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

ancient_mariner said:
Quite possibly lens and subject distance dependent. If there's no close foreground then images can be combined more readily.
Click to expand...

If the lens is one which shows real distortion rather than perspective then there are going to be issues plus I suppose how much overlap you have from shot to shot could affect the outcome.
 
I hadn't watched Manny for a while so I had a look and saw this.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbQ-9v7a9TU


The bulk and weight compared to the Sony f1.8's rule these out for me but that doesn't stop me looking every now and again. His comments on the pulsing and freezing had me thinking I wouldn't bother and would just get the Sony or Sigma alternatives if I wasn't bothered about bulk or weight but I know the cost could be a deciding factor for some. The flaring could also be an issue but in some shots I like the effect.

I was thinking about trying another TTA 40mm f2 but ordering stuff and then sending it back (it kept causing my camera to freeze) along with the disappointment and waste of time annoy me.
 
Just while I'm here. Another dull day at the seaside picture. A7III and Sony 24mm f2.8, f16. Taken at Redcar with the cliffs at Saltburn in the far distance on the RHS.

DSC00993.jpg

Liberal use of Dehaze has given it some sky :D
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
A7v arrived.
On charge and still to set up so not had a chance to use it yet.

Coming from the 3,( from what I remember.. as I sold it 2 months ago)
The body seems a fair bit larger/ wider, there was a lot of talk about the grip being better, but from the little I’ve held it lens-less it feels worse for me.
Maybe it’s my small girly hands or I just need to get used to it but everything just seems abit more stretched and while the new button angle is better the front dial seems harder to use.

So much more in the menu system and thinks to set up. Think may need to watch/ read some guides.
Couldn’t do far figure out how to have different a.f for the af on and ael buttons. Managed to set the ark to af also but on my a73 I had it as eye af specifically.
 
snerkler said:
Today's dog walk
Click to expand...

Lovely pictures.

The last time I was there was 2004 with my then GF and a Canon 300D and Sigma 28-300mm. The weather was poor and I got some ho-hum dull pictures :D It's on my list of places to visit again.
 
woof woof said:
Lovely pictures.

The last time I was there was 2004 with my then GF and a Canon 300D and Sigma 28-300mm. The weather was poor and I got some ho-hum dull pictures :D It's on my list of places to visit again.
Click to expand...
Thanks :)

We were there 3 years ago and it was a bit gloomy but I liked the more moody shots. Whilst it’s a lovely place there’s not much to do, we’re hard pressed to spend much more than an hour there. We were there right from when the causeway first opened and it felt pretty weird with the water still lapping the edge of the road :runaway:

Had to be patient with the light today, whilst there was a lot of blue sky the clouds moved very slowly meaning that they’d block the sun for some considerable time. Bit odd really as at ground level it was very windy, not to mention Baltic
 
We went to the ruined abbey before going to the castle so all that ate up the time.

Sadly I took jpegs in those days so I have no raws to redo but I have tried to rework some. With newer software it is possible to improve even old jpegs a bit.

300D and Sigma 28-300mm. Dehaze strikes again.

1-110_1067-R-M1.jpg
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
We went to the ruined abbey before going to the castle so all that ate up the time.

Sadly I took jpegs in those days so I have no raws to redo but I have tried to rework some. With newer software it is possible to improve even old jpegs a bit.

300D and Sigma 28-300mm. Dehaze strikes again.

View attachment 477779
Click to expand...
Here's my previous shot from 3 years ago, looking back I'm not sure if I went a bit OTT with the editing :thinking:


A1_05163 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr
 
I got a new monitor yesterday.

This one.
www.asus.com

ProArt Display 6K PA32QCVï½Monitorsï½ASUS United Kingdom

ASUS ProArt series for creative enthusiasts and professionals offer advanced display technologies and industry-leading colour accuracy, connectivity and performance. ProArt monitors remain the go-to solution for creating masterpieces.
www.asus.com www.asus.com

I had an excellent 27" Benq monitor which i will now move across to my spare computer. I only changed it because I thought I might be missing not having a 5k display for my Mac Studio. I was originally going to get the Apple Studio Display but opted for this instead as it's 32" and 6k. It turned out I was missing out 6k is absolutely amazing :oops: :$
 
Another Samyang.

Just announced: new Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 P FE | sonyalpharumors

The AF 35mm F1.8 P FE features UMC II (Ultra Multi Coating II), LK SAMYANG’s next generation coating technology. It effectively reduces flare and ghosting, delivering improved contrast and clarity even in challenging lighting conditions such as strong backlight or night scenes. This ensures...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Lets hope it works straight out of the box with no need to check the firmware or send it back for QC issues.

