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

woof woof said:
Just out of interest...

Even though I've had some issues with Chinese lenses and aperture accuracy I've been reading/watching Thypoch 28 and 35mm f1.4 reviews so I posted on DPR as I thought there might be more footfall there asking if anyone had used one and if so could they comment on the accuracy of the aperture settings.

I got this reply.

"What body are you using? Then, why are you messing with sub-standard Chinese lenses? For me, it's a total waste of time, energy and money. Just buy a great lens and, if you must, shoot it in manual focus."

Oh well. Lesson learned.

This reminds me what Mrs WW said. She said only I would notice and no one else cared. Yes Dear.
Click to expand...

I have issue with Viltrox lens showing wrong aperture at one particular setting. It was showing f18 when I set the aperture ring to f16. It was every so slightly off.
LCE could not get it fixed in this country, in the end they refunded my money.

I had almost decided to give up on the Viltrox and simply buy a sony but another used one showed up at Wex with 12 months warranty at a good price. So I bought it again but hope I don't regret it!

Similarly I sold Laowa 100mm f2.8 macro lens in Canon EF mount on ebay. I was adapting it on Sony and it was working fine. I specifically bought the EF version since it had electronic aperture control and EXIF. The person who bought it from me was trying to adapt it onto a canon RF body.
For some reason the Canon body was seeing it an APS-C lens and automatically putting the camera in crop mode. Unlike Sony, Canon in their infinite wisdom do not allow users to manually change APS-C crop mode.
So the guy was asked by Laowa to send the lens all the way back to China to get it fixed. Not sure if he ever got it fixed. I felt sorry for him, too bad he found the issue outside the return window.

The Chinese manufacturers are still new in the market and some of them are making some really great optics. But their after sales support is basically non-existent. I guess this is where they are cutting costs to sell things cheaper. Providing good after sales support and that too around the world, also costs a fair bit of money.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
The Chinese manufacturers are still new in the market and some of them are making some really great optics. But their after sales support is basically non-existent. I guess this is where they are cutting costs to sell things cheaper. Providing good after sales support and that too around the world, also costs a fair bit of money.
Click to expand...

The Artralab 35mm f1.4 was the one that shocked me the most as not only are the aperture setting widely inaccurate but the company know and said it's for aesthetic reasons. It's something that I first spotted with the Pergear 35mm f1.4. It's such a shame and TBH I just can't understand why they'd release lenses in this condition as the cost involved in getting the apertures right must be insignificant once it's in production... ie. It'll surely cost the same to make a lens with accurate apertures as it'll cost to make one which is all over the place.

I keep looking at these lenses because I'd like something compact in Sony mount which is better at the widest apertures than the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4. That lens is probably my most used lens but with busy scenes the bokeh is wild at f1.4 and only settles at about f2 and it's very poor when focusing at long distances at f1.4. The Pergear and the Artralab are both better in both respects but of course they're not really (IMO) f1.4 lenses. I do have the Voigtander 35mm f1.2 and it is a much better lens than the Voigtlander f1.4 at the widest apertures but it's a chunk bigger and heavier.

Having gone through this twice now with lenses from two manufacturers I'm reluctant to buy any more of these lenses without first knowing if the apertures are somewhere near accurate but sadly the reviewers don't seem to mention this issue which seems odd as some of them must have noticed as if they don't spot it in shutter speeds or bokeh/depth it's obvious that something is wrong when you look into the lens.

I sent the original Pergear back and bought another one and of course it's just the same but I've kept it because the only real issue is that at f1.4 it isn't IMO f1.4, other than that it has its uses. The Artralab went back because although it's well made and IMO the image quality is good throughout the aperture range the fact that the aperture markings are meaningless make it for me an ocd triggering steaming pile.

I have wondered if the Chinese AF lenses are the same. I should just give up.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Just out of interest...

Even though I've had some issues with Chinese lenses and aperture accuracy I've been reading/watching Thypoch 28 and 35mm f1.4 reviews so I posted on DPR as I thought there might be more footfall there asking if anyone had used one and if so could they comment on the accuracy of the aperture settings.

