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

f/2.8 said:
Skoda VRS, Golf G.T.I and R are all the same platform. They are basically the same car only the Golf R has a different ECU tune Stage 1 the VRS or the GTI and they are the same car.

It’s pretty much the same for all Skoda , V.W., Audi and CUPRA. They all share platforms. The only model that differs is the Audi R.S range. R.S versions still share the same platform but have bigger turbos and intercoolers etc plus stealing some of the engines from Porsche. Just one giant parts bin for the whole V.A.G group.

They all do it my focus for example is the exact same car as the 2.3l mustang even small stuff like brake pads are the same. Just a different body shape.
Click to expand...

wookie6262 said:
A very good thing and in my view standardised parts should be a goal for most things.
Click to expand...

I've just fitted Volvo front discs & pads on my Focus :)

In the past, I also fitted Mk3 (I think) Golf coilovers on my SEAT Toledo.
 
For anyone interested the Sony 2x Teleconverter is on sale with £200 off! so only £299.

Thought I'd mention it as that's a really good price although a few places have now sold out.
 
Jase said:
For anyone interested the Sony 2x Teleconverter is on sale with £200 off! so only £299.

Thought I'd mention it as that's a really good price although a few places have now sold out.
Click to expand...
Was mentioned the other day (y)
 
snerkler said:
Was mentioned the other day (y)
Click to expand...

ohh, I was looking for one to go with a 70-200 2.8 GM ii so I ordered one although I haven't got the lens yet.

But talking of which anyone using a teleconverter with the 70-200 2.8 GM ii? if so does it work OK?
 
Jase said:
ohh, I was looking for one to go with a 70-200 2.8 GM ii so I ordered one although I haven't got the lens yet.

But talking of which anyone using a teleconverter with the 70-200 2.8 GM ii? if so does it work OK?
Click to expand...
I use the 1.4x TC with it and it works very well, hard to see any difference in IQ.

I’ve never been happy with 2x TC’s in the past so have always been reluctant to try any more.
 
snerkler said:
I use the 1.4x TC with it and it works very well, hard to see any difference in IQ.

I’ve never been happy with 2x TC’s in the past so have always been reluctant to try any more.
Click to expand...

I've always stuck with the 1.4 TC but interested to see how it is with the 70-200. I guess at £299 its worth a go, I'd get my money back probably if I don't like it as prices will go up again in a week or two.
 
Jase said:
I've always stuck with the 1.4 TC but interested to see how it is with the 70-200. I guess at £299 its worth a go, I'd get my money back probably if I don't like it as prices will go up again in a week or two.
Click to expand...
The 1.4x is on sale too at £279, I’d rather use that and then crop but if you do buy the 2x I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts.
 
snerkler said:
The 1.4x is on sale too at £279, I’d rather use that and then crop but if you do buy the 2x I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts.
Click to expand...

I've got the 1.4x and I've just ordered the 2x, it's actually more for landscapes than sports/wildlife. I'd rather carry the 70-200 2.8 and a TC if I need it than the 100-400 (assuming the TC turns out to be ok).
 
Jase said:
I've got the 1.4x and I've just ordered the 2x, it's actually more for landscapes than sports/wildlife. I'd rather carry the 70-200 2.8 and a TC if I need it than the 100-400 (assuming the TC turns out to be ok).
Click to expand...
I’d have thought this would be a weak point of the TC as from my experience IQ is good for subjects relatively close, but when you start focussing closer to infinity it takes a bigger hit so I’m really interested to hear what you find.
 
