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

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,296
Edit My Images
Yes
Face registration, do any of the wedding photographers here use it and how does it work, is it worth bothering with?

Thanks
Haven't used in wedding scenario but have used it in other places. It's a nice feature if you are certain you always want a certain person (eg. Bride, bridegroom) over others in focus. It could also work against you in that if you don't want a registered person in focus but someone else and the camera will try to fight you lol (of course there are ways around it by moving you focus point etc for the odd different picture)
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
19,676
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Rumor sites are saying that a Canon CSC will be announced on 4th or 5th September...

https://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/co...less-camera-to-be-announced-on-september-4-5/

As with Nikon I don't suppose that the kit will be available on announcement day. I do wonder if we'll see something from Sony at or about the time Canon and Nikon announce their new CSC's, maybe an A9r or S or at least an A7sIII.

In my experience companies often have a very good idea what the competition is up to so I wouldn't be too shocked if Sony do have a very good idea what Nikon and Canon will be offering and maybe have a spoiler announcement just about ready. Just a thought :D
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,279
Edit My Images
No
Looks like the a7iii wins out against the A7Rii. Just need to get the d750 and lenses sold to finance it now.

Probably going to try and pick up a 35mm F2.8 and 55mm F1.8 as the lens combo. Both fairly pricey mind!
 
Messages
502
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Looks like the a7iii wins out against the A7Rii. Just need to get the d750 and lenses sold to finance it now.

Probably going to try and pick up a 35mm F2.8 and 55mm F1.8 as the lens combo. Both fairly pricey mind!
I would have thought 35 and 55mm are a bit close together, have you considered the lovely little Sony FE28 f2.0 and the 55?
 
Messages
1,302
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
19,676
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Maybe, but I think we'll see a new APS-C body before any significant lens announcements. There might be a new kit lens with the A7600 though :D

I've looked at the A6xxx line a few times and to be honest the only things missing for me are a compact and reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 (the current one is a bit much and a bit big) and a 18-50mm f2.8.
 
Messages
1,302
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
It's an 16-50 f/2.8 or similar that's the most glaring omission, Sigma have several APS-C primes which fill most of the Sony gaps, you do have the 16-70 f/4 CZ, but an f/2.8 would be better.

I'd also like to see an APS-C version of the 70-200 f/4 - something better than the 55-210 (which is not bad, to be honest), but more compact and affordable than the FF G masters
 
Messages
502
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
Sony need to bring out a better range of APS-C lenses before a new APS-C body.
I have the 10-18, 16-70 and FE 70-300 which I use on my A6300 and they all great lenses and give a 35mm equiv 15-450mm. I know the 70-300 is an FE lens but it's still fairly compact and I doubt an APS-C lens would be much smaller. The 10-18 and 16-70 are compact enough.
What do folk want, a few more APS-C primes?
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,296
Edit My Images
Yes
I have the 10-18, 16-70 and FE 70-300 which I use on my A6300 and they all great lenses and give a 35mm equiv 15-450mm. I know the 70-300 is an FE lens but it's still fairly compact and I doubt an APS-C lens would be much smaller. The 10-18 and 16-70 are compact enough.
What do folk want, a few more APS-C primes?
the 16-70mm and 10-18mm while very nice lenses are overpriced.
A fast 16-50mm/2.8 would be nice.

A few nice affordable pancake primes like canon EF-M 22mm/2 STM would be nice. The sony 20mm/2.8 is more expensive. The EF-M 22mm f2 is as sharp wide open as Sony is at f5.6. To make things worst the EF-M 22 is as sharp as sony zeiss 24mm f1.8 which is a few time more expensive!
The sony 16mm/2.8 is probably the worst prime lens in history. Don't think I have come across a worst one.
Sony 55-210mm is crap also at long end.
I can carry on ranting but you get the idea... sony APS-C is crap

though sigma jumping with a few nice fast sharp primes has made it slightly more bearable.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
19,676
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I have the 10-18, 16-70 and FE 70-300 which I use on my A6300 and they all great lenses and give a 35mm equiv 15-450mm. I know the 70-300 is an FE lens but it's still fairly compact and I doubt an APS-C lens would be much smaller. The 10-18 and 16-70 are compact enough.
What do folk want, a few more APS-C primes?
Knocking the Sony APS-C lens line up seems to be SOP but as a non user reading the reviews and looking at the pictures the lenses I've bothered to look at look at least adequate to me with some appearing to be more than adequate and maybe even very good. The prices of some of them in comparison to the competition is maybe another issue. I remember people being apoplectic at the cost of one more recent lens despite it being in the region of what the competition charge for a similar lens.

If there was a 24mm f1.x that appealed to me more than the current one I'd be a lot more tempted to an Axxxx body. MFT is hard to give up though.
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,296
Edit My Images
Yes
The 55-210 is actually a very nice lens for the money and I've taken many a shot throughout the focal range and been quite pleased.
This Pheasant was taken with one at 210mm wide open through a window too.
Can't say that example is doing your cause any favours tbh.

