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

OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
If anyone needs another view on the Sony 35mm f1.8 here's a review from Phillip Reeve...

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-35mm-f1-8/

To sum it all up...

"The Sony FE 1.8/35 is a very well balanced lens. It is very sharp, for most applications. It has pleasant bokeh at short to medium distances and becomes a bit harsher at longer distances but so does almost any competing 35mm. In general it corrects all aberrations good enough so that you need to push it for them to become distracting. At the same time it handles well thanks to quick AF, ok MF and useful buttons without any quirks. And the 1.8/35 manages all that while being rather small and significantly lighter than most competing E-mount lenses. Therefore I would say that the Sony 1.8/35 will easily keep up with most photographer’s expectations. Only the price seems to be maybe $100 too high at the moment and I hope that we will see it come down a bit with time."

I do agree with that. The bokeh has been criticised by some but I think it's pretty much good for a 35mm f1.8 or at least in line with what I'd expect and what I've seen from other 35mm lenses but as I've never used the new expensive bigger 35mm Art and GM type lenses maybe they are better at f1.8. I haven't seen much ca to worry about and imo if you have to go to 100% with back lit examples to make it an issue it's not something I'm too upset about and no one I show pictures to is going to ever notice even if I point it out :D I think it's ok to quite good actually if not truly exceptional for a lens of this sort and at this level. It's a shame it isn't as good as the 55mm f1.8. It may be overpriced but I think it's worth it in todays market and in todays terms for the overall image quality and the close focus ability. If it didn't have that close focus ability I'd be much less happy :D
 
Messages
2,639
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
If anyone needs another view on the Sony 35mm f1.8 here's a review from Phillip Reeve...

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-35mm-f1-8/

To sum it all up...

"The Sony FE 1.8/35 is a very well balanced lens. It is very sharp, for most applications. It has pleasant bokeh at short to medium distances and becomes a bit harsher at longer distances but so does almost any competing 35mm. In general it corrects all aberrations good enough so that you need to push it for them to become distracting. At the same time it handles well thanks to quick AF, ok MF and useful buttons without any quirks. And the 1.8/35 manages all that while being rather small and significantly lighter than most competing E-mount lenses. Therefore I would say that the Sony 1.8/35 will easily keep up with most photographer’s expectations. Only the price seems to be maybe $100 too high at the moment and I hope that we will see it come down a bit with time."

I do agree with that. The bokeh has been criticised by some but I think it's pretty much good for a 35mm f1.8 or at least in line with what I'd expect and what I've seen from other 35mm lenses but as I've never used the new expensive bigger 35mm Art and GM type lenses maybe they are better at f1.8. I haven't seen much ca to worry about and imo if you have to go to 100% with back lit examples to make it an issue it's not something I'm too upset about and no one I show pictures to is going to ever notice even if I point it out :D I think it's ok to quite good actually if not truly exceptional for a lens of this sort and at this level. It's a shame it isn't as good as the 55mm f1.8. It may be overpriced but I think it's worth it in todays market and in todays terms for the overall image quality and the close focus ability. If it didn't have that close focus ability I'd be much less happy :D
sounds good. I think it’s important to remember that one persons ‘omg it exhibited x issue in a majorly backlit situation’ is everyone else’s ‘it’s a very decent lens that will work perfectly’ with lens reviews.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
My search for the perfect 35mm lens for me goes on but although this lens is bigger than I'd probably unrealistically hoped it would be the good points seem to be that it's sharp from f1.8 with what seems to me to be high contrast, it's fast to focus and it has that close up ability. The disappointing or really maybe no better than I could realistically expect being some ca in some situations and not having the best bokeh in the world at some distances for messy stuff like foliage.

