Jump to content

Dying To Buy Into Sony


Recommended Posts

Ever since I had decided a while back that I was just going to shoot Fuji and Sony, I made the move to dump most of my Canon stuff (which was a pretty extensive collection). I successfully dumped about 12 lenses once I realized the A7R2 was the real deal and that it would work for me.

 

Since then, I have bought the 28/2 and the 35/1.4 FE lenses. The 28 is compact, and renders nicely enough that it comes in very handy. The 35 was an inconsistent dog which was returned after a week of frustration (magical at the one thing it did well though which was centered subjects at close distances wide open).

 

Since returning the 35, I have gone into a mode where I'm furiously looking for glass to put in front of this amazing sensor. I came to the point this morning where upon receiving my most recent purchase (Sigma 20mm 1.4 Art) that I have no completely bought back into a Canon glass system. I have since rebought (and resold) the 50L, rebought 85L2, Sigma 20mm and 50mm Art, and the Canon 200mm F2.0 IS all within the last two months. Adapting glass is not a perfect solution which is why I was hoping to buy into Sony completely. But seeing as my first experience with one of their expensive primes was complete shite, I was pushed back in the other direction to look for a fix for right meow.

 

By my estimates, I've spent over 8k on Canon EF mount lenses recently while no longer owning a Canon EF mount body. This, to me is indicative of a major issue with Sony's ability to produce a line of impressive, consistent, and alluring lenses at comparable/acceptable prices. If they did have a solid line of lenses that I could trust, the cheese I just spent would all be in Sony's pocket already.

 

I have owned a multitude of lenses in a multitude of different systems and the FE 35/1.4 was the first lens I've ever gotten that exhibited a blaring problem immediately upon mounting and shooting. This, combined with the subsequent reading I have done from lensrentals etc do not instill the confidence necessary for me to feel comfortable sending 1-3k to Sony for any lens right now.

 

Go ahead and flame me if you want. But know that I would love for Sony to succeed and become a true contender as I have appreciated every bit of their innovation these past few years. Rant over. lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had the 55 when I took the first Sony go around with the a7r1 and dumped both. It was good. But it didn't blow my mind. My true preferred FL is actually a little bit wider than 50 so 55 really cramped my walk around style. Size is also not an issue for me. So my desire is for fast and optically excellent. The Sigma Art is much better than the FE 55 (for me).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Peter Kelly

It all depends upon what you want, or expect, and what you will be doing with the results.

 

If you want perfection, at every level, then you will be disappointed no matter what you use. I fear that too many of us are swayed into that perspective by the constant comparisons provided by endless reviews and measurements.

Back when Nikon brought out their Nikon F, people just used them and they worked. I can guarantee that no one examined the results with a microscope and most DSLRs today perform far better than the Nikon F ever could (let's not dive into a film versus digital debate!).

 

Of course, all this desire for perfection should be measured against final use. If web-based, or small prints, then you could use a phone in many cases, so 'slight softness of the edges' becomes a nonsense.

Indeed, most so-called issues will never be noticed in almost all cases and certainly not by the general public.

 

As an example, I was walking past a large 'Boots' store last week and there were many advertising posters (all the Christmas perfumes and such) measuring 3 metres high. These were, presumably, expensive high-level professional shots, yet the blurring, pixellation, and jpeg artifacts were horrendous. However, I would put good money on me being the only person within a week that even noticed! Despite my seeing the faults, though, they weren't of any consequence because the nature of the viewing in the vast majority of cases made them inconsequential and I'm pretty sure the photographer wouldn't have been biting his nails with worry as he cashed his cheque.

 

The bottom line is to follow the old advice, do not look for equipment to give you better results, look to get better results out of your equipment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends upon what you want, or expect, and what you will be doing with the results.

 

If you want perfection, at every level, then you will be disappointed no matter what you use. I fear that too many of us are swayed into that perspective by the constant comparisons provided by endless reviews and measurements.

Back when Nikon brought out their Nikon F, people just used them and they worked. I can guarantee that no one examined the results with a microscope and most DSLRs today perform far better than the Nikon F ever could (let's not dive into a film versus digital debate!).

 

Of course, all this desire for perfection should be measured against final use. If web-based, or small prints, then you could use a phone in many cases, so 'slight softness of the edges' becomes a nonsense.

Indeed, most so-called issues will never be noticed in almost all cases and certainly not by the general public.

 

As an example, I was walking past a large 'Boots' store last week and there were many advertising posters (all the Christmas perfumes and such) measuring 3 metres high. These were, presumably, expensive high-level professional shots, yet the blurring, pixellation, and jpeg artifacts were horrendous. However, I would put good money on me being the only person within a week that even noticed! Despite my seeing the faults, though, they weren't of any consequence because the nature of the viewing in the vast majority of cases made them inconsequential and I'm pretty sure the photographer wouldn't have been biting his nails with worry as he cashed his cheque.

