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

[JohnMcL7]

The problem is we are just guessing and assuming the reasons - we do have a concrete example that IN this SPECIFIC case, the Lens + TC + High FPS works - but that is not the same as saying any lens will work at hight FPS, or that any lens will work with a given TC (we do know, for example, that with other mounts there are sometimes physical restrictions on TC's due to some TC having elements forward of the mount, which impact on the lens rear element).

We don't know what's going on 'behind the scenes' in terms of licensing, etc.

That's exactly it and I've no idea why some people seem to be looking for this deep nefarious reason for the issue. It's not an unusual problem and one I've seen plenty of places elsewhere.

I suspect if the demand was there Sony would consider adding such an option but it seems unlikely it is.

 

[nandbytes]

You keep claiming Sony are doing this deliberately to hurt their users and keep ignoring complaints with no technical reason for the approach, the word for that is very much malicious. I don't think Sony are being malicious at all having seen this behaviour regularly but you're the one that keeps arguing the point Sony are just doing this because for no reason whatsoever apart from to annoy and harm their users.

I don't think their intension is to annoy or harm their users. That wouldn't be a good way of doing business.
I think their intension is maximise their profits (which is not wrong either).
Just saying while trying to do that they are annoying certain users (apparently only me on this forum )

The intension to stop 3rd party lenses working with TC is deliberate in that they have made an effort to make sure TC only works with certain lenses. Plus 3rd parties don't seem to want to produce their own TCs either which might be a licensing issue. All in all Sony seem to have deliberately limited use of TCs with certain select few lenses.
if you want to call that malicious that's up to you, I don't consider it as such. Unethical perhaps.

 

[Faldrax]

...
As said above not long ago 3rd parties made lenses for DSLRs. They worked with all sort of TC combination.
perhaps they weren't officially "open" but for all intents and purposes they operated like an open system.
so saying now they are regressing because its officially "open" seems a bit backwards to me or one step forwards and two steps back.

Sigma used to reverse engineer the mount protocols, rather than licence them - which is why when new cameras came out some Sigma lenses would fail to work with them,and required updating (while Sony and Minolta lenses had no such problems).
And if someone had said you'd be limited to max 15 fps in the days of DSLR no one would have had the slightest problem with it.
Note that Sony A-Mount TC's were also limited in lens compatibility (the 1.4x was compatible with just the 500f/4, 300f/2.8, 70-400G, 70-200f/2.8 & 135 f/2.8), but I don't know what happened if you tried an 'incompatible' setup (other than AF failing if the TC pushed the aperture outside the range it could function in).

 

[snerkler]

Somehow people seem to forget not long ago 3rd parties made lenses for DSLRs. They worked with all sort of TC combination.
perhaps there weren't officially "open" but for all intents and purposes they operated like an open system.
And in that time there were also plenty of issues but that never stopped people buying canon or nikon or even Sony DSLRs. I remember when Sony in-body drive motor ripped some sigma lenses AF motors and the only option was to choose a lower drive speed in the body. Sony didn't care and didn't stop sigma from making lenses or doing AF-C etc.

I am just not bought into this line of reasoning.

I don’t think anyone is forgetting it but everyone knew it was reverse engineered and so might not be 100% compatible. Now the mount is open people will expect it to work. I’m not saying this is the reason, just that it could be

 

[the_accidental]

Does anyone know how the electrical interface works for an e-mount? How does the body know what corrections to apply to undistort the jpeg or calibrate AF etc?

If it’s the lens providing calibration info etc that makes sense, new lenses would be able to work on existing bodies/firmwares.

But in that case how would a TC work? Either the body needs to know about all TC/lens combos or the TC needs to know about all lenses it works with to then communicate with the body.

Those wanting TCs to work with all lenses, how would you propose elements in the camera that need to know parameters of the optical system (lens + TC) work?

It’s not just focal length BTW, there are many other lens parameters.

