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

xibinim said:
Ola. Wondering if anyone has rented equipment abroad, particularly in Cape Town? I'm off on a safari later in the year and keen to rent something appropriate, currently eying the GM 100-400 (I have a A7iii), it's going to cost £400-500 from Fat Llama as I would obviously need to rent it for the whole holiday and only plan to really use it for those few safari days. I imagine there must be a market for photographers travelling the world to rent abroad/as a foreigner but assuming details like insurance/proof of address might be a barrier.
Click to expand...

Been a while since I have been able to do any travelling unfortunately but when I had the opportunity and I needed something purely for my travels I would just have hunted to buy used at a good price and sold on my return. Rental costs always seemed astronomical. Buying used and selling on I was up a few times and slightly down a few others.
 
xibinim said:
Ola. Wondering if anyone has rented equipment abroad, particularly in Cape Town? I'm off on a safari later in the year and keen to rent something appropriate, currently eying the GM 100-400 (I have a A7iii), it's going to cost £400-500 from Fat Llama as I would obviously need to rent it for the whole holiday and only plan to really use it for those few safari days. I imagine there must be a market for photographers travelling the world to rent abroad/as a foreigner but assuming details like insurance/proof of address might be a barrier.
Click to expand...
I agree with Tommy, buying smartly used and then reselling it is likely more cost effective than renting more than a day or two. That being said the rental on the 100-400mm isn't that expensive to hire in the UK, for example lenses for hire have it for just over £100 for the week (plus shipping and insurance) and £180 for 2 weeks (plus shipping and insurance), much cheaper than fat llama.
 
Thank you both, I never even considered buying and reselling though I'd hate to think how much a GM 100-400 would cost - even second hand. Nor going elsewhere from Fat Llama, I'll check out Lens for Hire. Cheers :).

Edit - £256 for the full holiday is far more reasonable.
 
Last edited:
xibinim said:
Thank you both, I never even considered buying and reselling though I'd hate to think how much a GM 100-400 would cost - even second hand. Nor going elsewhere from Fat Llama, I'll check out Lens for Hire. Cheers :).

Edit - £256 for the full holiday is far more reasonable.
Click to expand...
You’re looking at around £900 for well used, and £1500 for a mint one, or £1399 new grey import.

If you wanted to look at something a bit cheaper the Sigma 100-400mm is supposedly almost as good as the GM, lenses for hire are showing £105 for 14 days before shipping and insurance.
 
snerkler said:
You’re looking at around £900 for well used, and £1500 for a mint one, or £1399 new grey import.

If you wanted to look at something a bit cheaper the Sigma 100-400mm is supposedly almost as good as the GM, lenses for hire are showing £105 for 14 days before shipping and insurance.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I've considered the Sigma as well and would almost certainly have a great time with it but after renting the GM 70-200, I fancy trying out another GM. Plus I believe the GM plays better with a TC (x1.4) if I got that as well.
 
xibinim said:
Thank you. I've considered the Sigma as well and would almost certainly have a great time with it but after renting the GM 70-200, I fancy trying out another GM. Plus I believe the GM plays better with a TC (x1.4) if I got that as well.
Click to expand...
A converter doesn't fit the Sigma, however even though the Sigma is a nice lens, if I was buying again the Sony has better image quality, better IS, focuses fast and closer and takes the converter.
 
xibinim said:
Thank you. I've considered the Sigma as well and would almost certainly have a great time with it but after renting the GM 70-200, I fancy trying out another GM. Plus I believe the GM plays better with a TC (x1.4) if I got that as well.
Click to expand...
The GM is better, and does take TC's as you say so if you're happy to pay the price then it's the one to get imo.
 
Since we've had a lot of trouble in my family Mrs WW is insisting that the pictures of the people who've been a problem must come down so I'm picking pictures to print and frame and put up in their place. I'm a bit annoyed that my pictures are in 3x2 or 4x3 and the frames aren't. I have some 10x8" and some which are about A3 but I'll have to check exactly what they are in case they too need cropping.

