I like it but for reasons that aren't quite logical.
I'm always shooting with the 200600 where it lives at 600 and often with a 1.4TC.
I just don't do much landscaping but feel like I should have a wide angle in the pocket.
This 24mm is perfect for that.
I had the 24/1.4GM and used it a whopping two times on one trip. Of course it beats the
24/2.8 easily in many areas but not size and weight and the likelihood that I'll actually carry it.
As far as overall image quality I'm not shot enough with it to judge, but I judge my wildlife photos
way more harshly than I'd ever judge a landscape. To me landscaping is just snapshots of where I've
been.
Now in this genre of FE lenses I will say the FE20/1.8 is a gem. Only thing I wish is that it had been an 18mm
I had the Tam 28-75 for FE. Sold it, but now thinking of repurchasing just for the A7C.
Here's another with the TamFE70300.
Where I live it is clouds/rain/snow/sleet/ice 300+ days a year. If the clouds aren't above me
they are below me. I've yet to get an opportunity to try the Milky Way here
Wow Robert, those macro shots (especially that of the fly) and landscapes are terrific! If landscape shots to you are "just places you visited" I say you gush with humility. They are terrific with the A7C.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Weevil ? Ha! I don't think so. Let me check my underware haha!
Honestly I think I've seen one weevil in my area one time....long skinny nose right?
_______
I thought you had a pet insect. Well, maybe it was a favorite insect to photograph.
LL an attempt to dominate the low end of the camera market with a camera that IMHO, seems a poor fit with other cameras in the Sony line. Sony's strength IMHO is in the mid range and high end pro and advanced hobbist market. Are they going to come out with a range low end lenses in FF? And can Sony produce price competitive lenses for this market? That low end of the market is IMO,going to be dominated by cell phones with more advance lens system offering WA and moderate telephoto capability.
sundial40 wrote:
LL an attempt to dominate the low end of the camera market with a camera that IMHO, seems a poor fit with other cameras in the Sony line. Sony's strength IMHO is in the mid range and high end pro and advanced hobbist market. Are they going to come out with a range low end lenses in FF? And can Sony produce price competitive lenses for this market? That low end of the market is IMO,going to be dominated by cell phones with more advance lens system offering WA and moderate telephoto capability.
I think you may be misjudging the A7C. It actually has one of the newest and best autofocus systems and one of the best sensors for image quality among Sony's cameras. It is just in a much smaller body, which for many people will be an attractive advantage.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I like it but for reasons that aren't quite logical.
I'm always shooting with the 200600 where it lives at 600 and often with a 1.4TC.
I just don't do much landscaping but feel like I should have a wide angle in the pocket.
This 24mm is perfect for that.
I had the 24/1.4GM and used it a whopping two times on one trip. Of course it beats the
24/2.8 easily in many areas but not size and weight and the likelihood that I'll actually carry it.
As far as overall image quality I'm not shot enough with it to judge, but I judge my wildlife photos
way more harshly than I'd ever judge a landscape. To me landscaping is just snapshots of where I've
been.
Now in this genre of FE lenses I will say the FE20/1.8 is a gem. Only thing I wish is that it had been an 18mm ...Show more →
I went back and forth between the Sony 24/2.8 G and the Sigma 24/3.5. According to lenstip.com the Sony 24/2.8 has more distortion (a whopping ~8%) than the Sigma 24/3.5 (~1.5%), so I ended up ordering the Sigma 24/3.5, although it’s a little heavier than the Sony lens. I think, as you said that the 24/1.4 GM would more often than not be left at home in my case as well, due to its weight. I have the 20/1.8 G, and it’s a splendid lens. That made my decision easier.
Thanks for your thoughts on these lenses, they helped me. 🙂
OK some ofyou guys/gals know I live in a rain forest (300 days a year we have either snow/rain/cloud/sleet/ice) but last night no Moon and no clouds....at least visible clouds.
The moisture load here is insane...but luckily it is a very cool place or the humidity comfort level would be horrible.
When I got across the lake I couldn't even see a hint of the Milky Way, in fact the visible stars were 10% (yep a best guess)
of what the camera captured.
It was a learning experience/first time use of the FE20/1.8G for stars....and I like it. But at 20mm I started getting trailing (no tracking)
at anything beyond 15 sec exposures and 15 sec was pushing it.
