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

Had my first trip out with the A9 iii. Nothing of note as it was my first time photographing Swallows and all that showed up was Sand Martins which may be even more difficult to photograph as they are just as quick and agile but are smaller. The camera was fine, the file size on such small birds was definitely noticeable and the 120fps is well worth having albeit it won't be used for everything
 

Attachments

  • A9301525-Enhanced-NR.jpg
    A9301525-Enhanced-NR.jpg
    46.1 KB · Views: 17
woof woof said:
I've just had an email from MBP to say they have a Voigtlander 50mm f1.2 in Sony mount in stock. I have one already from Robert White. It's a nice lens. Someone should but MBP's :D There's is the SE version. I have the older one with the declick option and scalloped focus ring.
Click to expand...

What did you buy last week Alan?

Did I miss the post about it?
 
LeeRatters said:
What did you buy last week Alan?

Did I miss the post about it?
Click to expand...

I bought a Sony 40mm f2.5. I posted my thoughts about it and I posted pictures and you replied :D

www.talkphotography.co.uk

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

What? No 28mm setting? :D I've no doubt it's a nice lens but being physically shortest at 50mm and extending to 24mm seems rather odd to me. As I included the 28-70mm kit lens above I'll add that that lenses in / out action through the zoom range also seems odd. I always feel a bit...
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk

I haven't been able to get out much with it yet. I was going to go out today with it but due to the weather I didn't bother. I have to go out tomorrow so I'll take my A7 and that lens but if I use it or not depends on the weather and how I feel but I have actually used it in pouring rain once already :D

I think it is a good lens but it might be a little tight for me. It might be stuck between my liking for 35 and me reaching for a 50mm if I want tighter. Once I've given it a more thorough road test I'll decide if I'm going to keep it or try and sell it here.

PS.
One thing that struck me today is that because the performance seems so good across the frame and into the corners this might be a good lens to do panoramas with.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I bought a Sony 40mm f2.5. I posted my thoughts about it and I posted pictures and you replied :D

www.talkphotography.co.uk

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

What? No 28mm setting? :D I've no doubt it's a nice lens but being physically shortest at 50mm and extending to 24mm seems rather odd to me. As I included the 28-70mm kit lens above I'll add that that lenses in / out action through the zoom range also seems odd. I always feel a bit...
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk

I haven't been able to get out much with it yet. I was going to go out today with it but due to the weather I didn't bother. I have to go out tomorrow so I'll take my A7 and that lens but if I use it or not depends on the weather and how I feel but I have actually used it in pouring rain once already :D

I think it is a good lens but it might be a little tight for me. It might be stuck between my liking for 35 and me reaching for a 50mm if I want tighter. Once I've given it a more thorough road test I'll decide if I'm going to keep it or try and sell it here.

PS.
One thing that struck me today is that because the performance seems so good across the frame and into the corners this might be a good lens to do panoramas with.
Click to expand...

:facepalm: :facepalm::ROFLMAO:

Oh, yeah. I was thinking you already had that small G lens but it's the other focal lengths isn't it! It's been a long, short week!
 
wookie6262 said:
A bit of a bargain arrived today. £1240 saw me get a gripped A7R3 in very decent order with 2 extra genuine batteries and pro media Lbracket, 85mm GM, HVL-F60RM flash, Think Tank Bag, BlackRapid Strap and a good few other bits and bobs. The camera is the oldest I have had in my hand from Sony and the only one without real time tracking. I may use it as a remote instead of my A9 for the extra resolution which will allow looser framing and more chance of getting the shot. Works well with the Pocketwizards. I'll sell either the A9 or the A7R3 and most of the other bits and bobs in the hope of getting the bulk of my cash back and ending up with a very, very cheap 85Gm and Sony Flash.

Had a quick go on the HVL-F60RM flash on the A1 and TTL is night and day better than the Godox flashes I have used and struggled with. I think they will all be up for sale too and I will get the new SonyHVL-F60RM2 for the A9 iii and the commander unit. I'll keep the bigger Godox Units as I only use them in Manual anyways and they are excellent.

