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

twist said:
The A7 is smaller and weighs less than the cameras he mentioned. The A7ii weighs 600g vs 840g of the D750, the D750 battery lasts 3 1/2 times as long. 80g per battery = 240g to meet D750 capacity. 600g plus 240g = D750 weight tada! But thats if you look at it that way, my arms can manage another 240g though.

The point is that if you add the same spec lens to the D750 you have the same overall package weight considering battery capacity OR you have to man up and carry 240g more. Battery use is subjective and a smaller camera is not always more comfortable in the hand.

The main thing is it works for you though and youve stuck with it, so it can work very well for people.
Click to expand...

If i had the same spec D750 i would still have a bigger heavier system. I have never once thought the A7 was uncomfortable to use, most of the time the battery still has >30% left so i only carry one spare as a precaution as i would no matter what camera i use. I tend to carry the 35mm and the 24-70 with me and thats it.
The A7 has the ability to be tiny when i need it, A7+35mm and nothing else, the D750 doesnt come close.
 
Last edited:
@chrism_scotland What it comes down to imo is if you think 240g saving and a little less bulk of the camera body is worth the additional outlay of another system (in your case). The A7 is a fine camera and to some people the reduction is enough to justify the additional cost as a second system or its a good main camera as they dont need certain things a DSLR has to offer or prefer things mirrorless has to offer (like woof woof).
 
woof woof said:
Even if an A7 series plus lens and multiple batteries weighed slightly more than a DSLR I'd still take the A7 every time for the bulk and weight saving when it's possible and the features a CSC offers, in view histogram, level, peaking, magnified view, constant preview WYSIWYG etc.
Click to expand...

I have a live histogram but dont need it as I have highlight metering and other modes, I also have magnified live view with WYSIWG, its called exposure preview. But more importantly I have a nice clear view via my OVF. Both systems have pros and cons. Like I said before the A7 was practically made for your type of shooting.
 
robj20 said:
If i had the same spec D750 i would still have a bigger heavier system. I have never once thought the A7 was uncomfortable to use, most of the time the battery still has >30% left so i only carry one spare as a precaution as i would no matter what camera i use. I tend to carry the 35mm and the 24-70 with me and thats it.
The A7 has the ability to be tiny when i need it, A7+35mm and nothing else, the D750 doesnt come close.
Click to expand...

Yes, 240g heavier. Battery life is dependant on usage, like I said. One A7 battery wouldnt last me a day and Im not the only one who 'complains' about it. If you put a Nikkor 35mm f2 on a D750 it would be pretty damn close but you think 240g is a lot so not in your eyes EDIT 16mm bigger when viewed from the top to be exact ;)

All my comparisons have been against the A7ii which is what the OP was talking about anyway. I know the A7/r is smaller!
 
Last edited:
The d810 offers better dynamic range and has an amazing af system mate. I'd go for that imo.

Canon are the ones slacking anyway and I bet most a7 users came from Canon. If your a Nikon user there is no no benefit going a7 imo
 
twist said:
I have a live histogram but dont need it as I have highlight metering and other modes, I also have magnified live view with WYSIWG, its called exposure preview. But more importantly I have a nice clear view via my OVF. Both systems have pros and cons. Like I said before the A7 was practically made for your type of shooting.
Click to expand...
If you have but don't need a feature like an in view histogram you can turn it off but if you don't have it you can't turn it on if you need it. The OVF/EVF thing has been done to death but the advantages of even a half way good EVF have got to me and I'd hate to go back to an OVF... full WYSIWYG with DoF and exposure with a DSLR? If it can I'd be surprised and doubly surprised if it's anywhere near as good as with a CSC unless you're talking about live view on the back screen, arms length shooting with the back screen isn't for me.
 
jonneymendoza said:
The d810 offers better dynamic range and has an amazing af system mate. I'd go for that imo.

Canon are the ones slacking anyway and I bet most a7 users came from Canon. If your a Nikon user there is no no benefit going a7 imo
Click to expand...

The D750 has a BETTER AF system, its the best AF system Nikon makes.

Seriously? You need to check your facts a bit better, the D810 DR is 14.8 and the D750 is 14.5 EV, BUT the D810 only has that because its base ISO is slightly lower, at EVERY other ISO the D750 has MORE DR.

Canons def slacking but their lenses are good.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
The D750 has a BETTER AF system, its the best AF system Nikon makes.

