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

If you have Nikon and Sony already wouldn't it make more sense to get a 50mp Sony rather than a Canon and so restrict yourself to two systems rather than run three?
 
5abi said:
Don't expect everyone to agree. My opinions are mine and computing power is not a concern for me. I will adjust my equipment according to what technology throws at me, besides the at things are moving, we won't need all that power in your home, cloud computing is your answer. Companies like Dropbox are swiftly integrating to multiple cloud tools. In no time you will have someone integrating with Adobe cloud and AWS and then people will follow suit. Tools like Dropbox will start making apps for WiFi enabled cameras like the a7 and then you have fuller richer system that moves files for you and makes them avaliable to cloud computing services for editing through a browser. Sony will do the same and make their tools available online to deal with the raw files. Furthermore the tools will be constantly updated and they will improve those tools with time, Sony will be able to fix shortcomings with the camera hardware lenses and bodiea through their online raw codecs and tools right at import. The problem is that you guys are thinking in the "now". Look at all the angles guys.
Click to expand...

I think the days of a thin client photo editing app across the WAN with the file sizes we are talking about are a so far in the future as to be irrelevant to a camera choice made today.

Combining that with the obvious drawback of having to have a web connection at all times to even start the thin client app and it's unlikely to be a mainstream solution in the next 10 years and IMO will probably never be a mainstream solution.

As internet speeds go up and storage costs go down I would expect a shift to large NAS solutions in home, and back away from the gimmick of 'the cloud'

Once the proper infrastructure is standard at all the endpoints (homes/businesses etc) then the cloud solution offers no real benefits to a consumer anymore, it's just a bridging product so that people can have things connected now with minimal costs.
 
Can I also ask out of interest what you shoot (5abi)? You've just said that you own an A7R, D810, 'bags of lenses' and are looking at the A7Rii and 5DS so I'm interested in why you need all of that kit at all?

Most people here have a selection of kit but also actually shoot with it instead of attempt to just brag about it..

Also, with regards to a stable/high speed data connection (assuming you'd be shooting out in the field rather than tethered to a home PC), how fast do you think 50Mb Raw files will actually upload to your cloud storage direct from any camera?
 
Last edited:
I do mostly landscape and architecture Steve. Thanks for asking. I don't brag but I was being asked why I even have an opinion so i had to put it straight.

I think I am being targeted for saying something out of the ordinary. Let's not try to focus on obstacles. Internet out in the field is not something I was taking about. I'll have to come back to respond, have to run.
 
5abi said:
I do mostly landscape and architecture Steve. Thanks for asking. I don't brag but I was being asked why I even have an opinion so i had to put it straight.

I think I am being targeted for saying something out of the ordinary. Let's not try to focus on obstacles. Internet out in the field is not something I was taking about. I'll have to come back to respond, have to run.
Click to expand...

I don't think that you should think that 5abi, this is an internet forum and just the place to talk about things ordinary and extraordinary :D Just state your views and discuss and who could ask for more :D

And on the general point of technology... I spent decades working in computers and wider electronics and whilst I've very largely turned my back on it all now I try and keep a passing interest and I'm vaguely aware of what's possible or indeed sensible now. At the moment I can see some advantages for the application suppliers in cloud based systems and subscription models and there are some advantages for users too but one of the things that makes me blow higher than the Ort cloud is technology that stops working and although it only happens a few times a year when it does I want to kill someone and for those few times a year when I want to kill someone I'm resistant to cloud based internet reliant systems... because sometime they just stop and don't work and I want to kill someone.

Personally for me the best approach would be to hold everything locally and that would include the operating system, the applications and the end result, my pictures. This approach has implications for the hardware as every couple/few years or so if you want the latest, fastest, greatest application and the latest mega mp camera you'll possibly need to update your hardware too but IMVHO that's a price worth paying if it stops me driving to my internet suppliers HQ and killing someone. And then there's the possible security and privacy issues when someone else holds your stuff. All in all I'm for local existence and ownership :D
 
Last edited:
5abi said:
I do mostly landscape and architecture Steve. Thanks for asking. I don't brag but I was being asked why I even have an opinion so i had to put it straight.

