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

[nandbytes]

This is very true.
I have the much maligned 16-50 kit lens on my A6000 - but in reality it's a lot better than many of the kit lenses of the past, and capable of really nice images in when used with care - it's just that all the alternatives are so good in comparison.

the 16-50mm is kinda decent stopped down to f8. Wide open it leaves a lot to be desired especially in the corners.

 

[snerkler]

the 16-50mm is kinda decent stopped down to f8. Wide open it leaves a lot to be desired especially in the corners.

If I'm shooting wide open I'm usually not bothered about the corners as I'd be trying to get some kind of background blur, stopped down most modern lenses are plenty acceptable (y0

 

[nandbytes]

If I'm shooting wide open I'm usually not bothered about the corners as I'd be trying to get some kind of background blur, stopped down most modern lenses are plenty acceptable (y0

The 16-50mm is a f3.5-5.6 lens and that too on APS-C. Not sure about background blur on that one

 

[ancient_mariner]

The 16-50mm is a f3.5-5.6 lens and that too on APS-C. Not sure about background blur on that one

Background blur it what AI processing is for.

That and the sharpening modes in some of the better software packages to recover missing detail.

 

[nandbytes]

Background blur it what AI processing is for.

tbh I have not come across anything makes me want to ditch my f1.4 lenses.
may be one day you will able choose the bokeh rendering and what lens it looks like.

 

[ancient_mariner]

tbh I have not come across anything makes me want to ditch my f1.4 lenses.
may be one day you will able choose the bokeh rendering and what lens it looks like.

Likewise, but computational manipulation may be the only way to make lenses like this sort-of work in more than a 'compact camera ' style.

 

[gman]

Background blur it what AI processing is for.

That and the sharpening modes in some of the better software packages to recover missing detail.

Very applicable for phone cameras and I have to admit the "portrait mode" on my phone is pretty damn good so long as I don't push the blur effect too far. It's quite insane some of the built in tools and effects and the spot remover in particular is very handy. AI is certainly coming a long way I reckon.

 

[gman]

Here's a few quick examples done in phone. I've resized them on the computer for the forum. There's already a little natural bokeh from the phone's lens which can be seen in the first photo. You can see at 100% AI bokeh there is some encroachment into the subject. I find 25-50% works best.








Monitor power light and logo removed with in-phone spot removal:

 

[Raymond Lin]

Here's a few quick examples done in phone. I've resized them on the computer for the forum. There's already a little natural bokeh from the phone's lens which can be seen in the first photo. You can see at 100% AI bokeh there is some encroachment into the subject. I find 25-50% works best.

View attachment 374962
View attachment 374963
View attachment 374964




Monitor power light and logo removed with in-phone spot removal:

View attachment 374965

What phone are you using?

I just got an iPhone 14 Pro, still not really used it much but i know it can do a lot.

 

[gman]

What phone are you using?

I just got an iPhone 14 Pro, still not really used it much but i know it can do a lot.

I ended up going with the Pixel 7 Pro and I'm still discovering new stuff on it.

Originally it was a toss up between the Pixel 6 Pro, the Samsung S22 and the Sony Xperia 1 IV but I started looking at the 7 Pro and it ticked every box. The others had a few issues from overheating, poor fingerprint sensor, poor telephoto lens etc that put me off and there was issues with the 6 Pro that appear to have been fixed as well so pretty happy.

 

[srhmoto]

Huge amount of choice in terms of bodies and lenses out there now, will depend what you mainly are going to use it for.

I wouldn't be looking at an A7RIII at this point, a.f doesn't really keep up with the newer bodies.

A7IV is a good all rounder although I personally absolutely detest the flippy screen and while other rave about it's a.f performance I haven't found it to be that great tbh.

A7III is a good solid shout with a 3k budget you can pick one up used for around £1000, leaving 2k for lenses, flash, cards etc and what ever else you need.

A9 is great for anything that moves fast and is the only one of those you have mentioned that has a usable silent shutter, blackout free shooting is a gamechanger. Being an older body it doesn't have some of the bells and whistles of the A7IV, but can be bought so cheap now used are amazing value for money.

The Sony 24-105 lens is okay for a 24-105 f/4 but its a pretty boring lens.

