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

Anyone able to recommend any decent 3rd party Z100 batteries?
 
I have just been scanning through some images from todays wedding, while backing everything up.

The Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 is ridiculously sharp at 17mm.
 
I have just been scanning through some images from todays wedding, while backing everything up.

The Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 is ridiculously sharp at 17mm.

That, the 28-75 and some form of tele and macro option would be all I'd ever need. If I had the funds, that's what I'd have
 
I have the opportunity to buy 24 and 85 Sigma ART lenses. Being new to Sony, what’s the performance like? Do they need an adapter? Is AF performance impaired at all?
 
I have the opportunity to buy 24 and 85 Sigma ART lenses. Being new to Sony, what’s the performance like? Do they need an adapter? Is AF performance impaired at all?

Native or Canon mount? I'd steer clear of the 85 purely due to its size.
 
Native or Canon mount? I'd steer clear of the 85 purely due to its size.
Native mount. I’ve always loved the sigmas and thought this was an ideal choice but was concerned about performance. I’ve not really considered the size yet
 
I have the opportunity to buy 24 and 85 Sigma ART lenses. Being new to Sony, what’s the performance like? Do they need an adapter? Is AF performance impaired at all?
I'd buy the GM version both any day and once again steer clear due the size (especially the 85mm)
 
If only I had the money for those!
 
I am holding out for a 35mm G.M.
I’m hoping for a 50mm f1.4 GM too lol.
I doubt that’s coming anytime soon with the Sony Zeiss versions. Can’t immediately think of many examples of a manufacturing putting out two lenses with identical attributes (focal length, aperture) but slightly different rendering. Officially GM focuses on resolution and bokeh while Zeiss emphasises resolution and contrast. In practice I think they came up with the GM brand later and it will displace Zeiss as the premium branding over time. Perhaps it already has: wasn’t the last Zeiss-branded lens released in 2016?
 
I doubt that’s coming anytime soon with the Sony Zeiss versions. Can’t immediately think of many examples of a manufacturing putting out two lenses with identical attributes (focal length, aperture) but slightly different rendering. Officially GM focuses on resolution and bokeh while Zeiss emphasises resolution and contrast. In practice I think they came up with the GM brand later and it will displace Zeiss as the premium branding over time. Perhaps it already has: wasn’t the last Zeiss-branded lens released in 2016?

The 35mm G.M has been rumoured for a while actually and is one of the lenses that is expected before the end of the year. The Zeiss 35 is 4 years old now and is an old and outdated design.
 
I have the opportunity to buy 24 and 85 Sigma ART lenses. Being new to Sony, what’s the performance like? Do they need an adapter? Is AF performance impaired at all?

If they are native mount they obviously won't need an adaptor.

The Siggy 24mm is the worst performing of the art lenses, it is also big and heavy. The 24GM is a much better lens.

The Siggy 85mm is a very good lens, but weighs an absolute ton which makes it not so popular. It also has very clinical rendering. The 85GM, has much nicer bokeh and the 85mm f/1.8 is popular as it is cheap and has very fast a.f speed.
 
Last edited:
I doubt that’s coming anytime soon with the Sony Zeiss versions. Can’t immediately think of many examples of a manufacturing putting out two lenses with identical attributes (focal length, aperture) but slightly different rendering. Officially GM focuses on resolution and bokeh while Zeiss emphasises resolution and contrast. In practice I think they came up with the GM brand later and it will displace Zeiss as the premium branding over time. Perhaps it already has: wasn’t the last Zeiss-branded lens released in 2016?

I think the zeiss branded Sony lenses stopped since Zeiss decided to make their own set of zeiss lenses for e-mount. At a recent Sony event I visited, zeiss were also there. The rep claimed "we are not like other 3rd party manufacturers, we work closely with Sony to develop native lenses" (whatever that means...)
So Sony-zeiss lenses are now only seen on fixed lens cameras like RX series.
 
Last edited:
I have the opportunity to buy 24 and 85 Sigma ART lenses. Being new to Sony, what’s the performance like? Do they need an adapter? Is AF performance impaired at all?

