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

nandbytes said:
The difference in bokeh is obvious between f1.4 and f1.8. the shallower DoF at F1.4 is noticeable.
Click to expand...

Only when we see them side by side, if he only showed the 1.8 I think for most people the DOF would be plenty shallow enough. The 1.8 looked sharper, that may count more for some. Looks a tidy little lens, that and the 85 1.8 would be 90% of all I'd need for this system
 
G0Q19My.jpg
 
I'm going to return the 50 f1.8. Forget eye AF, the lens simply can't keep up, and the eye box goes all over the subject. By comparison the Sammy 50 was super-fast and accurate.

Went to a children's party yesterday and was lucky if I got 1 in 10 in focus. The 24-105 is MUCH better.
 
135mm f1.8 review featured on the rumor site... Direct link follows...

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-fe-135mm-f-1-8-g-master-lens-review-33641

"Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 G Master Verdict
The Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 G Master is indeed a very impressive lens. In terms of design, ergonomics and performance it cannot be faulted. It is expensive, and that is really the only downside to a lens that will produce the goods and offers the potential of a very long service life.

A superb choice for Sony FE mount full frame users and as such Highly Recommended."

That's nice.

:D
 
ancient_mariner said:
I'm going to return the 50 f1.8. Forget eye AF, the lens simply can't keep up, and the eye box goes all over the subject. By comparison the Sammy 50 was super-fast and accurate.

Went to a children's party yesterday and was lucky if I got 1 in 10 in focus. The 24-105 is MUCH better.
Click to expand...

That's a shame as it's apparently a very sharp lens, once you do lock focus.
 
Cagey75 said:
That's a shame as it's apparently a very sharp lens, once you do lock focus.
Click to expand...
Optically it's better than I dared hope and better than a Nikon G, but it focuses slower than an old screw drive lens. I really like the crisp high contrast output, but it's as frustrating to use as a long lens on an early Minolta af camera.
 
Has anyone tried the Sony ADP-MAA adapter for using the old Minolta flash mount on the new MI mounts? Thinking of buying one so I can continue to use my F58AM flash with my new A6400. I also see another version of the adapter made by Pixel, model TF-335.
 
woof woof said:
135mm f1.8 review featured on the rumor site... Direct link follows...

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/sony-fe-135mm-f-1-8-g-master-lens-review-33641

"Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 G Master Verdict
The Sony FE 135mm f/1.8 G Master is indeed a very impressive lens. In terms of design, ergonomics and performance it cannot be faulted. It is expensive, and that is really the only downside to a lens that will produce the goods and offers the potential of a very long service life.

A superb choice for Sony FE mount full frame users and as such Highly Recommended."

That's nice.

:D
Click to expand...
Is it nice enough for you to get one? Hehe
 
Sneeks said:
Has anyone tried the Sony ADP-MAA adapter for using the old Minolta flash mount on the new MI mounts? Thinking of buying one so I can continue to use my F58AM flash with my new A6400. I also see another version of the adapter made by Pixel, model TF-335.
Click to expand...

I have used Sony adapter and it works pretty well (afaik retains all the native functionality too). Hard to find one sometimes though
Never used or heard of the Pixel one.
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
Is it nice enough for you to get one? Hehe
Click to expand...

Dunno what I'd use one for.

I have f3.5 and f2.8 film era ones and I can't remember the last time I used either but having said that one of my favorite pictures of Mrs WW was taken with my Rokkor f2.8. I can see how one would be lovely for portraits but I prefer more casual shots with some context and with more than one iris in the DoF so 24 to 55mm is mostly what I use with the odd 85mm picture thrown in. As for other uses, 135mm is too short for moon shots, squirrels and birds etc.

I really liked the Sigma 150mm f2.8 macro but that was a macro and even though it was only f2.8 it was pretty good for longer lens people shots too.

So, dunno what I'd want this lens for even though it's excellent :D

Good luck to those who want or have one. I'd imagine those who do mostly do people shots with them?

I suppose peeps do know why 135mm lenses became popular?

Clue... RF's. :D
 
woof woof said:
On another site people are discussing higher resolution sensors and the question of why anyone would use them as diffraction will be visible at f5.6 came up and on that note here's a short piece answering the question, why f16?
Click to expand...

Seems to happen every time they bump the sensor resolution.
 
f/2.8 said:
It's the delivery driver I feel for to be honest. :LOL:



View attachment 251302


So is it any good?
Click to expand...

I'll know after these 4 back to back weddings coming up man. Quick look at it, AF seems faster, manual focus for a focus by wire lens is the best I've used. Video AF seems to be vastly better.

Physically it's fine but I can feel the weight difference after about an hour of use in my forearms lol. I'm keeping the other 35 for the wife to use
 
F/1.4 said:
I'll know after these 4 back to back weddings coming up man. Quick look at it, AF seems faster, manual focus for a focus by wire lens is the best I've used. Video AF seems to be vastly better.

Physically it's fine but I can feel the weight difference after about an hour of use in my forearms lol. I'm keeping the other 35 for the wife to use
Click to expand...

I have decided it's probably too heavy for me especially for a lens I would carry all day.

4 in a row. :ROFLMAO:

Screw that, the year before last I did 5 in 7 days with 4 in a row. Never again was dead on my feet for about a week after. Went through 2 cases of redbull.

I don't even like taking 2 in a row any more unless they are local.

In saying that I did 3 in a row last week but 2 of them where small easy local weddings so wasn't to bad, but even that has me knackered. Not out again until Thursday and Saturday, thankfully.

Won't be doing it again, best of luck!
 
f/2.8 said:
I have decided it's probably too heavy for me especially for a lens I would carry all day.

4 in a row. :ROFLMAO:

Screw that, the year before last I did 5 in 7 days with 4 in a row. Never again was dead on my feet for about a week after. Went through 2 cases of redbull.

I don't even like taking 2 in a row any more unless they are local.

In saying that I did 3 in a row last week but 2 of them where small easy local weddings so wasn't to bad, but even that has me knackered. Not out again until Thursday and Saturday, thankfully.

Won't be doing it again, best of luck!
Click to expand...

Aye man. Video gigs are even worse with all the gear lol
 
I try not to do 2 in a row and with where i shoot mostly it is impossible anyway to get from one end of the country to the other since I always stay until beyond midnight. Physically it is very draining to do that with another 7am start and do another 16-18 hour days.

(Yes I am mad)
 
Raymond Lin said:
I try not to do 2 in a row and with where i shoot mostly it is impossible anyway to get from one end of the country to the other since I always stay until beyond midnight. Physically it is very draining to do that with another 7am start and do another 16-18 hour days.

(Yes I am mad)
Click to expand...

Why do you stay to midnight you rocket?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top