Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

vinmunoz wrote in post #19017713
i never thought my RIV+Sigma 105mm fits my PD 5L

And I thought my RIV + Sigma 35 1.2 looked huge.

Random but who are the best Sony photographers to follow on YouTube? I’ve been on a YouTube binge lately and realized I should follow some who shoot with the camera system we use lol

OK, guys. I've been contemplating a telephoto lens for my a7iii but have really mixed feelings about the Sony FE 70-200 G f2.8. It's really expensive but this is not the biggest issue. I used to shoot with the Canon 70-200 F2.8 l IS mkii and it was a fantastic lens but big and heavy. I'm looking for something I can shoot some distant objects with, an occasional bird or maybe some landscapes or cityscapes as love the compression of that lens and the fact that it was fast and had IS. But my major objective now is to have a light lens as I can't cope with the weight of anything as heavy as that Canon beast. Any recommendations? Thanks.

Apricane wrote in post #19017649
Meh. I'm sure Canon will blow us away with this camera, I guess, but that still doesn't take away from Sony's quality. And Sony's Eye AF is still superior to Canon's. That camera seems to be a high-resolution contender to the a9/II, I think the a7 line is "safe" for now. If I had the CA$4500 (which I really don't haha) that this camera is rumoured/expected to cost, I'd still rather get an a7r4, since I have no interest in sports or video.

I'll really consider this R5 simply because I have all of my Canon L glass and Mirrored bodies. An adapter with my EF glass will apparently perform just like native RF glass. I care very little for video so for still photography the USM motor in the lenses can be quiet enough for stills. The difference would be Canon colour science and if it's like my Canon mirrored bodies......substantia​lly better AWB than Sony. This is something I compare and see all of the time between my 5dmk3/4 and A7iii photo shoots.

The eye af is a big thing now but for a lot of my photography I use focus hold and DO NOT USE eye af. Eye af can be a pain as it does not always lock on the person you want in a group function.

I've never had issues focus/recompose using one shot "af-s" with my Mirrored canon bodies for a decade. Sony AF-S is rather inaccurate with focus / recompose. The Fuji aps-c using focus recompose works substantially better with higher keeper rate than Sony. This is where one must use af-c for Sony to have any accurate high keeper rates using the Sony system.

I'm still happy with Sony but also having a system that renders differently is also a big thing for me.

AlanU wrote in post #19017722
I'll really consider this R5 simply because I have all of my Canon L glass and Mirrored bodies. An adapter with my EF glass will apparently perform just like native RF glass. I care very little for video so for still photography the USM motor in the lenses can be quiet enough for stills. The difference would be Canon colour science and if it's like my Canon mirrored bodies......substantia​lly better AWB than Sony. This is something I compare and see all of the time between my 5dmk3/4 and A7iii photo shoots.

The eye af is a big thing now but for a lot of my photography I use focus hold and DO NOT USE eye af. Eye af can be a pain as it does not always lock on the person you want in a group function.

I've never had issues focus/recompose using one shot "af-s" with my Mirrored canon bodies for a decade. Sony AF-S is rather inaccurate with focus / recompose. The Fuji aps-c using focus recompose works substantially better with higher keeper rate than Sony. This is where one must use af-c for Sony to have any accurate high keeper rates using the Sony system.

I'm still happy with Sony but also having a system that renders differently is also a big thing for me.

Canon skin tone is still the best.

itsallart wrote in post #19017721
OK, guys. I've been contemplating a telephoto lens for my a7iii but have really mixed feelings about the Sony FE 70-200 G f2.8. It's really expensive but this is not the biggest issue. I used to shoot with the Canon 70-200 F2.8 l IS mkii and it was a fantastic lens but big and heavy. I'm looking for something I can shoot some distant objects with, an occasional bird or maybe some landscapes or cityscapes as love the compression of that lens and the fact that it was fast and had IS. But my major objective now is to have a light lens as I can't cope with the weight of anything as heavy as that Canon beast. Any recommendations? Thanks.

I guess you can wait and see what the Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 will offer. In due time Sigma will produce a heavy pig 70-200 f/2.8 ART as well.

The problem with the Sony A73 with adapted Canon 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 is the AF for moving subjects is terrible if you compare it to a GM 70-200.

This image was taken with an Sigma mc-11 with 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2. This image was a lottery and I won as far as the TERRIBLE AF speed I had to deal with. The Grizz photos was a walk in the park effortlessly simple. If I used my GM70-200....all images would have been easy peasy due to native glass performance.

