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

nandbytes said:
You can actually ;)
Sony APS-C lenses just suck or are overpriced and in some cases both! :p
Click to expand...

Its going to be difficult balancing size/weight and quality I guess. I wanted a small and light camera that worked well for photos and videos which is what the A6300 gives me but the Sigma 16mm F1.4 weighs more than the body of the camera so would take me from 400g to a little over 800g in weight versus the Sigma 19mm which is only 140g but clearly is not going to be as good :cautious:
 
noneforit said:
Yes it seems the reviews are not very favourable on the 20mm Sony, I might skip that one as its only meant to be marginally better than the kit lens.

The sigma 16mm looks good but it also looks fairly hefty but I guess if you want good images, you need to have a bigger lens usually. Can't have your cake and eat it as they say.

Will have a think, thanks for your reply.
Click to expand...


The 16mm Sigma is a bit on the big side for apsc although still pretty small when you compare with full frame lenses.

It is an excellent performer though. A lot of people rave about Fuji APSC lenses but they don't have anything as good as this and it is pretty reasonably priced too.
 
noneforit said:
Its going to be difficult balancing size/weight and quality I guess. I wanted a small and light camera that worked well for photos and videos which is what the A6300 gives me but the Sigma 16mm F1.4 weighs more than the body of the camera so would take me from 400g to a little over 800g in weight versus the Sigma 19mm which is only 140g but clearly is not going to be as good :cautious:
Click to expand...

Not really Sony just couldn't make a good one.
Checkout canon eos-m 22mm f2. Wide open it's as sharp as Sony 24mm f1.8 is at f4, not to mention the Sony costs like 4-5 times more.

The samyang 35mm f2.8 weighs less than 100g and is very sharp across the frame. So small, light and sharp lenses can be a thing but just not on Sony APS-C :p

Sigma 19mm f2.8 is only slightly better than the Sony 20mm f2.8.
The a6300 is indeed a great hybrid body, but lenses on Sony APS-C don't do it much justice.

Sorry I don't mean to bash into a system you just bought into but there is no nice of putting it really.

Sigma f1.4 trio-primes are awesome though.
 
Last edited:
JJ! said:
It’s one of life’s mysteries! Lol
Click to expand...

Well I’ve finally got one and like it very much. Can’t see myself leaving it for a lower specs now
 
rookies said:
Well I’ve finally got one and like it very much. Can’t see myself leaving it for a lower specs now
Click to expand...

I have only one issue with the A9, before I got it I was very happy with my A7III's but now I always want to use the A9.

I will probably have to get another one, it will have to replace one of the A7III's though as I can't justify another additional body.
 
f/2.8 said:
I have only one issue with the A9, before I got it I was very happy with my A7III's but now I always want to use the A9.

I will probably have to get another one, it will have to replace one of the A7III's though as I can't justify another additional body.
Click to expand...

I’m kind of torn really. I bought the A9 as I knew i would make a bit of money on it no matter what I decided.

I only use my camera like once every couple of weeks and no real complaints with the A73. Its never really missed focus and I find its tracking more than enough for what I do when I actually do it.

But the A9 is a step up, and can shoot silent under lights without funny effects, but it’s whether it’s beneficial enough! No rush. I have both so can decide whenever!
 
JJ! said:
I’m kind of torn really. I bought the A9 as I knew i would make a bit of money on it no matter what I decided.

I only use my camera like once every couple of weeks and no real complaints with the A73. Its never really missed focus and I find its tracking more than enough for what I do when I actually do it.

But the A9 is a step up, and can shoot silent under lights without funny effects, but it’s whether it’s beneficial enough! No rush. I have both so can decide whenever!
Click to expand...
How are you making money off of buying gear using it for a few times and selling it for more you got it?
 
nandbytes said:
I guess he is buying used at a very good price and selling it for slightly higher.
Click to expand...

To be fair, not everyone realises about grey import prices either.

A guy I know bought an A7RIII from e-infin not that long ago then sold it on Facebook and made a little bit over what he paid for it new.
 
jonneymendoza said:
How are you making money off of buying gear using it for a few times and selling it for more you got it?
Click to expand...

Someone wanted a quick sale and a quick MPB check meant it was worth the purchase.

They offered £1975 - that’s pretty damn decent!
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
The 16mm Sigma is a bit on the big side for apsc although still pretty small when you compare with full frame lenses.

It is an excellent performer though. A lot of people rave about Fuji APSC lenses but they don't have anything as good as this and it is pretty reasonably priced too.
Click to expand...

Fuji's 16mm f1.4 is a brilliant lens.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Meant to have better af? Maybe faster buffer?
Click to expand...
But this is where it all gets a bit 'needless' imo. From what I gather the A9 AF is more or less instant and nails everything in all modes so who needs better than that? There's going to come a time (maybe we're there already) where AF can't get faster, or at least perceivably faster.

Like wise with the buffer, doesn't the A9 have a raw buffer of over 200 shots? Who needs that seriously? Also 20fps is more than enough for anyone or anything, I'm not sure what else you'd need? Maybe a camera that has all this and a 42-50mp sensor might please some?

IMO Sony should start focussing more on their menu systems, ergonomics (I know most find them OK but I think it's fair to say they're not the best out there) and things like lossless compression whilst in the meantime working on global shutters.
 
