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

pmac said:
wow thats the first time ive looked at the images I posted straight to the forum on a laptop:eek:
totally destroys them
Click to expand...

I post straight from my laptop now. Posting any other way seems to be just as much as a lottery. Sometimes pictures look good... sometimes they don't. If it helps you to relax a bit at all, your pictures look good to me and I think we all know what the posting process can be like and know that anything posted here will very likely look much better on the posters own screen :D
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
Alan, I don't think so!! You would be bound to find something that you couldn't get over............................this forum is made up of impulse purchasers and procrastinators - it's a Venn diagram where the circles never meet :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

It's all part of the "fun."

I'd love a compact 35mm f2 or wider of the size and quality of the mini G's but I can't see it happening because it'd either be very expensive or a bit wild at wide apertures and I don't think Sony will do either as people will point and either scream or laugh. Someone else might do it though. I do have compact f2.5 and f2.8 lenses and bigger f1.8 and f2 lenses and small MF 35mm f1.4 and f2 lenses. The Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 can be funky at f1.4 or so but it calms down a lot by f2 and all this is scene dependant and some pictures can look nice at f1.4 whilst for some other scenes f1.4 should be for emergency only use. The TTA 50mm f2 has massive vignetting and seriously bad corners at some apertures and distances and can give colour casts but it is tiny. Both are still MF though.

If there was a mini G 35mm f2 with reasonable performance at a reasonable price the next thing I'd want would be an A7cIII with a good evf and either a tilting or fully articulated rear screen.

Then I'd shut up.
 
woof woof said:
It's all part of the "fun."

I'd love a compact 35mm f2 or wider of the size and quality of the mini G's but I can't see it happening because it'd either be very expensive or a bit wild at wide apertures and I don't think Sony will do either as people will point and either scream or laugh. Someone else might do it though. I do have compact f2.5 and f2.8 lenses and bigger f1.8 and f2 lenses and small MF 35mm f1.4 and f2 lenses. The Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 can be funky at f1.4 or so but it calms down a lot by f2 and all this is scene dependant and some pictures can look nice at f1.4 whilst for some other scenes f1.4 should be for emergency only use. The TTA 50mm f2 has massive vignetting and seriously bad corners at some apertures and distances and can give colour casts but it is tiny. Both are still MF though.

If there was a mini G 35mm f2 with reasonable performance at a reasonable price the next thing I'd want would be an A7cIII with a good evf and either a tilting or fully articulated rear screen.

Then I'd shut up.
Click to expand...
I do know what you mean, it’s taken me years of gear changing to end up with 3 lenses

28mm F1.7
43mm F2
APSC 100-400 (for motorsport)

I definitely in the less is more camp - but it’s nice to have virtually no choice, it certainly reduces the dithering about!!!
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I do know what you mean, it’s taken me years of gear changing to end up with 3 lenses

28mm F1.7
43mm F2
APSC 100-400 (for motorsport)

I definitely in the less is more camp - but it’s nice to have virtually no choice, it certainly reduces the dithering about!!!
Click to expand...

I think I've decided to sell most of my MF lenses, maybe all the film era ones but I might keep the Voigtlander 35mm f2.5 Color Skopar. I shouldn't but I know if I sell it I'll regret it. I should sell my E mount Voigtlanders including the 35mm f1.4 even though it is probably my most used lens ever. My Sony lenses should be looked at too. My MFT kit needs pruning as well. I did sell quite a bit but there's too much left. My Panny TZ100 should go to as I only use it about twice a year.

But then I think... Why? I don't need the money and it's all there if I want to take it out and use it.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I do know what you mean, it’s taken me years of gear changing to end up with 3 lenses

28mm F1.7
43mm F2
APSC 100-400 (for motorsport)

I definitely in the less is more camp - but it’s nice to have virtually no choice, it certainly reduces the dithering about!!!
Click to expand...
I must admit I don’t dither about when it comes to which lens to use, and I like having the choice (y)
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I do know what you mean, it’s taken me years of gear changing to end up with 3 lenses

28mm F1.7
43mm F2
APSC 100-400 (for motorsport)

I definitely in the less is more camp - but it’s nice to have virtually no choice, it certainly reduces the dithering about!!!
Click to expand...

snerkler said:
I must admit I don’t dither about when it comes to which lens to use, and I like having the choice (y)
Click to expand...

Mr Perceptive said:
Yes, but I never have the wrong lens on theh camera, I might have the wrong camera in my hand though :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

I very rarely can't decide on which lens. That's usually pretty easy.

