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

LeeRatters said:
So did I?

@snerkler thank you very much :)
Click to expand...
No worries, hope they're useful. I'm sure this is teaching you to suck eggs but I'd format them in camera before using them even though they were formatted in my A9ii.


woof woof said:
hehehe.

All I normally do is a centering test and then just shoot some stuff close up and at infinity, some stuff with straight lines and a couple to check sharpness and bokeh and I take a look at contrast and colour.

One disappointment with this lens I suppose is that it focuses past infinity. The 50mm f1.1 stops at infinity which is maybe more convenient when shooting hyperfocal. So I'll have to remember to dial it back a bit when using this 35mm f1.4.

100% at distance and f1.4. Very good.

7X9BFah.jpg


100%, focus on the eye lashes. Sharp enough.

SzCcS0s.jpg


Bokeh.

oek64HU.jpg


Towards the edge.

ZMMERRZ.jpg


I might be able to get out with it for an hour on Friday.
Click to expand...
That bokeh looks pretty nice, just a slight hint of cats eye shaping on the edges but no worse than most other lenses.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
That bokeh looks pretty nice, just a slight hint of cats eye shaping on the edges but no worse than most other lenses.
Click to expand...

I might compare it to my Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 but from a few test shots the bokeh from this Pergear doesn't seem as wild at its widest apertures.

The only real issue seems to be field curvature and I doubt that'll worry me too much. I suppose the distortion is ocd triggering as once corrections are applied and the file is cropped it's no longer 6,000x4,000.
 
woof woof said:
I might compare it to my Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 but from a few test shots the bokeh from this Pergear doesn't seem as wild at its widest apertures.

The only real issue seems to be field curvature and I doubt that'll worry me too much. I suppose the distortion is ocd triggering as once corrections are applied and the file is cropped it's no longer 6,000x4,000.
Click to expand...
Do you have a specific way of testing for field curvature or do you just go off the MTF charts?

I’ve heard rumors in the past about curved sensors being designed to combat this but I don’t know if it’s pie in the sky stuff. I guess if they ever did this then all previous lenses wouldn’t work well on them.
 
snerkler said:
Do you have a specific way of testing for field curvature or do you just go off the MTF charts?

I’ve heard rumors in the past about curved sensors being designed to combat this but I don’t know if it’s pie in the sky stuff. I guess if they ever did this then all previous lenses wouldn’t work well on them.
Click to expand...

I've ignored the issue before but it's specifically mentioned in the Pergear review with examples. The seagull picture and the focus shift section show it best... but remember that the pictures in the focus shift section are 100% crops.

phillipreeve.net

Review: Pergear 35mm 1.4 - The cheapest 35mm fullframe lens -

The Pergear 35mm 1.4 is the cheapest small and at the same time fast fullframe 35mm lens. For $129 what can we expect from this
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

I don't think it'll be an issue for me.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I've ignored the issue before but it's specifically mentioned in the Pergear review with examples. The seagull picture and the focus shift section show it best... but remember that the pictures in the focus shift section are 100% crops.

phillipreeve.net

Review: Pergear 35mm 1.4 - The cheapest 35mm fullframe lens -

The Pergear 35mm 1.4 is the cheapest small and at the same time fast fullframe 35mm lens. For $129 what can we expect from this
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

I don't think it'll be an issue for me.
Click to expand...
I don’t tend to test or look for it. I accept all lenses will have it to some degree and the corners are always softer than the centre. This is more true for fast primes as I’m more concerned with rendering whereas ‘landscape’ lenses I’m more interested in edge to edge sharpness.
 
srhmoto said:
Has anybody used the Samyang AF 135mm f1.8?
Click to expand...
I've always contemplated having a fast 135mm - lovely subject separation for full length photos, but you need lots of space. One of those lenses that might live in my bag for only the occasional use.
 
New A7IV firmware is pretty underwhelming.

improves the shutter reliability
Fixes an issue where the movie file rotated by the camera may not be rotated when displayed on a computer
Allows you to select M and S sizes in addition to L when using the RAW recording lossless compression method
The shutter speed and ISO sensitivity settings dedicated to flash photography can be retained
Adds the Touch Shutter function
The camera's serial number can be recorded in the metadata in the movie files Note: Where the Write Serial Number option was set to On before the update, the Write Serial Number (still image/movie) will be set to Off after the update. .
Improves operability of Wi-Fi connections
Adds a 1 minute setting to the Power Save by Monitor menu
Fixes an issue where the viewfinder display may not be brightened according to the ambient brightness
Improves the accuracy of the Eye AF feature
Fixes an issue where you may not be able to take photos when using a SEL2860 lens
Improves the operational stability of the camera
 
My postie has been busier than usual recently, treated myself to the Sony 85 1.8 last month, and this week he had a Sigma 35 1.4 DG DN. Just need some better weather this weekend to have a play!
 
snerkler said:
I don’t tend to test or look for it. I accept all lenses will have it to some degree and the corners are always softer than the centre. This is more true for fast primes as I’m more concerned with rendering whereas ‘landscape’ lenses I’m more interested in edge to edge sharpness.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't normally give it a second thought as with manual lenses I focus at the aperture I'm going to use. This lens is different as the corners can actually be better than the off centre area so I suppose it could potentially be noticeable, as in the examples in that review. I don't think it'll be too much of an issue for me.
 
