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

Picked up the Tamron 28-75 mm today, can't wait to see what all the hype is about.
 
Throttle said:
Did the order status change ? I’m asking as I’ve placed a order today ( and there open ) about 2.30pm, paid for extra for next day delivery and order status still hasn’t changed from pending :(
Click to expand...

Yes it changed to 'complete'
 
Ive been thinking of making the switch from Nikon DSLR to Sony so have been lurking on many internet groups and forums to learn what I can to help me decide which brand to follow. The one thing I have noticed is there a lot less moaning goes on when people talk Sony compared to Nikon and Canon which seems really encouraging. Thhe people discussing Nikon and Canon produce some outstanding pictures but all seem to have a wish list or niggles about their systems that I haven't so much on Sony

So my dilemma is with a budget of £2.5k where should my money go?
I've read loads of reviews and comparisons between the A7III & A7rIII the the conclusion seems to be that the based on a £1000 difference the R didn't make that much sense. However I'm looking at buying grey from somewhere like E-Infinty and the difference in price only seems to be around £300. So in this scenario is the R a better choice?

Looking back through my pictures I would say I shoot 50% Street/architecture, 40% Portraits and 10% Landscapes. Video is much less important and I am a habitual cropper.

My most used Nikon lens would be the 24-70 2.8 so was thinking my ideal starter lens for the Sony would be the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art?

Then in the future look to buy a couple of primes and perhaps a 70-200 once I'm happy with Sony I'll likely sell my Nikon stuff or donate to my daughter.

I'm no pro not even an enthusiastic amateur but I wouldn't want buy the 7rIII and immediately wish id waited for a IV or 9....

Is my logic sound above?

Also I haven't tracked down much on adaptors, is it worth adapting some of my Nikon glass for a while or just bite the bullet and go native.

Deano
 
Deano_uk said:
Ive been thinking of making the switch from Nikon DSLR to Sony so have been lurking on many internet groups and forums to learn what I can to help me decide which brand to follow. The one thing I have noticed is there a lot less moaning goes on when people talk Sony compared to Nikon and Canon which seems really encouraging. Thhe people discussing Nikon and Canon produce some outstanding pictures but all seem to have a wish list or niggles about their systems that I haven't so much on Sony

So my dilemma is with a budget of £2.5k where should my money go?
I've read loads of reviews and comparisons between the A7III & A7rIII the the conclusion seems to be that the based on a £1000 difference the R didn't make that much sense. However I'm looking at buying grey from somewhere like E-Infinty and the difference in price only seems to be around £300. So in this scenario is the R a better choice?

Looking back through my pictures I would say I shoot 50% Street/architecture, 40% Portraits and 10% Landscapes. Video is much less important and I am a habitual cropper.

My most used Nikon lens would be the 24-70 2.8 so was thinking my ideal starter lens for the Sony would be the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art?

Then in the future look to buy a couple of primes and perhaps a 70-200 once I'm happy with Sony I'll likely sell my Nikon stuff or donate to my daughter.

I'm no pro not even an enthusiastic amateur but I wouldn't want buy the 7rIII and immediately wish id waited for a IV or 9....

Is my logic sound above?

Also I haven't tracked down much on adaptors, is it worth adapting some of my Nikon glass for a while or just bite the bullet and go native.

Deano
Click to expand...
Ok as a Nikon shooter myself if I was making the switch and starting afresh going to mirrorless I would opt for Sony as it's the best FF mirrorless system at the mo imo. However, if you're heavily invested in Nikon glass it might not make the most financial sense and you might be better looking at the Nikon Z system (as I did). The F mount lenses work fantastically well on the Z6 and Z7, image quality is top notch and they will feel more familiar to you. OK so the AF isn't as good as the Sony (yet) but for street, architecture, portraits (assuming they're not running all over the place) and landscapes then you don't need class leading AF. Also, the Nikon ergonomics are much better (imo) than the Sony's (up to gen III) and still noticeably better (imo) than the gen 4. The Z6 is a relative bargain at the moment, and the Z lenses are excellent.

