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

jonneymendoza said:
It's as good as the 5d4 Which some regard better than d750 for af.

I've used the d750 and the af is barely better than the a7r2 but only used it briefly. A7R2 gets slated here by folks who only used it for 5min.ive hammered through it more than you for example.
Click to expand...

In your dreams Jonney, an A7rii cannot CAF as well as a D750 or 5DIV.

I used it for 2 months thats 1 month and 29 days more than I needed to know if it could CAF better, you're saying you've used a Nikon for 1 min and you noted it was BETTER than the A7R2 without even knowing how to adjust the AF settings, Ive used Sonys since the very first NEX and SLT model, I know how to configure them.

The a7rii has its own AF benefits, which I do know but I was specifically talking about the OPs case, erratic moving subjects and CAF mode.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
In your dreams Jonney, an A7rii cannot CAF as well as a D750 or 5DIV.

I used it for 2 months thats 1 month and 29 days more than I needed to know if it could CAF better, you're saying you've used a Nikon for 1 min and you noted it was BETTER than the A7R2 without even knowing how to adjust the AF settings, Ive used Sonys since the very first NEX and SLT model, I know how to configure them.

The a7rii has its own AF benefits, which I do know but I was specifically talking about the OPs case, erratic moving subjects and CAF mode.
Click to expand...
I hate to say it, but I agree...... I found the Fuji XT-2 to be more responsive especially when using AF-C compared to the Sony A7R II, however even with the Fuji booster grip it still struggled capturing my kid running quickly at 11fps with a fair few out of focus frames.
That being said, personal technique also plays a big part when trying to track a moving subject. You can have the worlds best AF system with 50 fps, it means nothing if you can see properly lol :D
 
snerkler said:
No grip of EVF on the RX1 either.
Click to expand...
Correct, also you can use the A7 as a backup body etc.
I actually like the Sony RX100 but in hindsight I should have bought a Sony A7 instead, especially at the prices we have seen them at.
 
addicknchips said:
I I think evf pops up on the mark ii. Looks uncomfortable with adding a grip though.
The lens is meant to be tip top though.
Click to expand...
Yes you’re right, just looked into it. If it’s anything like the RX100 though it’s not nice to use.
 
Riz_Guru said:
The Fujinon 56mm f1.2 is one Fuji’s best portrait lenses, the 90mm f2.0 is great too.
Surprised you found it lacking, didn’t you like the bokeh?
Click to expand...

Fuji's best is rather lacking unfortunately.

The bokeh is good and better than my 85mm f/1.8 but not by a huge lot. Reason I found is lacking is below :)

addicknchips said:
Lacking where? I wouldn’t recommend it to chase shots of children wide open but for more controlled stuff it’s an excellent lens.

Have you tried it on the more recent cameras? I thought you gave up after using the x-t1? It performs better on the x-t2. I shot a wedding where the evening reception was at the ritz in London, and it stayed on the camera all night. Wasn’t allowed to use flash but it managed perfectly well paired with a 35mm f1.4.
It’s sharp, and with the Fuji sensor renders colour and skin tones beautifully. It’s an excellent portrait lens.
Click to expand...

that says something about fuji sensor not about the lens. I already said sure the lens is sharp but so are many other equivalent lenses.
Its lacking because its a f1.2 with t-stop of T1.8 and DoF of f/1.8 also. Makes it no better than 85mm f1/.8 on FF in fact because its t1.8 you are loosing a stop of light also. The APD element isn't strong enough to give proper STF effect like sony STF lenses either. Plus it can't be used for focussing anything but snails (slight exaggeration ;) ). So all in all nothing special in fact its very lacking IMO.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Fuji's best is rather lacking unfortunately.

The bokeh is good and better than my 85mm f/1.8 but not by a huge lot. Reason I found is lacking is below :)



that says something about fuji sensor not about the lens. I already said sure the lens is sharp but so are many other equivalent lenses.
Its lacking because its a f1.2 with t-stop of T1.8 and DoF of f/1.8 also. Makes it no better than 85mm f1/.8 on FF in fact because its t1.8 you are loosing a stop of light also. The APD element isn't strong enough to give proper STF effect like sony STF lenses either. Plus it can't be used for focussing anything but snails (slight exaggeration ;) ). So all in all nothing special in fact its very lacking IMO.
Click to expand...

But Riz never said it was the APD version did he?
 
nandbytes said:
Fuji's best is rather lacking unfortunately.

