What is it with me and Sony?

In my last post I talked about getting ready to shoot a wedding, and the gear that I was planning on using for it. I had my Sony a77ii and a bag of lenses that I was looking forward to putting through their paces on a wedding day. Good times ahead....

Because the a77ii was a very recent purchase, and the bag full of lenses hadn't been used for quite a while, I decided to do due diligence and test everything before the big day. And boy am I glad I did! 

Te Kinga Macrocarpas. Sony a77ii. f/8 A 1/200th, ISO 100

To cut a very long (and very stressful) story short, it seemed that most of the lenses I had 'acquired' for the a77ii were past their best and badly in need of calibration. I've already discussed in previous posts how I've decided to build an A-mount Sony kit around the very generous gifting of a camera bag full (literally) of Minolta and Sony lenses. Well it seems like I may have been a little hasty in my decision.

I'm not going to cram this post full of slightly un-sharp photos just to prove a point, but basically that's what I was getting with the lenses I had. With a couple of exceptions.

The Minolta 85mm f1.4 was bitingly sharp. Ironically, for portraiture, you might even say it was a bit too sharp! The same goes for the Minolta 50mm f2.8 macro used as a regular 50mm lens. Incredibly sharp on my a77ii. So I know the camera can produce sharp images - with the right lenses.

But try as I might (and believe me, I did try), all the zoom lenses I had for the a77ii just didn't cut the mustard (as they say). For some they were sharp at the long end, but not so sharp at the wide end - and for others it was the exact opposite! The Minolta 24-70mm F2.8D wasn't sharp at all, at any focal length. While the Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8 and Sony Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 were just 'so-so'.

I took so many 'test shots' (thanks to my wife for being a willing(?) and very patient model) and poured over so many images at 100% that I started second-guessing myself and tying myself up in knots! One moment I'd think everything was 'soft', and the next I'd decide that some of them weren't 'too' bad. But were any of them good enough to shoot a wedding with? I didn't think so....

Rapahoe Relics. Sony a77ii. f/11 @ 1/50th, ISO 100

With only a week to go, and no lenses that I was happy with (other than an 85mm and 50mm prime), I was in panic mode. And wishing I hadn't agreed to shoot the damn wedding! But, once again, my mate Stew came to the rescue. Since I was getting all of his 'old' gear, and he was replacing it with new E-mount gear, he let me borrow his new Sony a7iii and Sony 24-105mm f4 to shoot the wedding with. Whew!

And again, long story short - it worked perfectly! Of course. In fact it was a joy to use. And I'm even getting used to the Sony A7 series ergonomics! So I'm getting one - right?

Hold that thought for a moment. Because yes, I have decided that the Sony A-mount system is obviously not for me. The a57 with the sensor alignment issue was the start of my A-mount woes. And although the a77ii is an amazing piece of kit, getting lenses for it has proven to be somewhat of a challenge. As much as I want to love the system, it seems the powers that be have other ideas.

So what's next, you may ask? And that, dear reader, is a very good question. Perhaps it's already been answered with my favourable experience with the Sony a7iii? But there are a couple of things that give me pause to jump straight into the Sony E-mount system.

First, it's a Sony. Duh! Do I really want to continue to tempt fate with my Sony woes? Who's to say these won't extend into the E-Mount system? And while no - I'm not a suspicious person by nature - this seems too much like out of the frying pan....

Trapdoor Spider. Sony a77ii with Minolta 100mm f2.8 macro. f/18 @ 1/4sec, ISO 400

The good thing about switching to the Sony E-mount is that it's a) full frame, and b) fairly plentiful on the used market. I could pick up an a7ii body for about $1k, and then have to figure out what lens to put with it (and how I'm going to afford it!?).

Then again, I could go back to my old flame - micro four thirds. A used Olympus E-M1 mk2 with a lens would be about the same price as an a7ii body - and further lenses down the track are surprisingly affordable.

But you know what... I think I've had it with second-hand gear! Recently it feels like I've just been inheriting somebody else's problems, and I'm getting tired of it. I'm also getting old, and frankly fed up with changing systems all of the time - even when there have been good reason to. I want a system, and a camera, that I can 'hang my hat on' so to speak - and grow old with. So yes, I think I'm going to buy new this time (and for the last time).

No, I haven't won the lottery, or fallen into a big pit of money. But my wife and my circumstances have changed recently. I've started a new job this year, with a bit more pay, so I think it's now or never! All I have to do is decide what my 'forever' camera system will be - oh, and convince my wife that it's a good idea! One of those things will be easier than the other 😳😂

Pre-focusing for action photography

Every year in the town where I live, they put on a motorcycle street race event. It's always over a long weekend (Labour Day here in NZ), and it's always a great day out. Especially if we get a warm spring day.

Fortunately, the weather Gods were smiling on the event this year, and the weather couldn't have been better. So I decided that I was going to attend this year and use the chance to get in a full day of photography - a very rare occasion nowadays. 

Catch me if you can. Sony A7iii with Sony G Master 100-400mm.  f/5.6 @ 1/2500, ISO 400

In my previous post I talked about scoring a bunch of Minolta lenses from a friend (thanks again Stew) to use for the event. Specifically the Minolta 100-400mm f/4.5-6.7 Apo and a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro. I was looking forward to using these on my also borrowed Sony a99.

I have shot this event several times over the years, with a lot of different gear, so I knew that lenses in the vicinity of 200mm would be about right if I wanted to get close to the action. In fact there are places around the track where you can get so close as to almost reach out and touch the riders as they hurtle past at 100mph. I kid you not! I, however, like to keep a slightly safer distance from the action as it unfolds. So the 100-400mm and even the 180mm macro were going to be about perfect for the whole day.

The observant among you (I'm sure that's everyone who reads this blog) will have noticed by now that the opening image in this post was not taken with the a99 in combination with the two lenses I've just discussed. It was taken with much newer gear that I also had a chance to 'play' with. More on that later.

Knee-scraping action. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

It may, at first glance, seem unusual to take a macro lens to a motorsport event. Macro lenses are for close up photos of bugs and flowers - aren't they? Well yes, they are. But they can also be used as a 'normal' lens. And they also tend to be reasonably fast, and reasonably sharp. For a 180mm focal length, that's a pretty slick combination.

The one thing they maybe aren't, however, is extremely fast focusing. And neither is the 10 year old Sony a99. 6 FPS (frames per second) isn't what you would call blazingly fast. And its continuous autofocus isn't anything spectacular either. It's a fantastic landscape camera. But for fast sports action shooting - not so much.

But then again, I knew this wasn't going to be a problem. Because my favourite technique for shooting these extremely fast action sports is rather old-school. It's known as pre-focusing, and was used by all the sports photographers before this snazzy thing called autofocus tracking was invented. And it's pretty easy to do.

