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

Took some close up shots with the Tamron 28-75, it is razor sharp, nothing amazing as they were just pictures from around my house. :)
 
meduk1 said:
How significant is the autofocus difference between the 2?
Click to expand...

The A7 III inherits the autofocus system of the Sony A9. Although it doesn’t share the same calculation speed as the flagship model, it retains the same number of phase detection points (693) while increasing the contrast detection points to 425. The A7R III shares the same number of contrast detection points but has fewer phase detection points (399).

Another aspect to consider is that the phase detection points on the A7 III cover 93% of the sensor, versus 68% on the A7R III which means the A7 III can be more accurate when tracking a subject at the edge of the frame.




A7 III: 693 phase detection points

A7R III: 399 phase detection points

A7 III / A7R III: 425 contrast detection points

credit to mirrorlesscomparison
 
Last edited:
Dynamic range of z7 out...

http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon Z 7,Sony ILCE-7M3,Sony ILCE-7RM3

Not looking so good for Z7....
I always thought Sony couldn't squeeze as much as Nikon out of their sensors which seemed odd to me but it seems they were doing as well as they could with PDAF points in the sensor which Nikon DSLRs don't have to deal with.

Not bad for a revamped 4 year old sensor in case of A7RIII ;)
 
nandbytes said:
Dynamic range of z7 out...

http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon Z 7,Sony ILCE-7M3,Sony ILCE-7RM3

Not looking so good for Z7....
I always thought Sony couldn't squeeze as much as Nikon out of their sensors which seemed odd to me but it seems they were doing as well as they could with PDAF points in the sensor which Nikon DSLRs don't have to deal with.

Not bad for a revamped 4 year old sensor in case of A7RIII ;)
Click to expand...

Look at that A7iii though! Sony said a couple years back they were keeping their best sensors to themselves from then on.
 
twist said:
Look at that A7iii though! Sony said a couple years back they were keeping their best sensors to themselves from then on.
Click to expand...
To be fair A7III is the latest FF sensor on market right now. So no surprise it's class leading.

We don't know what Z6 has but it's not on market yet. The other canikon mirroless seem have reused their DSLR sensors.
 
twist said:
The A7 III inherits the autofocus system of the Sony A9. Although it doesn’t share the same calculation speed as the flagship model, it retains the same number of phase detection points (693) while increasing the contrast detection points to 425. The A7R III shares the same number of contrast detection points but has fewer phase detection points (399).
Click to expand...

good post, also annoying that there is such a big advantage to the lower model. What does this likely translate to for real world? I’m not a big sports photographer, typically travel, family and landscapes. Does the a7r still have decent eye autofocus?
 
Last edited:

The improve in AF works for everything that moves, not just sports. Like kids running, like quick snap in street photography.

Think of it like this.

If you value mega pixels, like if you PRINT and if you take lots of photos with tripods or things like food or things that stands around. A7R3.

If you don't print that much, or print Large, get the A73.

The EVF and high res is nice, but ultimately is not what affect the final result, unless this is something you value a lot.
 
Was taking some pics of the misses on her horse this evening in near dark conditions. No idea how they have come out.

Look a bit soft on the screen but did have to drop to 1/250 and 10,000 iso as the light went!!
 
Raymond Lin said:
The improve in AF works for everything that moves, not just sports. Like kids running, like quick snap in street photography.

Think of it like this.

If you value mega pixels, like if you PRINT and if you take lots of photos with tripods or things like food or things that stands around. A7R3.

If you don't print that much, or print Large, get the A73.

The EVF and high res is nice, but ultimately is not what affect the final result, unless this is something you value a lot.
Click to expand...

Annoyingly I'm down the middle with my requirements here! I do display pics on a large 4k TV and print as canvas', so the extra MP helps a lot. Likewise the better AF really appears, one of my pet hates is my number of throwaways due to missing the AF point!