At the cheaper end of the scale these are all decent:

Sony 35mm f/1.8
Sony 85mm f/1.8
Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8
Samyang 45mm f/1.8 (if you get a good copy, lots of variation with these)

The best lenses I have had for Sony are:

Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM
Sony 135mm f/1.8 GM
Sony 24-70 f/2.8 GMII

They are all crazy money though and depending on what body you buy might take you out of your 3k budget.

Personally with 3k to spend I would go with an A7III or A9, 35 f/1.8 and an 85 f/1.8. leaving cash left over for all the other bits and bobs you may need.

Used prices would be along this sort of range:

A7III - £900-£1000
A9 - £1200-£1400

35MM f/1.8 - £400 They often pop up on Amazon at this price new
85 f/1.8 - £350

Grey market places like Panamoz and E-infin are worth checking out as can sometimes be cheaper than used. You could prob buy an A7IV, 35 and 85 for the grey market places new for under 3k.

If you need flash Godox is the the most popular choice for Sony, personally I prefer there flashes that have a battery pack included of those the V860III is the best one, they also have a round head flash V1 and a smaller V350s model.

My use may well be very different than yours though.

The Sony 35mm f1.4 is the only lens you need and you are bound to find an excellent used one for sale on here.... (I'm shameless!)

But on a serious note, it is an excellent lens with fast focussing and lovely resolution that almost never came off my A9, the focal length was great for general photography. It's also a great combination on something like the A9 what with its awesome AF and eye tracking accuracy, it made using such a wide aperture and shallow depth of field a doddle.

I usually say go with the latest tech that you can afford as things move on so quickly, that being said it depends on what is important such as dynamic range, resolution, blackout free shooting etc. All have very good AF although the A7RIII and A7RIV aren't the best for quickly moving subjects.

In terms of lenses, again it depends on what you want to shoot. As a general all rounder there's the 24-105mm as you've pointed out, the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8, Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, and then if you want something lighter then the 24-70mm f4 which I think is better than most give it credit for.

I've actually just snatched a bargain 24-70mm f4 (after cashback) and assuming there's nothing wrong with it (shouldn't be as it's new) I'll be off loading my 24-105mm f4.

Thank you all for taking the time to comment with such detailed replies - it is very much appreciated.

LCE seem to have some decent deals on both the A7III and A7IV (cashback and / or trade in bonuses) so may have a run to my local branch on Saturday to see what sort of a deal I can get.

Still mulling over lenses - has any one used any of the recent Sigma i range of primes? They may not be the fastest aperture, but they appear to be well built, nice and sharp and not overly big.

Cheers,

Simon.

 

[snerkler]

Thank you all for taking the time to comment with such detailed replies - it is very much appreciated.

LCE seem to have some decent deals on both the A7III and A7IV (cashback and / or trade in bonuses) so may have a run to my local branch on Saturday to see what sort of a deal I can get.

Still mulling over lenses - has any one used any of the recent Sigma i range of primes? They may not be the fastest aperture, but they appear to be well built, nice and sharp and not overly big.

Cheers,

Simon.

I’ve not used the Sigma i lenses but their DG DN art lenses are rather nice.

Some of the Samyang lenses render beautifully too, but you have to enter into the decentering lottery.

 

[LeeRatters]

I think I should have shot a shorter or longer exposure for the sky here..... I got the water right though And the focus

I do have a 'normal' shutter speed shot but the sky was TOO 'busy' hence I stuck the 6 stop on.

A7 and do it all 35GM


*** by Lee, on Flickr

 

[srhmoto]

I’ve not used the Sigma i lenses but their DG DN art lenses are rather nice.

Some of the Samyang lenses render beautifully too, but you have to enter into the decentering lottery.

I never do well on the lottery, so that might rule out Samyang lenses for me!

 

[snerkler]

I never do well on the lottery, so that might rule out Samyang lenses for me!

The 45mm f1.8 doesn’t seem to be affected so much and neither does the 50mm f1.4 FE II but the others are questionable. That being said the only lens I had issues with was the 35mm f1.8. The 18mm f2.8 and 24mm f2.8 (along with the 45mm and 50mm), I had were fine .

 

[ancient_mariner]

I’ve not used the Sigma i lenses but their DG DN lenses are rather nice.

Some of the Samyang lenses render beautifully too, but you have to enter into the decentering lottery.

This really. I actually prefer the look a photo gets from the Sanyang lenses, especially when wide open. Once most of the lenses get stopped down there's little to choose between them unless the decentering is really really bad, but wide open there's a bit of magic happening.