Bascially, just put your camera into manual focus (yes, I know, manual focusing is scary - but bear with me), 'pre-focus' on an area that you know your subject is going to move through, and then fire a burst of images as they move through the pre-focused zone. All in manual focus. Simple. And very effective.

All concentration. Sony a99 with Minolta 100-400mm Apo. f/6.3 @ 1/800th, ISO 640

There's really only one drawback using this method. You have to take a lot of images to make sure you get the sharp frame you are after. Unfortunately this dramatically increases the processing you need to go through afterwards. And I mean dramatically. For example, to get a decent 'hit rate' using this method, I took over 3500 images on the day. That's not a typo. 3500 images! And of that, around 80% are out of focus and will needed to be deleted. I'll probably end up throwing away 3000 images. But at least I'll be left with about 500 sharp ones.

Despite the tedious post-processing that this technique requires, I'm very happy with the results. If you don't have the latest and greatest gear, or a camera system that isn't optimised for fast action autofocusing, then this really should be your go-to technique.

Of course there is a better way. And it's not going to please the 'gear doesn't matter' brigade. Because for some types of photography (in fact for most types) the gear does matter. This was made abundantly clear to me later on in the afternoon.

Out in front. Sony A7iii with Sony G Master 100-400mm. f/5.6 @ 1/1600th, ISO 400

My mate Stewart turned up in the late afternoon to see how I was getting on. We chatted for a while, I told him that I was using the pro-focus technique, and he asked me if I would like to try using his Sony A7iii with Sony 100-400 G Master lens for a while?

Who am I to turn down an offer like that! So of course I said yes - thinking that I would fumble my way through, making a terrible hash of trying to follow and capture the action. OMG - was I wrong!

You can always hear the roar of the bikes approaching before you see them so you have some time to prepare. Stewart told me he had the camera set to focus tracking with a wide autofocus area, so all I needed to do was point and shoot. Yeah - right!

And yeah, he was right! As the first riders came screaming around the bend, I held the camera up to my eye, the focus points instantly locked onto the front rider, and they all lit up green. Click-click-click, the shutter fired in blazingly quick succession, and I had a series of tack-sharp images. All of them!

Need for Speed. Sony A7iii with Sony G Master 100-400mm. f/5.6 @ 1/2000th, ISO 400

I almost couldn't believe the speed and accuracy of the autofocus on the A7iii, paired with the Sony G Master 100-400mm teleophoto. It was mad, crazy, unbelievably fast. And the results were so much sharper than anything I got with the Minolta 100-400mm or Sigma 180mm. Period! I've never used anything quite this fast and accurate before. It was scary good - and exhilarating - I'm not gonna lie. 

It also happens to be over NZ$7k worth of kit! So yeah, there's that.

If you can afford it, and if you need it, then absolutely go for it. If I was doing this for a living it would be a no-brainer.

And for the rest of us mere mortals? Well, there's always the pre-focusing technique. Which does work. It just requires a lot more computer time in order to find the 'keepers' from the rest. 

Oh well. I'd better get back to post-processing then, I guess?

Alive and kicking

It's been 6 months since I last posted on this blog! Why so long?

Well, as my last post described I had a bit of gear trouble, which took a couple of months to work through. My Sony a57's sensor was out of alignment, resulting in blurry images no matter what I did (unless the camera was focused to infinity). The camera store was really good about working this out with me (thanks Greg and the team at Photo & Video in Christchurch). They tried to find me another a57 (or equivalent) to replace the faulty camera - since it wasn't really worth repairing the sensor alignment issue.

Anyhoo - long story short - they couldn't find me a replacement, so I took my Olympus E-M1 back (with two Panasonic kit lenses). I dived back into micro four thirds, and even started a new Wordpress blog about it. So I may not have been writing about photography on this blog, but I have been writing on another.

So why this new post here? What gives?

Greymouth Street Races 2022. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

A few reasons spring to mind -

A) it's about damn time I wrote something on this blog!

B) the Wordpress experiment didn't go all that well. I didn't really enjoy Wordpress as a platform.

C) things are starting to happen again in my photography sphere, and I want to write about them.

and D) it's about damn time I wrote something on this blog!

First things first, you'll notice that the above image, of last weekends (as I write this) street races, wasn't taken on my Olympus E-M1. I still have the Sony a99. And I still enjoy using it. And I still have access to some fantastic lenses for it. So no - I still haven't given up on using the Sony A-mount system. Things have, in fact, got even more muddy in those waters recently. Let me explain....

No.74. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1250th, ISO 200

Stewart - my photographer friend who I can borrow all this Sony gear from (hi Stew), called me recently and asked if I was still interested in using the Sony A-Mount gear. He has moved over fully to Sony E-Mount now, and was wondering whether I wanted his A-Mount gear!

That would be a YES!

We left it at that, but with the Greymouth Street Races coming up, I had an excuse to spend a full day on photography (a rarity). I got back in touch with Stewart and asked if he might have any telephoto lenses I could borrow for the a99. A couple of days before the event Stew turned up at my house with a bag full of lenses and proceeded to hand them to me. Two stood out as useful - a Minolta 100-400mm APO f4.5/6.7 and a Sigma 180mm f3.5 macro. But he also 'gave' me a Minolta 100mm macro (fungi photography here I come!), a Minolta 28-75mm f2.8D (gorgeous), and a beautiful Minolta 85mm f1.4.

See what I mean about being able to get good glass for the Sony A-Mount system! There's no way I could afford to get the equivalent lenses for my Olympus - or any other system, for that matter. I feel very blessed, and very spoilt. But I can't lie, I'm also now a little confused.

No.99. Sony a99 with Minolta 100-400mm APO. f/6.3 @ 1/800th, ISO 640

I've written before on this blog about how much I enjoy using the Sony a99. It's a full-frame beast of a camera, with a tonne of great features, and is a joy to use. But, (there's that but) I've also said that it isn't a camera body that I could base a system around, given that it's had a lot of professional use and is certainly nearing the end of its rated lifespan. So I would need to get another, lighter used a99, or similar, to seriously consider it as my new system going forward.

And there in lies the rub.

For some reason, Sony users here in New Zealand who have mint condition a99's, expect ridiculous prices for them. Far more (and I mean FAR more) than I would expect to have to pay for one. I know they are a good camera, but come on people...

And it doesn't stop their either. I would also consider getting an a77 - their top A-mount APSC body, if not for the fact that it too tends to fetch crazy-stupid prices on the secondhand market. What is it with these Sony users?

No.54. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200 

I guess I'll just have to bide my time and wait for something to come along at the right price? I'm sure it will? 

And even though the Sony A-Mount is a 'dead-end' (discontinued a year ago by Sony), for me it's practically the ideal camera system. I love the weight and feel of a traditional DSLR, but I also really love the 'new' technology that includes electronic viewfinders. The Sony SLT (single lens translucent) technology has both.

