duncangr wrote:
Skip the Sigma 500 - you will regret that purchase if you get and A1 or A9iii and find you are limited to 15fps. The 300 /f2.8 + 2xTC or 400-800 or 200-600 would be a better option I think.
A7r5 + 200-600 is very very sharp. Seems to be a better pair than A1 + 200-600, except of course for fast action.
I think I will be happy with the Sigma 500 prime. I have tried the 200-600 and it’s quite heavy, in the camera store I tried it and after about 10 minutes it was enough and I was wanting to put it down (I might just be feeble and weak). I am also a non-believer of having to have a camera which is capable of 20-30-120fps as the vast majority of wildlife I get to shoot are relatively static (perched birds, occasional zoo animals) so I don’t do the birds in flight thing which would perhaps warrant more speed in that regard. Having said that if I do end up getting a faster body 15 fps is more than enough for me to continue using the sigma Of course the 200-600 is quite cheap comparatively in the world of photography so I might get one later for more static shooting (hide based).
photo325 wrote:
I think I will be happy with the Sigma 500 prime. I have tried the 200-600 and it’s quite heavy, in the camera store I tried it and after about 10 minutes it was enough and I was wanting to put it down (I might just be feeble and weak). I am also a non-believer of having to have a camera which is capable of 20-30-120fps as the vast majority of wildlife I get to shoot are relatively static (perched birds, occasional zoo animals) so I don’t do the birds in flight thing which would perhaps warrant more speed in that regard. Having said that if I do end up getting a faster body 15 fps is more than enough for me to continue using the sigma Of course the 200-600 is quite cheap comparatively in the world of photography so I might get one later for more static shooting (hide based). ...Show more →
I had the 200-600mm, beautiful lens, but I reached a point where I was no longer having fun carrying and holding it for long periods. The Sigma 500mm is shockingly light and small and easy to handhold all day, and the IQ is gorgeous. I don’t think you will regret it.
Another astro note, not lens-related, but related to your comment that you would consider the A1 or other Sony bodies.
Make sure you figure out how to turn on Bright Monitoring on your A7R5 when shooting astro. Bright Monitoring will illuminate the viewfinder/back screen, which makes it easier to find stars, focus, and compose a shot in the dark. It toggles on and off. I map it to my AEL button, which makes it easy to engage and disengage in the dark.
I haven't shot the A7R5, but I have shot astro on the A1 and A9. The A1's viewfinder is not well suited for astro if you use Bright Monitoring because no matter how I configure it, it still seems to display at a very laggy framerate (i.e., 5fps), which makes it harder to nail focus in the dark. Not sure if the A7R5 has the same issue, but it may be worth exploring. The A9 does not appear to have this issue.
The flippy screen on the A7R5 will help a lot with portrait panos. Neither the A1 or A9 have flippy screens and it sucks. If you find that the A7R5 night shots are too noisy and you still have money to burn, I have heard from a very reputable astro photographer that the A74 is a great astro camera with decent resolution (33MP). It has a flippy screen too. He also shoots the A7S3 and swears by it too (12MP).
After looking into both, I chose the Sony 70-200 F4 G over the 70-200 2.8 GM II. The savings in weight/comfort and $$ outweighed the wider aperture of the GM, since I don't do much low-light work. Both lenses play nicely with the 1.4 TC. The 70-200 F4 has become a favorite for macro, portraits, medium reach.
I use, and am very happy with, the 24 1.4 GM and the 50 mm 1.4 GM. The 24 mm is extraordinary IQ, and I find I don't need wider for landscapes. The 50 mm is also superb, and is my main everyday lens. It's pretty easy to put one on the body and carry the other, switching as necessary, and I find I prefer "thinking" in 24 mm or 50 mm rather than zooming in or out.
