The Mirrorless Thread: Son(y), I Am Disappoint.

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Mirrorless Thread: Son(y), I Am Disappoint.

«‹›2 »

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Hopefully this is the right thread to ask for this, but I need recommendations for a Sony camera rental. It'll be used mainly for food photography, and maybe some kitchen shots at a local restaurant.

Should I go for the A7R II ($175/day), or the A7S II ($165/day)? I'll be using it with my 18-105mm and my Sonnar T* FE 55mm. I usually shoot with an NEX-5, but it's a terrible, outdated camera and I need something half-decent to use until I can get my hands on the a6500.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 14:07 on Oct 12, 2016

# ¿ Oct 12, 2016 13:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 04:28

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Wikipedia Brown posted:

For something like food photography, I'd think the extra resolution of the R would be way worth it. Photos from the S will be small, especially using the crop lens.

edit: Unless you'll be editing the photos on a really crappy computer, in which case the smaller images can be kind of a boon.

Finger Prince posted:

Go with the R. Also, if the rental place has one for a reasonable rate, get the Sony FE 90mm macro as well.

The R it is, then. Thanks!

I was eyeing the 90mm, but unfortunately the local rental place doesn't have any.

# ¿ Oct 12, 2016 19:02

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

I need help selecting a 30mm lens! I'm shooting with an NEX-5 (and probably renting the A7R II again) and am in need of a quick, sharp prime lens. This time it's for a retailer photoshoot, and I'll probably use it at local sports events and (small) group photos. It'd be nice to be able to use it for the occasional video, too. I was considering this Sigma 30mm f/1.4, but wasn't sure if it's my best option. I was also considering this Sony SEL35F18 35mm f/1.8 for the same purpose.

I'm willing to spend between $500 to $700 CAD. Any better recommendations?

melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Oct 17, 2016

# ¿ Oct 17, 2016 17:57

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Thanks for the lens recommendations, guys. It really narrowed down my list of buying options.

But there's a problem. After renting the A7R II, I nearly fell in love with the damned thing. It takes incredible photos. Ideally, I'd love to buy an a6500 + FS5 for video work, but given the FS5's $7500CAD pricetag I don't think an FS5 is in my future, anytime soon.

Is the A7R II in any way a good compromise for photos/video work until I can magically afford an FS5?

# ¿ Oct 20, 2016 04:21

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Need some suggestions on a Sony Alpha purchasing decision.

I recently bought the a7ii (body only) for $1900 CAD. But now I'm torn between sticking with the a7ii, or just returning it and preordering the a6500 instead for $1750. I just got caught up in the full-frame goodness of the a7ii and have heard that the a6500's sensor gives better low-light performance than the a7ii.

My needs: I need a B Cam for video shoots (mixed martial arts events), and occasional photography gigs. My wife also needs something for food photography and her blogging (she visits local business and takes photos for them). I do plan on getting an actual video camera at some point.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:52 on Nov 25, 2016

# ¿ Nov 25, 2016 18:46

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

windex posted:

First thought: How much do you care about depth of field, and do you want more or less? (This is the main sticking point beyond pricing differences in lenses.)

If more, a6500. If less, a7ii.

DOF is important to me ( <3 depthy shots), but above all I give priority to image/video sharpness.

# ¿ Nov 25, 2016 19:28

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

rio posted:

How about autofocus, how important is that to you? Because on the 6500 it is supposed to be blazing. Which, of course, won't matter if you are using old lenses since the lens lineup is such poo poo.

I do a lot more manual focusing, so fast autofocus would be a nice-to-have. Not really essential.

SMERSH Mouth posted:

From everything I've seen, the video quality from the a7ii is vastly inferior to the a6300, and the 6500 is probably even better. This comes from the a7ii not having 4K.

The a7ii's killer features (for me, if I was going to buy it, which I wouldn't irl, because I'm cheap) are the IBIS (for adapted lenses including a-mount lenses) and full frame sensor (for adapted lenses). I think the a6500 is supposed to have IBIS, right? If it does, you've probably got a better deals with it.

Except Sony's lens selection is even worse in apsc than FF. And unless you like manual focusing telephoto lenses (which you might because the Sony mirrorless cameras have great manual focus aids) you're not going to get as much out of older adapted lenses as you would on a Sony FF mirrorless camera.