I think at this point I'd be crazy not to be thinking about going down the Sony A-Mount route. With my Olympus E-M1, I have the camera body and two Panasonic kit lenses. That's it. With the Sony A-Mount, I have the full-frame a99 (admittedly on its last legs), a Minolta 28-75mm f/2.8D, Minolta 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5D, Minolta 16mm f/2.8 fisheye, Minolta 50mm f/2.8 macro, Minolta 100mm f/2.8 macro, Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro, Minolta 100-400mm f/4.5-6.7 Apo, and last, but by no means least, a Minolta 85mm f1.4. See what I mean.

If I sell my Olympus E-M1 kit, I still won't have enough for a used a77 or a99. Not without selling some other gear, or subsidising the purchase some other way. Like getting money from doing some photography. Which I will be doing shortly 😄

BTW - my next post will be about my day spent using the a99 and various lenses to actually take the street race images that accompany this post. It was an enlightening experience. But that's a story for next time...

Oh no! My Sony a57 is a 'lemon'!

Houston, we have a problem.

In my last post I gave a fairly positive review of the Sony a57 as a landscape photography camera. And I stick by that assessment 100%. On the whole it's well designed, has the right buttons in mostly the right places, and is packed with everything you need. But... there is a problem....

Rapahoe Beach, West Coast. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 4 secs, ISO 100

If you go back over my last few blogposts where I use the a57 as a landscape camera, the above image will be typical. A wide vista, shot at infinity, with a decently small aperture. Can't go wrong really. And the images, as you can see, look great.

But I haven't always loved the images I've been getting out of the a57. Case-in-point, my very first outing when I used the SAL75300 lens to photograph birds (read about that here). I shot about 100 photos that evening, and only came away with two that I thought were even approaching sharp. Not a great hit rate. And in the article, I put it down to the lens not being a stellar performer. 

I've tried a few more times since, photographing birds with the 75-300mm - I even shot using a tripod. And I still couldn't manage a sharp image. So I sold the Sony 75-300mm, thinking that it just wasn't a very sharp lens.

I decided last weekend that I needed to go out and have fun with the a57 - and play 'tourist' for the afternoon. Take a couple of decent lenses (Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G and Minolta 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5) and go out shooting hand-held. Surely with this glass, in decent light, the images would look fantastic?!

Lake Brunner, Moana. Sony a57 with Minolta 17-35mm G lens. f/8 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

I decided to go to one of my favourite places to test out new cameras - Lake Brunner at Moana. It's a beautiful location, at any time of the year, and it's hard to not come away with some 'nice' images. As can be seen from the photo above. I'm a sucker for a jetty, leading out to a lake, with a mountain in the distance (Mt. Te Kinga). Lovely image. Especially when viewed, as it is here, on a website.

But look a little closer - at 100% - at the area where the camera was focused, and the picture tells a different story. Because it's not sharp. At all.

The mountain, at infinity, is in focus - as you would expect it to be. But the jetty, in the place where I actually focused the camera (and received a green confirmation focus light in the viewfinder), isn't sharp. Not even close. And this is with a 'G' lens, at f/8. It should be tack - and I do mean 'tack' sharp! Damn! After studying this in Lightroom, and going over the other images I took that afternoon, the story was depressingly similar with all the shots. At infinity, not a problem. But where I actually focused the camera - not so sharp. Looks to me like my a57 has a sensor alignment issue!

Rapahoe Jetty Stumps. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/8 @ 1/10th, ISO 100

Then, of course, I started going back over some of the other images I had taken with the a57, at other locations. And unfortunately, time and again, the same problem with missing-focus occurs.

Once more, in the example above, the camera's autofocus point was placed directly over the largest stump in the foreground. And again, the stump just isn't in focus. And this is with the camera locked down, on a windless evening, on a sturdy tripod. The 1/10th of a second exposure was simply not a factor. This isn't camera shake. It's just plain missed-focus.

I've got loads of other examples (unfortunately), and I won't bore you with them all. Because they all tell the same story. And it's a pretty depressing story, truth be told. 

Basically, I'm left with a camera that can only really work at infinity focus, since the sensor is out of alignment. I've done all this lens testing with it, especially with the SAL75300 and SAL18250 (see previous posts), concluding that these lenses weren't very good performers (i.e. not very sharp), when all along it was the camera body itself! This bums me out a little, considering I went and sold the 75-300mm because I thought it was a crap lens! Although having said that, I'm also glad that it perhaps isn't as bad as I thought it was, and the new owner might be getting some decent images out of it 😄

Be that as it may, it stills leaves me with a camera that isn't focusing properly 😞

I thought about my next course of action for a few days (I'm obviously not happy that I've got a 'lemon'), considering I've only had the camera for a couple of months. I thought about just selling it on-line, but I couldn't do that in good faith, knowing that it doesn't focus properly. So in the end, I did the only thing I could under the circumstances - I contacted the owner of the store I got the camera from and let him know what was going on.

It took him a couple of days to reply (he's a busy guy, in a busy store), but when he did he was totally understanding - didn't question my conclusions at all - and basically agreed that 'yes, I've got a lemon'. So now he is looking out for another Sony a-mount camera for me, in the a57 vein.

Trouble is, Sony didn't make a lot of SLT models, and it might not be as simple as just 'finding' another a57? Greg (the store manager) has come up with a couple of options already, but unfortunately they weren't SLT models. I've said I really want the SLT technology - for its DSLR handling and its EVF functionality. But I don't want to go backwards (with the 3 series of cameras), and I also don't want the a58 'upgrade', since Sony (in their infinite wisdom - or should that be stupidity!?) gave the a58 a plastic lens mount! Plastic! So that really only leaves another a57, or the a67 and a77 - both upgrades from what I've already got (the a77 is a considerable upgrade, the a65 not so much).

Maybe he will have some luck getting me another a57? Maybe he won't? I've already sowed another seed though - mentioning that my original contact was over the Fujifilm X-T200, and suggesting that I maybe should have gone with that in the first place? Don't know whether that will prompt a look in the Fuji direction as well or not? We'll see. 

Time to rethink things a little...

Ok, so I got Covid...

Millie. Sony a57 with SAL18250

I'm just coming out of the worst of it now, and feel sufficiently 'human' enough to be able to sit down and write this. But it's taken over a week.

I won't say it's the worst I've ever felt in my life - I've been worse. And I guess being triple-vaccinated against it helped (at least I hope it did). But still, it wasn't great.

How did I get it? Well, the adorable little bundle of fluff pictured opposite had 'something' to do with it. And BTW - she might look adorable, but don't let that fool you. My wife and I are deciding whether she is the devil's spawn or not at the moment!

