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

Messages
8,903
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
No
indeed especially as they were so quick to bring out the 14-24mm/2.8 and 24-70mm/2.8 lenses.
The canon RF 70-200mm doesn't seem all that good looking at some reviews. can't say i am impressed for £2.7k lens!
the tamron is phenomenal though.
i really like the rf 70-200. worth every bit of the £1700 i paid for it. my only gripe is the zoom throw takes a few twists to move all the way through the range.
 
Messages
402
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
What's the word on the street about the Tamron 20mm 2.8 lens? is it worth a shot? I fancy something a wider than my 35mm, would love the Sony, but the Tamron sounds a little more budget friendly. I'd mostly use it stopped down f8 or so
 
OP
woof woof
Messages
25,893
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
I have zero interest in these either.

Seems a pointless release unless they are ridiculously cheap.
If you can find an AF lens built like these for this money let me know. They'll sell, the only question is how many.
 

Stephen L

I asked a Stupid Question Once...
Messages
5,069
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
What's the word on the street about the Tamron 20mm 2.8 lens? is it worth a shot? I fancy something a wider than my 35mm, would love the Sony, but the Tamron sounds a little more budget friendly. I'd mostly use it stopped down f8 or so
I considered this, but all reviews I read (yes, I know these aren’t necessarily objective) indicated that the lens had strong distortion and vignetting which was only partially corrected in profiles. I eventually went for the manual 21mm Voigtlander f3.5. @LeeRatters gets some great results from his. :)
 
Messages
402
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
Yes
I considered this, but all reviews I read (yes, I know these aren’t necessarily objective) indicated that the lens had strong distortion and vignetting which was only partially corrected in profiles. I eventually went for the manual 21mm Voigtlander f3.5. @LeeRatters gets some great results from his. :)
Interesting, just had a google. It looks quite small and this is a bonus. A little more expensive than the tamron, but potentially worth holding off for another pay day to pass
 

Fuji Dave

Teacher's Pet
Messages
16,355
Name
FUJI SON
Edit My Images
No
Messages
2,465
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Interesting, just had a google. It looks quite small and this is a bonus. A little more expensive than the tamron, but potentially worth holding off for another pay day to pass
It might not suit you, but manual focus isn't really an issue at that focal length especially stopped down. It's certainly worth considering anyway imo
 
Messages
581
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
I know Eclipse sensor fluid is recommended but VSGO swabs and fluid seems to be well respected and Sanhooii is another brand that seems to get good reviews. Both are a little less expensive than Eclipse. Anyone used those brands?
 
Messages
17,176
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
What's the word on the street about the Tamron 20mm 2.8 lens? is it worth a shot? I fancy something a wider than my 35mm, would love the Sony, but the Tamron sounds a little more budget friendly. I'd mostly use it stopped down f8 or so
The other lens to consider is the Samyang 18 f2.8. Small, light, well corrected, reasonably sharp and around the same price. If close focus is important then get the Tamron, otherwise get the Sammy.
 
Messages
581
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
I fixed the Sony sensor dust! Just pointed the camera down to the floor and used my Giotto Rocket to blow on the sensor. Then pointed the camera at a white wall using both my lenses. Absolutely spotless. :banana:Money saved!

I'll still buy cleaner and FF swabs for the Canon though as the Rocket didn't clean that sufficiently, there's too much dust on that sensor.
 
Messages
2,081
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
No
I can't really see people replacing f1.2 and f1.4 Arts for these f2's.

Maybe these will appeal to people who want a well made / well styled lens with nice bokeh and an aperture ring which is still quite compact. Maybe these may steal sales from the Sony 35mm f1.8 which has been criticised for ca and harsh bokeh although personally I think the bokeh isn't exactly harsh, more par for the course for a 35mm but not better than expected.
Worked for Fuji when they released f2 variants of the 23 and 35 and continue to sell 1.4 versions alongside. The size and WR made them a hit although not something I ever bought, 1.4 all the way for me.
 
Messages
581
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
Pop through my Flickr for mainly 85mm car meet shots. You will have to go back to pre covid 2019 though
I've had a look, Lee, there's some excellent car shots and very nice post processing. The isolation/separation you get from the background looks great. I hope I can get the same effect when I get the 56mm.
 
Messages
1,604
Edit My Images
No
Nice I like the first two but the third is not for me.
I was looking for UWA not many that go below 16mm. I think Samyang do a 14mm shame no 12 though.
 