I also had a quick play with the flash delay for a Godox V1 on the A9iii. It was very easy to get the timing right after setting the rear wheel up to change values. If shooting on manual the Godox Units will work brilliantly. No TTL though and I tend to use that at events. Hopefully, head out soon for my first shot with the A9ii outside the house.
Click to expand...
That sounds a real bargain :eek:
 
wookie6262 said:
Had my first trip out with the A9 iii. Nothing of note as it was my first time photographing Swallows and all that showed up was Sand Martins which may be even more difficult to photograph as they are just as quick and agile but are smaller. The camera was fine, the file size on such small birds was definitely noticeable and the 120fps is well worth having albeit it won't be used for everything
Click to expand...
I dread to think how many files you ended up with shooting at 120fps ;)
 
snerkler said:
I dread to think how many files you ended up with shooting at 120fps ;)
Click to expand...
More than I thought at the time, around 3000. 120fps for that type of subject is probably worth it. My skill only allowed the bird in frame at reasonably close distance occasionally. If I ever do manage to get one almost filling the frame I want as many shots to choose from as possible. I'm shooting Athletics tonight so will be back down to 20 or 30 fps. Skateboarding tomorrow which I haven't done so I will play it as I see it. Flicking through the files doesn't take that long and I am pretty brutal when it comes to deleting files so long term storage isn't that expensive.
 
I had to go to the solicitor today so I took my camera and 35mm f2.8 and 40mm f2.5 along just to compare the fov.

35mm f2.8 then 40mm f2.5 both at f5.6.

35-1.jpg

40-1.jpg

And again, 35 and then 40mm.

35-2.jpg

40-2.jpg

The 40mm is slightly tighter but overall there's no significant difference there, really. The first time I took this 40mm out I thought it was noticeably tighter than 35mm but it must have been all in my mind :D So, as the 40mm is a really nice lens with nice build and nice manual focus I'll keep it but what to do with the slightly smaller 35mm f2.8? I can't sell it because it's 35mm and what would my other 35mm lenses think? I'll keep both for now but one specific use for the 35mm f2.8 could be when I want to take my A7 in a small Lowepro bag I have as it just fits in and my A7 and 40mm wont.
 
A couple more 40mm f2.5 pictures again at f5.6.

Signing the beach.

1-DSC05963.jpg

Play me.

1-DSC05964.jpg
 
woof woof said:
I had to go to the solicitor today so I took my camera and 35mm f2.8 and 40mm f2.5 along just to compare the fov.

35mm f2.8 then 40mm f2.5 both at f5.6.

View attachment 424478

View attachment 424479

And again, 35 and then 40mm.

View attachment 424480

View attachment 424481

The 40mm is slightly tighter but overall there's no significant difference there, really. The first time I took this 40mm out I thought it was noticeably tighter than 35mm but it must have been all in my mind :D So, as the 40mm is a really nice lens with nice build and nice manual focus I'll keep it but what to do with the slightly smaller 35mm f2.8? I can't sell it because it's 35mm and what would my other 35mm lenses think? I'll keep both for now but one specific use for the 35mm f2.8 could be when I want to take my A7 in a small Lowepro bag I have as it just fits in and my A7 and 40mm wont.
Click to expand...
Looks noticeably tighter to me (y)
 
snerkler said:
Looks noticeably tighter to me (y)
Click to expand...

When you see pictures side by side, yes, but in use would you think the difference between 35 and 40mm was significant? As I've used 35mm a lot I did notice the difference but after seeing these it's less than I thought and I think it is so slight that it isn't even a step back, more of a lean back :D

Looking at the pictures I do think that the 40mm is a little more contrasty / punchier.
 
woof woof said:
When you see pictures side by side, yes, but in use would you think the difference between 35 and 40mm was significant? As I've used 35mm a lot I did notice the difference but after seeing these it's less than I thought and I think it is so slight that it isn't even a step back, more of a lean back :D

Looking at the pictures I do think that the 40mm is a little more contrasty / punchier.
Click to expand...
Yeah in use you’re not going to see much difference I guess, maybe one step back needed ;)
 
snerkler said:
Yeah in use you’re not going to see much difference I guess, maybe one step back needed ;)
Click to expand...