Can you get frames in various sizes but in photograph ratios like 3x2 and 4x3?
 
woof woof said:
Since we've had a lot of trouble in my family Mrs WW is insisting that the pictures of the people who've been a problem must come down so I'm picking pictures to print and frame and put up in their place. I'm a bit annoyed that my pictures are in 3x2 or 4x3 and the frames aren't. I have some 10x8" and some which are about A3 but I'll have to check exactly what they are in case they too need cropping.

Can you get frames in various sizes but in photograph ratios like 3x2 and 4x3?
Click to expand...
You can get 6x4 but I’ve never seen any generic ones that have the 4:3 ratio. It bugs me that the A sizing is different to camera/photo sizing.
 
snerkler said:
You can get 6x4 but I’ve never seen any generic ones that have the 4:3 ratio. It bugs me that the A sizing is different to camera/photo sizing.
Click to expand...

I "won" 4 10x8 frames at church on Saturday but I could always donate them to some where else. I'll have another look at the pictures I've cropped and see which aspect ratio I prefer and I'll double check those which are about A3. Ideally I want 2x A3 and 4x something like 10x8 size but possibly in 3x2 or 4x3 ratio.
 
woof woof said:
I "won" 4 10x8 frames at church on Saturday but I could always donate them to some where else. I'll have another look at the pictures I've cropped and see which aspect ratio I prefer and I'll double check those which are about A3. Ideally I want 2x A3 and 4x something like 10x8 size but possibly in 3x2 or 4x3 ratio.
Click to expand...

I like photos with a white mount tbh

Can you not make a 10x8 white canvas in PS & put your 4x3 image onto it & print the whole thing? I've never done that. And you might not like the idea of it. It might even look rubbish....

I do all my Instagram posts like that (but with a square) if you click the link in my Signature.
 
I usually choose frames a 'size up' with a cut mount inside. That often allows a 12X8 print to fit nicely inside a 12X16 frame, for example. Ikea or The Range used to offer very good value frames, although more recently Ikea seemed to no longer offer glass in their mounts.
 
LeeRatters said:
I like photos with a white mount tbh

Can you not make a 10x8 white canvas in PS & put your 4x3 image onto it & print the whole thing? I've never done that. And you might not like the idea of it. It might even look rubbish....

I do all my Instagram posts like that (but with a square) if you click the link in my Signature.
Click to expand...

All my recently framed pictures are in white frames and those 4 10x8 frames are white too. They'll be replacing light wood framed pictures.

Yes, that is an idea but in a different ratio to the frames I think they can start to look a bit letter box like. I'll have a think.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I usually choose frames a 'size up' with a cut mount inside. That often allows a 12X8 print to fit nicely inside a 12X16 frame, for example. Ikea or The Range used to offer very good value frames, although more recently Ikea seemed to no longer offer glass in their mounts.
Click to expand...

I chose bigger frames for three I recently mounted in the hallway and I think they look nice. I got those frames from ASDA and they're ok but annoyingly the hooks on the back aren't in the same place so it takes a bit more thought and measuring to mount them equally. The pictures which I'm taking down fill the frames but I'll have a think about what looks good for the replacements.

I have to say that I'm impressed with my new printer which replaced my old Epson R2880, it's a Canon Pixma Pro 200.
 
I’ve got stuff mounted in bought frames, but I’ve also had some pictures framer by a local picture framers (Hang It, on Wells road, for those in Bristol - I’d recommend them). Not as expensive as I feared it might be (I mean, maybe 5x a cheap ikea frame?), and the advantage of made to measure, and choice of frame to match the print etc, plus the expertise of the framer in terms of what would look good for mount size and frame etc.