Seriously? You need to check your facts a bit better, the D810 DR is 14.8 and the D750 is 14.5 EV, BUT the D810 only has that because its base ISO is slightly lower, at EVERY other ISO the D750 has MORE DR.
Click to expand...
Better then the d4 I think it's called ie there sports pro bodies?
 
woof woof said:
If you have but don't need a feature like an in view histogram you can turn it off but if you don't have it you can't turn it on if you need it. The OVF/EVF thing has been done to death but the advantages of even a half way good EVF have got to me and I'd hate to go back to an OVF... full WYSIWYG with DoF and exposure with a DSLR? If it can I'd be surprised and doubly surprised if it's anywhere near as good as with a CSC unless you're talking about live view on the back screen, arms length shooting with the back screen isn't for me.
Click to expand...

I dont have time to check DOF, histogram etc etc. and if I do the LV method works perfectly (as) well. I dont shoot still subjects in set locations. I set my camera and take the picture, the metering system is more than good enough (I dont need to worry about highlights in highlight metering) and I shoot in RAW so recover whatever else I need to. Pretty simple, it works for some, others not.

woof woof said:
Or try and explain a different point of view :D

Twist, the A7 isn't for you, acceot that and be happy and move on with your life :D
Click to expand...

I get your POV and I understand it as Ive said multiple times, you just want me to agree with your POV as being best instead of being balanced and looking at + and - of each system and perhaps ways of working around things without the OP spending £thousands on a second system. :D

You and the A7 crew put your POV across and I put mine across which is relevant because Chris has the same camera and all the stats Ive posted are based on real specs so nothing Ive posted is a lie.

... and I disagree, the A7(rii) is for me, though perhaps not until Ive tried it or see some in depth info about it. I love the idea of a small FF with light lenses but some things need ironing out first and I hope the A7rii and Sony can do that.
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
The d810 offers better dynamic range and has an amazing af system mate. I'd go for that imo.

Canon are the ones slacking anyway and I bet most a7 users came from Canon. If your a Nikon user there is no no benefit going a7 imo
Click to expand...
I moved from Canon in fairness though I never thought Nikon offered a better body or lens the only thing I liked on Nikon better than Canon was doing custom white balance

I find the EVF very easy to use and on mirrorless as the lens is stopped down even before shutter release that does give some advantages for dof. The rear LCD on cameras in daylight can be a pain lots of reflected light can reduce them to useless (for me)

In body is is also useful I feel not better the in lens but as wide angle Canon never had IS indoor shots led too higher ISO setting again for me lower ISO is a plus
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
Much like the
Canon 5ds having same af as a 1dx?
Click to expand...

I dont know much about the 5DS its not a camera Im interested in at all but the 5DS and 1DX price are much closer than the D750 and D4s price. Anyway, this is a Sony thread not Canikon question time.

border_all said:
I moved from Canon in fairness though I never thought Nikon offered a better body or lens the only thing I liked on Nikon better than Canon was doing custom white balance

I find the EVF very easy to use and on mirrorless as the lens is stopped down even before shutter release that does give some advantages for dof. The rear LCD on cameras in daylight can be a pain lots of reflected light can reduce them to useless (for me)

In body is is also useful I feel not better the in lens but as wide angle Canon never had IS indoor shots led too higher ISO setting again for me lower ISO is a plus
Click to expand...

Sure, depending on what you take photos of EVF can be incredibly useful, one thing I LOVE about an EVF is reviewing images on a sunny day ....and magnified view. Dont Canon have a 16-35 IS?

As said ime EVF and OVF both have a lot to offer.
 
Last edited:
@woof woof Quick question, you use a lot of adapted stuff so hopefully you can help, I have a 49mm ND and I want it to go onto a 40.5mm lens for the A6000, do I need a 40.5mm to 49mm step up ring?

Have any of you lot preordered the 7rii, supposed to be here end of the month? So tempted but I relieved the GAS by buying an A6000. :D
 
Last edited:
yeah just get a ring off ebay

if you need to track or pan then evf isn't so great, very slight video delay and then a longer blackout vs a dslr when its taking pics, and that's with a77ii, a mirrorless would probably be less happy about things
 
twist said:
I get your POV and I understand it as Ive said multiple times, you just want me to agree with your POV...
Click to expand...
No, I don't want you to agree with me but I tire of your multiple negative posts in this thread and your repeated Nikon and/or Fuji / other make posts.

The A7 series isn't for you, fine, so why not spend less time here and more time in the Nikon and other make threads.