It may seem barmy buying this 40mm f2.5 when I have two modern AF 35mm lenses (Sony f2.8 and f1.8) and multiple manual focus ones both modern and film era, cheap and expensive, but I just fancied something new and getting stuff does make it more likely I'll leave the house to test it out and whilst doing that I have the enjoyment of the day and I might even get a picture I want to keep :D Plus of course this 40mm has a nice build.

It's a while since I took two lenses out and changed lenses in (almost) a gale but I didn't collect a single dust bunny. I used to reguarly take 2, 3 or 4 lenses out with me but these days it's usually just the one.
 
dcash29 said:
40mm looks sharper
Click to expand...

I thought that but then I thought it might be just the extra magnification or the slight increase in contrast.

So... I've just upped the contrast in a 35mm picture and it looks just as sharp to me. The 40mm may actually be sharper but I think it is also giving a bit more contrast and I think that is contributing. I think just about the first thing I did notice about this 40mm was the more punchy look. That's not always a good thing and how we feel about it does I suppose come down to personal taste.

As I mentioned earlier, this 40mm reminds me a bit of the Voigtlander 50mm f2 apo as that too is very good across the frame and gives a punchy look straight out of the camera.

PS.
When I was out it was windy and like a winters day, and now the sun is out and it looks lovely. Grrrrr.
 
Last edited:
35mm at 115% with a slight boost to the contrast and then the 40mm at 100%.

1-DSC05946.jpg

2-DSC05948.jpg

I think that's very close now. As above, the 40mm may be sharper and it is the newer lens so maybe it is but I think these are so close sharpness wise after a slight boost to contrast for the 35mm f2.8.
 
Does anyone have the Tamron 20-40? I'm considering one as I want to save some weight for long backpacking trips with my A7 IV. It's a 300g saving over my 24-105 and quite a lot smaller!
 
Matt. said:
Does anyone have the Tamron 20-40? I'm considering one as I want to save some weight for long backpacking trips with my A7 IV. It's a 300g saving over my 24-105 and quite a lot smaller!
Click to expand...
Wasn't particularly impressed with the reviews. I went with Sony 20-70mm instead.
 
nandbytes said:
Wasn't particularly impressed with the reviews. I went with Sony 20-70mm instead.
Click to expand...
I've not really looked that much but the reviews seemed fairly good from my initial look? The 20-70 is possibly an option, but physically larger, heavier, and double the cost. My primary aim is to lighten my load for multi-week wilderness hikes whilst still maintaining a good photography setup and primes aren't for me.
 
Matt. said:
I've not really looked that much but the reviews seemed fairly good from my initial look? The 20-70 is possibly an option, but physically larger, heavier, and double the cost. My primary aim is to lighten my load for multi-week wilderness hikes whilst still maintaining a good photography setup and primes aren't for me.
Click to expand...

The corners are bad and never really improved on tamron 20-40mm especially at 40mm.
The Sony 20-70 is larger but it's also optically excellent. I'd happily use it wide open from f4.
 
Matt. said:
I've not really looked that much but the reviews seemed fairly good from my initial look? The 20-70 is possibly an option, but physically larger, heavier, and double the cost. My primary aim is to lighten my load for multi-week wilderness hikes whilst still maintaining a good photography setup and primes aren't for me.
Click to expand...
The 20-70mm is a superb lens as Nandbytes says, and it’s not that heavy. If you want light have you considered the 16-35mm pz, its optically very good.
 
snerkler said:
The 20-70mm is a superb lens as Nandbytes says, and it’s not that heavy. If you want light have you considered the 16-35mm pz, its optically very good.
Click to expand...

Every gram is fairly important for multi-week backpacking trips at elevation in the mountains. I’ve thought about the pz and will look at that also but the range isn’t so ideal as the others. The 20-70 is definitely pushing it for size and weight.
 
