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

nandbytes said:
I did wonder sometimes if A7RIII was slightly better. Overall A7RIV is better I think.
I haven't had any serious issues tracking with it even for subjects approaching me. Then again even my old A7RII could manage it without much issues for most subjects. So I don't really understand people's issues lol.
Of course I don't track a cheetah speed dog running at me and if I find a wild animal running at me at speeds my camera can't track I think getting shots in focus is least of my worries :D
Large birds are again not a problem but small birds has always been a problem regardless of the camera. Though in some cases I can see A9 being a lot better.
Click to expand...
For most things it fine it's just with the 200/600 and birds in flight that the hit rate isn't so good, true about the a9 it really is a stunning camera .
Rob.
 
Hi, Where is the best place to buy these? I went on the Manfrotto site and for one card they want £6.95 to post one card within the UK, has the postal service in the UK gone up that much?
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, Where is the best place to buy these? I went on the Manfrotto site and for one card they want £6.95 to post one card within the UK, has the postal service in the UK gone up that much?
Click to expand...

There are often codes for free delivery on the manfrotto site.
 
nandbytes said:
I did wonder sometimes if A7RIII was slightly better. Overall A7RIV is better I think.
I haven't had any serious issues tracking with it even for subjects approaching me. Then again even my old A7RII could manage it without much issues for most subjects. So I don't really understand people's issues lol.
Of course I don't track a cheetah speed dog running at me and if I find a wild animal running at me at speeds my camera can't track I think getting shots in focus is least of my worries :D
Large birds are again not a problem but small birds has always been a problem regardless of the camera. Though in some cases I can see A9 being a lot better.
Click to expand...
TBH Betty is not the best subject to test. A small dog with a predominantly black no contrast face running towards you like a lunatic :lol:
 
snerkler said:
TBH Betty is not the best subject to test. A small dog with a predominantly black no contrast face running towards you like a lunatic :LOL:
Click to expand...

I know the feeling, I have a Siberian Husky who works for treats and poses ok in the garden but if you try and get action shots in the park or somewhere with more interesting scenery, forget it. Thats his time and play comes before a pesky camera. Oh and try getting the focus on an A7ii!
 
So after much deliberation I'm jumping from Nikon to Sony. I've got lots of pages to read to catch up on here for a start. Plan is to get the A7 iii and a 16-35mm to start with. Can anyone help me with the real world differences between the f4 and f2.8. I liked the look of the Tamron 17-28mm but as this will be my only lens for a few months I could do with the 7mm extra reach.

I'm sure this has been discussed before so I'll keep searching in the meantime :)
 
adz740 said:
So after much deliberation I'm jumping from Nikon to Sony. I've got lots of pages to read to catch up on here for a start. Plan is to get the A7 iii and a 16-35mm to start with. Can anyone help me with the real world differences between the f4 and f2.8. I liked the look of the Tamron 17-28mm but as this will be my only lens for a few months I could do with the 7mm extra reach.

I'm sure this has been discussed before so I'll keep searching in the meantime :)
Click to expand...

The 16-35 f/4 is okay, the Tamron is a lot better, sharper, less distortion. Personally I prefer the Tamron to even the 16-35 f/2.8 just because it’s smaller and lighter but that wouldn’t be the same for everyone.

Sigma 14-24 is popular as well with the wide zooms.

Not sure I would want just a wide lens as my only lens though. If you have the budget for the Sony 16-35 f/2.8 you could buy the Tamron 17-28 f/2.8 and the 28-75 f/2.8 for less money.
 
f/2.8 said:
The 16-35 f/4 is okay, the Tamron is a lot better, sharper, less distortion. Personally I prefer the Tamron to even the 16-35 f/2.8 just because it’s smaller and lighter but that wouldn’t be the same for everyone.

Sigma 14-24 is popular as well with the wide zooms.

Not sure I would want just a wide lens as my only lens though. If you have the budget for the Sony 16-35 f/2.8 you could buy the Tamron 17-28 f/2.8 and the 28-75 f/2.8 for less money.
Click to expand...
That's what worried me about the Sony f4. I had the same issue with the Nikon 16-35 f4 so I want to make sure I get the sharpest lens this time as it's my most used range (mainly shoot travel and general landscape shots). I don't really need the 28-75mm range at the moment and then will probably be looking for something longer, maybe 70-200 or a long prime.

Thanks for replying so quickly too :)
 
adz740 said:
So after much deliberation I'm jumping from Nikon to Sony. I've got lots of pages to read to catch up on here for a start. Plan is to get the A7 iii and a 16-35mm to start with. Can anyone help me with the real world differences between the f4 and f2.8. I liked the look of the Tamron 17-28mm but as this will be my only lens for a few months I could do with the 7mm extra reach.