After my issues with Chinese MF lenses and the one Chinese AF lens I've bought and sent back I might be losing a bit of confidence in the Chinese brands but to be fair I haven't had a Samyang.
 
woof woof said:
Another Samyang.

Just announced: new Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 P FE | sonyalpharumors

The AF 35mm F1.8 P FE features UMC II (Ultra Multi Coating II), LK SAMYANG’s next generation coating technology. It effectively reduces flare and ghosting, delivering improved contrast and clarity even in challenging lighting conditions such as strong backlight or night scenes. This ensures...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Lets hope it works straight out of the box with no need to check the firmware or send it back for QC issues.

After my issues with Chinese MF lenses and the one Chinese AF lens I've bought and sent back I might be losing a bit of confidence in the Chinese brands but to be fair I haven't had a Samyang.
Click to expand...

IME its fairly difficult to beat 'you get what you pay for mantra'
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Another Samyang.

Just announced: new Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 P FE | sonyalpharumors

The AF 35mm F1.8 P FE features UMC II (Ultra Multi Coating II), LK SAMYANG’s next generation coating technology. It effectively reduces flare and ghosting, delivering improved contrast and clarity even in challenging lighting conditions such as strong backlight or night scenes. This ensures...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Lets hope it works straight out of the box with no need to check the firmware or send it back for QC issues.

After my issues with Chinese MF lenses and the one Chinese AF lens I've bought and sent back I might be losing a bit of confidence in the Chinese brands but to be fair I haven't had a Samyang.
Click to expand...

The new Samyang lenses like this one now have USB C so that you can just update the lens without the need for the dock that their older lenses need.

I would expect this lens to be pretty good, the lens it is replacing was well regarded.
 
f/1.2 said:
The new Samyang lenses like this one now have USB C so that you can just update the lens without the need for the dock that their older lenses need.

I would expect this lens to be pretty good, the lens it is replacing was well regarded.
Click to expand...
I had two copies of the old one that were badly decentered and went back, I ended up getting the Sony f1.8 instead.
 
snerkler said:
I had two copies of the old one that were badly decentered and went back, I ended up getting the Sony f1.8 instead.
Click to expand...

Thats crap, but know quite a few people that have them with no issues. I am not a fan of the Sony f/1.8 although we have one.

The Siggy 35 f/2 I quite like.
 
After 5 years finally replaced my A9. Lots of options with A7V, A7RV, used A1, adapted Nikon Z8.

Nikon was just too big/heavy, would miss a usable electronic shutter with the A7RV, and was close between the A7V and A1. The additional megapixels (for my beloved 70-350), faster electronic shutter and the better EVF swung it for the A1.
 
f/1.2 said:
Thats crap, but know quite a few people that have them with no issues. I am not a fan of the Sony f/1.8 although we have one.

The Siggy 35 f/2 I quite like.
Click to expand...
I thought the Sony was OK but I didn’t have it that long before upgrading to the f1.4 GM.
 
snerkler said:
I thought the Sony was OK but I didn’t have it that long before upgrading to the f1.4 GM.
Click to expand...

It has pretty awful colours, and very nervous bokeh. It does focus close but yeah its ooh no something else has broken and we need to use it lens for me.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
IME its fairly difficult to beat 'you get what you pay for mantra'
Click to expand...

I realise that these lenses are cheaper than the Sony or even Sigma alternatives if there are any alternatives, but maybe the Chinese are where Sigma was a decade or two ago and haven't got on top of the qc yet. Still, for those who don't want to pay Sony or Sigma money they are an option.
 
woof woof said:
I realise that these lenses are cheaper than the Sony or even Sigma alternatives if there are any alternatives, but maybe the Chinese are where Sigma was a decade or two ago and haven't got on top of the qc yet. Still, for those who don't want to pay Sony or Sigma money they are an option.
Click to expand...

I think that the likes of Viltrox are definitely in category you are talking about (Sigma a decade ago), and are probably optically better than the SIgma of old. We don't yet know how these lenses will stand up to many operating hours, but I actually have a degree of confidence in Viltrox. There also don't seem to be as many QC issues reported as we seem to hear about Samyang.

The manual focus Chinese lenses seem to be very hit and miss, both in build quality, optical quality, and the datasheet quality (exaggerated F-stops !!!)

I have issues with the colour renditions by using different manufacturer glass and prefer to major on one supplier (but even they can have coatingchanges which effect the colour) and I've always found that usually there are benefits of OEM glass, though the cost benefits of those may be very much on the path of decreasing returns. If I was shooting professionally I would much prefer all my images to look the same colour wise from the lenses that I se, this would simplify post processing workflow.

