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

russellsnr said:
Hi, Can get it back on but will not stay on, looks like they use clue and don't want to go that road because with my luck:oops: :$, will leave it there. Contacted Panamoz and been advised to get it fixed through Sony UK and they (Panamoz) will refund the cost of repair as it is still under there 3 year G/tee, if all works out I think that is more than great customer service. Russ.
Click to expand...
This is probably the best thing to do. Let us know how you get along with Sony+panamoz, would be interesting to hear a real world experience.
 
I spotted these lovely tiny little flowers in the cold frame, Mrs WW says they're radish. Who'd have known? :D

A7 and Chinon 50mm f1.4 + No.4 close up filter at just over minimum focus distance.

ZFQjG3K.jpg


66% crop.

4amk8Ip.jpg
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, Can get it back on but will not stay on, looks like they use clue and don't want to go that road because with my luck:oops: :$, will leave it there. Contacted Panamoz and been advised to get it fixed through Sony UK and they (Panamoz) will refund the cost of repair as it is still under there 3 year G/tee, if all works out I think that is more than great customer service. Russ.
Click to expand...

Wow, that would be amazing customer service! Hope you get it sorted. (y)
 
ancient_mariner said:
I'm a little tempted to let my 18 go in order to pick up Les's 28 because I don't use it much. OTOH it's sharper and cleaner than the 12-24 that I would use instead, and it's super light to pack if I want wide angles and low weight.
Click to expand...

If ever you think about it just let me know.
As long as it behave nicely!
 
woof woof said:
56mm, how did you get so close?
Click to expand...

Took it from my kitchen through the window and I was about 16 foot distance from the robin. The 56mm is giving me 84mm focal length though I think. I would have used my 70 to 350 but it always give me stupidly high ISO if I'm not pointing at the sky or if there isn't enough light.
 
woof woof said:
ah. Thanks :D

I can't get close to them. I must look like their super predator :D
Click to expand...

I got lucky as I wasn't on continuous shooting or tracking, just single shooting and AF-S but fortunately the shutter speed was 2500. :)
 
Merlin5 said:
I got lucky as I wasn't on continuous shooting or tracking, just single shooting and AF-S but fortunately the shutter speed was 2500. :)
Click to expand...

on the later sony bodies (which your A6600 is) with real time tracking there is almost no reason not to use AF-C permanently even with static subjects.
on rare occasions DMF comes in handy which is still better than AF-S only.
 
nandbytes said:
on the later sony bodies (which your A6600 is) with real time tracking there is almost no reason not to use AF-C permanently even with static subjects.
on rare occasions DMF comes in handy which is still better than AF-S only.
Click to expand...

Can you tell me more about DMF? I just tried it and it seems good because not only does it show me blue focus peaking, but I can zoom in while pressing back button and turning the focus ring. And I can still select either single or continuous shooting. Would this be better to use than AF-S or AF-C? Although, I guess I don't always want to see the focus peaking.

And thanks for the tip, I'll keep it on AF-C when/if not using DMF.
 
Last edited:
Merlin5 said:
Can you tell me more about DMF? I just tried it and it seems good because not only does it show me blue focus peaking, but I can zoom in while pressing back button and turning the focus ring. And I can still select either single or continuous shooting. Would this be better to use than AF-S or AF-C? Although, I guess I don't always want to see the focus peaking.

And thanks for the tip, I'll keep it on AF-C when/if not using DMF.
Click to expand...

DMF is basically does AF-S first and then puts your camera in manual focus in case you want to tweak focus a little if you wish (which is what you saw with the focus peaking and zoomed in view etc). you can turn off the focus peaking if you wish but that part of the point of using DMF. Also in very low light PDAF might struggle to nail focus in which case since AF-S/DMF uses contrast detection as the last step to lock-on focus it might still work. Plus since you have the option to MF later you can still tweak the focus if the camera failed to lock-on accurately in low light.

Apart from that in all cases you are better off using AF-C. the real time tracking is extremely accurate and will nail focus. plus even for stationary subject say you want to focus and recompose with real time tracking you can just focus with centre spot on your subject and recompose and the camera will keep your subject in perfect focus. in the past you either had to stop down your lens to increase the DoF to compensate for focus recomposing or move around your AF point. With real time tracking its really quick to just focus and recompose and let the camera do its magic.

hope that makes sense :)
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
DMF is basically does AF-S first and then puts your camera in manual focus in case you want to tweak focus a little if you wish (which is what you saw with the focus peaking and zoomed in view etc). you can turn off the focus peaking if you wish but that part of the point of using DMF. Also in very low light PDAF might struggle to nail focus in which case since AF-S/DMF uses contrast detection as the last step to lock-on focus it might still work. Plus since you have the option to MF later you can still tweak the focus if the camera failed to lock-on accurately in low light.

