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

Bobsyeruncle said:
Go over with sharpie and wipe off.
Click to expand...
Cagey75 said:
Have you tried an alcohol/medi wipe? WD-40 should also shift it, just a dab on some tissue or a Q-Tip
Click to expand...
twist said:
Rubbing alcohol, IPA (not the drink). Test on bottom first to check it won't remove paint. 70% IPA injection swabs are very good and mild so won't remove paint.
Click to expand...
ancient_mariner said:
White spirit is the most likely to be effective that you'll normally find at home. Otherwise use another sharpie of the same type on top & then wipe quickly.
Click to expand...

I like the simplicity of the "another sharpie" idea. I presume it's ink in a solution and therefore the solution ought to dissolve the old ink enough to wipe away? Worth trying first.

If that doesn't work, I will raid Ms Goldtop's paint/cleaning cupboard to see what other spirit/alcohol she has. As long as I don't go near her Havana Club, I should be OK...
 
GreenNinja67 said:
Can't believe the quality of the 28-70 kit lens if you stop it down.

I thought the high MP of the R would highlight its shortcomings.
Click to expand...
I've been impressed too, one of the bet £140's I've spent (y)
 
Last edited:
goldtop said:
Help needed: Shy Sony owner ruined my camera

Well, sort of: the A7ii I bought from Camera Jungle arrived with the white Sony logo blacked out with what looks like biro/marker ink. Too shy, perhaps? Anyway, with the time to catch up on all the little jobs at home in the current situation, I want to remove the ink and make the white logo visible again. My first attempt with cotton buds and very mild soap got hardly anything off. And a bathroom cleaner solution didn't make any difference.

So - what solvents might I try that could dissolve the ink, but not Sony's white paint? (Nor the black paint on the body itself.)

Ideas, please! :)
Click to expand...

white board pen. It’s how I have removed permanent ink that some numpty used on the white board at work.
 
On the 28-70mm f3.5-5.6, I think it's good enough from wide open as not every picture needs to be printed 2m wide or viewed very very closely.

I do appreciate that some need all the image quality they can get but for normal use for normal people doing web postings, screen viewing and even quite large prints I think it's possibly as good a kit lens as many will ever really need :D
 
JJ! said:
There is some hands on videos on Youtube - Matt Granger compares its size to some of the others, its so small!!

I wonder how they will price it. It might have me tempted!
Click to expand...

I'm not really a big zoom user as I much prefer a compact prime but I do like the look of the 17-28mm and also the 70-180mm, I'm less of a fan of 28-75mm f2.8's and I've never owned one.

I'll have to decide what I want to do. Up until fairly recently I've been holding off buying too many native mount lenses thinking that one day I might want a Nikon or something but the amount of e mount gear I have has slowly crept up. I'm not sure if I want to add zooms but I might :D I can see a use for the 17-28mm but I'm less sure about the 70-180mm as 180mm isn't a lot anyway for the times I wish I had a long lens.

I'll have to think about zooms.
 
I've just printed some pictures :D

I hadn't used the printer, Epson R2880, for months and the first one out was a complete reject but after going through the head cleaning cycle and changing one cartridge all was well :D

PS.
Anyone who has an external printer potty will doubtless like me be amazed how much ink doesn't end up on the paper. This certainly explains the rate printers eat cartridges and money.
 
Last edited:
That dog seems to be hogging the thread. Nice images Toby
Haven't been snapping much lately so last couple of weeks I've been using the 55 as a ;grab and run' option because it's so damn light. Actually getting used to the rendering too and it's really not that bad. Here's a couple from a little curfew wander last night, she wouldn't get changed from her silly random outfit she put on

49698651691_c4669f94ab_b.jpg


49698651616_a5c41fd167_b.jpg


49698651491_98341f95bc_b.jpg


49698119643_e13cb59fef_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, to anyone who thought the Samyang lenses are flimsy, I can tell you they're a lot stronger than they look. On Sunday I had an accident where I fell with the camera underneath me - hit the ground lens first, smashing the hood, with the force of it bruising my back on the left near my kidneys - it's still tender today.

The lens* is now a bit decentered but still usable, though it will get replaced at some stage sooner or later. * Just realised that I haven't actually tried the body with a different lens yet. :oops: :$
 
Livin The Dream said:
That dog seems to be hogging the thread. Nice images Toby
Haven't been snapping much lately so last couple of weeks I've been using the 55 as a ;grab and run' option because it's so damn light. Actually getting used to the rendering too and it's really not that bad. Here's a couple from a little curfew wander last night, she wouldn't get changed from her silly random outfit she put on

49698651691_c4669f94ab_b.jpg


49698651616_a5c41fd167_b.jpg


49698651491_98341f95bc_b.jpg


49698119643_e13cb59fef_b.jpg
Click to expand...
Nice photos. What's wrong with the rendering, I think it looks great it's got lovely pop, especially considering it's 'only' f1.8?
 
snerkler said:
Nice photos. What's wrong with the rendering, I think it looks great it's got lovely pop, especially considering it's 'only' f1.8?
Click to expand...

