Jump to content

Sony a7 III discussion


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks Don! It's an exciting time for Chris and I!

With all due respect, this is very wrong. The 400 f2.8 issue which you continue to reference and described as prattle earlier on was actually my prattle about the A9 rather than the A7 but I thou

Testing the A7iii in anamorphic setup in exterior condition, some quick run and gun test shoots but I m very happy with the result . A7iii ( full frame mode ) + Ninja V + Cinelux ES + Rectilux HC

Posted Images

25 minutes ago, kye said:

Wow, that seemed a bit hit and miss @jonpais.  I wonder if there's a setting somewhere in there that's derailing the process?

Nice images though, the overall look and bokeh seems nice :)

Thanks, Kye. I shot those while having my salesman see if there’s something I messed up. I’m not sure, but I believe he’d be willing to take back the lens no penalty if I buy a Sony. Just wasn’t ready to spend that kind of dough. As long as I’ve got the Sigma, I think I’ll do one of those dumb walking toward the camera tests in the morning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those with the emount Sigma 50mm f1.4, can you comment on whether the af motor noise is gone in af-c mode for video? 

I have some art lenses I use with the mc11 adaptor but the autofocus is somewhat loud in af c mode and are not good for audio recording in video mode 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you watch some of the first videos out, the af-c isn't that impressive so far.  I was thinking of picking some up but clearly slapping an e-mount on the back of DSLR lenses isn't the way to go.  No size advantage and the af can't keep up.  Whatever they did, if anything, to the AF motors doesn't seem to do much for performance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jonpais said:

Thanks, Kye. I shot those while having my salesman see if there’s something I messed up. I’m not sure, but I believe he’d be willing to take back the lens no penalty if I buy a Sony. Just wasn’t ready to spend that kind of dough. As long as I’ve got the Sigma, I think I’ll do one of those dumb walking toward the camera tests in the morning. 

This video talks a little about settings, but he didn't seem to change them that much, so I'm not sure if it will help:

The reason I mention this YT video is that he shot a wedding with this camera and used AF on a gimbal with face detection and was really impressed, so he should know some stuff..

This is a snippet of that AF:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tamron 28-75mm is really something else. Wide open sharpness at every focus distance and zoom. Almost no CA. Excellent flare control. All in a relatively compact and cheap form. But still, I've decided to return it as I can't really afford it. 

I have a sigma mc-11, canon 24-85mm f3.5-4.5, 50mm stm and yongnuo 35mm f2 on order. Kind of interested in their performance compared to the Tamron, Sony 50mm Fe f1.8 and Samyang 35mm f2.8. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Inazuma said:

The Tamron 28-75mm is really something else. Wide open sharpness at every focus distance and zoom. Almost no CA. Excellent flare control. All in a relatively compact and cheap form. But still, I've decided to return it as I can't really afford it. 

I have a sigma mc-11, canon 24-85mm f3.5-4.5, 50mm stm and yongnuo 35mm f2 on order. Kind of interested in their performance compared to the Tamron, Sony 50mm Fe f1.8 and Samyang 35mm f2.8. 

except the autofocus issues not being solved at the moment

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

The Sony 1.4 ?

 

First, the salesman gave me the Sony 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3. I set it to 50mm and started shooting peeps around the shop and it nailed focus quickly and accurately every time. I double-checked the clips on their iMac just to be sure. But I ended up leaving with the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jonpais said:

But I ended up leaving with the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM. 

Thanks for sharing.

Out of curiosity, why the 16-35 over the 24-70?  I thought your style might have been more aligned with the longer focal lengths (but I could be wrong).  There's always the combination of crop mode and clear-image zoom to take the 35 to 79mm equivalent, seemingly without much loss in quality.

I was assuming I would get the 24-70 but then realised that a wider lens might be useful so now am torn.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2018 at 9:37 PM, kye said:

Thanks for sharing.

Out of curiosity, why the 16-35 over the 24-70?  I thought your style might have been more aligned with the longer focal lengths (but I could be wrong).  There's always the combination of crop mode and clear-image zoom to take the 35 to 79mm equivalent, seemingly without much loss in quality.

I was assuming I would get the 24-70 but then realised that a wider lens might be useful so now am torn.  

I’ve been doing a little research and it looks like there are several reasons why the 24-105mm f/4 might be a better investment than the 24-70mm for a general purpose lens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jonpais said:

I’ve been doing a little research and it looks like there are several reasons why the 24-105mm f/4 might be a better investment than the 24-70mm for a general purpose lens. 

What did you find?  I have a vague memory of reading something about the 24-70 being better, but maybe I'm not remembering correctly.  24-105 is a very flexible range, especially with the crop/zoom functions also available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@kye Max Yuryev just uploaded a video recommending the 24-105mm f/4 to those who can only afford one lens, and Chris Niccolls also speaks highly of it in his review of the Tamron 28-75mm. Ken Rockwell loves it too, calling it "the world's best midrange zoom" for its great optical performance, build quality, price, weather resistance, extra zoom range and optical stabilization. It's hard to argue with him, since his picture gallery shot with the lens is pretty spectacular, especially his aerial view from the Las Vegas Strip at sunset shot wide open. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@kye Max Yuryev just uploaded a video recommending the 24-105mm f/4 to those who can only afford one lens, and Chris Niccolls also speaks highly of it in his review of the Tamron 28-75mm. Ken Rockwell loves it too, calling it "the world's best midrange zoom" for its great optical performance, build quality, price, weather resistance, extra zoom range and optical stabilization. It's hard to argue with him, since his picture gallery shot with the lens is pretty spectacular, especially his aerial view from the Las Vegas Strip at sunset shot wide open. 

I've had the 24-105 for almost 6 months. Where it is particularly good for video is that the 'OIS' of the lens works very well with IBIS for handheld (particularly useful at the long end.) For some reason ibis alone doesnt seem to work as well for video (with Sony). So that is a plus relative to the 24-70 GM (not that I have tried it) which doesnt have OIS. After getting the 24-105 I sold my 24-70 Zony f4 which doesnt really compare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...