I have a 24 art and it’s excellent. Bit chunky for sure, but unless you really want to pay double for the GM it’s very good indeed.
 
The Siggy 24mm is the worst performing of the art lenses, it is also big and heavy. The 24GM is a much better lens.

The 35mm G.M has been rumoured for a while actually and is one of the lenses that is expected before the end of the year. The Zeiss 35 is 4 years old now and is an old and outdated design.

I’m sorry but that really is a load of sh1te. Clearly we’re spoilt with the quality of lenses these days. If lenses are outdated in 4 years then I give up.

There’s marginal improvements granted with newer models, but they are exactly that, marginal.

I do miss the rendering of my old 35G but the af accuracy of the zeiss, coupled with the A73, I’d sooner have all day long. And even though I’d say I’m a bokeh junkie, it’s not that bad at all, perfectly useable.

The 24 art isn’t such a slouch in real use. Much better?? For the money, there’s nothing to equal it. So, it comes down to whether you have deep pockets and can justify the GM for an overall 10-15% gain in all aspects other than weight.

Let’s get real, we’re generally splitting hairs these days with the overall quality from the mid-priced to the very best.
 
I’m sorry but that really is a load of sh1te. Clearly we’re spoilt with the quality of lenses these days. If lenses are outdated in 4 years then I give up.

There’s marginal improvements granted with newer models, but they are exactly that, marginal.

I do miss the rendering of my old 35G but the af accuracy of the zeiss, coupled with the A73, I’d sooner have all day long. And even though I’d say I’m a bokeh junkie, it’s not that bad at all, perfectly useable.

The 24 art isn’t such a slouch in real use. Much better?? For the money, there’s nothing to equal it. So, it comes down to whether you have deep pockets and can justify the GM for an overall 10-15% gain in all aspects other than weight.

Let’s get real, we’re generally splitting hairs these days with the overall quality from the mid-priced to the very best.

Why are you afraid of saying s***e? Are you a child?

Marginal improvements for you maybe be a massive difference for others.

The Zeiss lens is too big and heavy. It also uses older a.f focus motors so it isn't as fast as your making out here. It also has massive copy variation and is renowned for being decentered, a while back on one the larger photo sites there was a discussion and some people seemed to believe almost 50% of these where effected.

A new GM lens would be expected to be lighter, smaller and have faster a.f motors which would be a huge improvement. It would also not have that Zeiss high contrast look which I hate and much more pleasing bokeh.

The 24mm Art since launch has been widely regarded on every mount option as not as good as the rest of the Art line. It is also is the only e-mount Art lens that has iffy autofocus with moving subjects. It isn't a bad lens but it isn't an excellent one either. It's also heavy and cumbersome.

I had the 24mm Art for a little while on Nikon, I was very disappointed in it, I returned it and got the 20mm Art which is a much better lens.
 
Last edited:
Why are you afraid of saying s***e? Are you a child?

Marginal improvements for you maybe be a massive difference for others.

The Zeiss lens is too big and heavy. It also uses older a.f focus motors so it isn't as fast as your making out here. It also has massive copy variation and is renowned for being decentered, a while back on one the larger photo sites there was a discussion and some people seemed to believe almost 50% of these where effected.

A new GM lens would be expected to be lighter, smaller and have faster a.f motors which would be a huge improvement. It would also not have that Zeiss high contrast look which I hate and much more pleasing bokeh.

The 24mm Art since launch has been widely regarded on every mount option as not as good as the rest of the Art line. It is also is the only e-mount Art lens that has iffy autofocus with moving subjects. It isn't a bad lens but it isn't an excellent one either. It's also heavy and cumbersome.

I had the 24mm Art for a little while on Nikon, I was very disappointed in it, I returned it and got the 20mm Art which is a much better lens.

Sure, I’m 16 in my head.

The zeiss is known for the decenter issue granted, lucky to have a decent copy, but have known others to have had to have fixed or returned. I’ve used the fastest af lenses and find the zeiss af speed perfectly fine in it’s class. Really don’t have an issue with it, old motors or otherwise. All 1.4 lenses in longer fl’s are slower, and yet used for most things. Again, depends how picky you want to be. You say it’s too heavy? It’s smaller and lighter than the 35 art you are using?!

