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

JYC said:
Gotta admit though, Fuji have got their lenses sorted in less time than Sony. Make a big difference, sensor isn't everything - I don't think people deny that Sony is better on paper.
Click to expand...
Fuji's X-system has been out longer than the FE system so that is to be expected ;)
 
chrism_scotland said:
There seems to be a fair amount of negativity towards anything thats not a Sony at times in here.
Click to expand...
lol its a sony thread ;-) Nikon ones are the same and canon .... nothing wrong with a good debate on a Saturday morning though saves me speaking to the wife before I go off to a wedding lol
 
@twist as we have discussed I'm pretty sure mine was faulty as was well crap........... its put me off Fuji for a long time .... just my personal thing though
 
owenb said:
@twist as we have discussed I'm pretty sure mine was faulty as was well crap........... its put me off Fuji for a long time .... just my personal thing though
Click to expand...

That's fair enough I personally don't get put off by a bad experience as my 1st experience of the a7 was very poor but tried it again and found it a good camera for the money.
 
yes mate totally understand what your saying ..... we don't want this thread turning into a leica thread where every other camera is awful and wont do lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: JYC
Rizvan said:
For a first gen body the Sony A7 series was a game changer, yes it's not perfect but was and still is ahead of the Fuji XT-1 for IQ vs size. I was also considering the XT-1 but with only a £200 difference at the time between the A7 and XT-1, it was a no brainer for me.
Anybody who says that the Fuji is better for IQ vs Sony needs to apply the simple physics, FF sensors are better than crop for IQ for various reasons, the downside for some is larger lenses.
The Fuji lenses aren't that much smaller when you apply 35mm eqiv factoring.
If you want to go to a Fuji system fine, just be prepared to have to deal with mushy detail which can sometimes occur with the Fuji X-Trans sensor array configuration.
Best of luck. :)
Click to expand...

Not sure if this aimed at me, but I don't remember comparing Fuji IQ to Sony IQ? Clearly the Sony is better as it uses a modern full frame sensor. But the original a7 uses a poorly implemented full frame sensor for high ISO, meaning other full framers perform better.
 
owenb said:
but and it is a big but the sony adapted lenses are in a different stratosphere to the fuji
Click to expand...

What Sony adapted lenses? If you mean attaching gigantic full frame lenses to a small mirrorless camera, then that defeats the purpose (for many Fuji owners). Fuji already have an excellent range of native lenses :) Anyway, I only posted to point out that the Fuji output is a step up on MFT :)
 
manualfocus-g said:
With the greatest of respect, I couldn't give a monkeys with what you're sticking with, I'm just documenting my experience which demonstrated to me that the Fuji system gave clearly better results than micro four thirds. If you are comfortable with the results from your G1 then good for you, but I had one and the sensor was pretty naff.

Going back to high ISO on the a7, when used in low light it has significant chroma noise which results in lots of ugly black dots when NR is applied. I demonstrated this two years ago (v the 6D) and you were on the defensive back then as well. The reality is that for a modern full frame camera, the a7 is not great at high ISO. The a7r was significantly better (I've owned both). Your image looks soft BTW.
Click to expand...

oh dear. here was I thinking we were just chatting nicely about cameras you get all huffy..... and no, I'm not defensive, not in a fan boy way about any particular brand anyway. I'll criticise any brand when I see fit but I'll do it when I have convincing evidence or at least evidence worth talking about and here I was not blindly defending my beloved Sony, I was just asking you to clarify the pattern noise as I don't see it but there you go and get all huffy...

Where did I say that the G1 has a great sensor? It's not up to todays standards but I'd don't agree that it has a naff sensor. It's sensor is just of it's time. Actually I don't think it's all that bad unless you go to the higher ISO's and pixel peep. To clarify what I think, I think it gives good results at 100-maybe 800 ISO, above that it gives OK results for whole images to maybe 2000 and up to ISO 3200 it needs increasing care but you can get decent results if you put in a bit of effort.

When looking at Fuji v MFT performance it's the GX7 that I've used for comparison not the G1 as the G1 is relatively old tech now and can't live in this company at higher ISO's. At lower ISO's it does ok IMO, I've posted many G1 100% crops in the Panny thread.