However, if you're dead set on Sony then either camera will be superb. The A7RIII has a better EVF which may enhance shooting 'enjoyment' but Sony don't as yet have lossless compression like Nikon do so file sizes will be huge, in which case the A7III might suit better. In terms of the A7RIII vs A7RIV then the only things really worth considering (imo) are the ergonomics and mp. They have improved the grip on the mark IV meaning you can comfortably fit your fingers on the grip without scraping them on the lens like some do on the mk3. Also you have a whopping 61mp, but this means files will be even bigger. IIRC an uncompressed 14 bit RAW file from the Mark IV is over 100mb :eek:

The A9 is complete overkill in terms of AF for what you need, and base ISO isn't as good as the others so won't be as suited to landscape.
 
Guys,

I'm having trouble deciding between the Tokina 20mm f2 and the Samyang 18mm f2.8.

The Tokina has the wider aperture but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 significant these days of high ISO ability? The Samyang is 2mm wider and every mm matters at the wide end but would it really be noticeable? Really?

I've had both in my basket and can't decide... then there's the Tamron 20mm f2.8 with closer focus ability so that's another to think about.

This would be used for my usual general stuff and my longer term aim is to one day go to on a cruise to see the northern lights so also buying for that possible future use.
 
Gandalf said:
Hi Guys,

How do you all rate the Sony 24-240mm as an all in one walkabout lens?
Click to expand...

I'd love to read answers to this, too. I would like a walkabout for travel. I would be happy with compromise to get the weight/size/hassle factors down, but once I start to think about that, then an A6000 body with the 18-200LE looks more sensible (1.4kg vs 800g).

24240.jpg
 
Deano_uk said:
Ive been thinking of making the switch from Nikon DSLR to Sony...
Click to expand...

The first thing I'd decide is how many mp's I want or how many is too much.

I find the mp count of my A7 enough but if you want to print massive or crop like a mad thing and print big then you may want more. Or you may find the high mp count pictures just too big and resource hungry to bother with.

Once the mp question has been answered the decision could be pretty much made.
 
woof woof said:
Guys,

I'm having trouble deciding between the Tokina 20mm f2 and the Samyang 18mm f2.8.

The Tokina has the wider aperture but is the difference between f2 and f2.8 significant these days of high ISO ability? The Samyang is 2mm wider and every mm matters at the wide end but would it really be noticeable? Really?

I've had both in my basket and can't decide... then there's the Tamron 20mm f2.8 with closer focus ability so that's another to think about.

This would be used for my usual general stuff and my longer term aim is to one day go to on a cruise to see the northern lights so also buying for that possible future use.
Click to expand...

tokina while optically great hasn't really been great for AF. if you like AF then go for either samyang or tamron but I don't think you care about AF massively.

if you are shooting astro then tokina is better.
if you want small, light, compact for travelling then samyang is better.
If you want some unusual macros with a wide-angle then tamron is better.
 
Deano_uk said:
Ive been thinking of making the switch from Nikon DSLR to Sony so have been lurking on many internet groups and forums to learn what I can to help me decide which brand to follow. The one thing I have noticed is there a lot less moaning goes on when people talk Sony compared to Nikon and Canon which seems really encouraging. Thhe people discussing Nikon and Canon produce some outstanding pictures but all seem to have a wish list or niggles about their systems that I haven't so much on Sony

So my dilemma is with a budget of £2.5k where should my money go?
I've read loads of reviews and comparisons between the A7III & A7rIII the the conclusion seems to be that the based on a £1000 difference the R didn't make that much sense. However I'm looking at buying grey from somewhere like E-Infinty and the difference in price only seems to be around £300. So in this scenario is the R a better choice?

Looking back through my pictures I would say I shoot 50% Street/architecture, 40% Portraits and 10% Landscapes. Video is much less important and I am a habitual cropper.

My most used Nikon lens would be the 24-70 2.8 so was thinking my ideal starter lens for the Sony would be the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art?

Then in the future look to buy a couple of primes and perhaps a 70-200 once I'm happy with Sony I'll likely sell my Nikon stuff or donate to my daughter.

I'm no pro not even an enthusiastic amateur but I wouldn't want buy the 7rIII and immediately wish id waited for a IV or 9....

Is my logic sound above?

Also I haven't tracked down much on adaptors, is it worth adapting some of my Nikon glass for a while or just bite the bullet and go native.

Deano
Click to expand...

