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

This interested me in Kevin Raber's bit on the 12-24mm.

"Lately, I have become a firm believer in zoom lenses. While I own some real nice prime lenses for all my camera system, the zoom lenses these days are just so good that it quickly dispels the belief that you should only shoot with primes. Sony’s G-Master line is a perfect example of incredible lenses. I see the same thing in what Fuji has done with its X-Series lenses. Olympus also has done wonders with its Pro-Series zoom lenses."

I'm still mostly a prime guy. I think that primes offer a couple of things... a wider aperture and a saving in bulk and weight and less of the in your face factor that might be there with a big zoom if that bothers you. I started to use my 12-35mm quite a bit on MFT but an equivalent FF zoom will be bigger and heavier so I still prefer even an adapted prime on my A7 to the thought of using a zoom on it. Apart from size and weight there's the issue of aperture for exposure and depth of field but I personally think that razor thin depth is a little over used and that it's best to think about the whole picture and the best depth to go for to suit.

How do you lot feel about primes v zooms given that both are soooo good these days?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Nice.

I may grab 24-70 gm lens to replace the canon. Already got my 16-35 and 100-400 on sale. Slowly getting rid of my canon.
Click to expand...

Get rid of them all and go native....... I prefer a single system setup.
The Sony 24-70 GM is a great lens however technically the Canon 24-70mm is sharper.... The GM produces better bokeh thought so it depends.... for me the GM is the better all rounder compared to the Canon 24-70mm as sharpness and bokeh are great!

On a whole the G Masters are sharper than Canon lenses.

http://briansmith.com/sony-fe-lenses-sharp-canon-nikon-glass/
 
woof woof said:
The fan boy comments are interesting, whilst I can see how someone so invested in something else may be irritated by a disruptive new product from another manufacturer I can't quite understand why they'd put so much energy into posting so many inaccurate little rants... all the accusations of being a [paid shrill etc. Get A Life seems appropriate :D
Click to expand...

Yeah haters.... :D
 
Riz_Guru said:
Get rid of them all and go native....... I prefer a single system setup.
The Sony 24-70 GM is a great lens however technically the Canon 24-70mm is sharper.... The GM produces better bokeh thought so it depends.... for me the GM is the better all rounder compared to the Canon 24-70mm as sharpness and bokeh are great!

On a whole the G Masters are sharper than Canon lenses.

http://briansmith.com/sony-fe-lenses-sharp-canon-nikon-glass/
Click to expand...
Slowly doing it. I think by end the year all my canon stuff may go.
 
woof woof said:
This interested me in Kevin Raber's bit on the 12-24mm.

"Lately, I have become a firm believer in zoom lenses. While I own some real nice prime lenses for all my camera system, the zoom lenses these days are just so good that it quickly dispels the belief that you should only shoot with primes. Sony’s G-Master line is a perfect example of incredible lenses. I see the same thing in what Fuji has done with its X-Series lenses. Olympus also has done wonders with its Pro-Series zoom lenses."

I'm still mostly a prime guy. I think that primes offer a couple of things... a wider aperture and a saving in bulk and weight and less of the in your face factor that might be there with a big zoom if that bothers you. I started to use my 12-35mm quite a bit on MFT but an equivalent FF zoom will be bigger and heavier so I still prefer even an adapted prime on my A7 to the thought of using a zoom on it. Apart from size and weight there's the issue of aperture for exposure and depth of field but I personally think that razor thin depth is a little over used and that it's best to think about the whole picture and the best depth to go for to suit.

How do you lot feel about primes v zooms given that both are soooo good these days?
Click to expand...
Yea im in the middle really. I think zooms are great for not changing your lenses much and being versatile but primes are great too especially for low light shooting. I think my most used lens was the 25mm batis last year
 
woof woof said:
This interested me in Kevin Raber's bit on the 12-24mm.

"Lately, I have become a firm believer in zoom lenses. While I own some real nice prime lenses for all my camera system, the zoom lenses these days are just so good that it quickly dispels the belief that you should only shoot with primes. Sony’s G-Master line is a perfect example of incredible lenses. I see the same thing in what Fuji has done with its X-Series lenses. Olympus also has done wonders with its Pro-Series zoom lenses."

