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

[Hogboy]

The Canon version weighs 1195g, a bit of a chonker.

 

[snerkler]

The Canon version weighs 1195g, a bit of a chonker.

Looks mahoosive here too The Sigma f/1.2 looks quite a bit bigger than the f/1.4, a bigger difference than I thought it might be.

 

[woof woof]

Hood's on though. Need to see it without the hood to judge the size, and then there's the weight.

I suppose the interest in f1.2 over the f1.4 will depend on the quality of the bokeh?

 

[snerkler]

Hood's on though. Need to see it without the hood to judge the size, and then there's the weight.

I suppose the interest in f1.2 over the f1.4 will depend on the quality of the bokeh?

You can still see the size difference with the hood on

 

[nandbytes]

The 85mm's not light at 905g, although I don't know how it compares to other lenses of this type.

It's lighter than the Canon and nikon equivalents.
I'm in two minds, so won't be buying it immidiately. But if I come across a good deal later in life I might pick one up

 

[Hogboy]

View: https://youtu.be/zrDQ3EfkP6A?is=PpLcyQ6Gf1yIAyVy

 

[pmac]

Watched most the reviews earlier today.
Was smaller and lighter than both the Nikon and canon versions.

The trade of seems to be bad purple fringing at 1.2.
Kills it for me.

 

[snerkler]

The sigma 20-60mm looks a good alternative (on paper) to the Sony 20-70mm, smaller and approx 100g lighter, just a shame there’s no aperture ring.

 

[nandbytes]

The sigma 20-60mm looks a good alternative (on paper) to the Sony 20-70mm, smaller and approx 100g lighter, just a shame there’s no aperture ring.

Doesn't seem as sharp looking at reviews. Like dpreview says it's probably the best kit lens replacement. Sony 20-70mm can also be had for less probably given it's been out a while.

 

[snerkler]

A few more from the British GT Championship


A1202022-Edit-Edit by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

A1202842-Edit by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

A1208783-Edit-Edit by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr