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

[nandbytes]

The fact this is an enthusiast forum, reading thousands of posts talking of image quality and looking at the vast majority of photos on here I think it's a fair assumption that most members value image quality. Of course, I could be wrong and have no issue with being proven so

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Some of us like to have good image quality as well as a record of an event/moment etc therefore images like the one you posted don't cut it

Quality, so far as I'm concerned, is in the eye of the beholder and depends greatly on the viewer's expectations. There are many pictures shown here that I find boring or pointless but that's OK, many of my pictures must excite similar responses.

This mysterious term "image quality" is often used in relation to a picture that just isn't showing me anything interesting. If I pointed out every image that I found boring I'd quickly become persona non grata and I'd deserve to be told to go elsewhere.

In the 1960s there was a vogue for images shot on Tri-X (or even Royal-X) and developed in the most energetic developer available. The massive graininess that resulted was seen as an indicator of the photographer's artfulness and suitability for inclusion in glossy magazines or display on exhibition walls. That's another fad that's passed but if it returns, my moon picture might qualify for inclusion at some prestigious event!

(sorry don't mean to offend)

None taken - or at least, not much!

 

[nandbytes]

Depends what the item is, personally on a lens like that i'd rather know the warranty would be dealt with by Sony, other items i'd be happy with the Panamoz warranty but it's still more hassle having to get a quote and get them to pay you, then arrange the repair yourself.

Absolutely, I almost always buy UK stock for this reason. All my current gear is UK bought and majority from LCE.
LCE are great at sorting out any issues, never had problems.
This is why your lens was really attractive to me. But unfortunately I think you and I are in the minority

 

[GeordieStew]

The new f4 is compelling and it's a tough call. The GM2 is an incredible lens, and at just over 1kg it's not excessively heavy.

I'm sure the new f4 will have great IQ and AF so for me it'd be a question whether the extra stop, internal zoom and maybe edge in IQ is worth the extra money and weight.

The internal zoom is probably what attracts me the most.

Hmmm.

 

[nandbytes]

I want a 70-200 for my a1. New f/4 looks nice. But is it enough cheaper than the f/2.8?

I need to understand pros and cons! Weight, size etc.

Anyone any thoughts?

I personally just can't afford the f2.8. the only one I could even remotely buy (i.e. one discussed above) is sold now to a dealer.

But if you can afford both I think it basically comes down to how much you value the macro capability vs. f2.8.

 

[snerkler]

Quality, so far as I'm concerned, is in the eye of the beholder and depends greatly on the viewer's expectations. There are many pictures shown here that I find boring or pointless but that's OK, many of my pictures must excite similar responses.

All very true, although image quality has nothing to do with the subject or how interesting the image is . I'd love to have the eye to take more interesting pics, however I find most of mine are quite 'generic'. At least they're a record of things I've done and places I've been so mean something to me

 

[snerkler]

I personally just can't afford the f2.8. the only one I could even remotely buy (i.e. one discussed above) is sold now to a dealer.

But if you can afford both I think it basically comes down to how much you value the macro capability vs. f2.8.

Then there's always the Tamron 70-180mm that throws a spanner into the works, light, considerably cheaper and with f2.8

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

All very true, although image quality has nothing to do with the subject or how interesting the image is .

You may say that and I may agree but there are posts that suggest a different point of view.

Still, as my parents' generation were fond of saying: "it takes all types".

 

[nandbytes]

Then there's always the Tamron 70-180mm that throws a spanner into the works, light, considerably cheaper and with f2.8

I had the tamron in the past. Really liked it.
If I move Nikon would definitely buy their rebadged version. On Sony it doesn't take TCs which is a deal breaker for me.

I really like to be able to get to 300mm minimum.

 

[nandbytes]

Why do you feel their bodies are compelling? Genuine question.

They are not at the moment but with samyang lenses also acting like first party lenses I think provides really great number of choices that's affordable and potentially work as well as native lenses.

