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

Mr Perceptive said:
Alan

You can set custom profiles then assign them to a function button,, the button within the rear (top) dial can be assigned several functions (user configurable) which you can then scroll through

Or you can just use the Q menu

The menu system is much simpler and easy to navigate compared with Canon/Fuji/Nikon/Sony etc, so it’s not a chore to drop into when required

That all said, I hardly ever change anything!! I have a couple of user profiles (usually different auto ISO capabilities and one for movement AF-C capture)

I actually find the lack of buttons a welcome distraction as it allows me to concentrate on the image.

The Q and Q2 only have contrast detection AF so while they are accurate they are not as fast as the phase detection available in the Q3 - this is snappy in AF-S but not up to current Sony speeds in AF-C. That said it appears to be accurate and I have more info us shots from either Q3 than I do from the Fuji X-T3 in similar scenarios.

I would recommend not holding one unless you are prepared to buy, they are very tactile cameras and everything IMO feels right, yes they are a little weighty (and bulky), but that resonates with the price tag, they feel incredibly well made, it is a very satisfying experience using them
Click to expand...
Do you use the film simulations or are they a waste of time?
 
snerkler said:
Do you use the film simulations or are they a waste of time?
Click to expand...

Generally Leica ‘Looks’ including the extra ones you can download into the Q3 are pretty much IMO a waste of time, the monochrome is good though and I have quite a few mono jpgs that I’ve been happy with.

I only switch the EVF between standard and monochrome mainly for visualisation

The JPGs from my wife’s D-Lux 8 though seem to be quite good and she is happy with them - but the labcoat probably wouldn’t be
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Generally Leica ‘Looks’ including the extra ones you can download into the Q3 are pretty much IMO a waste of time, the monochrome is good though and I have quite a few mono jpgs that I’ve been happy with.

I only switch the EVF between standard and monochrome mainly for visualisation

The JPGs from my wife’s D-Lux 8 though seem to be quite good and she is happy with them - but the labcoat probably wouldn’t be
Click to expand...
Isnt' the D-Lux 8 just a rebadged Panasonic Lx-100? They look nice little cameras but I've been down the m4/3 route before ;)

You have piqued my interest in the Q3 damn you :headbang: :ROFLMAO: It is well outside of my budget though so it's not a serious contender,.... unless I win the Euromillions tonight :lol:
 
To David's comment above.

I use custom buttons for AF/MF, timer, exposure mode, exposure lock, I think that's it. I use the custom menu for other things including ISO. Beyond that I have two custom modes on the pasm dial. I could cope with a more minimal camera and just use a custom menu but I imagine a lot of people wouldn't. I don't use any film or other jpeg modes and I don't necessarily equate bulk, weight or tactile feel with quality and of course the badge means next to nothing to me.

In theory a Leica should be right up my street but in reality they'd have to be smaller, lighter and cheaper and I'm not going back to a range finder as they're too limiting for me now that I'm used to being able to focus anywhere in the frame. tbh a cheaper and lighter camera with both AF and MF lenses available is good enough for me. I have no real problem ignoring features or buttons I don't use as long as the kit doesn't end up looking like a scientific calculator. I would obsess if some basic function was missing though and I had to dive into a menu to get it. There has to be a good balance of design and useful buttons and dials.

I do see the appeal of Leica's and even of being invested in a brand but that's just not me. In some instances (and excluding the Panasonic rebadges with imo only mild differences) there's nothing else exactly like a Leica but my A7 with a AF/MF lens capability is as tactile and involving as I need although an evf in the corner FF camera without the evf hump might be nice too.
 
woof woof said:
To David's comment above.

I use custom buttons for AF/MF, timer, exposure mode, exposure lock, I think that's it. I use the custom menu for other things including ISO. Beyond that I have two custom modes on the pasm dial. I could cope with a more minimal camera and just use a custom menu but I imagine a lot of people wouldn't. I don't use any film or other jpeg modes and I don't necessarily equate bulk, weight or tactile feel with quality and of course the badge means next to nothing to me.

