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

Peaking works well for me but you have to work with it. Use peaking at f8 and everything will be peaking and there'll be quite a bit of movement on the focus ring before anything changes and the result will be that a whole image might look ok but view at 100% and you may see that you've missed critical focus on your subject. Peak and shoot wide open or peak wide and then stop down and you should get good results that stand up to pixel peaking. It's worked well for me.
 
shoshone said:
Now Available! The Complete Guide to Sony’s Alpha A7r II by Gary L. Friedman!

Can anyone comment on the hype promoted by this Authors books please? http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/now-available-the-complete-guide-to-sonys-alpha-a7r-ii-by-gary-l-friedman/

I bought the Brian Smith book "Sony A7 Series (From snapshots to Great Shots)" mainly because the A7RM2 menu system as explained in the Sony manuals was totally perfunctory to say the least. At least Smith's book helped with the menus but not much else as it was effectively a book covering the A7 series generically with a few inserts which related to the A7RM2 but far too A7 series generic TBH.
Now I see Friedman's book "apparently" entitled explicitly aimed at the Sony A7r II.

Does anyone have experience of this guy's stuff (i.e Friedman, G.L.), as once bitten (Smith, B), twice shy ???
TIA
Click to expand...
Bit late as I was away I bought the A7 version that gave the mkii as a free update it's got lots of info and many pages the majority if you are familiar with DSLR settings you will probably know, in short it is ok but I would not rush for one dedicated with the rmkii should I ever buy one
 
border_all said:
Bit late as I was away I bought the A7 version that gave the mkii as a free update it's got lots of info and many pages the majority if you are familiar with DSLR settings you will probably know, in short it is ok but I would not rush for one dedicated with the rmkii should I ever buy one
Click to expand...

Ta for that feedback sums up where I've got to. Normally I'm the proverbial manual junky but given a bit of info from the B Smith book I'm progressing fine by just exploring. So the money went on not just the Black Rapid strap with eBay discount but also on a Manfrotto MINI EVO thingy tripod for still life stuff for close ups with my auto extension tubes which I also acquired.
Oh b*gg*r all that was more than 31 Bucks for that book I didn't buy
 
Last edited:
Hey all,

I just upgraded to the sony alpha A7. This is my first message on this thread. Iv taken it to china for a trip and I'm absolutely loving the camera. Unfortunately funds have been tight and I haven't been able to get any nice zeiss/FE glass im using the highly acceptable kit lens.

I'm wondering does anybody have any experience using an adapter and any of the below lenses:
1) sony a mount 50mm 1.8 (Aps-c)
2) tamron 70-300 (aps-c)
3) tamron 17-50mm 2.8 (aps-c)

I'm wondering how they worked and also how much does it crop the photo? I have found so many different answers on the interweb! I would love to know the output megapixel count.

Phew long message!

Thanks

Jonny
 
Crop mode drops you to a little over 10mp. If you're happy with the kit lens I wouldn't rush to buy anything in the same sort of range, especially if it's as limiting as a crop lens would be.

The 17-50 - by the time you take into effect the effect of crop of field of view will give you basically a 10mp copy of the kit lens. Complete waste.
If you're desperate for a fast 50mm (which when cropped will actually give you a field of view similar to your kit lens at 70), don't waste your time with the a mount, at least get the E mount 50mm. It will fit natively without an adapter, be much smaller, and cost about the price of the adapter alone.
I don't think tamron make a crop 70-300mm, so that's probably full frame anyway. If you need something that goes that long and can't afford the 70-200 or 24-240, it does at least make sense if you can get that plus the adapter cheap enough.

In general if you're looking at crop lenses, it's probably not worth it unless it's much cheaper, and does something you're kit lens can't already do (like the 70-300). And if you insist on doing so anyway, at least look at native E mount lenses first so you don't have the expense and hassle of an adapter.

The other alternative is if you can handle manual focus, look at either a cheap samyang lens or adapt some old film lenses. You could pick up an old 50mm f2 manual lens and adapter for less than £50.
 
ok great thanks for the advice. Il double check the tamron lens.
Otherwise what you guys say makes a lot of sense.
The A7 is great but truly missing the 2.8 aperture!

Il have to take a look at the E mount lenses in more detail. Its quite tricky really. I think I can handle manual focus fairly well especially with peaking. Anybody know of any good, old cheap manual focus glass? Something fast for low light?

Jonny
 
rasmusrok1 said:
Anybody know of any good, old cheap manual focus glass? Something fast for low light?
Click to expand...

