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

Malfis said:
I bought a fe 20-70m f4 over the Christmas period from Park Cameras - paid £1169 with £200 cashback to come, making it £969.
I’ve also got some Sony £100 discount codes, so hopefully if I can also use one of those it netts out at £869, a worthwhile extra premium for a genuine UK purchase.
Does any one know if you can get two cashbacks on one purchase?

BTW - I’ve not yet had the opportunity to do some proper shooting with the lens, but the trial shots look great - terrific focal lengths as well for a walkabout lens.
Click to expand...
I saw Parks had it at £1169 with £200 CB but that's still nearly £200 difference from Cotswolds which is a lot. If you had a discount code for a further £100 it is more appearling to go for UK for sure.

I'm pretty sure you can't use tow cash backs on the same purchase.
 
nandbytes said:
20-70mm is the smallest of the bunch which is nice. I think my favourite is still the 24-105mm overall but it's the largest of the three.
Click to expand...
If we presumed optical quality is equally satisfactory*

20-70mm is more useful range for general travel and landscape work as a single lens option

and 24-105 range is probably a little more geared towards lifestyle and portrait, but there is a good bit of overlap, and I expect 105mm end to perform least well.

* - now that is a very big IF
If you have a bunch of primes, you may not need a 2.8 zoom. If you don't then probably a good idea... GM2 will be also better optically.

nandbytes said:
But the 70-200mm removes the need for owning a separate macro lens
Click to expand...
no it doesn't. But macro aren't anywhere near the most expensive of the lot, and even older versions are very good so a very minor issue.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
If we presumed optical quality is equally satisfactory*
Click to expand...
Satisfactory for me, may be not for you.
LongLensPhotography said:
20-70mm is more useful range for general travel and landscape work as a single lens option

and 24-105 range is probably a little more geared towards lifestyle and portrait, but there is a good bit of overlap, and I expect 105mm end to perform least well.

* - now that is a very big IF
If you have a bunch of primes, you may not need a 2.8 zoom. If you don't then probably a good idea... GM2 will be also better optically.
Click to expand...

My main primes are a Sony 35mm f1.4 GM and a Samyang 85mm f1.4 ii
Have recently taken delivery of a Viltrox 16mm f1.8 that replaced my Sony 14mm f1.8 GM

I have a Samyang 24mm f1.8 which I picked up to mostly just try out.
I have a Sony 50mm f1.2 GM also but most likely going to sell it someday.... may be when Sony makes a 85mm f1.2.

LongLensPhotography said:
no it doesn't. But macro aren't anywhere near the most expensive of the lot, and even older versions are very good so a very minor issue.
Click to expand...
It does for me, I mostly shoot flowers and larger insects. Most of the time I can get away with 0.5x and for the odd time I need higher I can use TCs to get closer.
 
I fell lucky with the 20-70mm - WEX had it mail order return with 20% off mid December. Cost me £758.

It’s unused. I wonder how many people order stuff from Wex, hang on for the 30 days to claim cash back then send back within the 45 days they allow for online purchases?? Quite a few MO returns on their sale sites in recent weeks.

It’s worth watching their used sales stuff. Things pop up in the 20% and 25% off sections periodically.

Used it a couple of times over the holidays when I want to travel light. Happy so far.
 
Last edited:
simonbe said:
I fell lucky with the 20-70mm - WEX had it mail order return with 20% off mid December. Cost me £758.

It’s unused. I wonder how many people order stuff from Wex, hang on for the 30 days to claim cash back then send back within the 45 days they allow for online purchases?? Quite a few MO returns on their sale sites in recent weeks.

It’s worth watching their used sales stuff. Things pop up in the 20% and 25% off sections periodically.

Used it a couple of times over the holidays when I want to travel light. Happy do far.
Click to expand...
What warranty do you get with Wex used?

Edit. Just checked, it’s 12 months.
 
