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

Shoot Em Up said:
20% off at Camera Jungle. Use code FATHER20

e.g. mint A7iii for £1340
Click to expand...
There’s an excellent graded A7iii at £1535 so £1228 if you can workout where to put that code in (it was hide off screen unless I turned the iPad to landscape).

The FATHER20 code is much better than the FATHER15 code they are advertising in the banner at the top.

I got my 100-400 with a 10% code from them back in January. A 20% code is fantastic value for a buyer.
 
My half case came so my A7 is no longer naked...

ZPPrIlD.jpg


It needs to be well dressed as it's moving into my new bag...

Vzcc65g.jpg


I also have one of these, it's my second of these...

Ed1KR0k.jpg
 
Last edited:
Might be after another A7RII, any of you guys looking to shift one ?
 
With the current 20% code at camera jungle making the A6300 around £366 and the A6000 around £216 it’s made me think about those as a second body for remote camera stuff. What’s everyone’s opinion on those two cameras? How good is the A6000 or A6300 AF and ISO if I used it as a wildlife camera with a longer lens (though it may look a little small on the end of a 100-400).

I’ve been thinking of getting something as a second body as I like trying my luck with remote wide angle wildlife. It’s too much of a gamble using my main/only camera (A7R3) for that type of stuff as it’s too much of a gamble and most often ends up with nothing. With animal eye AF the A7R3 may be the better remote wide angle option and the A6000/A6300 could be used with a longer lens to get the normal wildlife photos at the same time.
 
I am thinking of buying the RX1RII because Sony refuses to release a 35mm f1.8-2 lens :eek:

Btw how long is this offer valid for?
 
nandbytes said:
An ok. Then again you may end up with a grey body buying used. So is it better to buy used or grey? ;)
Click to expand...

An easy answer to that really.

Anyone that chooses a used u.k or grey body at similar money over a brand new grey body needs a trip to the doctor. :ROFLMAO:
 
Some the discount code was posted I’ve been thinking about an A6000/A6300 as a second body option has started to make me think about my kit setup. I would like a second body to allow me to play around again with remote wildlife stuff. I currently have a 70-200 f4 that’s not used very often since I got a 100-400 (I haven’t used it since I got the 100-400). Between the 24-105 and 100-400 they pretty much cover the range I need. That makes the 70-200 f4 kind of surplus to requirements as it’s only benefit is a 1/2 to 1 stop faster aperture and that’s it’s lighter than the 100-400. Having read up on the A6000/A6300 and now the A6400 I’m thinking I may be best to trade in the 70-200 f4 for the A6400 as that would fit my needs for wildlife much better than the A600/A6300 especially when animal Eye AF comes in the summer. It would mean a 70-200 lens doesn’t sit in the cupboard relatively under used. Currently my thinking is the 70-200 would only be used for landscapes as a lighter option to carrying the 100-400 but it’s a lot of lens just to sit there most of the time for an occasional outing. The reason I bought it was because I tried to duplicate my 3 lens Nikon setup where the 70-200 was useful as I had a gap to fill between 120mm and 300mm. In hindsight I don’t think I thought about it enough that there wasn’t the issue if I went 24-105 and 100-400 on Sony. I bought the 70-200 f4 new 6 months ago from WEX so it’s practically in new condition so in great condition to sell on and has some warranty left too. It could be a good buy for someone.

So my questions are:

1) has anyone else had both a 70-200 f4 and 100-400 then let the 70-200 go? Have you regretted it?
2) any users of the A6400 on this thread? What’s your opinion of it and comparing it to the A73/A7R3 as a benchmark?
3) anyone else run a similar 2lens & 2 camera setup to what Im potentially thinking of?

