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

Direct link to the Lensrentals bit on the 135mm f1.8...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/03/sony-fe-135mm-f1-8-gm-early-mtf-results/

"This has been an MTF test. It has only been an MTF test. If it had been an actual lens review, I would have 762 images showing you pretty models, dramatic landscapes, and bokeh examples. Lens reviewers will do that in a while; be patient.

But as far as the test goes, the results are pretty simple. This is the sharpest lens we’ve tested. Period. (At last count, that’s out of 300+ lenses tested."
 
Last edited:
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Are you a Sony shooter now Keith?
Click to expand...

Only seeing this now for some reason! Nope, but never say never - it's all just different shaped gear end of the day. Wouldn't mind an A7RII, but then the lenses I'd want for it would require holding up the local PO with a banana ... because guns are also too expensive for me :p
 
Cagey75 said:
Only seeing this now for some reason! Nope, but never say never - it's all just different shaped gear end of the day. Wouldn't mind an A7RII, but then the lenses I'd want for it would require holding up the local PO with a banana ... because guns are also too expensive for me :p
Click to expand...
Yes the lenses are a lot. Was it the 800 or 800e you had?
 
woof woof said:
Direct link to the Lensrentals bit on the 135mm f1.8...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/03/sony-fe-135mm-f1-8-gm-early-mtf-results/

"This has been an MTF test. It has only been an MTF test. If it had been an actual lens review, I would have 762 images showing you pretty models, dramatic landscapes, and bokeh examples. Lens reviewers will do that in a while; be patient.

But as far as the test goes, the results are pretty simple. This is the sharpest lens we’ve tested. Period. (At last count, that’s out of 300+ lenses tested."
Click to expand...

That's going to be insanely sharp if true. I think I'd end up toning down the clarity as that must be on the clinical level of sharpness.
 
addicknchips said:
That's going to be insanely sharp if true. I think I'd end up toning down the clarity as that must be on the clinical level of sharpness.
Click to expand...

I was thinking similar, only so sharp an image can be before it's over the top and not even life-like anymore. These companies are all warring over numbers at this stage - more MP, faster than possibly usable AF, sharper than reality sharpness, 'colour science' [biggest load of my arse ever] - not even sure where they can go with it all next to lure in the bigger spenders.
 
addicknchips said:
That's going to be insanely sharp if true. I think I'd end up toning down the clarity as that must be on the clinical level of sharpness.
Click to expand...

The first time I thought sharpness was an issue was back when I had a Canon 20D and took a picture of my then GF with my new Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 at f4, it was quite unflattering. These days things can get even more unflattering very easily but at least you can usually make a sharp shot look flattering but you can't make a shot taken with an old milk bottle sharp.
 
Cagey75 said:
I was thinking similar, only so sharp an image can be before it's over the top and not even life-like anymore. These companies are all warring over numbers at this stage - more MP, faster than possibly usable AF, sharper than reality sharpness, 'colour science' [biggest load of my arse ever] - not even sure where they can go with it all next to lure in the bigger spenders.
Click to expand...

Dunno about things not looking life like as extreme sharpness is only visible when you look closely, viewed normally things should look at lot more... normal.

On the next big thing for selling to big spenders, Leica and Zeiss show the way. There's usually/always a market for high end shiny stuff even in these days of austerity. My personal pet hate is the move towards smartphone like operation.
 
woof woof said:
Dunno about things not looking life like as extreme sharpness is only visible when you look closely, viewed normally things should look at lot more... normal.

On the next big thing for selling to big spenders, Leica and Zeiss show the way. There's usually/always a market for high end shiny stuff even in these days of austerity. My personal pet hate is the move towards smartphone like operation.
Click to expand...

Extreme sharpness is usually very obvious even at standard viewing, I'm not talking decent sharpness from your average lens but these insanely sharp ones, you can tell right away. It's not always a bad thing, can be great for certain subjects, but even for landscape it can look unnatural. Look at 4K video, often it looks a bit odd due to over sharpening - this can be down to the grading too of course. And yet there's people crying out for 8K, why? because we're pushed toward believing we need it.

I'm with you on the smartphone side of it, but it's 2 extremes.
 
As I keep saying. I try to start at the end result and work backwards to decide the kit and the settings. Doing that I can see the appeal of high res and super sharpness for some but being honest a 100% crop from my A7 or MFT cameras is already good enough for me for a full screen picture and possibly an A4 print. What this means for me is that I can make a picture of a flower or something like that taken with an ordinary lens look like it was taken with a macro, or get close to looking like it was anyway. I can imagine someone with a very high res camera and a very sharp lens doing a 100% crop at A3 and for those people the high res high sharpness stuff is great... if you can't fill the frame to start with.

All this new better for some people kit just gives us more options.
 
woof woof said:
All this new better for some people kit just gives us more options.
Click to expand...


This is also true, which is what has me eyeing the likes of the A7RII ... it looks plenty camera for me, of course it's not as fast or efficient as the 7III but I'm seeing it about for up to €600 less. Used, but still. I find it odd that it's already a has-been to some. But like you say, means better deals for those of us a few rungs down
 
Cagey75 said:
This is also true, which is what has me eyeing the likes of the A7RII ... it looks plenty camera for me, of course it's not as fast or efficient as the 7III but I'm seeing it about for up to €600 less. Used, but still. I find it odd that it's already a has-been to some. But like you say, means better deals for those of us a few rungs down
Click to expand...
I've had the r2 before and it's a brilliant camera!
 
jonneymendoza said:
I've had the r2 before and it's a brilliant camera!
Click to expand...