Anyway, since we do now have her, we had to fence our back section so she could roam around. A builder friend (hi Ian) said he would come over last weekend and give me a hand building one - and long story-short, Ian had Covid. And passed it on to me...

So while I was convalescing and feeling sorry for myself, it gave me time to mull over my last few posts. It also gave me time to rethink my current kit - in light of those posts - and the possible ramifications going forwards. Whatever that means...?

I'm rambling. I'm delirious. I'm recovering from Covid. Let me see if I can make something coherent out of all this head-space mess - shall we?

First - my continuing thoughts around full frame. I had assumed, now that I am using (and enjoying) the Sony system, that I would 'upgrade' to a full frame Sony mirrorless. Something like the a7ii. These can be found fairly regularly now for around $1400NZ on the second hand market. Sony are the king of full-frame mirrorless and dominate that space with the a7 line, so it was a natural decision to make. Well done me 😄

And then I tried one. And I wasn't blown-away using one. In fact, just the opposite really. Enter the first roadblock. Yet, undeterred, the 'research' continued.

Then I realised that, for not much more $$, I might even be able to get a brand new mirrorless full-frame camera! Something like the Canon EOS RP that retails for $1985.00NZ body-only. Even these are beginning to appear on the used market, which means even more savings can be had. 

Notice, however, how the above price is for 'body-only'. Getting a decent lens for the Canon R system, even second hand, is not a cheap prospect. Even the 50mm f1.8 RF lens is over $400NZ new. So maybe 'new' isn't the way to go?

And maybe mirrorless isn't the way to go full-frame either?

Both Canon and Nikon have been producing full-frame DSLR's for over ten years now. Plenty of time for the second-hand market to see its fair share of full frame offerings. In Canon there is the famous 5D line of cameras, as well as the 6D (Mk 1 and II). 5D Mk 3's and 6D Mk1's can be found online for even less than a Sony a7ii body. They even often include a lens, a grip, and spare batteries! 

The same is true with Nikon - where D600s, D700s and D800s are regularly turning up on TradeMe. Especially now that their owners are switching to the new mirrorless systems.

So yes, there's a plethora of great full-frame DSLR's to choose from now. In fact you could argue that it's the perfect time to be 'getting into' a full frame system.

But then... THEN... maddeningly, annoyingly, frustratingly, there is a part of my brain that says "Why bother? Why go full frame at all? What's really so bad with APS-C?" (Or micro four thirds for that matter).

What's so bad, for example, with a Fujifilm XT-2, with grip, and Fujinon 18-55mm XF lens - available on auction here in New Zealand as I write this, for only $875.00! Yes please! I'll have some of that!

That would be an incredible mirrorless kit, at a fraction of the full frame price. And I have to say, I'm sorely tempted! Because lets face it, there's nothing bad with APS-C. Especially for what I do, what I need it to do, and what I might want it to do in the future. And the Fujifilm system is an amazing eco-system to get into. Much better, it could (easily) be argued, than the now defunct Sony A-mount system I find myself a part of. Why, oh why (part of my brain bemoans) am I still not shooting Fujifilm? The XT-2 with grip looks right up my alley!

And then... THEN... strangely, weirdly, uncontrollably, I go on to TradeMe (our internet auction site here in NZ) and add a Sony flash and leather grip to my existing a57 kit! At the same time that I have put the Sony SAL75300 and Sony SAL18250 lenses online to sell! 

Because there is another part of my brain (how many parts do I actually have!?) that keeps saying to me "Be content with what you have. There's nothing wrong with the images you're getting out of the a57. Use what you've got and stop looking elsewhere!"

And I would agree with that part of my brain. It is, after all, the same part that convinced me to get the a57 in the first place. And yes, on many levels, the a57 (or at least the Sony SLT system) is my 'ideal' system. I love the feeling of an SLR style body. It just feels so right in the hand. Tick for the a57. I also love an evf, and seeing all my information, histogram and changes through the viewfinder while I compose the image. Another tick for the a57. I love an articulating screen and a good live-view implementation when I'm shooting landscapes. Tick again. In fact, it's the only system that ticks all these boxes - apart, maybe, from the Panasonic micro four thirds cameras that are designed to feel like a DSLR.

Why, then, have I put two lenses up for sale? Well, it was an easy decision getting rid of the 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 - it's just not a great lens. I got it for birding and extreme telephoto images, but based on my testing of this lens, it's not likely that I will ever use it. It's just never sharp enough (for me). Selling the 18-250mm was a tougher decision, since it's actually a decent performer up to 100mm, and a great travel lens. But I also have those focal lengths covered with other (better) lenses, so really I'm just giving up the convenience factor. And with the money I hope to get from selling them both, I might look at getting a Sony 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G SSM to replace the SAL75300? Should be a much better lens.

So no, I haven't given up on my a57, or the Sony SLT a-mount system  - just yet at least. And I may not give up on it at all? Full frame might remain just a philosophical thought - for the time being 😆 I really am going crazy....

Testing the Sony SAL75300 and Sony SAL18250 lenses

a57 with 75-300. f/8 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

I have continued to persevere with bird photography now that I have the Sony a57 and SAL75300 lens. On an APS-C sensor that equates to a 450mm equivalent fov (field of view), so I can get reasonably close to the wildlife.

But I can't say that I have been blown away by the performance of the Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lens. It's certainly not 'tack' sharp (or even close) at the 300mm end - which is exactly where you want to be if you buy a telephoto lens. 

Case-in-point - the other evening I went back down to my local lagoon and followed a Grey Heron around for about an hour. He slowly became used to my presence, and so I got reasonably close. I managed to get some decent poses, fairly close up, but the light was low, so I had to crank the ISO up (again). I've had to do this on both occasions now and I'm beginning to think that the high ISO's are contributing to the overall 'softness' I'm experiencing with this lens?

Of the 250-ish images I shot of the grey heron, I kept just four. All the rest were just too soft. And the four I kept only just snuck through.

So I decided that on the next sunny day, I was going to go out in the middle of the afternoon, in bright conditions, and test the lens at ISO 100. On a tripod. With a 2 second delay on the shutter. At all focal lengths and apertures. Just to see what this lens is really capable of in a 'best case' scenario. So that's what I did this weekend.

And while I was at it, I thought I'd test the SAL18250 at the same time. Just - ya know - because. So sit back, relax, get a beverage, and lets find out how good(?) these two lenses are...

Greymouth Wharf from Cobden. Sony a57 with SAL75300. f/8 @ 1/250th, ISO 100 (at 135mm)

Looking across to the Greymouth Wharf area from Cobden Lagoon is a great place to do these kinds of telephoto lens tests. First because there's plenty of space to set up your tripod, second because it provides lots of details and contrast to lock in on, and third because it's only five minutes from my house 😆

I set up as outlined above; on a tripod, with 2 second timer, central focus point (yes, I auto-focused because that's what I do 99% of the time in real-world shooting conditions), steady shot off (because I'm on a tripod) and aperture priority mode so I could speed up the process, since I would be working through all the apertures at every focal point marked on the lens barrel. Easy...