I'm sure this has been discussed before so I'll keep searching in the meantime :)
Click to expand...
You could get the Tamron 17-28mm and pair it with the A7RIII or A7RIV if budget allows as this would give you extra effective focal length. For example, use it in crop mode on the A7RIV and you’d get 42mm at the long end and still get a 25mp image.

I’d recommend one of the R bodies anyway if your main interests are landscapes and travel (y)
 
snerkler said:
You could get the Tamron 17-28mm and pair it with the A7RIII or A7RIV if budget allows as this would give you extra effective focal length. For example, use it in crop mode on the A7RIV and you’d get 42mm at the long end and still get a 25mp image.

I’d recommend one of the R bodies anyway if your main interests are landscapes and travel (y)
Click to expand...
Is that purely down to the extra megapixels?
 
adz740 said:
Is that purely down to the extra megapixels?
Click to expand...
Yep, most cameras have a crop/APS-C mode now so it would be like using the lens on a crop body camera, giving you 1.5x more effective reach. You can of course do this with the A7III but it’s just that the crop image would ‘only’ be around 10mp. Of course this is still ample for most applications (y)
 
snerkler said:
Yep, most cameras have a crop/APS-C mode now so it would be like using the lens on a crop body camera, giving you 1.5x more effective reach. You can of course do this with the A7III but it’s just that the crop image would ‘only’ be around 10mp. Of course this is still ample for most applications (y)
Click to expand...
Oh sorry I meant is that the reason you'd say the A7RIII over the A7III (the extra MP). Should have phrased my response differently :)
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
tamron 28-200 vs Sony 24-240
View: https://youtu.be/C2L-fRVhx6k

TL;DR - Sony lens is crap. Tamron is actually rather good for its kind in fact seems somewhat impressive for a superzoom.
Click to expand...

I haven't any interest in buying this, but that reviewer was such a nice guy and he's put so much work into it that I watched 'til the end :ROFLMAO:
 
NewBeetle said:
I haven't any interest in buying this, but that reviewer was such a nice guy and he's put so much work into it that I watched 'til the end :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

this is the second of his reviews I am watching (previous being for tamron 70-180mm). He seems to be one of the first folks to be able to get his hands on new tamron lenses for review. I find his reviews rather light on the image quality test side of things but he seems like a nice person like you said.
 
adz740 said:
Oh sorry I meant is that the reason you'd say the A7RIII over the A7III (the extra MP). Should have phrased my response differently :)
Click to expand...
Yeah sorry, I thought that's what I'd referred to, in my own little way ;)

So to clarify, you were saying that you'd looked at the 17-28mm but wanted more reach, and using crop/APS-C mode gives you more effective reach (1.5x extra reach). The R models are better for this as the crop mode still retains a high number of megapixels. In crop mode you get the following megapixels

A7 III - 10mp
A7R III - 18mp
A7R IV - 26mp

Now as I said, 10mp is enough for a lot of applications and so the A7 III may still be the right choice if this is the case, but if you want to crop further still you start to be limited. With the A7R IV you can do a 2x crop and still have 15mp.

It was just a suggestion so that you could get the arguably better lens in the Tamron 17-28mm and not lose out at the long end, in crop mode you'd get 42mm at the long end (y)
 
I was wondering yesterday what's missing from the Sony lens line up these days or what needs to be done better?

I have the 20mm f1.8 but maybe they could do a wider prime?

Maybe they could redo the much critisised for issues 35mm f1.4?

I'd like them to redo the lenses with those cheapo and arguably crappy focus systems, like that unusable on my A7 50mm f2.8 macro.

What else is missing or needs a better mk2?

Actually another thing I'd like is for Sony to redo the lenses that suffer from noticeable cats eye bokeh and get rid of it.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I was wondering yesterday what's missing from the Sony lens line up these days or what needs to be done better?

I have the 20mm f1.8 but maybe they could do a wider prime?

Maybe they could redo the much critisised for issues 35mm f1.4?

I'd like them to redo the lenses with those cheapo and arguably crappy focus systems, like that unusable on my A7 50mm f2.8 macro.

What else is missing or needs a better mk2?

Actually another thing I'd like is for Sony to redo the lenses that suffer from noticeable cats eye bokeh and get rid of it.
Click to expand...

Wider primes are bit of a niche and historically mostly provided by 3rd parties.

I think all their 50mm lenses could do with an AF update and also the 85GM.
Perhaps a longer macro lens like 150-200mm macro.
Also I'd like to see some Nikon PF style teleprimes like the 300mm PF and/or 500mm PF.

