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

woof woof said:
Talking about prices.

The Online Photographer has a bit on the Canon RP which apparently is the lowest priced FF camera ever which is a bit phasing as I was sure the A7 is cheaper.

I know the A7 is old tech now but AFAIK it's still in production and may actually be the real lowest priced FF camera ever but all these things need caveats so I'd add "new" to that, as in not used.

I do wish some caveat could be added to the Canon RP noise. Maybe something like the cheapest at introduction FF camera ever. That'd satisfy my ocd a bit.

Anyway.

I'm irritated by reading that over and over and over again.

I'll have a cup of tea and try and calm down :D


Linky. Don't get too stressed...

https://theonlinephotographer.typep...n-on-to-something-here-or-the-fun-factor.html
Click to expand...


I thought it was a given that they're talking about on-release prices. It's the only fair way to compare, the RP will be like £800 by early next year.

I'll be honest, if the RP had IBIS I would have seriously considered it. The older Sony cameras might match or even better it in terms of end result, but the RP has the ergo's, that full touch screen control that I love and with the adapter access to a tonne of old cheap EF lenses that would suit me just fine.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I thought it was a given that they're talking about on-release prices. It's the nly fair way to compare, the RP will be like £800 by early next year
Click to expand...

That's not what everyone says though. All they say is it's the cheapest ever.

I know it's me...

:D
 
Cagey75 said:
never used any of their AF lenses, in fact I've only ever used one Samyang lens and that was the 12mm F2 for M43. That lens is excellent, sharp from F2 on, very well built and the MF is a cinch using it. I've heard good things about some of their other MF offerings too, but AF is whole nother ball game.
Click to expand...

samyang MF lenses are indeed pretty good. I have mostly used their UWA options where MF is hardly an issue and easy. The samyang 8mm f2.8 fisheye is amazing and still my favourite fisheye lens really miss that on FF. The samyang 12mm f2 is another good one. The DSLR 14mm f2.8 is good for the price but comes with compromises.

On the AF front the 35mm f1.4 hits way about its price point for IQ. Optically, it matches and in some cases beats the native zeiss 35mm f1.4. The samyang 35mm f2.8 and 85mm f1.4 have reviewed really well optically. I had the 24mm f2.8 and its a so-so lens but its really small and reminds me of the old minolta 24mm 2.8 in a-mount so I liked it.
Their Achilles-heel is the AF. But if you don't do much tracking or care about fast action or video AF they are still plenty good.
 
addicknchips said:
That one on amazon wasn't actually being sold by amazon, so cashback wouldn't have applied
Click to expand...
It was. I had it on my basket, then this morning it alerted me to a price increase.
 
addicknchips said:
Read the rest of the posts.
Click to expand...
I did. Read mine, up to yesterday as in Thursday i had one in my basket sold and shipped by Amazon for £1699.

I'm going to have to just buy it next time it's at that price. Hopefully soon i could do with it before my trip in July.
 
Last edited:
robj20 said:
I did. Read mine, up to yesterday as in Thursday i had one in my basket sold and shipped by Amazon for £1699.

I'm going to have to just buy it next time it's at that price. Hopefully soon i could do with it before my trip in July.
Click to expand...

Happy days. The only one I found on there at that price was sold by BH photo and posted by amazon.
 
f/2.8 said:
Cash back isn’t valid on amazon warehouse stock.
Click to expand...

I've successfully claimed cashback for Warehouse stock from Fuji and Sony before. On the invoice it doesn't actually state it's Warehouse stock.

There is the risk that the serial number may have already been used for a cash back claim, but it's unlikely since most won't let you claim cash back until at least 30 days after purchase.
 
So last night we had a hare come round nibbling the plants in the meadow behind our house.
Hare today by Toni Ertl, on Flickr

A few years back someone gave me a 600mm Sigma mirror lens with CY mount, and this is the first time I've used it. Focusing was 'interesting' with the low-contrast scene (6pm-ish, heavy overcast) and I had to use ISO128000 to keep shutter speeds up. I'm not overly impressed with noise handling TBH and wouldn't have said it was any better than my old D610 at this speed - had to process much more than normal to get something OK at this size, though the lens may be partly responsible for a lack of fine detail.

OTOH happy with this from Monday on the 24-105.
Handlebars by Toni Ertl, on Flickr
 
OK so took delivery of the Sony after selling my Fuji gear. First Impressions it's going to take a little while to get used to, but once I set up the C buttons I will be fine. With the Fuji everything was there on top and the menu was easier to use.

First few photos I took were blurred but I'm using the kit lens for now so I've upped the iso.

Files are a lot easier to use in lightroom and I like the colours coming out.
 
Ok, so I'm trying to use the imaging edit app for android to connect to the camera and it's a bit of a pain.