I do accept the cost v return benefit, I've taken the route of premium glass but less of it, others may wish to have a larger number of lenses and then budget dictates that these can't all come from premium suppliers.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I think that the likes of Viltrox are definitely in category you are talking about (Sigma a decade ago), and are probably optically better than the SIgma of old. We don't yet know how these lenses will stand up to many operating hours, but I actually have a degree of confidence in Viltrox. There also don't seem to be as many QC issues reported as we seem to hear about Samyang.

The manual focus Chinese lenses seem to be very hit and miss, both in build quality, optical quality, and the datasheet quality (exaggerated F-stops !!!)

I have issues with the colour renditions by using different manufacturer glass and prefer to major on one supplier (but even they can have coatingchanges which effect the colour) and I've always found that usually there are benefits of OEM glass, though the cost benefits of those may be very much on the path of decreasing returns. If I was shooting professionally I would much prefer all my images to look the same colour wise from the lenses that I se, this would simplify post processing workflow.

I do accept the cost v return benefit, I've taken the route of premium glass but less of it, others may wish to have a larger number of lenses and then budget dictates that these can't all come from premium suppliers.
Click to expand...
I’ve been seeing a fair bit of negativity around the new 85 1.4 pro. Seems to be a lot of duds and focus issues, many arising after using for a while.
Maybe not huge amounts but enough to be noticeable compared to any other lens they have made.
The only other criticism’s before seemed to be about size and weight
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I think that the likes of Viltrox are definitely in category you are talking about (Sigma a decade ago), and are probably optically better than the SIgma of old. We don't yet know how these lenses will stand up to many operating hours, but I actually have a degree of confidence in Viltrox. There also don't seem to be as many QC issues reported as we seem to hear about Samyang.

The manual focus Chinese lenses seem to be very hit and miss, both in build quality, optical quality, and the datasheet quality (exaggerated F-stops !!!)

I have issues with the colour renditions by using different manufacturer glass and prefer to major on one supplier (but even they can have coatingchanges which effect the colour) and I've always found that usually there are benefits of OEM glass, though the cost benefits of those may be very much on the path of decreasing returns. If I was shooting professionally I would much prefer all my images to look the same colour wise from the lenses that I se, this would simplify post processing workflow.

I do accept the cost v return benefit, I've taken the route of premium glass but less of it, others may wish to have a larger number of lenses and then budget dictates that these can't all come from premium suppliers.
Click to expand...

The f stop issue was a biggie with the Artralab 35mm f1.4 which was IMO a total disgrace (and I've read other Artralabs are the same) and less so with Pergear 35mm f1.4 which apert from IMO not being f1.4 is a decent lens for the money. Being prone to flare seems to be the other biggie with some of the Chinese lenses I've had. I can't be bothered dealing with problems with kit now, I just want it to work and get out of the way. Some of these lenses are cheap but I think I'd rather decide if they are cheap enough to go for by comparing them to used established make lenses rather than new. With lenses like the TTA 40mm f2 AFAIK there is no direct Sony or other established name alternative. The Sony f2.5 is a much better lens and it focuses closer but it's much more expensive and isn't f2.
 
jimmyjamjojo said:
Pretty sure Samyang are Korean...
Click to expand...

Yes, my mistake. I should have said cheaper brands and then gone on a rant about the cheap lenses I've had.

I originally started going for cheap modern MF lenses as an alternative to using film era lenses via an adapter with the hope that they could replace the film era primes I had and maybe even my Sony mount Voigtlanders. IMO they are a viable alternative to some of the less good film era lenses but aren't as good as some of the better mass market ones and aren't in the same league as the Sony mount Voigtlanders.

I think the best cheap MF lens I've had was he Syoptic 50mm f1.1. Soft wide open but otherwise IMO a good lens for the money and would be a good lens for twice the price.
 
Last edited:
As it's a quiet day...

Does being shaper mean being better?

Christopher Frost claims the Sigma 50mm f/1.2 FE is better than Sony’s 50mm GM lenses | sonyalpharumors

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiWOvm_U1u4 Christopher Frost tested the best 50mm lenses out there and here is his ranking: Sigma 50mm f/1.2 DG DN Art at BHphoto, Amazon, Adorama, Fotokoch, FotoErhardt, Calumet, Clifton, WexUK Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 L USM at BHphoto, Amazon, Adorama, Fotokoch...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

I suppose sharpness is one way to measure things and for some people it could be the most valued thing but surely there are other factors? What good is a sharp lens if the AF is naff? What about the bokeh? Flare? CA? Surely for most people being the best has to be a mix of things?