I got this reply.

"What body are you using? Then, why are you messing with sub-standard Chinese lenses? For me, it's a total waste of time, energy and money. Just buy a great lens and, if you must, shoot it in manual focus."

Oh well. Lesson learned.

This reminds me what Mrs WW said. She said only I would notice and no one else cared. Yes Dear.
Click to expand...
Alan. You might remember I have the Typoch 28mm f1.4. I shoot it a lot wide open. Often close up. No, I’ve not considered checking the Aperture. Very happy with the rendering and creaminess of the Bokeh. From my experience I’d say it was or is pretty accurate as far as f stop is concerned. I have it in M mount adapted to my Nikon Zf.
Not a Sony picture.
Thypoch test by -justTrev-
 
woof woof said:
I got this reply.

"What body are you using? Then, why are you messing with sub-standard Chinese lenses? For me, it's a total waste of time, energy and money. Just buy a great lens and, if you must, shoot it in manual focus."
Click to expand...

Some will never understand.
 
trevorbray said:
Alan. You might remember I have the Typoch 28mm f1.4. I shoot it a lot wide open. Often close up. No, I’ve not considered checking the Aperture. Very happy with the rendering and creaminess of the Bokeh. From my experience I’d say it was or is pretty accurate as far as f stop is concerned. I have it in M mount adapted to my Nikon Zf.
Click to expand...

I thought I remembered someone but I didn't want to say anything just in case I was wrong.

If you get a mo and if you have another 28mm could you compare the apertures or if you haven't got another 28mm just take a look and guestimate? (aperture in mm equals focal length divided by aperture in f = 10mm so it should be pretty easy to guess when looking at the aperture.)
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
I thought I remembered someone but I didn't want to say anything just in case I was wrong.

If you get a mo and if you have another 28mm could you compare the apertures or if you haven't got another 28mm just take a look and guestimate? (aperture in mm equals focal length divided by aperture in f = 10mm so it should be pretty easy to guess when looking at the aperture.)
Click to expand...
Yep. I’ll get around to it. Recently moved. Chaos here.
 
so it should be pretty easy to guess when looking at the aperture.
Click to expand...

Forgive a silly question, but is that so? In nearly all lenses you can’t directly observe the aperture, there is at least one lens element in the way to bend the light and affect your estimation.*

You could measure light transmission by comparing exposures to another lens… but although that will get you close it is comparing T values not aperture (there is a reason cine lens are labelled T not f stops).

You could shoot resolution test charts and compare DoF against calculated numbers for a distance/focal length, this would be accurate if focal length is…

Perhaps the real question is which is the important factor, light gathering or DoF, and then do an appropriate comparison?

* I may soon have to disassemble a 135/2.8 again to fix some sticking blades. I might be able to test this theory comparing observation against a direct measurement.
 
the_accidental said:
Forgive a silly question, but is that so? In nearly all lenses you can’t directly observe the aperture, there is at least one lens element in the way to bend the light and affect your estimation.*

You could measure light transmission by comparing exposures to another lens… but although that will get you close it is comparing T values not aperture (there is a reason cine lens are labelled T not f stops).

You could shoot resolution test charts and compare DoF against calculated numbers for a distance/focal length, this would be accurate if focal length is…

Perhaps the real question is which is the important factor, light gathering or DoF, and then do an appropriate comparison?

* I may soon have to disassemble a 135/2.8 again to fix some sticking blades. I might be able to test this theory comparing observation against a direct measurement.
Click to expand...
I think woof woof is more concerened with light gathering in DOF, obviously this would need to be a very controlled test to assess this.
 
Easy controlled test in that case would be shutter at max sync, low iso and a flash on manual and just adjust aperture. Then you can compare to any other lens easily.
 
the_accidental said:
Easy controlled test in that case would be shutter at max sync, low iso and a flash on manual and just adjust aperture. Then you can compare to any other lens easily.
Click to expand...
Or you can have controlled light, set aperture and shutter speed and see what ISO the camera is suggesting (y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: nog
I think for my purposes I can get near enough when looking at the aperture plus I have other lenses to compare any suspect lens with. For me it's a mix of looking at the aperture and also the resulting shutter speed and to a lesser extent bokeh balls/DoF. I accept also that coatings affect light transmission but there shouldn't be obviously noticeable and significant differences.