I’m thinking two lenses covering the 24-400 range plus two bodies (full frame and APC-S) would be pretty much ideal for what I do (mainly wildlife with some landscapes thrown in).
 
rob-nikon said:
Some the discount code was posted I’ve been thinking about an A6000/A6300 as a second body option has started to make me think about my kit setup. I would like a second body to allow me to play around again with remote wildlife stuff. I currently have a 70-200 f4 that’s not used very often since I got a 100-400 (I haven’t used it since I got the 100-400). Between the 24-105 and 100-400 they pretty much cover the range I need. That makes the 70-200 f4 kind of surplus to requirements as it’s only benefit is a 1/2 to 1 stop faster aperture and that’s it’s lighter than the 100-400. Having read up on the A6000/A6300 and now the A6400 I’m thinking I may be best to trade in the 70-200 f4 for the A6400 as that would fit my needs for wildlife much better than the A600/A6300 especially when animal Eye AF comes in the summer. It would mean a 70-200 lens doesn’t sit in the cupboard relatively under used. Currently my thinking is the 70-200 would only be used for landscapes as a lighter option to carrying the 100-400 but it’s a lot of lens just to sit there most of the time for an occasional outing. The reason I bought it was because I tried to duplicate my 3 lens Nikon setup where the 70-200 was useful as I had a gap to fill between 120mm and 300mm. In hindsight I don’t think I thought about it enough that there wasn’t the issue if I went 24-105 and 100-400 on Sony. I bought the 70-200 f4 new 6 months ago from WEX so it’s practically in new condition so in great condition to sell on and has some warranty left too. It could be a good buy for someone.

So my questions are:

1) has anyone else had both a 70-200 f4 and 100-400 then let the 70-200 go? Have you regretted it?
2) any users of the A6400 on this thread? What’s your opinion of it and comparing it to the A73/A7R3 as a benchmark?
3) anyone else run a similar 2lens & 2 camera setup to what Im potentially thinking of?

I’m thinking two lenses covering the 24-400 range plus two bodies (full frame and APC-S) would be pretty much ideal for what I do (mainly wildlife with some landscapes thrown in).
Click to expand...

You might even get some change out of the 70-200 f/4 if you go grey with the 6400, it's down to £675 body only on E-Infinity
 
rob-nikon said:
Some the discount code was posted I’ve been thinking about an A6000/A6300 as a second body option has started to make me think about my kit setup. I would like a second body to allow me to play around again with remote wildlife stuff. I currently have a 70-200 f4 that’s not used very often since I got a 100-400 (I haven’t used it since I got the 100-400). Between the 24-105 and 100-400 they pretty much cover the range I need. That makes the 70-200 f4 kind of surplus to requirements as it’s only benefit is a 1/2 to 1 stop faster aperture and that’s it’s lighter than the 100-400. Having read up on the A6000/A6300 and now the A6400 I’m thinking I may be best to trade in the 70-200 f4 for the A6400 as that would fit my needs for wildlife much better than the A600/A6300 especially when animal Eye AF comes in the summer. It would mean a 70-200 lens doesn’t sit in the cupboard relatively under used. Currently my thinking is the 70-200 would only be used for landscapes as a lighter option to carrying the 100-400 but it’s a lot of lens just to sit there most of the time for an occasional outing. The reason I bought it was because I tried to duplicate my 3 lens Nikon setup where the 70-200 was useful as I had a gap to fill between 120mm and 300mm. In hindsight I don’t think I thought about it enough that there wasn’t the issue if I went 24-105 and 100-400 on Sony. I bought the 70-200 f4 new 6 months ago from WEX so it’s practically in new condition so in great condition to sell on and has some warranty left too. It could be a good buy for someone.

So my questions are:

1) has anyone else had both a 70-200 f4 and 100-400 then let the 70-200 go? Have you regretted it?
2) any users of the A6400 on this thread? What’s your opinion of it and comparing it to the A73/A7R3 as a benchmark?
3) anyone else run a similar 2lens & 2 camera setup to what Im potentially thinking of?

