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

ancient_mariner said:
OK, I'm seriously considering the switch from Nikon D610 to A7III. For those who've made the jump already from Nikon (any) what disadvantages have you found with your new system?

And if you don't mind a few more questions:
FE24-70 f4 - is a bad choice (it's what I keep reading) - any reasonable value alternatives?
Is it worth buying an adapter for Nikon AFD lenses, or are they just not up to the job?
How are the Samyang primes performing for you?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Big upgrade from a d610. Get the tamron 2875.
 
ancient_mariner said:
OK, I'm seriously considering the switch from Nikon D610 to A7III. For those who've made the jump already from Nikon (any) what disadvantages have you found with your new system?

And if you don't mind a few more questions:
FE24-70 f4 - is a bad choice (it's what I keep reading) - any reasonable value alternatives?
Is it worth buying an adapter for Nikon AFD lenses, or are they just not up to the job?
How are the Samyang primes performing for you?

Thanks
Click to expand...
It's not a bad lens, in fact it's a good lens, just not a spectacular one. It's pretty compact and light.
As mentioned in previous posts consider tamron 28-75 or Sony 24-105 depending on your budget.
 
ancient_mariner said:
OK, I'm seriously considering the switch from Nikon D610 to A7III. For those who've made the jump already from Nikon (any) what disadvantages have you found with your new system?

And if you don't mind a few more questions:
FE24-70 f4 - is a bad choice (it's what I keep reading) - any reasonable value alternatives?
Is it worth buying an adapter for Nikon AFD lenses, or are they just not up to the job?
How are the Samyang primes performing for you?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I've recently made the jump, (although I've held onto my D3300 and two lenses for now as I can't afford to buy a wide angle for the sony!). I was expecting the menu system to be a nightmare but as others have said, I've customised some of the buttons to do what I need the majority of the time anyway. Having had my D3300 ever since beginning photography as a hobby the AF on the Sony and the advancement in technology I found incredible.
 
ancient_mariner said:
OK, I'm seriously considering the switch from Nikon D610 to A7III. For those who've made the jump already from Nikon (any) what disadvantages have you found with your new system?

And if you don't mind a few more questions:
FE24-70 f4 - is a bad choice (it's what I keep reading) - any reasonable value alternatives?
Is it worth buying an adapter for Nikon AFD lenses, or are they just not up to the job?
How are the Samyang primes performing for you?

Thanks
Click to expand...

Not used many of their primes, but the 24mm and 35mm 2.8 ones are really good for the price and so small!
 
jonneymendoza said:
Back again with some pics

nsfw spoiler below

untitled-589.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr

untitled-446.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr

CamilleStudioShoot-423.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr

These are ok to share with no spoiler

untitled-198.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr

GrassRootsDay15-A-944.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr

GrassRootsDay13-A9-2560.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr

GrassRootsDay13-A9-902.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr
Click to expand...


nice work. would clean up the floor 4th one though. nice to see the watermarks under control too :)
 
f/2.8 said:
I went to Sony when the z series was launched. I held of a good long while waiting to see what Nikon would offer in terms of mirrorless. If they had even managed to get close to what’s sony offers I would have stayed with Nikon and probably bought 4 x Z6’s straight away. I had the cash just sitting waiting for some time.

The first thing that put me off was the single card slot. That just isn’t an option for me as far as I am concerned. The iffy a.f performance on the z series was also a concern. In the first instance I bought 1x A7III to trial Sony first before jumping in. Around the same time I got to have a good play with a Z7, I preferred the Sony. I now have 3 x A7III’s and will be picking up a 4th body soon.

I found it a bit of a jump at first the menu etc seemed overly complicated. Having used the system for a few months now it’s all second nature now.
Click to expand...
Dual slots is surely one of the least important features on a camera. Storage prices are lower than ever, faster than ever and as reliable as ever.
 
From everyone that came from a d750, how much better is the AF... is it actually a very noticeable difference?
Ive been on the fence about buying a z6 or selling the lot and moving to the a7iii. I've gone through the FM z6 thread and at first was impressed with the images and AF(they all seemed to think its no where near as bad as many reviews, it just takes work to figure out).. then I started looking at a7iii images and they just seemed a lot sharper something I've never been totally happy with on my d750 or d800... I always thought my d700 was better in this regard.

swapping means loosing a fair bit of cash but if its worthwhile I will take the hit.

