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

A quick test of my Canon FD 85mm f1.8 breech lock on the way to the shops. All wide open.

DSC08360.jpg

DSC08373.jpg

100% from that.

DSC08373-1.jpg

DSC08378-C.jpg

100%.

DSC08378-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
More :D

DSC08379.jpg

DSC08383.JPG

It seems quite sharp at f1.8. I previously had the later f1.8 and I rated it behind my Rokkor 85mm f2 but this breech lock may be more of a match for the Rokkor if not better.

The lens seems to be well made and is quite heavy. There's a touch of CA and some vignetting but nothing that's going to spoil the experience.

I like this one, she's complaining about the cold. I did tell her to wear a coat :D

DSC08406.JPG

100%.

DSC08406-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
FD 35mm f2.8.

DSC08428.JPG

There's some fringing here, at f2.8 and into the sun, but not too bad.

DSC08425.jpg

100%.

DSC08425-1.jpg

As usual with these old lenses I think that's very good for not a lot of money :D
 
Last edited:
Very quiet in here! Everyone waiting for the A7riii?

The more I read about it the more I think I'm going to cancel my pre-order and wait until 2018, yes I want the dual slots, bigger battery, improved EVF and AF stick but I don't really "need" the enhanced AF, Pixelshift or what seems a marginal dynamic range improvement. Seems a no brainer if you need the AF but my kit is mainly Loxia manual primes and as most folk know tends to be static subjects like city's, landscapes so the more I look at it I think I'm going to cancel my pre-order and invest in glass for now instead.... its not like me to be sensible, but I'd bet £100000 that I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a pic shot on the A7rii or A7riii....
 
chrism_scotland said:
Very quiet in here! Everyone waiting for the A7riii?

The more I read about it the more I think I'm going to cancel my pre-order and wait until 2018, yes I want the dual slots, bigger battery, improved EVF and AF stick but I don't really "need" the enhanced AF, Pixelshift or what seems a marginal dynamic range improvement. Seems a no brainer if you need the AF but my kit is mainly Loxia manual primes and as most folk know tends to be static subjects like city's, landscapes so the more I look at it I think I'm going to cancel my pre-order and invest in glass for now instead.... its not like me to be sensible, but I'd bet £100000 that I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a pic shot on the A7rii or A7riii....
Click to expand...

Now that begs the question can you tell the difference between a pic shot with A7R and A7RII?
A7R was no slouch in the IQ department.
 
nandbytes said:
Now that begs the question can you tell the difference between a pic shot with A7R and A7RII?
A7R was no slouch in the IQ department.
Click to expand...

I'd say possibly but I never owned one, I can tell the difference between my A7RII and 36mp Nikon shouts though!
 
chrism_scotland said:
Very quiet in here! Everyone waiting for the A7riii?

The more I read about it the more I think I'm going to cancel my pre-order and wait until 2018, yes I want the dual slots, bigger battery, improved EVF and AF stick but I don't really "need" the enhanced AF, Pixelshift or what seems a marginal dynamic range improvement. Seems a no brainer if you need the AF but my kit is mainly Loxia manual primes and as most folk know tends to be static subjects like city's, landscapes so the more I look at it I think I'm going to cancel my pre-order and invest in glass for now instead.... its not like me to be sensible, but I'd bet £100000 that I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a pic shot on the A7rii or A7riii....
Click to expand...

Wise and good move in my opinion, Sony are squeezing every last bit of profitability out of their current 24/42mp sensors and I suspect the next big leap from Sony will be in their next generation sensors... :)
I see the A7RIII like a refresh rather than a ground breaking new model, the differences in IQ will indeed be small.
 
nandbytes said:
Now that begs the question can you tell the difference between a pic shot with A7R and A7RII?
A7R was no slouch in the IQ department.
Click to expand...

A7r has the image quality but the biggest head turner was the noise of the shutter. Man that thing is loud.

