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

[woof woof]

You may be partially right, but essentially you are throwing money away for 8k+ camera, when you can only resolve as much as 24mp / 6k one, particularly where such sensor would have better snr and high ISO performance at nearly half the expense. In canon analogy you get nearly same out of r6 / r3 / 1dx whatever Vs 5ds / R5 when using most of the zoom lenses. 8k one just leads to frustration and bloated file sizes for the most part. With a good prime on it the difference is night and day. The morale is match your kit and don't spend more than you really have to

I don't see it as throwing anything away. When you look at a picture either on screen or in print how much detail can your eye see? Not 24mp.

My point is that you can enjoy some of the benefits of a modern sensor even with cheap lenses.

 

[snerkler]

OK, it's a pretty well known issue. Basically if the multi-interface (hot shoe) gets wet, it shorts the connectors so the camera thinks you are trying to connect something when you are not. It's not a permanent fault but it's not something that clears by wiping it and the message will constantly pop up meaning its very difficult to use the camera.

I used a hairdryer on low heat on it when I got back to the hotel and sorted it, but that's not really something you can do in the field (and I was literally in the middle of a field photographing wildlife when it started).

What surprises me is that it doesn't need much water (rain in this case) to cause the issue, I always keep the cover over it to try to stop this happening but that obviously doesn't work.

I recall reading that Sony were going to address (but they haven't) so I was wondering if there was a workaround or third party products to use on it. I don't really want to go down the route of taping it up etc,

Interesting, not come across this anywhere before on any of the forums or reports. Is it all Sony mirrorless or specific models? I'm finding very little onfo on google

 

[Jase]

Interesting, not come across this anywhere before on any of the forums or reports. Is it all Sony mirrorless or specific models? I'm finding very little onfo on google

I'm not sure, I've seen comments going back a while, but certainly a lot more recently. I know fototripper has had the problem various times with his A1 eg.:

In that he had next to no water just humid, in others he's had light rain etc.

For me there was a little more water but nothing I would expect to stop a camera operating properly, pretty poor tbh.



In the video I took of it below you'll see it flicker, when that happen that would be the error message popping up again had I pressed ok :

 

[snerkler]

I'm not sure, I've seen comments going back a while, but certainly a lot more recently. I know fototripper has had the problem various times with his A1 eg.:

In that he had next to no water just humid, in others he's had light rain etc.

For me there was a little more water but nothing I would expect to stop a camera operating properly, pretty poor tbh.

View attachment 404626

In the video I took of it below you'll see it flicker, when that happen that would be the error message popping up again had I pressed ok :

That it poor, especially considering it’s a “flagship”

 

[LeeRatters]

I'm not sure, I've seen comments going back a while, but certainly a lot more recently. I know fototripper has had the problem various times with his A1 eg.:

In that he had next to no water just humid, in others he's had light rain etc.

For me there was a little more water but nothing I would expect to stop a camera operating properly, pretty poor tbh.

View attachment 404626

In the video I took of it below you'll see it flicker, when that happen that would be the error message popping up again had I pressed ok :

I was about to tag Gavin's recent video.

I had an issue with my A7 this morning. The auto EVF/LCD wasn't working properly. Very intermittent. During shooting I picked up the A7Riii for a 35mm shot and the same happened.....

Don't shoot wearing an orange hi viz work jacket

 

[woof woof]

M mount 50mm lenses...

Comparison: Super Fast 50mm M-mount Lenses - phillipreeve.net

For many years the Leica 50mm 0.95 Noctilux-M was the fastest 50mm M-mount lens, but over the years many competitors have been

phillipreeve.net

I'm happy with the Sony mount Syoptic 50mm f1.1.

 

[nandbytes]

Just came across these smallrig batteries

NP-FZ100 USB-C Rechargeable Camera Battery

NP-FZ100 USB-C Rechargeable Camera Battery【SmallRig - DIY Camera Rigs, Stabilizers and Other Camera Accessories】

www.smallrig.com

You can charge them directly with the USB-C connector on the battery themselves. That's really nice I think.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I don't see it as throwing anything away. When you look at a picture either on screen or in print how much detail can your eye see? Not 24mp.

