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

snerkler said:
Have you used them all? I've just been on fredmiranda and folk on there are saying that the A7RIV is better than the A7III for AF????
Click to expand...

I tried one only for about 10 mins I didn't think the AF was as quick as the A7iii at all but the A9 is a different story
 
snerkler said:
Have you used them all? I've just been on fredmiranda and folk on there are saying that the A7RIV is better than the A7III for AF????
Click to expand...

I have an A7RIV, an A9, 4 x A7III’s and an A9II on its way to me. Although at least one of the A7III’s will be going to a new home.

A7RIV has real time a.f but I found it not to be anywhere near as reliable as the A9, also think I get far more keepers with the A7III. A7RIV also seemed to struggle keeping focus on the higher speed modes. I expected this when I bought it to be fair something has to be sacrificed for the crazy resolution.

Been a few questions about real time tracking in the thread recently this video is a bit basic but does a good job of explaining some of the basics

View: https://youtu.be/pn0fh4XHpLY
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Have you used them all? I've just been on fredmiranda and folk on there are saying that the A7RIV is better than the A7III for AF????
Click to expand...

@nandbytes said the rmkiv wasn't as good as his rmkiii (ive read similar), the rmkiii isn't as good as the mkiii, which isn't as good as the a9.
 
Though someone on here said he upgraded from the A7Riii to the A7Riv and found the A7Riii was better??

The A7iii and A9 have more AF point and it prob doesn't sound as it need it but honestly i think more the point the more it get the dot on the eye more accurate..
 
@snerkler also... The a7RIV advances to 567 PDAF points spread out over 87% of the sensor. That leaves only the a9/a9II (and, oddly, the a73) in better shape with 693 PDAF points covering 93% of the sensor.
 
LeeRatters said:
They are probably equal on actual IQ. I went for the E because it's apparently designed for the thicker Sony sensor. I'd already had several years with an M mount 40/1.4 and the smeary corners used to bug me!
Click to expand...
Thanks very much for your response. I have spent a lot of time admiring your photos.
 
snerkler said:
Thanks for the lengthy response. When you got the second body did you do the battery test straight away and decide it was front focussing, or did you test with some real world subjects too?

The detail in the eyes of the above shot is impressive (y)
Click to expand...

Hey Toby! :clap:

I did the tape measure and battery tests straight away and also some tests on objects around the house, i.e. a business card at a 90 degree angle. I didn't do any other "real world" testing though.

Yeah, happy with the detail as the original shot is of the whole head and neck.
 
woof woof said:
I'm sure I read in a review on FM that the FE mount version of the 40mm f1.2 is better on Sony, here on page 40...

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/39

If that's true I can think of one reason to still buy the M mount version, it's more portable as you can use it on just about anything but the Sony mount version is limited to, well, Sony I suppose.

More on 42...

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/41

I've had the Sony mount version since it first came out but tbh I prefer the 35mm f1.4 which is a bit wild at f1.4 but from f2 or so and onwards it's a different beast and it's smaller and lighter but if your heart is set on the 40mm f1.2 I'd go for the FE, in fact I did. Even if they're the same, which they may not be, with the FE you gain exif and the ability to have the magnified view automatically magnify when you turn the focus ring also I don't know if the M mount one has the de click feature but the FE one does but personally I prefer the clicky setting.

I've been thinking about buying the 50mm f1.2 or maybe the new 50mm f2.
Click to expand...


Thank you so much for this. I spent one whole evening traversing that thread and I missed that. Someone quipped that the answer to all my questions are in the thread somewhere. Thanks so much for telling me where to go. I will get the E version.
 
woof woof said:
Thanks guys. That's a good price but I think the 50mm would need to be sold if I'm not happy with the focus and I do have the excellent 55mm.

I'll give it some thought, repair v new A7 v A7III, over the next few days. Mrs WW birthday today and it's stopped raining and there's a blue sky!!! So we're going out for the day and a nice Thai meal :D
Click to expand...

It just got cheaper.

64561761-01EB-4EA3-A24C-D84797024BB6.jpeg
 
nandbytes said:
they are optically the same AFAIK. I haven't had both versions of this particular lens but I have had both version of CV10/5.6 and CV15/4.5. The e-mount versions have a longer helicoid inside which is possible due the shorter flange of e-mount and hence focus closer than m-mount version. Optically they are all the same.
Click to expand...
Thanks very much for your response.
 
f/2.8 said:
I have an A7RIV, an A9, 4 x A7III’s and an A9II on its way to me. Although at least one of the A7III’s will be going to a new home.

