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

rookies said:
Ah go one rub it in lol

though you already had one?

BTW have you tested low light with the A7iii pls
Click to expand...
Yeah I had one before and sent it back as the autofocus noise was audible. This one is perfectly silent ! It will be used as a video lens too so that's why the original went back, it was razor sharp though!
 
It's not necessarily the sharpness that impressed me but rather the performance across the whole frame.

When I had DSLR's I thought that the Sigma 50mm f1.4 was excellent. I remember comparing it to my Canon 50mm f2.5 which at the time was thought by some to be Canon's sharpest 50mm and for me the Sigma matched or beat the Canon at every aperture the Canon could match. At the time I couldn't imagine ever wanting a better 50mm than the Sigma but the Sony 55mm is IMO on a different level if you're looking for performance across the frame.
 
Last edited:
F/1.4 said:
Yeah I had one before and sent it back as the autofocus noise was audible. This one is perfectly silent ! It will be used as a video lens too so that's why the original went back, it was razor sharp though!
Click to expand...

Cool have you tested Low light photo yet what iso noise like and AF like in low light
 
I have not come away with a camera!
 
rookies said:
You cant comment as you not got both.. He has
Click to expand...
Lightroom won't open the raws so I'm not entirely sure.

The jpegs are very very clean at high ISO.

Low light ISO for me has been fine on every camera I've owned for a long time (started to get amazing with the D700 and D3) I never shoot beyond iso6400 though. The only bodies I found disappointing in terms of dynamic range and ISO were the Canon 5D series
 
F/1.4 said:
Lightroom won't open the raws so I'm not entirely sure.

The jpegs are very very clean at high ISO.

Low light ISO for me has been fine on every camera I've owned for a long time (started to get amazing with the D700 and D3) I never shoot beyond iso6400 though. The only bodies I found disappointing in terms of dynamic range and ISO were the Canon 5D series
Click to expand...
So lightroom not supporting the raw yet? Have does it AF in low light..

Amaze you not gone over 6400 iso I sometime have to have 10000 in low light unless you use flash?
 
rookies said:
So lightroom not supporting the raw yet? Have does it AF in low light..

Amaze you not gone over 6400 iso I sometime have to have 10000 in low light unless you use flash?
Click to expand...
Never do I shoot at that pal though I usually shot all f/1.4 or 1.2 lenses haha. The AF feels the exact same to me as the A9 I can't see any difference.
 
F/1.4 said:
Never do I shoot at that pal though I usually shot all f/1.4 or 1.2 lenses haha. The AF feels the exact same to me as the A9 I can't see any difference.
Click to expand...

And I suppose with the IBIS it helps to keep it down too for static shooting
 
rookies said:
Ohh surprise surprise.. I guess you didn't like the long lens on the A7iii
Click to expand...

No that was fine! Very stable, felt perfect TBH! Maybe even better balanced than D750!
 
JJ! said:
No that was fine! Very stable, felt perfect TBH! Maybe even better balanced than D750!
Click to expand...

Then why you staying LOL come on
 
JJ! said:
You need to go try it and base your decision on your experience and not mine!
Click to expand...

Ive already tried one the other day ;) I did like the camera very much indeed it just the cost of moving over and getting the equal lens i have now..

What didn't you like
 
rookies said:
Ive already tried one the other day ;) I did like the camera very much indeed it just the cost of moving over and getting the equal lens i have now..

What didn't you like
Click to expand...

Then there you go! You don’t need my reasons why I am staying!
 
JJ! said:
Then there you go! You don’t need my reasons why I am staying!
Click to expand...

Your reason the same then cost wise for lens to move over
 
Would of though the AF would of tempt you as I did like that
 
addicknchips said:
You’ve been banging on all week about trying one. Let’s hear your thoughts on it. Did it just feel dirty the thought of becoming a Sony shooter?
Click to expand...
I agree, we would like to hear your genuine positive and negative thoughts. :)
 
rookies said:
Your reason the same then cost wise for lens to move over
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with cost! I could have got all I needed today but I have chosen too stay with my D750.
 
So WEX have offered me £620 for my A7R and £450 for my 24-70 f4.
So would require another £2000 or so.

Not sure it's worth it could always keep the 24-70 for now and just change bodies.
 
robj20 said:
So WEX have offered me £620 for my A7R and £450 for my 24-70 f4.
So would require another £2000 or so.

Not sure it's worth it could always keep the 24-70 for now and just change bodies.
Click to expand...
What other lenses do you own? Are you looking at the Sony A7 III?
 
Riz_Guru said:
I agree, we would like to hear your genuine positive and negative thoughts. :)
Click to expand...

I still don’t like EVFs even though this one is very good.
Indoor focus was not as fast as I wanted with the 70-200. And yes I tried different modes.
No top screen
Not as easy to change things on the fly (although this would improve with use)
Didn’t really feel comfortable in the hand

It is very nicely built
With the primes it felt lovely
Eye AF was really good
Much better than any mirrorless I have used or tried before
Quiet and discreet
Make a great wedding camera

I didn’t feel I was going to gain anything from swapping systems so I have decided for the moment not to make a move.
 
robj20 said:
So WEX have offered me £620 for my A7R and £450 for my 24-70 f4.
So would require another £2000 or so.

Not sure it's worth it could always keep the 24-70 for now and just change bodies.
Click to expand...

Id only sell the camera if you can afford to
 
JJ! said:
I still don’t like EVFs even though this one is very good.
Indoor focus was not as fast as I wanted with the 70-200. And yes I tried different modes.
No top screen
Not as easy to change things on the fly (although this would improve with use)
Didn’t really feel comfortable in the hand

It is very nicely built
With the primes it felt lovely
Eye AF was really good
Much better than any mirrorless I have used or tried before
Quiet and discreet
Make a great wedding camera

I didn’t feel I was going to gain anything from swapping systems so I have decided for the moment not to make a move.
Click to expand...
A wise choice considering the amount of money involved to change over.
I had a suspicious feeling the Sony A7 III might struggle indoors and/or dim light hence my post earlier regarding low light performance compared to the Sony A9.
Will need to do a back to back test to really confirm but online videos / reviews show the Sony A7 III to be excellent in low-light.
 
robj20 said:
I have the 35 f2.8 and the 16-35 f4.
Yes looking to get the A7iii.
Click to expand...

Keep the lenses including the 24-70mm f4 if its a sharp / good copy, are you happy with the IQ from it, if so keep it.
Just try and get the A7 III?
 
Riz_Guru said:
A wise choice considering the amount of money involved to change over.
I had a suspicious feeling the Sony A7 III might struggle indoors and/or dim light hence my post earlier regarding low light performance compared to the Sony A9.
Will need to do a back to back test to really confirm but online videos / reviews show the Sony A7 III to be excellent in low-light.
Click to expand...

Don’t get me wrong it was a nice camera!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top