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

snerkler said:
Would you then buy the A1 again if Sony bring out some tele primes?

I still see myself as a Nikon shooter at heart but I can’t see myself going back due to the lenses.
Click to expand...
Yes probably will do.
I'll never buy z9. Don't like unnecessarily bloated bodies.
Essentially a race between Nikon releasing a new body with new AF features from Z9 or Sony releasing light cheaper teleprime.

Also will need Nikon to release a 85mm f1.4 or f1.2 prime. That's my most used prime lens.
 
nandbytes said:
Yes probably will do.
I'll never buy z9. Don't like unnecessarily bloated bodies.
Essentially a race between Nikon releasing a new body with new AF features from Z9 or Sony releasing light cheaper teleprime.

Also will need Nikon to release a 85mm f1.4 or f1.2 prime. That's my most used prime lens.
Click to expand...

Why not adapt a Canon 500mm f/4 MKII or 400mm DO MKII on the A1? I always thought the Canon lenses worked really well on the a9 with the MC-11
 
nandbytes said:
Yes probably will do.
I'll never buy z9. Don't like unnecessarily bloated bodies.
Essentially a race between Nikon releasing a new body with new AF features from Z9 or Sony releasing light cheaper teleprime.

Also will need Nikon to release a 85mm f1.4 or f1.2 prime. That's my most used prime lens.
Click to expand...
Is the Sigma DG DN not available for Nikon?

It’s annoying there’s always something with each manufacturer where you go “ why haven’t they done that” or “why have they done that”. Sony are tech giants, capable of making high end TV’s and smart phones yet you have to put up with sub par LCDs and EVFs on their cameras.

Nikon had similar unnecessary (imo) niggles when I was with them.
 
Mike.P said:
Why not adapt a Canon 500mm f/4 MKII or 400mm DO MKII on the A1? I always thought the Canon lenses worked really well on the a9 with the MC-11
Click to expand...
The AF is subpar when adapting canon lenses to Sony. No where close to native performance.

They do work really well on R5 and that's the other option I have considered
 
snerkler said:
Is the Sigma DG DN not available for Nikon?

It’s annoying there’s always something with each manufacturer where you go “ why haven’t they done that” or “why have they done that”. Sony are tech giants, capable of making high end TV’s and smart phones yet you have to put up with sub par LCDs and EVFs on their cameras.

Nikon had similar unnecessary (imo) niggles when I was with them.
Click to expand...
Nope no major 3rd party lenses for Nikon (or canon)

Viltrox makes a few and voigtlander offer manual lenses
 
nandbytes said:
The AF is subpar when adapting canon lenses to Sony. No where close to native performance.

They do work really well on R5 and that's the other option I have considered
Click to expand...

You should just jump to canon. They have the ef teleprimes that work brilliantly adapted, plus the native 85 and 50 f1.2 glass.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nog
snerkler said:
Seems an odd focal length, thought it must be a macro lens at first.
Click to expand...

I thought the same but it's close enough to 85mm which people would accept as a valid and useful length.

I do have an Oly 45mm for MFT but to be honest I can't remember the last time I used it and I've only used my Sony 85mm f1.8 a few times. Some people will no doubt love 85 and even 90mm but I do think a lot of people will probably look straight past the fact that it's quite compact and only see the f2.8 and then stop looking.
 
Oh er... There's a Sony 40mm f2.5 for sale in the classifieds. Somebody should buy it. Now. It'll only tempt me but I have the 35mm f2.8.
 
imattersuk said:
Go on open your purse Alan :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

I really fancy that or the 50mm but I have the old 35mm f2.8 and the other problems are time and opportunity for photography and at this point in my life both are in short supply.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Looking Good :D
Click to expand...
I think the Tokina 17mm will be the keeper but I'm tempted to keep hold of the Vivitar 19mm for times I want to just throw an extra light lens in the bag.
Will continue to have a play over the next couple of weeks and decide.

Another shot from yesterday with the Tokina.

20220707-_DSC9440 by barrysprout, on Flickr
 
I’m tempted by the 40 or the 50 2.5. Just not sure what one would be most handy.

Thinking the 40 and might be a bit more versatile.
 
Barrysprout said:
I think the Tokina 17mm will be the keeper but I'm tempted to keep hold of the Vivitar 19mm for times I want to just throw an extra light lens in the bag.
Will continue to have a play over the next couple of weeks and decide.
Click to expand...