The 24 art’s af works fine with my 3 year old in full flight. Again, real use = very good.

The improvements from the Sony bodies have more of an effect than the lenses where af is concerned, in conjunction with a mid-high end lens. Didn’t matter what L lenses I had on my old 5D2, af was still a bitch for anything with a hint of movement.
 
Sure, I’m 16 in my head.

The zeiss is known for the decenter issue granted, lucky to have a decent copy, but have known others to have had to have fixed or returned. I’ve used the fastest af lenses and find the zeiss af speed perfectly fine in it’s class. Really don’t have an issue with it, old motors or otherwise. All 1.4 lenses in longer fl’s are slower, and yet used for most things. Again, depends how picky you want to be. You say it’s too heavy? It’s smaller and lighter than the 35 art you are using?!

The 24 art’s af works fine with my 3 year old in full flight. Again, real use = very good.

The improvements from the Sony bodies have more of an effect than the lenses where af is concerned, in conjunction with a mid-high end lens. Didn’t matter what L lenses I had on my old 5D2, af was still a bitch for anything with a hint of movement.

Yes, exactly why I want a 35GM, I had the Zeiss and preferred the Sigma. Now I want rid of the Sigma for a 35GM.

I have owned the 24mm Siggy for Nikon, I wasn't happy with it all. I have also used the e-mount version and wouldn't be happy with it either. Maybe I am just spoiled with the 24GM being so damn good.
 
Yes. Alot lol. The weight isn't a problem at all. Aperture ring is the only thing that is a minor pain

I just tape down any aperture rings. Never used them and always use the front wheel for it instead. Stops them getting knocked.
 
I just tape down any aperture rings. Never used them and always use the front wheel for it instead. Stops them getting knocked.

I don’t seem to knock mine often enough to tape them, but reckon an elastic band would also do a similar job.
 
The 35mm G.M has been rumoured for a while actually and is one of the lenses that is expected before the end of the year. The Zeiss 35 is 4 years old now and is an old and outdated design.
I haven’t picked up those rumours. A G series 35mmm was rumoured for 2019, but that seems in hindsight clearly to have been the recently released/announced non-G 35mm 1.8. Would be very surprised if they put out another 35mm four months after this one.
 
Hi Guys,

Been a while since I've been on here. I lost my way in life somewhat health,wealth, family and now am on the road to recovery. Would love to get back into photography to bring some sanity into my life and give me something to focus on.

Will be starting from scratch and was looking at taking advantage of the current Sony cashback offer. For someone who tends to shoot generally family pics, potraits and very rarely maybe asked to be second photographer at weddings would there be any advantages of purchasing the A7 mkII over the A7?Was hoping to purchase either of these cameras and pairing it with the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS.

Also a friend of mine will possibly be letting go of an A6300 body. If I went for this can anyone recommend a decent lens for this.
 
Hi Guys,

Been a while since I've been on here. I lost my way in life somewhat health,wealth, family and now am on the road to recovery. Would love to get back into photography to bring some sanity into my life and give me something to focus on.

Will be starting from scratch and was looking at taking advantage of the current Sony cashback offer. For someone who tends to shoot generally family pics, potraits and very rarely maybe asked to be second photographer at weddings would there be any advantages of purchasing the A7 mkII over the A7?Was hoping to purchase either of these cameras and pairing it with the Sony FE 24-70mm f/4 ZA OSS.

Also a friend of mine will possibly be letting go of an A6300 body. If I went for this can anyone recommend a decent lens for this.

Hi, welcome. Sorry to hear about your misfortune.

The main difference between the A7 and mk2 is the better ergonomics and body stabilisation. The sensor performance / image quality will be pretty much the same. Very slight bump in AF speed.

The 2470 has built in stabilisation, generally a mixed bag when it comes to quality control and you may be better looking into the Tamron 28-75 2.8 with the saving you make if you go with a A7 Mk1 instead of Mk2.

Depends, do you like zooms or primes, what focal lengths.
 
Back
Top