The Amazing Sony A1/A7/A9/APS-C & Anything else welcome Mega Thread!

woof woof said:
I'm surprised that you'd consider a camera as expensive as the fuji, it's another world to me but maybe you wouldn't spend what I have on cars :D

I agree with the A7 for primes idea :D

There's no photography for me today... it's another dull day and no one can be bothered going out.
Click to expand...

I made the mistake of trying one and felt that the combo of GFX50 and 32-64 would cover off about 80% of what I shoot, but ultimately £8300 on one body and lens seemed crazy when I actually compared, it seems that the A7rii and even my Pentax K1 can actually run it close.

Fuguru said:
Buy G Master lenses :D
Click to expand...

Haha, the only one I'd potentially be tempted with the the 24-70 f2.8 as I really didn't get on with the 24-70 f4 before, however if I was really having to drop almost £2000 on it I think I'd be looking at cheaper adapted Canon or Sony DSLR options first
 
Last edited:
chrism_scotland said:
I made the mistake of trying one and felt that the combo of GFX50 and 32-64 would cover off about 80% of what I shoot, but ultimately £8300 on one body and lens seemed crazy when I actually compared, it seems that the A7rii and even my Pentax K1 can actually run it close.



Haha, the only one I'd potentially be tempted with the the 24-70 f2.8 as I really didn't get on with the 24-70 f4 before, however if I was really having to drop almost £2000 on it I think I'd be looking at cheaper adapted Canon or Sony DSLR options first
Click to expand...
The 24-70mm f2.8 G Master is a epic lens, they all are I suppose.... cost aside.
 
There's just too many issues with Fuji for me to get over. I like the thought of the manual dials but in reality I know I'd rather change the settings with one finger with my eye to the VF so the manual dials would be mostly to be looked at and loved rather than be a tool upgrade, the potential mushy file issue would bother me as would the arguably fiddled more than usual ISO and exposure. I can see how the Fuji's appeal with the dials and to the jpeg crowd and also Olympus in that respect too but I've shot raw for years now and I'd have a mental block going to mainly jpeg shooting and a I'm not really interested in making my pictures look like they did in 1973 all that often. There's the bulk, weight and costs too as I'd gain next to nothing going to Fuji from my minimal compact Sony kit and then there's losing the ability to use manual lenses.

One of my comments to the anti CSC crowd is that I'd only go back to DSRL's with a gun to my head but in reality I'd hate to move from the Sony A7 to anything including an APS-C CSC as I'd be making few if any cost savings and saving little in bulk weight either and I'd lose quality and the manual lens aspect.

I can see how multi and longer lens users could save going to APS-C but I've been lucky in that I like the 28 to 50mm range and have been able to keep the bulk and costs down plus I have MFT from 24 to 400mm equiv at a fraction of the cost and bulk of even a CSC APS-C system.
 
Last edited:
woof woof said:
There's just too many issues with Fuji for me to get over. I like the thought of the manual dials but in reality I know I'd rather change the settings with one finger with my eye to the VF so the manual dials would be mostly to be looked at and loved rather than be a tool upgrade, the potential mushy file issue would bother me as would the arguably fiddled more than usual ISO and exposure. I can see how the Fuji's appeal with the dials and to the jpeg crowd and also Olympus in that respect too but I've shot raw for years now and I'd have a mental block going to mainly jpeg shooting and a I'm not really interested in making my pictures look like they did in 1973 all that often. There's the bulk, weight and costs too as I'd gain next to nothing going to Fuji from my minimal compact Sony kit and then there's losing the ability to use manual lenses.

One of my comments to the anti CSC crowd is that I'd only go back to DSRL's with a gun to my head but in reality I'd hate to move from the Sony A7 to anything including an APS-C CSC as I'd be making few if any cost savings and saving little in bulk weight either and I'd lose quality and the manual lens aspect.

