Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

And that was at f/22...at normal landscape apertures of f/8 or f/11 they'll be a lot smaller. So, doing a little imaginative extrapolating, I think stars are neither going to be an major asset nor a flaw in the 16-35mm GM. A very slight asset (not a concern); but nothing to get excited about like those gorgeous Loxia stars.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18413818
And that was at f/22...at normal landscape apertures of f/8 or f/11 they'll be a lot smaller. So, doing a little imaginative extrapolating, I think stars are neither going to be an major asset nor a flaw in the 16-35mm GM. A very slight asset (not a concern); but nothing to get excited about like those gorgeous Loxia stars.

Thats the hard thing it its replacing the great Lox 21 and FE 55

Moved a Sofa.. found a Dead BEE.. Dixie found it very intriguing

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/WBdn​vQ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/WX8z​pG

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/X9bz​1C

Last video made on the A6500.. best in its class.. at lowest in this video ISO 6400.,,

possible NSFW language




everyday I say i'm putting my a7sii on ebay .. but I've been shooting video for my little you tube channel at ISO 12,800 that looks like iso 100 on every other camera I have..

TMaG82 wrote in post #18413695
Just got the 50 f/2 today, it was an easy decision. I had the 56 before yet rarely used it. The 50 is fast, small, and doesn't take up much space at all. With th 23/35 I'm torn. One minute I want to get the 1.4 versions for th extra speed and bokeh. The next I want to get the f/2's for th smaller size, WR, and faster AF. The next I want to get the 23 1.4 since I like the 35 equivalent and want the extra speed and want the 35 f2 for the smaller size, faster af, and the WR. Then the next I want the 23 f2 and the 35 1.4, lol. Maybe the answer is to just get all 4 lenses.

Did you find the 1.4 slow to focus at all? Some reports I see that the f2 is fast and the 1.4 is a dog to AF. Others report that that f2 is just slightly faster than the 1.4. I'm concerned about the 23 f2 due to the supposed softness wide open at minimum focus distance like the X100 series and having the same f stop as the X100 instead of faster 1.4 makes me hesitate.

I didn't feel the 23 1.4 was slow and that was on the xt1. If it wasn't for the poor handling of the raf files by Lightroom (at the time) I would still be shooting fuji probably. I'm glad I'm shooting sony now I though for landscapes etc. The 23 1.4 was sharp wide open but I don't think I shot it at mfd wide open

Ive been in a bit of a photo rut recently sometimes even questioning if I should continue with photography. Ive just been so busy with other stuff that I haven't managed to find the time to head out for landscapes etc like I used to do. I have found though that actually going out and shooting takes away the negative thoughts and after taking some photos for work I am feeling slightly more positive again so hopefully its a passing phase.

Anyway - these wont really excite anyone with the content but thought I would post them anyway as I found the sunstars pleasing on all of the lights (or light stars??). This is a structure we have just finished building at work and I took these photos (amongst others) for my company to use in marketing material. Its a level crossing replacement (wheelchair friendly ramps, stairs and a bridge over two railway lines to remove a track level pedestrian crossing)

All taken with Loxia 21

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/X9qv​Wd

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/VWor​gJ

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/X9qv​xs

Disagree, I find all of these of interest, especially the last in the 2cd in the series, with all the leading lines my eyes are captivated. The
sky, the light stars all contribute to intrigue.
Gene and I've written about take the mundane---and a walkway normally is eh--and turning it into something suddenly different/novel.
So I give it a big thumbs up!

I find it interesting Eddie. I spend most days making gates, railings, balustrade, steps/stairs, handrail, platforms, stepovers..... lol

Oh, has anyone actually switched from Batis 85 to FE85 so far please....??

WEX apparently has 10% off which puts the FE85 at £540 new.