I haven't been able to take many pictures in the last couple of weeks but when I can I've been using my Voigtlander manual focus lenses :D
 
Messages
7,926
Edit My Images
No
My search for the perfect 35mm lens for me goes on but although this lens is bigger than I'd probably unrealistically hoped it would be the good points seem to be that it's sharp from f1.8 with what seems to me to be high contrast, it's fast to focus and it has that close up ability. The disappointing or really maybe no better than I could realistically expect being some ca in some situations and not having the best bokeh in the world at some distances for messy stuff like foliage.

I haven't been able to take many pictures in the last couple of weeks but when I can I've been using my Voigtlander manual focus lenses :D
Big? It's the smallest and lightest 1.8?
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Big? It's the smallest and lightest 1.8?
But it's bigger than I want it to be!

My Voigtlander f1.4 is just about the perfect size but it's manual focus, it has funky bokeh and the corners are never sharp but that last complaint will never ever be noticed by normal non geek people.

Oh, and the Sony is bigger than my Rokkor 35mm f1.8.

So there!
 

JohnBradbury

A jolly good egg!
Messages
768
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
After seeing the leaked specs of the 1DX-III I can’t see Sony winning over the legions of Canon Pro Sports shooters this year. Which did seem to be something they wanted.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
After seeing the leaked specs of the 1DX-III I can’t see Sony winning over the legions of Canon Pro Sports shooters this year. Which did seem to be something they wanted.
Some of them will be too old to change wont they? They'll have been using Canons since 1843 and they wont want to change now and besides, they'll probably think the Sony A9II is a DVD player.
 
Messages
3,156
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
So with the A7RIV replacing the A7RIII within less than 2 years does anyone think we might see an A7IV before April next year? The A7III launched in April 2018.

I think there is a fair chance we might.

It will likely have the red focus point, the evf from the original A9/A7RIII, the newer body shape, real time a.f and a few other bits and bobs and like the other recent updates be an incremental upgrade rather than a big change.

I am very happy with my A7III's not sure if any of those things would be enough for me to push forward with upgrading them.

There seems to be no rumours around new lens releases at the moment, the only thing I would like to see from Sony is a 35GM.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,809
Edit My Images
Yes
After seeing the leaked specs of the 1DX-III I can’t see Sony winning over the legions of Canon Pro Sports shooters this year. Which did seem to be something they wanted.

It does look good but how much it is real?
Also I doubt 30fps is with the slapping mirror box and mechanical shutter. And if it's live view does it have rolling shutter making it useless for action.
 
Messages
3,156
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
I’d like to see a 24 1.8 priced around same as 35 1.8
Won't happen 24mm is supposed to be one of the most difficult primes to make, they couldn't do it at the same price as the 35mm. Even with the old Nikon DSLR lenses the 24 f/1.8 is a couple of hundred quid more expensive than the 35 f/1.8.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,254
Name
Tim
Edit My Images
Yes
Won't happen 24mm is supposed to be one of the most difficult primes to make, they couldn't do it at the same price as the 35mm. Even with the old Nikon DSLR lenses the 24 f/1.8 is a couple of hundred quid more expensive than the 35 f/1.8.
The Sigma arts are the same price? Even though they’re 1.4. To be fair the Nikon one is £650 anything around that mark would be pretty fair.
 
Messages
3,156
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
The Sigma arts are the same price? Even though they’re 1.4. To be fair the Nikon one is £650 anything around that mark would be pretty fair.
Yeah but Sigma cut corners with the 24mm, it is the weakest lens in the range, its still a decent lens and a cheap option for someone wanting a 24mm. While the Nikon 24 f/1.8 might be only £650 it's a DSLR lens. As we have seen with all of the other mirrorless lenses including Nikon the price of the mirrorless version would be a fair bit higher by at least a couple of hundred pounds. The Sigma 24 is also just a DSLR lens with an adaptor, there actual mirrorless lenses like the 35 f/1.2 45 f/2.8 etc. are expensive.

