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

After a quick non scientific test between the Samyang 50mm f1.4 FE II and the 45mm f1.8 I would say the 50mm is a smidge sharper and has a smidge more contrast. What's really surprised me is how much difference the 5mm makes in terms of framing and compression, I wasn't expecting it to be noticeable. Also the combo of the 5mm and 2/3 stop wider aperture gives more pop and background blur that I was expecting, I thought some of that would be negated from having to be further away from the subject with the 50mm vs the 45mm. Overall I'm very happy with the results from the 50mm (y)
 
snerkler said:
Completely get that, and if I made a living from photography I wouldn't have anything other than Sony glass, preferably GM.

For a hobbiest I don't have to have the best of the best performers and if I get a missed shot it's not the end of the world (although still can be very annoying). As a result I can pick and choose between cost vs performance vs weight (y) As much as I'd like to have the absolute best quality I can't afford some of the lenses, plus I'm not willing to put up with the weight. There's always a compromise ;)
Click to expand...

To be honest if I was just shooting stuff only for myself, I would be very happy with an A6400 and the Sigma 16,30 and 56mm art. That would cover everything I would need as a hobbyist.

Although in saying that when I was a hobbyist and shot Nikon I had 2 full frame bodies and 8 lenses. :D
 
f/2.8 said:
The Samyang colours are also a real pita to match with other lenses as well in post.
Click to expand...

This is very true and something that is overlooked by many, I had the same issues in the world of Fujifilm. IMO Samyang have to be viewed as a budget alternative (and you're getting what you pay for), I've never been happy with any of the Samyang lenses I've owned.

snerkler said:
I can't afford the .......
Click to expand...

Given the vast array of lenses that you have, this doesn't make sense, especially as you have quite a bit of overlap, ie 3 lenses that shoot at 85mm and 3 that shoot at 100mm (and thats just in Sony!)

I do understand about the weight though, but given that you'll only ever be taking a selection of lenses out (and the 50GM is considerably less weight than the 100-400 for instance, and really not that much more than the Sigma 85mm)
 
snerkler said:
After a quick non scientific test between the Samyang 50mm f1.4 FE II and the 45mm f1.8 I would say the 50mm is a smidge sharper and has a smidge more contrast. What's really surprised me is how much difference the 5mm makes in terms of framing and compression, I wasn't expecting it to be noticeable. Also the combo of the 5mm and 2/3 stop wider aperture gives more pop and background blur that I was expecting, I thought some of that would be negated from having to be further away from the subject with the 50mm vs the 45mm. Overall I'm very happy with the results from the 50mm (y)
Click to expand...

I used the 55 f1.8 for the village jubilee shots, and having walked about with the 50 f1.4 for a couple of weeks found the extra 5mm to irritatingly narrow the field of view.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
This is very true and something that is overlooked by many, I had the same issues in the world of Fujifilm. IMO Samyang have to be viewed as a budget alternative (and you're getting what you pay for), I've never been happy with any of the Samyang lenses I've owned.



Given the vast array of lenses that you have, this doesn't make sense, especially as you have quite a bit of overlap, ie 3 lenses that shoot at 85mm and 3 that shoot at 100mm (and thats just in Sony!)

I do understand about the weight though, but given that you'll only ever be taking a selection of lenses out (and the 50GM is considerably less weight than the 100-400 for instance, and really not that much more than the Sigma 85mm)
Click to expand...
I've always shot different brand lenses so have never really worried too much about exact colour match, as long as each one looks good to my eyes that's all that matters to me, obviously would be different if you're doing a shoot for someone etc.

