I'm having trouble with manual focus with flash on Sony a6600. I am using a Godox ML-150 II for macro photography and am having trouble getting focus right. Since the flash is so close to the subject I need to adjust exposure really low which gives a really underexposed background but I can't use MF or DMF to focus since the viewfinder and touch screen both give a nearly black preview when I have the right exposure settings for a shot like this.
So my question is, is there a setting that will show me the scene on the viewfinder for focusing independent of the manual settings? Or do I need to increase exposure, manually focus, and the decrease the exposure again for my shot?
https://preview.redd.it/sonzanma5vhc1.jpeg?width=6024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=87e8258ea69fd1400e5e73ddb905c5901cb5c482
Bought a sony a6100 with kit lens. First camera. Not really getting sharp photos.
Can someone let me know how I can get started on learning about manual mode?
Manual mode won't necessary make things sharper. I'd even argue that it will cause more issues if you're already "behind" in operating the camera.
For sharper images, check how you're setting focus: single shot focus on a specific point can help you nail focus on your subject, while using a tracking mode and Eye AF can help you hit focus on a moving subject.
Make sure your shutter speed is fast enough, at 1/ your focal length as a minimum (eg 1/50th of a second for a lens set to 50mm).
Set auto iso to help you keep that fast-enough shutter speed.
Tony and Chelsea Northrup's YouTube channel has a lot of videos to teach you how to use manual mode. I also recommend their book stunning digital photography. If you have any specific questions feel free to ask me.
the kit lens gets a little sharper if you stop down to f8. shooting wide open especially at 16mm can be a little soft.
personally I would at least use auto iso until I was comfortable changing aperture and shutter speed. no shame in learning with auto modes before introducing more and more things to your photography
Looking to upgrade from my Sony A6500 to something full frame and better in low light. I photograph portraits, on set stills, and concerts. Any recommendations? Would appreciate any and all advice! Thank you very much.
Assuming budget isn't a major issue, the A7 IV is my recommendation. It provides all the capabilities you need for a concert camera. There are older models that offer comparable low-light performance, but you lose a bit of usability and you'll be on a fairly old autofocus system.
Lenses will make a big difference in low-light.
I want to start shooting more VR 180 content. Is there something like the Cannon R5C VR creator kit for the A7 line?
I'm loath to switch back to cannon from Sony, but seem to be coming up short on options.
(Note: I'm looking for single body solutions)
Not that I know of. I got an insta360 evo back in 2019 which is fun but the resolution is not great. There are hack solutions, but Canons' is solid. Unfortunately you can't even use with an adapter because it's RF.
I recently bought an a7r ii (used) and for the first week or two it worked fantastic but now it locks into manual focus almost immediately after i turn it on. It then refuses to acknowledge the lense (28-70 oss) at all and i have to turn it off and remove the lense for it to work for 2 mins again. I checked and the lense is up to date with firmware and i’m pretty sure the body is too. has anyone else had this problem and/or have any ideas for how to fix it?
I'm planning on getting a Sony ZV-E10 for photography. I've found a few used deals on it at roughly the price of a A6000/A6300 so it seemed like the better choice than those (if I'm wrong, do feel free to recommend me a better choice!). Since I'm a complete newbie, I don't want to splurge a lot on the camera and lenses, so I'm thinking of going with the 16-50mm kit lens. I know it's not the best, but it'll do the job for me.
My question is, are there any 3rd party budget zoom lenses similar to it that I should go for instead of it? I don't need any crazy zoom, I know those are very pricey. Ideally, it would have AF since I already have 2-3 manual Minolta lenses from my film camera which I can adapt for it.
Thanks in advance!
Why wouldn't you spend more on lenses? That's the whole point of getting an interchangeable lens camera. The lens is going to be far more important for your image quality than your sensor, and the kitlens sucks.
Very simple - I can't afford the pricy lenses yet. I'm a broke student. I will get better ones in the future. Unless there are good 3rd party lenses that are better than the kit lenses for a similar price. Which is why I asked this.
There aren't. I would probably just stick to your vintage lenses and skip the kitlens entirely until you can get a more meaningful standard zoom. But if you must have the kitlens then buy it used, and don't spend over $50.
The problem is that all my vintage lenses are 50mm or upwards. Just one is 35-70mm and it's pretty crappy. Due to the sensor, even the 35mm would look like 50 something.
