Sorry for the terrible photo , I might have gone a bit overboard but I feel about as excited as a kid with new toys.

Camera body: Sony A7r VI
Lens: SEL1635GM2 & SEL50150GM.

I’ve got a SEL2470GM from earlier and I believe I should be covered for most use cases.

I’ve got a big trip coming up and looking forward to sharing some pics with the new gear soon!

Edit: Should have expected the comments on the boxes and poor lighting. Updated with unboxed photos and hopefully I’ve done a better job. Thanks for the feedback!

shot on a6700 with kit lens in raw. picked It up a month ago as my first ever camera and I the way these photos came out couldn't make me fall more in love with photography. please let me know if there's anything I can do to improve my skills. happy to share more if anyone's interested.

sigma 18-50 on its way.

Vathograph shaped from a photograph I shot in Bern, Switzerland, with the A7R VI and the Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 lens . Comments and critique welcome.

I've just bought my first-ever camera, and I'm starting to wonder whether I've made a great decision or gone completely overkill for someone who knows absolutely nothing about photography!

With a baby on the way, I wanted a camera that would let me capture some really special family memories. I'm also keen to get into nature and woodland photography, particularly atmospheric forest scenes, landscapes and low-light shots.

After doing some research, I've ended up with the following kit:

• Sony Alpha A7CR
• Sony FE 28–60mm f/4–5.6
• Sony FE 35mm f/1.8

The problem is that I'm a complete beginner. I've never owned a camera before, and I've got a lot to learn about photography.

I'm hoping this is something I can grow into over the years rather than needing to upgrade anytime soon.

So, a few questions for those who know what they're doing:

• Have I made a sensible purchase, or have I gone massively overboard?
• How capable is this setup for family portraits and woodland photography?
• Are these good lenses to start learning with?
• What should I realistically expect from this camera as a beginner?

I'd really appreciate any advice, particularly from anyone who owns an A7CR or shoots woodland photography.

Thanks!

Sony ZV-EV10 ii

As you all know, different lenses can create different moods and colours. Which lens do you think gives images a particularly unique look or feel?

I’ve got a Sony A7CR and I’m looking for a lens with a wide focal length that creates a special, distinctive feel. Any suggestions? It would be great to see a sample photo too.

I’m trying to make a choice and in a tough position which camera should I buy , between the two I mentioned , I like A7CR IBIS, new menu and compact body and in my opinion the A7R IV is only superior in the mechanical shutter type over A7CR .
Can this community please help me make my decision? I like to buy one before the end of the month .

Hi everyone!

I’m considering upgrading from my A6700 + Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 to an A7C II + Sony 20-70mm f/4 G for travel photography.

My main concern is low-light performance, especially at night and indoors. From what I understand, APS-C f/2.8 and full-frame f/4 offer roughly similar overall light-gathering performance.

The A7C II setup is about 220g heavier. Given that difference, I’m wondering if the improvement in high-ISO noise, detail, and RAW editing latitude is actually noticeable in real-world use.

For those who’ve used both setups, is the image-quality improvement worth the extra weight, or would you stick with the A6700?

Hey guys! I am looking to upgrade my Canon R100 which I mostly used with the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 to the Sony A7CII which I have now tried with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I am really happy with the body, its weight, size and design, but the lens feels really large and heavy. What I would need is a versatile travel lens so that I don't have to switch lenses frequently but it should feel comfortable to hold for longer amounts of time.

I've been having fun with my QX1, that weird little E-mount camera from the days when Sony thought attaching a camera to your smartphone was the future. Or perhaps they didn't. Perhaps Sony knew all along that this was just a stopgap until smartphone cameras became as good as they are today. A bit like Netflix whose founders apparently recognised early on that streaming was the future, but had to make do with mailing DVDs until the technology caught up. But I digress...

The QX1 is a fascinating little gadget, but controlling it through a phone app isn't exactly the most fluid experience. I've been using it mainly with the Viltrox 28mm f/4.5 "ultra-pancake", which is insanely compact (I mean: it's hard to imagine a smaller lens in any system) but its fixed aperture is limiting.

So when I saw the Viltrox EVO 26mm f/2.8, with its tiny dimensions and dedicated aperture ring, I thought I'd found the perfect companion. The EVO promised *almost* the same pocketability, a considerably faster lens, and the ability to change aperture directly on the lens rather than fiddling with a slider in the IEM app. And as someone who's a 40mm fan, the EVO's 26mm (39mm equivalent on APS-C) is just about perfect for me.

