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

f/2.8 said:
Underpowered as only has the 2 x AA batteries. Better of with the v350s which has the lithium battery pack.

Size wise the v350s and the cheaper AA version are great.

If you don’t mind the much bigger size the new V860IIs is very good as is the V1.
Click to expand...
The TT350 and V350 are identical in power (guide number, zoom), the only difference is a slightly shorter recycle time (0.1-1.7s vs 0.1-2.2s), and number of flashes from fully charged (210 vs 500+).
If you are using it occasionally, then there is a significant price saving in getting the TT350 over the V350.
 
Actually I was thinking of getting the Godox TT350S the AA battery version, As I have Godox Receivers/triggers and transmitter for my Canon. The transmitter can fire the TT350S and likewidse the TT350S will act as transmitter to fire my 2 Godox triggers on my Canon speedlites.
 
With AA batteries the main disadvantage I found was as battery lost power the flash recycle got slower and seemed less powerful below 50-ish%
With lithium battery you don't have such an issue and it lasts longer. That's the main reason I went with V350s.
 
Tysonator said:
Hi,
I now have my A6600 and Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 Contemporary and went out last weekend on a TimeLine event shoot at Crossness Pumping Station in Bexley. I must say the eye AF is pretty damn good and portrait shoots are so much easier than using my 7Dii. Especially in low light were my 7Dii starts to struggled of course the A6600 does struggle as well, just not as much as my 7Dii !
The Sigma f2.8 helps a lot as my canon EF fit Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 OS HSM Contemporary has variable apeture and it makes a difference in low light. I was sad that my lovely EOS 7Dii struggled so much in the low light, however it will still be great for 400mm plus lens when shooting wildlife and sports.

I was tempted to buy the Sony A7C, howvwer I have no full frame E mount lenses which pushed me more towards the A6600 and the cost as I took advantage of the Sony cash back offer.

Is there any accessories I should have a look at which will compliment my A6600 ! ?
Click to expand...
l bracket makes camera much nicer to handle dirt cheap on amazon ,

mc-11 sigma canon to sony adaptor enables canon fit lenses to be used on the Sony
 
f/2.8 said:
Underpowered as only has the 2 x AA batteries. Better of with the v350s which has the lithium battery pack.

Size wise the v350s and the cheaper AA version are great.

If you don’t mind the much bigger size the new V860IIs is very good as is the V1.
Click to expand...
Great stuff, cheers. I like the idea of the small size and light weight TBH. I understand that they are about a stop less powerful than their full size counterparts, is that right? Cheers.
 
nandbytes said:
With AA batteries the main disadvantage I found was as battery lost power the flash recycle got slower and seemed less powerful below 50-ish%
With lithium battery you don't have such an issue and it lasts longer. That's the main reason I went with V350s.
Click to expand...
Cheers. TBH, it's only for very occasional , one-off use. I have a couple of Yongnuo's that I could use in manual mode if necessary, but I like the idea of a camera, lens, and a small flash fitting nicely in my little Tenba dna7 as a travel kit. I mentioned earlier that I'm off to Lisbon shortly, so that's my thinking anyway.
 
Lostmymojo said:
Cheers. TBH, it's only for very occasional , one-off use. I have a couple of Yongnuo's that I could use in manual mode if necessary, but I like the idea of a camera, lens, and a small flash fitting nicely in my little Tenba dna7 as a travel kit. I mentioned earlier that I'm off to Lisbon shortly, so that's my thinking anyway.
Click to expand...
fair enough, will certainly do fine for that (y)
 
Oops. :oops: :$

I only need 12MP, I said. :pompous:

An old battered A7S is good enough for my return to Sony FE, I said. :sony:

But ... how much would I get trading in my RX10 for a A7rii, I wondered. :thinking:

Quite a generous offer, it seems. :snaphappy:
 
The newly announced Samyang 135 1.8 is getting good reviews, £798 in the UK vs the £1500 for the Sony GM version.
 
Kieran_89 said:
The newly announced Samyang 135 1.8 is getting good reviews, £798 in the UK vs the £1500 for the Sony GM version.
Click to expand...

Don't think there has ever been a bad 135mm lens ever made and the 135GM is exceptional.