 

[nandbytes]

Sigma used to reverse engineer the mount protocols, rather than licence them - which is why when new cameras came out some Sigma lenses would fail to work with them,and required updating (while Sony and Minolta lenses had no such problems).
And if someone had said you'd be limited to max 15 fps in the days of DSLR no one would have had the slightest problem with it.
Note that Sony A-Mount TC's were also limited in lens compatibility (the 1.4x was compatible with just the 500f/4, 300f/2.8, 70-400G, 70-200f/2.8 & 135 f/2.8), but I don't know what happened if you tried an 'incompatible' setup (other than AF failing if the TC pushed the aperture outside the range it could function in).

Not sure what happened. I only had minolta TCs and minolta lenses that worked with TCs. But I think minolta was also "3rd party" as far as lens and TC combinations was concerned.

if Sony limits their TCs to only be used with 1st party lenses i can get on board with that too as long as they allow sigma to make their own TCs for e-mount. But looks like they won't allow the latter option too.

Tbh I'm not fully sure why Sony has issues with TC in general. Even a-mount Sony TCs can't be used with Sony a-mount lenses via. the LA-EA adapters. But if get one of those chipped LA-EA4 adapters you can actually use TCs. So once again they are limiting it while technically it's possible to support it.

Canon EF and Nikon F TCs works fine when adapted to RF or Z mount respectively. So I think Sony has some kind of a TC phobia

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

...Sony are just doing this because for no reason whatsoever apart from to annoy and harm their users.

Almost certainly they are.

After all: what company doesn't want to anger its customers and send them off to spend their filthy lucre with the competition?

 

[nandbytes]

Does anyone know how the electrical interface works for an e-mount? How does the body know what corrections to apply to undistort the jpeg or calibrate AF etc?

If it’s the lens providing calibration info etc that makes sense, new lenses would be able to work on existing bodies/firmwares.

But in that case how would a TC work? Either the body needs to know about all TC/lens combos or the TC needs to know about all lenses it works with to then communicate with the body.

Those wanting TCs to work with all lenses, how would you propose elements in the camera that need to know parameters of the optical system (lens + TC) work?

It’s not just focal length BTW, there are many other lens parameters.

been looking into a little last night, well from the point of view of perhaps removing the connection with the TC to body so the body see it just as an extension tube.
for corrections i imagine its the lens providing the info since you can have corrections on with 3rd party lenses.

In case of TC as above I noted only supported Lens+TC combination works. So the body somehow is either able to look up or deduce that a certain combination is supported or not based on the info provided by the lens and/or TC.

but some random person on FM forum with only 2 posts comments:

It is possible to take out , without damaging it, the board inside the sony tc14 and connect directly with a small flat cable extension connector the two cables from the pins. You will have a dumb tc14 that the camera will not see, like an extension tube. Wrong data registered and still 15fps cap but the dumb tc14 could be used on any lens that have the right space inside.

not going to try it yet with my TC but will continue to look for more info on such possibilities.... if enough people begin to bastardise Sony TCs, sony might do something just like how they released LA-EA5 soon after a few folks figured out how to mod the LA-EA4 for work just like LA-EA5 does now.

 

[woof woof]

Mrs WW taken with my A7 and Voigtlander 50mm f1.2. I've been thinking of selling all my Voightanders as they're not getting used so much but every time I use them I think they're just lovely things to use. I'll have to think.

 

[snerkler]

Not sure what happened. I only had minolta TCs and minolta lenses that worked with TCs. But I think minolta was also "3rd party" as far as lens and TC combinations was concerned.

if Sony limits their TCs to only be used with 1st party lenses i can get on board with that too as long as they allow sigma to make their own TCs for e-mount. But looks like they won't allow the latter option too.

Tbh I'm not fully sure why Sony has issues with TC in general. Even a-mount Sony TCs can't be used with Sony a-mount lenses via. the LA-EA adapters. But if get one of those chipped LA-EA4 adapters you can actually use TCs. So once again they are limiting it while technically it's possible to support it.

Canon EF and Nikon F TCs works fine when adapted to RF or Z mount respectively. So I think Sony has some kind of a TC phobia

I do find it strange third party aren’t allowed to develop their own TC’s. It would be nice if these questions were asked and answered but as it’s not happened yet (to my knowledge) I’m not sure it ever will.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Looks like my camera will need to go under repair as now it is constantly draining the battery even when the camera is switched off...

