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

robj20 said:
Are you tempted?
Click to expand...

To be honest, the A7iii was the first body that really caught my attention throughout the whole A7 releases. I don't need the 9, I don't want big R megapixels.... Etc etc If I had to buy a body tomorrow, it could well now be the A7c..... I do like the look of it, the rangefinder style doesn't bother me, the lack of EVF hump makes bagging it easier for me...

I'm not going to say yes. But if I had to say yes to something....
 
LeeRatters said:
To be honest, the A7iii was the first body that really caught my attention throughout the whole A7 releases. I don't need the 9, I don't want big R megapixels.... Etc etc If I had to buy a body tomorrow, it could well now be the A7c..... I do like the look of it, the rangefinder style doesn't bother me, the lack of EVF hump makes bagging it easier for me...

I'm not going to say yes. But if I had to say yes to something....
Click to expand...

Personally, I love the rangefinder EVF and wouldn't be without it now. It feels much nicer and totally natural having it at the left end of the camera. Less of my face is blocked and I can occassionally open my left eye to spy what's coming into view.
 
I wouldn't be without my 42mp on my a7Riii - it makes getting a nice close up of distant wildlife, a tad easier - being able to crop in PP has its advantage's :)
 
on the A7iii what focus made do you normally use, i have just bought it and having a play with it at the moment
 
Sharps said:
on the A7iii what focus made do you normally use, i have just bought it and having a play with it at the moment
Click to expand...

For people it’s eye AF. Otherwise I shoot often in single point, regularly wide open. Actually even when stopped down I’ll still use it. Always AF-C
 
Merlin5 said:
Personally, I love the rangefinder EVF and wouldn't be without it now. It feels much nicer and totally natural having it at the left end of the camera. Less of my face is blocked and I can occassionally open my left eye to spy what's coming into view.
Click to expand...
I'm left eye dominant, so rangefinders don't work so well.
 
We done a local woodland walk today. Took longer than we thought, but with two people taking photos.... Even the dog was whining :ROFLMAO: So late the missus started dinner and I had to bath the dog :rolleyes:

I've got photos from the other week I've not posted yet. Ones from last Friday in LR. Ones from Monday still on the camera. Plus a few today.....
 
LeeRatters said:
I've got photos from the other week I've not posted yet. Ones from last Friday in LR. Ones from Monday still on the camera. Plus a few today.....
Click to expand...

I haven't uploaded anything since coming home from Greece in September. [emoji849] I've got a bunch of autumn shots that are all too late now. [emoji853]

OTOH I have almost finished doing the Greek pictures. [emoji4]
 
I asked a lady walking in the park today if I could photo her lovely Scottish Deerhound. :) I realised after that I had my shutter speed at 1/2000 and so these are at 12,800 ISO! Well, I guess they haven't come out too noisy.

Scottish Deerhound 1 by Merlin 5, on Flickr


Scottish Deerhound 2 by Merlin 5, on Flickr
 
nandbytes said:
Very interesting lens for APS-C users
Constant f2.8 all the way to 70mm :eek:

LEAKED: First images of the new Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 APS-C E-mount lens – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

@Merlin5 may be one for you :D
Click to expand...

Oh that definitely does interest me! With VC built in and up to 70mm and a constant f2.8 that's a 16-55 killer. I'd love to know what the price will be though. The 16-55mm is too much for me at the moment at £839. I would expect the Tamron to be the same or more.
 
Merlin5 said:
Oh that definitely does interest me! With VC built in and up to 70mm and a constant f2.8 that's a 16-55 killer. I'd love to know what the price will be though. The 16-55mm is too much for me at the moment at £839. I would expect the Tamron to be the same or more.
Click to expand...

i imagine they'll price it less than sony lens option.

robj20 said:
Exact same lens for full frame would be nice.
Click to expand...
would be huge :D
 
nandbytes said:
i imagine they'll price it less than sony lens option.
Click to expand...

That would be very tempting. I know that Tamron have very nice competitive prices, so if that came in at around say £600 I think it would be a no brainer. Meanwhile though, I'm still contemplating the Sigma 56mm F1.4 which gives me 85mm in FF reach and is even better for low light on aps-c. Whether I could afford both is another question!
 
Merlin5 said:
That would be very tempting. I know that Tamron have very nice competitive prices, so if that came in at around say £600 I think it would be a no brainer. Meanwhile though, I'm still contemplating the Sigma 56mm F1.4 which gives me 85mm in FF reach and is even better for low light on aps-c. Whether I could afford both is another question!
Click to expand...

judging by the pricing of their other zooms i am guessing it'll be around £700-800 for UK stock. probably means you can eventually get it at £600 if you grey import.
that's just pure speculation.
 