Priority is photography, and I’d go as far to say that I have zero interest in video features. I’m very much an enthusiast and a generalist with what I photograph but am looking at prioritising image quality and AF performance. It is very rare I’d shoot in low light without using a tripod.

The 24-105 is good - I have one - as a walk-about lens and for general landscapes. I'd probably look for a used copy of the Sony 28 f2 as well, as a small, light wide angle, possibly a Samyang 45 or 75 f1.8 too, unless you like the shallow depth of field from an f1.4 lens, as I do.

FWIW I use the Samyang 1st gen 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, 18 f2.8 and 35 f2.8 compact lens. I have a samyang 45 f1.8 that took a heavy frontal impact and is't right any more. I also have a Sony 55 f1.8 that's a sharp lens corner to corner even wide open, but has a very neutral rendering that I find less attractive than the Sammys.

One thing I did notice was a jump in image quality in terms of sharpness and detail compared to the Nikon outfit I had previously.

 

[srhmoto]

Hmmm - looks like with cashback and trade in bonuses I could get an A7III, 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 for £2800 at LCE.

Questions is, how much real world performance am I giving up between the A7III and the A7IV? Also, any user experience of the Sony 70-200mm f4?

The deal above requires claiming £600 in cashback from Sony. That’s a lot - do they set any upper limit on cashback claims?

 

[ancient_mariner]

That’s a lot - do they set any upper limit on cashback claims?

IIRC only 3 claims (items)per person.

 

[imattersuk]

Hmmm - looks like with cashback and trade in bonuses I could get an A7III, 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 for £2800 at LCE.

Questions is, how much real world performance am I giving up between the A7III and the A7IV? Also, any user experience of the Sony 70-200mm f4?

The deal above requires claiming £600 in cashback from Sony. That’s a lot - do they set any upper limit on cashback claims?

You'll be fine with the cashback, no upper limit on total amount, but if you swap gear later you can't claim on the same item again ie. if you sold a lens and rebought the same model later technically it wouldn't be eligible.

The 70-200 f4 is a great lens, some will claim it isn't sharp at 200mm, that's nonsense, it's a very underrated lens.

If you go for the 70-200 f4 I would get the Tamron 28-75 VXD G2, (don't get the older model) I've had both and the Tamron is far better imo, very sharp, better bokeh and images have more of a "pop". If you really need wider than 28 then add a Sony or Sigma 20mm, Tamron also do a very good 17-28 RXD.

Had the A7III and A7IV, personally I wouldn't be buying a new A7III, even with the cashback the difference in performance makes the 7IV worth the extra, onlyndownside is the floppy screen which I hate but overall everything else is a huge step up.

Cashback lures many people into something that sometimes wouldn't be their first choice or the best choice.

 

[nandbytes]

Hmmm - looks like with cashback and trade in bonuses I could get an A7III, 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 for £2800 at LCE.

Questions is, how much real world performance am I giving up between the A7III and the A7IV? Also, any user experience of the Sony 70-200mm f4?

The deal above requires claiming £600 in cashback from Sony. That’s a lot - do they set any upper limit on cashback claims?

The AF in A7IV is really a fair bit better than A7III for tracking and especially tracking non-human subjects.

I wouldn't buy the 70-200mm f4. It isn't a great lens and overpriced for it performance.
The tamron 70-180mm f2.8 is sharper, lighter and faster. You are actually better off cropping the tamron to match 200mm than shoot at 200mm with the 70-200/4.
The 70-200mm is actually even matched by the tamron 28-200mm for sharpness and that's a superzoom lens!

Basically I personally wouldn't buy 70-200mm f4 unless you really need that OSS for whatever reason.

You can claim £600 cashback. It'll just take a while to get it because you need to wait a month to put in the request and then Sony takes another 3-4 weeks to payout. So it'll be like nearly two months before you see that £600.

 

[snerkler]

Hmmm - looks like with cashback and trade in bonuses I could get an A7III, 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 for £2800 at LCE.

Questions is, how much real world performance am I giving up between the A7III and the A7IV? Also, any user experience of the Sony 70-200mm f4?

The deal above requires claiming £600 in cashback from Sony. That’s a lot - do they set any upper limit on cashback claims?