Apart from that in all cases you are better off using AF-C. the real time tracking is extremely accurate and will nail focus. plus even for stationary subject say you want to focus and recompose with real time tracking you can just focus with centre spot on your subject and recompose and the camera will keep your subject in perfect focus. in the past you either had to stop down your lens to increase the DoF to compensate for focus recomposing or move around your AF point. With real time tracking its really quick to just focus and recompose and let the camera do its magic.

hope that makes sense :)
Click to expand...

Awesome, thanks for that, (y) Quick question. When focusing on a bird sitting on a fence, such as I did, but let's say a blue tit which is super twitchy and moving its head around all the time, would you turn off stabilisation? I kept mine on but probably should have turned it off?
 
Merlin5 said:
Awesome, thanks for that, (y) Quick question. When focusing on a bird sitting on a fence, such as I did, but let's say a blue tit which is super twitchy and moving its head around all the time, would you turn off stabilisation? I kept mine on but probably should have turned it off?
Click to expand...

if your shutter speed is high enough you could try turning it off.
but tbh in the many many thousands of pictures I have shot I have tried it both ways and never really found a real difference.
so it doesn't really matter I think.
though if your tele-lens has "mode 2" stabilisation i.e. for panning that does help slightly with panning shots.
 
Last edited:
For AF I always use DMF as for me AF just isn't a do it all as sometimes it'll focus very quickly but just not necessarily on the right thing. For people who want the benefits other modes offer they make more sense but for me with static or slow moving subjects DMF works fine and allows me to quickly intervene if the AF is likely to hit something else rather than the exact detail I want it to hit.

I would never focus and recompose, I can't remember the last time I did that as do that and the chances are that your focus isn't where you wanted it to be. There are more reliable ways of doing it, move the focus point or tracking.
 
nandbytes said:
if your shutter speed is high enough you could try turning it off.
but tbh in the many many thousands of pictures I have shot I have tried it both ways and never really found a real difference.
so it doesn't really matter I think.
though if your tele-lens has "mode 2" stabilisation i.e. for panning that does help slightly with panning shots.
Click to expand...

Thanks. By the way, on a similar subject about stabilisation, when I was learning about using an ND filter, I watched this video. Interestingly, he says when using Sony cameras on a tripod, stabilisation can be on because he thinks the camera detects when it's on a tripod. At 8:24.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZKVFOsPYKs&t=379s
 
Merlin5 said:
Thanks. By the way, on a similar subject about stabilisation, when I was learning about using an ND filter, I watched this video. Interestingly, he says when using Sony cameras on a tripod, stabilisation can be on because he thinks the camera detects when it's on a tripod. At 8:24.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZKVFOsPYKs&t=379s
Click to expand...

pretty sure it doesn't.
the Sony camera manuals tell you to turn it off.

Steadyshot - "We recommend that you set [Off] when using a tripod, etc."

ILCE-6600 | Help Guide | SteadyShot

helpguide.sony.net
 
nandbytes said:
pretty sure it doesn't.
the Sony camera manuals tell you to turn it off.

Steadyshot - "We recommend that you set [Off] when using a tripod, etc."

ILCE-6600 | Help Guide | SteadyShot

helpguide.sony.net
Click to expand...

I've taken some long exposures and forgotten to turn it off and they came out fine, but it might be that they'd be sharper without. But yeah, I always try to remember to disable it.
 
Merlin5 said:
I've taken some long exposures and forgotten to turn it off and they came out fine, but it might be that they'd be sharper without. But yeah, I always try to remember to disable it.
Click to expand...
9 times out of 10 it's probably fine. I have forgotten to turn it off myself at times.
I mostly forget when I am in a hurry.
 
What about buying a 200-600 with missing tripod foot :-/. I do never use a gimbal but sometime a tripod. There's a lot of tripod foot arca swiss plate on ebay for £30. Anyone used any of them?
 
Lemaildetom said:
What about buying a 200-600 with missing tripod foot :-/. I do never use a gimbal but sometime a tripod. There's a lot of tripod foot arca swiss plate on ebay for £30. Anyone used any of them?
Click to expand...

yep I have got one those and they work rather well.
missing the original tripod foot is not end of the world but make sure its priced appropriately as your resale value will also be lower for that reason.
 
nandbytes said:
yep I have got one those and they work rather well.
missing the original tripod foot is not end of the world but make sure its priced appropriately as your resale value will also be lower for that reason.
Click to expand...