In theory a Leica should be right up my street but in reality they'd have to be smaller, lighter and cheaper and I'm not going back to a range finder as they're too limiting for me now that I'm used to being able to focus anywhere in the frame. tbh a cheaper and lighter camera with both AF and MF lenses available is good enough for me. I have no real problem ignoring features or buttons I don't use as long as the kit doesn't end up looking like a scientific calculator. I would obsess if some basic function was missing though and I had to dive into a menu to get it. There has to be a good balance of design and useful buttons and dials.

I do see the appeal of Leica's and even of being invested in a brand but that's just not me. In some instances (and excluding the Panasonic rebadges with imo only mild differences) there's nothing else exactly like a Leica but my A7 with a AF/MF lens capability is as tactile and involving as I need although an evf in the corner FF camera without the evf hump might be nice too.
Click to expand...
For me a compact camera would be pretty much a point and shoot which means just shooting in aperture priority for me, I doubt I'd change any other function once set up.

I don't think the Q3 is the old rangefinder VF, isn't it a modern EVF, albeit a lower res one?
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
For me a compact camera would be pretty much a point and shoot which means just shooting in aperture priority for me, I doubt I'd change any other function once set up.

I don't think the Q3 is the old rangefinder VF, isn't it a modern EVF, albeit a lower res one?
Click to expand...

No the Q's are not rf's.

I need manual mode too as when the light drops and takes the shutter speed too low in aperture mode I switch to manual with auto iso and set the aperture and shutter speed I want. I use shutter priority a out once a decade.
 
snerkler said:
For me a compact camera would be pretty much a point and shoot which means just shooting in aperture priority for me, I doubt I'd change any other function once set up.

I don't think the Q3 is the old rangefinder VF, isn't it a modern EVF, albeit a lower res one?
Click to expand...
Don’t think the Q3 EVF is particular low res at 5.76mp

And yes I can move the focus point about just like any other mirrorless camera

And yes the D-Lux 8 is the guts of an LX100, it’s been regarded and the menus have been changed to mimic those of the Q series. My wife’s is the 100th anniversary edition do made to look even more Leica like!!!!

What the Leica (Q3 and D/Lux8) does have that is ahead of all the competition is an excellent wireless connection to the phone, a selling point for my wife!!!
woof woof said:
No the Q's are not rf's.

I need manual mode too as when the light drops and takes the shutter speed too low in aperture mode I switch to manual with auto iso and set the aperture and shutter speed I want. I use shutter priority a out once a decade.
Click to expand...

Manual mode is switched by taking the lens and shutter dial out of A - manual focus when required is excellent using a clutch release on the lens.

Your function button requirements can be handled but several functions would have to be assigned to one button, which when selected defaults to the last used function but other functions can be selected through the scroll wheel
 
Regarding the ongoing communication with Sony regarding the electronic shutter sound not working on my A7RV they have come back saying that my serial number is invalid. Now of course this will be because it was bought from Panamoz, however what's odd is that when I had issues with my A1 there was never any mention of my serial number being invalid, can anyone suggest a reason why?
 
I'm hoping an AF 28mm f1.8/2 comes along. I'm not happy with the Sony f2 and the only other option seems to be the Viltrox f1.8 but the clickless aperture puts me off that lens. I know you'll see the value in the vf but it's possibly going to be easy to turn accidentally and if that's the case it's something that's going to need constant checking for. I realise it's to please the video crowd but I'd much rather have a clicking aperture ring.

I don't think I've missed one have I?

A7 and Sony 28mm f2. Somewhere in Cumbria on my birthday in May :D

DSC08258.jpg
 
woof woof said:
I'm hoping an AF 28mm f1.8/2 comes along. I'm not happy with the Sony f2 and the only other option seems to be the Viltrox f1.8 but the clickless aperture puts me off that lens. I know you'll see the value in the vf but it's possibly going to be easy to turn accidentally and if that's the case it's something that's going to need constant checking for. I realise it's to please the video crowd but I'd much rather have a clicking aperture ring.

I don't think I've missed one have I?

A7 and Sony 28mm f2. Somewhere in Cumbria on my birthday in May :D

View attachment 459964
Click to expand...
I thought the 28mm f2 was OK for what it is, although I don't think it's worth the RRP. I just didn't find the focal length suited me and prefer 35mm as a general purpose lens.