 

[LeeRatters]

The tiny HX90 can produce pictures in so many situations, it can be hard to justify carrying anything bigger...

View attachment 395334

It would be interesting if next time you took 6 - 8 images and stacked them for noise reduction in software like I would for my night sky Milky Way images and see how much it would reduce any of the noise that's visible in the sky and maybe even increase some of the detail.

Then you'd be getting even more from your small lightweight set up

 

[imattersuk]

Sorry if I didn't explain very well. Some of us like to have good image quality as well as a record of an event/moment etc therefore images like the one you posted don't cut it (sorry don't mean to offend) and therefore it's not hard to justify carrying bigger heavier gear. Even for holiday snap shots like those I've been posting this week I want nice image quality and therefore am prepared to carry my camera and a couple of lenses.

Is there a reason you're happy having other items (possibly even a camera) covered by third party warranty but not lenses?

AFAIK with Panamoz the items go back to the manufacturer service centre and not a third party one, unless it's changed?

I think it's fair to say that lens repairs are more complex than cameras which usually just have a main board, sensor or shutter assembly replaced.

 

[GeordieStew]

I personally just can't afford the f2.8. the only one I could even remotely buy (i.e. one discussed above) is sold now to a dealer.

But if you can afford both I think it basically comes down to how much you value the macro capability vs. f2.8.

Yeah... hmmm... I'll give it some thought over the weekend. My 200-600 is on body 98% of the time now.

But feel 200mm is a bit too long sometimes.

 

[ancient_mariner]

You may say that and I may agree but there are posts that suggest a different point of view.

Still, as my parents' generation were fond of saying: "it takes all types".

There was a phrase for musicians that went something like "if you can't make great music then you should at least be technically able". If the first thing that we see in a picture are the technical aspects then it's already failed as an image for us - one might at least hope it is technically competent. If the technical side is so poor that it gets in the way of an otherwise good picture then that really is disappointing.

 

[nandbytes]

Yeah... hmmm... I'll give it some thought over the weekend. My 200-600 is on body 98% of the time now.

But feel 200mm is a bit too long sometimes.

I personally don't need f2.8 at 200mm. I don't do weddings or portraits of that style.
For me 200mm is more for landscapes, flowers/insects and sometimes motorsport. So 70-200mm f4 makes a whole lot sense for me.

 

[nandbytes]

Comparison between samyang 85mm and sigma 85 in terms of size, the samyang is so much slimmer with hood reversed actually means I can pack it day to day....
with the hood off they are about even

Samyang also feels more like the 35GM than the sigma because they both are about the same weight while sigma is a wee bit heavier. so for my 35/85 combo samyang feels more natural

no aperture ring on samyang which is a shame

 

[snerkler]

There was a phrase for musicians that went something like "if you can't make great music then you should at least be technically able". If the first thing that we see in a picture are the technical aspects then it's already failed as an image for us - one might at least hope it is technically competent. If the technical side is so poor that it gets in the way of an otherwise good picture then that really is disappointing.

Yep, that's what I try and do. I can't 'naturally/innately' come up with a melody, rhythm etc so use technical aspects (chord progressions,scales etc) to write music and in playing about with these then often I can come up with something. I feel that my photography is very similar.

Comparison between samyang 85mm and sigma 85 in terms of size, the samyang is so much slimmer with hood reversed actually means I can pack it day to day....
with the hood off they are about even

Samyang also feels more like the 35GM than the sigma because they both are about the same weight while sigma is a wee bit heavier. so for my 35/85 combo samyang feels more natural

no aperture ring on samyang which is a shame

View attachment 395368
View attachment 395369

The Sigma hood reversed does make the lens unnecessarily large imo.

 

[nandbytes]

The Sigma hood reversed does make the lens unnecessarily large imo.