My point is that you can enjoy some of the benefits of a modern sensor even with cheap lenses.

So basically my point stands that most are better off with a modern 6k sensor.

When I print A1 I do clearly see the difference with 8k camera + excellent prime + very careful technique. On A4 and A3 you will only see the difference between good lens (but maybe not necessarily class leading) and poor lens with shoddy edges and field curvature, while 6k Vs 8k will be largely and completely irrelevant.

 

[Bungieben]

The hide

20231022_113404 by Ben Cheneler, on Flickr

 

[f/2.8]

OK, it's a pretty well known issue. Basically if the multi-interface (hot shoe) gets wet, it shorts the connectors so the camera thinks you are trying to connect something when you are not. It's not a permanent fault but it's not something that clears by wiping it and the message will constantly pop up meaning its very difficult to use the camera.

I used a hairdryer on low heat on it when I got back to the hotel and sorted it, but that's not really something you can do in the field (and I was literally in the middle of a field photographing wildlife when it started).

What surprises me is that it doesn't need much water (rain in this case) to cause the issue, I always keep the cover over it to try to stop this happening but that obviously doesn't work.

I recall reading that Sony were going to address (but they haven't) so I was wondering if there was a workaround or third party products to use on it. I don't really want to go down the route of taping it up etc,

Not had this personally but know others have had it with older bodies like the A9.

The only time we have seen this error message happen on our bodies is when using flash and there was a problem with the Godox mounts which is another common problem especially with the plastic hot shoes, easily solved by upgrading to the metal ones which now come as standard on the V1 and V860III etc.

 

[Jase]

Just came across these smallrig batteries

NP-FZ100 USB-C Rechargeable Camera Battery

NP-FZ100 USB-C Rechargeable Camera Battery【SmallRig - DIY Camera Rigs, Stabilizers and Other Camera Accessories】

www.smallrig.com

You can charge them directly with the USB-C connector on the battery themselves. That's really nice I think.

There’s a few companies that do those now, I almost bought some at a camera show earlier this year but couldn’t think of a scenario where I’d want to charge 1 battery that way.

 

[snerkler]

So basically my point stands that most are better off with a modern 6k sensor.

When I print A1 I do clearly see the difference with 8k camera + excellent prime + very careful technique. On A4 and A3 you will only see the difference between good lens (but maybe not necessarily class leading) and poor lens with shoddy edges and field curvature, while 6k Vs 8k will be largely and completely irrelevant.

I guess this will depend how far you're viewing it from, if scrutinising with a loupe differences will be much more apparent. Of course this will also depend how bad/good the kit lens is too. Printing definitely blurs the lines more, but I do think that lenses have more influence than resolution, as you can see here between a 30mp and 18mp (he shot in 3:2) the difference in resolution is not detectable (8:48)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGn3yPl59ZM&ab_channel=TheSchoolofPhotography

 

[woof woof]

So basically my point stands that most are better off with a modern 6k sensor.

When I print A1 I do clearly see the difference with 8k camera + excellent prime + very careful technique. On A4 and A3 you will only see the difference between good lens (but maybe not necessarily class leading) and poor lens with shoddy edges and field curvature, while 6k Vs 8k will be largely and completely irrelevant.

I'm getting lost here and I think we're talking at cross purposes. My point was and is that the qualities of a nice FF sensor can still be appreciated with basic lenses.

That's all

But I think also "we" need to think about what we want and as I've said 100 times, start at the end result you want and work back to decide the kit and the settings.

Therefore, if "all" you want is a picture to view normally or even closely and you don't expect to see great performance maintained across the frame and into the corners almost anything will do but if you want to pixel peep into the corners and see as near to perfection as is possible at the SOTA today then what you need is SOTA kit.

Personally I'm mostly happy with a nice picture which can be viewed normally or even closely.

Taken with a brand new lens which can be yours for under £100.

