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

Apparently comlite Nikon to Sony adapter is now on eBay (according to Brian smith).
After my experience with adapters I won't rush and get this just yet..
 
@addicknchips see your experience was odd I cant praise my metabobnes highly enough well odd yours is defo the iv with the felt lining?
 
owenb said:
@addicknchips see your experience was odd I cant praise my metabobnes highly enough well odd yours is defo the iv with the felt lining?
Click to expand...

That's the one. When it works it's wonderful. I might turn it on today and it won't offer or attempt to af. Then later it will be fine.
 
gotta be a dodgy one mines faultless have you got a local camera store u could try another one?
 
I got my a7ii with metabones from jessops as I posted the deal up a few days back bit of a pain then tbh I'm amazed yours is like that must have a fault somewhere
 
addicknchips said:
I have a7 and a7rii. Previously had a7ii but feel the a7 is good enough to back up the r2.
Only recently bought the a7 again after having one for a few months last year.

These days many modern lenses will have vr or such like.
Get the idea of a kit lens out of your head. All these cameras that have been mentioned deserve better.

Sony a7 - hand held.
View attachment 55040
Click to expand...
Love that well done young man. Right off to fountains abbey to try shoot deer, camera of course not elephant gun
 
Lovely there I go there when I visit in laws in Green Hammerton off the A59.
 
I can see you all talking about using canon glass with the metabones on the A7, but do you do that because you already had the glass before buying the a7 or do you guys buy canon glass to use with the a7? The zeiss lenses are suppose to be very sharp no ?
 
Does anyone have an opinion on the kit lens for video?

Almost ready to pull the trigger on an A7ii plus Batis 25 and Sony 55 (I shoot mainly landscape and love the rendering of both these lenses), but I need to make some videos for work and think a zoom would be easier.

I don't want to spend money on better zooms if I can help it, as I won't use them for anything apart from video, and the kit can be bought for £150 more than body only.

Has anyone used the kit lens for video? How does it do?

Cheers.
 
Danones said:
I can see you all talking about using canon glass with the metabones on the A7, but do you do that because you already had the glass before buying the a7 or do you guys buy canon glass to use with the a7? The zeiss lenses are suppose to be very sharp no ?
Click to expand...

Think most people already had the glass.
I didn't as was a Nikon man.
But picked up cheap canon glass - focal lengths that are not available on native fe.
 
rookies said:
LOL I dare not say

The Kit lens that comes with the A7ii some say it better than the 24-70 and some says it isn't...
and the lovely 55mm 1.8 in which I believe is a good lens according to owen :)
Click to expand...

Anybody who says the kit lens is better than the Zeiss 24-70mm is incorrect, performance vs price maybe. Depends on the copy as they do/did have lens to lens variations.

The main gripes online reviewers had was the price vs it's performance.

I like mine, no issues really. :)
 
Last edited:
Rizvan said:
Anybody who says the kit lens is better than the Zeiss 24-70mm is incorrect, performance vs price maybe. Depends on the copy as they do/did have lens to lens variations.

The make grip online reviewers had was the price vs it's performance.

I like mine, no issues really. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah its performance v price for me, I found the 24-70 to be not bad, its not an equal to the DSLR 24-70 lenses but its not too bad, I assume the rumoured f2.8 will hopefully be much better!
 
Danones said:
I can see you all talking about using canon glass with the metabones on the A7, but do you do that because you already had the glass before buying the a7 or do you guys buy canon glass to use with the a7? The zeiss lenses are suppose to be very sharp no ?
Click to expand...

I came from canon ( and still own a 6d and 5dsr) so obv had a lot of good glass already if I was buying the sony as a new system I would always try and buy native unless there is a particular lens that interests you
 
the general consensus on the kit lens is that FOR THE MONEY it is very good However I think a zeiss f4 24-70 as noted is better performance
 
Danones said:
I can see you all talking about using canon glass with the metabones on the A7, but do you do that because you already had the glass before buying the a7 or do you guys buy canon glass to use with the a7? The zeiss lenses are suppose to be very sharp no ?
Click to expand...

