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

It always catches my attention when people say there's no difference between MFT and Sony kit. I don't have the latest kit, the newest MTF camera I have is a Panasonic GX9 (this has the 20mp Sony chip) and my Sony is an old creaking A7, but the differences are there to be seen and quite easily so, IMO, if I look for them.

I'd assume that the same is true for the top end (IQ wise) MFT and Sony kit, but I don't know as I don't have either :D
 
woof woof said:
It always catches my attention when people say there's no difference between MFT and Sony kit. I don't have the latest kit, the newest MTF camera I have is a Panasonic GX9 (this has the 20mp Sony chip) and my Sony is an old creaking A7, but the differences are there to be seen and quite easily so, IMO, if I look for them.

I'd assume that the same is true for the top end (IQ wise) MFT and Sony kit, but I don't know as I don't have either :D
Click to expand...
That would be my experience too but I still like the Oly kit and may well give it a go if they can improve the sensor. For birding in any decent light it makes a lot of sense.
 
wookie6262 said:
That would be my experience too but I still like the Oly kit and may well give it a go if they can improve the sensor. For birding in any decent light it makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

Yup. The bulk and weight, IQ combination and responsiveness are what keep me with MFT although sensor tech and IQ seems to be inching along but I suppose we just don't know what the future could bring.

I've been using MFT rather than my A7 in the last few weeks because it'll fit in my coat pocket but the lack of DR does show up in some circumstances with the letting the highlights blow or protecting them and boosting the shadows conundrum. I suppose the low in the sky sun and everything else that comes with living up North could be bit of a harsh test but this shows that I don't always have to be pixel peeping to see a real advantage for my A7, sometimes. I suppose better processing software could help too, I'm on CS5.
 
To me, the reason for using a particular format (or not) is down to whether it produces the type of image you like. A while back Toby/Snerkler posted some near identical pictures taken on M43 and FX - the M43 images were quite flat in terms of lacking a sense of 3 dimensionality *to me*, compared to the appearance of depth from the D810 pictures. Not everyone could see a difference.

A little like using zooms or primes, pick the tool that works for the job. If you're going to be at a motor circuit all day with reasonable lighting, M43 will tick a lot of boxes. But if I were shooting a portrait or certain kinds of landscape then I'd want a larger format, possibly even medium format.
 
1st is A7C + FE28mm f2, the others are A7 III + AF50mm f1.4 FE Samyang II, I have now started to shoot in Manual mode and set the ISO as will not use auto ISO anymore.


The Trumpet jazz Man by Rohan, on Flickr

Mick by Rohan, on Flickr

DAVE by Rohan, on Flickr
 
wookie6262 said:
That would be my experience too but I still like the Oly kit and may well give it a go if they can improve the sensor. For birding in any decent light it makes a lot of sense.
Click to expand...
the new Olympus ha s piqued my interest, the weight reduction is attractive the af seems to be a lot better for BIF , but the claimed 2 stop improvement in iso is questionable, the best thing I like about the Sony is the Low light Performance .I have applied for the Oly loan scheme to try it out .
 
ancient_mariner said:
To me, the reason for using a particular format (or not) is down to whether it produces the type of image you like. A while back Toby/Snerkler posted some near identical pictures taken on M43 and FX - the M43 images were quite flat in terms of lacking a sense of 3 dimensionality *to me*, compared to the appearance of depth from the D810 pictures. Not everyone could see a difference.

