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

Is it me or what. The a9 is the fist camera I’ve not had to set custom settings. The camer just seem to work
 
rookies said:
Is it me or what. The a9 is the fist camera I’ve not had to set custom settings. The camer just seem to work
Click to expand...
TBH I don't have to set custom settings for any cameras, but it just makes it quicker and easier. For example I have a landscape setting that's A priority, has base ISO, f8, uncompressed, wide metering, S-AF, single drive, no face detection and like to have BBF. For sports I then have manual mode, Auto ISO, f1.8, 1/1000, compressed, multi metering, expandable flexible spot, continuous hi drive mode, tracking, and not BBF. Having to change all those settings and remembering to change them back takes time, just being able to turn the mode dial to 1 or 2 etc is much easier and quicker (y)
 
snerkler said:
TBH I don't have to set custom settings for any cameras, but it just makes it quicker and easier. For example I have a landscape setting that's A priority, has base ISO, f8, uncompressed, wide metering, S-AF, single drive, no face detection and like to have BBF. For sports I then have manual mode, Auto ISO, f1.8, 1/1000, compressed, multi metering, expandable flexible spot, continuous hi drive mode, tracking, and not BBF. Having to change all those settings and remembering to change them back takes time, just being able to turn the mode dial to 1 or 2 etc is much easier and quicker (y)
Click to expand...

Might give it a go pal
 
On my a7Riv & a7Riii I have every custom button set for something - It's what I feel make Sony a cut above the rest :)

Les
 
TGphoto said:
It was your use of the word ‘fortuitous’ that made it sound like I was either silly at selling for that price or they’re rare as hens teeth :)

I think it’s just a case of keeping an eye out for someone selling at a reasonable price. (y)
Click to expand...
Yeah maybe I worded it wrongly, but I think it's a stonking price if it's in as new condition and you need to keep on the lookout to get one that good imo. But having sold one yourself you'll know the prices better than me (y)
 
Last edited:
Update done and all camera settings kept from what I can see (y)
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
I've tried the 50mm 1.8 on my A7ii and it was ok.
The guy that I bought my 24-105mm off was also selling a 50mm f1.8.
If I'd had enough cash at the time I'd have bought it too.
Click to expand...

That's reassuring for the 50mm f1.8.

The Sony 50mm macro on my A7 was a disgrace, just simply unusable as an AF lens. It hunted and even if it locked on the chances are that it was off and could be seen to be off with peaking, it couldn't reliably acquire focus three times in a row. It could have been a duff lens but that experience has put me off the cheaper focusing systems and if a review even hints at hunting I think that'll be it for me.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
When it comes o cases like this, where AF on a lens is sluggish or not the best response-wise, then MF lenses are far better IMO. Take macro for example, the AF on a dedicated macro [1:1+] lens is practically useless, you're better off with a MF macro lens as that is the best way to do it reliably. Does this 50mm macro not have decent manual focusing?
Click to expand...

Yes, close focus pretty much has to be manual but I'd always prefer to have AF than not as the lens can then be used for other non macro things.
 
TGphoto said:
Don’t understand Fuji, people talk about Kaizen yet they release cameras like there is no tomorrow. :thinking:
Click to expand...

I don't understand Tom, surely Kaizen on steroids would lead to several new camera iterations a day? :D

Anyway, don't get me on about Japanese companies or management :D
 
snerkler said:
I’ve only had the A7RIV for a few days and even I know it doesn’t have this issue tracking, clearly someone doesn’t know how to use the camera ;)
Click to expand...
Or wanted to make out their camera was so much better than the competition :oops: :$. I’d be intrigued to see if it was definitely Fuji themselves as that would be very poor trying to make out a competitors camera is bad. The video itself doesn’t seem to have Fuji branding and the fact it’s filmed from a TV makes me suspicious that it’s really Fuji themselves and not some third party.

The main point is manufacturers should stick to marketing the advantages of their system and never slag off another manufacturers camera system to gain an advantage. It doesn’t feel right to do that.
 
Last edited:
I always find reactions to silly things like this more amusing. Why people get almost defensive or upset over gear manufacturers and who's better at this or that. I mean come on, there's no real competition here, an a7riv will p*** all over an xt3 in pretty much every way. But who cares? Unless you happen to own both
 
Last edited:
I've found out that converting the A7RIV uncompressed raws to DNG using adobe's DNG converter decreases the file size from around 120mb to around 60mb, which is interestingly similar to Sony's compressed raw file size. Now my brain tells me that if you convert a 120mb file to a 60mb file some data is lost somewhere, or does DNG act as some kind of lossless compression?

So the question is, am I losing any image quality, colour or anything else by converting to DNG?
 
snerkler said:
I've found out that converting the A7RIV uncompressed raws to DNG using adobe's DNG converter decreases the file size from around 120mb to around 60mb, which is interestingly similar to Sony's compressed raw file size. Now my brain tells me that if you convert a 120mb file to a 60mb file some data is lost somewhere, or does DNG act as some kind of lossless compression?

So the question is, am I losing any image quality, colour or anything else by converting to DNG?
Click to expand...

