Sony a7 III discussion

[jonpais]

If I remember correctly, the reason Sony took as long as they did to release their superb 85mm f/1.4 had to do with trying to achieve the best bokeh possible, which involved molding special aspherical glass to much higher tolerances, helping rid bokeh of the ugly onion rings still seen in some high end productions.

The development of their XA aspherical lenses took somewhere between two to three years. They use the same procedure in their most recent 24mm f/1.4 G Master, as well as the same super high speed AF motors used in the insanely expensive 400mm f/2.8. 

This from Diglloyd, who I thought was smitten with Nikon’s Z mirrorless only days ago:

By the time Nikon and Canon get to 10 native lenses, Sony will probably have 40. If Nikon and Canon are smart, they’ll heartily encourage 3rd-party lenses. I deem lens adapter a crummy solution in most all cases. The Sigma FE DG HSM Art lenses strongly reinforce that thinking even though they are native lenses—top-flight DSLR lens designs adapted to mirrorless are large and heavy and awkward.

As well, Sony surely will have a Sony A7R IV and other sibling out before long, which might well leapfrog the CaNikon offerings right out of the gate. Accordingly, I dislike the idea of buying into either the Canon EOS R system (30 megapixels = no way) or the Nikon Z7 (good but not groundbreaking) at this stage in the game, because both offerings will be outdated in a year (my prediction).

- end of quote

And, I might add, Tamron, Voigtlander and a dozen others will continue to pump out E mount lenses for the most demanding photographers in the meantime...

I’d also faintly hoped Sony would release a set of three superb ultra compact f/2 primes like Fuji, but as long as they continue to focus on producing compact affordable designs like the 85mm f/1.8 and the soon-to-be released 24mm f/1.4 G Master, which can be flown on the original, inexpensive and highly portable Zhiyun Crane, I’m not going to quarrel. And I tend to agree with Lloyd Chambers: adapting huge-ass Sigmas to mirrorless is no solution for me.

 

[heart0less]

4 hours ago, jonpais said:

as long as they continue to focus on producing compact affordable designs like the 85mm f/1.8 

Well, Sony released only two compact and affordable lenses: 50/1.8 and 85/1.8

That's it, nothing more. 

 

The newest 24/1.4 GM may seem not that expensive (compared to the other GMs), but it can't be called a basic, affordable lens. 

 

[webrunner5]

Well the Sony 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 FE OSS is not 100 bucks, 399 bucks, but I don't think that is too bad for a zoom. And the one I have is pretty damn good sharpness wise.

[Drew Allegre]

5 minutes ago, heart0less said:

Well, Sony released only two compact and affordable lenses: 50/1.8 and 85/1.8

That's it, nothing more. 

 

The newest 24/1.4 GM may seem not that expensive (compared to the other GMs), but it can't be called a basic, affordable lens. 

 

The 28/2 is definitely in the compact/affordable category.

The line up of shorter primes is kind of a mess though, just not a lot of consistency and overlapping lines all over the place.

[jonpais]

5 minutes ago, heart0less said:

Well, Sony released only two compact and affordable lenses: 50/1.8 and 85/1.8

That's it, nothing more. 

 

The newest 24/1.4 GM may seem not that expensive (compared to the other GMs), but it can't be called a basic, affordable lens. 

 

If we compare it to other premium lenses in my collection, like the Olympus 25mm f/1.2, Olympus 45mm f/1.2 and PanLeica 12mm f/1.4, it can be considered a bargain. It is also reasonably priced when compared to its direct competitors. 

[webrunner5]

2 minutes ago, Drew Allegre said:

The 28/2 is definitely in the compact/affordable category.

The line up of shorter primes is kind of a mess though, just not a lot of consistency and overlapping lines all over the place.

Plus you can make it a 21mm with this add on.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1126141-REG/sony_sel075uwc_21mm_ultra_wide_converter_for.html?ap=y&gclid=Cj0KCQjwrZLdBRCmARIsAFBZllH-8xDy538xhutJEZPco8uSjlwYLlHYDgpecLJNPFRSeMJCAtT_y2kaAsZQEALw_wcB&smp=y

[heart0less]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

If we compare it to other premium lenses in my collection, like the Olympus 25mm f/1.2, Olympus 45mm f/1.2 and PanLeica 12mm f/1.4, it can be considered a bargain. It is also reasonably priced when compared to its direct competitors. 

That's completely true. 

1 hour ago, Drew Allegre said:

The 28/2 is definitely in the compact/affordable category.

Ah, forgot about this little fella. My bad. 

[Inazuma]

Imo "affordable" means less than $400 or something that someone can purchase who is not professionally involved in photography. I don't think the 85 falls into that category. I make a decent salary but can't justify buying that lens. Not after spending 2k on the body anyway.  

[Mako Sports]

13 minutes ago, Inazuma said:

Imo "affordable" means less than $400 or something that someone can purchase who is not professionally involved in photography. I don't think the 85 falls into that category. I make a decent salary but can't justify buying that lens. Not after spending 2k on the body anyway.  

You can't justify the 85mm F1.8 FE??? ??  That lens is absolutely insane for the price. Its unbelievably sharp, fast, lightweight, and affordable.

Sony E mount doesn't have a lot of affordable native AF glass like how MFT and Canon has.

I always say in my Photography Discord Server "If your on a shoestring budget Sony E mount is simply not for you". 

[jonpais]

2 minutes ago, Mako Sports said:

You can justify the 85mm F1.8 FE??? That lens is absolutely insane for the price. Its unbelievably sharp, fast, lightweight, and affordable.

