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

Rizvan said:
Or maybe its down to my lack of Lightroom tweaking :(
I shot the photos on ISO 200 f9 with the 55mm f1.8 with WB set to Flash.
In LR I then used the Auto Exposure, Lens Correction buttons followed by the clarity tool for the eyes, eyebrows and lips. :)
Click to expand...

Could be but it is kind of Sonys colour, you can see it in the DPReview studio comparisons, yellow/green bias, Canons are reds etc.
 
Rizvan said:
Or maybe its down to my lack of Lightroom tweaking :(
I shot the photos on ISO 200 f9 with the 55mm f1.8 with WB set to Flash.
In LR I then used the Auto Exposure, Lens Correction buttons followed by the clarity tool for the eyes, eyebrows and lips. :)
Click to expand...

Is there any advantage to using one of the WB presets?

I sometimes use a custom WB and then probably use the eyedropper in raw and sometimes fiddle with sliders in raw for best effect... rather effect and maybe not for accuracy. Art over reality :D Occasionally I have something in the frame I can use for WB (or at least a start) with the intent of cropping it out.
 
woof woof said:
Is there any advantage to using one of the WB presets?

I sometimes use a custom WB and then probably use the eyedropper in raw and sometimes fiddle with sliders in raw for best effect... rather effect and maybe not for accuracy. Art over reality :D Occasionally I have something in the frame I can use for WB (or at least a start) with the intent of cropping it out.
Click to expand...

I was using some studio lights which had a yellowy tint to them so yes, it was really worth using the Flash white balance .... or so I was told by the pro tog at the event.
 
Rizvan said:
I was using some studio lights which had a yellowy tint to them so yes, it was really worth using the Flash white balance .... or so I was told by the pro tog at the event.
Click to expand...

Ah. Maybe there is some advantage then.

Actually I've just remembered the biggest advantage to me of using a custom WB... it stops people looking at the back of my camera saying "It's all yellow/red/blue that." :D
 
Last edited:
Hi all i did a shoot today with flashes on my sony a7r2 for the first time and struggled to see through the evf as i killed of the ambiant light and therefore set the exposure so it is pitch black so that my strobe lights lite u the scene.However, the EVF was also blank and i could not find an option(if any) to view the scene not based on my manual setting, but based on the scenes ambient light so i can manually focus/see the scene!

Any settings to change this?

Because of this, i had to revert to my trusted canon 5d3 for half the shoot. I wanted to use my a7r2 to see its limitations and to test it in an actual photo shoot and see if it can do the job.
 
I hope you can find a combination your happy with, Chris. As I've said several times I'm quite happy with the 35mm f2.8 but I could be tempted to replace it with a f1.8 lens of the same quality and bulk if that could be possible. Perhaps this is only a state of mind for me though and maybe f2.8 is just enough :D

And...

There are some interesting A7 related threads at Luminous Landscape. They get a bit technical for my liking but even so some threads make interesting reading and it's nice to see a different take on things from the highly skilled and technical people there. This threat is about the A7rII v medium format...

http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=104061.msg855899;boardseen#new

LL mentioned a while ago that they'd be posting an in depth review of the A7rII, for those of us who don't own one it might be worth a read when/if it appears.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Hi all i did a shoot today with flashes on my sony a7r2 for the first time and struggled to see through the evf as i killed of the ambiant light and therefore set the exposure so it is pitch black so that my strobe lights lite u the scene.However, the EVF was also blank and i could not find an option(if any) to view the scene not based on my manual setting, but based on the scenes ambient light so i can manually focus/see the scene!

Any settings to change this?

Because of this, i had to revert to my trusted canon 5d3 for half the shoot. I wanted to use my a7r2 to see its limitations and to test it in an actual photo shoot and see if it can do the job.
Click to expand...