I think I am being targeted for saying something out of the ordinary. Let's not try to focus on obstacles. Internet out in the field is not something I was taking about. I'll have to come back to respond, have to run.
Click to expand...

Thanks 5abi. I don't think the kit you have determines whether you should have an opinion though, hence me asking what you shoot instead. The results we deliver are a better measure of our experience than the amount of kit we buy.

With regards to feeling targeted, I don't believe anyone is targeting you but your comments come across as pretty arrogant in a very long running thread made up of a cross section of photographers with varying skills/experience. Your attitude suggesting that people are wrong simply because they don't feel a need for 50mp files to deliver the results they expect (with reasons) was pretty narrow minded.

Cheers
Steve
 
So, I appear to have a dirty sensor (already!), there's one stubborn spot that the blower won't shift. Any recommendations for cleaning the A7? I've looked at the Dust Aid Stamp and the Sensor Gel thing, apparently there's one designed for the Sony, as the regular one doesn't work.

Any suggestions?
 
I just use a Pec pad wrapped around a slice cut form an old credit card onto which I drip a drop of Eclipse fluid.
 
Just wondering if anyone is or has been in the position to compare the zeiss 35/2.8 with the Nikon 35/1.8. I'd like to know how they compare, likewise with the zeiss 55 and nikon 50. Both Nikons are dirt cheap but very highly rated. Debating buying a D610.
 
Last edited:
rodd1000 said:
Just wondering if anyone is or has been in the position to compare the zeiss 35/2.8 with the Nikon 35/1.8. I'd like to know how they compare, likewise with the zeiss 55 and nikon 50. Both Nikons are dirt cheap but very highly rated. Debating buying a D610.
Click to expand...

I've tried both and indeed the vaunted Sigma 35mm the Nikon holds its own cracking lens v the Sigma. The Sony is good but it is only an f2.8 if I was choosing I'd probably take the Nikon and a D610 or D750..
 
I'm surprised people are going back to DSLR's. They are a cheaper package I suppose and each to his own but there's no going back for me as I'd miss the combination of FF in a small package, no front / back focusing silliness and all the goodies like WYSIWYG, peaking and magnified view etc.

I've no idea about the 35mm's (although the Sony/Zeiss 35mm f1.4 seems to be getting rave reviews) and even my old Minolta 35mm f1.8 is good enough for me. Isn't the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f1.8 supposed to be one of the very best AF lenses ever although personally I think it's all pretty much irrelevant once you stop the lenses down, it is an impressive lens though.
 
Im not really surprised people are going back to DSLRs or choosing to rather run a CSC/advanced compact alongside, most people here wont need MF aids as they probably use AF lenses. EVF and OVF both have their benefits and its pretty difficult to mess up an exposure especially if youre shooting RAW, the sensors allow so much to pulled back and forth these days. FF/BF isnt really that much of an issue either, get a dud, send it back, alternatively just fine tune it, only takes a few minutes.
 
Last edited:
i wont part away from my dslr until the AF matches it :p

But imo the sony a7 series is the best street/ put in your random bag type of camera
 
woof woof said:
I've no idea about the 35mm's (although the Sony/Zeiss 35mm f1.4 seems to be getting rave reviews) and even my old Minolta 35mm f1.8 is good enough for me. Isn't the Sony/Zeiss 55mm f1.8 supposed to be one of the very best AF lenses ever although personally I think it's all pretty much irrelevant once you stop the lenses down, it is an impressive lens though.
Click to expand...

mine arrived today :D got the two Batis lenses on preorder - then I will be complete.......right

View attachment 36625

(P.s. I will keep my Canon for as long as I need to, but I will build a Sony system anyway)
 
Last edited:
Going all in then? That's a lot of money to spunk on a new camera system/lenses!

jonneymendoza said:
i wont part away from my dslr until the AF matches it :p

But imo the sony a7 series is the best street/ put in your random bag type of camera
Click to expand...