Looks a little beast, the only thing it would lack for me is touch screen - just gotten so used to it. Another feature we've just become accustomed to that isn't necessary, hard to break habits though.
 
Cagey75 said:
Looks a little beast, the only thing it would lack for me is touch screen - just gotten so used to it. Another feature we've just become accustomed to that isn't necessary, hard to break habits though.
Click to expand...
The mk3 hardly have touch support. I call it none existent tbh.

Until u can freely swipe and touch on the menus it's a dud!

The main issues with the r2 is buffer and battery life. The rest is well up for the task
 
Cagey75 said:
The E - with some council estate primes apparently :ROFLMAO:

I miss when people got excited about council estate primes :( now it's 2K lenses or you're a 'budget' photographer
Click to expand...
Alan likes council state primes and he’s a Sony and Pany shooter,kudos to him
 
Cagey75 said:
Extreme sharpness is usually very obvious even at standard viewing, I'm not talking decent sharpness from your average lens but these insanely sharp ones, you can tell right away. It's not always a bad thing, can be great for certain subjects, but even for landscape it can look unnatural. Look at 4K video, often it looks a bit odd due to over sharpening - this can be down to the grading too of course. And yet there's people crying out for 8K, why? because we're pushed toward believing we need it.

I'm with you on the smartphone side of it, but it's 2 extremes.
Click to expand...
One of the things I loved about the x100c was the film like look to the images,particularly the not too sharp look or perhaps less digital is what imean
 
Cagey75 said:
Looks a little beast, the only thing it would lack for me is touch screen - just gotten so used to it. Another feature we've just become accustomed to that isn't necessary, hard to break habits though.
Click to expand...

ive had about 15 of these. a proper love-hate thing going on. the sensor is outstanding. at the time the eye af was revolutionary and is still a lot better than many alternatives. its a seriously good camera and if you can find a mint one for just over a grand its hard to resist.
 
addicknchips said:
ive had about 15 of these. a proper love-hate thing going on. the sensor is outstanding. at the time the eye af was revolutionary and is still a lot better than many alternatives. its a seriously good camera and if you can find a mint one for just over a grand its hard to resist.
Click to expand...

15!?? o_O
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
One of the things I loved about the x100c was the film like look to the images,particularly the not too sharp look or perhaps less digital is what imean
Click to expand...

One camera that I still think about is the Panasonic G1. I thought that the files that came from that from ISO 100-400 looked about as natural and film like, although film like is not something I look for or a term I'd normally use, as anything I've seen.

I still miss that camera from time to time as it was the best handling camera I've ever had unlike the G7 that replaced it which was for me so uncomfortable to hold that I just didn't want to use it.

The sad part is that I sold that lovely G1 to someone who didn't love it and sold it on soon afterwards. I can't remember who it was but they should be ashamed of themselves... ;)
 
Anyone use the Zeiss Batis 25mm ?

Just wondering about swapping by 16-35 f4 for one to save weight ?

Otherwise I’m going to change systems...
 
Which was the Batis that had some sort of problem? And what was the problem? I can't remember but I'm sure I read something within the last few weeks about some sort of problem...
 
woof woof said:
One camera that I still think about is the Panasonic G1. I thought that the files that came from that from ISO 100-400 looked about as natural and film like, although film like is not something I look for or a term I'd normally use, as anything I've seen.

I still miss that camera from time to time as it was the best handling camera I've ever had unlike the G7 that replaced it which was for me so uncomfortable to hold that I just didn't want to use it.

The sad part is that I sold that lovely G1 to someone who didn't love it and sold it on soon afterwards. I can't remember who it was but they should be ashamed of themselves... ;)
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:o_O:oops: :$:confused::LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Well if anyone has a Batis 25mm they would like to sell or swap for a 16-35 please let me know :)
 
woof woof said:
Yes maybe. As it crossed my mind I might do some Googling later and remind myself what the issue was.
Click to expand...

The Eye AF and AF in magnified view don't work properly, consistent front focus when close.

This isn't a fault but most people find it undesirable, the lens automatically closes down the aperture quite a lot regardless of setting when you're within 1 meter of the subject.

Zeiss have claimed they're putting out a firmware update to fix the former and improve the latter but it's been a pretty shoddy experience with them so far.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Lol wow
Click to expand...

You must be new? Welcome :ROFLMAO:

It was an attempted flame his sister flung at me a while back saying that's all I used on my old D800E, which is ironic as I never used cheap lenses on that camera, all the better Nikon ones at the time bar the Sigma 35 1.4. But it was still pretty funny. I will use a 25 cent lens these days if it gets me so much as one likeable image!
 
Cagey75 said:
You must be new? Welcome :ROFLMAO:

It was an attempted flame his sister flung at me a while back saying that's all I used on my old D800E, which is ironic as I never used cheap lenses on that camera, all the better Nikon ones at the time bar the Sigma 35 1.4. But it was still pretty funny. I will use a 25 cent lens these days if it gets me so much as one likeable image!
Click to expand...


You used to have a D800e, really you don't say? Not sure you have ever mentioned that before. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top