ancient_mariner
Moderator
- Messages
- 27,780
- Name
- Toni
- Edit My Images
- No
The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!
- Thread starter woof woof
- Start date
Temple of religion and science 1jonneymendoza
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 8,530
- Edit My Images
- No
Surreal. Love itSchool shot from today, speech day marquee with A9 + 70-200 2.8
NewBeetle
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,414
- Name
- Ant
- Edit My Images
- No
"Lightning deal has ended"
:banghead:
addicknchips
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,795
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- No
Your only issue here really is replacing the 16mm. You'll be looking at a large lens in the sigma art 24mm or the pricey G master 24mm.
If you can do without the 16mm (24mm) focal length or get by with the samyang 24mm, then it's an easy switch.
Samyang 35mm used costs less than the fuji 23mm. As does the the Sony 85mm f1.8.
Sell the
xt2 and xh1 £1,300
16mm £500
23mm £400
56mm £500
Total £2,700
Buy
-£1,500 a7iii
-£380 samyang 35mm f1.4
-£400 Sony 85mm f1.8
-£220 samyang 24mm f2.8
£2,500
Last edited:
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
If that's all you can get for those cameras I would keep them, seriously. I don't care what anyone says, an A7III isn't better than the Fuji cams combined. Those lens price estimates are poor too, did you not pay more for a 16mm not long ago?
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Tbh the 23mm on Fuji is slow, and the 56mm is God awful slow. The equivalents on Sony with A7III are blazing fast. Even the samyangs are better!
So if anyone cares for tracking and AF speed+accuracy those two lenses are a no go.
No idea about 16mm f1.4 though.
So if anyone cares for tracking and AF speed+accuracy those two lenses are a no go.
No idea about 16mm f1.4 though.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Depends what you're shooting, whenever I see people call lenses slow - I often scratch my head. Slow for what? thousands of photographers manage just fine using those very lenses for street, landscape, portraits ... I mean, how fast do you need a lens to be for a portrait? that's what the 56 is designed for. They are some of Fuji's older lenses btw, there are faster alternatives if AF is more important to you than IQ.
But yeah, we all know Sony has better everything ...
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Lol off again accusing people are we.
I clearly mentioned what is slow for i.e. tracking. Couldn't get a single shot of my son in focus with it. It's fine for the other things you mentioned I never said otherwise. A 56mm is designed to be a 56mm lens and nothing else. How photographer puts it to use is up to themselves that's not dictated by the focal length.
What is a faster 56mm alternative on Fuji? Do let me know because that's one of things that prevents me considering moving to Fuji. AFAIK there isn't one.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Accusing? are you drunk?
As for faster there's the 50mm F2, plenty enough for most, not 1.2 but a much faster lens. Lenstip rate it as one of the highest ever Fuji lenses they have ever tested. Check it out
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Accusing? are you drunk?
I am not a total bokeh whore but F2 APS-C is F3 on FF. Come on even I have standards
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I am not a total bokeh whore but F2 APS-C is F3 on FF. Come on even I have standards
F2 is F2 to me .. even on M43. But if you do need the shallow DOF nonsense that you FF people find impossible without having to do math, then it's the 56 1.2 or adapt some juicy old voigt. And for the kind of purpose you look for a lens like this , AF is your least concern.
jj_glos
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,685
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
They both track a running child towards the camera just fine, so they are not unusably slow.
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Not in my experience with 56mm. Forget running couldn't even keep up with him sitting down and playing. I was using XT3 with latest firmware.
IME the 56mm might as well be a manual focus lens.
Last edited:
addicknchips
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,795
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- No
Those prices are worst case scenario to highlight that it's actually not going to cost much to switch. Nick didn't mention about a need or want for a 2nd body, so not sure if that needs to be considered.
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't think I need telling what kind of lens I need and what I should use what lens for. I think I know my use case better than you
NickTB
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,111
- Name
- Nick
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yeah, there’s no need for a second body yet. IF I switched, I’d get a second body when Father Christmas came calling. My post was more about the cost to replicate the lens line up with one body
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You could manage costs pretty well going with Sigma ART 35 and also FE85/1.8. But there is nothing on Sony to match your 16mm f1.4. Unless you consider the 24GM which is possibly the best lens I have owned but expensive. TBH even a 35mm f1.4 isn't really a good match for the fuji 23mm f1.4 because fuji is rather small and all the 35mm f1.4 are huge. Sony still lacks a 35mm f/1.8-2 option.
As an alternative, you could just buy 24GM and 85mm f1.8 with A7RIII. Use the 24GM in crop mode for 35mm option and you are still left with 18mp which isn't actually too bad, the difference with 24mp isn't as large as it may seem. This is the setup I used for a little while and like quite a lot.
jj_glos
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,685
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Search the X-T# thread, I've shown examples in there shot on a X-T1 with the 56mm and AF has only gotten better since then. Calling it a manual lens is ridiculous to be honest!
I would say in low light and if using the very smallest AF square (Fuji small AF square is really small) the AF will slow down a lot, making the square bigger mitigates that though.