A little like using zooms or primes, pick the tool that works for the job. If you're going to be at a motor circuit all day with reasonable lighting, M43 will tick a lot of boxes. But if I were shooting a portrait or certain kinds of landscape then I'd want a larger format, possibly even medium format.
Click to expand...
These are the examples in question. The difference is far more obvious to me these days, I've had several trips to specsavers since I posted them before ;) That being said, considering the price and size difference I still think the M4/3 stands up well (y)


Screen Shot 2018-09-06 at 13.24.37 by TDG-77, on Flickr

Screen Shot 2018-09-06 at 13.25.00 by TDG-77, on Flickr
 
Although I shoot in crop mode on my a7R4a quite a lot with good results (26mp), I thought I’d do a wee experiment doing the same with the a7c (10mp) + Sigma 100-400 shooting our local Goosanders
Pleasantly surprised and not too bad for posting on Social Media and Forums.
These are quite heavily cropped images

Goosander by Mike Stephen, on Flickr

Bird 33 by Mike Stephen, on Flickr
 
GeordieStew said:
Just had to rebuild my PC and installing everything again.

What's the craic between PureRAW and PureRAW 2? Worth the £70 upgrade?

Sorry if I've missed a whole load of discussion :)
Click to expand...

Lightroom and windows plug-ins, meant to be a performance upgrade too.

I decided to get it for the potential performance boost, as I use it a lot. Don’t have any figures to compare though.

Lightroom plug-in doesn’t fit with my professional workflow but might be good for occasional use
 
Last edited:
There are lots of reviews of the Sony 16-35mm on the rumour site...

Officially announced: New Sony 16-35mm f/4.0 PZ FE lens | sonyalpharumors

Preorders: Sony 16-35mm at BHphoto. Adorama. Amazon. Calumet DE. FocusCamera. Fotokoch DE. WexUK. Calumet NL. Erhardt DE. Reviews: Review at Explora. Sample gallery at Dpreview. Hands-on at 42West. Review at PetaPixel. French test at Lesnumeriques. Official product page with image samples at...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Who's getting one?
 
woof woof said:
There are lots of reviews of the Sony 16-35mm on the rumour site...

Officially announced: New Sony 16-35mm f/4.0 PZ FE lens | sonyalpharumors

Preorders: Sony 16-35mm at BHphoto. Adorama. Amazon. Calumet DE. FocusCamera. Fotokoch DE. WexUK. Calumet NL. Erhardt DE. Reviews: Review at Explora. Sample gallery at Dpreview. Hands-on at 42West. Review at PetaPixel. French test at Lesnumeriques. Official product page with image samples at...
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

Who's getting one?
Click to expand...
Not unless they come down under £500 for used as new ;)
 
nandbytes said:
that's what you said about the 70-200GMii
resistance is futile
Click to expand...
Haha, true but I’ve no burning desire for a new 16-35mm, I’m happy with the one I have (y)
 
I used to like my Sigma 12-24mm but I've not had a wide zoom since, I can't remember how much I paid for that. I don't suppose I'll get this new 16-35mm.
 
Hi folks, sorry for asking a silly question but is there a massive difference between the A7iii and the new A7 IV? I ask is there is a fair difference in price and wondered if the A7iv is that much better than the A7iii?
 
Adamcski said:
Hi folks, sorry for asking a silly question but is there a massive difference between the A7iii and the new A7 IV? I ask is there is a fair difference in price and wondered if the A7iv is that much better than the A7iii?
Click to expand...
Didn't you buy a S5 recently?
As for the question depends on what you are after in terms of your uses and how much you value having updated AF and bit more megapixels.
 
Adamcski said:
Yep and a G9 and I like them both :)

Just wondered if the difference warranted the increased price.

I was comparing the A7IV plus 70-200 2.8 GM II Vs the R6 and RF 70-200 2.8.
Click to expand...
The GM lens is better and I think that’ll make more of a difference.
 
Adamcski said:
Yep and a G9 and I like them both :)

Just wondered if the difference warranted the increased price.

I was comparing the A7IV plus 70-200 2.8 GM II Vs the R6 and RF 70-200 2.8.
Click to expand...

GMii is indeed a optically better lens and also supports TCs unlike RF version.
The original GM lens was already faster focusing than RF version and GMii even more so.

The increased price is worth it you are looking to the latest AF tech and also wee bit more megapixels.
you also get some nice improvements like dual USH-ii cards, better ergonomics, EVF etc.

R6 has slightly better AF features but A7IV has a slightly better image quality.

