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

[woof woof]

In saying that I really want a 50 f/1.2 so may pick up the R5 or more likely the R6.

You could always try the MF Voigtlander 50mm f1.2 for a fraction of the price. When shooting at wide apertures I find peaking to be surprisingly accurate as next to nothing is peaking so for people shots it's often quite easy to focus on an eye and get results that stand up to close viewing. For posed still shots the magnified view probably gives you an as good as it gets chance to focus on exactly what you want to be the point of focus.

 

[f/2.8]

But it does, because a lot of people shifted their Riii for an Riv or switched from other systems to Riv and paid the extra to have those features.

Early reviews will be a mixed bag, I guess we'll have to wait and see when more people get them in their hands.

Those silly wee techie things might interest you bigger lcd etc. I have no interest in that nonsense.

I have a zoom call later on with a dude that has had an R5 and an R6 for the last few weeks, will be interesting to hear what he says.

 

[f/2.8]

You could always try the MF Voigtlander 50mm f1.2 for a fraction of the price. When shooting at wide apertures I find peaking to be surprisingly accurate as next to nothing is peaking so for people shots it's often quite easy to focus on an eye and get results that stand up to close viewing. For posed still shots the magnified view probably gives you an as good as it gets chance to focus on exactly what you want to be the point of focus.

Na for my purposes it will need to be a.f.

 

[twist]

Those silly wee techie things might interest you bigger lcd etc. I have no interest in that nonsense.

I have a zoom call later on with a dude that has had an R5 and an R6 for the last few weeks, will be interesting to hear what he says.

Better EV AF
Faster FPS
Better buffer
Potentially better IBIS
Potentially better AF
and the rest.

And thats compared to the RIV (which is obviously an incredible camera), its better than the RIII in every way, if it was just IQ you could pretty much then say the R2 is the best because youre ignoring everything else the newer models bring and people are paying for.

Yeah, they do add up, thats why they charge more. Be interesting once more reviews come through but so far the R5 doesnt seem overpriced for its spec. All the high end stuff is increasing in price and thats also partly due to the market.

 

[snerkler]

Adapted lenses are garbage on every system so no.

Plus that would mean adapting the old 50 1.2 I want the rf version.

Although I will probably hold of until Nikon releases there 50 1.2.

Ahh yes, I keep forgetting you can’t adapt the RF lenses

Compare Sony A7R IV vs Canon R5 | B&H Photo

Compare Sony A7R IV vs Canon R5 | B&H Photo

www.bhphotovideo.com

VS RIV
8 stop stabilisation
Faster FPS in MS and ES
Bigger Buffer (even looking at the file size difference)
Video obvs much better
More OSPDAF points (usually means better AF, we'll see)
-6EV AF vs A7riv -3EV
Bigger/Higher res LCD
CF Express
Better ergonomics

You could argue the A7RIV is a smaller upgrade from the RIII than the R5 is.

Better EV AF
Faster FPS
Better buffer
Potentially better IBIS
Potentially better AF
and the rest.

And thats compared to the RIV (which is obviously an incredible camera), its better than the RIII in every way, if it was just IQ you could pretty much then say the R2 is the best because youre ignoring everything else the newer models bring and people are paying for.

Yeah, they do add up, thats why they charge more.

Sounds interesting, although a lot of those features don’t matter to me. Their ergonomics is a big one though.

It will be interesting to see if Sony release a firmware update for the R4 to keep it ahead, but I won’t hold my breath I still need my 61mp though for the 2 x crop so Canon’s not tempting me yet

 

[twist]

Ahh yes, I keep forgetting you can’t adapt the RF lenses


Sounds interesting, although a lot of those features don’t matter to me. Their ergonomics is a big one though.

It will be interesting to see if Sony release a firmware update for the R4 to keep it ahead, but I won’t hold my breath I still need my 61mp though for the 2 x crop so Canon’s not tempting me yet

Well Sony delivered a great update to the A9 so who knows. Sony neednt be concerned but I think Nikon should be.