Last edited:
OP
- Messages
- 43,206
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Just on equivalence... I suppose a lot hangs on what image quality you're willing to accept. Generally you're probably going to get better image quality from a larger format and if you want to begin to get closer or match the image quality with a smaller format equivalence will help you as shooting at a wider aperture may allow you to use a lower ISO and possibly begin to close the image quality gap. So there's that, the crop factor doesn't just have to be about getting razor thin DoF from APS-C or MTF it can be about getting the best out your kit.
Most of the time I'm happy with MFT when applying the crop factor and shooting from wide open to 5.6 for full pictures and very often 100% crops too and there's the fact that the kit is compact and very fast and responsive but for me there's no denying the image quality advantage of a larger system and some will never accept anything less than FF. Actually the most obvious disadvantage for me with MFT isn't overall image quality but dynamic range and for me the gap here is sometimes pretty easy to see.
Last edited:
GyRob
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,071
- Name
- Robert
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Does this make the A9 about 2 stops advantage over say the omd mk II I do like this camera but just wondering about a lower light setup .
Rob.
hth... A9 is very slightly noisier than the A7 mk3. Its not just the noise, look at the fine details in the hair/eyes.
Last edited:
On the talk about Fuji, I came to Sony from Fuji but have also previously used M4/3rds and Canon DSLRs. I loved all the stuff I used in different ways. With Fuji it did have a really nice feel but I guess in the end it's about the results. If I could afford to keep a Fuji Xt-30 with the 18-55 kit lens I probably would since it's such high quality for such a compact setup.
I owned the 50mm f2 with Fuji and it was fast, very small and very sharp. The bokeh though...just not quite enough for a prime lens I found. So I looked at the 35 f/1.4 and the 56mm. Trouble is that the 35 f/1.4 is no sharper than the kit lens and an older lens which isn't the fastest to AF. The 56 is very expensive for what it is and the focusing again is not the quickest.
So I tried Sony... I'm personally quite happy with the 50 f/1.8 and I can't believe it gets such a hard time on here. It's not fast to AF either I agree, but it's not awful. It's optically very sharp and clean rendering. The Tamron 28-75 is just outstanding and I'm totally happy with it as a replacement for the Fuji 18-55. Having the constant f/2.8 on full frame is awesome. It's light and compact enough given what it is on FF, but still wish it wasn't quite as long. Contrast is great and I think a good all rounder. The 85 f/1.8 is again another gem, nuff said.
It depends on your needs. I'm happy with the output I'm getting and dof/bokeh is now more able to be more extreme for me. I take a lot of people shots so it works for me. I sometimes want a long zoom which is where it gets expensive, but that's not exclusive to Sony. In fact arguably options are good with adapting old canon L glass etc.
I owned the 50mm f2 with Fuji and it was fast, very small and very sharp. The bokeh though...just not quite enough for a prime lens I found. So I looked at the 35 f/1.4 and the 56mm. Trouble is that the 35 f/1.4 is no sharper than the kit lens and an older lens which isn't the fastest to AF. The 56 is very expensive for what it is and the focusing again is not the quickest.
So I tried Sony... I'm personally quite happy with the 50 f/1.8 and I can't believe it gets such a hard time on here. It's not fast to AF either I agree, but it's not awful. It's optically very sharp and clean rendering. The Tamron 28-75 is just outstanding and I'm totally happy with it as a replacement for the Fuji 18-55. Having the constant f/2.8 on full frame is awesome. It's light and compact enough given what it is on FF, but still wish it wasn't quite as long. Contrast is great and I think a good all rounder. The 85 f/1.8 is again another gem, nuff said.
It depends on your needs. I'm happy with the output I'm getting and dof/bokeh is now more able to be more extreme for me. I take a lot of people shots so it works for me. I sometimes want a long zoom which is where it gets expensive, but that's not exclusive to Sony. In fact arguably options are good with adapting old canon L glass etc.
Last edited:
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
I don't think I need telling what kind of lens I need and what I should use what lens for. I think I know my use case better than you
You went from claiming I'm "accusing" you to telling you what to do
dude, go get some sleep and stop taking everything so literally. I don't care what you use, really couldn't give a monkeys - maybe stop quoting me with your nonsense talk and I won't have to tell you anything. With ridiculous exaggerations like 'may as well be a manual focus lens' .... makes you wonder if it's not the person shooting rather than the lens. Talk about being melodramatic. Many people use the 56 and can nail focus on the likes of kids at play.
Of course, there's no denying you will get a bump in IQ but it's so minimal in half decent lighting I don't really crave it, I was able to work with M43 no hassle and APSC is that little bit better all-round. DR was also more than sufficient, I've posted near white-out images with the comparison after some PP and the detail was incredible. I could really push the G80 files when needed. But they would be rare shots that were massively over or under exposed, only happens when I'm using off-cam flash. Mis-fires, over powered testers etc. I tend to get the exposure right mostly no matter the system besides.
There's advantages to both, I'd much rather use M43 for macro or hand held LE for example.