Matt. said:
Every gram is fairly important for multi-week backpacking trips at elevation in the mountains. I’ve thought about the pz and will look at that also but the range isn’t so ideal as the others. The 20-70 is definitely pushing it for size and weight.
Click to expand...
The 16-35mm is only 5mm shorter than the 20-40mm you’re considering :thinking:
 
snerkler said:
The 16-35mm is only 5mm shorter than the 20-40mm you’re considering :thinking:
Click to expand...
and a fair bit wider

Matt. said:
Every gram is fairly important for multi-week backpacking trips at elevation in the mountains. I’ve thought about the pz and will look at that also but the range isn’t so ideal as the others. The 20-70 is definitely pushing it for size and weight.
Click to expand...
I appreciate you wanting to save weight but depends at what cost. if tamron is really the only option for you then its better to take that no lens/camera!
 
nandbytes said:
and a fair bit wider


I appreciate you wanting to save weight but depends at what cost. if tamron is really the only option for you then its better to take that no lens/camera!
Click to expand...

I currently have the standard 24-105 which is big and heavy and not quite wide enough. The Tamron saves me 300g and a lot of bulk which is fairly appealing. I’ll see if I can go and look at some of these options over the weekend.
 
Matt. said:
I currently have the standard 24-105 which is big and heavy and not quite wide enough. The Tamron saves me 300g and a lot of bulk which is fairly appealing. I’ll see if I can go and look at some of these options over the weekend.
Click to expand...
IMG_7906.jpeg

The Sony is a touch lighter, much wider and cropping 35mm to give 40mm loses you very few megapixels (y)
 
Matt. said:
Does anyone have the Tamron 20-40? I'm considering one as I want to save some weight for long backpacking trips with my A7 IV. It's a 300g saving over my 24-105 and quite a lot smaller!
Click to expand...
I have the Sony A7CR and secided that a couple of A
Matt. said:
Does anyone have the Tamron 20-40? I'm considering one as I want to save some weight for long backpacking trips with my A7 IV. It's a 300g saving over my 24-105 and quite a lot smaller!
Click to expand...
I have the Sony A7CR FF but decided to lighten the load at times by buying APS-C lens. So I bought the Sony 70-350 for telephoto, and it has been fantastic, and very light to carry. I have just re-bought a Sony 18-135. to carry around in a small light package, again a super sharp lens with great zoom. At other times when I have the car etc I use full frame lenses.
 
So I finally got around to trying out the print copying setup from earlier in the thread. I actually ended up doing ok with the zoom I have at 150mm which gave me good working distance/FOV shooting straight down at prints on the floor. Then light on a stand + brolly. I'll need to re-do some as I didn't spot slight reflections (or dust!) at the time.

The tips above, particularly tethering to get a bigger screen, were helpful, so thank you.

Anyway, by way of example here's one (gah! just spotted it was slightly misaligned so the crop is a touch off).

Sony A7, Samyang 35-150 - but the original is I think a Nikkormat, probably a soligor 135/2.8. I like this picture as it speaks to me of the area it was taken in winter (near Edinburgh), and the small aperture/long exposure necessary and subsequent slight blurring of the trees in motion gives a slightly imperfectly sharp photo...and thus reminds me that good kit and technically perfect does not a great photo make.

DSC03018.jpeg
EDIT: I should really upload elsewhere and link to get better quality here.
 
Last edited:
Thankyou. The 6x6s will be more of a challenge, I can only fill a bit under a quarter of the frame on either of my E mount lenses. Time to break out the manual Nikkors and extension tubes I think!

(Or use the excuse for a macro lens.)
 
After a week of cursing all things Ford the Capri lives and is ready for the Ford Fair on Sunday.

Also arrived home from todays wedding to find that Amazon have at last delivered my Sigma 35mm f/2, it should have been here a few days ago.

Really impressed with the overall build quality and how the lens feels to use. Will probably bring it to the ford fair with me tomorrow and put it through it's paces.
 
That's a lens I looked at but I have the Sony 35mm f1.8.

Have you had the Sony f1.8? If you have I'll look forward to your comparison or just your thoughts on the Sigma. But I should really stop buying lenses :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top