I have Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko and Canon FD and when I can see any differences between then the Rokkors are the best. The main and popular focal lengths are relatively easy to find and are cheap enough so it depends what focal length and aperture you're interested in. You mention 50mm, you can get 50mm f1.2, 1.4 and f1.8. A 50mm f1.4 might tempt you but a f1.8 might be the smarter choice as they're much cheaper and in some cases quite a bit smaller and lighter. Others which may interest you are 24 or 28mm f2.8, the 28mm's are much cheaper than the 24mm's, 35mm f1.8 and 85mm f2.

You may come across third party lenses in these mounts and they are often cheaper.
 
Last edited:
Surely a Minolta 50mmf1.7 would go great on the A7, cheap as chips and autofocuses on all the adapters, right?
 
Crossroads said:
You had me thinking I made a mistake there, but after a quick check I was right, the A mount 50mm f1.8 is actually aps-c only.
Click to expand...
Your both right, it's marketed as Apsc but will cover the ft image circle
 
I wrote up a personal review on the Sony A7ii that I bought a few weeks ago (along with the 55mm f/1.8 and 28mm f/2 lens) on my website. It's perhaps not as in-depth as many of the other reviews I've read about it, but it summarises my thoughts. Would be good to get your thoughts, interested to see if you guys agree or disagree with any of the points! :)

Regarding the point I made about AF on small areas like my dog's eyes - if you have any tips for this I'd love to hear them. (Feel free to comment on the post)

http://melissakeizer.com/journal/sony-a7ii-facts-and-thoughts/
 
TinySpark said:
I wrote up a personal review on the Sony A7ii that I bought a few weeks ago (along with the 55mm f/1.8 and 28mm f/2 lens) on my website. It's perhaps not as in-depth as many of the other reviews I've read about it, but it summarises my thoughts. Would be good to get your thoughts, interested to see if you guys agree or disagree with any of the points! :)

Regarding the point I made about AF on small areas like my dog's eyes - if you have any tips for this I'd love to hear them. (Feel free to comment on the post)

http://melissakeizer.com/journal/sony-a7ii-facts-and-thoughts/
Click to expand...

The A7ii isnt an SLT, its mirrorless. With Auto ISO you can set the maximum upper limit of the iso. Seems a good move for you and glad its working out. Enjoy the camera.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
The A7ii isnt an SLT, its mirrorless. With Auto ISO you can set the maximum upper limit of the iso. Seems a good move for you and glad its working out. Enjoy the camera.
Click to expand...

Oh, glad you pointed that out - i thought SLTs and mirrorless were essentially the same thing! Good to know about the upper ISO limit too, thanks for that! Will make some edits to the post! :)
 
TinySpark said:
Oh, glad you pointed that out - i thought SLTs and mirrorless were essentially the same thing! Good to know about the upper ISO limit too, thanks for that! Will make some edits to the post! :)
Click to expand...
Just had a look at your blog re dogs eyes i have been trying manual focus for that with peaking i get the tip of the nose and work ever so slightly back even with very shallow doc the eyes are fairly good

Nice article and enjoy the camera :)
 
border_all said:
Just had a look at your blog re dogs eyes i have been trying manual focus for that with peaking i get the tip of the nose and work ever so slightly back even with very shallow doc the eyes are fairly good

Nice article and enjoy the camera :)
Click to expand...

Ah yes, I know what you mean. Great tip, gonna give that a try! Thanks :)
 
So any interest in the rumoured 70-200 f2.8 and the fact there may be a whole range of fast zooms? I love that there will be options, the 70-200 f2.8 appeals to me more than the f4.

At first i thought i would be annoyed if they did a 24-70 f2.8 but it will be too big for a general purpose lens so i'm not fussed.
 
robj20 said:
So any interest in the rumoured 70-200 f2.8 and the fact there may be a whole range of fast zooms? I love that there will be options, the 70-200 f2.8 appeals to me more than the f4.

At first i thought i would be annoyed if they did a 24-70 f2.8 but it will be too big for a general purpose lens so i'm not fussed.
Click to expand...

I personally wouldnt like to have a lens that big and heavy on the front of an A7. The A7rii gripped may be okay.
 
Wouldn't bother me in the slightest, its plenty tough enough.
 
They (Sony) didn't make a tough mount.

I've dropped mine twice so far once with an FD 70-200 f4 fitted and once with a 100-300 f5.6 fitted both lens hits and the mount is fine.
 
woof woof said:
The mount has been beefed up since the mk1, do keep up.
Click to expand...