I can see how multi and longer lens users could save going to APS-C but I've been lucky in that I like the 28 to 50mm range and have been able to keep the bulk and costs down plus I have MFT from 24 to 400mm equiv at a fraction of the cost and bulk of even a CSC APS-C system.
Click to expand...

well you have the option with manual controls AND/OR front and back dials. also note how sony are including thew aperture ring on some their premium lenses now.
from what you describe your uses for and glass you like i think m43 would be the best choice for you and no need for the a7 at all?
 
woof woof said:
There's just too many issues with Fuji for me to get over. I like the thought of the manual dials but in reality I know I'd rather change the settings with one finger with my eye to the VF so the manual dials would be mostly to be looked at and loved rather than be a tool upgrade, the potential mushy file issue would bother me as would the arguably fiddled more than usual ISO and exposure. I can see how the Fuji's appeal with the dials and to the jpeg crowd and also Olympus in that respect too but I've shot raw for years now and I'd have a mental block going to mainly jpeg shooting and a I'm not really interested in making my pictures look like they did in 1973 all that often. There's the bulk, weight and costs too as I'd gain next to nothing going to Fuji from my minimal compact Sony kit and then there's losing the ability to use manual lenses.

One of my comments to the anti CSC crowd is that I'd only go back to DSRL's with a gun to my head but in reality I'd hate to move from the Sony A7 to anything including an APS-C CSC as I'd be making few if any cost savings and saving little in bulk weight either and I'd lose quality and the manual lens aspect.

I can see how multi and longer lens users could save going to APS-C but I've been lucky in that I like the 28 to 50mm range and have been able to keep the bulk and costs down plus I have MFT from 24 to 400mm equiv at a fraction of the cost and bulk of even a CSC APS-C system.
Click to expand...

APS-C is the sweet spot.... better IQ compared to the M4/3 systems, not quite as good as the modern Full-Frame systems but not far off. :D
Fuji XT-2's Speed, Auto-Focus, Build, Sealing, Eye-AF, GUI/MENU, EVF and in some respects IQ is notably better than the Sony A7.
I agree the Sony A7 paired with the 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 lenses is a great package but as soon as your start looking at zooms and greater focal lengths the size advantage soon diminishes.
The Sony A7 is a first generation (market tester) product and its now showing its age.
 
addicknchips said:
@chrism_scotland come on mate you know you really want my 85mm g master. :) best 85mm on the market that has af

she's a big old girl though
Click to expand...

Haha, I wouldn't mind an 85mm actually.... but it would be hard to over look the new 85 FE 1.8
 
addicknchips said:
well you have the option with manual controls AND/OR front and back dials. also note how sony are including thew aperture ring on some their premium lenses now.
from what you describe your uses for and glass you like i think m43 would be the best choice for you and no need for the a7 at all?
Click to expand...

I know you can use the Fuji both ways but for me that detracts away the appeal of the manual dials... I like the idea of them but I know I wouldn't use them and there goes one of the big appeals of the system for me.

MFT is a good system, it's compact, it's cheap and it gives better results than any film camera I've ever had but the A7 is on another level and as I've said many times I bought into FF Canon and than Sony for use when I need the best quality I can get when taking pictures of the things that matter to me... my family, my partner and things and places I have an emotional connection with and of course although I can mount my manual lenses on MFT it's a x2 crop system so it's not exactly the same and the lenses don't perform anywhere near as well as they do on my A7.

Another thing I've posted repeatedly is the need for thought, about the end result and the kit used to get it. I'm not getting at you here as like me you're an adult with money to burn (relatively...) but we have seen people on this forum repeatedly spending large amounts on gear and then selling that perfectly good gear and moving to something else and repeating the process over and over again... and sometimes I just want to shake them... but at other times I think it's all a part of life and at least it's cheaper than me swapping a perfectly good Merc for a Porsche / Lotus / whatever... At least although I have two camera systems in my mind they compliment each other, A7 for quality when it matters to me and MFT for unobtrusiveness, speed of operation, relative cheapness and coverage when I'm happy with the results.
 
Fuguru said:
APS-C is the sweet spot.... better IQ compared to the M4/3 systems, not quite as good as the modern Full-Frame systems but not far off. :D
Fuji XT-2's Speed, Auto-Focus, Build, Sealing, Eye-AF, GUI/MENU, EVF and in some respects IQ is notably better than the Sony A7.
I agree the Sony A7 paired with the 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8 lenses is a great package but as soon as your start looking at zooms and greater focal lengths the size advantage soon diminishes.
The Sony A7 is a first generation (market tester) product and its now showing its age.
Click to expand...