I thought this was quite impressive - before and after the crop.
I took this shot on the A73 with the FE 200-600mm using APS-C mode, so an effective range of 900mm.
Although old - it must be an impressive sensor, surely?

A7300823 - 2020-11-23 at 12-19-18.jpg

TopRobin.jpg
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
judging by the pricing of their other zooms i am guessing it'll be around £700-800 for UK stock. probably means you can eventually get it at £600 if you grey import.
that's just pure speculation.
Click to expand...

Grey import.. I would never do such a thing. :exit: :D

I got a couple of moon shots yesterday, one of which was taken before 3.30pm!


Afternoon Moon by
Merlin 5, on Flickr


Half moon by
Merlin 5, on Flickr
 
GreenNinja67 said:
The moon at night shot's either very grainy or has some artifacts ruining the sharpness.

You don't need a high SO for the moon.

Try it again at lowest ISO on a tripod
Click to expand...

Hi Terry, thanks for the pointers. It was on a tripod and I set the self timer for 5 seconds. I've actually got a couple of other unprocessed raw files that were both shot at 1/200 shutter and 200 ISO F11 which I guess I should have used instead. However, if I zoom in on them at 2:1 I can still see grain in the dark patches of the moon. I had a similar problem when i first took moon photos with my Canon. And my poor processing is probably highlighting it more. When I use noise reduction it makes the craters look weird. So something I'm doing a bit wrong. Maybe you can see the grain in this screenshot? Hmm, it's not quite as visible on the screenshot as in lightroom, but it's certainly there. I can certainly try shooting 100 ISO to see if it avoids grain.

Moon grain.png
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Of course you do, the looney 11 rule :D

en.m.wikipedia.org

Looney 11 rule - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

Though strictly speaking you could shoot it at f2.8 lol
Click to expand...

Yep that's what I was going by, the looney 11 rule. Well I've just been outside and of course it's BBM (brass bloody monkeys) :D . Set the tripod up and I decided to try f6.3 and some bracketed shots. Looking at my camera I've got three shots at f6.3 100 ISO at 1/125, 1/60 and 1/30. Looks pretty good on the camera screen but I'll see now what it looks like in lightroom. If there's still grain then I'm at a loss as to how to avoid that. The only thing I remember being told once was not to shoot the moon above buildings and rooftops because of atmospheric something or other. Whether that would create noise I've no idea.
 
Merlin5 said:
Yep that's what I was going by, the looney 11 rule. Well I've just been outside and of course it's BBM (brass bloody monkeys) :D . Set the tripod up and I decided to try f6.3 and some bracketed shots. Looking at my camera I've got three shots at f6.3 100 ISO at 1/125, 1/60 and 1/30. Looks pretty good on the camera screen but I'll see now what it looks like in lightroom. If there's still grain then I'm at a loss as to how to avoid that. The only thing I remember being told once was not to shoot the moon above buildings and rooftops because of atmospheric something or other. Whether that would create noise I've no idea.
Click to expand...

f11 shouldn't give you grain but could be heading needlessly into diffraction. Underexposing could give you noise. I'd maybe recommend using whatever aperture you think your lens is best at and trying not to under expose the image and trying not to boost the exposure post capture.

Other than that. It looks nice on screen.
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
Looking at the histogram it's underexposed by a fair amount.

I'd use F8 and manual and keep shooting until you get a good exposure.

Under exposure will highlight any noise apparent.


Also try stacking multiple images as below.

[url=https://flic.kr/p/2iLonAV]Moon - 8 shot stack by Terence Rees, on Flickr[/URL]
Click to expand...

Awesome photo, Terry. That's what I want mine to look like. I see what you mean about the histogram. So that's the key then, i'm underexposing and creating noise. I'm just currently processing mine and will be interested on your thoughts when I finish it and post it here to see if it's improved or not. I decided to process just the middle shot of my bracket. Does my histogram in this screenshot look correct or still not quite there?

Moon processing .png
 
You've got more information in the lights (right of the image) so should be better.

For more info on my shot that was an 8 shot stack from my A7Rii attached to my 8" reflector telescope so it was effectively a 1200mm teleohoto lens (even if it was just a big mirror)
 
GreenNinja67 said:
You've got more information in the lights (right of the image) so should be better.

For more info on my shot that was an 8 shot stack from my A7Rii attached to my 8" reflector telescope so it was effectively a 1200mm teleohoto lens (even if it was just a big mirror)
Click to expand...

Oh nice, you have a telescope. 1200m, that's more than twice my reach.

I'm going to try an 8 shot stack, I've watched a couple of tutorials how to stack them between LR and PS and back to LR. It'll also be the first time I've used the interval shoot function on the Sony. I've just set shooting start time to 5 seconds, shooting interval to 3 seconds, and number of shots 8. I'll see how that goes. And I'll set F8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top