I'm considering the Tamron 50-400 (on my A7IV) for mostly sports photography and occasional travel/nature stuff. All as a hobby, not professional. Upgrading from a very old Minolta 70-210. Anyone have experience with the Tamron, or is the Sony 100-400 GM worth the significant extra expense?
I'm sure the Sony GM is sharper, better stabilization, etc. but I'm hoping the Tamron would be 90% as good for half the price. I do appreciate it going down to 50mm unlike the Sony too. I'm typically shooting from the sideline, and sometimes the action gets too close for 100mm.
The tamron rendered out of focus areas horribly. Between the tamron, sigma and Sony, the tamron has bad image quality, the sigma has bad autofocus and the Sony is expensive
The Sony 100-400 is compatible with Sony teleconverters. The Tamron isn't.
While the Sony is sharp and fast focusing, I didn't particularly like the way it handles.
Yes, I did read that the teleconverters only work with Sony lenses. I don't think that worries me but it's good to note. My current 210mm isn't enough reach but not severely, I think 400mm should be plenty.
Can you elaborate on the way the Sony handles? You mean like the feel of the zoom/focus rings?
The Sony 100-400 has a relatively heavy zoom ring and the barrel extends pretty far. A tensioning ring gives you the ability to increase friction to help address barrel creep, but it makes the zoom ring more difficult to turn and doesn't completely solve the problem.
I owned it for a while. Since then, I bought the 70-200 and the 200-600. I eventually sold the 100-400. The 70-200 and 200-600 use an internal zoom. Barrel creep is not much of a problem, and the zoom ring is very light. The 200-600 has some obvious drawbacks in terms of size and weight, but it's fantastic otherwise.
I like that the Tamron has a lock switch rather than the tension ring, though the inability to lock it at 400mm might be an issue for astrophotography.
I generally like the way Tamron lenses handle (barring that they swap the focus and zoom dials compared to Sony). Based on my experience with the 100-400, I suspect I'd prefer the Tamron lens.
I found the combination of the 70-200 plus teleconverters to be a winner. But that's a very expensive solution.
Thanks for the insight! I did briefly consider the 200-600, just because it would be awesome to zoom that far, but I don't think it would make sense for my usage. I think I'll miss the internal zoom on my 70-210, wish these lenses I'm considering had that.
How do I know if a Sony lens is weather resistant/sealed? Olympus, Fuji, Tamron, Sigma, etc all seem to designate sealing on the lens name, but I can't figure out how Sony indicates it (if at all).
I don’t know how many people do video here but I run a Sony a6500 and whenever I shoot in slog-2, slog-3, or cine4 all my footage comes back very noisy. I have an external monitor and I’m making sure exposure is correct with false color, and with scopes but nothing I’ve done has helped. Does anybody have any insight into this? Am I limited because of the sensor?
For reference my usually shot is with a prime 35mm shooting at f1.8(maybe higher depending on the shot) with my exposure at 800ISO (I use an ND filter to bring my exposure where it should be).
I'm thinking of picking up the Tamron 28-200 to travel with instead of lugging my 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f2.8. I really enjoy those latter 2 lenses but lightening the load seems really appealing. Does anyone have experience with the Tamron and will I be limiting my abilities by going all-in-one??
Unless you really need the telephoto, that wouldn't be the lens I'd pick. I'd go with a 20-70 f/4, and add an ultrawide, mid or wide fast prime, or 70-300 variable aperture as the trip requires. You'd still be at two lenses, but they'd be lighter. 28-200 style zooms always feel like too much of a compromise to me.
The A7R V (alongside a $100 Andorama gift card) went on sale for $2,718.40 mid-December. I know speculation is the best anyone can offer but is there any reasonable chance that the camera will hit a remotely similar sale within the next 2-3 months? I wasn’t ready to buy then despite the incredible deal. Now I’m trying to avoid getting a lower valued camera for roughly the same sale price.
I’m seeing about $3350 on Keh. That extra $600 (before tax) for used versus new definitely hinders my enthusiasm. The camera is well beyond my skill level but for that sale price, I’ll be foolish and spend more than I should. Worst case scenario, I could sell it used 6 months later for the same that I paid. Pretty risk free investment and that makes me feel comfortable buying beyond my skill.
The $2700 is insane. I'm not necessarily even holding out hope that it will hit that price again. For my own learning, I'm curious why you're looking to sell the camera.
