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

WWA said:
I love my song A7ii and the images that it produces. I love its size, the handeling, and the glass I have for it. What I do not like at all is the focus speed and the auto mode.

I have a DSLR for doing wildlife photos and the A7 for days out, family shots etc. The photos when right are amazing and I love the detail and the FF look, BUT the amount of keepers I'm getting from the camera is really very low. Most of my shots are of my young lad or his cousins who do not sit still ever. The camera just seems to fail to keep up. It couldn't even keep up with a 7 week old puppy last week.

Also the auto mode is rubbish, I like to give my camera to my wife or other family members when out and about so everyone can have fun getting some photos, I always just stick it in auto and let them blast away. With the a7 the photos are either missed focus or the camera has selected a too slow shutter speed or something like that. Fine when I'm using it and just shove it in manual but the auto mode doesn't seem to work well at all.

Is it me? Any tips to improve? Or should I sell it and get a more action orientated compact like the A6300? I'm sure I'd miss the quality of the photos but at least I'd get the keepers.



I'd say 90% of my shots are kids/ dogs/ action and the remainder is posed shots (which the A7ii handles fine).
Click to expand...

Before you sell it, consider to try it more in a manual mode.
I am not sure if there is AUTO ISO setting on the A7 II - if yes - then just go and set speed 1/125 +, F/4+ and leave the AUTO ISO to deal with the light conditions.
May be many people will disagree with me, but my opinion is that you will find almost NO difference in the photos between the Sony A7 II and Sony A6300.
Of course A6300 has much better and improved focus system, so I guess it will deal with the fast moving kids much better.
But leaving the camera on Auto mode is no no for me - the camera is trying to analyse the situation and some times it just not working as you are expecting.
I am shooting almost every day different scenarios and still I am learning - I am not perfect - usually I have tons of unusable images, so .. it is normal :)

Regards,
Kalin
 
I can't remember the last time I used auto mode mostly because I don't understand it :D When handing the camera to someone else I'd either leave it in aperture priority or in the case of low light and too low a shutter speed I switch to manual and dial in more sensible settings and let the auto ISO float.

None of that helps with focus speed although for accuracy I'd be tempted to ignore any fancy focus modes and just leave it on centre spot so there's no chance the camera will focus on something it thinks is more interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WWA
woof woof said:
"Known sources" say that a model above the A7 is comping and will "drop a huge bomb in the imaging industry." Oh er... That's fighting talk!

Read all about it...

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/big-...ny-a99ii-zeiss-lenses-sony-stf/#disqus_thread

My prediction is... It'll be expensive :D but maybe not Leica expensive :D
Click to expand...

The only thing missing on my A7r2 is the buffer rate. the rest i would welcome incremental upgrades but the major pain in the backside is the buffer rate! i cant shoot professional portraits with it :( Slows me down a lot.

I would take 1 frame every second or two and by the 4th or 5th frame it is clearing buffer and i cant see the results. Sometimes i cant even shoot more frames as the camera is maxed out trying to send the images onto the card
 
photosample said:
Before you sell it, consider to try it more in a manual mode.
I am not sure if there is AUTO ISO setting on the A7 II - if yes - then just go and set speed 1/125 +, F/4+ and leave the AUTO ISO to deal with the light conditions.
May be many people will disagree with me, but my opinion is that you will find almost NO difference in the photos between the Sony A7 II and Sony A6300.
Of course A6300 has much better and improved focus system, so I guess it will deal with the fast moving kids much better.
But leaving the camera on Auto mode is no no for me - the camera is trying to analyse the situation and some times it just not working as you are expecting.
I am shooting almost every day different scenarios and still I am learning - I am not perfect - usually I have tons of unusable images, so .. it is normal :)

Regards,
Kalin
Click to expand...


Thank you for your reply. That's what I currently do and it works fine I suppose. I would like the focus speed to be better but you can't have everything. I think I need to stop comparing it to a DSLR and treat it like a different camera altogether and work with it rather than working with the GAS!

Interesting to note that you think IQ would be the same between an A7 and A6300.

Thanks for you reply.
 
woof woof said:
I can't remember the last time I used auto mode mostly because I don't understand it :D When handing the camera to someone else I'd either leave it in aperture priority or in the case of low light and too low a shutter speed I switch to manual and dial in more sensible settings and let the auto ISO float.