"Menu > Custom Settings 2 > Live View Display > Setting Effect

Set it to Off"

I've just found this at;

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55668034

Cheers
Steve
 
Ordered the 70-200 f4 today after trying the 28-70 decided 2 things zoom is my thing and the 28-70 is just the wrong range for me.

I have not yet decided if I will cancel my place on waiting list for the Batis no rush

Also ordered a thinktank pro belt as I don't enjoy neck straps
 
jonneymendoza said:
Hi all i did a shoot today with flashes on my sony a7r2 for the first time and struggled to see through the evf as i killed of the ambiant light and therefore set the exposure so it is pitch black so that my strobe lights lite u the scene.However, the EVF was also blank and i could not find an option(if any) to view the scene not based on my manual setting, but based on the scenes ambient light so i can manually focus/see the scene!

Any settings to change this?

Because of this, i had to revert to my trusted canon 5d3 for half the shoot. I wanted to use my a7r2 to see its limitations and to test it in an actual photo shoot and see if it can do the job.
Click to expand...

I think I know what you mean and on my A7...
- Go to the second menu setting from the left... the little cog.
- Go to page 2.
- Scroll down to "Live View Display... Setting Effect On" and change it to off.
What should happen then is your display should remain the same regardless of what aperture, shutter speed or compo you dial in.
Hope that's right.

Just seen that Steve beat me to it as I typed :D
 
jonneymendoza said:
Hi all i did a shoot today with flashes on my sony a7r2 for the first time and struggled to see through the evf as i killed of the ambiant light and therefore set the exposure so it is pitch black so that my strobe lights lite u the scene.However, the EVF was also blank and i could not find an option(if any) to view the scene not based on my manual setting, but based on the scenes ambient light so i can manually focus/see the scene!

Any settings to change this?
Click to expand...
Yes there is - "Live View Display". I think it's on one of the cog menu pages from memory.

In one mode it will set the display to exactly what you set it to with live exposure preview. It's the "WYSIWYG" mode - so in a dark studio with your camera set at f8/ISO100/etc you'll get a black screen, because without the external flash, that's exactly what you'd get.

In the other mode the display will try to give you a "normal" exposure so no matter what setting your camera is set to, you'll be able to see hat you're pointing it at.

Generally you want to be in the first mode unless you're doing OCF, in which case you'll want the other one.
 
Ken Rockwell has posted his review! :D

http://www.kenrockwell.com/sony/a7r-ii.htm

Of course it's highly personal and I think contains contradictions...

"Most of the time when you need to set something, you have to forage through the entire menu system to find it.

Many buttons are programmable, so if you have the patience, you can get it to work extremely well."

Oh, that's that then :D

"Hobbyists are completely different from photographers, photographic artists or pro shooters. The problem with this Sony is that even though it has few weak points and many, many highlights, ultimately its images don't look as uniformly superb as what I get from my Canon or Nikon DSLRs right out of the camera. This is due to the simple fact that the look it gets with its built-in camera profiles never really astonishes me. Ultimately I want very, very Velvia vivid for my photos of things, and at Vivid and +3 saturation, the A7R II just isn't cranked as high as I want my colors. As shot, it's too dull for my work compared to the Nikon or Canon cameras cranked all the way up.

The problem with the A7R II for use by a photographic artist like myself is that while A7R II images look great, its colors never look as great in real-world shots as I get directly from my Canons and Nikons. Most people are hobbyists and won't notice the subtle things I do, and therefore I certainly recommend the A7R II, but for serious work, the Sony isn't there yet.

Great color rendition is an artist's concept and has nothing to do with how well a sensor reproduces color charts in a lab. Color rendition comes from how well a camera makes real-world colors look in a final image, and also has a lot to do with how well Auto White Balance sees the world."

Hmmm. Ok.

"Raw shooters are a different breed and what they get will depend on what software they use and how they use it, but for those of us who need our cameras to deliver perfect images directly from camera with no need for external processing, the Sony never really excels — if you shoot as many different cameras as I do and are as sensitive as I am to their look."