I'm still mostly a prime guy. I think that primes offer a couple of things... a wider aperture and a saving in bulk and weight and less of the in your face factor that might be there with a big zoom if that bothers you. I started to use my 12-35mm quite a bit on MFT but an equivalent FF zoom will be bigger and heavier so I still prefer even an adapted prime on my A7 to the thought of using a zoom on it. Apart from size and weight there's the issue of aperture for exposure and depth of field but I personally think that razor thin depth is a little over used and that it's best to think about the whole picture and the best depth to go for to suit.

How do you lot feel about primes v zooms given that both are soooo good these days?
Click to expand...

I tend to agree but big fast primes do give you better bokeh and light gathering capabilities compared to the high quality Fuji / G Master zooms....... so it depends on your needs.
From a sharpness point of view, the G Master zooms are sharp enough, its only low light capability and bokeh where the primes show the edge.
For a typical wedding I could easily use the 24-70mm GM zoom for 80-90% of the photo's, the prime does give you that certain render though for portrait shots etc.
I still would like to have a few primes in my kit though for the more slower portrait based stuff / low light.... a 55mm and 135mm would be great as I loved the Fuji 90mm f2.0 (135mm foc equiv)
 
Last edited:
Riz_Guru said:
I tend to agree but big fast primes do give you better bokeh and light gathering capabilities compared to the high quality Fuji / G Master zooms....... so it depends on your needs.
From a sharpness point of view, the G Master zooms are sharp enough, its only low light capability and bokeh where the primes show the edge.
For a typical wedding I could easily use the 24-70mm GM zoom for 80-90% of the photo's, the prime does give you that certain render though for portrait shots etc.
I still would like to have a few primes in my kit thought for the more slower portrait based stuff.... a 55mm and 135mm would be great as I loved the Fuji 90mm f2.0 (135mm foc equiv)
Click to expand...
I'd love the 135mm bet it's sexy as f***. I'd take it to bed with me as well, kick the wife out ;)
 
I still find myself preferring the look I get from the Rokkors. I know they're nowhere near the technical excellence of modern lenses but the older days crappiness they offer (no offence to any Minolta die hard fans out there...) can give a look that suits sometimes :D
 
Nuzik said:
I'd love the 135mm bet it's sexy as f***. I'd take it to bed with me as well, kick the wife out ;)
Click to expand...

make use of the crop mode on your a7rii. your 85mm will then come close to 135mm at 127mm(ish) f2.8

my 85mm gmaster f1.4 then becomes a 127mm f2 in crop mode.
 
woof woof said:
I still find myself preferring the look I get from the Rokkors. I know they're nowhere near the technical excellence of modern lenses but the older days crappiness they offer (no offence to any Minolta die hard fans out there...) can give a look that suits sometimes :D
Click to expand...
That's the thing, each lens offers a different feel and look irrespective of cost/brand etc.
 
Riz_Guru said:
That's the thing, each lens offers a different feel and look irrespective of cost/brand etc.
Click to expand...

The lens I keep going back to is the Rokkor 50mm f1.2, I initially almost dismissed it as complete garbage and it's probably the worst 50mm FoV lens I've ever used but I've taken some of my favorite pictures with it.

The person who shot our wedding (Canon owner) had a go with my A7 + 50mm f1.2 and almost squealed with delight at the pictures loving "the light and the look." :D
 
Last edited:
addicknchips said:
make use of the crop mode on your a7rii. your 85mm will then come close to 135mm at 127mm(ish) f2.8

my 85mm gmaster f1.4 then becomes a 127mm f2 in crop mode.
Click to expand...
That's a good point.... how does it compare to the Fuji 90mm 2.0?
 
Riz_Guru said:
That's a good point.... how does it compare to the Fuji 90mm 2.0?
Click to expand...

the 90mm is snappier for sure. but I'm finding it a really good option as a workaround. i do like that focal length so its proving to be really good. you can still do an awful lot with 18mp.
spent most of the day at the zoo with the 85 on the camera in crop mode.

20170727-DSC02455 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr
 
woof woof said:
This interested me in Kevin Raber's bit on the 12-24mm.

"Lately, I have become a firm believer in zoom lenses. While I own some real nice prime lenses for all my camera system, the zoom lenses these days are just so good that it quickly dispels the belief that you should only shoot with primes. Sony’s G-Master line is a perfect example of incredible lenses. I see the same thing in what Fuji has done with its X-Series lenses. Olympus also has done wonders with its Pro-Series zoom lenses."

