So I've got my full frame kit for the next year or so pretty much laid out in the form of my A7III, my Sony 85mm 1.8, and the new-ish Sony 24mm 1.4 GM, of which here is a gratuitous picture:
Mmmm, dat aperture ring.
Next on my list is the even newer Sony 135mm 1.8 GM, but at about $1900 that one might have to wait a while. (You know what, from here on out, assume everything is Sony unless stated otherwise. It just starts sounding daft.)
Tina and I are lucky enough to live near Longwood Gardens, which is a prime spot for photographers, plus spots like Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna and Valley Forge National Park, closer to Philadelphia. I've taken the 24GM with me on a few jaunts and I can report that it's impressively sharp and detailed; the colours are excellent too.
Conowingo Dam: you can't see without zooming, but there's a heron on that outcrop near the foaming water.
Apparently there's some big debate over sunstar quality. I like it *insert shrug*
Not a super awesome composition by any means but it does showcase the blues and greens.
Whichever lens I'm using, I continue to be impressed by the image quality out of the A7III. It really is a huge step up from a crop sensor camera. There's a wide ranging argument in the online space over whether or not you need to upgrade to full frame and if it makes your pictures any better; I can only say that if you've learned how to make even a reasonably good image with a crop sensor or aps-c camera, you'll make better ones with an equivalent or better full frame system.
Here's a little comparison. These are both using my 85mm 1.8, the one on the left is from our a6400 crop sensor camera and the shot on the right is from the A7III.
Yes, lighting conditions are different etc but you can't miss the dramatic improvement in colour, smoothness, contrast and tonal range out of the A7III. The a6400's sensor is newer; the A7III is full frame, and it would seem that makes all the difference.
Oh, did someone mention a cup of tea?
