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

nandbytes said:
If RF had the glass I'd be gone by now. I don't like half the native lenses and one I do like are crazy expensive lol

After looking at the 20G and 35GM, I don't feel like buying sigmas. they are "old-ish" design and for DSLRs, big and unwieldy IMO. if it serves your purpose then go for it, just not for me.
Also I dislike adapters in general unless you have one per lens to avoid swapping (or you permanently stick the adapter on the body and use it as a EF-body for most part). otherwise gets too fiddly and annoying. been there done that, wouldn't do it again.
Click to expand...
Yeah the RF glass prices are eye watering
 
nandbytes said:
If RF had the glass I'd be gone by now. I don't like half the native lenses and one I do like are crazy expensive lol

After looking at the 20G and 35GM, I don't feel like buying sigmas. they are "old-ish" design and for DSLRs, big and unwieldy IMO. if it serves your purpose then go for it, just not for me.
Also I dislike adapters in general unless you have one per lens to avoid swapping (or you permanently stick the adapter on the body and use it as a EF-body for most part). otherwise gets too fiddly and annoying. been there done that, wouldn't do it again.
Click to expand...
I'm an early adopter so half my lenses are third party from sigma or zeiss.

The only thing I may be tempted to upgrade would be the sigma 35mm to the gm and the 12-24 Sony g to the F2.8 gm.

BTW what's a7c? Another new camera?
 
gman said:
This video worried me when thinking about the R6. I'm guessing a firmware update could fix it though, if not already done?

Click to expand...
Yeah that's the video that's holding me back, although it seems a lot of people are very happy with the R6 / R5 for video.

Nobody makes a camera that just works which is shocking for 2021.

I watched loads of reviews of the A7siii and it seems a bit soft.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Definitely.
He says he keeps pressing the C3 button by mistake....
Click to expand...
I’ve never done that either
nandbytes said:
If RF had the glass I'd be gone by now. I don't like half the native lenses and one I do like are crazy expensive lol
Click to expand...
Ditto. No 16-35mm f4, no 24-70mm f4, the 100-500mm seems an odd choice, especially with it being f7.1, and the 85mm f1.2 is crazy expensive and heavy.

It’s a shame as I do fancy trying Canon as I’ve tried most of the other main brands, and the ergonomics look better than Sony.
 
gman said:
I use LR for stitching, allows me the full dynamic range to play with.
Click to expand...

I guess editing the RAW's in LR I have the full dynamic range to play with too....??

I don't think LR5 does stitching "in house" though. I just have the "open as panoramic in CS6" option.
 
imattersuk said:
Nobody makes a camera that just works which is shocking for 2021.

I watched loads of reviews of the A7siii and it seems a bit soft.
Click to expand...

tell me about it!! its almost like there is a conspiracy between camera manufacturers to cripple a camera one way or another!!

A7Siii isn't soft per say the other bodies down sample from higher res sensors which ends in a sharper looking video. Even the A6400 for example which downsamples from 6K will probably look sharper.
I wouldn't be put off by A7SIII due to lack of sharpness.... I don't think anyone will look at your 4K video and say "you must have shot that one A7SIII because it looks a tad softer" lol
 
snerkler said:
Ditto. No 16-35mm f4, no 24-70mm f4, the 100-500mm seems an odd choice, especially with it being f7.1, and the 85mm f1.2 is crazy expensive and heavy.

It’s a shame as I do fancy trying Canon as I’ve tried most of the other main brands, and the ergonomics look better than Sony.
Click to expand...

RF15-35mm is fair bit heavier than 16-35GM plus the vignetting in corners is horrendous (its close to 6 stops! canon sensor don't even have enough dynamic range to correct for that much)
100-500mm costs like £2.7K even if I get over the cost, its f7.1 and 100mm less reach than 200-600mm. Its like I'd be paying to downgrade! lol

RF 85mm f1.2 is crazy expensive too but seems like an amazing lens. I'm crazy enough to splurge on that one!

their 24-105mm is also great along with the really nice IBIS on the R5. so no issue there.

no 24GM equivalent....
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Surprised that in this day and age using hate speech in reference to disabled people is tolerated. Joke or not, personally I find it disgusting.
Click to expand...
Hate speech ? Guess you've had a humour bypass, you're problem. I'm sure you get outraged on a daily basis about something.
 
imattersuk said:
Hate speech ? Guess you've had a humour bypass, you're problem. I'm sure you get outraged on a daily basis about something.
Click to expand...

No not really I just find what you wrote extremely offensive and in very bad taste.

