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

ChrisHeathcote said:
I think costwise it purely depends on what size you print and on what paper, from looking at the online prices, as soon as you move away from the standard gloss, the prices rise rapidly. Also once you factor in shipping it jumps up again, it isn’t too bad if you are sending off a lot of prints, but if it’s just a couple, the. The additional 3.99 or whatever really makes a difference.



I was looking at this sort of thing to reduce costs a bit. Fotospeed do a set for the Epson which gets good reviews. Where do you get yours from and which printer do you use.

Also how do you find the difference between oem inks
Click to expand...

Cityinkexpress , pixma 9000 mk2. I find the inks very good. Read good things about fotospeed. I use Ilford papers.
 
jonneymendoza said:
How are you getting along with the R3? Do you rate the af system and overall build quality of the camera?
Click to expand...

I really like it but then I really liked the A7rii and the 3 is just an improved version.
I think the AF is great but I haven't really done much that demands fast AF, was really impressed with the eye AF though (even working through my wives sunglasses!).
Build wise I think it feels like a tightly put together package, can't say I've any concerns, maybe doesn't feel quite as solid as a DSLR but then what does? You could hammer in nails with a D850 or a K1!
 
nandbytes said:
true so currently i mainly do a minimum of 10 per batch and its normally the standard paper like you said.

with the new found information about inks I am considering buying the canon pixma iP8750 which is pretty decent and cheap from reviews I read...
Click to expand...

I haven’t the patience to wait until I have a few to send, I need to see them now :)
 
There's a Loxia 35mm f2 in the for sale section, I'd prob have had that if I hadn't recently got the Voigtlander. It seems to be a reasonable price.

Somebody buy it before I'm tempted more.
 
woof woof said:
There's a Loxia 35mm f2 in the for sale section, I'd prob have had that if I hadn't recently got the Voigtlander. It seems to be a reasonable price.

Somebody buy it before I'm tempted more.
Click to expand...
Ive not lookedbut my money’s on its Adrian’s :D
 
woof woof said:
There's a Loxia 35mm f2 in the for sale section, I'd prob have had that if I hadn't recently got the Voigtlander. It seems to be a reasonable price.

Somebody buy it before I'm tempted more.
Click to expand...

I'm tempted, love the Loxia but looking at both AF Samyangs (f1.4 and the f2.8) have me thinking about those.
 
I haven't tried the Loxia 35mm f2 but this guy mentions it whilst reviewing the Voigtlander...

https://admiringlight.com/blog/review-voigtlander-35mm-f1-4-nokton-classic-e-mount/

Amongst other things he says...

"If you do want a more modern rendering lens, be prepared to both spend more and carry around a larger lens. One of the nice alternatives is Voigtländer’s own 40mm f/1.2, which is $300 more expensive, about twice the length and twice the weight, but is still fairly compact for such a lens, and while it’s a slightly longer focal length, from samples I’ve seen it’s also much better corrected and is a more modern optic. Otherwise, you’re stuck with the giant 35mm f/1.4 lenses, or the also less than perfect, but also quite pricey (and slower) Loxia 35mm f/2. In fact, the Loxia and the Voigtländer share a fair bit in how they draw, with nervous bokeh wide open. The Loxia is a touch sharper, a little bigger and a lot more expensive at $1,299, and its relationship to price was why I didn’t really feel it was worth a purchase when I reviewed that lens. However, the Voigtländer’s $500 lower price and full stop faster aperture make it a lot easier to overlook flaws and embrace the drawing style."

I agree with quite a bit he says in that review and if he's right about the Voigtlander and Loxia being similar at wider apertures I'd take the Voigtlander every time as it at least gives the option of shooting wider than f2 if there's no choice or the subject suits the bokeh.

I think I could be tempted to buy another 35mm if it's a compact AF f1.x or a compact and more modern rendering MF f1.x which is sharp into the extreme corners when stopped down (the Voigtlander isn't) but at the mo neither seem to be available so the Voigtlander will be my only FE mount fast 35mm for now.
 
woof woof said:
I haven't tried the Loxia 35mm f2 but this guy mentions it whilst reviewing the Voigtlander...

https://admiringlight.com/blog/review-voigtlander-35mm-f1-4-nokton-classic-e-mount/

Amongst other things he says...

"If you do want a more modern rendering lens, be prepared to both spend more and carry around a larger lens. One of the nice alternatives is Voigtländer’s own 40mm f/1.2, which is $300 more expensive, about twice the length and twice the weight, but is still fairly compact for such a lens, and while it’s a slightly longer focal length, from samples I’ve seen it’s also much better corrected and is a more modern optic. Otherwise, you’re stuck with the giant 35mm f/1.4 lenses, or the also less than perfect, but also quite pricey (and slower) Loxia 35mm f/2. In fact, the Loxia and the Voigtländer share a fair bit in how they draw, with nervous bokeh wide open. The Loxia is a touch sharper, a little bigger and a lot more expensive at $1,299, and its relationship to price was why I didn’t really feel it was worth a purchase when I reviewed that lens. However, the Voigtländer’s $500 lower price and full stop faster aperture make it a lot easier to overlook flaws and embrace the drawing style."

I agree with quite a bit he says in that review and if he's right about the Voigtlander and Loxia being similar at wider apertures I'd take the Voigtlander every time as it at least gives the option of shooting wider than f2 if there's no choice or the subject suits the bokeh.