 

The bottom line is to follow the old advice, do not look for equipment to give you better results, look to get better results out of your equipment.

That's precisely it though. I have been in this game a long time to know what is feasible and what isn't. I also know what reasonable expectations are which is why I chose to keep the A7R2 this time around. While it still has some issues that I really dislike, it brings a lot of tools to the table that I can't get in any other package that makes a lot of things possible for my shooting so I can forgive the shortcomings.

 

I am not an MTF chart reader or a brick wall shooter as both of those things are not indicative of what can be done when doing real world shooting in my experience. So those get very little merit in my book on determining whether I am going to love or hate a lens. My determination comes from the pudding which is what my final results look like.

 

However, I have been a gear head since the late 90s and my issues have never been with the glass as I have been fortunate enough to always have very good lenses in the kit. As I stated previously, the FE 35/1.4 is literally the first lens of at least 30-40 I have owned since I started shooting that has exhibited enough optical problems that I was prompted to go and figure out what was wrong in the first place.

 

I am also no stranger to using vintage lenses as I have been adapting them for a long time since the Canon days so I understand and accept plenty of optical aberrations and account for many different tolerances that must be had when doing so.

 

What I cannot accept is a lens that I paid $1600 for which doesn't even come close to giving me my 42 million pixels (of a subject I focused on) anywhere outside of the core/center 30% of the frame. I accept field curvature. I am not talking about landscape shooting. I am talking about placing a specific subject (namely people and or objects) outside of the center third of the frame and having them be consistently soft and haloed (especially on the right 30% of the frame).

 

Furthermore, I still have an extensive Fuji kit that I use concurrently with my Sony rig. It is only 16mp and I was getting sharper/more detailed and better looking results out of the 35mm equivalent on that system than with the FE 35. The fact that I love my Fuji kit still should indicate that I am not all about pixel peeping. I simply love when I can get good looking final results.

 

With regard to my lens kit for the Sony, I spent about $750 on each of the Sigma Art lenses new which is still less than the cost of the FE 35. Both are beyond stellar and make the optics of the FE look like they are definitely a rip off at the current price tag.

 

My whole point was, I absolutely wish Sony would make some stellar primes with consistent production quality if they are going to charge pro level prices. Right now, they are not and it has lost them over $8000 from this guy that has gone to other companies to use on Sony's body! Why not do right by the system they have released 6 bodies for in the last several years and back it up with the stuff that many people are looking for?

 

I know there are a lot of people on the internet just trolling around. But I am not one of them. I am an actual shooter who has been very happy with all of his gear all along the way. I just happen to love new tech and trying stuff out. So I am definitely not looking for gear to make me better. I spend/spent plenty of time shooting/learning and in general working to develop my abilities. All I want is for my tools to behave as they should.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Sigma Art is much better than the FE 55 (for me)"

 

for shure...what do you expect?

 

i love the nokton 50mm 1.5 and i know that i will not find a lens like this

For the money Sony is charging, I expect more not only with regard to specs, but production quality and consistency. When you are the company trying to play catch-up, you shouldn't be charging king of the hill prices and providing bottom of the totem poll specs and production consistency. Furthermore, there service department is the least confidence building of all the major companies at the moment. Key is, if you want to gain more market share, then build the right ecosystem, build them well, and back them up. Then people won't have issues investing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nice to see you spending money into Canon gear AGAIN John :D. Canon 200f2 is truly an amazing lens and I'm glad it works well with your a7rii.

 

For me, I'll keep my 1Dx and use it with my Canon 200f2 and 400f2.8 IS II + 2x TC III. The only lens I really look forward to see in a7 series is Batis135f2. That will complete my wish list for Sony line up.

 

I'm itching for that FE35 f1.4, but feel like it might duplicate FL with my Batis25.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's nice to see you spending money into Canon gear AGAIN John :D. Canon 200f2 is truly an amazing lens and I'm glad it works well with your a7rii.

 

For me, I'll keep my 1Dx and use it with my Canon 200f2 and 400f2.8 IS II + 2x TC III. The only lens I really look forward to see in a7 series is Batis135f2. That will complete my wish list for Sony line up.

 

I'm itching for that FE35 f1.4, but feel like it might duplicate FL with my Batis25.

If you decide to jump on the 35/1.4, please keep me posted about your findings during real world usage. As stated previously, mine was absolutely the most beautiful rendering I have had in a 35 in one specific shooting scenario. At everything else, it was sub par and inconsistent.

 

Don't have anymore Canon DSLR bodies. But if the 5D4 proves to be a leap instead of a small step forward, I will still have enough EF glass that I would consider it. LOL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

They really need to announce these new lenses already.

