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

twist said:
A7r v1.
Click to expand...

Brings an interesting question...

With the A7II they've stayed at 24mp but the rumoured A7rII could be 50mp? Bypassing 36mp? I'd have thought that it would make more sense to have 12, 24, 36 and 50mp with the 50 sporting a new badge, A7x? A8?

I think that the A7r was a bigger seller than the A7? I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere and if so I wonder what making the A7rII 50mp would do for the sales figures? I wonder if more people would actually prefer a 36mp A7rII?
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Brings an interesting question...

With the A7II they've stayed at 24mp but the rumoured A7rII could be 50mp? Bypassing 36mp? I'd have thought that it would make more sense to have 12, 24, 36 and 50mp with the 50 sporting a new badge, A7x? A8?

I think that the A7r was a bigger seller than the A7? I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere and if so I wonder what making the A7rII 50mp would do for the sales figures? I wonder if more people would actually prefer a 36mp A7rII?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I would've hoped that's the way they'd do it.

I think it was a7 / r / s being the top seller.
 
twist said:
Yeah, I would've hoped that's the way they'd do it.

I think it was a7 / r / s being the top seller.
Click to expand...

They're all the top seller? :D

12, 24, 36 and 50mp would assume that Sony have the capacity/ability to do them all. Time will tell.
 
woof woof said:
They're all the top seller? :D

12, 24, 36 and 50mp would assume that Sony have the capacity/ability to do them all. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

If they have the ability to produce so many e mount models and compacts then I'm sure they can produce one more fe.
 
I don't know. The gear they use to make FF chips is pretty high end and pretty expensive. I have no idea if it's possible to use existing equipment to produce a 50mp chip or what the costs are in changing production from 36 to 50mp if that's possible. I've also no idea if any additional capacity would be needed but I'd imagine that introducing a new model will boost sales so they'd need some slack in the existing production capacity or they'd need to add additional capacity. If they need to add capacity or a new machine then I'd imagine that even to Sony that might be a significant cost.

As I said, I don't know if they can do it all but time will tell.
 
I love the 24-70 really good allround lens it spends a lot of time on my A7R.
 
Any recommendations for a 135mm manual focus lens for my A7s? I was just about to order the new Samyang and noticed that there are loads of vintage 135s about that all look to be very decent performers. Smaller and cheaper too. I already have a couple of suitable adapters so M39 would be ideal but I'm open to suggestions from users of lenses with other fittings. I'll be using it mostly for outdoor portraits so nice rendering and no crazy bokeh please.

Some possibilities that I came across:

OLYMPUS OM E ZUIKO AUTO-T 135MM F2.8
JUPITER-11
CANON 135mm f3.5 M39
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR 135mm F:3.5
 
i think the halinx or something begining with h is very good too
you looked on mf forum?

takumar pentax is probably lovely too
 
paulcamcas said:
Any recommendations for a 135mm manual focus lens for my A7s? I was just about to order the new Samyang and noticed that there are loads of vintage 135s about that all look to be very decent performers. Smaller and cheaper too. I already have a couple of suitable adapters so M39 would be ideal but I'm open to suggestions from users of lenses with other fittings. I'll be using it mostly for outdoor portraits so nice rendering and no crazy bokeh please.

Some possibilities that I came across:

OLYMPUS OM E ZUIKO AUTO-T 135MM F2.8
JUPITER-11
CANON 135mm f3.5 M39
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR 135mm F:3.5
Click to expand...

Super Takumar 135 2.5 or Nikon 105 2.5
 
robj20 said:
I love the 24-70 really good allround lens it spends a lot of time on my A7R.
Click to expand...

It's surprising how this lens has garnered such negative press. Looking at the raw files at f5.6 it's as sharp across the frame at 55mm as the 1.8 prime and with better contrast. I wonder if there were issues with some early batches and Zeiss have quietly corrected things.
 
paulcamcas said:
Any recommendations for a 135mm manual focus lens for my A7s? I was just about to order the new Samyang and noticed that there are loads of vintage 135s about that all look to be very decent performers. Smaller and cheaper too. I already have a couple of suitable adapters so M39 would be ideal but I'm open to suggestions from users of lenses with other fittings. I'll be using it mostly for outdoor portraits so nice rendering and no crazy bokeh please.