It's which format to take which causes more thought :ROFLMAO:
 
LeeRatters said:
I very rarely can't decide on which lens. That's usually pretty easy.

It's which format to take which causes more thought :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

I know!!

Just packed my bags for Oulton Park tomorrow - fortunately being the Friday I'll be able to park in the middle and use the car as my main camera bag, thought I'd shoot mainly in the paddock/pits tomorrow as I've got a weekend pass, so I've packed the Fuji GX680 (thats a bag on its own) and the Q3 43, then thrown the Q3 28 and X-T3 + 100-400 in 'just in case' :ROFLMAO:

I shall see how I get on with 4.5kg of medium format film camera - the 2 additional lens and spare back I've packed add another 2.5kg!! But at least I can dedicate one back for B&W and one to colour and change whenever I want.

It will be interesting shooting the beast handheld!
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
Just packed my bags for Oulton Park tomorrow - fortunately being teh Friday I'll be able to park in teh middle and use the car as my main camera bag, thought I'd shoot mainly in the paddock/pits tomorrow as I've got a weekend pass, so I've packed the Fuji GX680 (thats a bag on its own) and the Q3 43, then thrown the Q3 28 and X-T3 + 100-400 in 'just in case' :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Should be a good selection of cars there, always good events those kinds of things. I've just found out that Silverstone Festival is also (as well as Goodwood FOS) celebrating 75 years of F1 and have a number of the championship winning cars there so I'm even more excited than I was already. Whilst they were there at Goodwood it was difficult to get close in the paddock as it was soooooo busy so I'm hoping firstly that it's dry, and secondly it's much quieter so I can take my time and get the shots I want.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I know!!

Just packed my bags for Oulton Park tomorrow - fortunately being the Friday I'll be able to park in the middle and use the car as my main camera bag, thought I'd shoot mainly in the paddock/pits tomorrow as I've got a weekend pass, so I've packed the Fuji GX680 (thats a bag on its own) and the Q3 43, then thrown the Q3 28 and X-T3 + 100-400 in 'just in case' :ROFLMAO:

I shall see how I get on with 4.5kg of medium format film camera - the 2 additional lens and spare back I've packed add another 2.5kg!! But at least I can dedicate one back for B&W and one to colour and change whenever I want.

It will be interesting shooting the beast handheld!
Click to expand...

Damn, that's a lot of weight for one 'camera' :ROFLMAO:

We've booked a bit of a Wales 'roadtrip' holiday (Anglesey/Snowdonia, Aberystwyth, Tenby areas) for September so I shall probably do the usual like I did for Devon last month & take everything* and decide on the day what to use depending on location/time of day/what else needs to be carried etc

*well, almost everything. I think we are away when the moon isn't great for milky way so that gear & the 24GM may stay at home.
 
Just for fun.

I wondered how much bigger the RX1 is than the Panny TZ100 which is a 1" sensor camera with a zoom lens which extends when you turn it on.

1-Untitled-1.jpg

1-Untitled-2.jpg

The RX1 is bigger than my Panny GM5 (now sold) but looking at it next to the TZ100 really shows how small this camera and lens are. This camera seems to be getting so many way OTT hate filled comments but I have to be honest and say that I see the point and although the price is high I don't see it as ridiculously high when looking at its size and spec and comparing it to the A7crII and... what lens? That's a problem. I'm not getting one but I could be more tempted if it had a tilting back screen. Actually the very low max shutter speed/speeds and what I've read is bad rolling shutter when using the electronic shutter could also be an issue.
 
woof woof said:
Just for fun.

I wondered how much bigger the RX1 is than the Panny TZ100 which is a 1" sensor camera with a zoom lens which extends when you turn it on.

View attachment 458742

View attachment 458744

The RX1 is bigger than my Panny GM5 (now sold) but looking at it next to the TZ100 really shows how small this camera and lens are. This camera seems to be getting so many way OTT hate filled comments but I have to be honest and say that I see the point and although the price is high I don't see it as ridiculously high when looking at its size and spec and comparing it to the A7crII and... what lens? That's a problem. I'm not getting one but I could be more tempted if it had a tilting back screen. Actually the very low max shutter speed/speeds and what I've read is bad rolling shutter when using the electronic shutter could also be an issue.
Click to expand...
My phone is even smaller and doesn't cost any extra so case closed :LOL:
 
LongLensPhotography said:
My phone is even smaller and doesn't cost any extra so case closed :LOL:
Click to expand...

