Sony My autofocus situation (looking for a solution)

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Hello, as I gather experience from my time with my Sony a7R II, I am slowly learning its quirks and limitations. At first, I was very impressed with the AF performance of the camera but as I use it in more varied situations and with different lenses the experience is getting more "colourful".
I have had a few situations where the camera has become an impediment to getting the images I needed. Here are a few of those:
1) I was at work and we had a music party organized for the birthday of a couple of individuals, the light for the scene was not my choice, the space while large it was pretty crowded and I had limited mobility and composition options, the light was (to a varying degree) 1/125th (fixed) at f 2.8 (fixed) for ISO 3.200 (at best) to ISO 25.600 (at worse). The C-AF from the Tamron 28-75mm f 2.8 Di III VXD G2 was very slow and difficult, often pulsating and hunting, the Face Detection was working but not reliably and Eye-AF has never activated through about two hours (and 300 pictures) event. While I know it's a 3rd party lens that will never be as good as Sony G/GM lenses the Tamron should perform to 90-95% of Sony's given how close Sony and Tamron work together and have access and share information. There were quite a few moments that I wish I didn't lose all the pictures because of being out of focus.
2) Most of the pictures I can make of my dog is her running towards me or away from me (because if she stops she dies ... I think ... maybe she was born on the bus from Speed, 1994). In this situation all 3 lenses (Sony FE 50mm f 1.8, Tamron 28-75mm f 2.8 Di III VXD G2, Tamron 150-500mm f 5-6.7 Di III VC VXD) can not give me a good hitrate on C-AF. I am lucky to get one close enough, extremely rare in perfect, focus. The camera's pedestrian 5 FPS is not helping the situation either since it's even less of a chance to get more images in focus. It can get quite frustrating as she loses patience after running at me but we take too long to move from the spot because I can't get an image right.
3) The camera is abysmal in Single AF, I have seen it struggle for more than 5 seconds on a brightly lit subject in direct daylight to get focus on all 3 lenses. Most times if I need a flower shot I switch to Manual Focus to make sure I get the shot. I have never experienced any camera this bad and I have used and owned 11 cameras.

Now I understand that this situation is predicated solved by buying a newer model with better AF and I will get there at some point, can't afford the cost of it this year. That gives me time to decide what would be the better option. I plan on owning mostly Tamron and possibly Sigma and/or Samyang lenses BUT if I get a good enough AF boost I can consider Sony G lenses for the portrait/action moments (though I can't justify the cost of G Master lenses, not when I am not making money from the images).
The types of photography that I am going to do will be portraits and events (mainly for my job as a support worker for adults with learning disabilities) in low light and with no control over light (flash photography is out of the question as some of the people suffer from epileptic seizures on a daily basis), action/pet photography (mainly outdoors, for now) as I want to build up experience and focus on this as a professional photographer and hopefully build a business out of it.

Of course, my dream camera would be a Sony a1 but that's a very very far away dream ... like 10 years of waiting for a decent used copy under 2.500 £ dream.
I have been thinking and being tempted by the Sony a7R IV because the Tamron 150-500mm f 5-6.7 that I bought was on the premise that I have a very large amount of pixels to crop in to make up for the lack of teleconverter and 500mm limitation. But the Sony a7 IV may be a better option just for portrait, event, action and pet photography while still getting 33 MegaPickle Ricks for a good amount of cropping and printing large. And as much as I tried to think about the Sony a9, even with all the firmware updates it received that brought it very close to the Sony a1, those 24 MegaPickle Ricks are hard to trade for 61 or even 42. Real-Time Eye-AF tracking AND animal Eye-AF tracking would be very helpful in all the situations ... and more than 5 FPS shooting?

 

[Brownie]

One thing you don't mention is your aperture settings. This may be negated by your problems shooting in bright light, but it does have an effect. I don't know what the RII is rated at, but the IV is rated down to f/22.

There are posts in this forum talking about AF and advances made in the various models. I have the IV and the RIII and have commented previously that the IV is lightyears ahead of the RIII in AF. The sensor itself is pretty amazing too, with very wide DR.