The 55 gets a bit of stick for being too clinical. You can get swirly bokeh and onion rings around the edges but looks ok here I reckon too. We are all a little too critical sometimes. It is though, extremely sharp!
 
Livin The Dream said:
The 55 gets a bit of stick for being too clinical. You can get swirly bokeh and onion rings around the edges but looks ok here I reckon too. We are all a little too critical sometimes. It is though, extremely sharp!
Click to expand...

Definitely too critical. It's a beaut of a lens and it gets added bonus points for its size and weight. My favourite e mount lens.

PS her outfit is cool.
 
Livin The Dream said:
The 55 gets a bit of stick for being too clinical. You can get swirly bokeh and onion rings around the edges but looks ok here I reckon too. We are all a little too critical sometimes. It is though, extremely sharp!
Click to expand...
Doesn't look clinical to me, not in those shots anyway (y)
 
addicknchips said:
Definitely too critical. It's a beaut of a lens and it gets added bonus points for its size and weight. My favourite e mount lens.

PS her outfit is cool.
Click to expand...

Cheers, I’m learning to like it.

snerkler said:
Doesn't look clinical to me, not in those shots anyway (y)
Click to expand...

It doesn’t to be fair but other situations can look it I guess. I’m not too critical these days, it does the job needed.
 
Livin The Dream said:
Cheers, I’m learning to like it.



It doesn’t to be fair but other situations can look it I guess. I’m not too critical these days, it does the job needed.
Click to expand...

This was also my finding, a real mixed bag but more often than not I wasnt liking the look I got. Gave it a fair go (bought it 3 times) because everything else about the lens is so likable.
 
Livin The Dream said:
Cheers, I’m learning to like it.



It doesn’t to be fair but other situations can look it I guess. I’m not too critical these days, it does the job needed.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why but there's something about the 3rd that reminded me of the Nikon 58mm :eek: Think I need a trip to specsavers ;) I really like the colours in the first and third, I'm assuming you have some kind of preset?
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I'm not sure why but there's something about the 3rd that reminded me of the Nikon 58mm :eek: Think I need a trip to supersavers ;) I really like the colours in the first and third, I'm assuming you have some kind of preset?
Click to expand...

Nah, it’s no 58 [emoji6] I have the 85 GM for more discerning shots [emoji16]

It’s a tweak of Portra 160
 
I think it's fair to say that I've got my photography mojo back (great timing with the lockdown ;)), who says buying new gear doesn't help :p
 
snerkler said:
I think it's fair to say that I've got my photography mojo back (great timing with the lockdown ;)), who says buying new gear doesn't help :p
Click to expand...

New gear and the weather, certainly helps! I’ll have to find something more than just my little girl to shoot though..
 
Livin The Dream said:
The 55 gets a bit of stick for being too clinical. You can get swirly bokeh and onion rings around the edges but looks ok here I reckon too. We are all a little too critical sometimes. It is though, extremely sharp!
Click to expand...

It's strange how those who say it's too clinical often then go on to point out it's non clinical aspects which often makes me think that the main problem in the eyes of some is that although it's rather good it has the wrong badge :D
 
woof woof said:
It's strange how those who say it's too clinical often then go on to point out it's non clinical aspects which often makes me think that the main problem in the eyes of some is that although it's rather good it has the wrong badge :D
Click to expand...

So what youre saying is people have something against a brand like Zeiss and actually the people who say it is clinical havent used the lens and use other camera brands, because they must be fanboys o_O
 
A PS on the clinical aspect of things.

I recently bought a Voigtlander 50mm f2 and it's a fantastic lens and in some or maybe most respects better than the Sony 55mm f1.8 and therefore maybe more open to the criticism of being too clinical but it too has it's own personality. Maybe the issue is more that some are too quick to label and don't take the time to see and appreciate the different qualities that different kit brings.
 
addicknchips said:
i'll have a bunch of sony stuff in the classifieds soon if you're after anything.
Click to expand...
Thanks but I’m all set, just waiting for the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8
woof woof said:
It's strange how those who say it's too clinical often then go on to point out it's non clinical aspects which often makes me think that the main problem in the eyes of some is that although it's rather good it has the wrong badge :D
Click to expand...
I think people hold Zeiss in high regard ;)

Bit as for the whole clinical thing, can’t you just decrease sharpness in post (or add NR to soften it) to reduce the clinical look or is there more to it than that?
 
snerkler said:
Thanks but I’m all set, just waiting for the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8
I think people hold Zeiss in high regard ;)

Bit as for the whole clinical thing, can’t you just decrease sharpness in post (or add NR to soften it) to reduce the clinical look or is there more to it than that?
Click to expand...

Well, no, because as you know, certain people can and cant see pop (another IQ thats fairly difficult to define), or to varying degrees, its like saying well cant you just add clarity and itll pop. You know from experience lenses render very differently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top