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

GyRob said:
It may seem that way but the 1dxmkII Scares the birds away after a few shots so then the 600f4 is useless the Olympus and the Sony both have silent shutters birds don't veer off as they get closer as there is no shutter sound this is the main reason Iv changed
Canon have been too slow to bring out a pro type mirror less .
Rob.
Click to expand...

If this is your main use case then going for A9 is definitely better. You only get a slight bump in resolution over 1Dxii but more importantly you can use silent shutter for action shots without rolling shutter issues.
 
GyRob said:
It may seem that way but the 1dxmkII Scares the birds away after a few shots so then the 600f4 is useless the Olympus and the Sony both have silent shutters birds don't veer off as they get closer as there is no shutter sound this is the main reason Iv changed
Canon have been too slow to bring out a pro type mirror less .
Rob.
Click to expand...

What bird that you scared off with your camera? :oops: :$
 
Livin The Dream said:
I don’t think it takes much to realise that taking pictures with a phone is one of the top things they’re used for these days and so improving that function will be high up on the list of every phone manufacturer for along time yet. Phones and digital imagery have revolutionised photography and brought it to within everyone’s grasp, they’re going to milk that for whatever they can.
Click to expand...

We've done the bulk of improvements to smartphone hardware so they have to find other ways to justify upgrades, if it can take better quality photos that is a good selling point for many people, it would be much harder to try and justify the minor improvements to hardware speed, battery life etc over last years model.
 
simonbarker said:
We've done the bulk of improvements to smartphone hardware so they have to find other ways to justify upgrades, if it can take better quality photos that is a good selling point for many people, it would be much harder to try and justify the minor improvements to hardware speed, battery life etc over last years model.
Click to expand...
There's only so much you can improve in such a tiny sensor though
 
jonneymendoza said:
There's only so much you can improve in such a tiny sensor though
Click to expand...

Sure but that's why we're seeing them focusing on improving the software, most people aren't going to care that there's a small sensor just that it can give them usable/good photos when they go out etc.
 
simonbarker said:
Sure but that's why we're seeing them focusing on improving the software, most people aren't going to care that there's a small sensor just that it can give them usable/good photos when they go out etc.
Click to expand...

I think the key is that most pictures taken with phones will only ever be looked at on phones and tablets.

Mrs WW and her family and friends swap pictures that often look absolutely lovely when looked at as whole pictures on the smartphone or tablet and it's only when looking at them on a bigger screen that the shortcomings become evident. If all that's needed is a picture to look at as a whole picture on a smartphone then surely it's been pretty much job done for a while.
 
Steve Huff on those new smartphones and where photography is heading...

https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2019/09/18/where-is-the-camera-industry-headed-my-take/

I'm surprised he thinks they're better than early mirrorless. I had the Panasonic GF1 and G1 and I've seen nothing from a smartphone yet that gets near those cameras so I'll be interested to see any example shots from the newest phones if and when they appear on the net.
 
I am in a slight quandry I was chatting to another photographer yesterday and was telling him that I was waiting with bated breath for the A9II. I wanted the A9II as the rumoured spec includes a jump to 36 million pixels which would be handy for a little side project I am going to do. I had originally pre-ordered the A7RIV for this purpose but cancelled in favour of the A9II.

The guy that I was talking too suggested that I should just get an A9 and a A7RII, or a A7RIII instead, as the A9II will likely be coming in at round 5k and I could potentially buy a new A9 for under £2300 and and a new A7RIII for under £1800 and save myself a few quid. The A7RII new is only £1070 which would save even more money plus I might be able to pick up any of these used at a little less money.

I know first world problems. :rolleyes:

I guess I need to just wait and see what else the A9II has over and above the bump in resolution before deciding what to do.
 
woof woof said:
Steve Huff on those new smartphones and where photography is heading...

https://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2019/09/18/where-is-the-camera-industry-headed-my-take/

I'm surprised he thinks they're better than early mirrorless. I had the Panasonic GF1 and G1 and I've seen nothing from a smartphone yet that gets near those cameras so I'll be interested to see any example shots from the newest phones if and when they appear on the net.
Click to expand...

The phones that he's talking about are about 5x the price of the cheaper ML bodies. But yeah, they are certainly catching up on the camera side. I'd still prefer to use an actual camera though for the ergonomics, lens options and physical buttons.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
The phones that he's talking about are about 5x the price of the cheaper ML bodies. But yeah, they are certainly catching up on the camera side. I'd still prefer to use an actual camera though for the ergonomics, lens options and physical buttons.
Click to expand...

I'll believe the quality when I see it.

I have about a gazillion early MFT shots and at ISO's like 100-400 they look good at 100%. I've yet to see a smartphone shot that looked as good at the same size but I'll be happy to see the quality when I see it.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I'll believe the quality when I see it.

I have about a gazillion early MFT shots and at ISO's like 100-400 they look good at 100%. I've yet to see a smartphone shot that looked as good at the same size but I'll be happy to see the quality when I see it.
Click to expand...

I'm talking in good light, I still think they completely fall apart once the ISO gets pushed beyond 200 - aggressive NR causing that usual smudginess. But, outdoors in average lighting they can produce very usable images. And then it depends on the brand, they are certainly not all on par. But he's talking the latest iphone, and the later models do have decent enough cameras. As good as older M43? I doubt it, I would imagine even 1" sensor bridge cameras will still kick their arse, but they are getting there. They're never actually going to directly match any ML camera until they develop larger sensors for them
 
A few weeks ago we had a family do and lots of pictures were taken with phones and most of them were hopeless as they had very slow shutter speeds, so slow that for people shots they were useless as there was too much motion blur.