 

[twist]

Na for my purposes it will need to be a.f.

+1, MFing a 50mm 1.2 on even slightly moving stuff would be impossible.

 

[woof woof]

Well Sony delivered a great update to the A9 so who knows. Sony neednt be concerned but I think Nikon should be.

Nikon seem to have been creaking for some time but have kept going. Time will tell if they can keep going in the long run. I think we're maybe seeing an acceleration of what some predicted some time ago, that the shift is away from the traditional camera companies and towards the electronic giants. If I was have a soft spot for any brand (but I don't) it'd possibly be Nikon as a Nikon SLR was my first serious camera and I kept it for a very long time but nostalgia wont keep them in business as the older people with rose tinted glasses die off and the younger ones probably wont care about history and heritage.

 

[twist]

Nikon seem to have been creaking for some time but have kept going. Time will tell if they can keep going in the long run. I think we're maybe seeing an acceleration of what some predicted some time ago, that the shift is away from the traditional camera companies and towards the electronic giants. If I was have a soft spot for any brand (but I don't) it'd possibly be Nikon as a Nikon SLR was my first serious camera and I kept it for a very long time but nostalgia wont keep them in business as the older people with rose tinted glasses die off and the younger ones probably wont care about history and heritage.

Same, I also like Nikon but they are making some odd choices and their poor QC hasnt helped.

 

[woof woof]

+1, MFing a 50mm 1.2 on even slightly moving stuff would be impossible.

At f1.2 even with AF your decision time and the time it takes you to press the shutter and for the camera to take the picture will matter as will the slight movement of you and the kit as well as your subject. At distance you get more DoF which will give you some wiggle room and the same will be true for MF, with MF you can keep slowly turning the focus ring / panning if the subject is moving slowly and predictably. It really isn't as impossible as it may seem when you try it especially with peaking.

 

[twist]

At f1.2 even with AF your decision time and the time it takes you to press the shutter and for the camera to take the picture will matter as will the slight movement of you and the kit as well as your subject. At distance you get more DoF which will give you some wiggle room and the same will be true for MF, with MF you can keep slowly turning the focus ring / panning if the subject is moving slowly and predictably. It really isn't as impossible as it may seem when you try it especially with peaking.

Not really, with CAF and especially Eye AF the camera will track and continually micro adjust according to the movement, way faster and way more accurately than MF, in terms of keepers for people photography theres no comparison. For stationary stuff I still dont trust peaking up close and rather use magnification for critical focus.

 

[nandbytes]

they're stopped down to f8-11 99% of the time I would hazard a guess that the performance difference is somewhat bridged?

yeah not a lot of difference at that point. the main difference you will see will be at 35mm corners which the weak point of the zeiss 16-35mm.

overall I really liked my zeiss 16-35mm. I have got some of my favourite pictures with it.

 

[f/2.8]

The wedding video guys are full on cracking up about the over heating on the R5 now that some more details are available. Apparently it can’t be used outdoors in direct sun at all and indoors is also very problematic.

 

[nandbytes]

Better EV AF
Faster FPS
Better buffer
Potentially better IBIS
Potentially better AF
and the rest.

And thats compared to the RIV (which is obviously an incredible camera), its better than the RIII in every way, if it was just IQ you could pretty much then say the R2 is the best because youre ignoring everything else the newer models bring and people are paying for.

Yeah, they do add up, thats why they charge more. Be interesting once more reviews come through but so far the R5 doesnt seem overpriced for its spec. All the high end stuff is increasing in price and thats also partly due to the market.

part of me doesn't like it because feels like I am paying for video centric features I will never use. I barely need 2-3 stops stabilisation, so while 8 stops sounds amazing on paper in real life I wouldn't really use it (unless I can handhold it for 2-5s exposures which would be a real benefit)

IMO canon has definitely leap-frogged the competition. but how much longer before Sony matches it. A7RIV is already a year old. If someone keeps chasing the bodies it will never end lol

I am glad Canon has come with these at the very least I am hoping it will force sony to add better usability features like canon has.
IQ is important but like you said things haven't improved a huge lot since R2 days. So I'd be surprised if canon hasn't closed the GAP or come very close to it now.

oh and then there is the expensive CFExpress cards. sigh.... this move is getting expensive....