The EVF - agreed not a deal breaker either way, but it is very noticeably better in the R. Argh - decisions decisions!
 
one for the wedding photograghers, how do you set up your focus settings on you a7iii and do you change it throughout the day? the discussion above about auto focus got me thinking with such a complex system what would be the best settings etc
 
meduk1 said:
Annoyingly I'm down the middle with my requirements here! I do display pics on a large 4k TV and print as canvas', so the extra MP helps a lot. Likewise the better AF really appears, one of my pet hates is my number of throwaways due to missing the AF point!

The EVF - agreed not a deal breaker either way, but it is very noticeably better in the R. Argh - decisions decisions!
Click to expand...

A 4K tv is only displaying around 8.5 megapixels and printing on canvas is much less critical. I’m looking at a 3x2’ canvas on my wall here that was shot on my old Panasonic GF1 so an A7iii would be more than enough for either situation.

The cropability of the A7Riii is an advantage if you want to shoot more telephoto without a longer lens, or to change composition etc, but I wouldn’t buy one specifically for displaying on a tv/canvas.
 
stevelmx5 said:
A 4K tv is only displaying around 8.5 megapixels and printing on canvas is much less critical. I’m looking at a 3x2’ canvas on my wall here that was shot on my old Panasonic GF1 so an A7iii would be more than enough for either situation.

The cropability of the A7Riii is an advantage if you want to shoot more telephoto without a longer lens, or to change composition etc, but I wouldn’t buy one specifically for displaying on a tv/canvas.
Click to expand...

Yes has just been reading up on its crop mode, sounds very useful and still at 18.

See your point re canvas & TV, I've currently got pics on both that have been shot with 22mb and they're all fine.

Price is really not a differentiator for me as the grey price for the R is only a few hundred quid more. With that out of the picture I'm still leaning towards the R right now!
 
meduk1 said:
Yes has just been reading up on its crop mode, sounds very useful and still at 18.

See your point re canvas & TV, I've currently got pics on both that have been shot with 22mb and they're all fine.

Price is really not a differentiator for me as the grey price for the R is only a few hundred quid more. With that out of the picture I'm still leaning towards the R right now!
Click to expand...

The a7iii will also shoot in crop at 10mp which is still enough to view plus then some at 4k and print pretty huge.
 
Last edited:
Radiohead said:
Continuous, smallest focal point. Move with Joytick. Unless I can use eye-Af which is configured to a button.

First dance I’ll switch to zone.
Click to expand...

How does the zone cope with grabbing faces etc rather then the closest arm?

twist said:
Same, ael as eye af or fn on lens and I use af on. Joystick set to reset point when depressed.
Click to expand...

Small focal point t as well? Do either of you bother with the small lock on setting?
 
Not sure what happened or if this is normal.

I was in AFC and shutter speed mode. Camera was set to small expandable spot.

I was taking few pics around the yard when one of the dogs came towards me. As I went to take some pics my little spot became a massive square and started to track the dogs face?! Is this to do with the dogs expandable spot? Or have I got some other setting active?!
 
meduk1 said:
Annoyingly I'm down the middle with my requirements here! I do display pics on a large 4k TV and print as canvas', so the extra MP helps a lot. Likewise the better AF really appears, one of my pet hates is my number of throwaways due to missing the AF point!

The EVF - agreed not a deal breaker either way, but it is very noticeably better in the R. Argh - decisions decisions!
Click to expand...
If you can afford the R, get the R. Make sure you can also afford expensive fast UHS-II cards also otherwise things will slow down and you won't like it :P

IMO you don't lose a huge lot in terms of AF. It's not like A7RIII AF or frame coverage is bad, just not entire frame.

I went with A7RIII but for me the resolution and pixel shift feature comes in handy.
 
nandbytes said:
If you can afford the R, get the R. Make sure you can also afford expensive fast UHS-II cards also otherwise things will slow down and you won't like it :p

IMO you don't lose a huge lot in terms of AF. It's not like A7RIII AF or frame coverage is bad, just not entire frame.