To me the IQ gain APS-C offers over MFT is minimal and for me you really have to go FF to see a significant improvement plus of course neither APS-C or MFT are ideal for old lenses. At the mo the A7 series and including the first generation A7 can't be beat for the combination of size, weight, cost and quality in the focal range I'm mostly interested in. As I said, go mad and go for a complete and longer focal range system and it gets expensive very quickly but assess your needs realistically and you don't hit this problem :D

The A7 has the CSC FF market to itself at the mo and Sony seem to be going for the higher end and that means size and cost. As I'm brand agnostic if there'd been a Nikon FF CSC with lenses that suited me I may have bought it.
 
woof woof said:
There's just too many issues with Fuji for me to get over. I like the thought of the manual dials but in reality I know I'd rather change the settings with one finger with my eye to the VF so the manual dials would be mostly to be looked at and loved rather than be a tool upgrade, the potential mushy file issue would bother me as would the arguably fiddled more than usual ISO and exposure. I can see how the Fuji's appeal with the dials and to the jpeg crowd and also Olympus in that respect too but I've shot raw for years now and I'd have a mental block going to mainly jpeg shooting and a I'm not really interested in making my pictures look like they did in 1973 all that often. There's the bulk, weight and costs too as I'd gain next to nothing going to Fuji from my minimal compact Sony kit and then there's losing the ability to use manual lenses.

One of my comments to the anti CSC crowd is that I'd only go back to DSRL's with a gun to my head but in reality I'd hate to move from the Sony A7 to anything including an APS-C CSC as I'd be making few if any cost savings and saving little in bulk weight either and I'd lose quality and the manual lens aspect.

I can see how multi and longer lens users could save going to APS-C but I've been lucky in that I like the 28 to 50mm range and have been able to keep the bulk and costs down plus I have MFT from 24 to 400mm equiv at a fraction of the cost and bulk of even a CSC APS-C system.
Click to expand...

Interesting thoughts and, like you say, we're all different. I haven't seen a lot of what you shoot overall but to be honest, what you've added into this thread over the months since it started haven't screamed full frame so I'm not really sure why you think you couldn't take the same images on an aps-c or m4/3 sensor?

I'd agree that a full frame sensor and good lens combination can deliver lovely results (regardless of the brand) but realistically, I'd bet that 95% of the pictures shared could have been shot on a crop sensor with good lens and even us photographers wouldn't immediately see a difference.
 
I want the best quality I can get from a compact system for when I want the best quality I can get for pictures of people and things and places that matter to me.

When I look at my pictures of my gf and family and places that I have a connection with on my screen and in print no kit I've had in the past can match the quality I can get from my A7. The 5D was lovely and for a while that was my benchmark but the A7 is more compact and just... better... and has the advantages a csc has and the pictures I can get from it are better than those I can get from mft if I look for the differences, I've posted mft v A7 pictures for comparison. If you can't see the difference between mft, aps-c and ff or don't care, and btw I've seen nothing from you that's blown my socks off either and made me want to rush out and buy the kit you use, then maybe a smartphone would suit you but I assume you think you get better shots from your gear than you'd get from a phone or you wouldn't be here day after day talking about camera gear with the rest of us gear head pixel peepers.

Fact is that a smartphone would suit many of us much of the time as would a 1inch compact, mft or aps-c but for when it matters to me I want the best quality I can get and at the mo the A7 plus a compact prime respresents the best mix of price, portability and quality for me plus of course no other csc at the mo allows me to use old lenses at their original fov. and I get enjoyment from that. So, I like the A7 for a number of reasons, compactness, quality and it's old lens friendly. ymmv.

As I've justified myself again I suppose we can get back to talking about Fuji's now?
 
woof woof said:
I want the best quality I can get from a compact system for when I want the best quality I can get for pictures of people and things and places that matter to me.

When I look at my pictures of my gf and family and places that I have a connection with on my screen and in print no kit I've had in the past can match the quality I can get from my A7. The 5D was lovely and for a while that was my benchmark but the A7 is more compact and just... better... and has the advantages a csc has and the pictures I can get from it are better than those I can get from mft if I look for the differences, I've posted mft v A7 pictures for comparison. If you can't see the difference between mft, aps-c and ff or don't care, and btw I've seen nothing from you that's blown my socks off either and made me want to rush out and buy the kit you use, then maybe a smartphone would suit you but I assume you think you get better shots from your gear than you'd get from a phone or you wouldn't be here day after day talking about camera gear with the rest of us gear head pixel peepers.

