Sony A7x lounge

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #18347543
is that USM motor struggling to do what it barely can..

Pretty much. It works though...just not as graceful as a native lens

xpfloyd wrote in post #18347603
Been looking at this option too, thanks for posting. The sigma 35 with mc-11 is about the same size and weight as the FE35 1.4 but it's a lot cheaper (£650 inc adaptor vs £1100). My main concern was low light focussing as that's the reason I left non native AF

Honestly the low light AF is pretty good....A LOT better than a typical adapted lens. It's kind of slow, but probably no slower than the 85GM. I remember this lens focusing slowly on Canon bodies too. The FE 35 1.4 focuses really quickly though.

It seems that the Sigma 35 + MC11 is a solid alternative to the FE 35 1.4. I love the rendering of the FE 35 1.4, but its a lot more expensive...I have trouble rationalizing it because I have the RX1rII, which I really like and will probably never get rid of.

navydoc wrote in post #18346640
I think my FE 90G macro is my favorite lens.

How do you (and anyonre else who has the lens)
Find the AF on this lens..

Im finding mine to be ok-ish
The slowest , most unreliable amongst all my sony lenses

, now im noy saying its slow or totally unreliable.. just if i had to position all my lenses , it would b3 at the bottom..

Anyway just want to find out if this is consistent with everyone elses 90, or did i get a dud?

rantercsr wrote in post #18347737
How do you (and anyonre else who has the lens)
Find the AF on this lens..

Im finding mine to be ok-ish
The slowest , most unreliable amongst all my sony lenses

, now im noy saying its slow or totally unreliable.. just if i had to position all my lenses , it would b3 at the bottom..

Anyway just want to find out if this is consistent with everyone elses 90, or did i get a dud?

I've used this lens a bit. It focuses like a macro lens....really wide focal range and the motors are on the slow side.

rantercsr wrote in post #18347737
How do you (and anyonre else who has the lens)
Find the AF on this lens..

Im finding mine to be ok-ish
The slowest , most unreliable amongst all my sony lenses

, now im noy saying its slow or totally unreliable.. just if i had to position all my lenses , it would b3 at the bottom..

Anyway just want to find out if this is consistent with everyone elses 90, or did i get a dud?

I wouldn't use this lens to shoot my great grandkids running around but for portraits, it focuses fast enough. As Carlo says, for macro work, because of the extreme range of depth of focus, AF can be a challenge sometimes. It helps to have the focal range selector at the right range to minimize travel of the elements to focus. Increasing the depth of field by using a higher f-stop helps but flash may be needed to be sure there's enough light without high iso's noise becoming a possible issue. Many times I just move the focus ring to MF, focus to the general area and lean in/out until focus is achieved. Having MF peaking set to "ON" will help too of course.

I use this set-up a lot when shooting macro. Flash is set to TTL and the mini softbox helps soften shadows.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wnbR​VM

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/TRHL​dm

Thanks for the input..

Yes exaclty focus speed is fine for portraits and the like..

Ok so seems like what im experiencing is typical for this lens .. like i said its ok , just not as snappy as my other lenses


Yeah im a total macro noob , so i appreciate the tips..
But so far figured out that MF is the way as a finishing touch at least
And yeah dof is crazy thin in macro mode at 2.8 , even 5.6 is tricky

Still figuring it all out tho, thanks again

By way of a change, a bit of still-life.

^ Ray, those are cool instruments.

More abstract/minimalism fun

Sony α7R II / ILCE-7RM2 • 1/320 • f/8 • ISO 100

IMAGE LINK: http://www.alfredomora​photo.com …cture/n-WM9Ps/i-RrzmK2b/A

Rayfo wrote in post #18347854
By way of a change, a bit of still-life.

Very nice...with pieces of eight included too I see.

Here's one more before and after conversion I just finished.

Yeah so the MC-11 + Sigma 35 is a no-go for me. Shot a low-key event with it this afternoon and it didn't quite cut it. At one point I put it away and finished up with the RX1RII....made me appreciate how much of a workhorse that little camera is.

The Sigma + MC-11 seems passable for static shooting, but not so great for event shooting. AF is slow, has a tendency to hunt, and will occasionally fail to lock outright. The failures happen probably <10% of the time, but its really frustrating when it does happen. Eye focus works well and while you're not going to shoot anything in motion with it, I think the MC-11 is a good choice for for posed portraiture....I'd give the 135 f1.8 with the MC-11 a try if the bokeh didn't look so harsh, if it weren't so massive, and if it weren't so expensive (it's basically priced only slightly below a Canon L, or Sony Zeiss/GM lens).

