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

woof woof said:
Changing the goalposts again?

By all means prove things to your own satisfaction but if you want to go beyond opinion then a little more is needed. Opinions are fine and we all have them but if you questing figures that the manufacturers quote then I think that more than your opinion is needed otherwise it's just hyperbole.

You've made a series of statement that you can't substantiate so the matter is closed as far as I'm concerned, but yes, some pro's do indeed use CSC's. Google and you shall find.
Click to expand...

How am i changing the goal posts? All im pointing out is that manufacturers dont always tell the truth.

Your opinion is that cscs are more accurate and faster to af than dslrs, thats laughable.

Id spend a lot longer time trying to find those rare creatures than i would finding pro dslr users.

Yes, you can only make a comparison with a 10yr old camera with extremely basic af and mostly shoot MF, the case is closed. Enjoy the wardrobe photos.
 
it can depend on the lens too

i think my sigma's are acurate, normally if i get a off shot its because its decided to focus on the background, but thats from using larger focusing area.
 
I see many people saying how slow the A7 is and then others saying how fast it is. Could anyone put it in to perspective a little more for me. If we compare them to old DSLRs like the Nikon D200 say how would it compare? Thanks
 
Very pleased with the 16-35. Cracking lens.

I00001l06_nTKxxY.jpg


I0000FnE2RG85hlo.jpg


I0000qzG5C2pqoQA.jpg
 
I have a Minolta MD 135mm f3.5 but I fancied the f2.8 and so got one :D and it seems to be a rather good lens, better than I thought.

As a first test of any new lens I normally shoot a series of shots of my neighbours conservatory and the hill stepping through the apertures. I was expecting some softness and purple fringing and glowing on the pointy bit of the conservatory and the skyline of the hill but it performed better than I thought it would.

100% crops from the centre of the frame at f2.8 then f8. They're sharp enough on my screen but they'll be a bit softer here due to whatever evil photobucket does.









Performance at f2.8 is better than I thought it would be, not much purple or glowing and reasonably sharp. I wont use this a lot as I find 135mm a bit long to hand hold but it'll be a nice thing for occasional use.
 
Last edited:
I am about ready to upgrade my trusty RX10 to an A6000 or A7. With the A7 price falling, at the moment £899 on Amazon, but Amazon pricing can be something of a moving target, I am very tempted to get the R7. Thing is, I really only shoot landscapes, and so I need a wide angle, preferably ultra wide angle capability. I was waiting for the new 16-35mm Zeiss lens to hit the streets, but its near £1300 which is a little out of my price range, so wondering if there is a good viable alternative that you would recommend? If there isnt then it will need to be the A6000 + SEL1018 combo at about £1100. Many thanks.
 
If the 16-35 is out of your price range, you really shouldn't be considering a FF camera, unless your willing to use legacy glass. You could look at the Samyang 14mm its a cracking lens, but fully manual.
The A7R would be better suited for landscape as well, its what i use mine for 90% of the time.
 
u can use the 10-18 or whatever on FF at certain MM's, think about 17
google ;)
 
Creo said:
I am about ready to upgrade my trusty RX10 to an A6000 or A7. With the A7 price falling, at the moment £899 on Amazon, but Amazon pricing can be something of a moving target, I am very tempted to get the R7. Thing is, I really only shoot landscapes, and so I need a wide angle, preferably ultra wide angle capability. I was waiting for the new 16-35mm Zeiss lens to hit the streets, but its near £1300 which is a little out of my price range, so wondering if there is a good viable alternative that you would recommend? If there isnt then it will need to be the A6000 + SEL1018 combo at about £1100. Many thanks.
Click to expand...
Find a minolta 20mm and use the LAe3 or 4 adaptor. It's better than the sal 16-35 @ 20mm. It's not as far as I know been compared to the Sel 16-35 but I'd be surprised if the e mount lens was better than the A mount version.
 
My GF's birthday and like a true northern lass rather than a meal out she wanted Yorkshires at home :D

Nothing wrong with that :D and I'm impressed with the picture at ISO 20,000 :D



My favourite from the day at a mere ISO 800.