I guess from your point of view it’s okay to post racist and homophobic content here as well as sure it’s only a laugh. I don’t personally see any difference.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Exactly my thought. If I am paying £6500 for a sports body I want the best in class.
Click to expand...

How about this one.

model.jpg
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Something wider than 24mm which is the widest I have right now (24-105mm)
Can't decide and keep changing my mind ....
Sony 20mm f1.8 or Sony 16 -35mm f4. I don't need a wide zoom, but not sure if 20mm would be wide enough?
Can't justify 16-35mm f2.8
Click to expand...

SFTPhotography said:
20 1.8 would be my pick.

I've never found need for wider in Scotland. Unless you plan on shooting interiors 20 is wide enough.

If you do plan on shooting astro its a handy thing to have. I also suspect optically it'll be amazing and if you do end up with the a7r4 you'd love the combo.

My advice if new grey breaks the bank look at used. The Sony eco system is alive and well, buy a used 20 1.8 - if its no good sell and buy the 16-35
Click to expand...

Maybe it's just that I remember my time with the Sigma 12-24mm but 20mm doesn't seem all that wide. Not wide enough to make me think it needs exceptional care and thought, but maybe that's a good thing as you can use it in more situations without thinking it's too wide and too limiting.
 
Last edited:
About the above... Perhaps an apology for any unintended offence and then we quickly move on?

I'm sure no one wants this to escalate or for people to fall out.
 
nandbytes said:
Not impressed :(
Especially if their birdAF isn't any good. Also seems like they think R5 is better for all animals and you don't even have to pick between animals or birds separately as far as I know.
Click to expand...

I watched it as well.

I will strongly suggest to wait for more and different reviews
Not defending anyone, but Tony is not the best lover of Sony.


Some of the recent comments of Facebook about this video (not sure if true):
https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors/posts/3606970399352118
View: https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors/posts/3606970399352118
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Any thoughts on this one?
sigma art 2.8 14-24 dg dn
Click to expand...
I heard its a worthy lens but for landscapes you just won't need wider than 20. Trust me, I only got 14-24 for interiors. Not once in a landscapes in the UK did I use it wider than that. Trust me, you could take your FF and that lens to Glencoe and take the bulk of the shots with it. Mine barely left my camera.

Honestly, a 20mm prime is a stupendously good thing to have on a full frame camera. If I still shot FF its the 1st I'd buy followed by the finest 24-70 available then 70-200 2.8
 
Last edited:
dancook said:
GAS has been hitting me hard last couple of days..

The idea of selling all hasselblad gear and invest everything into sony

2xA1, 35 GM, 135 GM 400 GM

but since i Don’t trust the post with gear I cant insure, lockdown prevents me from getting ahead of myself..
Click to expand...
What about GXF100s and the best lenses for that?

Me, if I was buying a Sony that a7r4, 20 1.8 gm 24-70mm and 70-200 2.8 GM. Actually if sony made DSLRs I'd have bought in long ago
 
SFTPhotography said:
I heard its a worthy lens but for landscapes you just won't need wider than 20. Trust me, I only got 14-24 for interiors. Not once in a landscapes in the UK did I use it wider than that. Trust me, you could take your FF and that lens to Glencoe and take the bulk of the shots with it. Mine barely left my camera.

Honestly, a 20mm prime is a stupendously good thing to have on a full frame camera. If I still shot FF its the 1st I'd buy followed by the finest 24-70 available then 70-200 2.8
Click to expand...
The other appeal about the 20mm f1.8 is for astro photography.
I'm not far from a dark sky area, and have been considering some astro photography....
 
LeeRatters said:
I guess editing the RAW's in LR I have the full dynamic range to play with too....??

I don't think LR5 does stitching "in house" though. I just have the "open as panoramic in CS6" option.
Click to expand...

It might be v6 but aye you get the full range of play just as if you are editing a single raw file. I've got a feeling it might convert it to a dng or something behind the scenes though.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
The other appeal about the 20mm f1.8 is for astro photography.
I'm not far from a dark sky area, and have been considering some astro photography....
Click to expand...
Dumfries and Galloway are amazing for total lack of light pollution.

An F4 zoom just won't cut it for that and using a 1.8 lens is a chunk faster than a 2.8 which is moot as you're not buying it. If its properly fast and wide it is your only option.

I also think it'll be better balanced mass wise on a lighter camera. Unless the Sony version is much much heavier than the stellar Nikon one I think it'll be better in the hands than a 16-35 f4.