One good reference is this article at Mirrorless Comparison, which ranks cameras for BIF based on the author's testing. While I understand we aren't talking about BIF specifically, the information is directly related since we're talking about action focusing. In the summary list of 24 cameras, The A1 is #1, the A9/9II is #2, the A7IV is #3, The A7R-IV is #7, A7 III is #9, The A6400 is #12, The A6500 is #16, and the A7R-III is #20. The A7R-II didn't make the list but is mentioned under 'other cameras'.

Here's a link to the list:

The Best Mirrorless Cameras for Birds in Flight Ranked - Mirrorless Comparison

A few years ago, our reader Alfredo suggested an idea for an article. Since we test the autofocus performance of many cameras at the same red kite feeding stations, why not publish a list of all the cameras we use with their keeper rate for birds in flight? I liked ... Read more

mirrorlesscomparison.com

And a link to the entire article. It's a pretty interesting read regardless of your brand preference.

The Best Mirrorless Cameras for Birds in Flight Ranked - Mirrorless Comparison

A few years ago, our reader Alfredo suggested an idea for an article. Since we test the autofocus performance of many cameras at the same red kite feeding stations, why not publish a list of all the cameras we use with their keeper rate for birds in flight? I liked ... Read more

mirrorlesscomparison.com

This link is to a post I made about the AF prowess of the A7IV in another thread. This very loose field test was an eye-opener for me.

Sony - A7C vs. A7 iv

Yes, but the OP's question is asked as a comparison to his experience with the A7R-III. I can say without question the A7-IV beats it hands down, by a lot. Even the a7C beats the R III hands down when it comes to AF. I was reminded of this just this week when I had the R with me on a family...

cameraderie.org

Regarding the resolution, I do find myself liking the 42MP of the RIII more than I thought I would. Yes, it's a memory hog as compared to the IV, and I'm not sure I'd want to deal with the R-IV or the A1, but when things are moving fast and getting the action means more than composition it's nice to have those added MP to fix composition in post. I've wondered aloud before if Sony's planned A9-III might sport a newer 35-40MP stacked sensor or if they'll keep it around 24 to fill that sensitivity niche. Although looking at the photons to photos DR chart, Sony has been able to exceed the DR of the 9 by a 1/2 to 1 stop with the A7-IV's 33MP. That sensor or something similar in resolution but a stacked version would be amazing.

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

One thing you don't mention is your aperture settings. This may be negated by your problems shooting in bright light, but it does have an effect. I don't know what the RII is rated at, but the IV is rated down to f/22.

There are posts in this forum talking about AF and advances made in the various models. I have the IV and the RIII and have commented previously that the IV is lightyears ahead of the RIII in AF. The sensor itself is pretty amazing too, with very wide DR.

One good reference is this article at Mirrorless Comparison, which ranks cameras for BIF based on the author's testing. While I understand we aren't talking about BIF specifically, the information is directly related since we're talking about action focusing. In the summary list of 24 cameras, The A1 is #1, the A9/9II is #2, the A7IV is #3, The A7R-IV is #7, A7 III is #9, The A6400 is #12, The A6500 is #16, and the A7R-III is #20. The A7R-II didn't make the list but is mentioned under 'other cameras'.

Here's a link to the list:

The Best Mirrorless Cameras for Birds in Flight Ranked - Mirrorless Comparison

A few years ago, our reader Alfredo suggested an idea for an article. Since we test the autofocus performance of many cameras at the same red kite feeding stations, why not publish a list of all the cameras we use with their keeper rate for birds in flight? I liked ... Read more

mirrorlesscomparison.com

And a link to the entire article. It's a pretty interesting read regardless of your brand preference.

The Best Mirrorless Cameras for Birds in Flight Ranked - Mirrorless Comparison

A few years ago, our reader Alfredo suggested an idea for an article. Since we test the autofocus performance of many cameras at the same red kite feeding stations, why not publish a list of all the cameras we use with their keeper rate for birds in flight? I liked ... Read more

mirrorlesscomparison.com

This link is to a post I made about the AF prowess of the A7IV in another thread. This very loose field test was an eye-opener for me.

