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

Radiohead said:
Good AF can’t save crap technique but after 4 years with D750’s it’s not even close to the A9. If a shot if OOF it’s down to me and not the camera.
Click to expand...

Agreed, had 3ish years with the D750 and the A9 is a huge step up, but I have got a lot of bad shots due to user error and learning the camera as it is a lot different!
 
JJ! said:
Agreed, had 3ish years with the D750 and the A9 is a huge step up, but I have got a lot of bad shots due to user error and learning the camera as it is a lot different!
Click to expand...
It was your first Sony e camera as well. That didn't help at all.

Like a kid learning how to drive in a bugatti.
 
I had 5x d750 since launch, they are superb but the Sony a7iii AF is better. The eye AF, frame coverage, ospdaf and FPS also adds to the better afc performance and better hit rate.
 
Last edited:
pmac said:
Ok thanks for the replies
I guess I’m trying to justify the move.
I’m Giving up a lot of good glass that I won’t be able to replace with the Sony equivalent, so don’t won’t to be unhappy in the end I guess.
Click to expand...

Try before you buy?
 
pmac said:
Im truly interested in switching to the Sony and not asking these to start anything, so please keep the fanboyism in check, I know it seems to have taken over a lot in here.

I've now spent a fair bit off time looking over images on the likes of Flickr and such like and I don't know if I hold standards to high or expected to much, but there seems to be so many soft and miss focus shots especially wide open, defiantly comparing the d750 images to the a7iii there doesn't seem to be any higher of a hit rate for what I would class as sharp portraits.
this was looking at non studio/flash images anyway.

So is the AF and eye AF actually as good as everyone makes out, all I hear is praise on how great and revolutionary it is but can't see the proof.
Has this camera been hyped up so much by the internet/youtube celebrity's who it seems a lot more use it for video than stills and its started a cascade of everyone jumping on.

I'm actually interested to how its better than the likes of the d750/5dm4 and if anyone has been getting hight hit rates wide open.
Click to expand...
Sorry quote the whole post, but I'm on a phone.

I'm looking at moving over, almost there now. I've been doing lots of lens reviews, and a common theme is that many of the 'not top end' lenses (not just the budget or kit lens) have a sharp centre but poor sides. Decentering also seems to be frequently reported in some, like the CZ24-70 f2.8. stopping down doesn't seem to help, unlike in many older lenses either.

I've seen some brilliant images from SOME of the range (24-105 for example) but if I move I'll be using non-sony lenses for quite a while. I think if you want really sharp images you will either have to look at GM lenses or go Sigma ART.
 
pmac said:
Ok thanks for the replies
I guess I’m trying to justify the move.
I’m Giving up a lot of good glass that I won’t be able to replace with the Sony equivalent, so don’t won’t to be unhappy in the end I guess.
Click to expand...
What lenses so you have?
 
ancient_mariner said:
Sorry quote the whole post, but I'm on a phone.

I'm looking at moving over, almost there now. I've been doing lots of lens reviews, and a common theme is that many of the 'not top end' lenses (not just the budget or kit lens) have a sharp centre but poor sides. Decentering also seems to be frequently reported in some, like the CZ24-70 f2.8. stopping down doesn't seem to help, unlike in many older lenses either.

I've seen some brilliant images from SOME of the range (24-105 for example) but if I move I'll be using non-sony lenses for quite a while. I think if you want really sharp images you will either have to look at GM lenses or go Sigma ART.
Click to expand...
The Sony CZ 24-70mm f2.8 is an a-mount lens not an E-mount lens
The Sony Zeiss 24-70 f4 is an E-mount lens

Confused yet? :p
 
pmac said:
Im truly interested in switching to the Sony and not asking these to start anything, so please keep the fanboyism in check, I know it seems to have taken over a lot in here.

I've now spent a fair bit off time looking over images on the likes of Flickr and such like and I don't know if I hold standards to high or expected to much, but there seems to be so many soft and miss focus shots especially wide open, defiantly comparing the d750 images to the a7iii there doesn't seem to be any higher of a hit rate for what I would class as sharp portraits.
this was looking at non studio/flash images anyway.

So is the AF and eye AF actually as good as everyone makes out, all I hear is praise on how great and revolutionary it is but can't see the proof.
Has this camera been hyped up so much by the internet/youtube celebrity's who it seems a lot more use it for video than stills and its started a cascade of everyone jumping on.

