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

woof woof said:
When I look at pictures closely I can often see a difference and even in whole pictures sometimes too. MFT may not be lacking as such, it's just not as technically good as FF which may not matter if you can avoid excessive nit picking. The main things for me are a lack of dynamic range against my A7 and ultimate performance at the highest ISO's. The plus things for me are the small camera and lens size and weight as a package and the sheer speed of operation, oh, and the less conspicuousness the small size brings.
Click to expand...
I can’t disagree with the DR and high ISO noise but two of my favourite images are motorsport ones and there’s no difference from the motorsports ones I’ve taken with other gear (y)
 
Not even when you look closely?

If not then I'm happy for you. Looking at my own pictures I do see image quality differences between any of the Panasonic bodies I've owned and my A7. Image quality isn't everything, it's just a part of the package and another thing to consider and there are times I'd choose my MFT over my A7 gear.
 
woof woof said:
Not even when you look closely?

If not then I'm happy for you. Looking at my own pictures I do see image quality differences between any of the Panasonic bodies I've owned and my A7. Image quality isn't everything, it's just a part of the package and another thing to consider and there are times I'd choose my MFT over my A7 gear.
Click to expand...
Not on those specific ones no. Where I see the biggest difference if looking 1:1 is landscapes, FF is noticeably sharper and more detailed, but then at normal viewing there’s little in it (barring DR).

Obviously a lot depends on the lenses, for example I’d say for wildlife my EM1-II with Panny 100-400mm was a match for the D750 with Tamron 150-600mm, but then the Sony 100-400mm bears both of them, which is no surprise really.

The EM1-II was noticeably better than the EM1 though, I could see noise at base ISO with the EM1 if I was slightly heavy handed with the processing.
 
I really liked my Olympus setup but time to let it all go, although the AF is very good my a9mkII is just so much better at tracking BIF I will miss it but another a9mkII will be more handy to me.
Rob.
 
GyRob said:
I really liked my Olympus setup but time to let it all go, although the AF is very good my a9mkII is just so much better at tracking BIF I will miss it but another a9mkII will be more handy to me.
Rob.
Click to expand...
Stop it, I don’t even have one yet :LOL:
 
ancient_mariner said:
I confess to having a new toy.
Opteka 6.5mm f3.5 from CeX. I was listed as Canon, but is actually Nikon fitting. :rolleyes: Full 180 degrees for those silly/atmospheric shots in odd places, and at £62 OK if it doesn't get used too much.
Click to expand...
canon nikon all the same, what's the difference anyway they all take pictures right :p
 
Fred Miranda has posted some initial thoughts on the Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 SE...

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1649771/1#lastmessage

Looking at his comments on performance v the 40mm f1.2 I don't think there's anything significant there for me. So, apart from the difference in focal length and gas I can't see any point in anyone already owning a 40mm f1.2 swapping to the 35mm f1.2. I already have the 35mm f1.4 which can give a funky look at its widest apertures with the wrong subject but is imo perfectly acceptable at more normal apertures.
 
Haha.

Yes there is that.

When I started looking at modern manual lenses I did intend to sell off (or try to sell off) some of my film era ones but that hasn't happened and I've kept them. The new lenses are better in every way and you don't need an adapter either but the older lens are just nice things and selling them would bring in just a little money I'm not missing so why have the hassle of selling? So I've just kept them.

The V 35mm f1.4 earns it's place as it's lovely if funky at it widest apertures, the 40mm f1.2 is bulkier and heavier and not a favourite because of that but it gives a much less funky look at f1.x and gives the look a 40mm f1.2 gives, so that just about earns it's place. The 50mm f2 I just wanted because it's excellent :D

I think buying the 35mm f1.2 would only make sense if I swapped the 40mm f1.2 for a 50mm f1.2 and that would make keeping the 50mm f2 seem a bit silly. If going for the 35mm f1.2 I'd probably still keep the 35mm f1.4 as it's just so small and lovely :D

35mm f1.2, 35mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.2 could make sense for me but to be honest I'm not getting much chance to use the gear at the mo so why bother.
 
A mate of mine shot an engagement session yesterday and the session was at sunset and she shot pretty much everything with the Sigma 24-70.

All of the images were purposely shot backlit and none of them are usable as pretty much every photo suffers really badly with striping. She is an a full scale panic as she isn’t the most technical and she thought that there was a fault with her gear.

I wasn’t aware of this with this lens, I know you can get it a bit with the 85 1.8. I did a bit of digging this morning and apparently this is a really common issue with this lens.

Anyone here have the Siggy 24-70 and noticed this?
 
f/2.8 said:
A mate of mine shot an engagement session yesterday and the session was at sunset and she shot pretty much everything with the Sigma 24-70.

All of the images were purposely shot backlit and none of them are usable as pretty much every photo suffers really badly with striping. She is an a full scale panic as she isn’t the most technical and she thought that there was a fault with her gear.