None of that helps with focus speed although for accuracy I'd be tempted to ignore any fancy focus modes and just leave it on centre spot so there's no chance the camera will focus on something it thinks is more interesting.
Click to expand...


Thank you for your reply.

I also note that in the scene modes there is a active setting so may try that next time I'm handing the camera over!
 
WWA said:
Thank you for your reply. That's what I currently do and it works fine I suppose. I would like the focus speed to be better but you can't have everything. I think I need to stop comparing it to a DSLR and treat it like a different camera altogether and work with it rather than working with the GAS!

Interesting to note that you think IQ would be the same between an A7 and A6300.

Thanks for you reply.
Click to expand...

I would personally be surprised if the A7 and A6300 image quality is the same but does the A6300 have a newer sensor?

If the sensors are anywhere near the same generation and / or tech I'd expect the A7 with its larger sensor to offer the better image quality or at least a sharper image however my experience with Micro Four Thirds tells me that differences in image quality may not be significant or even detectable if the files are processed for best effect and viewed normally, differences may only be visible when pixel peeping or when pushing things hard for example at higher ISO's.
 
woof woof said:
I would personally be surprised if the A7 and A6300 image quality is the same but does the A6300 have a newer sensor?

If the sensors are anywhere near the same generation and / or tech I'd expect the A7 with its larger sensor to offer the better image quality or at least a sharper image however my experience with Micro Four Thirds tells me that differences in image quality may not be significant or even detectable if the files are processed for best effect and viewed normally, differences may only be visible when pixel peeping or when pushing things hard for example at higher ISO's.
Click to expand...

Different opinions everywhere, but the difference (my opinion) is that is not much. Especially above ISO400 in the real world use (not big prints).

Here is interesting article about it:
http://blog.kasson.com/?p=14021
 
I can image that the a6300 may compete with the the original a7 for iq, but there is also the difference in crop factor and f stops etc to consider.
 
Any suggestions for a wide angle lens that is cheapish?

Must be 24mm or wider and dust resistant so probs a prime. Also auto focus. Doesn't need to be top IQ, just a cheap and cheerful that does the job. Camera is A7ii. Thanks
 
Anybody care to offer an opinion on the 28mm F2 and using It with the 21 and 16 mm converters?
 
woof woof said:
Steve Huff is comparing the 50mm f1.4 to the 55mm f1.8 again and this time the results look much closer, he says he maybe had a flare issue last time...

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/08/17/zeiss-vs-zeiss-the-sony-50-1-4-vs-55-1-8-part-2/

The results may be closer but he's still enthusing about the f1.4.
Click to expand...

I thought the general consensus was that the 55/1.8 was the best 50mmish lens out there, bar the Otus? How come it's suddenly so easily beaten - Steve Huff with a naff copy? BTW, I don't care much for his lens testing methodology, it all seems a bit subjective e.g. the flower test is ridiculous with different points of focus. Maybe that explains the poor performance of the 55/1.8?
 
manualfocus-g said:
I thought the general consensus was that the 55/1.8 was the best 50mmish lens out there, bar the Otus? How come it's suddenly so easily beaten - Steve Huff with a naff copy? BTW, I don't care much for his lens testing methodology, it all seems a bit subjective e.g. the flower test is ridiculous with different points of focus. Maybe that explains the poor performance of the 55/1.8?
Click to expand...
Not trying to defend the 55 here, but Huff seems to shoot from the hip then follows up with a further review when criticised.
Price wise anyway it seems a rather dumb comparison anyway. Don't think I'll be holding my breath on SHuff reviews ongoing
 
I've been doing some initial testing today using the FE 24-70mm f2.8 GM and I'm very impressed indeed, it's not high end Zeiss 55mm f2.8 prime level sharpness but it's not bad at all for a zoom lens, I'd say it'll outperform the cheaper primes on the market from various vendors.
Thinking about it more this single lens would easily keep you happy unless your a serious pixel peeper.

I didn't find the weight a issue but it was the only lens I took with me on my A7RII & Grip.

It's a big beast for sure but if you want high quality f2.8 glass then they are all about the same size/weight.
IMG_1471470953.919287.jpg

I'm still keeping my Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 as my go to travelling setup but the 24-70mm GM is starting to question my need for primes.
 