Been thinking about buying the 50mm f1.8 AF lens as the manual lenses are fine except when wanting to be a bit quicker.
 
Last edited:
the sal50 covers full frame and is light and cheap, bit meh focus wise
it might be fine with lea3, but I don't know
 
pingu666 said:
the sal50 covers full frame and is light and cheap, bit meh focus wise
it might be fine with lea3, but I don't know
Click to expand...

I'll take a look. Was thinking of the FE 55mm f1.8.

chrism_scotland said:
Back when I had a Sony DSLR the Minolta full frame glass was what to buy, the Minolta 50 F1.7 was a really nice lens.
Click to expand...

MF? Those shots were taken with a Minolta Rokkor MD 50mm f1.4.

Looking at my pictures from yesterday there's one at ISO 20,000 and a few at 8,000 and despite looking a bit soft here they're fine on my screen. None could have been taken with my 5D, I'd have been at f1.4 and something like 1/30 whereas with the A7 I can get some depth of field and keep the shutter speed reasonable. Amazing really.
 
Last edited:
pingu666 said:
the sal50 covers full frame and is light and cheap, bit meh focus wise
it might be fine with lea3, but I don't know
Click to expand...

Just took a look at that. I'm amazingly cheap! I assume it needs an adapter?
 
Sony do the following A mount 50's that could be used with the LAE3 or 4 adapters.

50 1.8 apsc only
50 1.4 sony and minolta flavours full frame.
Sony/minolta 50 2.8 macro careful you don't cut yourself. Full frame
Minolta 50 3.5 macro (as above) full frame
Zeiss 50 1.4 full frame and yikes!
 
Last edited:
the apsc50 actually covers full frame, the focus isn't great, like emulating screw drive
the minolta 1.7 has a great body feel
sigma 60mm covers ff nearly, with baffle removed
 
Another shot from the A7s using the Voigtlander 15mm. The most interesting thing to me, however, is that the firmware update has increased dynamic range; instrument panel was totally black before editing in DXO Optics Pro 10, and a previous attempt with the original firmware in similar conditions resulted in so much noise from recovering the blacks that the shot was unusable. Here there is noise, but far less. It's not perfect, but this type of shot has been impossible with any other camera I have owned. Although the shot looks very bright, it was taken just before sunset.

F/O by Jon Bowles, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
:D

Believe it or not... far from it :D She actually likes posing and if I look like I'm not taking my camera with us she says "Remember your camera" and when we're out it's "Take my picture" every time we meet something photogenic. She also snaps non stop with her phone. For every picture I take she must take 20.
 
My GF wanted a picture of these trees with red berries and four squirrels running about underneath. It's not the worlds greatest shot but I couldn't really get any closer and I needed to get both the berries and the squirrels in shot. The cameras auto ISO selected 25,600 and it's perfectly useable for a whole screen image and I expect it would look ok as quite a largish print too. IMVHO... whilst not up to 7s standards it's still pretty remarkable and wouldn't have been possible with any other camera I've owned.

 
Last edited:
Can anyone comment on how good the 28-70 "kit lens" is? I was so so close to buying an A7 with the lens in Heathrow yesterday as it was slightly cheaper than the offers that were floating around elsewhere but didn't.
However I'm still considering it as it seems a fairly cheap way to give one of these a go alongside my D800 and see which I prefer! However the sticking point for me is lenses, I've been mainly using a Tamron 24-70 f2.8 on the D800 but I think the size and cost of the 24-70 Zeiss lens makes this look very expensive as an experiment so I wondered if the 28-70 was any good as I'd probably pickup the 35mm f2.8 to go with it and would like to also have the zoom.
 
As kit lenses go I'd say it's ok and IMVHO it's actually quite well made for the price. It seems to focus quickly enough for a kit lens and all in all it's possibly the best kit type lens I've had, better than the relatively woeful Canon 17-85mm.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Can anyone comment on how good the 28-70 "kit lens" is? I was so so close to buying an A7 with the lens in Heathrow yesterday as it was slightly cheaper than the offers that were floating around elsewhere but didn't.
However I'm still considering it as it seems a fairly cheap way to give one of these a go alongside my D800 and see which I prefer!
Click to expand...