Hi all, I’m hoping you can help, I’ve decided to move over to Sony full frame from m4/3 for my landscape photography, I’ve picked up the Sony a7iv and am hoping you can help me choose a decent lens for general landscapes.
Ideally I’d be purchasing used, with a budget of around £600 max, I’m not too concerned with going for the gm lenses, that can wait for the future lol.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Hi all, I’m hoping you can help, I’ve decided to move over to Sony full frame from m4/3 for my landscape photography, I’ve picked up the Sony a7iv and am hoping you can help me choose a decent lens for general landscapes.
Ideally I’d be purchasing used, with a budget of around £600 max, I’m not too concerned with going for the gm lenses, that can wait for the future lol.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Click to expand...
Different people like different focal lengths for landscape, so what focal lengths did you use for landscape on m4/3?
Are you looking to go wider with the switch to FF, or go with something similar in FOV?
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Hi all, I’m hoping you can help, I’ve decided to move over to Sony full frame from m4/3 for my landscape photography, I’ve picked up the Sony a7iv and am hoping you can help me choose a decent lens for general landscapes.
Ideally I’d be purchasing used, with a budget of around £600 max, I’m not too concerned with going for the gm lenses, that can wait for the future lol.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Click to expand...
If you’re ok with zoom. Tammy 28-75 G2 is a very good lens.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Hi all, I’m hoping you can help, I’ve decided to move over to Sony full frame from m4/3 for my landscape photography, I’ve picked up the Sony a7iv and am hoping you can help me choose a decent lens for general landscapes.
Ideally I’d be purchasing used, with a budget of around £600 max, I’m not too concerned with going for the gm lenses, that can wait for the future lol.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks
Click to expand...
Sony 16-35mm f4 is my go to landscape lens, great sharpness (stopped down) and not too big and heavy. The equivalent of this lens on m4/3 would be an 8-17.5mm if there was such a thing. If you want someting simlar to the Olympus 12-40mm you'd be looking at a 24-70mm. The Sony 24-70mm f4 is another good lens (stopped down) that's not too big or heavy. I think all other 24-70's will be out of budget.

The Tamron 28-75mm is another great lens, but I don't find 28mm wide enough for landscapes most of the time.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Sony 16-35mm f4 is my go to landscape lens, great sharpness (stopped down) and not too big and heavy. The equivalent of this lens on m4/3 would be an 8-17.5mm if there was such a thing. If you want someting simlar to the Olympus 12-40mm you'd be looking at a 24-70mm. The Sony 24-70mm f4 is another good lens (stopped down) that's not too big or heavy. I think all other 24-70's will be out of budget.

The Tamron 28-75mm is another great lens, but I don't ginf 28mm wide enough for landscapes most of the time.
Click to expand...

There is the Oly 9-18mm. I've just sold mine as I wasn't using it.

Until James says what focal length or lengths he wants we're just guessing what'll suit. An aperture range might be nice too and also an indication of how fussy James is, for example if ultimate sharpness at f8 into the corners isn't required I'd guess that anything including the various kit lenses might be good enough but once wider apertures, cutting edge performance and specific focal lengths are added the list of possibilities will get whittled down.
 
Last edited:
Faldrax said:
Different people like different focal lengths for landscape, so what focal lengths did you use for landscape on m4/3?
Are you looking to go wider with the switch to FF, or go with something similar in FOV?
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply, I would typically opt for 14-35/40 on m43 which I have been happy with width wise I’ve never shot wider than this.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Thanks for the reply, I would typically opt for 14-35/40 on m43 which I have been happy with width wise I’ve never shot wider than this.
Click to expand...

28-70mm then? Deffo a zoom? What aperture range would you like? Would you be happy with f3.5-5.6 or would you like a constant f2.8?
 
snerkler said:
Sony 16-35mm f4 is my go to landscape lens, great sharpness (stopped down) and not too big and heavy. The equivalent of this lens on m4/3 would be an 8-17.5mm if there was such a thing. If you want someting simlar to the Olympus 12-40mm you'd be looking at a 24-70mm. The Sony 24-70mm f4 is another good lens (stopped down) that's not too big or heavy. I think all other 24-70's will be out of budget.

The Tamron 28-75mm is another great lens, but I don't find 28mm wide enough for landscapes most of the time.
Click to expand...
Thank you, the 24-70 was the first lens I considered, is there a considerable difference as you upgrade from Sony g -Sony gm etc?
 
woof woof said:
28-70mm then? Deffo a zoom? What aperture range would you like? Would you be happy with f3.5-5.6 or would you like a constant f2.8?
Click to expand...
Ideally a zoom to start with, I would like to add primes in the future, my first one being a 50mm I think as I often used the 25mm prime on the Olympus.
The constant f2.8 would be nice but I’m in no major hurry if it’s going to be out of budget compared to others.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
Thanks, that looks interesting, do the 3rd party lenses play nicely on the Sony bodies?
Click to expand...
Yes Sony opened up their mount to third party so they work really well. The only restrictions are that they can only be used at 15fps max, and you can't use TC's with them.
Micro-four-thirds said:
Thank you, the 24-70 was the first lens I considered, is there a considerable difference as you upgrade from Sony g -Sony gm etc?
Click to expand...
This will depend on the individual as not everyone sees the differences as much as the next person. Also, as you stop down the differences can become less apparent. I don't think there's a "considerable" difference as you go from non G > G > GM but the GM's are the cream of the crop for sure, usually haveing better edge to edge sharpness, less CA's, better AF etc.
 
snerkler said:
Yes Sony opened up their mount to third party so they work really well. The only restrictions are that they can only be used at 15fps max, and you can't use TC's with them.

