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

TGphoto said:
'The Nikon D780 is the first new DSLR of 2020... and it's pretty groundbreaking'

Doesn't really work as a headline in 2020 does it.
Click to expand...

7fps. Errrrrggggghhhhh. Yeah it’s faster in live view but I don’t do action using a screen personally.
 
twist said:
You have an A9, why would you even consider the d780 for £2200!
Click to expand...

Oh I’m not considering one it was more of a general WTF.

I would have probably bought one, 2 years ago.
 
JJ! said:
Oh I’m not considering one it was more of a general WTF.

I would have probably bought one, 2 years ago.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see.

Yeah, I wouldve considered it before the a7iii arrived, its to late, they milked the d750 for way to long. Not sure why anyone would buy it instead of a Z6, even if they have F mount glass.
 
nandbytes said:
because someone owns a bunch of F-mount lenses or the new 120-300mm;)
Click to expand...

So they can use an outdated 51pt AF system or zombie arms out live view for all their sport/wildlife long lens shots. Awesome ergonomics!

Or just use an FTZ and buy the vastly cheaper and in most cases better z6 (at least its somewhat future proofed) or a bargain d750.
 
Last edited:
Need some new SD cards - is it safe to buy Sandisk cards from eBay or is it still too risky ?
 
justa1972 said:
Need some new SD cards - is it safe to buy Sandisk cards from eBay or is it still too risky ?
Click to expand...

Why would you buy from Ebay instead of mymemory or amazon directly, Ive found they are usually the cheapest anyway.
 
if finally read over all the posts since mid dec and see a lot have been asking about wide angles.. similarly I'm looking myself after selling my last Nikon lens.

so is it worth spending the extra for the tamron 17-28 over either the sayang 18mm or tamron 20mm 2.8 when its released.
is the sigma 20mm art not worth considering?
 
snerkler said:
I think things like that are fair comment, we all have different opinions. Whether you see it or not does that make it wrong? I think a number of things have character or whatever you want to call it (including cars, and hifi’s), am I delusional? ;) :p
Click to expand...

To a degree I think you are. I'd much rather at least try and be objective and quantify and be balanced but maybe that's my tendency. I do think that what some appear to think are intangibles aren't and can be described better. What I don't like is lazy sloppy vague language like that which was posted as to me it just smacks of laziness at best and fanboyism at worst. That's my opinion and I'd have more respect and understanding if people just said "I'd rather stick with Nikon because I've used them for 10 years and I have a bag full of lenses." or the more usual "I don't like the Sony ergonomics and the menus are a nightmare." I just don't buy "I think the Sony system is soulless but I just can't put my finger on why."

And before I'm accused of being a Sony fanboy, I had a Nikon SLR for over 20 years which is probably longer than some have been taking pictures. I just don't care about the badge on the front or if I'm using a Sony made in Thailand or a Nikon made in Vietnam.

Anyway. I'll use the ignore button more and if I think people are posting to hide laziness or fanboyism I'll just hit the button :D
 
justa1972 said:
Hummm thats a bit disappointing...
Click to expand...

I like his reviews. I think he's hard on the lens but maybe he has a point/points. I like the lens because it's sharp from wide open, fast to focus and focuses quite close. At the moment it's the lens I'd choose if I wanted an AF lens for a day out and thought I might be taking some close up pictures. The main criticism I can see is the ca but to me it's not a real world worry, for me, in the vast majority or pictures I'm likely to take.

I can see how other people could nit pick but another question to keep in mind is what's a better buy?
 
pmac said:
if finally read over all the posts since mid dec and see a lot have been asking about wide angles.. similarly I'm looking myself after selling my last Nikon lens.

so is it worth spending the extra for the tamron 17-28 over either the sayang 18mm or tamron 20mm 2.8 when its released.
is the sigma 20mm art not worth considering?
Click to expand...