Yeah
I know this may sound silly to many people but that was main reason I started looking at samyang. It wasn't even the weight to start with. Reduction in weight is just an added bonus.

 

[woof woof]

Mrs WW watches health and food related stuff on youtube and has recently started watching vids by a young Korean woman who goes camping with her dog, she has lots of camping gadgets and cooks lots of interesting dishes. I've watched some and they are interesting and funny and she gets a lot of views so I imagine she's making money out of this and possibly product placement too. One of her viewers asked what camera she uses and she said she uses one of those ZV vlogging camera thingies and the quality looks to be good as do her production values. They are IMO really good vids especially considering she seems to do it all herself.

I have no interest in this type of camera or making vids at all but I can imagine people seeing what others are using and going for these cameras. I can maybe understand a little more why these cameras seem to be selling well.

 

[gman]

The tiny HX90 can produce pictures in so many situations, it can be hard to justify carrying anything bigger...

View attachment 395334

I get the whole argument about the strive for ever better image quality etc and sure when it comes to the moon perhaps it's pretty important because the subject detail is pretty much all there is with the moon. However, for a camera not much bigger than a cigeratte packet I think it's fair to say that's pretty impressive.

Out of curiosity, I wondered if anything could be done with this photo and literally a quick edit and a little creativity can actually turn this into a nifty image. You've got "No" selected so can't post my quick attempt, but it's certainly a usable photo depending on what you are after.

 

[nog]

I find I use -exposure comp a lot on Sony, more than I used to on the OM-1 I used to have. Thinking of using the exposure std adjustment in menu to reduce the default exposure.
Anyone else changed the default exposure?

 

[woof woof]

I find I use -exposure comp a lot on Sony, more than I used to on the OM-1 I used to have. Thinking of using the exposure std adjustment in menu to reduce the default exposure.
Anyone else changed the default exposure?

It's not something I've ever thought of doing.

I usually don't worry about minor exposure issues as pushing the sliders post capture may have next to no impact on image quality but yesterday in Whitby the light seemed to be so harsh that I had real issues but that was a rare event and I can't really remember the last time I had that problem go that degree. I think to fiddle with the default exposure issues would have to be pretty common and extreme rather than once in a while incidents and there's the question of the effect any changes you make will have on more normal shooting occasions.

Are you having so many issues that you think this is a worthwhile thing to do?

 

[snerkler]

I find I use -exposure comp a lot on Sony, more than I used to on the OM-1 I used to have. Thinking of using the exposure std adjustment in menu to reduce the default exposure.
Anyone else changed the default exposure?

I can't remember if I changed it or not, I know I looked in to it. What I've found though is that Sony show a lot of highlight clipping in the jpeg preview on the camera which is not there in the raw files in lightroom. I still find that I sometimes reduce exposure because of this but then end up with an underexposed image

 

[nog]

It's not something I've ever thought of doing.

I usually don't worry about minor exposure issues as pushing the sliders post capture may have next to no impact on image quality but yesterday in Whitby the light seemed to be so harsh that I had real issues but that was a rare event and I can't really remember the last time I had that problem go that degree. I think to fiddle with the default exposure issues would have to be pretty common and extreme rather than once in a while incidents and there's the question of the effect any changes you make will have on more normal shooting occasions.

Are you having so many issues that you think this is a worthwhile thing to do?

Seem to use it a lot so was thinking of changing default, nearly always lift the shadows and drop highlights in LR so not major problem

I can't remember if I changed it or not, I know I looked in to it. What I've found though is that Sony show a lot of highlight clipping in the jpeg preview on the camera which is not there in the raw files in lightroom. I still find that I sometimes reduce exposure because of this but then end up with an underexposed image

I have set up the zebra display as Mark Galer’s guide with lower limit at 109+, very often have the zebras showing so put in some neg exposure. Think I need to take a few shots of same scene with zebras on and off. Also need to get out and use camera a bit more.