I went with A7RIII but for me the resolution and pixel shift feature comes in handy.
Click to expand...

I’m still reading up and thinking No rush for a decision as I need to sell some kit before I can purchase. I’m ignoring price as grey price is virtually the same, and over the lifetime I’ll have the camera it doesn’t really factor.

Mega pixels I’m also putting to one side, as I simply don’t think I’ll benefit from it.

That then comes down to better evf vs better af. Having more pics in focus is winning on that front.
 
meduk1 said:
I’m still reading up and thinking No rush for a decision as I need to sell some kit before I can purchase. I’m ignoring price as grey price is virtually the same, and over the lifetime I’ll have the camera it doesn’t really factor.

Mega pixels I’m also putting to one side, as I simply don’t think I’ll benefit from it.

That then comes down to better evf vs better af. Having more pics in focus is winning on that front.
Click to expand...

A better evf won't improve your hit rate.
 
meduk1 said:
I’m still reading up and thinking No rush for a decision as I need to sell some kit before I can purchase. I’m ignoring price as grey price is virtually the same, and over the lifetime I’ll have the camera it doesn’t really factor.

Mega pixels I’m also putting to one side, as I simply don’t think I’ll benefit from it.

That then comes down to better evf vs better af. Having more pics in focus is winning on that front.
Click to expand...

Then get the A7III :D

If you don't appreciate the pixels and pixel shift there is not must point in the getting the A7RIII. I wouldn't get the A7RIII for just the EVF alone.
 
meduk1 said:
Thanks, that’s the best price I’ve seen. Not used them before, I’m presuming there a similar setup to digitalrev, so grey import with warranty provided by them.

Interesting that there lens prices don’t seem much cheaper than normal places
Click to expand...

Better than digital rev in my opinion! I think a very high % of people on here have used them at some point!
 
meduk1 said:
Thanks, that’s the best price I’ve seen. Not used them before, I’m presuming there a similar setup to digitalrev, so grey import with warranty provided by them.

Interesting that there lens prices don’t seem much cheaper than normal places
Click to expand...

Very good seller... Better than DR.
 
Whats the low light high ISO capability of the A7R3 compared to the A73?

It must be poorer with that bloody great 40 odd mp sensor?
 
GreenNinja67 said:
Whats the low light high ISO capability of the A7R3 compared to the A73?

It must be poorer with that bloody great 40 odd mp sensor?
Click to expand...
Going by graphs on photonstophotos not a lot. About 1/3rd stop max.
There isn't much in it to make it a useful deciding factor.

If low light high ISO is your main thing might be worth waiting for A7SIII but end up sacrificing base ISO dynamic range for that.
It's all a compromise which ever way you look at it :D
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised there's not much in it.

Not a deal breaker no but good to know.

I tried some astro the other night at Elan Valley with my M43 gear but it's really not cut out for it.
 
I wouldn't worry too much about any slight noise differences. Many of my pictures are downsized anyway which makes the noise less apparent and if you downsize too you may not see any significant difference.
 
There's a nice little piece here on the creation, rise and persistence of 24x36mm....

http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...8/10/the-remarkable-persistence-of-24x36.html

I agree that "full frame" is daft.

Also interesting that the first lens fitted was a 42.5mm.

I'm ok with 3:2 for landscape but I prefer 4:3 for portrait. On the long lens / wide aperture / zero dof cudos issue I do like shallow dof now and again but I do think it's overdone and looking at the pictures I like best from the pioneers and greats few if any are razor thin dof pictures.
 
Last edited:
GreenNinja67 said:
I'm surprised there's not much in it.

Not a deal breaker no but good to know.

I tried some astro the other night at Elan Valley with my M43 gear but it's really not cut out for it.
Click to expand...

Well you'll probably get better results with m43 if you use their really fast lenses. But those cost a huge lot.

Having said that I have shot night sky successfully with f4 lenses on A7RII.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top