Some possibilities that I came across:

OLYMPUS OM E ZUIKO AUTO-T 135MM F2.8
JUPITER-11
CANON 135mm f3.5 M39
MINOLTA MD TELE ROKKOR 135mm F:3.5
Click to expand...

I have Olympus Zuiko and Minolta Rokkor f3.5's and also a Rokkor f2.8 and the latter is easily the best of the three.
 
rodd1000 said:
It's surprising how this lens has garnered such negative press. Looking at the raw files at f5.6 it's as sharp across the frame at 55mm as the 1.8 prime and with better contrast. I wonder if there were issues with some early batches and Zeiss have quietly corrected things.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of people rather than going out and actually taking pictures just sit on the internet looking at MTF charts and come to the conclusion its rubbish.
 
New FE lenses, official info coming tomorrow.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/more...rique-confirms-official-info-coming-tomorrow/

sonyroadmap-700x670.jpg
 
Woooohoooooo FE 90mm f2.8 Macro G OSS...... lets see how much it will cost! :(
 
Rizvan said:
Massive just like the Zeiss 35mm f1.4 [emoji50]
Click to expand...

I dont mind massive if it has a massive aperture. They can keep the 90 macro, dont do macro and I have a much smaller Summicron for portraits.

28mm F2 interests me the most. Doubt Id buy it though.
 
Last edited:
When they first teased us with the 28mm as far as I remember it was pictured with the two adapters and I thought that they came with it... free. I'm not so happy to see that you have to pay for them :(

Been thinking about AF lenses and as my most used lens is 50mm and I only use other focal lengths now and again I might just stick with the AF 55mm f1.8 and the kit lens (which I still haven't used...) and use my manual 24, 28, 35, 85 and 135mm lenses as and when.
 
Last edited:
How do u rate ur camera as torn between this and A7s
robj20 said:
I love the 24-70 really good allround lens it spends a lot of time on my A7R.
Click to expand...
 
have u had a A7s yes I hand held most of the time. Is it cos it AF better? Why A7s
rodd1000 said:
For tripod work the a7r is superior, the detail is amazing. Pretty much everything hand held then it's a7s.
Click to expand...
 
rookies said:
have u had a A7s yes I hand held most of the time. Is it cos it AF better? Why A7s
Click to expand...
Due to its low light performance. If your using a tripod you just dial up the exposure time so iso is less important unless your doing astrophotography.
 
A7s will also handle rf wides much better, anything under 50mm fov will benefit.
 
I don't struggle with the A7r handheld at all. Took me about a week of use to get my keeper back to where it was using my 40D, just a bit more effort that's all. Typically using the 35mm i'm happy at about 1/40 shutter speed.
I would say 90% of my pictures are handheld.

I haven't used the A7S it really doesn't interest me in the slightest. From what i have seen as well the A7R isnt that far behind in low light when you downsize the images.
 
Last edited:
Also I believe the ISO performance of the A7/A7R up until ISO 6400 the A7S is no better.
So if you don't need higher ISO the A7/A7R will suffice but with the added benefit of 24/36mp.
 
Rizvan said:
Also I believe the ISO performance of the A7/A7R up until ISO 6400 the A7S is no better.
So if you don't need higher ISO the A7/A7R will suffice but with the added benefit of 24/36mp.
Click to expand...

This is why I said the A7S is only better if you shoot hand held in low light but the a7m2 claws back some of those gains with the ibis if using lenses without it that is.
 
Last edited:
Hang on a minute...

1) Ibis wont help if you are shooting a moving target
2) The A7s handles RF lenses much better
3) The A7s has a completely silent shutter
4) The A7s video output is way better
5) The A7s focuses to -4EV, other models 0EV

@Rizvan And finally, an ISO sample.... have a look at the ISOs and levels of detail

 
Last edited:
twist said:
Hang on a minute...

1) Ibis wont help if you are shooting a moving target
2) The A7s handles RF lenses much better
3) The A7s has a completely silent shutter
4) The A7s video output is way better
5) The A7s focuses to -4EV, other models 0EV

@Rizvan And finally, an ISO sample.... have a look at the ISOs and levels of detail

Click to expand...

