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

As i previously said though, in my opinion I don’t find it any more expensive, granted the 70-200 GM is about 20-30% more than the Canon equivalent, however you could always use the Canon lenses in conjunction with the Metabones.
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
I guess it’s relative to the individual. Personally I don’t find the pricing that inhibitive, yes maybe a couple of hundred quid. I managed to switch a 5d3 with Tamron 24-70 f2.8 and Canon 70-200 f4 l is for a new A7R2, 16-35 f4, 55mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, the only cost to me has been circa £600
Click to expand...

Errr let's do bread and butter stuff

2470 - l2 vs gm = 300 difference
70200 - l2 vs gm = 800 difference
85 1.8g vs 85 fe = 150 difference

Basic stuff and were already at 1250 more. Those hundreds add up.
 
twist said:
Errr let's do bread and butter stuff

2470 - l2 vs gm = 300 difference
70200 - l2 vs gm = 800 difference
85 1.8g vs 85 fe = 150 difference

Basic stuff and were already at 1250 more. Those hundreds add up.
Click to expand...

When you are comparing prices you need to compare launch prices but sometimes even that may not be a proper comparison. For example the canon 85mm/1.8 has been around for dog years and nikon 85mm f/1.8 for about 5 years. Sony is newer and still selling close to its launch price. Nikon was $500 vs. $600 for Sony.

p.s. not saying Sony is cheaper or same price because Sony is almost always more expensive but just saying if are going to compare the prices it should be on an even ground :)
 
nandbytes said:
When you are comparing prices you need to compare launch prices but sometimes even that may not be a proper comparison. For example the canon 85mm/1.8 has been around for dog years and nikon 85mm f/1.8 for about 5 years. Sony is newer and still selling close to its launch price. Nikon was $500 vs. $600 for Sony.

p.s. not saying Sony is cheaper or same price because Sony is almost always more expensive but just saying if are going to compare the prices it should be on an even ground :)
Click to expand...

What? Use fair comparisons? Come on... this is the internet!
:D
 
nandbytes said:
When you are comparing prices you need to compare launch prices. For example the canon 85mm/1.8 has been around for dog years and nikon 85mm f/1.8 for about 5 years. Sony is newer and still selling close to its launch price. Nikon was $500 vs. $600.

p.s. not saying Sony is cheaper or same price because Sony is almost always more expensive but just saying if are going to compare the prices it should be on an even ground :)
Click to expand...

Nope, the G is not a Canon lens, I tried to provide some balance ;) I remember paying 320 odd quid for a G at launch, regularly 250 used..... (fe used more like 500) guess you weren't around those days. Times have changed but its still cheaper. Care to comment on the other lenses?

800 quid vs arguably the best 70200 pfffft
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
When you are comparing prices you need to compare launch prices but sometimes even that may not be a proper comparison. For example the canon 85mm/1.8 has been around for dog years and nikon 85mm f/1.8 for about 5 years. Sony is newer and still selling close to its launch price. Nikon was $500 vs. $600 for Sony.

p.s. not saying Sony is cheaper or same price because Sony is almost always more expensive but just saying if are going to compare the prices it should be on an even ground :)
Click to expand...

Exactly Alan
 
I'm not saying it's not worth the dosh to some folk... I'm saying comparatively it's more money. Which it is.
 
Godamn Halloween parties, better get some sleep before the shoot or the ghoulies will get me. See ya folks!
 
twist said:
Errr let's do bread and butter stuff

2470 - l2 vs gm = 300 difference
70200 - l2 vs gm = 800 difference
85 1.8g vs 85 fe = 150 difference

Basic stuff and were already at 1250 more. Those hundreds add up.
Click to expand...
Looking at the maunfacturer sites, the MRSP is much closer. I’m not saying that Sony isn’t more expensive, but in my opinion, not massively more than the competition. Let’s not forget the difference in body costs too
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Looking at the maunfacturer sites, the MRSP is much closer. I’m not saying that Sony isn’t more expensive, but in my opinion, not massively more than the competition. Let’s not forget the difference in body costs too
Click to expand...

Why? Look at retail price like cpb or do you pay Mrsp?

I think you're kidding yourself, you've been into switching systems and Sony for 10 mins v most here.... ive already posted basic numbers. Sony used is widely available.

.... and I did say Sony cameras are competitive.... they catch you with the bits and bobs, a camera does not make a system ;)
 
Last edited:
Whatever the prices, clearly customers are finding the prices worth paying, since Sony are reporting camera and lens sales increasing by over 50%, even in what we all know is a shrinking camera market.
 