A7RIV has real time a.f but I found it not to be anywhere near as reliable as the A9, also think I get far more keepers with the A7III. A7RIV also seemed to struggle keeping focus on the higher speed modes. I expected this when I bought it to be fair something has to be sacrificed for the crazy resolution.

Been a few questions about real time tracking in the thread recently this video is a bit basic but does a good job of explaining some of the basics

View: https://youtu.be/pn0fh4XHpLY
Click to expand...

So this is real time tracking. How does the A7iii handle the scenarios without it. It still has the tracking modes, but you need to enable/disable Face detect depending on the situation? Whether you want to track either face or object?
 
Last edited:
JustinB said:
So this is real time tracking. How does the A7iii handle the scenarios without it. It still has the tracking modes, but you need to enable/disable Face detect depending on the situation? Whether you want to track either face or object?
Click to expand...

yep
 
JustinB said:
So this is real time tracking. How does the A7iii handle the scenarios without it. It still has the tracking modes, but you need to enable/disable Face detect depending on the situation? Whether you want to track either face or object?
Click to expand...
Yup and it still brilliant... The A7iii is a much better camera than the Z6 Ive had both.. OK the Z6 might have a better grip and buttons in a nice place.. The IQ was very nice from it I did try to convince myself that it was a better camera but it didn't last i had to go back to sony so instead going a7iii which i already had i though i try out the A9 and no regret
 
And on top of off the above I can get the lens line up quicker rather than waiting for them to come out
 
Earlier today (working from home) I stuck an old plastic Cosina 35-70 lens on my A7 ii and took 3 shots at 35, 50 & 70mm out of my office window.

Now I've yet to try it out in earnest but it appears to be an incredibly sharp lens.

It's this one, I know looks crap. https://picclick.co.uk/Cosina-MC-35-70mm-f-35-48-Wide-Angle-6-Blade-Macro-223545750590.html

After a bit of research it apparently was sold as a Petri & Rikenon.

I'm going to give it a good try out over the weekend.
 
@f/2.8 ...... You forgot the Partridge in the Pear Tree
 
rookies said:
Yup and it still brilliant... The A7iii is a much better camera than the Z6 Ive had both.. OK the Z6 might have a better grip and buttons in a nice place.. The IQ was very nice from it I did try to convince myself that it was a better camera but it didn't last i had to go back to sony so instead going a7iii which i already had i though i try out the A9 and no regret
Click to expand...

Much better ? The A7 iii is very good but its not 'much better' than the Z6. Me thinks you are convincing yourself !
 
Last edited:
justa1972 said:
Much better ? The A7 iii is very good but its not 'much better' than the Z6. Me thinks you aer convincing yourself !
Click to expand...
Dont need to i am already back in the sony lands.. and i knew a few who agree with me.. Each to there owns.... The AF on the Z6 was no where near
 
justa1972 said:
Much better ? The A7 iii is very good but its not 'much better' than the Z6. Me thinks you are convincing yourself !
Click to expand...

Hard to take advice from someone that can’t spell “are” correctly. :ROFLMAO:

How many times are you going to edit that post?
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Hard to take advice from someone that can’t spell “are” correctly. :ROFLMAO:

How many times are you going to edit that post?
Click to expand...

Lol I edited it once and I wasn't even offering advice !

At least I know how to spell 'nowhere'.

I'm not a Nikon fanboy and I appreciate how good the A7iii is but I think it was fair comment to question whether its a 'much better' camera than the Z6.

Better at some aspects - yes of course but its largely swings and roundabouts.
 
justa1972 said:
Lol I edited it once and I wasn't even offering advice !

At least I know how to spell 'nowhere'.

I'm not a Nikon fanboy and I appreciate how good the A7iii is but I think it was fair comment to question whether its a 'much better' camera than the Z6.

Better at some aspects - yes of course but its largely swings and roundabouts.
Click to expand...

No need to be sarcastic toward my spelling "NOWHERE" I wasn't even having a dig at you. Thank you
 
justa1972 said:
Lol I edited it once and I wasn't even offering advice !

