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

T_J_G said:
Yes, guilty of this. Time to crack on with the craft. This chat has lots about gear but not many photos posted.
Click to expand...
problem solved :D

46012314564_93b6d90146_b.jpg
 
T_J_G said:
Yes, guilty of this. Time to crack on with the craft. This chat has lots about gear but not many photos posted.
Click to expand...

It's not a dig. The best advice I was ever given was:

'Don't think you need every lens and every focal length covered - everyone does and you really don't. Use as few as you can. Learn those focal lengths and you'll compose the shot before you have the camera up.'

He was so right. After some months of bearing that in mind (this is about 10 years ago) I sold a lot of lenses and settled on 3 or 4 and have done every since. It makes life much easier (and more cost-effective).
 
Radiohead said:
Do you not all find this constant second-guessing about what lens you’re using/buying/missing exhausting?

Where’s the emphasis on the craft?
Click to expand...

There's that too but for some of us the kit is just a part of the enjoyment and mostly innocent fun and it does add to the enjoyment for some of us and it must be a part of it for you too or you wouldn't be reading and posting in a gear thread in a gear part of the forum. Other parts of the forum are more picture or craft biased but here it's a mix of the craft and the gear.

Some people buy watches... some suits... some trainers and some sad b@st@rds are into mobile phones :jawdrop: Give me cars or camera gear anytime over phones or God forbid... games and gaming consoles.

You get this split in any art, craft or interest so if any of it bothers or exhausts you just skip over it.
 
Last edited:
Radiohead said:
It's not a dig. The best advice I was ever given was:

'Don't think you need every lens and every focal length covered - everyone does and you really don't. Use as few as you can. Learn those focal lengths and you'll compose the shot before you have the camera up.'

He was so right. After some months of bearing that in mind (this is about 10 years ago) I sold a lot of lenses and settled on 3 or 4 and have done every since. It makes life much easier (and more cost-effective).
Click to expand...

I imagine that's very good advice to be honest.
 
It's one way to go but there are many other ways. I used to have a fixed lens fixed everything Kodak and I took it everywhere for something like 20 years but these days get a lot of enjoyment from buying cheap old lenses and looking at the differences between them in pictures. Sometimes the differences are subtle and sometimes they hit you in the face. That might not be pure photography but who gives a flying :D I'd rather do something that's fun until I'm sick of it and want to do something else than stick to what could be seen limiting.

It takes all sorts :D
 
Radiohead said:
It's not a dig. The best advice I was ever given was:

'Don't think you need every lens and every focal length covered - everyone does and you really don't. Use as few as you can. Learn those focal lengths and you'll compose the shot before you have the camera up.'

He was so right. After some months of bearing that in mind (this is about 10 years ago) I sold a lot of lenses and settled on 3 or 4 and have done every since. It makes life much easier (and more cost-effective).
Click to expand...
.
I got it wasn’t a dig, I’ve only got a 24/35 & 85.

When I first got into photography I thought you needed everything covered but I have real limited use for them. A 135 would be good but wouldn’t add a great deal to my output.
 
Radiohead said:
It's not a dig. The best advice I was ever given was:

'Don't think you need every lens and every focal length covered - everyone does and you really don't. Use as few as you can. Learn those focal lengths and you'll compose the shot before you have the camera up.'

He was so right. After some months of bearing that in mind (this is about 10 years ago) I sold a lot of lenses and settled on 3 or 4 and have done every since. It makes life much easier (and more cost-effective).
Click to expand...

Same really, I used to buy and sell so many lenses, trying all different focal lengths but now settled on my 3 favourite, all be it 2 of the budget versions! 28/50 and 70-200.
 
woof woof said:
There's that too but for some of us the kit is just a part of the enjoyment and mostly innocent fun and it does add to the enjoyment for some of us and it must be a part of it for you too or you wouldn't be reading and posting in a gear thread in a gear part of the forum. Other parts of the forum are more picture or craft biased but here it's a mix of the craft and the gear.

Some people buy watches... some suits... some trainers and some sad b@st@rds are into mobile phones :jawdrop: Give me cars or camera gear anytime over phones or God forbid... games and gaming consoles.

You get this split in any art, craft or interest so if any of it bothers or exhausts you just skip over it.
Click to expand...

I never knew we had so much in common Alan ;)

I'd say there were three aspects to 'enthusiast' photography - the gear, creative craft techniques, and the subject/light. They all work together of course, but some of us exist predominantly in only one and get along just fine with that enjoyment. I'm not sure why that should bother anyone else and if we end up with a decent image, that's almost a bonus - it's been a great ride along the way.

I count myself lucky as having a foot in all three aspects, and the emphasis can shift according to how much spare cash I've got, or spare time, or what picture-taking opportunities come my way. It's kept me happily engaged, and employed, since a teenager.
 
