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

I’m currently debating about getting a small APS-C camera to use for family walk about & travel portraits and MTB rides out with my son.
I currently have a Sony A73 & Canon G7X MKII and I’m looking for something that sits in the middle. The Sony is too big to lug around and the Canon doesn’t quite have the AF speed or photo quality to hit the mark.

Current options are:
  • Sony A6100 with a Sony APS-C 50mm F1.8
  • Sony A6400, as above
  • Canon M200 with a Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4, or Sigma 56 F1.4
Is there anything else I’m missing?
It must be compact and have fast and light weight prime lens options
 
SDK^ said:
I’m currently debating about getting a small APS-C camera to use for family walk about & travel portraits and MTB rides out with my son.
I currently have a Sony A73 & Canon G7X MKII and I’m looking for something that sits in the middle. The Sony is too big to lug around and the Canon doesn’t quite have the AF speed or photo quality to hit the mark.

Current options are:
  • Sony A6100 with a Sony APS-C 50mm F1.8
  • Sony A6400, as above
  • Canon M200 with a Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4, or Sigma 56 F1.4
Is there anything else I’m missing?
It must be compact and have fast and light weight prime lens options
Click to expand...

I had an A6400 for a little while. It was very good and the Sigma 16, 30, and 56mm lenses were excellent.

The a.f on the A6400 is pretty much as good as the A9.
 
SDK^ said:
I’m currently debating about getting a small APS-C camera to use for family walk about & travel portraits and MTB rides out with my son.
I currently have a Sony A73 & Canon G7X MKII and I’m looking for something that sits in the middle. The Sony is too big to lug around and the Canon doesn’t quite have the AF speed or photo quality to hit the mark.

Current options are:
  • Sony A6100 with a Sony APS-C 50mm F1.8
  • Sony A6400, as above
  • Canon M200 with a Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4, or Sigma 56 F1.4
Is there anything else I’m missing?
It must be compact and have fast and light weight prime lens options
Click to expand...

Have you looked at the canon EOS M6ii. IMO better than A6400.

Also you could sell your G7x for a larger sensor bodies like LX100 or x100 series or if you really want to splash out there is RX1 and Leica Q.

I am hoping someone will make a small FF body like original A7 with updated AF and the same small factor. You can then use it with small primes. But everyone is so hell bent on making them larger.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
:ROFLMAO: Been debating the Canon 50 1.2 a lot recently and almost took the plunge this morning but I had an engagement session this afternoon and decided to wait until I got back.

Used the little 55 during the engagement session and have decided to put the 50 1.2 on the back burner for now anyway. Such a great wee lens and the small form factor makes it a joy to use.
Click to expand...

Same here. There was a Eos R in sales I nearly bought. After a shoot on Friday I realised 50mm doesn't work for me.
But the 85mm really does work for me and I'd love that 85mm f1.2 :ROFLMAO:
 
I swear when I had the canon 1.2 lenses there were always some people going on about “1.2 and 1.4 is hardly any difference”, “the T stop of them is the same” and “you can never get anything in focus” and “it’s a huge blur mess” and “your client will never tell the difference “

where have they gone?! Unless they are all the same ones I got on ignore :eek: for different reasons.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I swear when I had the canon 1.2 lenses there were always some people going on about “1.2 and 1.4 is hardly any difference”, “the T stop of them is the same” and “you can never get anything in focus” and “it’s a huge blur mess” and “your client will never tell the difference “

where have they gone?! Unless they are all the same ones I got on ignore :eek: for different reasons.
Click to expand...

I still say the T-stop or transmission is no better than f1.4 lenses. You don't buy f1.2 lenses and in some cases even f1.4 lenses for more light. You buy them for the rendering the huge blur mess :p
 
SDK^ said:
I’m currently debating about getting a small APS-C camera to use for family walk about & travel portraits and MTB rides out with my son.
I currently have a Sony A73 & Canon G7X MKII and I’m looking for something that sits in the middle. The Sony is too big to lug around and the Canon doesn’t quite have the AF speed or photo quality to hit the mark.

Current options are:
  • Sony A6100 with a Sony APS-C 50mm F1.8
  • Sony A6400, as above
  • Canon M200 with a Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4, or Sigma 56 F1.4
Is there anything else I’m missing?
It must be compact and have fast and light weight prime lens options
Click to expand...
I've been using the A6000 as a dedicated macro body recently, it goes very well with the Sony 90mm macro lens. It's cheap and light and the IQ is good but this week I'm changing to to a used A6500 mainly because of the IBIS and much improved EVF, the 4K video capability might come in handy. As a walkabout I've paired it with the Samyang 35mm F2.8 and I've been pleased.

