' and you paraphrase them. I'm not a pixel peeper and I really hope you're not implying I am one of the people you refer to.
 
Last edited:
It's in your post. I'm not a pixel peeper and I really hope you're not implying I am one of the people you refer to.

No, what you do is misinterpret what people say.

If you're not sure what effect mounting lenses on different cameras can have there are articles you can Google your way to. And to be clear, I doubt this would be an issue for me and maybe it wont be an issue at all but I do suspect that people would whinge if Sigma change the mount and do nothing else but there's always a number of complainers. You can't please everyone etc.
 
You mean like mirrorless cameras.
The A7 is the smallest "35mm" SLR I've had since my film days, my GX80 and a f1.8 prime is the size of a quality 35mm compact camera and my 1" Panny is the size of an everyday compact camera like the old Jessops 35mm I have. I've never been happier.
 
No, what you do is misinterpret what people say.

If you're not sure what effect mounting lenses on different cameras can have there are articles you can Google your way to. And to be clear, I doubt this would be an issue for me and maybe it wont be an issue at all but I do suspect that people would whinge if Sigma change the mount and do nothing else but there's always a number of complainers. You can't please everyone etc.

But to be clear you spoke on behalf of the people re your 400% comment.
 
The A7 is the smallest "35mm" SLR I've had since my film days, my GX80 and a f1.8 prime is the size of a quality 35mm compact camera and my 1" Panny is the size of an everyday compact camera like the old Jessops 35mm I have. I've never been happier.

Sure, however, mirrorless have grown in size and weight year on year.
 
Sure, however, mirrorless have grown in size and weight year on year.

Yeah, it sucks, too. It's the main reason I went for the A7 - now I don't want to upgrade cause I don't want a fat-ass camera on my hip. I ditched the DSLR game for this very reason!
 
Can't beat physics. It's only the mirror that's gone

Can't beat physics? What's that got to do with anything? It's about adding extra features to the body of the camera that adds bulk. It's about the implementation of those features that adds bulk. It's the unfortunate nature of product development pandering to customers' insatiable appetite for shiny new things.

Sony could have implemented many, many improvements to the original A7 through firmware - but they decided to restrict them to new models. If only Fuji did a FF sensor..
 
And let's be honest. Its the lenses that have not innovated in tech to make it smaller. The body has but not lenses. The latest innovation was DO lenses but only found on 400mm primes...
 
Can't beat physics? What's that got to do with anything? It's about adding extra features to the body of the camera that adds bulk. It's about the implementation of those features that adds bulk. It's the unfortunate nature of product development pandering to customers' insatiable appetite for shiny new things.

Sony could have implemented many, many improvements to the original A7 through firmware - but they decided to restrict them to new models. If only Fuji did a FF sensor..
Adds bulk. Listen. The a7 and this a9 ain't a world of a difference. Check the size. It's what? 0.1mm tall lol.

And what do you expect with dual SD card and a bigger battery plus ibis? You think those weigh like feathers?
Some of these cameras have more features then a dslr yet smaller.
 
Last edited:
Adds bulk. Listen. The a7 and this a9 ain't a world of a difference. Check the size. It's what? 0.1mm tall lol.

And what do you expect with dual SD card and a bigger battery plus ibis? You think those weigh like feathers?
Some of these cameras have more features then a dslr yet smaller.

You're missing the point, I'm not comparing the A7 & A9 - they're very clearly for two different markets. (And for the record, the A9 is 1.5cm thicker than the A7).

Not everybody needs the features of the A9 - there's a world of photographers out there who want capable cameras that do the basics well & don't want the bulk and heft of a DSLR. I, for one, am one of those. And if Sony continues down this current trend, it'll end up making a mirrorless camera no less bulky than a DSLR. Seems pointless, to me.
 
fuji doesn't do APS-C sensors either, Sony does ;)

Anyway I think its safe to say Fuji won't be getting into FF mirrorless market anytime soon. I am hoping canon/nikon will oblige soon enough...
 
You're missing the point, I'm not comparing the A7 & A9 - they're very clearly for two different markets. (And for the record, the A9 is 1.5cm thicker than the A7).

Not everybody needs the features of the A9 - there's a world of photographers out there who want capable cameras that do the basics well & don't want the bulk and heft of a DSLR. I, for one, am one of those. And if Sony continues down this current trend, it'll end up making a mirrorless camera no less bulky than a DSLR. Seems pointless, to me.
These features will increase weight and a bit of bulk. You can't have these features for free?

The A9 is still the lightest and smallest sports full frame camera out there
 
fuji doesn't do APS-C sensors either, Sony does ;)

Anyway I think its safe to say Fuji won't be getting into FF mirrorless market anytime soon. I am hoping canon/nikon will oblige soon enough...
Yup and there a6500 is smaller then there xpro line or whatever it's called
 
These features will increase weight and a bit of bulk. You can't have these features for free?

The A9 is still the lightest and smallest sports full frame camera out there

No s***.

If I wanted those features I'd have bought an A9.

But Sony could have easily updated software to add new features, fix a host of simple issues (the shutter speed issue, terrible menus, AF speed upgrades, etc - just as other manufacturers do). They would endear themselves to users much more, create a more loyal customer base (how many die hard Fuji fans have you met!) rather than fleecing customers with a new body every single year.
 
