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

Messages
18,455
Edit My Images
No
Yeah, good point. Just tried it, actually prefer it as it is which is probably what I thought at the time of the edit. I can see some would prefer it corrected though
More often than not I prefer shots like this uncorrected too.
 
Last edited:
Messages
8,489
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
I've been thinking about selling my pretty brand new Sony 24-105mm and getting a 200-600mm instead, although that would leave a fair gap between 35mm and 200mm.

I don't do portraits (if I did I would get the 85mm or 135mm). I've got the 35mm for family stuff so that leaves landscape/panoramic. Would the 200-600mm be useful for doing high detail stitched panos, or is it overkill?

Part of me is thinking that because the 200-600mm focal lengths are so far away from 35mm, then will I be more likely to actually make use of this lens? Whereas the 24-105mm overlaps and is much closer in focal length to the 35mm, so I can often make do by either stitching or moving physically?
 
Messages
6,336
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been thinking about selling my pretty brand new Sony 24-105mm and getting a 200-600mm instead, although that would leave a fair gap between 35mm and 200mm.

I don't do portraits (if I did I would get the 85mm or 135mm). I've got the 35mm for family stuff so that leaves landscape/panoramic. Would the 200-600mm be useful for doing high detail stitched panos, or is it overkill?

Part of me is thinking that because the 200-600mm focal lengths are so far away from 35mm, then will I be more likely to actually make use of this lens? Whereas the 24-105mm overlaps and is much closer in focal length to the 35mm, so I can often make do by either stitching or moving physically?
I’m not sure anyone uses the 200-600 as a landscape lens. It would be a big lens to carry around. perhaps the 100-400 would be a better option.
 
Messages
6,336
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Perhaps I would of been better to say ‘most wouldn’t use it as a landscape lens‘ as there is always the exception to the rule (you’re the first I know of who does). I’m guessing you don’t carry it far or take it up a mountain. It’s not what many would regard as a standard landscape lens that should be in every landscape photographer kit bag.
 
Messages
15,709
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
Perhaps I would of been better to say ‘most wouldn’t use it as a landscape lens‘ as there is always the exception to the rule (you’re the first I know of who does). I’m guessing you don’t carry it far or take it up a mountain. It’s not what many would regard as a standard landscape lens that should be in every landscape photographer kit bag.
You're correct, I don't carry it up mountains etc, but it is my most used lens, and it is used mainly for wildlife, but I've taken some good landscape shots with it, as well as portraits....
 
Messages
8,489
Name
Graham
Edit My Images
No
What about for stitched panoramic photos though, would that immense reach allow for very detailed results? The size and weight wouldn't bother me as I would only be taking it out for specific purposes in a backpack rather than a walkabout with the family.

The thing is, there have been many an occasion in the past when I wished I had more reach whether it be Faslane where you are shooting across Gare Loch and can't get any closer, or a warship sailing down the Firth of Clyde and even instances such as getting a shot of the lighthouse on Pladda from a vantage point in Kildonan.

However, how is the quality at 600mm whilst taking into account atmospheric effects?
 
Messages
15,709
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
What about for stitched panoramic photos though, would that immense reach allow for very detailed results? The size and weight wouldn't bother me as I would only be taking it out for specific purposes in a backpack rather than a walkabout with the family.

The thing is, there have been many an occasion in the past when I wished I had more reach whether it be Faslane where you are shooting across Gare Loch and can't get any closer, or a warship sailing down the Firth of Clyde and even instances such as getting a shot of the lighthouse on Pladda from a vantage point in Kildonan.

However, how is the quality at 600mm whilst taking into account atmospheric effects?
I've never tried stitching.
Most of the landscape stuff that I've taken is around the 300-400mm mark.
There's a couple of landscape shots in my Flickr taken with the 200-600mm.

https://flic.kr/p/2koTG2X View: https://flic.kr/p/2koTG2X
https://flic.kr/p/2koTGea View: https://flic.kr/p/2koTGea
 
Last edited:
Messages
18,455
Edit My Images
No
What about for stitched panoramic photos though, would that immense reach allow for very detailed results?
However, how is the quality at 600mm whilst taking into account atmospheric effects?
That's the issue, detail will depend a lot on atmospheric conditions and how far away you are shooting.
 