I'm not going to buy a top end smartphone but I would like to see them give good results so that I can have one in 2 to 5 years time when someone kindly gives me their old one :D

My phone camera, which I was given years ago is crap and the newer one I've recently been given is good enough for a still life shot in good light when looked at as a whole image but in low light it too is crap and the shutter speeds are useless and if you look closely at a good light picture that looks good as a whole picture chances are it'll be crap too.

I hope Steve Huff is right but I'll believe it when I see it or when someone I trust here tell me they're good :D

In the meantime I've seen nothing from a smartphone that can compete with the GF1 and G1 I had.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
A few weeks ago we had a family do and lots of pictures were taken with phones and most of them were hopeless as they had very slow shutter speeds, so slow that for people shots they were useless as there was too much motion blur.

I'm not going to buy a top end smartphone but I would like to see them give good results so that I can have one in 2 to 5 years time when someone kindly gives me their old one :D

My phone camera, which I was given years ago is crap and the newer one I've recently been given is good enough for a still life shot in good light when looked at as a whole image but in low light it too is crap and the shutter speeds are useless and if you look closely at a good light picture that looks good as a whole picture chances are it'll be crap too.

I hope Steve Huff is right but I'll believe it when I see it or when someone I trust here tell me they're good :D

In the meantime I've seen nothing from a smartphone that can compete with the GF1 and G1 I had.
Click to expand...

I barely use my phone as a phone let alone as a camera. So I'll never own one of the kind he's refering to either. I have a chinese phone for the past 2yr, cost me 200euro and even that was a stretch for me but I wanted one good enough to play some app games on without lag. The camera is complete rubbish, even outdoors.
 
Sometimes when I'm out without a camera I see things I'd like to take a picture of. I'm sure we all do. I saw a lovely dragon fly on a leaf the other day :D but when I'm pushing a wheelchair or carrying bags of shopping a camera in a bag can be too much and a decent phone giving quality that would stand up to viewing closely on a pc rather than just as a whole picture on a smartphone screen would be nice.

I was just surprised when Steff Huff said they're better than early MFT. He's seen them and I haven't so I hope he's right but I'll still only believe it when I see it :D
 
woof woof said:
Sometimes when I'm out without a camera I see things I'd like to take a picture of. I'm sure we all do. I saw a lovely dragon fly on a leaf the other day :D but when I'm pushing a wheelchair or carrying bags of shopping a camera in a bag can be too much and a decent phone giving quality that would stand up to viewing closely on a pc rather than just as a whole picture on a smartphone screen would be nice.

I was just surprised when Steff Huff said they're better than early MFT. He's seen them and I haven't so I hope he's right but I'll still only believe it when I see it :D
Click to expand...

He's known for his over exaggerations though, he over rates many thing.

I'd like a phone cam good enough for the odd snap when I've no camera with ,but I wouldn't even bother processing the files, just SOOC snap shots good enough for sharing on FB or whatever would do the job. I had that with the Samsung S6, the camera on that was good enough had decent enough macro capabilities too and nice punchy colours, But the images still had an obvious over PP look to them
 
f/2.8 said:
I am in a slight quandry I was chatting to another photographer yesterday and was telling him that I was waiting with bated breath for the A9II. I wanted the A9II as the rumoured spec includes a jump to 36 million pixels which would be handy for a little side project I am going to do. I had originally pre-ordered the A7RIV for this purpose but cancelled in favour of the A9II.

The guy that I was talking too suggested that I should just get an A9 and a A7RII, or a A7RIII instead, as the A9II will likely be coming in at round 5k and I could potentially buy a new A9 for under £2300 and and a new A7RIII for under £1800 and save myself a few quid. The A7RII new is only £1070 which would save even more money plus I might be able to pick up any of these used at a little less money.

I know first world problems. :rolleyes:

I guess I need to just wait and see what else the A9II has over and above the bump in resolution before deciding what to do.
Click to expand...

Mint one at a grand man with 20% off from camera jungle. Absolute bargain
 
I've just received this from Jessops clearance. What an amazing bag, I'm so happy with it. In the top section I have the A7III with 85mm f/1.8 attached, Zeiss 35mm f/2.4 & 28-70 kit lens. In the bottom section removable tray (which is removable, apparently for a travel tripod) I have 70-200L f/4 with MC-11 attached and 50mm f/1.8. If I remove the lens tray from the bottom section I can fit my Sigma 150-600 with MC-11 & tripod foot attached. The leather & build is amazing quality. The only reason it was reduced so heavily is the padded slider on the strap has Olympus branding. It cost me £98 delivered (instead of the usual £299)

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


https://www.gillislondon.com/trafalgar-7749-messenger
 
NewBeetle said:
I've just received this from Jessops clearance. What an amazing bag, I'm so happy with it. In the top section I have the A7III with 85mm f/1.8 attached, Zeiss 35mm f/2.4 & 28-70 kit lens. In the bottom section removable tray (which is removable, apparently for a travel tripod) I have 70-200L f/4 with MC-11 attached and 50mm f/1.8. If I remove the lens tray from the bottom section I can fit my Sigma 150-600 with MC-11 & tripod foot attached. The leather & build is amazing quality. The only reason it was reduced so heavily is the padded slider on the strap has Olympus branding. It cost me £98 delivered (instead of the usual £299)

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


https://www.gillislondon.com/trafalgar-7749-messenger
Click to expand...

That looks fantastic, camera, laptop and tripod all in one and all hidden!

My only reservation is there is no zip lock at the top, it’s only a flap, so if you have it in the car and had to brake quickly, things will go flying. Or if for some reasons someone else tried to pick up your bag by the strap and it does a 180.

How secure is that flap?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top