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

Durbs said:
So my trusty A7R2 fell out the boot recently, whilst attached to the camera bag with a capture clip - and the rear screen and card-reader now no longer work.

Does anyone have any idea on cost/feasibility of repair? It's insured, with an excess of £350, so just wondering whether I'm looking at a £200 repair job, or a write-off and new camera.
I was surprised/dismayed to find out how old the camera is! 2016 I got mine, and with the pace of Sony's releases, I do wonder if they're no longer viable to repair.

Also, any recommendations for Sony repair shops?
Click to expand...

Was it fresh water or salt water?

If it's salt water it can't be fixed guranteed.

If it's fresh water it might be able to be fixed but it's probably beyond economical repair.

Many years ago I dropped my trusty D7000 and Sigma 10-20mm into a local lough, knocked over the tripod by mistake, was only in the water for seconds. Was a complete write off but house insurance sorted it with brand new replacements.

Edit - Oops read that as boat not boot. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

You will have to excuse me its transfer deadline day and I have already had a few sherbets.

Probably looking at around £600 repair cost for what its worth, problem will be it won't be easy for insurance company to replace so they will likely repair. Fixation does all of Sony's repairs in the U.K, if you go through Sony direct. If you send it into them they will provide a quote by email to give your insurance company. Most insurers will ask for at least 2 repair quotes if you are going through house insurance, it depends on your policy. It is different if you have dedicated equipment insurance they will sort it all out.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
They are struggling for content with nothing of interest having been released for some time.

Also to be fair the video isn't wrong the 135GM is a special lens, although like the video also says, for most it will have limited use.

Also Manny is dead annoying, just as well his missus is smoking hot.
Click to expand...
Have to agree about the 135mm. Sensational in every way. Fast, sharp and wonderful rendering. I wish Sony would make something similar in the form of a 300mm f2.8.
 
A7 and Sony 35mm f1.8 Whitby snaps.

FohbPFi.jpg


J2ypizZ.jpg


Golly. The price of F&C these days :oops: :$ Evoque coped well with the twisties.
 
f/2.8 said:
Probably looking at around £600 repair cost for what its worth, problem will be it won't be easy for insurance company to replace so they will likely repair.
Click to expand...
So my insurance is "replace for new/latest version", so potentially would be a A73/4 (I don't think I'd bother with the R if offered...)

Anyhoo - I've packed it up and sent it off to Fixation, shall see what they say.
 
Durbs said:
So my insurance is "replace for new/latest version", so potentially would be a A73/4 (I don't think I'd bother with the R if offered...)

Anyhoo - I've packed it up and sent it off to Fixation, shall see what they say.
Click to expand...

That is not how insurance works, you won't get a choice of choosing a new camera model for replacement.

They will try and source an A7R2 if they are replacing it, it's unlikely they will be able too get one, so they will then look to source a replacement model which would be an A7RIII, which they should still be able to get the hold of.

If the repair costs even £10 less than a replacement they will do the repair. It is very likely they will do a repair as it shouldn't be anymore than £600 or so for a replacement card slot and screen.
 
f/2.8 said:
That is not how insurance works, you won't get a choice of choosing a new camera model for replacement.

They will try and source an A7R2 if they are replacing it, it's unlikely they will be able too get one, so they will then look to source a replacement model which would be an A7RIII, which they should still be able to get the hold of.

If the repair costs even £10 less than a replacement they will do the repair. It is very likely they will do a repair as it shouldn't be anymore than £600 or so for a replacement card slot and screen.
Click to expand...
It's always worth talking options with the insurance company - years ago when I had just an A200, I bought a couple of Minolta 7000 film cameras off eBay for the lenses they were bundled with - then had a break in and the film cameras were stolen - my insurers offered the Sony A350 as a replacement, since they couldn't get a Minolta 7000 - I check that they meant 2x A350, and they said yes! I then asked if I could have an A700 instead of 2x A350 (price was similar), and they said OK!
 