It sounds like the Riii might work better for you. If I were you I would sell my F mount stuff before it devalues further and invest in whichever brands MILC and its native lenses. Theres no lossless but there is compressed which is much smaller and the difference is only there if you really push a lot in post, storage is cheap so I dont feel this is an issue anyway. If you are considering Canikons MILC then I would strongly recommend you look at the lens line up and their roadmaps. Sony already has a lot of lenses for all budgets so you wont find that an issue.

@snerkler Did you see the ratio of landscape shots? 10%. For everything else the A9 could be the best choice.
 
Some lens purchase advice being requested here.

Some background first though. I recently bought a Sony A7ii which came with the 28-70 kit lens, which from first use seems ok. I'm returning to photography from the old film days but have had an Olympus Pen EPL-1 which I basically used as a point and shoot to record the family growing up, holiday photos etc.

My main interests are informal portraits, urban/street and just generally wandering around the streets trying to capture anything interesting or unusual. All strictly in an amateur or for fun type scenario.

My first purchase was going to be the Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 lens as my initial thoughts were to capture some better portrait shots of the family and friends as this really appeals to me. Was fairly certain this was the first lens I was going to buy so started pondering what the second one was going to be so was trawling through the range on E-infinity/Wex when I was reading reviews of the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 macro where people were saying it doubles up well as a portrait lens. Does anyone have any experience of this or any advice whether this lens could do two jobs for me and save some money (for another lens obviously :LOL:)

This would then probably lead on to a choice of wide angle prime (I like my primes for some reason).

Choice here would be between:-

Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 @ £455 (all e-infinity prices)
Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm F2.8 @ £379
Sony FE 28mm f/2 @ £269

Main use for the above being urban, buildings etc, some landscape.

Don't mind paying more if you are getting better, be that pics, build quality, faster aperture etc but wouldn't think the GM lenses worth it for what I will be doing. Happy to hear suggestions for other makes although I would say (and it might sound strange) but I like my lenses to look "good" and I think the Sony lenses do (subjective I know) but not at the expense of final results or usability.

Look forward to any advice or experience people have of my proposed lenses.
 
I was just trying out the 90mm macro lens I got recently and the AF motor makes a whirring noise. Even while manual focusing.
Is this normal?
I know @f/2.8 has one of these, and if any one else has one could someone please confirm?

edit:
AF is fast and accurate in good light despite the noise
 
Last edited:
Lucien said:
Some lens purchase advice being requested here.

Some background first though. I recently bought a Sony A7ii which came with the 28-70 kit lens, which from first use seems ok. I'm returning to photography from the old film days but have had an Olympus Pen EPL-1 which I basically used as a point and shoot to record the family growing up, holiday photos etc.

My main interests are informal portraits, urban/street and just generally wandering around the streets trying to capture anything interesting or unusual. All strictly in an amateur or for fun type scenario.

My first purchase was going to be the Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 lens as my initial thoughts were to capture some better portrait shots of the family and friends as this really appeals to me. Was fairly certain this was the first lens I was going to buy so started pondering what the second one was going to be so was trawling through the range on E-infinity/Wex when I was reading reviews of the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 macro where people were saying it doubles up well as a portrait lens. Does anyone have any experience of this or any advice whether this lens could do two jobs for me and save some money (for another lens obviously :LOL:)

This would then probably lead on to a choice of wide angle prime (I like my primes for some reason).

Choice here would be between:-

Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 @ £455 (all e-infinity prices)
Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm F2.8 @ £379
Sony FE 28mm f/2 @ £269

Main use for the above being urban, buildings etc, some landscape.

Don't mind paying more if you are getting better, be that pics, build quality, faster aperture etc but wouldn't think the GM lenses worth it for what I will be doing. Happy to hear suggestions for other makes although I would say (and it might sound strange) but I like my lenses to look "good" and I think the Sony lenses do (subjective I know) but not at the expense of final results or usability.

Look forward to any advice or experience people have of my proposed lenses.
Click to expand...
85 / 90 mm for indoor portraits is probably too long. I have the 85 F1.8 but use a 55mm for portraits.
Also, you could use a macro lens for portraits but it’s 2.8 compared to 1.8 and the focus will be slower.
 
SDK^ said:
85 / 90 mm for indoor portraits is probably too long. I have the 85 F1.8 but use a 55mm for portraits.
Also, you could use a macro lens for portraits but it’s 2.8 compared to 1.8 and the focus will be slower.
Click to expand...