Why not just buy a 70-200mm in L-mount?
 
Last edited:
From what I have seen on YouTube (dpreview and others) the Lumix version is pretty good also. Just looking at the animal eye tracking of the Sony's and the R6. Lumix doesn't have this facility as of yet and the S5 has a burst speed of 7 which reduces to 5 IRC with AFC enabled. Hence I was looking at the above combos as I'm getting more interested in the pet photography side of things. Lumix lens is about £2600 (if you can find one) which is a lot to invest and not be sure of the outcome. I've been quoted £3.67k for the R6 and RF lens, which is no small sum of money but likely to yield better AF results..

I'm just window shopping currently :-). I've even thought of just buying the equivalent lens for my G9 as I love that camera and it has a much higher burst speed than the S5, up there with the R6.

That being said, I used my S5 out the back yesterday in the 6k photo mode and got some really good images of my mother in law's dog running around my garden :-)
 
Last edited:
Adamcski said:
From what I have seen on YouTube (dpreview and others) the Lumix version is pretty good also. Just looking at the animal eye tracking of the Sony's and the R6. Lumix doesn't have this facility as of yet and the S5 has a burst speed of 7 which reduces to 5 IRC with AFC enabled. Hence I was looking at the above combos as I'm getting more interested in the pet photography side of things. Lumix lens is about £2600 (if you can find one) which is a lot to invest and not be sure of the outcome. I've been quoted £3.67k for the R6 and RF lens, which is no small sum of money but likely to yield better AF results..

I'm just window shopping currently :). I've even thought of just buying the equivalent lens for my G9 as I love that camera and it has a much higher burst speed than the S5, up there with the R6.

That being said, I used my S5 out the back yesterday in the 6k photo mode and got some really good images of my mother in law's dog running around my garden :)
Click to expand...

If you want animal eyeAF then you'll want A7IV instead of A7iii.

IIRC the 6k/4k photo modes give you a frame grab which is only JPGs. If that's good enough for you then I guess you can continue using that. Though it seems rather inefficient to doing this all the time.

Having 3 systems to satisfy 3 different requirements seems much to me. In your shoes I'd either stick with what I have or sell the other two and invest in one system that works for everything. But it's your money of course....

Panasonics not being great at AF tracking is not a surprise. Having owned a few of them I wouldn't buy one for action.
 
Yes it's 18 mp frame grab, but it does work. I believe the new Z9 can shoot 120 FPS but is something like 11 MP jpeg only so sounds like a similar set up.

It's just thoughts at the moment as the S5 fits everything else I do nicely. Just don't know if buying a £2.6k lens for it is worth the risk...

I'll have to do some more research and see how things stack up.
 
Last edited:
Adamcski said:
Yes it's 18 mp frame grab, but it does work. I believe the new Z9 can shoot 120 FPS but is something like 11 MP jpeg only so sounds similar
Click to expand...
Yes it can indeed. But not a very useful feature for me but S5+G9+A7IV/R6 is getting close to Z9 territory in terms of price.

You can frame grab in post too by the way as @snerkler recently found out. It's just nice that Panasonic allows you to do it in camera.
 
Not Sony and not even digital but I found this short piece of film deterioration interesting...

theonlinephotographer.typepad.com

Charles Daniels and Latent Image Deterioration with Film

I'm hearing a lot about an article on PetaPixel about "Master Blaster" Charles Daniels, longtime emcee of the Boston Tea Party and a devoted photographer of the rock bands he rubbed elbows with. It's reported that he has approximately 3,200...
theonlinephotographer.typepad.com

The worst I ever had was pictures coming back from development looking like it'd been shot though a dark brown stocking. There was a little printed label suggesting causes and one was fumes from glue in new furniture and that was afaik the cause. I stuck with film when others were going digital but gave up when the quality I was getting back nosedived. I could have tried another place to develop my film, but I gave up. I tried again years later but meh. As always, good luck to those who love film.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top