It could give you a surprisingly light set up to carry too - which is something that when you speak to Sony user's matters to them
 
woof woof said:
Maybe it's just that I remember my time with the Sigma 12-24mm but 20mm doesn't seem all that wide. Not wide enough to make me think it needs exceptional care and thought, but maybe that's a good thing as you can use it in more situations without thinking it's too wide and too limiting.
Click to expand...
Thats the beauty of it. Wide enough to comfortably fit it all in, but not that awful wide and stretchy way. I adored that FL on my full frame rig.

If I was confined to one FF camera plus one lens and Glencoe for the rest of my days it would be the 20 1.8 I would choose.
 
nandbytes said:
100-500mm costs like £2.7K even if I get over the cost, its f7.1 and 100mm less reach than 200-600mm. Its like I'd be paying to downgrade! lol
Click to expand...
It may be 7.1 but imo its still a better lens than both the 100-400 gm and the 200-600 but you do pay for it. Mine cost me 2500 and it went for 2600 on ebay with most places on there asking 3400. I'll revisit when there are enough lenses to warrant the switch as the adapted EF lenses didn't cut it for me.
 
Tatts said:
It may be 7.1 but imo its still a better lens than both the 100-400 gm and the 200-600 but you do pay for it. Mine cost me 2500 and it went for 2600 on ebay with most places on there asking 3400. I'll revisit when there are enough lenses to warrant the switch as the adapted EF lenses didn't cut it for me.
Click to expand...

Nothing I have seen so far suggests it's better or worst than either lens. In fact none of the RF lenses apart from the RF85/1.2 seems particularly better than competition. They are either different or similar in performance or in some cases actually worst.
 
Last edited:
photosample said:
I watched it as well.

I will strongly suggest to wait for more and different reviews
Not defending anyone, but Tony is not the best lover of Sony.


Some of the recent comments of Facebook about this video (not sure if true):
https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors/posts/3606970399352118
View: https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors/posts/3606970399352118
Click to expand...
Yeah I am not sure I believe some of the things they say. A9/ii having lag for example while R5 doesn't.
Looking at what everyone says about the ES in R5 I'd find it unusable in general let alone for action. Yet they shoot with it and say it's pretty good.
 
gman said:
It might be v6 but aye you get the full range of play just as if you are editing a single raw file. I've got a feeling it might convert it to a dng or something behind the scenes though.
Click to expand...

CS6 isn't doing any editing. It's stitching the panorama. Never had any range of play issues, ever.
 
Tatts said:
It may be 7.1 but imo its still a better lens than both the 100-400 gm and the 200-600 but you do pay for it. Mine cost me 2500 and it went for 2600 on ebay with most places on there asking 3400. I'll revisit when there are enough lenses to warrant the switch as the adapted EF lenses didn't cut it for me.
Click to expand...
I assume you've had both the 100-500mm and 100-400mm GM lens? That's high praise for the Canon, in what way is it better as I rate the GM lens highly? (genuinely interested)
 
SFTPhotography said:
I'm actually autistic and take no offence at the word and use it freely to describe acts of wanton stupidity.
Click to expand...

That is not the meaning of the word as I am sure you are well aware.

It is very much a derogatory word used to describe people that have a disability.

I am involved with a local charity that supports people with learning disabilities and it would seem you have no idea at all how much hurt using a word like that can cause.

While some of the folks I see do not have the level of understanding needed to see that word for what is, many of them do and find it incredibly distressing. Every time you use that sort of terminology you cause exactly the same hurt as you would do using other hate speech such as racist terminology. For most people that have a family member with a disability, using these sort of words couldn't be any more distasteful.
 
f/2.8 said:
That is not the meaning of the word as I am sure you are well aware.

It is very much a derogatory word used to describe people that have a disability.

I am involved with a local charity that supports people with learning disabilities and it would seem you have no idea at all how much hurt using a word like that can cause.

While some of the folks I see do not have the level of understanding needed to see that word for what is, many of them do and find it incredibly distressing. Every time you use that sort of terminology you cause exactly the same hurt as you would do using other hate speech such as racist terminology. For most people that have a family member with a disability, using these sort of words couldn't be any more distasteful.
Click to expand...

I had and also have family members with disability.
While initially I didn't think much of the original comment now that you point out I can see that it's not very inclusive. Best to not use such language anywhere.
 
f/2.8 said:
That is not the meaning of the word as I am sure you are well aware.

It is very much a derogatory word used to describe people that have a disability.

I am involved with a local charity that supports people with learning disabilities and it would seem you have no idea at all how much hurt using a word like that can cause.

