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

Raymond Lin said:
Earlier yesterday you say the price is fine, but what is stopping you is the principle...aka, mentality.



Today it is too expensive by a mere £3 (difference of your £6) and it is not a mental block.

You sure do change your tune daily :p
Click to expand...
I can read no need to increase the font, then bolden it and then underline it lol.

I also know what I said.

My point is still the same. It's not expensive, as you say £3 is barely anything. I spend that much on coffee everyday. It's the principal that I have to pay that much extra from stuff I don't need.

I also said of it was £6 for just LR I'd more for it. That is not same as saying "I'd sign up immediately". Just that I'd have less objection. The point that I am happy with using the same version of LR with perpectual licence for 3-4 years with no issues still stands.
 
twist said:
Or renew every black Friday or Xmas and it's 6 a month :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Well if they had a LR only model it'd have been £4 a month:rolleyes:
But they don't have that do they because they want me to pay for stuff I don't want so that they can coerce me into thinking I need those
 
Last edited:
I don't even know which way you are leaning from one moment to the next, it is impossible to debate with someone who moves the goal posts constantly but it is your money and your photos so you'd do what you want. My post was more a generic observation on various forums on why people won't subscribe, not just you.

p.s. I just paid £74.99 for 12 months, ooooh, extra £2.99 more for the 12 months for PS...HUGE price to pay for something you don't need if you can get the other thing for cheap! lol
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
I don't even know which way you are leaning from one moment to the next, it is impossible to debate with someone who moves the goal posts constantly but it is your money and your photos so you'd do what you want. My post was more a generic observation on various forums on why people won't subscribe, not just you.
Click to expand...

Well yes a lot of people don't like subscriptions whom I believe are the people you referred to as having mental block.
I am not one of those especially since I subscribe to other things I use.

I will probably end up getting a subscription when I next upgrade my body and if I can't a find a good alternative for LR (which I haven't yet).

But again that is not to say I'd be happy with it or that I'd agree with the principal.
 
nandbytes said:
Well yes a lot of people don't like subscriptions whom I believe are the people you referred to as having mental block.
I am not one of those especially since I subscribe to other things I use.

I will probably end up getting a subscription when I next upgrade my body and if I can't a find a good alternative for LR (which I haven't yet).

But again that is not to say I'd be happy with it or that I'd agree with the principal.
Click to expand...

But you're paying for features in lots of software you will probably never use either and can say that you use every function of everything you own.
 
Sony manager Kenji Tanaka has been interviewed by Amateur Photographer. He shared some interesting thoughts and info:

About the mount diameter discussion: “The diameter of lens doesn’t matter. Honestly speaking it is very difficult to create a small size mount. But the quality of our new 400mm f/2.8 is better than the competitors. That means the diameter of the mount is not critical for our foremost lenses.”

About doing faster primes: “Maybe some demand exists for an f/1.2, but an f/1.0? Technically we could produce an f/1.0, but it would not make business sense.”

About the new comptition: “Of course we are planning new models but honestly speaking, I don’t care about competitors. We care about our customer’s voice. A lot of our customers have given us feedback and we will create new products based on that.”

About new telephoto lenses: “We recently launched the 400mm f/2.8 for sports shooters and we are planning to develop another lens for this segment.”

About the size of the A7-A9 camera: “bigger cameras, that is not the Sony philosophy, and maybe another product might be better for them.”
 
I'd love a 1.0 lens...for bragging rights, I'd probably would use it and would probably will buy it if it exists but do I need it? Probably not.
 
twist said:
But you're paying for features in lots of software you will probably never use either and can say that you use every function of everything you own.
Click to expand...

No I don't. But we are not talking features of a software or product. I have no need for half the products offered as part of the subscription i.e. I am not using the whole PS software though I can find plenty uses for PS and gimp is not so nice to use. But the this is exactly the point, I don't need PS but when I have it I'll start using it thus making me want it in future. It's exactly what Adobe is banking on :P
 
Raymond Lin said:
I'd love a 1.0 lens...for bragging rights, I'd probably would use it and would probably will buy it if it exists but do I need it? Probably not.
Click to expand...