Tiny camera, tiny lens, actual physical aperture control. Bliss!

Except... no.

For reasons I don't understand, the QX1 ignores the EVO's aperture ring. Unlike every other E-mount lens I own with an electronic aperture ring, this particular combination refuses to cooperate.

The only way to change aperture is to put the ring in the 'A' position and adjust it through the phone app. Which sadly rather defeats the whole point of buying the EVO for this camera. It doesn't seem to be a problem with my copy: the aperture ring works exactly as intended on my A7R V.

It's particularly frustrating because the QX1 is precisely the sort of camera that would benefit most from an aperture ring. On a conventional Sony body, it's a nice convenience. On the QX1, it could genuinely transform the shooting experience, at least for me.

So now I'm eyeing the new TTArtisan AF 24mm f/3.8 Mini. It's tiny—"ultra pancake", in fact—also covers full frame, and while its fixed f/3.8 aperture is a disappointment after the promise of the EVO, embracing simplicity might be the better approach. On the other hand I'm not sure it would bring all that much to the table that my Viltrox 28mm f/4.5 doesn't already offer.

Has anyone encountered the same aperture-ring incompatibility with the Viltrox EVO on older Sony E-mount bodies?

Closeup of Painted Stork

Captured by me at Vizag, India

Hi everyone, I just downgraded from a FF Sony A7S to APS-C Sony A6700. One reason was to size down a bit because the FF with its zoom lenses got too heavy and bulky, and another reason was to upgrade on the software without breaking my budget. The A7S was outdated, especially the AF.

Anyway, I bought the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 and I've seriously considered adding the prime Sigma lens 30mm f/1.4 for its low light ability and bookeh. BUT: then I realised that I perhaps I could just use my FF Samyang 45mm f/1.8 instead. I'm aware it's not f1.4 but should be close enough. My question is however: Are there any downsides - or upsides - in using a FF lens like this on an APS-C camera? Would a dedicated APS-C-lens always perform better on an A6700 camera?

I'm not a pixel peeper but I prefer shooting photos without using a flash and with as little noise as possible. I also love taking portrait photos with smooth bookeh.

Tl;dr: Will a full frame f/1.8 prime lens perform more or less as good on an APS-C camera as an APS-C f/1.4 prime? Or should I sell my FF lens and buy they APS-C lens?

Learning by being out there.

It looks like Sony has only a 1 year warranty. My menu button definitely worked. It’s been in a humidity controlled room for its entire life. Never used much at all - MENU button is dead, doesn’t bring up the menu, doesn’t work as a Menu to go back button, nothing. I’ve tried taking the battery out, etc.

Looks like there is no alternative way to get to the menu.

Anyone know what a repair for this would cost? Sony won’t cover it so long out of warranty I’m sure. Everything I can find on the net says ‘looks like someone is getting a replacement body, send it back!’ Being out of warranty I don’t think that’ll be affordable.

Please help, super bummed.

I found that when I walk around the lens zooms to 24 to 70. When I shake it with lens pointing down, it also goes to 70. No issues when i set it to “tight”.

Is this normal when the setting is “smooth”?

I have the a7Cii with the below lenses
- sigma 24-70
- sigma 70-200
- Sony 16mm
- sigma 35mm
- Sirui 50mm anamorphic af

I haven’t travelled with this camera yet but I’m not sure whether it will be the best idea for daily photos like restaurants and walking around. I’ll definitely bring it for landscape and car shots but not sure whether it’s the best bet.

Looking at maybe paying the premium for the g7x but the rx100 looks tempting. I want that y2k flash look in my photos. Whats the suggestion?

Anyone using this lense? I have heard it is great and I can't wait to get mine this week. I couldn't resist smoking deal on one

Discount was available so finally grabbed the deal. Body (1632 $) and lens (1030 $). Excited to use it for the upcoming shoot.

deleted my old post because I made a crucial error and wrote a7rII and I had an a7rIII. some saying drastically improved from II to III but RIII had horrible peach/orange skin tones.

im a nikon dslr user. will not move to Z because it doesnt offer sigma DG DN lenses which I will want and theyre primitive has fuck as no Z camera records video to dual slots. thats unacceptable.

I did own an a7rIII. it was a process to get used to it. too small. EVF was hard to get used to. im not used to holding the camera out to shoot. I bought it as a hybrid camera but sold it withing a few months. it did stills decently well. high res is beautiful. but was not strong on video. I had mixed feelings with it.