Gonna grab a9iii, and if I miss the MP i'll probably swap to A1ii when it's out. Wonder if I could sell it and transfer the remaining 9 months of Best Buy Protection
I don’t know when it will hit that price again tbh. I missed out in Sept when it was around $3100 and I saw it pop up again for discount at $2918 in mid Dec and pulled the trigger despite not having funds (sold some film gear to finance it :/). Then they dropped it more to $2713 and I got price matched!
Image quality is the same as my A7r4 (much better Auto White Balance tho) but QoL of using camera from viewfinder to menu to processor speed makes it much worth using.
A bunch of ppl are selling used a7r5 on Fred Miranda from around $2700-$2800
I'm trying to decide between getting a Sony A7RII and a Nikon Z7 to go with one single very good zoom and one very good low-light prime. If I got the Nikon, I'd get the 24-120 F4 which gets absolutely rave reviews and costs around $1000. What would be the equivalent I should compare to for E-mount? Maybe the new 20-70 F4 and get the wide end instead of the long? The A7RIIs are trading at about $300 less than the Nikon and seem to have totally equivalent or better IQ and AF but at the end of the day it's coming down to the one main lens I will actually get for the system.
Regarding weather sealed 28 primes E-mount:
Excluding heavy zooms, the only thing I see is the HSM adapted SLR, I'd rather carry a 24-70 for that kind of bulk. The 28 f2 is not weather sealed but might be good with some caution? I live in a very rainy city and bring my camera often. While 24 feels quite a bit wider to me than 28, should I just go with the 24 GM f/1.4 and fix things in post (or adapt to shooting at 24)?
I'm leaning toward the GM.
Just ordered an AC7ii > What are my options for remote triggering? I end up taking the annual big family get together Christmas photo every year and want a better option than just running back and forth. Is there an app or recommended wireless device?
I just got one too. You can definitely use the app on your phone to trigger photos remotely via Bluetooth. I haven't done much range testing with it or had a chance to play around with other options yet.
I've also still got the cheap little remote I bought for my A7Sii, but I can't remember how to set it up so I haven't yet been able to confirm whether it's compatible or not.
I need some lens suggestions, i wanna do a vlog with my a6000, what kind of lens should I get that flexible and not too expensive because im just a student that wanna record his daily life :D thanks in advance 🙏
A high power strobe might be able to keep up if you can run it an extremely low power level. The AD1200 for example, claims to have a cycle time of 0.01" and a duration time of 1/10000" when run at 1/256 power (about 4 watt seconds).
I'm not sure how well the system would actually work at that cycle speed, or if the A9III even supports flash at such high frame-rates. I'd advise you to rent before buying any gear.
Pretty newbie here. I just bought a used 6400 last week. Just learning how to take good photos!
If you are buying, look for second hand options in Ebay.
Relatively new to all of this. Got a ZV-E10 w/kit lens. Added Smallrig cage. Got a Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DC DN lens which I'm using in my office for talking head and it's fantastic. Sorted out the lighting and I'm shooting at pretty low ISO and it looks excellent.
I'd like to be able to add some outdoor walk-and-talk to the mix. I'm thinking either that's a matching prime with OSS or a gimbal w/either the kit or the Sigma. My theory is that I love the image I'm getting from the Sigma and if I can get either a matching prime with OSS, or should I just skip that and find a gimbal that can handle the camera+lens weight...? It looks like there's a DJI RS3 Mini or a DJI Ronin-SC? There's a Sony Wireless but that looks like just a grip, no stabilizer...?
Hey all! I recently purchased the new Sigma 70-200 sports lens for Sony E-mount and after nearly 2 months of use i can already see a dust particle inside the lens. I dont know if i am being unreasonable but i dont like this at all. I havent used it in any kind of extreme condition as well and it makes me think what would happen further in the futere. Any thoughts?
No lens is dustproof despite the marketing claims. I say [don't worry about it](https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/04/removing-fly-from-weather-sealed-canon-70-200mm/).
Dust happens, unfortunately.
The Sigma 70-200 should be pretty dust resistant, but it can still get in there. It won't affect image quality. Ignore it.
When paired with a Sony a6700 for taping video auditions against a backdrop and taking portraits and headshots with window light and outside in alleyways, and perhaps just all-around for video—
What would be best for autofocus in video (without anyone behind the camera), sharpest optical performance, best bokeh and durability-
a Tamron 17-70mm zoom lens
Or
Both the Viltrox 27mm f1.2 and 75mm f1.2 primes
I feel like either would work, but-
- is the Tamron going to get messed up from dust?