Also how is the sigma glass on this does all the AF work as good?
 
pmac said:
From everyone that came from a d750, how much better is the AF... is it actually a very noticeable difference?
Ive been on the fence about buying a z6 or selling the lot and moving to the a7iii. I've gone through the FM z6 thread and at first was impressed with the images and AF(they all seemed to think its no where near as bad as many reviews, it just takes work to figure out).. then I started looking at a7iii images and they just seemed a lot sharper something I've never been totally happy with on my d750 or d800... I always thought my d700 was better in this regard.

swapping means loosing a fair bit of cash but if its worthwhile I will take the hit.

Also how is the sigma glass on this does all the AF work as good?
Click to expand...

I have come from a D750 and tracking wise I can't tell you the A7iii is any better or accurate. But I think the rest of what you get as a package is worth the move. It cost me money to move to Sony but it was worth it.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Back again with some pics

nsfw spoiler below...
Click to expand...

All excellent as usual :D and I normally wouldn't comment on stuff like this but this morning... why not? D?

I wasn't sure about the empty goal shot but it quickly grey on me :D Other than that the lady in the first shot... I'm drawn to her double cheeks and tbh I think I'd have been tempted to go for a cleaner profile and just the one to give the one smooth line. Dunno what you think and if open to that idea maybe you could clone out the double rear or maybe you prefer the two. Just sayin'. :D
 
clicktor said:
Dual slots is surely one of the least important features on a camera. Storage prices are lower than ever, faster than ever and as reliable as ever.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you shoot. Non-commercial work, family stuff it's less important.

Memory cards, hard drives.... any storage format can and will fail at some stage in their lifetime.

Try telling a bride that "oh sorry, my card failed, really sorry about that but i didn't think it was an important feature to have"
 
-markie- said:
Depends on what you shoot. Non-commercial work, family stuff it's less important.

Memory cards, hard drives.... any storage format can and will fail at some stage in their lifetime.

Try telling a bride that "oh sorry, my card failed, really sorry about that but i didn't think it was an important feature to have"
Click to expand...
Or if you go away abroad specifically to take photos for say a personal project and come home with all your cards curruped
 
clicktor said:
Dual slots is surely one of the least important features on a camera. Storage prices are lower than ever, faster than ever and as reliable as ever.
Click to expand...

Not if you are a professional photographer. Dual card slots are an absolute must and is very much one of the most important features of any camera for me. The cards aren’t the issue they simply wear out due to how much images we put through regardless of type of card type etc. On average we have 2 card failures a year. This includes all types of cards including SD, Compact Flash and XQD, we have had failures with them all at one point or another and I am not willing to put my clients images at risk by choosing a camera that doesn’t have dual card slots.

Anyway the A7III has numerous advantages over the options available from other mirrorless camera manufacturers.
 
f/2.8 said:
Not if you are a professional photographer. Dual card slots are an absolute must and is very much one of the most important features of any camera for me. The cards aren’t the issue they simply wear out due to how much images we put through regardless of type of card type etc. On average we have 2 card failures a year. This includes all types of cards including SD, Compact Flash and XQD, we have had failures with them all at one point or another and I am not willing to put my clients images at risk by choosing a camera that doesn’t have dual card slots.

Anyway the A7III has numerous advantages over the options available from other mirrorless camera manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Mate even for none pro work it's important to have a backup slot
 
I'm not a pro but always use 2 slots these days - mainly set up for 1 x jpeg and 1 x RAW. I do need a fast card though!
 
jonneymendoza said:
Mate even for none pro work it's important to have a backup slot
Click to expand...

Yeah I can see that. Important family moments, once in a life time trip's etc.

I probably wouldn't want to a risk a one card slot camera even if I was only shooting stuff for myself, there is no chance at all I would risk my work stuff though.
 
clicktor said:
Dual slots is surely one of the least important features on a camera. Storage prices are lower than ever, faster than ever and as reliable as ever.
Click to expand...

All memory can fail. If I am running a business I wouldn't risk getting bad press, court cases etc on something like SD card failure when it can be easily avoided.

I am not a pro so I wouldn't mind a body with single card slot. I would still back it up every night though. But Nikon has a lot more missing than just a card slot ;)
 
Just out of interest....

