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

The Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8 was very quick to AF compared to the Sony 85mm f1.4 G Master.
I did like the Batis lenses... I had the 85mm and 25mm lenses! :)
 
What is this AF of which you all speak?

Maybe I can get it on my 35mm's with a firmware update?
 
stevelmx5 said:
Whilst the A9 is clearly the flagship, there's no denying that, the fact that a photographer using them side by side is seeing better performance from the A7iii in some areas is important. Paper specs don't always tell the full story.
Click to expand...

I hate to nitpick but I don't agree with the use of the term flagship, the A9, A7R III and A7 III all cater to different needs. It shouldn't be too difficult for someone to figure out if they'd be better off with an A7R over the A9 or vice versa and not simply a question of buy the most expensive because it's the best.

If the A9 is worse than the A7 III at eye af I'd be willing to bet that's something they could correct with firmware, it doesn't sound like the hardware is holding it back.
 
simonbarker said:
I hate to nitpick but I don't agree with the use of the term flagship, the A9, A7R III and A7 III all cater to different needs. It shouldn't be too difficult for someone to figure out if they'd be better off with an A7R over the A9 or vice versa and not simply a question of buy the most expensive because it's the best.

If the A9 is worse than the A7 III at eye af I'd be willing to bet that's something they could correct with firmware, it doesn't sound like the hardware is holding it back.
Click to expand...

"Flagship" is just he term usually used for the highest spec/price camera in a line up. A 1DX might not be as good at fitting in your pocket as an EOS-M but it's still the 'flagship' from Canon.
 
simonbarker said:
I hate to nitpick but I don't agree with the use of the term flagship, the A9, A7R III and A7 III all cater to different needs. It shouldn't be too difficult for someone to figure out if they'd be better off with an A7R over the A9 or vice versa and not simply a question of buy the most expensive because it's the best.

If the A9 is worse than the A7 III at eye af I'd be willing to bet that's something they could correct with firmware, it doesn't sound like the hardware is holding it back.
Click to expand...

As much as I like to defend the Sony A9, I am not so sure that Eye-AF can be improved to A7 III levels just via a firmware update, the Sony A7 III has more contrast-detect AF points compared to the Sony A9.
If these points are used for Face/Eye-AF functions, it might explain why the Eye-AF on the Sony A7 III is better.
However the video's I have seen on the internet show that the A7 III tracks they eye better/stickier, however that does not mean that the actual hit rate and critical focus on the Eye will be better than the Sony A9.
What we need is a real back to back situation at max fps for a definitive answer.

More Sony A9 firmware updates are planned. :)
 
On other news.. it seems Sony has increased their prices of xQD memory cards.
This will mostly impact Nikon users :D ooops......
 
simonbarker said:
Conjecture and assumption has gotten us this far, no need to start testing now!
Click to expand...
:D lol fair comment.....

A7 III users...... do you have any problems with Eye-AF = No.
A9 users ..... do you have any problems with your Eye-AF = No.

problem solved.

It seems the only competition Sony are creating is almost their own owners/bodies! :D lol
Nikon and Canon .... we await your response.
 
Riz_Guru said:
A7 III users...... do you have any problems with Eye-AF = No.
A9 users ..... do you have any problems with your Eye-AF = No.
Click to expand...

ACTUALLY

There's plenty to enthuse about the A9 - but since I don't need to defend it.

If the person closes their eyes, eye tracking stops working.. what's with that crap..
 
dancook said:
ACTUALLY

There's plenty to enthuse about the A9 - but since I don't need to defend it.

If the person closes their eyes, eye tracking stops working.. what's with that crap..
Click to expand...
Sony will fix that and add Animal-AF in the Sony A9 II :D lol
 
lmao @jonneymendoza
Just had a quick read over on the Canon M thread..... you pretty much got butchered innit :D lol
Don't mess with them Canon M folk innit :)
 
Last edited:
It would be great if Zeiss announced a Batis 24-70mm f2.8 lens... followed by 35mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8 Batis lenses too.
 
stevelmx5 said:
Or, the 6" behind the EVF just concentrates on where they're pointing the camera instead of relying on more focus aids ;)
Click to expand...
True..... I am just getting carried away again..... need to get the Sony A9 out this weekend, dust it and take some photos!
 
stevelmx5 said:
Or, the 6" behind the EVF just concentrates on where they're pointing the camera instead of relying on more focus aids ;)
Click to expand...

