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

addicknchips said:
There’s one dropping on the new canon mirrorless next month. 35mm f1.8 macro. Looks small and compact.

https://www.jessops.com/p/canon/rf-35mm-f-1-8-is-macro-stm-lens-159022
Click to expand...

I'll have a think as time goes by and the newer systems fill out. At the moment it's difficult to get time to myself to go out and take pictures and I can't say how long this situation will last. I've asked and asked for help, pleaded really, but the help I got amounted to half a day here and there and even that very quickly evaporated so in some ways it's pretty pointless spending anything on gear but then I think that when I do get time to go out and pursue my little hobby I might as well enjoy it with the kit I want to use so why not indulge myself... So at some point if for example Nikon offer a good enough body and nice 35 and 85mm f1.8's I'd have no problem buying but to save hassle and expense I'd much rather Sony or Sigma or Tamron got around to a nice Sony fit 35mm f1.8 so that I didn't have the hassle of selling all of my current native Sony stuff.
 
Livin The Dream said:
I'm really pleasantly surprised with the 55 zeiss. There's nothing detrimental for me between 50mm and 55mm, son get used to that. But for such a small little lens, it's great.
Click to expand...

I was shocked when I got one. I used to think that I wouldn't ever want a better lens than the old (non Art) Sigma 50mm f1.4 but the Sony f1.8 is better than any 50mm I've used. I do notice the extra 5mm though. Actually the thinking I'd never want better also extends to 85mm as I loved the Sigma f1.4 but the Sony f1.8 is better, just not f1.4.
 
old bloke said:
I think a small and light 35mm1.8 AF lens is achievable you only have to look at the size and weight difference between Sony's own 85mm 1.8 and 1.4 lenses to realise that
if Sony don't do it someone else will, my bet would be on Tamron.
Click to expand...

woof woof said:
I'll have a think as time goes by and the newer systems fill out. At the moment it's difficult to get time to myself to go out and take pictures and I can't say how long this situation will last. I've asked and asked for help, pleaded really, but the help I got amounted to half a day here and there and even that very quickly evaporated so in some ways it's pretty pointless spending anything on gear but then I think that when I do get time to go out and pursue my little hobby I might as well enjoy it with the kit I want to use so why not indulge myself... So at some point if for example Nikon offer a good enough body and nice 35 and 85mm f1.8's I'd have no problem buying but to save hassle and expense I'd much rather Sony or Sigma or Tamron got around to a nice Sony fit 35mm f1.8 so that I didn't have the hassle of selling all of my current native Sony stuff.
Click to expand...


They have had 5 years to make a compact 35 1.8, with some like I’ve 100 e mount full frame lenses available, you would of thought that if there was enough of a demand/ it was possible to make a suitable quality version they would of by now. Or at least said they are working on it lie tamron did with the 28-75, they announced it long before they actually let anyone test it etc.

At least everyone who moaned persistently about the lack of 35mm 1.8’s can now get the canon r mount version and cameras
 
RPhotos said:
They have had 5 years to make a compact 35 1.8, with some like I’ve 100 e mount full frame lenses available, you would of thought that if there was enough of a demand/ it was possible to make a suitable quality version they would of by now. Or at least said they are working on it lie tamron did with the 28-75, they announced it long before they actually let anyone test it etc.

At least everyone who moaned persistently about the lack of 35mm 1.8’s can now get the canon r mount version and cameras
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends what the priorities are. Some people think that compact and reasonably priced 35 and 85mm f1.8's are basic staples of a good system whilst others would prefer a 50mm and others would prefer SOTA f1.4's. Some prefer zooms and of those some would prefer f4's and some f2.8's. I suppose it would be ideal if there was a set of lenses to suit everyone and the Sony system has filled out a lot to the point that we have most things now and indeed we have reasonably priced compact 50 and 85mm f1.8's, they just haven't so far given us a 35mm. I'm sure they could do one if they decided to. I just don't believe it's impossible due to some strange limitation of the mount... Stick an adapter on a Canikon DSLR f1.8 and it'd still be smaller than the Sony or Sigma f1.4's.

The glaring omissions for me are the 35mm f1.8, a longer macro (150mm?) and I'd add a 50mm macro to that little list, one with a decent focus system as the one I had was rubbish and went straight back.

PS.
Talking about glaring things the Nikon Whatsit has a max shutter speed of 1/2,000 with EFCS. I'd find that unacceptable as I don't want to go back to fitting and removing ND's because of shutter speed limitations. I hope they either cure the shutter shock or somehow get around that limitation. Given the choice of swapping my A7 and AF 35mm f2.8 or MF f1.4 for a Nikon with a compact 35mm f1.8, if they have one, and that limitation I'll keep the Sony gear and live with the lenses I have.
 
Last edited:
But I think there is a demand? I best if one came out it would out-sell a lot of other Sony glass. But maybe thats what the worry is, it stops sales of the bigger lenses.

I mean take Nikon, the 35mm f1.8g. I believe it out sells the 1.4g by a large margain.
 
JJ! said:
But I think there is a demand? I best if one came out it would out-sell a lot of other Sony glass. But maybe thats what the worry is, it stops sales of the bigger lenses.

I mean take Nikon, the 35mm f1.8g. I believe it out sells the 1.4g by a large margain.
Click to expand...

There isn't though not really.

For those that want a light weight 35mm there is the 35mm f/2.8. For those that want a high quality lens with excellent optics there is the 35mm f/1.4

Would seem a bit overkill to have a 3 different 35mm lenses, would only make sense if they where to discontinue the 35mm f/2.8.

They won't be able to make a 35mm f/1.8 which is smaller or lighter weight than the f/2.8 version or even an equivalent weight and size due to the restrictions of the mount.

