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

nandbytes said:
Well Sony lens is every so slightly better in AF-C especially for eye-AF. But indoors tamron is still better because of more light. It not something I'd worry over.
The Sony is as sharp as tamron at f4. But sony does cost more. Tamron for the price is very good and performs very well. Its no GM lens but its also not as heavy or pricey. Its perfectly usable wide open across the range. You'll just have to rely on software more to correct vignetting etc but Sony 24-105mm has the same issues. You'd have to go with 24-70GM if you want optically better but that's huge and expensive.

Sigma ART 85 is huge and its out of question for me. you might be willing to put up with it. I wouldn't hold my breath with the zoom catalogue improving anytime soon. If you could just settle for the Sony kit lens (28-70). Its actually decent. if you can find Sony zeiss 24-70mm f4 for around £400 used that's also worth it. Just wouldn't pay more than that for it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don’t think i’ll Be able to wait. As much as I like a prime, they can be limiting with the kids!

I think i’ll Narrow it to the 24-105mm or the tamron for now. I owned the 85mm art for Nikon a few years back. Cracking lens, but you’re right about the weight of it. It’s a monster and a half!

Incidentally I thought I’d try a lens adapter for some of my Nikon glass (an AF one), but trying it this morning it’s not looking promising at all. I thought it might tide me over but alas, it seems like it isn’t meant to be. I’ll give it another shot later. I might be able to make do though until I find something on the used market in the zoom range.
 
draiman said:
Yeah, I don’t think i’ll Be able to wait. As much as I like a prime, they can be limiting with the kids!

I think i’ll Narrow it to the 24-105mm or the tamron for now. I owned the 85mm art for Nikon a few years back. Cracking lens, but you’re right about the weight of it. It’s a monster and a half!

Incidentally I thought I’d try a lens adapter for some of my Nikon glass (an AF one), but trying it this morning it’s not looking promising at all. I thought it might tide me over but alas, it seems like it isn’t meant to be. I’ll give it another shot later. I might be able to make do though until I find something on the used market in the zoom range.
Click to expand...

I have a child too. Tamron is definitely better for shooting children indoors or in low light. The stop of extra light helps and I miss that.
On the plus side with 24-105mm I rarely need to swap lenses any more on travels. in the evening and low light I just use a 24mm GM.
Its all a trade-off you'll never find the perfect option tbh. Just pick one that you find more useful, can't go wrong with either in terms of image quality.

BTW if you are buying used just make sure the Sony 24-105mm is not one of the effected for faulty AF. You can do this by using the serial number of the lens, there is a tool on Sony website. Even if you get one from this batch Sony will fix it for free but you have factor in extra postage costs.

Nikon AF adapter is worst one of the lot. So it doesn't work well or supported as much by 3rd parties.
 
nandbytes said:
I have a child too. Tamron is definitely better for shooting children indoors or in low light. The stop of extra light helps and I miss that.
On the plus side with 24-105mm I rarely need to swap lenses any more on travels. in the evening and low light I just use a 24mm GM.
Its all a trade-off you'll never find the perfect option tbh. Just pick one that you find more useful, can't go wrong with either in terms of image quality.

BTW if you are buying used just make sure the Sony 24-105mm is not one of the effected for faulty AF. You can do this by using the serial number of the lens, there is a tool on Sony website. Even if you get one from this batch Sony will fix it for free but you have factor in extra postage costs.

Nikon AF adapter is worst one of the lot. So it doesn't work well or supported as much by 3rd parties.
Click to expand...


Yeah. I read the reviews so kind of knew what to expect before I tried it, but thought I might as well. Even if it works reasonably for one zoom right now, it’ll help a lot.

I think the Tamron will probably be my go to then. I usually prefer higher aperture lenses due to the dull nature of good old Scotland ! Anyone selling?
 
Shoot Em Up said:
I've just put up my Sony FE 85mm up for sale if you're interested.
Click to expand...

I have a 85mm f1.8 and I think it's a good lens :D

I'm not a great 85mm lover as it's bit long for me but I wanted to replace the pre art Sigma 85mm f1.4 I had so I got the Sony. I prefer the bokeh of that Sigma I had, most of the time, but the Sony f1.8 is definitely sharper at the wider apertures and the only real issue IMO is the bokeh which some will actually like and in fact I like too sometimes :D

I got mine to mainly use for people shots and I've been mostly very happy with it and I've taken some of my favorite 85mm pictures with it.

GLWTS. I'm sure someone will want it.
 
draiman said:
Yeah, I don’t think i’ll Be able to wait. As much as I like a prime, they can be limiting with the kids!

I think i’ll Narrow it to the 24-105mm or the tamron for now. I owned the 85mm art for Nikon a few years back. Cracking lens, but you’re right about the weight of it. It’s a monster and a half!

Incidentally I thought I’d try a lens adapter for some of my Nikon glass (an AF one), but trying it this morning it’s not looking promising at all. I thought it might tide me over but alas, it seems like it isn’t meant to be. I’ll give it another shot later. I might be able to make do though until I find something on the used market in the zoom range.
Click to expand...

