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

T_J_G said:
Not so much, got the D750 still so it’ll be fine. Going D750 and 35 and A7iii and 85mm. But may pop the art on the A7iii for a bit
Click to expand...

When I shot my first wedding with the A7III I was a bit concerned but within an hour or two of using it I packed my D750 away back in the car. Got home that night had a quick scan through the photos and went online and ordered another A7III.
 
addicknchips said:
got a few fun snaps on the way to the coffee shop today. the light sucked but its looking more promising tomorrow.

4-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr

3-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr

1-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr

2-1 by Jonathan Howes, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Beautiful :) only thing I would suggest is on the third image, I'd try tone down the yellow reflections/shadows on her face. Gawd I miss when my girls were this age, they were so photogenic and never moaned about posing for me, now they're 11 & 15 and trying to get a nice portrait of them is a ruddy chore :(
 
Cagey75 said:
Beautiful :) only thing I would suggest is on the third image, I'd try tone down the yellow reflections/shadows on her face. Gawd I miss when my girls were this age, they were so photogenic and never moaned about posing for me, now they're 11 & 15 and trying to get a nice portrait of them is a ruddy chore :(
Click to expand...

That's the first thing my Mrs said to me (about the yellow).
 
Hello can I come back in lol

Trying find on here of talk of a7 iii firmware update that’s coming what going be added or improved?
 
rookies said:
Hello can I come back in lol

Trying find on here of talk of a7 iii firmware update that’s coming what going be added or improved?
Click to expand...

Thought you were buying a Z6? It’s improvements for eye af and a few other tweaks. The A9 is having the biggest overhaul.
 
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)

What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids :)

The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
 
Nawty said:
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)

What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids :)

The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
Click to expand...

The colour science thing is blown out of proportion on the internet. Funnily enough people never talked about it when it was truly aweful on original A7 lol. I am sure this will pass and people will find a new point to obsess and moan about.

At this point it's purely subjective. I prefer canon/Fuji to Sony and sony to Nikon. None of them are bad or good, they all give you a good starting point and any minor niggles can be easily tweaked in post. It's not something that I'd use make camera decisions especially if you shoot RAW.

If you are a jpg shooter I think Fuji has long held the crown in this area.
 
Last edited:
dancook said:
For those who bought a proper camera.

52753315_10161700502085227_5793137977169281024_o.jpg


51840620_10161700502105227_4397446761870786560_o.jpg
Click to expand...

Really quite impressed with Sony over this, it was unexpected. I was thinking of selling the A9 but I'll definitely wait for this now. It might even get me to go fully in with Sony (not Jonny before he tries to take credit :D ).
 
Nawty said:
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)

What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids :)

The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
Click to expand...

Sony has much better skin tones than they used to, they started improving noticeably with the A7rii onwards. Id say for me Canon has the worst colour.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMfCDujQywY

Screen Shot 2019-02-17 at 13.53.54 copy.jpg
 
Last edited:
Nawty said:
Genuine question from someone with a bit of GAS and some money burning a hole... (i.e. not trying to start a war!)

What do you all make of this Sony "colour science" debate and them not being very good for skin tones? My primary reason for getting one would be portraits of my new kids :)

The alternative would be a Z6, which on one hand I am draw to because I had Nikon DSLRs and also the f/4 kit lens is smaller and also I understand the Sony 50mm 1.8 isn't all that. On the flip side, the Z6 is a first gen product and Sony have shown how quickly a product can mature (and also the Sony is cheaper).
Click to expand...

I went from Nikon too Sony. Colour science hasn’t been an issue for me. The Northrups did a blind test on colour science and most people preferred Sony colours. When they did the same test but included the brand names most people preferred Fuji.

The Sony 50mm is actually not that bad but the a.f is a little slower than their better lenses. I actually really like the 55mm f/1.8. It s a good performer and a.f is snappy. It’s also a nice and compact light weight lens.
 
nandbytes said:
The colour science thing is blown out of proportion on the internet. Funnily enough people never talked about it when it was truly aweful on original A7 lol. I am sure this will pass and people will find a new point to obsess and moan about.

At this point it's purely subjective. I prefer canon/Fuji to Sony and sony to Nikon. None of them are bad or good, they all give you a good starting point and any minor niggles can be easily tweaked in post. It's not something that I'd use make camera decisions especially if you shoot RAW.

If you are a jpg shooter I think Fuji has long held the crown in this area.
Click to expand...