 

[snerkler]

Seem to use it a lot so was thinking of changing default, nearly always lift the shadows and drop highlights in LR so not major problem

I have set up the zebra display as Mark Galer’s guide with lower limit at 109+, very often have the zebras showing so put in some neg exposure. Think I need to take a few shots of same scene with zebras on and off. Also need to get out and use camera a bit more.

I’ve started using the Zebras with the same settings but again the camera shows lots of clipping which is not there in the raws so I’m not finding it that useful. I’m going to play about and see if I can find a setting where it doesn’t show clipping so early.

 

[nog]

Yes I find the zebras interfere with the view at times which is one of the reasons was thinking of changing exposure default. Have put zebras on/off on a button for now.
Let me know if you find a good setting

.

 

[snerkler]

Yes I find the zebras interfere with the view at times which is one of the reasons was thinking of changing exposure default. Have put zebras on/off on a button for now.
Let me know if you find a good setting

.

I have zebras in the Fn menu, I’ll keep you posted.

 

[snerkler]

Has anyone updated the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II yet and if so have you seen any difference?

 

[LeeRatters]

@nog @snerkler

I pretty much use the zebras to set exposure on the A7Riii I'll go until they start to show and know its still there/recoverable. On the A7 with max zebra I can go about one stop over from them appearing. Same on the drone for video.

 

[nog]

@LeeRatters

​

So you increase exposure until the zebras start to show?

I usually have to decrease exposure to reduce/ remove the zebras

 

[snerkler]

So you increase exposure until the zebras start to show?

I usually have to decrease exposure to reduce/ remove the zebras

Same for me, but then it’s underexposed in LR with extra room to the right of the histogram.

 

[snerkler]

Sony have confirmed my cashback claims have been successful for the 35mm and 50mm GM’s. I was a bit worried as I’ve read about people having issues in the past, but all seems to have gone smoothly so far, just waiting for the money to come in.

 

[woof woof]

Sony have confirmed my cashback claims have been successful for the 35mm and 50mm GM’s. I was a bit worried as I’ve read about people having issues in the past, but all seems to have gone smoothly so far, just waiting for the money to come in.

And as it's free money you can then spend it

 

[LeeRatters]

@LeeRatters

​

So you increase exposure until the zebras start to show?

I usually have to decrease exposure to reduce/ remove the zebras

Increase. Decrease..... Whichever it needs for the zebras to be just on the brink of showing. But I use the zebras more often than not to set my exposure rather than the histogram or LCD display.

I typically shoot in Av with auto ISO. Manual for night skies or panoramic stuff and things like Waterfalls etc

 

[wookie6262]

Has anyone updated the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II yet and if so have you seen any difference?

Yes I have updated and couldn't see any difference. Saying that I can't see how it could be any better

 

[mstphoto]

Increase. Decrease..... Whichever it needs for the zebras to be just on the brink of showing. But I use the zebras more often than not to set my exposure rather than the histogram or LCD display.

I typically shoot in Av with auto ISO. Manual for night skies or panoramic stuff and things like Waterfalls etc

I shoot Manual and use the rear wheel dial set to ISO to adjust exposure and zebras

 

[woof woof]

I can't get away with zebras, they end up being too distracting for me.

 

[nog]

Increase. Decrease..... Whichever it needs for the zebras to be just on the brink of showing. But I use the zebras more often than not to set my exposure rather than the histogram or LCD display.

I typically shoot in Av with auto ISO. Manual for night skies or panoramic stuff and things like Waterfalls etc

Same here, Aperture with auto ISO but nearly always need to put in - exposure comp to reduce zebras

 

[Mike.P]

A9 and adapted Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 MK II


Crocodile by Mike Pursey, on Flickr


Crocodile by Mike Pursey, on Flickr


Crocodile by Mike Pursey, on Flickr


Crocodile by Mike Pursey, on Flickr

 

[woof woof]

Oh er Mike