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

nandbytes said:
No idea if it matches A9ii. They are different kind of bodies tbh. I like high Res bodies in general.



I would. Never understood why you had so many primes. For price and size of 18mm+24mm+28mm you can get a tamron 17-28mm f2.8 which will also be probably better than two out of those three primes.
Click to expand...
Just wanted to try something different (y)
 
nandbytes said:
Well canon has a 800mm f11 lens on a 45mp body. In crop mode it'll give you 1200mm reach at 20mp. That's different :D
Click to expand...
Sure is. I don’t have an endless budget though ;)
 
Bought myself an a6500 few days ago. arriving tomorrow. An upgrade from an a6000. I'm quite excited. Mainly so i can play about with the 120fps video. Not that i'll have any real use for it but its good for a bit of fun. I plan to do a proper A/B against the a6000 for photo purposes so ill be keen to see if theres any improvement. it seems there should be a slight improvement in ISO performance.

Anyway. Im excited!
 
twist said:
It sure is, but so is every other high end camera. If you really wanted those FL lenses though the combos aren't expensive.
Click to expand...
I want those focal lengths but not those apertures. Still waiting for reviews on how well adapted EF telephotos work on R5.
Also dynamic range.
 
nandbytes said:
I want those focal lengths but not those apertures. Still waiting for reviews on how well adapted EF telephotos work on R5.
Also dynamic range.
Click to expand...

The r6 uses same sensor and processor as the 1dxiii. Not sure how the r5 will perform but looks like Canon arnt messing about too much.
 
snerkler said:
We’re getting into A9-II territory with that price, I appreciate it’s a higher mp camera but is it likely to match A9-II performance?
Click to expand...

It doesn’t come close the 20fps only works in live view and it doesn’t have the stacked sensor.

The video guys are now cracking up as well as it overheats very easily.


D4409569-7142-4914-8F85-6E58EC140632.jpeg
 
snerkler said:
I’m thinking of selling my Samyang 18mm f2.8, 24mm f2.8, Sony 28mm f2, 28-70mm and Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 and getting the 16-35mm f4 instead. I liked the idea of small primes but I just find zooms more handy :thinking:
Click to expand...

The 16-35 f/4 is very ordinary.
 
f/2.8 said:
It doesn’t come close the 20fps only works in live view and it doesn’t have the stacked sensor.

The video guys are now cracking up as well as it overheats very easily.


View attachment 285891
Click to expand...

yeah saw its 20min in 8k/4k at 23oC and shorter if the camera is hotter. might not be such an issue here in the uk, but hotter places it could be.
 
snerkler said:
Mr Huff seems to like it (y)

The Sony-Zeiss 16-35 F/4 OSS Lens Review By Steve Huff | Steve Huff Hi-Fi and Photo

The Sony-Zeiss 16-35 F/4 OSS Lens Quick Review By Steve Huff A few weeks ago Sony sent me the 16-35 F/4 Zeiss OSS lens to review and seeing that I rarely shoot wider than 35mm, I knew it would be a while before I could really evaluate the lens. I do not get a review
www.stevehuffphoto.com www.stevehuffphoto.com
Click to expand...

He likes everything.

I was never impressed with mine traded up to the Tamron 17-28.
 
f/2.8 said:
View attachment 285897
Click to expand...

Although those times don't seem to long they also don't indicate any required cooldown time either. If you're recording 8K Raw then you are probably doing a serious bit of filming and unluckily to be recording constantly for 20 minutes. If it records say 5 minutes, you take a couple of minutes break and then repeat without ever encountering the overheating then there will not be an issue.

Either way the Canon R5 looks pretty amazing and all I hope is that it pushes Sony to innovate and update the many things on their cameras which are falling behind the competition already and their latest updates ie A9II have been disappointing.
 
Jase said:
Although those times don't seem to long they also don't indicate any required cooldown time either. If you're recording 8K Raw then you are probably doing a serious bit of filming and unluckily to be recording constantly for 20 minutes. If it records say 5 minutes, you take a couple of minutes break and then repeat without ever encountering the overheating then there will not be an issue.

Either way the Canon R5 looks pretty amazing and all I hope is that it pushes Sony to innovate and update the many things on their cameras which are falling behind the competition already and their latest updates ie A9II have been disappointing.
Click to expand...

Haha how can you say that when the new Canon ones aren't even released to market yet?

'falling behind the competition', with one announcement? Come on.
 
snerkler said:
So’s my photography so it’ll be a good match ;)
I’d prefer the 35mm at the long end tbh.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to avoid pressing the buy button on the 16-35GM. Let's face it, most people only buy one WA zoom so might as well get the best available.
Then I look at the price....
 
Raymond Lin said:
I waited like 10 years and kept saying Canon has all the glass, all they need is a single killer body....they do it when I have switched to Sony!

Typical. lol
Click to expand...
Only if you're happy using adapted (y)
MrMackyB said:
I'm trying to avoid pressing the buy button on the 16-35GM. Let's face it, most people only buy one WA zoom so might as well get the best available.
Then I look at the price....
Click to expand...
I kind of agree, but I also have to justify it to myself whether it's worth the extra. As I never shoot with these lenses wide open, and they're stopped down to f8-11 99% of the time I would hazard a guess that the performance difference is somewhat bridged?
 