Can't see it happening any time soon.
 
woof woof said:
I suppose it depends what the priorities are. Some people think that compact and reasonably priced 35 and 85mm f1.8's are basic staples of a good system whilst others would prefer a 50mm and others would prefer SOTA f1.4's. Some prefer zooms and of those some would prefer f4's and some f2.8's. I suppose it would be ideal if there was a set of lenses to suit everyone and the Sony system has filled out a lot to the point that we have most things now and indeed we have reasonably priced compact 50 and 85mm f1.8's, they just haven't so far given us a 35mm. I'm sure they could do one if they decided to. I just don't believe it's impossible due to some strange limitation of the mount... Stick an adapter on a Canikon DSLR f1.8 and it'd still be smaller than the Sony or Sigma f1.4's.

The glaring omissions for me are the 35mm f1.8, a longer macro (150mm?) and I'd add a 50mm macro to that little list, one with a decent focus system as the one I had was rubbish and went straight back.

PS.
Talking about glaring things the Nikon Whatsit has a max shutter speed of 1/2,000 with EFCS. I'd find that unacceptable as I don't want to go back to fitting and removing ND's because of shutter speed limitations. I hope they either cure the shutter shock or somehow get around that limitation. Given the choice of swapping my A7 and AF 35mm f2.8 or MF f1.4 for a Nikon with a compact 35mm f1.8, if they have one, and that limitation I'll keep the Sony gear and live with the lenses I have.
Click to expand...

Why do you think EFCS over 1/2000 is such an amazing thing? Its not like the camera is limited to 1/2000 completely.
 
twist said:
Why do you think EFCS over 1/2000 is such an amazing thing? Its not like the camera is limited to 1/2000 completely.
Click to expand...

the above EFCS limit is the same with the fuji i think. personally not had an issue with shutter shock.
mechanical shutter maxes out ay 1/8000 and electronic 1/32000.
 
addicknchips said:
the above EFCS limit is the same with the fuji i think. personally not had an issue with shutter shock.
mechanical shutter maxes out ay 1/8000 and electronic 1/32000.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point, its not a dealbreaker and it doesn't force the use of ND. Shutter shock mainly effects images at VERY low shutter speeds, well below 1/2000.
 
Street food in Taipei.

C7vzMvk.jpg


qrx4ZZ4.jpg
 
I heard/read a while ago that Sony aren't willing to do a fast 35mm because of competing with it's own RX1 range with the 35/2 lens.

Whether that's true? Rumours? Hearsay...? Sort of makes sense though in a way.
 
So watching some videos on YouTube I have seen that some sports shooters choose to shoot in aperture priority then set a minimum shutter speed including a the Aussie Sony ambassador guy.

I have typically always shot in shutter or manual modes.

Any benefits to shooting in aperture over these, or is it more about what is most important to you?
 
JJ! said:
So watching some videos on YouTube I have seen that some sports shooters choose to shoot in aperture priority then set a minimum shutter speed including a the Aussie Sony ambassador guy.

I have typically always shot in shutter or manual modes.

Any benefits to shooting in aperture over these, or is it more about what is most important to you?
Click to expand...
I've decided to put neither mode in priority for the stuff I do most, namely wildlife.

I use manual and set the appropriate shutter speed most suitable for the physical movement of my subject and then use auto ISO. For static/semi-static birds or other wildlife I find I can set a shutter speed of 1/500th and for BIF etc. I set it to 1/2000th and assign each setting to M1 and M2. I am constrained to use the widest aperture I can because I shoot with the 100-400GM with the 1.4x tc which is always going to be F8 at full stretch.
I set the M3 option to a manual "sunny F8" setting also with auto ISO and then find it easy to adjust according to conditions.

It's the amazing capacity of the A7R3 to cope with high ISO that allows me to set a high maximum ISO of 12,800 and the ease of changing exposure compensation with a simple dial turn that makes me love this system.
 
Last edited:
JJ! said:
So watching some videos on YouTube I have seen that some sports shooters choose to shoot in aperture priority then set a minimum shutter speed including a the Aussie Sony ambassador guy.

I have typically always shot in shutter or manual modes.

Any benefits to shooting in aperture over these, or is it more about what is most important to you?
Click to expand...

I don’t shoot sports obviously but the theory I get. I guess the question needs to be: what benefit is there to locking down the exposure in manual? In many outdoor situations the light can change slightly and so aperture or shutter priority makes sense. But where light is constant (indoor ménage maybe in your circumstances?) then locking exposure is a means to an end. If you use manual to lock the aperture and shutter, but have iso set on auto, that wouldn’t be completely manual either. In a controlled environment manual can make sense, but I personally shoot aperture in most situations because you can react quicker.
 
Livin The Dream said:
I don’t shoot sports obviously but the theory I get. I guess the question needs to be: what benefit is there to locking down the exposure in manual? In many outdoor situations the light can change slightly and so aperture or shutter priority makes sense. But where light is constant (indoor ménage maybe in your circumstances?) then locking exposure is a means to an end. If you use manual to lock the aperture and shutter, but have iso set on auto, that wouldn’t be completely manual either. In a controlled environment manual can make sense, but I personally shoot aperture in most situations because you can react quicker.
Click to expand...

The indoor ménage this weekend is a terrible one - the lights differ throughout and at one end they are more yellow and there is also a door the other end that emits a completly different light! Maybe I might try aperture this time!
 
JJ! said:
The indoor ménage this weekend is a terrible one - the lights differ throughout and at one end they are more yellow and there is also a door the other end that emits a completly different light! Maybe I might try aperture this time!
Click to expand...

tbh, I would put it in Manual, set max aperture, and the minimum shutter that you need, then Auto ISO.

Let the noise commence no matter what.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top