Once you know when the focus aids can't be relied on, you know when they are a burden and when they are a benefit - and you can make a decision on whether it's worth using.

it's just another tool on your belt
 
In other news

dogs in flight (DIF): Elliott Erwitt, the world master of these pictures, used Leica M with 90 or 135mm lenses. He thinks thru his pictures from the dog's point of view. It's not the equipment, it's the attitude.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, I want a cool action shot of my dog - I don't need a camera with fast AF I just need to master manual focus and make photographing dogs my life.
 
All these talk about modern flagships are making photography into a point and shoot is interesting. All these years I shoot with single point focus purely because of the reason that I like to pick a face or an object and have that as my point of focus. Capturing the moment and put the focus into that single point, in position of framing, time and space. Now the camera is smart enough to do 1 of the 3 for me. This will in a way take off 1/3rd of my work load.


But we have been here before, Canon has the Eye Control focus point, but backwards in that the camera viewfinder has an IR sensor to see what your eye is looking at and you can use your eye to control which focus point to lock to on the viewfinder. That was meant to work quickly and efficiently but in reality I found it unreliable.


Each generations makes the AF that bit better but we always want that bit more and it’s never 100%. I really don’t think having the A7III with a Wide focus point shooting mode will make your photography better. Because every time you click that button you are letting the camera to decide for you, guessing what you think you want. The algorithm is normally quite simple in the past, it either picks up the nearest subject or a face that is facing you. I often shoot through something for framing and there are often many faces in the shot. So I think I will continue to shoot with a single point and using the joystick and move it around.


I am glad it is easier and more reliable, but it’s not at a point where it can read my mind.


I’ll take the reliable focusing as an improvement though.
 
dancook said:
In other news



Oh yes, I want a cool action shot of my dog - I don't need a camera with fast AF I just need to master manual focus and make photographing dogs my life.
Click to expand...

I've never had a top of the range really fast camera so my way of photographing dogs would be to spend hours with them snapping away and I'd get some keepers... and that's what I've done in the past but these days people want to get the shot first time every time at f1.4.

I'm always skeptical when the DSLR crowd insist that they can nail focus every single time... and to be honest I rarely believe these claims. Back when I had Conon DSLR's on their web sit it said, and I'm paraphrasing, that if you took three pictures of the same subject you'd see focus differences between them and this is perfectly normal. I'd assume that although things may be a little better today that's still true.

It's all been said... we all know that it's not possible to get the shot every single time but we still want the ability and the forum masses run around like headless chickens when it's not possible with the very latest thing to come out.

Dogs. Canon 20D and Sigma 30mm f1.4 at f1.4.

3251-CS5.jpg

I took about 30 pictures that day and maybe 6 of them were keepers.
 
Last edited:
dancook said:
In other news



Oh yes, I want a cool action shot of my dog - I don't need a camera with fast AF I just need to master manual focus and make photographing dogs my life.
Click to expand...

He didn't shoot action shots, he shot 'street' that had dogs in it. The fact he shot a lot of images with dogs in was accidental initially then he spent time developing his imagery. In the same way, you could develop your ability to know where your dog is going to run or turn etc to anticipate the image and get the result. Alternatively, you can fire off 20fps and pick out the best later because we're lucky now to have that level of gear available.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I really don’t think having the A7III with a Wide focus point shooting mode will make your photography better. Because every time you click that button you are letting the camera to decide for you, guessing what you think you want
Click to expand...

This is definitely true. I've always chosen to use single point AF as it gives me the final decision on what the camera then focuses on (or tracks etc). When I tried out the A7iii and A9 they were both set to Wide AF and, whilst it's an excellent technological setup, I did find it a little disconnected when shooting in the busy hall because there were 50 faces in the scene and the camera was making the decision on what it thought I wanted to focus on. I fully agree that improvements in tracking etc are excellent though, when combined with dedicated focus point selection.
 
