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

woof woof said:
a range of f1.8 lenses which are compact and reasonably priced in the context of the system (and to me something between £500 to 600 is reasonable priced)
Click to expand...

This is the bit I take issue with.

£600 f1.8 lenses are not reasonable if you can get a body for that much!
 
Swanseajack said:
Alan, If you want smaller and lighter primes, why don't you consider buying a D750 and some of the smaller but excellent performing primes. I have the 35mm f2 and 50mm 1.8g and to be honest they are tiny on the body along with the AF it makes life so much easier.

With the excellent grip, I feel this set up is so much better that the XT1 I had previously and the A7 I trialled before purchasing.
Click to expand...

I had a 5D and I suspect that the Nikon system will be more or less the same bulk. For me personally a DSLR is too big to carry about and too attention grabbing and this is something that I worry about. I'm much happier with MFT size wise but IMO it's not quite there yet image quality wise to replace a FF DSLR set up and there are a couple of issues with the Sony Nex (or whatever it's called now) and the Fuji systems which put me off.

If the A7 series hadn't come along I'd probably still have my 5D and MFT but I might have swapped a couple of my 5D lenses for more compact ones. Happily for me though the A7 series exists and paired with a smallish prime (I have the 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8) is right up my street and with a few small reservations I'm quite happy. I say quite so as not to appear a fan boy :D Yes there are issues and I have my little personal gripes but all in all it's the best system for me at the mo, me being a slightly wide through normal to slightly longish prime user.

PS. Forgot to mention that another reason for switching to CSC's is that I like old lenses and it's much easier to use them on a CSC with the focusing aids.
 
Last edited:
JYC said:
This is the bit I take issue with.

£600 f1.8 lenses are not reasonable if you can get a body for that much!
Click to expand...

Fair enough but what saves the relatively expensive f1.8 55mm for me is that it's pretty good, better than the Sigma 50mm f1.4 I used to have and I think it's reasonably priced considering what it is and within the context of the system. I have used more expensive lenses on my Panasonic G1 and that's worth about 2p.
 
Looks like there will be some faster zooms soon, 24-70 f2.8 G incoming.
 
jbw said:
Hi,
Some snaps taken with my Sony A7R2 using Zeiss Batis 25mm & 85 mm lens (other than the inside of the Grand central which was shot using Samsung Full frame 12mm Fisheye lens). So glad I changed from Canon & lugging around all the heavy kit.
Cheers
James
14 by james boardman-woodend, on Flickr
03 by james boardman-woodend, on Flickr
John Lewis by james boardman-woodend, on Flickr
Grand Central Station- Birmingham by james boardman-woodend, on Flickr
Click to expand...
HI where did you get the batis lenses from?
 
Lovely forrest shots there James :D

Care to post some thoughts on the 85mm?
 
chrism_scotland said:
@woof woof Alan I would like to apologise, I shouldn't have made personal remarks and kept it on topic, so I'm sorry for my rant!
Click to expand...
Hey no problem Chris. Although I'm a people person there's a reason I've spent so much of my life staring at circuit boards... I'm a bit of an odd geek and it's no surprise that I cause a few rants from time to time.
 
jbw said:
A truly lovely lens - not too heavy or large and for those ( like myself) not used to shooting fully open at f1.8 its a revelation. Very much enjoying it!
James
Click to expand...
James, forgot to ask about the bokeh. I've read that it divides opinion so if you get time for some more feedback would like to know your views.

At the moment when I want an 85mm I use a manual Minolta Rokkor but will probably buy an AF 85 at some point.
 
Last edited:
A brief bit from Steve Huff on the SLR Magic 50mm f1.1...

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/11/25/the-slr-magic-50-1-1-for-e-mount-at-349-happy-holidays/

This might be better than my Minolta 50mm f1.2. I'll follow this with interest.

Actually, just reminded myself that this lens has a clickless aperture ring and that would be a problem for me as I often focus wide open and then stop down without taking my eye from the VF counting the clicks. Setting the aperture with a clickless lens would be guesswork.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
James, forgot to ask about the bokeh. I've read that it divides opinion so if you get time for some more feedback would like to know your views.