 

[woof woof]

I guess this will depend how far you're viewing it from, if scrutinising with a loupe differences will be much more apparent. Of course this will also depend how bad/good the kit lens is too. Printing definitely blurs the lines more, but I do think that lenses have more influence than resolution, as you can see here between a 30mp and 18mp (he shot in 3:2) the difference in resolution is not detectable (8:48)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGn3yPl59ZM&ab_channel=TheSchoolofPhotography

As has been said many times on this and other sites, the number of mp's you can resolve by eye when looking at a picture isn't that many so a lot of this is mute unless we start to pixel peep.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I guess this will depend how far you're viewing it from, if scrutinising with a loupe differences will be much more apparent. Of course this will also depend how bad/good the kit lens is too. Printing definitely blurs the lines more, but I do think that lenses have more influence than resolution, as you can see here between a 30mp and 18mp (he shot in 3:2) the difference in resolution is not detectable (8:48)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGn3yPl59ZM&ab_channel=TheSchoolofPhotography

When your edges look this bad all you can do is shoot portraits in the mid-section or if you are lucky some narrow street cityscapes to accommodate the curvature... You can just barely get away with printing this at A4 'as is'. You are really running this through Sharpen AI with multiple passes of varying strength before you can print. That was £1k++ lens, and no not a focus error. f/4 ones were even worse for both curvature and sharpness in general, and slow kit and most wide angle zoom lenses typically go way way worse. So there was basically zero advantage shooting this on 5Ds. 18MP original 1DX would have produced same resolution with room to spare. So that's where you don't see the difference in printing.
Maybe it is a good thing, but essentially 5Ds made me sell it, and a few more along with it. I now have only 50mm between 35 and 70mm, or more like 75mm in real life.

Since a £100 challenge was mentioned above, well that's not a problem at all. Stick the little 50mm f/1.8 STM on, use MC11 adapter if you must, and I bet Sony one will do just the same; set it to f/6.3 and print happily at 2m wide all day long. There are insane bargain lenses that will cost little more and will cover the 8K+ resolution easily. These are all typically primes and tend to be at or over 50mm, with some very recent exceptions closer to £500 mark used.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

As has been said many times on this and other sites, the number of mp's you can resolve by eye when looking at a picture isn't that many so a lot of this is mute unless we start to pixel peep.

if we look at small size images, then yes. 32" screen, and A1 prints set the bar pretty high.

 

[snerkler]

View attachment 404783

When your edges look this bad all you can do is shoot portraits in the mid-section or if you are lucky some narrow street cityscapes to accommodate the curvature... You can just barely get away with printing this at A4 'as is'. You are really running this through Sharpen AI with multiple passes of varying strength before you can print. That was £1k++ lens, and no not a focus error. f/4 ones were even worse for both curvature and sharpness in general, and slow kit and most wide angle zoom lenses typically go way way worse. So there was basically zero advantage shooting this on 5Ds. 18MP original 1DX would have produced same resolution with room to spare. So that's where you don't see the difference in printing.
Maybe it is a good thing, but essentially 5Ds made me sell it, and a few more along with it. I now have only 50mm between 35 and 70mm, or more like 75mm in real life.

Since a £100 challenge was mentioned above, well that's not a problem at all. Stick the little 50mm f/1.8 STM on, use MC11 adapter if you must, and I bet Sony one will do just the same; set it to f/6.3 and print happily at 2m wide all day long. There are insane bargain lenses that will cost little more and will cover the 8K+ resolution easily. These are all typically primes and tend to be at or over 50mm, with some very recent exceptions closer to £500 mark used.

To be fair it's difficult to assess the edges on that image on here as the IQ is poor across the whole frame. However, as I said earlier I agree that a lens will have a bigger impact on the IQ of an image when printed than the resolution. That being said, some 'kit' lenses do produce surprisingly good images, even at the edges (when stopped down)

 

[woof woof]

if we look at small size images, then yes. 32" screen, and A1 prints set the bar pretty high.

I wouldn't describe A4 or even A3 as small. These are in historical terms at least large prints for the vast majority of people. Today we can easily print large and we can afford to (way back photography was an expensive thing, it's arguably less so today) but many people will only print rarely if at all.

