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

Don’t think it AF as fast?

The AF on the A7riii is almost as good (in my opinion) as the D850, if anyone needs more AF than that for anything but shooting Sports or other Pro use then the A9 but for non sports shooters I can't see them needing anything more than the A7riii,
 
The AF on the A7riii is almost as good (in my opinion) as the D850, if anyone needs more AF than that for anything but shooting Sports or other Pro use then the A9 but for non sports shooters I can't see them needing anything more than the A7riii,

I forgot you had a d850 so you can compare. What about IQ and high iso
 
I forgot you had a d850 so you can compare. What about IQ and high iso

Well there's only 3mp difference between them, IQ is very similar and is as much dependent on lenses as anything else. I'd say the rendering and look from my Zeiss Loxia lenses I had outweighed anything on Nikon but really for most use there's nothing between them.

High ISO as well I'd say is close, I didn't realise how much of a difference IBIS would make though, I really missed it with the Nikon, probably why I preferred the Pentax K-1 to the very similar Nikon D810
 
picked up a used a7rii and the samyang 35mm f1.4.

How is the focussing on that samyang 35mm f/1.4? Is it noisy like other samyang lenses? Also does it support eye AF?

p.s. can I get first dibs when you inevitably sell this lens :D
 
How is the focussing on that samyang 35mm f/1.4? Is it noisy like other samyang lenses? Also does it support eye AF?

p.s. can I get first dibs when you inevitably sell this lens :D

seems fine. there is some noise but doesn't seem as loud as the 50mm. eye af works fine.

nah you drive too hard a bargain! :p
 
Out with my newly acquired A7r bought from @magicaxeman - love it, paired with a 16-35 that I had, love the sensor soooo much [emoji7], and the shutter sound is a very funny bonus [emoji38]

Discovered a Buddhist temple behind a job I’m working on today..

Thailand?
 
Wimbledon? How amazing! :D Looks just like the ones in Thailand but looking at the pictures again those leafless trees give a clue.

My Mrs would love to go there, this is her families temple.

P1000206-C.jpg
 
Last edited:
Just did a shoot using just the a7r3 and canon 70-200. Worked fine except it hunted a tiny bit when shooting at 200mm but other than that it was like shooting a native lens with even eye af working
 
Just in case anyone is interested in the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4.

I've been pixel peeping for two hours and have decided it's about as good in the corners at f8 as the Sony 35mm f2.8.

:D
 
Tokina’s FiRIN 20mm F2 FE AF Is Another Third-Party Sony Lens With Autofocus

https://www.thephoblographer.com/20...other-third-party-sony-lens-with-autofocus/#/

giphy.gif
 
The new tamron 28-75, sigma 105/1.4 and samyang 35mm/1.4 and I am all set for life :D (till GAS hits again and I decide to swap all my lenses)
 
I've done some more testing of the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4, I can't leave the house today so just shots about the garage and garden. If anyone wants to see pictures/crops just say so but otherwise...

- I expected some blooming at f1.4 maybe in line with what I've seen from old f1.2-f1.4 lenses but it seems very good.
- I expected CA with bright / backlit subjects but although there's sometimes a tiny amount it's very good.
- It's sharp in the centre at wide apertures and sharp across the frame at f5 with only the very corners showing smearing, a bit better at f8-f10.
- Against the Sony 35mm f2.8, the Sony is good into the very corners at f5 and even better at f8, the Voigtlander at f8 can't match the Sony at f5 but this is at 100% and for normal viewing I think it's pretty good at f5 and better at f8. Brick wall shots look ok :D
- There isn't a great difference between the Voigtlander and the Sony bokeh at f2.8, IMO. At f1.x the Voigtlander looks busy with a subject such as flowers and twigs etc but for more normal stuff it's perfectly ok, IMO.

Edit - I don't know what T stop the Sony and Voigtlander are but maybe the latter has a teeny bit less DoF at f2.8. I could be wrong.

Things that impress...
The build and handling.
It's sharp at f1.4.
Stopped down a bit it's sharp across the frame.
Next to no blooming around lighter things at f1.4.
Next to no fringing with backlit stuff.
Little CA at f1.4.
Resistance to flare seems good.
Nice sunstars.

Not so good.
The very corners are only getting to be a match for what the Sony 2.8 can do at f5 at f10.
F1.x bokeh can look messy with the wrong subjects but is pretty much in line with what I expected from a 35mm at f1.x, at f2.8 it seems to be about the same as the Sony and would you want to shoot flowers, leaves and twigs at f1.x with a 35mm anyway?
I still haven't shot bright lights at night like that guy in the review.

So, I don't think that this lens will suit pixel peeping landscape or f1.x flower and hedge shooting guys and girls but for other stuff it's very good. IMO.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top