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

LeeRatters said:
Wish I saw that..... I might have been tempted to upgrade :ROFLMAO: Could you imagine the shock of going from my original A7 to an A9ii.......??
Click to expand...

Performance wise it'd be a shock but for the pictures I take and how I look at them my fear would be that I'd see little to no improvement. That comforts me :D
 
Hi, Ok I no that this quetion has probably been asked before but with over 1600 pages here!!
I was going to buy a Canon 5D MK IV along with a 100-400mm MK II lens but the boss or some call wife suprised me by saying why don't you change brands so you can have something lighter and easier to carry, I keep reading so many articles about the differant brands available but Sony keeps catching my eye but as a long time Canon brand user I have no idea what to go for in the Sony range, with a budget between £4000-£5000 I need to get a Sony camera and lens combo for manly bird photography, now the lens I was looking at the 200-600mm F5.6-F6.3 as this seems to have the longest reach at 600mm but a poor F6.3. Camera wise I have no idea where to start, I don't want to go back to far in production time but need a decent/good option for bird photography close to the Canon 5D MK IV specs. Again please note I am Canon thru and thru for some years but also would like/need a change so any advice please? Many Thanks for your time, Russ.
 
Has to be the a9 or a9mkII Russ I was Canon all my life 1dxmkII the a9 is the best bird focusing camera iv ever used .
Rob.
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, Ok I no that this quetion has probably been asked before but with over 1600 pages here!!
I was going to buy a Canon 5D MK IV along with a 100-400mm MK II lens but the boss or some call wife suprised me by saying why don't you change brands so you can have something lighter and easier to carry, I keep reading so many articles about the differant brands available but Sony keeps catching my eye but as a long time Canon brand user I have no idea what to go for in the Sony range, with a budget between £4000-£5000 I need to get a Sony camera and lens combo for manly bird photography, now the lens I was looking at the 200-600mm F5.6-F6.3 as this seems to have the longest reach at 600mm but a poor F6.3. Camera wise I have no idea where to start, I don't want to go back to far in production time but need a decent/good option for bird photography close to the Canon 5D MK IV specs. Again please note I am Canon thru and thru for some years but also would like/need a change so any advice please? Many Thanks for your time, Russ.
Click to expand...

there is an A9 in sales at a really great price (not sure if its still available).
when you are buying such huge tele-lenses I don't think mirrorless or DSLR makes a difference in size really. Nikon made some progress on lighter smaller tele-lenses with the 300mm PF and 500mm PF. Apart from those to the rest are equally huge that a small saving in body won't make a huge lot of difference.
 
f/2.8 said:
No one is hoping harder than me :ROFLMAO:

Would be very surprised if they will let it go through when its such an obvious misprice, but if your not in you can't win.

Think the difference between those two is mainly down to the I.B.I.S I had an A6400 for a while and really liked it. I had the Sigma 16 f/1.4, 30 f/1.4 and 56 f/1.4 they were all great.
Click to expand...

If you get 2 please see my wanted thread for an A9ii
 
GyRob said:
Has to be the a9 or a9mkII Russ I was Canon all my life 1dxmkII the a9 is the best bird focusing camera iv ever used .
Rob.
Click to expand...
Hi, Thankyou for the reply. What lens would you advise then for BIF and static to go along with the A9? Thankyou. Russ
 
I think the 200 / 600 is very good I have one and its internal zoom ISO is very good on the a9 so f6.3 isn't a big problem as always the better the light the more settings options you have .

Time to go birding :)
Rob.
 
I'm really enjoying the A9, I traded in my A7Riv last week and was going to replace it with another A7Riii but don't think I will now. The eos r was a good step up from the 5D iv for me but still way behind the A7iii. if staying with canon wait and see what the R5 brings, if not the A9 will be a great upgrade from the 5D. Lens wise 100-400 or 200-600.
 
Tatts said:
I'm really enjoying the A9, I traded in my A7Riv last week and was going to replace it with another A7Riii but don't think I will now. The eos r was a good step up from the 5D iv for me but still way behind the A7iii. if staying with canon wait and see what the R5 brings, if not the A9 will be a great upgrade from the 5D. Lens wise 100-400 or 200-600.
Click to expand...

Stop it :D

Another thread got me thinking about my long since sold Panasonic GF1. That camera was small and would easily fit in a coat pocket.

A7+35mm f2.8, GF1+40mm f1.7 and RX1.

zV5i9dx.jpg


pLBQg4c.jpg


Looking at that I could maybe be tempted to a RX1 type camera.
 
woof woof said:
Stop it :D

Another thread got me thinking about my long since sold Panasonic GF1. That camera was small and would easily fit in a coat pocket.