Last edited:
manualfocus-g said:
I thought the general consensus was that the 55/1.8 was the best 50mmish lens out there, bar the Otus? How come it's suddenly so easily beaten - Steve Huff with a naff copy? BTW, I don't care much for his lens testing methodology, it all seems a bit subjective e.g. the flower test is ridiculous with different points of focus. Maybe that explains the poor performance of the 55/1.8?
Click to expand...

How come? How come you're so far behind the times? He's comparing the new Sony 50mm f1.4 to the 55mm f1.8. The new 50mm is apparently excellent, even more excellent than the 55mm which of course it should be as it's bigger and much more expensive.

shoshone said:
Not trying to defend the 55 here, but Huff seems to shoot from the hip then follows up with a further review when criticised.

Price wise anyway it seems a rather dumb comparison anyway. Don't think I'll be holding my breath on SHuff reviews ongoing
Click to expand...

I like Steve Huff's reviews. Of course he isn't perfect but he's enthusiastic, passionate and he expresses an opinion which is something that some seem to be afraid of doing.
 
Rizvan said:
I'm still keeping my Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 as my go to travelling setup but the 24-70mm GM is starting to question my need for primes.
Click to expand...

I've been thinking along the same lines but for MFT rather than Sony as the Sony zooms are too big for me to be comfortable with but other than that a nice standard zoom and a wide aperture prime in the 28-55mm range would probably satisfy most of my needs and many other peoples too. I bought the 12-35mm f2.8 for MFT and it's an outstanding lens... but still on the large size for me as I much prefer compact, unobtrusive kit.
 
woof woof said:
How come? How come you're so far behind the times? He's comparing the new Sony 50mm f1.4 to the 55mm f1.8. The new 50mm is apparently excellent, even more excellent than the 55mm which of course it should be as it's bigger and much more expensive.



I like Steve Huff's reviews. Of course he isn't perfect but he's enthusiastic, passionate and he expresses an opinion which is something that some seem to be afraid of doing.
Click to expand...

What I mean is what I said. How come the 55/1.8 can be the best thing since sliced bread for so long, then suddenly look a bit naff in crops? A newer, better lens doesn't make an older lens worse suddenly. Either the lens was over-hyped to start with, Steve Huff has a duff copy or his testing methods are flawed.

As far as his opinion is concerned, I also agree that his enthusiasm is nice to see, but in my (albeit limited because I stopped reading them) experience of his reviews, he pretty much seems to like everything regardless :D
 
woof woof said:
I've been thinking along the same lines but for MFT rather than Sony as the Sony zooms are too big for me to be comfortable with but other than that a nice standard zoom and a wide aperture prime in the 28-55mm range would probably satisfy most of my needs and many other peoples too. I bought the 12-35mm f2.8 for MFT and it's an outstanding lens... but still on the large size for me as I much prefer compact, unobtrusive kit.
Click to expand...

How about the Sony A6000/6300 paired up with the Sony Zeiss 16-70mm f4?
I was thinking about having a A6300 with 16-70mm as my travel setup but in the end decided to stick with FF. :)

The 55mm f1.8 is a stellar lens, I doubt there is a big noticeable gap between it and the new 50mm f1.4.
 
Last edited:
WWA said:
Any suggestions for a wide angle lens that is cheapish?

Must be 24mm or wider and dust resistant so probs a prime. Also auto focus. Doesn't need to be top IQ, just a cheap and cheerful that does the job. Camera is A7ii. Thanks
Click to expand...

I use the Samyang 14mm MF, Sony E mount, works great with my A7ii. The colour is different to Sony/Zeiss, Nikon and Canon lenses I use, but easily corrected if it bothers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WWA
manualfocus-g said:
What I mean is what I said. How come the 55/1.8 can be the best thing since sliced bread for so long, then suddenly look a bit naff in crops? A newer, better lens doesn't make an older lens worse suddenly. Either the lens was over-hyped to start with, Steve Huff has a duff copy or his testing methods are flawed.

As far as his opinion is concerned, I also agree that his enthusiasm is nice to see, but in my (albeit limited because I stopped reading them) experience of his reviews, he pretty much seems to like everything regardless :D
Click to expand...

I was surprised to see the 55's performance in the first comparison but Steve seems to think there was an "issue." The second test is closer but I didn't bother looking closely so I don't know what the differences are, there seems to be more contrast in the 50mm shot but beyond that I don't know but I assume that the 50mm is built to perform better on the higher mp count cameras we're probably going to see at some point.