Sony - A7C vs. A7 iv

Yes, but the OP's question is asked as a comparison to his experience with the A7R-III. I can say without question the A7-IV beats it hands down, by a lot. Even the a7C beats the R III hands down when it comes to AF. I was reminded of this just this week when I had the R with me on a family...

cameraderie.org

Regarding the resolution, I do find myself liking the 42MP of the RIII more than I thought I would. Yes, it's a memory hog as compared to the IV, and I'm not sure I'd want to deal with the R-IV or the A1, but when things are moving fast and getting the action means more than composition it's nice to have those added MP to fix composition in post. I've wondered aloud before if Sony's planned A9-III might sport a newer 35-40MP stacked sensor or if they'll keep it around 24 to fill that sensitivity niche. Although looking at the photons to photos DR chart, Sony has been able to exceed the DR of the 9 by a 1/2 to 1 stop with the A7-IV's 33MP. That sensor or something similar in resolution but a stacked version would be amazing.

I shoot mostly wide open, weather it's action or portrait, mostly for the DoF because it's one of the reasons I wanted to go 35mm FF, the keep my shutter speed as high as I can (I am learning that this format size is a lot more punishing when the shutter speed is not high enough but it could also be the lesser effective IBIS then smaller formats, but I can only speak to the Sony mount and not Nikon, Canon or Panasonic) and still being used to shoot wide open from the Micro Four Thirds days.
I do believe that the Sony a7R II is rated to CAF to f 11 and in low light it can AF (don't know if it's single or continuous) to -2 EV with a f 1.4 lens.
I do follow Mirrorless and really appreciate their work. It's a strange situation in the Sony lineup where the a7 IV has all the Speed (except for black-out free option) with lacks the buffer, the a9 has the buffer and the speed but lacks the resolution and DR, the a1 has all of them but costs as much as buying both cameras. So a middle ground is more expensive option.
The only thing I find disappointing with the Sony a7 IV is the electronic shutter roll, which is as excessive as the a7C I used to have. Being forced to use mechanical shutter only for 5 FPS on my Sony a7R II makes me forget how bad it can get.

I would imagine Sony would keep the a9 and the a1 seperated for marketing and extra cash so I doubt they will increas the MP in the a9 III until the a1 II has at least double of a9 but i would love to be wrong.

Maybe I should stick with Sony a9 (Mark I) for pet action portraits as I wouldn't need the reach and use it with a (future purchase) Tamron 70-180mm f 2.8 Di III VXD. And for events and indoor portraits get the Sony a7 IV.
That would be the plan for the next 2 years.

 

[Brownie]

I shoot mostly wide open, weather it's action or portrait, mostly for the DoF because it's one of the reasons I wanted to go 35mm FF, the keep my shutter speed as high as I can (I am learning that this format size is a lot more punishing when the shutter speed is not high enough but it could also be the lesser effective IBIS then smaller formats, but I can only speak to the Sony mount and not Nikon, Canon or Panasonic) and still being used to shoot wide open from the Micro Four Thirds days.
I do believe that the Sony a7R II is rated to CAF to f 11 and in low light it can AF (don't know if it's single or continuous) to -2 EV with a f 1.4 lens.
I do follow Mirrorless and really appreciate their work. It's a strange situation in the Sony lineup where the a7 IV has all the Speed (except for black-out free option) with lacks the buffer, the a9 has the buffer and the speed but lacks the resolution and DR, the a1 has all of them but costs as much as buying both cameras. So a middle ground is more expensive option.
The only thing I find disappointing with the Sony a7 IV is the electronic shutter roll, which is as excessive as the a7C I used to have. Being forced to use mechanical shutter only for 5 FPS on my Sony a7R II makes me forget how bad it can get.

I would imagine Sony would keep the a9 and the a1 seperated for marketing and extra cash so I doubt they will increas the MP in the a9 III until the a1 II has at least double of a9 but i would love to be wrong.

Maybe I should stick with Sony a9 (Mark I) for pet action portraits as I wouldn't need the reach and use it with a (future purchase) Tamron 70-180mm f 2.8 Di III VXD. And for events and indoor portraits get the Sony a7 IV.
That would be the plan for the next 2 years.

Actually, the A9 has the speed with the stacked sensor, and the A7-IV has the larger buffer, over 800 shots using a CF card. The reason the IV is slower on the shutter is the non-stacked sensor readout. The 6FPS for uncompressed RAW is more than enough for my use.

I think Sony will up the ante on the A9-III. The A1 is 50MP, they could easily bump it to 36-40MP and still be below the A1. They can separate the two further with features sets.

 

[John King]

Regardless of brand or wide open aperture, every single lens I have any experience with is better at least one stop down from wide open ...