I'd rather have my eyes gouged out with a hot poker than have my photography hobby ruined by having to jab at a fingerprint smeared oblong glass box 18 inches from my face, but each to their own. Phone photography is for me a joyless experience.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Just for fun.

I wondered how much bigger the RX1 is than the Panny TZ100 which is a 1" sensor camera with a zoom lens which extends when you turn it on.

View attachment 458742

View attachment 458744

The RX1 is bigger than my Panny GM5 (now sold) but looking at it next to the TZ100 really shows how small this camera and lens are. This camera seems to be getting so many way OTT hate filled comments but I have to be honest and say that I see the point and although the price is high I don't see it as ridiculously high when looking at its size and spec and comparing it to the A7crII and... what lens? That's a problem. I'm not getting one but I could be more tempted if it had a tilting back screen. Actually the very low max shutter speed/speeds and what I've read is bad rolling shutter when using the electronic shutter could also be an issue.
Click to expand...
I think all the "hate" come from the ludicrous price, if it was around the £2k mark I think people would have a much better impression and nicer things to say about it. I don't think people are saying it's a bad camera, I'm sure it will produce top notch images, however Sony are charging you top whack for a 10 year old lens, a sub par EVF, a sub par LCD, and sub par controls. If you break it down I don't see how anyone can think it's worth £4200 regardless of how nice the images may be.

Let's be honest, you're highly unlikely to use this camera for sports etc so the latest and greatest AF is probably not needed (although is always welcome) therefore you'd be better off saving a shed load of money and buying an RX1R II. Of course, if you're a vlogger the III maybe better suited but even then I doubt anyone can justify the price. That being said, you don't always have to justify the price to want something. I think the A1 II is way overpriced but I still want it ;) I would never buy it at UK RRP though, even grey prices are hard to justify.
 
woof woof said:
Just for fun.

I wondered how much bigger the RX1 is than the Panny TZ100 which is a 1" sensor camera with a zoom lens which extends when you turn it on.

View attachment 458742

View attachment 458744

The RX1 is bigger than my Panny GM5 (now sold) but looking at it next to the TZ100 really shows how small this camera and lens are. This camera seems to be getting so many way OTT hate filled comments but I have to be honest and say that I see the point and although the price is high I don't see it as ridiculously high when looking at its size and spec and comparing it to the A7crII and... what lens? That's a problem. I'm not getting one but I could be more tempted if it had a tilting back screen. Actually the very low max shutter speed/speeds and what I've read is bad rolling shutter when using the electronic shutter could also be an issue.
Click to expand...

snerkler said:
I think all the "hate" come from the ludicrous price, if it was around the £2k mark I think people would have a much better impression and nicer things to say about it. I don't think people are saying it's a bad camera, I'm sure it will produce top notch images, however Sony are charging you top whack for a 10 year old lens, a sub par EVF, a sub par LCD, and sub par controls. If you break it down I don't see how anyone can think it's worth £4200 regardless of how nice the images may be.

Let's be honest, you're highly unlikely to use this camera for sports etc so the latest and greatest AF is probably not needed (although is always welcome) therefore you'd be better off saving a shed load of money and buying an RX1R II. Of course, if you're a vlogger the III maybe better suited but even then I doubt anyone can justify the price. That being said, you don't always have to justify the price to want something. I think the A1 II is way overpriced but I still want it ;) I would never buy it at UK RRP though, even grey prices are hard to justify.
Click to expand...
There seem to be a few people on the Sony alpha Reddit group that have bought or are a waiting on it being delivered.

One guys justification was due to size. He said he doesn’t want to carry his a7iv everywhere and had been using the original version for years with great results.

I do think it looks great but the price is definitely not justified.
I could have an A1 and 35.1.4 for less if bought from HK.
 
Last edited:
pmac said:
There seem to be a few people on the Sony alpha Reddit group that have bought or are a waiting on it being delivered.

One guys justification was due to size. He said he doesn’t want to carry his a7iv everywhere and had been using the original version for years with great results.

I don’t think it looks great but the price is definitely not justified.
I could have an A1 and 35.1.4 for less if bought from HK.
Click to expand...
I get why people will want it, who doesn’t want a small lightweight FF camera ;) Maybe Sony banked on folk buying with their hearts rather than their heads.
 