Still for ISO 1600 a lot of stars appeared.
I used Bright Monitoring to a custom key (the only custom key on the A7C, and that helps a whole lot for focus. Fly-by-wire focus will always suck compared to a manual lens
30 shots via the internal
intervalometer, then stacked in PScc.
Not great by any means but first time with the A7C doing wild field astro and first time with the 20mm so I'm glad we ventured out.
The real beauty of this rig is of course size and weight and I still feel the A7C has better ISO performance than my A1.
Next time I try for the Milky with the A7C I will take a small polar tracker.
And this wide field astro experience now has me having tried all the genres I normally shoot
(BIF,macro, snapshot landscaping) with the A7C. So now I feel I can finally judge the camera-
It needs more buttons and a front dial!
The sensor is fantastic.
The size and weight for a FF camera is remarkable.
Failures include the omission of a smart USB (multi port). This is a horrible move by Sony.
It means I cannot use my StackShot and it is a pain to use the Timelapse+ View intervalometer,
and in fact no external intervalometer granting longer than 30 second exposures can be used.
If I did a lot of wide field astro (I get 2-3 tries a year with our skies) I'd not like the A7C. If I
stacked super macro a lot and wanted use of the Cognysis StackShot I'd not like the A7C.
But as companion to the A1 and the ability to jump in the game if for some reason the A1 failed
me on a trip I'm keeping it
I don't think thats true. As I understand A7c uses sensor and AF from A7III, which was released 3 years ago.
chiron wrote:
I think you may be misjudging the A7C. It actually has one of the newest and best autofocus systems and one of the best sensors for image quality among Sony's cameras. It is just in a much smaller body, which for many people will be an attractive advantage.
ajamils wrote:
I don't think thats true. As I understand A7c uses sensor and AF from A7III, which was released 3 years ago.
The point I was discussing is not when the sensor was introduced but how good the image quality is. The A7C and the A7III have about the best image quality of Sony's cameras. If you go to Bill Claff's site, Photons to Photos, and check the Photographic Dynamic Range charts, you will see that the A7C and the A7III have better PDR than the A1, the A7RIV, the A9, the A9II, the A7RII, and the A7RIII.
While the A7C and the A7III share best-in-class image quality, the A7C has better autofocus than the A7III. The A7C shares one of Sony's latest AF systems with the A7SIII. It is superb AF and a very strong version of Real Time Tracking and Eye-AF.
The A7C offers some of Sony's best image-making technology in a small, lightweight package.
chiron wrote:
The point I was discussing is not when the sensor was introduced but how good the image quality is. The A7C and the A7III have about the best image quality of Sony's cameras. If you go to Bill Claff's site, Photons to Photos, and check the Photographic Dynamic Range charts, you will see that the A7C and the A7III have better PDR than the A1, the A7RIV, the A9, the A9II, the A7RII, and the A7RIII.
While the A7C and the A7III share best-in-class image quality, the A7C has better autofocus than the A7III. The A7C shares one of Sony's latest AF systems with the A7SIII. It is superb AF and a very strong version of Real Time Tracking and Eye-AF.
The A7C offers some of Sony's best image-making technology in a small, lightweight package. ...Show more →
Not quite…the a7r3, a7r4 (and a7r) have higher PDR than the a7c according to Photons to Photos and an appreciable resolution bump. But, the A7c IQ is still fantastic, and the AF and small package are fabulous.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Not quite…the a7r3, a7r4 (and a7r) have higher PDR than the a7c according to Photons to Photos and an appreciable resolution bump. But, the A7c IQ is still fantastic, and the AF and small package are fabulous.
The A7C does in fact have better PDR than the A7RIV, the A7RIII, and the A7R (as well as better PDR than the A1, A9, A9II, and A7RII). The A7RIII comes closest, but the A7C still edges it out.
chiron wrote:
The A7C does in fact have better PDR than the A7RIV, the A7RIII, and the A7R (as well as better PDR than the A1, A9, A9II, and A7RII). The A7RIII comes closest, but the A7C still edges it out.
I was not looking at the overall PDR, but the max PDR which is more important to me but now I see what you mean as other might prefer higher PRD across the range. Either way, all excellent options.
