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

Anyone buy much from Alibaba.
I really like the look of the Ulanzi Falcam F38 quick release set, get one for my strap, tripod and backpack but look really hard to find in the UK.

Peak design are missing a trick not expanding on their Capture Clip.
 
robj20 said:
Anyone buy much from Alibaba.
I really like the look of the Ulanzi Falcam F38 quick release set, get one for my strap, tripod and backpack but look really hard to find in the UK.

Peak design are missing a trick not expanding on their Capture Clip.
Click to expand...

I’ve used them. A little slow but no other problem.
 
wookie6262 said:
The Alpha 1 is whizzing up in price on Panamoz, Is it the semi conductor shortage allowing them to raise prices due to lack of available cameras.
Click to expand...

£171 cheaper on e-infinity, albeit rather insignificant at this price range, lol.
 
After a shocking weekend of photography with a crash cutting short a Knockhill Trip and a misunderstanding meaning I went to a Rugby match on Sunday that was 40 miles away from where I pitched up it was good to get some clicks under the belt yesterday. A really interesting day photographing Birds of Prey, insects and reptiles with the excellent Andy Howey.

Some challenging things to shoot and good to get the grey matter working as all I have really shot recently is sports where settings have been pretty much fixed.

_A9_5068 by Simon Wootton, on Flickr
A7R05678_DxO by Simon Wootton, on Flickr
_A9_5468_DxO by Simon Wootton, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
 
Mike.P said:
Clever title ... like it (y)
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike. I often think a street photo without a title is a like a book without a cover. :)


wookie6262 said:
Really nice. Can't make my mind up about that top sandstone. Works with and without but I think I prefer out for the slightly more abstract look.
Click to expand...
Thanks Simon, likewise with your photos above, killer shots. Yes, I had done an edit with just a thin sliver of the stone and an edit with no stone at all, and then I decided to add more of it. But yeah, it would have been nicer if the left side didn't have the curve.
 
"Aren't you ready yet?"
"Shut up. Tell yourself."

A7 and Sony 35mm f2.8.

p0CnCxl.jpg


I guess that's a "no" then.
 
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies. I am trying to justify paying one to one & a half thousand pounds for a lens with 600mm reach, over my Sigma 100-400 Sony fit.
I personally thought the first one (the 20 sign) was clearer on the right. All photos were taken hand held, just as 90% of the time I would be using them. I took several photos, each time re focusing & took the best of each set. The camera used in every photo was the Sony A73 III. The Sigma 100-400 was used in every photo. The New Sigma 150-600 & Sony 200-600 were the other lens used. The answer to the questions is. 1st photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 2nd photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 3rd photo Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 4th photo Sigma 100-400 on left. Sony 200-600 on right.
 
 
Redspider said:
Thanks for the replies. I am trying to justify paying one to one & a half thousand pounds for a lens with 600mm reach, over my Sigma 100-400 Sony fit.
I personally thought the first one (the 20 sign) was clearer on the right. All photos were taken hand held, just as 90% of the time I would be using them. I took several photos, each time re focusing & took the best of each set. The camera used in every photo was the Sony A73 III. The Sigma 100-400 was used in every photo. The New Sigma 150-600 & Sony 200-600 were the other lens used. The answer to the questions is. 1st photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 2nd photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 3rd photo Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 4th photo Sigma 100-400 on left. Sony 200-600 on right.
Click to expand...
Did you take all the photos from the same spot?
 
Redspider said:
Thanks for the replies. I am trying to justify paying one to one & a half thousand pounds for a lens with 600mm reach, over my Sigma 100-400 Sony fit.
I personally thought the first one (the 20 sign) was clearer on the right. All photos were taken hand held, just as 90% of the time I would be using them. I took several photos, each time re focusing & took the best of each set. The camera used in every photo was the Sony A73 III. The Sigma 100-400 was used in every photo. The New Sigma 150-600 & Sony 200-600 were the other lens used. The answer to the questions is. 1st photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 2nd photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 3rd photo Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 4th photo Sigma 100-400 on left. Sony 200-600 on right.
Click to expand...

snerkler said:
I prefer the rendering of the left, but the right are sharper but this may be a result of greater DOF>
Click to expand...
I think I've looked at these wrong as I only saw one lot of side by side photos for each image (road sign and field).
 
OK, seen them properly now.

1. Road sign: left looks way better but again has the appearance of not being as sharp due to loss of DOF
2. Flower: the right has rendered better but doesn't look as good overall as it's underexposed compared to the left
3. Field with building: Left looks better, renders nicer but has the appearance of being less sharp but I think this is loss of DOF in the foreground
4. Back of plane, the left looks better than the right, better colours and maybe a tad sharper

So looking at your post above this suggests:-

1. 150-600mm better than 100-400mm
2. 100-400mm better than 150-600mm (would like to compare with same exposure though)
3. 150-600mm better than 100-400mm
4. 100-400mm better than 200-600mm (that's surprised me a lot)
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
OK, seen them properly now.