As above, start at the end result and work back to decide the kit and the settings and cropping has to be taken into consideration to and anyone likely to crop heavily could well need a high resolution picture and depending upon the subject and requirements a high performing lens too.

Having said all that there's still viewing distance to consider and the larger the print or on screen picture the further you need to step back or we get into pixel peeping or it's equivalent when looking at a large print or on screen picture but with the kit I have (24mp sensor and lenses which range from cheap to respectable even in todays market) I can crop to 100% and still have the quality I want.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

To be fair it's difficult to assess the edges on that image on here as the IQ is poor across the whole frame. However, as I said earlier I agree that a lens will have a bigger impact on the IQ of an image when printed than the resolution. That being said, some 'kit' lenses do produce surprisingly good images, even at the edges (when stopped down)

All you have seen is the left edge. A terrible edge.

I've inspected many a lens and the bad ones rarely improve to acceptable levels even at f11 or ever. There is not a single acceptable 24-105/120 under the sun from any manufacturer and I now in fact have questions if a truly good 24-70 even exists. Certainly not in canon world or Nikon f.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I wouldn't describe A4 or even A3 as small. These are in historical terms at least large prints for the vast majority of people. Today we can easily print large and we can afford to (way back photography was an expensive thing, it's arguably less so today) but many people will only print rarely if at all.

As above, start at the end result and work back to decide the kit and the settings and cropping has to be taken into consideration to and anyone likely to crop heavily could well need a high resolution picture and depending upon the subject and requirements a high performing lens too.

Having said all that there's still viewing distance to consider and the larger the print or on screen picture the further you need to step back or we get into pixel peeping or it's equivalent when looking at a large print or on screen picture but with the kit I have (24mp sensor and lenses which range from cheap to respectable even in todays market) I can crop to 100% and still have the quality I want.

A4 is the smallest print my printer will do. The smallest, not just small

I certainly don't need to step back to look at one
If I need to crop heavily I have certainly failed as a professional. Rarely go under 90%, 60-70 are extreme and super rare cases

 

[woof woof]

All you have seen is the left edge. A terrible edge.

I've inspected many a lens and the bad ones rarely improve to acceptable levels even at f11 or ever. There is not a single acceptable 24-105/120 under the sun from any manufacturer and I now in fact have questions if a truly good 24-70 even exists. Certainly not in canon world or Nikon f.

With zooms you are very likely compromising on technical quality. If you want quality the way forward is very likely to be a nice prime, possibly even a nice macro.

The best lens I have is a Voigtlander 50mm f2 apo and it is imo outstanding.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

With zooms you are very likely compromising on technical quality. If you want quality the way forward is very likely to be a nice prime, possibly even a nice macro.

The best lens I have is a Voigtlander 50mm f2 apo and it is imo outstanding.

A bag of sigma arts in my case

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I remember there was precious little that was any better than canon 24-70mm f/2.8 ii some 11 years ago now. You were likely adapting old Zeiss primes if you were desperate. Not even their own primed in the range were any better. This really changed now, and mostly thanks to third parties, and namely sigma trying to outdo Zeiss otus line. I think they lost that a little since the move to dn line

 

[woof woof]

A4 is the smallest print my printer will do. The smallest, not just small

I certainly don't need to step back to look at one

To look at larger prints you will need to step back otherwise there's just no way you can see and appreciate the whole image as a whole image. Without a whole picture appropriate viewing distance what you are doing is effectively pixel peeping but I suppose this goes to what we are trying to achieve. Even with A4, for eg., you surely hold it at a different distance than you would a postcard.

Also think of larger pictures for commercial use. When you look at those from a distance they may look very nice but stand very close and things won't be the same. I've never produced a picture that big but waaaay back I did artwork to be viewed from a stage and the detail needed to be seen from the audiences distance, not from a foot away. I think similar applies to photography unless we have to include pixel peeping.

A bag of sigma arts in my case

From what you've posted recently you seem to be in a minority of very demanding people. If you want technical quality from a lens, then yes, go prime or go home

I'm in another category. I'm a happy snapper and very honest about the results and the quality I want to achieve. Mostly I'm recording memories and therefore a nice picture is usually much more important than ultimate sota or even top 10 performance in category by todays standards.