Sony E mount doesn't have a lot of affordable native AF glass like how MFT and Canon has.

I always say in my Photography Discord Server "If your on a shoestring budget Sony E mount is simply not for you". 

I guess he's on a budget.  

I paid some $1,200.00 for the Olympus 45mm f/1.2, and it was worth every penny to me - and the Sony 85mm f/1.8 only cost half that!

[Inazuma]

"good for the price" and "affordable" are two different things though. I would definitely be able to justify it if I were to use it a lot or even somewhat often. But it would be rarely used for me so no. For example, if I had a Canon/Nikon I would probably have their 85mm just to have around because theirs are $400 or less and I'd probably have spent less on the body as well

[jonpais]

To me, body price has got little or nothing to do with what I’d spend on lenses. I upgrade bodies every couple years, I don’t let go of the lenses. 

[Inazuma]

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

 I upgrade bodies every couple years, I don’t let go of the lenses. 

Haven't you had the G85, XT2, GH5 & A73 all within a year of each other? ?

 Body price matters if you have a total budget. You can buy more lenses if you buy a cheaper body, especially if the lenses for that body are cheaper as well (i.e. canon/nikon dslr's)

[noone]

Since I am probably going to have to sell my FE 85 1.8 to pay for fixing my A7s I  was looking at sold prices for them on Ebay today.

Dunno about the rest of the world but here in Australia, the FE 85 1.8 seems to be going for quite a bit more than I paid for it months ago.

I guess that is down to popularity of Sony here now (lots of pros and semi pros and even just good Instagrammers have switched to Sony in the last few months) and the reputation of the lens.

I considered it to be the biggest bargain going in photography for ANY brand and any system.     While it still IS a screaming bargain and still an extremely good lens regardless of price, there is definitely a bit of a cult mystic about it now pushing up prices and maybe due to supply.

I do think anyone even remotely interested in an 85 prime who uses Sony FF E mount should have it unless they want a different 85 for their taste.

The FE 28-70 kit lens is also quite nice and well worth the money though there may be copy variation (I use it as a 5.6 constant aperture zoom for video though don't use it often).

 

This is a screen grab from a video I did using the FE kit lens at some really high ISOs (on an A7s -was in a quite dimly lit beer garden in Winter a while ago).

I love the video of this and would love to show it but I can not.      Sarah Mcleod from the Superjesus playing solo.

 

[jonpais]

I didn’t want to start a new topic for this, but here’s an interesting conversation with Jarred Land and Brent Carter, who talk about how the Sony a7 cameras paved the way for large format cinema cameras (just as they have with FF mirrorless), and how they prefer cine lenses with motors, which they say would be smaller, cheaper and one hundred times faster than the wireless control units used in productions. Jon Fauer says he sees Full Format as the biggest change in the business since movies went from silent to talkies.

[heart0less]

Had a pleasant walk today.

A couple of screen grabs.

S-Log2, S-Gamut3.cine + Resolve. FE50/1.8

[ntblowz]

My friend was testing portrait shoot using my A7III today, when he shoot with some flowers near the front of the model's face it always focus on the flower even if he use flexible point s on the model's eye position, turns out the face detection was interfering with it, so after turning face detection off it can focus properly on the model's face again with the flexible point.

 

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

Did my first non corporate/commercial/videography shoot with the A7 III. Gotta say, in 4K with Resolve Color Management it's grading really nicely. Even held up to some mildly aggressive power windowing with only a little compression weirdness. Skin tones look nice (if thin), and operationally it was a nice smooth ride once I got all the initial setup done. My only real complaint with the files is that highlight detail is VERY brittle. Desaturating and other tricks for reigning in highlights help, but anything remotely close to clipping is going to fight manipulation hard, even in LOG. Such is the nature of 8-bit files.

Super fun project, and I'm looking forward to pushing this little camera harder in the coming weeks.
 

[webrunner5]

Wow nice stuff. Sony just does so well in dark situations with DR and noise. For the money a no brainer. Yeah still no Canon color science, but a big gain from my A7s! Although I really do like the Grungy look from the original.

Although this is one of my favorite videos using the original A7s. Shot at 60fps, pretty much OOC. I don't see why a person can't make something pretty great with one. They are close now to 700 bucks for a FF camera. Damn good machine for the money.

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

9 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Wow nice stuff. Sony just does so well in dark situations with DR and noise.

Thanks! Actually, it wasn't dark at all. Lit the scene with a Rifa 66 skirted with diffusion over the table, Kinos on the floor raking the back wall, and an Altman 650 with a couple sheets of opal on the doors through a roll of Lee 216 diffusion to clean up the coverage and give faces some shape. You can see the faint catchlight above/in front of them and a stronger one high on the far side. Blending a soft toplight/butterfly light with a sidey-er source tends to feel natural and look flattering as hell, which served my primary goal of making this feel like a romantic dinner. 

I wanted f/4 for sharpness and to give actors some freedom to move without focus having to chase too much, so I pushed ISO here and there, but I kept it within 800-2000 throughout. Overexposed a bit too, so overall not a challenging scene in terms of levels. Even still, the A7 has some noticeable color noise weirdness; desaturating and crushing them down hid it pretty effectively, but it simply doesn't deal with contrasty light and post stretching as well as an F3. 

My other sad observation is that my Leicas don't match up perfectly in color: the 28 leans a little green and the 50 is a touch warm, comparing both to the 35 (pretty neutral IMO). Luckily, just a little adjustment to the color bars got things lined up pretty easily.