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

woof woof said:
On the rumor sire...

Leaked Samyang 135mm f/1.8 FE lens specs – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Anyone interested?

I'll watch and read the reviews but 135mm is too long for me.

I thought the 0.7m min focus distance looked short but I see the Sony f1.8 is the same. That's shorter than I thought it'd be.
Click to expand...
It's lighter than I expected.

It's not really a prime I'd normally buy unless I could use it with TCs like we could on a-mount version of the Sony lens.
 
I was interested in the min focus distance and checked the spec for the Sony 85mm f1.8 and that's 0.8m. I think 0.7m for a 135mm is good. That would add to the appeal for detail pictures, but it is too long for me.
 
woof woof said:
I was interested in the min focus distance and checked the spec for the Sony 85mm f1.8 and that's 0.8m. I think 0.7m for a 135mm is good. That would add to the appeal for detail pictures, but it is too long for me.
Click to expand...
Yeah the 135GM gives 0.25x magnification which is twice the magnification of the FE85/1.8.
 
There doesn't seem to be many folk who have got the 70-200mm f2.8 OSS II yet, the Flickr group's very quiet too. I wonder if people just aren't interested or whether stock's been an issue?
 
snerkler said:
There doesn't seem to be many folk who have got the 70-200mm f2.8 OSS II yet, the Flickr group's very quiet too. I wonder if people just aren't interested or whether stock's been an issue?
Click to expand...

Dare say its a bit of both,

Most people that already shoot Sony and need a 70-200 probably already have one and for the small difference probably can't justify the cost of changing.

70-200 is also not anywhere near as popular a lens as it used to be, especially for event photographers. Many will just use an 85 or 135 and crop as needed if they have the A7RIV for example. Nobody wants to be dragging around a 70-200 all day.
 
Mrs wanted some pictures of the orchids.

A7 and haven't used for quite a while film era Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro in Minolta mount.

1UyJXvX.jpg
 
f/2.8 said:
Dare say its a bit of both,

Most people that already shoot Sony and need a 70-200 probably already have one and for the small difference probably can't justify the cost of changing.

70-200 is also not anywhere near as popular a lens as it used to be, especially for event photographers. Many will just use an 85 or 135 and crop as needed if they have the A7RIV for example. Nobody wants to be dragging around a 70-200 all day.
Click to expand...
Yep, makes sense. Although the weight shouldn't be an issue anymore as the new 70-200mm is only just heavier than the 135mm f1.8 (y)
 
Been a while since I last even thought about my camera. Came across this, which I think is CA, should I be worried about this? CA correction, colour correction etc couldn't get rid of it properly and the only way would be local editing.

It's the Sony 35mm f/1.4 so a little concerning.

Bad CA.jpg


Bad CA Close Up.jpg
 
snerkler said:
Yep, makes sense. Although the weight shouldn't be an issue anymore as the new 70-200mm is only just heavier than the 135mm f1.8 (y)
Click to expand...
It’s not the weight that is a problem it’s just cumbersome to carry around all day.
 
gman said:
Been a while since I last even thought about my camera. Came across this, which I think is CA, should I be worried about this? CA correction, colour correction etc couldn't get rid of it properly and the only way would be local editing.

It's the Sony 35mm f/1.4 so a little concerning.

View attachment 339875


View attachment 339876
Click to expand...

Is this the Zeiss or the GM?

Hardly ever see any C.A with the G.M and that is quite bad.

Surely the dropper in Lighteoom would fix that in 2 seconds?
 
It's the GM. I never tried the dropper though, just the CA button and also the colour sliders. Will give that a try now, but I'm still a little disappointed. I've got some similar shots which hardly show it, although if peeping you can still see it, so I'm wondering if it's just been some precise and unlucky angle which the sun has entered the lens?
 
Couldn't see any dropper in LR, but there was an "adjust in photo" which seems similar. Took a few different adjustments as there was a mixture of magenta and purple but got it to this:

1641326602188.png


I don't think I should have to be doing this with such a lens though?
 
gman said:
Couldn't see any dropper in LR, but there was an "adjust in photo" which seems similar. Took a few different adjustments as there was a mixture of magenta and purple but got it to this:

View attachment 339877


I don't think I should have to be doing this with such a lens though?
Click to expand...

This will explain better than I could. The dropper is when you choose manual C.A removal much better than the auto remove.

Capture.JPG

fstoppers.com

How to Remove Color Fringing in Lightroom

If you've ever shot on a budget lens, or composed a dark subject against a bright sky, you will have surely noticed color fringing — a glowing colored edge around any contrasted subject. Learn how to remove even the most difficult chromatic aberration in Lightroom Classic using some manual...
fstoppers.com fstoppers.com


That would concern me if it is happening a lot I cant actually think of a situation off hand where I have seen noticeable C.A with the 35 G.M. Shooting straight into the sun like that will cause issues for any lens.
 
Last edited:
gman said:
It's the GM. I never tried the dropper though, just the CA button and also the colour sliders. Will give that a try now, but I'm still a little disappointed. I've got some similar shots which hardly show it, although if peeping you can still see it, so I'm wondering if it's just been some precise and unlucky angle which the sun has entered the lens?
Click to expand...
Think the condition is pretty extreme tbh. I am not sure if any lens would do much better in such a situation.
 
gman said:
Been a while since I last even thought about my camera. Came across this, which I think is CA, should I be worried about this? CA correction, colour correction etc couldn't get rid of it properly and the only way would be local editing.

