- Messages
- 1,456
- Edit My Images
- No
Not everybody is a wedding photographer and comparing a D750 to an A9 is just silly.Sony A9 Wedding Photographer - 7 Months on....
He came from the Nikon D750.
Not everybody is a wedding photographer and comparing a D750 to an A9 is just silly.Sony A9 Wedding Photographer - 7 Months on....
He came from the Nikon D750.
Not everybody is a wedding photographer and comparing a D750 to an A9 is just silly.
Sony A9 Wedding Photographer - 7 Months on....
He came from the Nikon D750.
https://www.robtarren.co.uk/2018/01/30/sony-a9-wedding-review-6-months-on/
I know, I was just teasing lolI said not everybody is a wedding photographer! lol
You don't need but maybe want..... give in and buy a Sony A7 III, you've got your moneys worth out of the Sony A7Those focus on the eye confetti shots are impressive. I'd have thought that the only way of getting a shot like that would be to manually focus. I can imagine a DSLR being very frustrating for that sort of shot.
All this talk of the A7III is very interesting and tempting so I have to keep reminding myself that I don't need one.
Another thing that's impressed me over the recent pages is the 85mm f1.8 but it's not a focal length I use much and I have 4 manual 85's and a 45mm f1.8 MFT, so again it's something that I don't really need.
You don't need but maybe want..... give in and buy a Sony A7 III, you've got your moneys worth out of the Sony A7
Sony A9 Wedding Photographer - 7 Months on....
He came from the Nikon D750.
https://www.robtarren.co.uk/2018/01/30/sony-a9-wedding-review-6-months-on/
Of course you can compare and that's what many people do..... hence the online reviews.....Can’t compare, it’s 3 x the cost.
That’s like saying ‘I upgraded from a Mercedes to a Ferrari and it’s better’
Fair point - but people make out that there is a vast difference in price - but thats not quite true.
big difference, maybe it has special rare nano crystal particles inside it lolWell...
Sony FE 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 £1199
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM £464
I'm sure the Sony lens is a lovely example of a slow 70-300mm but god damn that's expensive.
Can’t compare, it’s 3 x the cost.
That’s like saying ‘I upgraded from a Mercedes to a Ferrari and it’s better’
There has been plenty of discussion and some say that they work great and in some instances better on Sony bodies because of features like Eye-AF.
Personally I don't think they are as fast as native FE lenses.
I thought you were going to get the FE 70-200mm f4? I have owned this lens and it was tack sharp with great IQ, you could easily crop and retain sharpness.
Do you really need more than 200mm? What's the longer Nikkor you got at the moment?
Yep, take the cost out of it and the Sony A9 is great lolThe cost is just another point for comparison,
The Sony FE 70-200mm f4 is a extremely sharp lens (my copy was) so this helped crop without too much worry about loss of detail.Unless people want to produce an absolutely massive picture and view it very closely or crop like crazy and produce a big final picture I'm pretty sure that 24mp will be enough for most uses and the 40+ mp of the A7R cameras... even more so
The Sony FE 70-200mm f4 is a extremely sharp lens (my copy was) so this helped crop without too much worry about loss of detail.
Have to confess to being tempted by the R3, purely for the joystick and the better eye-AF. But those alone aren't worth the extra for me, as a hobbiest with not enough time to shoot as it is. Couldn't imagine going back to a non-R model, the crop-ability and detail you can get out the shots still blows my mind.
Did you not see the video I posted showing the A7Riii with the Canon 70-200mm f2.8? It was pretty abysmalThere has been plenty of discussion and some say that they work great and in some instances better on Sony bodies because of features like Eye-AF.
Personally I don't think they are as fast as native FE lenses.
I thought you were going to get the FE 70-200mm f4? I have owned this lens and it was tack sharp with great IQ, you could easily crop and retain sharpness.
Do you really need more than 200mm? What's the longer Nikkor you got at the moment?
The benefit with Canon is the 3rd party alternatives which are MUCH cheaperThey have a few?
The 50mm 1.8 looks decent for the money and not far off Nikon 50mm 1.8.
The 70-200 2.8 is on par with Nikon new version price wise
The 28-70 is much cheaper than Nikon kit lenses and meant to be decent enough.
The 70-200 f4 is a bit high on price
The 28mm 2 is cheaper than Nikon 28mm 1.8
I think because there are not really any gen 1 or gen 2 versions of lenses as they are so new, there hold used value.
So Wet have offered me just over £4500 for all of my gear, trouble with that is that it's trade value rather than cash and if I bought UK I'd be even more out of pocket than accepting a lower cash offer and buying grey
What video? I did a whole shoot with the canon 70-200 and it focuses like nativeDid you not see the video I posted showing the A7Riii with the Canon 70-200mm f2.8? It was pretty abysmal
The benefit with Canon is the 3rd party alternatives which are MUCH cheaper
Well...
Sony FE 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 £1199
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM £464
I'm sure the Sony lens is a lovely example of a slow 70-300mm but god damn that's expensive.
So Wet have offered me just over £4500 for all of my gear, trouble with that is that it's trade value rather than cash and if I bought UK I'd be even more out of pocket than accepting a lower cash offer and buying grey
Dslr tech is nonsenseThat's just nonsense!
You hear that.... flap flap flap.... that's the sound of a DSLR mirror flapping about lolDslr tech is nonsense
But in comparison some lenses are pretty equal in price:
YupNot the ones I want though!
Don't get me wrong, I agree the prices are fairly comparable when you compare apples to apples (same kind of performance, age of design etc) but I don't normally buy lenses that soon after they're introduced and the second hand market is that much smaller so it's going to sting more than normal.
Dslr tech is nonsense
From the rumor site...
"1) Sony realizes their menu system needs to be radically overhauled and maybe even re-designed from scratch.
2) The personal preference of that one Sony engineer “would be for a complete re-design based on a new touchscreen interface.” Something like the Hasselblad X1D has."
Read all about it...
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/son...ased-new-touchscreen-interface/#disqus_thread
I can't remember the last time I changed any settings or went through a menu on the back screen as I much prefer doing these things whilst looking at the EFV. I suppose I'm in a minority again but I just don't care about touch screens and menus. At all.
Been waiting for a response from them, just checked my spam and it's gone in there. Needed some details from me so will wait to see what they say.
Not sure I followNo, Toby is wet.
So Wet have offered me just over £4500
Not sure I follow
No, Toby is wet.
Been waiting for a response from them, just checked my spam and it's gone in there. Needed some details from me so will wait to see what they say.
Not sure I follow
The benefit with Canon is the 3rd party alternatives which are MUCH cheaper
nah its just overpricedWell...
Sony FE 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 £1199
Canon EF 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS II USM £464
I'm sure the Sony lens is a lovely example of a slow 70-300mm but god damn that's expensive.
Why have you got 4 if you don't use that FL much? LolThose focus on the eye confetti shots are impressive. I'd have thought that the only way of getting a shot like that would be to manually focus. I can imagine a DSLR being very frustrating for that sort of shot.
All this talk of the A7III is very interesting and tempting so I have to keep reminding myself that I don't need one.
Another thing that's impressed me over the recent pages is the 85mm f1.8 but it's not a focal length I use much and I have 4 manual 85's and a 45mm f1.8 MFT, so again it's something that I don't really need.