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

chrism_scotland said:
To be fair I agree the 55 is overpriced (as good as it is) because similar lenses on FF for Nikon and Canon are less than £150 (50mm f1.8) however £760 for the 70-200 is a bargain when you consider the Nikon 70-200 f4 is closer to £950!
Click to expand...

Ermmm not quite ;)

Sony 1056 vs Nikon 889!!
 
Last edited:
Can't really believe people are comparing the 55mm to Canikon 50mm f1.8's.

I can imagine what the press and reviewers would say if Sony's 50mm offering was a £100 average performer or some missfocusing soft thing likely to fall apart. I wonder how lenses like that will perform on an A7rII.

I think maybe it's time to accept that Sony aren't in that market, yet, and if people want to use cheap and good enough lenses, buy a Canokon and be happy.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Can't really believe people are comparing the 55mm to Canikon 50mm f1.8's.

I can imagine what the press and reviewers would say if Sony's 50mm offering was a £100 average performer or some missfocusing soft thing likely to fall apart. I wonder how lenses like that will perform on an A7rII.

I think maybe it's time to accept that Sony aren't in that market, yet, and if people want to use cheap and good enough lenses, buy a Canokon and be happy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, tbf the Sony is much better in every way to a Canon nifty, the Nikon 50g is pretty good and punches well above its weight in terms of price, af and build quality but its still not as good as the 55.

However, there are a lot of mid range Canikon and 3rd party lenses that arent just 'good enough' but excellent. Sony will get there eventually, I have no doubt about that.
 
chrism_scotland said:
To be fair I agree the 55 is overpriced (as good as it is) because similar lenses on FF for Nikon and Canon are less than £150 (50mm f1.8) however £760 for the 70-200 is a bargain when you consider the Nikon 70-200 f4 is closer to £950!
Click to expand...

Similar focal length and aperture but not at all similar in performance. I totally agree that there should be a low-cost 50/1.8 like the SAL lens but the 55/1.8 is a superb lens and worth every penny.
 
paulcamcas said:
And big and heavy - 815g vs 281g. I was impressed with mine but, to my eyes, it didn't match the Sony 55 and I don't think it was much lower cost.
Click to expand...

Which is what you get with a faster aperture.

But yours had issues and from what Ive seen, theres nothing in it, both are superb lenses. And generally F1.4 lenses cost more than f1.8 lenses.
 
Last edited:
Any ideas for something really fast and wide, i want something for taking night time photos handheld without a flash. Only thing i can find that works well is the 50mm f0.95, ideally would love the same but 24mm or even wider.
 
robj20 said:
Any ideas for something really fast and wide, i want something for taking night time photos handheld without a flash. Only thing i can find that works well is the 50mm f0.95, ideally would love the same but 24mm or even wider.
Click to expand...

Sigma 24mm 1.4?
 
twist said:
Which is what you get with a faster aperture.

But yours had issues and from what Ive seen, theres nothing in it, both are superb lenses. And generally F1.4 lenses cost more than f1.8 lenses.
Click to expand...

I really shouldn't encourage you but... the faster aperture has no real-world benefit too me - either in light gathering or depth of field and on both counts the Mitakon Speedmaster had the edge - but the size and weight would be huge disadvantage. I didn't mention the problems because criticising Sigma on quality issues is a bit too "easy" but, since you mentioned it, I had to return the lens for refund due to very inconsistent focusing.
 
Last edited:
paulcamcas said:
I really shouldn't encourage you but... the faster aperture has no real benefit too me - either in light gathering or depth of field and on both counts the Mitakon Speedmaster had the edge - but the size and weight would be a huge disadvantage. I didn't mention the problems because criticising Sigma on quality issues is a bit too "easy" but, since you mentioned it, I had to return the lens for refund due to very inconsistent focusing.
Click to expand...

I really shouldnt encourage you... again, but I wasnt specifically aiming the f1.4 comment at your usage, it was just a statement of fact. :)

Except the Mitakon is softer at f1.4 and its MF only, which is fine for some, but not most.
 
Last edited:
twist said:
Sigma 24mm 1.4?
Click to expand...

If 24mm f1.4 was my main choice i think i would be going with the Samyang. Wouldnt be happy spending so much money on a non native lens.
 
robj20 said:
If 24mm f1.4 was my main choice i think i would be going with the Samyang. Wouldnt be happy spending so much money on a non native lens.
Click to expand...

You mentioned the Mitakon, I thought that was an indicator for budget.
 
twist said:
But you cant focus it very easily and thats why you sold it :p
Click to expand...

I really had to rack my brains to remember why I sold the Speedmaster. So many cameras, so little brain. At the time I was running an A7S + Speedmaster and a D700 + 58/1.4. I found that for things that don't move much, MF with the Speedmaster was quicker and gave more keepers than AF on the D700. In the end the D700 + 58/1.4 won out and I sold the Sony kit but it was more to do with GAS, the limitations of the A7S and weight of the Mitakon than focusing difficulties - although it is fair to say that at f0.95, focusing ain't easy. On reflection, I rather wish I'd kept the Speedmaster - I do prefer the Loxia 95% of the times but sometimes f0.95 would be handy.
 
I suppose, is it available in A mount that way i can maintain full functionality.
 
... same here, the Mitakon was very nice but big, very heavy and very difficult to focus unless you had a stationary subject which made the 50mm FL a little pointless.
 
The 55 is weather sealed, maximum aperture aside it's about as far as it's possible to get from a 'nifty fifty'.

Price comparisons with CaNikon and their huge economies of scale are kinda irrelevant anyway, if using a relatively niche system you've got to expect higher prices.
 
I hate making compromise, lol.
 
robj20 said:
I hate making compromise, lol.
Click to expand...

I guess you either get a faster 50mm thats not the FL you want ideally and MF with native mount.

OR

A slightly slower 24mm FL which you do want with fast AF and better optical performance but have to use an adapter.

For me, not really a tough choice. One ticks more boxes than the other.
 
.... could go down the middle and look at the Loxia 35/2? Small, reasonably fast, native. OR theres the Nokton 35 / 1.2 which is SUPERB via a LM adapter (they are tiny adapters).
 
Loxia is out already have the 35 2.8 not enough difference.
Maybe the 55 1.8 is a good compromise. Going to have to give it some thought. Im going to get another Nissin i40 soon as well, hope it works this time.
 
Last edited:
The most important criteria is decent low light pictures with as far as possible no flash. Usually i like to go wide to make hand holding a longer shutter speed easier, but the 55 1.8 would at least give me some nice dof over my 24-70 f4.
 
twist said:
Ermmm not quite ;)

Sony 1056 vs Nikon 889!!
Click to expand...

I've been looking at the 70-200 f4 today funnily enough, can't believe how much it's come down in price. £850 from a legit UK source (with £150 cashback) is pretty decent.
 
Twist's suggestion of the Nokton, is a good one. Money-no-object answer is a Summilux 35/1.4. Not sure there's a better 35mm lens made. But, I'd go for the Loxia if I couldn't live with f2.8.
 
A lens i hadn't looked at is the new 28mm f2 with converters. Has anyone used these?
 
ukaskew said:
I've been looking at the 70-200 f4 today funnily enough, can't believe how much it's come down in price. £850 from a legit UK source (with £150 cashback) is pretty decent.
Click to expand...

CPB is 1056, 150 cashback makes it 906. Its only the cashback that makes it seem 'cheap'. Sonys doing some good deals all round at the mo with cashback.
 
Been looking into the 28mm f2, thats seems a great buy for those wanting cheaper lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top