Just a thought
 
twist said:
@woof woof Quick question, you use a lot of adapted stuff so hopefully you can help, I have a 49mm ND and I want it to go onto a 40.5mm lens for the A6000, do I need a 40.5mm to 49mm step up ring?

Have any of you lot preordered the 7rii, supposed to be here end of the month? So tempted but I relieved the GAS by buying an A6000. :D
Click to expand...

Yes. Step up rings seem to work fine and I've had no issues, other than them getting tight and stuck to stuff. I've never looked but I don't remember seeing any x.5mm option, that could be a bit specialist and could mean a higher price than the very cheap standard size step up rings.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
No, I don't want you to agree with me but I tire of your multiple negative posts in this thread and your repeated Nikon and/or Fuji / other make posts.

The A7 series isn't for you, fine, so why not spend less time here and more time in the Nikon and other make threads.

Just a thought
Click to expand...

Alan, I never brought up the D750, Chris did and I replied with something he may want to consider before splashing out thousands of pounds, then everyone else chipped in. Thats how a forum works. If everything was to your liking nobody would have anything to discuss. Dont talk about my negativity when in practically every post you bad mouth DSLR cameras and discuss in length how they arent for you.

If you get upset by specific stats dont reply to the posts. Just a thought. Weve both had our say and can now move along.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Yes. Step up rings seem to work fine and I've had no issues, other than them getting tight and stuck to stuff. I've never looked but I don't remember seeing any x.5mm option, that could be a bit specialist and could mean a higher price than the very cheap standard size step up rings.
Click to expand...

Thanks, will remember that.
 
there not to expensive, we got one for my mum as we try to keep everything 49mm for her
 
pingu666 said:
there not to expensive, we got one for my mum as we try to keep everything 49mm for her
Click to expand...

Cheers mate, I found some on ebay, do you know where I can get these fairly urgently? Im put off by so called Ebay UK / China sellers.
 
pingu666 said:
if you need to track or pan then evf isn't so great, very slight video delay and then a longer blackout vs a dslr when its taking pics, and that's with a77ii, a mirrorless would probably be less happy about things
Click to expand...

I actually find the a77II / a99 worse than the latest mirrorless offerings in terms of general EVF lag (even the top LCD is laggy as hell on the a77II/99, actually), I'm not sure if it's a 'feature' of the SLT design but even Auto White Balance takes a few moments to correct itself when moving between subjects.

The Fuji X-T1 and a7II have been absolutely fine for panning (and responsiveness, in general), no problems whatsoever.
 
twist said:
I dont know much about the 5DS its not a camera Im interested in at all but the 5DS and 1DX price are much closer than the D750 and D4s price. Anyway, this is a Sony thread not Canikon question time.



Sure, depending on what you take photos of EVF can be incredibly useful, one thing I LOVE about an EVF is reviewing images on a sunny day ....and magnified view. Dont Canon have a 16-35 IS?

As said ime EVF and OVF both have a lot to offer.
Click to expand...
Canon at the time I left had a 16-35mm f2.8 no IS I think they have an f4 version now with IS

The EVF for me makes lee filters so easy to use
 
border_all said:
Canon at the time I left had a 16-35mm f2.8 no IS I think they have an f4 version now with IS

The EVF for me makes lee filters so easy to use
Click to expand...

I dont shoot landscapes a lot but can see how that would be a very big plus but wouldnt you just use live view on the Canon or doesnt it show a live exposure?
 
Last edited:
ukaskew said:
I actually find the a77II / a99 worse than the latest mirrorless offerings in terms of general EVF lag (even the top LCD is laggy as hell on the a77II/99, actually), I'm not sure if it's a 'feature' of the SLT design but even Auto White Balance takes a few moments to correct itself when moving between subjects.

The Fuji X-T1 and a7II have been absolutely fine for panning (and responsiveness, in general), no problems whatsoever.
Click to expand...

yeah the interface and top lcd can be laggy, interesting and disapointing on the evf on mirrorless being better, because it probably shouldnt be. ive heard stuff like face recognition and exposure preview can slow things down. but sony have neglected a mount a hell of a lot so its no real surprise :|
 
jonneymendoza said:
The d810 offers better dynamic range and has an amazing af system mate. I'd go for that imo.

Canon are the ones slacking anyway and I bet most a7 users came from Canon. If your a Nikon user there is no no benefit going a7 imo
Click to expand...
Actually, I came from a Nikon D800. Obviously benefits vary from person to person but what sealed it for me was the time I used the A7+55 side by side with the D800+50 f1.4G on a shoot. The weakness of Nikon's 50mm compared to the 55mm sealed the deal for me. It wasn't even close. The only bit of Nikon kit I kept around was the 85mm which was a fantastic lens.