The 12-100 is a brilliant lens, even at f/4; but it's even better at f/5.6 to f/11 ...

 

[LightSpeed]

Regardless of brand or wide open aperture, every single lens I have any experience with is better at least one stop down from wide open ...

The 12-100 is a brilliant lens, even at f/4; but it's even better at f/5.6 to f/11 ...

I do thirds
Every single lens that I have doesn't matter.
It's not the lens that matters.
The light matters.
All of the lenses are good.
It's the light, John King
And being at the right place at the right time. To catch that light.
I know how to do it, but, it doesn't happen every time..
Any camera can capture a good image , depending on time and light.
Remember this .
Yous a good man , John King.

Sometimes I get lucky
A. Smith

 

[John King]

@LightSpeed While I agree with you mostly, Arthur, I reckon it always helps if a person develops the basic competences. It's something that you are so far past, you have probably forgotten it, or just do it automatically. Which is exactly how it should become.

Knowledge of how lenses behave is part of that, and many seem unaware of this, and other basics.

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

So in the grand scheme of things???????????????????????? If the shot. the right light, isn't there? Now what? You guys are not limited by specs , or, megapixels.
You're limited by , being there, where you need to be. When it happens. And............you have to be ready. It happens fast.
All this BS about camera specs, means nothing. Buy the worlds best camera. Then go out and see what you can do with it.
None of that shit matters. This is coming from me Heart. To all of you. I been there.
I say this with love. And hope.

I would love to have all the dedication in the world to have the best light at the best moments in the beat locations. But I can not.
My traveling options are limited to how far I can afford to go by public transport (I don't own a car or driver's license), the time of day that the transport is available or walking on foot, and what I can do in one or two days or a couple of weeks holiday per year.

Ideally I would spend from 05:00 to 22:00 every day for landscape, wildlife, macro, street photography. I have the patience to watch the grass grow. I would love to practice and improve as much as I could but life constantly and I always have to make a sacrifice.

Now gear and specs is not everything, what it can do is make getting the results you want easier or quicker but that's never a guarantee that is the BEST result possible.
You will always have people who swear that only the best gear will get you the best result and anything less is not worth it. For me G Master is beyond what I can afford so I try my best with 3rd party and/or 2nd hand and zoom lenses. Then you have those that swear by light and skill to be the only thing you will ever need for the best result. That will require significant amount of time, dedication and luck

I try to balance between the two, not always successfully, and hope that one day I can give up a day job for a dedicated photograph career.

(PS. Trying to balance light, location and client work, like pet portrait photography, and a day job is basically impossible)

 

[Brownie]

So in the grand scheme of things???????????????????????? If the shot. the right light, isn't there? Now what? You guys are not limited by specs , or, megapixels.
You're limited by , being there, where you need to be. When it happens. And............you have to be ready. It happens fast.
All this BS about camera specs, means nothing. Buy the worlds best camera. Then go out and see what you can do with it.
None of that shit matters. This is coming from me Heart. To all of you. I been there.
I say this with love. And hope.

Yes, light is everything. Lack of light is also everything.

Being there and being ready can be as much about equipment as ability. I've not only been there, I am there, every time I go to the track. Wrong equipment = bad shots. I experience it EVERY TIME, even switching from one camera body to another.

Your experiences may be 100% true for your experiences, but they are not 100% true for everyone's experiences, and certainly not everyone's situation. It's best not to try and paint with too-broad a brush.

 

[John King]

Serendipity is present in every 'good' photograph.

Being prepared and knowing your gear intimately increases your chances of capturing that serendipitous moment.

 

[AlwaysOnAuto]

You might find this helpful:

I haven't watched it since I don't own an A7Rii, but I've watched other videos of his and found them to be quite informative.

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

You might find this helpful:

I haven't watched it since I don't own an A7Rii, but I've watched other videos of his and found them to be quite informative.

I appreciate everything he shared and mentioned but it was nothing that I did not know about or used already.

 

[LightSpeed]

One thing you don't mention is your aperture settings. This may be negated by your problems shooting in bright light, but it does have an effect. I don't know what the RII is rated at, but the IV is rated down to f/22.

There are posts in this forum talking about AF and advances made in the various models. I have the IV and the RIII and have commented previously that the IV is lightyears ahead of the RIII in AF. The sensor itself is pretty amazing too, with very wide DR.

