The Amazing Sony A7 / A9 / Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

Messages
1,372
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Need some advice here, good people of the forum. I'll hopefully be picking up my A7mkII in a couple of days and went with the Sony FE 24-70mm f4 ZA oss lens.

Now my plan of thought is to chop the Sony lens in and get the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 di iii rxd. I'll only be paying an extra £200 odd.

Or would I be better off purchasing the 35 or 50mm prime instead? And keeping the Sony lens.

Won't be in a position to purchase any lenses after this for quite a while. So trying to see which way forward is the best way.
Going by what I've read/heard, the FE24-70ZA isn't all that special.

I have used the FE28-70mm kit lens & it's not too bad for the cost imo but then I was using it at smaller, landscape apertures, not wide open.

The Tamron is certainly the one to go for for both speed & IQ. But obviously that comes at a much higher cost than the kit lens which is under £150.
 
Messages
12,770
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
Need some advice here, good people of the forum. I'll hopefully be picking up my A7mkII in a couple of days and went with the Sony FE 24-70mm f4 ZA oss lens.

Now my plan of thought is to chop the Sony lens in and get the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 di iii rxd. I'll only be paying an extra £200 odd.

Or would I be better off purchasing the 35 or 50mm prime instead? And keeping the Sony lens.

Won't be in a position to purchase any lenses after this for quite a while. So trying to see which way forward is the best way.
My *personal* view would be to trade the sony for the Tamron, because from what I've seen the 24-70 f4 has very soft edges at all apertures. However it's probably better for you to evaluate the copy you have, and if it looks good to you then keep it & pick up a prime. My experience so far has been that the Sony 50 f1.8 has a problem with focusing (I sent mine back) but not everyone would agree that it's so bad. I'd probably chose the tiny Samyang 35 f2.8 instead to give you a small, lightweight lens for when you need to be discrete.
 
Messages
804
Name
Sohail
Edit My Images
Yes
Be surprised if the cost to change into the Tamron will be so little. The f/4 lens is poorly regarded and can be bought very cheaply. The Tamron isn’t bad, supposedly much better than the f/4 lens. The 35mm f/1.8 is very good. The 50mm f/1.8 is pretty poor.
I'm getting a very good discount on the Tamron and an above normal p/x quote for the Sony.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,076
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
oh dear.

It just so happens that I have several sets of manual lenses, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85 and 135 and having modern AF f1.8's is very tempting.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,227
Edit My Images
No
Just another update on the A7RIV, I managed to get out with it this evening and I'm pretty happy with it now.

I'm not sure what/if I changed anything from my initial test but the EVF when I used it for landscapes tonight appeared much better, I mean it was already better than the A7RIII (which wouldn't take much) but I'm now quite happy with it. The focus is much faster imo and the camera is so much more comfortable to use. I've been pixel peeping tonight and the amount of detail is amazing and super sharp with the 16-35 2.8 GM.

I think I've finally found a Sony that I'm happy with, hopefully the A9II has some good improvements and then I'll be sorted and maybe start moving on some of my other systems, I'll certainly start looking to thin them down a bit where I have multiple of same things.
 
Messages
4,430
Name
Kris
Edit My Images
No
oh dear.

It just so happens that I have several sets of manual lenses, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85 and 135 and having modern AF f1.8's is very tempting.
I noted that you really rate the 55 Alan. Do you not find a bit clinical given your old lens collection? I’m giving mine a bit more of a workout as I’ve not used it much. Whilst it’s super sharp and has lots of micro contrast, it does lack character. But, I am also being ultra critical.

For my non working purposes, I am thinking of stepping down a couple of my lenses for the 1.8 versions. I’ll give it till early next year to decide. Having the small form factor of the A7 and 55 out yesterday, it felt a bit odd on the PD slide. Probably just used to having a heavier combination.
 