After I had all the images, I opened them in Lightroom, looked through each set of f/stops for each focal length I shot at, and chose the sharpest of the set. The lenses 'sweet spot' at that focal length, if you will. Below, are the results.

The selections above are all central crops at 100%, made in Photoshop, with my 'normal' sharpening applied (Unsharp Mask Filter applied at 125%, Raduis 1, Threshold 0). It might be difficult to make out what's happening from a low-res internet image, so I'll just tell you what I found....

The Sony SAL75300 lens (at least my copy of it), is soft at 75mm across the aperture range - with f/16 being somewhat presentable. But this isn't a lens I will be shooting at the 75mm end. Period 

From 100mm through to about 250mm, the lens is what I would call 'acceptably' sharp from f/5.6 to f/11 - with f/8 more than likely being the sweet spot. Images within this aperture and focal range are sharp, without being 'tack' sharp. This lens never really manages tack sharp.

At 300mm there is a fall-off in overall sharpness again, although not as bad as at the 75mm end (where it really is horrendous). At the 300mm focal length, f/5.6 to f/8 is 'reasonably' sharp, but I would stick to the 100 - 250mm range for better performance if I could. The lens has other issues at 300mm as well, exhibiting high levels of purple fringing. This is very evident at f/5.6, becoming better (although not completely gone) at f/8. Even with 'Remove Chromatic Aberrations' ticked in Lightroom's lens correction tab.

I thought that maybe the 16MP sensor of the a57 wasn't doing the SAL75300 any favours, and it may perform better on the full-frame 24MP sensor of the a99? So, of course, I tested this theory as well.

Once again, I'll decipher the low-res findings for you...

Basically, nothing changes. Apart for the fact that the a57 crop sensor is producing a slightly bigger fov for equivalent focal lengths - the actual sharpness remains relatively the same. Yes, the a99 is ever so slightly 'cleaner' (ISO 50 compared to ISO 100), and maybe a hair sharper? Maybe. But nothing that makes it shockingly different.

So bottom line with the Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (SAL75300); don't shoot at 75mm (at all), stick between 100-250mm and between f/5.6 to f/11 (let's just call it f/8 shall we?), and you should get 'acceptably' sharp results. Depending, of course, on your idea of 'sharpness'.

Cobden Lagoon. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/8 @ 1/400th, ISO 100 (at 18mm)

Ok. So having established that the SAL75300 is really a 100-250mm, lets tackle the 18-250mm super zoom shall we!?

The SAL18250 is another one of those lenses that gets a bad rap from some reviewers. Actual users, on the other hand, often have some good things to say about this lens. Let's find out for ourselves.

Same process as above for the 75-300mm lens, although I changed position slightly so that there would be some interesting foreground in the image. Going through the apertures and focal lengths on this lens, what did I find?

Deciphering the above from what I see full-screen on my desktop computer at home, there's some good news if you want to use this lens as a pseudo landscape lens (as I do).

From 18mm up to 70mm, the lens performs very well in terms of sharpness - from f/5.6 to f/11. I wouldn't hesitate to use any combinations of the above. 18mm up to 35mm is even sharp through to f/16, which is a great result for us landscape photographers. Lens correction at the extreme 18mm end works well in Lightroom, and the corners are also nice and sharp. So at the 'wide' end of the lens, I'm very happy.

From 100mm up things change slightly. At 100mm sharpness is good from f/5.6 to f/8, and at 200mm from f/6.3 to f/8. At the extreme telephoto end of 250mm, only f/8 is what I would call 'acceptably' sharp.

So again, the good news for this lens, as a walk-around/travel/do-it-all superzoom, is that if you lock the aperture down at f/8, then practically all your images will be sharp. And if you want to use it as a landscape lens at the wider ends, then you have a great range of f/stops and focal lengths to choose from (up to about 100mm).

All-in-all I think this is a great result, and I'm well pleased with the SAL18250. 

I'm less pleased with the SAL75300, due to the less than impressive performance at 300mm (and 75mm). So does that mean I should just use the SAL18250 for everything and leave the 75-300mm at home?

Actually - no. Because again, based on my testing, the SAL75300 is a decent performer from 100mm to about 250mm. And the SAL18250 is an excellent performer from 18mm to about 100mm. Can you see the synergy here? The 75-300mm picks up where the 18-250mm leaves off. So effectively, with both lenses, I have decent (to sometimes excellent) performance from 18 to 250mm using both lenses. I did, of course test this theory out as well...

Hopefully you can clearly see that the SAL75300 is sharper from 100mm to 250mm than the SAL18250. Which means that it is still worth keeping both lenses, and taking both with me when I go out. If the 75-300mm lens was a big, heavy beast, then I'd think twice about bringing it. But it's not (it's only 460grams).

Am I disappointed with the lenses performance at 300mm? Yes, I am. And if I had the money, I would be changing it for either the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 or the Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM lens - both of which would, I believe, be infinitely better.

But I don't (have the money), so the Sony SAL75300, confined to shooting between 100 to 250mm, and from f/5.6 to f/8, will have to do during the meanwhile...

Sorry for the long post - and thanks for sticking with me this far (if you have). But it's a good, and important, exercise to do for yourself if you want to get the best out of your lenses. No matter what they might be. Lens testing doesn't have to be about boring test charts and brick walls. Get out in your natural environment and do some 'real-world' testing. I find this is always the best kind of testing. And the results may surprise, delight, or upset you!? 😄

__________________________________________________________________________________

UPDATE: 15/04/22

Take all of the above with a grain of salt... 

I have recently discovered that my a57 isn't focusing properly - the sensor is probably out of alignment. So my overall impression of 'softness' is not surprising - and therefore all of the above is probably somewhat invalid!

Landscapes with the Sony a99

My Olympus camera gear is off to Photo & Video in Christchurch to be appraised for a trade-in, and I'm now almost 100% sure that my next system will be Sony. Wow!

Spiney rock formation, Motukiekie Beach.
Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/16 @ 1/6th, ISO 50. + Polariser

To mentally prepare myself for the transition, I decided to go out this weekend (as I write this) with the Sony a99 full-frame SLT camera and Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 lens to take some landscape photos. We have had some gorgeous sunsets here on the West Coast recently, and I was hoping the same would be true of this evening. 

Alas, it wasn't to be, with no clouds in the sky and no real colour to speak of. Just flat open skies all along the horizon. Oh well, never mind. At least sunset coincided with low tide (both happened at 8.30pm), so I was able to get right out among the rocks and take some interesting rockscapes.