I tried a couple of Canon lenses, as a former Nikon shooter I didn't have any but some of the Canon glass (zooms mainly) seem a much cheaper way to pickup an AF lens if you have an adapter.
The Canon 16-35 f4 and 24-70 f4 lenses are cheaper than the Sony equivalents (even cheaper used) and most comparisons have suggested have better performance then the native Sony equivalents, albeit there is a size penalty as obviously they are FF DSLR lenses, not FF CSC lenses.

Primes though the native ones seem to cover off the main things, although the Sigma 35 f1.4 adapted (Canon again) seems to be fairly popular among A7ii/A7rii users as a good value 35mm f1.4 option v the £1000+ Sony 35 f1.4.
 
yeah agreed all the sigma art lenses are fantastic via metabones ....... was selling my 2.8 70-200 although heavy its spectacular on the a7 ii and a7rii......... obv coming from canon I had decent glass....... probably wouldn't have stumped up nearly £300 for the metabones would of got a cheaper adapter but the deal I got basically it was free lol .... but if you want to experiment I believe a commlite and a sigma art is a gr8 combo :)
 
owenb said:
yeah agreed all the sigma art lenses are fantastic via metabones ....... was selling my 2.8 70-200 although heavy its spectacular on the a7 ii and a7rii......... obv coming from canon I had decent glass....... probably wouldn't have stumped up nearly £300 for the metabones would of got a cheaper adapter but the deal I got basically it was free lol .... but if you want to experiment I believe a commlite and a sigma art is a gr8 combo :)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have stumped up the £300 either.... but for £100 with the A7ii it was a great deal and gave me the chance to at least try out the Canon stuff.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Yeah its performance v price for me, I found the 24-70 to be not bad, its not an equal to the DSLR 24-70 lenses but its not too bad, I assume the rumoured f2.8 will hopefully be much better!
Click to expand...

I'm sure Sony will make their G Master f2.8 lens line up every bit as good as its competitors, price may not be the cheapest but if the quality is there / IQ then count me in.
My let go of my 24-70mm & 70-200mm f4 lenses. :)
 
Danones said:
Yeah I have nikon as well.
But crop frame.
So did you buy Sony glass?
Click to expand...

I have done. 55 1.8, 16-35 f4, 70-200 f4.
Then 85 1.8 canon and 150-600 canon.

Had the Batis 85 also which was lovely. But perhaps not worth nearly a grand for me at this stage.

Also have some fd Minolta glass at the sorting off too.
 
Rizvan said:
I'm sure Sony will make their G Master f2.8 lens line up every bit as good as its competitors, price may not be the cheapest but if the quality is there / IQ then count me in.
My let go of my 24-70mm & 70-200mm f4 lenses. :)
Click to expand...

I'm still tempted to get a Tamron 24-70.
I wonder how the Sony 24-70 f4 will drop in price once this master series comes out
 
Just a heads up folks, Amazon UK have the Sandisk 64GB Extreme Pro UHS-I SD cards down to £29.99 plus you can get £10 off your order using "BIGTHANKS" code.
I've ordered a fair few at this price [emoji106][emoji41]
Seen as the Sony A7 series only have a single SD card slot, I am just planning to change out the SD cards every 1-2hrs on shoots, hence a SD failure will only result in losing part of the shoots photos
 
One thing I didn't check if the demo had the latest firmware on it oops
 
Doubt it would make too much difference in terms of AF. If your directly comparing your D750 to the A7II and thinking the A7II is better for AF then your probably mistaken, mirrorless do nail focus quickly, AF tracking is dependant on various factors.
For me the A7 series had more advantages vs DSLR's so I gave up Nikon, can't see me going back.
 
What advantage the a7 give you apart from size and weight? Prob the EVF I did like that I must admit
 
I believe Sony are cutting edge at the moment producing better & better bodies, something which the DSLR's aren't really doing in my opinion, I originally wanted to move to a new system with a potential for growth in the future. I don't see that with DSLR's in my opinion, it's old technology and its only a matter of time before the advantages of the Pro DSLR's are passed/matched by Sony mirrorless.

