Jonathan F/2: I actually use my pelican case as my carry on luggage for clothes and put my cameras in my backpack!
With all due respect, if it is less expensive than a pelican, a suitcase cannot be that fancy and good quality.
cirtapfotos: ....This will not matter when Sigma Releases it's 85mm Art....will it? lol
To Zigi_SI own a few zeiss and I have hard time touching anything else, but I do not have problem to recognize that these new GM have character and they are sharp.
FuhTeng: I'm going to leave this here for all those who believe sharpness (resolution? accutance?) is the most important thing about lenses -
"Our young men should spend more time considering the composition and merit of their images, and less time with magnifying glasses counting how many bricks and shingles they can resolve." - from a Paris newspaper article on Daguerrotype photography, from 1841.
Is a canon nikon world...
RidgeRunner22: Ha! for some reason I got a real kick out of this one. Looks like s lovely lens! Wish they would make one equally sharp a few stops slower, and way smaller. When do you use an 85 at 1.4? sounds hard to deal with, from a DOF stand point.
@quiquaeCanon portrait photographers swear by the 50mm 1.2 because they spent 2 grands and signed a "no complain agreement" to canon. ;)only amateurs shoot portraits at less than f2.8, never mind if they get away at making a living at taking photos.
Angrymagpie: Oh dear. People get mad if the lens is not sharp enough (for the asking price it should be razor sharp...etc),, people get mad if the lens is very sharp (people who think sharpness is that important don't know photography...etc). People get mad if the lens is not fast enough (slow lens for the price...etc), people get mad if the lens is plenty fast enouh (the DoF is too shallow...etc).
With all due respect... Canon can get away with murder...
Sorry, I meant charisma and break down...
Daniel Lauring: As many of these shots show, F1.4 is a too open for a 85mm portrait lens at head shot distances. Even at F2 the shallow depth of field doesn't allow both the iris and eyebrows to be in focus.
Agree, way to shallow.Some people think that shooting at 1,4 or f1,8 is artistic, yet only amateurs do it regularly. Another tester, also called photographer, who tested the same lens for his blog, stated that the sweet spot for portraits of this lens is around f 1,8, just because the bokhe still looks good..... A portrait where only half of the eyebrows is in focus and the rest is blurred is hard to look at.
with all due respect all Sigma lenses, for how sharp some of them they may be, they lack carisma. ... and they brake down easily BTW.These new sony lenses, on term of "look" not mentioning sharpness, are on the same league of Zeiss and Leica.
Rooru S: Any comparisons with the A-Mount Sony-Zeiss 85mm F1.4 ZA?
It seems to be sharper in the center and all over the place as well.I have the ZA and no way you can get the same amount of details on the police woman face or on the Tony montana look alike.
endofoto: Sony is moving fast. It is aiming Fuji like a raptor. It is fast enough for birding and for serious video footage. It will be 800$ after 6 months just like previous models. But still not good enough for heavy work in the mountains, temperatures below zero, heavy rain, dust of deserts. If you are not a pro this is theee camera.
Or if you are a pro that does not like extreme weather and stay were is nice and sunny.
wootpile: Ach what a bummer... I had at least hoped for1) Different placement of shutter button2) Better Screen!!!3) Better EVF
IBIS would have been nice but not really expected it. I'm certain IBIS is what Sony will use exclusively to drive sales to FF.
In short though, I had several a6000 bodies during 2015. Might get one again to fool around with while I await the Fuji XT2 because the a6000 really is a nice camera. The only real downside being poor battery time, but that is a constant with most mirrorless.
Too bad Sony didn't at least put a better screen on the a6300
I agree.I would have love the shutter button to be placed on the bottom... like the iPhone headphones jack.
GabrielZ: This maybe the beginning of an era where Sony produce lenses as optically good or better than the competition. Looking forward to read the reviews for these very expensive new lenses.
That era started in 2006. At least.
electrophoto: So the 24-70 2.8 has NO Image Stabilisation? at 2200$?Even Nikons "mildly" overpriced 24-70 2.8 VR costs a tad less and has image stabilisation.