I do have an overlap of focal lengths but I wouldn't say I have an overlap of lenses. For example, the 85mm f1.4 at f1.4 is going to give a very different look to the 24-105mm f4 at 85mm f4. One I'd shoot portraits with, the other I wouldn't. Again the 70-200mm and 100-400mm are very different lenses despite the overlap. Possibly doesn't make sense to everyone but makes sense to me ;)

I clearly don't mind spending money now and again if I've got it, and REALLY pushed the boat out to get the 70-200mm, but I can't afford to be spending money on lenses like that very often, and even if I could I think it would end up in divorce :lol: The 70-200mm is possibly my most used lens, whereas primes I don't use a great deal hence why I'm happy to go for the 'budget' option (y)
 
snerkler said:
I've always shot different brand lenses so have never really worried too much about exact colour match, as long as each one looks good to my eyes that's all that matters to me, obviously would be different if you're doing a shoot for someone etc.

I do have an overlap of focal lengths but I wouldn't say I have an overlap of lenses. For example, the 85mm f1.4 at f1.4 is going to give a very different look to the 24-105mm f4 at 85mm f4. One I'd shoot portraits with, the other I wouldn't. Again the 70-200mm and 100-400mm are very different lenses despite the overlap. Possibly doesn't make sense to everyone but makes sense to me ;)

I clearly don't mind spending money now and again if I've got it, and REALLY pushed the boat out to get the 70-200mm, but I can't afford to be spending money on lenses like that very often, and even if I could I think it would end up in divorce :LOL: The 70-200mm is possibly my most used lens, whereas primes I don't use a great deal hence why I'm happy to go for the 'budget' option (y)
Click to expand...

Since you are a 'zoom' shooter (generally), do you really need 3 x budget primes (35/50/85), why not one really good one? (I know you are sending the 35mm back, buts thats effectively what you were targeting)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Since you are a 'zoom' shooter (generally), do you really need 3 x budget primes (35/50/85), why not one really good one? (I know you are sending the 35mm back, buts thats effectively what you were targeting)
Click to expand...
Possibly don't need the 35mm, I got it more for Goodwood in case 50mm proves too long if there's big crowds around the cars. I then thought it might be fun to try at the session day next weekend, and if I decide that 35mm's not for me it'd be cheaper to buy and sell than rent. 50mm vs 85mm will serve 2 different purposes, plus I'm more than happy with the performance of both anyway and not sure I'd swap either for something else. There's no 50mm f1.4 that's close in terms of size and weight of the Samyang 50mm FE II, even the Gen I is bigger and heavier. I'm also a big fan of Samyang's rendering.

After looking into it recently I think I prefer the rendering of the Sigma DG DN over the GM too, although there's no disputing that the GM is much better in backlit scenarios.

We all make our choices ;)
 
And for me too, the Sammy lenses give a much nicer look than the Sony f1.8 primes. If I need corner to corner sharpness then I'd pick the 55 or even the 24-105, but that's not usually a requirement.
 
woof woof said:
I don't have a problem with it and one thing that does bother me a bit is that the newer model are bigger and wont fit in the Lowepro bag I sometimes put my A7 and 35mm f2.8 in, it's a tight fit with he half case on but it goes in. I guess if/when I get a new A7/A9 I just wont be able to use hat bag any more.
Click to expand...
Just been looking at the different models on camerasize, and if it's accurate the A7-III is only 1.2mm bigger than the A7 so will it really be an issue. OK the grip protrudes more than the A7 but less than the 35mm f2.8 does so won't make a difference in terms of being able to fit.
 
As we on Topic of lenses,
I used my Canon ef70-300L IS USM, and Sigma 150-600 Contemporary canon fit via sigma MC-11 adapter on my Sony A6600, and I am pleased with the results as the canon glass is sharp and natural tone colors IMO !
Sure if I had wealth of cash I would get Sony GM glass, however I am amateur and use as much as possible the gear I already own. As I own a canon EOS 7Dii I use the same glass for both cameras. Except a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 on E mount as my walk around. Which is a light weight, compact and very sharp little lens !
 
If anyone's interested, Amazon have the A7c for £1699.
 
robj20 said:
Honestly. Stick with your A7, maybe wait to see what the A7C2 brings.
You seem like me on that the increase in size after the MK1 cameras is a big turn off.
Your A7 seems to do everything you want it to. I only changed my A7R after having children and wanting better AF.
The increased size with the A7iii was a no no for me then the A7C was announced and it answerer my prayers.
Obviously when your A7 breaks you night have to have a bigger body of the what ever version A7C doesn't do what you want.
Money to spend then get a nice lens.
Click to expand...