Last edited:
Cloudforest said:
I’ve just treated myself to a 35 f1.4 GM from WEX. An unused MO return with 20% off. Cost me £863, which I’m well pleased with. Looking forward to trying it out over the weekend.
Click to expand...
That's a crazy good price :eek:
 
simonbe said:
I fell lucky with the 20-70mm - WEX had it mail order return with 20% off mid December. Cost me £758.

It’s unused. I wonder how many people order stuff from Wex, hang on for the 30 days to claim cash back then send back within the 45 days they allow for online purchases?? Quite a few MO returns on their sale sites in recent weeks.

It’s worth watching their used sales stuff. Things pop up in the 20% and 25% off sections periodically.

Used it a couple of times over the holidays when I want to travel light. Happy so far.
Click to expand...

I didn't realise they had such a long return window. That's really bad if people are exploiting it for cash back. :(
What will end up happening is they'll reduce the return window because of such people.
 
nandbytes said:
I didn't realise they had such a long return window. That's really bad if people are exploiting it for cash back. :(
What will end up happening is they'll reduce the return window because of such people.
Click to expand...
It has to be or cashback needs to be extended before paying.

Personally I hate the idea of cashback, loyalty scheme, etc. they just need to simply price the items accordingly and be done with the nonsense. It actually serves them well for doing all this shabang
 
LongLensPhotography said:
It has to be or cashback needs to be extended before paying.

Personally I hate the idea of cashback, loyalty scheme, etc. they just need to simply price the items accordingly and be done with the nonsense. It actually serves them well for doing all this shabang
Click to expand...

I agree I don't like the whole cashback approach.
Why can't they simply charge less.
But it's not really wex's fault though. They are simply trying to adhere to whatever bs the manufacturers come up with.
They shouldn't be penalised for having a good returns scheme and after sales support.
Wex is the one making a loss because of such schemes. I don't think they are purposefully trying to make a loss!
 
I think a percentage of people for whatever reason wont be eligible for cashback and some for whatever reason wont claim it. If these things happen it's a win for the company.
 
On the Sony 7CR it is mentioned that it has '7-stop IBIS system'. If a lens has IS built in, does that mean the 7 stop IBIS will not work. I say this, as on my A73 if I have a lens with IS on it, my in camera 'IS' is greyed out and can't be used, even if I turn the lens 'IS' off. Unless there is a way around, this would make it useless on any lens with built in IS?
 
Redspider said:
On the Sony 7CR it is mentioned that it has '7-stop IBIS system'. If a lens has IS built in, does that mean the 7 stop IBIS will not work. I say this, as on my A73 if I have a lens with IS on it, my in camera 'IS' is greyed out and can't be used, even if I turn the lens 'IS' off. Unless there is a way around, this would make it useless on any lens with built in IS?
Click to expand...

Lens IS and IBIS should work in tandem to give 5-axis IBIS.
Uses OSS for pitch and yaw and IBIS for x,y,z axis. Basically using the strengths of each.

If your lens has a switch on it to turn on or off the stabilisation you'll need use the switch and in camera option will be greyed out.

Unfortunately your can't choose to have just the OSS or just the IBIS on. It's all or nothing.
 
simonbe said:
I fell lucky with the 20-70mm - WEX had it mail order return with 20% off mid December. Cost me £758.

It’s unused. I wonder how many people order stuff from Wex, hang on for the 30 days to claim cash back then send back within the 45 days they allow for online purchases?? Quite a few MO returns on their sale sites in recent weeks.

It’s worth watching their used sales stuff. Things pop up in the 20% and 25% off sections periodically.

Used it a couple of times over the holidays when I want to travel light. Happy so far.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was more than happy to find an OB Sony FE 35mm on WEX for £343 a month or so back. New they are £549 on there
 
I'm just looking for pictures to include in a slideshow and concentrating on pictures I haven't bothered with too much before. I rather like this one taken in January 2019 with a film era lens, possibly my Miranda 24mm f2.8 "Macro" in FD fit. On my A7 obs :D

DSC02933.jpg
 
woof woof said:
I think a percentage of people for whatever reason wont be eligible for cashback and some for whatever reason wont claim it. If these things happen it's a win for the company.
Click to expand...
that is a very predatory scheme
 
It is. It also keeps people employed in marketing. The sort of people who maybe should be on something like the Galgafrincham B Arc.