I'm actually interested to how its better than the likes of the d750/5dm4 and if anyone has been getting hight hit rates wide open.
Click to expand...

I think if you loo at the cameras you use on Flickr, you’ll find similar issues, chances are you probably aren’t following those people.

When I was considering the same, I noted some lens renditions that didn’t look too good but then also subject and general quality of the pics also contributed to my perception. AF is just different, but much better. The Sony tracks well for one which the D750 couldn’t and you have 93% of the screen as focus points. It’s a dream to use.

WEX do cheap hire of £60 for a day, might be worth a try.
 
nandbytes said:
What lenses so you have?
Click to expand...

currently have
Nikon
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8 vr2
85 1.4g
50 1.8g
samyang 14 2.8

if I move I think it will be tamron 28-75, 55 1.8 and 85 1.8 that my budget will allow , not sure if I should sell the 14 or just buy a basic converter seeing as its manual anyway


twist said:
Try before you buy?
Click to expand...

Theres no where around here that has them in store and know one I know around this area does, the joys of being in a smaller town in Scotland I guess.
 
pmac said:
currently have
Nikon
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8 vr2
85 1.4g
50 1.8g
samyang 14 2.8

if I move I think it will be tamron 28-75, 55 1.8 and 85 1.8 that my budget will allow , not sure if I should sell the 14 or just buy a basic converter seeing as its manual anyway




Theres no where around here that has them in store and know one I know around this area does, the joys of being in a smaller town in Scotland I guess.
Click to expand...

Amazon or online retailers.
 
pmac said:
currently have
Nikon
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8 vr2
85 1.4g
50 1.8g
samyang 14 2.8

if I move I think it will be tamron 28-75, 55 1.8 and 85 1.8 that my budget will allow , not sure if I should sell the 14 or just buy a basic converter seeing as its manual anyway




Theres no where around here that has them in store and know one I know around this area does, the joys of being in a smaller town in Scotland I guess.
Click to expand...

The Tamron 28-75 is a great lens, I had one one for a while, the Sony 24-105 f4 is also a fantastic lens (I'd say its as sharp as the 24-70 GM) however it is "only" f4.0 v the f2.8 and 28mm of the Tamron.
 
pmac said:
Ok thanks for the replies
I guess I’m trying to justify the move.
I’m Giving up a lot of good glass that I won’t be able to replace with the Sony equivalent, so don’t won’t to be unhappy in the end I guess.
Click to expand...

Can I just say, try before you buy!!!! Wex offer a deal where if you rent a camera you get that refunded if you decide to buy.

I have a Nikon D850 and Fuji X-T3, I tried the A7III and didn't like it (the EVF was terrible) I'm now using an A7RIII and not convinced.

I won't go into details as I'm sure it would prompt some responses and derail. I will say that I would choose the D850 over it if size/weight was not an issue. If I had to choose between the A7III and and the X-T3 I would take the X-T3 even though it is a crop sensor.

So honestly try one, you may love it but equally you may not...
 
pmac said:
Im truly interested in switching to the Sony and not asking these to start anything, so please keep the fanboyism in check, I know it seems to have taken over a lot in here.
Click to expand...

Here's a post I wrote about switching from the D750.

It's based on wedding photography, but I'm sure you'll find some relevant sections. But yes, in my reasonably capable hands, the A7III is significantly better than the D750 in virtually every respect. The hit rate is much better and I regarding EyeAF, I couldn't buy a camera without it from now on.

The only things that I prefer about the D750 are the assignable 'REC' button, the better way of turning auto ISO on/off quickly, and the big IR focus splodge you get when shooting with flash on a dark dancefloor.
 
decigallen said:
Here's a post I wrote about switching from the D750.

It's based on wedding photography, but I'm sure you'll find some relevant sections. But yes, in my reasonably capable hands, the A7III is significantly better than the D750 in virtually every respect. The hit rate is much better and I regarding EyeAF, I couldn't buy a camera without it from now on.

The only things that I prefer about the D750 are the assignable 'REC' button, the better way of turning auto ISO on/off quickly, and the big IR focus splodge you get when shooting with flash on a dark dancefloor.
Click to expand...

It’s pretty quick to scroll through the iso from auto upwards, off the scroll wheel, no?

Great write up, certainly helped when I switched.
 
decigallen said:
Here's a post I wrote about switching from the D750.