I keep a few test shots on my pc so here's a G1 ISO 3200 test shot I took some time ago when I was looking at sensor performance against my Canon's. It's a 100% crop at 3200, ETTR and a little NR applied but nothing heroic as my PP skills are pretty limited. As I see it noise isn't too bad, there's still plenty of detail and this was under artificial light which can give the worst results.

Photobucket seems to be giving me endless Trojans this morning so I'll try and link this via my pc... it's meant to show the detail and noise in transition area to shadows and remember that this is a 100% crop of a test shot at 3200 taken with a relatively ancient G1 and its naff sensor.

s_1040952.jpg

Not too bad IMO and possibly better than anything I got from 35mm film. (At high ISO.)

On the needless monkey huffiness... I'm secure enough in my life not to be upset by a little steam from delicate little flowers rambling on about respect and monkeys but it's a shame to pollute the thread with huffiness so if you can't have a reasonable discussion (and I meant nothing huffy in my posts... AFAIK we're just chatting about cameras here) without getting huffy maybe you could step away from the keyboard until you've calmed down a bit or if not I suggest you use the ignore button. Your choice.
 
Last edited:
owenb said:
yes mate totally understand what your saying ..... we don't want this thread turning into a leica thread where every other camera is awful and wont do lol
Click to expand...

I don't think we have awful cameras these days do we? Handling might in my opinion be awful... battery life might be awful, the way it looks might be awful... but all things are relative and on the IQ side I can't remember slagging any camera off too much apart from a couple of compacts and even then it's all relative.

Agree with the thought that negativity isn't good but if people want to blow off every few pages I can't see any great harm in it as long as it's just a quick burst now and again and doesn't take over every page...
 
manualfocus-g said:
What Sony adapted lenses? If you mean attaching gigantic full frame lenses to a small mirrorless camera, then that defeats the purpose (for many Fuji owners). Fuji already have an excellent range of native lenses :) Anyway, I only posted to point out that the Fuji output is a step up on MFT :)
Click to expand...
Fair enough your entitled to your own opinion my friend
 
woof woof said:
I don't think we have awful cameras these days do we? Handling might in my opinion be awful... battery life might be awful, the way it looks might be awful... but all things are relative and on the IQ side I can't remember slagging any camera off too much apart from a couple of compacts and even then it's all relative.

Agree with the thought that negativity isn't good but if people want to blow off every few pages I can't see any great harm in it as long as it's just a quick burst now and again and doesn't take over every page...
Click to expand...

If people have owned the Sony etc then at some point of time it must have done something there previous camera didn't so that's cool with me mate......
I might go on a few nikon threads and bash them now as I have never owned one lmao
 
At least I post 100% crops of my crappy pictures taken with my crappy cameras.

If I'm missing pattern noise or anything else too nasty in Sony files and anyone else is getting nastiness I think it'd be good idea to post examples for either the sake of friendly argument / discussion or to ask for help in solving or avoiding it.

If I'm not seeing pattern noise with my basic PP skills then either I need to get to spec savers or someone else is doing something a bit extreme that I'm not doing... like boosting 5 stops and pixel peeping at 200%. I don't see any pattern noise in that +2 boosted 100% crop I posted earlier, maybe I'm missing it.

If you want noise, boost a Canon 20D ISO 3200 image :D
 
Rizvan said:
Is that a true Fuji 3200 ISO or their own made up ISO? ;)
Click to expand...

I think they are within what's allowed under the "standard" but I think they maybe push things as far as they can to look good whist still complying.

There does seem to be a general consensus that Fuji files are a little under exposed at the same ISO setting when compared to some other cameras.
 
owenb said:
imho as long as your happy with your own equipment that's all that matters tbh.... everyones views are subjective some people use a 150-600 with the a72 and think its ok I think mines crap hence buying a 1dx2
Click to expand...

Well said.