I prefer the look of the FE, the side button, it's slightly lighter (smaller?) but I do have a really sharp Batis!!

xpfloyd wrote in post #18413876
I didn't feel the 23 1.4 was slow and that was on the xt1. If it wasn't for the poor handling of the raf files by Lightroom (at the time) I would still be shooting fuji probably. I'm glad I'm shooting sony now I though for landscapes etc. The 23 1.4 was sharp wide open but I don't think I shot it at mfd wide open

Found a good deal on an excellent condition 23 f/2. Silly Fuji for making us choose between a brighter, better IQ, no minimum focus distance, beefy lens and a smaller, faster to AF, WR cheaper lens. I decided on the f2 since I'm a super vain person and want to keep the primes looking consistent, lol. Doesn't hurt that it's small and takes up less space in the bag. As I get older my body tends to get more frail and my bones hurt from carrying too much weight. It'll certainly help if I decide this is the one for me at Disney World. After shooting the X100 series for a while, I don't think the minimum focal distance softness will bother me, i don't usually shoot a 35mm lens at minimum focus distance often.

LeeRatters wrote in post #18413911
I find it interesting Eddie. I spend most days making gates, railings, balustrade, steps/stairs, handrail, platforms, stepovers..... lol

Thanks Lee, this thing is a monstrosity. There are a row of fancy houses right next to it, I wouldnt be happy if I lived there. We just build what we get paid to build though

LeeRatters wrote in post #18413912
Oh, has anyone actually switched from Batis 85 to FE85 so far please....??

WEX apparently has 10% off which puts the FE85 at £540 new.

I prefer the look of the FE, the side button, it's slightly lighter (smaller?) but I do have a really sharp Batis!!

LeeRatters wrote in post #18413912
Oh, has anyone actually switched from Batis 85 to FE85 so far please....??

WEX apparently has 10% off which puts the FE85 at £540 new.

I prefer the look of the FE, the side button, it's slightly lighter (smaller?) but I do have a really sharp Batis!!

I considered swapping to the FE85 (even though I love my batis) but realsied by the time I sell it at a loss (compared to purchase price) then pay the ebay and paypal fees I would break even on the FE85 which means I would have paid original B85 price for a FE85 so I decided to keep the Batis. I really like the look of the FE lens though especially the button

xpfloyd wrote in post #18413918
I considered swapping to the FE85 (even though I love my batis) but realsied by the time I sell it at a loss (compared to purchase price) then pay the ebay and paypal fees I would break even on the FE85 which means I would have paid original B85 price for a FE85 so I decided to keep the Batis. I really like the look of the FE lens though especially the button

See, that's the thing that puts me off - I bought my Batis used, I think I paid about £750-780ish but by the times it's sold/fees etc it's almost a breaking even situation ain't it!

LeeRatters wrote in post #18413925
See, that's the thing that puts me off - I bought my Batis used, I think I paid about £750-780ish but by the times it's sold/fees etc it's almost a breaking even situation ain't it!

Exactly and whilst the FE is slightly smaller it's minimal and the batis is the better lens overall

xpfloyd wrote in post #18413888
Ive been in a bit of a photo rut recently sometimes even questioning if I should continue with photography. Ive just been so busy with other stuff that I haven't managed to find the time to head out for landscapes etc like I used to do. I have found though that actually going out and shooting takes away the negative thoughts and after taking some photos for work I am feeling slightly more positive again so hopefully its a passing phase.

Your work always amazes me Eddie. Love the color in these. The highlights in the last two are hotter than I prefer, but they look great regardless.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18413980
Your work always amazes me Eddie. Love the color in these. The highlights in the last two are hotter than I prefer, but they look great regardless.

Thanks David, in these shots I had to keep them looking brighter than I normally would. We used a new light supplier on this structure with some clever auto dimming functionality etc so the photos were mainly about showing the light system and I didn't want the client thinking they were not bright enough by dialling them back a bit in post. They are bright enough in real life but I had to be careful not to give the impression of dullness in the images as normally on a structure like this we would instead have lots of high lamp posts with lights shining down with a bigger light spread (and much more light pollution). This was an attempt to move away from that (the lights drop to 10% power when no one is on the structure)