I've got it connected via wifi but this means having to disconnect my phones wifi too - a bit of a pain. Has anyone managed to figure out if you can connect via bluetooth instead? It would make far more sense and I do have the camera and my phone paired via bluetooth, but that doesn't seem to do anything!!

A definite area for improvement methinks!
 
draiman said:
Ok, so I'm trying to use the imaging edit app for android to connect to the camera and it's a bit of a pain.

I've got it connected via wifi but this means having to disconnect my phones wifi too - a bit of a pain. Has anyone managed to figure out if you can connect via bluetooth instead? It would make far more sense and I do have the camera and my phone paired via bluetooth, but that doesn't seem to do anything!!

A definite area for improvement methinks!
Click to expand...

It's not the app, can your phone connect to 2 WiFi connections at the same time? Nope.

Bluetooth would be ridiculously slow to transfer.
 
twist said:
It's not the app, can your phone connect to 2 WiFi connections at the same time? Nope.

Bluetooth would be ridiculously slow to transfer.
Click to expand...
I never said I couldn't get it to connect through WiFi. It's just not as convenient. I'd only ever be sending a small jpeg to my phone so that would be fine via Bluetooth. I was thinking more for the remote trigger options though.

Id rather use my phone than have to buy and carry about a separate accessory.
 
ancient_mariner said:
IIRC the camera should send a live feed to your phone.
Click to expand...
It does indeed. It sends a live stream and is pretty good actually.

So is there any point connecting the camera to my phone via Bluetooth? Or is Bluetooth designed for some other use?
 
draiman said:
It does indeed. It sends a live stream and is pretty good actually.

So is there any point connecting the camera to my phone via Bluetooth? Or is Bluetooth designed for some other use?
Click to expand...

Y'know, I've no idea, other than possibly a remote shutter release. TBH Bluetooth seems a battery-draining waste of space except for audio streaming (and even then it seems a bit iffy).
 
Bluetooth can barely do audio. Anyway no Bluetooth can't give you the functionality i.e. live feed connection to camera.
Bluetooth historically wasn't designed for audio either. It has a limited bandwidth.
 
nandbytes said:
Bluetooth can barely do audio. Anyway no Bluetooth can't give you the functionality i.e. live feed connection to camera.
Bluetooth historically wasn't designed for audio either. It has a limited bandwidth.
Click to expand...

Thats why I laugh when people say their £25 bluetooth Anker speaker sounds better than a Sonos.

Bluetooth doesnt have the range either.
 
Right, well I'll just ignore the bluetooth functions then. That's the easy way.

For what I need, the remote functions on the app will save me buying a separate accessory (right now anyway!).
 
twist said:
Thats why I laugh when people say their £25 bluetooth Anker speaker sounds better than a Sonos.

Bluetooth doesnt have the range either.
Click to expand...

I don't know much about the inner workings of Bluetooth, but I know that my soundbar would be loud enough to upset the neighbours if we didn't live in a detached house when I crank it up sending music via my phone.
 
Cagey75 said:
I don't know much about the inner workings of Bluetooth, but I know that my soundbar would be loud enough to upset the neighbours if we didn't live in a detached house when I crank it up sending music via my phone.
Click to expand...

Loudness doesn't always equal quality though. Bluetooth can't carry the same amount of data as WiFi.
 
twist said:
Loudness doesn't always equal quality though. Bluetooth can't carry the same amount of data as WiFi.
Click to expand...
T_J_G said:
Loud doesn’t equal quality
Click to expand...


I think anyone not tone deaf knows this, it's stating the extremely obvious. They have very good sound, better than some decent - more pricey hi-fi systems I've had tbh.

A bit like cameras, there isn't really any that have bad image quality these days, once you step into the £300 range for any sound system, it's going to have decent sound. That's what my soundbar cost at least and it would have been a lower end model about 5yrs back when I bought the set

Tbh I only ever use it when we're having a bit of a party, which is few and far between these days - BT is just quick and easy and anyone with a phone can hook up to it so it's good for taking turns running the music
 
Last edited:
All the audio data transmitted via. Bluetooth is compressed and it's lossy. This is due to the bandwidth limitation. As I said Bluetooth wasn't designed for audio streaming.
I still use Bluetooth headphones because it's small and convenient when travelling on trains and especially London underground. It's not exactly for quality if one really appreciates music.
 
nandbytes said:
All the audio data transmitted via. Bluetooth is compressed and it's lossy. This is due to the bandwidth limitation. As I said Bluetooth wasn't designed for audio streaming.
I still use Bluetooth headphones because it's small and convenient when travelling on trains and especially London underground. It's not exactly for quality if one really appreciates music.
Click to expand...

Depends on your source though doesn't it? iTunes is AAC which is easily supported by Bluetooth (doesn't need to be compressed?) so you won't see any different with a wired connection. Aptx-hd is near lossless so they say? There are those that say they can easily tell the difference, and blind tests where people couldn't. I'm deaf in one ear now so couldn't care less! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top