AlanU wrote in post #19017733
I guess you can wait and see what the Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 will offer. In due time Sigma will produce a heavy pig 70-200 f/2.8 ART as well.

The problem with the Sony A73 with adapted Canon 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 is the AF for moving subjects is terrible if you compare it to a GM 70-200.

This image was taken with an Sigma mc-11 with 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2. This image was a lottery and I won as far as the TERRIBLE AF speed I had to deal with. The Grizz photos was a walk in the park effortlessly simple. If I used my GM70-200....all images would have been easy peasy due to native glass performance.

Hosted photo: posted by AlanU in
./showthread.php?p=190​17733&i=i256354903
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by AlanU in
./showthread.php?p=190​17733&i=i49116729
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Alan, your images are fantastic.
I don't want to invest in any metabones oi similar. I have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and I can rave about it all day. When is the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 going to be on the market?

vinmunoz wrote in post #19017725
Canon skin tone is still the best.

I will have to agree 100% that Canon "more" forgiving and skin tones just look better than Sony. This comment is based on shooting in different types of lighting. Canon is easier to land the skin tones. This may partly due to AWB. Sometimes even using Xrite passport colour checker the Sony is still more work to get the colours right.

If I dumped my Canon gear I would have less excitement with the Canon R5. Knowing I can simply buy an adapter or hopefully it's a bonus package ..... R5 will have a high potential in experimenting and be a part of my gear bag.

I do like my current sony e mount glass. I just look at the R5 as a fun camera that will be compatible with my EF glass.This way I justify keeping my mirrored Canon bodies for events. I still get much better results using Canon mirrored bodies for events work using blazing fast focus/recompose technique and superior AF lock in pitch darkness using red focus assist. So far Sony is not even remotely close with my comparison between my two systems for events.

My render with my 105 f/1.4 is still a step above my current glass I own for my mirrored canon gear. So you can see I love tools

AlanU wrote in post #19017722
I'll really consider this R5 simply because I have all of my Canon L glass and Mirrored bodies. An adapter with my EF glass will apparently perform just like native RF glass.

It very much does, for someone who's used it I can say for an absolute certainty. In fact, because I moved to the RP from the 6D, my AF actually improved. You can professional photographers on YouTube shooting Canon (there are still some of these) that would say the same, and coming from the 5d4.

AlanU wrote in post #19017722
I care very little for video so for still photography the USM motor in the lenses can be quiet enough for stills. The difference would be Canon colour science and if it's like my Canon mirrored bodies......substantia​lly better AWB than Sony. This is something I compare and see all of the time between my 5dmk3/4 and A7iii photo shoots.

vinmunoz wrote in post #19017725
Canon skin tone is still the best.

Seriously? That is a concept that I have a lot of trouble with, but then again I guess I only have shot both next to each other only once, and maybe the lighting conditions weren't conducive to comparing skin tones, not sure, but I don't see a huge difference between my a7 III and my RP. Not for skin tones at least. I'd have to look at exactly the same scene, shot more or less exactly the same way, and analyze closely, to be able to tell the difference (and it wasn't with skin tones, but a much more colorful subject). True, in the couple rare situations where I've been in a position to seriously tell which was which.

Let me suggest this: I post two photos, one from the RP and one from the a7RIII, same model, same shoot, shot approximately within 30-so minutes from each other, more or less against the setting sun, and post-processed more or less exactly the same, and you need to correctly pick out which was taken with the Sony and which with the Canon. And actually you know what I have a couple pairs more or less like that, but the other pair wouldn't be against the setting sun (and with a model with a different skin tone). Are you game, for the funsies?

Apricane wrote in post #19017742
It very much does, for someone who's used it I can say for an absolute certainty. In fact, because I moved to the RP from the 6D, my AF actually improved. You can professional photographers on YouTube shooting Canon (there are still some of these) that would say the same, and coming from the 5d4.

Seriously? That is a concept that I have a lot of trouble with, but then again I guess I only have shot both next to each other only once, and maybe the lighting conditions weren't conducive to comparing skin tones, not sure, but I don't see a huge difference between my a7 III and my RP. Not for skin tones at least. I'd have to look at exactly the same scene, shot more or less exactly the same way, and analyze closely, to be able to tell the difference (and it wasn't with skin tones, but a much more colorful subject). True, in the couple rare situations where I've been in a position to seriously tell which was which.

