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

Damian Brown said:
Exactly. I review gear, alas I'm not doing much Sony yet but I'm considering an A7iii to do so. For now it's X, M4/3 and L.
Click to expand...
Ahh Ok, that makes sense now (y)
 
snerkler said:
That's the one (y)
Click to expand...
Got loads like that way over exposed nearly binned them all and yes the first pic at 1/8th was with a ND filter again got loads to go through.

The filter was an ND 3.0 10 stop Firecrest used on a dullish day just to try it and has since been returned due to a pinpoint blemish (clear bit) i could see. Coulourcast,,, would that be the off white in that particular pic.
Don't forget i am a newbie so lots to learn and more critique on what i post the better.
 
Sootchucker said:
OK, first of the many questions, in Sony vernacular IS XAVC HS equivalent to H265 and XAVC S - H264 please ?

Also, what would be a well regarded and small (similar to the 15mm F1.4 in size) 35mm or 50mm equivalent standard lens (so I guess a 27mm and / or 35mm in APS-C focal lengths) with a max aperture of say around F1.4-F2 ish please ?
Click to expand...

The Viltrox 27mm f/1.2 XF Pro seems to be very well regarded, if I shot APSC that’s the one I would go for.

It would seem all of their newer A.P.S.C lenses are supposed to very good.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
The Viltrox 27mm f/1.2 XF Pro seems to be very well regarded, if I shot APSC that’s the one I would go for.

It would seem all of their newer A.P.S.C lenses are supposed to very good.
Click to expand...
As a big fan of 40mm this caught my eye as well, but in a huge display of willpower vs GAS, I managed to convince myself that an A6000 + Viltrox is only 80g lighter than a A7r2+ Batis 40mm.

Well done me
 
Bungieben said:
Got loads like that way over exposed nearly binned them all and yes the first pic at 1/8th was with a ND filter again got loads to go through.

The filter was an ND 3.0 10 stop Firecrest used on a dullish day just to try it and has since been returned due to a pinpoint blemish (clear bit) i could see. Coulourcast,,, would that be the off white in that particular pic.
Don't forget i am a newbie so lots to learn and more critique on what i post the better.
Click to expand...
Ahh a ten stopper that’s why. It doesn’t look too bad in that it should be an easy fix in post by simply tweaking white balance, some colour casts can be a nightmare to correct.

When using big stoppers like that I tend to use one of the WB settings that looks most natural, or manually set it. If you can be bothered you can set an exact WB but I’ve never tended to bother, in fact I don’t think I’ve done it at all with a Sony camera.

With the shot at f2.8 you needn’t have shot wide open as there’s no fence at that part of the track so there’s nothing to try and ‘hide’, also it doesn’t matter that there’s loads of DOF as the background’s blurred.

Through Redgate and Craners from the inside of the track I rarely use ND’s, although I did have to once when it was actually sunny (kinda forgotten what that’s like) and at 1/10 I was beyond the minimum aperture.
 
It's no wonder shipping is so expensive these days, been tracking the Panamoz return. It left East Midlands Airport the next day, it's then been sat in Germany for over 2 days and this morning it's arrived back in Stanstead :oops: :$
 
snerkler said:
It's no wonder shipping is so expensive these days, been tracking the Panamoz return. It left East Midlands Airport the next day, it's then been sat in Germany for over 2 days and this morning it's arrived back in Stanstead :oops: :$
Click to expand...

Are they making you send it back to China?

When I have returned stuff to them before it only had to be shipped to an address in London.
 
f/2.8 said:
Are they making you send it back to China?

When I have returned stuff to them before it only had to be shipped to an address in London.
Click to expand...
Yes, well Hong Kong. It’s at their expense though, they provided all the labels and customs invoices.
 
snerkler said:
Yes, well Hong Kong. It’s at their expense though, they provided all the labels and customs invoices.
Click to expand...
Maybe they have changed how they do things to be fair it’s been a long time since I sent anything back to them.
 
I took some pictures with my MFT Panasonic GX9 and 12-35mm f2.8 yesterday and I made a little panorama from three pictures taken at 12mm, that's 24mm FF equivalent. I don't think I've done a panorama with a wide lens before, I think they've all been at either 35 or 50mm.

For those who do panoramas more than I do, is there a better focal length? A worse one? Just wondering.