Interested in this also although I can see me going for the Samyang 18mm
 
woof woof said:
I like his reviews. I think he's hard on the lens but maybe he has a point/points. I like the lens because it's sharp from wide open, fast to focus and focuses quite close. At the moment it's the lens I'd choose if I wanted an AF lens for a day out and thought I might be taking some close up pictures. The main criticism I can see is the ca but to me it's not a real world worry, for me, in the vast majority or pictures I'm likely to take.

I can see how other people could nit pick but another question to keep in mind is what's a better buy?
Click to expand...

Depends what you mean by a better buy - the Samyang 35mm f2.8 is a decent lens but obvioulsy not 1.8
 
pmac said:
if finally read over all the posts since mid dec and see a lot have been asking about wide angles.. similarly I'm looking myself after selling my last Nikon lens.

so is it worth spending the extra for the tamron 17-28 over either the sayang 18mm or tamron 20mm 2.8 when its released.
is the sigma 20mm art not worth considering?
Click to expand...

The ones I keep looking at are the Tokina 20mm f2 and the Samyang 18mm f2.8.
 
pmac said:
if finally read over all the posts since mid dec and see a lot have been asking about wide angles.. similarly I'm looking myself after selling my last Nikon lens.

so is it worth spending the extra for the tamron 17-28 over either the sayang 18mm or tamron 20mm 2.8 when its released.
is the sigma 20mm art not worth considering?
Click to expand...

The Tamron 20mm looks interesting though - https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tamron-20mm-f-2-8-di-iii-osd-m1-2-lens-review-34354/verdict

Although Ephotozine always seem to give good reviews ! The Macro focusing to 1:2 makes it even more interesting...
 
justa1972 said:
Depends what you mean by a better buy - the Samyang 35mm f2.8 is a decent lens but obvioulsy not 1.8
Click to expand...

I have the Sony 35mm f2.8. I bought it before the Samyang came out.

I think I'll be keeping both the f1.8 and f2.8 because they offer me slightly different things... the f1.8 has its f1.8 for low light and DoF reasons and also the close focusing ability all going for it whilst the f2.8 options from Sony and Samyang are more compact. In fact I think these f2.8 lenses give such a great option of having a very compact camera and lens package that they deserve a serious look even if you already own a f1.8 or f1.4 35mm.

If going out with other people and not wanting to be the geek with the camera holding everyone up I'd choose the f2.8 as it makes the kit more compact and less noticeable.
 
I'm struggling to decide if I should get a Voigtlander 50mm f2 or not bother.

I have the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 and 35mm f1.4 and although they're similar focal lengths they do different things for me. The 40mm f1.2 gives low light ability and subject separation, tamer bokeh and a sharper look across the frame. The 35mm is very compact but the bokeh at f1.4-f1.8 or so can be funky with an unfriendly subject/background and although it's lovely stopped down the extreme corners are never good and although this wont be noticeable in a whole picture you can see this when pixel peeping. Neither lens can match the 50mm f2 for technical excellence and relative freedom from aberrations across the frame and it's this technical goodness that attracts the geek in me as it's just nice to have nice things :D Some kit is nice because it's nice to handle and gives a certain look whilst some other kit is nice because it's pretty much state of the art which this 50mm f2 seems to be, for a 50mm lens, and it's still in a compact package.

So I'm struggling to make my mind up as although I can afford it I feel guilty spending money on myself when I don't really need to.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I'm struggling to decide if I should get a Voigtlander 50mm f2 or not bother.

I have the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 and 35mm f1.4 and although they're similar focal lengths they do different things for me. The 40mm f1.2 gives low light ability and subject separation, tamer bokeh and a sharper look across the frame. The 35mm is very compact but the bokeh at f1.4-f1.8 or so can be funky with an unfriendly subject/background and although it's lovely stopped down the extreme corners are never good and although this wont be noticeable in a whole picture you can see this when pixel peeping. Neither lens can match the 50mm f2 for technical excellence and relative freedom from aberrations across the frame and it's this technical goodness that attracts the geek in me as it's just nice to have nice things :D Some kit is nice because it's nice to handle and gives a certain look whilst some other kit is nice because it's pretty much state of the art which this 50mm f2 seems to be, for a 50mm lens, and it's still in a compact package.