 

[nandbytes]

A bag of sigma arts in my case

Why do you need such big fast primes?

You seem to be mostly shooting landscapes or things that don't move.

I feel you'd be better served with voigtlander lanthar lenses or Zeiss Loxia lenses. They are smaller, slower, MF but I'm sure they'll make you happy optically.

 

[snerkler]

All you have seen is the left edge. A terrible edge.

I've inspected many a lens and the bad ones rarely improve to acceptable levels even at f11 or ever. There is not a single acceptable 24-105/120 under the sun from any manufacturer and I now in fact have questions if a truly good 24-70 even exists. Certainly not in canon world or Nikon f.

It sounds as though your standards are extreme to be fair (nothing wrong with that) as the Sony 24-105mm has great sharpness across the frame, likewise the Sony 24-70mm f2.8 GM II, I’ve also heard very good things with the 20-70mm f4. We’re now seeing corner and edge sharpness we could have only dreamed of in the DSLR world. However, we all have our own standards as I say. I have the 16-35mm f4 and whilst it’s not perfect it’s perfectly acceptable for me (not as good at 35mm).

 

[nandbytes]

However, we all have our own standards as I say. I have the 16-35mm f4 and whilst it’s not perfect it’s perfectly acceptable for me (not as good at 35mm).

Once you use the 35GM, nothing is as good at 35mm

I still find myself changing lenses to 35GM for landscapes even though the 20-70mm covers it.

35GM just has a very nice rendering with a lot of microcontrast.

 

[woof woof]

I've been thinking about selling my film era lenses as I just haven't been using them. A while back I rang a dealer and they seemed pretty keen and they'll even send a box so if I do sell I think that'll be the way to go as sadly in the for sale section here people want kit at extreme knockdown prices and postage paid too, maybe not always that extreme but sometimes getting there

If I do sell I'll hold just a few back, the Minolta 55mm f1.7 being one I'll definitely keep and I'll keep a few others of similar build. I'll also keep my Sigma macro.

 

[woof woof]

Why do you need such big fast primes?

You seem to be mostly shooting landscapes or things that don't move.

I feel you'd be better served with voigtlander lanthar lenses or Zeiss Loxia lenses. They are smaller, slower, MF but I'm sure they'll make you happy optically.

The 50mm f2 is excellent and I've read good things about the others too, the 65mm being reportedly the best. The things that attract me to this sort of lens rather than the Sony GM's include the build and that they're much smaller.

I think someone would have to be very picky to pick fault with these Voigtlander apo lenses.

 

[snerkler]

Once you use the 35GM, nothing is as good at 35mm

I still find myself changing lenses to 35GM for landscapes even though the 20-70mm covers it.

35GM just has a very nice rendering with a lot of microcontrast.

It is a wonderful lens for sure, as is the 50mm f1.2 GM but I don't tend to take them out to do landscapes with as I find my zooms more than acceptable and more convenient.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Why do you need such big fast primes?

You seem to be mostly shooting landscapes or things that don't move.

I would not say that at all. As commercial photography business I get variety of jobs and some include people, dogs, etc.
In fact there is plenty of use of fast quality glass for landscape without immediate foreground

 

[LongLensPhotography]

It is a wonderful lens for sure, as is the 50mm f1.2 GM but I don't tend to take them out to do landscapes with as I find my zooms more than acceptable and more convenient.

Convenience is the thing for landscape. It took 8k camera to pry it out of my hands, and I still have 16-35 2.8 as bad as it suddenly gets just past the 6k resolution mark.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

It sounds as though your standards are extreme to be fair (nothing wrong with that) as the Sony 24-105mm has great sharpness across the frame, likewise the Sony 24-70mm f2.8 GM II, I’ve also heard very good things with the 20-70mm f4. We’re now seeing corner and edge sharpness we could have only dreamed of in the DSLR world. However, we all have our own standards as I say. I have the 16-35mm f4 and whilst it’s not perfect it’s perfectly acceptable for me (not as good at 35mm).

