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

Lemaildetom said:
I don't really know if it's any good or better than other but for my hobbyist use it does the job in a compact form.
3 photos taken with the samyang f2.8 this weekend on hoy, near the old man of hoy at the top of moor fea.

20210925-hoy-DSC04743 by Thomas, sur Flickr

20210925-hoy-DSC04805-HDR by Thomas, sur Flickr

20210925-hoy-DSC04817-HDR by Thomas, sur Flickr
Click to expand...
These are so sharp. I love the way the light and shadow falls onto the hills, particularly #3. Beautiful colours as well.



snerkler said:
Been out to take a dedicated landscape photo today, first time in ages.


A9_06278 by TDG-77, on Flickr

A9_06286 by TDG-77, on Flickr
Click to expand...
Excellent Toby, I love the way you filtered the streams to get that milky look.
 
I just had it in my head the 35 GM was big, but it doesn't look much different to the 20mm f1.8 so fine for me.
 
robj20 said:
I just had it in my head the 35 GM was big, but it doesn't look much different to the 20mm f1.8 so fine for me.
Click to expand...

Stop it!

35mm f2.8, 35mm f1.8, 20mm f1.8, 35mm f1.4 GM.

s5ykzNT.jpg
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
its bigger than 20G
Its noticeably denser too.
Balances fine on the A7C though.

Its definitely THE 35mm lens to own IMO.
Click to expand...
I think I compared it to my old 24-70 and it wasn't much different and I didn't mind carrying that around all day and night.
 
I do like my manual lenses...

CnD4wDX.jpg


but there's a lot to be said for a modern AF lenses especially when taking less posed people shots using face/eye detect.

Nit picking the 35mm f1.8, there's some ca and I'd describe the bokeh as par for the course and not really any better. It is imo sharp across the frame from wide open though and even on my old creaking A7 it's fast to focus.

Just Googled the 35mm f1.4 and saw it in stock for £1,170.
 
Last edited:
A nice review of the Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 here.

phillipreeve.net

Review: Voigtlander Nokton 35mm F1.2 SE - phillipreeve.net

Review of the Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 SE which covers real world use as well as in-depth technical analysis and contains many full resolution images.
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

As I have the 40mm f1.2 I can't really justify changing to either the 35 or 50mm f1.2 but I still keep looking at them :D

I see these lenses as indulgence lenses, just for me, and I take them out when I think I'll be ok MF-ing and wont upset anyone too much. AF lenses are better when I think I'll be the PITA geek with the camera if I faff about with MF.
 
woof woof said:
A nice review of the Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 here.

phillipreeve.net

Review: Voigtlander Nokton 35mm F1.2 SE - phillipreeve.net

Review of the Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 SE which covers real world use as well as in-depth technical analysis and contains many full resolution images.
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

As I have the 40mm f1.2 I can't really justify changing to either the 35 or 50mm f1.2 but I still keep looking at them :D

I see these lenses as indulgence lenses, just for me, and I take them out when I think I'll be ok MF-ing and wont upset anyone too much. AF lenses are better when I think I'll be the PITA geek with the camera if I faff about with MF.
Click to expand...
Wish youd not shown me this, im tempted, refuse to pay sony TAX for the 50mm 1.2 for what i,ll use it for....MPB have 1 for 699....
 
robj20 said:
I think I compared it to my old 24-70 and it wasn't much different and I didn't mind carrying that around all day and night.
Click to expand...
I'd say the experience of carrying it around is closer to your 28-200mm than the 20G.
(Of course 28-200mm extends so discounting that)

Right now my kit is basically
20G, 35GM, 85DN & 28-200mm.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I do like my manual lenses...

CnD4wDX.jpg


but there's a lot to be said for a modern AF lenses especially when taking less posed people shots using face/eye detect.

Nit picking the 35mm f1.8, there's some ca and I'd describe the bokeh as par for the course and not really any better. It is imo sharp across the frame from wide open though and even on my old creaking A7 it's fast to focus.

Just Googled the 35mm f1.4 and saw it in stock for £1,170.
Click to expand...

I must say Alan, that does look good :cool:
 
littleted said:
Wish youd not shown me this, im tempted, refuse to pay sony TAX for the 50mm 1.2 for what i,ll use it for....MPB have 1 for 699....
Click to expand...
From all accounts it's a really nice lens.
But AF is such a nice thing to have, and you can always MF of you want.
It would be an easy choice of the price gap was bigger. It's a lot of money for a MF lens.
 
robj20 said:
Looks a good location. Shame about the brown water.
Click to expand...
It is, although I had to wait ages for a break in the weather and to get a people free shot. I don't mind the brown water, you see this quite a bit in the peaks due to the soils, rocks and minerals.
Merlin5 said:
These are so sharp. I love the way the light and shadow falls onto the hills, particularly #3. Beautiful colours as well.




Excellent Toby, I love the way you filtered the streams to get that milky look.
Click to expand...
Thanks, appreciate the comments.
 
woof woof said:
I do like my manual lenses...