@chrism_scotland very wise. For your type of shooting the A7rii should be spot on and and investment in glass would get you better results.
I think the a7riii looks a stonking bit of kit - but it’s improvements are aimed at shooters shooting more mobile subjects. Not considered revisiting the gfx?
 
To me the advantages of a new body would be the focus joystick, the bigger battery, the new shutter to reduce the possibility of shutter shock and an electronic shutter.

I can't remember, has the A7RIII got an electronic shutter?
 
addicknchips said:
A7r has the image quality but the biggest head turner was the noise of the shutter. Man that thing is loud.

@chrism_scotland very wise. For your type of shooting the A7rii should be spot on and and investment in glass would get you better results.
I think the a7riii looks a stonking bit of kit - but it’s improvements are aimed at shooters shooting more mobile subjects. Not considered revisiting the gfx?
Click to expand...

But is it really aimed more at moving targets with the same phase points as the a7rii (ignoring the fps)? Afaik it only has more contrast points which really come into play in very low light.

I think it' more clear cut going straight to the mk3 from a different brand or from a mk1, from a mk2 it's tricky.
 
woof woof said:
To me the advantages of a new body would be the focus joystick, the bigger battery, the new shutter to reduce the possibility of shutter shock and an electronic shutter.

I can't remember, has the A7RIII got an electronic shutter?
Click to expand...

2 and 3 have e shutter. A7s was the first a7 to get it.
 
twist said:
But is it really aimed more at moving targets with the same phase points as the a7rii (ignoring the fps)? Afaik it only has more contrast points which really come into play in very low light.

I think it' more clear cut going straight to the mk3 from a different brand or from a mk1, from a mk2 it's tricky.
Click to expand...

I’d rather use a dedicated focus stick than the d-pad when wanting to manually select a focus point. Also the improved eye af will be better for moving subjects (all be it slow moving) than what is on the A7rii.
 
Riz_Guru said:
Wise and good move in my opinion, Sony are squeezing every last bit of profitability out of their current 24/42mp sensors and I suspect the next big leap from Sony will be in their next generation sensors... :)
I see the A7RIII like a refresh rather than a ground breaking new model, the differences in IQ will indeed be small.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think your right there, I'd really expected another sensor in the "new" A7r actually, not a tweaked version of the existing sensor, although it probably reflects that its still one of the top 2/3 sensors available on the market today (in full-frame anyway, not including Medium Format!)

addicknchips said:
A7r has the image quality but the biggest head turner was the noise of the shutter. Man that thing is loud.

@chrism_scotland very wise. For your type of shooting the A7rii should be spot on and and investment in glass would get you better results.
I think the a7riii looks a stonking bit of kit - but it’s improvements are aimed at shooters shooting more mobile subjects. Not considered revisiting the gfx?
Click to expand...

Yeah in hindsight I agree, I'll probably wait and see if Panamoz have them next year and see what the cost is, bigger battery would be nice but I've already got 6 for the A7rii, more than enough along with a battery grip and L-Grip I'd need to replace, I did briefly consider a GFX again when I saw another used one but even though I'd like the relatively simplicity of choosing glass (because there isn't much!!) - I actually think the A7rii is a better camera, IQ is very close and the size of the Sony just makes it more portable, the AF on the GFX was pretty chronic, more like an XT1/X-Pro 1 than anything newer. Maybe one day though!!!!

woof woof said:
To me the advantages of a new body would be the focus joystick, the bigger battery, the new shutter to reduce the possibility of shutter shock and an electronic shutter.

I can't remember, has the A7RIII got an electronic shutter?
Click to expand...

They're definitely advantages Alan but as a non-event/wedding shooter I find it hard to reconcile an extra £1000 just for those things currently.

twist said:
But is it really aimed more at moving targets with the same phase points as the a7rii (ignoring the fps)? Afaik it only has more contrast points which really come into play in very low light.