Thanks for weighing in on this. It sounds like the A7ii would be excellent if it would be used mainly for photos only and no video. But since I'm looking for a good B cam for video projects it's sounding more and more like the a6500 is the better option, for me. And to be honest, while it'd nice to have the option of vintage glass due to FF IBIS on the a7ii I'd rather have a few really good, sharp lenses instead of a collection of adapters and adapted lenses. I preordered the a6500, and will be returning my a7ii once it arrives in the mail!

Thanks for your help on this, guys. It really helped me narrow things down. I've been obsessing over it for weeks!

melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Nov 26, 2016

# ¿ Nov 26, 2016 16:08

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

melon cat fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Mar 16, 2019

# ¿ Dec 12, 2016 03:27

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Fruit Chewy posted:

Had an a6000 a couple years back that got sold because I was poor and a sony lens was two months rent. Love the size and image quality, not so much the interface. What's the cool 2017 option in the "$450-500 sketchy ebay snipe" bracket?

I know that this post is kinda old bit I just wanted to chime in on the Sony question. I've been a Sony shooter (I do about 75% video, 25% photo) for years, but I'm getting really disillusioned with the cost of their lenses. Sure, Sony's AF is super fast but I'm starting to feel like their advantages end there. I'm really considering an all-out switch from my Sony a6500 + FS5 to Panasonic. Anyone been down this road, before?

# ¿ Oct 25, 2017 04:59

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Fruit Chewy posted:

Had an a6000 a couple years back that got sold because I was poor and a sony lens was two months rent. Love the size and image quality, not so much the interface. What's the cool 2017 option in the "$450-500 sketchy ebay snipe" bracket?

I know that this post is kinda old bit I just wanted to chime in on the Sony question. I've been a Sony shooter (I do about 75% video, 25% photo) for years, but I'm getting really disillusioned with the stupidly-high cost of Sony glass. Sure, Sony's AF is super fast but I'm starting to feel like their advantages end there. I'm really considering an all-out switch from my Sony a6500 + FS5 to Panasonic. Anyone been down this road, before?

# ¿ Oct 25, 2017 05:06

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Popelmon posted:

A friends small production company switched from Sony to a bunch of GH 5s and they couldn't be happier. The image quality is amazing, they love the lenses and they have pretty much ditched their steady cam rigs because the dual IS is just that good.

They let me play around with their Metabones speedbooster + Sigma 18-35 1.8 combo and that poo poo is just nuts. I don't know what I would use it for but I really want it.

That's great to hear! My only concern about the GH5 is it's still quality, though. Any issues that you might've heard about?

Encrypted posted:

A7R III is out.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/3426999280/sony-a7r-iii-promises-faster-bursts-better-focusing-and-longer-battery-life

It's about time that they got dual SD cards on it. But it still sounds like a mostly incremental improvement over the a7rii.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 15:12 on Oct 25, 2017

# ¿ Oct 25, 2017 14:35

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

GonadTheBallbarian posted:

hell I use m4/3 exclusively professionally and it's more than fine enough. may take a few minutes extra in post but it's not a big deal

So you mean to tell me that I should just properly expose my shots instead of buying the biggest sensor possible to compensate for poor exposure?

What do you even mean, by this.

But seriously guys thanks for the info. My wife likes the APS-C but maybe she can be convinced the embrace the M43 (or even a separate Fuji X100F just for her own projects) with the money we'd save by not being locked in the eMount ecosystem.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Oct 25, 2017

# ¿ Oct 25, 2017 19:25

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

blowfish posted:

Why is Sony glass often more expensive but not at all better/worse (see also 70-200/2.8)? The cameras are amazing technically, surely Sony isn't too broke to hire some good optical engineers?

You really do pay a premium simply for the Sony brand (which is why I'm considering a switch from Sony completely). I've known a lot of people who've worked with Sony reps, and they basically show up, tell you how much their gear will cost for their shop to carry, then cross their arms and say, "Take it or leave it we really don't give AF."