IQ wise I'm mostly happy with the A7 (but everyone would like more DR) and it's easily the best camera I've even had but there are things I'd like improving and they are as follows...

- My A7 is slow even with my fastest acting lenses. It's much slower than my MFT cameras which are Lotus Elise's in comparison to the A7's Landrover.
- The A7 lacks an electronic shutter and I miss this. My MFT cameras have it.
- Moving the focus point is a slow process which might be a bit quicker with a joystick, maybe.

That's about it I think.

The current A7c isn't for me, there are just too many control and spec limitations and they trigger me :D A mk2 could be an option as I do like RF style cameras (I have 3) but I have no confidence that Sony will add the additional controls and settings I'd like to see. I've looked at the A7III so many times and at the mo that does seem the most likely choice.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Just been looking at the different models on camerasize, and if it's accurate the A7-III is only 1.2mm bigger than the A7 so will it really be an issue. OK the grip protrudes more than the A7 but less than the 35mm f2.8 does so won't make a difference in terms of being able to fit.
Click to expand...

I think it's just a touch bigger with the bigger grip. It might fit in my current Lowepro bag but it's a very tight squeeze at the mo so maybe not but anyway this doesn't matter as I have other bags and a new Lowepro bag or similar will be on Amazon somewhere :D
 
snerkler said:
Yep depending on the scene even with the best cameras they can still lack in DR, that's why if I'm doing a dedicated landscape photo I still use grad filters. I've not seen the "mirrorless take-over" thread, I'll have to take a gander.

I think when the A9 was released people said the reduced DR was down to speed and also to keep DR higher in the range of ISOs the camera's most likely to be used at (although the latter I'm not sure about when you see the graph below), this was the same for the Nikon D4, D5, Canon 1Dx's etc. It does appear that they are now getting over this 'issue' with the 1Dx-III And SOny A1 having a DR of 14.5ev. The A9-II is 'reasonable' at 14ev.

I think scenes like the tree lined path you posted above you're always going to have to expose to the left and bump exposure in post where needed, even with 14.8ev DR.
Click to expand...

This is what I thought, speed and higher ISO performance. I've no idea why this should affect lower ISO DR and I'd like to know, but it is what it is.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I used the 55 f1.8 for the village jubilee shots, and having walked about with the 50 f1.4 for a couple of weeks found the extra 5mm to irritatingly narrow the field of view.
Click to expand...

This is why the 55mm f1.8 sits in a drawer. It bothers me every time.

At the moment I'm trying to get used to the 35mm f1.8 which has also been mostly in the drawer and once I'm happier with it I might see if I can get used to the 55mm. I used to really like the old Sigma 50mm f1.4 on my 5D and perhaps not being able to get to love the Sony 55mm is partly why I've gravitated to 35mm rather than 50mm in later years.
 
woof woof said:
This is why the 55mm f1.8 sits in a drawer. It bothers me every time.

At the moment I'm trying to get used to the 35mm f1.8 which has also been mostly in the drawer and once I'm happier with it I might see if I can get used to the 55mm. I used to really like the old Sigma 50mm f1.4 on my 5D and perhaps not being able to get to love the Sony 55mm is partly why I've gravitated to 35mm rather than 50mm in later years.
Click to expand...

You could pick up an old sigma 50 1.4 and mc11 adapter in canon mount or LA-EA4 in A mount for a couple of hundred.

My A mount Sony 50 1.4 is nice, but not nearly as sharp as the Sammy and offers a lot of coma and fringing by comparison.
 
ancient_mariner said:
You could pick up an old sigma 50 1.4 and mc11 adapter in canon mount or LA-EA4 in A mount for a couple of hundred.

My A mount Sony 50 1.4 is nice, but not nearly as sharp as the Sammy and offers a lot of coma and fringing by comparison.
Click to expand...

