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

nandbytes said:
I think the whinging is more that Sony is not releasing enough small lenses as they are doing big expensive lenses. They initially did (FE35,55,28,85,50,24-70mm) but went the way of canikon. But if you look at canon, they also have their huge L lenses but also their smaller, slightly slower versions especially for primes. Sony isn't doing too badly at this, a compact 24mm and 35mm f/1.8 would be nice.
Click to expand...
I think Sony will end up plugging the gaps eventually, guess we just have to wait until they do so.
I am hoping Sony release a FE Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.8 to match the lovely 55mm f1.8, this will make a nice 2 lens travelling setup.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I think Sony will end up plugging the gaps eventually, guess we just have to wait until they do so.
I am hoping Sony release a FE Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.8 to match the lovely 55mm f1.8, this will make a nice 2 lens travelling setup.
Click to expand...

Yup and also a 50mm f2.8 macro that isn't pants at focusing like the one they have now.
 
It'll probably by early - mid next week I get the 70-200, 85/35 1.4 lenses - but i will get the 24-70 today :) think I will go into london tomorrow to give it a test run
 
david357 said:
I don’t understand all the whinging about the lenses making the cameras front heavy, no-one uses a canikon with 400mm lens combo by holding the camera body alone - support the lens and the camera sits on the back. Same principle with sony and g masters - support the lens to operate the camera.
Attitude matters, look for the solution, not the problem.
Just saying‍♂️
Click to expand...

Well I'm not whingeing, just giving a reaction to how I found it.
I am interested in the A7riii as an everyday walkaround/travel camera. The high pixels, ibis and eye AF are attractive.
But ideally I would like something lighter than my 750 and an everyday lens with a better balance than the 24-120 I use.
In fact I prefer to carry D500 with 16-80 for this reason.

Everyone is different and the weight I carry needs to go down.
 
dancook said:
It'll probably by early - mid next week I get the 70-200, 85/35 1.4 lenses - but i will get the 24-70 today :) think I will go into london tomorrow to give it a test run
Click to expand...
Would be interested to hear your views/findings even if they are negative :)
 
Riz_Guru said:
Would be interested to hear your views/findings even if they are negative :)
Click to expand...

I'm sure I will find it difficult to be negative about the camera, my only reservation is image quality - it's subjective for everybody

When I see Sony shots in poor lighting conditions, the colour looks a bit muddy.. but it could also be the photographers processing. Really, I'm sure it's also not much different from the Leica, I've just got selective memory about it.

Will I get this level of quality? I don't know
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4665/26487068618_1516dcffb6_o.jpg

should have picked an image where the eye was in focus ;)
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4757/40650511371_0ab00e9aa6_o.jpg

But realistically for work no one will care, I will be much happier about not missing shots.
 
nandbytes said:
Nah, it was DoA. Samsung pulled out because it didn't sell, not the other way round.
Also its not as great as people make it out to be. Its bit of a paper dragon, looks great on specs but not much beyond that.
Click to expand...

It was a very good camera, IQ was excellent when you consider what it was competing against in the APs-C space. Ultimately they discovered that building a new mount and camera was easy, getting a following wasn’t.
 
chrism_scotland said:
It was a very good camera, IQ was excellent when you consider what it was competing against in the APs-C space. Ultimately they discovered that building a new mount and camera was easy, getting a following wasn’t.
Click to expand...

For some reviewers it was almost as Samsung weren't in the market and when comparing whatever they were reviewing to the competition sometimes Samsung were completely overlooked. I suppose snobbery played a part as it does now with the madder elements of the Canikon crowd repeatedly mentioning playstations and DVD players whenever slagging off Sony cameras and the view that Panasonic are for video and Olympus are for stills shooters. In the eyes of some only traditional camera makers should make camera kit and electronic company products are to be sneered at.
 
chrism_scotland said:
It was a very good camera, IQ was excellent when you consider what it was competing against in the APs-C space. Ultimately they discovered that building a new mount and camera was easy, getting a following wasn’t.
Click to expand...

actually IQ was not much better than A6000. It had few more megapixels, that's it.

Their fancy AF on the other hand worked only with their two huge premium zoom lenses and the kit lens. With primes and other lenses it didn't work unlike on Fuji and Sony where AF works equally well with all native lenses. Then there was low light AF which was basically nonexistent... A6000 is no low light demon but was certainly better than NX1 (and fuji bodies at the time).

Then there is the size, why would someone buy a camera that size when they can get a 7Dii or D7200 or even a FF DSLR camera in that size. It didn't have IBIS either. Yes it had better video than most APS-C cameras but buyers in this area look at stills first then video features are more like icing on the cake.

So yeah just like I predicted on day 1 (or more like day 10) its DoA.

edit:
but one thing Sony and others could learn from samsung is the UI, it was really nice and intuitive to use. It was almost like using a mobile phone in some case which IMO is a good thing as its really easy to use. Sony is maze in comparison.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top