Fact is that a smartphone would suit many of us much of the time as would a 1inch compact, mft or aps-c but for when it matters to me I want the best quality I can get and at the mo the A7 plus a compact prime respresents the best mix of price, portability and quality for me plus of course no other csc at the mo allows me to use old lenses at their original fov. and I get enjoyment from that. So, I like the A7 for a number of reasons, compactness, quality and it's old lens friendly. ymmv.

As I've justified myself again I suppose we can get back to talking about Fuji's now?
Click to expand...


I forgot to add that I wasn't having a dig at your images, I agree that our own images mean much more to us than others. I've also never suggested that you should imitate me or the kit I use, just that full frame isn't always the only way to deliver an image that means something, in response to your post about feeling that you (personally) don't get the same results without it.

I would suggest that having a smartphone still has its place over any of the cameras I shoot with. I generally document my camera builds/repairs using my iPhone because it's always to hand and I can grab quick shots. That's not to say I couldn't take the 'same' photographs with a FF system but if I thought I had to use a full frame system and only shoot in RAW to document my builds then I'd be pretty ridiculous. Maybe it's laziness on my part but I only ever shoot RAW if I'm delivering shots for clients now but that's not say I'm missing anything by capturing everything else in JPG and saving myself some editing time/storage capacity but let's not get into the whole JPG/RAW discussion as well! Also, there are clear advantages to using a larger-sensor camera with interchangeable lenses instead of a smartphone but the difference is understanding when those actually matter.

Anyway, back to the Sony thread with a bit of other brand discussion mixed in just so it's not a dictatorship thread ;0)
 
Last edited:
Squeezed in a very quick couple of shots with the A7rii today, this thing is great with the 55mm although didn't find manual focusing as good as it was on closer objects, probably an advert for buying more native glass if I'm honest!

20170511 - The Crags - A7rii & 55mm by Chris Mitchell, on Flickr
 
woof woof said:
I want the best quality I can get from a compact system for when I want the best quality I can get for pictures of people and things and places that matter to me.

When I look at my pictures of my gf and family and places that I have a connection with on my screen and in print no kit I've had in the past can match the quality I can get from my A7. The 5D was lovely and for a while that was my benchmark but the A7 is more compact and just... better... and has the advantages a csc has and the pictures I can get from it are better than those I can get from mft if I look for the differences, I've posted mft v A7 pictures for comparison. If you can't see the difference between mft, aps-c and ff or don't care, and btw I've seen nothing from you that's blown my socks off either and made me want to rush out and buy the kit you use, then maybe a smartphone would suit you but I assume you think you get better shots from your gear than you'd get from a phone or you wouldn't be here day after day talking about camera gear with the rest of us gear head pixel peepers.

Fact is that a smartphone would suit many of us much of the time as would a 1inch compact, mft or aps-c but for when it matters to me I want the best quality I can get and at the mo the A7 plus a compact prime respresents the best mix of price, portability and quality for me plus of course no other csc at the mo allows me to use old lenses at their original fov. and I get enjoyment from that. So, I like the A7 for a number of reasons, compactness, quality and it's old lens friendly. ymmv.

As I've justified myself again I suppose we can get back to talking about Fuji's now?
Click to expand...


Fuji fan boy
 
nandbytes said:
I beg to differ (unless you are comparing to canon APS-C sensors). There is a full one stop difference between latest MFT and latest Sony/Toshiba APS-C sensors.
Click to expand...
I agree with this statement, APS-C IQ is more closer to FF, M4/3 has reached its peak at present in terms of what IQ they can extract at higher ISO/DR.

If you take a look at the DPReview studio comparison tool and compare, to my eyes the higher ISO Fuji XT-2 files are very similar to the Sony A7/7II. I would even say that the Fuji noise at higher ISO's is better while the Sony files a tad sharper.
 