TBH a f1.4 aperture could tempt me but not of that bulk and I do have a number of manual 50mm f1.4's and a f1.2 but of course they're nowhere near the optical quality of a modern lens.

Just on Steve liking everything... no, he doesn't and he's said before that he's not interested in reviewing kit he doesn't like so if he only reviews kit he likes the fact that he likes it sort of follows... :D

I do remember him saying he was going to review a Panasonic (but I forget which) and when the review didn't materialise he got bombarded with emails and eventually previously and of course the reason he hadn't previously published and had to be nagged is that he didn't like it :D
 
Last edited:
G Master lenses are the ones which will resolve better on future high megapixel sensors..... I'm surprised Sony made the 50mm f1.4 a non-GM lens, I suspect a 50/55mm GM will come.
 
Rizvan said:
How about the Sony A6000/6300 paired up with the Sony Zeiss 16-70mm f4?
I was thinking about having a A6300 with 16-70mm as my travel setup but in the end decided to stick with FF. :)

The 55mm f1.8 is a stellar lens, I doubt there is a big noticeable gap between it and the new 50mm f1.4.
Click to expand...

I've thought about ditching MFT a few times for a number of reasons and I've taken a look at the A6xxx system a few times and of course it would make sense as I have an A7 but one thing that puts me off is that there's only one 35mm equivalent lens, the 24mm, and it's a big fat expensive lump and I just don't fancy it. If they did a more compact 24mm f1.8 I'd be much more interested but they don't and I can't see them doing one anytime soon. Plus there's no f2.8 zoom range other than the FF ones.

A couple of things I really like about the Sony's is the full time DoF preview and the ability to have exposure compensation with auto ISO in any mode, these wonderful abilities are not available in MFT land and of course MFT has shutter shock and the IMO frankly awful sequential field EVF.
 
To be honest unless Sony had made a real much up, the Sony 50 f.14 should be better than the 55mm f1.8, it's faster, more expensive bigger and a newer design. A more interesting comparisons would be against the sigma art 50mm f1.4, as from what I can tell this is the bench mark for this type of lens.
 
fstorm said:
I use the Samyang 14mm MF, Sony E mount, works great with my A7ii. The colour is different to Sony/Zeiss, Nikon and Canon lenses I use, but easily corrected if it bothers.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll take a look.
 
I don't know what old Hufflepuff had done with that first shot with the 55, but he seems to have made a right pigs ear of it. Looks lacking in saturation and not very sharp. It would be nice to see a genuine comparison with multiple shots. Was obvious from the first paragraph when he stated he had never been keen on the lens (very odd as it's widely deemed one of the best for e mount) which way the comparison would go.

The 55 is one of best (probably the best in its weight division). It's not all of a sudden a crappy lens. The new 50 should out perform the 55 but I'd think its target market is rather niche.

I fail to see where there is room or need for a plastic g master version at this focal length - other than on Rizvan's shelf with the rest of them :)
 
So off to Canada in 2.5 weeks (YAY!) - just wondering what you'd all recommend for a long lens to rent on the (hopefully not too rare) chance we see some wildlife... Renting, but should I stay native, or Canikogma with adaptor?
 
Hmmm - nothing native over 200mm so that answers that question. So assuming non-native, any views on what performs best adapted for AF? 300mm min, probably 400mm more useful...
 
Durbs said:
Hmmm - nothing native over 200mm so that answers that question. So assuming non-native, any views on what performs best adapted for AF? 300mm min, probably 400mm more useful...
Click to expand...

Isn't there an FE 70-300mm?
 
woof woof said:
Isn't there an FE 70-300mm?
Click to expand...

There is yes, also the FE 24-240mm but doubt they are as sharp as the 70-200mm f4.
I remember somebody once mentioned that my cropped 70-200mm f4 images were as good as stuff they had shot with the Nikkor 300mm.
 
Sony released the new firmware 3.30 for the Sony A7rII (download from Sony UK).

Benefits and improvements:
Support for Radio-controlled Lighting System
Improves stability of the camera while shooting still images by regulating the internal temperature
Overall stability and operability of the camera is improved.

http://www.sony.co.uk/support/en/product/ILCE-7RM2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top