Tamron's pretty excellent 24-70 2.8 has VR... at about half the price (or even less).
And now there's what I've been saying for some time about the Sony FF Alpha:it's "size advantage" is reduced significantly if you attach the respective fast lenses... making it less appealing in my opinion...
It depends on how his knees feel on the day.
SeeRoy: Of course DSLRs focus better and are therefore better for wildlife photography...Unfortunately only for those wildlife photographers who don't walk far from the car. For those of us for whom all kinds of photography involve walking long distances in the countryside, lugging along a backpack plus extra clothing, plus food, plus drink, adding 20 lb+ of DSLR and lenses (600 F4 anybody?) is a PIA.Trading the DSLR benefits for increased range and mobility will often produce better photographic opportunities.But of course by now the pix are usually secondary to the gear and notional "IQ" - in most senses of the acronym.
It is: what ever float your boat guys....
Absolutic: the biggest thing that bothers me on my A7RII is ridiculous battery life. I have a total of 8 batteries, but it is a headache to always remember which ones I have charged and which ones I have not.... battery goes down so quick..... not a good vacation camera because of that. I do have a grip too but the camera becomes too big then, I might as well bring my Canon DSLR or Sony SLT instead (and never worry about battery life). I wish Sony finds a space to put in a larger capacity battery in the next iteration of this camera.
The a900 does not charge over usb. the main reason why I can pull about 1200 shots on a charge while tethered, is that review is off.Yet even untethered with review off and little chimping, you get up to 900 shots.Probably with an a7 series and keeping review and LCD off if that is possible, you may get an extra 50/60 shots, but that is still not satisfactory.
Battery life is an issue for those who work in advertising, wedding and fashion.With the a900 i was able to do up to 8/900 captures per battery and if tethered i was doing about 1200.For example on a fashion shooting day for a catalogue or an editorial of 8/10 pages, it is not unusual of doing +2000 captures. If you need of replacing the battery every 300 captures, it is a a pain in the neck, not mentioning when you will surely run out of charge in the middle of a photo at the worst possible moment. it is not even a matter of the cost of the extra batteries that can be bought for 10 dollars on eBay, it is just not a practical way of working. Battery is one of the several reasons why i did not buy any of these a7 series cameras.
Too bad. It looked like a lovely camera...Samsung are good at home appliances. period.A part for doing good solid state product there is not a lot they are good at.Samsung produce good cars. Yes they do.... in joint venture with Renault. They are called Samiyang and they are only sold in South Korea, but they practically are Renault cars produced in Korean plants.Forget theirs lousy phones. Since they have been succesfully forbidden to copy Apple, their phone business is going downward. No wonder.Theirs TV have good image quality, yet they are ugly and they do not last long as the Japanese brands. That is why they are cheaper.Samsung are great at vacuum cleaners. They recently made a competitor of Dyson and they have done it better. Incredible but true.They do very nice refrigerators and kitchen appliances.that is what Samsung are good for.
Gionni Dorelli: if you use lightroom CC you do not need these HDR softwares anymore.I have Photomatix and Nik HDR software packages and have not touched them since the last version of LR CC came out.
And there you can discern the fans from the pros.
if you use lightroom CC you do not need these HDR softwares anymore.I have Photomatix and Nik HDR software packages and have not touched them since the last version of LR CC came out.
CameraLabTester: Just when everyone thought that the A mount was dead...
Sony suddenly found the keys to the accidentally locked warehouse of 3 years ago.
."Cowabungga! We forgot all about these!"
I also have an a900, although it is still works as the first day I bought 6 years ago, it is long in the tooth for some applications, considering what is available these days. The a900 it is way more responsive and has better ergonomics/batterie life than the a7xxx, but the AF on the a7xxx is way superior and image quality is much better.These days I use the a900 only for architectural and interior design work because I can bracket and expose at 100 iso.If I have to do fashion, life style or advertising work I use an a77 II, a7r or I rent a phase one.