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

Betty keeping cool with her cool vest on.

Edit: looks soft on here again :(


DSC00052 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
Your new camera is broken, it appears to only go to F2.2 now :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I know, I didn't notice I'd not moved the aperture ring far enough, such an amatuer :lol:
 
Question.. Apart from the MP difference, which would you say is the better camera… Sony A7Riv or the Nikon Z7ii ?

To be used mainly for Portraiture.
 
Gandalf said:
Question.. Apart from the MP difference, which would you say is the better camera… Sony A7Riv or the Nikon Z7ii ?

To be used mainly for Portraiture.
Click to expand...
Tough call, I don’t think you can go wrong with either. I’d base it on which you prefer using and which has the better lenses you want. Sony primes tend to be smaller and lighter, and the 35mm f1.4GM and 50mm f1.2 GM are hands down the best lenses I’ve ever used.

Nikon do have an 85mm f1.2 which could be tempting, however it’s big, very heavy and very expensive.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
The Q3 has a min wide aperture of F2.8 in Macro mode, so theres a party trick your Sony can do that the Q3 can't!!
Click to expand...
What’s the min focussing distance?
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Q3 Normal 60cm Macro 17cm
Q3 43 Normal 60cm Macro 27cm

Looks like you can go to 14cm in Macro Mode
Click to expand...
It says so on the specs but on the focus ring it ‘only’ says 0.2m, and when you use manual focus it only goes to 0.2m :thinking:
 
snerkler said:
It says so on the specs but on the focus ring it ‘only’ says 0.2m, and when you use manual focus it only goes to 0.2m :thinking:
Click to expand...
Ahh, I see the confusion where the confusion lies now, according to the Sony website 14cm is from the front of the lens, it’s 20cm from the camera sensor.
 
snerkler said:
Testing out the macro capabilities of the RX1R II, wide open of course ;)
Click to expand...

They look nice. There's been a lot of critisism of this lens on the MKIII but I can understand why Sony have kept it unaltered as changing it would have changed the look of the pictures. Maybe a change to more SOTA motors but leaving the optics as they are would have been nice though.
 
woof woof said:
They look nice. There's been a lot of critisism of this lens on the MKIII but I can understand why Sony have kept it unaltered as changing it would have changed the look of the pictures. Maybe a change to more SOTA motors but leaving the optics as they are would have been nice though.
Click to expand...
I would question whether the lens stands up to the 61mp sensor. It certainly does on the 42mp sensor, it's not 35mm GM sharp but not much is and it's certainly better than I was expecting. It would go in my "very good" category. The focus motors definitely could do with updating, I'd forgotten what old lenses were like.
 
This is IMO the whole point of the camera.

This shocked me... The RX1 looks very similar in size to my 1" sensor Panasonic TZ100. The Panasonic is thinner but only when turned off and the lens retracted.

Untitled-1.jpg

When I did this comparison I almost couldn't believe it.
 
woof woof said:
This is IMO the whole point of the camera.

This shocked me... The RX1 looks very similar in size to my 1" sensor Panasonic TZ100. The Panasonic is thinner but only when turned off and the lens retracted.

View attachment 460545

When I did this comparison I almost couldn't believe it.
Click to expand...
I’ve always thought the TZ100 was large for what it is when you consider the size of the RX100

IMG_0881.jpeg
 
It does have the VF and maybe more physical and arguably better placed controls though.

I think if the RX1 was any smaller we'd have people complaining louder about it being too small and they couldn't grip it and use the buttons. I could manage it at this size but even if technology allows I think making the body significantly smaller would only be an idea if it was to become a true point and shoot with limited buttons and dials and maybe just automated modes on the top dial like a more traditional point and shoot.

Anyway. A big car bill came and went today and the bank balance still looks healthy so I'll have to think about an A7cII. The stumbling blocks at the moment are worries about the VF quality but it will probably be ok for me and the articulated screen. One reason for going for the A7III over the 4 was the choice of screen type and there's no point buying something which I might not like. I'll have a think.
 