I think I could be tempted to buy another 35mm if it's a compact AF f1.x or a compact and more modern rendering MF f1.x which is sharp into the extreme corners when stopped down (the Voigtlander isn't) but at the mo neither seem to be available so the Voigtlander will be my only FE mount fast 35mm for now.
Click to expand...

I've always been delighted with the Loxia 35 although truth be told of the Loxia "gang" (21/35/50/85) its actually the weakest of the lot, based on quite an old optical design now.
The 21 is epic and the new 25mm looks nice too, 50mm I've tried but never owned and I'd love to try the 85mm, it looks ace.

My enjoyment in using MF glass is one of the reason's I'm staying with Sony truth be told, I've had a notion for a while that I'd like the bulk of my main kit to be MF (Voigtlander / Zeiss), I can't really get away from needing a decent AF lens to cover off some things (24-70 ish)
 
I like my manual lenses for when I have the time to use them but the AF lenses are sometimes the ones to reach for as although Mrs Woof Woof is very patient there are times when I want to be a bit quicker taking pictures.

PS.
I've looked at a few Loxia 50mm reviews and I can't say that the bokeh looks particularly good. It looks like what I'd expect from a wider lens.
 
Last edited:
There are some advantages... zone and hyperfocal type shooting is easier and if we're talking older lenses or older optical designs they have their own look, for good or bad, and then there's the joy of using them as they can just feel so much nicer to use.
 
woof woof said:
There are some advantages... zone and hyperfocal type shooting is easier and if we're talking older lenses or older optical designs they have their own look, for good or bad, and then there's the joy of using them as they can just feel so much nicer to use.
Click to expand...

Unless the lens is a TS, I think most look they offer isn’t worth the pain so to speak. Missing the shot is more painful.

That said, I once shot 10 days, everyday with my 45/TSE. It can rewire your brain to think about photography differently which I can appreciate, you leave to know when something comes into focus etc but mostly....AF for me.
 
Last edited:
chrism_scotland said:
I've always been delighted with the Loxia 35 although truth be told of the Loxia "gang" (21/35/50/85) its actually the weakest of the lot, based on quite an old optical design now.
The 21 is epic and the new 25mm looks nice too, 50mm I've tried but never owned and I'd love to try the 85mm, it looks ace.

My enjoyment in using MF glass is one of the reason's I'm staying with Sony truth be told, I've had a notion for a while that I'd like the bulk of my main kit to be MF (Voigtlander / Zeiss), I can't really get away from needing a decent AF lens to cover off some things (24-70 ish)
Click to expand...

I've been contemplating trading in my Batis 25 for the Loxia 25. And also getting the 85, though still I'd use my 100mm trioplan far more.
But simply because loxias are such nice lenses to use, and of course the resulting photos are fine.
Its the amateur in me, and I'd like the set.
I don't need autofocus; and also I find the Batis to be a very clinical lens, as too the Sony 90mm macro. Might trade also that one in, though the Mrs will object. Nothing wrong with either, just personal preferences and feelings.
Hmmm
 
Raymond Lin said:
Unless the lens is a TS, I think most look they offer isn’t worth the pain so to speak. Missing the shot is more painful.

That said, I once shot 10 days, everyday with my 45/TSE. It can rewire your brain to think about photography differently which I can appreciate, you leave to know when something comes into focus etc but mostly....AF for me.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you shoot I guess. Granted it's very hard to accurately focus fast manual lenses on DSLR's due to the lack of split prism, but with mirrorless it should be easier with the focus aids. I do love the look of some of the retro lenses, especially the Leica ones. I think Leica have lost that 'look' with some of their modern lenses for example. I wouldn't want to be shooting moving things manually focussing with shallow DOF though. I wonder if there's a market for someone designing retro lenses but with autofocus?
 
Been offered a very decent trade in price on my A7r2. Anyone want me to list it in the classifieds before it’s taken to the shop?
 
I like the way that Samyang have painted the 35mm 2.8 mount to make it look like metal lol
 
twist said:
hmmm, with the problems that lens has Id probably skip used.
Click to expand...

Return it if it's no good.

I bought the Sony Zeiss 16-70mm used which is reported have more QC issues than this lens and got a terrific copy. You just need to buy selectively either with return options or with possibility of testing it first or owned by a forum member for example who you know will have tested it.

To some extent I'd argue it's better buying used because you can sometimes know what you are getting unlike new one which is pure lottery
 
Last edited:
twist said:
... its metal
Click to expand...

Most reviews say otherwise?

The lens mount is silver-coloured and definitely designed to look like metal, but a close examination reveals its colour and finish to be very different to that of the AF 50mm f/1.4 FE: it's also plastic. But, again, on a lens of such a weight there's nothing to worry about.
 
nandbytes said:
Return it if it's no good.

I bought the Sony Zeiss 16-70mm used which is reported have more QC issues than this lens and got a terrific copy. You just need to buy selectively either with return options or with possibility of testing it first or owned by a forum member for example who you know will have tested it.

To some extent I'd argue it's better buying used because you can sometimes know what you are getting unlike new one which is pure lottery
Click to expand...

Its made from alloy, that is a metal, not a plastic. Silver paint would come off almost instantly.

https://www.ephotozine.com/articles...ang_35mm_f28_rear_oblique_view_1498569206.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top