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

woof woof said:
I can't say that I agree. I've used all my old lenses on MFT and I have to say that they perform better on my A7. Yes, there can be some edge issues but when stopped down and used for across the frame performance I have no real issues (the picture posted above has no real issues) and they're sharper on my A7 than on my MFT due to the usual issues... magnifying a smaller image more and all that.
Click to expand...

Well we will have to disagree then!! No legacy manual lens has come close to sharpness against the native Fuji XF lenses I have, not they aren't capable of producing a decent image.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Well we will have to disagree then!! No legacy manual lens has come close to sharpness against the native Fuji XF lenses I have, not they aren't capable of producing a decent image.
Click to expand...

How legacy lenses compare to modern lenses wasn't what I was replying to. What I was replying to was this...

Mr Perceptive said:
There are even better on a crop sensor, as the often inherent softness towards the edges is outside the required sensor image circle.
Click to expand...

And although I'm repeating myself :D I have to say that I think you're wrong. Yes with a crop camera you only see the better central section of the image but what you see has been magnified more and will suffer for it. All IMHO of course but others seem to agree :D If you find otherwise then good luck to you and I'm happy for you but the exact opposite has been my experience and my legacy lenses have a new lease of life on my FF A7 :D

"Decent" is I suppose open to debate. Whilst I'm certain that my old lenses perform better on FF than on my MFT camera I'll also say that they can't compete with my Sony primes for technical excellence across the frame especially at wide apertures. For example I tested my legacy 50mm lenses against my Sony 55mm and it simply crushes them. The look is a different matter and my 50mm f1.2 Rokkor (for example) give a look that I like, from wide open to stopped down.

Have you used old lenses on a FF camera?
 
chrism_scotland said:
That's your opinion. Plenty of people are more than happy with the XT2. Aside from the A9 it has better AF than most of the Sony bodies.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I have to agree, the Fuji XT-2's AF system is better than most of the Sony bodies and one of the reasons I shifted from the A7RII, there are other reasons when I moved to Fuji too but the Fuji also has negatives so you need to understand these and decide what's right for you.
Both are great systems imo and you can't go wrong with them.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I'm afraid I have to agree, the Fuji XT-2's AF system is better than most of the Sony bodies and one of the reasons I shifted from the A7RII, there are other reasons when I moved to Fuji too but the Fuji also has negatives so you need to understand these and decide what's right for you.
Both are great systems imo and you can't go wrong with them.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. While XT2 is definitely a huge improvement over XT1 (which was terribad even after their 400 firmware updates :p ) its still not as good as A6300/A6500. Its about as good as A7RII which is not a good thing since it has a APS-C sensor. Also doesn't provide AF with adapted lenses.
 
Nuzik said:
All-round what? Rubbish. Hated the bloody thing.
Click to expand...

Quick &a reliable af and focus tracking, ergonomically superb, decent mp sensor and lots of decent glass, two cards slots..

Was lacking 3rd hss support, but that had now been sorted. Personally I just found it a joy to use.

What didn't you like about it?
 
addicknchips said:
Quick &a reliable af and focus tracking, ergonomically superb, decent mp sensor and lots of decent glass, two cards slots..

Was lacking 3rd hss support, but that had now been sorted. Personally I just found it a joy to use.

What didn't you like about it?
Click to expand...
We fell apart like a bad marriage couldn't get on with it at all.
 
nandbytes said:
I'm afraid I'd have to disagree. While XT2 is definitely a huge improvement over XT1 (which was terribad even after their 400 firmware updates :p ) its still not as good as A6300/A6500. Its about as good as A7RII which is not a good thing since it has a APS-C sensor. Also doesn't provide AF with adapted lenses.
Click to expand...

Sorry - in my experience one thing the xt2 smokes the A7rii at is focus tracking.
 
addicknchips said:
Sorry - in my experience one thing the xt2 smokes the A7rii at is focus tracking.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it smokes anything apart from may be XT1 :p
Its still rather unreliable, and no more reliable than A7RII. Not mention some lenses are also slow to focus on fuji.

Anyway when its subjective opinion, we'll just have to agree to disagree :D
If focus tracking was really of particular concern and I wanted something reliable most of the time, I'd probably go with D750 not Fuji or Sony.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
What about continuous single point af?
Click to expand...

It's not bad - but with a subject such as a small child running toward camera my hit rate was considerable higher with the x-t2. Possibly my poor technique and skill level.
 
twist said:
How do you get that from what he said?
Click to expand...
Because the a9 smokes the af. And apparently so does the Xt2 yet loads of people who have been used and compared it seem to think it's barely any better than the a7r2

The a9 is the first true af that goes toe to toe with the very best dslr.

So I guess the Xt2 can focus as good as a d500?
 
jonneymendoza said:
Because the a9 smokes the af. And apparently so does the Xt2 yet loads of people who have been used and compared it seem to think it's barely any better than the a7r2

The a9 is the first true af that goes toe to toe with the very best dslr.

So I guess the Xt2 can focus as good as a d500?
Click to expand...