So if you have a local place that does framing, might be worth asking.
 
the_accidental said:
I’ve got stuff mounted in bought frames, but I’ve also had some pictures framer by a local picture framers (Hang It, on Wells road, for those in Bristol - I’d recommend them). Not as expensive as I feared it might be (I mean, maybe 5x a cheap ikea frame?), and the advantage of made to measure, and choice of frame to match the print etc, plus the expertise of the framer in terms of what would look good for mount size and frame etc.

So if you have a local place that does framing, might be worth asking.
Click to expand...

Years ago I used to get my pictures professionally framed but since that shop went I haven't.
 
woof woof said:
Years ago I used to get my pictures professionally framed but since that shop went I haven't.
Click to expand...

Alan, I buy standard frames, print to the ratio/size that I want and then buy mounts to fit. I use Icanframe.co.uk for the mounts. They have always provided an efficient service and even large mounts (30"x20") have arrived well packed.

 
Last edited:
There are posts naming frame suppliers if you do a search. I know the company who supplies all the big stores but I don't wish to get involve with them.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
Yes, that is an idea but in a different ratio to the frames I think they can start to look a bit letter box like. I'll have a think.
Click to expand...
I think it'd bug me if the photo was a different ratio to the frame, but I'd have to see it to know for sure. Some photos I can crop so that I can print in the 1:1.41 ratio needed for A3, A4 etc, however with landscapes you often end up cropping an important part of the image off. However, it's rare that I will print in the 'A' format due to the frames not matching as discussed.

The issue then becomes if I have a frame that's not in the 3:2 ratio, anything other than that means that I have to crop the image. I don't take a photo having prints in mind so I don't tend to leave room to crop afterwards. I guess if I printed a lot I'd bear it in mind a lot more, but as it's extremely rare I print it's just not something that I consider.

What's 'odd' thinking about all this is that when I had a point and shoot 35mm film camera I never considered the ratio and would either just print in 6x4 or 7x5, whichever took my fancy at the time. I never even considered that printing in 7x5 would crop part of the image out.
 
Last edited:
snerkler said:
I think it'd bug me if the photo was a different ratio to the frame, but I'd have to see it to know for sure. Some photos I can crop so that I can print in the 1:1.41 ratio needed for A3, A4 etc, however with landscapes you often end up cropping an important part of the image off. However, it's rare that I will print in the 'A' format due to the frames not matching as discussed.

The issue then becomes if I have a frame that's not in the 3:2 ratio, anything other than that means that I have to crop the image. I don't take a photo having prints in mind so I don't tend to leave room to crop afterwards. I guess if I printed a lot I'd bear it in mind a lot more, but as it's extremely rare I print it's just not something that I consider.

What's 'odd' thinking about all this is that when I had a point and shoot 35mm film camera I never considered the ratio and would either just print in 6x4 or 7x5, whichever took my fancy at the time. I never even considered that printing in 7x5 would crop part of the image out.
Click to expand...

IMO you should process the photo as you fit, then find a suitable frame/mount, cropping to suit a frame menas that the intention of photographer is lost.

Photo's can look great in different ratio frames, and more weight in the mount at the bottom usually makes it pleasing to the eye, its just important not to make the sides too thin when designing a mount.
 
Last edited:
Mr Perceptive said:
IMO you should process the photo as you fit, then find a suitable frame/nount, cropping to suit a frame menas that the intention of photographer is lost.

Photo's can look great in different ratio frames, and more weight in the mount at the bottom usually makes it pleasing to the eye, its just important not to make the sides too thin when designing a mount.
Click to expand...
I just tend to shoot in the aspect ratio of the camera so that I'm getting the max resolution, aspect ratio isn't something I consider when shooting. Maybe I should :thinking:
 
snerkler said:
I know I mentioned it yesterday but I’m really impressed with the subject detection on the A7RV, spot on each and every time with Betty even when she’s side on it somehow finds her eye, and not once has it mistaken her ears for eyes (common mistake on the other cameras I’ve had). What it will be like at actual tracking I’ll have to reserve judgement but I haven’t really bought it as an action camera anyway so if it can do a decent job at this I’ll be more than happy.
Click to expand...
Good to hear you have good initial impressions.
Will be interested to hear how you get along in the field.