A key part of this thread is that it's about a new and rapidly evolving range of cameras and lenses, so there's going to be a constant stream of updates & new gear. It doesn't happen so much with Canikon because there's been relatively little innovation with those companies for a long time until the new mirrorless range appeared.

Personally I wouldn't want to *live* in this thread, but it's a good place to discuss a single dimension out of many regarding photography. Once I get my new A7 I expect to settle down with about 4-5 regular lenses for the next 3-5 years.
 
Speaking of new kit, my Sigma 16/1.4 has just arrived and I’m happily impressed with its’ performance. AF is easily as quick/silent as the Zeiss 55 and the rendering looks good too. I’ve literally just tried it around the house for 15 minutes so nothing much to show but I’m happy with it.

I’ve got the 30/1.4 arriving on Monday, so that will be my 2 lens setup with the A6500 for a while, staring with a holiday to Florida in 4 weeks’ :0)

IMG_2767.JPG

ORG_DSC05959.JPG
 
stevelmx5 said:
Speaking of new kit, my Sigma 16/1.4 has just arrived and I’m happily impressed with its’ performance. AF is easily as quick/silent as the Zeiss 55 and the rendering looks good too. I’ve literally just tried it around the house for 15 minutes so nothing much to show but I’m happy with it.

I’ve got the 30/1.4 arriving on Monday, so that will be my 2 lens setup with the A6500 for a while, staring with a holiday to Florida in 4 weeks’ :0)

View attachment 238723

View attachment 238724
Click to expand...

Nice setup, perfect FLs, will you also get the 56?
 
T_J_G said:
.
I got it wasn’t a dig, I’ve only got a 24/35 & 85.

When I first got into photography I thought you needed everything covered but I have real limited use for them. A 135 would be good but wouldn’t add a great deal to my output.
Click to expand...

Same here. I’m 35/55/85 for everything. Got a 24 recently to spend some time getting to know that fl better. 35 is my comfort range where I visualise before holding the camera up.
Plans for a 135 and a cheap 14 but they won’t be used that much, a bit of fun.
 
Last edited:
Radiohead said:
Do you not all find this constant second-guessing about what lens you’re using/buying/missing exhausting?

Where’s the emphasis on the craft?
Click to expand...

There are plenty of other threads on the forum to discuss photography. This thread is in the equipment section of the forum to specifically discuss Sony equipment, would be a bit odd surely if that wasn’t what was being discussed?
 
twist said:
Nice setup, perfect FLs, will you also get the 56?
Click to expand...

I was torn between the 30/56 as I previously shot with a 50/1.8 entirely on my A6000. After spending 18 months shooting a 50/1.8 on my A7 I’ve got more used to the slightly wider FOV so decided to go with the 30 instead for now. I’m tempted to add an 85/1.8 for longer portraits but, for the holiday at least, I’m sticking to just 2 lenses.

Although, saying that, we’re staying in the Animal Kingdom so I could do with a 55-210 for some safari shots so am looking to borrow one rather than buy as it won’t get much use after that.
 
I am very impressed by the Sony 24-105mmG overall. First lens I am able to get ~5 stops of stabilization with on Sony. I got ~3 stops with tamron 28-75mm.
 
nandbytes said:
I am very impressed by the Sony 24-105mmG overall. First lens I am able to get ~5 stops of stabilization with on Sony. I got ~3 stops with tamron 28-75mm.
Click to expand...

I really liked the idea of that lens, but just couldn't justify the outlay + A7III.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I really liked the idea of that lens, but just couldn't justify the outlay + A7III.
Click to expand...
I felt the same way for a while. Paying a premium for a f4 zoom felt a bit odd, especially over the tamron which I had and liked.
But it's an excellent lens and in many ways better than tamron unless you need/want f2.8
 
The 24-105 is a great lens and I would have definitely kept it if I hadn’t been spoilt by the 24-70 GM. In the end I decided the 2.8 was worth more to me than the reach and weight.

I’ve just pulled the trigger on a 24 GM. I wanted to buy UK stock but at just over a grand for grey I couldn’t resist. I think I’m done with GAS for now!
 
nandbytes said:
I felt the same way for a while. Paying a premium for a f4 zoom felt a bit odd, especially over the tamron which I had and liked.
But it's an excellent lens and in many ways better than tamron unless you need/want f2.8
Click to expand...

I don't really get the need for f2.8 in a zoom like that. It's not really a big enough aperture for great light gathering or amazing bokeh/separation, it makes the lens larger and heavier than it needs to be and for most applications the lens will be between f5.6 and 16 anyway. I'd much prefer f4 or f3.5 to f4.5 and if possible have greater & more even sharpness, higher flare resistance and a flatter field. If I wanted shallow DoF and pretty bokeh then I'd normally choose a prime. Sure it's a more flexible jack of more trades, but having a super-high peak of sharpness at f11 is a better trade for a walkabout landscape lens.