On the subject of price, the price of the Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 has always baffled me, how it's worth £630 is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, it's a good lens from a technical point of view, but it's relatively slow and there's nothing extra special about the rendering that could ever justify the cost to me. Occasionally you can get a used 'bargain' though.
 
snerkler said:
I thought the 28mm f2 was OK for what it is, although I don't think it's worth the RRP. I just didn't find the focal length suited me and prefer 35mm as a general purpose lens.

On the subject of price, the price of the Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 has always baffled me, how it's worth £630 is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, it's a good lens from a technical point of view, but it's relatively slow and there's nothing extra special about the rendering that could ever justify the cost to me. Occasionally you can get a used 'bargain' though.
Click to expand...

I would much rather get the 40G than the Zeiss 35mm.
 
snerkler said:
I thought the 28mm f2 was OK for what it is, although I don't think it's worth the RRP. I just didn't find the focal length suited me and prefer 35mm as a general purpose lens.

On the subject of price, the price of the Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 has always baffled me, how it's worth £630 is beyond me. Don't get me wrong, it's a good lens from a technical point of view, but it's relatively slow and there's nothing extra special about the rendering that could ever justify the cost to me. Occasionally you can get a used 'bargain' though.
Click to expand...

In the past I did defend the Sony 28mm f2 but I think that was down to not using it enough. I've recently had some slightly missed focus shots but that could be down to my old A7, I'm not sure and I haven't tried it on my A7III yet but anyway, I want lenses which work on both my A7's. The other issue is that IMO the far corners are poor at anything less than f8. I could forgive that with an old film era lens but I think a modern lens could do better. I suppose a fix for the poor corners is... don't pixel peep.

Perhaps I'm being too harsh but as I can't resist looking into the corners this affects my choice of aperture and at 28mm and a reasonable distance I should be able to get front to back acceptable sharpness into the corners at f5. I don't use it much but 28mm does give a different FoV and perspective v 35mm and sometimes that extra width is nice.

You're probably right about the Sony 35mm f2.8's price. I have taken some of my favourite pictures with it but I haven't used it since getting the 40mm. I can't bring myself to sell it though because it's a small 35mm :D

Some Sony 28mm f2 pictures, just for fun.

I'm reasonably happy with this one even though the corners aren't great, f5 and showing a little more vignetting than I'd ideally like but sometimes vignetting can help.

1-DSC08275.jpg

Playing with perspective, IMO there's a bit more scope for this than with a 35mm but not as much as with a 24mm :D

1-DSC08445.jpg

I am annoyed with this one. The A7 was set to eye detect and it hit her eye and it looked ok in the vf but look closely and you can see it missed. Why? I had maybe 3 or 4 like this out of maybe 120 or so and sadly I didn't spot this one at the time. OK she is more side on here and it was on my A7 but other missed ones were square on.

1-DSC08448.jpg

I might so some selective sharpening or dehazing or something on her face and see if it looks any better. I was going to print this A4 but the slight miss has put me off.
 
snerkler said:
I've never used a 40mm, not sure whether I'd miss that bit of extra FOV.
Click to expand...

My first camera was 43mm equivalent and I loved it but in my mind I do know that 40 isn't 35 and I do prefer 35mm but really if you do notice the difference all you have to do is lean back :D
 
sjh2008 said:
There is always the Sigma DG DN 35mm F2 which is a lovely and sharp lens, metal casing and nice Bokeh.

dustinabbott.net

Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN Review - DustinAbbott.net

Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a thorough review of the premium yet compact Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN - the i35 is for Sony FE and Leica L.
dustinabbott.net dustinabbott.net
Click to expand...

