Maxxus it really is strange. From the beginning it appeared Sony was going for the gold in the mirrorless arena especially with updates.....I remember well the first a9 update and I was blown away THEN Sony gave us yet another. At that time a firmware update with Canon meant, as you alluded (or someone up above), meant $6K on a new body. The firmware update schemata has turned upside down with Sony now on the bottom.
It's like civilizations...one rules for a while, gets fat complacent and lazy then is toppled/invaded/inflated to death.
But I had a good run with Sony, sticking with them (and Olympus) because I'm too old to resist the invaders/love the Nikon Z8 and 400/4.5 but my Nikon ship has sailed.
In the selfish pity picture I can look at my Flickr albums and say when it's all over that I tried haha!
In the bigger picture Sony has only hurt itself and in the end probably will watch the gold slip through their fingers.
Hejnar has received the OEM foot I sent him.
If anyone else is interested this may be a good time
to incentivize him, or maybe just let me have the custom
foot all to myself
But he is modeling the foot this weekend/I assume he uses
an auto-cad type program.
Maybe others would like to give their input.
This -> "It's like civilizations...one rules for a while, gets fat complacent and lazy then is toppled/invaded/inflated to death."
-- Couldn't have said it any better! Curious, what did you not like about the Z8/400 combo? I am considering that setup (or Z8/ 600pf) myself, would love to hear about any downsides with this combo. Of course I'll have to sell my A1, and I love that camera. It Will be painful to let it go. For me, the issue is Sonys lack of mid range primes along with the firmware support issues. Thanks and take care
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Maxxus it really is strange. From the beginning it appeared Sony was going for the gold in the mirrorless arena especially with updates.....I remember well the first a9 update and I was blown away THEN Sony gave us yet another. At that time a firmware update with Canon meant, as you alluded (or someone up above), meant $6K on a new body. The firmware update schemata has turned upside down with Sony now on the bottom.
It's like civilizations...one rules for a while, gets fat complacent and lazy then is toppled/invaded/inflated to death.
But I had a good run with Sony, sticking with them (and Olympus) because I'm too old to resist the invaders/love the Nikon Z8 and 400/4.5 but my Nikon ship has sailed.
In the selfish pity picture I can look at my Flickr albums and say when it's all over that I tried haha!
In the bigger picture Sony has only hurt itself and in the end probably will watch the gold slip through their fingers.
Max, I've got zero problem with the Z8. A dear friend has one and abs. loves it.
She has the 400/4.5 and loves it even more.
I'm just too old now to be flipping systems. My Nikon heyday was with the D500+500PF (even
though at the time I also had the D850 and a IDXii/EOS 500ISii etc.)
The Sony a9 changed everything. Just think, there would be no Z7,Z8,Z9 or any of the latest
EOS bodies if Sony had not lit a fire under the CaniKon arse with the a9.
Anyway, I'm with Sony until the end (and Olympus), and speaking of Olympus, the newest body
the OMs OM-1ii is freaking amazing and just plain fun.
Like many though, if I was starting new I'd go Nikon just for the lenses offered.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Max, I've got zero problem with the Z8. A dear friend has one and abs. loves it.
She has the 400/4.5 and loves it even more.
I'm just too old now to be flipping systems. My Nikon heyday was with the D500+500PF (even
though at the time I also had the D850 and a IDXii/EOS 500ISii etc.)
The Sony a9 changed everything. Just think, there would be no Z7,Z8,Z9 or any of the latest
EOS bodies if Sony had not lit a fire under the CaniKon arse with the a9.
Anyway, I'm with Sony until the end (and Olympus), and speaking of Olympus, the newest body
the OMs OM-1ii is freaking amazing and just plain fun.
Like many though, if I was starting new I'd go Nikon just for the lenses offered.
You are probably right, I would still be subjected to the loud clacking sound that the Nikon dslr made when taking a shot, if it had not been for Sony shaking up the market with their mirrorless full frame cameras, as well as having to deal with the AF inconsistencies, and slight blur in many shots caused by the mirror induced shake..... and much more dslr awkwardness.
I have been with Sony since the A7R and they have done a great job evolving.
Sony drove the transition and Canon, but especially Nikon were doing everything to stop it from happening, until they realized it could not be stopped, and then made a frantic u-turn.
But now that Nikon has a complete system for wildlife/birding and other action shooting, there are cracks appearing in my Sony endorsement. I am fascinated by the technical marvel that the A9III is as a camera, but I have zero interest in such ultra-high camera technology. I like the Z8 much better as a well rounded package with an at least acceptable price tag. Sony is hitting everything out of the ballpark, and that goes for the prices as well.
A Z8 with Z800mmPF, Z600mmPF and Z400mm is awefully nice and I wonder if I should make the jump.
The fact that Sigma has to bail Sony out with a middle ground 500mm f5.6, for which Sony thanks them by crippling functionality, ughh.... Sony are starting to be pretty ugly, also with the way they are handling firmware for their flagship.
So Nikon seems much more sympathetic right now, and just much more fun, but that's all so, so relative. Just shoot what you have and enjoy it!!