It's based on wedding photography, but I'm sure you'll find some relevant sections. But yes, in my reasonably capable hands, the A7III is significantly better than the D750 in virtually every respect. The hit rate is much better and I regarding EyeAF, I couldn't buy a camera without it from now on.

The only things that I prefer about the D750 are the assignable 'REC' button, the better way of turning auto ISO on/off quickly, and the big IR focus splodge you get when shooting with flash on a dark dancefloor.
Click to expand...

thanks will have a read once I get rid of the children.

Jase said:
Can I just say, try before you buy!!!! Wex offer a deal where if you rent a camera you get that refunded if you decide to buy.

I have a Nikon D850 and Fuji X-T3, I tried the A7III and didn't like it (the EVF was terrible) I'm now using an A7RIII and not convinced.

I won't go into details as I'm sure it would prompt some responses and derail. I will say that I would choose the D850 over it if size/weight was not an issue. If I had to choose between the A7III and and the X-T3 I would take the X-T3 even though it is a crop sensor.

So honestly try one, you may love it but equally you may not...
Click to expand...

if I buy it will have to be grey so the rent and reduce the cost isn't an option.
one reason I'm wanting to change is the weight and IBS as I'm a little shaky due to having bad hands
 
nandbytes said:
The Sony CZ 24-70mm f2.8 is an a-mount lens not an E-mount lens
The Sony Zeiss 24-70 f4 is an E-mount lens

Confused yet? :p
Click to expand...

Now why would I talk about an A mount lens in this context? I had assumed it was CZ rather than Z, and yes, it's the Zeiss f4 24-70 in FE mount that isn't terribly good. I was a bit 'surprised' when I was able to compare images in lightroom between this lens and the one I own, to see how poor the edges were, even enlarging my 24mp images 2:1 vs 1:1 for the A7r images to compensate for the lower resolution.

I am coming round to the Tamron a bit though, having looked at more real-world samples and not seen the same shortcomings. 24-105 is definitely the lens to have though, unless you need 1 stop more light gathering and narrower deth of field.
 
pmac said:
if I buy it will have to be grey so the rent and reduce the cost isn't an option.
one reason I'm wanting to change is the weight and IBS as I'm a little shaky due to having bad hands
Click to expand...

OK how about going to the Photography show in a couple of weeks? you'll be able to try all the cameras and get a show price which will probably be as good as grey.
 
Jase said:
OK how about going to the Photography show in a couple of weeks? you'll be able to try all the cameras and get a show price which will probably be as good as grey.
Click to expand...

:ROFLMAO: The photography show prices are no where near grey import prices.
 
pmac said:
thanks will have a read once I get rid of the children.



if I buy it will have to be grey so the rent and reduce the cost isn't an option.
one reason I'm wanting to change is the weight and IBS as I'm a little shaky due to having bad hands
Click to expand...

Also, some people’s experiences with Sony are bad due to the cross over period, much like my own.

I just couldn’t get on with mine at all coming from the D750, even contemplated switching back a number of times.

I think if I rented first I probably wouldn’t have got one. But now I wouldn’t go back.
 
Not everyone’s favorite lens but finally finished my same set up as the D750 and got the 28mm f2. It’s even smaller than I thought it was!

May not be the quality G master line up but it makes me happy and its the classifieds for the 35mm.
 
JJ! said:
Honestly thought they may have gone with the 35mm 1.8 VC.

Has Sony stopped people making 1.8's to force them in to 1.4's or slower 2.8s?!

35-150 f2.8-f4... hmmmmmmm, not ideal!
Click to expand...

I am quite tempted by this tbh if its as sharp as my new 24-105mm. But size and price matters too...
though I with they remade their old 35-105mm f2.8 lens which was great
 
Last edited:
I've just had a quick read of the 135mm hands on write up at DPR and foolishly scrolled down to the comments where I saw someone ask (paraphrasing) why not just use an 85mm and foot zoom.

I do dislike the idea that different focal lengths aren't needed as we can foot zoom as this shows a basic misunderstanding or a lack of realisation at least as if you walk forward or back you change the perspective. Shocker I know and it may not matter to some but if you want the 135mm look there's only a couple of ways of getting it, use a 135mm or stand at 135mm distance, shoot with a wider lens and crop it to the same FoV.

Anyway, if you can avoid nit picking the comments here it is...

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8...tm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source

It does look to be a very nice lens and if my conscience allowed me I just might buy one for the 1 time a year I'd use it. Good luck to anyone who buys one, I'm sure it'll get them lovely shots :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top