Motukiekie Rockscape. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 1/6th, ISO 50 + Polariser

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... the a99 is a joy to use for landscape photography. Yes, it's bigger and heavier than my Olympus E-M1 was (even with grip attached), and the Minolta 17-35mm lens is no lightweight either. But it's also one of the lighter DSLR-style full-frame cameras you can get, and it really wasn't an issue carrying it - along with a couple other lenses, in my Crumpler messenger-style camera bag. I would, however, like to get a camera backpack to use instead of the Messenger bag, especially if I'm going on a longer walk with my camera gear.

But for this trip, the messenger bag worked fine (Crumpler's 6 Million Dollar Home), and I even took my lighter Manfrotto travel tripod instead of my heavier Slik that I usually take when using the full-frame camera. The Manfrotto actually worked fine, and I always felt the camera had a stable platform. It might have been different on a windy day, but fortunately this evening there wasn't a breath of wind to worry about.

Motukiekie Rockscape 2
Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm

Unfortunately this meant that the mosquitos were out in force! Little blood-sucking vermin. They really do ruin a great evening out photographing! For some reason they really love the taste of me, and I always get swarmed whenever they are around (must be my animal magnetism 😂). Very unpleasant. 

I try not to hang-around in the one spot for too long so that they don't all get the chance to converge. This can mean that I don't take my time composing an image as long as I should, because I just want to keep moving and get away from the little buggers! But fortunately the Sony a99 is very quick to set-up, and the vari-angle LCD screen makes it a breeze to see your image no matter how you have the camera positioned. It really is the best rotating  LCD screen I've ever used. Unfortunately I don't think that the a57's back panel LCD screen is as flexible!? Shame.

Because the a99 has most of its important functions mapped to a button or dial on the body of the camera, changing settings is also very quick. The 'Function' button also acts as a 'quick' menu, allowing you to change settings on the fly. I usually shoot most of my images in Apeture priority, so I have the aperture value set to change with the front dial on the camera, while exposure compensation is mapped to the rear dial. I let the camera take care of the shutter speed, and the ISO was set to the smallest native ISO the a99 shoots - an impressive 50 ISO. It's amazing to be able to shoot at these lower ISO's on a digital camera, since I'm used to a native ISO 200 on my Olympus E-M1. ISO 50 on the Sony a99 is very clean, and impressively 'smooth'.

Motukiekie low tide. Sony a99 with 17-35mm. f/11 @ 1/2sec, ISO 50 + Polariser (35mm fov)

The 24MP files that come off of this Sony full-frame sensor are just drop-dead gorgeous! Not to mention the dynamic range that the sensor can capture. DXO puts it on par with the likes of the Nikon D3x and the (much) newer Canon EOS R6. That's pretty impressive for a 10 year old camera! 

In the image above, I have actually processed it to look more like a silhouette - darkening the highlights and shadows. I wanted a more dramatic look to the image, although in reality, the sensor has captured much more detail in the shadows. And at ISO 50 it's very clean, noise-free detail.

Motukiekie low tide silhouette. Sony a99 with 17-35mm. f/11 @ 5 secs, ISO 50 + polariser

Again , more detail was captured in the shadows than is showing up here. In fact, I can see more detail in the image when it is opened in Photoshop. The internet compression isn't doing this image any favours. It does have the 'mood' I was going for though, and the colours are very faithfully reproduced. This is pretty much exactly what I saw with my own eyes when I was there.

Unfortunately, as mentioned above, the sunset never really kicked-off, and with no clouds to catch the colour that was there, the photo doesn't have the kind of impact I was after. Just imagine the same scene with big orange clouds reflected in that mirror-like reflection of the water. Would have been epic! Oh well, there's always next time I guess.

Motukiekie beach sunset. Sony a99 with 17-35mm. f/11 @ 8 secs, ISO 50 + polariser

This was my last shot of the night, taken quickly as I trudged my way back to the car to head home. I was tired, had the images I thought I was going to get for the evening, and simply looked behind me as I was walking along the beach. I begrudgingly got all my gear back out in the semi-dark because I thought it was 'kinda nice', and took one shot. Turns out it's probably my favourite shot of the night. Lol

I am still struggling with motivation to go out and take landscape photos of my local area, even though I enjoyed myself once I was there (apart from those damn mosquitoes). I am still hoping that an injection of 'new' gear will help in this regard, and I am looking forward to getting the a57 and reviewing the camera and lenses that I have. If nothing else, reviewing gear actually gets me out photographing and making images. And if they turn out anything like the photos I took at Motukiekie Beach with the a99, then that's got to be a good thing...

Sony a57. Does the 'head' finally win?

I wrote in a previous post (here) about my desire to change systems and shake things up a bit in my photography. In that post, I concluded that my 'head' said I should go with a Sony a57, while my 'heart' really wanted the Fujifilm X-T20. And usually in these scenarios, my heart wins...

But not, I think, this time. This time, I might actually do the 'right' thing? I might actually go with the wiser option, and get the Sony a57. It's looking very likely...

Why is the a57 the wiser option? For a few reasons actually. First, if I did opt for the Fujifilm X-T20, then I would be purchasing the body only, and then having to source a lens elsewhere. For the money I would have left over after purchasing the more expensive X-T20 body, I could probably only afford the basic 16-50mm XC kit lens. So, in essence, I'd be trading in an Olympus E-M1 + grip, with 12-35mm f2.8, 40-150mm 4/4-5.6 and external flash - and getting an X-T20 with cheap kit lens as a replacement. Not very wise...

If, however, I opt for the Sony a57, then it already comes with a Sony 18-250mm super-zoom (not a stellar lens, but hey, better than nothing) for less than the price of the X-T20 body-only! I can probably also squeeze in a Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 as well, depending on how much they offer me for my Olympus gear. So that's an a57 body, with two lenses, for not much more than the X-T20 body on its own.

And it gets even better! Because, as I think I've previously mentioned, I already have a few stellar Minolta lenses just sitting here waiting to be used on a Sony a-mount body. Exotic lenses like a 16mm fisheye and 50mm macro. The 17-35mm f3.5 'landscape' lens. And a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 Minolta power zoom. Add to these the aforementioned Sony 18-250mm and Tamron 70-300mm, and that's a pretty impressive line-up of glass! As opposed to the 16-50mm XC kit lens for the Fuji (sorry Fuji, no offence intended). 

So really the answer, in the end, is fairly obvious. I just have to go with the Sony a57. Especially if you also add in the fact that I still have a full-frame a99 on-loan, and can probably borrow even more glass to use with the Sony if and when I want.

The more I thought about it, the more my 'head' took over from my 'heart', the more complete and utter sense it made to go with the a57 over the X-T20. I was enamored by the Fuji because it has the 'newer' processor than was in my X-E2 - which means I could use grain settings and the Acros film simulation in-camera. Something I really wanted to be able to do on the X-E2 but couldn't.