Fuji Dave

Teacher's Pet, of Borg
Messages
17,179
Name
PRINCESS
Edit My Images
No
Great pack now going in classified.

I have now Withdrawn this deal, reason why is, I have never tried using it at all so have decided to start using it.
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,723
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Messages
2,228
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,723
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I agree. Very chilling. Mrs WW would be terrified by that shot, she absolutely refuses to be anywhere near teenagers.
 

Fuji Dave

Teacher's Pet, of Borg
Messages
17,179
Name
PRINCESS
Edit My Images
No
A6400 + Zeiss 32mm f1.8 @5000 ISO for Susie

Susie by Dave, on Flickr


Then I stuck the A6400 on one of my tripods

Bloom by Dave, on Flickr
 

Fuji Dave

Teacher's Pet, of Borg
Messages
17,179
Name
PRINCESS
Edit My Images
No
Another A6400 + Zeiss 32mm f1.8

Lily by Dave, on Flickr
 
Messages
18,455
Edit My Images
No
Last edited:
Messages
19,826
Name
George.
Edit My Images
No
Just a simple tourist close up type Snapograph taken at Kent UK of a pile of Oyster Shells that have had the Oysters removed.
I've deliberately gone for a higher contrast gritty look to this snap to emphasise the texture.

Sony-RX, 1/1000th @ F5.6, ISO-100, Handheld.
Oyster Shells-03516 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking., (y):sony:
 

Stephen L

I asked a Stupid Question Once...
Messages
5,299
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Just a simple tourist close up type Snapograph taken at Kent UK of a pile of Oyster Shells that have had the Oysters removed.
I've deliberately gone for a higher contrast gritty look to this snap to emphasise the texture.

Sony-RX, 1/1000th @ F5.6, ISO-100, Handheld.
Oyster Shells-03516 by G.K.Jnr., on Flickr

:ty: for looking., (y):sony:
Great idea! Love the textures. Were the oysters tasty?
 
Messages
19,826
Name
George.
Edit My Images
No
Great idea! Love the textures. Were the oysters tasty?

Thank you Stephen, appreciate your reply.

"They were indeed although I do hasten to add I didn't have that many, half a dozen or so is about my limit in one go"
 

Stephen L

I asked a Stupid Question Once...
Messages
5,299
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Is the A7R2 still a valid camera today? I’m considering something with greater crop-ability than my A7C as a second camera, but my budget is crippled. I can get a 7R2 new from E-Infin for just over £1k, which is just do-able. I never use video, and rarely shoot anything which moves. Most of my lenses are manual focus.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
12,077
Edit My Images
Yes
Is the A7R2 still a valid camera today? I’m considering something with greater crop-ability than my A7C as a second camera, but my budget is crippled. I can get a 7R2 new from E-Infin for just over £1k, which is just do-able. I never use video, and rarely shoot anything which moves. Most of my lenses are manual focus.
Yep it's IQ is still up there with the latest and greatest. Things haven't actually improved a whole lot since that sensor.
But it uses a different battery to your A7C which can be annoying.
 

Stephen L

I asked a Stupid Question Once...
Messages
5,299
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Yep it's IQ is still up there with the latest and greatest. Things haven't actually improved a whole lot since that sensor.
But it uses a different battery to your A7C which can be annoying.
Are the batteries the same as the A6500? I might have some knocking about.
 
Messages
2,228
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm considering getting a 100-400ish lens for my a7R IV. Which lens in that bracket is "best"? What are the top 3 options?

Cheers
The Sigma 100-400 gets really good reviews
Some say its not far from the Sony 100-400 in terms of IQ but at a fraction of the cost.
I had the same dilemma recently but in the end I went for the Sony 200-600G
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
26,723
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
There's a nice blue sky here and it's cold again, we had a bit of snow Monday and Tuesday. Might see if I can sneak out today.
 
Top