I know it's missing the box too.
Honestly, I don't care about the box and the foot, I'd rather an arca swiss plate compatible one anyway. But resale value is important. I think I'll try to get the price a bit down or save a bit more and go for the cashback.
 
Lemaildetom said:
I know it's missing the box too.
Honestly, I don't care about the box and the foot, I'd rather an arca swiss plate compatible one anyway. But resale value is important. I think I'll try to get the price a bit down or save a bit more and go for the cashback.
Click to expand...

I have bought lenses new whenever it's a lens I plan on keeping a while. 200-600mm is one of them.
If you do get it new don't forget to register your lens online for an extra 1 year warranty, so you actually get two years warranty in total.
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, Can get it back on but will not stay on, looks like they use clue and don't want to go that road because with my luck:oops: :$, will leave it there. Contacted Panamoz and been advised to get it fixed through Sony UK and they (Panamoz) will refund the cost of repair as it is still under there 3 year G/tee, if all works out I think that is more than great customer service. Russ.
Click to expand...

When my 35 1.4 needed the focus realigned I got a quote from Sony, sent it to panamoz, and had the money in 20 minutes.
 
mstphoto said:
Does this work if purchased from E-Infinity or Panamoz?
Click to expand...
No, grey imports are not covered by UK warranty. The way it works is you get it fixed by Sony UK and the grey importer refunds you the amount of the repair.
If the grey importer goes bust or becomes unresponsive you are basically screwed.
I don't trust e-infinity much but panamoz has been in business a while and have been good on their 3 years warranty by most reports. They seem to have good customer service too.

If you are going with grey importer I think your "safest" option is to pay with PayPal credit (not same as using your credit card via. PayPal) in which case you'll be covered by PayPal for 6 months and then section 75 thereafter or just pay with your credit card directly.
 
Last edited:
Not Sony related but maybe worth a read, even if at the end you think "What the..." and have to read it again...

www.dpreview.com

Fire-damaged and unusable Leica M4 and Summicron lens sells for around $2,000

Some cameras are worth money to collectors even when they can't be used to capture photos. A charred Leica M4 and Summicron 50mm F2 lens recently sold at auction in the United Kingdom for over $2,000 USD.
www.dpreview.com www.dpreview.com

Particularly erudite here...

"Anyone who bemoans the broken camera is full of s–t.' "

PS.
Back in my computer days I used to hang onto circuit boards that'd spectacularly blown and burnt as talking points between us nerds but one problem was that the smell meant they never hung around too long. I wonder if this Leica smells as bad.
 
Last edited:
But they could buy a working one... or a duff one that doesn't smell or stain your hands when you fondle it.

I have two Minolta Rokkors with damaged coatings and one is on a shelf... but it's a good looking lens. I can't really see myself having something like that Leica on show. It probably smells too.

Anyway.

I shot a few test shots with one of those Rokkors the other day and it gives a sort of dreamy look. I posted a couple of examples in this thread.

www.talkphotography.co.uk

Recommend Me Some RUBBISH Lenses!

Looking at some of the images from old, Russian 35mm cameras, I have to say I just love them! Those grainy shots with no detail but loads of noise and loads of character! I'd love a couple of lenses that I could stick on the camera and turn my modern day mirrorless in a 60s throw away camera or...
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk

If a regular to this thread want it as a use once in a blue moon dreamy look thing or for some special project they can have it, no charge. I'm not even asking $1,000 for it. If someone wants it they'll have to buy their own adapter though.
 
woof woof said:
But they could buy a working one... or a duff one that doesn't smell or stain your hands when you fondle it.

I have two Minolta Rokkors with damaged coatings and one is on a shelf... but it's a good looking lens. I can't really see myself having something like that Leica on show. It probably smells too.

Anyway.

I shot a few test shots with one of those Rokkors the other day and it gives a sort of dreamy look. I posted a couple of examples in this thread.

www.talkphotography.co.uk

Recommend Me Some RUBBISH Lenses!

Looking at some of the images from old, Russian 35mm cameras, I have to say I just love them! Those grainy shots with no detail but loads of noise and loads of character! I'd love a couple of lenses that I could stick on the camera and turn my modern day mirrorless in a 60s throw away camera or...
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk

If a regular to this thread want it as a use once in a blue moon dreamy look thing or for some special project they can have it, no charge. I'm not even asking $1,000 for it. If someone wants it they'll have to buy their own adapter though.
Click to expand...

That lens in working order is like $10k isn't it?
 
No idea but chances are that the buyer of that smouldering wreck could afford one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top