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

Messages
2,182
Name
Russell
Edit My Images
No
OK, as the Johnny Nash song goes 'There are more questions than answers' so next question.
A9 users do you use a battery grip or an ArcaSwiss L bracket to give a little more grip on the camera body.
Just trying to get together what else I may need to buy as extras if any.
Thankyou,
Russ.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
9,797
Edit My Images
Yes
OK, as the Johnny Nash song goes 'There are more questions than answers' so next question.
A9 users do you use a battery grip or an ArcaSwiss L bracket to give a little more grip on the camera body.
Just trying to get together what else I may need to buy as extras if any.
Thankyou,
Russ.
not an A9 user but since getting A7RIII I prefer L-plates to grips. The bodies are bigger with plenty of battery life. L-plate allows me to easily compose portrait style.

Of course you go grip+l-plate too.....
 
Messages
3,525
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Sorry if this has already been posted - the rumour site has a picture of the Tamron 28-200mm on an A7x...

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/lea...00mm-fe-lens-image-shipment-start-is-june-25/

I think that's make a nice day out and holiday lens, add a fast prime and maybe that's a lot of things covered :D

Anyone interested?
I found the Sony 24-240mm to be awesome for our family holiday to NYC (with a 3 year old, so carrying a bag full of gear wasn't entirely practical) but a bit slow in some situations. I'd happily trade the 4mm at the wide end for a slightly brighter lens.

I've been so impressed with the 28-75 and 70-180mm (especially as 99% of my day to day photography has been with primes until now), so I'll happily add this once a) price drops a little, and b) we can start travelling again.

Either way, awesome for the system as a whole that another third party (albeit one linked to Sony) is doing well and giving us more choice. We just need a super tele alternative now.
 
Last edited:
Messages
4,741
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
OK, as the Johnny Nash song goes 'There are more questions than answers' so next question.
A9 users do you use a battery grip or an ArcaSwiss L bracket to give a little more grip on the camera body.
Just trying to get together what else I may need to buy as extras if any.
Thankyou,
Russ.
Neither I use a half leather case thing it adds about 4 cms to the base of the camera and that is perfect for me.
 
Messages
8,336
Edit My Images
No
OK, as the Johnny Nash song goes 'There are more questions than answers' so next question.
A9 users do you use a battery grip or an ArcaSwiss L bracket to give a little more grip on the camera body.
Just trying to get together what else I may need to buy as extras if any.
Thankyou,
Russ.
I use a battery grip mostly
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
24,930
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Welcome Jonney. You're regular input and pictures are missed in this thread.
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
24,930
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
The rumor sites are thinking there's an EVF-less Nikon FF mirrorless coming.

That wouldn't interest me as really don't get on with back screen shooting. It could lead to a more compact and cheaper camera though.

Would anyone be interested in an A7x without a EVF?

Mock up pictures of a possible Nikon without an EVF...

http://thenewcamera.com/nikon-z5-coming-without-viewfinder-rumor/
 
Last edited:
Messages
17,653
Edit My Images
No
Interesting. I have the Sony 100-400mm but if this is significantly lighter and comparable IQ I could be interested. I'd be 'happy' to lose the 1/3 stop at the long end for significant weight saving.
I may be the only owner here at the moment, but the Tamron 70-180mm 2.8 has a recall for what appears to be a small number of units...

https://www.tamron.com/news/press_release/20200602.html

Mine is fine, thankfully.
It's been mentioned already but no harm it raising awareness again. Glad to hear that yours in unaffected too (y)
 
Messages
1,679
Name
Robert
Edit My Images
Yes
I use a battery grip on my a9 mkii but a little grip extender on my ar 4 not sure if they do one for the a9 but it works very well .
Rob
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
24,930
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Not too bad. My eyes aren't even sore looking at those :D These days I only wear socks when I'm going out. Indoors I'm barefoot.

PS.
Do some sweeping up Jonney, there's a good chap :D

DSC00511.jpg
 
Last edited:
OP
woof woof
Messages
24,930
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
Socks and sliders? Where's the fashion police? :police::police::police::ROFLMAO:
I was just admiring those... and Googling them and I'm seriously tempted. Swimming pool sandles? I'm wearing a pair of those thin white things you get in hotel rooms. For outdoors I have a pair of those plastic ones with holes in.
 
Messages
6,127
Name
Trevor
Edit My Images
No
I was just admiring those... and Googling them and I'm seriously tempted. Swimming pool sandles? I'm wearing a pair of those thin white things you get in hotel rooms. For outdoors I have a pair of those plastic ones with holes in.
Too much information..
 
Messages
17,653
Edit My Images
No
I was just admiring those... and Googling them and I'm seriously tempted. Swimming pool sandles? I'm wearing a pair of those thin white things you get in hotel rooms. For outdoors I have a pair of those plastic ones with holes in.
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Messages
991
Name
Ant
Edit My Images
No
The rumor sites are thinking there's an EVF-less Nikon FF mirrorless coming.