I now also get either a system error when I try the bt or WiFi connection in it, or it just stuck in a infinite loading screen saying something like "turning on bt"

Sometimes the camera doesn't even turn back on and I have to take out the battery out and back in for it to turn on....

I notice this all today when I went out to take some pics this morning.

My camera was at 100 percent this morning and when I traveled an hour to location I notice my camera was warm as soon as I took it out my camera bag...

It had 60 percent battery left and the dial was definetly on the off position...

 

[nandbytes]

Looks like my camera will need to go under repair as now it is constantly draining the battery even when the camera is switched off...

I now also get either a system error when I try the bt or WiFi connection in it, or it just stuck in a infinite loading screen saying something like "turning on bt"

Sometimes the camera doesn't even turn back on and I have to take out the battery out and back in for it to turn on....

I notice this all today when I went out to take some pics this morning.

My camera was at 100 percent this morning and when I traveled an hour to location I notice my camera was warm as soon as I took it out my camera bag...

It had 60 percent battery left and the dial was definetly on the off position...

Is that with genuine sony batteries and have you tried with more than one battery?

if you paid with your credit card you can try going down section 75 route too. because this problem showed up after your firmware update and sony should take responsibility for it even when out of warranty.

 

[jonneymendoza]

Is that with genuine sony batteries and have you tried with more than one battery?

if you paid with your credit card you can try going down section 75 route too. because this problem showed up after your firmware update and sony should take responsibility for it even when out of warranty.

Yea genuine battery is what was in my camera this morning fully charged and down to 60 percent at the shoot and literally at the end of shoot the camera died on me.

I just loaded my camera with a new battery fully charged but third party one and just 30mins in just sitting on my desk at work completely off, and it's down to 70 percent...

On my way home now and I bet by the time I reach home, the battery will be dead...

My problem is that it is a grey import, else Sony pro would have sorry me out..

 

[jonneymendoza]

Back home and took out my camera out of the bag and it's warm to the touch despite the camera being off...

7 percent battery left... wtf...

 

[snerkler]

Looks like my camera will need to go under repair as now it is constantly draining the battery even when the camera is switched off...

I now also get either a system error when I try the bt or WiFi connection in it, or it just stuck in a infinite loading screen saying something like "turning on bt"

Sometimes the camera doesn't even turn back on and I have to take out the battery out and back in for it to turn on....

I notice this all today when I went out to take some pics this morning.

My camera was at 100 percent this morning and when I traveled an hour to location I notice my camera was warm as soon as I took it out my camera bag...

It had 60 percent battery left and the dial was definetly on the off position...

I had numerous occurrences of the camera ‘bricking’, not turning on and nothing worked. After some time, up to 30 mins it would come back to life. Even two motherboard replacements didn’t fix it, turned out it was the battery.

Back home and took out my camera out of the bag and it's warm to the touch despite the camera being off...

7 percent battery left... wtf...

I’ve seen this complaint by numerous people on FB and SAR.

If it was me I’d be fighting my corner, as nandbytes said it was working fine before the update (although Sony will tell you it would’ve been broken before and the new firmware highlights it). However the battery depleting and the camera getting warm is definitely a new thing since the update.

I would argue that you’re a Sony Pro member, and it’s a well documented ‘ common’ fault and regardless of where the camera was bought they should fix it as a goodwill gesture.

I do think it’s poor that a ‘flagship’ camera has had so many faulty cameras. It’s not even as though it was a first batch issue, the A1 had been out a few years before I bought mine.

 

[jonneymendoza]

I had numerous occurrences of the camera ‘bricking’, not turning on and nothing worked. After some time, up to 30 mins it would come back to life. Even two motherboard replacements didn’t fix it, turned out it was the battery.

I’ve seen this complaint by numerous people on FB and SAR.

If it was me I’d be fighting my corner, as nandbytes said it was working fine before the update (although Sony will tell you it would’ve been broken before and the new firmware highlights it). However the battery depleting and the camera getting warm is definitely a new thing since the update.