Just thinking about the 50's I have had, I've had lots but most of them have been film era MF lenses. I think the technically best I've had is the Voigtlander 50mm f2 apo which I think is outstanding but the best overall I think was the Sigma 50mm f1.4 I had for my Canon DSLR's which was not really sharp across the frame by todays standards but is probably my favourite and best because of the overall look it gave. The best film era 50 I've had is probably the Rokkor f1.4 (I still have it) although the Chinon (I think it was made by Tomioka or maybe Cosina) was also very good and is IMO a much underrated film era 50mm.

What's your best or favourite 50mm?
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
As it's a quiet day...

Does being shaper mean being better?

Christopher Frost claims the Sigma 50mm f/1.2 FE is better than Sony’s 50mm GM lenses | sonyalpharumors

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiWOvm_U1u4 Christopher Frost tested the best 50mm lenses out there and here is his ranking: Sigma 50mm f/1.2 DG DN Art at BHphoto, Amazon, Adorama, Fotokoch, FotoErhardt, Calumet, Clifton, WexUK Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 L USM at BHphoto, Amazon, Adorama, Fotokoch...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

I suppose sharpness is one way to measure things and for some people it could be the most valued thing but surely there are other factors? What good is a sharp lens if the AF is naff? What about the bokeh? Flare? CA? Surely for most people being the best has to be a mix of things?

Just thinking about the 50's I have had, I've had lots but most of them have been film era MF lenses. I think the technically best I've had is the Voigtlander 50mm f2 apo which I think is outstanding but the best overall I think was the Sigma 50mm f1.4 I had for my Canon DSLR's which was not really sharp across the frame by todays standards but is probably my favourite and best because of the overall look it gave. The best film era 50 I've had is probably the Rokkor f1.4 (I still have it) although the Chinon (I think it was made by Tomioka or maybe Cosina) was also very good and is IMO a much underrated film era 50mm.

What's your best or favourite 50mm?
Click to expand...
I suppose depends on whom you ask. Personally no, I have long given up maximising lenses solely based on sharpness.
Traded 20-70+50-300 for 20-200mm
35GM for sigma 35mm f1.2ii
85GM and 85DN for samyang 85mm f1.4ii.
In all cases I have taken a hit on sharpness.

For me its a combination of size, sharpness, rendering, AF etc. But everyone will have their own priorities.

I'm not much of a 50mm shooter but if I had to pick it'd be Sony 55mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.2GM.
I never tried the sigma 50mm f1.2 so can't comment on it.

Edit:
He's made two videos recently - 50mm and 35mm.
In both cases 4 our of the 7 lenses are available for Sony. We are definitely spoilt for choice regardless you the preferences.
 
Last edited:
I've said on here many times that I think lenses can be too sharp for a picture of your Mrs / GF. I first thought this when I took a picture of my then GF with a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 on my Canon 20D. Maybe I just hadn't looked at her very closely, I have had better looking GF's :D and note that being good looking with perfect skin or not is subjective and relative and these are just factors of attractiveness to be weighed against and together with other attributes both physical and otherwise and I'm no oil painting either :D

But no, I think sharpness has stopped being an issue unless we're talking about across the frame and into the extreme corners and/or wide open.
 
Last edited:
It's worth asking how we see sharpness - is it resolving power for fine detail, micro-contrast, or some other factor?

Other factors make a lens pleasing including rendering and speed of AF, CA isn't generally a problem most of the time, colour production can be managed. I tend to use the 50 GM 1.2 most of the time because AF is fast & accurate and even wide open everything on the focal plane is acceptably detailed. In some applications other lenses render more pleasingly but may smudge important details, and while I can fix rendering in post to an extent, I can't add detail without AI. If the Sigma Art 35 1.2 was half the weight I might use it more despite the slightly iffy focusing because it renders nicely as well as giving excellent detailing.
 
I choose lenses on focal length/focal length range, size/weight, and price. Sharpness never enters my head as all the designed for digital lenses I've tried have been sharp enough for my needs.

I've never understood people asking which is the 'better' lens of two different focal length . If you want a 35mm why get a 50mm because it's sharper or has nicer bokeh?
 
Ed Sutton said:
I've never understood people asking which is the 'better' lens of two different focal length . If you want a 35mm why get a 50mm because it's sharper or has nicer bokeh?
Click to expand...

In that particular example both are 'standard' focal lengths, give or take a little (zoom with your feet) and so it's likely they'll just was the lens that gives the nicest overall image. It would be odd if they were asking about 28mm and 80mm.