You guys doing very large numbers of shots and card reliability - How do you transfer the pictures to your pc? Do you remove the card and use a card reader or connect it directly to your pc or do you leave the card in place and use a cable connected to the camera? Or maybe it could be wireless? I rarely remove cards these days, I just plug the camera into my pc.

I suppose each approach has implications for reliability as frequent removal and replacement could affect the connectors but leaving the card in place could bring the risk of tarnishing and there's the possibility of wear on the port but of course that wont affect the card.

Back when I worked in computers connection issues were a big thing as was repeated removal and replacement of cards. Some connectors back then had a frighteningly low rating for the number of reseats before failure. Dunno how many reseats the cards and slots in cameras are rated for.
 
pmac said:
From everyone that came from a d750, how much better is the AF... is it actually a very noticeable difference?
Ive been on the fence about buying a z6 or selling the lot and moving to the a7iii. I've gone through the FM z6 thread and at first was impressed with the images and AF(they all seemed to think its no where near as bad as many reviews, it just takes work to figure out).. then I started looking at a7iii images and they just seemed a lot sharper something I've never been totally happy with on my d750 or d800... I always thought my d700 was better in this regard.

swapping means loosing a fair bit of cash but if its worthwhile I will take the hit.

Also how is the sigma glass on this does all the AF work as good?
Click to expand...

There is a noticeable A.F difference for portraits I can't speak for other types of photography but would imagine there isn't as big a difference compared to the D750 for other types of photography. Eye A.F is an amazing feature to have.

The native e-mount Sigma Art lenses are awesome. Due to the a.f being on the sensor it's 100% accurate. I had a few Sigma Art lenses for Nikon, the 20mm f/1.4 was great but could back focus sometimes even after micro adjustment, sometimes it was great, sometimes it was a nightmare with no discernible reason why although it was always worse with backlit images. My 35mm f/1.4 on Nikon was very good, well I thought it was until I got the e-mount version. The 50mm F/1.4 on Nikon I found to be a complete nightmare, I actually bought and returned numerous copies and had gave up buying a good one. I eventually got one at a really cheap price on used one which I thought was worth a risk which was very good and I still have that lens but even it's not 100% perfect all of the time depending on subject distance. I have also for short periods of the time had the 85mm and the 135mm for Nikon and found them to be similar. I have tested both of these on e-mount and they are superb but too bulky for me.

The only downside really with the Sigma Art lenses on e-mount is the sheer size of them. Although I have seen a few people say that the 24mm can hunt a lot and that its very unreliable using any of the tracking modes the DSLR version doesn't have a great rep either.

The only a.f issues I get now is purely my own fault and not equipment related.
 
Last edited:
good to hear, portraits will be the main use. Thats my issue at the moment is the consistency of the AF even with Nikon lenses wide open.
I know a lot is probably user error and I do suffer from slightly shaky hands due to issues with my hands, not having consistent results and carrying all that weight is making me use my camera less.

I know the sigma lenses are large and heavy but I thought they might be cheaper alternatives.

If I switch I will due to money and trying to loose weight be cutting down my kit, probably going for a 50/80 and a standard zoom (24-70/17-35) type lens and if fund allow a wide-angle.

how are Nikon-sony converters? I've a samyang 14mm and as its manual AF issues with converters wouldn't be an issue or is it just better to look for a Sony mount.
 
pmac said:
good to hear, portraits will be the main use. Thats my issue at the moment is the consistency of the AF even with Nikon lenses wide open.
I know a lot is probably user error and I do suffer from slightly shaky hands due to issues with my hands, not having consistent results and carrying all that weight is making me use my camera less.

I know the sigma lenses are large and heavy but I thought they might be cheaper alternatives.

If I switch I will due to money and trying to loose weight be cutting down my kit, probably going for a 50/80 and a standard zoom (24-70/17-35) type lens and if fund allow a wide-angle.

how are Nikon-sony converters? I've a samyang 14mm and as its manual AF issues with converters wouldn't be an issue or is it just better to look for a Sony mount.
Click to expand...

For portraits anyway you will notice a huge difference in a.f accuracy, ibis will also help.

In terms of lenses it depends what you want. The FE85mm f/1.8 is reasonably priced and cheap grey import and is exceptionally good value. I have the 85mm G.M f/1.4 which is superb but expensive, The Sigma Art 85mm is very good as well but heavier and very bulky.

