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

jonneymendoza said:
Diddnt bring a towel lol [emoji23] and it was the same case last weekend. It p***ed down while shooting!

Diddnt use no rain cover etc. All good.
Click to expand...

You're getting the same weather as here so. The only camera that ever suffered from water damage for me was a D90, which has zero sealing. I was shooting a marathon in Dublin city and it p***ed down non stop the whole day, I just gave up trying to cover it. The only real damage in the end was the top LCD got frizzled and wouldn't display info properly from there on. Everything else was fine. Even the barest minimum of sealing would have saved it.
 
I was using the A7 last week over at the Brecon's Waterfalls in a bit of rain.

Another photographer there asked about it..... I said, I do look after my stuff & I'm more worried about the lens [CV40/1.2E] in all honesty. If the A7 goes I'll have to treat myself to an A7iii :LOL::LOL:
 
What way are people utilising the tow memory card slots on A7R, A9 etc? When I shot Canon to CF Cards I always just wrote duplicate RAWs to both cards for full redundancy. But it isn't that simple with Sony? Given only Slot 1 can take an SD II card I would be wiping out any speed gains of using one if I also write RAW to an SD I in Slot 2. I haven't used a jpeg straight from the camera in over a decade so while that would be a level of redundancy it wouldn't be ideal.
 
Stephen Devine said:
What way are people utilising the tow memory card slots on A7R, A9 etc? When I shot Canon to CF Cards I always just wrote duplicate RAWs to both cards for full redundancy. But it isn't that simple with Sony? Given only Slot 1 can take an SD II card I would be wiping out any speed gains of using one if I also write RAW to an SD I in Slot 2. I haven't used a jpeg straight from the camera in over a decade so while that would be a level of redundancy it wouldn't be ideal.
Click to expand...
I just scan disk extreme uhs-1 cards in both slots although currently testing a transcend card with similar write speeds but half the price.
The buffer os so good on the sonys that i don't find it am issue with fast uhs1 cards. Particularly not worth the cost increase, or loss of redundancy
 
Stephen Devine said:
What way are people utilising the tow memory card slots on A7R, A9 etc? When I shot Canon to CF Cards I always just wrote duplicate RAWs to both cards for full redundancy. But it isn't that simple with Sony? Given only Slot 1 can take an SD II card I would be wiping out any speed gains of using one if I also write RAW to an SD I in Slot 2. I haven't used a jpeg straight from the camera in over a decade so while that would be a level of redundancy it wouldn't be ideal.
Click to expand...
It’s a hard decision as shooting raw to both can slow things down. It depends on what you photograph. If out and out speed (10fps) is needed I’m shooting raw to UHS-II card and jpeg to UHS-I card. Not ideal but it’s a level of backup. If speed isn’t required shooting raw to both cards seems ok. The other option is to forget backup and just shoot to one card.

I did noticed quite a difference between UHS-I and UHS-II cards when I was shooting bursts at higher FPS. The Burst rate would slow down and the camera wouldn’t respond if you tried to go into the menus until the buffer had wrote the data to the cards. If you don’t need higher FPS or long bursts it shouldnt be as much of a problem. I found it was a problem I encountered when photographing otters where there was fast action in just a short time scale. Anything slower shouldn’t be too much of a problem.
 
Last edited:
rob-nikon said:
It’s a hard decision as shooting raw to both can slow things down. if out and out speed (10fps) is needed I’m shooting raw to UHS-II card and jpeg to UHS-I card. Not ideal but it’s a level of backup. If speed isn’t required shooting raw to both cards seems ok. The other option is to forget backup and just shoot to one card.

I did noticed quite a difference between UHS-I and UHS-II cards when I was shooting bursts at higher FPS. Burst rate would slow down and the camera wouldn’t response if you tried to go into the menus until it had the buffer had wrote to the cards. If you don’t need higher FPS or long bursts it should be as much of a problem.
Click to expand...
I basically do this.
For shooting landscapes I go full on uncompressed RAW with RAW to both SD cards. But with fast action I write RAW only to UHS-II slot.
 
LeeRatters said:
I was using the A7 last week over at the Brecon's Waterfalls in a bit of rain.

Another photographer there asked about it..... I said, I do look after my stuff & I'm more worried about the lens [CV40/1.2E] in all honesty. If the A7 goes I'll have to treat myself to an A7iii :LOL::LOL:
Click to expand...


I don't remember taking the 40mm out in heavy rain but I've certainly had the 35mm f1.4 out in heavy rain and it survived, so did the camera.
 
With the new Leica and Zeiss fixed lens cameras coming along I wonder if Sony will bring out a new RX1?