I don't know how this compares to the Sony f1.8. I don't think the Sigma was out when I bought the Sony but one thing the Sony does have going for it is its close focus ability.
 
sjh2008 said:
There is always the Sigma DG DN 35mm F2 which is a lovely and sharp lens, metal casing and nice Bokeh.

dustinabbott.net

Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN Review - DustinAbbott.net

Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a thorough review of the premium yet compact Sigma 35mm F2 DG DN - the i35 is for Sony FE and Leica L.
dustinabbott.net dustinabbott.net
Click to expand...
I think I'd choose the 35mm f1.8 over this as it's a bit lighter, although I do like that the Siggy has an aperture ring.
 
snerkler said:
I've never used a 40mm, not sure whether I'd miss that bit of extra FOV.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it was my copy of the Zeiss, but I had quite a few instances where I wasn't happy with the IQ. Maybe it was a bit decentered or something, but it put me off - so much so I sold it and bought the even cheaper Samyang 35/2.8 but I didn't use that much before my boy nabbed it (this was back in my adapted M mount days I think)

Right now, I would give up the 5mm in exchange for the more modern G badge :)
 
LeeRatters said:
Perhaps it was my copy of the Zeiss, but I had quite a few instances where I wasn't happy with the IQ. Maybe it was a bit decentered or something, but it put me off - so much so I sold it and bought the even cheaper Samyang 35/2.8 but I didn't use that much before my boy nabbed it (this was back in my adapted M mount days I think)

Right now, I would give up the 5mm in exchange for the more modern G badge :)
Click to expand...

To me the 40mm f2.5 is technically the better lens and it has an aperture ring and a more attractive build. By technically better I mean it is sharper across the frame and I also like the colours in raws straight out of the camera. It is one of the best lenses I've had, maybe No.2 with the Voigtlander 50mm f2 being the best lens I've had.
 
In Italy for my usual summer holiday with the in-laws. This time I had my Sony A7 original with me, together with a couple of primes (50 and 28mm).

1. Sunset at Pintura. This is the local high point with views to the Adriatic sea in one direction and over the mountains to the west. I was, of course, looking the wrong way and my wife took way better sunset shots with her iPhone, but I managed this grab once she called me over.
Pintura I by Ian, on Flickr

2. Stunning sunset the next night that this six shot pano does little justice to. That's my house on the right
Fiastra I by Ian, on Flickr

3. Next evening at another high point in the area. I blew out the highlights through user error, unfortunately. My wife is one of the tiny blobs about to be very surprised when a deer breaks cover and runs right past her
Pintura II by Ian, on Flickr

4. A pano with moonlight later that night. Individual shots are a little blurred as I was handholding but it looks OK on a screen.
Pintura III by Ian, on Flickr

Thanks for looking
 
ianmarsh said:
In Italy for my usual summer holiday with the in-laws. This time I had my Sony A7 original with me, together with a couple of primes (50 and 28mm).

1. Sunset at Pintura. This is the local high point with views to the Adriatic sea in one direction and over the mountains to the west. I was, of course, looking the wrong way and my wife took way better sunset shots with her iPhone, but I managed this grab once she called me over.
Pintura I by Ian, on Flickr

2. Stunning sunset the next night that this six shot pano does little justice to. That's my house on the right
Fiastra I by Ian, on Flickr

3. Next evening at another high point in the area. I blew out the highlights through user error, unfortunately. My wife is one of the tiny blobs about to be very surprised when a deer breaks cover and runs right past her
Pintura II by Ian, on Flickr

4. A pano with moonlight later that night. Individual shots are a little blurred as I was handholding but it looks OK on a screen.
Pintura III by Ian, on Flickr

Thanks for looking
Click to expand...
Very nice, lovely light.
 
This could be interesting...

New Sirui 35mm f/1.4 FE lens now available for preorder at BHphoto | sonyalpharumors

You get it for $549 at BHphoto, Amazon, Sirui Store .
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

I couldn't find any spec for the e mount version. Everything took me to other mounts or an 85mm or ended in a broken link. Even on the makers own site a search ended in a broken link which isn't inspiring. If I remember or see this again I'll be interested to at least read about it once working links and reviews are out.
 
snerkler said:
I think I'd choose the 35mm f1.8 over this as it's a bit lighter, although I do like that the Siggy has an aperture ring.
Click to expand...

I have both of those lenses the Sigma is a much better lens overall.

The Sony 35 f/1.8 has pretty awful O.O.F focus areas, heavy vignette and a lot of fringing. The Siggy is a much nicer lens to use as well.
 
f/2.8 said:
I have both of those lenses the Sigma is a much better lens overall.