GM ii and 20-70 need to be investigated deeper. They would be hopefully absolutely fine for a9 and regular A7 lines. Will they fill the shoes of the r sensor is the really big question

 

[snerkler]

GM ii and 20-70 need to be investigated deeper. They would be hopefully absolutely fine for a9 and regular A7 lines. Will they fill the shoes of the r sensor is the really big question

The 24-105mm stands up really well on the A7RIV so I'd expect the 20-70mm f4 and 24-70mm GM2 to do so too.

 

[wookie6262]

Just got the megadap to try my Sony lenses on the Z9. Seems a robust well made kit and nicely packaged. No issue with fitting to camera or mounting lens. No energy or light for a proper test but under the living room lights it isn't even close to Sony performance. The 85mm F1.8 focused on the target but a good deal slower than the A1 native focusing. In 3d tracking it was losing my sleeping dogs paw as I moved the camera but was rock solid with the A1. I'll try again daylight but first impressions are it won't be any use for my purposes.

Z9 is a mixed bag so far. Love the body, battery life is unbelievable, ergonomics are excellent and image quality on a par with Sony A1 but not fully tested it. Colours are better and more natural but the Sony is fine too. Autofocus I'm not too sure about. It definitely works well but nowhere near as easy as the A1 which you can basically stick in medium sized box and it tracks your subject all over. 3D is similar but the box is very small so not as easy to place of a moving footballer. Early days though and I may be missing something

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The 24-105mm stands up really well on the A7RIV so I'd expect the 20-70mm f4 and 24-70mm GM2 to do so too.

They may be interesting convenience options, with 20-70mm being somewhat newer and more useful FL than 24-105mm. I wonder where you would put Sigma 24-70 DN between the three, for landscapes and portraits combined?

 

[snerkler]

They may be interesting convenience options, with 20-70mm being somewhat newer and more useful FL than 24-105mm. I wonder where you would put Sigma 24-70 DN between the three, for landscapes and portraits combined?

I’ve no experience nor researched that lens so can’t comment I’m afraid.

The Tamron 17-50mm f4 is getting very good reviews,… barring the vignetting.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

The Tamron 17-50mm f4 is getting very good reviews,… barring the vignetting.

17-50mm F/4 Di III VXD (Model A068) | Specifications | Lenses | TAMRON Photo Site for photgraphic lenses

The page is Tamron's lens product / Specifications [17-50mm F/4 Di III VXD (Model A068)].It's the world’s first lens covering from ultra wide-angle 17mm to the standard 50mm focal length. The highly-compact TAMRON 17-50mm F/4 Di III VXD (Model A068) for Sony E-mount full-frame mirrorless cameras...

www.tamron.com

17mm end MTF looks a little suspect. It may have hard time resolving at or past 6K mark. It depends on field curvature etc.

24-105 also has crazy vignetting at 24mm. 24-70 GM2 is one of the cleaner(est?) examples in that regard.

 

[woof woof]

Update...

New A7cII firmware update released – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com

 

[snerkler]

17-50mm F/4 Di III VXD (Model A068) | Specifications | Lenses | TAMRON Photo Site for photgraphic lenses

The page is Tamron's lens product / Specifications [17-50mm F/4 Di III VXD (Model A068)].It's the world’s first lens covering from ultra wide-angle 17mm to the standard 50mm focal length. The highly-compact TAMRON 17-50mm F/4 Di III VXD (Model A068) for Sony E-mount full-frame mirrorless cameras...

www.tamron.com

17mm end MTF looks a little suspect. It may have hard time resolving at or past 6K mark. It depends on field curvature etc.

24-105 also has crazy vignetting at 24mm. 24-70 GM2 is one of the cleaner(est?) examples in that regard.

I stop these lenses down so vignetting is less of a problem for me. I still don't fully understand MTF's, I just go by real world examples

I'm still to find some example raw files but this review is pretty comprehensive

Tamron 17-50mm F4 Di III VXD Review - DustinAbbott.net

Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a thorough, real world review of the Tamron 17-50mm F4 VXD wide angle zoom

dustinabbott.net