I don't know how that combination would work on my A7, it may be slow to AF.

I have thought about the 50mm f1.2 GM but that's a bit big or the 50mm f2.5 G but one thing that stops me is that I've got used to 35mm and 50mm isn't that much of a change. I suppose looking at 50mm the most sensible options are stick with the 55mm f1.8 and get used to it or go for the 50mm f2.5 G. I don't take a lot of pictures in lower light now so the f2.5 would only really be a limitation on the odd holiday or evening out but the 35mm f2.8 was a bit limiting when we went to Singapore. I haven't thought about the Sony 50mm f1.8 because of possible focus issues on my old A7.
 
Tysonator said:
Here is a link on the A7C Mkii

Sony α7C II is NOT coming in 2022, but three (or maybe four) other new Sony cameras will be announced | sonyalpharumors

A rumor posted by a website that never got a single rumor right is going around the web. It says the A7cII is coming this fall. Well, according to what I have learned so far the A7cII should not be on market in 2022. There will be three (and maybe four) new Sony cameras that
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com
Click to expand...
Yeah literally the post before yours. Lol
 
Been following the discussion on A7 III vs A9, I’ve owned both but for me the sweet spot is the A7R III, widely regarded as the best sensor Sony have produced when considering IQ/performance/ value for money. I can see a clear advantage in IQ but would go back to an A9 if I needed to shoot fast moving action or BIF.
 
Last edited:
imattersuk said:
Been following the discussion on A7 III vs A9, I’ve owned both but for me the sweet spot is the A7R III, widely regarded as the best sensor Sony have produced when considering IQ/performance/ value for money. I can see a clear advantage in IQ but would go back to an A9 if I needed to shoot fast moving action or BIF.
Click to expand...

Interesting take I have had all 3 of these as well still have a couple of A7III's and A9's.

Thought the A7RIII was a complete dog of a camera personally, it has a nice sensor but a.f isn't great and purely for my purposes it didn't suit my needs at all. For someone that maybe just shoots landscapes or stuff that doesn't move the A7RIII might still be a good option as the sensor is good. Although to be fair you might as well just get an A7RII then as its the same sensor.

At the moment between the 2 of us we have:

A9II
A9 x 2
A7RIV
A7IV x 2
A7III X 2

Of those for us anyway the A9 is my favourite, for me the A9II is just the same thing with slightly different ergonomics. The A9 being a fair bit cheaper is much better value, I should never have bought the A9II, the ergonomics difference means nothing to me.

Even with all the different options available now the A9 is still a great choice especially at what they can be bought for now used.

A9 has better A.F than the A7RIV, A7III and equivalent A.F to the A7IV. The blackout free shooting is a good advantage over those as well. The ability to use the silent shutter all the time is also a huge advantage. Each of my A9's have less than a couple of hundred actuations because we never need to use the mechanical shutter. We always set the other camera's up when we need to use flash. It is just handier for us to have a camera ready to go with a flash and others without.

Yeah the A9 doesn't have the dynamic range of the others, but have honestly never once found that to be an issue in real life situations, the difference is very small.

24Mpx is also no issues for what we need either, although a little more would be nice.

In an ideal world I would like a 33-36mpx A9III with the viewfinder from the A7RIV and an upgraded L.C.D and the option to use the newer faster cards. That would be the perfect camera for me. Although rumours suggest the A9III will still have a 24mpx sensor.

Everyone's usage will be different for a hobbyist that shoots a lot of different things. I guess the A7III probably makes the most sense as a do all camera. The A7IV is better at everything but is a fair bit more expensive and has the flip out screen which I personally dislike.

The A1 is the interesting one I guess as it has the best of everything but 50mpx is too much for me and for the price of an A1 I can have an A9 and an A7RIV which makes a lot more sense to me.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Interesting take I have had all 3 of these as well still have a couple of A7III's and A9's.