CnD4wDX.jpg


but there's a lot to be said for a modern AF lenses especially when taking less posed people shots using face/eye detect.

Nit picking the 35mm f1.8, there's some ca and I'd describe the bokeh as par for the course and not really any better. It is imo sharp across the frame from wide open though and even on my old creaking A7 it's fast to focus.

Just Googled the 35mm f1.4 and saw it in stock for £1,170.
Click to expand...
I looked into this lens a while ago following another post from you thinking it might be budget friendly but how wrong I was ;) What adapter do you use?
 
Merlin5 said:
These are so sharp. I love the way the light and shadow falls onto the hills, particularly #3. Beautiful colours as well.




Excellent Toby, I love the way you filtered the streams to get that milky look.
Click to expand...
Thanks, sharpening wise I don't think I even added any other that my usual preset which is about sharpening at 40 with a mask at 60 in lightroom. These were shot in handheld HDR combined in LR thing which I had never done before.
 
nandbytes said:
It's good. Not the best not the worst, easily corrects. Mostly all gone by f2.
Click to expand...

I think "easily corrects" must be software dependant as ticking the box in my CS5 has no effect that I can see at all.

It probably isn't really a real world issue, it's just something that annoys the geek in me, which is powerful.
 
LeeRatters said:
I must say Alan, that does look good :cool:
Click to expand...

It just makes me want to go out and take pictures.

The bokeh is like an oil painting at f1.4 with a complex scene but with less challenging scenes I don't think it's bad and when stopped down I do like the character.

PS.
Another issue is that the extreme corners are mushy and don't improve a lot when stopping down.
 
Last edited:
littleted said:
Wish youd not shown me this, im tempted, refuse to pay sony TAX for the 50mm 1.2 for what i,ll use it for....MPB have 1 for 699....
Click to expand...

I originally started to look at the Voigtlanders as I have some old film era manual lenses and I thought it'd be nice to have some modern ones too which would mount direct to the camera rather than needing an adapter. Looking at what was available I preferred the styling of the Voigtlanders to the more modern look of the Zeiss Loxia's. I do like lenses like this, some of the old Minolta Rokkor MC's, Takumar and Nippon Kogaku's are very similar in look and handling. The Voigtlanders like the older film era lenses feel like they'll last a lifetime.

Sorry for the lens porn :D

Voigtlanders.

wIZIoC4.jpg


Nippon Kogaku.

gOMY4cp.jpg


Minolta Rokkor.

oUvBW3u.jpg


Takumar. These are teeny tiny.

rHe4fZ0.jpg
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I looked into this lens a while ago following another post from you thinking it might be budget friendly but how wrong I was ;) What adapter do you use?
Click to expand...

It doesn't need an adapter as it's Sony mount as are some other Voigtlander lenses including the 35, 40 and 50mm f1.2's and 50mm and 65mm f2 apo's.

I've also briefly had the older M mount version of the 35mm f1.4 lens and the E mount one is IMO better on my A7 in every way.
 
woof woof said:
How does the 35mm f1.4 perform for ca? That's one thing that seems to dog the Sony f1.8's.
Click to expand...

At 1.4 you can get it, but it doesn't always seem to be consistent. Here's some examples at 1.4 and 2.8. I don't think I ever correct for CA. I probably should though lol


@ 1.4

35mm 1.4.jpg

35mm 1.4 2.jpg

35mm 1.4 3.jpg

35mm 1.4 4.jpg



@ 2.8

35mm 2.8.jpg

35mm 2.8 2.jpg
 
woof woof said:
I originally started to look at the Voigtlanders as I have some old film era manual lenses and I thought it'd be nice to have some modern ones too which would mount direct to the camera rather than needing an adapter. Looking at what was available I preferred the styling of the Voigtlanders to the more modern look of the Zeiss Loxia's. I do like lenses like this, some of the old Minolta Rokkor MC's, Takumar and Nippon Kogaku's are very similar in look and handling. The Voigtlanders like the older film era lenses feel like they'll last a lifetime.

Sorry for the lens porn :D

Voigtlanders.

wIZIoC4.jpg


Nippon Kogaku.

gOMY4cp.jpg


Minolta Rokkor.

oUvBW3u.jpg


Takumar. These are teeny tiny.

rHe4fZ0.jpg
Click to expand...

Now that you mention Minolta, i think i also have the 50 F1.4 and that 135 f2.8 how do you find they compare.
I need to hunt down my Minolta adaptor, but might have a play with them this weekend...