Messages
3,131
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
I noted that you really rate the 55 Alan. Do you not find a bit clinical given your old lens collection? I’m giving mine a bit more of a workout as I’ve not used it much. Whilst it’s super sharp and has lots of micro contrast, it does lack character. But, I am also being ultra critical.

For my non working purposes, I am thinking of stepping down a couple of my lenses for the 1.8 versions. I’ll give it till early next year to decide. Having the small form factor of the A7 and 55 out yesterday, it felt a bit odd on the PD slide. Probably just used to having a heavier combination.
Images from the 55mm look a lot better with more character if you disable profile corrections in post.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,076
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I noted that you really rate the 55 Alan. Do you not find a bit clinical given your old lens collection? I’m giving mine a bit more of a workout as I’ve not used it much. Whilst it’s super sharp and has lots of micro contrast, it does lack character. But, I am also being ultra critical.

For my non working purposes, I am thinking of stepping down a couple of my lenses for the 1.8 versions. I’ll give it till early next year to decide. Having the small form factor of the A7 and 55 out yesterday, it felt a bit odd on the PD slide. Probably just used to having a heavier combination.
I think I'd describe it as a lens that lacks issues and some may say it's clinical but it's horses for courses and if you want an issue free look that's sharp across the frame it can do that and if you want a more oldie worldie look you can possibly get that with a bit of fiddling or maybe just a tweak of the wb sliders.
 
Messages
804
Name
Sohail
Edit My Images
Yes
I see and read that a lot of people use Canon lenses with their Sony bodies (I have access to quite a few Canon lenses). Can anyone recommend an adapter for these, would like to keep the auto focus etc of the lens.
 
Messages
7,488
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I see and read that a lot of people use Canon lenses with their Sony bodies (I have access to quite a few Canon lenses). Can anyone recommend an adapter for these, would like to keep the auto focus etc of the lens.
Sigma MC-11.

Some lenses works better than others.

I have had good results with most but ones i have hiccups with were the 24L when the light is low, 100L (it struggles to focus a lot), but the rest - 35L mk2, Sigma 20A & 50A, 85L 1.2 mk2, 135L, 16-35L., 24-70L are all fine.
 
Messages
804
Name
Sohail
Edit My Images
Yes
Sigma MC-11.

Some lenses works better than others.

I have had good results with most but ones i have hiccups with were the 24L when the light is low, 100L (it struggles to focus a lot), but the rest - 35L mk2, Sigma 20A & 50A, 85L 1.2 mk2, 135L, 16-35L., 24-70L are all fine.
I'll get that added to the list!! Quick search on Google, it's cheaper than buying the Sony 50mm!!
I'll probably be using the Canon 50&85mm with it.
Thank you for the knowledge.
 
Messages
4,430
Name
Kris
Edit My Images
No
For the 55mm in Lightroom anyway it automatically enables them because of the built in lens profile on the camera which can't be turned off for that lens.
Just checked and all off. But then, I did import with a preset as part of that and so turned off as standard, which I guess is the workaround. Just trying them as a comparison, it just seems to take out a bit of distortion and vignetting as with any lens profile, couldn't see any difference in the bokeh.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,062
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
No
Messages
3,131
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
The samyang 18mm f2.8 FE looks tiny - https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-first-leaked-image-of-the-new-samyang-18mm-f-2-8-fe-lens/

I really hoping this lens is decent especially wide open and at f4. I don't expect batis quality but something more along the lines of the 35mm f2.8 and not 24mm f2.8
The simple truth is that Samyang don't really care if these will be decent or not. Make it cheap enough and small enough and people will buy them. At that size for a wide budget lens there is pretty much no chance of it being any good. The Batis to be fair is okay but not great either.

Then as per usual there will be the argument about it being crap but others will say yes but is so small and costs peanuts and for some that's enough.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,797
Edit My Images
Yes
The simple truth is that Samyang don't really care if these will be decent or not. Make it cheap enough and small enough and people will buy them. At that size for a wide budget lens there is pretty much no chance of it being any good. The Batis to be fair is okay but not great either.