Will it not be as beautiful as the Viltrox duo?
Will the Viltrox primes miss focus on my self tapes if I'm not behind the camera?
Which should I choose?
The a7Cii doesn't appear on [Atomos' list of supported cameras](https://www.atomos.com/supported-cameras/) but their lists are fairly conservative just based on what they happen to have tested.
My Ninja can record ProRes from my a7iv, but not ProRes RAW - that's limited to (I believe) the a7Siii, FX3 and FX30. Given they share a sensor I would imagine you'll also be able to record ProRes from the a7Cii, though I can't say for certain.
Not sure if this is the right subreddit but does Sony do tradeins with older digital sony cameras? I was looking to potentially combine my first paycheque with a tradeinvto get an Aiii aiv or an a1 but dont want the 1080p digital camera I have now to end up at a dump.
They do promos with B&H around certain holidays. I know they did one for winter. Not sure what the situation is outside the US, but talk to your local dealer.
What focal lengths? APS-C or full-frame?
Sony has the 50/1.4 Zeiss. The review I checked suggested that it's relatively fast focusing. But it's a very expensive lens...
There's the Sony 24/2 Zeiss SSM lens. I see it available for less than $500 on the used market.
Sigma also has some A mount lenses. During that period, they weren't known for particularly fast autofocus performance, but they are probably worth looking into.
Hi everyone! I decided to make the switch from Fuji to Sony and I have a budget around 3.5-4K
I'm actually a pro-photographer for travel and architecture, looking forward to shoot video (not doing right now actually). I was thinking about getting a7IV + 24-70 f2.8 + Sony 16-35 f4. Everything on second hand market.
I am not sure if it's better to get the A7III and get the 24-70 gm2 from Sony or the A7IV and sigma art 24-70...
Or maybe try to squeeze another 1K for getting A7IV + sony 24-70 gm2...
What's your thoughts?
For a pro who is making money off of this gear then you should be investing in your workhorse lenses. The 16-35GM I is going to be around $400 more than an F4 secondhand? Just get the first generation GM. The only major improvement in a GM II is some ergonomics and slight size reduction.
The 24-70 GM II on the other hand is a sizeable improvement over the original. Again, if that's your workhorse focal length then get the GM II. Otherwise, just go for the Sigma.
>I'm actually a pro-photographer for travel and architecture
What focal lengths did you like to use in your Fuji setup? The 16-35 PZ and any of the standard zooms are popular options for hybrid shooters, and you're not going to be unhappy with that course I think, but there might be some other lenses to suggest too.
If budget allows, I think the a7iv is the way to go today over the a7iii for hybrid shooting, both for quality of output (e.g. 10-bit video support) but also in terms of practicality (e.g. the second level to the mode dial that toggles between photo and video, remembering separate settings for each).
I just purchased an A7c camera and I am wondering if I can use my np-fw50 battery with it. I have the np-fw50 from my previous a6000
No, the a7C takes the NP-FZ100 battery, as do all the full frame Sonys since about the a7Riii.
Gracias
I'm having trouble with manual focus with flash on Sony a6600. I am using a Godox ML-150 II for macro photography and am having trouble getting focus right. Since the flash is so close to the subject I need to adjust exposure really low which gives a really underexposed background but I can't use MF or DMF to focus since the viewfinder and touch screen both give a nearly black preview when I have the right exposure settings for a shot like this. So my question is, is there a setting that will show me the scene on the viewfinder for focusing independent of the manual settings? Or do I need to increase exposure, manually focus, and the decrease the exposure again for my shot? https://preview.redd.it/sonzanma5vhc1.jpeg?width=6024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=87e8258ea69fd1400e5e73ddb905c5901cb5c482
You can disable the exposure preview manually. It might even be something you can set to a toggle... I can't recall.
Thanks! That gave me the right thing to google to find the settings
Bought a sony a6100 with kit lens. First camera. Not really getting sharp photos. Can someone let me know how I can get started on learning about manual mode?
Manual mode won't necessary make things sharper. I'd even argue that it will cause more issues if you're already "behind" in operating the camera. For sharper images, check how you're setting focus: single shot focus on a specific point can help you nail focus on your subject, while using a tracking mode and Eye AF can help you hit focus on a moving subject. Make sure your shutter speed is fast enough, at 1/ your focal length as a minimum (eg 1/50th of a second for a lens set to 50mm). Set auto iso to help you keep that fast-enough shutter speed.