But even then, the more I thought about that, the more nervous I became. Do I really want to go down the 'what film simulation will I use today' rabbit-hole!? It's fun - don't get me wrong. But I also found it a huge time-waster when I was using my Fuji's. It tied me up in knots more than once. My life is much simpler without film recipes to be programming.

And then there's the form-factor of the X-T20. It's small. Very small. Similar to the X-T1, but even smaller. And I really didn't like the X-T1. It was too small, too cramped, and I much prefer a more solid (larger) DLSR style camera. A lot like the a57...

The Sony a57, with its translucent mirror technology, also offers the best-of-both-worlds (as far as I'm concerned). DSLR-like handling, yet with mirrorless tech included - like the Tru-Finder evf. OK, so it's not the highest resolution evf you'll ever find, but it's an evf. And I like evf's. I love the ability to see changes in exposure through the viewfinder, in real time, with histogram overlays, levels, focus peaking - the whole works.

Yes, I've changed my mind. Or should I say, I've listened to my mind - and not my heart. If there is one thing that all photographers who have been doing this for a while agree on, it's that glass is king! Camera bodies come and go, but the glass is what makes the photo. Going 'cheaper' with the Sony a57 body makes perfect sense when you consider the lens lineup I already have access to. So it would seem that this time - finally - the 'head' has won.

Possible gear for macro

In my last post I discussed my recently discovered enthusiasm for fungi (and therefore macro) photography. I also mentioned that I had briefly dabbled in this very genre last year - first with the Sony a99 and then with my Olympus OM-D E-M1.

Fungi photography with the Olympus OM-D E-M1

I still have both systems available to me, so now that I have decided to pursue this style of photography a bit more seriously in 2022, I have a few decisions to make around the type of gear I will need going forward.

First option is to stick with my micro four thirds system, and add to it, to cover macro photography. To do this 'seriously', I would be looking at purchasing the Olympus 60mm f2.8 macro lens.

By all accounts (I've never even held one), the M Zuiko 60mm macro lens is a stellar lens, offering waterproofing and 1:1 magnification. It certainly looks the part - is apparently tack sharp (I don't doubt it) - and would balance perfectly on my E-M1.

Olympus do offer a 30mm f3.5 macro lens as well, but it's not weather sealed, doesn't go to 1:1 magnification - and is a 60mm equivalent full-frame focal length, which isn't as conducive to shooting skittery insects (since you have to get physically closer with the lens). On the positive side, it's a bit cheaper than the 60mm ($450NZ for the 30mm and $600NZ for the 60mm) - but that seems to me to be the only real positive. I'd rather spend the extra for the 60mm (120mm full frame focal length equivalent) than 'settle' for the 30mm and wish I had the 60mm, especially if I am really serious about pursuing macro fungi photography.

The second option is to move to the Sony A-mount system, since I already have access to a 50mm macro for Sony A-mount (it's actually a Minolta AF lens), as well as a few other lenses. The Sony a99 I have at the moment is being borrowed from a friend, together with the 50mm macro, a fisheye, standard zoom and wide angle zoom - so I've got the lenses pretty well covered. I will have to give the a99 back at some stage, but I'm pretty sure I can keep the 50mm macro long-term, since I know the guy I borrowed it from also has a 100mm macro that he uses instead.

If I sold my E-M1 with all accessories and lenses, I could possibly get about $1k (maybe). With that sort of money I could pick up a used Sony SLT 65v or a55 and have a decent chunk of change left over for spare batteries and other accessories if required.

This option has some appeal, not withstanding the fact that the dedicated 50mm macro would get me up and running straight away with a macro lens. If I sold my Olympus gear, I would actually end up in the black, even after purchasing a Sony body. Whereas if I have to wait to be able to afford an Olympus 60mm lens - even secondhand (if one comes up for sale) - it will probably be 2024 before I can actually afford one! Damn...

There is, however, a third option. I already have the a-mount 50mm macro lens - why don't I just adapt it to fit the Olympus E-M1? A mount adapter like the one shown here, will cost me around $45NZ - and viola, a dedicated macro lens for my E-M1.

Yes, this means that the macro lens will be manual focus only - but that's par for the course with macro photography anyway. So no great loss there. And, when fitted to my micro four thirds camera, the Minolta 50mm macro lens becomes a 100mm macro lens focal length equivalent - again great news for a comfortable distance to subject when shooting. So option three is sounding like a win-win.

It also means that I can continue to use my E-M1, which has a whole host of advantages when using it for macro photography. There is greater depth of field when using the smaller sensor - which is helpful for keeping very small areas in sharp focus at lower apertures. It has crazy-good in-body image stabilisation - again very helpful when shooting insects handheld. The body is weather sealed (excellent when out in damp forest conditions), it's very light-weight and portable (never a bad thing), has focus peaking and manual focus magnification aids - and also has built-in focus bracketing and focus stacking - in camera! This camera was built for macro photography! Are you serious!!!! Option three baby! I love option three!

In all seriousness, sticking with the Olympus E-M1 and adapting the Minolta 50mm macro to it does seem like the perfect solution - at least until I can afford that 60mm M Zuiko. For $45NZ I'll be up and running with an excellent macro system, and I may even find that I don't need the 60mm Olympus lens at all?

It will also mean that I can use the Mecablitz flashgun I have for the Olympus in an off-camera wireless flash setup, or I could keep it even simpler and use the Godox LED cube (pictured opposite). Or both.

I've looked into purchasing the a-mount to micro 4/3 adapter from a local retailer, and they can have one for me by the end of February. In the meantime, I still have the Sony a99 and 50mm Minolta macro lens, and I'll  use that combination until the adapter for the E-M1 arrives. That will give me a month to see if I really am serious about this macro-fungi thing - and a month to fall in love with the Sony A-Mount system and change my mind about staying with Olympus! 😉  Me - change my mind? Never!

In Memoriam of the Sony A-mount

Alas, poor Sony A-mount, I knew you well (kind of). 

Sony has recently discontinued all of their A-mount products, quietly deleting them from their website. This includes their SLT line of cameras (a-99, a-77 etc), as well as all A-mount lenses. It's a shame, but also no great surprise, since their interest in the A-mount had waned considerably over recent years.

And let's face it, Sony aren't the only culprits. The world has 'gone mirrorless'. All SLR technology is going the way of the Dodo, and I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon, and then Canon, quickly follow Sony's lead and officially end production of all DSLR's. Nikon have the new 'Z' mount for their mirrorless system, and Canon are concentrating on boosting their RF lens lineup - so their can't be much (if any) R&D being put into their 'traditional' DSLR systems anymore? Canon have already stated that there will be no 5D MkV - putting an end to their incredibly popular 5-series full frame DLSR line. Surely that does not bode well for their other DSLR products either? 