There are a few sites with detailed comparisons of all the A6000 series, I think Sony have made the series numbering unnecessarily complicated and counter-intuitive but the A6000 series is really very good all round.

I might even give the A9 a rest and use the A6500 with the 200-600 for the extra reach.
 
SDK^ said:
I’m currently debating about getting a small APS-C camera to use for family walk about & travel portraits and MTB rides out with my son.
Click to expand...

50mm is a bit too long for me on APS-C but if it's what you want, go for it.
 
nandbytes said:
I still say the T-stop or transmission is no better than f1.4 lenses. You don't buy f1.2 lenses and in some cases even f1.4 lenses for more light. You buy them for the rendering the huge blur mess :p
Click to expand...
100%, but tbh why would anyone want anything with a wider aperture than 1.8, lets face it they are more corrected, lighter, faster AF, cheaper, surely thats better er.
 
Cagey75 said:
The 1:2.5 macro capabilities do make it a bit more interesting than the usual reflex lens - but they're almost always a bit funky, to say the least in terms of IQ. I'd be interested to see reviews on it though
Click to expand...

I can see it appealing to people who want a really compact lens and also to those who like the look. It'll be a lot Marmite but the world is big enough for choice.
 
twist said:
100%, but tbh why would anyone want anything with a wider aperture than 1.8, lets face it they are more corrected, lighter, faster AF, cheaper, surely thats better er.
Click to expand...

I must be a rarity then, because I buy a 1.4 lens specifically for the light gathering, not the bokeh ... I can achieve good enough seperation and/or bokeh using 2.8 lenses so long as they have decent CFD, but a 1.4 - which I consider a bit of a luxury, for me is much more about shooting in low light. I just don't like to bump ISO much, 3200 being my cap most times no matter the camera
 
Cagey75 said:
I must be a rarity then, because I buy a 1.4 lens specifically for the light gathering, not the bokeh ... I can achieve good enough seperation and/or bokeh using 2.8 lenses so long as they have decent CFD, but a 1.4 - which I consider a bit of a luxury, for me is much more about shooting in low light. I just don't like to bump ISO much, 3200 being my cap most times no matter the camera
Click to expand...

Not really, lots do. For me it's 99.9% about subject separation, the qualities of the fall off and 3d / contrast, especially at distance, up close there's not much in it. But imo a fast lens on a ff sensor is a great balance between cost/weight/af/vfm.
 
twist said:
Not really, lots do. For me it's 99.9% about subject separation, the qualities of the fall off and 3d / contrast, especially at distance, up close there's not much in it. But imo a fast lens on a ff sensor is a great balance between cost/weight/af/vfm.
Click to expand...

I do like that effect when I desire it too, but it'll not be priority when purchasing. I can get nice seperation and decent bokeh at F4 using the right M43 lens [example, the wonderful little 12-40 2.8 pro] - In fact the only thing I disliked about that system was the poor ISO performance, but for me 1.4 on there was no different to 1.4 on APSC or FF
 
When I get the chance I'm going to take a series of pictures from f1.2-f2.x at different distances and see how I feel. The last time I did this I decided that until I got to f2.8 I didn't really care about the differences. If I've changed my mind over the years since I last did this I might care.

I do like this one, but I might like it just as much at f2.

IXb3HaA.jpg
 
I’m feeling slightly disillusioned about my choice of gear after this weekend at Donington. I didn’t think that handholding the 100-400mm would be ‘that’ much different to the Panny 100-400mm but it’s amazing just how different 500g is, really struggled to hold it steady and my arms were aching after about 30 mins or so. Plus even the 100-400mm with focus limiter on got caught out by the fence a couple of times today. I wonder why they went with 3m rather than 5m? Finally Sony really doesn’t seem to handle WB very well imo.

I guess I’m going to have to give the monopod another serious go to see if I can get used to that. Not sure how to solve the WB issue, don’t fancy carrying a grey card with me, especially shooting outdoor where the light is constantly changing.
 
snerkler said:
I’m feeling slightly disillusioned about my choice of gear after this weekend at Donington. I didn’t think that handholding the 100-400mm would be ‘that’ much different to the Panny 100-400mm but it’s amazing just how different 500g is, really struggled to hold it steady and my arms were aching after about 30 mins or so. Plus even the 100-400mm with focus limiter on got caught out by the fence a couple of times today. I wonder why they went with 3m rather than 5m? Finally Sony really doesn’t seem to handle WB very well imo.