I would argue that you’re a Sony Pro member, and it’s a well documented ‘ common’ fault and regardless of where the camera was bought they should fix it as a goodwill gesture.

I do think it’s poor that a ‘flagship’ camera has had so many faulty cameras. It’s not even as though it was a first batch issue, the A1 had been out a few years before I bought mine.

I have just sent out another email to sony pro about the latest drama of this and asking for them to fix it despite it being a grey import.

Its unacceptable really as you say and my camera is almost now completely useless with a battery life that cant even last a 2hour shoot.

WHat was wrong with your battery?

I tend to use official ones but i did recently buy some third party ones but dont really use them. they came free with this 3 battery charger dock i got

 

[snerkler]

I have just sent out another email to sony pro about the latest drama of this and asking for them to fix it despite it being a grey import.

Its unacceptable really as you say and my camera is almost now completely useless with a battery life that cant even last a 2hour shoot.

WHat was wrong with your battery?

I tend to use official ones but i did recently buy some third party ones but dont really use them. they came free with this 3 battery charger dock i got

No idea what was wrong with it but Sony replaced it and I’ve not had the issue since.

It wasn’t obvious it was the battery initially as it was intermittent and I have four Sony batteries that I alternate.

 

[f/1.2]

I have just sent out another email to sony pro about the latest drama of this and asking for them to fix it despite it being a grey import.

Its unacceptable really as you say and my camera is almost now completely useless with a battery life that cant even last a 2hour shoot.

WHat was wrong with your battery?

I tend to use official ones but i did recently buy some third party ones but dont really use them. they came free with this 3 battery charger dock i got

How old is the body?

If it’s grey import and from Panamoz they give a 3 year warranty. If it’s more than 3 year old I would be surprised if they agree to fixing it for nothing especially with it being an import. In my experience dealing with Pro Support and the ordinary Sony Customer Services they treat imports like a hot potato.

Can see why you would be frustrated but it would be a hell of a job to confirm that the problem was caused by a firmware update and it’s not just coincidence that the fault appeared at the same time.

I haven’t really been following any A1 issues so don’t know if this is a common issue or not. You might need to prove that it’s an issue impacting on a lot of people to have a chance of a free repair.

It does sound like a battery drain problem as even if you left the switch on it wouldn’t be draining the battery that quickly.

 

[jonneymendoza]

How old is the body?

If it’s grey import and from Panamoz they give a 3 year warranty. If it’s more than 3 year old I would be surprised if they agree to fixing it for nothing especially with it being an import. In my experience dealing with Pro Support and the ordinary Sony Customer Services they treat imports like a hot potato.

Can see why you would be frustrated but it would be a hell of a job to confirm that the problem was caused by a firmware update and it’s not just coincidence that the fault appeared at the same time.

I haven’t really been following any A1 issues so don’t know if this is a common issue or not. You might need to prove that it’s an issue impacting on a lot of people to have a chance of a free repair.

It does sound like a battery drain problem as even if you left the switch on it wouldn’t be draining the battery that quickly.

I've tried a few batteries and they all drain fast.

Plus there is still the issue of the WiFi and BT not working at all

 

[LeeRatters]

Mrs WW taken with my A7 and Voigtlander 50mm f1.2. I've been thinking of selling all my Voightanders as they're not getting used so much but every time I use them I think they're just lovely things to use. I'll have to think.

View attachment 449123

I was going to trade/sell my 40/1.2 after getting the 35GM a few years ago. But I didn't, and I'm happy I didn't!

Also, my Fuji plan was to try that X100f and either sell it on or trade it & the 40/1.2 in for an X100vi - but I now think I'd rather have the X100f & keep the 40/1.2 *I think I said that recently, maybe in here maybe in another thread.

 

[nandbytes]

I was going to trade/sell my 40/1.2 after getting the 35GM a few years ago. But I didn't, and I'm happy I didn't!

Also, my Fuji plan was to try that X100f and either sell it on or trade it & the 40/1.2 in for an X100vi - but I now think I'd rather have the X100f & keep the 40/1.2 *I think I said that recently, maybe in here maybe in another thread.