Pretty much all of the other camera brands (especially Fuji and Canon) will apparently play ball and give the stores some leeway in pricing and really try to sell the brand to them. But not Sony. And if they ever discount Sony gear (even at the store's expense) Sony will fine them or blacklist them as an unauthorized Sony distributor.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Oct 26, 2017

# ¿ Oct 26, 2017 13:03

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

blowfish posted:

That's dumb as gently caress, Sony isn't exactly a premium brand image wise. Nobody buys Sony over Canon/Nikon just to flash the logo at people like rich hipsters do with Leica, they buy Sony because the camera bodies have good sensors and no mirror at a low weight. If they want to be Smug Assholes: The Camera Co. they should make artisanal special edition $15000 cameras in numbered production runs under 100, otherwise they're basically Fuji with bigger sensors.

Well, yeah. It is dumb as gently caress. But ask anyone who has had to work with Sony's Sales Representatives and they'll tell you that Sony is adopting the Apple-style approach to branding and pricing. Whether or not they truly are a premium product line is entirely up to you to decide as a camera user, but the fact is that they are trying to position themselves as a premium camera manufacturer that sells the latest in camera technology.

And you're definitely right about hipsters adopting Leica and stuff as their brand of choice. But something else is also happening- people aren't drooling over full-frame bodies like they used to. And people are adapting vintage glass and being perfectly happy with it. M43 is kicking all sorts of rear end. poo poo, even high-end smartphones have great cameras. Which is why Sony FE lenses/full frame bodies overpricing is even more ridiculous since full frame isn't king, anymore. Sony's neglect of APS-C bodies is also getting annoying. A lot of Sony shooters feel like Sony just isn't listening to their customer base. Sure, Sony's got nice sensors. But sensors aren't the be-all-end-all of a good camera. Their lens lineup is limited, customer service is non-existent, Sony app store is garbage, they lag in colour technology, and Sony camera menus are still hell.

But in either case, after being a Sony shooter for about 7 years and having done professional shoots with most of the other brands, I just feel like Sony doesn't offer anything remarkably special that justifies their "premium" pricing. Heck, a lot of professionals that I work with adapt more vintage class and EF mount to their Sony than they buy actually Sony glass. Based on what I've seen, Sony seems to appeal mostly to the pixel-peepers and people who obsess over DxOMark Scores. Don't get me wrong- Sony gear is great. But their pricing is just silly.

[/vent over. Sorry.]

melon cat fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Oct 26, 2017

# ¿ Oct 26, 2017 19:50

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

powderific posted:

Whether full frame is king or not, that's why you're paying a premium. Look at equivalent camera and lens pricing from Canon and Nikon. FF glass, sensors, whatever are more expensive to manufacture. Look at even the new "cheap" medium format stuff too.

I think you're underestimating how much people are attracted to Sony's full frame camera specs. 10fps at 42mp is no joke. Personally, I don't like Sony bodies that much and sold my A7s a month after buying it, but they've sold a lot of those FF bodies.

Oh for sure. Not going to deny that Sony has had success in the FF market. But even Sony's APS-C lenses are really overpriced. Even their on-camera flashes are more expensive than the other brands' despite comparable performance and build quality. poo poo, their NP-FW50 batteries went up in price despite the fact that they moved their battery production from Japan to China. And at the end of it all, I just can't help but feel like Sony's offering prosumer products at professional prices while thumbing their nose at what their customers actually want while charging a +20% Sony tax on their gear.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Oct 26, 2017

# ¿ Oct 26, 2017 20:57

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

bobfather posted:

I guess Pana saw Sony getting away with their lens prices and thought "me too!"

Sony: "Hold my beer."

*sticks a blue Zeiss sticker on it*

$4000.

# ¿ Nov 9, 2017 01:36

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

GEMorris posted:

Tha G9 looks nice, but I'll probably never own one.

I'm still not sure what the G9 offers above the GH5, though. The articles I've been seeing about it online seem to emphasize the fact that's it's $300 cheaper than the GH5, but that's about it. What can the G9 do that the GH5 can't? Because specs-wise, it doesn't sound seem like it's a "photo stills-focused" camera once you hack through their marketing speak.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Nov 9, 2017

# ¿ Nov 9, 2017 18:46

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

The fuzziest, pinkest catte toes! :3:

He's a Maine Coon cross, isn't he?