It really does depend on the compression techniques used as to whether it is lossy or lossless.
 
Cagey75 said:
I always find reactions to silly things like this more amusing. Why people get almost defensive or upset over gear manufacturers and who's better at this or that. I mean come on, there's no real competition here, an a7riv will p*** all over an xt3 in pretty much every way. But who cares? Unless you happen to own both
Click to expand...

I agree, I personally think both systems have their advantages and disadvantages, but the Sony is ultimately going to always be ahead in some key area’s.
It’s not a fair comparison to be honest, should be compared against Sony’s flagship APS-C body.
 
woof woof said:
That's reassuring for the 50mm f1.8.

The Sony 50mm macro on my A7 was a disgrace, just simply unusable as an AF lens. It hunted and even if it locked on the chances are that it was off and could be seen to be off with peaking, it couldn't reliably acquire focus three times in a row. It could have been a duff lens but that experience has put me off the cheaper focusing systems and if a review even hints at hunting I think that'll be it for me.
Click to expand...

That was my experience with the 50 f1.8 on my A7III - worse than the worst of the supposedly poor Samyang AF lenses: slow, unreliable wide open and inclined to focus in different places every time.
 
snerkler said:
Any idea what DNG uses?
Click to expand...

DNG is lossless, but there are loads of ways of storing data, some are more efficient than others. You may get better (more compact) lossless compression at the expense of processor speed, and for some just writing the data out quickly is the aim, and often the fastest way of doing that is uncompressed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Negative

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_file_formats

that lot will keep you busy for a few hours.......
 
Mr Perceptive said:
DNG is lossless, but there are loads of ways of storing data, some are more efficient than others. You may get better (more compact) lossless compression at the expense of processor speed, and for some just writing the data out quickly is the aim, and often the fastest way of doing that is uncompressed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Negative

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_file_formats

that lot will keep you busy for a few hours.......
Click to expand...
Thanks, just found this too.
https://theblog.adobe.com/dng-pros-cons-and-myths/

I think I’ll be using DNG’s in the future (y)
 
Probably down to the presentation softwae, but I do find colours and tones of files encoded to dng to be slightly different (no, it's no the embedded jpg).
 
ancient_mariner said:
Probably down to the presentation softwae, but I do find colours and tones of files encoded to dng to be slightly different (no, it's no the embedded jpg).
Click to expand...
Interesting. I’ve just tested it using one of my Betty pics above and I couldn’t see a difference, but I’ll try it when I shoot something with more tones and ‘complex’ colours and see what I find (y)
 
ancient_mariner said:
That was my experience with the 50 f1.8 on my A7III - worse than the worst of the supposedly poor Samyang AF lenses: slow, unreliable wide open and inclined to focus in different places every time.
Click to expand...

Oh dear.

I had thought that this was only an issue with creaking older models like my A7. If they don't work well on newer bodies that's even worse.
 
snerkler said:
Interesting. I’ve just tested it using one of my Betty pics above and I couldn’t see a difference, but I’ll try it when I shoot something with more tones and ‘complex’ colours and see what I find (y)
Click to expand...

Lab coat in then
 
woof woof said:
Oh dear.

I had thought that this was only an issue with creaking older models like my A7. If they don't work well on newer bodies that's even worse.
Click to expand...

I found the opposite when testing it with an A7iii, seemed fine, as fast as the Nikon 50g in lock and accuracy was fine. Sharpness was very good.
 
twist said:
I found the opposite when testing it with an A7iii, seemed fine, as fast as the Nikon 50g in lock and accuracy was fine.
Click to expand...

It is absolutely gash no matter what body you use it on in terms of a.f performance. Far and away the worst Sony lens in terms of a.f.
 
f/2.8 said:
It is absolutely gash no matter what body you use it on in terms of a.f performance. Far and away the worst Sony lens in terms of a.f.
Click to expand...

Its as good as its DSLR competitors at the pricepoint.
 
twist said:
Its as good as its DSLR competitors at the pricepoint.
Click to expand...

That's not my experience - perhaps I had a 'bad' copy. I wouldn't have accepted AF like that on a DSLR, never mind Sony ML.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
I found the opposite when testing it with an A7iii, seemed fine, as fast as the Nikon 50g in lock and accuracy was fine. Sharpness was very good.
Click to expand...

The 50mm macro gave great sharpness when it hit focus.

I don't know how good other brands 50's are but I can't see myself trying another Sony with a cheaper focus system if there are any reports of hunting or iffyness at all. If it's a lottery I have better things to do with my time.
 
woof woof said:
The 50mm macro gave great sharpness when it hit focus.

I don't know how good other brands 50's are but I can't see myself trying another Sony with a cheaper focus system if there are any reports of hunting or iffyness at all. If it's a lottery I have better things to do with my time.
Click to expand...

On the copy I had sharpness was 'biting', and perceptually quite a bit sharper than a Nikon 50 1.8G. Just that the bits in focus were a little hard to predict. I found both the Nikon 50 f1.8 G and D to be much more reliable focus-wise on the D610 than the Sony 50 on my A7.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top