Samyang lenses are often well reviewed as they will always take the very cheap cost to buy into account. Samyang are also very good in terms of providing free equipment and incentives for reviews, they are the best at this from any of the manufacturers. Even with a small Instagram account like our own (we have 15k followers) they have been in touch several times via their marketing company offering us free equipment in exchange for a review. Free stuff generally = a positive review.

Samyang's quality control though is absolutely shocking and it's a complete crap shoot in terms of getting a good copy of every autofocus lens they make, (Some of their manual focus lenses are excellent.) I guess that is one way they keep their costs down.

Samyang lenses are a good choice for the amateur photographer that doesn't need to rely on their equipment. My eldest has a few Samyang lenses which she is happy with, but to be fair she doesn't really know any better as we don't allow her to use the gear we use for work.

We have owned quite a few Samyang lenses, who doesn't like a bargain, the only one I was ever mostly happy with was the 45mm, although even with that one, the first one that arrived with us had several large clumps of dust inside it and had to be returned for replacement. All of the others had either permanent or intermittent a.f issues or were decentered. Add the orange colour cast that effects all of their lenses and even though they are cheap they aren't for us.

I can see why Samyang lenses will appeal to some. If I wasn't reliant on my equipment for work I could probably live with some of the common Samyang issues to save some cash. When buying equipment for work the price doesn't matter just as much, it's more important to get the right tool for the job. Although that's not to say that the price doesn't matter at all of course.

The other simple truth is that some people just can't see the issues that would stand out like a sore thumb for others. Just as an example, my wife is very friendly with another wedding photographer, she had a Zeiss Distagon that she has been using for donkeys years she pretty much shoots everything with it. She is an ultra trendy hipster wedding photographer and they all pretty much only use a 35mm lens. She has shot probably about 500 weddings using the distagon and not being the most technical person when it comes to equipment never realised at any point at all that the lens was very badly decentred and has been from day one. My wife wouldn't be the most technical person either but even she realised straight away that her friends lens was decentered. You wouldn't believe how happy the other photographer was after my wife lent her our 35GM for a couple of weddings. She had been thinking for years that the issues she was having were down to user error, she had never even heard of decentering.
 
f/2.8 said:
Samyang lenses are a good choice for the amateur photographer that doesn't need to rely on their equipment. My eldest has a few Samyang lenses which she is happy with, but to be fair she doesn't really know any better as we don't allow her to use the gear we use for work.

I can see why Samyang lenses will appeal to some. If I wasn't reliant on my equipment for work I could probably live with some of the common Samyang issues to save some cash. When buying equipment for work the price doesn't matter just as much, it's more important to get the right tool for the job. Although that's not to say that the price doesn't matter at all of course.

The other simple truth is that some people just can't see the issues that would stand out like a sore thumb for others. Just as an example, my wife is very friendly with another wedding photographer, she had a Zeiss Distagon that she has been using for donkeys years she pretty much shoots everything with it. She is an ultra trendy hipster wedding photographer and they all pretty much only use a 35mm lens. She has shot probably about 500 weddings using the distagon and not being the most technical person when it comes to equipment never realised at any point at all that the lens was very badly decentred and has been from day one. My wife wouldn't be the most technical person either but even she realised straight away that her friends lens was decentered. You wouldn't believe how happy the other photographer was after my wife lent her our 35GM for a couple of weddings. She had been thinking for years that the issues she was having were down to user error, she had never even heard of decentering.
Click to expand...

When I'm using mf lenses I take time and often use the magnified view and pretty much every shot will be technically acceptable, in focus etc., but when using af lenses I'll trust the kit more and when I see a shot that's slightly off it annoys me. I don't want an af lens which could be off now and again and any mention of hunting or iffy focus really puts me off.
 
My bugbear with AF (and this may be user error) is that when I get the green square(s), it often seems to cover more than one edge or surface within the scene. It's not possible - as far as I know - to be sure of which edge within the square is actually the in-focus one. With a very shallow DoF, it can be a bit random. Which is why I try to keep away from wide apertures unless I have more time to be sure (or use MF).

But as I said, this might well be user error on my part. I'm still learning.
 
f/2.8 said:
I can see why Samyang lenses will appeal to some. If I wasn't reliant on my equipment for work I could probably live with some of the common Samyang issues to save some cash. When buying equipment for work the price doesn't matter just as much, it's more important to get the right tool for the job. Although that's not to say that the price doesn't matter at all of course.