Also don't forget to give that 8 stops ibis a spin ;)
 
nandbytes said:
Good to hear you have good initial impressions.
Will be interested to hear how you get along in the field.

Also don't forget to give that 8 stops ibis a spin ;)
Click to expand...
Will do. I've got a portrait lighting workshop on Saturday, and a wildlife experience (hopefully seeing foxes and badgers) on Sunday so I'll see how I get on as it doesn't sound like my A1's going to be back, I got a message from saying

"The repair of your ILCE-1 is taking longer than expected. Our engineers are working to get the unit back to you as soon as possible. Sorry for the delay"

My thoughts are that they are struggling to find or even reproduce the fault :oops: :$

With regards to the A7RV can you change the burst rate for HI+, Hi etc etc like you can on the A1 as I can't find the option? Also, at 10fps (Hi+) do you still get full time tracking and AEL?
 
snerkler said:
I just tend to shoot in the aspect ratio of the camera so that I'm getting the max resolution, aspect ratio isn't something I consider when shooting. Maybe I should :thinking:
Click to expand...

Yes because a 3:2 in vertical format rarely works for me, a 5:4 vertical looks a lot more pleasing to the eye (all IMHO :) ) - I often shoot vertically knowing I'll be cropping to 5:4 in post - was only a small crop on the 4:3 FGX sensor but a bigger one on 3:2 sensors (usually chopping top and bottom, though sometimes depending on the scene I'll just crop to the bottom 5:4.
 
snerkler said:
I think it'd bug me if the photo was a different ratio to the frame, but I'd have to see it to know for sure. Some photos I can crop so that I can print in the 1:1.41 ratio needed for A3, A4 etc, however with landscapes you often end up cropping an important part of the image off. However, it's rare that I will print in the 'A' format due to the frames not matching as discussed.

The issue then becomes if I have a frame that's not in the 3:2 ratio, anything other than that means that I have to crop the image. I don't take a photo having prints in mind so I don't tend to leave room to crop afterwards. I guess if I printed a lot I'd bear it in mind a lot more, but as it's extremely rare I print it's just not something that I consider.

What's 'odd' thinking about all this is that when I had a point and shoot 35mm film camera I never considered the ratio and would either just print in 6x4 or 7x5, whichever took my fancy at the time. I never even considered that printing in 7x5 would crop part of the image out.
Click to expand...

Mr Perceptive said:
Yes because a 3:2 in vertical format rarely works for me, a 5:4 vertical looks a lot more pleasing to the eye (all IMHO :) ) - I often shoot vertically knowing I'll be cropping to 5:4 in post - was only a small crop on the 4:3 FGX sensor but a bigger one on 3:2 sensors (usually chopping top and bottom, though sometimes depending on the scene I'll just crop to the bottom 5:4.
Click to expand...

I very often shoot with the ratio in mind. Esp vertical as David says - I never do a 3:2 in vertical, always looks too long and thin imo.

Horizontal is 4:3 followed by 5:4 and 3:2
Vertical is usually 4:5 followed by 3:4

I have even been known to shoot a 2 shot panorama in vertical to get the extra width for a 4:5 vertical finished image :ROFLMAO:
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Yes because a 3:2 in vertical format rarely works for me, a 5:4 vertical looks a lot more pleasing to the eye (all IMHO :) ) - I often shoot vertically knowing I'll be cropping to 5:4 in post - was only a small crop on the 4:3 FGX sensor but a bigger one on 3:2 sensors (usually chopping top and bottom, though sometimes depending on the scene I'll just crop to the bottom 5:4.
Click to expand...
Yeah I tend to prefer 4:3 or 5:4 in vertical a lot of the time. Do you change the aspect in camera or shoot leaving room top and bottom?
 
snerkler said:
Yeah I tend to prefer 4:3 or 5:4 in vertical a lot of the time. Do you change the aspect in camera or shoot leaving room top and bottom?
Click to expand...

