Sony A7x lounge

Yeah I want auto focus and it's a full frame sensor. The 28 mm seems to be the only thing that is decently priced. I might just end up getting that for now I guess


By the way, I was looking for the streetlight 360 W but I can't seem to find one for Sony? I'm trying to find a flash or strobe that is non-TTL. The xplor 600 is what I want and I guess it's only $549 for the non TTL

Nick Aufiero wrote in post #18345479
lol what wide angle lenses do people use here? I think I may just take the cheap way out and get the 28mm FE. Not many other choices ha

Voigtlander 15 and loxia 21 for me

Nick Aufiero wrote in post #18345479
lol what wide angle lenses do people use here? I think I may just take the cheap way out and get the 28mm FE. Not many other choices ha

FE28 with the wide angle converter to make it a 21mm are a good, cheap option. Has distortion but with software corrections shouldn't be that big an issue. There's sharper and better options out there but for the price, size, etc it's not a bad option.

Wide angle I mean like 24-35mm
But ya
And I would like auto focus and not have to use an adapter. From what I've seen it's basically the 28 mm and then the 2x 35 mm?

digital_AM wrote in post #18345505
I think it was Travis that mentioned this before but apparently firmware version 3.30 should be avoided if you are an astro shooter. Ian over at Lonely Speck is no longer recommending the a7RII or a7sII for astrophotography because of Sony's software spatial filtering update that was embedded in v3.3. It's been called "star eater". This is not good news at all.

http://www.lonelyspeck​.com …y-an-open-letter-to-sony/

Yep...its bad news...I won't be updating until they fix it...really bad move for Sony. I wonder if the A9 ships with that already embedded...

I thought originally that 3.30 was brand new and I would not be affected...but it was released in August of 2016...I updated firmware around New Years...I bet mine is on 3.30...gonna check when I get home. I have only shot Astro once since then...

TRhoads wrote in post #18345577
I thought originally that 3.30 was brand new and I would not be affected...but it was released in August of 2016...I updated firmware around New Years...I bet mine is on 3.30...gonna check when I get home. I have only shot Astro once since then...

I updated in January when I thought it was "safe" after 3.30 being out 3 months. That sucks. At a minimum Sony needs to do a patch that allows folks to go back one version. Better yet, fix this problem with a menu options to turn it off or on.

It makes me want to go back and look at my one set of astro images and see if I notice anything...

Nick Aufiero wrote in post #18345557
Wide angle I mean like 24-35mm
But ya
And I would like auto focus and not have to use an adapter. From what I've seen it's basically the 28 mm and then the 2x 35 mm?

Big fan of the Sony Zeiss Distagon FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA. It has some QC issues, so it might take a couple tries to get a good one. I had a bad one and returned it, but never got round to trying again. I really want one though - it's got a great wide-open rendering to it. Two main negatives are CA in the high contrast areas of the bokeh (at wide apertures), and it's maybe not as contrasty wide open as some would wish. Still it's plenty awesome though.

Here is my little 3 pound yorkie melting my heart by wanting to be held shot with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA (pardon the choppy haircut - we were taking a break from her haircut here):

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rVBS​Ha

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rTjz​Ds

Looks good man. I think I might just get the 28 mm and called a day. I won't shoot anything super special with that so I'm not too worried about it. Really I think it's going to be for family sessions outdoors and maybe some of my personal conceptual shoots but ya. It's not my main money maker by any means. And I do a lot of post processing so.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18345601
Big fan of the Sony Zeiss Distagon FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA. It has some QC issues, so it might take a couple tries to get a good one. I had a bad one and returned it, but never got round to trying again. I really want one though - it's got a great wide-open rendering to it. Two main negatives are CA in the high contrast areas of the bokeh (at wide apertures), and it's maybe not as contrasty wide open as some would wish. Still it's plenty awesome though.

Here is my little 3 pound yorkie melting my heart by wanting to be held shot with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA (pardon the choppy haircut - we were taking a break from her haircut here):

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rVBS​Ha
Resistance Is Futile - OR - She Always Gets What She Wants by David Arbogast, on Flickr

I don't know why people complain about the wide-open contrast...looks great to me...