It strikes me from the lens tests I've read for Sony FE lenses that they've prioritised centre sharpness at the widest apertures and generally forgotten about edge-edge and increasing sharpness at smaller apertures in many of the lower cost lenses.
 
Woof woof, my Nikon friend has a collection like that despite occasional rationalisation of stock.
And 13 camera bodies. And he still has gas. Makes me feel normal
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
I don't really get the need for f2.8 in a zoom like that. It's not really a big enough aperture for great light gathering or amazing bokeh/separation, it makes the lens larger and heavier than it needs to be and for most applications the lens will be between f5.6 and 16 anyway. I'd much prefer f4 or f3.5 to f4.5 and if possible have greater & more even sharpness, higher flare resistance and a flatter field. If I wanted shallow DoF and pretty bokeh then I'd normally choose a prime. Sure it's a more flexible jack of more trades, but having a super-high peak of sharpness at f11 is a better trade for a walkabout landscape lens.

It strikes me from the lens tests I've read for Sony FE lenses that they've prioritised centre sharpness at the widest apertures and generally forgotten about edge-edge and increasing sharpness at smaller apertures in many of the lower cost lenses.
Click to expand...

Weddings and sports? I’m always usually at 2.8 for indoor sports and the guy I shoot with sometimes uses a 24-70 2.8 when too close for a 70-200.

Did a wedding once in my D610 and primary lens was the 28-75 2.8 Tamron and due to the dim light it was for the most part at 2.8 indoors.

Obviously they are specific circumstances but I can see why they are needed.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I don't really get the need for f2.8 in a zoom like that. It's not really a big enough aperture for great light gathering or amazing bokeh/separation, it makes the lens larger and heavier than it needs to be and for most applications the lens will be between f5.6 and 16 anyway. I'd much prefer f4 or f3.5 to f4.5 and if possible have greater & more even sharpness, higher flare resistance and a flatter field. If I wanted shallow DoF and pretty bokeh then I'd normally choose a prime. Sure it's a more flexible jack of more trades, but having a super-high peak of sharpness at f11 is a better trade for a walkabout landscape lens.

It strikes me from the lens tests I've read for Sony FE lenses that they've prioritised centre sharpness at the widest apertures and generally forgotten about edge-edge and increasing sharpness at smaller apertures in many of the lower cost lenses.
Click to expand...

The f2.8 lenses help for shooting indoors, action and in low light. People normally don't buy f2.8 lenses to shoot at f5.6-16. The bokeh is dependent on various factors such as focal length, focus distance, distance between subject and background. Not just the aperture. You can get decent bokeh at f2.8 on a FF sensor :)

Actually one thing I don't get is the need for flat field. It's needed for macro lenses and long telephotos, otherwise things one would shoot in real world are all in 3D and not flat, unless it's a brickwall ;)

As for your second point the only Sony FE lens I can think of matching your description is Sony ziess 24-70 f. the Sony 24-240mm is also the same only at @24mm but it's a superzoom and you don't buy that for it's amazing optical qualities :p
The rest of the lenses are either already pretty sharp wide open or sharpen up stopped down. Any other FE lenses you don't feel do this?
 
Last edited:
Was thinking of trying to get into actor headshots, have the 85 1.4 and 70-200 GM, but was thinking I wonder if it’s a perfect job for the 135 1.8!
 
I know the 50mm gets some bad press for its AF speed but in the A9 it’s pretty damn quick!
 
dancook said:
Was thinking of trying to get into actor headshots, have the 85 1.4 and 70-200 GM, but was thinking I wonder if it’s a perfect job for the 135 1.8!
Click to expand...
Later this month I intend going into London with my Sigma version to get some similar headshots of politicians involved in this brexit stuff. I did the same in the 2010 election aftermath and it was very rewarding photographically.
 
Amazon have the A7III for £1726.21 it is U.K stock as well as it's direct from Amazon not a third party. Also available for £345.24 a month for 5 months, so 5 months interest free credit.
 
f/2.8 said:
Amazon have the A7III for £1726.21 it is U.K stock as well as it's direct from Amazon not a third party. Also available for £345.24 a month for 5 months, so 5 months interest free credit.
Click to expand...

is Sony dropping prices to basically compete with R/RP and Z6 at the same time? lol
 
nandbytes said:
is Sony dropping prices to basically compete with R/RP and Z6 at the same time? lol
Click to expand...

Doubt it, only that price on Amazon prob only for today they have done that a few times.

Don't think Sony are worried about trying to compete on price with the R/RP and Z6.
 
nandbytes said:
About the same price as A7III and for some reason you can't nikon z6 body only... you have to buy it with ftz adapter o_O
Click to expand...

It definitely says something when the A7 III has been out over a year and has a RRP of £2000 and the EOS R has been out just a few months and has an RRP of £2350
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top