Last edited:
Has this been posted already? I forget. Sorry if it has.

phillipreeve.net

REVIEW: TTArtisan AF 40mm f/2 - phillipreeve.net

TTArtisan AF 40mm f/2, a popular focal length with a bright aperture and an ace up its sleeve: a dedicated aperture ring
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

Available in Sony mount for £159 but Wex say "awaiting stock." Ah! In stock at London Camera Exchange.

If I didn't already have the more expensive Sony f2.5 I might be interested.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It does have the VF and maybe more physical and arguably better placed controls though.

I think if the RX1 was any smaller we'd have people complaining louder about it being too small and they couldn't grip it and use the buttons. I could manage it at this size but even if technology allows I think making the body significantly smaller would only be an idea if it was to become a true point and shoot with limited buttons and dials and maybe just automated modes on the top dial like a more traditional point and shoot.

Anyway. A big car bill came and went today and the bank balance still looks healthy so I'll have to think about an A7cII. The stumbling blocks at the moment are worries about the VF quality but it will probably be ok for me and the articulated screen. One reason for going for the A7III over the 4 was the choice of screen type and there's no point buying something which I might not like. I'll have a think.
Click to expand...
The A7c's are very nice, however the VF isn't the best. I found it awkward to look through, but I'm a left eye shooter, and coming from the A1 and compared to the A7RV it is smaller and not as detailed. How it compares to the A7III I don't know.

With regards to the RX100VII vs the TZ100, the RX100 does have a VF, it's the pop up type which is actually better than you might imagine. No it's not great, but it's good enough for this sort of camera imo.

The ergonomics of the RX1R aren't great, it's manageable but obviously whenyou start to go small you don't have much to hold on to. I've actually ordered a grip for mine.
 
I know it has the pop up vf so I should have added "fixed" or something for the TZ. As I mostly use the vf I don't want one which has to be popped up and down. Some people wont care especially if they mostly use the back screen but I want a fixed or tilting vf not a pop up and of course popping it up increases the size and if you leave it up there could be a feeling that it's more exposed to damage.

I have the GX8 and GX80 and although if I think about it I do think the evf's are poor when I'm out taking pictures and not analysing the tech I don't notice the poorness and they're ok and I think the same will be true of the A7cII. That really just leaves the screen as the sticking point. After years with articulated screen on my G1 and G7 and then years with just a tilt screen on my A7 and A7III I think I'd much rather just have a tilting screen.
 
woof woof said:
I know it has the pop up vf so I should have added "fixed" or something for the TZ. As I mostly use the vf I don't want one which has to be popped up and down. Some people wont care especially if they mostly use the back screen but I want a fixed or tilting vf not a pop up and of course popping it up increases the size and if you leave it up there could be a feeling that it's more exposed to damage.

I have the GX8 and GX80 and although if I think about it I do think the evf's are poor when I'm out taking pictures and not analysing the tech I don't notice the poorness and they're ok and I think the same will be true of the A7cII. That really just leaves the screen as the sticking point. After years with articulated screen on my G1 and G7 and then years with just a tilt screen on my A7 and A7III I think I'd much rather just have a tilting screen.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I prefer the tilt screen however the articulated screen on the new sonys is much better than the other makers as it can just be used as a tilt screen, or you can pull it out and use it as a vari angle so you have the best of both worlds.
 
Shame the A7cII hasn't got the fully articulated and tilting screen. Maybe the MK III will or maybe not if it means the camera will be 2mm thicker and Sony don't want that.
 
woof woof said:
Shame the A7cII hasn't got the fully articulated and tilting screen. Maybe the MK III will or maybe not if it means the camera will be 2mm thicker and Sony don't want that.
Click to expand...
I must admit I just assumed the two new A7c's would have the new type screen but you're right, it's the old type flip out screen, that's a shame.
 
It is.

Everything should be made to suit ME! and YOU too of course but sadly there's something annoying with everything so it's just comes down to what we need and what we can do without and also what will annoy us too much.

