The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!
- Thread starter woof woof
- Start date
- Messages
- 274
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have a Sony A7RII arriving this week with the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 after selling the D750.
Are you guys using a wrist strap or proper shoulder strap? I used a footprint wrist strap on the A6000.
Are you guys using a wrist strap or proper shoulder strap? I used a footprint wrist strap on the A6000.
- Messages
- 2,149
- Name
- Allan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I use capture pro belt clip very handy
- Messages
- 9,407
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- No
Used to use black rapid when I had a dslr. No need for the strap on the sonys. The a6000 can fit in a coat pocket.
- Messages
- 845
- Name
- Omar
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Peak Design Cuff!
- Messages
- 3,129
- Edit My Images
- No
Hurry folks.... Sony 70-200mm f4 G OSS at HC for £899.00 (last one)
http://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/pd/Sony-E-70-200mm-F4-G-OSS-FE-Lens_SEL70200G.htm
Not exactly a fantastic price.
£769
http://www.digitalrev.com/product/sony-fe-70-200mm-f4/MTEwMzI3Mg_A_A
£735
http://panamoz.com/index.php/sony-sel70200g-fe-70-200mm-f4-g-oss-lens.html
Good for the UK though i suppose.
- Messages
- 77
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
Wrist strap! I highly recommend cordy wrist strap.
http://www.cordweaver.co.uk/about.php
The camera should be with you shortly!
- Messages
- 3,129
- Edit My Images
- No
Dont buy one of those, so easy to make and cheap. I made a shoulder strap and a wrist strap and fitted with quick release so i can easily swap.
- Messages
- 274
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks!
- Messages
- 274
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I normally use the Footprint straps. Handmade English or Italian leather. Problem is the owner and maker has recently had a horrific disease and lost his hands and feet! Poor chap.
http://footprintstraps.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/capnocytophaga-canimorsus.html?m=1
No. Shoot RAW.
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,659
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Why do you want to shoot jpeg's?
When spending this much on camera gear shouldn't you be trying to get the best from your shots and in doing so shoot raw?
Never really bothered with jpeg's for years myself but if you insist on using them I'd imagine that there must be in camera settings to tweak them more to your liking?
Thank you for your help. When I do for best quality i shoot raw, for family outings, walks, birthdays etc I shoot raw+jpegs. Share, view etc 90% of these in jpegs for convinience and time saving, and work on raw on the remaining 10% that I want to print. So yes, I do need decent jpegs.
Are the poor jpegs a domain of the original a7 only? or a7R is the same?
Are the poor jpegs a domain of the original a7 only? or a7R is the same?
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,659
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
I can't comment on jpeg's as I don't use them but I do suspect that in camera setting could tweaked for best effect.
Personally I see the A7 series as my luxury choice and if wanting to shoot mainly jpeg's and possibly more for social media use I think I'd possibly look elsewhere, maybe to a Panasonic or Olympus MFT, a Sony A6000 or something from Fuji.
Personally I see the A7 series as my luxury choice
and if wanting to shoot mainly jpeg's and possibly more for social media use I think I'd possibly look elsewhere, maybe to a Panasonic or Olympus MFT, a Sony A6000 or something from Fuji.- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
What's stopping u from converting to jpeg on import? Seriously I don't see a single reason to shoot jpg only
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,659
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Ah, forgot you already had an A6000. Soz about that
Well, the A7 series are good cameras and quite compact too if you fit a compact lens to them, not too much bigger than an A6000. Maybe someone could investigate jpeg's for you and how good they can me made by fiddling with the in camera settings? Maybe that could help you decide if an A7 series is the way to go for you?
Last edited:
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,659
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
TBH I can understand it even if it's something I don't really want to do but I do think that maybe anyone spending A7 series money might want to think about shooting raw and processing for best effect. Maybe there are better choices for mainly jpeg shooters but maybe A7 series jpeg's can be improved by fiddling with the settings...
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
What's the point in using your PC/Mac to auto-convert to jpg on import when the camera has a built in engine to output jpg's direct?
I don't get the slightly snobby attitude towards jpg either? It's not only colour corrections (that can be tweaked) but lens corrections are already applied too. The OP has already said that they want good jpg output for family/holiday usage where I'd agree that shooting raw then performing corrections/edits before saving to jpg is potentially a waste of time. I shoot raw if I'm shooting landscape/paid work but if I'm shooting 'life' I don't see the problem with jpgs.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
It's not a waste of time. It can be auto output to jpg on import. No tweaking needed at all
RAW actually offers quite a bit in terms of detail not just recovery, the jpg engine is quite aggressive with its noise reduction and causes detail loss and smearing.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Not sure you're getting my point mate? If all you're going to do on import of a RAW file is convert it JPG and save you lose all benefit of the RAW file without gaining any benefits of the cameras built in processing engine hence it being a waste of time.
With regards to the agressive noise reduction, that can be disabled completely in camera (or at least it can on my A6K) as can colour processing etc. However, other than the noise reduction, standard jpeg output would be perfectly fine for day to day shooting.