Crossroads said:
Whatever the prices, clearly customers are finding the prices worth paying, since Sony are reporting camera and lens sales increasing by over 50%, even in what we all know is a shrinking camera market.
Click to expand...

True but 50% to Sony is still nothing in the grand scheme of things camera sales wise, despite their perceived shortcomings Nikon and Canon DSLR's are still way outselling everything else..
 
nandbytes said:
When you are comparing prices you need to compare launch prices but sometimes even that may not be a proper comparison. For example the canon 85mm/1.8 has been around for dog years and nikon 85mm f/1.8 for about 5 years. Sony is newer and still selling close to its launch price. Nikon was $500 vs. $600 for Sony.

p.s. not saying Sony is cheaper or same price because Sony is almost always more expensive but just saying if are going to compare the prices it should be on an even ground :)
Click to expand...

No, when you're comparing prices you compare the best price you can get it for at that time you want to buy it or it's equivalents. It makes no odds how long a bit of kit has been available as to whether you want to buy it or not. There is nearly always a premium for being first out the blocks with something but to try and justifying your purchase by saying well the equivalent by so and so was the same at launch when it's now £1k less is just another way of convincing yourself it's good value.

I'm not knocking people spending money. If someone wants something it's usually pretty easy to come up with a way to justify it., that's all. :)
 
Crossroads said:
Whatever the prices, clearly customers are finding the prices worth paying, since Sony are reporting camera and lens sales increasing by over 50%, even in what we all know is a shrinking camera market.
Click to expand...
Are they finding them 'worth' paying, or is it there's no other option if you want FF mirrorless? There's no doubt in my mind mirrorless is the future and Sony are ahead of the game. Canikon are definitely going to lose some market share imo delaying FF mirrorless so long.
 
snerkler said:
Are they finding them 'worth' paying, or is it there's no other option if you want FF mirrorless? There's no doubt in my mind mirrorless is the future and Sony are ahead of the game. Canikon are definitely going to lose some market share imo delaying FF mirrorless so long.
Click to expand...

I think canikon are very comfortable in their own ability to produce a mirrorless camera that will be close to what consumers and pros want. It’s taken Sony years and costs over £3k if you want a mirrorless camera from them with a joystick on. My bet is that canikon will know what to do ergonomically and when they release their mirrorless offerings it will completely turn the tables on Sony. If they come up with something that allows good use of their current respective glass suite, that will clinch it.
 
addicknchips said:
I think canikon are very comfortable in their own ability to produce a mirrorless camera that will be close to what consumers and pros want. It’s taken Sony years and costs over £3k if you want a mirrorless camera from them with a joystick on. My bet is that canikon will know what to do ergonomically and when they release their mirrorless offerings it will completely turn the tables on Sony. If they come up with something that allows good use of their current respective glass suite, that will clinch it.
Click to expand...

I'd move over night if canikon made mirrorless and offered sensibly priced lenses. Also canon will need to improve their sensor
 
addicknchips said:
I think canikon are very comfortable in their own ability to produce a mirrorless camera that will be close to what consumers and pros want. It’s taken Sony years and costs over £3k if you want a mirrorless camera from them with a joystick on. My bet is that canikon will know what to do ergonomically and when they release their mirrorless offerings it will completely turn the tables on Sony. If they come up with something that allows good use of their current respective glass suite, that will clinch it.
Click to expand...

The main thing seems to be the makers name on the front. Just look at Canons relatively lacklustre mirrorless offerings to date which are by many accounts relatively poor cameras with a limited native lens range but they've apparently sold well. I've little doubt that if Canon carry this forward and produce a lacklustre years behind Sony in every respect FF CSC it'll sell by the boatload.
 
woof woof said:
The main thing seems to be the makers name on the front. Just look at Canons relatively lacklustre mirrorless offerings to date which are by many accounts relatively poor cameras with a limited native lens range but they've apparently sold well. I've little doubt that if Canon carry this forward and produce a lacklustre years behind Sony in every respect FF CSC it'll sell by the boatload.
Click to expand...

At least canon made some good cheap tack sharp lenses not overpriced (in some cases junk) like on sony APS-C.

I moved to Sony e-mount for the size, they've managed to ruin that also. Their bodies are becoming increasingly bigger and heavier.
 
nandbytes said:
At least canon made some good cheap tack sharp lenses not overpriced (in some cases junk) like on sony APS-C.