Last edited:
Got my Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 from mpb today but disappointed with the sharpness at the long end :-(

DSC08481 by Gilbo B, on Flickr
DSC08481 1 by Gilbo B, on Flickr

More testing to be done - but for all of my photos to be just as soft - it's not looking good. Will attempt some portraits and let you know what happens.
 
Last edited:
That does look soft.

I suppose there's a chance it'll be going back?

I wonder if this is copy variation or if they're all like this?
 
It's snowing here. So far it's not laying but if it keeps this up it will and I may get to go for a walk in it if it lays and if it's still here in the morning.
 
gilbouk said:
Got my Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 from mpb today but disappointed with the sharpness at the long end :-(

DSC08481 by Gilbo B, on Flickr
DSC08481 1 by Gilbo B, on Flickr

More testing to be done - but for all of my photos to be just as soft - it's not looking good. Will attempt some portraits and let you know what happens.
Click to expand...
That’s not right :(
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
It's snowing here. So far it's not laying but if it keeps this up it will and I may get to go for a walk in it if it lays and if it's still here in the morning.
Click to expand...
Been several inches deep here all day, just started to thaw now as it’s turned to sleet.
 
f/1.4 said:
I used one of the 70-180 Tamrons on a commercial shoot all day long and found its AF to be pants and indeed soft at the long end
Click to expand...
I might end up swapping it for something different, or just getting a refund. They aren't exactly cheap too
 
snerkler said:
That’s not right :(
Click to expand...

gilbouk said:
I might end up swapping it for something different, or just getting a refund. They aren't exactly cheap too
Click to expand...
Sorry I was a bit busy before hence my short reply. Unlike f1.4 I found the AF to be good and accurate except with subjects moving towards the camera at a fast pace eg a dog running towards the camera. Sharpness was always very good, not the sharpest lens I've owned but nothing to be disappointed about.

Unfortunately your copy doesn't seem right, that's not just a soft lens it's so soft it looks out of focus :(

Here's an old photo I took of Betty with it followed by 100% crop

Screenshot 2023-03-09 at 17.14.35 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

Screenshot 2023-03-09 at 17.14.48 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr


I'll have to see if I can get a similar shot with the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II for a comparison, the GM II is definitely sharper though.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Sorry I was a bit busy before hence my short reply. Unlike f1.4 I found the AF to be good and accurate except with subjects moving towards the camera at a fast pace eg a dog running towards the camera. Sharpness was always very good, not the sharpest lens I've owned but nothing to be disappointed about.

Unfortunately your copy doesn't seem right, that's not just a soft lens it's so soft it looks out of focus :(

Here's an old photo I took of Betty with it followed by 100% crop

Screenshot 2023-03-09 at 17.14.35 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

Screenshot 2023-03-09 at 17.14.48 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr


I'll have to see if I can get a similar shot with the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II for a comparison, the GM II is definitely sharper though.
Click to expand...

IMO These are totally fantastic images of Betty reason why is, she is giving you some attitude with that great look.
 
Fuji Dave said:
IMO These are totally fantastic images of Betty reason why is, she is giving you some attitude with that great look.
Click to expand...
Yep definite side eye there :lol:
 
snerkler said:
Sorry I was a bit busy before hence my short reply. Unlike f1.4 I found the AF to be good and accurate except with subjects moving towards the camera at a fast pace eg a dog running towards the camera. Sharpness was always very good, not the sharpest lens I've owned but nothing to be disappointed about.

Unfortunately your copy doesn't seem right, that's not just a soft lens it's so soft it looks out of focus :(

Here's an old photo I took of Betty with it followed by 100% crop

Screenshot 2023-03-09 at 17.14.35 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr

Screenshot 2023-03-09 at 17.14.48 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr


I'll have to see if I can get a similar shot with the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II for a comparison, the GM II is definitely sharper though.
Click to expand...

That's nice and sharp!! I'm gonna do some proper testing tomorrow afternoon before I make my final conclusions. I'm a bit of a sucker for sharpness and consistent focus so it might make me want to reconsider my choice. Although your copy seemed like it was so much better. I can't shake my memory of my Canon RF 70-200 f/4 which was a marvel.
 
gilbouk said:
I might end up swapping it for something different, or just getting a refund. They aren't exactly cheap too
Click to expand...
I think you have a faulty lens, that looks just like the results I got when I tried a Samyang 135 at a dealer open day, the rep soon put it away when I showed him how pants the shots were that i'd taken. Generally the Tamron 70-180 is regarded very highly.
 
gilbouk said:
That's nice and sharp!! I'm gonna do some proper testing tomorrow afternoon before I make my final conclusions. I'm a bit of a sucker for sharpness and consistent focus so it might make me want to reconsider my choice. Although your copy seemed like it was so much better. I can't shake my memory of my Canon RF 70-200 f/4 which was a marvel.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should just get the GM II then :naughty:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top