Let me suggest this: I post two photos, one from the RP and one from the a7RIII, same model, same shoot, shot approximately within 30-so minutes from each other, more or less against the setting sun, and post-processed more or less exactly the same, and you need to correctly pick out which was taken with the Sony and which with the Canon. And actually you know what I have a couple pairs more or less like that, but the other pair wouldn't be against the setting sun (and with a model with a different skin tone). Are you game, for the funsies?

If you shoot under overcast skies, under evergreen trees YIKES!!!, under bright sun, mixed artificial light......All camera's can have difficulties. Sony in my world has been the worst. Fuji is scary amazing in AWB, Canon is good the Sony is no where near the "good" category in events environments.

AlanU wrote in post #19017733
I guess you can wait and see what the Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 will offer. In due time Sigma will produce a heavy pig 70-200 f/2.8 ART as well.

The problem with the Sony A73 with adapted Canon 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 is the AF for moving subjects is terrible if you compare it to a GM 70-200.

This image was taken with an Sigma mc-11 with 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2. This image was a lottery and I won as far as the TERRIBLE AF speed I had to deal with. The Grizz photos was a walk in the park effortlessly simple. If I used my GM70-200....all images would have been easy peasy due to native glass performance.

Hosted photo: posted by AlanU in
./showthread.php?p=190​17733&i=i256354903
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Hosted photo: posted by AlanU in
./showthread.php?p=190​17733&i=i49116729
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Alan, first I also have to echo Renata's words: these images are awesome. I'd particularly like to hear where you were to shoot that eagle like that, a tower or something? It's quite the pov.

I think that the MC-11 is very hit or miss. I originally got it with my new Sony so I could use my Sigma and, I figured, also my Canon glass if it worked well (as I had heard and expected that Sigma glass would work better with the Sigma adapter). What happened is that my Sigma could barely focus, my 40 pancake was meh, and the 100L focused almost as well if not better than on my RP.

That being said, when I returned it, and the reason I had gotten my Sony to begin with, is to be able to lose those annoying adapters. I'm certainly curious as to how exactly well the 70-180/2.8 will perform.

itsallart wrote in post #19017735
Alan, your images are fantastic.
I don't want to invest in any metabones oi similar. I have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and I can rave about it all day. When is the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 going to be on the market?

I would assume Sigma will be a different level to the Tamron....but substantially heavier.

The Tammy will hopefully be a killer light weight alternative.

No idea when the tammy is out...

AlanU wrote in post #19017746
If you shoot under overcast skies, under evergreen trees YIKES!!!, under bright sun, mixed artificial light......All camera's can have difficulties. Sony in my world has been the worst. Fuji is scary amazing in AWB, Canon is good the Sony is no where near the "good" category in events environments.

Fair enough... but I hadn't really raised AWB at all in my post, mostly I was just addressing skin tones.

IMO I don't care much for AWB, I mostly shoot my RAWs in monochrome mode: it allows me to better see light/contrast in most scenes without having to be distracted by color balance, which is something I can fix fairly easily after anyway. I understand that it may be different for you if you're shooting and, more importantly, post-processing while you're on the clock.

Apricane wrote in post #19017747
Alan, first I also have to echo Renata's words: these images are awesome. I'd particularly like to hear where you were to shoot that eagle like that, a tower or something? It's quite the pov.

I think that the MC-11 is very hit or miss. I originally got it with my new Sony so I could use my Sigma and, I figured, also my Canon glass if it worked well (as I had heard and expected that Sigma glass would work better with the Sigma adapter). What happened is that my Sigma could barely focus, my 40 pancake was meh, and the 100L focused almost as well if not better than on my RP.

That being said, when I returned it, and the reason I had gotten my Sony to begin with, is to be able to lose those annoying adapters. I'm certainly curious as to how exactly well the 70-180/2.8 will perform.

Grouse Mountain in North Vancouver has a pair of 2 male Grizzly bears. They also have a great bird show too.

I was in the stands taking photos of the birds. The Mc-11 STRUGGLED like mad to keep up. I will say that moment of frustration....... I was disappointed that I went out and bought a GM70-200 almost immediately after.

another Canon 70-200 adapted lens.

Skin tone challenges or not, it does make me think I have some photos from my a7r3 rental that I've never posted before...