I moved to Sony e-mount for the size, they've managed to ruin that also. Their bodies are becoming increasingly bigger and heavier.
Click to expand...
Then go buy a Canon/Nikon/Fuji :D

I do wish we could drop this. All this Sony price stuff has IMHO been done to death. I suppose every marque has it's issues... Leica snobbery, Fuji worms etc., Canon sensors... Sony prices...
 
woof woof said:
Then go buy a Canon/Nikon/Fuji :D

I do wish we could drop this. All this Sony price stuff has IMHO been done to death. I suppose every marque has it's issues... Leica snobbery, Fuji worms etc., Canon sensors... Sony prices...
Click to expand...

I would and quite happily too only if they offered FF!! :p
 
nandbytes said:
I would and quite happily too only if they offered FF!! :p
Click to expand...

I don't seem to be suffering the gas that many have plus all I want is a small camera to take good quality pictures of family, friends, holidays and days out and the Sony A7 is perfect for that. I only have four native lenses at the mo, the kit lens, 55mm f1.8, 35mm f2.8 and the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 and IMHO all are well priced for what they offer.

I had Canon SLR's and DSLR's and before them Nikon SLR for over twenty years or more with Voigtlander and other cameras in the mix too so I have no brand loyalty and if Canikon made a camera that I thought was better for me I'd possibly sell all my Sony native gear and buy the new stuff but I honestly can't see that happening anytime soon.

I just think all this has been done to death but it just seems that we have to go through this every so often for page after page.

Just sayin.
 
There is plenty of options out there but I agree that Sony prices are high. :(
 
woof woof said:
I don't seem to be suffering the gas that many have plus all I want is a small camera to take good quality pictures of family, friends, holidays and days out and the Sony A7 is perfect for that. I only have four native lenses at the mo, the kit lens, 55mm f1.8, 35mm f2.8 and the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 and IMHO all are well priced for what they offer.
Click to expand...

perhaps I should go back to shooting primes. I'd probably be much happier :p

I am tempted by that voigt 40mm/1.2 but I am not sure how good it'll be for shooting baby portraits. Right now he doesn't move so it'll be fine but eventually I hear they are a handful :D
 
Last edited:
Peaking at wide apertures is quite accurate but of course next to nothing is going to be in the DoF. Looking at baby pictures I've taken I'm happiest with 50/85mm lenses at apertures around f4+ and I think AF and Sony's eye focus would be a big help here.

If doing this with my manual lenses I'd expect a low keeper rate :D but memory is cheap so I'd just keep pressing the button and sort them out later :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Peaking at wide apertures is quite accurate but of course next to nothing is going to be in the DoF. Looking at baby pictures I've taken I'm happiest with 50/85mm lenses at apertures around f4+ and I think AF and Sony's eye focus would be a big help here.

If doing this with my manual lenses I'd expect a low keeper rate :D but memory is cheap so I'd just keep pressing the button and sort them out later :D
Click to expand...

I have FE85. I always liked the 40mm FoV over 35mm. But for 50mm FoV I'd just crop :p (I got 42mp :D)

The annoying this thing on Sony is there is no AF f/2 option. I either have to buy big f1.4 lenses, small f/2.8 ones, or small f/1.2-1.4 with no AF. :(

Memory is indeed cheap, but time is not :D
 
Last edited:
addicknchips said:
My bet is that canikon will know what to do ergonomically and when they release their mirrorless offerings it will completely turn the tables on Sony.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't bet too much on Canon and Nikon getting the ergonomics right looking at the mirrorless cameras they have had out so far. I know the Nikon cameras were quite small, and so limited in ergonomic options, but the Canon M series did not arrive looking that well designed imho, being just a rectangular box, a la Sony, but it has evolved. I think their system is limited by not having an EVF so far.

Ergonomics are a personal thing, and has been mentioned before, important for some, not for others. Some are willing to put up with poor ergonomics if they feel the the whole product has the features they want. Like I said, it's a personal thing.
 
redhed17 said:
I wouldn't bet too much on Canon and Nikon getting the ergonomics right looking at the mirrorless cameras they have had out so far. I know the Nikon cameras were quite small, and so limited in ergonomic options, but the Canon M series did not arrive looking that well designed imho, being just a rectangular box, a la Sony, but it has evolved. I think their system is limited by not having an EVF so far.

Ergonomics are a personal thing, and has been mentioned before, important for some, not for others. Some are willing to put up with poor ergonomics if they feel the the whole product has the features they want. Like I said, it's a personal thing.
Click to expand...
I don't know why they just don't all copy the ergonomics of the EM1, job done ;)
 
snerkler said:
I don't know why they just don't all copy the ergonomics of the EM1, job done ;)
Click to expand...

because not everyone wants a body size of e-m1? :p

tbh I quite like the size and feel of A6XXX bodies. It'd be perfect for me if they added a fore-finger dial to that body.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top