I think it' more clear cut going straight to the mk3 from a different brand or from a mk1, from a mk2 it's tricky.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, the A7rii was a massive leap from the MK1 and really made the system for a lot of people (me included) its probably my favourite camera of the many I've had this last 18 months and when I look back at the shots I capture on my travels in Berlin the detail is just staggering.
 
chrism_scotland said:
They're definitely advantages Alan but as a non-event/wedding shooter I find it hard to reconcile an extra £1000 just for those things currently.
Click to expand...

Very sensible :D

Silent shooting could mean I could think about dropping MFT... except that I have more native lenses covering a wider range so I'd keep it for that.
 
woof woof said:
Very sensible :D

Silent shooting could mean I could think about dropping MFT... except that I have more native lenses covering a wider range so I'd keep it for that.
Click to expand...

Silent shooting is amazing...... :)
 
Yes it is but it comes at the possible price of rolling shutter and banding under some lighting.
 
woof woof said:
Yes it is but it comes at the possible price of rolling shutter and banding under some lighting.
Click to expand...

Both easily avoided if you know when and when not to use silent shutter.
The A7RIII apparently gives 14-bit output which is rather nice compared 12-bits in others in SS mode
 
nandbytes said:
Both easily avoided if you know when and when not to use silent shutter.
The A7RIII apparently gives 14-bit output which is rather nice compared 12-bits in others in SS mode
Click to expand...

For me the advantage of silent shutter is shooting silently indoors when the mechanical shutter would be too noticeable. I'm not really bothered by rolling shutter.

I have a Panasonic GX7 and a GX80 and both have this feature but the GX80 also has a very quiet mechanical shutter which could be used without the risk of banding in all but the quietest rooms without anyone taking any notice. Another useful feature would be a flicker detect which could switch from electronic to mechanical shutter if any flicker is detected by the camera. My G7 had and GX80 has an auto electronic/mechanical option although I not sure if it detects flicker or not it does seem to work well and something like the Panny system in an A7 would be lovely.
 
Where did I get the idea for this????

A7 and FD 85mm f1.8.

DSC08394.jpg

hehehe :D

She likes leaf shots and sends them to her family :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Yes it is but it comes at the possible price of rolling shutter and banding under some lighting.
Click to expand...
Well the Sony A9 is as good as it gets.... Sony can only make it better in future bodies to get the Silent Anti-Distortion Shutter. :D
 
Riz_Guru said:
Well the Sony A9 is as good as it gets.... Sony can only make it better in future bodies to get the Silent Anti-Distortion Shutter. :D
Click to expand...

Stop it!

Actually I do have a bit of gas at the mo.... I fancy the Voigtlander 65mm f2.
 
woof woof said:
Stop it!

Actually I do have a bit of gas at the mo.... I fancy the Voigtlander 65mm f2.
Click to expand...
Shotgun 40mm/1.2 if you are selling it :D

I'd be more tempted if the 65mm actually shot 1:1 macro. Voigtlander 125mm macro lens is legendary. This would be to if it did 1:1...
 
One last one from yesterday.

A7 and FD 85mm f1.8. The relative weakness of the old lens at f1.8 shows at the top with the branches but this is no surprise considering how bright the sky was.

DSC08413.jpg
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Shotgun 40mm/1.2 if you are selling it :D

I'd be more tempted if the 65mm actually shot 1:1 macro. Voigtlander 125mm macro lens is legendary. This would be to if it did 1:1...
Click to expand...

I think I'm keeping the 40mm f1.2 :D

I saw some CA on the brightest areas at f1.2 when at 100% yesterday. It wasn't noticeable in the whole image though. I'll have to check at what aperture it disappears, it was certainly gone at f5.

How are you doing with your Voigtlander?

PS.
I don't think that the lack of 1:1 would bother me too much, all I really need is a close focusing lens for flower and leaf shots etc.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
How are you doing with your Voigtlander?
Click to expand...

Hmm... Well I am kinda managing but with just peaking I still fail to nail focus sometimes. I get about 50% shots in critical focus with just peaking. Magnifying and taking shots would take too long... Though that gives 100% hit rate.
 