I'll have to make my mind up but if I get one it'll be the 33 and not the 60mp version. I might not save a lot in size or weight but one attraction is the lack of evf hump. The difference between the A7 and Panasonic GXxx is noticeable to me.
 
snerkler said:
I must admit I just assumed the two new A7c's would have the new type screen but you're right, it's the old type flip out screen, that's a shame.
Click to expand...
That's the only negative thing I have to say about the A7Cii, otherwise I love it to bits.
 
woof woof said:
It is.

Everything should be made to suit ME! and YOU too of course but sadly there's something annoying with everything so it's just comes down to what we need and what we can do without and also what will annoy us too much.

I'll have to make my mind up but if I get one it'll be the 33 and not the 60mp version. I might not save a lot in size or weight but one attraction is the lack of evf hump. The difference between the A7 and Panasonic GXxx is noticeable to me.
Click to expand...
I don't get it, I know we all have different wants but when a new camera comes out most people complain about the same things that are either missing or could be better so what sample the developers use when designing a new camera go only knows :thinking:

That being said, I don't think there's anything I'd change on the A1 II, apart from the price and weight of course ;)

With regards to the A7cII I'm not sure the lack of EVF hump is worth sacrificing the EVF quality for, but YMMV.
 
snerkler said:
With regards to the A7cII I'm not sure the lack of EVF hump is worth sacrificing the EVF quality for, but YMMV.
Click to expand...

For me the lack of a hump does make a difference and the camera does feel smaller plus it fits into a bag better. The hump on my A7's always catches the bag, my evf in the corner humpless Panasonics seem to slide in and out much better.

EVF quality wise, as above, my Panasonics have pretty poor evf's by todays standards but in use I don't seem to obsess over that. I do when I sit at home and think about it and look at them but I don't seem to notice when I'm out.

Really apart from an arguable and probably minor handling difference it's probably just gas. I haven't bought anything photography related since the 40mm f2.5 so I'm maybe overdue some gas :D
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It does have the VF and maybe more physical and arguably better placed controls though.

I think if the RX1 was any smaller we'd have people complaining louder about it being too small and they couldn't grip it and use the buttons. I could manage it at this size but even if technology allows I think making the body significantly smaller would only be an idea if it was to become a true point and shoot with limited buttons and dials and maybe just automated modes on the top dial like a more traditional point and shoot.

Anyway. A big car bill came and went today and the bank balance still looks healthy so I'll have to think about an A7cII. The stumbling blocks at the moment are worries about the VF quality but it will probably be ok for me and the articulated screen. One reason for going for the A7III over the 4 was the choice of screen type and there's no point buying something which I might not like. I'll have a think.
Click to expand...

I did once try a Ricoh GR series - And that I found to be much too small imo Plus other things I wasn't keen on.
 
LeeRatters said:
Makes you understand why some people are willing to give up 1 stop of aperture for that size & weight difference though!!
Click to expand...
Yeah it does. What I don't understand is why they can't make something similar for ILCE. OK it may have to be slightly longer for the flange distance but surely it's only a few mm :thinking:
 
LeeRatters said:
I did once try a Ricoh GR series - And that I found to be much too small imo Plus other things I wasn't keen on.
Click to expand...
I think 35mm is more versatile than 28mm but the ricoh is much more pocketable so I can see the appeal.
 
Might be a bit controversial and I don't want to upset people who like to shoot wide open but for me with every decimal point wider you get past something like f2.5 light gathering becomes less of an issue. I think with f2.8 there can be issues but the closer I get to f2 or there abouts the fewer complaints I have so that leaves DoF and bokeh. When I have a f1.x lens I do usually take some pictures at or near wide open but again the cut off point for me is usually something between f2 and f2.5 or so as for me that's about the point at which DoF differences become increasingly obvious. Most of the time I want what I think is appropriate depth for the picture and most often that isn't going achieved at f1.2-f1.4, it's usually at smaller apertures than that. Bokeh balls are a different thing and you can often see obvious differences between f1.2 and f1.8 but I don't take a lot of pictures which rely on bokeh balls as a main feature.

I'd be happy with an f2 lens. I don't see that as a big issue with the RX1. I see bigger issues as the leaf shutter imposed limits on aperture v shutter speed and the fixed rear screen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top