That said, I am keeping a lookout for the forthcoming Samyang/Schneider-Kreuznach 24-60 F2.8, given the positive reviews of their recent 14-24
photo325 wrote:
I think I will be happy with the Sigma 500 prime. I have tried the 200-600 and it’s quite heavy, in the camera store I tried it and after about 10 minutes it was enough and I was wanting to put it down (I might just be feeble and weak). I am also a non-believer of having to have a camera which is capable of 20-30-120fps as the vast majority of wildlife I get to shoot are relatively static (perched birds, occasional zoo animals) so I don’t do the birds in flight thing which would perhaps warrant more speed in that regard. Having said that if I do end up getting a faster body 15 fps is more than enough for me to continue using the sigma Of course the 200-600 is quite cheap comparatively in the world of photography so I might get one later for more static shooting (hide based). ...Show more →
Fair enough, the A7R5 is perfectly adequate for medium/large birds in flight and the image quality is unmatched. Just be sure to use Mechanical Shutter and set the camera to H not H+. H will give you a live view EVF, while H+ will result in a lag in the EVF which will make keeping the subject in the EVF difficult.
Even with H once you press the shutter button the camera will not be that reliable at maintaining focus but with enough patience and if you time things well you can still get the shot you want.
I’d recommend the Sony 35mm GM f/1.4 It’s the lens I enjoy taking out all by itself. It’s a focal length that really matches how I tend to see scenes.
When I go out with two lenses, it’s usually the 35 paired with the 70-200 GM II. Sometimes I swap the 35 for Sony’s 50mm f/1.2, which is another incredible lens.
duncangr wrote:
Fair enough, the A7R5 is perfectly adequate for medium/large birds in flight and the image quality is unmatched. Just be sure to use Mechanical Shutter and set the camera to H not H+. H will give you a live view EVF, while H+ will result in a lag in the EVF which will make keeping the subject in the EVF difficult.
Even with H once you press the shutter button the camera will not be that reliable at maintaining focus but with enough patience and if you time things well you can still get the shot you want.
Thanks for the advice duncangr it’s nuggets like that which will save me a lot of time and frustration. I think I will have a bit of a learning curve when the camera gets here. Quick start guides like another user recommended might be a good idea when it gets here. Storing different profiles to the custom profile spaces (1,2,3) looks like a good idea. Perhaps one for wildlife, one for general shooting and one for macro. A lot of reading and watching to do. I ordered memory cards and spare Sony batteries yesterday oh and a peak design strap and card reader for compact flash type A.
photo325 wrote:
Thanks for the advice duncangr it’s nuggets like that which will save me a lot of time and frustration. I think I will have a bit of a learning curve when the camera gets here. Quick start guides like another user recommended might be a good idea when it gets here. Storing different profiles to the custom profile spaces (1,2,3) looks like a good idea. Perhaps one for wildlife, one for general shooting and one for macro. A lot of reading and watching to do. I ordered memory cards and spare Sony batteries yesterday oh and a peak design strap and card reader for compact flash type A....Show more →
The very first thing you want to learn about is Zebras for exposure control. Enable Zebras and assign it to a button so you can toggle it on or off quickly if needed (which is rarely). Set it to lower limit 107 and you will almost always have perfectly exposed subjects when used with manual exposure.
For wildlife you should be able to set the camera up similar to an A1 or A1ii or A9iii - I have setup guides for the A1 and A9iii which cover the basics available to download from my web site and on Apple Store (books) .
Good luck and enjoy, and be sure to get yourself a 27" 5K or 32" 6K retina display to view your images on, the detail is impressive.
Maybe you'll find it useful. There is a lot of instructional material and setup recommendations out there if you go looking for it. In fact it is a little overwhelming at first, since Sony has so many options and customization. Hang in there, it is worth it.
For street/walking around I highly recommend the 24-50/2.8 G. Yes, it needs software correction in Lightroom, but it has parked my 24/2.8G and 40/2.5G since I got it. I have owned and used the 20-70/4G and 24-105/4G, both are nice (but I do think the latter is pretty long in the tooth and warrants an update by now). In reality, I prefer having the f/2.8 in a smaller/lighter package.