I’m thinking two lenses covering the 24-400 range plus two bodies (full frame and APC-S) would be pretty much ideal for what I do (mainly wildlife with some landscapes thrown in).
Click to expand...
That's a dilemma I frequently find myself in. In my Canon days I always had a 70-200 F4 but looking back I realise I only gave it much use when shooting the youth academy games for my local league football club, that was every week in the season. They've closed that academy so these days I really only do wildlife, family portraits and general stuff when I get out and about. ATM I have the 35mm F2.8, 24-70GM, the Sigma Art 135mm 1.8 and the 100-400GM in my bag to use with my A7R3.
Every time I see a Sony 70-200 F4 come up for sale I'm so tempted but with using the 100-400 for wildlife and the other lenses for all else I just can't justify getting the 70-200, I know it will gather dust.
As far as using the the A7R3 vs the A6300 don't forget the pixel density the crop sensor offers when cropping, the downside being coping with high ISO in the light in the UK, but then of course the FF sensor offers higher resolution.
 
Last edited:
rob-nikon said:
2) any users of the A6400 on this thread? What’s your opinion of it and comparing it to the A73/A7R3 as a benchmark?
Click to expand...

I have an A6400 but bought it for different reasons. I wanted a smaller, cheaper camera for family holidays etc. as I prefer not to risk my work stuff for this just because of the hassle, if it was stolen or damaged.

I have A7III's for work and had planned on using one of those for dedicated photo trips.

Since buying the A6400 though my mind has changed and it will be used for all of my photos trips and my family hols and when I am shooting something for myself it is often the camera I reach for first. The a.f on the A6400 is just superb, I had an A9 on loan for a month or so some time ago and in my personal opinion I would say the A6400 is better. That was before the recent A9 firmware update though. The A9 with the new firmware update is probably better, but I haven't used one. A.F performance is better than my A7III's and I am very happy with those. The smaller camera and smaller A.P.S.C lenses are great for travelling, I mostly use mine with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. The longest lens I have used with the A6400 is my 70-200 f/4 and it works great although the ergonomics of using a small body on a longer lens took a little getting used too.

The main disadvantages for me with the A6400, I already knew about before I bought it. It only has one control wheel and it doesn't have a joystick which I personally prefer to using the touchscreen or the buttons on the back to move the focus point. It doesn't have ibis either but I haven't really noticed that as being a problem. It also only has the one card slot although for my personal stuff I am not concerned about that. It also has the older, smaller battery which I was very concerned about before I bought it. Although I haven't actually found that to be much of an issue, battery life is better than I thought it would be.

I have taken it to 2 weddings with me, the first time I hated using it, I found it slower to use in terms of being able to change settings etc. Since then and after getting to know the camera a bit better I have taken it to another wedding mainly just to use with my 70-200 f/4 for an outdoor ceremony where I wanted to stay a bit more out of the way and it worked great. Due to the single card slot though it wouldn't be something I would use on a regular basis.

I am very happy with mine. If I woke up tomorrow morning and decided to stop photography as a career. I would happily sell of all of my A7III's and associated bits and be quite happy with just the A6400, my A.P.S.C lenses and my 70-200 f/4.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
I have an A6400 but bought it for different reasons. I wanted a smaller, cheaper camera for family holidays etc. as I prefer not to risk my work stuff for this just because of the hassle, if it was stolen or damaged.

I have A7III's for work and had planned on using one of those for dedicated photo trips.

Since buying the A6400 though my mind has changed and it will be used for all of my photos trips and my family hols and when I am shooting something for myself it is often the camera I reach for first. The a.f on the A6400 is just superb, I had an A9 on loan for a month or so some time ago and in my personal opinion I would say the A6400 is better. That was before the recent A9 firmware update though. The A9 with the new firmware update is probably better, but I haven't used one. A.F performance is better than my A7III's and I am very happy with those. The smaller camera and smaller A.P.S.C lenses are great for travelling, I mostly use mine with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. The longest lens I have used with the A6400 is my 70-200 f/4 and it works great although the ergonomics of using a small body on a longer lens took a little getting used too.