What is a very nice lens for the money is my canon 100-300mm I got £10

DSC01863
by Anand Gopinath, on Flickr

DSC01884
by Anand Gopinath, on Flickr

DSC01760
by Anand Gopinath, on Flickr

the 55-210 is not a good lens, probably worst in its class tbh. I used to own one too when I had A6000.
 
Messages
6,674
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I have shot a few wedding now, a few portrait shoots now with the A73 with a combination of Sony, Sony Zeiss and Canon L and I have slowly realised:-

1 – Sony colours, white balance at least, can be really off, it can go way too blue, I can see the EVF actually changing in real time. I find the white balance is worst when people stand in front of a lot of green, like a garden...

2 – I love the AF, it is extraordinary.

3 – Sony 85/1.8. Great technically but I was going through the latest images and at one point I switched to the 85L but I forgot, when I was culling all of the sudden I notice the rendering went up to another level but not as sharp….Sigh...I guess in the end the 85/18 isn’t the 85L, the look of the photo isn’t on par. I can sharpen the 85L images and it is sharp enough but the 85/1.8 just do not have that background render. I might buy the 85GM and see how that is, I actually think the ultra sharp of the Sigma might be a negative for skin.

4 – Both Sony Zeiss are nice, bokeh are very smooth, still different to the Canon but just smooth.

Great camera, would get another, when shooting with it I am loving it, but when editing and reviewing I am left in a little mix bag. Amazing DR, it is so sharp, it’s like a scalpel but I think deep down I want a paint brush. I am sure shooting things like motorsport is fine but the camera isn’t that flattering on skin, both in colours or rendering. At a glance, or if you have not been shooting Canon for like 10 years like me or able to look at them at pixel level you probably won’t notice, but something that I can tell and hope Sony will improve upon.
 
Messages
5,585
Edit My Images
Yes
I have shot a few wedding now, a few portrait shoots now with the A73 with a combination of Sony, Sony Zeiss and Canon L and I have slowly realised:-

1 – Sony colours, white balance at least, can be really off, it can go way too blue, I can see the EVF actually changing in real time. I find the white balance is worst when people stand in front of a lot of green, like a garden...
Why don't you use a WB preset or custom WB for colour consistency? Any large swathes colour will fool any Auto White Balance.
 
Messages
5,585
Edit My Images
Yes
It's a wedding, inside, outside, shade, open light. There isn't time to set WB every 2 mins.
I know the locations can change (quickly) at a wedding, but if for example you are in the garden on a sunny day, would it not be easy to change to Daylight WB as you may be there for awhile? On my camera changing the WB is pressing a button and moving the wheel a click or two. Is it not as easy on the Sony, or Canon?
 
Messages
6,674
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I know the locations can change (quickly) at a wedding, but if for example you are in the garden on a sunny day, would it not be easy to change to Daylight WB as you may be there for awhile? On my camera changing the WB is pressing a button and moving the wheel a click or two. Is it not as easy on the Sony, or Canon?
It's just easier to fight the WB in post than faff with changing settings all the time.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,296
Edit My Images
Yes
Wait, what?? You got a Canon 100-300 for £10?
I found someone who was selling the canon 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 USM with fungus plus a camera bag for £20. So I took a small risk and bought it. The lens was rather easy to remove and the fungus cleaned out nicely without leaving any marks. The bag was also surprisingly useful and I used it for a year till I replaced it with a tenba DNA 10. Then I sold the bag the £10. So I essentially paid £10 for the lens :D
 
Messages
5,585
Edit My Images
Yes
It's just easier to fight the WB in post than faff with changing settings all the time.
If I am in quickly changing situations I will use Auto WB as it gets it pretty close to correct most of the time, and if needs be, fix it in post, but if I am in a specific lighting situation for awhile I will choose an appropriate WB. One second changing the WB when shooting can save 20-30 secs highlighting groups of images to make a global WB change, or changing the WB for each specific image that was wrong.

There are times when I forget to change it back AWB, (to be ready for anything) but on a mirrorless camera that shouldn't happen as often as on a DSLR because you could see an incorrect WB in the viewfinder.

Just trying to offer a solution to one of your occasional problems. :)
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,296
Edit My Images
Yes
received a couple of Fuji UHSII cards yesterday and I tried fast bursts with A7RIII. Not slow at all in fact its pretty quick to get into preview mode. Not sure why people complain about it being slow. Just get fast cards?
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
5,296
Edit My Images
Yes
Wasn't particularly slow tbh. It actually took me a while to fill the buffer in the first place. I am not sure who'd hold the shutter down that long. Normally you'd burst in short periods when you expect some kinda action rather than holding it down?

Not saying it couldnt be faster. Sure it could but it does not seem to be such a big issue.
 
Last edited:
Top