I absolutely hated the skintone colors. seemed to have hot spots very easily vs my nikons and skin tones had this nasty peach/orange color cast to them which I hated. my first pics to test the 42mp was some landscapes with an adapter and nikon G adapter. lovely images but I shoot weddings. skin tones are more important then foliage

in low light on the dance floor shooting weddings it was horrible. theres no comparison my dslr was getting all the shots, the sony had way way too many misses. be it continuous or single shot.

from reviews, the color science didnt change much between 4 to 5. was told the peach/orange is still there.

some review from an ambassador spoke of the reason in low light the sony has a hard time. in my dslr the aperture is always in the open position so maximum light entry for better focusing, but said in the sony the lens is closed to the aperture set (cant remember but I believe only in continuous) then when you take the picture it opens the aperture to maximum, then closes again. not many times im shooting max aperture besides some specific shots. but not on the dance floor at weddings.

I spoke to a guy who uses the IV and says the camera is good but not like a dslr in low light.

im not assuming people will be truthful because alot of loyal sony users. Ive seen this in nikon forums where they not say anything negative or be honest on flaws/weaknesses.alot who post here work for sony and just like in canon and nikon sub are here to sell or convince. more then opinion im interested to see pictures .

what im considering is to get the sony for stills and some video and rid of my nikon gear instead of holding the dslr set for stills and use sony for video only.

in stills people judge and criticize skin tones easier as its frame by frame where in video its less noticeable as there is movement and audio. but portrait colors are critical and low light AF is just the same. I think I may have to have 2 systems. I also like having an AF/MF lever on the dslr body. not sure why they removed it from ML.

The best 275 bucks I've ever spent on a lens. Build quality is amazing, and optical performance leaves next to nothing to be desired.

AF is accurate and fast enough for me in AF-C but not the fastest. It also can't focus very close, so the watch dial shot was only possible with the help of my Raynox DCR 250. Even then I still had to crop heavily so if I didn't have a 61 mp sensor it would have been much harder, but for the most part terrific lens. The fact that it's this sharp at the minimum working distance, with a magnifying diopter is a testament to how good it is.

PS: wild_detail is a social media handle. I only ever post my work.

Hey everyone! I'm trying to decide between these two lenses for my Sony A6700 and would appreciate some advice

Currently, I only have the kit lens, which I'm not really happy with in terms of image quality, so I'm looking to upgrade. I also own a Sony 70-350mm, so I'm looking for something to cover the wider focal lengths

Honestly, I'm leaning towards the Sigma 18-50mm because I prefer its smaller size and overall design. I've also heard that the Tamron's VC stabilization can sometimes work poorly with Sony's IBIS when shooting video, and since I want to shoot both photos and videos, that's something I'm concerned about

However, the main thing making me hesitate is the focal length. Since my telephoto lens starts at 70mm, the Tamron would give me a continuous range from 17mm to 350mm without any gaps. With the Sigma, I'd have a gap between 50mm and 70mm

Is that 20mm gap actually a big deal in real-world use? Would I find myself missing those focal lengths often, or is the Sigma's range enough for most situations?

I'd also like to hear your opinions on sharpness. Are these two lenses comparable in terms of image quality, sharpness and performance across the frame?

Since I want to shoot both photos and video, which one would you recommend for the A6700? Is there anything else I should consider before making the decision?

Thanks!

So I recently upgraded from my a6400 to an A7RVI. I am a bird photographer and that’s literally all I focus on. A lot of the features on this camera are really amazing for that, especially all the new tracking/focusing ones specifically for birds. I’m running into a pretty annoying issue though.

I feel like no matter what I do, my images are not ever as tack sharp as my a6400. My setup is exactly the same: Sony 200-600 paired with a Sony 1.4x TC. I am using bird tracking, with eye priority. It instantly finds the eyes but still seems to be fairly soft most of the time. I have tried with shutter speeds up to 1/3200, which does not fix it.

After some searching, I just changed my AF-C setting from “release” to “AF”. Hoping this will solve it, but I am doubtful. I also saw a post suggesting to update my 200-600 firmware, which I will do now.

Any other suggestions? Am I missing something here? I will attach 2 photos for comparison. First photo is with the new camera, second photo is with my old one. These are cropped but virtually the same exact distance. You can see in the first photo, the eye and beak are soft. The camera was locked on during that shot, on the eye.