Sony a7 III discussion

[Ingerson]

Since no one is answering in the footage request thread:

Can anyone upload some HDR clips that I can play around with in Davinci? Looking for faces, bright colors and high DR (want to test highlight recovery and shadow lifting).

[jonpais]

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. 

[026163]

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 

[scotchtape]

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.

[kye]

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:

 

[Robert Collins]

Hmmmm... focus on the Sigma 50 1.4 doesnt look good.

Have you tried some different settings - such as flexible spot af?

Also face detect af wont work in 4k if you are also recording proxies?

[jonpais]

I returned the Sigma and bought a Sony. AF-C is much faster and more reliable. 

[Inazuma]

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. 

[BTM_Pix]

5 hours ago, jonpais said:

I returned the Sigma and bought a Sony. AF-C is much faster and more reliable. 

The Sony 1.4 ?

 

[eoslover]

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

[jonpais]

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. 

[BTM_Pix]

14 minutes ago, jonpais said:

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

And tears in your eyes no doubt !

[kye]

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.  

[jonpais]

I’ve been watching Godless and Luke Cage on Netflix and really like  how they use wide angle lenses to include the surroundings, so I might have a go at that. But longer lenses are definitely in the cards. 

[Inazuma]

8 hours ago, eoslover said:

except the autofocus issues not being solved at the moment

I had no autofocus issues at all with mine

[eoslover]

1 minute ago, Inazuma said:

I had no autofocus issues at all with mine

if that's the case it's even worse..not sure a firmware will be helpful for those bad copies

 

 

 

[jonpais]

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. 

[kye]

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.

[jonpais]

@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. 

 

[Robert Collins]

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.