The first time I came across this was when using the Pergear 35mm at f1.4 at night time when out camping. I can't remember exactly what shutter speed I was at but I do remember thinking that at f1.4 I shouldn't be at that shutter speed and ISO 25,600 so when we got home I checked against my Voigtlander and saw that something was definitely amiss at various apertures. Not at all apertures, just some. Since then I've looked at every MF lens I have and most are ok, just the Pergear and the Artralab have issues, the former not too bad all considering and that's why I've kept it and the latter is just a disaster.

The Voigtlanders are my standard as they are consistent between themselves (I have 4) except for one lens at one aperture and they are in line with the other quality MF lenses I have and also with my Sony lenses too with again only one Sony lens showing any real discrepancy at one aperture only. I expect some variation and that's fine but I don't expect things to be so far out of whack that it is obvious and to a degree that matters to me.

I'll check the Thypoch reviews and dimensions again and have a think. I may give one a try or decide to stick with the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 which I think of as an f2 lens with wider apertures available for emergency use with messy bokeh being the price to pay if there's a messy composition :D From f2 and onwards I have few complaints with that lens and it's probably my most used lens, ever. Also I have to think 28 or 35mm as a 28mm could give a bit more flexibility when used together with the Sony 40mm f2.5 which is becoming a favourite.
 
Another from the archives...

The RAF's evaluation BAE 146 over Exeter in 2018 (Sony A65, Tamron 16~300mm).

Airbus A400M over Exeter A65 DSC02321.JPG
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
I'm so pleased you like it. :naughty:
Click to expand...

I thought it was the paint job until I read Toby's comment - looking on the phone I can see the fringe. The picture itself is a good illustration of the plane, but could just be so much nicer to look at with a few simple issues fixed. Lightroom could automatically deal with CA like this.

This is NOT a dig in any way.
 
I'm giving up on the idea of a Thypoch as I checked the dimensions and it isn't really very compact when compared to the larger Voigtlanders I have.

PS.
I had an interesting time on DPR despite having to run through the explanation again and again. Sadly no one has any experience. I think I am now giving up on these start ups at least until there's more accurate info and feedback, if that ever happens. Until then I'll stick with my Voigtlanders.
 
Last edited:
ancient_mariner said:
I thought it was the paint job until I read Toby's comment - looking on the phone I can see the fringe. The picture itself is a good illustration of the plane, but could just be so much nicer to look at with a few simple issues fixed. Lightroom could automatically deal with CA like this.

This is NOT a dig in any way.
Click to expand...
No need to apologise.

I think it looks almost like an old fashioned. half tone artist's impression, which was unintentional, by the way. Still I've got it just how I want it and beauty, as they say, is in the eye of the beholder.
 
woof woof said:
Deep sigh. I see there's banding again which I can't see in the originals.
Click to expand...

I would look at your export properties. Rather than setting a compression value, instead tell it to keep file size under 500k and export no larger than 1920px longest side.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I would look at your export properties. Rather than setting a compression value, instead tell it to keep file size under 500k and export no larger than 1920px longest side.
Click to expand...

In ps I resize to 1000px and save at a quality which keeps the file under 500kb. Sometimes this means saving as quality 11 rather than 12 which is the max quality, sometimes I have to go lower and very occasionally I get away with 12. TBH I feel like it sometimes just varies on the day and some days things do fine and sometimes there's banding.
 
When I used to fiddle with export quality in LR I'd sometimes see sky banding. But I forgot you're still using an older Photoshop.
 
ancient_mariner said:
When I used to fiddle with export quality in LR I'd sometimes see sky banding. But I forgot you're still using an older Photoshop.
Click to expand...

I'm mostly using CS2024, the subscription one so it should be up to date. I still have CS5 but only use it when I want to use a Nik filter.
 