Depends, on the GFX I set up a function button to change the aspect ratios so I could frame better, I always re-cropped the original RAW in post though, on the Leica it has so few function buttons, that I just shoot leaving room. I think my eye is fairly well tuned in now, so I usually get the desired result.
 
I've just tried spot metering (not something I use very often at all) and even though I have it set to "focus point link" it will only move with the focus point if I manually move the AF point, i.e. it doesn't move with the AF point during tracking and just stays central. Is there a way you can set spot metering to the AF point when tracking too?
 
nandbytes said:
Also don't forget to give that 8 stops ibis a spin ;)
Click to expand...
With the 35mm GM handholding at 1s is fairly easy, but then I don't seem to be able to handhold at 2s and get it tack sharp, it's ever so slightly soft.
 
LeeRatters said:
For me, it's just done by eye and experience :ROFLMAO:

No in camera options.
Click to expand...
You can put aspect markers on the screen in some Sony cameras. I do it for school photography where 7x5 is our normal crop. It basically dulls the area outside but you still record the full size image. That is definitely my preference as it is easier to crop on a big screen at home than in teh field under pressure
 
wookie6262 said:
You can put aspect markers on the screen in some Sony cameras. I do it for school photography where 7x5 is our normal crop. It basically dulls the area outside but you still record the full size image. That is definitely my preference as it is easier to crop on a big screen at home than in teh field under pressure
Click to expand...

Standard 3:2 or 16:9
 
wookie6262 said:
You can put aspect markers on the screen in some Sony cameras. I do it for school photography where 7x5 is our normal crop. It basically dulls the area outside but you still record the full size image. That is definitely my preference as it is easier to crop on a big screen at home than in teh field under pressure
Click to expand...
I can't find that on the A7RV :thinking:

Another 'quirk' I've found with the A7RV is that you can't have a simulated shutter sound when using the electronic shutter. A shutter sound is useful when shooting models etc so they know when to change/break pose.
 
If not for the silence and not for speed, why would you use an electronic shutter?

Actually, could be flash sync speed? Not checked if it’s higher in that mode.
 
the_accidental said:
If not for the silence and not for speed, why would you use an electronic shutter?

Actually, could be flash sync speed? Not checked if it’s higher in that mode.
Click to expand...
To reduce 'unnecessary' shutter wear, which in turn may help with resale value.

You can't use flash with the electronic shutter, only those cameras with a faster sensor readout or global shutter can use flash with the electronic shutter.
 
Camera shake kinda makes sense, but is it practically an issue? Nothing like the mass of a mirror slapping about in an SLR. Though maybe on very high res sensors it matters more?

On the resale value, my view is I bought the camera to use it I’ll look after it but I’d not shy away from using it as intended. I tend not to shoot bursts and rack up big shutter counts though, if I shot sports I might have a different view. OTOH when I’ve used cameras to make money the depreciation of the camera has been insignificant.
 
the_accidental said:
Camera shake kinda makes sense, but is it practically an issue? Nothing like the mass of a mirror slapping about in an SLR. Though maybe on very high res sensors it matters more?

On the resale value, my view is I bought the camera to use it I’ll look after it but I’d not shy away from using it as intended. I tend not to shoot bursts and rack up big shutter counts though, if I shot sports I might have a different view. OTOH when I’ve used cameras to make money the depreciation of the camera has been insignificant.
Click to expand...

For lower shutter speeds I'd say the electronic shutter can help, yes. I have found that without IS I can use slower shutter speeds with my A7III and its electronic shutter than with my A7.
 
I've not yet seen any downside to the IBIS in my Cii, but have you seen some in the III? (long exposures on a tripod maybe? I know older lens OIS systems could make images on a tripod worse)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top