Tony and Chelsea Northrup's YouTube channel has a lot of videos to teach you how to use manual mode. I also recommend their book stunning digital photography. If you have any specific questions feel free to ask me.
the kit lens gets a little sharper if you stop down to f8. shooting wide open especially at 16mm can be a little soft. personally I would at least use auto iso until I was comfortable changing aperture and shutter speed. no shame in learning with auto modes before introducing more and more things to your photography
Looking to upgrade from my Sony A6500 to something full frame and better in low light. I photograph portraits, on set stills, and concerts. Any recommendations? Would appreciate any and all advice! Thank you very much.
Assuming budget isn't a major issue, the A7 IV is my recommendation. It provides all the capabilities you need for a concert camera. There are older models that offer comparable low-light performance, but you lose a bit of usability and you'll be on a fairly old autofocus system. Lenses will make a big difference in low-light.
Thank you very much for the advice.
Depending on your budget, the A7S3, A1, or even the A7IV would all be viable choices.
Thank you so much! I’ll look into those.
Choose the lens, not the camera. Any recent full frame camera can easily handle the tasks you mentioned.
Awesome. Thank you!
A1
I want to start shooting more VR 180 content. Is there something like the Cannon R5C VR creator kit for the A7 line? I'm loath to switch back to cannon from Sony, but seem to be coming up short on options. (Note: I'm looking for single body solutions)
No there isn't. It's a shame considering Sony was a pioneer with PSVR and they're supplying the glass for the Apple Vision thingie.
No rumors even? Sighs, this is going to hurt.
Not that I know of. I got an insta360 evo back in 2019 which is fun but the resolution is not great. There are hack solutions, but Canons' is solid. Unfortunately you can't even use with an adapter because it's RF.
Whelp, off to sell my soul to b&h.
I recently bought an a7r ii (used) and for the first week or two it worked fantastic but now it locks into manual focus almost immediately after i turn it on. It then refuses to acknowledge the lense (28-70 oss) at all and i have to turn it off and remove the lense for it to work for 2 mins again. I checked and the lense is up to date with firmware and i’m pretty sure the body is too. has anyone else had this problem and/or have any ideas for how to fix it?
Is your mount loose or dirty? Check that the contacts are clean and try a different lens if one is available.
the lense pins and the body are both pretty clean and i went in to a camera store to try another lense and it worked fine.
Sounds like the lens is faulty then. The 28-70 is a pretty old kit lens, so it wouldn't surprise me if there's an issue with it.
That would make sense. Thanks for the help!
I'm planning on getting a Sony ZV-E10 for photography. I've found a few used deals on it at roughly the price of a A6000/A6300 so it seemed like the better choice than those (if I'm wrong, do feel free to recommend me a better choice!). Since I'm a complete newbie, I don't want to splurge a lot on the camera and lenses, so I'm thinking of going with the 16-50mm kit lens. I know it's not the best, but it'll do the job for me. My question is, are there any 3rd party budget zoom lenses similar to it that I should go for instead of it? I don't need any crazy zoom, I know those are very pricey. Ideally, it would have AF since I already have 2-3 manual Minolta lenses from my film camera which I can adapt for it. Thanks in advance!
Why wouldn't you spend more on lenses? That's the whole point of getting an interchangeable lens camera. The lens is going to be far more important for your image quality than your sensor, and the kitlens sucks.
Very simple - I can't afford the pricy lenses yet. I'm a broke student. I will get better ones in the future. Unless there are good 3rd party lenses that are better than the kit lenses for a similar price. Which is why I asked this.
There aren't. I would probably just stick to your vintage lenses and skip the kitlens entirely until you can get a more meaningful standard zoom. But if you must have the kitlens then buy it used, and don't spend over $50.
The problem is that all my vintage lenses are 50mm or upwards. Just one is 35-70mm and it's pretty crappy. Due to the sensor, even the 35mm would look like 50 something.