This will depend on the individual as not everyone sees the differences as much as the next person. Also, as you stop down the differences can become less apparent. I don't think there's a "considerable" difference as you go from non G > G > GM but the GM's are the cream of the crop for sure, usually haveing better edge to edge sharpness, less CA's, better AF etc.
Click to expand...
the last paragraph is certainly interesting, I have to say I am one for pixel peeping and examine the bokeh, if I remember rightly I think you done some testing I remember reading a while back with regards to bokeh balls etc and I think I recall one lens in particular causing cats eye bokeh, I think this would bug me lol I like round bokeh in my images. So I will certainly be coming back in the future to ask for advice on low light primes.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
the last paragraph is certainly interesting, I have to say I am one for pixel peeping and examine the bokeh, if I remember rightly I think you done some testing I remember reading a while back with regards to bokeh balls etc and I think I recall one lens in particular causing cats eye bokeh, I think this would bug me lol I like round bokeh in my images. So I will certainly be coming back in the future to ask for advice on low light primes.
Click to expand...
Having since discovered “cat eye” bokeh it appears every lens I have demonstrates it to some degree or another, as have most if not all lenses in the past barring the Samyang 50mm f1.4 FE II. Some are more noticeable than others, and most go away if you stop down 2/3 stop or so.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
the last paragraph is certainly interesting, I have to say I am one for pixel peeping and examine the bokeh, if I remember rightly I think you done some testing I remember reading a while back with regards to bokeh balls etc and I think I recall one lens in particular causing cats eye bokeh, I think this would bug me lol I like round bokeh in my images. So I will certainly be coming back in the future to ask for advice on low light primes.
Click to expand...
Following on, once you notice it you see it everywhere. For example it can be seen here on the Olympus 25mm f1.2


p***oir Reeperbahn by Torsten Schlüter, on Flickr

Bokeholic by MomoFotografi, on Flickr


And even here on the 42.5mm Nokton

Early Morning by Joseph Eckert, on Flickr


I never noticed it in all these years on my 70-200mm f2.8's but it's there, and even the Sigma 85mm DG DN which I've always praised for it's bokeh. The good news is that 99% of the time you don't notice it as you're more interested in the centre of the frame, and also you don't always have small light sources at the edges.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
the last paragraph is certainly interesting, I have to say I am one for pixel peeping and examine the bokeh, if I remember rightly I think you done some testing I remember reading a while back with regards to bokeh balls etc and I think I recall one lens in particular causing cats eye bokeh, I think this would bug me lol I like round bokeh in my images. So I will certainly be coming back in the future to ask for advice on low light primes.
Click to expand...

Did you know, a lot of what we hate in still photography is something that they embrace and pay EXTRA for in cinematography?

Just look at Cooke Lenses.

On the Product page, "The Cooke Look"

Take at look at what Hollywood production use these lenses. Then you realise these lenses embrace the look and the truth is....people either don't notice or they LOVE it, they are on lenses that cost 5 figures.

t6gAWWe.png
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Having since discovered “cat eye” bokeh it appears every lens I have demonstrates it to some degree or another, as have most if not all lenses in the past barring the Samyang 50mm f1.4 FE II. Some are more noticeable than others, and most go away if you stop down 2/3 stop or so.
Click to expand...
That’s encouraging to know i can stop down and it calms down a bit.
I’ve always struggled to capture bokeh balls with m4/3 and I love the effect it gives to images when they are anything but cat eye so I’m looking forward to experimenting once I get some lower f stop primes for the Sony.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Did you know, a lot of what we hate in still photography is something that they embrace and pay EXTRA for in cinematography?

Just look at Cooke Lenses.

On the Product page, "The Cooke Look"

Take at look at what Hollywood production use these lenses. Then you realise these lenses embrace the look and the truth is....people either don't notice or they LOVE it, they are on lenses that cost 5 figures.

t6gAWWe.png
Click to expand...
Wow that is a surprise.
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
That’s encouraging to know i can stop down and it calms down a bit.
I’ve always struggled to capture bokeh balls with m4/3 and I love the effect it gives to images when they are anything but cat eye so I’m looking forward to experimenting once I get some lower f stop primes for the Sony.
Click to expand...
Cat eye bokeh is due to optical vignetting so therefore is only seen on the periphery of the image. Here you can see the difference in bokeh of the 50mm f1.2 GM at the centre compared to mid frame and corner and also the same when stopped down.
Screenshot 2024-02-19 at 18.56.48.jpg




Here you can see some slightly weird bokeh shapes from the Olympus 20mm f1.4. Also you can see the effect of the fewer aperture blades creeping in when stopped down, look how the bokeh ball isn't as round in the centre of the frame at f2.5. Also, the edge bokeh is never fully circular.