 

[twist]

The wedding video guys are full on cracking up about the over heating on the R5 now that some more details are available. Apparently it can’t be used outdoors in direct sun at all and indoors is also very problematic.

View attachment 285912

Sony had exactly the same issues with their 4K, they fixed it via FW. Sonys 4K isnt anywhere near as demanding as RAW 8K so Im not surprised theres a lot of heat. Most shooting 8K professionally in RAW wont be shooting for 20 mins at once, they will shoot clips. Watch anything well shot and its never a single clip of 20mins+.

What are these wedding photographers doing? Just shooting the whole day in 8K single clip and doing nothing else?

 

[f/2.8]

Sony had exactly the same issues with their 4K, they fixed it via FW. Sonys 4K isnt anywhere near as demanding as RAW 8K so Im not surprised theres a lot of heat. Most shooting 8K professionally in RAW wont be shooting for 20 mins at once, they will shoot clips. Watch anything well shot and its never a single clip of 20mins+.

I know zero about video as I have zero interest in it. 2 wedding videographers I know pre ordered a couple of R5’s yesterday and they have both cancelled them today based on the screen grabs I posted above.

Most videographers we have worked with shoot short clips but also have one camera that records the whole ceremony.

 

[woof woof]

Not really, with CAF and especially Eye AF the camera will track and continually micro adjust according to the movement, way faster and way more accurately than MF, in terms of keepers for people photography theres no comparison. For stationary stuff I still dont trust peaking up close and rather use magnification for critical focus.

Strange that you don't get on with peaking. I find it quite accurate but it will depend on the subject and the lens as if there isn't enough for the peaking to see it wont work and there is a noticeable difference between lenses that have higher contrast and those that don't. For me it's mostly academic as apart from the odd shot or when playing with the gear close up zero dof people pictures aren't ones that I normally like.

 

[woof woof]

Sony had exactly the same issues with their 4K, they fixed it via FW. Sonys 4K isnt anywhere near as demanding as RAW 8K so Im not surprised theres a lot of heat. Most shooting 8K professionally in RAW wont be shooting for 20 mins at once, they will shoot clips. Watch anything well shot and its never a single clip of 20mins+.

What are these wedding photographers doing? Just shooting the whole day in 8K single clip and doing nothing else?

Video doesn't interest me but from what's I've seen crop up on the various blogs before I've lost interest it seems like most people shooting professionally aren't chomping at the bit for 8k. Time will tell I suppose.

 

[wack61]

This is a big thread

I've just bought an original A7 with the 50mm 1.8 , barely used by the previous owner , now I've seen the prices of the lenses I can see why he's only got the one.

From past experience I don't want cheap lenses as they always disappoint so what's the best option for a telephoto zoom and a wide angle , adapters seem to be available for all makes, is that the best route, an adapter and canon lenses or any other make

Thanks

 

[nandbytes]

This is a big thread

I've just bought an original A7 with the 50mm 1.8 , barely used by the previous owner , now I've seen the prices of the lenses I can see why he's only got the one.

From past experience I don't want cheap lenses as they always disappoint so what's the best option for a telephoto zoom and a wide angle , adapters seem to be available for all makes, is that the best route, an adapter and canon lenses or any other make

Thanks

new sigma 100-400mm and tamron 17-28mm budget options but really good.
but how much reach are you looking for at long end and wide end?

 

[woof woof]

If you have an original A7 I don't think adapted lenses will work as well as they do on later models.