Yes, if sensor performance matters to you, that's an enormous reason to switch from Canon, but there are still many other options and most of them apply just as much to Nikon as they do to Canon.
 
twist said:
I dont shoot landscapes a lot but can see how that would be a very big plus but wouldnt you just use live view on the Canon or doesnt it show a live exposure?
Click to expand...


It's not landscape that I have the issue with its inside buildings, in York Minster I used ISO 12800 so I could get usable shutter speed I can easy drop 2 maybe 3 stops with IS so I get say 1600 - 3200 ISO which suits me much better

Yes the 5D mkiii does do live view though unless you are on a tripod I find it odd steadying the camera looking at the LCD
 
pingu666 said:
yeah the interface and top lcd can be laggy, interesting and disapointing on the evf on mirrorless being better, because it probably shouldnt be. ive heard stuff like face recognition and exposure preview can slow things down. but sony have neglected a mount a hell of a lot so its no real surprise :|
Click to expand...
My A77 mkii is good if you turn off the after image preview and going into airplane mode seems to help, face recognition etc are all off for me

I will be a happy chap if the A7 mkii does as well for EVF
 
twist said:
I dont have time to check DOF, histogram etc etc. and if I do the LV method works perfectly (as) well. I dont shoot still subjects in set locations. I set my camera and take the picture, the metering system is more than good enough (I dont need to worry about highlights in highlight metering) and I shoot in RAW so recover whatever else I need to. Pretty simple, it works for some, others not.



I get your POV and I understand it as Ive said multiple times, you just want me to agree with your POV as being best instead of being balanced and looking at + and - of each system and perhaps ways of working around things without the OP spending £thousands on a second system. :D

You and the A7 crew put your POV across and I put mine across which is relevant because Chris has the same camera and all the stats Ive posted are based on real specs so nothing Ive posted is a lie.

... and I disagree, the A7(rii) is for me, though perhaps not until Ive tried it or see some in depth info about it. I love the idea of a small FF with light lenses but some things need ironing out first and I hope the A7rii and Sony can do that.
Click to expand...

Sorry I didn't mean to cause so much debate! Your spot on with the weights, etc however I just think that an A7 (of some variety) gives that option to be very very small and very light when you want it to be, the A7 &35mm f2.8 is miniscule compared to the D750 & even the Nikon 35mm f1.8G lens (appreciate thats 1.8 v 2.8 but thats the only comparison in Nikon mount).

Its almost more a perception of weight, if I think its going to weigh less then I'm more likely to take it and I don't think its unfair to say that it wouldn't be hard for a Sony CSC to be lighter than my current kit (D750, 24-70 f2.8, 18-35, 70-300), i appreciate there are lighter Nikon options but only if I go the prime route, none of the FX zoom lenses are going to be small, light and of a decent quality.

I think its partly because I'm on holiday and its been a constant battle to fit both size and weight of my kit into carry-on luggage limits and weights, a lesson for the future! I'm also changing job soon which means back to public transport, if I want to take a camera with me all the time (and I do!) then it has to be a smaller part of my day to day bag rather than something I can stick in the car.

I'm not saying it would be the A7rii, it looks a great bit of kit but I'm not sure its yet worth the extra over the really cheap used A7r's around now or a 24mp A7ii from Hong Kong!
 
chrism_scotland said:
Sorry I didn't mean to cause so much debate! Your spot on with the weights, etc however I just think that an A7 (of some variety) gives that option to be very very small and very light when you want it to be, the A7 &35mm f2.8 is miniscule compared to the D750 & even the Nikon 35mm f1.8G lens (appreciate thats 1.8 v 2.8 but thats the only comparison in Nikon mount).

Its almost more a perception of weight, if I think its going to weigh less then I'm more likely to take it and I don't think its unfair to say that it wouldn't be hard for a Sony CSC to be lighter than my current kit (D750, 24-70 f2.8, 18-35, 70-300), i appreciate there are lighter Nikon options but only if I go the prime route, none of the FX zoom lenses are going to be small, light and of a decent quality.

I think its partly because I'm on holiday and its been a constant battle to fit both size and weight of my kit into carry-on luggage limits and weights, a lesson for the future! I'm also changing job soon which means back to public transport, if I want to take a camera with me all the time (and I do!) then it has to be a smaller part of my day to day bag rather than something I can stick in the car.