These are my output settings for Flickr which then go on to forums

Screenshot 2024-09-03 at 11.49.39.jpg
 
This isn't Sony, he used a Nikon, but there's some nice pictures of an ice hotel.

phillipreeve.net

Travel Diary: An Arctic Trip (Part 2) - phillipreeve.net

This diary entry covers our second day of the trip. For details on previous days, see the ‘Further Reading’ section at the end of the article. See the video of this second day! An Arctic Trip; Day Two On the second day of our trip, we embarked on a morning hike through a nearby Nordic … Continue...
phillipreeve.net phillipreeve.net
 
For those that had a repair at Sony how long did it take for them to get back to you regarding what the fault was, and then how long to repair? Sony received my camera last Thursday, I got an email confirmation of this on the day but I’ve not heard anything since :(
 
snerkler said:
For those that had a repair at Sony how long did it take for them to get back to you regarding what the fault was, and then how long to repair? Sony received my camera last Thursday, I got an email confirmation of this on the day but I’ve not heard anything since :(
Click to expand...
They gave me a tracker I think. Info was incorrect. The emails they sent were spot on though and they answered a phone call when I queried the tracker. I took just over a week from me sending to get the camera back and that was a main board replacement for the wifi failure. My repair was done by Sony in Wales. I believe they sometimes use fixation which may introduce delay and of course it will all be about what the issue is and if they are carrying spares in stock.
 
wookie6262 said:
They gave me a tracker I think. Info was incorrect. The emails they sent were spot on though and they answered a phone call when I queried the tracker. I took just over a week from me sending to get the camera back and that was a main board replacement for the wifi failure. My repair was done by Sony in Wales. I believe they sometimes use fixation which may introduce delay and of course it will all be about what the issue is and if they are carrying spares in stock.
Click to expand...
Thanks, mine went back to Wales. They acknowledged receipt and that I’d asked for it to be returned before the 14th if possible and they said they’d do everything they could to get it back by then but couldn’t guarantee it.

It just seems odd to me therefore that a week’s gone by and they’ve not investigated it yet :thinking:
 
snerkler said:
Thanks, mine went back to Wales. They acknowledged receipt and that I’d asked for it to be returned before the 14th if possible and they said they’d do everything they could to get it back by then but couldn’t guarantee it.

It just seems odd to me therefore that a week’s gone by and they’ve not investigated it yet :thinking:
Click to expand...
How do you know they haven't. Don't trust the tracker just give them a bell
 
snerkler said:
For those that had a repair at Sony how long did it take for them to get back to you regarding what the fault was, and then how long to repair? Sony received my camera last Thursday, I got an email confirmation of this on the day but I’ve not heard anything since :(
Click to expand...

Because they use fixation anyway. I went direct to them rather than going through Sony which you can do under normal warranty or if you are paying for a repair like I was to save time.

In my case it was for a faulty E.V.F. I got an email when it arrived with them. Didn’t hear anything for about a week then got another email saying the replacement part was out of stock. They told me it was going to take around 4 weeks to source. Then I remembered I had the pro support so contacted them and got an email back the same day saying that the camera would be repaired and sent back within 3 days, which it was to be fair.

Was less than happy with Fixation though, camera came back covered in dust and crap and missing the hotshot cover and the eye piece. I wasn’t offered the option of an online tracker.
 
Last edited:
f/2.8 said:
Because they use fixation anyway. I went direct to them rather than going through Sony which you can do under normal warranty or if you are paying for a repair like I was to save time.

In my case it was for a faulty E.V.F. I got an email when it arrived with them. Didn’t hear anything for about a week then got another email saying the replacement part was out of stock. They told me it was going to take around 4 weeks to source. Then I remembered I had the pro support so contacted them and got an email back the same day saying that the camera would be repaired and sent back within 3 days, which it was to be fair.

Was less than happy with Fixation though, camera came back covered in dust and crap and missing the hotshot cover and the eye piece. I wasn’t offered the option of an online tracker.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info, I’ve contacted fixation but they say they don’t deal with repairs sent into Sony, they say Sony have their own repair centre.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top