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

Dave Semmens said:
A tripod for landscape photography is a different beast than one for most other uses. You can buy small, light and easy to carry, but in the end you will get more results with a long, heavy tripod.

I have been through 4 tripods that started small and light and worked up to using my Benro that was purchased to hold my Nikon D810 and 500mm F4 - it is a beast.

This is an ok day on Mam Tor - I have been up there when you struggled to stand up in the wind.

Dave.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

jonneymendoza said:
With IBIS , you can get away with no tripod for landscape during the day
Click to expand...

Not if you are using ND filters and doing long exposures.
I tend to use a lot ND filters and go for very long exposures, I need a very sturdy tripod and that's where some of the pack small tripods fail.
 
Seriously impressed with the Sony A7 III....... is the Sony A9 worth the price over the Sony A7 III for most users..... honestly I don't think it is. :eek:
In practice I am not finding the rear LCD and EVF significantly worse than the A9, yes their is a difference but its not a life & death difference.
I prefer using it in 8fps live view mode vs 10fps though.
I do miss the dedicated drive mode & focus mode dial of the A9.

Overall the Sony A7 III is worth the £1999 price tag, no question about it.
Even better for those go bagged the cheaper discounted offers.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Yes, as Dan says the first rule of landscapes is to get the horizon straight :p
Click to expand...

Surely you have to judge picture by picture as sometimes straightening the horizon will cause something else to be wonky and in this case there's a chance of knocking the walkway and fence posts out. Sometimes you just have to ignore a "rule" and instead strike a balance and go with what looks best and not obsess over some element in the picture being 1 degree out.

Just MHO :D
 
woof woof said:
Surely you have to judge picture by picture as sometimes straightening the horizon will cause something else to be wonky and in this case there's a chance of knocking the walkway and fence posts out. Sometimes you just have to ignore a "rule" and instead strike a balance and go with what looks best and not obsess over some element in the picture being 1 degree out.

Just MHO :D
Click to expand...
Well said. I wanted the path to be straight.
 
woof woof said:
Surely you have to judge picture by picture as sometimes straightening the horizon will cause something else to be wonky and in this case there's a chance of knocking the walkway and fence posts out. Sometimes you just have to ignore a "rule" and instead strike a balance and go with what looks best and not obsess over some element in the picture being 1 degree out.

Just MHO :D
Click to expand...
Rules sometimes can be ignored, but not with horizons in landscapes, especially when there's a large body of water in the scene (unless you've done it deliberately such as 45 degrees to look 'arty' ;)) In any case, in Jonney's pic nothing's straight, the fence posts and bench are leaning to the right too ;)
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Rules sometimes can be ignored, but not with horizons in landscapes, especially when there's a large body of water in the scene (unless you've done it deliberately such as 45 degrees to look 'arty' ;)) In any case, in Jonney's pic nothing's straight, the fence posts and bench are leaning to the right too ;)
Click to expand...
I'm on a tablet and the picture is quite dark but from what I can see the pathway would be sloping more with the horizon corrected, fence posts don't look too bad and would imo suffer should the horizon be straight. It's all opinion and maybe straightening the horizon is the majority opinion but photography is a personal thing and knocking the fence posts and path out to get the horizon straight is just a different trade off. The shot could be taken from a different location and / or a different angle but it'd then be a different pucture.

I have hundreds if not thousands of pictures with the horizon knowingly a bit off and guess what, no one has ever commented on that, including here :D Imo it's about making a picture to look at not complying with rules. ymmv.
 
Has anyone experience of the Canon 17-40 with MC11 on A7III? Does it work OK and is fast to focus, eye detect etc?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
woof woof said:
I'm on a tablet and the picture is quite dark but from what I can see the pathway would be sloping more with the horizon corrected, fence posts don't look too bad and would imo suffer should the horizon be straight. It's all opinion and maybe straightening the horizon is the majority opinion but photography is a personal thing and knocking the fence posts and path out to get the horizon straight is just a different trade off. The shot could be taken from a different location and / or a different angle but it'd then be a different pucture.

I have hundreds if not thousands of pictures with the horizon knowingly a bit off and guess what, no one has ever commented on that, including here :D Imo it's about making a picture to look at not complying with rules. ymmv.
Click to expand...
It looks fine straightened imo ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top