At least I know how to spell 'nowhere'.

I'm not a Nikon fanboy and I appreciate how good the A7iii is but I think it was fair comment to question whether its a 'much better' camera than the Z6.

Better at some aspects - yes of course but its largely swings and roundabouts.
Click to expand...

:ROFLMAO:

Much better to be fair is probably a stretch.

It is better for the most important aspect, autofocus performance is much improved in the A7III but the Z does have nicer ergonomics. The Z6 also has those weird exif tags that mean you have to reset everything to get a real raw file when you import to Lightroom. The Z is also slower but has a better evf.

I think most people would agree that the A7III is better than the Z6 although maybe much better is a bit of a stretch. The A9 is much better than the Z6.
 
f/2.8 said:
:ROFLMAO:

Much better to be fair is probably a stretch.

It is better for the most important aspect, autofocus performance is much improved in the A7III but the Z does have nicer ergonomics. The Z6 also has those weird exif tags that mean you have to reset everything to get a real raw file when you import to Lightroom. The Z is also slower but has a better evf.

I think most people would agree that the A7III is better than the Z6 although maybe much better is a bit of a stretch. The A9 is much better than the Z6.
Click to expand...

EVF is also much better on the Z6
 
justa1972 said:
EVF is also much better on the Z6
Click to expand...

That is one thing I can agree on.. The EVF is brilliant on the nikon but that i can live without as it doesn't effect the image
 
f/2.8 said:
I have an A7RIV, an A9, 4 x A7III’s and an A9II on its way to me. Although at least one of the A7III’s will be going to a new home.

A7RIV has real time a.f but I found it not to be anywhere near as reliable as the A9, also think I get far more keepers with the A7III. A7RIV also seemed to struggle keeping focus on the higher speed modes. I expected this when I bought it to be fair something has to be sacrificed for the crazy resolution.

Been a few questions about real time tracking in the thread recently this video is a bit basic but does a good job of explaining some of the basics

View: https://youtu.be/pn0fh4XHpLY
Click to expand...
twist said:
@nandbytes said the rmkiv wasn't as good as his rmkiii (ive read similar), the rmkiii isn't as good as the mkiii, which isn't as good as the a9.
Click to expand...
rookies said:
Though someone on here said he upgraded from the A7Riii to the A7Riv and found the A7Riii was better??

The A7iii and A9 have more AF point and it prob doesn't sound as it need it but honestly i think more the point the more it get the dot on the eye more accurate..
Click to expand...
twist said:
@snerkler also... The a7RIV advances to 567 PDAF points spread out over 87% of the sensor. That leaves only the a9/a9II (and, oddly, the a73) in better shape with 693 PDAF points covering 93% of the sensor.
Click to expand...

Cool ta. At least that's quashed my GAS ;)
 
Diamonddec said:
Hey Toby! :clap:

I did the tape measure and battery tests straight away and also some tests on objects around the house, i.e. a business card at a 90 degree angle. I didn't do any other "real world" testing though.

Yeah, happy with the detail as the original shot is of the whole head and neck.
Click to expand...
(y)
 
snerkler said:
Have you used them all? I've just been on fredmiranda and folk on there are saying that the A7RIV is better than the A7III for AF????
Click to expand...

A pal of mine has the A9 and A7R iv - he says the R iv for birds in flight is not in the same class as the A9.
 
Last edited:
rookies said:
Dont let it stop you getting a A7iii or a A9 even ;)
Click to expand...
A7iii doesn’t interest me tbh.
twist said:
Its still better than the Z7 even if its not as good as an A9 (nothing is except the mk2) ;)
Click to expand...
I’m sure it is, but IF (and it’s a big if) I dip my toe into the dark side it needs to be something special (y)
 
Mike.P said:
But is it "good enough"? I have been looking at the A9/A7R IV and it's the cropability of the R for wildlife that attracts me but obviously I would like decent AF as well.
Click to expand...

Knowing some of the results you get with your Pentax bodies, even the A7R IV will be fantastic!
 
snerkler said:
A7iii doesn’t interest me tbh.
I’m sure it is, but IF (and it’s a big if) I dip my toe into the dark side it needs to be something special (y)
Click to expand...

A9 is special with it good lens line up
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top