So I'm struggling to make my mind up as although I can afford it I feel guilty sending money on myself when I don't really need to.
Click to expand...
If you have to ask, then you dont need it...
 
I used to buy cars on a whim but now I'm spending days wondering over a lens. Maybe I'm growing up :D
 
Time to say bye to my GM lenses, decided to trade them in. Will be gone soon. :(
 
Last edited:
Riz_Guru said:
Time to say bye to my GM lenses, decided to trade them in. Will be gone soon. :(
Click to expand...

Are you getting something else?

As for the sad face, they're just things and you can always rebuy them in a few years time if you feel the need.
 
pmac said:
looking for an af lens for on the go shooting.



this is also a large consideration, as I'm a lazy photographer a lot of the time.. why move when I can zoom.
Click to expand...

Perspective!
 
simonbarker said:
I haven't used any of them but wasn't the 65mm supposed to be slightly better than the 50mm? Easier to justify having that with the 40mm too.
Click to expand...

Yes, people seem to be saying that the 65mm is better corrected but it's bigger and I really like 35 and 50mm lenses and 65mm is on the long side for me. It's a macro but not 1:1 AFAIK but to be honest for macro/close up I prefer a longer lens, I use a 50mm on MFT but really preferred the Sigma 150mm on my DSLR.

I think I could justify having the 35mm f1.4, 40mm f1.2 and 50mm f2 as they are actually quite different lenses each with different uses I'd use them for. I'm still thinking.
 
woof woof said:
To a degree I think you are. I'd much rather at least try and be objective and quantify and be balanced but maybe that's my tendency. I do think that what some appear to think are intangibles aren't and can be described better. What I don't like is lazy sloppy vague language like that which was posted as to me it just smacks of laziness at best and fanboyism at worst. That's my opinion and I'd have more respect and understanding if people just said "I'd rather stick with Nikon because I've used them for 10 years and I have a bag full of lenses." or the more usual "I don't like the Sony ergonomics and the menus are a nightmare." I just don't buy "I think the Sony system is soulless but I just can't put my finger on why."

And before I'm accused of being a Sony fanboy, I had a Nikon SLR for over 20 years which is probably longer than some have been taking pictures. I just don't care about the badge on the front or if I'm using a Sony made in Thailand or a Nikon made in Vietnam.

Anyway. I'll use the ignore button more and if I think people are posting to hide laziness or fanboyism I'll just hit the button :D
Click to expand...
That's fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion (y) There are things that aren't quantifiable though, for example I prefer a V8 over a straight 6 as it has more character, but what is that character? It's not something that you can quantify. Likewise I like the 'character' of V-twins over an inline 4. I could spend forever trying to come up with a way to describe what I mean by this, but I can't explain it.

Likewise there are cameras that I enjoy using such as Olympus, some Sony and some Nikon, but then there are those that leave me a 'bit cold'. I got rid of the D850 for this reason, I can't say why but I just didn't bond with it, yet I have with the Z7 and I did with the D750. I really liked the A77 and A77-II but the A7's not so much (discounting ergonomics).

Now if I was a pro and my livelihood depended on getting the best shot then I'd choose Sony all day long, but I'm not and it doesn't, therefore I have to enjoy what I use. I marvel at what the Sony's can do, like I did my D850, but that doesn't always equate into enjoyment. I keep trying the Sony's out as I may feel differently at some point, and they are wonderful pieces of kit. I could well feel differently after owning one for a while, but it's a lot of money to shell out to find out ;)

FYI I'm not trying to sway your opinion in any way regarding this, I'm just trying to explain how I see it (y)
 
pmac said:
if finally read over all the posts since mid dec and see a lot have been asking about wide angles.. similarly I'm looking myself after selling my last Nikon lens.

so is it worth spending the extra for the tamron 17-28 over either the sayang 18mm or tamron 20mm 2.8 when its released.
is the sigma 20mm art not worth considering?
Click to expand...