Anywho, my a7rii is in the classifieds. Not had minerals to list the the 55 or 16-35 yet. Taking the 55 on the a7 to a protest today.
 
tbh the batis looks good impractical for me as have new canon body on the way and 85l already.... if I was buying purely for sony and didn't own the 85 l though.................................
 
More GM 85 v Batis 85 on the rumour site...

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/85mm-batis-vs-85mm-gm-and-24-70mm-gm-model-shoot/#disqus_thread

He makes a valid point that you don't get the swirly cats eye look from many lenses and if you like that look then of course the Batis might be a Godsend but I'm still not sure that look is for me. I think I prefer the more conventional round oof highlights look.

Just on the GM 85... it actually looks a teeny bit more compact on the camera than I imagined but I'm not sure I'd be using a lens of that bulk as a walk about :D

I'm still not sure if I'll buy one of these as I don't use 85mm all that much, I have 3 old SLR 85's and a 45mm for my MFT.

I wonder how the GM looks on the camera bulk wise to the Sigma 85mm + adapter?
 
woof woof said:
oh dear. here was I thinking we were just chatting nicely about cameras you get all huffy..... and no, I'm not defensive, not in a fan boy way about any particular brand anyway. I'll criticise any brand when I see fit but I'll do it when I have convincing evidence or at least evidence worth talking about and here I was not blindly defending my beloved Sony, I was just asking you to clarify the pattern noise as I don't see it but there you go and get all huffy...

Where did I say that the G1 has a great sensor? It's not up to todays standards but I'd don't agree that it has a naff sensor. It's sensor is just of it's time. Actually I don't think it's all that bad unless you go to the higher ISO's and pixel peep. To clarify what I think, I think it gives good results at 100-maybe 800 ISO, above that it gives OK results for whole images to maybe 2000 and up to ISO 3200 it needs increasing care but you can get decent results if you put in a bit of effort.

When looking at Fuji v MFT performance it's the GX7 that I've used for comparison not the G1 as the G1 is relatively old tech now and can't live in this company at higher ISO's. At lower ISO's it does ok IMO, I've posted many G1 100% crops in the Panny thread.

I keep a few test shots on my pc so here's a G1 ISO 3200 test shot I took some time ago when I was looking at sensor performance against my Canon's. It's a 100% crop at 3200, ETTR and a little NR applied but nothing heroic as my PP skills are pretty limited. As I see it noise isn't too bad, there's still plenty of detail and this was under artificial light which can give the worst results.

Photobucket seems to be giving me endless Trojans this morning so I'll try and link this via my pc... it's meant to show the detail and noise in transition area to shadows and remember that this is a 100% crop of a test shot at 3200 taken with a relatively ancient G1 and its naff sensor.

View attachment 57891

Not too bad IMO and possibly better than anything I got from 35mm film. (At high ISO.)

On the needless monkey huffiness... I'm secure enough in my life not to be upset by a little steam from delicate little flowers rambling on about respect and monkeys but it's a shame to pollute the thread with huffiness so if you can't have a reasonable discussion (and I meant nothing huffy in my posts... AFAIK we're just chatting about cameras here) without getting huffy maybe you could step away from the keyboard until you've calmed down a bit or if not I suggest you use the ignore button. Your choice.
Click to expand...

Didn't mean to sound huffy - was just responding to your point about MFT being close to Fuji IQ wise. You being happy with your a7 is neither here nor there, you tell us often enough that it's engrained in our brains now ;) Good for you though!

As for the rest, I don't have time to read it all now I'm afraid, but I used a GF1 and G1 for real life shots and know full well that they're rubbish at iso 3200!
 
manualfocus-g said:
Didn't mean to sound huffy - was just responding to your point about MFT being close to Fuji IQ wise. You being happy with your a7 is neither here nor there, you tell us often enough that it's engrained in our brains now ;) Good for you though!

As for the rest, I don't have time to read it all now I'm afraid, but I used a GF1 and G1 for real life shots and know full well that they're rubbish at iso 3200!
Click to expand...

Oh dear. Am I talking to an adult here? I give up with you and in fact I've lost my usual patience so I'll bite for once...

No, the G1 isn't rubbish at real world shots it's just not as good as more modern kit. If yours was rubbish I'm afraid the unavoidable conclusion is that you don't know what you're doing.