No s***.

If I wanted those features I'd have bought an A9.

But Sony could have easily updated software to add new features, fix a host of simple issues (the shutter speed issue, terrible menus, AF speed upgrades, etc - just as other manufacturers do). They would endear themselves to users much more, create a more loyal customer base (how many die hard Fuji fans have you met!) rather than fleecing customers with a new body every single year.
Canikon don't. Only fuji does
 
Yup and there a6500 is smaller then there xpro line or whatever it's called
Sony don't make any great APS-C lenses! :D It's swings and round-a-bouts, nothing is perfect.
Like you said, you can't beat the law of physics, so unless some new technology comes out that magically shrinks fast lenses we are reaching the point where bodies that are too small don't go well with fast lenses.
For example I would never consider using a Sony A7RII/A9 with the G Master zoom's without the Vertical Grip. So the size and weight advantage is gone.

The original A7 is smaller and can see the appeal, its cheap for what is is and pair with the 35mm f1.8 and 55mm f1.8 its a great kit. You could even add the new 85mm f1.8 to it and its still a nice little setup.
 
Canikon don't. Only fuji does
Yes but Canon does have decades worth of experience behind them, with this, they get the ergonomics, design, menu GUI, AF ability for studio work etc done right first time.
The whole studio focusing issue/behavior with the Sony A7RII was a bitter kick in the teeth for some, we are talking about a tool costing £2500 approx. and yet Sony has left those users high and dry!

As for Fuji, they have always had the "improvement" mindset, I remember the firmware they released for my discontinued original X100, it transformed the AF into a totally different beast from when it was first released and that was a brave move from Fuji considering they could have just focused on their X100s.
 
Last edited:
Yes but Canon does have decades worth of experience behind them, with this, they get the ergonomics, design, menu GUI, AF ability for studio work etc done right first time.
The whole studio focusing issue/behavior with the Sony A7RII was a bitter kick in the teeth for some, we are talking about a tool costing £2500 approx. and yet Sony has left those users high and dry!
It's why I use the 5d4 for studio work
 
Canikon don't. Only fuji does

Indeed. And how are sales at Canon and Nikon, currently?

If you treat customers like a commodity, they'll respond with their feet.

(Fuji, Olympus & Panasonic all regularly post big firmware upgrades with new features to their respective cameras, for reference.)
 
Last edited:
If I had the need for a full-frame 35mm system, Sony would be it, no questions at all.
They are leading and heading right for Nikon and Canon's Goolies :D
The Sony A7 III will probably be another step to doing that.
 
Indeed. And how are sales at Canon and Nikon, currently?

If you treat customers like a commodity, they'll respond with their feet.
Correct...... I am happy with my Fuji, not just for its abilities but knowing that Fuji may yet improve if further...... the last firmware they released was quite substantial and it gives a certain value add to their customer base.
 
If I had the need for a full-frame 35mm system, Sony would be it, no questions at all.
They are leading and heading right for Nikon and Canon's Goolies :D
The Sony A7 III will probably be another step to doing that.

Probably. Hoping the A7S line, at least, retains the slightly smaller footprint in the current Sony lineup. My A7 will need an upgrade soon..
 
Probably. Hoping the A7S line, at least, retains the slightly smaller footprint in the current Sony lineup. My A7 will need an upgrade soon..

Funny you should mention that, I do like the appeal of the A7S / SII type of design as it gives you incredible ISO/DR abilities.
If only Fuji did this for their APS-C line, we could then see better ISO/DR putting it closer to the 24mp FF variants for DR/ISO abilities. :D
 
But Sony could have easily updated software to add new features, fix a host of simple issues (the shutter speed issue, terrible menus, AF speed upgrades, etc - just as other manufacturers do).

Maybe, or maybe not - unless you have access to the detailed internal specifications of the cameras concerned, and the firmware from both, you cannot be sure that it is possible to modify the firmware from an older model to provide all the features on a newer model - the older camera may simply not have the required hardware to support the new firmware (and the reason could be as simple as the new firmware simply being too big to fit in the available memory on the old camera).
 
Maybe, or maybe not - unless you have access to the detailed internal specifications of the cameras concerned, and the firmware from both, you cannot be sure that it is possible to modify the firmware from an older model to provide all the features on a newer model - the older camera may simply not have the required hardware to support the new firmware (and the reason could be as simple as the new firmware simply being too big to fit in the available memory on the old camera).
Very possible, but I think its more a case of maximizing Sony's bottom line! PROFIT. :D
 
Maybe, or maybe not - unless you have access to the detailed internal specifications of the cameras concerned, and the firmware from both, you cannot be sure that it is possible to modify the firmware from an older model to provide all the features on a newer model - the older camera may simply not have the required hardware to support the new firmware (and the reason could be as simple as the new firmware simply being too big to fit in the available memory on the old camera).

Sure. But what's stopping Sony releasing fixes for software flaws? What's stopping them creating more intuitive menus? What's stopping Sony adding features that wouldn't invoke extra processor power? Nothing, other than their bottom line. I think that much is obvious.
 
Back
Top