I did have the native Helier 15mm, which i loved
 
Must admit id be sceptical to pay 1599 for a Tamron, id have to go grey.....i only paid that for my 100-400 and its a GM ..i hazard a guess Einfinity will have it under 1k in a few months
 
Given its size there'll be no initial rush from me. I'll pick one up when one shows up used around or under £1000
 
littleted said:
Must admit id be sceptical to pay 1599 for a Tamron, id have to go grey.....i only paid that for my 100-400 and its a GM ..i hazard a guess Einfinity will have it under 1k in a few months
Click to expand...
Does seem pricey but then it’s probably in line with the 70-180mm f2.8 given that it’s f2 (briefly).
 
littleted said:
Now that you mention Minolta, i think i also have the 50 F1.4 and that 135 f2.8 how do you find they compare.
I need to hunt down my Minolta adaptor, but might have a play with them this weekend...

I did have the native Helier 15mm, which i loved
Click to expand...

I have both the Minolta Rokkor 50mm f1.4 and 135mm f2.8, both MD's.

The 50mm f1.4 MD with the similar f1.7 MD possibly give the most modern look of all my film era 50mm's as they're technically the best, I suppose, being affected by fewer optical issues than the other 50's I have but even so I don't think it can really be compared to a modern lens at wider apertures. When stopped down I have no issues with it and I've taken some pictures I really like with it and I've posted quite a few in the thread over the years. I have quite a few 50/55mm lenses from f1.2 to f2 and although I think the Minolta is possibly technically the best others have a character and look. Others worthy of mention and perhaps giving the Minolta's competition are the Nikon 50mm f1.4 AIS and f1.8 pancake lens. The older Minolta 55mm f1.7 MC pictured above IMO gives a less modern look and has more character and the 50mm f1.2 MD is nice, wild at wider apertures but stopped down IMO it gives a nice look. None of these are going to compete for technical excellence with a Sony 55mm f1.8 or even the likes of an E mount Voigtlander 35, 40 or 50mm f1.2.

I can't really comment too much on the Minolta 135mm as I've never had a modern 135mm but did have a Sigma 150mm f2.8 which I'd say was better in every way but so much bigger and heavier. The Minolta 135mm is better than the Minolta 135mm f3.5 I had and Olympus 135mm f3.5 I still have.

These old lenses are definitely useable if you can resist nit picking them at wide apertures with challenging scenes.
 
gman said:
At 1.4 you can get it, but it doesn't always seem to be consistent. Here's some examples at 1.4 and 2.8. I don't think I ever correct for CA. I probably should though lol
Click to expand...

My Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 can show pronounced ca at f1.2. I did once do a series of pictures to check when it disappeared but I can't find them now. With challenging scenes it's certainly visible at f1.2.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Does seem pricey but then it’s probably in line with the 70-180mm f2.8 given that it’s f2 (briefly).
Click to expand...
Toby saw you on AVforums, i was going to say, if you ever do Cadwell or Oulton and are going alone, let me know, i can pop over for an 8 quid Burger and shoot some stuff. im in Leeds but go quite a bit to these 2 with my mate, but hes not always free due to work... offers there anyway same for landscapes etc... Happy to meet.
 
woof woof said:
My Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 can show pronounced ca at f1.2. I did once do a series of pictures to check when it disappeared but I can't find them now. With challenging scenes it's certainly visible at f1.2.
Click to expand...
for me the coma correction or rather lack thereof on the fast Voigtlander primes are more of an issue.
 
I have a Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 that I have used on my Canon M5 with an adapter so a couple of nights ago I ordered another adapter to try it on the A9.

Last night I won a Sony FE 35mm 1.8 on Ebay so not sure what to do now, I only used the Voigtlander a couple of times before putting it back in the box.
 
nandbytes said:
for me the coma correction or rather lack thereof on the fast Voigtlander primes are more of an issue.
Click to expand...

To be fair though it only really looks bad in specific circumstances, at the widest apertures and with backlighting. That'll only affect a percentage of pictures. In most instances it'll probably not be a problem, even for geeks. If you check the sample pictures, and there are many, you'll see it or not and be able to decide if it's a significant issue or not.
 
littleted said:
Toby saw you on AVforums, i was going to say, if you ever do Cadwell or Oulton and are going alone, let me know, i can pop over for an 8 quid Burger and shoot some stuff. im in Leeds but go quite a bit to these 2 with my mate, but hes not always free due to work... offers there anyway same for landscapes etc... Happy to meet.
Click to expand...
Cool. Not sure when I’ll next be going to a race meet but I’ll let you know (although may need reminding as my memory’s terrible). Landscapes I’m always happy to do, although I don’t tend to venture outside of Derbyshire as I don’t leave my dog alone for more than 4 hours (y) (she’s not the kind of dog you can take out doing photography with ;))
 
Mike.P said:
I have a Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 that I have used on my Canon M5 with an adapter so a couple of nights ago I ordered another adapter to try it on the A9.

Last night I won a Sony FE 35mm 1.8 on Ebay so not sure what to do now, I only used the Voigtlander a couple of times before putting it back in the box.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about the M mount one I've had one and really didn't rate it that much on my A7. The e mount one is much better on a Sony camera.

The Sony 35mm f1.8 is a different beast. It's sharp across the frame from wide open and fast to focus. The only things I'd nit pick are the ho-hum bokeh and some ca with challenging scenes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top