It's the Sony 35mm f/1.4 so a little concerning.

View attachment 339875


View attachment 339876
Click to expand...
Looks pretty bad that, but it also looks like the shot has had some heavy processing which may have exacerbated the CA?
 
As it's quiet.

The moon through the trees, f2, ISO 3200 and 0.5 sec hand held with the The Creeker and Voigtlander 35mm f1.4, focus on the tree in the middle distance.

6iF6pMR.jpg


Home again, f4, ISO 3200 and 0.6 sec handheld.

hVJUqh1.jpg
 
f/2.8 said:
This will explain better than I could. The dropper is when you choose manual C.A removal much better than the auto remove.

View attachment 339879

fstoppers.com

How to Remove Color Fringing in Lightroom

If you've ever shot on a budget lens, or composed a dark subject against a bright sky, you will have surely noticed color fringing — a glowing colored edge around any contrasted subject. Learn how to remove even the most difficult chromatic aberration in Lightroom Classic using some manual...
fstoppers.com fstoppers.com


That would concern me if it is happening a lot I cant actually think of a situation off hand where I have seen noticeable C.A with the 35 G.M. Shooting straight into the sun like that will cause issues for any lens.
Click to expand...

Ah I never noticed that manual tab! Muchas gracias, this is very helpful and managed to remove almost all of the CA.


nandbytes said:
Think the condition is pretty extreme tbh. I am not sure if any lens would do much better in such a situation.
Click to expand...

That's reassuring to hear thanks.


snerkler said:
Looks pretty bad that, but it also looks like the shot has had some heavy processing which may have exacerbated the CA?
Click to expand...

On both counts you are right.

Here's a crop of the image reset to RAW out of the camera with full on manual CA removal plus some additional magenta saturation removal. CA has completely gone.


1641424622795.png


Here's two more from the same day which didn't seem to suffer to the same extent, even after editing. Unfortunately, being Scotland in Winter and having weather of despair, there can be a requirement heavy editing to gain some semblance of well being lol

1.jpg

2.jpg




And a couple of exposure blends...

GS_06430.jpg

GS_06474.jpg
 
f/2.8 said:
Dare say its a bit of both,

Most people that already shoot Sony and need a 70-200 probably already have one and for the small difference probably can't justify the cost of changing.

70-200 is also not anywhere near as popular a lens as it used to be, especially for event photographers. Many will just use an 85 or 135 and crop as needed if they have the A7RIV for example. Nobody wants to be dragging around a 70-200 all day.
Click to expand...
For the early part of my career it never left my camera, must have shot 90% of pictures using one. Since getting a 85 a few years ago, I hardly use it anymore, but still have to take it on jobs, just in case...
 
EdMoss said:
For the early part of my career it never left my camera, must have shot 90% of pictures using one. Since getting a 85 a few years ago, I hardly use it anymore, but still have to take it on jobs, just in case...
Click to expand...

Pretty much the same here as well, when I shot Nikon 70-200 was my most used lens for a long time. Then once I got a good 85 I was only using the 70-200 for things like the speeches or when we needed something longer for the ceremony. When I switched to Sony knowing I wasn't using a 70-200 much I got the f/4 version but found I hardly used it much at all, I eventually got a 135 and stopped using the 70-200 at all, so sold it on.

The 135mm is superb but we have stopped bringing it for weddings now as well and we only use it now for family portrait sessions really, were it is excellent. The only time I need a longer lens now is for some stuff during the speeches and we now just use the 85 on our A7RIV in crop mode, same thing applies for the very odd time we need a longer lens during the ceremony. It is not worth the hassle of carrying a longer lens around for the occasional use we would need it for.

In some ways it's a pity really, do love the compression you get at 200mm, but it just makes no sense to have one for us anymore. Very rare to see wedding/event photographers with a 70-200 these days, only the old school guys that are still using DSLR's tend to have them and they are very much a dying breed, I don't think they use them much either.

We don't even use the 85mm much anymore. I guess our shooting style has changed a bit, I mainly use the 35GM and the 50GM, my missus mainly uses the 24GM and the 55.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
I thought you has completely moved over to Panasonic.
Nice shots, I like the rendering from that lens, how are you finding it?
Click to expand...

Bit of both! Love the Panasonic for Live Comp and love the Sony for the Tamron 35-150, so they make a strange but perfect (for me) combination for what I like to shoot, which is a bit of everything. The range is pretty much perfect for a walkaround for me, I only ever go wider than 35mm when doing star trails etc, so day to day it's all I need.

I absolutely love the Tamron, it goes in my relatively small rucksack attached to my a9 along with my Mavic Mini, not much I can't shoot with that rucksack :) I was thinking yesterday how bonkers it would have seemed 10 years ago to have that my coverage and speed on a full frame camera, AND a decent photography drone, in what is essentially a school rucksack.
 
E Infinity have the new Samyang 24-70mm f/2.8 in stock for just £669

Samyang AF 24-70mm f/2.8 FE Lens for Sony E

£699.00 - 12 Months<br />Warranty - 14 Days<br />Money Back - 100%<br />Brand New - Free<br />Shipping - Import Tax<br />Included
www.e-infin.com www.e-infin.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top