Thanks, just the kind of advice I was looking for. Interesting with regard to indoor/outdoor focal length. Hope you are not telling me I need to get both the 85mm and the 55mm now? :ROFLMAO:
 
SDK^ said:
I used a Canon 6D with a 24mm F1.4 and a Sony A7 with a 55mm F1.8.
My biggest annoyance is getting the photos from the cameras to view and edit. I’m staying with family today without access to my computer and I’m not going through the frustration of wI-fi connect to my iPad so will wait to get home. It would be so much easier if all my photos went from my camera to cloud storage.

Examples :

55mm

49277822032_d357d249d5_c.jpg


24mm

49277147483_b05383c578_c.jpg
Click to expand...

Damn lucky lad!
 
Lucien said:
Thanks, just the kind of advice I was looking for. Interesting with regard to indoor/outdoor focal length. Hope you are not telling me I need to get both the 85mm and the 55mm now? :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I like prime over zoom lenses because they have wider apertures, are lighter and generally produce sharper images. The down side of primes is convenience but I can live with this.
If you prefer, a 24-70mm lens will do the job of several prime lenses in one, will cover your landscape, portraits and buildings.
 
Last edited:
Lucien said:
Thanks, just the kind of advice I was looking for. Interesting with regard to indoor/outdoor focal length. Hope you are not telling me I need to get both the 85mm and the 55mm now? :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Things to think about... If all you want is a head and shoulders shot then 85/90mm will probably be fine indoors unless you're in a very small room :D Full body shots and some context may be another issue unless you're in a rather large room :D

Personally I'm not too keen on very tight head / head and shoulder shots with no context so 85/90mm is a bit tight for me for indoor use. I'm also not keen on zero DoF shots with just one eye in partial focus so I'm not too sure the depth of field difference between the 85mm f1.8 and 90mm f2.8 would bother me too much as I'd probably be stopping down to get the head in the depth.

The 55mm f1.8 will give you a better chance of getting more of the body and some context in the picture than the longer lenses if space is tight and there's still the option of getting just one eye in the depth with a tighter shot if that's the look you're going for :D

What you prefer will be the clincher though :D
 
Last edited:
twist said:
@snerkler Did you see the ratio of landscape shots? 10%. For everything else the A9 could be the best choice.
Click to expand...
Could be, but imo is still probably overkill. Nothing the A7iii can’t handle, or the A7riii for that matter. Of course the OP is the only one that knows (y)

A grey A9 is a bit of a bargain though.
 
Deano_uk said:
Ive been thinking of making the switch from Nikon DSLR to Sony so have been lurking on many internet groups and forums to learn what I can to help me decide which brand to follow. The one thing I have noticed is there a lot less moaning goes on when people talk Sony compared to Nikon and Canon which seems really encouraging. Thhe people discussing Nikon and Canon produce some outstanding pictures but all seem to have a wish list or niggles about their systems that I haven't so much on Sony

So my dilemma is with a budget of £2.5k where should my money go?
I've read loads of reviews and comparisons between the A7III & A7rIII the the conclusion seems to be that the based on a £1000 difference the R didn't make that much sense. However I'm looking at buying grey from somewhere like E-Infinty and the difference in price only seems to be around £300. So in this scenario is the R a better choice?

Looking back through my pictures I would say I shoot 50% Street/architecture, 40% Portraits and 10% Landscapes. Video is much less important and I am a habitual cropper.

My most used Nikon lens would be the 24-70 2.8 so was thinking my ideal starter lens for the Sony would be the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art?

Then in the future look to buy a couple of primes and perhaps a 70-200 once I'm happy with Sony I'll likely sell my Nikon stuff or donate to my daughter.

I'm no pro not even an enthusiastic amateur but I wouldn't want buy the 7rIII and immediately wish id waited for a IV or 9....

Is my logic sound above?

Also I haven't tracked down much on adaptors, is it worth adapting some of my Nikon glass for a while or just bite the bullet and go native.

Deano
Click to expand...
I moved over from Nikon last year. I made the mistake of duplicating my Nikon lens setup on Sony. A year later I’ve just sold the 70-200 f4 because it didn’t make sense to have it whilst the 24-105 and 100-400 covered the same focal lengths.