This guy seems to wax lyrical about the A9-II saying that as a package it's quite a step up from the A9, although I have to admit a lot of the stuff about transfer speeds and voice tagging wouldn't interest me in the slightest, but then the camera's not aimed at people like me ;) One thing that I found interesting was the ergonomic tweaks and that it's now useable wearing gloves. Maybe my sausage fingers would fit the grip better on this ;)

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/reviews/sony-a9-ii-review
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
But this is where it all gets a bit 'needless' imo. From what I gather the A9 AF is more or less instant and nails everything in all modes so who needs better than that? There's going to come a time (maybe we're there already) where AF can't get faster, or at least perceivably faster.

Like wise with the buffer, doesn't the A9 have a raw buffer of over 200 shots? Who needs that seriously? Also 20fps is more than enough for anyone or anything, I'm not sure what else you'd need? Maybe a camera that has all this and a 42-50mp sensor might please some?

IMO Sony should start focussing more on their menu systems, ergonomics (I know most find them OK but I think it's fair to say they're not the best out there) and things like lossless compression whilst in the meantime working on global shutters.
Click to expand...

20fps is insane enough so yeah who would actually need or want any faster! I used 20fps a couple of times and the amount of photos and work I ended up having was quite mad as it’s just way to easy to blast off 100 shots!
 
Focus camera in the states are doing a 30% discount of the A7RIV for students. :ROFLMAO:
 
Although the decision really is keep A9 or keep the A7iii and get the 35mm 1.8. Ohhhhhhhhhhh decisions decisions!
 
noneforit said:
Hopefully this is the right thread for these but I just picked up a used A6300 + 35mm F1.8.

Took a few test shots last night and very happy so far, its so much lighter than my previous Canon 6D but still feels really solid.

We are off to Bruges next weekend but I am thinking the 35mm on the crop is not going to be wide enough for most of the shots I am going to want so looking at alternative options. I would prefer to avoid the kit lens but I bought into the mirrorless range to save weight and size so would prefer a wide angle prime as opposed to a zoom. My thoughts are the 20mm F2.8 pancake lens as it should be wide enough for most shots but also small and light.
Click to expand...

Kit zooms don't tend to get a lot of love on forums but for general purpose good light use I think they make a lot of sense given the useful zoom range. One of my sisters has a kit lens for her A5xxx but sorry I don't know the model number, anyway, the pictures look very nice on screen, even the low light and night time shots, and in the few prints she does and she only shoots jpeg. For holiday and day out use I'd consider a zoom if I wasn't mostly an old prime guy, a kit lens and a prime would cover most things :D

I'm sure you'll enjoy Bruges :D
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
IMO Sony should start focussing more on their menu systems, ergonomics (I know most find them OK but I think it's fair to say they're not the best out there) and things like lossless compression whilst in the meantime working on global shutters.
Click to expand...

This again?

The Sony's are configurable and there's a lot of options you can use or not but once they're set up is it a problem?

Maybe it's just me. I remember my Canon's, they didn't have a menu as such just a long list of stuff but that was ok. These days there's page after page but it's arguably more manageable than a long list as at least you know mostly where to look and then there's the configurable buttons and menus that can make diving into the settings a rare event.

I'd be fine with some reorganisation with options maybe coming out of some sections and going into others but other than that I'm constantly phased by people who seem to see the menus and the large number of options as a stumbling block that puts them off the system.
 
I don’t mind Sony menus. So many buttons to make shortcuts too anyway!
 
woof woof said:
This again?

The Sony's are configurable and there's a lot of options you can use or not but once they're set up is it a problem?

.
Click to expand...
Nope but if they can improve on it why not? My point was there's not much to improve on so why not start focussing on the little things and make those perfect as well?
 
snerkler said:
This guy seems to wax lyrical about the A9-II saying that as a package it's quite a step up from the A9, although I have to admit a lot of the stuff about transfer speeds and voice tagging wouldn't interest me in the slightest, but then the camera's not aimed at people like me ;) One thing that I found interesting was the ergonomic tweaks and that it's now useable wearing gloves. Maybe my sausage fingers would fit the grip better on this ;)

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/reviews/sony-a9-ii-review
Click to expand...

I don't think the A9II is for the vast majority of people on here, it's for a relatively small number of people who'll see real advantages and from what I've read there is some real enthusiasm out there for it amongst it's target audience.
 
snerkler said:
Nope but if they can improve on it why not? My point was there's not much to improve on so why not start focussing on the little things and make those perfect as well?
Click to expand...
People have been using this as a stick for years now but I just don't see it. It is maybe more just familiarity with how other brands do things rather than how awful Sony are, maybe, IMO.

Actually this makes me think of my first digital camera, a Fuji S602 pro zoom. When I decided to sell that camera the first person who was very interested said no because it was too complicated and I think there's still a bit of that attitude today. I don't see cameras as being complicated as you can stick them in Aperture, shutter or manual and use them like it's 1952, instead I see them as having additional features which can be ignored, turned off or used as per your requirements and that has to be a good thing. The more menu options the better, IMO, and I don't really care if an option or two is arguably in the wrong folder.
 
snerkler said:
Nope but if they can improve on it why not? My point was there's not much to improve on so why not start focussing on the little things and make those perfect as well?
Click to expand...

How can they ever be perfect for everyone? I don't like Canon menus but I don't mind Sony and Nikon, not that I use them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top