A7+35mm f2.8, GF1+40mm f1.7 and RX1.

zV5i9dx.jpg


pLBQg4c.jpg


Looking at that I could maybe be tempted to a RX1 type camera.
Click to expand...

Ewww, no grip and no eyecup, I wouldn't be at all comfortable.
 
I grew up with cameras with no grip so that probably wouldn't be a problem. I would insist on an EVF and the battery life would need to be much better than the 100 or so shots I read in a review on DPR.

The A7 with 35mm f2.8 is pretty small but for me it isn't coat pocketable and needs to be in a bag.

I've recently decided I have too much camera gear. The MFT kit would be the obvious kit to ditch (two cameras and 8 lenses) but at the mo it fulfills a role the A7 doesn't and the 1" TZ100 can't quite.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I grew up with cameras with no grip so that probably wouldn't be a problem. I would insist on an EVF and the battery life would need to be much better than the 100 or so shots I read in a review on DPR.

The A7 with 35mm f2.8 is pretty small but for me it isn't coat pocketable and needs to be in a bag.
Click to expand...

I don't find using a camerabag an inconvenience personally, in fact I would prefer that to having something like a camera in my pocket.
 
NewBeetle said:
I don't find using a camerabag an inconvenience personally, in fact I would prefer that to having something like a camera in my pocket.
Click to expand...

I don't like bags of any sort but if I have a camera with me that's where it has to go unless it's the TZ100 which will fit in a coat pocket. If we're out for a walk the bag will contain drinks and snacks as well, so I'd be carrying it anyway. I used to use a cheap man bag but now I sometimes use a Billingham.
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, Ok I no that this quetion has probably been asked before but with over 1600 pages here!!
I was going to buy a Canon 5D MK IV along with a 100-400mm MK II lens but the boss or some call wife suprised me by saying why don't you change brands so you can have something lighter and easier to carry, I keep reading so many articles about the differant brands available but Sony keeps catching my eye but as a long time Canon brand user I have no idea what to go for in the Sony range, with a budget between £4000-£5000 I need to get a Sony camera and lens combo for manly bird photography, now the lens I was looking at the 200-600mm F5.6-F6.3 as this seems to have the longest reach at 600mm but a poor F6.3. Camera wise I have no idea where to start, I don't want to go back to far in production time but need a decent/good option for bird photography close to the Canon 5D MK IV specs. Again please note I am Canon thru and thru for some years but also would like/need a change so any advice please? Many Thanks for your time, Russ.
Click to expand...
A lot of advice already but here's my twopenneth worth. There's two bodies I would consider, the A9 for outright performance and incredible AF, and the A7RIV to give you the ultimate cropability. Lenses wise you could adapt your Canon gear, or you there's the choice of the 200-600mm and 100-400mm. I have the latter as I have the A7RIV and I can get the equivalent of 800mm reach and still have a 15mp image. At 600mm equivalent it's a 26.8mp image. Whilst AF is very good it can't match the A9. Might be worth watching this to see if the A7RIV is 'good enough'

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4hQJh-LX3M&t=294s
 
woof woof said:
Stop it :D

Another thread got me thinking about my long since sold Panasonic GF1. That camera was small and would easily fit in a coat pocket.

A7+35mm f2.8, GF1+40mm f1.7 and RX1.

zV5i9dx.jpg


pLBQg4c.jpg


Looking at that I could maybe be tempted to a RX1 type camera.
Click to expand...
Looking at that I could maybe be tempted to a 35mm f2.8 lens for my A7ii :-)
 
It makes for a compact set up. I've taken mine to Thailand twice and to Singapore and to lots of places in the UK too.
 
While I agree with the cropability above (if you're making large prints), the R4 isn't the best for BIF and there's currently issues when paired with the 200-600 which is why I sold mine.
 
Tatts said:
While I agree with the cropability above (if you're making large prints),
Click to expand...
crop ability isn’t just for prints ;)
the R4 isn't the best for BIF
Click to expand...
no it’s not, but as the video shows it’s more than capable (y)

and there's currently issues when paired with the 200-600 which is why I sold mine.
Click to expand...
Whilst it is an issue and very unfortunate it does appear as though it’s the minority that have issues (y)
 
snerkler said:
crop ability isn’t just for prints ;)
no it’s not, but as the video shows it’s more than capable (y)


Whilst it is an issue and very unfortunate it does appear as though it’s the minority that have issues (y)
Click to expand...

It's actually the majority. they did a poll on a sony group and it was close to three quarters that had the issue.
What other advantages are there with cropping? I was obsessed with MP until I did that test above, I was going to buy another R3 but thought is it worth it.
 