I'm not saying it would be the A7rii, it looks a great bit of kit but I'm not sure its yet worth the extra over the really cheap used A7r's around now or a 24mp A7ii from Hong Kong!
Click to expand...

Lol, thats the way it goes, debate is good. Yeah, of course an A7 is lighter than your current kit but your comparing apples to oranges, a DSLR with large fast zooms against a mirrorless with a fairly slow small prime. Yes, there are smaller options down the Nikon route in terms of primes, when you compare like for like. The only real saving you are making is in the camera, not the lenses so its not fair to compare a 24-70 2.8 to a 35mm 2.8 option.

If it were me Id go for the A7ii for that little extra, no point in getting the A7r unless you need the pixels, which you know you dont. Obviously there are also other options to look at for size/weight savings like M43.

Good luck with the new job :)
 
Last edited:
Sony 85mm f1.4 later this year?

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-851-4-g/#disqus_thread

I'll believe it when I see it but time will tell...

That rumour of 6 new lenses seems to have fizzled out so I'm not too sure that I put much faith in this 85 but we can only hope.

On the size thing... I mostly use primes and the A7 + 35mm f2.8 or 55mm makes a very compact package and actually I'd include the kit lens too as it's smaller than the awful Canon 17-85mm I had some time ago and that was awful and APS-C, it's also a touch shorter than my MFT 14-42mm when the latter is extended.

I don't think that the bodies could be any smaller without a tidal wave of critisism and although being FF means that the AF and possibly IS lenses can't be tiny I think that the fact that they can get close to the bulk and weight of APS-C and even MFT lenses is impressive considering the quality of the Sony lenses.
 
twist said:
Yeah, of course an A7 is lighter than your current kit but your comparing apples to oranges, a DSLR with large fast zooms against a mirrorless with a fairly slow small prime.
Click to expand...

I know I shouldn't encourage you but... my apples are that my recently sold Nikon D7200 + Sigma 50/1.4 ART was positively enormous compared to my A7R + 50 Loxia :)

You can't beat physics and FF AF lenses are going to end up similar sizes whatever the mount but the fact that the relatively tiny A7R allows me to use small high-quality MF lenses is very much to my taste. It took me a while to get here but I plan to stay for a while. Summicron 90 arrives tomorrow. Want your Jupiter-9 back? :D
 
Nice to see people usung MF but I'm actually thinking of selling some MF lenses as the native AF 35mm f2.8 and 55mm are so good and I don't reeeeeaaaally need three sets of manual lenses.
 
woof woof said:
Sony 85mm f1.4 later this year?

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-sony-851-4-g/#disqus_thread

I'll believe it when I see it but time will tell...

That rumour of 6 new lenses seems to have fizzled out so I'm not too sure that I put much faith in this 85 but we can only hope.

On the size thing... I mostly use primes and the A7 + 35mm f2.8 or 55mm makes a very compact package and actually I'd include the kit lens too as it's smaller than the awful Canon 17-85mm I had some time ago and that was awful and APS-C, it's also a touch shorter than my MFT 14-42mm when the latter is extended.

I don't think that the bodies could be any smaller without a tidal wave of critisism and although being FF means that the AF and possibly IS lenses can't be tiny I think that the fact that they can get close to the bulk and weight of APS-C and even MFT lenses is impressive considering the quality of the Sony lenses.
Click to expand...

Shame the 6 lenses havent amounted to anything yet, I think it got a lot of people excited!

The Canon 17-85 is one of the worst lenses ever made.

I think the body size is fine, I was just debating that as a package the A7 system isnt compact due to the lenses. But thats what you get if you want a FF sensor. Id argue the lenses arent as small as APSC or MFT, they cant be, they are FF lenses so are the same size as FF DSLR lenses, you just need to compare the same lenses specs and youll see that.

24-70 f4 oss - 73 x 94.5 mm vs Canon IS - 83.4 x 93 mm
70-200 f4 oss - 80 x 175 mm vs Nikon 70-200 VR - 78.7 x 177 mm
Sony 90mm 2.8 macro - 79.0 x 130.5 mm vs Nikon 105 VR - 83.8 x 116.8 mm
Sony 16-35 f4 - 78 x 98.5 mm vs Canon IS - 82.6 x 112.8 mm
Distagon 35mm 1.4 - 78.5 x 112.0 mm vs Sigma 77 x 94 mm

etc etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top