The Sony 35 f/1.8 has pretty awful O.O.F focus areas, heavy vignette and a lot of fringing. The Siggy is a much nicer lens to use as well.
Click to expand...
Fair do’s, I’ve not used the Siggy to comment but I’m happy to take your word on it (y)
 
The A7RV’s definitely going, along with the 10-20mm PZ. The question is do I buy something with the money or bank it :thinking: I’m leaning towards a left field option of an RX1R II. I had a look at an X100 (original) today, it’s actually bigger than I thought and I wasn’t as wowed by the retro looks as I thought I would be.

I also had a play with a Leica Q, it actually feels better in the hand that it looks like it would. I’m not interested in the Q or the Q2, and the Q3 is way out of budget, and to be honest it’s much bigger than I’d want for the camera on my radar.

The RX1R III is not on the radar, not only is the price unjustifiable for me, the lack of tilt screen rules it out.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
The A7RV’s definitely going, along with the 10-20mm PZ. The question is do I buy something with the money or bank it :thinking: I’m leaning towards a left field option of an RX1R II. I had a look at an X100 (original) today, it’s actually bigger than I thought and I wasn’t as wowed by the retro looks as I thought I would be.

I also had a play with a Leica Q, it actually feels better in the hand that it looks like it would. I’m not interested in the Q or the Q2, and the Q3 is way out of budget, and to be honest it’s much bigger than I’d want for the camera on my radar.

The RX1R III is not on the radar, not only is the price unjustifiable for me, the lack of tilt screen rules it out.
Click to expand...
The OG X100 is slightly smaller than the later variants

Not surprised the Q was nicer in the hand than you expected
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The OG X100 is slightly smaller than the later variants

Not surprised the Q was nicer in the hand than you expected
Click to expand...
I must admit, after having looked at it in more detail I totally get the Q series, the way the lens renders is something else. If my 6 numbers come up and I wasn't looking for something smaller then it'd certainly be on the cards. The only thing I don't like is that in the various crop modes you just get a box outline to mark where the image will be cropped to rather than showing the true cropped image as you'd normally see in APS-C mode on Sony etc. I'd personally find the bits outside the box distracting.
 
snerkler said:
I must admit, after having looked at it in more detail I totally get the Q series, the way the lens renders is something else. If my 6 numbers come up and I wasn't looking for something smaller then it'd certainly be on the cards. The only thing I don't like is that in the various crop modes you just get a box outline to mark where the image will be cropped to rather than showing the true cropped image as you'd normally see in APS-C mode on Sony etc. I'd personally find the bits outside the box distracting.
Click to expand...
I don’t like the crop mode implementation either, but I understand its implementation using rangefinder OVF logic - it would be nice to have it switchable in the menus between two modes of operation
 
Seeing beyond the frame can be an advantage as you see what's beyond and what may be about to enter the frame. I'm sure some people will like that but I think the best of both worlds would be to have the choice of frame lines or filling the frame. Surely this would be easy to do with a firmware update if Leica wanted to do it.
 
woof woof said:
Seeing beyond the frame can be an advantage as you see what's beyond and what may be about to enter the frame. I'm sure some people will like that but I think the best of both worlds would be to have the choice of frame lines or filling the frame. Surely this would be easy to do with a firmware update if Leica wanted to do it.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying but there's hardly anything in it in the 35mm crop and it just seems a bit distracting to me. As you say I'd have thought it would be something that can be done in firmware and you'd have thought they'd give you the choice.
 
snerkler said:
I understand what you're saying but there's hardly anything in it in the 35mm crop and it just seems a bit distracting to me. As you say I'd have thought it would be something that can be done in firmware and you'd have thought they'd give you the choice.
Click to expand...

Its manageable for static subjects but for moving objects it's quite challenging, especially at the full "90mm" crop of the Q3
 
Heard on the radio that there's a meteor shower tonight.

Anyone going to try and photo it? It's a bit overcast here so I doubt I'll even try but might try and get out with a camera later.
 
woof woof said:
Heard on the radio that there's a meteor shower tonight.

Anyone going to try and photo it? It's a bit overcast here so I doubt I'll even try but might try and get out with a camera later.
Click to expand...
Not something I’ll be doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top