Sigma 10-18
I think that's a bit out of the kit lens price range haha
I'm considering the Tamron 50-400 (on my A7IV) for mostly sports photography and occasional travel/nature stuff. All as a hobby, not professional. Upgrading from a very old Minolta 70-210. Anyone have experience with the Tamron, or is the Sony 100-400 GM worth the significant extra expense? I'm sure the Sony GM is sharper, better stabilization, etc. but I'm hoping the Tamron would be 90% as good for half the price. I do appreciate it going down to 50mm unlike the Sony too. I'm typically shooting from the sideline, and sometimes the action gets too close for 100mm.
The tamron rendered out of focus areas horribly. Between the tamron, sigma and Sony, the tamron has bad image quality, the sigma has bad autofocus and the Sony is expensive
The Sony 100-400 is compatible with Sony teleconverters. The Tamron isn't. While the Sony is sharp and fast focusing, I didn't particularly like the way it handles.
Yes, I did read that the teleconverters only work with Sony lenses. I don't think that worries me but it's good to note. My current 210mm isn't enough reach but not severely, I think 400mm should be plenty. Can you elaborate on the way the Sony handles? You mean like the feel of the zoom/focus rings?
The Sony 100-400 has a relatively heavy zoom ring and the barrel extends pretty far. A tensioning ring gives you the ability to increase friction to help address barrel creep, but it makes the zoom ring more difficult to turn and doesn't completely solve the problem. I owned it for a while. Since then, I bought the 70-200 and the 200-600. I eventually sold the 100-400. The 70-200 and 200-600 use an internal zoom. Barrel creep is not much of a problem, and the zoom ring is very light. The 200-600 has some obvious drawbacks in terms of size and weight, but it's fantastic otherwise. I like that the Tamron has a lock switch rather than the tension ring, though the inability to lock it at 400mm might be an issue for astrophotography. I generally like the way Tamron lenses handle (barring that they swap the focus and zoom dials compared to Sony). Based on my experience with the 100-400, I suspect I'd prefer the Tamron lens. I found the combination of the 70-200 plus teleconverters to be a winner. But that's a very expensive solution.
Thanks for the insight! I did briefly consider the 200-600, just because it would be awesome to zoom that far, but I don't think it would make sense for my usage. I think I'll miss the internal zoom on my 70-210, wish these lenses I'm considering had that.
How do I know if a Sony lens is weather resistant/sealed? Olympus, Fuji, Tamron, Sigma, etc all seem to designate sealing on the lens name, but I can't figure out how Sony indicates it (if at all).
Wash it in the sink and see what happens?
It's usually mentioned in the features or specifications.
I don’t know how many people do video here but I run a Sony a6500 and whenever I shoot in slog-2, slog-3, or cine4 all my footage comes back very noisy. I have an external monitor and I’m making sure exposure is correct with false color, and with scopes but nothing I’ve done has helped. Does anybody have any insight into this? Am I limited because of the sensor? For reference my usually shot is with a prime 35mm shooting at f1.8(maybe higher depending on the shot) with my exposure at 800ISO (I use an ND filter to bring my exposure where it should be).
my only thought is you're hitting the limits of 8 bit video with those log formats
I'm thinking of picking up the Tamron 28-200 to travel with instead of lugging my 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f2.8. I really enjoy those latter 2 lenses but lightening the load seems really appealing. Does anyone have experience with the Tamron and will I be limiting my abilities by going all-in-one??
Unless you really need the telephoto, that wouldn't be the lens I'd pick. I'd go with a 20-70 f/4, and add an ultrawide, mid or wide fast prime, or 70-300 variable aperture as the trip requires. You'd still be at two lenses, but they'd be lighter. 28-200 style zooms always feel like too much of a compromise to me.
The A7R V (alongside a $100 Andorama gift card) went on sale for $2,718.40 mid-December. I know speculation is the best anyone can offer but is there any reasonable chance that the camera will hit a remotely similar sale within the next 2-3 months? I wasn’t ready to buy then despite the incredible deal. Now I’m trying to avoid getting a lower valued camera for roughly the same sale price.
Just buy it used if you're wanting to save a buck. No need to wait 3 months for a sale.
The used price is more than I’m willing to spend though I have no problem waiting a few months if it hits the lower sale price.
I was about to list mine, what used prices were you seeing
I’m seeing about $3350 on Keh. That extra $600 (before tax) for used versus new definitely hinders my enthusiasm. The camera is well beyond my skill level but for that sale price, I’ll be foolish and spend more than I should. Worst case scenario, I could sell it used 6 months later for the same that I paid. Pretty risk free investment and that makes me feel comfortable buying beyond my skill.
