Just bought first A7 III, my first semi expensive camera ever besidfes the rx100 i got on a deal.
ok.......good luck
Question: how does adapter-based lenses compare with sony GM or other highly talked about sony FE mount lenses?
what are you looking for? auto focus ? pure iq?
no offense but it sounds like you don't understand the subject at hand.......
If there are actual good adapters and lenses
good is a relative term
(since im looking for cheaper alternatives clearly),
well then why discuss GM lenses.......do you have an actual budget? desired focal lengths?
are there any really good adapters?
using the relative term......yes
yes........
native . it is one of the few native lenses that beats the competition in every category
the canon f4 is a mixe bag but by the time you pay for it and an adapter you could buy the sony
native......1.8?
native again......1.8? are you willing to use manual lenses? want 1.4?
someone told me that with their a7r III that they tried the adapter and found all glasses couldnt do AF well
a lot of users on here are somewhat to very satisfied with adapted canon af
adapters dont add CA
adapted glaas doesnt have in camera correction. this can be done in post
That biothers me lol.
Convince me otherwise?
no. there are pros and cons
Sorry for the nooby appearance, it's clearly because I am.
that is no problem. we all start somewhere
Apologies on not providing more information as well but there is no need for the subtle rudeness either. Benefits nobody.
sorry if I sounded rude. Sometimes my writing style is just short and blunt. I especially am guilty of it on long winding questions.
That being said, I suppose AF would be more ideal but I am not personally sure how useful MF would be under vlogging considerations?
what sort of vlogging?
Perhaps it can be done but it seems like most use AF correct?
kelley explains this. The a7iii screen doesn't face forward if you are a one man setup.
I did see the 55 f1.8 zeiss lens that looked decent but i heard there is some focus breathing and faint motor noises.
focus breathing yes. some
i thought the lens was pretty silent but i don't run a lot of video
seems like the IQ is good with minor distortion?
excellent with a little easily corrected distortion.
85 anything i feel like i wouldnt use a ton so im more leaning on something like a 24mm and lower or a 16-35mm type or perhaps a prime lens of sorts. As far as the f/x portion, i assume since the A7 III has better low light benefits, that i could get away with the higher f/x lenses. But what worries me about f/2 and above, is the image quality both in photo and video.
well. you need light. light is what is being recorded.
the fastest lenses are not always the sharpest
I know that I am new and still learning and I apologize for being confusing
completely understandable.
. I just don't want to invest in adapters and lenses only to find out I cant return them because most are probably used lenses, and then I take a loss or whatever the case may be.
there are rental houses. lens rentals perhaps. there will also be videos popping up. Jason Lainer has an eye af video using a canon lens, sony body a7iii, and sigma mc11 adapter
So I wanted to hone in on those who have tried this or that for inputs really.
It is a long subject. You have nine different bodies, a dozen or more adapters,and then hundreds of lenses. You can search through volumes of conversations about it on here BuT none of the conversations will be about the a7iiiyet
So a short general summary. Discussing af glass with builtin motors. Adapted works in most cases. Canon EF and Sony A lenses adapt the best generally. You will not get any in camera lens corrections. this can be done in post though. You will not get access to all features that you would with Sony lenses and the af will almost definitely be a little faster with Sony lenses. Most adapted lenses focus fast enough for casual use on the newer bodies though
My personal story. I got into Sony on the cheap. I added the cheapest adapted glass I could and built a kit for $1500 or so all adapted except the 28-70. This covered 19-300 with two primes. The a7ii got me mediocre af with adapted glass and I upgraded in both sony and canon glass along the way. Replacing dirt cheap UWA with a mid cost one. Buying excellent but expensive primes in either mount. The a7rii was a double edged sword. It jumped af to a speed that I could live with 95% of the time. It also took the glassthat I already new wasn't great and highlighted how poor it was.
So slowly along the way I learned that you get what you pay for MOSt of the time. I also learned all my glass didn't need to be the "best". The 55 would be an example. It beats the 50 1.8 in EVErY category except price. FOR me it just made more sense to have the cheap 50 and the sony 85 . I had to make that call. You will also have to navigate that most of the conversations on here regarding IQ revolve around the 42 mp sensor. On the 24 mp sensor it is harder to see minute differences in glass
good luck
