This has been a hectic weekend. I rented a Sony A7s to evaluate where it might fit into my camera collection. Originally the idea was that perhaps with a good set of adapters I could use it in lieu of my 6D and M240. I have a good deal of EF- and M-glass so it’s natural to want to condense the herd.
Further, the kilo-bucks so liberated could be diverted for more wonderful glass. Was looking covetously at the Zeiss OTUS 55 and perhaps 85 if the the 55 is that good. But in the back of my mind, the Sigma ART 50 looks good also,and of course has AF... good old AF
Well, the weekend was indeed frenetic with about 600 images collected at various lighting thresholds and ISO settings (and still more images will be taken before i send the Sony back tomorrow). Sometimes I would stand there with all three bodies thinking, “...OK, what next... “. Great fun on the cheap actually.
Well, long story short, the Sony can replace the M for some things, though I still prefer the subjective feel of the M-images. However the Sony is razor sharp and a bit of post will draw the apparent IQ’s very close indeed. While the Nocutlux is a bundle to focus in any light that you’d actually use it, my keeper rate with the A7s was about the same as with the M240.
Where the A7s really disappointed was with the Metabones IV and AF. Just awful in terms of lock and hold. Upgraded it to V.36 but still meek in both departments. The 6D was several times faster in acquisition (even in fair to good light) and far more tenacious in holding or AF-C mode.
Through all the work, and using Zeiss EF- lenses (21 f2.8 and 100 f2) as well as an M- workout it occurs to me that Manual Focus is great! The Sony has a very good way of getting good manual a couple different ways and the EVF is so good that often neither the mag system or peaking are necessary. Ditto the 6D and it’s oft- dismissed few points. I grew up with central manual focusing and re-composure and of course for very critical shots this is not always best, but it does just fine most of the time. One simply has to know when to go an alternative route.
Yes, for sports, wildlife and wild children AF helps get more keepers, but it also often misses the focus for those special shots with thin DoF and sharp eyelash focus. I would say I’m almost hooked on MF except where only AF will do
Does anyone here strictly or mainly go MF even if their equipment can do AF just fine? It’s almost a joy to MF and stops the spraying that I might do to statistically enhance my rate of getting what was intended. I realize that MF lenses have some keen advantages and won't go there right now. Just want to hear about other's impressions.
What say you more experienced People?
As always, thanks in advance for sharing your experiences