I came from a similar place a month or so back - ended up choosing the 24-105 as an all-rounder, feeling the 28-70 of the Tamron would be too limited and make me want to keep changing lenses when I was out & about. I think it was the right decision. I also bought a Samyang 35 f2.8 (open box) from Amazon for under £200, which is a nice and really tiny lens for discrete use. A Samyang 85 f1.4 will likely complete my native mount outfit, mostly because I really like Samyang rendering with their faster lenses.

One budget option if you don't need eye-AF is to pick up a Sony adapter (LA-EA4) and some older Sony A mount lenses. AF with that combination is fast and accurate, even with screw drive lenses. I also use Nikon mount lenses adapted to the A7III, but it's far from ideal with a manual adapter.
 
Last edited:
draiman said:
Yeah. I read the reviews so kind of knew what to expect before I tried it, but thought I might as well. Even if it works reasonably for one zoom right now, it’ll help a lot.

I think the Tamron will probably be my go to then. I usually prefer higher aperture lenses due to the dull nature of good old Scotland ! Anyone selling?
Click to expand...

Looks like there is a Sony 85mm f1.8 lens for sale on the forum. It's a great little lens. Unless you need/want f1.4 this is probably as good as it gets for an 85mm f1.8 lens. Sharp from wide open and AF is very very fast, best out of all the 85mm lenses.
 
nandbytes said:
I am surprised A7RIII still takes top marks for the best IQ. That sensor is getting old, its from A7RII days.
Click to expand...

It's not really surprising.

Sony dominate high end sensors. In the last 5 years improvements have been incremental. The A7rii sensor IMO represents the point where resolution and performance reached a technology plateau.

The A7iii family seems to have been about improving AF and camera software performance than sensor IQ.
 
T_J_G said:
Tough decision. I love my 85 1.8 but would be tempted by a 1.4..
Click to expand...

I got rid of my 1.8 for the GM when one popped up used for £1k.

I couldn’t justify it new but much easier to swallow for the £600 difference (if you can sell the 1.8 for £400)
 
Raymond Lin said:
I got rid of my 1.8 for the GM when one popped up used for £1k.

I couldn’t justify it new but much easier to swallow for the £600 difference (if you can sell the 1.8 for £400)
Click to expand...

Worth the difference? I love the super fast AF on the 1.8 and the fact it feels light after using the Sigma 35.
 
Prices, then and now...

http://pindelski.org/Photography/2019/05/04/camera-prices-unchanged-50-years/

This is something I often think about when I'm buying or using old film era lenses. This kit was expensive in its day but now it's often very cheap... with the odd notable exception which is still expensive.

Looking at the relative simplicity of some of this old kit though maybe it's a little difficult to understand why it was so expensive in its day. I suppose because they didn't have the automated mass production capabilities of today.
 
One from today, A7 and 35mm f2.8 at f8.

I've been trying to get a picture I'm happy with of the war memorial. It's only 10 minutes walk from home but the sky and lighting is often not the best when I'm able to get there. I sat waiting for the light to change but it was never going to be what I'm looking for today.

LJJ6oSY.jpg


I'll get it one day.

There was a cricket match going on to my right. Mrs WW just couldn't understand :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
One from today, A7 and 35mm f2.8 at f8.

I've been trying to get a picture I'm happy with of the war memorial. It's only 10 minutes walk from home but the sky and lighting is often not the best when I'm able to get there. I sat waiting for the light to change but it was never going to be what I'm looking for today.

LJJ6oSY.jpg


I'll get it one day.

There was a cricket match going on to my right. Mrs WW just couldn't understand :D
Click to expand...

A stormy day might be your best bet, if you want some character in the sky, get some nice moody clouds? maybe not what you're after?
 
Cagey75 said:
A stormy day might be your best bet, if you want some character in the sky, get some nice moody clouds? maybe not what you're after?
Click to expand...

Anything would be an improvement on the gray/flat/nothingness that seems to be pretty standard. As you can maybe tell, that shot has been processed more than I'd like.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Tbh they could do what ever they are filming with almost any recent camera.
Click to expand...

They could, but they'd not have it as easy, the GH5 has some of the best video codecs and options on the market, it also has better IBIS than most others. There's a reason many pro videographers use it. That's like saying you could use any modern camera for photos too ... and you can! more choices the better for all ;)
 
Cagey75 said:
They could, but they'd not have it as easy, the GH5 has some of the best video codecs and options on the market, it also has better IBIS than most others. There's a reason many pro videographers use it. That's like saying you could use any modern camera for photos too ... and you can! more choices the better for all ;)
Click to expand...

I don't think these cameras would have the reputation they have if anything could do it.
 
woof woof said:
I don't think these cameras would have the reputation they have if anything could do it.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts re the GH5. I just thought it interesting that on a video featuring some of the top FFML bodies on the market, an M43 is still the preference for video. Nothing more.
 
Cagey75 said:
They could, but they'd not have it as easy, the GH5 has some of the best video codecs and options on the market, it also has better IBIS than most others. There's a reason many pro videographers use it. That's like saying you could use any modern camera for photos too ... and you can! more choices the better for all ;)
Click to expand...