How do you find the Af at iso below 3200 compared to the A7?
 
rodd1000 said:
How do you find the Af at iso below 3200 compared to the A7?
Click to expand...

Im not using AF with my A7S, so couldnt say. But judging by this video its quite a bit better and has no problem locking fast in difficult situations.

 
Trying find some low light on A7r
 
rodd1000 said:
What was it that you didn't like about the A7? All of the image samples I've seen look very impressive at reasonable iso.
Click to expand...

Colour (obviously subjective), iso performance, noise characteristics and AF (which is now a moot point as I shoot MF). I just feel for me the a7s is a much better camera and so it should be, it cost a hell of a lot more. The a7 is a bargain now though, not much else that will touch it at 799.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Colour (obviously subjective), iso performance, noise characteristics and AF (which is now a moot point as I shoot MF). I just feel for me the a7s is a much better camera and so it should be, it cost a hell of a lot more. The a7 is a bargain now though, not much else that will touch it at 799.
Click to expand...

For a stills camera I'm still wide open as to which a7 to go for. I can see the iq is fairly comparable at base iso for all cameras, although fine detail contrast is lacking a bit with the A7S compared to the other two according to the image-resource sample files. Obviously as iso rises this advantage levels out again as noise creeps in on the 7 and 7r. DXO state the A7s DR and colour depth isnt as good, although not sure how noticeable that is in real use. If you're shooting landscapes from a tripod at around base iso, coupled with the lower resoltion sensor then the a7s may not be the best choice.
I've also noticed theres a difference in colour output between the A7 and A7ii, with the later now producing slightly better contrast and depth to my eyes. Sony definitely tweaked something there. The A7r files I've seen are very impressive, amazing dr, a smidge less sharp though, which surprises me given the lack of aa filter.

I think overall at base iso the A7 and A7r appear to have a slight edge in Iq. As iso rises things level out until the a7s just takes over from 1600 onwards. Now if Sony could produce a camera that amalgamates the benefits of all three cameras it would be a much simpler decision. I've no idea when Sony plan to announce the A7rii but I hope it's soon, I did expect it last week :/
 
rodd1000 said:
For a stills camera I'm still wide open as to which a7 to go for. I can see the iq is fairly comparable at base iso for all cameras, although fine detail contrast is lacking a bit with the A7S compared to the other two according to the image-resource sample files. Obviously as iso rises this advantage levels out again as noise creeps in on the 7 and 7r. DXO state the A7s DR and colour depth isnt as good, although not sure how noticeable that is in real use. If you're shooting landscapes from a tripod at around base iso, coupled with the lower resoltion sensor then the a7s may not be the best choice.
I've also noticed theres a difference in colour output between the A7 and A7ii, with the later now producing slightly better contrast and depth to my eyes. Sony definitely tweaked something there. The A7r files I've seen are very impressive, amazing dr, a smidge less sharp though, which surprises me given the lack of aa filter.

I think overall at base iso the A7 and A7r appear to have a slight edge in Iq. As iso rises things level out until the a7s just takes over from 1600 onwards. Now if Sony could produce a camera that amalgamates the benefits of all three cameras it would be a much simpler decision. I've no idea when Sony plan to announce the A7rii but I hope it's soon, I did expect it last week :/
Click to expand...

Thats why I said for me the A7s is the better camera. Id rather have those 5 killer features over a 1 stop improvement in DR at base. I dont do landscape, so I dont need MP. What I do needs accurate skintones / good ISO and it has to be good with RF lenses, the rest are nice bonuses for me. The A7s has plenty DR anyway and Ive not found I need any more.

What people need to do is look at their requirements and decide which model suits them, Sony has given 3 very different models in the same form factor for us to pick and choose from. You cant have the best of all worlds.
 
The new 28-135mm "is truly a stunner" and that's nice :D

Read all about it...

http://www.cinema5d.com/sony-28-135mm-review-cine-zoom-lens/

I can't see myself buying this and it seems from the write up to be aimed more at professional video use.

Even though this isn't for me it's nice to see that it's a quality bit of kit and that has to be good for the system.

Anyone even remotely tempted to one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top