As for your back handed little digs, little fan boy silliness and unsupported by any evidence criticisms (A7 banding with no examples posted) please take them and post them in another thread.

I'll do as I suggested earlier and choose to ignore you as I can't remember the last time I read anything sensible or even objective from you so it'll be no loss to me.

I suggest you choose to ignore me too so as you don't waste your time spitting your dummy out and replying again as I won't be reading your ramblings and snipes anymore.

Dunno why I waste my time with the likes of you.

Shakes head and heads off to hit the ignore button...

Ah... ignore option selected and the thread is now a better place :D
 
Last edited:
Durbs said:
Hi all


I’m looking to sell up all my Canon gear and switch over to an Alpha 7 II setup.

A friend works for Sony so gets below grey-import prices…


Anyway, I’m trying to decide between the A7II and the A7RII. Obviously the price difference is significant (£700 with his prices), but is the camera that much better to justify the price?


I’ll mostly be shooting landscapes, portraits (including crawling/toddling baby – so fast focus is a must!), and occasional rock climbing (bouldering) too, as well as other random bits.


I can’t find any sites which directly compare the two, except for side-by-side stats comparisons which don’t mean much to me, so was just looking for some advice really.


I can either sell ALL my Canon gear and get a A7RII with 24-70 f/4 (or maybe the 35 f/2.8 – undecided), or possibly keep hold of my beloved Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART and get an adapter – but the reason for selling up is downsizing and this won’t be the smallest combo?


Alternatively I could go for the A7II with the 24-70 f/4 and should have enough for a second-hand x100t for more of a grab-and-go camera.


I’m not a pro, but a keen amateur – so will the ‘R’ be over spec’d for me?
Click to expand...

R2 i shoot with my Father whos got the A7II i run A7Rii and in landscapes the sharpness is very noticeable, if you have the money then go for the RII, i use a Canon 24-70 F4 as i wasn't going to gamble with the Sonys F4 which was touch and go.
I'm so impressed with the Canon on Metabones for sharpness and detail i doubt i,ll better it, even with the G Master coming.
 
woof woof said:
More GM 85 v Batis 85 on the rumour site...

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/85mm-batis-vs-85mm-gm-and-24-70mm-gm-model-shoot/#disqus_thread

He makes a valid point that you don't get the swirly cats eye look from many lenses and if you like that look then of course the Batis might be a Godsend but I'm still not sure that look is for me. I think I prefer the more conventional round oof highlights look.

Just on the GM 85... it actually looks a teeny bit more compact on the camera than I imagined but I'm not sure I'd be using a lens of that bulk as a walk about :D

I'm still not sure if I'll buy one of these as I don't use 85mm all that much, I have 3 old SLR 85's and a 45mm for my MFT.

I wonder how the GM looks on the camera bulk wise to the Sigma 85mm + adapter?
Click to expand...

the gm lens are big, and someone on sar pointed out there maybe little room for your fingers between the grip and the lens.

the sal85 1.4 zeiss on a900 is actually smaller in the image someone posted there too xD

the 24-70 is also bigger than its dslr competitors, while the 70200 might save you a inch in length
 
Apologies if I offended anyone (Woof included, obviously, although he can't read this!).

My view on the various camera bodies discussed is based on real world usage and I have demonstrated my findings in the past. I'm not going to dig all that up again, as I don't have the time (The Woof and I have been back and forth several times on multiple topics) and, I was merely responding to a comment which I felt was wrong (that an aps-c sensor doesn't perform much better than an MFT sensor).

To clear up a couple of things - I never stated that the Sony a7 produces banding, just that it is noisier than other full framers of the same era, and I didn't enjoy shooting high ISO with it as a consequence.

I am not a Fuji fan boy, in fact I think the system has limitations like all the others - but it suits my needs and I like the output. I've owned many Sonys in the past and very much enjoyed my first DSLRs (a100 and a200). I've also owned an a450, Nex-3, Nex-5, Nex-7, a7 and a7r but didn't click with any of them. That doesn't mean the cameras don't suit someone else of course.

