Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


2xbass last won the day on May 28

2xbass had the most liked content!

About 2xbass

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Ottawa, Canada

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I’ve been thinking about the 55 1.8 recently but since it is one of the “older” lenses, I’m wondering how well it will fare with the A7RIV’s 61 MP sensor.
  2. The 24mm GM is incredible. However I also have the Loxia 21 and absolutely love it too. I can highly recommend it especially if you don’t need autofocus and you want to space space and weight. For comparison, here are some travel-style photos I took using the 24 GM as well as some landscapes: https://adrianchophotography.com/sony-24mm-f14 and here are some landscapes taken with the Loxia 21: https://adrianchophotography.com/zeiss-loxia-21. I also have the A7RIV on preorder and the only thing I’m concerned about now is whether the Loxia 21 will be able to resolve enough detail to take full advantage of the sensor. I have faith that the 24 GM can.
  3. I typically shoot stills (although I always use AF-C) with the 24 GM on an A7RIII and usually wide open at f1.4 and have never had a problem with focusing. However I also use the lens for vlogging on an A6400 and recently I was shooting video outside and it was very bright and I didn’t have an ND filter so I had to stop down to f11. I also wanted more of the background in the shot anyway. When I looked at the footage it was useless and there was continuous focus breathing going on but it was more the background than me in the foreground.
  4. I have since sold mine only because I’m only shooting primes nowadays but I enjoyed my copy when I had it. One of the best value Sony EF lenses.
  5. Based on previous orders I know about including the ones Tony and I mentioned in this thread, you’re looking at about ten weeks.
  6. You might want to think about the Loxia 21 too. I think it’s a stellar landscape lens and great for astro too. I’m only an occasional landscape shooter but here’s some of my pics with that lens.
  7. To be clear, with LR CC you can edit completely offline. I do it all the time on the go or in remote areas. Then I get the benefit of cloud backup and easy sharing with my other devices as well as easy sharing through Adobe Portfolio when I am connected to the Internet.
  8. So apparently it turns out that I’m wrong and Sony Pro Support does have the 400/2.8 in the loaner pool. I sometimes shoot next to people with 500/4s and I personally think 400/2.8 is the way to go with the options to use the teleconverters but it depends on what you do. For me, the extra stop of light gathering, not to mention the shallower depth of field, is invaluable.
  9. It depends on a lot of things A few thoughts: You can definitely take portraits with the 100-400 but you won’t typically get much separation with the background. Of course it depends on how far you are to the subject and where the background is but the 70-200 with f2.8 would always be easier to get more isolation. Although some people would say the 70-200 overlaps with the 24-105, if you use the 1.4x teleconverter with the 70-200 then it’s 98-280 at f4 so basically no overlap. Also, you can also use the 2x teleconverter with the 70-200 at f5.6 and it’s actually pretty good. Check out these images I took here with the 70-200 and 2x vs the 100-400. If you are serious about shooting wildlife you will want reach and more reach because sometimes the animals are really far away or small, or both. That means the 100-400 and likely with the 1.4x on there and possibly even the 2x if you absolutely have to. The 100-400 with the 1.4x is pretty good. Less so with the 2.x.
  10. Maybe things are changing now and they are starting to stock them in some places. Mine also took about 10 weeks. It’s a bit scary if something happens to the lens too as you can’t easily get a replacement. They don’t even seem to have them in the Pro Support loaner pool.
  11. The problem is that Sony apparently only makes the 400 2.8 to order. Takes ten weeks to get one. I wonder if they released a 500 f4 whether they would take the same approach.
  12. Unless they come up with a way to make them small like the Nikon PF lenses, I personally wouldn’t want anything longer than my 400 f2.8. That’s the limit for me although I’m glad I can use the teleconverters on it. However a 200 or 300 prime would be interesting.
  13. I’m wondering if there are any Sony shooters here who are, or have tried, shooting wildlife with only primes and no zooms. I’ve been slowly getting drawn into this way both at the long and short ends of my kit. I shoot primarily wildlife although I am starting to do more portraits of people too. I’ve already abandoned my 100-400 after I moved to the 400 f2.8. At the short end, I used to use the 24-105 for some wildlife closeups but lately I’ve just been using the 24 1.4. Also I only do occasional landscapes and astro so at the short end so ’ve abandoned my 16-35 and my whole square filter system and just use my Loxia 21 and some screw-in NDs and CPL. I’m also currently using the 24 1.4 for astro and have also used the Loxia for that too. In theory I might be able to leave the Loxia at home and use the 24 for landscapes but I haven’t really tried the 24 for landscapes yet and I’m too much in love with the rendering of the Loxia. I know that there’s a lot of flexibility with the zooms for wildlife shooting but more and more I’ve been finding that I don’t mind losing that and gaining the AF speed, IQ, and weight savings that comes with the primes, not to mention the bigger apertures for when I absolutely have to use them. It’s really just a different way of shooting and I like changing things up and being forced to shoot in a different style. The problem comes in the middle. My medium lens is currently my 70-200 f2.8 and often with a 1.4x teleconverter. My idea was to try using a 135 in place of the 70-200. Of course it’s shorter than the 70-200 let alone with the teleconverter but, although the A9 and A7RIII are my primary cameras, I have been recently testing the A6400 and it’s actually pretty good for wildlife shooting. A 135 on that body would obviously reach out further. The downside here is that you can’t use the teleconverters on any 135s and it’s also good to know that if something happens to my 400 and I’m far from home, which is often the case, I can put my 2x on the 70-200 and still get some reach. Now if only Sony had a 200 prime...
  14. The $1000 promo has been running for a long time now and as was pointed out, they just made, major firmware updates and there is still another major update to come in the summer. They also put the A9 processor into the A6400. My bet is that do not see a new A9 this year.
  15. The lens is built that way in order to get particularly smooth bokeh. The apodization filter is basically a radially graduated ND filter that is darker on the outside of the filter so but clear in the centre. This means that once you stop down the lens where the aperture is smaller, the filter is effectively not being used since it’s only seeing through the clear part of the filter and it behaves like any other lens. However when shooting wide open the filter is used and since it’s darker around the edges it reduces the total amount of light coming in. Usually you would only buy this lens knowing exactly what you are getting and why you are buying it as it has a very specific look which some people love and others hate but the loss of light is the price you pay.
  • Create New...