At the moment when I want an 85mm I use a manual Minolta Rokkor but will probably buy an AF 85 at some point.
Click to expand...
The bokeh is lovely and creamy - it also has that Zeiss pop you get in the mid tones. I used to have a Zeiss Distagon for use on my Canon camera - very similar if you have ever used one.
James
 
Thanks for that. No, I haven't used one. My only 85's have been the Sigma f1.4 which I thought was excellent and old Minolta Rokkor and Olympus Zuiko f2's and Canon fd f1.8.
 
woof woof said:
Fair enough but what saves the relatively expensive f1.8 55mm for me is that it's pretty good, better than the Sigma 50mm f1.4 I used to have and I think it's reasonably priced considering what it is and within the context of the system. I have used more expensive lenses on my Panasonic G1 and that's worth about 2p.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth I own the 55, the 35 1.4 and I'm buying the batis 85 and I shoot the canon 85 1.2, I think they're expensive but I bought them anyway. The 35 55 and 85 batis all being more than double the cost of the already stellar sigma/art series lenses and with slower apertures to boot

I'm probably an unusual case in that I don't really look for small lenses, I use the a7 for its EVF, stabiliser and face detection focus accuracy, if the body was dslr sized I'd be even happier, the 35 1.4 is great, I wish the 55 and the 85 were also 1.4, and I feel they should be for cost, I feel like I'm paying for compact size and weight when I really want to be paying for aperture size, and having such limited options means I get what I'm given, although I will consider getting the sigma 85 and 50 1.4 to use on the a7 but imo focus just isn't as good in lower light, which is where I mostly shoot

I also owned the 50 1.8 stm, 50 1.4 canon and now looking to buy the 1.2- sharpness doesn't really push my buttons compared to bokeh, rendering, colour, and mainly aperture.

Perhaps I should have gone with a Sony a99!

I'm just waiting for a third party manufacturer to start making lenses for the system
 
Last edited:
jbw said:
Enjoy - I found mine to be of excellent quality. Used it for portraits, street photography & landscapes - very good wide open.
James
Click to expand...

Thanks. Hoping it will compliment the 55 1.8. Love how that lens renders bokeh
 
It's not going to set the world on fire, but the a7RII has finally got its first meaningful UK price cut, £2399 at CameraWorld.
 
chrism_scotland said:
I have to admit looking at a few of the deals today I'm going to have to try very hard not to give the A7ii another go....
Click to expand...

Cheaper price won't make it any better suited for you Chris!

Spend the money on a holiday instead, BA are doing some good deals for Black Friday :p
 
JYC said:
Cheaper price won't make it any better suited for you Chris!

Spend the money on a holiday instead, BA are doing some good deals for Black Friday :p
Click to expand...

Maybe not but I feel I should maybe have given it a bit more time, at least it was in my bag everyday, I can't say that about the Nikon.....
 
chrism_scotland said:
Maybe not but I feel I should maybe have given it a bit more time, at least it was in my bag everyday, I can't say that about the Nikon.....
Click to expand...

......... and that is exactly why I made the change, really happy with the a7r2 and A6000, and at least one of them is always with me.
 
I'm tempted by the A6000 as a replacement for my MFT as I love auto ISO in all modes including manual mode with the ability to dial in exposure compensation and also dof preview in all modes and sadly neither of these features are available in MFT land. I'm disappointed that the 24mm is quite large though, if they did a 24mm about the size of the 35 and 50 I'd be very interested.

Been sort of thinking about getting an A7rII but being honest with myself I think it's just GAS, I'm pretty sure the A7 does everything I want, apart from a couple of niggles.
 
Last edited:
The sigma 19mm and 30mm e mount lenses are very good and compact, I have the 19mm and it works well on the crop body A6000.
 
Yes, those are options and I'd just need to get over the OCD thought that they're not 35mm fov (in 35mm terms) and aren't f1.8's.
 
I'm on the market for an A7II.

I can decide on a first lens setup -

1) 35 2.8 + 70-200
2) 24-70 4 and wait for the 70-200

I've read the IQ of the 24-70 is very poor?
 
christurbo said:
I'm on the market for an A7II.

I can decide on a first lens setup -

1) 35 2.8 + 70-200
2) 24-70 4 and wait for the 70-200

I've read the IQ of the 24-70 is very poor?
Click to expand...

What do you take photos of? Do you need to cover 24-200mm?
 
twist said:
What do you take photos of? Do you need to cover 24-200mm?
Click to expand...
I would like the idea of covering that focal length due to the varied photos i take. However I would be mainly in the lower regions but would like to take some wildlife and portraits. Not a huge prime user in the past however I have been checking what focal length I have been using and it varies from 35 or 50.

Is the 24-70 that bad?

Thanks
 
I think the 24-70mm is a very good lens but perhaps a little expensive vs its performance :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top