I suppose I mostly have 35 or 50mm lenses mounted but I think a thought at the back of my mind was that wider lenses have less good edges and corners but these days I don't think that's necessarily true anymore so maybe I should consider wider lenses more for panoramas.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I took some pictures with my MFT Panasonic GX9 and 12-35mm f2.8 yesterday and I made a little panorama from three pictures taken at 12mm, that's 24mm FF equivalent. I don't think I've done a panorama with a wide lens before, I think they've all been at either 35 or 50mm.

For those who do panoramas more than I do, is there a better focal length? A worse one? Just wondering.

I suppose I mostly have 35 or 50mm lenses mounted but I think a thought at the back of my mind was that wider lenses have less good edges and corners but these days I don't think that's necessarily true anymore so maybe I should consider wider lenses more for panoramas.
Click to expand...
I find with wide angle you're more prone to the distortion, is it parallax effect or something?
 
woof woof said:
I took some pictures with my MFT Panasonic GX9 and 12-35mm f2.8 yesterday and I made a little panorama from three pictures taken at 12mm, that's 24mm FF equivalent. I don't think I've done a panorama with a wide lens before, I think they've all been at either 35 or 50mm.

For those who do panoramas more than I do, is there a better focal length? A worse one? Just wondering.

I suppose I mostly have 35 or 50mm lenses mounted but I think a thought at the back of my mind was that wider lenses have less good edges and corners but these days I don't think that's necessarily true anymore so maybe I should consider wider lenses more for panoramas.
Click to expand...

I generally use longer focal lengths (35mm plus) for panoramic images instead of using a wide angle tbh but I do that for the look and compression rather than the typical "fit as much into frame as possible" panoramas. I would imagine most people wouldn't notice the difference, but I do :)

24mm probably the exception for night sky panoramic arch images.
 
I think for pano work, if your WA doesn't distort in the corners then you're OK. However many do, increasingly as they get wider, so if there are objects in the image with an obvious shape they may appear squished.
 
woof woof said:
I took some pictures with my MFT Panasonic GX9 and 12-35mm f2.8 yesterday and I made a little panorama from three pictures taken at 12mm, that's 24mm FF equivalent. I don't think I've done a panorama with a wide lens before, I think they've all been at either 35 or 50mm.

For those who do panoramas more than I do, is there a better focal length? A worse one? Just wondering.

I suppose I mostly have 35 or 50mm lenses mounted but I think a thought at the back of my mind was that wider lenses have less good edges and corners but these days I don't think that's necessarily true anymore so maybe I should consider wider lenses more for panoramas.
Click to expand...
Personally I always use an 85mm for panoramas otherwise I might as well use my wide lenses.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I think for pano work, if your WA doesn't distort in the corners then you're OK. However many do, increasingly as they get wider, so if there are objects in the image with an obvious shape they may appear squished.
Click to expand...
This is what I was referring to with wide angle and panos. Obviously it's worse with close objects, and it may be that with wide angle you're tendning to shoot something closer and hence why it's more pronounced.

A1_08333-Pano by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr


That being said, the sky and clouds aren't exactly close and it can still be seen here 'distorting' the clouds :thinking:


A9_08248-Pano-2 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
 
I haven't used an 85mm for quite a while but it's on my list of things to do.

I think maybe half of my panoramas haven't been deliberately taken to stitch, it's just that I've spotted they might when I get home, like yesterday. So that's another thing I should do, more deliberate panoramas.
 
Why is it that with the exception of say the 16-55 F2.8, most of the "standard" zoom lenses for the Sony E mount APS-C start at 18mm (27mm effective) and not 16mm (24mm) as their FF counterparts do ?
 
Sootchucker said:
Why is it that with the exception of say the 16-55 F2.8, most of the "standard" zoom lenses for the Sony E mount APS-C start at 18mm (27mm effective) and not 16mm (24mm) as their FF counterparts do ?
Click to expand...
I don't know, but it seems to be the way with quite a lot of APS-C lenses :thinking:
 
Cost maybe?

I have a 12-35mm (FF equiv of 24-70mm) f2.8 zoom for MFT and it certainly cost more than the 14-xx zooms I had.

Just on zooms. I mostly use primes but I took a zoom yesterday to photograph Mrs WW's citizenship ceremony as I didn't know where I'd be able to stand and using the zoom did feel strange compared to my usual primes.
 
Last edited:
Maybe, I've only really had main experience with Olympus / Panasonic in Micro Four thirds mounts for anything other than FF, and as has been said, taking Micro Four thirds, you have the Olympus 12-40, 12.45, 12-100, 12-200, then the Panasonic 12-35, 12-60 etc - all starting at 24mm (equivalent) ?
 