Screenshot 2024-02-19 at 18.58.11.jpg




Edit: Sometimes people call the cause of cat eye bokeh mechanical vignetting, others optical vignetting, I'm not sure which is correct.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
Did you know, a lot of what we hate in still photography is something that they embrace and pay EXTRA for in cinematography?

Just look at Cooke Lenses.

On the Product page, "The Cooke Look"

Take at look at what Hollywood production use these lenses. Then you realise these lenses embrace the look and the truth is....people either don't notice or they LOVE it, they are on lenses that cost 5 figures.

t6gAWWe.png
Click to expand...
I've just had a look on here and can't see anything regarding cat eye bokeh? They talk about colour, fall off, flare etc and the only thing I found about bokeh was on the primes page.

"The SP3’s all-spherical design gifts the lenses with a gradient quality in the bokeh which presents as smooth and round"
 
Are we ready to be WoW'd?

Confirmed: Sony “WOW” product announcement coming soon after the CP+ show | sonyalpharumors

https://youtu.be/Du3RQSjU6b0 The Cp+ show is kicking off on Feb 22 and these are the new product we will get: Sigma 500mm f/5.6 (Feb 20 at 8pm New York time) Sigma 15mm f/1.4 diagonal fisheye lens (Feb 20 at 8pm New York time) Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 G (Feb 21 at around 10am New York time) Some
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

If it's a camera I suppose it could be more video orientated as that seems to be the way things are going, but it's also broader interest. Hmmm. I suppose we'll soon know.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Are we ready to be WoW'd?

Confirmed: Sony “WOW” product announcement coming soon after the CP+ show | sonyalpharumors

https://youtu.be/Du3RQSjU6b0 The Cp+ show is kicking off on Feb 22 and these are the new product we will get: Sigma 500mm f/5.6 (Feb 20 at 8pm New York time) Sigma 15mm f/1.4 diagonal fisheye lens (Feb 20 at 8pm New York time) Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 G (Feb 21 at around 10am New York time) Some
www.sonyalpharumors.com www.sonyalpharumors.com

If it's a camera I suppose it could be more video orientated as that seems to be the way things are going, but it's also broader interest. Hmmm. I suppose we'll soon know.
Click to expand...
No idea, can’t think what product no other manufacturer has done. No doubt it’ll be an overhyped disappointment ;)
 
Micro-four-thirds said:
That’s encouraging to know i can stop down and it calms down a bit.
I’ve always struggled to capture bokeh balls with m4/3 and I love the effect it gives to images when they are anything but cat eye so I’m looking forward to experimenting once I get some lower f stop primes for the Sony.
Click to expand...

If smooth rendering is your thing then I'd recommend Samyang lenses, as these have the nicest, smoothest, most pleasing rendering of all the lenses I've owned, including the GM 50 f1.2. I very much like the GM, and detail is amazing, but it just doesn't render quite so nicely *for me*.
 
ancient_mariner said:
If smooth rendering is your thing then I'd recommend Samyang lenses, as these have the nicest, smoothest, most pleasing rendering of all the lenses I've owned, including the GM 50 f1.2. I very much like the GM, and detail is amazing, but it just doesn't render quite so nicely *for me*.
Click to expand...
As you know I really liked the Samyang rendering as well, I sometimes wonder if I did the right thing. That being said stopping the GM down to f1.4 to match the Sammy results in more rounded bokeh, and from my tests the GM had more shallow DOF and smoother OOF areas for a given aperture.

I believe the extra ‘pop’ of the Samyang is attributed to the vignetting, if I added a similar vignette to the GM then ‘pop’ was very similar.
 
snerkler said:
I've just had a look on here and can't see anything regarding cat eye bokeh? They talk about colour, fall off, flare etc and the only thing I found about bokeh was on the primes page.

"The SP3’s all-spherical design gifts the lenses with a gradient quality in the bokeh which presents as smooth and round"
Click to expand...

Not from their description but look at the images, look at that screenshot they chose to use. In general, cats eye in cine lenses is desired and not something cinematographers avoid.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top