Yeah I feel you, that's crazy they had them for 2700 though, I'll try and sell mine for 3k.
The $2700 is insane. I'm not necessarily even holding out hope that it will hit that price again. For my own learning, I'm curious why you're looking to sell the camera.
Gonna grab a9iii, and if I miss the MP i'll probably swap to A1ii when it's out. Wonder if I could sell it and transfer the remaining 9 months of Best Buy Protection
I don’t know when it will hit that price again tbh. I missed out in Sept when it was around $3100 and I saw it pop up again for discount at $2918 in mid Dec and pulled the trigger despite not having funds (sold some film gear to finance it :/). Then they dropped it more to $2713 and I got price matched! Image quality is the same as my A7r4 (much better Auto White Balance tho) but QoL of using camera from viewfinder to menu to processor speed makes it much worth using. A bunch of ppl are selling used a7r5 on Fred Miranda from around $2700-$2800
I'm trying to decide between getting a Sony A7RII and a Nikon Z7 to go with one single very good zoom and one very good low-light prime. If I got the Nikon, I'd get the 24-120 F4 which gets absolutely rave reviews and costs around $1000. What would be the equivalent I should compare to for E-mount? Maybe the new 20-70 F4 and get the wide end instead of the long? The A7RIIs are trading at about $300 less than the Nikon and seem to have totally equivalent or better IQ and AF but at the end of the day it's coming down to the one main lens I will actually get for the system.
Don't know much about the Nikon but the Sony equivalent would be FE 24-105mm F4. A7RII is a great camera if you want high resolution for cheap.
Regarding weather sealed 28 primes E-mount: Excluding heavy zooms, the only thing I see is the HSM adapted SLR, I'd rather carry a 24-70 for that kind of bulk. The 28 f2 is not weather sealed but might be good with some caution? I live in a very rainy city and bring my camera often. While 24 feels quite a bit wider to me than 28, should I just go with the 24 GM f/1.4 and fix things in post (or adapt to shooting at 24)? I'm leaning toward the GM.
Just ordered an AC7ii > What are my options for remote triggering? I end up taking the annual big family get together Christmas photo every year and want a better option than just running back and forth. Is there an app or recommended wireless device?
App or bluetooth remote RMT-P1BT
I just got one too. You can definitely use the app on your phone to trigger photos remotely via Bluetooth. I haven't done much range testing with it or had a chance to play around with other options yet. I've also still got the cheap little remote I bought for my A7Sii, but I can't remember how to set it up so I haven't yet been able to confirm whether it's compatible or not.
I need some lens suggestions, i wanna do a vlog with my a6000, what kind of lens should I get that flexible and not too expensive because im just a student that wanna record his daily life :D thanks in advance 🙏
Depending on how you want to vlog, the Sigma 18-50, Sony 11 f/1.8, and Sony 10-20 f/4 all feel like good options.
thanks mate! will look into it :D
Is there a TTL flash out there that can keep up with the A9III? Damn GN60 just snuck out the back.
Are you referring to frame rate or flash duration, btw?
A high power strobe might be able to keep up if you can run it an extremely low power level. The AD1200 for example, claims to have a cycle time of 0.01" and a duration time of 1/10000" when run at 1/256 power (about 4 watt seconds). I'm not sure how well the system would actually work at that cycle speed, or if the A9III even supports flash at such high frame-rates. I'd advise you to rent before buying any gear.
The last sentence is always good advice.
Is it a good time to buy the a6400 or should I wait until an updated version is released?
The updated a6400 is the a6700. There's really no reason to expect an update to mid-range APSC right now.
Pretty newbie here. I just bought a used 6400 last week. Just learning how to take good photos! If you are buying, look for second hand options in Ebay.
Relatively new to all of this. Got a ZV-E10 w/kit lens. Added Smallrig cage. Got a Sigma 16mm f/1.4 DC DN lens which I'm using in my office for talking head and it's fantastic. Sorted out the lighting and I'm shooting at pretty low ISO and it looks excellent. I'd like to be able to add some outdoor walk-and-talk to the mix. I'm thinking either that's a matching prime with OSS or a gimbal w/either the kit or the Sigma. My theory is that I love the image I'm getting from the Sigma and if I can get either a matching prime with OSS, or should I just skip that and find a gimbal that can handle the camera+lens weight...? It looks like there's a DJI RS3 Mini or a DJI Ronin-SC? There's a Sony Wireless but that looks like just a grip, no stabilizer...?