So say they did bring out a 24 f/1.8 it would likely be priced at about £900. I can't see that happening any time soon. There is no real demand for it and those that would want it probably wouldn't be prepared to spend that sort of money on it.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Won't happen 24mm is supposed to be one of the most difficult primes to make, they couldn't do it at the same price as the 35mm. Even with the old Nikon DSLR lenses the 24 f/1.8 is a couple of hundred quid more expensive than the 35 f/1.8.
I don't know why it should be so difficult or expensive and isn't the short flange distance supposed to be an advantage at the wider end? Sigma used to do a reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 which was supposedly pretty close to the 20mm f1.8 I had. That 20mm was excellent across the frame when stopped down and I expect the 24mm was too. Actually I've just checked a review and they say it was :D If Sony will do it or not is another question but I'll eat my shorts if it's beyond them to make a reasonably priced one for any technical reason.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Anyone fancy switching to Nikon to use that $7,999 50mm f0.95?

I can see the appeal of a 50mm f0.95 but is light that much of an issue? And if going for subject isolation that's the equivalent of about f1.6 at 85mm so another idea is to just buy a 85mm f1.4 and stand back a bit.

Just thinking :D

PS.
Interesting comments on the Sony rumor site. People still saying that the Sony mount can't have f0.95 lenses. Amazing.
 
Last edited:
Messages
12,786
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
Anyone fancy switching to Nikon to use that $7,999 50mm f0.95?

I can see the appeal of a 50mm f0.95 but is light that much of an issue? And if going for subject isolation that's the equivalent of about f1.6 at 85mm so another idea is to just buy a 85mm f1.4 and stand back a bit.

Just thinking :D
It'll be about rendering.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
It'll have a look, yes, and it'll probably be a look that divides opinion. It would be interesting to see f0.95 pictures taken with this lens v a cheaper 50mm f0.95 v a quite ordinary 85mm f1.4 or more exotic 85mm f1.2 or even v a 50mm f1.2 and think about if the Nikon look is worth paying for.

I've no doubt they'll sell some and it's a halo product and maybe that's more the point.
 
Messages
2,639
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone fancy switching to Nikon to use that $7,999 50mm f0.95?

I can see the appeal of a 50mm f0.95 but is light that much of an issue? And if going for subject isolation that's the equivalent of about f1.6 at 85mm so another idea is to just buy a 85mm f1.4 and stand back a bit.

Just thinking :D

PS.
Interesting comments on the Sony rumor site. People still saying that the Sony mount can't have f0.95 lenses. Amazing.
Just demonstrates how messed up Nikon’s priorities are.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I suppose it depends how many recourses they've put into it (50mm f0.95) and how much revenue it generates either through sales or through attracting people to the system. This has certainly got people on forums chattering as have the f2 zooms and fast primes for Canon.

I am a bit phased at the thought that people might be attracted to a system because of lenses they'll never buy but I suppose it could happen, in fact it probably will happen.
 
Messages
7,507
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I suppose it depends how many recourses they've put into it (50mm f0.95) and how much revenue it generates either through sales or through attracting people to the system. This has certainly got people on forums chattering as have the f2 zooms and fast primes for Canon.

I am a bit phased at the thought that people might be attracted to a system because of lenses they'll never buy but I suppose it could happen, in fact it probably will happen.
I would argue that the F/2.0 zooms is actually useful in real life whereas the 0.95 Nikon isn't for the very fact that it is manual focus. It becomes a practical issue rather than a cost issue, as there will always be people who don't even look at the price and buy it but if you are not going to be able to use it in a job then no matter how cheap it is, you just won't buy it.

Generally speaking.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,809
Edit My Images
Yes
Just demonstrates how messed up Nikon’s priorities are.
This is what happens when you let marketing department set priorities and take control.

They milked the large mount so much that in the end it worked to their detriment! Their lenses are larger (the Z24/1.8 is larger that 24GM!), Less sharp, and subpar AF. But they all have less CA.
I was expecting them to be trouncing FE lenses not just have better CA control!
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I would argue that the F/2.0 zooms is actually useful in real life whereas the 0.95 Nikon isn't for the very fact that it is manual focus. It becomes a practical issue rather than a cost issue, as there will always be people who don't even look at the price and buy it but if you are not going to be able to use it in a job then no matter how cheap it is, you just won't buy it.