Well I swithering on ordering a 24-70.... but think as I'm more likely to use that maybe for landscaping when I don't mind lugging a bigger bag that I'll take a closer look at much cheaper adapter Sony and Canon options for that... ordered a Batis 25 and 85 today, not totally sold that I'll keep the 85 but wanted to give it a go, noticed that any used ones at MPB or WEX seem to be very similar to the new price anyway and private sales seem quite rare so might as well just go new.

I think my experiences manual focusing mean its likely to be restricted to tripod work for me but if I want a 35mm I might invest in a Loxia as I've used this before and thought it was a cracker of a lens.

I've all but decided already though that the rest of my Pentax kit will go, K1, 31 and 50mm......
 
chrism_scotland said:
Well I swithering on ordering a 24-70.... but think as I'm more likely to use that maybe for landscaping when I don't mind lugging a bigger bag that I'll take a closer look at much cheaper adapter Sony and Canon options for that... ordered a Batis 25 and 85 today, not totally sold that I'll keep the 85 but wanted to give it a go, noticed that any used ones at MPB or WEX seem to be very similar to the new price anyway and private sales seem quite rare so might as well just go new.

I think my experiences manual focusing mean its likely to be restricted to tripod work for me but if I want a 35mm I might invest in a Loxia as I've used this before and thought it was a cracker of a lens.

I've all but decided already though that the rest of my Pentax kit will go, K1, 31 and 50mm......
Click to expand...
The Zeiss Batis lenses are awesome, sharp and built like tanks. That lovely Zeiss POP! :D
 
I'll second Riz in saying how awesome the Batis lenses are. I've got the 25 and 85mm and they are easily my most used lenses. The 25mm is especially useful, brilliantly sharp across the frame and great for landscapes.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Oh if they did a Batis 35mm I'd be buying that..... they do look great,
Click to expand...
chrism_scotland said:
Well I swithering on ordering a 24-70.... but think as I'm more likely to use that maybe for landscaping when I don't mind lugging a bigger bag that I'll take a closer look at much cheaper adapter Sony and Canon options for that... ordered a Batis 25 and 85 today, not totally sold that I'll keep the 85 but wanted to give it a go, noticed that any used ones at MPB or WEX seem to be very similar to the new price anyway and private sales seem quite rare so might as well just go new.

I think my experiences manual focusing mean its likely to be restricted to tripod work for me but if I want a 35mm I might invest in a Loxia as I've used this before and thought it was a cracker of a lens.

I've all but decided already though that the rest of my Pentax kit will go, K1, 31 and 50mm......
Click to expand...

85mm g master is the one you want :)
 
Bizarrely, since I had my FE 24-70mm f4 repaired (the focus mechanism packed up) it seems significantly sharper than it ever did before. It makes me wonder if something was slightly out of kilter when the lens was new (perhaps even resulting in the failure?)
 
addicknchips said:
85mm g master is the one you want :)
Click to expand...

Its too big!! (and dear!)

aliengrove said:
Bizarrely, since I had my FE 24-70mm f4 repaired (the focus mechanism packed up) it seems significantly sharper than it ever did before. It makes me wonder if something was slightly out of kilter when the lens was new (perhaps even resulting in the failure?)
Click to expand...

I have tried a few 24-70 f4 lenses, one was dire but the second one was much better, I can only assume there's wide sample variation because generally it gets panned but I noticed the DXO Mark "best lenses" for the A7rii feature actually rated it relatively close to the much much dearer 24-70 f2.8 GM...
 
woof woof said:
The A7 has the CSC FF market to itself at the mo and Sony seem to be going for the higher end and that means size and cost. As I'm brand agnostic if there'd been a Nikon FF CSC with lenses that suited me I may have bought it.
Click to expand...

Not quite my friend, there is also the Leica SL, FF mirrorless, but its way out of most of us's price range.

As for the Fuji argument, to be honest I lost interest after the X-pro1, I tried an XT-1 but didn't like the Mk2 sensor's output, the EVF wouldn't adjust to suite my eyes and as said when shooting with the camera at the eye the dials are a pain, I sold mine and didn't bother trying the X-pro2 or XT-2 as they just didn't offer anything I wanted and for APS-C I'm still happy with the X-pro1.