The thing with that Vivitar is that although it has distortion that you'll need to correct in pictures with straight lines in them and although the corners are a bit mushy it's tiny and just a joy to use and I think it's also a lovely looking lens.

Two things prompted the sale, firstly I just can't really pursue this hobby at the moment as other commitments have taken over and that's sad but true and secondly I have the Sony 20mm f1.8 for when I do want and have the chance to use a wide angle lens.
 
JJ! said:
I’m tempted by the 40 or the 50 2.5. Just not sure what one would be most handy.

Thinking the 40 and might be a bit more versatile.
Click to expand...
There's a brand new 40 in the classifieds and it's a bargain.
 
JJ! said:
I’m tempted by the 40 or the 50 2.5. Just not sure what one would be most handy.

Thinking the 40 and might be a bit more versatile.
Click to expand...

If it helps at all... I have the 24mm f2.8 G and it really is nicely made. There is quite noticeable distortion with this but applying the lens profile seems to clean it up with no ill effects that I can see. I'd expect the 40 and 50mm's to be very nice too.

I've watched quite a few reviews of these compact G lenses and they seem to be very well thought off.

40 or 50mm isn't that big of a deal for me. I'm mostly a 35mm fan these days so I'd probably go for the 40 but 50 is perfectly liveable and was my most used FoV at one time.

Good luck choosing :D
 
JJ! said:
I’m tempted by the 40 or the 50 2.5. Just not sure what one would be most handy.

Thinking the 40 and might be a bit more versatile.
Click to expand...

I shot 50mm for years when I had the 5D2. When I first picked up the A7 I bought an M mount Voigtlander 40/1.4 and used that for years. For me, I'd go for the 40mm as I find it a lot nicer for more general use and a one lens fix! I've of course now switched wider to 35mm :ROFLMAO: but because I don't do wide at all really I find it nice for landscapes too and it's pretty much all I use with the Tamron 70-180mm
 
snerkler said:
Sounds good in theory, I can imagine it could cause problems with post processing like Fuji’s X-trans
Click to expand...

Maybe. After reading about XTrans I can't see a reason for it other than marketing. AFAIK Fuji claim it's a random pattern but it isn't, it's just a larger repeating pattern than bayer and the whole thing takes more processing power... Or so I've read.

I've no idea if this new Sony development is an improvement and even if it is we can't guess when it'll appear in a camera but Sony being what they are they could stick it in a new camera and announce it next week :D
 
woof woof said:
Maybe. After reading about XTrans I can't see a reason for it other than marketing. AFAIK Fuji claim it's a random pattern but it isn't, it's just a larger repeating pattern than bayer and the whole thing takes more processing power... Or so I've read.

I've no idea if this new Sony development is an improvement and even if it is we can't guess when it'll appear in a camera but Sony being what they are they could stick it in a new camera and announce it next week :D
Click to expand...
I can’t find any benefits of X-Trans only flaws tbh.
 
I nearly bought an A7c today.

After all the trouble I've had with a recent Panasonic buy I thought "(bad word) it and (bad word) Panasonic. I'll just get the Sony."

I didn't buy it of course :D but I came closer than ever :D

What nearly got me to buy it was the agro with this Panasonic and comments above saying it's a very well made camera.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I nearly bought an A7c today.

After all the trouble I've had with a recent Panasonic buy I thought "(bad word) it and (bad word) Panasonic. I'll just get the Sony."

I didn't buy it of course :D but I came closer than ever :D

What nearly got me to buy it was the agro with this Panasonic and comments above saying it's a very well made camera.
Click to expand...
I keep toying with swapping my m4/3 for an RX100, but I’m not sure I can take the IQ drop and fiddliness. It’s only for me to take out on dog walks though and would save me taking a bag.
 
snerkler said:
I keep toying with swapping my m4/3 for an RX100, but I’m not sure I can take the IQ drop and fiddliness. It’s only for me to take out on dog walks though and would save me taking a bag.
Click to expand...

I persist with MFT because they're small and light and cheap and it's a way of keeping the interest and the hobby going quite cheaply but I do sometimes get disappointed with the lack of DR against my A7 and the general reduction in IQ if you go looking for it.

I bought the TZ100 to take when even a small MFT camera is too much and the pictures are nice but again the limitations are there to be seen if you go looking for them especially if conditions aren't the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top