Tatts said:
It's actually the majority. they did a poll on a sony group and it was close to three quarters that had the issue.
What other advantages are there with cropping? I was obsessed with MP until I did that test above, I was going to buy another R3 but thought is it worth it.
Click to expand...

Don't know what Sony group you are referring to. I also think it'll be the minority than the majority because no one will come online to express how their camera is normal ;)
On the flip side the issues even rather small ones (*not* saying this focus issue is small) will spread like wildfire in the internet
 
Tatts said:
It's actually the majority. they did a poll on a sony group and it was close to three quarters that had the issue.
What other advantages are there with cropping? I was obsessed with MP until I did that test above, I was going to buy another R3 but thought is it worth it.
Click to expand...
As I posted above, it allows me to crop heavily and still maintain good resolution. I don’t know what your tests are above, and what the resulting file sizes were so can’t comment on that but I did my own tests and the extra MP were an advantage.

I’m not “obsessed” with mp either and for quite a bit of my shooting it’s unnecessary however as many on here will know the reason for me wanting the mp was to ‘gain’ reach whilst reducing weight as health issues mean that weight is an issue these days. Having the 100-400mm saves me 1kg, that’s significant on a day out shooting. The other advantage is that you can use the 1.4tc with the 100-400mm if you really need the extra reach (I haven’t yet).
 
Tatts said:
On the subject of cropping. Same lens, same distance, same crop. A9 vs A7Riv

2. A9 90mm by liam tattersall, on Flickr
2. R4 90mm by liam tattersall, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Cropping is a difficult discussion as it depends on the use the file will receive and each person’s personal preference/needs. A few years back I did a test with comparing cropping with using a teleconverter. For general web use I couldn’t see any difference between the two. I can understand the advantage that generally a higher MP camera will allow you to crop more whilst still maintaining a good sized file size.

I can see the benefit of the A7iv regarding cropping. I personnally moved from the A7Riii to the A9 due to the better AF and no blackout. I did think about the A7iv as it was a similar price as a used A9 but the no blackout was my main draw. I don’t think either camera is bad for wildlife, it’s just certain situations will suit one camera and a photographers personal preference more than the other.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
As I posted above, it allows me to crop heavily and still maintain good resolution. I don’t know what your tests are above, and what the resulting file sizes were so can’t comment on that but I did my own tests and the extra MP were an advantage.

I’m not “obsessed” with mp either and for quite a bit of my shooting it’s unnecessary however as many on here will know the reason for me wanting the mp was to ‘gain’ reach whilst reducing weight as health issues mean that weight is an issue these days. Having the 100-400mm saves me 1kg, that’s significant on a day out shooting. The other advantage is that you can use the 1.4tc with the 100-400mm if you really need the extra reach (I haven’t yet).
Click to expand...
The above is the camera on a tripod, same lens, same settings, same distance, same crop size. The size is 6.37mb vs 19mb and 3721x3310 vs 5952x5412 but can you see that much difference? While we're on the subject of MP being an advantage, you'll lose what you gained by fitting the TC. You'll actually have sharper images just cropping to the equivalent focal length but that's a whole other subject.
 
nandbytes said:
Don't know what Sony group you are referring to. I also think it'll be the minority than the majority because no one will come online to express how their camera is normal ;)
On the flip side the issues even rather small ones (*not* saying this focus issue is small) will spread like wildfire in the internet
Click to expand...
One of the Sony facebook groups, they all had a poll for r4 & 200-600 owners. It was close to three quarters that voted yes to focus issues.That video on youtube I've previously posted is getting more comments of more people with the same issues, again on there the people with issues far outweigh the ones without.
 
Tatts said:
One of the Sony facebook groups, they all had a poll for r4 & 200-600 owners. It was close to three quarters that voted yes to focus issues.That video on youtube I've previously posted is getting more comments of more people with the same issues, again on there the people with issues far outweigh the ones without.
Click to expand...
How many people in the polls have issue, how many people in YouTube comments have issues?
And how many copies of this lens has sold in total?

I don't see any factual information yet to say it's a majority. A random poll and a bunch of comments on YouTube doesn't really prove that. Until such time I'll continue to believe it's a minority.
Besides I am an optimist :D
 
Tatts said:
The above is the camera on a tripod, same lens, same settings, same distance, same crop size. The size is 6.37mb vs 19mb and 3721x3310 vs 5952x5412 but can you see that much difference? While we're on the subject of MP being an advantage, you'll lose what you gained by fitting the TC. You'll actually have sharper images just cropping to the equivalent focal length but that's a whole other subject.
Click to expand...

downsized to the same small res no you cannot tell a difference and that's not the point at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top