As for wide angle, it depends how wide you want to go. I've been impressed with the Sony 20mm f1.8.

 

[twist]

Video doesn't interest me but from what's I've seen crop up on the various blogs before I've lost interest it seems like most people shooting professionally aren't chomping at the bit for 8k. Time will tell I suppose.

Yeah, its not quite mainstream yet, there are benefits to shooting in 8K though, stills grabbing at higher FPS, cropping, sharper 1080p and 4k etc.

 

[snerkler]

Well Sony delivered a great update to the A9 so who knows. Sony neednt be concerned but I think Nikon should be.

I hope Nikon continue, I really like their stuff. The 's' versions of the Z's looked good, but then Canon bring this out

yeah not a lot of difference at that point. the main difference you will see will be at 35mm corners which the weak point of the zeiss 16-35mm.

overall I really liked my zeiss 16-35mm. I have got some of my favourite pictures with it.

I'm used to weak at 35mm, the Nikon 18-35mm was the same. Does the OSS of sony lenses such as that on the 16-35mm f4 combine with the IBIS to give more stops stabilisation or is it one or the other?

 

[nandbytes]

I'm used to weak at 35mm, the Nikon 18-35mm was the same. Does the OSS of sony lenses such as that on the 16-35mm f4 combine with the IBIS to give more stops stabilisation or is it one or the other?

they combine and work together yes.

 

[snerkler]

they combine and work together yes.

That's handy, although I've not actually looked into how many stops stabilisation I get with the A7RIV yet let alone the lens

 

[twist]

I hope Nikon continue, I really like their stuff. The 's' versions of the Z's looked good, but then Canon bring this out

I'm used to weak at 35mm, the Nikon 18-35mm was the same. Does the OSS of sony lenses such as that on the 16-35mm f4 combine with the IBIS to give more stops stabilisation or is it one or the other?

I think if Nikon can create a lower end FF segment (not like the ancient A7), a small, modern body, optional EVF, touch screen etc. they could do well. Something thats really consumer friendly, around £1.2k incl a cheap power zoom. A lot of people want FF IQ but dont want the complication of it or a system and to many options.

 

[nandbytes]

That's handy, although I've not actually looked into how many stops stabilisation I get with the A7RIV yet let alone the lens

5 stops is the claim I think.
I have only ever got 5 stops with one lens (24-105G) with the rest its more like 2.5-4 stops.

 

[snerkler]

5 stops is the claim I think.
I have only ever got 5 stops with one lens (24-105G) with the rest its more like 2.5-4 stops.

Just had a look, the A7RIV claims 5.5 stops but they don't say how many stops the 16-35mm should give. I've managed to handhold the 85mm f1.8 at around 1/2 IIRC which is around 5.5 stops I believe.

 

[MrMackyB]

yeah not a lot of difference at that point. the main difference you will see will be at 35mm corners which the weak point of the zeiss 16-35mm.

overall I really liked my zeiss 16-35mm. I have got some of my favourite pictures with it.

That's why I held off on the GM version, as stopped down I'm not sure there is too much difference wide. I'm back in work next week, I plan on taking my 24-105 down into the tube network and seeing what I get at F4 @24mm. I think that might help me decide whether I need F2.8. GAS is an evil mistress sometimes, I've been using old MF lenses for so long I want an AF 16-35...

 

[nandbytes]

Just had a look, the A7RIV claims 5.5 stops but they don't say how many stops the 16-35mm should give. I've managed to handhold the 85mm f1.8 at around 1/2 IIRC which is around 5.5 stops I believe.

Perhaps your handholding technique is better than mine

 

[snerkler]

Perhaps your handholding technique is better than mine

Or maybe just lucky

 

[Jase]

Haha how can you say that when the new Canon ones aren't even released to market yet?

'falling behind the competition', with one announcement? Come on.