Thought the A7RIII was a complete dog of a camera personally, it has a nice sensor but a.f isn't great and purely for my purposes it didn't suit my needs at all. For someone that maybe just shoots landscapes or stuff that doesn't move the A7RIII might still be a good option as the sensor is good. Although to be fair you might as well just get an A7RII then as its the same sensor.

At the moment between the 2 of us we have:

A9II
A9 x 2
A7RIV
A7IV x 2
A7III X 2

Of those for us anyway the A9 is my favourite, for me the A9II is just the same thing with slightly different ergonomics. The A9 being a fair bit cheaper is much better value, I should never have bought the A9II, the ergonomics difference means nothing to me.

Even with all the different options available now the A9 is still a great choice especially at what they can be bought for now used.

A9 has better A.F than the A7RIV, A7III and equivalent A.F to the A7IV. The blackout free shooting is a good advantage over those as well. The ability to use the silent shutter all the time is also a huge advantage. Each of my A9's have less than a couple of hundred actuations because we never need to use the mechanical shutter. We always set the other camera's up when we need to use flash. It is just handier for us to have a camera ready to go with a flash and others without.

Yeah the A9 doesn't have the dynamic range of the others, but have honestly never once found that to be an issue in real life situations, the difference is very small.

24Mpx is also no issues for what we need either, although a little more would be nice.

In an ideal world I would like a 33-36mpx A9III with the viewfinder from the A7RIV and an upgraded L.C.D and the option to use the newer faster cards. That would be the perfect camera for me. Although rumours suggest the A9III will still have a 24mpx sensor.

Everyone's usage will be different for a hobbyist that shoots a lot of different things. I guess the A7III probably makes the most sense as a do all camera. The A7IV is better at everything but is a fair bit more expensive and has the flip out screen which I personally dislike.

The A1 is the interesting one I guess as it has the best of everything but 50mpx is too much for me and for the price of an A1 I can have an A9 and an A7RIV which makes a lot more sense to me.
Click to expand...
There are a few more benefits for the A9ii over the A9 such as dual UHS-II slots, anti-flicker, better fps with mechanical shutter, more DR, and better connectivity, of course whether any of those matter will be down to the individual (y)
 
snerkler said:
There are a few more benefits for the A9ii over the A9 such as dual UHS-II slots, anti-flicker, better fps with mechanical shutter, more DR, and better connectivity, of course whether any of those matter will be down to the individual (y)
Click to expand...

As I said none of those matter to me for me the only difference is the ergonomics.

The dual UHS-II make very little difference in real world use.

The anti flicker makes no difference at all.

I never use the mechanical shutter.

A bump form 13.3 to 14 Evs is no difference at all.

Have never used any of the more advanced networking stuff, I dare most people won't ever need that.
 
snerkler said:
There are a few more benefits for the A9ii over the A9 such as dual UHS-II slots, anti-flicker, better fps with mechanical shutter, more DR, and better connectivity, of course whether any of those matter will be down to the individual (y)
Click to expand...

Yup. I've read / watched several reviews and blogs now which tend to say that although to some the A9II might have looked like a very mild update to the people who the upgrades matter to it really is a step forward.

Not that all the bells and whistles would matter to me, they wouldn't, except for the step up in DR.
 
imattersuk said:
Been following the discussion on A7 III vs A9, I’ve owned both but for me the sweet spot is the A7R III, widely regarded as the best sensor Sony have produced when considering IQ/performance/ value for money. I can see a clear advantage in IQ but would go back to an A9 if I needed to shoot fast moving action or BIF.
Click to expand...

I'm amazed to see how "old" the A7R3 actually is - it was back in 2017 I originally had one - can't believe thats 5 years ago now!
I loved the A7R2 but the 3 just got it right for me (as a landscaper/travel/city shooter) - the addition of the improved controls (thumbstick, etc), new battery and the improved manual focusing.
 
chrism_scotland said:
I'm amazed to see how "old" the A7R3 actually is - it was back in 2017 I originally had one - can't believe thats 5 years ago now!
I loved the A7R2 but the 3 just got it right for me (as a landscaper/travel/city shooter) - the addition of the improved controls (thumbstick, etc), new battery and the improved manual focusing.
Click to expand...