Messages
17,176
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
Nice I like the first two but the third is not for me.
I was looking for UWA not many that go below 16mm. I think Samyang do a 14mm shame no 12 though.
That's fair - the third breaks the rules about buildings falling backwards, and is not well centred. Like this it's too small to have any impact.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
11,009
Edit My Images
Yes
Nice I like the first two but the third is not for me.
I was looking for UWA not many that go below 16mm. I think Samyang do a 14mm shame no 12 though.
Loawa have a bunch of primes that start 9mm.

If you fancy my Sony 12-24mm is in sales :D
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
11,009
Edit My Images
Yes
Far too steep for me. I'll look at the Laowas though.
It's a one stop shop for UWA lens.
Or the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 if you want f2.8 for astrophotography.
Both sharp from wide open across the focal range.
Sigma is heavy but still compact. Sony is both compact and light.
Just to tell you how sharp sigma is it gives my 24GM a run for it's money at equivalent apertures and that's at it's weakest point i.e. the long end of the zoom.

Slow manual primes are great for keeping things compact.
 
Last edited:
Messages
581
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
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.

Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 announced

$799 seems to work out at £596, even cheaper than we expected. So I'd imagine grey around £450?
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
11,009
Edit My Images
Yes
$799 seems to work out at £596, even cheaper than we expected. So I'd imagine grey around £450?
unfortunately unlike sigma and even sony, tamron are bastards!
UK price will be £800

edit:
but generally speaking US prices are quoted without tax so it'll never convert evenly since UK price which has VAT included. but even still with sigma and sony lenses prices are not simply replace '$' with '£' like it is with tamron.
 
Last edited:
Messages
581
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
unfortunately unlike sigma and even sony, tamron are bastards!
UK price will be £800

edit:
but generally speaking US prices are quoted without tax so it'll never convert evenly since UK price which has VAT included. but even still with sigma and sony lenses prices are not simply replace '$' with '£' like it is with tamron.
Yes, very good points. Ah that's a pity. Still, if at some point I complete the Sigma Trio with the 30mm f1.4 I probably wouldn't really have much need for the Tamron. The only real advantage would be the ability to zoom which of course is nice without having to keep swapping lenses.
 
Messages
8,550
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
Not very scientific, which I actually like, a comparison with my favourite Sony lens against the Canon RF 50/1.2.

First off...I need to get this off my chest.

1 - What's with shooting with the LCD? That's not how you hold a camera.
2 - Why Shoot the Sony with the trigger at the bottom and the Canon at the top? She is constrained by that strap that she is using. It seems she pulls it out tight to create that 3rd point for stability....really odd.

So, the images, she mentioned the Canon is sharper, but I take that with a pinch of salt as the R5 has like 40% more pixels. But on my 4k TV, they both look pin sharp and the Sony setup being like half the price stacks up well, like 98% there. In fact I think I like the colours out of the Sony more. The Canon does have better bokeh fall off, even at the same 1.4.

Overall they seem pretty even at a glance and I think from an IQ point of view, the client wouldn't know the difference but there is 1 deal breaker, what is with that reverse lens double flare in the RF50/1.2? That is a dealbreaker in shooting into backlit or into the sun. I can totally see a client asking me to remove that in PS which could be almost impossible to do it perfectly or at least too time consuming to a point that I would just end up rejecting the shot.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eRFd_fs0d4&t
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
11,009
Edit My Images
Yes
Not very scientific, which I actually like, a comparison with my favourite Sony lens against the Canon RF 50/1.2.

First off...I need to get this off my chest.

1 - What's with shooting with the LCD? That's not how you hold a camera.
2 - Why Shoot the Sony with the trigger at the bottom and the Canon at the top? She is constrained by that strap that she is using. It seems she pulls it out tight to create that 3rd point for stability....really odd.

So, the images, she mentioned the Canon is sharper, but I take that with a pinch of salt as the R5 has like 40% more pixels. But on my 4k TV, they both look pin sharp and the Sony setup being like half the price stacks up well, like 98% there. In fact I think I like the colours out of the Sony more. The Canon does have better bokeh fall off, even at the same 1.4.