One good reference is this article at Mirrorless Comparison, which ranks cameras for BIF based on the author's testing. While I understand we aren't talking about BIF specifically, the information is directly related since we're talking about action focusing. In the summary list of 24 cameras, The A1 is #1, the A9/9II is #2, the A7IV is #3, The A7R-IV is #7, A7 III is #9, The A6400 is #12, The A6500 is #16, and the A7R-III is #20. The A7R-II didn't make the list but is mentioned under 'other cameras'.

Here's a link to the list:

The Best Mirrorless Cameras for Birds in Flight Ranked - Mirrorless Comparison

A few years ago, our reader Alfredo suggested an idea for an article. Since we test the autofocus performance of many cameras at the same red kite feeding stations, why not publish a list of all the cameras we use with their keeper rate for birds in flight? I liked ... Read more

mirrorlesscomparison.com

And a link to the entire article. It's a pretty interesting read regardless of your brand preference.

The Best Mirrorless Cameras for Birds in Flight Ranked - Mirrorless Comparison

A few years ago, our reader Alfredo suggested an idea for an article. Since we test the autofocus performance of many cameras at the same red kite feeding stations, why not publish a list of all the cameras we use with their keeper rate for birds in flight? I liked ... Read more

mirrorlesscomparison.com

This link is to a post I made about the AF prowess of the A7IV in another thread. This very loose field test was an eye-opener for me.

Sony - A7C vs. A7 iv

Yes, but the OP's question is asked as a comparison to his experience with the A7R-III. I can say without question the A7-IV beats it hands down, by a lot. Even the a7C beats the R III hands down when it comes to AF. I was reminded of this just this week when I had the R with me on a family...

cameraderie.org

Regarding the resolution, I do find myself liking the 42MP of the RIII more than I thought I would. Yes, it's a memory hog as compared to the IV, and I'm not sure I'd want to deal with the R-IV or the A1, but when things are moving fast and getting the action means more than composition it's nice to have those added MP to fix composition in post. I've wondered aloud before if Sony's planned A9-III might sport a newer 35-40MP stacked sensor or if they'll keep it around 24 to fill that sensitivity niche. Although looking at the photons to photos DR chart, Sony has been able to exceed the DR of the 9 by a 1/2 to 1 stop with the A7-IV's 33MP. That sensor or something similar in resolution but a stacked version would be amazing.

I usually don't go by any of that. These same people claimed that the A7R4-A is not a good camera for birds in flight while using the 200-600mm lens.
I have proven that wrong about a thousand times in less than a year. Could there have been a few lenses or bodies that slipped through the cracks? Of course.
But what I've mostly seen is user error/inexperience. The A7R4 paired with the 200-600 is ridiculously good with birds in flight. Far far better than, eons better than the E-M1X+ 7500.00 150-400mm f4.5 olympus that I used to use. Just as soon take the Olympus camera lens and all and dump it in the garbage in comparison. IN fact that is why I transitioned away from Olympus.

 

[Brownie]

Well, now I'm confused.

Every single lens that I have doesn't matter.
It's not the lens that matters.
The light matters.
All of the lenses are good.
It's the light, John King
And being at the right place at the right time. To catch that light.
I know how to do it, but, it doesn't happen every time..
Any camera can capture a good image , depending on time and light.
Remember this .

I usually don't go by any of that. These same people claimed that the A7R4-A is not a good camera for birds in flight while using the 200-600mm lens.
I have proven that wrong about a thousand times in less than a year. Could there have been a few lenses or bodies that slipped through the cracks? Of course.
But what I've mostly seen is user error/inexperience. The A7R4 paired with the 200-600 is ridiculously good with birds in flight. Far far better than, eons better than the E-M1X+ 7500.00 150-400mm f4.5 olympus that I used to use. Just as soon take the Olympus camera lens and all and dump it in the garbage in comparison. IN fact that is why I transitioned away from Olympus.

So, is it that any camera can capture a good image depending on time and light, or is it that Olympus cameras can't shoot BIF, but Sony can? You're contradicting yourself, so I have no idea what your position is. The funny part is while you say you "don't go by any of that", the ranking supports your position. The A7R-IV comes in ahead of every Olympus except the OM-1.