If you're shooting wildlife or sports, mirrorless just isn't there yet. But if you're not, I see no reason why the AF isn't good enough. In fact, I'm getting a better hit ratio with AF than I ever did with my D7000.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Im not really surprised people are going back to DSLRs or choosing to rather run a CSC/advanced compact alongside, most people here wont need MF aids as they probably use AF lenses. EVF and OVF both have their benefits and its pretty difficult to mess up an exposure especially if youre shooting RAW, the sensors allow so much to pulled back and forth these days. FF/BF isnt really that much of an issue either, get a dud, send it back, alternatively just fine tune it, only takes a few minutes.
Click to expand...
For me a DSLR has no advantage at all other than being cheaper. Even for AF I don't see a single advantage in DSLR.

Focus seems to be a critisism but the fuji system still seems popular despite having a few issues

Personally I'm happy even with AF lenses :D
 
woof woof said:
For me a DSLR has no advantage at all other than being cheaper. Even for AF I don't see a single advantage in DSLR.

Focus seems to be a critisism but the fuji system still seems popular despite having a few issues

Personally I'm happy even with AF lenses :D
Click to expand...

Perhaps not for you and your circumstances but people who require high end AF will notice an immediate difference between a good DSLR and a CSC. The XT1 focuses better than the A7, but still not at DSLR level. People have different requirements.
 
At under £700 for the Sony a7 I'm now really tempted to get on board. Not sure i can afford an a7r though. I'd keep my d7200 for nature and action stuff though. Just a shame there is no adaptor for Nikon lenses to give auto focus.
Now to do some research on what lenses will work on the a7.
 
twist said:
Perhaps not for you and your circumstances but people who require high end AF will notice an immediate difference between a good DSLR and a CSC. The XT1 focuses better than the A7, but still not at DSLR level. People have different requirements.
Click to expand...
Then buy what's best for you and be happy.

Personally I don't have any problem with my A7's AF as it's as fast as the AF of any DSLR I've owned. How did I ever manage :D
 
Purely on a affordability basis the Sony offers a dirt cheap camera body in the original A7 but with very very expensive lenses. This is against a more expensive dslr such as the D610 which offers high quality but much much cheaper lenses, as well as having a vast amount of choice. I'm still concerned about Sonys lack of commitment to FE, they seem happy for Zeiss to do their work, which doesn't suit everyones needs.
 
Last edited:
well fe is there baby, lack of commitment is on a mount side...

other issue is if u want to shoot more than 240mm with a native lens, for the moment anyways...
 
rodd1000 said:
Purely on a affordability basis the Sony offers a dirt cheap camera body in the original A7 but with very very expensive lenses. This is against a more expensive dslr such as the D610 which offers high quality but much much cheaper lenses, as well as having a vast amount of choice. I'm still concerned about Sonys lack of commitment to FE, they seem happy for Zeiss to do their work, which doesn't suit everyones needs.
Click to expand...

Reading the criticism of lens prices here I've looked at A7 lenses v DSLR lenses but not at the total cost of a system so I might do that when I have the time and interest.

I do think that much of the criticism of focus performance and lens pricing is a bit OTT but to explain... all I've ever used is centre point single shot and for that every interchangeable lens camera and AF lens I've owned has been good enough and my current cameras, G1, GX7 and A7 are at least as fast as any DSLR and lens combination I've ever had and in some ways better for example for low light focusing there's just no comparison and if I have the time I can achieve accurate focus in much lower light than I could with any DSLR/lens combination I've ever had. Focus tracking and birds in flight may well be different issues but are not things I'm going to lose sleep over. Price wise I've accepted that for now this is an expensive system but as I'll only ever need a hand full of lenses 7-10 at the very most it's not too bad for me and I am actually pretty convinced that more reasonably priced lenses will probably come at some point.