1. Road sign: left looks way better but again has the appearance of not being as sharp due to loss of DOF
2. Flower: the right has rendered better but doesn't look as good overall as it's underexposed compared to the left
3. Field with building: Left looks better, renders nicer but has the appearance of being less sharp but I think this is loss of DOF in the foreground
4. Back of plane, the left looks better than the right, better colours and maybe a tad sharper

So looking at your post above this suggests:-

1. 150-600mm better than 100-400mm
2. 100-400mm better than 150-600mm (would like to compare with same exposure though)
3. 150-600mm better than 100-400mm
4. 100-400mm better than 200-600mm (that's surprised me a lot)
Click to expand...
Each left/right photo had the same exposure & settings. I just swapped the lens. Then swapped back etc.
 
My reason for doing this is I bought the Sony 200-600 lens & was underwhelmed at the difference. Perhaps I am wrong, but I expected it to be a third better plus the difference between Sigma & Sony. When I took a picture with the Sony 200-600 I thought it was super, but out of interest I decided to compare. Once comparing I was surprised at the results. Because of this I sent the Sony 200-600 back, at that price I want a more defined difference. Now I have the Sigma 150-600 & have the same dilemma, but at £400 less than the Sony. I'm sure overall the 600mm lenses are better, but weight, portability & not a lot better photo makes me wonder if it is worth it. But I'm listening to all opinions.

Incidentally all the photos were out of the camera with no processing.
 
The poor old A65 doesn't get much of a mention here, yet it's a decent camera with a good 24MP sensor. I'm running a pair, one with a 16~300mm Tamron and the other with a 10~20mm Sigma. Some samples...

Chimneys The Colony Exeter A65 DSC00790.JPG

Heavy dury piping by Clyst Bridge A65 DSC03599.JPG

Seagull on street light A65_DSC03300.JPG
 
Last edited:
Redspider said:
Thanks for the replies. I am trying to justify paying one to one & a half thousand pounds for a lens with 600mm reach, over my Sigma 100-400 Sony fit.
I personally thought the first one (the 20 sign) was clearer on the right. All photos were taken hand held, just as 90% of the time I would be using them. I took several photos, each time re focusing & took the best of each set. The camera used in every photo was the Sony A73 III. The Sigma 100-400 was used in every photo. The New Sigma 150-600 & Sony 200-600 were the other lens used. The answer to the questions is. 1st photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 2nd photo. Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 3rd photo Sigma 150-600 on left. Sigma 100-400 on right. 4th photo Sigma 100-400 on left. Sony 200-600 on right.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you asked the wrong question. At least one of my answers was because of exposure and another about the rendering/dof. There are clearly considerations of reach and how many pixels you need. Sharpness, which it looks like is your primary concern in your question, is of course only one measure of a lens. Rendering, colour balance, bokeh, weight etc are all important too. In fact sharpness there days is pretty much acceptable on all lenses.

What will you do with the files and what type of image do you prefer as pixels and separation will be different as will perspective given the same framing before crop. The narrower view of a long lens is also very useful in pinpointing complementary backgrounds.

For what it is worth I own the 200-600 and it has blown me away in terms of sharpness. It also focusses quickly and accurately too and I'll be keeping my one despite owning two long lenses that are equally as good.
 
wookie6262 said:
Perhaps you asked the wrong question. At least one of my answers was because of exposure and another about the rendering/dof. There are clearly considerations of reach and how many pixels you need. Sharpness, which it looks like is your primary concern in your question, is of course only one measure of a lens. Rendering, colour balance, bokeh, weight etc are all important too. In fact sharpness there days is pretty much acceptable on all lenses.

What will you do with the files and what type of image do you prefer as pixels and separation will be different as will perspective given the same framing before crop. The narrower view of a long lens is also very useful in pinpointing complementary backgrounds.

For what it is worth I own the 200-600 and it has blown me away in terms of sharpness. It also focusses quickly and accurately too and I'll be keeping my one despite owning two long lenses that are equally as good.
Click to expand...
You may be right, but for £1500.00 I would like to be blown away with the difference, not struggle to see any.
 
Redspider said:
Each left/right photo had the same exposure & settings. I just swapped the lens. Then swapped back etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah I appreciate that but one is clearly darker than the other and so will affect perception (y)
Redspider said:
My reason for doing this is I bought the Sony 200-600 lens & was underwhelmed at the difference. Perhaps I am wrong, but I expected it to be a third better plus the difference between Sigma & Sony. When I took a picture with the Sony 200-600 I thought it was super, but out of interest I decided to compare. Once comparing I was surprised at the results. Because of this I sent the Sony 200-600 back, at that price I want a more defined difference. Now I have the Sigma 150-600 & have the same dilemma, but at £400 less than the Sony. I'm sure overall the 600mm lenses are better, but weight, portability & not a lot better photo makes me wonder if it is worth it. But I'm listening to all opinions.