But here's what I do know. I can take the A7-IV and the A7R-III out on the exact same day, using the exact same lenses, under the exact same conditions, and the A7-IV will excel on AF tracking where the A7R-III fails. Now, there isn't a damned thing wrong with the R-III. It has a fantastic sensor and makes beautiful photos, it's just has AF that's a few generations older. Perfectly acceptable, not a dig on the camera, it just is.

 

[LightSpeed]

I edited this, rather than heating up some debate with another who likes to do it.
If he doesn't think that I know what I'm talking about, so be it. If he's confused, he did it to himself.
Has nothing to do with me.

 

[Brownie]

You have caused animosity time and time again. Seems like you want to fight and argue about camera specs which ( in some cases/most cases) don't amount to a hill of beans. Oh yeah I know, you photograph NASCAR. Big whoop. That's as simple as a sunset photo, or flower shot. " Here comes the car again........I get another chance...........oh here it comes again...............wait wait..........here is comes again!" Round and round and round. And you get to be there. As many shots as you want. This does not happen with what I do. I do not know how you can compare THAT with wildlife photography. It's like comparing an apple to a Corvette.
Did I get any nice images with olympus? Of course I did. Quite a few actually. Is the Sony auto focus better? Yes. Is the Sony 200-600mm better than the Olympus 150-400mm, probably not.
There were other reasons for transitioning to Sony, None of them had anything to do with not being able to capture a good image with Olympus.

You seem to think because you shoot the a74 that it's the best camera in the world. No other camera can compete. Which is complete and utter BS. And anyone who listens to you and takes that as the gospel, is a fool.
I think I mentioned this before, but, Im gonna do it again. Every time I turn around you're snippy with people, and like to argue with them, sometimes even insult them.
I'm not trying to insult you, though this may. Let me put it another way. I'll take you on with any camera that I'm holding in my hand at the time. On any day of the week and twice on Sunday's.
Since you're trying to make me look foolish, for whatever reasons, which in your case could be just about anything. Since I don't have access to Nascar, I'm wondering , since you're so all fired good, if you have access to wildlife. If you do, lets go at it and shut you up once and for all. Because my friend, that's what will happen. It's not because I'm the greatest photographer in the world. I'm clearly not. But I'm tired of you and your BS and I'm willing to prove my point.
In fact, I'll go a step further..........I have access to over 10,000 acres of private property. You are more than welcome to ( I know this is dumb because no one will do it) come for a stay and we will hit the field. At the end of the day, might even have a few beers. I believe your tune will change thereafter. After you get tore up, badly. It will still be fun after a few beer's. The migration is coming. I will be there. And you could too. The Gators will be mating too. Im talkin wild, not the zoo. You might end up with a shot of a lifetime. You know why? Because ANY camera can take a good photo.

And yes......I can see your circle of confusion.

I'm sorry? The OP asked a question and I responded based on my direct experience with two specific cameras in the Sony line. I cited a list from an online review of camera action focusing that I though he may find informative, since that was the basis of his question. There was nothing in this thread that is antagonistic until you decided to come in and pick a fight. In fact, the thread sat dormant for over a month.

Your posts are contradictory. I pointed them out because it was clear you came into the thread with a motive, which is now obvious. I have never been snippy or short with you (until now), and what I say to anyone else is none of your business. I've also never said I was good, but I know you need to push that idea to make your point. If you take the time to read (and comprehend) the posts they're about the camera's abilities and are in response to questions, almost always about AF.

As for the rest of it, you go ahead and feel superior since that seems to be important to you. I am not a wildlife shooter, nor BIF, and other than dabbling and the occasional opportunity have no desire to put any effort into it. You sure are insulting a lot of photographers in this forum who enjoy shooting flowers and sunsets with your self-righteous rant. I guess in your world, none of that counts. In your own words, "big whoop".

You're trying to act noble by calling me out, but you aren't really defending anything or anyone, it sounds more like you're butthurt. It's an open forum, if you don't like what I say, don't read my posts. You can bet I won't be reading yours.

 

[LightSpeed]

Oh good, you saw it.
Anything you'd like to add?
To me, you're just another tech speccy on the internet. Nothing wrong with that.
Personally, I don't care what you read on the Internet.
Exposing what you are is good enough for me

 

[LightSpeed]

olympus

 

[LightSpeed]

olympus

 

[LightSpeed]

Sony