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/TYku​LL

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UjcR​e7

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UjcS​1Y

mystik610 wrote in post #18348017
Yeah so the MC-11 + Sigma 35 is a no-go for me. Shot a low-key event with it this afternoon and it didn't quite cut it. At one point I put it away and finished up with the RX1RII....made me appreciate how much of a workhorse that little camera is.

The Sigma + MC-11 seems passable for static shooting, but not so great for event shooting. AF is slow, has a tendency to hunt, and will occasionally fail to lock outright. The failures happen probably <10% of the time, but its really frustrating when it does happen. Eye focus works well and while you're not going to shoot anything in motion with it, I think the MC-11 is a good choice for for posed portraiture....I'd give the 135 f1.8 with the MC-11 a try if the bokeh didn't look so harsh, if it weren't so massive, and if it weren't so expensive (it's basically priced only slightly below a Canon L, or Sony Zeiss/GM lens).

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/TYku​LL _DSC0275 by Carlo Alcala, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UjcR​e7 _DSC0214 by Carlo Alcala, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UjcS​1Y _DSC0468 by Carlo Alcala, on Flickr

Good to know Carlo. Whilst I don't shoot events I do shoot family stuff with a fast moving kid often in low light and as you know this requires the same ability to lock accurately under these circumstances. I may give the distagon a try, been thinking about it for a few days. Really want to try the 24-70 GM but I think that's just a tad too heavy for my liking and I would quickly regret it. I love the FE28 and I've been using the 55 a lot here in London but 35 is my preferred focal length

Well just made the fatal mistake of looking through the 35 distagon group on Flickr. Seems like it's a really special lens. The out of focus areas are really smooth and it's got nice pop. I think I'm pretty sold now in the absence of an f/2 option

xpfloyd wrote in post #18348212
Well just made the fatal mistake of looking through the 35 distagon group on Flickr. Seems like it's a really special lens. The out of focus areas are really smooth and it's got nice pop. I think I'm pretty sold now in the absence of an f/2 option

I joined that group just a few days ago for the same reason!!

You DO know what is going to happen don't you??

xpfloyd wrote in post #18348173
Good to know Carlo. Whilst I don't shoot events I do shoot family stuff with a fast moving kid often in low light and as you know this requires the same ability to lock accurately under these circumstances. I may give the distagon a try, been thinking about it for a few days. Really want to try the 24-70 GM but I think that's just a tad too heavy for my liking and I would quickly regret it. I love the FE28 and I've been using the 55 a lot here in London but 35 is my preferred focal length

xpfloyd wrote in post #18348212
Well just made the fatal mistake of looking through the 35 distagon group on Flickr. Seems like it's a really special lens. The out of focus areas are really smooth and it's got nice pop. I think I'm pretty sold now in the absence of an f/2 option

Yeah 35MM is the ideal focal length for kids, family, and travel photos...really any kind of documentary photography. But that type of shooting where you're trying to photograph things in the moment lives is very highly dependent on a good AF system and the MC-11 + Sigma 35 doesn't cut it IMO.

The distagon really is a special lens....its often overlooked because its not as sharp as the Sigma or the FE55, but the rendering, particularly the OOF areas, is something special. It's large, but pretty light weight and balances well against the a7rII. If/when Sony releases a 35 F2, it will either be fairly large itself, or not nearly as good optically (probably the latter). 35mm requires a more complicated design than 50mm(ish) does, and to keep things small, something else has to give.

The 24-70GM is a heavy lens. I never used it outside of shooting events, and even then, I found myself preferring to use a 35mm prime. Your situation is a bit like mine where you have a solid 85 in the batis, and the loxia 21. A solid 35mm will basically round everything out to where you really don't need the 24-70GM. This is why I sold the 24-70GM.

xpfloyd wrote in post #18348173
Good to know Carlo. Whilst I don't shoot events I do shoot family stuff with a fast moving kid often in low light and as you know this requires the same ability to lock accurately under these circumstances. I may give the distagon a try, been thinking about it for a few days. Really want to try the 24-70 GM but I think that's just a tad too heavy for my liking and I would quickly regret it. I love the FE28 and I've been using the 55 a lot here in London but 35 is my preferred focal length

I tried the MC-11, albeit only with the EF85 1.8. My experience was very similar to Carlo's and ended up passing it on. No way it was going to cut it with my kids. Eddie, I don't think you'd be happy with it.