The main disadvantages for me with the A6400, I already knew about before I bought it. It only has one control wheel and it doesn't have a joystick which I personally prefer to using the touchscreen or the buttons on the back to move the focus point. It doesn't have ibis either but I haven't really noticed that as being a problem. It also only has the one card slot although for my personal stuff I am not concerned about that. It also has the older, smaller battery which I was very concerned about before I bought it. Although I haven't actually found that to be much of an issue, battery life is better than I thought it would be.

I have taken it to 2 weddings with me, the first time I hated using it, I found it slower to use in terms of being able to change settings etc. Since then and after getting to know the camera a bit better I have taken it to another wedding mainly just to use with my 70-200 f/4 for an outdoor ceremony where I wanted to stay a bit more out of the way and it worked great. Due to the single card slot though it wouldn't be something I would use on a regular basis.

I am very happy with mine. If I woke up tomorrow morning and decided to stop photography as a career. I would happily sell of all of my A7III's and associated bits and be quite happy with just the A6400, my A.P.S.C lenses and my 70-200 f/4.
Click to expand...
No way the a6400 has better af then the A9.. Please retest the A9 again mate
 
jonneymendoza said:
No way the a6400 has better af then the A9.. Please retest the A9 again mate
Click to expand...

Tracking on the A6400 vs the A9 pre the recent firmware update was better for me. :)

Have no interest in the A9 now, so won't be asking to borrow it again, no point.

Might take a bite at the new version when it comes out in September.
 
One of the things that does put me off the A6xxx series is the control dial arrangement. I much prefer the handling of the Panasonic RF style cameras which have dials at the top front and back. I'd imagine it's probably something that most people can get used to or at least live with.
 
Even for holidays especially once in a lifetime kind I'd really want dual SD card slots.
 
I'll be taking my A73 to Japan this year, instead of my Canon. Really tempted to get a 35/2.8 to reduce the size and bulk.
 
nandbytes said:
Even for holidays especially once in a lifetime kind I'd really want dual SD card slots.
Click to expand...

I used to feel the same before i started to travel a bit more. For the last few years I have done 6-8 dedicated photography trips a year plus 3-4 family holidays a year. The toss up is either light kit that is no bother at all to take anywhere or dual card slots. For me having the lighter kit is a much bigger advantage. I always mitigate loss by changing out cards regularly, I have hundreds of sd cards so it's not really an issue. Plus I always back the cards up at the end of the day. Realistically anyway there is no such thing for me as a once in a lifetime trip. I have been to pretty much everywhere I want to go several times.

The only place I haven't been that's on my "bucket list" is Israel and I will be ticking that off this year. If I had of done a trip like that a few years ago I would taken loads of gear, multiple bodies, lenses etc. but I have more sense now. Have no idea what I am gonna do next year, I actually can't think of where too go, which is annoying as I always like to have a trip in the pipeline as it gives me something to look forward too.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Even for holidays especially once in a lifetime kind I'd really want dual SD card slots.
Click to expand...
I'm of the same mind tbh, but up until this year when I bought the EM1-II I only had one card slot on my travel cameras (EM10, XT1, RX100-III, G7x) and (touch wood) never had a failure. I would of course be gutted if I did, but I did (and still do tbh) back up my photos each day on holiday onto my iPad and/or Verbatim.
 
f/2.8 said:
I used to feel the same before i started to travel a bit more. For the last few years I have done 6-8 dedicated photography trips a year plus 3-4 family holidays a year. The toss up is either light kit that is no bother at all to take anywhere or dual card slots. For me having the lighter kit is a much bigger advantage. I always mitigate loss by changing out cards regularly, I have hundreds of sd cards so it's not really an issue. Plus I always back the cards up at the end of the day. Realistically anyway there is no such thing for me as a once in a lifetime trip. I have been to pretty much everywhere I want to go several times.