While some of the folks I see do not have the level of understanding needed to see that word for what is, many of them do and find it incredibly distressing. Every time you use that sort of terminology you cause exactly the same hurt as you would do using other hate speech such as racist terminology. For most people that have a family member with a disability, using these sort of words couldn't be any more distasteful.
Click to expand...
It just shows complete lack of understanding. I fully agree with you.
I think one day I will put my sons story on here its an emotional story but opens peoples eyes to disability.
 
robj20 said:
It just shows complete lack of understanding. I fully agree with you.
I think one day I will put my sons story on here its an emotional story but opens peoples eyes to disability.
Click to expand...

It must be very difficult dealing with a son or daughters disability, a few years ago my youngest was hit by a car and was in a wheel chair for around a year and we found it hard.

My brother also has a severe learning disability from birth and has had a very difficult life. Then to add to these difficulties while under respite care he contracted a viral infection which was misdiagnosed as lymphoma for some time. Due to the misdiagnosis and not getting the correct treatment he ended up having a stroke, while in hospital he had another stroke and is now paralysed and will spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair.

He has had to deal with words like "retard" his entire life and while he is now 40, he only has the mental age of a 7 year old, he still understands what words like that mean and finds them very upsetting.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
It must be very difficult dealing with a son or daughters disability, a few years ago my youngest was hit by a car and was in a wheel chair for around a year and we found it hard.

My brother also has a severe learning disability from birth and has had a very difficult life. Then to add to these difficulties while under respite care he contracted a viral infection which was misdiagnosed as lymphoma for some time. Due to the misdiagnosis and not getting the correct treatment he ended up having a stroke, while in hospital he had another stroke and is now paralysed and will spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair.

He has had to deal with words like "retard" his entire life and while he is now 40, he only has the mental age of a 7 year old, he still understands what words like that mean and finds them very upsetting.
Click to expand...
Quick summary he was born with PPHN (lungs not working) St Marys (famous childrens Hospital) told us there was nothing more they could do.
Off to Alder Hey for life saving surgery (he didn't meat any criteria so it was on the surgeons head), he was put on ECMO (heart and lung bypass) to give his lungs time to heal.
Side effect of ECMO was he had a grade 4 bleed (the worst one) whole left side of his brain gone, told to not expect him to last 24 hours.
Well he did and as of now hes walking and talking, but he cant use his right arm, and has whole right side weakness.

The full story has me in tears everytime i read it but its a brilliant story of how a premature baby even can beat all the odds and how the NHS is so amazing.
 
robj20 said:
Quick summary he was born with PPHN (lungs not working) St Marys (famous childrens Hospital) told us there was nothing more they could do.
Off to Alder Hey for life saving surgery (he didn't meat any criteria so it was on the surgeons head), he was put on ECMO (heart and lung bypass) to give his lungs time to heal.
Side effect of ECMO was he had a grade 4 bleed (the worst one) whole left side of his brain gone, told to not expect him to last 24 hours.
Well he did and as of now hes walking and talking, but he cant use his right arm, and has whole right side weakness.

The full story has me in tears everytime i read it but its a brilliant story of how a premature baby even can beat all the odds and how the NHS is so amazing.
Click to expand...

A difficult journey for you and your wife for sure, your son sounds like a real wee fighter to be able to get through all of that.

The NHS do an amazing job, we are all very lucky that we have them and aren't having to rely on health insurance like in other countries and I say that even though my brothers issues were caused by NHS doctors.

With my brother we were just unfortunate that he was misdiagnosed by a doctor who worked in the respite centre, while under their care. We can't help but feel that if it had of been a proper doctor that things may well be different. My brothers learning disability issues stem from when he received whooping cough injection as a baby which caused brain damage, 3 other kids that received the same injection in the same hospital on the same day also had the same reaction and ended up with brain damage in the same area of the brain. Over the years though he has had many doctors, nurses etc. who have been amazingly helpful.
 
robj20 said:
Quick summary he was born with PPHN (lungs not working) St Marys (famous childrens Hospital) told us there was nothing more they could do.
Off to Alder Hey for life saving surgery (he didn't meat any criteria so it was on the surgeons head), he was put on ECMO (heart and lung bypass) to give his lungs time to heal.
Side effect of ECMO was he had a grade 4 bleed (the worst one) whole left side of his brain gone, told to not expect him to last 24 hours.
Well he did and as of now hes walking and talking, but he cant use his right arm, and has whole right side weakness.

The full story has me in tears everytime i read it but its a brilliant story of how a premature baby even can beat all the odds and how the NHS is so amazing.
Click to expand...

That's very inspirational and nice to hear some good things about the NHS and of course that your son is recovering so well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top