 

 

Exactly, I'm kinda in a similar boat lens wise, I've been trying to downsize from Nikon and been through Fuji and now an a7ii - the rubbish 24-70 is the main stickler for me but its clear more lenses are needed, built more consistently ... it would also be nice to see Sigma and Tamron join the party!

Link to post
Share on other sites

John whats the longest Canon you've tried, Im looking for a 300mM upwards Canon that works well with metabones, you managed to test any ?

 

thanks

The longest one I've tried is the 300/4 IS. It didn't work at all. I haven't tried it since upgrading metabones firmware though so it may have changed. The 70-200/2.8 IS II is the other one I sold off because it just wasn't doing so hot at the longer half of the zoom range with regard to AF. Currently, the only telephoto option I use on it is the 200/2.0 as it focuses superbly on the Sony. After the most recent metabones updates, it also works with the 2x TC III which gets me to 400/4.0. Haven't used it extensively in the latter setup with TC. But I did test it and it seemed to work just fine.

The only other thing I tested (which doesn't really count) is the 55-250/4-5.6 IS STM in crop mode which works surprisingly well also. Not really that meaningful though since it is not a ff option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

why did you dump all your canon gear before renting and testing sony equipment to see if it fits into your needs first? thats a very poor financial decision. its fine to not like sony lenses, i don't like lots of brands. but you need to make sure these fit your needs before you dump all the gear that DOES work for you

Link to post
Share on other sites

why did you dump all your canon gear before renting and testing sony equipment to see if it fits into your needs first? thats a very poor financial decision. its fine to not like sony lenses, i don't like lots of brands. but you need to make sure these fit your needs before you dump all the gear that DOES work for you

 

I didn't dump all of my Canon gear before testing (and I don't rent). I bought the A7R2 while I still had a fairly large Canon kit still. I was already in the process of selling the Canon stuff because I was pretty certain I was done with DSLR regardless as I was very happy with my Fuji kit already. So my thought was, even if the Sony didn't work out, it didn't mean I was going to keep my Canon kit. What it really meant was that the Fuji rig would be my only kit left if the Sony didn't work out.

 

Regarding the financial decision, I am very calculated in this area which is why I have been able to perpetuate my money for this long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread above. I see myself in those paragraphs above. I am 68 years old and have been taking photos since I was 8. For decades I went back and forth between Nikon and Canon, and enjoyed both brands. I have finally settled on Sony (have A7m2 and A6000) for two main reasons. The tilting LCD and the Focus Peaking, both of which are a God send for old photogs like me.

 

The point I wish to drill home here is this: Every lens and camera has its limitations, and it is up to us to learn those limitations, and then push our gear to the limit using this knowledge and our imagination. Let me give you an example. I am a landscape photographer (now) and take a lot of photos around the chain of lakes near Clermont, FL. Thus, I need to use zoom lenses (or learn to walk on water). The two I have settled on are the Sony Zeiss 16-35 f4, and the SZ 24-70 f4. I know from testing my lenses, and experience, that the 35mm on the 16-35 is pretty soft, as is the 70mm on the 24-70. So for serious landscapes I figure the 16-35 is a 16-28, and the 24-70 is a 24-50. Thus, using both lenses, I can count on 16mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm with some pretty nice results. Sure, I'm not thrilled I have to take the 16-35 off, and attach the 24-70 to get a sharp 35mm shot, but I know what I have to do to get the shot, and I haven't spent a fortune on lenses (2 grand for 6 focal lengths, and the ability to zoom) is working for me. In fact, I just sold a 1.5 foot by 6 foot metal panorama to Lilly's on the Lake in Clermont. Using my "old" A7, I stitched together 9 vertical 35mm shots (in Lightroom) which resulted in a 500MP file that pretty much sold itself. (My MacBook Pro handled the file ok. My previous computer would have froze).

 

So keep on keepin on. Analyze your lenses and bodies. Learn what they will do -- then push them to the limit. For me, that's where the fun and the challenge is.

 

 

 

markphoto4u

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops again. This wasn't the one that made the final cut. But you get the idea. The chosen photo had a little less foreground and therefore showed the restaurant a little larger. Anyway, I will try to get better at posting. And Happy Shooting! Also, Sony Rocks!

 

 

markphoto4u

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok. Above photo was the one Lilly's on the Lake chose for their 6 foot pano. Hard to pick the correct pano from a thumb nail. Also, note that 9 vertical shots with the 24MP A7 ended up being a 500MP file. I am experimenting now with stitching together 3 or 4 photos taken with a 35mm or even 50mm focal length to give a very cool and different look that has some of the benefits of those focal lengths, and also a wider almost wide angle look. If I get some stitched panos like this I will share.

 

 

markphoto4u

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...