I wasn’t aware of this with this lens, I know you can get it a bit with the 85 1.8. I did a bit of digging this morning and apparently this is a really common issue with this lens.

Anyone here have the Siggy 24-70 and noticed this?
Click to expand...

That's a shame, as I like to shoot like that. Heard good things about this lens.
 
f/2.8 said:
A mate of mine shot an engagement session yesterday and the session was at sunset and she shot pretty much everything with the Sigma 24-70.

All of the images were purposely shot backlit and none of them are usable as pretty much every photo suffers really badly with striping. She is an a full scale panic as she isn’t the most technical and she thought that there was a fault with her gear.

I wasn’t aware of this with this lens, I know you can get it a bit with the 85 1.8. I did a bit of digging this morning and apparently this is a really common issue with this lens.

Anyone here have the Siggy 24-70 and noticed this?
Click to expand...

if you have some samples may be we can look at fixing it in post
 
FWIW when using the 24-105 in compressed RAW mode I had a lot of problems with banding in the sky if shooting against the light. Always shoot uncompressed now and don't see the problem any more.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I love to see the images too, I tried googling "sony sigma 24-70 art striping problem" and found nothing, only 2 Pages of results.

What should I search for?
Click to expand...

Have a look on the Sony Facebook groups quite a few people seem to be having the same issue with the Sigma 24-70.
 
f/2.8 said:
Have a look on the Sony Facebook groups quite a few people seem to be having the same issue with the Sigma 24-70.
Click to expand...

You are going to have to help me out here, I am only members of 2 Sony Groups.

Only find references to Sony 85FE, 135G and 100-400GM. Since the lens only came out like Jan/Feb this year...I didn't bother looking at threads that are older.

YdlyBEP.png


uayudDy.png
 
Raymond Lin said:
You are going to have to help me out here, I am only members of 2 Sony Groups.

Only find references to Sony 85FE, 135G and 100-400GM. Since the lens only came out like Jan/Feb this year...I didn't bother looking at threads that are older.

YdlyBEP.png


uayudDy.png
Click to expand...

Just as an example had a quick look there on one of the larger groups and this was the first post I found. Although it’s been mentioned in a few other groups as well.EAE1B79C-FFEB-4313-8044-A49DB6D2E501.jpeg

Also found this.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=tKvgwQ_oJ-U
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Just as an example had a quick look there on one of the larger groups and this was the first post I found. Although it’s been mentioned in a few other groups as well.View attachment 284142

Also found this.
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=tKvgwQ_oJ-U
Click to expand...

That video is April 2018....I haven't watched all of it but does he have a time machine?

So so far there is references to it from 85, 135, 100-400 and 24-70...it sounds like a sensor issue under certain conditions (no idea what people are shooting in - RAW, Jpeg?).

My conclusion is that nothing to worry about and not a specific lens issue if it's on all these lenses...i have the Sigma lens and I just looked through the imagines I took in Korea and Japan and can't find anything.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
That video is April 2018....I haven't watched all of it but does he have a time machine?

So so far there is references to it from 85, 135, 100-400 and 24-70...it sounds like a sensor issue under certain conditions (no idea what people are shooting in - RAW, Jpeg?).

My conclusion is that nothing to worry about and not a specific lens issue if it's on all these lenses...i have the Sigma lens and I just looked through the imagines I took in Korea and Japan and can't find anything.
Click to expand...

Try shooting shooting some backlit portraits with it. I seen images from the engagement session I mentioned around 200 or so were taken with the Sigma and about 30 with the 55mm. All of the Signa images had striping and all of the 55 images where fine.

Same lighting conditions etc. Like I said earier I then looked on a few Facebook groups and came across quite a few people have similar issues with the sigma lens.

Maybe not a huge issue if you don’t shoot a lot of backlit portraits.
 
f/2.8 said:
Try shooting shooting some backlit portraits with it. I seen images from the engagement session I mentioned around 200 or so were taken with the Sigma and about 30 with the 55mm. All of the Signa images had striping and all of the 55 images where fine.

Same lighting conditions etc. Like I said earier I then looked on a few Facebook groups and came across quite a few people have similar issues with the sigma lens.

Maybe not a huge issue if you don’t shoot a lot of backlit portraits.
Click to expand...
Can you post some examples?
 
f/2.8 said:
Try shooting shooting some backlit portraits with it. I seen images from the engagement session I mentioned around 200 or so were taken with the Sigma and about 30 with the 55mm. All of the Signa images had striping and all of the 55 images where fine.

Same lighting conditions etc. Like I said earier I then looked on a few Facebook groups and came across quite a few people have similar issues with the sigma lens.

Maybe not a huge issue if you don’t shoot a lot of backlit portraits.
Click to expand...

brb
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top