I feel slightly dazed.
Thanks Ken.
 
fyi on wb with flash, it can change with flash power and duration, more so on the cheaper or not as good flashes
 
Anyone getting up at 3am to see if you can see the rusty red supermoon lunar eclipse?

I'm so excited I wont sleep :D

Next one is 2023.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Anyone getting up at 3am to see if you can see the rusty red supermoon lunar eclipse?

I'm so excited I wont sleep :D

Next one is 2023.
Click to expand...

Not purposefully, but if the kids wake me up at 3am (not unlikely lol) then I'll grab some shots. If not, 8 years isn't too long to wait. Sony and Fuji might have some decent long lenses out by then too :D
 
I'll probably try my MFT and 50-200mm but it'll be cloudy :(
 
It was clear here but I didn't get any useable shots.

I tried with my GX7 and 45-200mm but the f5.6 aperture didn't give me a lot of chance so I switched to an old 135mm f2.8 and got slightly better results but could only get a decent exposure at 1 second, not fast enough. Will try again next time... with my A7.

Really quite cold here, I was surprised to see frosty cars, ISO 25,600.
 
Last edited:
Re WB, if your shooting RAW why care what the camera is set to when its your RAW software that decides the WB? The only thing in camera WB effects is the image preview.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Thanks Dan, how does it perform? Is it worth the money?
Click to expand...

I picked this over the loxia because I was getting into weddings - and really did not want to do without AF. The Zeiss Distagon on my Canon was one of my favourite lenses, but found it difficult to MF with OVF.

So an AF Zeiss Distagon? :) sign me up, IQ and rendering are great.

I took it on holiday as my sole lens with the A7S on a couple of occasions, Croatia probably a good example for it.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/62198876@N02/albums/72157654139098008
 
is the a7s ii released yet? I am planning to get that alongside a a7r ii :)
 
twist said:
lol. Decided on your replacement lenses yet?
Click to expand...

It's a bit gut wrenching tbh. However on Thursday I was walking my daily mile and a half stroll to the train station with my gym bag that also had my Nikon with sigma 85 1.4 attached. The extra weight I was noticing was really reinforcing the idea that I need to go the gym more often. It did make my think back to my a7 with the 55mm and what a combo that is. If only the a7 had a quieter shutter...

I want the 85 batis but am stunned at the production issue they are having. i may go for the 28 f2 for landscape. 70-200 f4 perhaps. Also having thoughts of the metabones and an old Tamron macro.
 
addicknchips said:
It's a bit gut wrenching tbh. However on Thursday I was walking my daily mile and a half stroll to the train station with my gym bag that also had my Nikon with sigma 85 1.4 attached. The extra weight I was noticing was really reinforcing the idea that I need to go the gym more often. It did make my think back to my a7 with the 55mm and what a combo that is. If only the a7 had a quieter shutter...

I want the 85 batis but am stunned at the production issue they are having. i may go for the 28 f2 for landscape. 70-200 f4 perhaps. Also having thoughts of the metabones and an old Tamron macro.
Click to expand...

The 85 1.8G setup and a D750 is 1100g vs A7rii Batis 1100g. Bear that in mind. The extra weight will mostly be the type of lens you use, if they are equivalent they will weigh the same or it can swing either way it times. The Nikon D750 and 70-200 f4 is 1600g vs Sony setup 1465g, but then you might add a grip to balance the A7 out.
 
Met a chap yesterday who had sold his D800e and Nikon lenses and moved to an A7rii plus old FD lenses, helped his back and saved him a load of cash to boot.

Some of those new FE mount lenses are heavy beasts though.
 
JYC said:
Met a chap yesterday who had sold his D800e and Nikon lenses and moved to an A7rii plus old FD lenses, helped his back and saved him a load of cash to boot.

Some of those new FE mount lenses are heavy beasts though.
Click to expand...