Size & weight in an advantage in some cases but I don't see that with every native FE lens setup, once the FE f2.8 lenses come out I believe the size and weight will be similar to DSLR's.

Other advantages include.... IBIS, 4K video & video AF, EVF, Silent electronic shutter, Zeiss lenses, ability to mount other vendor lenses with AF, epic sensor R&D and good value for money in bodies vs competitors.

There is a reason why Sony is getting positive reviews, camera of the year awards, top quality Zeiss lenses etc and how Sony supply sensors to other vendors etc.

I have invested heavily into Sony so I guess that's how much I believe mirrorless is the future.
 
Rizvan said:
Doubt it would make too much difference in terms of AF. If your directly comparing your D750 to the A7II and thinking the A7II is better for AF then your probably mistaken, mirrorless do nail focus quickly, AF tracking is dependant on various factors.
For me the A7 series had more advantages vs DSLR's so I gave up Nikon, can't see me going back.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure and in fact I think that CSC have an advantage if we're talking single focus here rather than tracking and especially at wider apertures where minor misfocusing can't be hidden by deeper depth of field.

It's a while since I looked into this as I thought it was pretty much a given that CSC were more accurate and more consistent at focusing than DSLR's but I do remember reading on Canon's web site that if you take three shots and look closely you'll see focus differences between them and that this is normal. That's DSLR's but it shouldn't be the case with CSC's or indeed with any half decent camera that takes focus off the chip rather than off a secondary device buried in the depths and that's before you get into the subject of micro adjusting to get over the issue of tolerances between DSLR bodies and lenses that doesn't affect CSC's. Certainly I get very few focus issues these days.
 
rookies said:
What advantage the a7 give you apart from size and weight? Prob the EVF I did like that I must admit
Click to expand...

Bulk and weight were big factors in my change to CSC's but since changing I've seen the advantages of EVF shooting and being able to see the shot in the EVF before I press the button. The magnified view, blinkies, zebras and in view histogram and level and being able to focus at almost any point over the whole chip are all icing on the cake.

Years back I did a load of side by side tests between my 5D and Panasonic G1 and although I don't have the specs to hand I'm pretty sure that the Canon has a greater dynamic range but in difficult shooting situations the G1's in view histogram and WYSIWYG more than made up for the Canon's bigger chip and with the G1 I could get a first time keeper much more often. With the Canon I'd have to pretty much guess how much compensation to dial in and chimp after taking the shot, and then possibly repeating the process. With an A7 or indeed any good CSC chimping and reshooting is reduced dramatically for me.

For me there's no going back to DSLR's now and indeed I'd rather have a less capable CSC than a newer 5D because for me the advantages would claw the gap back to the point that it becomes pretty negligible. Thankfully though with an A7 series camera you're giving up little if anything in image quality to any DSLR (IMO a stop or so either way at the top of the ISO range doesn't matter) and you have the advantages (if they are advantages to you) of a CSC. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Thing is, csc is more accurate*, I see the benefit of both, however, the rate at which a dslr acquires focus vs csc means a far higher hit rate in favour of the dslr over x amount of shots for moving subjects. Csc is great for afs, dslr is way better for afc. Moral of the story, buy both. :D

Alans last experience of a dslr is quite low end (in comparison to todays stuff)from what i understand (5d and 20d) vs a recent csc so experience is different. I also understand his sway, manual focus via mirror less is better unless your eyesight is 2020.
 
Last edited:
focus peaking............ smaller........... live view etc evf in certain scenarios ... lots of advantages.....
 
Rub it in lol go on rub it in ha ha.

One day maybe lol 2 cameras
 
owenb said:
focus peaking............ smaller........... live view etc evf in certain scenarios ... lots of advantages.....
Click to expand...

Peaking is cool, dmf also cool. Smaller depends on lenses. Fast lv is cool. Ovf and evf both have pros anf cons, i hate lag. Pluses and minuses for both.
 
I think the a7riii and iv will be at a point where peeps can't argue anymore regarding afc (I hope). But by then I reckon canikon will be well in the mirrorless game. Good times.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top