You clearly need one more 35-40mm type lens
Or add a couple more and you'll have have a collection to rival Alan's

 

[woof woof]

I was going to trade/sell my 40/1.2 after getting the 35GM a few years ago. But I didn't, and I'm happy I didn't!

Also, my Fuji plan was to try that X100f and either sell it on or trade it & the 40/1.2 in for an X100vi - but I now think I'd rather have the X100f & keep the 40/1.2 *I think I said that recently, maybe in here maybe in another thread.

I was thinking of rebuying the 40mm f1.2 but this has to stop. Or maybe it doesn't as all in all it's still a relatively cheap hobby

The Sony 40mm f2.5 is what's prompted all this as I think it's a really good lens with really only one issue apart from not being 35mm, vignetting, I think it's even nice to MF with so why do I need vintage lenses or even Sony mount MF lenses? I'll have to decide what to do.

On the Fuji X100 range. I did like the controls apart from the MF feel which for me gave no pleasure at all and I usually picked the GX85 over it. I can see the appeal though. I know they have a massive following and I know Fuji can't make them fast enough but I think the vi is over priced for what it offers. Just my VHO. If I wanted a X100 I'd buy another S or F.

 

[woof woof]

You clearly need one more 35-40mm type lens
Or add a couple more and you'll have have a collection to rival Alan's

I sold a lot of film era lenses. I think I only have about 6 or 8 50's now and 4 or 5 35's.

 

[nandbytes]

I sold a lot of film era lenses. I think I only have about 6 or 8 50's now and 4 or 5 35's.

Hence I said only a couple more as supposed to 20 more

 

[woof woof]

Hence I said only a couple more as supposed to 20 more

I do regret selling them.

One last picture. This is a bit unusual for me. I'd usually expose to keep the highlights but today I dialled in +2 exposure comp and fully expected the highlights in the background to blow. Just a small tweak to the curve and it says the highlights aren't blown but that is a bit hard to believe,

Mrs WW in the blue folly, Saltburn. Going for a more dreamy look at f1.2.

 

[LeeRatters]

You clearly need one more 35-40mm type lens
Or add a couple more and you'll have have a collection to rival Alan's

Nope. X100f for easy carry & street. A7Riii & 35GM if I need AF/eyeAF replaced with the CV40 if I'm shooting by myself for the enjoyment

Actually, I was out with the CV40 the other week for those sunrise village images I've been posting. On a walk around, I came to the farm shop area & found these little friends...

Manual focus with the CV40 They move pretty quick at this age too!!!


*** by Lee, on Flickr


*** by Lee, on Flickr


*** by Lee, on Flickr

 

[snerkler]

I do regret selling them.

One last picture. This is a bit unusual for me. I'd usually expose to keep the highlights but today I dialled in +2 exposure comp and fully expected the highlights in the background to blow. Just a small tweak to the curve and it says the highlights aren't blown but that is a bit hard to believe,

Mrs WW is the blue folly, Saltburn. Going for a more dreamy look at f1.2.

View attachment 449185

Nice photo. You can always bring the highlights down in the curves/sliders so that they’re not clipping on the histogram but it doesn’t necessarily mean there’ll be any detail there, sometimes doing this you just get an off white area of nothing rather than a white area of nothing

 

[jonneymendoza]

I'm doing a test now on my camera.

I have completely reset the camera back to it's default settings and left it turned off with full charged battery.

I will turn it back on in a couple of hours to see if the battery was drained

 

[f/1.2]

I've tried a few batteries and they all drain fast.

Plus there is still the issue of the WiFi and BT not working at all

When I said battery drain I wasn’t thinking if the battery itself. There is probably a short somewhere that is causing the battery to drain.

If you leave your camera switched on but not in use the battery still lasts much longer than what you described.

 

[snerkler]

When I said battery drain I wasn’t thinking if the battery itself. There is probably a short somewhere that is causing the battery to drain.

If you leave your camera switched on but not in use the battery still lasts much longer than what you described.