The x-t2 is very fast at af. I think the general opinion has been that it holds its own. I don't think it is as good as the d500 though but I haven't used a d500. Have you?

I've never compared it to the a9 and would not expect it to be up there with the a9. You can buy 3 x-t2's for the price of an a9 so I certainly would expect the a9 to outperform it in every department.

I've never considered the A7rii to be a speed demon though, so am very surprised to hear that loads of people have compared the two (A7rii and xt2) and found that they perform similarly. Obviously the right glass needs to be used as well.
 
addicknchips said:
The x-t2 is very fast at af. I think the general opinion has been that it holds its own. I don't think it is as good as the d500 though but I haven't used a d500. Have you?

I've never compared it to the a9 and would not expect it to be up there with the a9. You can buy 3 x-t2's for the price of an a9 so I certainly would expect the a9 to outperform it in every department.

I've never considered the A7rii to be a speed demon though, so am very surprised to hear that loads of people have compared the two (A7rii and xt2) and found that they perform similarly. Obviously the right glass needs to be used as well.
Click to expand...
I'm also surprised that some Say that the a7r2 is slow for af tracking.

I've said a lot times here that the af is as good as my canon 5d3 using native lenses anything better you are looking at d5/1dx2 territory imo.

The only thing slow about the camera is its buffer rate. Af speed is very fast and accurate
 
jonneymendoza said:
Because the a9 smokes the af. And apparently so does the Xt2 yet loads of people who have been used and compared it seem to think it's barely any better than the a7r2

The a9 is the first true af that goes toe to toe with the very best dslr.

So I guess the Xt2 can focus as good as a d500?
Click to expand...

He never said anything about the A9 in that post.
 
jonneymendoza said:
I'm also surprised that some Say that the a7r2 is slow for af tracking.

I've said a lot times here that the af is as good as my canon 5d3 using native lenses anything better you are looking at d5/1dx2 territory imo.

The only thing slow about the camera is its buffer rate. Af speed is very fast and accurate
Click to expand...

I'd say about 70% of weddings I've been to over the last 4 years the togs have been using a 5d3. Always thought it was an excellent choice for weddings.

Pretty much all the feedback I've had about the A7rii is that it just doesn't focus fast enough for weddings. So it's encouraging to hear that it matches the 5d3.
 
addicknchips said:
I'd say about 70% of weddings I've been to over the last 4 years the togs have been using a 5d3. Always thought it was an excellent choice for weddings.

Pretty much all the feedback I've had about the A7rii is that it just doesn't focus fast enough for weddings. So it's encouraging to hear that it matches the 5d3.
Click to expand...
Some here do weddings on an a7r2 and said it af fine on the job and I've heard it myself on other places too. I've done a reception wedding as a second shooter and it was fine again.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Some here do weddings on an a7r2 and said it af fine on the job and I've heard it myself on other places too. I've done a reception wedding as a second shooter and it was fine again.
Click to expand...

I know @Riz_Guru and @david357 have done. Thoughts chaps?

The shoot I did last night was a big party in a function room similar to a wedding reception. Very challenging conditions, disco lasers all over the place. Camera did pretty well. Used the 28f2 for most of the night. If that lens had a Fuji badge on it I'm sure it would be regarded as a "must own". It really is a good performer. Had the 55 1.8 on for part of the night which also did well. Tried the 85 for a few longer shots but just constantly hunted.
 
I suppose that'll interest a lot of people but I doubt I'll ever be interested as I like compact kit. I'll probably just stick to my 55mm f1.8 and 35mm f2.8.

It'll be nice to see more options though :D
 
addicknchips said:
I know @Riz_Guru and @david357 have done. Thoughts chaps?

The shoot I did last night was a big party in a function room similar to a wedding reception. Very challenging conditions, disco lasers all over the place. Camera did pretty well. Used the 28f2 for most of the night. If that lens had a Fuji badge on it I'm sure it would be regarded as a "must own". It really is a good performer. Had the 55 1.8 on for part of the night which also did well. Tried the 85 for a few longer shots but just constantly hunted.
Click to expand...

Right where do a start, I believe the problem is that what each one of expects in AF performance/AF-C tracking differs so much that we'll never be able agree which body is the best etc, you have to remember technique also plays a big part too so having the fastest AF tracking body ever made won't help if you are blind as a bat. lol :D

I have said this before and will say it again, any decent mirrorless body from probably the Sony A7 II, A7RII, Fuji XT-2 can shoot weddings if you work around their short comings and traits, you can find many photographers using these bodies without too much difficulty.

The weddings I shot with the A7RII's were mainly shot using the FE 24-70mm G Master for 90% of the time and it performed wonderfully, a real work horse of a lens.
The Fuji XT-2 and the Fuji system in general is great, smaller and cheaper than the Sony offerings but you have to understand its limitations in terms of DR/ISO etc.

For my requirements I preferred the AF-C tracking of the Fuji XT-2 vs the Sony A7RII but it cannot compete in key area's like DR/ISO, Eye-AF etc, its still a very hard choice though as the Sony system is not cheap, Fuji is a good all-rounder as its already been mentioned. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top