I find peaking quite accurate at the wider apertures as so little peaks but at smaller apertures everything peaks but when looking at the whole picture it's easy to see that focus is slightly... less than razor sharp. Maybe at smaller apertures it's like an old zone focus shot. Good enough for a whole image but not as good as deliberately focusing on your main subject when looking closely.
 
Yes I was also referring focusing wide open (f2 in my case).
Maybe I just need a little more practice. I am used magnifying and taking my time because I previously shot mostly static subjects.
Before it used to be use focus peaking->magnify to confirm critical focus->adjust slightly as needed->take shot.
Now I need to cut out the middle magnifying bit...
 
Last edited:
After a little advice here. I fancy ditching my Nikon FX stuff, mainly due to weight. I mainly shoot landscape (inc astro and urban stuff), families (kids running around) and motorsport. So things that are important to me have normally been dynamic range and continuous auto focus ability. More recently, portability has become a major consideration too. I'd ruled out the Sony system previously, mainly on the grounds of auto focus. My intention was to go down the Fuji X-T2 route, and I may still do that but the Sony A7Riii had piqued my interest a little. I've had a little price up of what I'd want/need and it's eye watering to say the least but I recognise that you cannot really compare FF and APSC on price alone. In an effort to keep things portable and affordable (relatively speaking!), I was looking at something along the lines of Samyang 14mm, Batis 25mm, Sony 35mm 2.8, Sony 55mm 1.8.

And then I'd want a 70-200. So my main question at this stage is whether I can save a few quid by going for the f/4 version of the 70-200. I don't see the 1 stop issue being a problem but more concerned about IQ for landscape as I shoot long quite often. Must admit I'd love to be able to save some weight and £'s here but I don't want to be disappointed. Any thoughts?
 
gad-westy said:
After a little advice here. I fancy ditching my Nikon FX stuff, mainly due to weight. I mainly shoot landscape (inc astro and urban stuff), families (kids running around) and motorsport. So things that are important to me have normally been dynamic range and continuous auto focus ability. More recently, portability has become a major consideration too. I'd ruled out the Sony system previously, mainly on the grounds of auto focus. My intention was to go down the Fuji X-T2 route, and I may still do that but the Sony A7Riii had piqued my interest a little. I've had a little price up of what I'd want/need and it's eye watering to say the least but I recognise that you cannot really compare FF and APSC on price alone. In an effort to keep things portable and affordable (relatively speaking!), I was looking at something along the lines of Samyang 14mm, Batis 25mm, Sony 35mm 2.8, Sony 55mm 1.8.

And then I'd want a 70-200. So my main question at this stage is whether I can save a few quid by going for the f/4 version of the 70-200. I don't see the 1 stop issue being a problem but more concerned about IQ for landscape as I shoot long quite often. Must admit I'd love to be able to save some weight and £'s here but I don't want to be disappointed. Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Get an a7rii and save the pounds.
 
twist said:
Get an a7rii and save the pounds.
Click to expand...

It was one thought I had but the only one I've tried was really disappointing with regards to continuous AF. It's only the reviews of the A9 and A7Riii that have got my interest up.
 
gad-westy said:
It was one thought I had but the only one I've tried was really disappointing with regards to continuous AF. It's only the reviews of the A9 and A7Riii that have got my interest up.
Click to expand...

I only use CAF and it's better than all the mirrorless I've used (most) which surprised me. With fast primes it's fast to achieve focus, mirrorless will slow down in lower light without the fastest primes though. A lot is also dependant on the camera af mode settings.

What setup did you test?

Edit.... I've also used most ff dslrs extensively and I think the way to go for speed would be the a9 and not a7riii, the riii af system looks like an incremental upgrade rather than revolution like a9. Id love an a9 tbh.
 
Last edited:
IF the a7riii really is twice as fast as the a7rii with the same phase system in all conditions only because of updated algorithms that would be impressive, but id wonder why Sony won't release that as a fw update for the rii if its not hardware based.

I'm a little cautious of mirrorless Af claims.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top