ChrisMak wrote:
You are probably right, I would still be subjected to the loud clacking sound that the Nikon dslr made when taking a shot, if it had not been for Sony shaking up the market with their mirrorless full frame cameras, as well as having to deal with the AF inconsistencies, and slight blur in many shots caused by the mirror induced shake..... and much more dslr awkwardness.
I have been with Sony since the A7R and they have done a great job evolving.
Sony drove the transition and Canon, but especially Nikon were doing everything to stop it from happening, until they realized it could not be stopped, and then made a frantic u-turn.
But now that Nikon has a complete system for wildlife/birding and other action shooting, there are cracks appearing in my Sony endorsement. I am fascinated by the technical marvel that the A9III is as a camera, but I have zero interest in such ultra-high camera technology. I like the Z8 much better as a well rounded package with an at least acceptable price tag. Sony is hitting everything out of the ballpark, and that goes for the prices as well.
A Z8 with Z800mmPF, Z600mmPF and Z400mm is awefully nice and I wonder if I should make the jump.
The fact that Sigma has to bail Sony out with a middle ground 500mm f5.6, for which Sony thanks them by crippling functionality, ughh.... Sony are starting to be pretty ugly, also with the way they are handling firmware for their flagship.
So Nikon seems much more sympathetic right now, and just much more fun, but that's all so, so relative. Just shoot what you have and enjoy it!! ...Show more →
horses for courses though sony will have to let there grip on 3rd party lenses go ,once canon joins the affray with no limitations on 3rd party,it will happen.It will be like canons equivalent to nikons firmware updates.
I hope you are right and sooner rather than later.
Sigma made a great effort in this 500mm and Sony has only hurt themselves
with their limitations. Hard to be a fanboy when the company you want to support
does this nonsense. If Sony had something in this weight/aperture/sharpness range
then by all means, but they shouldn't penalize another company for doing their job.
A lot of people swaying one way or another will look at these imposed limitations and
say no. I think Sony looses more in this situation then they gain.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I hope you are right and sooner rather than later.
Sigma made a great effort in this 500mm and Sony has only hurt themselves
with their limitations. Hard to be a fanboy when the company you want to support
does this nonsense. If Sony had something in this weight/aperture/sharpness range
then by all means, but they shouldn't penalize another company for doing their job.
A lot of people swaying one way or another will look at these imposed limitations and
say no. I think Sony looses more in this situation then they gain.
Maybe they can tighten things up before they loose even more...
Seriously, though, it's not as if Sony made those restrictions with this lens in mind. This lens didn't exist when those agreements were made. Most likely, they were trying to protect lenses like their own 70-200.
For anyone not too far committed to Sony and looking around, I think Nikon Z8 and their lenses become a real alternative.
I have trouble seeing what in the Sony line of lenses they are trying to protect.
Lotuselite wrote:
For anyone not too far committed to Sony and looking around, I think Nikon Z8 and their lenses become a real alternative.
I have trouble seeing what in the Sony line of lenses they are trying to protect.
Hejnar is computer modeling the replacement foot for the Sig500/5.6. The model
he sent looks good/typical Hejnar work.
Deeper for those with thick fingers or who where gloves.
Longer for more comfy 'handle' use AND attaching a Kirk Security Strap with
enough room left over for a flash mount or tripod/monopod mounting without removing
the Kirk mount.
Hole drilled into the back of the foot plate for a Peak Design anchor or Op/Tec Uni-loop
to pass through.
Just a guess, but I'd bet by the end of the week he'll have something in production.
Bob thanks,
Per habit I separated (subject selection in PScc) the RBWP and the branch
from the background, then ran NIK denoise only on the background.
Resized the photo and was done.
My best friend who is also a Sony shooter asked me about TC's. I told him the sad
news and about the frame rate for the A1 shooters like him. He's one who is looking at Nikon
these days too but at the same time he asked if I was keeping the 600/4. I told him the Sig500/5.6
is no 600 but surprisingly close in sharpness.....at least to my eye and my copies. I'm sure others
see things differently, but in relation to the RBWP posted, I saw no reason to apply any sharpening.
Today finally put the A1 on the Sigma 500/5.6.
The bushes behind the Blue J, for those bokeh curious, is right at 10 feet from where the bird was
landing in one of the shots.
The brown bokeh behind the Blue J en route is pine needles.
I'll spare you all all the in between shots. The Blue J was on a low stump 20 feet from the feeding array.
Would be nice to have Oly's pro-capture but I followed/the A1 tracked from the launch to the turn and landing on
the three shots with the clearer background.
ILCE-1500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | Sports 024 lens500mmf/6.31/2000s640 ISO-1.3 EV
ILCE-1500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | Sports 024 lens500mmf/8.01/2000s1000 ISO-1.3 EV
ILCE-1500mm F5.6 DG DN OS | Sports 024 lens500mmf/8.01/2500s2000 ISO-1.3 EV
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Thanks Bob, eternally evolving process
Today finally put the A1 on the Sigma 500/5.6.
The bushes behind the Blue J, for those bokeh curious, is right at 10 feet from where the bird was
landing in one of the shots.
The brown bokeh behind the Blue J en route is pine needles.
I'll spare you all all the in between shots. The Blue J was on a low stump 20 feet from the feeding array.
Would be nice to have Oly's pro-capture but I followed/the A1 tracked from the launch to the turn and landing on
the three shots with the clearer background.
