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

@JJ

Have had a good look at the images you took recently with your new A9 and compared them to some similar images you've taken with the A73 and also with the Nikon D750.

Overall, I think you're making far too early a decision to ditch the A9.

There's so many factors that can lead to the poorer images you've seen from your first trials with the A9. The main ones as I see them are as follows:

1) Unfamiliarity with the A9's AF system. This camera is apparently better / different compared to the Sony A73. The way it tracks and sticks with an acquired target or the way it is attracted to and switches to a new target is probably going to be quite different to every other camera you've tried and will take a lot of getting used to in order to get acceptable results.

2) I don't know too much about the Sony auto focus modes and can't really be bothered to research either but it may be that the modes you've tried are not the best suited to the images you are attempting to capture. I'm a Nikon guy myself and the Nikon AF modes really do take some getting used to and there have been some changes to the way in which these modes work on the newer D5, D500, D850 models compared with the older models. I am still getting used to them on the D850. The performance isn't just different it also varies with lighting conditions, with exposure settings and the subject that you're trying to shoot. The way in which the subject is moving and whether the object it is in the clear or partially obscured and what else is in the same image are all factors that need to be experimented with and tried with different techniques.

3) The weight and balance of the A9 with the Sony 70-200mm lens. Again, its different to what you've shot with before and will take some getting used to in terms of the way to support the camera and lens to avoid camera shake when tracking, especially at low shutter speeds. Practice, is the best way to improve technique. You've had plenty of practice with the Nikon D750 and obviously your handling technique has been perfected with that camera / lens combination. You really haven't had sufficient time with the A73 and certainly not with the A9 to even come close to the levels of expertise you were achieving with the D750.

Hope you stick with it and give it a really good trial. In the meantime I'm off to create some space for you on the Nikon D850 thread. Maybe see you there soon !!!!
 
One of my 5D4's lock down clip for the SD card failed just before a wedding last week....almost resorted to shoot single card until i realise if I close the cover down and push it down with that it can still read and write !!!!

Que gaffer tape to the door to stop it accidentally opening as it just shoots out like a nerf gun upon opening the card door lol
 
i ordered a new lens today.

A 90m macro sony one. Gunna flog the tamron canon mount one i had as it simply cant af at all in macro mode.

Also bought a new godox speedlite too
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Will be interested to hear your thoughts, I’m thinking of swapping my 55 and 35mm art for one
Click to expand...

The Batis 40mm sadly seems to have a fault, when using eye AF it front focuses, when focusing with magnified view it front focuses, under normal conditions it otherwise has excellent AF.

In actual use I think it's excellent, I've been casually comparing it to the Sony 50mm f/1.4 and they produce similar results but I did consistently (very slightly) prefer the 50mm background rendering even if I couldn't put into words quite why (the 50mm seemed a bit creamier?) but for the most part I think they're very comparable although where the Sony is warm the Zeiss is cool, there's about a 400k difference. The 40mm is much easier to handle, has faster AF, better in the corners, and has a lot more flexibility with the close focus which I make use of on a regular basis so if not for the aforementioned problem I'd be very happy right now.

I'm speaking with a support agent at Zeiss (spent 2 hours waiting on the phone which they never answered but they responded to email quickly) but we're still at the "is the camera switched on?" stage and there's been reports from others of the same problem on FM so I don't think I'm just unlucky and would recommend against buying the lens until this is fixed, although if you never use eye AF or AF in magnified view you won't notice the issue.
 
What a shame. I hope they can swap it for a good one.

Anyone else getting a security message about this site? Maybe just me.
 
woof woof said:
What a shame. I hope they can swap it for a good one.
Click to expand...

I've seen the issue reported from several different people, so if I were a gambling man I'd say it's a firmware issue and not a design flaw.

woof woof said:
Anyone else getting a security message about this site? Maybe just me.
Click to expand...

The SSL certificate was renewed today, you probably caught the old version.
 
( really must unsubscribe from this thread )
 
damianmkv said:
( really must unsubscribe from this thread )
Click to expand...
Seriously thinking about it as well. It's like a crap photo gallery at the moment !!! I've got my own version of that so don't need to look at other peoples :exit:
 
Competition news...

I see the Nikon Z7 has a max shutter speed of 1/2000 with EFCS. That would disappoint me.

Review at DPR.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-z7

"Overall this is a very impressive performance, meaning the Z7 will produce detailed, flexible files in a wide range of conditions. You'll have to remember to turn electronic first curtain on to avoid shutter shock, which unfortunately limits your fastest shutter speed to 1/2000s."
 
Raymond Lin said:
I just saw this and all I thought through out was "TP is going to go nuts" :D
Click to expand...
You think so??? :LOL:
I remember some years back when (I think) CSTV did a "color review" and Sony A6000 was spanked for having to natural colors :thinking: :D
 
If men (the largest group of photographers) want a lesson on colours they should really ask a woman.
 
soeren said:
You think so??? :LOL:
I remember some years back when (I think) CSTV did a "color review" and Sony A6000 was spanked for having to natural colors :thinking: :D
Click to expand...

I can literally picture certain members going "it's the Norhorps again, he doesn't know what he is talking about!"

Even when all he is doing is reflecting the data of his survey.

I have to admit that looking at some of the latest side by side comparison lately, #calistaring his videos of his recent EOS R, Fuji X-T3 and Sony A7III and I find myself liking the Sony more. The Canon can at times be more accurate but not always nicer.
 