Ed Sutton said:
I choose lenses on focal length/focal length range, size/weight, and price. Sharpness never enters my head as all the designed for digital lenses I've tried have been sharp enough for my needs.
Click to expand...

And that's absolutely the right approach. Superzooms (that I know you use) are enormously better than they once were, and I can see for your sheep photography they are really very useful and perfectly good. For me, this becomes a bit pointy when the lens I'm using lets down the picture - I went to London for a photo-day out a few weeks back, and took a picture at the long end of my 24-105G - f8 1/125 that needed a small crop. The image (plaster masks on a wire framework) isn't suffering camera shake as I can see that individual strands of wire are clean, but the details inside each mask are smudgy, and wouldn't be good enough for an A4 print in a photozine for example (a distinctly possible use, as I'm planning my next zine). A crisper lens would have hopefully give better results that would be usable.

FWIW the 24-105 is my walk-about lens. I accept the compromise in image quality for convenience, and usually it's 'good enough'. I'm still processing the pictures from that trip, and this is the first one where I feel like the lens let me down, although there are a few where viewing in lightroom, I do feel greater crispness would make for a more satisfying image.
 
ancient_mariner said:
In that particular example both are 'standard' focal lengths, give or take a little (zoom with your feet) and so it's likely they'll just was the lens that gives the nicest overall image. It would be odd if they were asking about 28mm and 80mm.
Click to expand...
To me there's a big difference between 35mm and 50mm, but see below...
ancient_mariner said:
And that's absolutely the right approach. Superzooms (that I know you use) are enormously better than they once were, and I can see for your sheep photography they are really very useful and perfectly good. For me, this becomes a bit pointy when the lens I'm using lets down the picture - I went to London for a photo-day out a few weeks back, and took a picture at the long end of my 24-105G - f8 1/125 that needed a small crop. The image (plaster masks on a wire framework) isn't suffering camera shake as I can see that individual strands of wire are clean, but the details inside each mask are smudgy, and wouldn't be good enough for an A4 print in a photozine for example (a distinctly possible use, as I'm planning my next zine). A crisper lens would have hopefully give better results that would be usable.

FWIW the 24-105 is my walk-about lens. I accept the compromise in image quality for convenience, and usually it's 'good enough'. I'm still processing the pictures from that trip, and this is the first one where I feel like the lens let me down, although there are a few where viewing in lightroom, I do feel greater crispness would make for a more satisfying image.
Click to expand...
We all have different standards of acceptability - and styles.

My standards were set when I had a photo from a 3mp bridge camera printed across two pages in a fishing magazine. Admittedly the quality of reproduction in fishing magazines isn't high, but anything that matches or beats that will do for me. I'm also more likely to be shooting at f5.6 or narrower, so fast lenses are mostly wasted on me, meaning I can use cheaper and smaller lenses.

If a picture won't print well at A4, I print it smaller! :D
 
Ed Sutton said:
To me there's a big difference between 35mm and 50mm, but see below...
Click to expand...

For me, they both oscillate about the 'eye view'. I had a 55 for a while, and it felt like a short telephoto. :p

Ed Sutton said:
We all have different standards of acceptability - and styles.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I've never had a shot printed in a magazine, although I've produced a few wedding albums. My first digital camera was VGA (640:480) but the level of what's acceptable for *me* starts at what my Bronica ETR would produce.
 
Ed Sutton said:
To me there's a big difference between 35mm and 50mm, but see below...

We all have different standards of acceptability - and styles.

My standards were set when I had a photo from a 3mp bridge camera printed across two pages in a fishing magazine. Admittedly the quality of reproduction in fishing magazines isn't high, but anything that matches or beats that will do for me. I'm also more likely to be shooting at f5.6 or narrower, so fast lenses are mostly wasted on me, meaning I can use cheaper and smaller lenses.

If a picture won't print well at A4, I print it smaller! :D
Click to expand...

Massive :D

On printing and apertures, I like being able to pixel peep and see a nice detailed file and modern kit spoils us here but I do have A3 prints taken with my Canon DSLR's and I have two prints filling A4's framed and wall mounted taken with my Medion compact which gives files around 2304x1728, 2.06MB. Printed to fill an A4 they look nice, I'm surprised how nice they look.

I do some hyperfocal at f8 and more focused shooting at f8 and I seem to be doing more panoramas now at f5 or f8. I occasionally go to f11 or f16 when I want front to back depth when there's something close to me but I take a lot more pictures wide open than at f11/f16. I think well over half of my pictures are stopped down a bit from wide open to f5/f5.6.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top