The only place I haven't been that's on my "bucket list" is Israel and I will be ticking that off this year. If I had of done a trip like that a few years ago I would taken loads of gear, multiple bodies, lenses etc. but I have more sense now. Have no idea what I am gonna do next year, I actually can't think of where too go, which is annoying as I always like to have a trip in the pipeline as it gives me something to look forward too.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I do not have the time or funds to make that many trips a year or multiple trips to the same place.
Nice that you have that option and opportunity :)

After a bad experience recently unless I have immediate duplicates its risky!
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I'm of the same mind tbh, but up until this year when I bought the EM1-II I only had one card slot on my travel cameras (EM10, XT1, RX100-III, G7x) and (touch wood) never had a failure. I would of course be gutted if I did, but I did (and still do tbh) back up my photos each day on holiday onto my iPad and/or Verbatim.
Click to expand...

I too did not have dual card for a while and things were just fine. never had issues.
On A7RIII while I had dual card slots I wasn't really using it. Until recently when I took the card out after shooting and plugged it into the computer and it just wouldn't read. Then plugged it into the camera and it didn't read it either. The card worked again after formatting it and I have no idea why. Luckily it only had shots of items I wanted to put on ebay, so I reshot them which isn't a big deal apart from being time consuming and annoying.
If this could happen again then backing up every night doesn't really protect me adequately.
 
f/2.8 said:
I actually can't think of where too go, which is annoying as I always like to have a trip in the pipeline as it gives me something to look forward too.
Click to expand...

If I had the chance to do a photography holiday I'd really fancy Kazakhstan. I've been three times and think it's just fantastic with a mix of Soviet era to modern with wooden huts to extreme opulence and such variation once you get out of the cities. The last time I went I went on a fishing trip, it took about 8 hours to get to our destination and I'd love to do that trip again but not just drive straight through.

When I went getting a visa was a hassle but I think they're not needed now, so that's good. I went to visit my then GF who split her time between there and Belgium so she knew where to go but with some research or a local guide it'd be a great place for a photographic holiday. I'd go back in a second if I had the chance. Oh, and the food was excellent too. That GF lived in Costa Rica for a while and raved about it but TBH I was never that interested in going.
 
woof woof said:
One of the things that does put me off the A6xxx series is the control dial arrangement. I much prefer the handling of the Panasonic RF style cameras which have dials at the top front and back. I'd imagine it's probably something that most people can get used to or at least live with.
Click to expand...

It's surprising how quickly I found getting used to it.
I use an A6000 as my travel camera, typically shooting AP with the top dial for Aperture, and the back dial for EC, and sometimes manual (with auto ISO), when again I have top dial for Aperture and back dial for Shutter.
My 'main' camera is the good old A900, with the traditional front / rear dials - perhaps it's because the bodies are so different in size / shape that I don't get confused between them - if I was switching between an A7xxx and the A6000, where they bodies are much closer in size and shape, It might be more awkward.
 
woof woof said:
If I had the chance to do a photography holiday I'd really fancy Kazakhstan. I've been three times and think it's just fantastic with a mix of Soviet era to modern with wooden huts to extreme opulence and such variation once you get out of the cities. The last time I went I went on a fishing trip, it took about 8 hours to get to our destination and I'd love to do that trip again but not just drive straight through.

When I went getting a visa was a hassle but I think they're not needed now, so that's good. I went to visit my then GF who split her time between there and Belgium so she knew where to go but with some research or a local guide it'd be a great place for a photographic holiday. I'd go back in a second if I had the chance. Oh, and the food was excellent too. That GF lived in Costa Rica for a while and raved about it but TBH I was never that interested in going.
Click to expand...


Kazakhstan, you say :ROFLMAO:

Was your girlfriends name Natalia?

8EDC93DE-F4E2-4802-A054-92D0746757FB.jpeg


Sorry couldn’t resist.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top