Overall they seem pretty even at a glance and I think from an IQ point of view, the client wouldn't know the difference but there is 1 deal breaker, what is with that reverse lens double flare in the RF50/1.2? That is a dealbreaker in shooting into backlit or into the sun. I can totally see a client asking me to remove that in PS which could be almost impossible to do it perfectly or at least too time consuming to a point that I would just end up rejecting the shot.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eRFd_fs0d4&t
for me the problem with this lens and some other RF lenses is the severe vignetting. some of them are really bad and canon sensor don't even that much dynamic range to recover.

look at this review of RF70-200mm in comparison to tamron 70-180mm - https://dustinabbott.net/2020/11/canon-rf-70-200mm-f2-8l-is-review/
the sharpness or lack thereof in corners at both ends is one thing but made worst by the vignetting in the corners

then look at this review - https://dustinabbott.net/2020/10/canon-rf-15-35mm-f2-8l-is-review/
again vignetting and i quote - "the RF15-35L suffers from a severe amount of vignette on the wide end…and I mean severe, As you can see, the vignette in the corners approaches 5 stops"

RF50/1.2 - https://dustinabbott.net/2019/12/canon-rf-50mm-f1-2l-review/
again heavy vignetting

didn't someone say something something large mount none of these optical issues and small lenses with less complex optical formulae and also cheaper?
engineering department missed the marketing's memo?
 
Last edited:

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
11,009
Edit My Images
Yes
Working in an engineering department, I can assure you that the engineering department probably didn't miss the memo, but their response to might get me a temporary ban for unsuitable language :LOL:
i too work in engineering and sometimes marketing are insane or just wrong and they expect engineering to prove their wrongness?

I wonder what happened when the fuji 33mm f1.0 which turned into a 50mm f1.0

marketing: make us a fast 50mm f1.0 equivalent lens because that's what all the cool kids are doing
engineering: ok whatever, specs are 1.2kg,....
marketing: wait! we are selling APS-C system that supposed to be small or at least be able to pretend that is. we can't sell/market >1kg prime monstrosity! make it less than 1kg
engineering: not possible
marketing: why not?
engineering: physics
marketing: ok what <1kg f1.0 lens can you make for APS-C
engineering: 50mm?
marketing: that works, let's just pretend like its one of the other 50mm f1.2 lenses but faster and ignore the crop factor.
 
Last edited:
Messages
8,550
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
i too work in engineering and sometimes marketing are insane or just wrong and they expect engineering to prove their wrongness?

I wonder what happened when the fuji 33mm f1.0 which turned into a 50mm f1.0

marketing: make us a fast 50mm f1.0 equivalent lens because that's what all the cool kids are doing
engineering: ok whatever, specs are 1.2kg,....
marketing: wait! we are selling APS-C system that supposed to be small or at least be able to pretend that is. we can't sell/market >1kg prime monstrosity! make it less than 1kg
engineering: not possible
marketing: why not?
engineering: physics
marketing: ok what <1kg f1.0 lens can you make for APS-C
engineering: 50mm?
marketing: that works, let's just pretend like its one of the other 50mm f1.2 lenses but faster and ignore the crop factor.
A lot of people are falling for that bit I highlighted.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfDb8BBcEi4


Check out this video, he compares it to the Leica, mention the Canon....erhhh it's not the same! The Fuji 50/1.0 is like a 84/1.4. I thought it's interesting and thought about trying it but having already own the 56/1.2, there really is no point.
 

nandbytes

I owe Cobra some bacon
Messages
11,009
Edit My Images
Yes
The Fuji 50/1.0 is like a 84/1.4.
its more like a 75mm f1.5.
buy yourself the smaller, cheaper, better AF-ing samyang 75mm f1.8, realise why its stupid and get over that idea and save yourself £££ :p
 
Messages
17,176
Name
Toni
Edit My Images
No
Overall they seem pretty even at a glance and I think from an IQ point of view, the client wouldn't know the difference but there is 1 deal breaker, what is with that reverse lens double flare in the RF50/1.2? That is a dealbreaker in shooting into backlit or into the sun. I can totally see a client asking me to remove that in PS which could be almost impossible to do it perfectly or at least too time consuming to a point that I would just end up rejecting the shot.
To me, that would be a deal-breaker too. Can't shoot backlit portraits? Really? :facepalm:
 
Messages
8,550
Name
Raymond
Edit My Images
No
I plan to get a Canon 50/1.2 EF when they get cheap enough, plenty of them out there and the market is slowly getting more of them around. It’s not sharp but the bokeh on it is nice.
 
Messages
8,903
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
No
its more like a 75mm f1.5.
buy yourself the smaller, cheaper, better AF-ing samyang 75mm f1.8, realise why its stupid and get over that idea and save yourself £££ :p
But an f1.8 isnt an f1.0.
And there's no such lens for xf mount.
 
Top