So I have both samyang 35mm f2.8 and 18mm f2.8. Worth saying that I actually like Samyang lenses and tend to choose them over others - the price advantage usually doesn't do any harm at all either, but that's not the sole driver.

Before buying the Sammy 18 I considered the Tamron 20. Price isn't especially different, but the Tammy is a much bulkier lens despite having 2mm less wideness. It's key selling point - very close focus - isn't attractive *to me* and because the Sammy is tiny, lightweight and was available as a UK purchase for just a few quid more than E-Infin pricing I grabbed one. So far it's the sharpest super-wide angle I've ever owned, and I'm happy with it, as you can tell. Flare resistance is good for a WA and if stopped down it's sharp right into the corners (I don't usually use a WA wide open).

Between 2 temples 4 by Toni Ertl, on Flickr

Between 2 temples 1 by Toni Ertl, on Flickr


The Sammy 35 f2.8 is a real favourite for street work because it makes the A7 look like a chunky compact, and using silent shutter and composing on the flipped screen like a WLF it lets me take pictures without being obvious. I used it a lot on the street in Morocco, and barely raised an eyebrow. Stopped down it's sharp corner to corner. If you use it wide open then the corners can look a little ugly - bokeh is NOT a strong point either - but the tiny size and feather weight make it a winner for me.

Bike and barrowman mogador by Toni Ertl, on Flickr

Market-06000 by Toni Ertl, on Flickr


The thing that would put me off the Tammy 17-28 is that it's just the wrong range for a WA zoom. 17mm at the wide end tells me it should go to 35-40mm at the tele end and be a true all-rounder for street use. Alternatively with 28mm at the tele end it should go down to 12-14mm at the wide end, but it isn't a really ultra-wide WA. Granted the f2.8 aperture is fast, but a fast aperture isn't especially important for a UW in my opinion, and it's too dear just to have as an 'in case' lens. Others will feel differently.
 
snerkler said:
FYI I'm not trying to sway your opinion in any way regarding this, I'm just trying to explain how I see it (y)
Click to expand...

I could describe exactly what I thought about any of my cars from torque, acceleration, engine note and characteristics through to fit and finish and ride and handling from normal road use through pushing on and into outright hooliganism.

If fanboyism isn't involved then fair enough and if I ever use a woolly phrase here when a more descriptive and helpful one could have been used I'll expect to be rightly castigated :D
 
snerkler said:
That's fair enough, you're entitled to your opinion (y) There are things that aren't quantifiable though, for example I prefer a V8 over a straight 6 as it has more character, but what is that character? It's not something that you can quantify. Likewise I like the 'character' of V-twins over an inline 4. I could spend forever trying to come up with a way to describe what I mean by this, but I can't explain it.

Likewise there are cameras that I enjoy using such as Olympus, some Sony and some Nikon, but then there are those that leave me a 'bit cold'. I got rid of the D850 for this reason, I can't say why but I just didn't bond with it, yet I have with the Z7 and I did with the D750. I really liked the A77 and A77-II but the A7's not so much (discounting ergonomics).

Now if I was a pro and my livelihood depended on getting the best shot then I'd choose Sony all day long, but I'm not and it doesn't, therefore I have to enjoy what I use. I marvel at what the Sony's can do, like I did my D850, but that doesn't always equate into enjoyment. I keep trying the Sony's out as I may feel differently at some point, and they are wonderful pieces of kit. I could well feel differently after owning one for a while, but it's a lot of money to shell out to find out ;)

FYI I'm not trying to sway your opinion in any way regarding this, I'm just trying to explain how I see it (y)
Click to expand...

I think woof woof might have a point here, not that we agree on most things all the time and that's okay. An explanation as to why something is soul less etc should be quite easy to back up, a v8 for me makes a wonderful noise, lots of low end torque, the motor doesn't need to be wrenched to do something, just wonderful. I feel the SZ 55 is clinical, there's another one of those terms, to my eyes its flat, very corrected which some love, but to my eyes it doesn't pop as much as some other lenses in as many scenarios, it can do it, just not most of the time.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top