I think the larger files could be an issue for some people but we better get used to them as larger files are probably coming to us all with just about each new camera release.
 
woof woof said:
I think the larger files could be an issue for some people but we better get used to them as larger files are probably coming to us all with just about each new camera release.
Click to expand...

They were certainly an issue back in 2017 for a lot of folk, should certainly be less of an issue now given there are larger sizes kicking about!
 
woof woof said:
Yup. I've read / watched several reviews and blogs now which tend to say that although to some the A9II might have looked like a very mild update to the people who the upgrades matter to it really is a step forward.

Not that all the bells and whistles would matter to me, they wouldn't, except for the step up in DR.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's what I've read too. For me it was about getting my fingers in comfortably between the grip and lens and not so unfortunately the A9 wasn't even a consideration for me. That being said I still catch my knuckles on the Sigma 85mm from time to time :rolleyes:
 
f/2.8 said:
Interesting take I have had all 3 of these as well still have a couple of A7III's and A9's.

Thought the A7RIII was a complete dog of a camera personally, it has a nice sensor but a.f isn't great and purely for my purposes it didn't suit my needs at all. For someone that maybe just shoots landscapes or stuff that doesn't move the A7RIII might still be a good option as the sensor is good. Although to be fair you might as well just get an A7RII then as its the same sensor.

At the moment between the 2 of us we have:

A9II
A9 x 2
A7RIV
A7IV x 2
A7III X 2

Of those for us anyway the A9 is my favourite, for me the A9II is just the same thing with slightly different ergonomics. The A9 being a fair bit cheaper is much better value, I should never have bought the A9II, the ergonomics difference means nothing to me.

Even with all the different options available now the A9 is still a great choice especially at what they can be bought for now used.

A9 has better A.F than the A7RIV, A7III and equivalent A.F to the A7IV. The blackout free shooting is a good advantage over those as well. The ability to use the silent shutter all the time is also a huge advantage. Each of my A9's have less than a couple of hundred actuations because we never need to use the mechanical shutter. We always set the other camera's up when we need to use flash. It is just handier for us to have a camera ready to go with a flash and others without.

Yeah the A9 doesn't have the dynamic range of the others, but have honestly never once found that to be an issue in real life situations, the difference is very small.

24Mpx is also no issues for what we need either, although a little more would be nice.

In an ideal world I would like a 33-36mpx A9III with the viewfinder from the A7RIV and an upgraded L.C.D and the option to use the newer faster cards. That would be the perfect camera for me. Although rumours suggest the A9III will still have a 24mpx sensor.

Everyone's usage will be different for a hobbyist that shoots a lot of different things. I guess the A7III probably makes the most sense as a do all camera. The A7IV is better at everything but is a fair bit more expensive and has the flip out screen which I personally dislike.

The A1 is the interesting one I guess as it has the best of everything but 50mpx is too much for me and for the price of an A1 I can have an A9 and an A7RIV which makes a lot more sense to me.
Click to expand...
Sounds to me like you expect the AF to do all of the heavy lifting hence your love for the A9. I’ve never missed a shot in a professional environment when shooting moving human or animal subjects with the A7RIII. Never tried it for motor sports or similar but to suggest it’s only suitable for static subjects is plain ridiculous.

I do wonder when I read comments like yours how you would have got on in the film era, cue you’re going to tell me just fine
 
chrism_scotland said:
I'm amazed to see how "old" the A7R3 actually is - it was back in 2017 I originally had one - can't believe thats 5 years ago now!
I loved the A7R2 but the 3 just got it right for me (as a landscaper/travel/city shooter) - the addition of the improved controls (thumbstick, etc), new battery and the improved manual focusing.
Click to expand...
Have to agree, the only downside of all Sony cameras for me is the ruthless efficiency, prefer the character of the Fujifilm range but they are pricing themselves out of the market in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top