That wouldn't interest me as really don't get on with back screen shooting. It could lead to a more compact and cheaper camera though.

Would anyone be interested in an A7x without a EVF?

Mock up pictures of a possible Nikon without an EVF...

http://thenewcamera.com/nikon-z5-coming-without-viewfinder-rumor/
I shoot almost exclusively through the EVF so I would hate the awkwardness of having to use a screen.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
9,797
Edit My Images
Yes
Interesting. I have the Sony 100-400mm but if this is significantly lighter and comparable IQ I could be interested. I'd be 'happy' to lose the 1/3 stop at the long end for significant weight saving.
Certainly caught my attention too. I really wish they make it compatible with TCs.
The current DSLR versions of 100-400C aren't as good as FE or EF 100-400mm. So remains to be seen if they improve the design.
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
24,930
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I shoot almost exclusively through the EVF so I would hate the awkwardness of having to use a screen.
Yup. The same for me. I don't like holding a thing at half arms length in front of my face and jabbing at it with a finger plus there's the problem of seeing it in sunlight and possible stability problems too. All in all I don't like it.

I can see how it could be ok for vloggers and the like but a swivelling screen to satisfy them could add the cost that an EVF saves. Anyway, if it happens we'll see how well it sells for Nikon. I haven't seen any rumours of a Sony EVF-less yet.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
9,797
Edit My Images
Yes
I think Sony dumped EVF-less mirrorless or EVF-less bodies in general. They stopped A5XXX line. All the RX series now have EVF.
I think the ZV1 is the only recent body without one but that's because its intended for a different audience.
 
Messages
1,511
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
The rumor sites are thinking there's an EVF-less Nikon FF mirrorless coming.

That wouldn't interest me as really don't get on with back screen shooting. It could lead to a more compact and cheaper camera though.

Would anyone be interested in an A7x without a EVF?

Mock up pictures of a possible Nikon without an EVF...

http://thenewcamera.com/nikon-z5-coming-without-viewfinder-rumor/
Nikon obviously listening to those who say they don't like an EVF :LOL:
 
Messages
8,336
Edit My Images
No
I was just admiring those... and Googling them and I'm seriously tempted. Swimming pool sandles? I'm wearing a pair of those thin white things you get in hotel rooms. For outdoors I have a pair of those plastic ones with holes in.
Yea swimming pool saddles, bought it just before lockdown for swimming.. Obviously have not used it for its intented purpose lol
 
Messages
16,072
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
Sorry if this has already been posted - the rumour site has a picture of the Tamron 28-200mm on an A7x...

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/lea...00mm-fe-lens-image-shipment-start-is-june-25/

I think that's make a nice day out and holiday lens, add a fast prime and maybe that's a lot of things covered :D

Anyone interested?
We'll just have to wait & see what the image quality is like, but it's really not a lens I'm likely to give up the 24-105 for. As already said, this 28mm break point for Tamron lenses is really irritating - this isn't 1985 any more.
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
24,930
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I'd imagine being 28mm rather than 24mm helps to keep the size, weight and costs down and of course the more you try and do the more the possible pitfalls and compromises and 24mm may just be a bit hopeful a target to aim for at the performance and price point they're going for.
 
Messages
16,072
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
I'd imagine being 28mm rather than 24mm helps to keep the size, weight and costs down and of course the more you try and do the more the possible pitfalls and compromises and 24mm may just be a bit hopeful a target to aim for at the performance and price point they're going for.
I agree for this superzoom, but for the other lenses - I agree that it lets then keep size (and cost of manufacture) down while maintaining a level of quality, but the FLs don't fit what I want as a potential customer. I would DEFINITELY prefer a decently sharp 16-35 f4 than 17-28 f2.8 for example.
 
Messages
4,741
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
I agree for this superzoom, but for the other lenses - I agree that it lets then keep size (and cost of manufacture) down while maintaining a level of quality, but the FLs don't fit what I want as a potential customer. I would DEFINITELY prefer a decently sharp 16-35 f4 than 17-28 f2.8 for example.
You aren’t the only customer around I much prefer the 17-28mm f/2.8’s I have now to the 16-35 f/4’s we had before.
 
Messages
17,653
Edit My Images
No
I'd imagine being 28mm rather than 24mm helps to keep the size, weight and costs down and of course the more you try and do the more the possible pitfalls and compromises and 24mm may just be a bit hopeful a target to aim for at the performance and price point they're going for.
It’s more understandable with the 28-200mm, but the 28-75mm is disappointing. By all accounts it’s one of the best performing short zooms, but as mentioned it’s off my radar because of the focal length chosen. I’d rather them make it a 24-65mm if it’s about weight saving.
 
Messages
991
Name
Ant
Edit My Images
No
Have any of these cheap 'superzooms' ever been good right through the focal range?
 
Messages
991
Name
Ant
Edit My Images
No
Top