I'm still mostly a prime guy. I think that primes offer a couple of things... a wider aperture and a saving in bulk and weight and less of the in your face factor that might be there with a big zoom if that bothers you. I started to use my 12-35mm quite a bit on MFT but an equivalent FF zoom will be bigger and heavier so I still prefer even an adapted prime on my A7 to the thought of using a zoom on it. Apart from size and weight there's the issue of aperture for exposure and depth of field but I personally think that razor thin depth is a little over used and that it's best to think about the whole picture and the best depth to go for to suit.

How do you lot feel about primes v zooms given that both are soooo good these days?
Click to expand...

I have a full set of both for my A7R2.
I use whatever I feel like, I'll take either my zooms (16-35,24-70,70-300 + 10mm prime) or just my primes or a selection of them (10, 15, 25, 28, 35, 55, 90).
It really depends on my mood and where I'm going, I like using both, primes require a slightly different approach to zooms and I like that.
If I'm just going for a walk along familiar territory I'll take my small shoulder bag with 3 primes, i.e. 15,25,55 or 28,55,90 etc.
But if going out with the zooms I'll take the whole set and the 10mm prime.
IQ wise unless I'm looking really hard it hard to tell the difference.
 
woof woof said:
This interested me in Kevin Raber's bit on the 12-24mm.

"Lately, I have become a firm believer in zoom lenses. While I own some real nice prime lenses for all my camera system, the zoom lenses these days are just so good that it quickly dispels the belief that you should only shoot with primes. Sony’s G-Master line is a perfect example of incredible lenses. I see the same thing in what Fuji has done with its X-Series lenses. Olympus also has done wonders with its Pro-Series zoom lenses."

I'm still mostly a prime guy. I think that primes offer a couple of things... a wider aperture and a saving in bulk and weight and less of the in your face factor that might be there with a big zoom if that bothers you. I started to use my 12-35mm quite a bit on MFT but an equivalent FF zoom will be bigger and heavier so I still prefer even an adapted prime on my A7 to the thought of using a zoom on it. Apart from size and weight there's the issue of aperture for exposure and depth of field but I personally think that razor thin depth is a little over used and that it's best to think about the whole picture and the best depth to go for to suit.

How do you lot feel about primes v zooms given that both are soooo good these days?
Click to expand...
I've recently become a convert to fast primes due to the simplicity and overall handling, no zoom ring to infinitely tweak back and forth searching for that perfect frame, and have been on the edge of buying the Batis 18mm to add as a travelling companion to my 35mm f1.4 art, however the flexibility of the 16-35mm f4 keeps calling. The thought of only carrying one lens, rather than 2 seems appealing, especially as I have seen a mint used 16-35mm for £400 less than RRP! oh what to do!!
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
I've recently become a convert to fast primes due to the simplicity and overall handling, no zoom ring to infinitely tweak back and forth searching for that perfect frame, and have been on the edge of buying the Batis 18mm to add as a travelling companion to my 35mm f1.4 art, however the flexibility of the 16-35mm f4 keeps calling. The thought of only carrying one lens, rather than 2 seems appealing, especially as I have seen a mint used 16-35mm for £400 less than RRP! oh what to do!!
Click to expand...

The Zeiss 16-35mm f4 is a cracking lens, I have a friend who uses it part of his gear for weddings with very pleasing results.
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
I've recently become a convert to fast primes due to the simplicity and overall handling, no zoom ring to infinitely tweak back and forth searching for that perfect frame, and have been on the edge of buying the Batis 18mm to add as a travelling companion to my 35mm f1.4 art, however the flexibility of the 16-35mm f4 keeps calling. The thought of only carrying one lens, rather than 2 seems appealing, especially as I have seen a mint used 16-35mm for £400 less than RRP! oh what to do!!
Click to expand...

Riz_Guru said:
The Zeiss 16-35mm f4 is a cracking lens, I have a friend who uses it part of his gear for weddings with very pleasing results.
Click to expand...

Whilst you can zoom a bit for framing my 16-35 tends to be either at 16 or 35. Much more like your 2 lens in 1 body analogy. But then there is always the option to just use it anywhere in between too. Zooming with your feet isn't always an option.

The Zeiss has no discernible image difference over the same Canon and doesn't deal with flares as well. But as it's native you don't need an adapter and all the bells and whistles work with it.

FWIW it will probably be my next buy. I'd like the Batis but I'd prefer a bit wider than 18mm in a prime.
 