I can't see myself buying one, but I've always fancied one :D
 
nandbytes said:
I basically do this.
For shooting landscapes I go full on uncompressed RAW with RAW to both SD cards. But with fast action I write RAW only to UHS-II slot.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?
 
I had to set the A9 up is haste yesterday as forgot when I got it it was all reset! Think most settings were wrong, including the card set up! It filled card 1 then kept telling me slot 1 was full and wouldn't shoot on card too. Zero prep - started out terrible - camera didnt seem to be tracking in AF-C, shots were a bit blurry but recovered eventually!

The card door worries me the most on the A9 - just feels so weak and flappy lol

Next week - will have it set up!
 
jonneymendoza said:
I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?
Click to expand...

Need to test this. might be true. but then even if there is conversion time, it may be quicker than writing 42MB? I don't know really....
I haven't shot action at 8 fps too much to notice difference either way. Need to have it figure by May for my airshows and carshows :D
 
-markie- said:
Not tempted to do the food bag and elastic bag trick to help protect it?
Click to expand...
i was actualy but could not be bothered. i may do so next time if it rains even heavier, i did have a spare plastic bag and elastics with me at hand mind u.
nandbytes said:
Need to test this. might be true. but then even if there is conversion time, it may be quicker than writing 42MB? I don't know really....
I haven't shot action at 8 fps too much to notice difference either way. Need to have it figure by May for my airshows and carshows :D
Click to expand...
It was @Riz_Guru who first mentioned it and found out about it somewhere
 
jonneymendoza said:
I read somewhere how shooting jpg on the 2nd slot vs shooting raw in the 2nd slot is actually slower as the camera needs to convert from raw to jpg in the 2nd slot?
Click to expand...
Ive just tried this out on my a7r3. RAW+RAW seems to be slightly faster to clear the buffer than RAW+JPEG but both are much slower than RAW to a single card (uhs-ii card). Good to know, jpeg isn’t really backup so better to shoot RAW+RAW when needed and just RAW when needing to take advantage so ultimate 10fps with the a7r3.

Edit: I was using compressed RAW’s rather than the larger uncompressed RAWs. Maybe different with uncompressed RAWs.
 
Last edited:
The LA-EA4 arrived today. Gave it a quick try, and it's like having a FF SLT camera with IBIS. :) Shot a few frames in the twilight with Sony 50 1.4 & Sammy 50 f1.4 plus the Minolta 70-210 f4 - I think I could see the IBIS working through the viewfinder.

Also did a quick comparison yesterday between the Sammy 50 1.4 and an old Nikkor 28 f3.5. Sammy wins on sharpness by quite a margin at the edges, but Nikon colours and rendering were nicer. Having just sold most of my Nikon kit I'm seriously thinking about sending the Sammy back & getting the 24-105 from E-finity, then maybe a 50 f1.8 later in the year. It's amazing how the Sony 50 f1.4 & LA-EA4 is so much smaller & lighter than the Sammy 50.
 
I need to do a 'proper' test with the camera on a tripod to compare between 50 f1.4s, but it's striking that the large front element on the Sammy collects more light than the Sony with a theoretically similar aperture - shutter speed for the Sammy was twice as fast as the Sony at f8. Sony seems to carry more detail though.
 
ancient_mariner said:
The LA-EA4 arrived today. Gave it a quick try, and it's like having a FF SLT camera with IBIS. :) Shot a few frames in the twilight with Sony 50 1.4 & Sammy 50 f1.4 plus the Minolta 70-210 f4 - I think I could see the IBIS working through the viewfinder.

Also did a quick comparison yesterday between the Sammy 50 1.4 and an old Nikkor 28 f3.5. Sammy wins on sharpness by quite a margin at the edges, but Nikon colours and rendering were nicer. Having just sold most of my Nikon kit I'm seriously thinking about sending the Sammy back & getting the 24-105 from E-finity, then maybe a 50 f1.8 later in the year. It's amazing how the Sony 50 f1.4 & LA-EA4 is so much smaller & lighter than the Sammy 50.
Click to expand...

Sony/minolta 50mm f1.4 is not the sharpest at f1.4 but does give a nice "dreamy" look. I quite liked this lens.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I need to do a 'proper' test with the camera on a tripod to compare between 50 f1.4s, but it's striking that the large front element on the Sammy collects more light than the Sony with a theoretically similar aperture - shutter speed for the Sammy was twice as fast as the Sony at f8. Sony seems to carry more detail though.
Click to expand...

Isn’t that because of the translucent mirror in the adaptor?
 
f/2.8 said:
Isn’t that because of the translucent mirror in the adaptor?
Click to expand...

Good point. Reviews have suggested that the Sammy collects about half a stop more light than the Sony 50 f1.4, and that together with the mirror probably combine to make a 1 stop difference (shutter open for half the time with the Sammy).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top