No wonder Sony did not bother...

Started Feb 12, 2020 | Discussions thread
PWPhotography Forum Pro • Posts: 10,855
Re: No wonder Sony did not bother...
3

sportyaccordy wrote:

PWPhotography wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

SQLGuy wrote:

I highly doubt it was anything but intentional. Just as they were suddenly able to offer additional focus zones and adapted lens Eye AF in the III models, but not before then on cameras using the same processors as their predecessors.

About the only benefit of the doubt I can throw to Sony, and I think this is the likely case, is that they maybe didn't explicitly cripple anything, but simply prioritized "good enough" functionality above the cutoff lines for each release, did a bit of extra work (like adding, enabling, maybe just testing, adapted Eye AF), but then didn't prioritize any work to backport the functionality to older cameras that probably could support it.

I am guffawing at the notion that the most technologically advanced camera maker couldn't do any better than the abysmal functionality of the LA-EAx adapters. FFS, 3rd party companies have been able to get more functionality out of their adapters to non Sony glass than Sony has to Sony A mount stuff. You can be more modest and measured but I'll be blunt- it's a complete joke. Couple that with the higher than average price barrier of zooms actually worth buying and it all feels very intentional.

I can only imagine what PWPhotography would say if Canikon's first constant aperture zoom were as terrible as the 24-70/4, or any of their L primes had the QC problems of the 35 1.4 ZA.

I didn't buy either one. Instead I adapted EF 24-70L/2.8 II on Sony bodies, either MF on A7r and AF-S and eye-AF work great from A7r II and above. And then I bought Tamron FE 28-75/2.8 , very happy. I bought Sigma 35/1.4 Art instead. Guess eventually it will be replaced by Sigma FE 35/1.2 Art. But portrait is not my main area so no hurry. I read all reviews before any purchases.

All the camera tech in the world can't overcome lenses that are either bad or unafforable. His 5 figure investment shows what you need to spend to have a comprehensively enjoyable experience in the Sony FE system.

Well since Sony FE system is so promising I have invested far more than I ever did with Canon EF system over 10 years. RF lenses are also very expensive, not cheaper than Sony counterparts actually. You actually can get much cheaper third party alternatives on FE system, such as Sigma FE 24-70/2.8 Art which is less than half price of Canon RF 24-70L/2.8.

Anyway since EOS R seems working for you now, just be happy and take photos rather keep complaining. No need to keep coming back to bash the system you had abandoned.

I'm not bashing anything. This thread topic is interesting to me and is relevant to my past and current experiences. If you don't like what I have to say keep scrolling. Nobody is forcing you to read my posts or reply point by point

funny is that it's you jumped on my post first in this thread if you checked.

I think Canon is shining a light on some opportunities for Sony to improve. There is a large market of people who want cameras for more than spec battling on the internet. If the R6/R5 are what their specs indicate they will be they will take a lot of wind out of Sony's sails.

I don't get that a few like you already switched. Supposedly you should enjoy your new system. But instead you frequently coming back to bash your old system.  Lacking of confidence?  What you wanted? You want Sony apologize you and give free GM lenses? Do RF lenses especially fast f1.2 portrait lenses cost less? Thanks there are so many choices so we choose whatever fit us the best.

 PWPhotography's gear list:PWPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Sony a7R IV Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Lan
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow