[Winder]

Sony Announces ?9 Camera Upgrade Through Major Firmware Updates | Sony | Alpha Universe

Major firmware update for A7III, A7rIII, & A9 coming

[Winder]

You Tube

You Tube

[LeRolls]

[The Squirrel Mafia]

^ I like them. How are you feeling about the A7III so far? Are you finding it easier to use than the K-1/1II?

[LeRolls]

^ I like them. How are you feeling about the A7III so far? Are you finding it easier to use than the K-1/1II?

Thanks. The A7III is incredibly easy to use. Still definitely prefer the rendering from Pentax glass as well as Fuji but it's pretty close. The AF is amazing as well as awesome low light performance.

[LeRolls]

But you are comparing a Sony 85mm F/1.8 that can be picked up for under $600 to lenses that typically cost 2x that price. The Fuji 56mm f/1.2 lists for $1,500. There have been some crazy discounts on the lens and it can be picked up for a lot less than that and some people think Fuji has a new version of the lens coming. The Pentax FA 85mm F/.14 is selling for over $1,000 used. You are comparing the budget 85mm Sony to the premium option from Fuji and Pentax. You should rent the 85mm GM or the 100mm STF if you want to judge rendering on portraits. The 100mm STF is not a good natural light photography lens, but in shots like your Under the Bridge with Cassidy

It would be perfect and you would not have football shaped bokeh in the background. The 85mm GM is an excellent natural light lens and the 11 blade aperture really does a nice job with lights. I still prefer the glowing orb look of the 100mm STF, but the 85mm GM is still really nice.

I understand where you are coming from and I'm definitely not trying to start an argument or anything but I think there are a few things to consider. Firstly when I see Youtubers make comparisons they usually list the camera and lens together as a combo which if you are looking to jump from one system to another is a reasonable way to look at it since you are not only using a lens from a different system but an entirely different camera as well. So in the case of the A7III with the 85 1.8 it retails for basically $2600. The Fuji X-T3 with the 56 1.2 is roughly $2500 (not sure where you got the $1500 price point for that lens from as it has almost always been listed as $999 full retail but happens to be on sale for $750 right now). Yes one is a FF and the other is a crop sensor and honestly that used to matter a lot to me but seeing the output on the X-T3 it no longer matters as much to me. So I think for me those two combos are reasonable comparisons. Secondly you mentioned the 85 GM 1.4 which I have not personally shot with but did have a chance to hold one time and boy was it a big heavy lens not to mention very expensive at roughly $1700. Almost every YouTuber who has shot with both the 1.8 and 1.4 seems to think there is little to no difference in the actual rendering of those two lenses and they usually end up selling the 1.4 and keeping the 1.8 because while it is as you say the "budget" portrait lens from Sony it still competes with the premium offerings at least when it comes to output which is what I am mostly concerned with. Now obviously one is a 1.4 and the other is a 1.8 but even when I was shooting with the Pentax 85 1.4 I almost always shot at f1.8 or f2 anyway and since the Fuji is a crop sensor and the 1.2 is equivalent to 1.8 on FF then that doesn't matter to me either.

Now with all the points that I just brought up I also understand that YouTubers are well...just YouTubers and definitely not the end all be all of photography knowledge. God knows that I most definitely take most of what they say with a grain of salt these days. So yes I do agree with you that I really should try the 85 1.4 GM and the 100mm STF so that I can form my own opinions on those two lenses. At the end of the day I plan on keeping both systems as I see advantages to both. The lowlight is vastly superior on the Sony no doubt in my mind and I am very interested in what Sony has in store for the eventual A7R4 which may be a 60 megapixel beast. Sony is also getting better and better when it comes to their color science which was something that bothered me for the longest.

[Winder]

I understand where you are coming from and I'm definitely not trying to start an argument or anything but I think there are a few things to consider. Firstly when I see Youtubers make comparisons they usually list the camera and lens together as a combo which if you are looking to jump from one system to another is a reasonable way to look at it since you are not only using a lens from a different system but an entirely different camera as well. So in the case of the A7III with the 85 1.8 it retails for basically $2600. The Fuji X-T3 with the 56 1.2 is roughly $2500 (not sure where you got the $1500 price point for that lens from as it has almost always been listed as $999 full retail but happens to be on sale for $750 right now). Yes one is a FF and the other is a crop sensor and honestly that used to matter a lot to me but seeing the output on the X-T3 it no longer matters as much to me. So I think for me those two combos are reasonable comparisons. Secondly you mentioned the 85 GM 1.4 which I have not personally shot with but did have a chance to hold one time and boy was it a big heavy lens not to mention very expensive at roughly $1700. Almost every YouTuber who has shot with both the 1.8 and 1.4 seems to think there is little to no difference in the actual rendering of those two lenses and they usually end up selling the 1.4 and keeping the 1.8 because while it is as you say the "budget" portrait lens from Sony it still competes with the premium offerings at least when it comes to output which is what I am mostly concerned with. Now obviously one is a 1.4 and the other is a 1.8 but even when I was shooting with the Pentax 85 1.4 I almost always shot at f1.8 or f2 anyway and since the Fuji is a crop sensor and the 1.2 is equivalent to 1.8 on FF then that doesn't matter to me either.

Now with all the points that I just brought up I also understand that YouTubers are well...just YouTubers and definitely not the end all be all of photography knowledge. God knows that I most definitely take most of what they say with a grain of salt these days. So yes I do agree with you that I really should try the 85 1.4 GM and the 100mm STF so that I can form my own opinions on those two lenses. At the end of the day I plan on keeping both systems as I see advantages to both. The lowlight is vastly superior on the Sony no doubt in my mind and I am very interested in what Sony has in store for the eventual A7R4 which may be a 60 megapixel beast. Sony is also getting better and better when it comes to their color science which was something that bothered me for the longest.

The $1,600 is for the APD version of the 56mm F/1.2. I had them mixed up.


I have the 85mm F/1.8. I had the Batis 85mm and I sold it with plans on buying the GM. I ended up with the 85mm F/1.8 and the 100mm SFT instead. I have shot with the 85mm GM 4-5 times. Its big, heavy, and slow to focus compared to the F/1.8 version. The F/1.8 version is just as sharp as the GM version and for a lot of work its hard to tell the difference. I usually shoot at F/2 - F/4 so I don't need F/1.4 often. The GM does have better bokeh and if you shoot into the light, the GM handles flare much better. The F/1.8 doesn't have the coatings that the GM does and it shows, but it also render more like older lenses which some people like. The GM will give you more of that 3D pop that people like. That is when the FF sensor starts to pull away. The 100mm SFT really has a special look to it, but you have to use it a very specific way or its nothing special and its not always possible to use it that way. Its an awful natural light lens.... unless you are shooting flowers on a tripod or something.



I don't like Fuji reds when it comes to the JPEGs. I see lipstick bleeding to magenta too often or other shifts that I don't like. The Sony A7II use to give me an orange skin tone that was often hard to process out without going to Photoshop. The A9 doesn't have that problem. The only thing I like about the Fuji system is that its fun to use. It's the best APS-C system on the market and they managed to achieve that in just 5-6 years. The Sony is more of a boring workhorse system. Ergonomics and menus are average at best. Its not a very attractive camera and the lenses are expensive. However, it really works. I'm using the A9 so its a little different, but I can basically shoot and never have to worry about AF. I love the user experience of shooting with the K-1, but it was a challenge compared to Sony. I didn't realize how much easier things could be until I switched over. I almost went to Fuji.


What does the Fuji do that you can't do with the Sony? Colors are not really an issue. Sean Tucker is a former Canon turned Fuji turned Sony photographer who does some pretty good videos.

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

[LeRolls]

The $1,600 is for the APD version of the 56mm F/1.2. I had them mixed up.


I have the 85mm F/1.8. I had the Batis 85mm and I sold it with plans on buying the GM. I ended up with the 85mm F/1.8 and the 100mm SFT instead. I have shot with the 85mm GM 4-5 times. Its big, heavy, and slow to focus compared to the F/1.8 version. The F/1.8 version is just as sharp as the GM version and for a lot of work its hard to tell the difference. I usually shoot at F/2 - F/4 so I don't need F/1.4 often. The GM does have better bokeh and if you shoot into the light, the GM handles flare much better. The F/1.8 doesn't have the coatings that the GM does and it shows, but it also render more like older lenses which some people like. The GM will give you more of that 3D pop that people like. That is when the FF sensor starts to pull away. The 100mm SFT really has a special look to it, but you have to use it a very specific way or its nothing special and its not always possible to use it that way. Its an awful natural light lens.... unless you are shooting flowers on a tripod or something.



I don't like Fuji reds when it comes to the JPEGs. I see lipstick bleeding to magenta too often or other shifts that I don't like. The Sony A7II use to give me an orange skin tone that was often hard to process out without going to Photoshop. The A9 doesn't have that problem. The only thing I like about the Fuji system is that its fun to use. It's the best APS-C system on the market and they managed to achieve that in just 5-6 years. The Sony is more of a boring workhorse system. Ergonomics and menus are average at best. Its not a very attractive camera and the lenses are expensive. However, it really works. I'm using the A9 so its a little different, but I can basically shoot and never have to worry about AF. I love the user experience of shooting with the K-1, but it was a challenge compared to Sony. I didn't realize how much easier things could be until I switched over. I almost went to Fuji.


What does the Fuji do that you can't do with the Sony? Colors are not really an issue. Sean Tucker is a former Canon turned Fuji turned Sony photographer who does some pretty good videos. Skin Tones in Portraits: Canon vs Sony and How to Correct - YouTube
Why I made the Big Switch to Sony (and a message to Canon and Fujifilm) - YouTube

I agree that the Fuji is a more fun system to use than the Sony for sure. The models also definitely prefer the Fuji but I'm guessing they really like the retro styling and the film simulations. I agree that the Sony is more of a workhorse system that has great tech and AF. I tend to use the Fuji more for my personal work and the Sony more for paid client jobs. I like Sean Tucker and while I do think he is a great photographer his style is very different from mine. I have a very specific workflow that I am currently comfortable with. Luckily this workflow has carried over pretty well to the RAW files of the Sony and Fuji but at the end of the day the Fuji files seems to have slightly more micro contrast or pop when everything is said and done. Not a huge difference but enough of one that a number of people have noticed and commented on it. Both Sony and Fuji have made great strides in the last few years and I am sure they will continue to do so.