I think he said it’s drained with different batteries which would suggest the camera is the issue

 

[woof woof]

Nice photo. You can always bring the highlights down in the curves/sliders so that they’re not clipping on the histogram but it doesn’t necessarily mean there’ll be any detail there, sometimes doing this you just get an off white area of nothing rather than a white area of nothing

Yes, that's what it is just an off white area with next to no detail. If I'd done my usual and kept the highlight and boosted the shadows there would at least be some real colour there if not a lot of detail as this was at f1.2. Just goes to show that the histogram / computer aren't right all the time

 

[jonneymendoza]

I think he said it’s drained with different batteries which would suggest the camera is the issue

This basically.

Anyways after resetting it back to factory settings it still drained the battery.

And each time I test I try a different authentic battery

 

[snerkler]

Yes, that's what it is just an off white area with next to no detail. If I'd done my usual and kept the highlight and boosted the shadows there would at least be some real colour there if not a lot of detail as this was at f1.2. Just goes to show that the histogram / computer aren't right all the time

I’m a little confused, in what way is the computer/histogram wrong?

 

[woof woof]

I’m a little confused, in what way is the computer/histogram wrong?

It says there are no blown areas whereas I think there are. This goes back to when I first got my A7 and found it just about impossible to get it to blow areas according to the histogram. I think what I'm seeing is areas of false colour. I don't know how it decides there are no blown areas but I think it's almost certainly wrong and that this off whiteness is convincing the histogram that the area isn't blown when it really is.

Just my opinion but I think those background areas in the above picture are indeed blown no matter what the software says.

 

[snerkler]

It says there are no blown areas whereas I think there are. This goes back to when I first got my A7 and found it just about impossible to get it to blow areas according to the histogram. I think what I'm seeing is areas of false colour. I don't know how it decides there are no blown areas but I think it's almost certainly wrong and that this off whiteness is convincing the histogram that the area isn't blown when it really is.

Just my opinion but I think those background areas in the above picture are indeed blown no matter what the software says.

Oh right I think I misunderstood as you said you tweaked the curves and then it showed no blown areas so I assumed that it did show blown areas before you adjusted it?

 

[f/1.2]

I think he said it’s drained with different batteries which would suggest the camera is the issue

That is what I just said.

 

[woof woof]

Oh right I think I misunderstood as you said you tweaked the curves and then it showed no blown areas so I assumed that it did show blown areas before you adjusted it?

Yes, the histogram showed blown areas but pulling the highlights down just a bit caused them to disappear but in reality I'm sure that they are in fact blown. I've seen this many times. I just took the picture with +2 for the fun of it. I could have protected the highlights and lifted the shadows but I was just being a rebel

This is with PS 26.5.0 and whatever the latest version of the raw processor is but I think it's always acted the same going back to CS5.

 

[saltireblue]

Yes, the histogram should blown areas but pulling the highlights down just a bit caused them to disappear but in reality I'm sure that they are in fact blown. I've seen this many times. I just took the picture with +2 for the fun of it. I could have protected the highlights and lifted the shadows but I was just being a rebel

Without a cause, presumably?

 

[woof woof]

Just a bit of boredom crept in as Mrs WW asked for a picture in "The blue room" and I've already taken several pictures of her there so I was going for something a bit different, hence f1.2, shooting from low down pointing upwards and blowing the highlights. Just something to do

 

[snerkler]

That is what I just said.

It was early morning when I read it

Yes, the histogram showed blown areas but pulling the highlights down just a bit caused them to disappear but in reality I'm sure that they are in fact blown. I've seen this many times. I just took the picture with +2 for the fun of it. I could have protected the highlights and lifted the shadows but I was just being a rebel

This is with PS 26.5.0 and whatever the latest version of the raw processor is but I think it's always acted the same going back to CS5.

That’s what I thought was happening. If you pull back blown highlights you’re not rescuing much data, if any as they’re blown or gone. When you’ve pulled the highlights back the histogram isn’t showing no blown highlights per se, it’s just showing that your luminosity levels have gone from 100%+ to below 100%, but it doesn’t mean there’s any data there.

I hope this makes sense?