Couldve saved himself even more cash by just buying old nikon lenses.
 
twist said:
The 85 1.8G setup and a D750 is 1100g vs A7rii Batis 1100g. Bear that in mind. The extra weight will mostly be the type of lens you use, if they are equivalent they will weigh the same or it can swing either way it times. The Nikon D750 and 70-200 f4 is 1600g vs Sony setup 1465g, but then you might add a grip to balance the A7 out.
Click to expand...

Ahh the voice of reason. Shhhhh!
Another problem is I won't be able to shoot any wildlife stuff that requires a longer lens.
 
addicknchips said:
Sod it. Think I'm going to buy an a7rii and sell all my Nikon gear. Takes deep breath...
Click to expand...

Totally depends what you want to shoot, you.mention wildlife later if you shoot that don't bother changing from the D750 as the A7rII isn't going to be up to it.

There are shortages of really good lenses outaide the 55mm f1.8 and the 16-35 which gets rave reviews, the Batis lenses seem ideal (25mm) for what I'd like but I'm discounting them for now as it seems it could be 2016 before there are any available!
 
chrism_scotland said:
Totally depends what you want to shoot, you.mention wildlife later if you shoot that don't bother changing from the D750 as the A7rII isn't going to be up to it.

There are shortages of really good lenses outaide the 55mm f1.8 and the 16-35 which gets rave reviews, the Batis lenses seem ideal (25mm) for what I'd like but I'm discounting them for now as it seems it could be 2016 before there are any available!
Click to expand...

It's the d610 I have, not the d750. Wildlife stuff is done once or twice a year. And now I have a baby I don't have time to sit by the window waiting for something to land near the bird feeder.
Portraits, landscape and macro will probably feature most going forward.
I've read a lot of hate for the 24-70 f4. Is that simply because it's prices and f4?
 
addicknchips said:
It's the d610 I have, not the d750. Wildlife stuff is done once or twice a year. And now I have a baby I don't have time to sit by the window waiting for something to land near the bird feeder.
Portraits, landscape and macro will probably feature most going forward.
I've read a lot of hate for the 24-70 f4. Is that simply because it's prices and f4?
Click to expand...

I've been looking at the 24-70 actually and there are very mixed reports, mist seem to say it's little better optically than the 28-70 although it is better built, I've had a few tell me that even at f8 it's not great which is a shame although it does seem there is a lot of difference between different copies of the lens. Price wise if it was good I don't think the £800 is too ridoculous when you considered that the Nikon 24-120 f4 is about £700 new in the UK.
 
chrism_scotland said:
I've been looking at the 24-70 actually and there are very mixed reports, mist seem to say it's little better optically than the 28-70 although it is better built, I've had a few tell me that even at f8 it's not great which is a shame although it does seem there is a lot of difference between different copies of the lens. Price wise if it was good I don't think the £800 is too ridoculous when you considered that the Nikon 24-120 f4 is about £700 new in the UK.
Click to expand...

But the Nikon has 50 more mm, less consistency issues and its available elsewhere for much less (£+-220 difference). From what Ive read the 24-70 is best avoided.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
But the Nikon has 50 more mm, less consistency issues and its available elsewhere for much less (£+-220 difference). From what Ive read the 24-70 is best avoided.
Click to expand...

True but cost is moot as the Sony is also (-£200) elsewhere, my point was that "IF" the Sony lens was good optically the price isn't really an issue.
 
chrism_scotland said:
True but cost is moot as the Sony is also (-£200) elsewhere, my point was that "IF" the Sony lens was good optically the price isn't really an issue.
Click to expand...

I never meant that both are available elsewhere cheaper..... The biggest saving is buying the D750 24-120 kit grey where the lens sets you back about £360 vs Sony lens cost of £600. Huuuge difference.
 
Last edited:
EVF is miles better, even while its in its infancy its still offers more benefits over an OVF than negatives. I simply couldn't go back now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top