A7IV will be noticeably better with AF for animals. I’m with Nandbytes, I’d choose the Tamron 70-180mm over the Sony 70-200mm f4.

 

[f/1.2]

Hmmm - looks like with cashback and trade in bonuses I could get an A7III, 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 for £2800 at LCE.

Questions is, how much real world performance am I giving up between the A7III and the A7IV? Also, any user experience of the Sony 70-200mm f4?

The deal above requires claiming £600 in cashback from Sony. That’s a lot - do they set any upper limit on cashback claims?

We have a few A7iv’s and we used to have A7III’s personally I find the A7IV autofocus performance to be a little unreliable compared to the A7III and certainly the A9 although it has tracking etc that the A7III lacks. I don’t use the animal eye a.f etc as have no interest in that sort of photography.

As other have said the 70-200 f/4 isn’t great. It’s an old lens now and doesn’t compare at all well with the Tamron 70-180. I used to have the 70-200 f/4 and we now have the Tamron.

You could buy an A7III, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and a Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 from e-infin for just over £2600 without the hassle of cashback etc. With the Sony lenses it would also be under £2900. Panamoz could likely offer similar prices.

 

[imattersuk]

@srhmoto Plenty of images on Flickr to examine and make up your own mind about the 70-200 f/4

SONY SEL 70-200 G f/4

This group is only for photos taken with the SONY FE mount 70-200 G f/4 lens.

www.flickr.com

The OSS can be very useful at times.

 

[woof woof]

Another old shot reprocessed.

A7 and film era lens. Hazy beach tracks.

Ponting the other way, on another day. Film era lens again.

One last one. I think this must have been a flare test. There was some but I cloned it out.

Definitely the last one. Not too hazy, just a bit flat. Film era lens.

 

[snerkler]

Some interesting lenses rumoured. I wonder how small and light they can make the 24-105mm.

The 150-400mm f4 sounds very interesting to me, guessing it’d be out of my price range though.

 

[robj20]

24-105 m2, wonder why they are leaving OSS in it?

Id say they need a 24-70 f4 m2 first. Its the second oldest lens.

 

[f/1.2]

Some interesting lenses rumoured. I wonder how small and light they can make the 24-105mm.

The 150-400mm f4 sounds very interesting to me, guessing it’d be out of my price range though.

View attachment 375042

Other than the 85 f/1.2 no interest in any of those.

Wish they would do another small 50mm lens with a minimum aperture of f/1.8, there isn't good options at 50mm really other than the 50 f/1.2 and my missus won't cart one of those around all day. The current 50mm f/1.8 is one of there oldest lenses and well overdue an update.

 

[snerkler]

24-105 m2, wonder why they are leaving OSS in it?

Id say they need a 24-70 f4 m2 first. Its the second oldest lens.

Other than the 85 f/1.2 no interest in any of those.

Wish they would do another small 50mm lens with a minimum aperture of f/1.8, there isn't good options at 50mm really other than the 50 f/1.2 and my missus won't cart one of those around all day. The current 50mm f/1.8 is one of there oldest lenses and well overdue an update.

I’ve been waiting on a Mark II version of the 50mm f1.8 and 24-70mm f4 for ages, ever since I swapped to Sony, but there’s no signs of an update anytime soon

My worry with the none GM zooms is they’ll go down the line of being PZ’s.

 

[rob88]

Pensford Viaduct. With that 35GM as usual.....


*** by Lee, on Flickr

This one reallly supports your argument for the contribution good rendering makes to the emotion of a scene. Lovely! I do think the 35GM is the best 35 I have owned. If only it were half the size and weight it would be glued to my camera like my old Summilux was!

 

[LeeRatters]

This one reallly supports your argument for the contribution good rendering makes to the emotion of a scene. Lovely! I do think the 35GM is the best 35 I have owned. If only it were half the size and weight it would be glued to my camera like my old Summilux was!

Thank you. I use the 35GM pretty much 90% of the time I think!

I keep meaning to dust the Voigtlander 40/1.2 off though.....

 

[imattersuk]

A7RIII + Sony Zeiss 50mm ZA Planar

One from last winter.....