Generally speaking.
I'm sure you can use lenses like this for some jobs. I can't remember the exact details but Leica once made a very expensive fast prime because a film producer wanted it. It was so expensive that I don't think they ever said how much it would cost to buy.

There must be some applications for lenses like this but they must be niche and maybe pro use isn't at the top of Nikons expectations. Golly knows what their expectations are. Halo product selling in tiny numbers I expect. The only f0.95 lens I've ever used was the 25mm one I had for MFT but someone here must have had a FF one.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
This is what happens when you let marketing department set priorities and take control.

They milked the large mount so much that in the end it worked to their detriment! Their lenses are larger (the Z24/1.8 is larger that 24GM!), Less sharp, and subpar AF. But they all have less CA.
I was expecting them to be trouncing FE lenses not just have better CA control!
I don't think ca is a function of the mount size though or even lens size. I read a bit recently about it and I think that was the gist but designing out ca could add to complexity and thus size, maybe. I don't believe it's anything to do with mount size though and we'll soon have another apo lens for e mount, the Voigtlander 50mm f2.

If anyone doesn't know about apo there's a wiki thingy on it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
6,809
Edit My Images
Yes
I don't think ca is a function of the mount size though or even lens size. I read a bit recently about it and I think that was the gist but designing out ca could add to complexity and thus size, maybe. I don't believe it's anything to do with mount size though and we'll soon have another apo lens for e mount, the Voigtlander 50mm f2.

If anyone doesn't know about apo there's a wiki thingy on it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apochromat
Never said it had anything to do with mount size but that's all they seem have achieved after claiming they had hit gold with their mount design
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
It's an achievement and I can only assume Sony have other design priorities and don't sometimes put ca that far up the list.

It does continue to surprise me how many people are buying into the mount size marketing and still insisting Sony are limited... to what? f0.6x?
 
Messages
3,156
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
I don't know why it should be so difficult or expensive and isn't the short flange distance supposed to be an advantage at the wider end? Sigma used to do a reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 which was supposedly pretty close to the 20mm f1.8 I had. That 20mm was excellent across the frame when stopped down and I expect the 24mm was too. Actually I've just checked a review and they say it was :D If Sony will do it or not is another question but I'll eat my shorts if it's beyond them to make a reasonably priced one for any technical reason.
The advantage for wider lenses is that they can be smaller due to the short flange distance that still doesn't mean that wider lenses are easier to make. 24mm for whatever reason is more difficult to manufacture, so more expensive.

Every single mirrorless lens that has launches so far has been a fair bit more expensive than it's older DSLR equivalent. 24mm lenses have always been more expsive than 35mm lenses. Why would a 24mm f/1.8 be any different?
 
Messages
7,507
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I'm sure you can use lenses like this for some jobs. I can't remember the exact details but Leica once made a very expensive fast prime because a film producer wanted it. It was so expensive that I don't think they ever said how much it would cost to buy.

There must be some applications for lenses like this but they must be niche and maybe pro use isn't at the top of Nikons expectations. Golly knows what their expectations are. Halo product selling in tiny numbers I expect. The only f0.95 lens I've ever used was the 25mm one I had for MFT but someone here must have had a FF one.
No fashion jobs, because if you eyes is in focus, everything else will be out of focus meaning all the clothing you are trying to sell is blur. So you won't buy this for that kind of jobs.

It is nothing more than a Halo lens, a collector's piece, it is impractical in use, size, weight and cost.

And they also failed to make it auto focus...so much for the big mount and R&D. I really don't understand why they can't make it auto focus. The 50/1.0 is in a much smaller body is, from 20 years ago. I would have thought with the Mirrorless tech and sensor focusing this would make is much easier now, or they just can't be bothered. Is it the size limitation? They can't fit it in that barrel even though it is massive?