For a year I used manual focus for 20+ weddings also at the odd play rehearsal and fashion show, before that I had DSLRs without any of these focus aids.

Just because I bought an A9 two weeks ago and enjoy its features, doesn't make me a spoilt brat with no appreciation for the skill of photography.
 
dancook said:
For a year I used manual focus for 20+ weddings also at the odd play rehearsal and fashion show, before that I had DSLRs without any of these focus aids.

Just because I bought an A9 three weeks ago and enjoy it, doesn't make me a spoilt brat with no appreciation for the skill of photography.
Click to expand...

I never said you were? I was just responding to your post about Erwin Elliott where you were making out that learning to shoot the subjects you want to through practice and time was somehow a negative point? We're all fully aware of the kit you have and have used previously but at least you're getting out and using it/sharing images.
 
stevelmx5 said:
making out that learning to shoot the subjects you want to through practice and time was somehow a negative point?
Click to expand...

That was not the point, sorry if it didn't come across clearly.

The negative was - the comparison being made of being able to pick up an A9 and casually get a photo of your dog running towards you - versus - spending time to master the manual focus and the photography of dogs.. being a problem of equipment vs attitude

My point is that I just wanted a shot of my dog whilst she was still a puppy........ I don't understand why people have to go so far to make arguments like this..
 
dancook said:
That was not the point, sorry if it didn't come across clearly.

The negative was - the comparison being made of being able to pick up an A9 and casually get a photo of your dog running towards you - versus - spending time to master the manual focus and the photography of dogs.. being a problem of equipment vs attitude

My point is that I just wanted a shot of my dog whilst she was still a puppy........ I don't understand why people have to go so far to make arguments like this..
Click to expand...

I would definitely agree that, whilst it's technically possible, it makes more sense to use a camera with fast AF and solid tracking than MF to shoot an image of a running dog. Maybe my point came across wrong earlier? Technology and algorithms are great and they mean that we, as photographers, can get results in situations that wouldn't have been possible or as easy 5-10 years ago (high ISO performance, AF tracking etc). However, I still think they're something that goes alongside the skills learned and developed through experience and time. One isn't specifically better than another.
 
Riz_Guru said:
lmao @jonneymendoza
Just had a quick read over on the Canon M thread..... you pretty much got butchered innit :D lol
Don't mess with them Canon M folk innit :)
Click to expand...
I think I need to have a read, should make for a good laugh ;)
 
Riz_Guru said:
On other news.. it seems Sony has increased their prices of xQD memory cards.
This will mostly impact Nikon users :D ooops......
Click to expand...

My D750 is in the same dark age as Sony and uses 2 x SD! Just means my Sony XQD card is worth more now to some D500 owners lol
 
stevelmx5 said:
This is definitely true. I've always chosen to use single point AF as it gives me the final decision on what the camera then focuses on (or tracks etc). When I tried out the A7iii and A9 they were both set to Wide AF and, whilst it's an excellent technological setup, I did find it a little disconnected when shooting in the busy hall because there were 50 faces in the scene and the camera was making the decision on what it thought I wanted to focus on. I fully agree that improvements in tracking etc are excellent though, when combined with dedicated focus point selection.
Click to expand...

I dont think Wide AF would suit my shooting needs either, when I am tracking horses I am usually always using centre point or move it up and down a bit of I want to focus on the head or rider. Wide AF might focus on the part of the horse I dont want it too! Not that I have ever tried mirrorless or Wide AF!
 
dancook said:
For a year I used manual focus for 20+ weddings also at the odd play rehearsal and fashion show, before that I had DSLRs without any of these focus aids.

Just because I bought an A9 two weeks ago and enjoy its features, doesn't make me a spoilt brat with no appreciation for the skill of photography.
Click to expand...
No and just in case I've added to that thought that's not how I feel. I said in a previous post it's better to have the bells and whistles even if you don't always use them as if you haven't got them you can't ever use them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top