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,659
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Can't speak for others but there's nothing snobby about me. I just thought that anyone droping A7 series money would probably be invested in the whole process and want to shoot raw.
If however the user makes an informed decision to shoot jpeg and accept any inherent disadvantages should there in fact be any then fair enough.
You can't disable the noise reduction completely, jpg means processed, more than raw... even raw is processed to a certain extent. If jpg works for whoever then i agree why not shoot it.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
OK fair enough. Cheers dude
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Fully agree @twist JPEG by definition has been processed to whichever degree you configure in camera whereas raw is the scene direct from the sensor. However, back to the OP, they asked about the jpeg output of the A7 for when they want to use it as a daily camera to shoot family/holidays etc and share images easily. There's no point in shooting raw with the added processing required to get even a base image in that situation. However, it appears that some people feel that jpeg is a little beneath them or an A7 :0) Probably worth asking any sideline photographer how they get on with processing raw files at the side of the pitch (as an example where jpeg's are perfectly acceptable)
- Messages
- 77
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
There was also a recent firmware which allows uncompressed 14bit files. The file sizes become humongous though
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
What did you expect hehe
- Messages
- 77
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
I thought there would be a lossless compressed version...
- Messages
- 2,149
- Name
- Allan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi
I have the a7m2 I mainly shoot raw though I have tried JPEG and they looked fine for my needs also you can select things like people, sunset night etc and the JPEG will have those kind of tweaks applied
My only concern with JPEG and raw would be if you need fast frame rate then I think the through put might be a bit slow
As a side note the movie mode is for me easy and watchable if just short family clips
I would share concern with others if I wanted high ISO though but that's just personal taste
All in all I like my A7
OP
woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 39,659
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Oh get off your high horse for God sake. Again, can't speak for anyone else but that's certainly not what I think and in deed I did make a point of clarifying... but hang on, I'm forgetting something... I'm in the right room for an argument. Carry on...
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
LmaoOh get off your high horse for God sake. Again, can't speak for anyone else but that's certainly not what I think and in deed I did make a point of clarifying... but hang on, I'm forgetting something... I'm in the right room for an argument. Carry on...
- Messages
- 10,055
- Name
- Steve
- Edit My Images
- No
Oh get off your high horse for God sake. Again, can't speak for anyone else but that's certainly not what I think and in deed I did make a point of clarifying... but hang on, I'm forgetting something... I'm in the right room for an argument. Carry on...
Lol, I did put a smiley face so it wasn't taken too seriously but that must have been missed from all the way down there (joke..) ;0)
Either way, I'm sure the jpeg output from an A7 is perfectly fine as it's designed to be and users can also shoot in Raw if they want to.
- Messages
- 788
- Name
- Jamie
- Edit My Images
- No
Can only speak for the A7R2 and the JPGs in extra fine are very good combined with a variety of Creative Styles, you should be good to go. Personally I shoot RAW to which a LR6 develop import sauce needs to be applied but that's just the way I do it. I can't think why DPreview would have anything negative to say about OOC JPGs ?
- Messages
- 194
- Name
- Tom
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nikon user here planning to move to an A7.
The whole lens situ is a bit of a minefield for a chap like me whos been spoilt for lenses.
Are there Sony equivalents of the following? Best reccomendations?
50mm 1.8
24-70mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
From what I can see so far, the Sony equivalents are more expensive and slower aperture, am I getting something wrong?
Also the whole adapter situation, what are the tradeoffs? Do you lose a stop using them? Is AF acceptable or very slow?
I understand this may be a can of worms, but I will be moving to the A7, love the form factor and liberating size coming from a Nikon FX.
Thanks!
The whole lens situ is a bit of a minefield for a chap like me whos been spoilt for lenses.
Are there Sony equivalents of the following? Best reccomendations?
50mm 1.8
24-70mm 2.8
70-200mm 2.8
From what I can see so far, the Sony equivalents are more expensive and slower aperture, am I getting something wrong?
Also the whole adapter situation, what are the tradeoffs? Do you lose a stop using them? Is AF acceptable or very slow?
I understand this may be a can of worms, but I will be moving to the A7, love the form factor and liberating size coming from a Nikon FX.
Thanks!
- Messages
- 3,129
- Edit My Images
- No
What Nikon are you coming from?
You can almost certainly negate the f4 vs f2.8 by using a higher ISO with the A7. There is an 24-70 f2.8 incoming though so if you wait on that one you can have it, would expect to see a 70-200 f2.8 at some point as well. Nothing to stop you using an A mount lens via the adapter though.
- Messages
- 7,954
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The Sony 55mm f1.8 is the closest equivalent to the Nikon f1.8, its a cracking lens but does come at a price (c£620 v £135 for the Nikon..)
As Rob already mentions there aren't native 24-70 f2.8 or 70-200 f2.8 lenses but its strongly rumoured that a 24-70 f2.8 is coming next March, I'd expect it to be quite expensive though given that the generally slated 24-70 f4 is around £805.
- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
Only the prime lens