Anyway, this was all just to help Nick out, he asked for comparable lenses for the Sony system, and he got the right answers. Of course the whole equivalent things had to come into it. If that's really important to him then the good news is switching that way you don't need to buy the more expensive 1.4 options, F2 or 1.8 versions will do the job and you save a bunch of cash.
Last edited:
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Selling, but people generally price their used gear accordingly, maybe knock a little off. I was going by the lower pricing - 'Good condition' they have, the 56mm for example is going for £689 in 'like new' condition.
Last edited:
addicknchips
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 9,795
- Name
- Jonathan
- Edit My Images
- No
You can buy both all day long for well under £600 each on either eBay, fb or on here.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
If you look hard enough you might, but some will only buy on more trusted sites. I'm wary of ebay and more so FB groups, I'd rather buy from a long term member with good rep on here or from the likes of MPB where you have some come back. If you keep an eye out for flash sales you can get some juicy value on there. Like recently I got a 'like new' 16-55 2.8 that had £225 off their usual price! :O
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You went from claiming I'm "accusing" you to telling you what to do
With ridiculous exaggerations like 'may as well be a manual focus lens' .... makes you wonder if it's not the person shooting rather than the lens. Talk about being melodramatic. Many people use the 56 and can nail focus on the likes of kids at play.
Sorry mum I'll remember my bed time.
Not an exaggeration. I can show you a person who shoots kingfishers in flight with manual canon FD lenses. So does that make canon FD lenses amazing at AF? Lol
The 56mm possibly has the worst AF on any modern lens.
p.s. you quoted me first. I suggest you practice your own advice and stop quoting to me in your replies.
Last edited:
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
As said above I'll show you examples of someone shooting birds in flight with manual teleprimes. That's just a testament to the photographer's skill
As far as performance of the gear itself goes, X-T1 was bad at AF tracking and even worst with 56mm.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Sorry mum I'll remember my bed time.
Not an exaggeration. I can show you a person who shoots kingfishers in flight with manual canon FD lenses. So does that make canon FD lenses amazing at AF? Lol
The 56mm possibly has the worst AF on any modern lens.
Good boy
or maybe be you're just an insomniac like me? I find MF lenses for birds and macro pretty easy and more reliable than AF in general, if there's a predictive pattern at least. I'm not saying the 56 Fuji could work for birds AF-wise, ignoring FL, but for kids at play or people sitting chatting etc it shouldn't have any problems. I had the 35 1.4 for a long time and remember people slating that for being one of Fuji's slowest lenses ever. I was nailing shots of the cat running about and the kids too.
nandbytes
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 16,780
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nah I was actually up in the morning shooting at a poppy field and between my "long exposure" I was posting on here lolGood boy
I did go to bed, just got up early
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Nice, any images from your outing? I was watching UFC, but I'm up at that hour most nights/mornings, I get about 2-3 hrs proper sleeping I'm lucky.
Good boy
I find MF lenses for birds and macro pretty easy and more reliable than AF in general, if there's a predictive pattern at least. I'm not saying the 56 Fuji could work for birds AF-wise, ignoring FL, but for kids at play or people sitting chatting etc it shouldn't have any problems. I had the 35 1.4 for a long time and remember people slating that for being one of Fuji's slowest lenses ever. I was nailing shots of the cat running about and the kids too.
You’re kidding right? Kids at play are one of the most demanding subjects on AF, there is no predictive pattern.
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
Kids at play could be sat in the garden making daisy chains, so no, I'm not kidding. Kids are not all speedy Gonzalez toddlers either
but that is what comes to mind when people complain that AF can't keep up. I have shots of my own daughter from a few years back using the 35 1.4 I mentioned, she was a bundle of chaos at the time and I have pics of her running, jumping, skipping, playing ball etc using that lens. There is always a pattern, even when they're hyper.
Last edited:
Kids at play could be sat in the garden making daisy chains, so no, I'm not kidding. Kids are not all speedy Gonzalez toddlers either
It’s not impossible, I’ve owned Fuji and those lenses... but in comparison to others, they are slow and afc is pretty poor. Hit a few, miss a lot, depends on what you’re comparing against. I wish they would update the 35/56 motors and drop xtrans but that’s me.
Last edited:
Cagey75
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 17,146
- Name
- Keith
- Edit My Images
- No
This is why I mentioned the 50mm F2, because it's one of their later lenses and has very fast AF. If you were shooting kids at play it's very likely it's outdoors, and you're not really concerned about shallow DOF, because you risk having more OOF shots in that case. It was a legit alternative suggestion, it's a lens more designed for that kind of use than the 56. That's a bit of a specialist lens tbh, it is designed more for portraiture where everything is predictable. But if you look at the groups for this lens on the likes of Flickr you'll see much more versatility. Just looking at one such group here and among the predictable mound of portrait style images I see a lot of street shots, both night and day, also kids at play in swimming pools etc
Not really concerned about shooting a lens like the 85 1.8 fe wide open, hit rate is consistently high, even at the fastest FPS rates.