The 24-105mm f/4 is going to have to go, which is a shame as it's a great lens but after getting it out the other day for the first time in ages I found myself struggling to get on with it and I was distracted trying to find a focal range I liked for my use.

There's four lenses I think I've narrowed it down to. My worry with the 135mm is that I could use it for family and dog shots as well so would it end up shelving my 35mm? The big reach zooms would be dedicated for big stitches so no threat to the 35mm.

I'm wondering if anyone here has any experience with them, in particular image quality and focus speed?

Sony 135mm f/1.8
Sigma 135mm f/1.8 (£500 saving over the Sony - worth it?)
Sigma 100-400mm
Sigma 150-600mm


Cheers!
 
gman said:
There's four lenses I think I've narrowed it down to. My worry with the 135mm is that I could use it for family and dog shots as well so would it end up shelving my 35mm? The big reach zooms would be dedicated for big stitches so no threat to the 35mm.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just me and even 85mm is getting long for me but... 135mm for family shots?

If you have a zoom that covers 135mm and have tried this length you can of course make an informed decision but I'd worry that the places you could use 135mm for family shots could be few and far between given the distances involved.
 
Last edited:
James talks about his favourite focal length.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWjDEwcTdpo


When watching some of his videos I find myself thinking that in his place I just wouldn't bother :D as I'm tired of complete cloud cover, dead light and everything being wet... What I really want to see is some light and shadow and even blue skies. I do accept that blue skies don't always make for good light for photography but it's just that I'm sick of the flat dead light and grey/white skies and drizzle I see so often.

50mm used to be my most used lens but these days it seems to be 35mm perhaps because I still can't get over the 55mm f1.8 being 55mm :D
 
Last edited:
gman said:
The 24-105mm f/4 is going to have to go, which is a shame as it's a great lens but after getting it out the other day for the first time in ages I found myself struggling to get on with it and I was distracted trying to find a focal range I liked for my use.

There's four lenses I think I've narrowed it down to. My worry with the 135mm is that I could use it for family and dog shots as well so would it end up shelving my 35mm? The big reach zooms would be dedicated for big stitches so no threat to the 35mm.

I'm wondering if anyone here has any experience with them, in particular image quality and focus speed?

Sony 135mm f/1.8
Sigma 135mm f/1.8 (£500 saving over the Sony - worth it?)
Sigma 100-400mm
Sigma 150-600mm


Cheers!
Click to expand...
The Tamron 35-150 is getting rave reviews not just from reviewers but users who have bought it. f2/2.8 and a really useful range.
 
imattersuk said:
The Tamron 35-150 is getting rave reviews not just from reviewers but users who have bought it. f2/2.8 and a really useful range.
Click to expand...
That lens is tempting me to switch to Sony as I have the f2.8/4 for Nikon and it's my most used lens. With that and a Tamron 17-28 (or the recently announced 20-40) I'd only need a macro lens to cover everything I do.

If only I could understand Sony's camera designations!
 
imattersuk said:
The Tamron 35-150 is getting rave reviews not just from reviewers but users who have bought it. f2/2.8 and a really useful range.
Click to expand...
Tamron are really on it in recent years aren't they. Make some not the norm focal ranges and at a great value.
 
Ed Sutton said:
That lens is tempting me to switch to Sony as I have the f2.8/4 for Nikon and it's my most used lens. With that and a Tamron 17-28 (or the recently announced 20-40) I'd only need a macro lens to cover everything I do.

If only I could understand Sony's camera designations!
Click to expand...
What about the Sony designations don't you understand?
 
Ed Sutton said:
Everything!

All I need is the equivalent to a Nikon D750/780.

24mp, great low light focusing and noise handling, and exposure compensation in auto ISO. Not much else I can think of.
Click to expand...
So you don't need an R then which means Resolution. So that immediately points you to something like the A7iii, A7C or A9 maybe.
 
robj20 said:
Tamron are really on it in recent years aren't they. Make some not the norm focal ranges and at a great value.
Click to expand...
I just got the new 28-75 G2 and it's fantastic, I almost went for the 35-150 but just a bit worried about carrying that weight around on a 12-14 hour paid shoot, not ruled it out totally yet.