@snerkler I think you are right that teh price is imeediately putting people on the back foot, and then comes the negative comments. Given that teh A7Cii is £1800 UK, I think your £2K figure is somewhat optimistic, we are in a world where every new release (from akll manufacturers) is setting a new price point, but I do think that at around £3,000-£3,250 it would have generated a lot of interest.
 
the_accidental said:
As I said above, £3600 would have made it the same price point as its predecessor, adjusted for inflation.
Click to expand...
I’m sure the
Mr Perceptive said:
@snerkler I think you are right that teh price is imeediately putting people on the back foot, and then comes the negative comments. Given that teh A7Cii is £1800 UK, I think your £2K figure is somewhat optimistic, we are in a world where every new release (from akll manufacturers) is setting a new price point, but I do think that at around £3,000-£3,250 it would have generated a lot of interest.
Click to expand...

I’m sure the rumours were saying the a7V is looking to be 3k US.
So I would expect it to be that or even higher in the UK.
 
the_accidental said:
As I said above, £3600 would have made it the same price point as its predecessor, adjusted for inflation.
Click to expand...
That would have made more sense, although still think it’s a cheek when it’s for a 10 year old lens, similar/same EVF and taken away the tilt screen.

Was the Mark II weather sealed?
 
In agreement pretty much, I think it's the pricing that is the issue. As you guys have mainly covered already. It's not a "professional" camera. It's more of a travel, holiday, everyday, dog walking, pocketable (?) type camera. And there are plenty of other cameras in that category which, although maybe don't have the sensor/aperture of the Sony, certainly have other features and price on their side.
 
I think the price in the US is inflated by tariffs and I think a lot of (possibly) Americans are commenting in a very negative and IMO OTT way. I think the price in the UK is still a touch high but within reach of what's understandable to me if we look at the price of the last one at launch and inflate it up to today.

Given the nice lens which is not available anywhere else and what else you can get which is reasonably small I'd say anything from about £3,500 (because that's what an A7CrII and a nice lens in the region of £800-£1k will probably cost and I'd pay that for a nice compact 35mm f2) to £4k (adding a bit here for it being a niche product which'll sell in relatively small numbers) is justifiable and in the UK it's £4,200 so not far off. It might be too much for me but I think the price in the UK is understandable and if it was to drop below £4k I'd think that it was reasonable and with every penny it got closer £3.5K I'd say it would be ever more of a bargain despite some of the technical limitations.

What's struck me is that I don't remember the forums and bloggers going so mental over a new piece of kit before. I wonder if Sony have really had more than expected preorders? And of course some people may cancel their preorders.

Just on tariffs. I agree with some tariffs for goods and services for which companies get out of the ordinary subsidies (Chinese EV's spring to mind) but with camera gear I think tariffs get a bit harder to justify as there is little if any US competition unless they just want to lump camera gear in with things that are heavily subsidised to give the origin countries government a extra kicking.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I think all the "hate" come from the ludicrous price, if it was around the £2k mark I think people would have a much better impression and nicer things to say about it. I don't think people are saying it's a bad camera, I'm sure it will produce top notch images, however Sony are charging you top whack for a 10 year old lens, a sub par EVF, a sub par LCD, and sub par controls. If you break it down I don't see how anyone can think it's worth £4200 regardless of how nice the images may be.

Let's be honest, you're highly unlikely to use this camera for sports etc so the latest and greatest AF is probably not needed (although is always welcome) therefore you'd be better off saving a shed load of money and buying an RX1R II. Of course, if you're a vlogger the III maybe better suited but even then I doubt anyone can justify the price. That being said, you don't always have to justify the price to want something. I think the A1 II is way overpriced but I still want it ;) I would never buy it at UK RRP though, even grey prices are hard to justify.
Click to expand...
snerkler said:
I get why people will want it, who doesn’t want a small lightweight FF camera ;) Maybe Sony banked on folk buying with their hearts rather than their heads.
Click to expand...

It's the small size and being 35mm that appeals for me. I'm not really interested in leaf shutters and sync speeds but I like compact kit and lenses in the 35mm range. As I said before, if I did get one of these it would be my most used camera. I'd use it for walks, days out and holidays which is what I use my other stuff for. I would get annoyed with the shutter speed foibles and I would get frustrated with not having a tilty screen but I'd very probably use it like I used my film compacts which I took just about everywhere with me.
 
Bit of a strange question, but I use my A6700 quite a bit for video, I use it almost exclusively with the Sony EMC-M1 mic which obviously connects wirelessly to the MI hot shoe of the camera. I’m thinking of getting a smallrig cage for the camera so I can se an external monitor and handle, but if I use the cage, I won’t be able to use the mic in the hot shoe.