I actually don't mind cat's eye a huge lot lol. Another one of those things that's blown out of proportion by the internet along with onion rings at 200% :p
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Yeah sorry, I thought that's what I'd referred to, in my own little way ;)

So to clarify, you were saying that you'd looked at the 17-28mm but wanted more reach, and using crop/APS-C mode gives you more effective reach (1.5x extra reach). The R models are better for this as the crop mode still retains a high number of megapixels. In crop mode you get the following megapixels

A7 III - 10mp
A7R III - 18mp
A7R IV - 26mp

Now as I said, 10mp is enough for a lot of applications and so the A7 III may still be the right choice if this is the case, but if you want to crop further still you start to be limited. With the A7R IV you can do a 2x crop and still have 15mp.

It was just a suggestion so that you could get the arguably better lens in the Tamron 17-28mm and not lose out at the long end, in crop mode you'd get 42mm at the long end (y)
Click to expand...
:) We got there in the end. Must have be more tired than i thought last night haha.

Thank you. The crop part is interesting and useful information (basically you've made me think again about it). The place i'm trading my gear into has a7R III in so i might have a go today. My main concern is that the GM is sooo widely regarded as one of the sharpest lenses out there am i better off with a better body and lesser lens or not as good body (it's marginal clearly) and one of the best UWA lenses around?

Thanks for causing me more confusion :D - I appreciate it.
 
kokolino23 said:
Excuse my ignorance, is this thread for sony apsc cameras as well? Thanks
Click to expand...

Anything goes on this thread! We have discussed cars, dogs, watches, music systems, plague to name a few lol. Quite open about things here even though it says A7/A9 thread. So you are welcome to discuss APS-C stuff here too.

If you are looking for constructive discussion about APS-C gear there may or may not be a equivalent thread for that (you are welcome to start one if there isn't one). But many of us here have shot or still shoot with APS-C too.

We even discuss other brands from time to time on here ;)
 
woof woof said:
I was wondering yesterday what's missing from the Sony lens line up these days or what needs to be done better?

I have the 20mm f1.8 but maybe they could do a wider prime?

Maybe they could redo the much critisised for issues 35mm f1.4?

I'd like them to redo the lenses with those cheapo and arguably crappy focus systems, like that unusable on my A7 50mm f2.8 macro.

What else is missing or needs a better mk2?

Actually another thing I'd like is for Sony to redo the lenses that suffer from noticeable cats eye bokeh and get rid of it.
Click to expand...

Top of the list for me is a new 35 f/1.4 or f/1.2 and a 50 f1.4 or f/1.2.

I want both to be smaller than current options, the similar size to the 24GM would be fantastic.
 
Can anyone recommend a sensor cleaning kit (swabs and fluid) for full frame sensor?
 
NewBeetle said:
Can anyone recommend a sensor cleaning kit (swabs and fluid) for full frame sensor?
Click to expand...
Hi, I use three options as the sensor sometimes just needs a quick clean, for that I use the visable Dust Artic Butterfly for slightly tuffer problems Lenspen Sensorklear and for the once a year or a bigger problem clean I use Sensor Swabs and Eclipse Cleaner.
Russ.


 
adz740 said:
:) We got there in the end. Must have be more tired than i thought last night haha.

Thank you. The crop part is interesting and useful information (basically you've made me think again about it). The place i'm trading my gear into has a7R III in so i might have a go today. My main concern is that the GM is sooo widely regarded as one of the sharpest lenses out there am i better off with a better body and lesser lens or not as good body (it's marginal clearly) and one of the best UWA lenses around?

Thanks for causing me more confusion :D - I appreciate it.
Click to expand...
No worries, I confuse many people including myself :lol:

There's too much choice and it causes headaches ;) You need to decide for yourself whether you need the extra mp, ie do you view large, do you print large, do you crop heavily? The sole reason for me buying the A7RIV was the ability to crop, meaning that I can use smaller lighter lenses and get the effective reach or larger heavier lenses on a lower mp body.
 
I normally only do dry clear via. dust blower. Used to get free cleans from Wex London from their open days that took place every 3-4 months. Thanks to lockdown there's none of that now so may have start wet cleaning myself.
 
nandbytes said:
I normally only do dry clear via. dust blower. Used to get free cleans from Wex London from their open days that took place every 3-4 months. Thanks to lockdown there's none of that now so may have start wet cleaning myself.
Click to expand...
I’ve only had to use the rocket blower so far with the Sony, but at least the sensor looks easier to get to than a DSLR as it’s not so recessed (y)
 
On A9II they are closing the shutter while changing lenses. I am hoping that feature makes its way to A7RIV at some point.
 
We had such a bad day on Monday we had to call for help and get out for an hour and that was the first time we'd been out since the start of the lockdown. Things were better yesterday and today was ok so we went for a walk for an hour to see the wild flowers where we'll be picking brambles later in the year.

A7 and Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 and No.4 close up filter sometimes on sometimes off.

bRE8zrx.jpg


ng0GerG.jpg


lkRF1ur.jpg


NiZpK9X.jpg


One last one at f1.4 just to see what it looks like.

zgSibpL.jpg


No matter what I do pictures always look softer here.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top