I guess I’m going to have to give the monopod another serious go to see if I can get used to that. Not sure how to solve the WB issue, don’t fancy carrying a grey card with me, especially shooting outdoor where the light is constantly changing.
Click to expand...

Yep even 100gms makes a difference IMO.
Personally don't find AWB a huge problem. I find that it's generally slightly warmer than I like but haven't had serious issues that's not quickly fixed in PP.

It's 3m because everyone in the world fixes it at 3m? :p
 
snerkler said:
I’m feeling slightly disillusioned about my choice of gear after this weekend at Donington. I didn’t think that handholding the 100-400mm would be ‘that’ much different to the Panny 100-400mm but it’s amazing just how different 500g is, really struggled to hold it steady and my arms were aching after about 30 mins or so. Plus even the 100-400mm with focus limiter on got caught out by the fence a couple of times today. I wonder why they went with 3m rather than 5m? Finally Sony really doesn’t seem to handle WB very well imo.

I guess I’m going to have to give the monopod another serious go to see if I can get used to that. Not sure how to solve the WB issue, don’t fancy carrying a grey card with me, especially shooting outdoor where the light is constantly changing.
Click to expand...

Do you mean auto WB?
 
You can adjust WB without a grey card by using K and adjusting the value until in looks right in the EVF.

Wont that work?

It's not something I do a lot and I don't remember ever using it outside but for difficult artificial lighting indoors it can help.
 
Interesting some don't like the Sony auto W.B.

I find it quite good, when I switched over from Nikon it was one of the things I noticed straight away that was better.
 
f/2.8 said:
Interesting some don't like the Sony auto W.B.

I find it quite good, when I switched over from Nikon it was one of the things I noticed straight away that was better.
Click to expand...

i found nikon to be the opposite. Its a bit cooler than I like lol.

As with any "auto" setting it will never be perfect and probably people will find one brand better than other depending on what situations they shoot in most. I bet I can break all of them :p
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Yep even 100gms makes a difference IMO.
Personally don't find AWB a huge problem. I find that it's generally slightly warmer than I like but haven't had serious issues that's not quickly fixed in PP.

It's 3m because everyone in the world fixes it at 3m? :p
Click to expand...
Yeah in my wonderful “Toby world” I didn’t think 500g (I actually think it’s closer to 400g) would make a world of difference :rolleyes:
Nikon 70-200mm is 5m focus limiter ;)
Jase said:
Do you mean auto WB?
Click to expand...
Mostly, but even when I select a specific one it’s not quite right. Doesn’t help I was using a 5 stop filter of course, but not had much of an issue before. Maybe just need to get used to it and find the best setting.
woof woof said:
You can adjust WB without a grey card by using K and adjusting the value until in looks right in the EVF.

Wont that work?

It's not something I do a lot and I don't remember ever using it outside but for difficult artificial lighting indoors it can help.
Click to expand...
It can work, but on a day where the light is constantly changing because of passing cloud it’s not ideal. I’ll figure it out, was just having a bad weekend all round I think.
 
snerkler said:
Mostly, but even when I select a specific one it’s not quite right. Doesn’t help I was using a 5 stop filter of course, but not had much of an issue before. Maybe just need to get used to it and find the best setting.
Click to expand...

The 5 stop may be a little of the issue depending on which one it is, however I find the AWB on Sony to be terrible and I noticed when I was out last week how inconsistent it was which is why I pretty much only use manual WB.
 
snerkler said:
Nikon 70-200mm is 5m focus limiter ;)
Click to expand...

that's a 70-200mm not a 100-400mm and especially not the one they copied. they copied the canon version which is the same :D

and just to add canon RF 70-200mm/2.8 is limited at 2.5m.
 
Last edited:
Jase said:
The 5 stop may be a little of the issue depending on which one it is, however I find the AWB on Sony to be terrible and I noticed when I was out last week how inconsistent it was which is why I pretty much only use manual WB.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's pretty inconsistent too. The filter is a hitch firecrest so not cheap :oops: :$
 
addicknchips said:
nice shot. I'm still surprised you got rid of the olympus kit. those MOTO GP photos you got were top drawer.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Wanted to consolidate into one kit, but having a few regrets now :oops: :$
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top