There are a few 0.95 lenses for E mount, also a 0.85. I owned the Mitakon dark knight.
 
twist said:
There are a few 0.95 lenses for E mount, also a 0.85. I owned the Mitakon dark knight.
Click to expand...

Yup. A fact that some Canokon fanboys seem to have airbrushed from history.
 
woof woof said:
I would, maybe.

I keep looking at the Voigtlander 50mm f1.1 and if it comes out in e mount I think a few people will have a look.
Click to expand...

I think if there was a lot of interest then people would have just adapted via LM mount by now. I used CVand LM lenses with my previous A7 cameras and the adapter is ridiculously small.
 
woof woof said:
Yup. A fact that some Canokon fanboys seem to have airbrushed from history.
Click to expand...

What you mean there were things like EVF, magnified focus, fast live view and no requirement for MA with 1st party lenses before the Canikon mirrorless cameras :eek:
 
twist said:
I think if there was a lot of interest then people would have just adapted via LM mount by now. I used CVand LM lenses with my previous A7 cameras and the adapter is ridiculously small.
Click to expand...

There are problems with adapting them... as I've just found out the adapters are a lottery and another potential issue is the close focus distance is often less than inspiring. I don't expect these lenses to be macros but a MFD of 1m is a bit restrictive if you want to odd close up. Voigtlanders Sony mount lenses tend to have a closer MFD than Leica mount ones. You can get helicoid adapters but again it seems to be a complete lottery, worse than my MD, OM and FD experience.
 
twist said:
What you mean there were things like EVF, magnified focus, fast live view and no requirement for MA with 1st party lenses before the Canikon mirrorless cameras :eek:
Click to expand...

Do people get that far? I thought most were put off by the impenetrable Sony menus.
 
twist said:
Theres a bigger challenge than manually focusing an f0.95 lens?
Click to expand...

woof woof said:
Where then? AF? Fitting the electronics in? I doubt either are mount size critical.
Click to expand...

The engineering challenge of making a fast and accurate AF, as it will be a lot of glass to move with 1.0.

I mean if it is easy, why do they stop at MF and why not put in an AF motor which will open up to most of the market?
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
The engineering challenge of making a fast and accurate AF, as it will be a lot of glass to move with 1.0.

I mean if it is easy, why do they stop at MF and why not put in an AF motor which will open up to most of the market?
Click to expand...

And make it twice as big and twice as expensive and cost them a crap load of money in R&D and people whining because they cant hit focus and 'most' of the market will not buy these lenses. A company cant make big sales from a unicorn like that.
 
Raymond Lin said:
The engineering challenge of making a fast and accurate AF, as it will be a lot of glass to move with 1.0.

I mean if it is easy, why do they stop at MF and why not put in an AF motor which will open up to most of the market?
Click to expand...

Canon did it already on DSLR design. But looking at the size of the Nikon noct 58/0.95 it seems more of a challenge with such a lens. And as Tanaka-san said it wouldn't make much business sense. Also makes me wonder why Nikon is making a £3+K huge MF lens.
 
twist said:
And make it twice as big and twice as expensive and cost them a crap load of money in R&D and people whining because they cant hit focus and 'most' of the market will not buy these lenses. A company cant make big sales from a unicorn like that.
Click to expand...

You just listed the challenges...good to know we are in agreement :p
 
nandbytes said:
Canon did it already on DSLR design. But looking at the size of the Nikon noct 58/0.95 it seems more of a challenge with such a lens. And as Tanaka-san said it wouldn't make much business sense. Also makes me wonder why Nikon is making a £3+K huge MF lens.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, I own Canon. Canon already makes a 50/1.0 in AF, a 58/0.95, at least on paper, seems like a joke to make such a big deal out of. I've said this before, 20 years ago Canon makde the 50/1.0 with a focus motor, Nikon is bringing out a 58/0.95 manual focus....on both spec and price it makes no sense.
 
Why are we having a discussion about having to pay to rent the adobe products, when we only use Lightroom, and don’t want to use storage or Photoshop?