Raymond Lin said:
I waited like 10 years and kept saying Canon has all the glass, all they need is a single killer body....they do it when I have switched to Sony!

Typical. lol
Click to expand...

Is the body killer though from a stills point of view?

Realistically from a stills point of view the R5's closest equivalent with Sony is the A7RIII, which is a 3/4 year old body now.

The A7RIV is arguably a much better camera for stills if I.Q is top of the agenda and neither of the new Canon's have the speed or sensor technology of the A9, A9II.

In saying that I really want a 50 f/1.2 so may pick up the R5 or more likely the R6.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Is the body killer though from a stills point of view?

Realistically from a stills point of view the R5's closest equivalent with Sony is the A7RIII, which is a 3/4 year old body now.

The A7RIV is arguably a much better camera for stills if I.Q is top of the agenda and neither of the new Canon's have the speed or sensor technology of the A9, A9II.

In saying that I really want a 50 f/1.2 so may pick up the R5 or more likely the R6.
Click to expand...
Aren’t you happy just adapting the 50mm onto the Sony?
 
f/2.8 said:
Is the body killer though from a stills point of view?

Realistically from a stills point of view the R5's closest equivalent with Sony is the A7RIII, which is a 3/4 year old body now.

The A7RIV is arguably a much better camera for stills if I.Q is top of the agenda and neither of the new Canon's have the speed or sensor technology of the A9, A9II.

In saying that I really want a 50 f/1.2 so may pick up the R5 or more likely the R6.
Click to expand...

It looks a better camera than the Riii and besides the MP count its more in line with the RIV but adds a few things which are reflected in the price.
 
snerkler said:
Aren’t you happy just adapting the 50mm onto the Sony?
Click to expand...

Adapted lenses are garbage on every system so no.

Plus that would mean adapting the old 50 1.2 I want the rf version.

Although I will probably hold of until Nikon releases there 50 1.2.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
It looks a better camera than the Riii and besides the MP count its more in line with the RIV but adds a few things which are reflected in the price.
Click to expand...

Doesn't seem much better than the RIII based on the reviews, the a.f still isn't as good as the newer Sony bodies about equivalent maybe not just as good as the RIII. The resolution is way under the A7RIV and only slightly more than the A7RIII.

From a still point of view the A7RIII is the closest Sony equivalent.

The sensor isn't supposed to be as good as the A7RIII never mind the A7RIV although that has still to be confirmed.

The Canon has nicer ergonomics.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Doesn't seem much better than the RIII based on the reviews, the a.f still isn't as good as the newer Sony bodies about equivalent maybe not just as good as the RIII. The resolution is way under the A7RIV and only slightly more than the A7RIII.

From a still point of view the A7RIII is the closest Sony equivalent.

The sensor isn't supposed to be as good as the A7RIII never mind the A7RIV.

The Canon has nicer ergonomics.
Click to expand...

Compare Sony A7R IV vs Canon R5 | B&H Photo

Compare Sony A7R IV vs Canon R5 | B&H Photo
www.bhphotovideo.com

VS RIV
8 stop stabilisation
Faster FPS in MS and ES
Bigger Buffer (even looking at the file size difference)
Video obvs much better
More OSPDAF points (usually means better AF, we'll see)
-6EV AF vs A7riv -3EV
Bigger/Higher res LCD
CF Express
Better ergonomics

You could argue the A7RIV is a smaller upgrade from the RIII than the R5 is.
 
Last edited:
twist said:

Compare Sony A7R IV vs Canon R5 | B&H Photo

Compare Sony A7R IV vs Canon R5 | B&H Photo
www.bhphotovideo.com

VS RIV
8 stop stabilisation
Faster FPS in MS and ES
Bigger Buffer (even looking at the file size difference)
Video obvs much better
More OSPDAF points (usually means better AF, we'll see)
-6EV AF vs A7riv -3EV
Bigger/Higher res LCD
CF Express
Better ergonomics

You could argue the A7RIV is a smaller upgrade from the RIII than the R5 is.
Click to expand...

Yeah it has better video if you don't mind the overheating issues and recording limits.

8 stop stabilisation isn't reviewing very well.

A.F already reviewed as not as good as the newer Sony's

The other stuff doesn't mean anything as it means nothing to the images produced.

The 20fps only works in live view :ROFLMAO:

Definitely much closer to the RIII than the RIV in terms of stills.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Yeah it has better video if you don't mind the overheating issues.

8 stop stabilisation isn't reviewing very well.

A.F already reviewed as not as good as the newer Sony's

The other stuff doesn't mean anything as it means nothing to the images produced.
Click to expand...

But it does, because a lot of people shifted their Riii for an Riv or switched from other systems to Riv and paid the extra to have those features.

Early reviews will be a mixed bag, I guess we'll have to wait and see when more people get them in their hands.
 
Quote from DPREVIEW

" But given my experience with a pre-production model, I'm comfortable claiming that there isn't a competing camera that meets this combination of image quality, responsiveness, autofocus, video specifications and usability".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top