Another A7 and Miranda 24mm picture, taken on the same day as the one above.

DSC02926-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
I agree I don't like the whole cashback approach.
Why can't they simply charge less.
But it's not really wex's fault though. They are simply trying to adhere to whatever bs the manufacturers come up with.
They shouldn't be penalised for having a good returns scheme and after sales support.
Wex is the one making a loss because of such schemes. I don't think they are purposefully trying to make a loss!
Click to expand...
I read an article a while back although didn't save it annoyingly but it showed that the percentage of people who successfully claim cashback is low so if they offered that money as a saving on all products it would likely be small and relatively meaningless. The generous cashback offers means they can entice people to buy the products but then don't have to pay out the cashback in most cases.

It's not something I'm keen on either.
 
Just went down to wex to handle A7RV and A7CR and mainly test the IBIS. I used my 20-70mm.

A7RV:
I could quite comfortably get sharp shots at 1s handheld across the focal range which was amazing!
At 20mm and 35mm I could get sharp shots at 2s with some trial and error. about 1 in 3 or 4 came out sharp which is still pretty good IMO (at 1.6s I got about 1 in 2 sharp shots)
Dropping from 35mm to 20mm didn't really improve my chances a huge lot of getting sharper shots. So this kinda tells me 2s is stretching the IBIS' limits. I did manage to get a sharp shot at 3.2s at 20mm after 7-8 tries but that was just too much effort.
But mind you I was shooting indoors in a small shop. My focus distance wasn't very far. So at longer distances for landscape it could well be possible to get better results.

A7CR - was basically about 1 stop less effective. Could consistently handhold at 1/3-1/2s. Could get 1s shots with some trial and error. Past that I didn't get a single sharp shot irrespective of the my focal length.
But for someone looking to upgrade from original A7C this is a massive upgrade. The IBIS in A7C was mostly hopeless below 2 stops (at least for me). I imagine on A7CII you'd get even better results as the shake is not as visible.

All in all that's really promising. a7RV is truly amazing to use. the new articulating screen, EVF, IBIS makes it super nice to use. Apart from lack of blackout free shooting this is a better body than A1 IMO.

Having said all that I wish A7RV was a little bit more consistent at 2s, feels like its just like half a stop below where I'd have liked it to be. So close.....
 
Last edited:
Sometimes I really question my intellegence. As some will know I've been wanting someone to do a 16-50mm lens for ages, but unfortunately the new Tamron 17-50mm isn't cutting it for me. However it's just dawned on me that I kind of already have a 16-50mm lens as I can use my 16-35mm in crop mode and still get a 22mp image.

Honeslty sometimes I do worry about myself :facepalm: :ROFLMAO:
 
snerkler said:
Any lens that doesn't take normal filters is instantly ruled out for me.
Click to expand...

Filters might be an issue with the wider focal lengths. This Sony lens seems similar to the Sigma 12-24 I had years ago with its ability to take rear gel filter. I haven't used any filters for years.
 
The weather and light here have been pretty poor so I haven't been outside to try my Pergear 35mm f1.4 against a Voigtlander so today I just took some inside shots and this Pergear is as the last one was consistently needing double the ISO for the same f1.4 aperture (and shutter settings.) The Pergear is a nice enough lens and it's very compact and light and cheap too and it gives better performance at f1.4 than the Vigtlander 35mm f1.4 but this difference in metering is significant when taking pictures in lower light. Another anomaly is that the Pergear bokeh balls at f1.4 look about the same size as the Voigtlanders at f1.8/f2. The bokeh ball smallness is spotted in this review too.

phillipreeve.net

Comparison: The Battle of 35mm lenses - Nikon Z vs Sigma vs Tamron vs Zeiss vs Pergear vs Nikon Ai-s - phillipreeve.net