I wasn't talking about with one announcement, Sony as late have not exactly improved much with each release. As an example they still have terrible rear screens, the A9ii EVF was the same as the first and actually there wasn't much difference in anything. I'd say at the moment Canon look to have some decent glass and Nikon too if they pulled their finger out.

My point is that Sony have pretty much had the FF mirrorless market to themselves and now that Canon, Nikon etc are in the game they've caught up quickly and in the case of the R5 beat them in many aspects.

 

[f/2.8]

I wasn't talking about with one announcement, Sony as late have not exactly improved much with each release. As an example they still have terrible rear screens, the A9ii EVF was the same as the first and actually there wasn't much difference in anything. I'd say at the moment Canon look to have some decent glass and Nikon too if they pulled their finger out.

My point is that Sony have pretty much had the FF mirrorless market to themselves and now that Canon, Nikon etc are in the game they've caught up quickly and in the case of the R5 beat them in many aspects.

If the rear screen determines what camera you need maybe photography isn't for you.

 

[snerkler]

If the rear screen determines what camera you need maybe photography isn't for you.

These things can deter from the user experience tbh. Whilst not vitally important most of us like to enjoy the experience. TBH though the Sony LCD has never bothered me, the EVF on the other hand.....

 

[GyRob]

I quite honestly never saw any difference in use with the EVF when out using my a7rIV (now sold ) and a9 mkII the image was fine on both .

Rob.

 

[Jase]

If the rear screen determines what camera you need maybe photography isn't for you.

Did I say it did? what a stupid comment.

 

[f/2.8]

These things can deter from the user experience tbh. Whilst not vitally important most of us like to enjoy the experience. TBH though the Sony LCD has never bothered me, the EVF on the other hand.....

Your either a photographer or a gadget guy. If you worry about the experience your a gadget guy.

 

[beercan]

Looking at getting a new bag to carry around my A6400, and a couple of lenses. I'd like something that's big enough to hold the camera with the 70-350 attached but still a small bag overall. Thinking backpack/sling bag rather than a messenger bag. Any recommendations please?

 

[Jase]

Your either a photographer or a gadget guy. If you worry about the experience your a gadget guy.

That is not true, I'm guessing you do wedding photography or something and the only thing you care about is getting the shots done quick and easy as possible. I'm guessing you use eye AF which some people consider to be a gadget and some even think it's cheating. Event/wedding photographers I know switched to Sony for the eye AF etc as it's a gadget/feature that makes their work easier.

If you were a landscape photographer for example there is more to it than the final photo, it is the experience of climbing a mountain to get catch a cloud inversion at sunrise, getting up in the early hours to get somewhere early to setup and wait for the light. It is the experience and the camera is all part of that experience, if you want to do a ground level portrait shot and the rear screen only goes one way, you can live it it but it would make life a lot easier if it you could flip the screen the other way. The D850 for example had lighted buttons, a bit of a gadget but handy at times when you can't see the camera and you fingers are not working as well as they should be on the cold... there are certain little things that can make the experience better.

 

[twist]

That is not true, I'm guessing you do wedding photography or something and the only thing you care about is getting the shots done quick and easy as possible. I'm guessing you use eye AF which some people consider to be a gadget and some even think it's cheating. Event/wedding photographers I know switched to Sony for the eye AF etc as it's a gadget/feature that makes their work easier.

If you were a landscape photographer for example there is more to it than the final photo, it is the experience of climbing a mountain to get catch a cloud inversion at sunrise, getting up in the early hours to get somewhere early to setup and wait for the light. It is the experience and the camera is all part of that experience, if you want to do a ground level portrait shot and the rear screen only goes one way, you can live it it but it would make life a lot easier if it you could flip the screen the other way. The D850 for example had lighted buttons, a bit of a gadget but handy at times when you can't see the camera and you fingers are not working as well as they should be on the cold... there are certain little things that can make the experience better.

I like gadgets, I also like photography and the entire process. Unsure why I cant enjoy both.