[Winder]

I agree that the Fuji is a more fun system to use than the Sony for sure. The models also definitely prefer the Fuji but I'm guessing they really like the retro styling and the film simulations. I agree that the Sony is more of a workhorse system that has great tech and AF. I tend to use the Fuji more for my personal work and the Sony more for paid client jobs. I like Sean Tucker and while I do think he is a great photographer his style is very different from mine. I have a very specific workflow that I am currently comfortable with. Luckily this workflow has carried over pretty well to the RAW files of the Sony and Fuji but at the end of the day the Fuji files seems to have slightly more micro contrast or pop when everything is said and done. Not a huge difference but enough of one that a number of people have noticed and commented on it. Both Sony and Fuji have made great strides in the last few years and I am sure they will continue to do so.

Which images in your Flickr stream would you post to show people the difference between Fuji, Sony, & Pentax? You have a large selection from all three.

[fiveseven]

Few shots from A7 II and R-Helios 100 (Medium or possibly large format Soviet TV camera lens).

[LeRolls]

New Sony 135 1.8 got announced and it seems like a great lens. $1900 is pretty steep but if I can get a decent discount from my job I will definitely consider picking it up. Even though the Sigma 135 is definitely cheaper all of the coverage I've seen has me feeling that the Sony version is more interesting to my style of shooting.

[Winder]

New Sony 135 1.8 got announced and it seems like a great lens. $1900 is pretty steep but if I can get a decent discount from my job I will definitely consider picking it up. Even though the Sigma 135 is definitely cheaper all of the coverage I've seen has me feeling that the Sony version is more interesting to my style of shooting.

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

You Tube

F/1.8 is awesome if you are shooting bust up and want to melt the background into pudding, but you usually have pretty awesome backgrounds and you are usually shooting full body. Don't forget about the Batis 135mm F/2.8 APO. Its going to give you the equivalent of the Fuji 90mm F/2 but the Zeiss is sharper and has almost zero CA or color fringing. Personally, I think the Zeiss focuses faster, but I've only used the Fuji 90mm once and that was on an XT-2.

[LeRolls]

The BEST Sony 135mm Lens To Buy? - G MASTER F/1.8 ANNOUNCEMENT! - TIMECODES - YouTube

Which 135mm is Better?! - Sigma Art f/1.8 VS Zeiss Batis f/2.8 - Sony a7III a7RIII - YouTube

F/1.8 is awesome if you are shooting bust up and want to melt the background into pudding, but you usually have pretty awesome backgrounds and you are usually shooting full body. Don't forget about the Batis 135mm F/2.8 APO. Its going to give you the equivalent of the Fuji 90mm F/2 but the Zeiss is sharper and has almost zero CA or color fringing. Personally, I think the Zeiss focuses faster, but I've only used the Fuji 90mm once and that was on an XT-2.

The Zeiss is too close to the price of the newly announced Sony so I would go for the Sony personally. I think I can get my job to pay for the Fuji 90mm and I have a feeling that the AF is faster on the X-T3 than on the X-T2. I would like to own both the Sony and Fuji. Especially if I eventually get the A7R4 which I'm sure will be a very impressive piece of kit when it gets released.

[Winder]

The Zeiss is too close to the price of the newly announced Sony so I would go for the Sony personally. I think I can get my job to pay for the Fuji 90mm and I have a feeling that the AF is faster on the X-T3 than on the X-T2. I would like to own both the Sony and Fuji. Especially if I eventually get the A7R4 which I'm sure will be a very impressive piece of kit when it gets released.

You can pick up the Zeiss 135mm Batis for $1,300 the Sony 135mm GM is $1,900. There are going to be a lot of good deals on the Batis as people chase the latest and greatest. If you can get a free Fuji 90mm that would be the way to go. The Batis is an excellent lens, but that doesn't beat free. APO lenses have their advantages. I'm sure the XT-3 AF is faster, but the 90mm is just a slower lens. Like the Sony 85mm GM or the Canon 85L, they are just a little slow. Not enough to matter for portrait work though.


I'm not sure we see an A7R4 in the near future. I was hoping Canon/Nikon/Panasonic would release cameras that would be a step ahead of the Sony A7III/A7RIII/A9 and force Sony to get off of the lazy butts, but that has not been the case. Panasonic might be the closest. Looks like Sony will just push out a firmware update and keep a comfortable lead over everyone. I think we get an A9II and an A7S3 in time for the 2020 Olympics in Japan. I don't see an A7IV or an A7RIV being launched before 2021. Sony has said the GM lenses are designed for 100MP FF sensors, but I don't know when we get there.

You Tube

You Tube

[LeRolls]

No doubt about it Sony has incredibly impressive AF technology going on in both the new lenses and bodies especially after firmware updates. Another reason for me to get the Sony 135mm. I will be getting my tax refund in about a month so might put my order in around that time.