Now we know why it was called slowny
Yeah you're correct I believe so if I was to use a laptop or PC to charge it... But if I use a usb plug or portable charger such as my anker, it supports up to 2.1A charging... Which should be faster then the wall plug which i think is 0.28A( I'm not very knowledgeable on this sort of stuff so could be totally wrong) .. But of course It would depend on the charger I'm. Using, and should only draw as much power as it needs... Anyone else have a mini USB type charger? Like the wasabi perhaps?
Haha absolutely no idea why, but when reading that out "slowny" lol sylvestor stallone came to mind haha
Never tried it that way, I'll have a go Tommorow, still need dual chargers so can charge multiples at once..
Think you can pick up cheap dual chargers on amazon
Yeah, finally being a Amazon prime member has started to pay off... Had countless orders from amazon over the past few weeks... Just hope the Godox speedlight arrives before the weekend so can finally test the 85mm gm properly! Whoop whoop!! Exciting times!! Now if only I had a volunteer model..
Try woof woof. He might like a shot of him with the top down in his mx5
with California dreaming track playing in the background
Latest rumors suggesting that the Sony A7S III is coming this month with the A7 III early 2018.
Pmsl they really can't get it right can they.
What do you mean?
Just to clarify the USB charging Vs mains charging
If charging from a computer port that is USB 1.0 or 2.0 you will only get a downstream amperage of 500mah, if you have USB 3.0 then the downstream amperage jumps up to 900mah.
The stock charger that comes with my Sony A5100 is heehaw and takes an age to charge the battery (only puts out 500mah).
Instead I use an old Nokia micro USB wall charger which pumps out 2000mah thus charging the battery in a fraction of the time.
The situation will probably be relative to other Sony models.
I think he means that the rumor site can't get it right......
For the best charging option use the Sony BC-TRW charger which can be bought separately with or without a extra battery, about £75 approx.
You can also charge via USB dongle which comes with the A7R II, I have used the Anker PowerCore 20000 Power Banks with quick charge technology and they work very well in that they seem to supply quicker than a conventional USB port.
Charging via the included USB done or off a USB port will probably be the slowest and worst option.
I use the (mains) charger that came bundles with 2 spare batteries - so much faster than charging via the USB connector on my A6000 (which doesn't come with a separate charger!)
The BC TRX is interesting, if you use it as a battery charger it only outputs 860mah @ 4.7v but if you use the USB cable to charge the battery whilst in the camera you get 1500mah @ 5v (is how i read it anyway from the manual)
Like i say the old Nokia micro USB charger i have is rated at 2000mah and cost me nada, so im presuming the benefit of the Sony BC TRX is the ability to charge 2 batteries at once (one in the cradle and one in the camera).
Sorry my mistake, its the Sony BC-TRW chargers which I used.
It charges the A7R II batteries in 220mins.
Specifications Input rating
100 V - 240 V AC 50 Hz/60 Hz
7 VA - 12 VA 6 W
Output rating Battery charge terminal: 8.4 V DC 400 mA
Thats slow if using the standard Sony FW50 battery which is only rated at 1080mah.
Im guessing you are using aftermarket batteries with a higher rating?
Nope I was using genuine Sony batteries, but I had 6-8 of them and used to change them at night before jobs.
No such problem now though with the Z-series batteries, 1 is enough for most work.
Sony offering £500 trade-in bonus for individuals trading in Canon/Nikon high end bodies
Their prediction dates. All they do is say the a7iii will be out at every show, it's pretty funny how wrong they've been.
Just a quick update on the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2.
I was worried about initial reports of CA and mushiness, poor corners and field curvature etc but my experience so far is different and so far it's WOW!
I've found it sharp enough in the centre area at f1.2 at about minimum focus distance and very sharp at f2, so it's fine for pictures of flowers and interesting "stuff" I see when out and about. At something like 4/5 feet, so sort of tightish portrait or bigger interesting stuff distance it's even good across the frame at f2. Across the frame at middle and longer distance is good too. I'd have no concerns using this lens for landscape at f4-10. So far I haven't seen anything nasty at f1.2, not even when shooting foliage against a bright sky. So far I'd say it's a remarkable lens. It's a bit bulky and heavy though. There's no point comparing it to my Rokkor 50mm f1.2 unless going for the particular character and look that the Rokkor gives at very wide apertures.
So far it's a stonking lens.
Samyang 50mm f1.4 just landed
How's af speed?
Not used it yet. A7rii lands tomorrow so try then. Got shoots on Saturday and Sunday so will know after that if I’ll keep it or defer back to the little 55 zeiss
If you have the 55mm why buy the Samyang? For the f1.4?
Apart from it being a different lens with different aperture? I don’t have the 55 anymore
Been looking at this with interest, could be a nice middle ground between 35 and 50 for me!
What’s your current set up Chris?
A7rii, Loxia 21 and was about to order a Loxia 35/50 but half thinking I'll just buy another 24-70 if I see a good deal.
Sigma 100-300 is going back, LE-AE4 performance is woeful, will probably just wait and pickup another 70-200 F4 when I see one, the IQ is excellent.
I thought you had one based on this...
Was wondering why you'd prefer it to the 55mm f1.8 but asking the question again seems too much effort
I'm not sure that I'd be tempted by the f1.4 over the 55mm's f1.8.
Yes, that's what I thought as there are times when 35 seems a bit wide and 50/55 a bit tight plus the 40mm focuses a little closer for the odd flower shot etc.
It is a big fat and heavy lens though, noticeably more so than the tiny 35mm f2.8 an 55mm f1.8.
I suppose the smartest thing to do would be to wait until the 35mm f1.4 comes out and decide then, but 40mm does seem a nice middle ground especially when coupled to the slightly closer focus distance.
Using the 40mm has tempted me to get the 65mm f2 but if I'm not careful I'll end up with the 40, 65 and 35
I sold the 55 recently while trying out some canon gear.
I’ve been interested to try this samyang as it’s nearly a grand cheaper than the only other native 50mm f1.4 - the Sony zeiss. If it does well I’ll be well chuffed at that price and I’ll look forward to the other samyang lenses launching.
If it’s no good I’ll look for a 55 zeiss as I’ve always loved that lens.
Hopefully I’ll get some time to test it tomorrow but if not it’ll definitely get used at he weekend and I’ll be happy to post up some shots.
New Whisky, camera by side plus tripod and torch = lightpainting
Nikka Japanese Whisky by Stuart Pardue, on Flickr
The samyang seems to render nicer than the 55 1.8 to my eye.
Love a drop of the Japanese
Reviews I’ve read have all been positive but I don’t know anyone who has used one.
Such a different taste to the malts i normally drink but very nice on the palette.
Had some of the jamazakki (could be spelt differently) at the weekend.
I do have few glasses left of yoichi single malt, which is packed with flavour
I’m normally a Macallan drinker, but I might give one a try
I've never been a whisky or any other short drinker but years ago I used to shoot at gigs and lots of the regulars used to bring flasks of their own mixtures, some would take the lining off your mouth and blow your socks off but others tasted just lovely. But of course the reason some of my shots were out of focus was because I only had ISO 1600 film and a slow lens