Sootchucker said:
Why is it that with the exception of say the 16-55 F2.8, most of the "standard" zoom lenses for the Sony E mount APS-C start at 18mm (27mm effective) and not 16mm (24mm) as their FF counterparts do ?
Click to expand...
I imagine that makes for smaller lenses for smaller bodies.

but that's not the only lens that starts at 16mm, there is a Sony zeiss 16-70mm f4 and Sony 16-50mm PZ. but because they are optimised for size, both not great in corners one at long end and other at wide end but for 4K they are are plenty good if that's your main use case.

There is also a tamron 17-70mm f2.8 which is not 16mm but wider than 18mm :D
 
Sootchucker said:
Why is it that with the exception of say the 16-55 F2.8, most of the "standard" zoom lenses for the Sony E mount APS-C start at 18mm (27mm effective) and not 16mm (24mm) as their FF counterparts do ?
Click to expand...

Size, weight, cost to manufacture, market needs and expectations. I don't think these cameras are targeted at serious users, although some do buy them, and focal lengths are likely less clearly understood by a majority of buyers.
 
robj20 said:
20-70 f4 has arrived.
Amazing the size of the thing compared to the old 24-70, that 20-23 makes so much difference for me. Can't wait to try it out.
Click to expand...
It is new kit day for me, my RX 100 VA has just arrived - it is adorable, I can't believe how small it is. Nice solid build quality as well, Charging up the batteries now, but Im waiting until my screen protector, grip and sticky CF wrap arrive this evening.
Oh, and find my USB card reader so I can check which of my cards is empty to use in it! :runaway:
 
Only main thing I don't like about my RX100 VII is that Sony still use the UHS-I standard for the SD cards not the much faster UHS II, so I quite often find myself waiting for the card to finish writing before I can do anything else, but as a pocket camera to take everywhere with you, the RX100 series really has very few peers. Would be great if Sony were developing a MK8 with UHS II, higher res rear screen and EVF, 10 bit video footage (even if only 4,2.0), and 4k 50 (60 if you are from that side of the pond). However I very much doubt we will ever see another RX100 generation again.
 
Sootchucker said:
Only main thing I don't like about my RX100 VII is that Sony still use the UHS-I standard for the SD cards not the much faster UHS II, so I quite often find myself waiting for the card to finish writing before I can do anything else, but as a pocket camera to take everywhere with you, the RX100 series really has very few peers. Would be great if Sony were developing a MK8 with UHS II, higher res rear screen and EVF, 10 bit video footage (even if only 4,2.0), and 4k 50 (60 if you are from that side of the pond). However I very much doubt we will ever see another RX100 generation again.
Click to expand...
been waiting nearly 7 years for a RX10 iv sucessor!
Same lens+stacked sensor with new AF capabilities and UHS-II card slot that can support the 24fps RAW shooting.
Also blackout free shooting from RX100 VII.

Would make for a great do-it-all backup body....
 
robj20 said:
20-70 f4 has arrived.
Amazing the size of the thing compared to the old 24-70, that 20-23 makes so much difference for me. Can't wait to try it out.
Click to expand...
Which 24-70mm?

The 20-70mm is a very sharp lens.
 
Sootchucker said:
Only main thing I don't like about my RX100 VII is that Sony still use the UHS-I standard for the SD cards not the much faster UHS II, so I quite often find myself waiting for the card to finish writing before I can do anything else, but as a pocket camera to take everywhere with you, the RX100 series really has very few peers. Would be great if Sony were developing a MK8 with UHS II, higher res rear screen and EVF, 10 bit video footage (even if only 4,2.0), and 4k 50 (60 if you are from that side of the pond). However I very much doubt we will ever see another RX100 generation again.
Click to expand...
I think it really depends on your use case, my other 2 camera's are a A6000 which was my test case for mirrorless, I liked it but the EVF was pants so I bought the A7r2 which I still use.
To the best of my knowledge I have only shot 2 videos on my cameras ever and they were 20 sec clips, I actually prefer phones for that especially my Xperia IV for Video, but Im not shooting professionally, it is all friends and family for me. I have also never used burst mode, but I can imagine if the camera isn't responding while the card writes then that would drive me up the wall. The things that limit you, I haven't even touched yet.
I think the thing with Sony is, if they gave you all that, they would make it a 2K camera.

Damn, it is pocketable, but those buttons are seriously fiddly...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top