If you also want to include longer, I'd go with the Sigma 24-70/2.8 II to save some money, or if you have unlimited funds, do go for the absolute stellar 24-70/2.8 GM II - the IQ on these modern lenses with sharpness, micro-contrast, well controlled, et - perhaps almost too clinical.
Personally, I like switching to an 85/1.8 or f/1.4 when I need a bit more reach or isolation.
Capture One correction profiles are built in house for specific lenses, but a lens not being listed does not mean it is not corrected at all. For many lenses, correction information is embedded in the RAW image file.If Capture One does not have an explicit profile, it will default to this embedded metadata if present. I actually have some lenses where I prefer the embedded profile over the Capture One profile.
All that said, the 24-50/2.8 is not listed as an explicit profile under lens correction in my up-to-date Capture One. But I would be pretty surprised if embedded correction metadata is not present. I don't have the lens, but if you get hold of a RAW image you could test this pretty easily by playing with the Lens Correction tool.
Camera and lenses arrived today so I have spent the evening putting in the suggested settings by the various guides. So hopefully it’s configured loosely correct. I have charged up the three batteries ready to give it ago tomorrow lunchtime. I did do a couple of test shots and everything looks very sharp. In terms of Sony RAW files are there any specific tools which provide an advantage for RAW processing ? With Fuji there was a tool called x-transformer which converted to .dng and extracted extra details. Is there something similar for Sony or do you just pop them into photoshop ?
I would guess the majority of people here (maybe everywhere) use a photo editor, with Lightroom being the most popular. You don't generally need to do much of anything other than perhaps an import process within the editor, and some don't even require that. Or if you want to just use Photoshop I think you pull them in with ACR (Adobe Camera Raw?), but that is outside my knowledge.
I would guess the Fuji workflow was due to the X-Trans sensor as a lot of editors do not support that directly, but often can handle DNGs.
The subject of RAW editors often stirs up a heated debate. Lightroom is the market heavyweight by far. I use Capture One but that's me and I know of other users who hang out here. Most of the popular ones out there have a 7 to 30-day free trial, which is basically the full product with a limited time license key, or no license key at all. Or you can stick with Photoshop I suppose. There are some free photo editors as well. Darktable comes to mind, RawTherapee is another one that also has been used as a basis for yet other free editors whose names escape me at the moment. I find the free/open source editors are usually fairly capable, but with a less intuitive user interface and a steeper learning curve. You'll have to decide how you prefer to proceed.
Here’s a shot I took this morning using the Sigma 500mm f5.6 still tweaking the focus / tracking for some reason the forum is showing a reduced res version
rob_ww wrote:
I moved to Sony (from Leica about 4 years ago). You will love it. The sensors are wonderful. The AF is fantastic -- so reliable I don't ever need to check, or even to use the viewfinder at all for some shots. The user interface is a complicated mess, but once you have it set the way you like it, that stops being important.
Having worked through a fair collection of lenses in this new Sony world, I have settled on the Sony G 24-50/2.8 small zoom as my main walkaround lens. It's hardly larger than a typical prime lens and with that wonderful sensor f2.8 is not a problem, unless you really want to blur the background. You can also crop to APS-C in camera to get a 75mm EFOV if needed, and still have plenty of pixels.
I did have a Batis 18/2.8 as my widest lens but am just replacing it with the Sony G 16-35/4.0 PZ. Very similar proposition to the 24-50 but with emphasis on the wider end. I still love the Batis range of lenses, but I can leave the 16-35 on my camera all day and have wide-angle on tap when needed. I still love the Batis range of lenses for Sony, but that's another conversation!
I moved from Leica because my eyesight deteriorated to the point where I could no longer MF reliably. And at the time Leica AF was relatively poor. Since then I have had my cataracts treated and would seriously consider going back to MF with a Leica M. What is tempting you to go in the other direction?