Yes, I guess finding anything camera related on the internet is asking for hyperbole and extreme opinions

twist said:
Sony has much better skin tones than they used to, they started improving noticeably with the A7rii onwards. Id say for me Canon has the worst colour.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMfCDujQywY

View attachment 237621
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, actually quite an interesting test, it tells us way more about human behaviour than anything else. Not usually a TN fan but I do like this experiment :)

f/2.8 said:
I went from Nikon too Sony. Colour science hasn’t been an issue for me. The Northrups did a blind test on colour science and most people preferred Sony colours. When they did the same test but included the brand names most people preferred Fuji.

The Sony 50mm is actually not that bad but the a.f is a little slower than their better lenses. I actually really like the 55mm f/1.8. It s a good performer and a.f is snappy. It’s also a nice and compact light weight lens.
Click to expand...

An A7iii plus 55mm could be just the kind of setup I'm looking for, the 50mm would be ok too except the slow and noisy AF would really bug me (especially being a m43 user where lenses focus instantly).
 
Nawty said:
Yes, I guess finding anything camera related on the internet is asking for hyperbole and extreme opinions

Thanks for that, actually quite an interesting test, it tells us way more about human behaviour than anything else. Not usually a TN fan but I do like this experiment :)

An A7iii plus 55mm could be just the kind of setup I'm looking for, the 50mm would be ok too except the slow and noisy AF would really bug me (especially being a m43 user where lenses focus instantly).
Click to expand...

The 55mm f1.8 is an outstanding lens and quite compact too when you compare it to the latest high performance f1.4 lenses from Sony and Sigma.

I've been with MFT since the GF1 but there's no denying that even my original A7 files are way ahead of anything you'll get from MFT if you go extreme pixel peeping.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
The 55mm f1.8 is an outstanding lens and quite compact too when you compare it to the latest high performance f1.4 lenses from Sony and Sigma.

I've been with MFT since the GF1 but there's no denying that even my original A7 files are way ahead of anything you'll get from MFT if you go extreme pixel peeping.
Click to expand...

I’m not a pixel peeper and m43 files are plenty ok for me, even up to ISO6400.

What I’m really after is the low DoF look for a few shots, the sensible thing would be to just get the Oly 25 1.2 but on the other hand it is always nice to try something different and the eye AF seems particularly good, and it’s been a long time since I’ve strayed...

Also, with the arrival of the twins I suspect it will be an awful long time before I have this kind of spare cash to throw at toys for me.
 
It's interesting that you think mft at ISO 6400 is ok, I'll use mine to 25,600 :D

I'm sure you know that f1.2 for mft is f2.4 for ff so you'll see shallower dof with a f1.8 lens and if that's you goal the 55 and 85mm f1.8's are both well worth a look. Both these lenses are very good from wide open.
 
Nawty said:
Yes, I guess finding anything camera related on the internet is asking for hyperbole and extreme opinions



Thanks for that, actually quite an interesting test, it tells us way more about human behaviour than anything else. Not usually a TN fan but I do like this experiment :)



An A7iii plus 55mm could be just the kind of setup I'm looking for, the 50mm would be ok too except the slow and noisy AF would really bug me (especially being a m43 user where lenses focus instantly).
Click to expand...

I have the 55 and it’s surprisingly good, but then, it’s not cheap for a 1.8 lens.
 
Nawty said:
I’m not a pixel peeper and m43 files are plenty ok for me, even up to ISO6400.

What I’m really after is the low DoF look for a few shots, the sensible thing would be to just get the Oly 25 1.2 but on the other hand it is always nice to try something different and the eye AF seems particularly good, and it’s been a long time since I’ve strayed...

Also, with the arrival of the twins I suspect it will be an awful long time before I have this kind of spare cash to throw at toys for me.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the sensible think to do tbh. You are paying a premium for such a fast lens on m43 for not equal returns. Something On FF will give you shallower DoF at a better price point and size
 
Nawty said:
Well being from m43 even the Sony 55mm looks chunky to me :D



It also small, the 1.4 lenses are flipping hoooooge!
Click to expand...

All my other lenses are 1.4, so the 55 is a nice change. All metal body so doesn’t feel quite like a toy lens. It’s pretty damn sharp too.

31564619527_2a1b948477_b.jpg
 
The 50mm 1.8 is not too bad really, especially at the price.

Although it can shoot 20fps on the A9, the 55mm can’t.
 
Nawty said:
Well being from m43 even the Sony 55mm looks chunky to me :D



It also small, the 1.4 lenses are flipping hoooooge!
Click to expand...

There is a 55mm f/1.8 just went up for sale in the classifieds at a decent price, might be worth a look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top