Also, I sold my FS5 and bought the GH5 with the 12-35 Panny lens. Still not sure if this is the right focal length for my video projects, but we'll see. So now I'll be using my a6500 on gimbal, and GH5 as my "workhorse" camera. So far, I really like being less encumbered by a big camcorder.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2017 06:12

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

GEMorris posted:

That lens is a great first prime for m4/3 and is an absolute steal. Mine rarely leaves my g85

As a new GH5 owner I was also wondering about this lens as well. Will it cannibalize my 12-35?

# ¿ Nov 20, 2017 05:12

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Finger Prince posted:

Speaking of the 12-35, I played around with one in a store yesterday and holy poo poo the AF on it is fast.

Is the mk2 version worth the +$300 premium? I snagged the mk1 at a good price, but I do a lot of video and am wondering if it's worth the upgrade

GEMorris posted:

I still haven't done much video so I can't say for sure. I would imagine the 12-35 would still get a lot of use especially when you need the wider angle.

Yeah I guess it'd still have a use. I suppose the 25mm would be useful for talking head/corporate shots.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Nov 22, 2017

# ¿ Nov 21, 2017 02:41

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

I'm new to the M43 world (new GH5 owner) and have a question about M43 lenses. If I buy an Olympus Lens and use it on my GH5, would my GH5's autofocus capabilities work? or does it automatically become a mechanical only lens the way an adapter vintage lens would?

# ¿ Nov 27, 2017 05:49

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

poopinmymouth posted:

X100F is so ..... unggggggg *fist biting noise* can't really describe.

I tried out the x100f not too long ago. The colours are amazing and the AF is fantastic. But my wife and I couldn't get over the tiny, awkward controls in it, especially the annoyingly-small focus ring. I don't even have large hands and felt like everything required tiny sweatshop hands to operate.

# ¿ Dec 8, 2017 15:08

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

rio posted:

How is it that camera menus can be so awful in almost 2018? This is seemingly basic level poo poo and if they are investing time into making bodies I would think putting some thought into the menu system would take a pretty short period of time comparatively. The most recent Sony camera I have used was when I had the rx10 miii and that was at least better than my old NEX 5n which was horrible so that isn�t saying much. Even a brand like Fuji having card format in �user settings� - I know that we all get used to where to find things eventually but why can�t they all just put some thought into it?

Also which camera brand is known for having he beat menu system these days? Are any of them doing it well?

Yeah, I never understood the still-terrible menu systems in many cameras, especially among Sony bodies. I feel like my no longer new GH5 has a fantastic menu layout, but that's only because I used to shoot with Sony gear prior to that. So anything was an improvement.

And something interesting- so I still own an a6500. But my wife, who's an intermediate-level photographer, instinctively grabs the GH5 when the a6500 is sitting right next to it. Even though the a6500 does better stills, she still prefers the GH5 because its menu system is so much easier to navigate. She can just find all of the stuff that she needs. She's really happy with it.

Proof that a good camera experience extends far beyond a fancypants sensor and "better" DxO Mark scores.

Zartans Lady Mask posted:

Would a Canon M100 be a good purchase, as a replacement/upgrade from an aging Powershot S95?

The m100 is a camera that was released in 2017 that would have been a "good" camera in 2007. Skip it. I'd take whatever7's suggestion and consider the higher end point and shoots.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Dec 27, 2017

# ¿ Dec 27, 2017 06:25

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Any recommendations for a good Nikon F to M43 adapter? I just bought a Nikon 50mm f1.4 AIS for my GH5. I'm cool with cheap dumb adapters as long as it doesn't have a fucky breech lock mechanism, like the one my cheap FD to NEX Fotodiox adapter had.

# ¿ Jan 4, 2018 04:34

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

polyester concept posted:

Big fan of K&F Concept adapters. Cheap but all metal construction and they�ve all fit really nice.

Alright that works for me. Pulled the trigger. Thanks for the recommendation.

8th-snype posted:

Don't blame Fotodiox for that Canon are the ones that designed that dumb breechlock on the FD lenses.

It was one of my least favourite aspects of the FD mount. It was always a fight to remove the adapters, and YouTube has all sorts of videos with people wrestling with the breechlock mechanism. So yeah screw whoever designed it.

# ¿ Jan 4, 2018 17:22

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Popelmon posted:

That Gh5s looks super interesting. The sample footage they showed during the TCS stream looked really good.

