The Sony A73/A7R3/A7S3/A9 Thread
- Thread starter traveyb
- Start date
Caporegime
What???? with 693 points…really?
That technique is so 1980's, just frame it as you see it.
Right done loads of research and decided to add some money into my part exchange.
My "starter" kit is as follows
Sony A7iii with Sony 55mm F1.8 ZA £2,419
Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G £1,199 (day to day walkabout, lighter and smaller than the 24-70 f2.8 plus more range)
Sony FE Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar 16-35mm F4 £1,049 (love my landscapes and mainly shoot at f8 so nothing to be gained from the f2.8 but weight)
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 £599 (my goto portrait lens)
Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art £699 (for astro work)
Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS £1,149 (I keep thinking about dropping this but its light and fills a hole between the 24-105 and the 150-600 monster)
Sigma 150-600 F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sports with Sigma 1.4TC Canon £1,400 (for my wildlife photography. good balance between cost and quality)
MC11 Canon Fit £199 (for the Sigma canon fit lens plus opens up possibility of more cheap quality used Canon lens)
I am staying away from the big native telephotos as they don't seem to be good value. Would love the sony 100-400 but reach is too short comarped with the effective FF 840mm f5.6 lens I am using atm.
Most lenses are picked for a balance between quality and size and weight. As much as I would love the 24-70 f2,8, 16-35 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 55m f1.4, 85mm f1.4 I dont think any offer enough extra quality over the lenses I have picked for the eyewatering extra cost and certainly the size and weight becomes a big issue with some weighing double.
If i did pick some of the more premium lenses my kit would become 2 to 3 lens max for my money.
So any suggestions before I check my basket out?
My "starter" kit is as follows
Sony A7iii with Sony 55mm F1.8 ZA £2,419
Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G £1,199 (day to day walkabout, lighter and smaller than the 24-70 f2.8 plus more range)
Sony FE Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar 16-35mm F4 £1,049 (love my landscapes and mainly shoot at f8 so nothing to be gained from the f2.8 but weight)
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 £599 (my goto portrait lens)
Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art £699 (for astro work)
Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS £1,149 (I keep thinking about dropping this but its light and fills a hole between the 24-105 and the 150-600 monster)
Sigma 150-600 F5-6.3 DG OS HSM sports with Sigma 1.4TC Canon £1,400 (for my wildlife photography. good balance between cost and quality)
MC11 Canon Fit £199 (for the Sigma canon fit lens plus opens up possibility of more cheap quality used Canon lens)
I am staying away from the big native telephotos as they don't seem to be good value. Would love the sony 100-400 but reach is too short comarped with the effective FF 840mm f5.6 lens I am using atm.
Most lenses are picked for a balance between quality and size and weight. As much as I would love the 24-70 f2,8, 16-35 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 55m f1.4, 85mm f1.4 I dont think any offer enough extra quality over the lenses I have picked for the eyewatering extra cost and certainly the size and weight becomes a big issue with some weighing double.
If i did pick some of the more premium lenses my kit would become 2 to 3 lens max for my money.
So any suggestions before I check my basket out?
Soldato
Perhaps maybe start with just the camera and kit lens, to see if you get on with the camera itself, before spending an additional £5k+ on lenses? For the sake of a week or two, it might save you a lot of hassle and money.
Lots of cashback to be had their, see a few posts above as I think with multiple lenses the rate of cashback doubles.
Also it looks like the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is going to be excellent value for money - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MP5hGBKs8Dg and is released on Thursday.
Have you looked at the Laowa 15mm for astro at all? - https://www.laowalens.co.uk/laowa-15mm-f2-zero-d-lens-sony-fe.html
While I agree he could start with 1 or 2 lenses then work up, starting with a kit lens is hardly a way of testing a camera's potential and capabilities. The 28-70mm kit lens is pretty damn awful.
Soldato
I was thinking more about the camera itself, rather than the capabilities. Speaking form experience with the couple of RX100s I've owned, the menu system is terrible and is normally tolerated as a grudging concession that other features make it worth sticking with.
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
The Sony A7 3rd gen series menus are fine (still not perfect but more usable than ever before) and it is easy to set up a custom menu. You can easily see it on many Youtube vids.
The menu system is not a reason for being put off any of the Sony 3rd gen cameras and can be considered a very minor issue.
Caporegime
Use my menu to set up your most used settings, customise all the buttons, set the quick menu shot cuts too and then you can forget the rest of the menus.
It takes a while and if you have 2 bodies....it’ll be a pain but at least you can now.
It takes a while and if you have 2 bodies....it’ll be a pain but at least you can now.
The Tamron just doesnt come close to the advantage of having 24-105 as a travel lens. If i need more bokeh or low light Ill use one of my three primes instead.
I will look at the Laowa 15mm as I have the Laowa 7.5mm f2 for the mft and its a gem.
Coming from the olympus omd em1 markii which has the most complicated menu ever invented which i own a 356 page book to explain it all, I can't believe the Sony menu is any worse!
Caporegime
It’s just illogical, I mean the features to select shooting RAW/JPEG and the feature to shoot whether you shoot raw/jpeg in dual cards or continuous us about 22 pages apart.
I will be totally at home then as basically thats the Olympus system of menus as well
While on a shoot I have been known to cycle through every sub menu on the olympus and still not find the setting I was looking for.
Associate
The Sony is £100 shy of being twice the price, it's heavier, it's larger, it's slower and it's softer. Not a bad trade off for a small loss of range.
To be fair while I agree about price and weight, I'm not sure the Sony is softer at the same apertures.
The great thing about having a 42MP camera is I can extend that 75mm to 105mm simply by cropping while still having close to 24MP left.
Associate
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61173487
In fairness there's a bigger difference between the center and corners on the Tamron so you may notice it more than the Sony but going by the AP numbers it should still be the sharper lens.
True but I don't have an A7R! I'm more bothered by the loss of 24-28mm than 75-105mm but we'll see how well the Tamron handles as it should be out in a few days, hopefully there's no (unwelcome) surprises.
I doubt it is sharper by any significant margin. The 24-105mm has been reviewed as a sharp lens, even across the frame. The reason to buy the Tamron isn't because it's sharper, it's because it's f2.8, small and light, and "sharp enough for most purposes".... for half the price.
I was speaking purely for myself and my own uses about why a 28-75mm isn't a problem vs a 24-105mm.
Soldato
All my Nikon gear sold, so I couldn't resist and have jumped on the bandwagon. No lenses selected yet - I think I'll try the Tamron 28-75 once it is out and then just get a fast-ish 50 to begin with. I'm off to the Outer Hebrides in a month's time, so maybe something around 20mm too by then.
Soldato
should i sell up all my canon too?
Yes of course, immediately.