I meant for their use case they would have it nearly as easy too. I don't think IBIS makes much of a difference for them either since they shoot on a gimbal.

I agree more choices is good and GH5/s is awesome for video. If I were serious about video I'd probably go down Panasonic route too, I like Panasonic in general anyway. The point was for their particular use case almost anything will do.
 
nandbytes said:
I meant for their use case they would have it nearly as easy too. I don't think IBIS makes much of a difference for them either since they shoot on a gimbal.

I agree more choices is good and GH5/s is awesome for video. If I were serious about video I'd probably go down Panasonic route too, I like Panasonic in general anyway. The point was for their particular use case almost anything will do.
Click to expand...

I know, I just had to ... being the M43 ambassador that I am :p they do make a point of stating they shot this episode on the GH5 at start.

On the video itself, it is impressive that the A7RIII keeps up and even beats the new kids in some areas, Sony really did set a tough benchmark. Healthy for all I would say, the others cannot afford to slouch on this.
 
Took my A6400 to our wedding day just for giggles. Note to self don't do that again. :)

Good little camera, but its not for weddings. :LOL: Too much faffing about jumping into menus and using the touchscreen for focus is much slower than a joystick.
 
f/2.8 said:
Took my A6400 to our wedding day just for giggles. Note to self don't do that again. :)

Good little camera, but its not for weddings. :LOL: Too much faffing about jumping into menus and using the touchscreen for focus is much slower than a joystick.
Click to expand...

That is surprising, as a good touch screen should be much quicker than a joystick for quick focus point select. On my ol' G80 it's instantaneous, it really is well implemented. On my XH1 however, I much rather use the joystick, the touch screen is iffy at best, nowhere near as responsive or fun to use as the G80. Sony sound somewhere closer to the Fuji TS then?
 
Cagey75 said:
That is surprising, as a good touch screen should be much quicker than a joystick for quick focus point select. On my ol' G80 it's instantaneous, it really is well implemented. On my XH1 however, I much rather use the joystick, the touch screen is iffy at best, nowhere near as responsive or fun to use as the G80. Sony sound somewhere closer to the Fuji TS then?
Click to expand...

Could be just me, because of what I am used to I was constantly looking for a joystick that wasn't there, the touchscreen is responsive but I badly missed the joystick.
 
f/2.8 said:
Could be just me, because of what I am used to I was constantly looking for a joystick that wasn't there, the touchscreen is responsive but I badly missed the joystick.
Click to expand...

I've been tuned the other way for a couple years, switching to a camera with not-so-good touch screen is feeling a bit odd, I keep forgetting there's a joystick even there! I'm getting used to it though. It's all habit, muscle memory, I keep stabbing the wrong buttons with the cam up to my eye too! Why can't they all have the same controls? :ROFLMAO:
 
f/2.8 said:
Took my A6400 to our wedding day just for giggles. Note to self don't do that again. :)

Good little camera, but its not for weddings. :LOL: Too much faffing about jumping into menus and using the touchscreen for focus is much slower than a joystick.
Click to expand...
According to dpreview with real time AF you don't need joystick or touchscreen or need to faff about with AF points or settings.
 
addicknchips said:
Isn't that only if it actually focuses on what you want it to though?
Click to expand...

no in general. That's the case with A7(R)III. With A6400/A9 and realtime AF you use single centre spot to focus on whatever you want, then recompose and the camera will simply follow your subject.
 
nandbytes said:
no in general. That's the case with A7(R)III. With A6400/A9 and realtime AF you use single centre spot to focus on whatever you want, then recompose and the camera will simply follow your subject.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it doesn’t.
 
nandbytes said:
dpreview TV comparison between A7RIII/Z7/S1R -
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jTYl0IvzYE


I am surprised A7RIII still takes top marks for the best IQ. That sensor is getting old, its from A7RII days.
Click to expand...
TBH you can find a number of reviews and tests that show the Z7 is better than the A7RIII and vice versa. I think it’s splitting hairs and both sensors provide IQ that’s more than good enough for most applications and will be more than good enough for many years to come. We are getting very picky nowadays, it’s like the ‘criticism’ the D850 got for noise handling vs the D750, I could still use ISO 12800 without needing NR most of the time (y)
 
snerkler said:
TBH you can find a number of reviews and tests that show the Z7 is better than the A7RIII and vice versa. I think it’s splitting hairs and both sensors provide IQ that’s more than good enough for most applications and will be more than good enough for many years to come. We are getting very picky nowadays, it’s like the ‘criticism’ the D850 got for noise handling vs the D750, I could still use ISO 12800 without needing NR most of the time (y)
Click to expand...

splitting hair - yes may be. I decided to look around their claims about IQ and they weren't wrong. A7RIII is better, so not sure what credible review shows Z7 is better.
 
Last edited:
A lot of it comes down to personal preference lads. The Z7 looks the better camera ergonomically, it has a much better touch screen and menu system - these things matter to some. On IQ, post-processing will see images from all 3 much the same I reckon. If I was offered the choice it would be a tough one between the Z7 and A7RIII, much as I like Pany, I think they made a mistake creating such a hefty beast. The S1R is heavier than a D850
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top