The 50mm Sigma Art is probably the best choice in terms of performance and cost in the 50mm range but I prefer the Sony 55mm f/1.8 as it's also very good and it is tiny.

All of the above will be good for portraits.

In terms of the zooms the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is very well regarded and cheap, I don't use a mid range zoom personally as I prefer just using a 35mm.

There are plenty of wide angle options but Tamron announced a new 17-28mm f/2.8 lens yesterday it might be wise to wait to see how that pans out.

Everything I have read online says Nikon lens converters for e-mount are very poor, but I have no personal experience of using one.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
In terms of the zooms the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is very well regarded and cheap, I don't use a mid range zoom personally as I prefer just using a 35mm.
Click to expand...

Have you tried the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art by any chance? It's one I'm looking at picking up when I get the AR7 III.
 
pmac said:
what else would you say it offers then?

Do you have any experience with sigma glass on it?
Click to expand...

No sorry have not used any Sigma glass.

EVF - its really good to see the adjustments appearing live so to speak.
Faster FPS
Eye AF
Silent Shooting
Pancake lenses
External controls - so many custom buttons to asign
On board image stabilization

Cheap and cheerful 50mm is quite good, the Samyang f2.8 lenses are tiny and AF is fast.
 
pmac said:
From everyone that came from a d750, how much better is the AF... is it actually a very noticeable difference?
Ive been on the fence about buying a z6 or selling the lot and moving to the a7iii. I've gone through the FM z6 thread and at first was impressed with the images and AF(they all seemed to think its no where near as bad as many reviews, it just takes work to figure out).. then I started looking at a7iii images and they just seemed a lot sharper something I've never been totally happy with on my d750 or d800... I always thought my d700 was better in this regard.

swapping means loosing a fair bit of cash but if its worthwhile I will take the hit.

Also how is the sigma glass on this does all the AF work as good?
Click to expand...

AF accuracy is definitely better, the amount of near misses are few and far between. Eye AF is a thing of beauty.
 
Last edited:
danbroad said:
I'm very tempted for the Samyang 14mm. Obviously the 17-xx Tamron is on the shortlist too, but impressed am I with the 35/2.8 [it's my walkaround A7 pancake] and I like the newer minimalist Samyang design.
Click to expand...

Mine is the manual focus version, you don't really need AF for a 14mm especially for the kind of shots I take.
 
pmac said:
From everyone that came from a d750, how much better is the AF... is it actually a very noticeable difference?
Ive been on the fence about buying a z6 or selling the lot and moving to the a7iii. I've gone through the FM z6 thread and at first was impressed with the images and AF(they all seemed to think its no where near as bad as many reviews, it just takes work to figure out).. then I started looking at a7iii images and they just seemed a lot sharper something I've never been totally happy with on my d750 or d800... I always thought my d700 was better in this regard.

swapping means loosing a fair bit of cash but if its worthwhile I will take the hit.

Also how is the sigma glass on this does all the AF work as good?
Click to expand...

The AF is definitely better, I never use (auto) tracking but I do use AFC all the time and its as good in terms of speed BUT the improvements that make it better are Eye AF, 96% frame coverage and the accuracy mirrorless offers, these things combined make it quite a lot better than the D750. The frame coverage and closer points will also make tracking better for objects entering the frame at the edges.

Ive used the 35 and 50 ART and both are as fast but more accurate due to on sensor AF. I suppose I could add another benefit for AF speed is live view AF is as fast as viewfinder AF, something the D750 is crap at.

P.s. I LOVED my D750s but the A7iii is better and for me was worth the extra cash.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
The AF is definitely better, I never use tracking but I do use AFC all the time though and its as good in terms of speed BUT the improvements that make it better are Eye AF, 96% frame coverage and the accuracy mirrorless offers, these things combined make it quite a lot better than the D750.

Ive used the 35 and 50 ART and both are as fast but more accurate due to on sensor AF. I suppose I could add another benefit for AF speed is live view AF is as fast as viewfinder AF, something the D750 is crap at.
Click to expand...

This is a big benefit, allows better angles. The eye-AF is so good I can often hold the camera away from me where I can't see the screen, hit eye-AF and get the shot.
 
T_J_G said:
This is a big benefit, allows better angles. The eye-AF is so good I can often hold the camera away from me where I can't see the screen, hit eye-AF and get the shot.
Click to expand...

Yup, really useful. Low to the ground, over the top of crowds etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top