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rTjz​Ds
Sony a7S by David Arbogast, on Flickr

Oldies but both goodies David. I really like the rendering from the Sigma 35 f1.4 Art lens too but it too suffers from CA wide open in high contrast conditions. Generally, it's easily fixed so that it hasn't been an issue for me. Size and weight...now that's a different story.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18345601
Big fan of the Sony Zeiss Distagon FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA. It has some QC issues, so it might take a couple tries to get a good one. I had a bad one and returned it, but never got round to trying again. I really want one though - it's got a great wide-open rendering to it. Two main negatives are CA in the high contrast areas of the bokeh (at wide apertures), and it's maybe not as contrasty wide open as some would wish. Still it's plenty awesome though.

Here is my little 3 pound yorkie melting my heart by wanting to be held shot with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA (pardon the choppy haircut - we were taking a break from her haircut here):

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rVBS​Ha
Resistance Is Futile - OR - She Always Gets What She Wants by David Arbogast, on Flickr

I don't know why people complain about the wide-open contrast...looks great to me...

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rTjz​Ds
Sony a7S by David Arbogast, on Flickr

I have been sweating that lens too...been debating selling off the 50ART and picking up the 35, I like the 35 FL a lot, and don't find myself using the 50ART as much as I used to, 35 is better for environmental portraits...and I tend to use the 135 a lot more now. yeah...I have cash burning a hole in my pockets and its not enough to satisfy all the wants...

TRhoads wrote in post #18345593
It makes me want to go back and look at my one set of astro images and see if I notice anything...

I went back and looked at two distinctly dark sky nights...one before updating the firmware and one after...there might be fewer small stars in the more recent image, but it certainly doesn't seem as bad as some of the images shown around the intarwebs...and if I had never known about it, I would have never even thought about it...so I am not gonna sweat it...too much other crap in life to worry about than faint little stars that in reality might clutter up an image...gonna use the camera like nothing happened...if Sony puts out a patch, I will patch...if not...oh well.

navydoc wrote in post #18345611
Oldies but both goodies David. I really like the rendering from the Sigma 35 f1.4 Art lens too but it too suffers from CA wide open in high contrast conditions. Generally, it's easily fixed so that it hasn't been an issue for me. Size and weight...now that's a different story.

Thanks. I try not to repost old stuff, but did so here to show off the wide-open rendering of the lens in support of my lens recommendation.

The Sigma is outstanding too...I need to do a weight comparison between Sigma 35+adapter vs Sony 35. I know the Sony's heavy like any 35mm 1.4 (except the outstanding Zeiss 35mm ZM (Leica mount)), but it's light and small comapred to Canon's superb EF 35mm f/1.4L II. The Canon lens is super clean wide-open and incredibly sharp, but I made my decision to go all native, so I sold mine.

TRhoads wrote in post #18345619
I have been sweating that lens too...been debating selling off the 50ART and picking up the 35, I like the 35 FL a lot, and don't find myself using the 50ART as much as I used to, 35 is better for environmental portraits...and I tend to use the 135 a lot more now. yeah...I have cash burning a hole in my pockets and its not enough to satisfy all the wants...

It's great for portraits and not as ideal at infinity for landscapes (according to Fred @ FM). I don't care about that though. I can live with a less-than-perfect-at-landscapes 35mm if it fills my street-shooting needs...especially with the landscape-excelling Batis lenses in my bag.

The reason I've been wanting the FE 35mm 1.4 it for streets is because it's got a decent bit of 3D pop - it might be the best native lens in that regard - and that (along with excellent bokeh) is the attribute I desire most for my street lens.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18345635
Thanks. I try not to repost old stuff, but did so here to show off the wide-open rendering of the lens in support of my lens recommendation.

The Sigma is outstanding too...I need to do a weight comparison between Sigma 35+adapter vs Sony 35. I know the Sony's heavy like any 35mm 1.4 (except the outstanding Zeiss 35mm ZM (Leica mount)), but it's light and small comapred to Canon's superb EF 35mm f/1.4L II. The Canon lens is super clean wide-open and incredibly sharp, but I made my decision to go all native, so I sold mine.

It's great for portraits and not as ideal at infinity for landscapes (according to Fred @ FM). I don't care about that though. I can live with a less-than-perfect-at-landscapes 35mm if it fills my street-shooting needs...especially with the landscape-excelling Batis lenses in my bag.

The reason I've been wanting the FE 35mm 1.4 it for streets is because it's got a decent bit of 3D pop - it might be the best native lens in that regard - and that (along with excellent bokeh) is the attribute I desire most for my street lens.

I dont see me using it for anything but portraits at or near wide open...and like you I really want to be all native...last night my beloved Sigma 50 Art just would not focus in low light...but my Batis had no trouble...made me want to chuck it right in the garbage!