There's a new 17-28 G2 on the way too although i'm tempted by the new Sigma 20mm DG DN f1.4, so many choices, the biggest reason for staying with Sony for me.
 
robj20 said:
So you don't need an R then which means Resolution. So that immediately points you to something like the A7iii, A7C or A9 maybe.
Click to expand...
You see that's the problem - three A7s. ;)

Sounds like the A7iii and maybe an A7C as second/back-up.

Ta.

I take it all this fancy eye and face detection can be switched off?
 
Ed Sutton said:
You see that's the problem - three A7s. ;)

Sounds like the A7iii and maybe an A7C as second/back-up.

Ta.

I take it all this fancy eye and face detection can be switched off?
Click to expand...
Yes it can.
The way I have it set is that the normal shutter button does AF-S with spot focus.
Holding the back button does AF-C with eye/face detect and tracking.
So I don't need to change any settings and can instantly do landscapes or children running around.

The A7C actually has better AF than the A7iii downside being it's not got a great EVF it's plenty usable but it's sacrificed for size. I think the A7C has the newer colour science as well.
 
Last edited:
Looking for a budget wider lens for my A700, my current widest is 35mm.

I am leaning towards a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, gets a resonable score on DYXUM and won't break my bank.

How are they rated on this group ?
 
leaky5 said:
Looking for a budget wider lens for my A700, my current widest is 35mm.

I am leaning towards a Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, gets a resonable score on DYXUM and won't break my bank.

How are they rated on this group ?
Click to expand...

If you don't mind losing a stop, consider the Zeiss 16-80 as a good all rounder.
 
Ed Sutton said:
Everything!

All I need is the equivalent to a Nikon D750/780.

24mp, great low light focusing and noise handling, and exposure compensation in auto ISO. Not much else I can think of.
Click to expand...
The A7 series is like your D750/D780, A7R is like your D800/D850, and A7s is mainly aimed at videography.
The A9 series was kind of aimed at the D4/D5/D6 series but this is now the A1. The A9's are now somewhere in the middle.

The A7 III and A7 IV would do everything that you require quite easily, however the A9 II can do this plus have the benefit of being able to use the electronic shutter 99% of the time and blackout free shooting (don't underestimate how great this feature is). It does also have the extra dial to that controls the drive mode and focus mode (AF-C, AF-S, MF etc), something that I missed from the D750 when I had the A7RIV.
Ed Sutton said:
You see that's the problem - three A7s. ;)

Sounds like the A7iii and maybe an A7C as second/back-up.

Ta.

I take it all this fancy eye and face detection can be switched off?
Click to expand...
Eye detection can be turned off and can be set to animal or human. I have set eye-AF on/off set to a button for quick access.
robj20 said:
Yes it can.
The way I have it set is that the normal shutter button does AF-S with spot focus.
Holding the back button does AF-C with eye/face detect and tracking.
So I don't need to change any settings and can instantly do landscapes or children running around.

The A7C actually has better AF than the A7iii downside being it's not got a great EVF it's plenty usable but it's sacrificed for size. I think the A7C has the newer colour science as well.
Click to expand...
That's quite surprising that the shutter button doesn't override the back button when you press it to take the shot :oops: :$
 
snerkler said:
That's quite surprising that the shutter button doesn't override the back button when you press it to take the shot :oops: :$
Click to expand...

Give it a try, works really well and covers all my scenarios without needing to change anything.

It's one of the main things I actually like about Sony's cameras the customisation.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Maybe it's just me and even 85mm is getting long for me but... 135mm for family shots?

If you have a zoom that covers 135mm and have tried this length you can of course make an informed decision but I'd worry that the places you could use 135mm for family shots could be few and far between given the distances involved.
Click to expand...

Probably more for the fast running dog shots as she grows up, but perhaps this is going to be a focal length just for special occasions and probably shelved.