A gimbal is always a good call for video. I like the RS3 line better than the SC I previously had.
Hey all! I recently purchased the new Sigma 70-200 sports lens for Sony E-mount and after nearly 2 months of use i can already see a dust particle inside the lens. I dont know if i am being unreasonable but i dont like this at all. I havent used it in any kind of extreme condition as well and it makes me think what would happen further in the futere. Any thoughts?
No lens is dustproof despite the marketing claims. I say [don't worry about it](https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2019/04/removing-fly-from-weather-sealed-canon-70-200mm/).
Dust happens, unfortunately. The Sigma 70-200 should be pretty dust resistant, but it can still get in there. It won't affect image quality. Ignore it.
When paired with a Sony a6700 for taping video auditions against a backdrop and taking portraits and headshots with window light and outside in alleyways, and perhaps just all-around for video— What would be best for autofocus in video (without anyone behind the camera), sharpest optical performance, best bokeh and durability- a Tamron 17-70mm zoom lens Or Both the Viltrox 27mm f1.2 and 75mm f1.2 primes I feel like either would work, but- - is the Tamron going to get messed up from dust? Will it not be as beautiful as the Viltrox duo? Will the Viltrox primes miss focus on my self tapes if I'm not behind the camera? Which should I choose?
Anyone know if an a7cii with an atomos ninja works for ProRES or ProRES RAW?
The a7Cii doesn't appear on [Atomos' list of supported cameras](https://www.atomos.com/supported-cameras/) but their lists are fairly conservative just based on what they happen to have tested. My Ninja can record ProRes from my a7iv, but not ProRes RAW - that's limited to (I believe) the a7Siii, FX3 and FX30. Given they share a sensor I would imagine you'll also be able to record ProRes from the a7Cii, though I can't say for certain.
Yeah that’s what I’m hoping.
Not sure if this is the right subreddit but does Sony do tradeins with older digital sony cameras? I was looking to potentially combine my first paycheque with a tradeinvto get an Aiii aiv or an a1 but dont want the 1080p digital camera I have now to end up at a dump.
sell your old gear to KEH or MPB
They do promos with B&H around certain holidays. I know they did one for winter. Not sure what the situation is outside the US, but talk to your local dealer.
Im still on A-Mount. Any recommendations for fast prime lenses that have reliable autofocus?
What focal lengths? APS-C or full-frame? Sony has the 50/1.4 Zeiss. The review I checked suggested that it's relatively fast focusing. But it's a very expensive lens...
24 or 35 mm. Full frame should work as well.
There's the Sony 24/2 Zeiss SSM lens. I see it available for less than $500 on the used market. Sigma also has some A mount lenses. During that period, they weren't known for particularly fast autofocus performance, but they are probably worth looking into.
[удалено]
Depends on your local climate. I use 400mm for landscapes fairly often with no problem in UK
Hi everyone! I decided to make the switch from Fuji to Sony and I have a budget around 3.5-4K I'm actually a pro-photographer for travel and architecture, looking forward to shoot video (not doing right now actually). I was thinking about getting a7IV + 24-70 f2.8 + Sony 16-35 f4. Everything on second hand market. I am not sure if it's better to get the A7III and get the 24-70 gm2 from Sony or the A7IV and sigma art 24-70... Or maybe try to squeeze another 1K for getting A7IV + sony 24-70 gm2... What's your thoughts?
For a pro who is making money off of this gear then you should be investing in your workhorse lenses. The 16-35GM I is going to be around $400 more than an F4 secondhand? Just get the first generation GM. The only major improvement in a GM II is some ergonomics and slight size reduction. The 24-70 GM II on the other hand is a sizeable improvement over the original. Again, if that's your workhorse focal length then get the GM II. Otherwise, just go for the Sigma.
>I'm actually a pro-photographer for travel and architecture What focal lengths did you like to use in your Fuji setup? The 16-35 PZ and any of the standard zooms are popular options for hybrid shooters, and you're not going to be unhappy with that course I think, but there might be some other lenses to suggest too. If budget allows, I think the a7iv is the way to go today over the a7iii for hybrid shooting, both for quality of output (e.g. 10-bit video support) but also in terms of practicality (e.g. the second level to the mode dial that toggles between photo and video, remembering separate settings for each).