Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

I've been testing placement of the camera and glass for a Martini shot using my new Venus lens and noticed that the glass was a bit dusty. I gave the glass a wash and that took care of the dust but There was still some water marks. So, after washing it three more times and even using some vinegar to try and remove those pesky spots, they're still not gone. Looks like I need to apply more elbow grease and keep at it...

As Vinz mentioned, sometimes these modern lenses can be too sharp.

I'm posting one of the test shots to show the bokeh this lens renders. It has 14 aperture blades and I like the bokeh it produces. This was taken wide open at f4 and is heavily cropped. The rim of the glass was about 8" from the front element of the lens.

Vibrant Gene. Love it.

Testing the mc11 with 135 art, single shot is really good and fast, even AFC. Tracking completely falls apart with any moderation of activity. Slower events, this may work out as initial acquisition is fast, and the lens acts like a native lens.

Metabones is much faster but not native. Tracking with metabones is a breeze. With that in mind, the mc11 is still very useful outside of sports.

Really loving the look the lens produces, selfie

Charlie wrote in post #18391778
Testing the mc11 with 135 art, single shot is really good and fast, even AFC. Tracking completely falls apart with any moderation of activity. Slower events, this may work out as initial acquisition is fast, and the lens acts like a native lens.

Metabones is much faster but not native. Tracking with metabones is a breeze. With that in mind, the mc11 is still very useful outside of sports.

Really loving the look the lens produces, selfie

How's the low light AF with the metabones? I really liked the lens but it crapped out on the mc-11 in not so low light. That and the limited PDAF spread was annoying.

I have a metabones iv and a Sigma mc -11 and need to sell off one of them. And I want to keep the Sigma merely because it's more aesthetically pleasing in outward appearances - especially looks good with my 35mm Art. Really ultra-stupid-lame, I know.

Thanks to a gentle nudge from Carlo, I grabbed a used copy of a CZ 135 1.8 recently. I've wanted to fill the 135 void in my lens lineup for some time, and even though I'm shooting with it MF for now on my a7r, I can already see the portrait potential of this lens.

Terrible 1pm lighting at the beach today, but it is hard to complain.

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …932/in/datepost​ed-public/

beach3717

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …983/in/datepost​ed-public/

beach717

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …052/in/datepost​ed-public/

beach5717

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18391866
Thanks to a gentle nudge from Carlo, I grabbed a used copy of a CZ 135 1.8 recently. I've wanted to fill the 135 void in my lens lineup for some time, and even though I'm shooting with it MF for now on my a7r, I can already see the portrait potential of this lens.

Terrible 1pm lighting at the beach today, but it is hard to complain.

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …932/in/datepost​ed-public/
beach3717 by Michael Bielecki on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …983/in/datepost​ed-public/
beach717 by Michael Bielecki on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://www.flickr.com …052/in/datepost​ed-public/
beach5717 by Michael Bielecki on Flickr

That bokeh is unreal. I miss that lens! Congrats!

Thanks, Carlo.

You nuke the background quite nicely with the 85GM.

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18391933
Thanks, Carlo.

You nuke the background quite nicely with the 85GM.

Nah the 135 is the one I would reach for when I specifically wanted bokeh. I'm a bokeh-whore and that lens had the best I've seen. It's just so hard to use in MF because the DOF is so thin and the focus ring is not as good as a true MF lens. AF with LA-EA4 wasn't accurate enough....though I never MFA the lens/adapter.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18391845
I have a metabones iv and a Sigma mc -11 and need to sell off one of them. And I want to keep the Sigma merely because it's more aesthetically pleasing in outward appearances - especially looks good with my 35mm Art. Really ultra-stupid-lame, I know.

I'm keeping both, but if I had to choose, I'd probably keep the MC-11 since it has a tighter fit.

mystik610 wrote in post #18391990
Nah the 135 is the one I would reach for when I specifically wanted bokeh. I'm a bokeh-whore and that lens had the best I've seen. It's just so hard to use in MF because the DOF is so thin and the focus ring is not as good as a true MF lens. AF with LA-EA4 wasn't accurate enough....though I never MFA the lens/adapter.

I really wanted a bokeh monster that was the next best thing to a 200 f2 prime, and I think this is a really good "settle".

MF isn't tons of fun, but I can throw it onto the A77ii when I need AF more than absolute IQ.

mickeyb105 wrote in post #18392047
I really wanted a bokeh monster that was the next best thing to a 200 f2 prime, and I think this is a really good "settle".

MF isn't tons of fun, but I can throw it onto the A77ii when I need AF more than absolute IQ.

MF is lots of fun...I just suck at it lol.

Yes if I had an a-mount camera I'd keep that lens for sure!

navydoc wrote in post #18391651
I've been testing placement of the camera and glass for a Martini shot using my new Venus lens and noticed that the glass was a bit dusty. I gave the glass a wash and that took care of the dust but There was still some water marks. So, after washing it three more times and even using some vinegar to try and remove those pesky spots, they're still not gone. Looks like I need to apply more elbow grease and keep at it...

As Vinz mentioned, sometimes these modern lenses can be too sharp.

I'm posting one of the test shots to show the bokeh this lens renders. It has 14 aperture blades and I like the bokeh it produces. This was taken wide open at f4 and is heavily cropped. The rim of the glass was about 8" from the front element of the lens.

Hosted photo: posted by navydoc in
./showthread.php?p=183​91651&i=i33137359
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

I can't find your sig I give up, where is it?

Nice Mickey! and a woohoo on your new glass. Manual focus sometimes is the way.

Well speaking of lenses I decided to have an FE 12-24 along for the Yellowstone/Glacier trip. It is now pre-ordered---more for Glacier than Yellowstone.
That means my Tamron 15-30/2.8 will hit the buy/sell column at FM later this week.
I'll make do adapting the EOS 100L Macro for a while and the Rokinons will continue to serve widefield astro duty. I am tempted/
curious about the new Sigma 14mm but honestly I get to shoot astro 2-3 times a year.