Balans Neo by FusionX.Photo, on Flickr

 

[woof woof]

I haven't been able to get out with a camera for weeks now so I've only taken the odd record shot and Mrs WW but... After recently buying a X100f and adding it to my little available to use selection of TZ100 (1" compact,) MFT GM5, GX80, GX9 and G100 and A7 I think all these cameras have their charms but none can match the A7 for image quality so I do find myself asking why I'd want to use the others? Well, the A7 is a bit big and it's slow and it doesn't have an electronic shutter. The TZ100 is tiny and it has a zoom, the GM5 is small and still small with the 20mm f1.7 on it and gives better IQ than the TZ100. The GX80, GX9 and G100 are very similar so maybe two should go and the X100f is just different and all these have an electronic shutter. Maybe the list should be...

TZ100.
GM5 + one other MFT camera.
X100f.
A7.

Thanks for "listening"

 

[imattersuk]

I haven't been able to get out with a camera for weeks now so I've only taken the odd record shot and Mrs WW but... After recently buying a X100f and adding it to my little available to use selection of TZ100 (1" compact,) MFT GM5, GX80, GX9 and G100 and A7 I think all these cameras have their charms but none can match the A7 for image quality so I do find myself asking why I'd want to use the others? Well, the A7 is a bit big and it's slow and it doesn't have an electronic shutter. The TZ100 is tiny and it has a zoom, the GM5 is small and still small with the 20mm f1.7 on it and gives better IQ than the TZ100. The GX80, GX9 and G100 are very similar so maybe two should go and the X100f is just different and all these have an electronic shutter. Maybe the list should be...

TZ100.
GM5 + one other MFT camera.
X100f.
A7.

thanks for "listening"

Certainly a good idea to slim down the collection.

Spend some time practising with the X100F and you will get some wonderful images, it's one of those cameras that you can give up on too easily but once you understand how to get the best out of it in some ways it will best your A7 quite easily imo.

Are you using the film sims yet ?

 

[LeeRatters]

I haven't been able to get out with a camera for weeks now so I've only taken the odd record shot and Mrs WW but... After recently buying a X100f and adding it to my little available to use selection of TZ100 (1" compact,) MFT GM5, GX80, GX9 and G100 and A7 I think all these cameras have their charms but none can match the A7 for image quality so I do find myself asking why I'd want to use the others? Well, the A7 is a bit big and it's slow and it doesn't have an electronic shutter. The TZ100 is tiny and it has a zoom, the GM5 is small and still small with the 20mm f1.7 on it and gives better IQ than the TZ100. The GX80, GX9 and G100 are very similar so maybe two should go and the X100f is just different and all these have an electronic shutter. Maybe the list should be...

TZ100.
GM5 + one other MFT camera.
X100f.
A7.

Thanks for "listening"

I think with the X100f, I'd be using it in a 35mm point and shoot film style.

 

[imattersuk]

I think with the X100f, I'd be using it in a 35mm point and shoot film style.

Absolutely, acros is wonderful as is classic chrome, perfect for the street.

 

[woof woof]

Certainly a good idea to slim down the collection.

Spend some time practising with the X100F and you will get some wonderful images, it's one of those cameras that you can give up on too easily but once you understand how to get the best out of it in some ways it will best your A7 quite easily imo.

Are you using the film sims yet ?

I think with the X100f, I'd be using it in a 35mm point and shoot film style.

At the mo not in any way that relates to image quality. Not that I can see anyway. It is more compact and it has a very quiet mechanical shutter and an electronic shutter. Plus the manual controls make it different.

I don't think I'm giving up on it but there are issues, the focus performance is the worst of any camera I currently own and the IQ is nothing special. Sorry if that upsets any Fuji users but they can take comfort from that being my opinion and nothing more. They can have their own opinions. Anyway, focus performance and IQ wise for me it doesn't justify its place over my MFT cameras but as an object it is nice to use, it has a nice EVF and a focal length I like and with good close focusing ability. So there's all that and those things enable it to keep its place.

I haven't used any film simulations yet but have run some pictures through Nik.

 

[imattersuk]

At the mo not in any way that relates to image quality. Not that I can see anyway. It is more compact and it has a very quiet mechanical shutter and an electronic shutter. Plus the manual controls make it different.



I don't think I'm giving up on it but there are issues, the focus performance is the worst of any camera I currently own and the IQ is nothing special. Sorry if that upsets any Fuji users but they can take comfort from that being my opinion and nothing more. They can have their own opinions. Anyway, focus performance and IQ wise for me it doesn't justify its place over my MFT cameras but as an object it is nice to use, it has a nice EVF and a focal length I like and with good close focusing ability. So there's all that and those things enable it to keep its place.