Then as per usual there will be the argument about it being crap but others will say yes but is so small and costs peanuts and for some that's enough.
I don't think that's true at all. Both the 35mm and 85mm lenses are optically very good. AF leaves something to be desired but that doesn't take anything away from the optical quality.

Batis 18mm is reviewed to be one of the best UWA primes.
 
Messages
3,131
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
I don't think that's true at all. Both the 35mm and 85mm lenses are optically very good. AF leaves something to be desired but that doesn't take anything away from the optical quality.

Batis 18mm is reviewed to be one of the best UWA primes.
An autofocus lens needs to be able to autofocus accurately, if it can't is pretty much not fit for purpose. So yeah a bit crap. If you bought a car and it wouldn't start but had a great entertainment system would you not say it was a bit crap?

I don't know about reviews but I know a few people that have the Batis 18mm, 2 of them have just replaced it with the Tamron 17-28 another is waiting to get the hold of the Tamron before getting rid, all have described it as a bit meh. I have only used one for half a wedding day but wasn't overly impressed, it's an okay lens.


I would think the 18mm Batis is redundant now that you can get the 17-28 Tamron for less.
I would imagine so, the Tamron is excellent at its widest and good at the longer end of the range.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,797
Edit My Images
Yes
An autofocus lens needs to be able to autofocus accurately, if it can't is pretty much not fit for purpose. So yeah a bit crap. If you bought a car and it wouldn't start but had a great entertainment system would you not say it was a bit crap?

I don't know about reviews but I know a few people that have the Batis 18mm, 2 of them have just replaced it with the Tamron 17-28 another is waiting to get the hold of the Tamron before getting rid, all have described it as a bit meh. I have only used one for half a wedding day but wasn't overly impressed, it's an okay lens.
the AF is accurate for AF-S and also good for slow action. It's just not up to native standards for fast action tracking but not everyone requires that. The car starts and works just fine. ;)
It's a bit like small electric cars that only do 90-ish miles per charge. It's not suitable for me since I need more mileage per charge but there are plenty people who would be happy with just 90 miles.

Besides I don't plan on shooting any action with a 18mm prime. So in this case all I care about is the optical quality of the samyang.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,797
Edit My Images
Yes
I would think the 18mm Batis is redundant now that you can get the 17-28 Tamron for less.
I imagine batis still has better coma correction for astrophotography and also probably slightly better sharpness wide open.

It also has a 77mm filter thread as suppose to 67mm on tamron. So it's a better fit for people like me to combo it with 24-105mm for example which also has 77mm filter thread. I imagine the same applies for people who already own 28-75mm which matches 17-28mm for filter thread.
 
Messages
3,131
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
the AF is accurate for AF-S and also good for slow action. It's just not up to native standards for fast action tracking but not everyone requires that. The car starts and works just fine. ;)
It's a bit like small electric cars that only do 90-ish miles per charge. It's not suitable for me since I need more mileage per charge but there are plenty people who would be happy with just 90 miles.
They are advertised as an autofocus lens, but they don't work as advertised. That makes them crap in my book. No where in their product description does it say that autofocus only works properly under certain circumstances.

Also the 35mm anyway has unreliable autofocus regardless of if it is fast action or not.
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,488
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I imagine batis still has better coma correction for astrophotography and also probably slightly better sharpness wide open.

It also has a 77mm filter thread as suppose to 67mm on tamron. So it's a better fit for people like me to combo it with 24-105mm for example which also has 77mm filter thread. I imagine the same applies for people who already own 28-75mm which matches 17-28mm for filter thread.
That remains to be seen/compared, but that is also a very specific usage/application of the lens, as opposed to general UWA day to day use.

Filter threads isn't really a concern, all you need is a different adaptor for Lee or the like.
 
Top