The Tamron 35-150mm mentioned covers an awful lot of focal range I don't need and is rather expensive when taking that into account. If looking near the 150mm end of it then I may as well get the 135mm prime?

Looks like it is going to be between the Sigma 100-400mm and Sigma 150-600mm. If nobody has them to comment on then I better start my research! lol
 
snerkler said:
The A7 series is like your D750/D780, A7R is like your D800/D850, and A7s is mainly aimed at videography.
The A9 series was kind of aimed at the D4/D5/D6 series but this is now the A1. The A9's are now somewhere in the middle.

The A7 III and A7 IV would do everything that you require quite easily, however the A9 II can do this plus have the benefit of being able to use the electronic shutter 99% of the time and blackout free shooting (don't underestimate how great this feature is). It does also have the extra dial to that controls the drive mode and focus mode (AF-C, AF-S, MF etc), something that I missed from the D750 when I had the A7RIV.

Eye detection can be turned off and can be set to animal or human. I have set eye-AF on/off set to a button for quick access.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's very helpful. Looks like the A9 would suit me best from that and it has a tilty screen which I prefert to a flippy one, but sadly it doesn't suit my wallet. So that's my Sony GAS cured.
 
leaky5 said:
Interesting, 2 on EBay are being sold as spares, both with jammed focusing.
Is this a known issue with them ?
Click to expand...
Not that I'm aware of - use one on my A200, then A700 fro several years, only sold as I upgraded to FF.
 
Faldrax said:
Not that I'm aware of - use one on my A200, then A700 fro several years, only sold as I upgraded to FF.
Click to expand...
If you Google this issue, it comes back with quite a few hits, althought the newest is about 2016. Maybe they fixed the issue.

I might keep an eye out for a SAL1650 2.8, that fits the bill I think
 
Ed Sutton said:
I take it all this fancy eye and face detection can be switched off?
Click to expand...

I have face detect (I don't have eye detect on my ancient A7) and wide area set as custom modes with Aperture and Manual modes. So, I can shoot in aperture or manual as normal and switch to a custom mode (either Aperture or manual with face detect and wide area) for people shots.
 
gman said:
Probably more for the fast running dog shots as she grows up, but perhaps this is going to be a focal length just for special occasions and probably shelved.

The Tamron 35-150mm mentioned covers an awful lot of focal range I don't need and is rather expensive when taking that into account. If looking near the 150mm end of it then I may as well get the 135mm prime?

Looks like it is going to be between the Sigma 100-400mm and Sigma 150-600mm. If nobody has them to comment on then I better start my research! lol
Click to expand...

As long as you know your uses as I just worried that 135mm may be a bit long for a family/group shot.
 
woof woof said:
As long as you know your uses as I just worried that 135mm may be a bit long for a family/group shot.
Click to expand...
Group shots yes probably, family members maybe not. I guess it depends what/how he wants to shoot?
 
snerkler said:
Group shots yes probably, family members maybe not. I guess it depends what/how he wants to shoot?
Click to expand...

I've never attempted to take any sort of group shot at that sort of focal length. I suppose a lot depends on the topography and what you want, head and shoulders, half body, full body etc but the more you want in, obviously, the further away the camera and lens need to be.
 
leaky5 said:
If you Google this issue, it comes back with quite a few hits, although the newest is about 2016. Maybe they fixed the issue.

I might keep an eye out for a SAL1650 2.8, that fits the bill I think
Click to expand...
Yes, the SAL 1650 f/2.8 is a good option - it wasn't out when I bought my CZ 1680, otherwise it would have been my choice.

The problem with using Google to determine the scale of a problem is that you only see how often things went wrong (or people repeated hearing about someone else having the problem) - you don't see the numbers where the lens / camera performed flawlessly. So unless you know how many copies of the item actually sold, it's impossible to determine the scale of the issue. 100 faulty items of something that sold 1000 copies is a significant problem, but if 1M copies were sold, it's a minor problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top