The simple answer would be to purchase LR6 outright, as we did in the past. Available from John Lewis for £119.99 or from Adobe for £114 (as a download).

Here is a link from Shotkit about the pros and cons of purchase re subscription: https://shotkit.com/buy-lightroom/

...and here is a link to purchase from Adobe: https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/download-install/using/download-install-single-app-Lightroom-6.html

HTH.
 
david357 said:
Why are we having a discussion about having to pay to rent the adobe products, when we only use Lightroom, and don’t want to use storage or Photoshop?

The simple answer would be to purchase LR6 outright, as we did in the past. Available from John Lewis for £119.99 or from Adobe for £114 (as a download).

Here is a link from Shotkit about the pros and cons of purchase re subscription: https://shotkit.com/buy-lightroom/

...and here is a link to purchase from Adobe: https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/download-install/using/download-install-single-app-Lightroom-6.html

HTH.
Click to expand...

It cant open A7iii or newer cameras RAW, thats enough reason to sub.
 
david357 said:
Why are we having a discussion about having to pay to rent the adobe products, when we only use Lightroom, and don’t want to use storage or Photoshop?

The simple answer would be to purchase LR6 outright, as we did in the past. Available from John Lewis for £119.99 or from Adobe for £114 (as a download).

Here is a link from Shotkit about the pros and cons of purchase re subscription: https://shotkit.com/buy-lightroom/

...and here is a link to purchase from Adobe: https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/download-install/using/download-install-single-app-Lightroom-6.html

HTH.
Click to expand...
The problem is, LR6.14 was the final release and is no longer supported, I can't open my Sony A7 III RAW files on it.
I only really use LR6.14, need to find a way to get my Sony A7 III RAW files converted so I can open them up with LR6.14. :(
 
Agreed, DNG converter, that solves the newer camera problems if you don't want to pay the subscription.
 
Raymond Lin said:
The engineering challenge of making a fast and accurate AF, as it will be a lot of glass to move with 1.0.

I mean if it is easy, why do they stop at MF and why not put in an AF motor which will open up to most of the market?
Click to expand...

I think some of them stop at MF because they don't have a history of doing AF (and might not have access to the protocols so they'd have reverse engineer the mounts.) If there's a will and enough money I don't think the electronics and mechanisms are a prohibitive challenge. The lens will be a lump and it may not focus blisteringly quickly but I think it could be quite accurate on mirrorless as peaking is quite accurate at wider apertures so if the camera can do that I think it could AF quite well.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
IIf they offered a subscription for LR only at say £6 I'd be more for it.
Click to expand...
I’m effectively paying £6.25 a month for my LR CC subscription. I don’t used photoshop as I’m all a lightroom but I do use the website builder and spark. There are other ways to have LR CC without paying the full monthly rate.
 
Riz_Guru said:
I will take a look when I get some spare time...... :)
Got all my LR library on my new MacBook Pro 13" now :D
Click to expand...
So your willing to spend almost 2k on a laptop but not a tenner a month for software? Lol [emoji23] come on lad cough up the tenner. I'm sure you lose more then a tenner of cash falling from your pockets to your sofa or washin machine!
 
jonneymendoza said:
So your willing to spend almost 2k on a laptop but not a tenner a month for software? Lol [emoji23] come on lad cough up the tenner. I'm sure you lose more then a tenner of cash falling from your pockets to your sofa or washin machine!
Click to expand...

There's also the view that Adobe are a bunch of twots to consider. I hate the prospect of giving them another 1p.
 
woof woof said:
There's also the view that Adobe are a bunch of twots to consider. I hate the prospect of giving them another 1p.
Click to expand...

So don't, nobody is forcing you to use Adobe. People are moaning but they all want to continue using their products. :LOL:
 
rob-nikon said:
I’m effectively paying £6.25 a month for my LR CC subscription. I don’t used photoshop as I’m all a lightroom but I do use the website builder and spark. There are other ways to have LR CC without paying the full monthly rate.
Click to expand...
What are the other ways? Care to shed some light? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top