I'm not lamenting the fact, other than for pure nostalgic reasons. I've been an advocate for mirrorless systems for a long time, and am thrilled that both Nikon and Canon have finally 'got in the game' seriously. It is the future, and always was the future. We can look forward with great excitement - whilst also shedding a small tear for the past.

Not that the past is going anywhere in a hurry. The used market will remain buoyant for another 20 years at least, with DLSR cameras and lenses that photographers will be more than happy to trade, collect and use. We may even see something similar with what happened to film cameras? There may be a ten year (or so) period where, because of the new technology,  DLSR's will be seen as largely worthless and available at ridiculously low prices. Followed by a resurgence in popularity (and price) as those who were raised on mirrorless 'discover' these old gems and start using them again. Maybe? Just a thought.

Surmising aside, when I heard that Sony had discontinued their A-mount products, I did come over all nostalgic-like. I have owned, and used, several Sony A-mount cameras over the years, and they were always very solid - and in some cases outstanding - performers. Case-in-point, the flagship full frame Sony a-99, which I just happen to have 'on loan' from a friend at the moment. An amazingly capable full frame DLSR - built like a tank and a joy to use.

And then, of course, there's the extra nostalgic tug of Sony's association with Minolta - a camera company that I truly loved. The A-mount was, of course, actually a re-branded Minolta M-mount, with all of Minolta's AF lenses being fully compatible with Sony DSLR's. With Sony's discontinuation of all things A-mount, all vestiges of the old Minolta camera company are now truly dead. And that really does sadden me.

Yet as I said earlier, I have moved on to mirrorless, currently with the Olympus OM-D EM1. But since I had the Sony a-99 kicking around, and with my thoughts freshly on the news of the A-mount demise, I decided to pay homage to the A-mount (and Minolta) and take the a-99 out for one final spin.

Coal Creek Falls. Sony a-99 with Minolta 17-35mm. 1/5th sec @ f8, ISO 64. Polarising filter

It was a very dull, overcast morning, so I decided to once again head out to my local waterfall. It's Autumn here in NZ as I write this, and the fungi are out in full force. Since I had a Minolta 17-35mm ultra-wide, and a Minolta 50mm macro as my two lenses, what better place to visit than the native bush.

Growth. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/5th sec @ f5.6, ISO 64

I'm not all that used to using a macro lens, so it took a while to figure out the process.. Eventually I realised that if I set the camera up on the tripod, and then manually focused, I could get better results than using the AF. Manually focus was a breeze, since the a-99 has a 'peaking' feature which automatically activates when you switch to manual focus. The 'in-focus' areas are indicated with a bright red outline so you can clearly and confidently set your focus. This feature isn't unique to the Sony's (it's also available on my Olympus EM1), but it's still nice to see it on the a-99.

 

Fungus stack. Sony a-99 with 50mm macro. 1 sec @ f22, ISO 800 

I said earlier that the fungus would be out in force this time of year, and I wasn't disappointed. They were everywhere, in all shapes and sizes, and I could have spent all day photographing them. It was a lot of fun, and not my normal subject matter. I enjoyed using the macro lens, and as already stated, the a-99 made this process very easy. 

Not only was peaking for sharpness helpful, but the fully articulating 3" screen was also greatly appreciated. It's one of the best designs I've ever used for screen articulation - being able to be positioned at almost any angle. It meant that I could place the camera and tripod very low to the ground, but raise and angle the LCD screen so that I could easily compose the shot without having to lie down on the wet forest floor. If I did a lot of forest fungi photography, I would seriously consider the Sony a-99 as my main camera for its articulated screen alone.

Button Fungi. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/2sec @ f16. ISO 800

While I appreciated many of the features available on the a-99, and did thoroughly enjoy my morning out with it, there was one thing I was very aware of that I didn't enjoy - the size (and weight). I know people harp on about this as the main factor many switch from a DLSR to Mirrorless - but I guess there's a reason for this. In the end, it's true. And it's not just the camera body, it's all the other associated products like lenses and tripods, that go together to add on the weight.

As a fully professional DLSR, you would expect the full frame a-99 to be built like a tank. And it is. The fully magnesium alloy body weighs in at around 733 grams, which is actually one of the lighter full-frame body weights. The Canon 5D MkIV, for example, weighs 890 grams, while the Nikon D850 is a whopping 915 grams. And this is without battery and lenses mounted. In comparison, my Olympus OM-D EM1 weighs 497 grams, including the battery. And the lenses offer even a greater weight saving.

Between two ferns. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/5th sec @ f/16. ISO 800

Since I was taking the a-99, and knew I would have to position it in some fairly precarious angles, I also decided I needed my largest (and most heaviest) tripod. After a morning of lugging the camera and tripod and lenses around the forest, I must admit I was wishing I had my Olympus gear instead. And I do plan to go back and take some more fungi images with my Olympus gear. Next time to try out the 'psuedo' macro on the 12-50mm f3.5/6.3 EZ lens.

Depth of field test. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. Left: f/11. Right f/4

For most of the morning, since I was shooting with a macro lens, I set a fairly small aperture so I could get as much depth of field as possible. Around f/11 to f/16 was the norm, and sometimes even going up to f/22. This helped to keep most things in the image in sharp focus.

But there were also times when I played around with a narrower depth of field for a little more creative effect. The above example shows how aperture value can greatly effect the look and feel of an image when you are close-focusing with a macro lens.

Fly Agaric (amanita muscaria). Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/13th sec @ f/5.6. ISO 400

Despite what I said earlier in regards to the weight of the a-99, plus lenses, plus tripod, I did enjoy my morning out shooting fungi in the forest with the camera. It has several features that make it ideal for this type of photography - not to mention the beautiful 24mp images that it produces. But then again, even that feels a little 'overkill' for me - though I realise that's almost blasphemous to say in this age of full-frame high-megapixel camera worship.

But for me, at least, it's true. I've said so on this blog over and over again. I don't need 20+ megapixels, and I strongly suspect you don't either. 12mp is probably more than enough for most use-cases, and yes, that includes large billboards.

So as I said right at the beginning of this post, I'm not lamenting the demise of Sony's A-mount. Although I realise that maybe some will. But probably not many. Most have probably already moved on to Sony E-mount, or Nikon Z, or Canon RF, or (perish the thought) micro four thirds.

And for those who do still want to stay with A-mount, maybe it's actually good news? Maybe the prices on the secondhand market will come down as people sell off their 'outdated' gear - just as they did in the days of film switching to digital?

Whatever happens, I'm glad we have the Sony/Minolta A-mount equipment that we can use for many, many years to come. No, there won't be any new releases. But that a-99, or a-77, or a-300 and associated lenses that you have will still work for the foreseeable future, and may even be serviceable by the right camera technician. So enjoy them while you can. And thanks, Sony, for the great products that bear the A-mount name. It was/is a great system.