I went with the A7Riii mainly because there was a well priced one for sale on here. The higher MP was similar to the D810 I was using so it kind of made sense and adds the extra to crop if needed. I’m now thinking an A9 would probably suit me better because of the better AF and real time animal eye AF (I shoot wildlife 90% landscapes 10%) but I’ve not yet made the change.
 
snerkler said:
Could be, but imo is still probably overkill. Nothing the A7iii can’t handle, or the A7riii for that matter. Of course the OP is the only one that knows (y)

A grey A9 is a bit of a bargain though.
Click to expand...

For street, architecture and portraits the A9s AF, silent shooting and 20FPS are possibly much more useful. The A7's cant do those things.
 
woof woof said:
Things to think about... If all you want is a head and shoulders shot then 85/90mm will probably be fine indoors unless you're in a very small room :D Full body shots and some context may be another issue unless you're in a rather large room :D

Personally I'm not too keen on very tight head / head and shoulder shots with no context so 85/90mm is a bit tight for me for indoor use. I'm also not keen on zero DoF shots with just one eye in partial focus so I'm not too sure the depth of field difference between the 85mm f1.8 and 90mm f2.8 would bother me too much as I'd probably be stopping down to get the head in the depth.

The 55mm f1.8 will give you a better chance of getting more of the body and some context in the picture than the longer lenses if space is tight and there's still the option of getting just one eye in the depth with a tighter shot if that's the look you're going for :D

What you prefer will be the clincher though :D
Click to expand...

Had the presence of fore thought to buy a house with big rooms a few years ago :LOL:

The 85mm f/1.8 still looking the favourite to start with I feel.
 
nandbytes said:
tokina while optically great hasn't really been great for AF. if you like AF then go for either samyang or tamron but I don't think you care about AF massively.

if you are shooting astro then tokina is better.
if you want small, light, compact for travelling then samyang is better.
If you want some unusual macros with a wide-angle then tamron is better.
Click to expand...

After looking at the ISO differences between f2 and f2.8 I'm leaning more towards the Tokina 20mm f2 now.
 
Lucien said:
Had the presence of fore thought to buy a house with big rooms a few years ago :LOL:

The 85mm f/1.8 still looking the favourite to start with I feel.
Click to expand...

The only real things against that lens are that it's f1.8 not f1.4 and some will always want the f1.4 and the bokeh which can be a bit more harsh/cats eye but that may not matter if the background is more bokeh friendly. It is relatively compact and light and focuses quite fast too.
 
twist said:
For street, architecture and portraits the A9s AF, silent shooting and 20FPS are possibly much more useful. The A7's cant do those things.
Click to expand...
I agree the A9 may be the better option because it’s an awesome camera, but the A73 and A7r3 do have silent shutter mode, good enough AF for those activities and have 10FPS which is fast enough for those activities (I found it was fast enough to capture a falling hazelnut shell in 3 images after a squirrel had open it and threw it away!).
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
The only real things against that lens are that it's f1.8 not f1.4 and some will always want the f1.4 and the bokeh which can be a bit more harsh/cats eye but that may not matter if the background is more bokeh friendly. It is relatively compact and light and focuses quite fast too.
Click to expand...

£600 difference between the lenses based on E-infinity prices. Pretty sure these days I wouldn't notice the difference. With the ISO range on modern cameras is the 1.4 really needed? Remember trying to get pictures indoors with Tri-x 400 and no flash with a 1.8 :oops: :$
 
Lucien said:
£600 difference between the lenses based on E-infinity prices. Pretty sure these days I wouldn't notice the difference. With the ISO range on modern cameras is the 1.4 really needed? Remember trying to get pictures indoors with Tri-x 400 and no flash with a 1.8 :oops: :$
Click to expand...

I'm sure some people will look at 85mm f1.4 and f1.8 shots side by side and drool over the f1.4's larger bokeh balls. So there's that. If you can avoid that one scenario an f1.8 lens might just do. At a pinch :D
 
rob-nikon said:
I agree the A9 May be the better option because it’s an awesome camera but the A73 and A7r3 do have silent shutter mode, good enough AF for those activities and have 10FPS which is fast enough to those activities (I found it was fast enough to capture a falling hazelnut shell in 3 images after a squirrel had open it and threw it away!).
Click to expand...

The A7 models silent shutter is nowhere near as good as the A9 (Im thinking street and portraits if theres movement), moving subjects and distortion is an issue. 10FPS is great, but 20 FPS is better (but a pain to cull!)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top