I've had a love / hate relationship with MFT since the start and I've repeatedly thought of ditching the system and I still do but I've stuck with it as despite the issues I have with it on balance it's still a good system for me. I feel a bit different about the A7 system and for me it's mostly love :D and there are few things I dislike and in fact the main irritation for me is not being able to quickly toggle between EVF and back screen and get the back screen off and really off. Small beer.
 
dancook said:
mine arrived today :D got the two Batis lenses on preorder - then I will be complete.......right

View attachment 36625

(P.s. I will keep my Canon for as long as I need to, but I will build a Sony system anyway)
Click to expand...


Very nice but if you've just got the Zeiss 35mm 1.4, isn't the Batis 25mm a bit too close in focal length to spend £1k on?
 
stevelmx5 said:
Very nice but if you've just got the Zeiss 35mm 1.4, isn't the Batis 25mm a bit too close in focal length to spend £1k on?
Click to expand...

Well I want something for street photography, and I want something for professional use.

So 35mm 1.4 ZA has AF - great for professional use - but not zone focussing and it's quite bulky for street.
The loxia 35mm f2 would be ideal for street, but I don't mind going wider and the 25mm has the oled gauge.

So 25mm for street, 35mm for walkabout + pro usage.
 
Just joined your club today guys. A7 with 28-70 (used with only 920 S/A) and 35mm f2.8.
Its basically the same size as My Em5 with the zeiss lens on it. Full frame in my pocket!
Love my Em5 and will keep it. I was going to get another dslr but couldn't go back to optical -so used now to being able to see or alter the picture in real time. When I looked through the A7 though I thought It was an optical VF its that good!
I had a d600 before my Em5 so I have the same sensor now but I had no chance of squeezing that in my coat poclet.
Oh and I am no big video person but I can say the quality is phenominal!
 
I have always used a 50mm F1. 8/.4 for portraits. I am considering getting the 55mm f1.8 but then I keep wondering about the 70-200f4. As an overall portrait lens and for isolating the subject which do you guys prefer on your a7/r/s.
If shooting in good light will the 70-200 give me better bokeh at the long end on a headshot rather than the 55?
I have never had a 70-200 before but think it may give me better options all round- in relation to portraits.
 
Well, if you don't want to shoot portraits at f1.8-4 then maybe the 70-200mm f4 would be a good choice so it's all down to the look. Maybe someone can post an example?

Actually, for portraits you could always get a couple of old film era lenses :D maybe a 85mm f2 and a 135mm f2.8 :D

(Just in case you haven't read too many of my posts... my answer to pretty much everything is "buy some old manual focus lenses." :D
 
Last edited:
The Sony 70-200mm f4 OSS is epic [emoji106][emoji41]
 
the pentacon 135mm 2.8 with crazy blade count is rather nice i guess on FF, or a 85/90mm

the pentacons seem to have a pastel colour rendering
 
I presume the expro batteries work fine with the a7 cameras? The ones on amazon say they are the upgraded version.
Just checking before I odder a couple.
 
Photopaque said:
I presume the expro batteries work fine with the a7 cameras? The ones on amazon say they are the upgraded version.
Just checking before I odder a couple.
Click to expand...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B005HOXE6G?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00

These yes, I just received an order of three.

I have an A7S - first battery I tried came 81% charged, charged them all to 100% - camera powers on with one of them.

That's all I can say at the moment, but I will be using it today.
 
might be worth going for the ex pro white battery, they seem abit better than the blacks
 
Expro batteries work fine with my A7R, not much different to the genuine Sony ones. Possibly they don't last as long but given the price they are a bargain so just buy more.
 
Went for a 12mile walk, went through 1 1/2 ex pro batteries - which seemed to be fair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top