The bokeh is good and better than my 85mm f/1.8 but not by a huge lot. Reason I found is lacking is below :)



that says something about fuji sensor not about the lens. I already said sure the lens is sharp but so are many other equivalent lenses.
Its lacking because its a f1.2 with t-stop of T1.8 and DoF of f/1.8 also. Makes it no better than 85mm f1/.8 on FF in fact because its t1.8 you are loosing a stop of light also. The APD element isn't strong enough to give proper STF effect like sony STF lenses either. Plus it can't be used for focussing anything but snails (slight exaggeration ;) ). So all in all nothing special in fact its very lacking IMO.
Click to expand...

Oh you’re talking about the apd version? There are two versions of this lens. The regular version t stop remains at 1.2. Give that one a try on a modern camera and your experience should improve. The regular version also focuses with pdaf rather than contrast Af..
 
addicknchips said:
Oh you’re talking about the apd version? There are two versions of this lens. The regular version t stop remains at 1.2. Give that one a try on a modern camera and your experience should improve. The regular version also focuses with pdaf rather than contrast Af..
Click to expand...

Ah good to know other one focusses better with newer bodies. But I doubt the f/1.2 will have a tstop of t1.2, probably closer to t1.4-1.5 going by the make of other f/1.2 lenses. Very fast lenses seldom have same tstop as fstop :)

i bought the camera and lenses used and returned it after 10 days. The shop only had APD version used.
 
Last edited:
Riz_Guru said:
Your right but if you compared all three, its not a missive difference.

http://j.mp/2GLKSUc
Click to expand...

As I like 35mm I've toyed with the idea of getting a RX1 but I decided that the A7 was better for me as I can change the lens and in reality it's only about the EVF hump bigger and they'd both need to be carried in a small bag so the difference in bulk doesn't matter to me. The RX1 does have a very nice lens and sensor combination though. Another thing is that I know that pop up EVF would annoy me from the outset.
 
woof woof said:
As I like 35mm I've toyed with the idea of getting a RX1 but I decided that the A7 was better for me as I can change the lens and in reality it's only about the EVF hump bigger and they'd both need to be carried in a small bag so the difference in bulk doesn't matter to me. The RX1 does have a very nice lens and sensor combination though. Another thing is that I know that pop up EVF would annoy me from the outset.
Click to expand...

Can’t use one of your other 40 35mm’s on an RX1 ;)
 
chrism_scotland said:
Can’t use one of your other 40 35mm’s on an RX1 ;)
Click to expand...

No, and as importantly can't use a 50mm either. For the small difference in size I think that the A7 makes more sense to me. The RX1 does have that sensor and lens though and if that's not enough some may also care about the slight saving in bulk.

It does look to be a very nice camera but that EVF would annoy me.
 
addicknchips said:
You would rather use the apd version in a more controlled environment.
Click to expand...

I didn't have much choice... I bought it used from LCE in case I didn't like it so I could return it with little or no loss to both parties. They only had the APD version used, I also used the 23mm/1.4 and 10-24mm. Both of which I didn't have much issue with in fact 10-24mm is terrific.

then I moved to Sony APS-C because I didn't get along with Fuji and Sony is a bigger pile of poop (to the point I almost prefer eos-m and got canon m5!!!). Eventually went back to shooting FF, APS-C systems are not for me :p
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Just out of interest do people here print their pictures?
If so at home or outsourced or a mixture of both?

As much as I like pixel peeping being a techno/specs nerd, personally I like to print very much also. Due to cost reasons I do a mixture of both. I use canon selphy for personal/family prints at home (which takes care of 70% of our needs). For large prints I outsource them.
Click to expand...

Ive recently started printing my own. Previously they have only been viewed on screen, but I decided to cut off an old mg6150 and print some holiday snaps. They look so much better, the only thing now is that I want to be able to print bigger for putting on the wall. I have seen the Canon Pro 10mand have been temped, but I keep drooling over the iPF 1000, if only it could print panoramas on a roll. I know there is the Epson P800 but I am put off by the ink swapping (although Fotospeed do a CIS system for it)
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Ive recently started printing my own. Previously they have only been viewed on screen, but I decided to cut off an old mg6150 and print some holiday snaps. They look so much better, the only thing now is that I want to be able to print bigger for putting on the wall. I have seen the Canon Pro 10mand have been temped, but I keep drooling over the iPF 1000, if only it could print panoramas on a roll. I know there is the Epson P800 but I am put off by the ink swapping (although Fotospeed do a CIS system for it)
Click to expand...

Its really fun to print and I really enjoy it. We completed making an album yesterday from all our pictures from 2017.

Previously when I worked out costs canon pixma-pro was the most cost effective to output option. But it was still cheaper to outsource the prints :(
The main issue is the ink dries out and becomes useless if you don't print often. This is not an issue with the canon selphy so its good for small 6x4 prints. I am used to printing in bulk instead of making regular prints; may its better if I print regularly...

I think @twist has a pixma-pro... I wonder how he feels about cost effectiveness?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top