Definitely. But my biggest issue with it is the lack of IBIS (the GH5's IBIS is amazing). And the lower MP sensor makes it a video mirrorless camera, which is unlike the "hybrid" GH5 which can does both stills and video.

Or maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that my recent GH5 is good enough for me. Yeah. Probably that.

# ¿ Jan 9, 2018 04:15

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

I really want to create an anamorphic setup for my GH5 (for video), but am having trouble finding information about this online. Everyone I've asked who does have an anamorphic gets weirdly secretive and awkward about it, as if I'm T-1000 asking them where Sarah Connor is, or something. It's getting kind of silly.

Any recommended resources for finding info on anamorphic setups for the m43?

# ¿ Jan 19, 2018 22:43

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

powderific posted:

I recall the EOS-HD guy posting about anamorphic stuff a lot; there might be decent info in those forums.

Well would you look at that- they have a guide. I guess $20 isn't that bad. :shrug:

# ¿ Jan 19, 2018 23:43

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Is there a 50mm equivalent lens in the M43 world that is decently-priced, but doesn't suffer from the overly-sharp look that modern lenses seem to have? Hopefully this makes sense but I'm just getting bored of lenses that are out to please the pixel-peepers and just emphasize sharpness sharpness SHARPNESS :byodood:

.

For example, I have a Nikon AIS 50mm (100mm equivalent) and it offers a vintage-y, almost dreamy look that I really love. But it's too punched in. I'd just like to have a 50mm equivalent lens that has a bit more character and uniqueness to it. I just want a nice walkaround lens that doesn't cater to the damned pixel-peeper crowd. Maybe I'm better off looking at old manual lenses, but they all seem to get impacted by the M43's 2x crop factor by turning them all into portrait lenses.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Feb 2, 2018

# ¿ Feb 2, 2018 20:47

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Schneider Heim posted:

Um, dumb question, but what is focus peaking? My X-T1 has like 3 different manual focus aids but I don't know how to use any of them (since I'm on AF all the time). The one I tried gave some magnified PIP thing to check if my subject was really in focus.

Focus Peaking is only used for manual focusing. It's a visual aid to help you properly set your focus. If you have Focus Peaking turned on, the EVF shows a highlighted, outlined area for the areas that are currently in-focus. An example.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Feb 6, 2018

# ¿ Feb 6, 2018 16:50

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

rio posted:

Ah yes, did a quick scroll and saw a few comments and remembered how toxic the community is there.

"We don't go to ~~Ravenholme~~ the DPReview forums."

# ¿ Feb 6, 2018 21:31

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Wikipedia Brown posted:

As an a6300 user who's equally into stills and video, the X-H1 sounds like it could be my ticket out of Sony town. I've been interested in Fuji cameras for years, but the video output just wasn't up to scratch.

As a mostly video shooter- oh gently caress yes. Fuji colour science + their lens selection + their AF. I'd jump ship to Fuji immediately if they came out with a decent video options.

# ¿ Feb 11, 2018 16:19

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Yeah the A7iii's stats looks amazing. At this point I'm wondering if I should ditch my a6500 for the A7iii's. It'd be nice to get the higher DR, better battery and full frame low light performance.

# ¿ Feb 27, 2018 02:31

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Wikipedia Brown posted:

The 18-105 is awesome, but it's a crop lens. The other is full frame (hence the FE in the name). The prices jump considerably between the two formats.

As a former owner of the 18-105 I'm going to give a different opinion- it's my least favourite lens in the Sony lineup. Stuck at F4, very soft at its wider apertures. Long and unwieldy. A true "jack of all trades" lens that does "all" things but isn't good at any one thing. But then again all of Sony's zoom APSC lenses are pretty mediocre.

Nice zoom rocker though.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Feb 28, 2018

# ¿ Feb 28, 2018 04:17

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

What kind of camera flash are you guys using for your M43 cameras? My GH5 needs a good flash that I can use for corporate portraits and food photography.

# ¿ Mar 29, 2018 00:03

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

strap on revenge posted:

re: the wideness of it, my favourite lens is the Sony 10-18 because when you get down to something that wide it's incredible how much more you can get in the frame

I like the Sony 10-18's focal length but cannot understand for the life of me why it costs $800-$900. F4, APS-C, soft picture, cheap plastic housing.

Sony lens prices are frigging weird.