I see this lens as an own goal in saying they lack the know-how to make an autofocus lens in 2019, as opposed to choosing deliberately not making it auto focus..
 
Messages
3,156
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
Is the lcd on the A7III and the A9 the same size?

I have an A9 on it's way to me and I have a couple of spare A7III screen protectors.
 
Messages
7,926
Edit My Images
No
No fashion jobs, because if you eyes is in focus, everything else will be out of focus meaning all the clothing you are trying to sell is blur. So you won't buy this for that kind of jobs.

It is nothing more than a Halo lens, a collector's piece, it is impractical in use, size, weight and cost.

And they also failed to make it auto focus...so much for the big mount and R&D. I really don't understand why they can't make it auto focus. The 50/1.0 is in a much smaller body is, from 20 years ago. I would have thought with the Mirrorless tech and sensor focusing this would make is much easier now, or they just can't be bothered. Is it the size limitation? They can't fit it in that barrel even though it is massive?

I see this lens as an own goal in saying they lack the know-how to make an autofocus lens in 2019, as opposed to choosing deliberately not making it auto focus..
That sort of lens is good for taking nude portraits u want to be safe for viewing lol ;)
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
The advantage for wider lenses is that they can be smaller due to the short flange distance that still doesn't mean that wider lenses are easier to make. 24mm for whatever reason is more difficult to manufacture, so more expensive.

Every single mirrorless lens that has launches so far has been a fair bit more expensive than it's older DSLR equivalent. 24mm lenses have always been more expsive than 35mm lenses. Why would a 24mm f/1.8 be any different?
They may not be easier to make but I'd be surprised if it's as difficult as you're suggesting. As to price point. Prices of newer lenses are generally higher for a number or reasons including the simple fact that they're newer and the development costs need to be recouped plus 24mm lenses will possibly sell in lower numbers than some others. Why do you think there are so many 50mm f1.8's about from just about every manufacturer?

As I mentioned earlier if Sigma could make a decent 20 and 24mm f1.8 10 years ago or more I don't see why it's suddenly become so difficult and it wasn't so long ago that someone here, I forget who, was suggesting something similar about a 35mm f1.8 being difficult to do despite just about everyone making one at some point. I'm not saying it'll happen, maybe they wont sell enough to make it worthwhile or maybe they'll protect the existing line up but I just don't see the technical barriers to it that you do.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,104
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
No fashion jobs, because if you eyes is in focus, everything else will be out of focus meaning all the clothing you are trying to sell is blur. So you won't buy this for that kind of jobs.

It is nothing more than a Halo lens, a collector's piece, it is impractical in use, size, weight and cost.

And they also failed to make it auto focus...so much for the big mount and R&D. I really don't understand why they can't make it auto focus. The 50/1.0 is in a much smaller body is, from 20 years ago. I would have thought with the Mirrorless tech and sensor focusing this would make is much easier now, or they just can't be bothered. Is it the size limitation? They can't fit it in that barrel even though it is massive?

I see this lens as an own goal in saying they lack the know-how to make an autofocus lens in 2019, as opposed to choosing deliberately not making it auto focus..
Besides the halo thing maybe this f0.95 will sell to some who just want it, and more power to them, and for the odd arty project use. I'm sure we'll see it one some blog at some point and I'll look forward to reading it and seeing what the lens can do.
 
Messages
6,473
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
edit:

just saw. 28mp at 30fps? thats more like it.

A9 have dropped the ball BIG time if this 1dx3 turns out to have those two features
I doubt having 28mp and 30 fps are the only features which make a difference.... what about AF, Silent black-out free shooting, Body size and connectivity features etc?
If it has a mechanical shutter which is capable of 30 fps it will be progress......

28mp vs 24mp isn't a big jump, nor is 30fps from 20fps. It looks like Canon are just chasing numbers as marketing bragging rights.
I am expecting a big advancement in their AF system... better than the A9 / A9 II?
Lets wait and see.... ;)
 
Top