I haven't used any film simulations yet but have run some pictures through Nik.

I really don't understand the focus comments. I've had X-T1, T2, T3, T4, H1 X100F, X100V & GFX 50S II and wouldn't say focussing was an issue on any of them, different yes but if you invest some time learning the system you can get great results. Although i'm all in on Sony these days I find it mind numbingly boring to use, way too easy in some ways, for professional use it's clinical and efficient, for personal use I miss the Fuji system but each to their own I guess, just trying to help you understand that some investment in time will pay dividends. I've also had a few of the later MFT bodies such as the OM1 Mkiii and it was a massive disappointment for me, I just don't see any advantage with MFT and lots of drawbacks.

 

[LeeRatters]

At the mo not in any way that relates to image quality. Not that I can see anyway. It is more compact and it has a very quiet mechanical shutter and an electronic shutter. Plus the manual controls make it different.

I don't think I'm giving up on it but there are issues, the focus performance is the worst of any camera I currently own and the IQ is nothing special. Sorry if that upsets any Fuji users but they can take comfort from that being my opinion and nothing more. They can have their own opinions. Anyway, focus performance and IQ wise for me it doesn't justify its place over my MFT cameras but as an object it is nice to use, it has a nice EVF and a focal length I like and with good close focusing ability. So there's all that and those things enable it to keep its place.

I haven't used any film simulations yet but have run some pictures through Nik.

I think that is why I would look at it as a digital 35mm film camera - straight jpeg images with film simulation. Fixed lens, retro style use, small, light, not perfect IQ. It'd be like shooting film but without the need to develop and scan

I've just got 35mm film scans back. Some nice images, but nothing is sharp

 

[woof woof]

I really don't understand the focus comments. I've had X-T1, T2, T3, T4, H1 X100F, X100V & GFX 50S II and wouldn't say focussing was an issue on any of them, different yes but if you invest some time learning the system you can get great results. Although i'm all in on Sony these days I find it mind numbingly boring to use, way too easy in some ways, for professional use it's clinical and efficient, for personal use I miss the Fuji system but each to their own I guess, just trying to help you understand that some investment in time will pay dividends. I've also had a few of the later MFT bodies such as the OM1 Mkiii and it was a massive disappointment for me, I just don't see any advantage with MFT and lots of drawbacks.

Well... so far I've found the eye detect not to be as accurate or consistent as with MFT and in single shot mode I've had more misfocused shots than with any of the other cameras I have. For example with Mrs WW walking / moving relatively slowly the Fuji's (I'm on my 2nd) can tend to miss whereas MFT tends to hit so that could be a camera/focus reaction time issue, it may not be reacting quickly enough and she's moved a bit by the time it does. Also with posed shots I've had missed focus shots, only slight misses maybe and I might have to look closely to see but they're still off a bit.

For me MFT does have a couple of strengths if going for the smaller bodies, I'm not interested in the bigger bodies. Smaller body wise and including the lenses they can still make a small package or with the larger lenses still a smaller package than the A7 and an equiv lens plus they have an electronic shutter and they're fast. I could convince myself that image quality wise the APS-C Fuji doesn't leave MFT far enough behind and doesn't match the old A7 but in some way it complements the A7 very well as it's smaller and it has an electronic shutter, but the handling and controls make the Fuji interesting and different.

I think that is why I would look at it as a digital 35mm film camera - straight jpeg images with film simulation. Fixed lens, retro style use, small, light, not perfect IQ. It'd be like shooting film but without the need to develop and scan

I've just got 35mm film scans back. Some nice images, but nothing is sharp

I sometimes look at my old film shots and I have no intention of going back for multiple reasons.

I put my X100f in the inside pocket of a light summer jacket and it went in and stayed upright rather than falling forward as my MFT cameras tend to do, even the GM5, so the size and weight/weight distribution made that work and as it worked with my summer jacket it'll work with my winter coats too, so being able to put it in a coat pocket is quite a plus point.

 

[woof woof]

Sizes.

A7 with 35mm f2.8 / X100f / GX80 with 17mm f1.8 / GM5 with 20mm f1.7.

Here we can see that the X100 is a touch slimmer than the GM5 with 20mm f1.7 and its shape makes it fit better in an inside coat pocket, for me and my coat anyway