# ¿ May 7, 2018 04:56

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

strap on revenge posted:

agree it's pricey but i've always thought it produced pretty sharp images?

Either I had a bad copy or what, but the 10-18 that I used to shoot with was annoyingly soft. It was kind of like the 18-105, in my opinion. As in, both takes average photos, produced soft images, but have a handy focal length and powerzoom that makes flying it on a gimbal much easier. Both lenses seem to be better-suited for video shooters who want a handy lens. I never used the 10-18 or the 18-105 for my professional photography because of how soft and unremarkable it was.

whatever7 posted:

Their business model is get you in the door with super cheap entry level APSC body and club you with the mid tier lens 2 years down the road.

Well they used to do it when the mirrorless market was booming.

That was their old way of doing things. They've changed things up- Sony now neglects their APS-C line completely and seems to be putting most of its stock in full-frame glass! :downs:

melon cat fucked around with this message at 18:41 on May 8, 2018

# ¿ May 8, 2018 18:31

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

cheese posted:

So just going straight for the Sony A7 line. Does it seem like crop sensor days are numbered?

Yes it does seem that way. I sold off my a6500 because I'm convinced that Sony APS-C is dead. And worse yet, they seem to be treating APS-C as the "budget" lineup for amateur photographer and marketing FF as the "upgrade" that they should all aspire to. Annoying, since APS-C is perfectly fine for professional use.

melon cat fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Jan 11, 2024

# ¿ Jul 29, 2018 19:07

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

Aredna posted:

I'd argue that not much has changed on the lens front over time. I'm not saying they're in a good situation, but nothing has really gotten much better or worse since they launched. I wouldn't use it as a sign that they've given up on APSC, but more that the future holds what we've seen in the past.

It's certainly a valid reason to leave Sony, but definitely lenses don't show that Sony has given up on the APSC line up at all. It just shows that while they can make great sensors and great bodies - they can't figure out how to compete on the lens front.

And therein lies the problem. Sony seems to be focusing on selling fancy sensors and camera bodies instead of developing their line of APS-C lenses. And as a video shooter, I really felt like they were pushing video people to "upgrade" to FF, which is silly because Super35 is closer to APS-C. And it was getting really annoying hearing all of these rumours about new Sony glass and it always ends up being some new $4000 FF emount.

On a somewhat related note- I also left Sony because I'm convinced that they hate their customers. Every lens repair that I've gone through has taken a minimum of 2 months. They've had my Zeiss 55mm in their New York repair shop since May 27. And sometimes they take over a month just to diagnose the problem, nevermind get to work on actually fixing it. And they're pretty much inaccessible throughout the whole process so you never know what stage of the repair they're at. Screw that.

cheese posted:

I took some shallow DOF pictures at a BBQ this past weekend and I regretted quite a few of them. I ended up with some sort of odd looking pictures where someone is holding a baby and the person standing just off their shoulder looking at the baby is just out of focus because I didn't stop it down. Not like "obliterated into a pleasing bokeh fuzz" but "Are they supposed to be blurry?" levels. Shallow DOF is for when you really want to isolate one thing or to create "art". F/8 is much better when you want to document things.

This is exactly why I could never understand those people who want those ultra-fast F/0.95 lenses. Pretty much the eyelash will be in focus while everything else gets depth of field'ed out into a bokeh'd mess.

"Awesome. The tip of my nose is in focus."

melon cat fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Aug 3, 2018

# ¿ Aug 3, 2018 08:03

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 04:28

melon cat: Jan 21, 2010; Nap Ghost

kefkafloyd posted:

I use Sony Pro Services and it's legitimately good. They gave me a loaner next day when my a99ii had a minor issue and I had my original body back in three days.

It's like people forget that Sony Pro Services has been supporting professional videographers for decades.

(that said, they stuck with Precision for too long)

So I've got to ask then- what are Sony's requirements for being considered a "professional"? Because given the Sony tax that I've been paying for all of my gear (FS5, a6500, Zeiss 55mm, Zeiss 24mm) I expected some degree of decent service (LOL), but we all know how that turned out.

Edit: Just checked out the Pro Support website and you have to apply for Pro Support? Like... huh.

# ¿ Aug 4, 2018 17:27

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Mirrorless Thread: Son(y), I Am Disappoint.

«‹›2 »