Thanks - I'm really surprised by them TBH! Very little PP needed, just a touch of contrast, sharpening and saturation, but not much more than normal for the RAWs.
I'd shot a few things with natural light, but due to the shallow DOF or high-ISO wasn't that excited by the results - adding flash however means I can stop it down f/10-ish at ISO400 and they look mint :D
 
Well, it's happening for me. I've been offered £5.2k for some of my Nikon gear. I'm not here to bash Nikon, just looking to move in a different direction. I'm in a bit of a dilemma though as what to buy.

A7Rii plus 2, maybe 3 lenses

or

A9 and 1 or 2 lenses. This is a really tempting first purchase.

I will buy the other body when I sell the D5 in September. I'm not a big fan of zooms tbh but all the talk about the Sony zooms has got me interested. There's only 3 I'm interested in: 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200. I prefer larger apertures. I'm tempted to skip the 24-70 and start with the 16-35mm plus a prime (85mm)

Any suggestions?
 
Jesus Quintana said:
Well, it's happening for me. I've been offered £5.2k for some of my Nikon gear. I'm not here to bash Nikon, just looking to move in a different direction. I'm in a bit of a dilemma though as what to buy.

A7Rii plus 2, maybe 3 lenses

or

A9 and 1 or 2 lenses. This is a really tempting first purchase.

I will buy the other body when I sell the D5 in September. I'm not a big fan of zooms tbh but all the talk about the Sony zooms has got me interested. There's only 3 I'm interested in: 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200. I prefer larger apertures. I'm tempted to skip the 24-70 and start with the 16-35mm plus a prime (85mm)

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

Well A7RII or A9 purely depends on your use cases. So can't really suggest without knowing that.

Same applies for lenses but I personally feel 16-35mm, 50/55mm and 85mm would be a good start. I have the 16-35mm, recently picked up 85mm/1.8 to replace my canon 100mm f/2. There isn't a replacement for the canon 50mm f1.4 on Sony.
 
nandbytes said:
If you are not answering directly I can't help you [emoji14]
Hope you enjoy the new lens, it's absolutely stunning on A7RII
Click to expand...
Apologies was trying to be evasive. In the end I paid £780 for a 3 week old lens. Apparently it's previous owner swap systems every few weeks. In the last few months he's had the Sony, Canon 5d4, Fuji xt2 and Xpro and is currently the owner of an Olympus em1.
 
nandbytes said:
Well A7RII or A9 purely depends on your use cases. So can't really suggest without knowing that.

Same applies for lenses but I personally feel 16-35mm, 50/55mm and 85mm would be a good start. I have the 16-35mm, recently picked up 85mm/1.8 to replace my canon 100mm f/2. There isn't a replacement for the canon 50mm f1.4 on Sony.
Click to expand...

The 50mm f1.4 no good for you?
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Apologies was trying to be evasive. In the end I paid £780 for a 3 week old lens. Apparently it's previous owner swap systems every few weeks. In the last few months he's had the Sony, Canon 5d4, Fuji xt2 and Xpro and is currently the owner of an Olympus em1.
Click to expand...
Some people are never happy:LOL:
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Apologies was trying to be evasive. In the end I paid £780 for a 3 week old lens. Apparently it's previous owner swap systems every few weeks. In the last few months he's had the Sony, Canon 5d4, Fuji xt2 and Xpro and is currently the owner of an Olympus em1.
Click to expand...

That's a very good price for that lens with 6 months warranty and so new. But you can haggle with LCE especially since there are multiple used copies for sale at £800.
You will have to call individual shops and ask for a discount (even though they say they charge delivery almost all of them will deliver to your door for free if you ask). You basically pit them against each other. I have previously got upto £50 off doing this. But you may not get one in as new condition as yours.
 
Jesus Quintana said:
Well, it's happening for me. I've been offered £5.2k for some of my Nikon gear. I'm not here to bash Nikon, just looking to move in a different direction. I'm in a bit of a dilemma though as what to buy.

A7Rii plus 2, maybe 3 lenses

or

A9 and 1 or 2 lenses. This is a really tempting first purchase.

I will buy the other body when I sell the D5 in September. I'm not a big fan of zooms tbh but all the talk about the Sony zooms has got me interested. There's only 3 I'm interested in: 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200. I prefer larger apertures. I'm tempted to skip the 24-70 and start with the 16-35mm plus a prime (85mm)

Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

I'd seriously consider the Sony A9, if you've got a D5 this would be a logical move.
The G Masters are very sharp so you might get away with getting zooms and see how you get on?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top