As kit lenses go, it's at least as good as any I used with Nikon. It's good but not amazing, but then no kit lens is. Good focus, comparatively lightweight, reasonable performance from wide to long, with no issues to speak of. The only problem you'll have with it is if you do pick up that 35mm, or the 55mm. It's not that the kit lens is bad, it's just that those two lenses are so incredibly good.

Also be careful pairing it up with your D800 - a month after doing the same thing myself, the D800 found itself homeless and looking for a new owner on eBay.
 
Crossroads said:
As kit lenses go, it's at least as good as any I used with Nikon. It's good but not amazing, but then no kit lens is. Good focus, comparatively lightweight, reasonable performance from wide to long, with no issues to speak of. The only problem you'll have with it is if you do pick up that 35mm, or the 55mm. It's not that the kit lens is bad, it's just that those two lenses are so incredibly good.

Also be careful pairing it up with your D800 - a month after doing the same thing myself, the D800 found itself homeless and looking for a new owner on eBay.
Click to expand...

Haha - I would be buying one with a view to doing exactly that I think!
 
I'm liking my Rokkor 135mm f2.8.

f2.8, 1/160 and ISO 4000 which is not an ideal ISO :D but the A7 has done better than any other camera I've ever owned and it's a useable shot :D



The more I read about the II the more I think anyone would be a fool to buy one and I certainly wont be :D That's what I'm telling myself so I'll probably end up getting one.
 
Last edited:
I don't think you'd be a fool to upgrade to 5 axis ibis or the numerous other benefits but I'd wait until the price drop Said!
 
Another new A7 owner, picked mine up today. Dithered over the A7 or A7r as I do landscape photography the r would probably have some benefit, but decided the A7 is pretty good as is from all the reviews and info I have read.
Now I need a lens!
Wasn't taken by the 28-70, and would rather put the spend into the 16-35mm which doesn't seem very available at the moment, than the 24-70.
Think I will probably get the 35mm Zeiss for now and then the 16-35mm in the new year. Unless I can come up with an alternate lens solution such as the Canon 17-40 on an adapter.
Anyway, just wanted to mention I had "joined the A7 club" !
 
Brazo said:
I don't think you'd be a fool to upgrade to 5 axis ibis or the numerous other benefits but I'd wait until the price drop Said!
Click to expand...

I didn't reeeeeaaalllllly mean you'd be a fool :D I'm just telling myself that I'd be a fool to get one. I might :D When these cameras first came out I told myself they were hideous and I just wasn't interested but I knew I'd end up getting one :D

This is what I said in post 1.

woof woof said:
Anyone interested?
I've been looking forward to this coming out but I'm hard to please...
1. The rumour was it'd have IBIS, it hasn't got it.
2. It's not exactly pretty is it? To me it looks like someone glued it together in a garden shed.
3. The EVF's in the middle.
4. No swivel screen.
5. No built in flash.
...So, sadly I'll probably pass on this.
Click to expand...
:D

... and now I'm sure I wont be getting a II :D
 
Last edited:
I keep coming back to this thread to see if there is any mention on the A7 mk2.....is there a separate thread somewhere ?
 
Now we have seen what the mk2 has I can't wait to see what the mk3 could possibly bring. Still prefer my R though.
 
Satellitetimedelay said:
I keep coming back to this thread to see if there is any mention on the A7 mk2.....is there a separate thread somewhere ?
Click to expand...

Us lot here have mentioned the mkII. I don't think that the MKII is in stock anywhere yet and I'm not sure anyone has pre ordered one yet.
 
Last edited:
January next year in Europe for the MKII I think or I might have picked one up - really want to try either an A7 or A7r and have been looking at used prices but a bit worried about investing before the A7ii comes out as I'm sure the value of a used A7 will plummet like we've seen with other replaced kit recently (like the D800).

Really fancy one for my trip to Munich this weekend though!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top