Does anyone know a way around this please (I.e. is there an off shoe extension cable available for the MI hot shoe from Sony?)
 
woof woof said:
I think the price in the US is inflated by tariffs and I think a lot of (possibly) Americans are commenting in a very negative and IMO OTT way. I think the price in the UK is still a touch high but within reach of what's understandable to me if we look at the price of the last one at launch and inflate it up to today.
Click to expand...
The more I read about pricing the less the argument holds up. This is a camera in a segment of two, the only other comparable camera is the Leica Q which is more expensive and has different compromises.

When you compare photography with other hobbies such as cars or boats (even more so private pilots!) photography is a relatively affordable interest, and theres a bunch of well heeled enthusiasts with the money for cameras of this category.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
I think you have to include the Fuji X100VI and the Fuji GFX100RF in the segement of premium fixed lens compacts, yes the Q3/Q3 43 are the only direct FF competitors, but I would see the two Fuji's as competion.
Click to expand...

The Leica's are more expensive and in the case of the 43 much more so and they and the MF Fuji are bigger and the X100 is APS-C with IMO a lens which isn't anywhere near the same class. Put a lens of that quality on the RX1 and what would the reaction be? I suppose it depends how far we want to stretch the comparison parameters and how you want to spend your money. Is my out of production Panny GX80 and 14mm f2.5 in the mix too? Maybe, maybe not. I see the competition as being any other small FF body and reasonably fast lens combination and I think even the Q's are a stretch as they are noticeably bigger and more expensive.

As I said. To me the RX1 is a one trick pony, discount the small size and compare it to larger cameras at different price points and that one trick goes away and I might as well just look no further than my A7III with my 35mm f1.8 or f2.8 on it.
 
Gold said:
The more I read about pricing the less the argument holds up. This is a camera in a segment of two, the only other comparable camera is the Leica Q which is more expensive and has different compromises.

When you compare photography with other hobbies such as cars or boats (even more so private pilots!) photography is a relatively affordable interest, and theres a bunch of well heeled enthusiasts with the money for cameras of this category.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying, and of course to a large exxtent that's how the market works. However, if you look at it objectively and purely on specs then the pricing argument definitely holds up.
 
Mr Perceptive said:
@woof woof are you basing your X190 lens classification on the X100F you had, the V and VI had an updated and much sharper lens
Click to expand...

I don't know what the X190 is. I had the X100s which quickly went back as it was faulty and f. For me the lens was ok, nothing special but ok but for me spoilt by a very poor (IMO) MF action although I do realise that the vast majority or people will never MF with these cameras. The latest lens may be better but it's an APS-C lens and one question could be... Would a lens of that quality be acceptable on a £3k, £4k or £5k FF camera? For me it could be as I've used film era lenses a lot but for other people?

I did like the X100 but as I have my Sony FF and MFT kit I found myself always choosing something else. I can definitely see the appeal, I can see how it can also appeal to people who want something beyond just a tool camera and instead are maybe venturing into what's cool and nice and I can see how the film filters can appeal but most of these things pass me by (as you might have noticed.) Looking at the X100 range as an alternative to the RX1 range doesn't really work for me except if I look at it beyond being a tool camera and include the more aesthetic and artistic aspects (gear fondling and film filters) and maybe include other ways to spend money on arguably luxury items such as a nice watch. For me a X100 is competing more with a nice watch than the RX1 or even my Sony or MFT kit.

That's just how I see it. The RX1 for me would be a small FF camera I could take out more and be more comfortable using when there are other people around because I think it would attract less attention than an A7III with 35mm f1.8 on it. The X100 is more of a fun thing, for me. Nothing wrong with having fun things in fact I encourage it :D
 
Last edited:
Petapixel are reporting high demand for the RX1R III, seems there’s enough people don’t mind the price.
 
In case anyone is looking to upgrade, I’ve just posted my a7r iv(a) in the classifieds.

Pics now added.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
Petapixel are reporting high demand for the RX1R III, seems there’s enough people don’t mind the price.
Click to expand...

I think this might well be true. On another forum where people have been ranting people have said that they've ordered and some have received their cameras. If we accept that ordinary people :D don't spend their time on forums it may well be that it is indeed selling better than Sony expected.
 
snerkler said:
Why is he only reviewing this now, I had this lens 3 years ago? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Just got around to it I suppose.

I linked it because I do like their reviews and they normally include example pictures. CA looks to be pretty epic but it is at 100%.
 
woof woof said:
Just got around to it I suppose.

I linked it because I do like their reviews and they normally include example pictures. CA looks to be pretty epic but it is at 100%.
Click to expand...
I never found CA’s too bad, even when shooting chrome on cars. The rendering was lovely :love:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top