Right, PC post over, as you were :D
 
woof woof said:
Oh dear. Am I talking to an adult here? I give up with you and in fact I've lost my usual patience so I'll bite for once...

No, the G1 isn't rubbish at real world shots it's just not as good as more modern kit. If yours was rubbish I'm afraid the unavoidable conclusion is that you don't know what you're doing.

As for your back handed little digs, little fan boy silliness and unsupported by any evidence criticisms (A7 banding with no examples posted) please take them and post them in another thread.

I'll do as I suggested earlier and choose to ignore you as I can't remember the last time I read anything sensible or even objective from you so it'll be no loss to me.

I suggest you choose to ignore me too so as you don't waste your time spitting your dummy out and replying again as I won't be reading your ramblings and snipes anymore.

Dunno why I waste my time with the likes of you.

Shakes head and heads off to hit the ignore button...

Ah... ignore option selected and the thread is now a better place :D
Click to expand...

Oh dear...
Didn't join this thread to read discussions about the G1 or for that matter any other Panasonic, Fuji or other systems. May be interesting to some so why not take this stuff to another thread. It seems there are a lot of toys out of the pram already and I question why a Sony "Owners" thread is getting so "huff"y (which by the way includes the thread starter).
I do value other perspectives however and I'm not particularly possessive about what I chose to buy and use but would like to get as much out of it as poss. Owen made his point probably more succinctly than Me "imho as long as your happy with your own equipment that's all that matters tbh". Indeed Addicknchips's move back to Nikon is important to hear. If however the majority of participants of this forum are really only subscribed to poo on mirrorless per se and as this is a Sony Owners thread p*ss on Sony mirrorless in particular, then it's time they went back to their Nirvana and let us "Sony Owners" get more involved discussing the system we have invested in and let us live quietly with our obviously cra*p choice.
If I have completely misunderstood what this forum is supposed to be about, then I'll go elsewhere.
 
Not sure why people get overly defensive about the system they use. It's not like it matters to anyone but the user as to how well it performs FOR THEM. It's all personal opinion.

I've only really used Nikon and Sony, and have enjoyed both. Sold shed loads of Nikon gear to go to Sony after convincing myself that if the gear weighed less I'd shoot more.. Now ive gone back into Nikon. I've had Nothing too bad to say about either of them but I personally feel like I want to try Fuji as a 2nd system to my Nikon set up. This may be more of a style over substance move but what the hell.

That doesn't mean I will walk away from Sony bitching about it. If I buy into Fuji and it doesn't work out for me then I wouldn't think twice about buying into Sony all over again. It's a quality system. I love the way they have innovated over the last few years. I've used it for 6 months and had a good time with it, shot some great stuff (possibly my best). Now to try something different. I enjoy photography and like trying different gear and would encourage others to try different stuff too.

Once my Sony gear is sold I'll still visit this thread and hope that some more photos are posted on it and people share the awesome images that this system is capable of. One thing this thread kicks a little is some photos imp.

Who knows, I may be back in a few months stating how I miss zeiss optics! Who cares? It's photography. You only live twice so enjoy it. I intend to.
 
Jonathan I'm fine with all of that and best wishes in your future Nikon / Fuji / maybe Sony :)
Not quite sure what "One thing this thread kicks a little is some photos imp"
If you mean there should be more Sony Owners images, I couldn't agree more.
Perhaps that could start happening I'd support that.
 
shoshone said:
Jonathan I'm fine with all of that and best wishes in your future Nikon / Fuji / maybe Sony :)
Not quite sure what "One thing this thread kicks a little is some photos imp"
If you mean there should be more Sony Owners images, I couldn't agree more.
Perhaps that could start happening I'd support that.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I meant to write. And after a long day in the pub I'm impressed it was close enough for you guess what I was trying to say :beer:
 
twist said:
.... nobody thought of the children.
Click to expand...

The greatest tragedy of all, of course. If my daughter were able to babble the words, she'd probably say "Dad, you never gave me the opportunity to chew on that a7r. Now I'll never know whether it tastes as good as your X-E2."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top