Incidentally all the photos were out of the camera with no processing.
Click to expand...

Redspider said:
You may be right, but for £1500.00 I would like to be blown away with the difference, not struggle to see any.
Click to expand...
It doesn't surprise me that that Sony isn't "that" much better tbh, although what surprised me was that I prefer the rendering of the Sigma, at least from the sample you gave. 3rd party lenses aren't far off main manufacturer lenses, and in fact sometimes can be better. Just because a lens is more expensive it doesn't automatically mean it's sharper and/or renders better.

What you do tend to find (although not across the board) is that like for like lenses the main manufacturer 'tend' to be better built and 'tend' to have better AF, but third party have really upped their game in this department over the years so the lines are now more blurred than ever.

With regards to the type of lenses above I actually went for the Sony 100-400mm GM as for me it's got the best IQ of the lot, has that bit more pop and has superb AF. Another big selling point over the 150-600mm and 200-600mm for me was the weight, it makes a huge difference to me. If the Sigma 100-400mm had been out at the time I could well have ended up with that, the cost (although I got cashback and 0% finance on my Sony 100-400mm) and weight saving of the Sigma probably makes up for the small difference in IQ.
 
More A7V rumours... V? Really?

RUMOR: Sony A7IV records full frame 4k30 and it is oversampled from 7K | sonyalpharumors

image on top is a mockup I can now add one more solid rumors: full frame 4k30 video is over sampled from 7K Sony A7IV rumored specs: launch in October (if chip supply permits this) Newly developed 33MP sensor 4k30 video is oversampled from 7K 5.5 stops of IBIS (+ AS)
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Rumour merchants seem to be saying it'll be 33mp.

What would temp you?

Being honest, I think I'll only replace my A7 when it dies although silent shooting, faster focus, eye detect and the ability to link metering to the focus point would all be nice things to have.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
More A7V rumours...

RUMOR: Sony A7IV records full frame 4k30 and it is oversampled from 7K | sonyalpharumors

image on top is a mockup I can now add one more solid rumors: full frame 4k30 video is over sampled from 7K Sony A7IV rumored specs: launch in October (if chip supply permits this) Newly developed 33MP sensor 4k30 video is oversampled from 7K 5.5 stops of IBIS (+ AS)
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Rumour merchants seem to be saying it'll be 33mp.

What would temp you?

Being honest, I think I'll only replace my A7 when it dies although silent shooting, faster focus, eye detect and the ability to link metering to the focus point would all be nice things to have.
Click to expand...
Blackout free shooting, that's a must have for me now.
 
woof woof said:
More A7V rumours... V? Really?

RUMOR: Sony A7IV records full frame 4k30 and it is oversampled from 7K | sonyalpharumors

image on top is a mockup I can now add one more solid rumors: full frame 4k30 video is over sampled from 7K Sony A7IV rumored specs: launch in October (if chip supply permits this) Newly developed 33MP sensor 4k30 video is oversampled from 7K 5.5 stops of IBIS (+ AS)
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Rumour merchants seem to be saying it'll be 33mp.

What would temp you?

Being honest, I think I'll only replace my A7 when it dies although silent shooting, faster focus, eye detect and the ability to link metering to the focus point would all be nice things to have.
Click to expand...
Silent shooting is nice, eye tracking is brilliant if you shoot people obviously. For me to move from the A7C nothing, its absolutely perfect for what i do, if they somehow managed to make an A7C with more MP and less money so i could just swap i would. But i wouldn't pay for more i think 24MP is spot on. Full global shutter would be nice if it allows even smaller cameras.
 
I wonder how long it'll be before global shutter is available in a consumer level camera, and I'm classing the A7 range as consumer.

Face detect seems to work well enough for me but there are times when it wont grab a face if it's too small in the frame. I hope newer cameras are a bit better.
 
woof woof said:
I wonder how long it'll be before global shutter is available in a consumer level camera, and I'm classing the A7 range as consumer.

Face detect seems to work well enough for me but there are times when it wont grab a face if it's too small in the frame. I hope newer cameras are a bit better.
Click to expand...
Yes, the C compared to my old MK1, it will grab the eye never mind the face where the MK1 would just about be able to spot a face.
You get face focus a long way off.
 
Redspider said:
You may be right, but for £1500.00 I would like to be blown away with the difference, not struggle to see any.
Click to expand...
I think the 200-600 comes into its own on the a9 with the burst rate etc and how fast the mode 3 is with it . i had the sigma dg dn 100-400 and offloaded it right away after getting a 200-600
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top