And that isn't necessarily because it needed it, they may have done it for marketing and because that's what people wanted, much like the full raw thing, looks what a let down that was, i bet most were expecting there to be a much bigger difference, looks like Sony were right about the compressed RAWs.
I haven't seen any reports of snapped mounts, due to simply mounting a lens. I found one but it was due to a drop, and for me the mount snapping was a good thing, meant all that broke was the mount not the front camera assembly.
 
twist said:
He has the A7r, do keep up :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You can add a new tough mount to the mk1 if worried. Remember? Or is this just another chance to be repeatedly negative?

Rumour site reports uncompressed raws for the A7II on 18th November.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
You can add a new tough mount to the mk1 if worried. Remember? Or is this just another chance to be repeatedly negative?

Rumour site repoerts uncompressed raws for the A7II on 18th November.
Click to expand...

What if people dont think they should have to do that? Not everyone will be comfortable taking their cameras apart to use lenses that are supposedly designed for them. Nope, thats your job... along with being a fanboy.
 
twist said:
What if people dont think they should have to do that? Not everyone will be comfortable taking their cameras apart to use lenses that are supposedly designed for them. Nope, thats your job... along with being a fanboy.
Click to expand...

So the lens mount is definitely defective? What weight lens can i use?
 
twist said:
What if people dont think they should have to do that? Not everyone will be comfortable taking their cameras apart to use lenses that are supposedly designed for them. Nope, thats your job... along with being a fanboy.
Click to expand...

This about finishes this thread for me. Don't get me wrong everything is never rosie in a garden and there are always pros and cons, however I figured a thread entitled Sony Owners shouldn't have such rude negativity.
 
shoshone said:
This about finishes this thread for me. Don't get me wrong everything is never rosie in a garden and there are always pros and cons, however I figured a thread entitled Sony Owners shouldn't have such rude negativity.
Click to expand...

But its okay to continually call specific members negative while being a hypocrite (not referring to you). Nothing is rosy in any thread, Alan and I dont always see eye to eye on some things but others we do.
 
Last edited:
robj20 said:
So the lens mount is definitely defective? What weight lens can i use?
Click to expand...

Dunno the specifics Rob, the mounts are 3rd party, if it is a concern you may be better off changing mount if youre out of warranty and comfy doing so as Alan suggested. The lenses you use are pretty light anyway though, arent they?

I was also thinking in terms of the original A7 size and design not lending itself well to having such a bulky lens fitted, hence the a7rii + grip comment which should be okay.
 
Last edited:
100-300 is far from light and its been fine even after being dropped lens first (cant fit filters anymore its that bent). Like i said im not worried by f2.8 zooms in the slightest.

Twist, you do sometimes come across like you have this real dislike for the Sony cameras.
 
Last edited:
robj20 said:
100-300 is far from light and its been fine even after being dropped lens first (cant fit filters anymore its that bent). Like i said im not worried by f2.8 zooms in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Thats fine if it doesnt bother you. Thats why I said 'personally', as in what would be my decision not what anyone else decides to do or feels comfortable with.
 
robj20 said:
Twist, you do sometimes come across like you have this real dislike for the Sony cameras.
Click to expand...

Rob, I have invested more in Sony and supported them far longer than most in this thread and continue to do so. It seems people gloss over the positives I post regarding Sony and how it works for me but prefer to nitpick every other post.

I dont live in a world where any camera is perfect, the point of these threads is not just to discuss positives but also negatives and possible issues and the system as a whole, everyone is also entitled to an opinion.

I wouldnt be happy putting a huge lens on the front of MY A7, you would, I then somehow became mr. Negative again, well in that case, should I call you mr. Positive refusing to accept any shortcomings of your chosen camera?

Perhaps it was harsh to call @woof woof a fanboy and I do apologise but I also dont appreciate being called mr. negative because I post something someone doesnt like. After all, I dont tell them they are making negative posts about every other system all the time.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Zooms, meh.
Click to expand...
play with a canon 70-200f2.8 or a 24-70 f2.8 and its far from meh. its better then some primes to be exact..

anyways you cant define physics. a large appature lens be in prime or zoom will be quite big .
 
jonneymendoza said:
play with a canon 70-200f2.8 or a 24-70 f2.8 and its far from meh. its better then some primes to be exact..

anyways you cant define physics. a large appature lens be in prime or zoom will be quite big .
Click to expand...

I have owned both types of those zooms and I know I still prefer primes. Cabana, I am well aware of that mate and never said otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top