ContentsIntroductionSample ImagesDisclosure / ContendersSpecificationsHandlingCarl Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 HFTPergear 35mm 1.4Nikon Nikkor Z 35mm 1.8 STamron SP 35mm f/1.4 Di USDSigma 35mm 1.4 HSM ArtNikon Nikkor 35mm 1.4 Ai-SEase of UseOn mirrorless cameras (in this case Nikon Z):On DLSR:On...
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

I think the exposure issue is the biggie for me and it was the first thing I spotted that bothered me. I think I'll sleep on it but I think it's going back. I don't take too may low light pictures these days but for the few I do take the doubling of iso for the same exposure does seem to be noticeable and significant. As I keep saying I've never seen a lens this far out of whack with other lenses which should be similar.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
The weather and light here have been pretty poor so I haven't been outside to try my Pergear 35mm f1.4 against a Voigtlander so today I just took some inside shots and this Pergear is as the last one was consistently needing double the ISO for the same f1.4 aperture (and shutter settings.) The Pergear is a nice enough lens and it's very compact and light and cheap too and it gives better performance at f1.4 than the Vigtlander 35mm f1.4 but this difference in metering is significant when taking pictures in lower light. Another anomaly is that the Pergear bokeh balls at f1.4 look about the same size as the Voigtlanders at f1.8/f2. The bokeh ball smallness is spotted in this review too.

phillipreeve.net

Comparison: The Battle of 35mm lenses - Nikon Z vs Sigma vs Tamron vs Zeiss vs Pergear vs Nikon Ai-s - phillipreeve.net

ContentsIntroductionSample ImagesDisclosure / ContendersSpecificationsHandlingCarl Zeiss Distagon 35mm 1.4 HFTPergear 35mm 1.4Nikon Nikkor Z 35mm 1.8 STamron SP 35mm f/1.4 Di USDSigma 35mm 1.4 HSM ArtNikon Nikkor 35mm 1.4 Ai-SEase of UseOn mirrorless cameras (in this case Nikon Z):On DLSR:On...
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net

I think the exposure issue is the biggie for me and it was the first thing I spotted that bothered me. I think I'll sleep on it but I think it's going back. I don't take too may low light pictures these days but for the few I do take the doubling of iso for the same exposure does seem to be noticeable and significant. As I keep saying I've never seen a lens this far out of whack with other lenses which should be similar.
Click to expand...
Exposure wouldn’t bother me as much as the rendering, if you’re not getting the correct DOF and corresponding out of focus areas that’d be an issue for me.
 
snerkler said:
Exposure wouldn’t bother me as much as the rendering, if you’re not getting the correct DOF and corresponding out of focus areas that’d be an issue for me.
Click to expand...

TBH I'm still undecided on this lens. I do like trying and comparing lenses and this lens does appeal to me as it's very cheap and very small and light with reasonable image quality but what's the point of a f1.4 lens? It has two points, providing reduced depth when you want it and low light shooting ability and the latter is quite compromised as I need a higher ISO or a slower shutter speed compared to either of my Voigtlander 35mm lenses and both these things could well affect the final picture, motion blur or noise, not all the time though, mostly in low light. So if I keep this lens it'll be a daylight lens with limited low light ability.

I could just use my Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 as it fixes the Pergears issues but it's bigger and heavier.
 
woof woof said:
TBH I'm still undecided on this lens. I do like trying and comparing lenses and this lens does appeal to me as it's very cheap and very small and light with reasonable image quality but what's the point of a f1.4 lens? It has two points, providing reduced depth when you want it and low light shooting ability and the latter is quite compromised as I need a higher ISO or a slower shutter speed compared to either of my Voigtlander 35mm lenses and both these things could well affect the final picture, motion blur or noise, not all the time though, mostly in low light. So if I keep this lens it'll be a daylight lens with limited low light ability.

I could just use my Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 as it fixes the Pergears issues but it's bigger and heavier.
Click to expand...

Send it back & move on imo Alan :)

You'll never be happy with it as the issues will always bug you nagging in the back of your head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top