For once I actually agree with ol' Tonser - I've said it many times on here in the past "colour science" is BS, especially for anyone who only shoots RAW and applies PP no matter the gear used. But I'm not TN so nobody listened. He should have thrown some of the other makes in the mix when doing his survey though to really throw people off.
 
Even with jpeg's there should be a way of setting the output more to your liking. It's a long time since I looked but I bet there's a page full of options to tweak just about everything colour and wb wise somewhere in the menu of every camera.
 
Cagey75 said:
For once I actually agree with ol' Tonser - I've said it many times on here in the past "colour science" is BS, especially for anyone who only shoots RAW and applies PP no matter the gear used. But I'm not TN so nobody listened. He should have thrown some of the other makes in the mix when doing his survey though to really throw people off.
Click to expand...
Ha well said.

Aimed at snake! Hehe oi snake geeza. What you saying now homie!
 
Raymond Lin said:
I can literally picture certain members going "it's the Norhorps again, he doesn't know what he is talking about!"

Even when all he is doing is reflecting the data of his survey.
Click to expand...

Those certain members most likely didn't need a youtuber to point this out for them. Just like the shallow DOF nonsense, I posted a video about how much that doesn't matter, it was also survey based and people moaned that survey based results don't mean anything. But I knew 'certain members' would giggle like school girls over this one when I saw it

I don't know how you can 'literally picture certain members' when all you ever have to go on is what you choose to take from their words on a screen
 
jonneymendoza said:
Ha well said.

Aimed at snake! Hehe oi snake geeza. What you saying now homie!
Click to expand...

Aimed at nobody in particular tbh, but I've seen it bandied about on here, and I would say it's mostly in here, or Canon threads. I see Fuji folk also say "I love the Fuji colours" too, then they process the hell out of them :D

I process all of my images, which is why it never matters so much to me what I'm shooting with. And what TN is correct about is that this "colour science" malarky seems to be a new trend, like Bokeh was before it. And youtube is responsible for a lot of it. Before Kai Wong started it, nobody was going around harping on about 'Booookay'
 
Cagey75 said:
Aimed at nobody in particular tbh, but I've seen it bandied about on here, and I would say it's mostly in here, or Canon threads. I see Fuji folk also say "I love the Fuji colours" too, then they process the hell out of them :D

I process all of my images, which is why it never matters so much to me what I'm shooting with. And what TN is correct about is that this "colour science" malarky seems to be a new trend, like Bokeh was before it. And youtube is responsible for a lot of it. Before Kai Wong started it, nobody was going around harping on about 'Booookay'
Click to expand...
I process my stuff too mate. Colour science is meh.
 
woof woof said:
There's a bit on the history of bokeh here...

https://theonlinephotographer.typep...04/20-years-ago-this-month-what-is-bokeh.html

If we're talking 20 years ago bokeh wouldn't be the first thing to come to mind as some of us know that it was 20 years ago today Sgt Pepper taught the band to play and that's much more important.
Click to expand...

It's always been possible, just wasn't so over used. I prefer when it's more subtle, not 90% of the image. There's such a thing as too much IMO.

Sgt Pepper? only 20 years ago eh?
 
It was 20 years ago today sgt pepper taught the band to play... they said that when they first sang the song :D

On bokeh, I think back then before it became the almost norm some people thought the out of focus areas weren't important and that what was was the subject. I can agree with that but also that the overall look matters too. I do think that people can go overboard to the point that very little is there apart from the bokeh. I agree with a lot of what the same on line photographer says in defence of depth.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It was 20 years ago today sgt pepper taught the band to play... they said that when they first sang the song :D

On bokeh, I think back then before it became the almost norm some people thought the out of focus areas weren't important and that what was was the subject. I can agree with that but also that the overall look matters too. I do think that people can go overboard to the point that very little is there apart from the bokeh. I agree with a lot of what the same on line photographer says in defence of depth.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/06/in-defense-of-depth.html
Click to expand...

Ha, the penny just dropped . . . I took you too literally :LOL:
 
Cagey75 said:
Those certain members most likely didn't need a youtuber to point this out for them. Just like the shallow DOF nonsense, I posted a video about how much that doesn't matter, it was also survey based and people moaned that survey based results don't mean anything. But I knew 'certain members' would giggle like school girls over this one when I saw it

I don't know how you can 'literally picture certain members' when all you ever have to go on is what you choose to take from their words on a screen
Click to expand...

Showing a random bunch of people shots with slightly different apertures and taking their thoughts on whether it was good or not isn't really going to convince many people that DOF is nonsense.

It really comes off as 'certain members' being overly defensive of the limitations of their system.
 
simonbarker said:
Showing a random bunch of people shots with slightly different apertures and taking their thoughts on whether it was good or not isn't really going to convince many people that DOF is nonsense.

It really comes off as 'certain members' being overly defensive of the limitations of their system.
Click to expand...
I'd recommend you watch that video again and listen very carefully to what he says.
 
simonbarker said:
Showing a random bunch of people shots with slightly different apertures and taking their thoughts on whether it was good or not isn't really going to convince many people that DOF is nonsense.

It really comes off as 'certain members' being overly defensive of the limitations of their system.
Click to expand...

You must not have watched it then, because the survey wasn't based on any make or model, just shallow DOF in general, 'certain members' just love to p*** on anything other 'certain members' post no matter, but that's been happening years and won't change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top