She has shot probably about 500 weddings using the distagon and not being the most technical person when it comes to equipment never realised at any point at all that the lens was very badly decentred and has been from day one.
Click to expand...
I think this is nail on head, if I was doing paid work I wouldn't rely on many 3rd party lenses tbh, I doubt even my Tamron 70-180mm. I think the only 3rd party lens I'd trust implicitly is my Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN.

That being said I am pretty picky, I'd say more so than most but as much as some. Decentering is usually obvious to me and not acceptable. Some mild corner distortion is acceptable, and sometimes inevitable, but not if instantly obvious at normal size viewing. AF needs to be tack sharp and I can't tell you how frustrated I got with DSLR lenses where it was deemed acceptable that they could be within 'tolerances'. Fine tuning wasn't reliable 100% of the time as it would work for some subject distances but not others. I had several lenses that went back to Nikon only for them to be sent back saying that they are "working as expected" :rolleyes:
 
snerkler said:
I think this is nail on head, if I was doing paid work I wouldn't rely on many 3rd party lenses tbh, I doubt even my Tamron 70-180mm. I think the only 3rd party lens I'd trust implicitly is my Sigma 85mm f1.4 DG DN.

That being said I am pretty picky, I'd say more so than most but as much as some. Decentering is usually obvious to me and not acceptable. Some mild corner distortion is acceptable, and sometimes inevitable, but not if instantly obvious at normal size viewing. AF needs to be tack sharp and I can't tell you how frustrated I got with DSLR lenses where it was deemed acceptable that they could be within 'tolerances'. Fine tuning wasn't reliable 100% of the time as it would work for some subject distances but not others. I had several lenses that went back to Nikon only for them to be sent back saying that they are "working as expected" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
The Tarmron 17-28 and 28-75 we have are great although we hardly ever use them but we do trust them, we just don’t use zoom lenses much. They have improved ao much from their DSLR lenses.

The Siggy 35’s we used were also good enough for us only lacking slightly in a.f speed and they used to struggle a bit in backlit situations, but we have the Sonys now.

It’s only Samyang really that we have found to not be suitable for work.

I do think Tamron have a bit of an edge on the other third party companies just because they are partly owned by Sony and with Tanron being used to manufacture a lot of Sonys glass they are probably getting more info from Sony than the info they provide as standard to all the other suppliers with e-mount being an open platform.

When we shot Nikon we had all of the Sigma art lenses but it often mean’t going through several copies of a lens to find a good one that could be fine tuned to be perfect. Even then we always tuned them once a month as sometimes the tune would slip and need redone, it just became second nature. Don’t miss that at all.
 
Tamron 17-28 just ordered, 50mm MF Nikkor bought from the Classifieds here.

Wide angle prime and 24-105/28-200 decision next.

Then I'm done. ;)
 
New question: anyone here had their A7/A6000-series camera turned into monochrome by removing the RGB filter layer on the sensor?

Wondering what sorts of photos are significantly better than just B+W JPGing?
 
goldtop said:
:) 35mm (poss 28mm) and prefer sharpness over bokeh.
Click to expand...
Budget?

For 35mm
Samyang has f1.4, f1.8 and f2.8 versions
Sony also has f1.4, f1.8 and f2.8 versions
Sigma has f1.2, f1.4 and f2 versions
Tamron has a f2.8 version but has 0.5x magnification (plus there is one in sales right now)

There are less 28mm options, I guess it's not that popular. There is Sony 28mm f2.
 
goldtop said:
New question: anyone here had their A7/A6000-series camera turned into monochrome by removing the RGB filter layer on the sensor?

Wondering what sorts of photos are significantly better than just B+W JPGing?
Click to expand...
The conversion is quite expensive and only one I found that'd do it was in the US
Is there anyone in UK that'll do it?

Well the conversion increases the sensitivity of your camera by about 1-2 stops which can be handy. Also there is slight difference in the rendering but if that difference is worth the money is up to you to decide. You can look at example RAW files from Leica monochromes for example to help you decide.
Leica for example had a colour version of Q2 and a monochrome version. If you can get some sample shots to compare that could be helpful
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top