I went to M43 with an EM5 Mkii and the Pen F, Kept the EM5, sold the Pen F and bought an A7R + 50mm F1.8, a set of auto extension tubes for when I want to shoot closer and a couple of weeks ago the 85mm F1.8.

I bought the A7R mainly for portraits and its not disappointed, in fact I'm impressed, its light enough for me to handle, easy to use once you adjust to the menu system. All round its been a pleasant surprise. You guys warned me about the loud shutter but I don't really have any issues with it, I just hope Sony come out with a 135mm thats as light as the 85mm.
 
The Leica SL...reassuringly expensive.

And with the 24-90 plus 90-280 a mere £13k ?
 
chrism_scotland said:
Its too big!! (and dear!)



I have tried a few 24-70 f4 lenses, one was dire but the second one was much better, I can only assume there's wide sample variation because generally it gets panned but I noticed the DXO Mark "best lenses" for the A7rii feature actually rated it relatively close to the much much dearer 24-70 f2.8 GM...
Click to expand...

I think there were more bad ones about than good - and the lens now has a bad reputation for being pretty soft. If you do find a good one you are in luck though as it's super light, small and well built.
 
If anyone is near the Cumbria Photo show at the Rheged Centre today and tomorrow, Sony have an A9 here. Nice bit of kit :)

Simon.
 
magicaxeman said:
Not quite my friend, there is also the Leica SL, FF mirrorless, but its way out of most of us's price range.

As for the Fuji argument, to be honest I lost interest after the X-pro1, I tried an XT-1 but didn't like the Mk2 sensor's output, the EVF wouldn't adjust to suite my eyes and as said when shooting with the camera at the eye the dials are a pain, I sold mine and didn't bother trying the X-pro2 or XT-2 as they just didn't offer anything I wanted and for APS-C I'm still happy with the X-pro1.

I went to M43 with an EM5 Mkii and the Pen F, Kept the EM5, sold the Pen F and bought an A7R + 50mm F1.8, a set of auto extension tubes for when I want to shoot closer and a couple of weeks ago the 85mm F1.8.

I bought the A7R mainly for portraits and its not disappointed, in fact I'm impressed, its light enough for me to handle, easy to use once you adjust to the menu system. All round its been a pleasant surprise. You guys warned me about the loud shutter but I don't really have any issues with it, I just hope Sony come out with a 135mm thats as light as the 85mm.
Click to expand...

I thought about mentioning Leica as I typed but to be honest they're not really on my radar. The A7 series and a compact prime or two is very probably the most I'll spend on camera gear but having said that my generous to a fault GF recently asked me if I wanted an A9 :D It's nice to be asked.... but the answer just has to be "Thank you but I'm just reading about it, I don't want one." :D

I have 85 and 135mm manual lenses. They wont stand comparison to modern stuff but for occasional use and whole image viewing they're fine :D
 
[QUOTE="woof woof, post: 7828744, member: 22277"
I have 85 and 135mm manual lenses. They wont stand comparison to modern stuff but for occasional use and whole image viewing they're fine :D[/QUOTE]

Then you haven't tried the Canon FD 85mm f1.2, it's stellar.
 
steveclem said:
Then you haven't tried the Canon FD 85mm f1.2, it's stellar.
Click to expand...

No, I have FD 85mm f1.8 and Zuiko and Rokkor f2's and of them the Rokkor is the best but stellar though the FD f1.2 may be I think my money would be on a modern f1.2 still being better :D
 
Last edited:
Does anyone use either of the LAEA3/LAEA4 adapters for Sony A Mount Glass? I see that a lot of the talk tends to be about the Canon EF Metabones adapters but I understand that any lens with an SSM or SAM motor should focus fine with the LAEA3 on the A7rii. There must be some advantage to Sony's own adapter with A Mount Glass v the Canon Metabones one, thinking compatability?

Reason I ask is that there's a couple of bits of glass that I'd like but based on cost of the native version v the amount of use they would actually get it is much much cheaper for me to look for A Mount of EF Mount options and adapt, I've seen some suggestion though that AF capability on some of these lenses is better with the A Mount Adapted than the Canon one and wondered if anyone can comment on the Sony adapters?

For info the glass I'm contemplating is the Tamron 70-300 USD and/or the Tamron 150-600 USD lens both of which are much, much cheaper than the pure native equivalent (or not really available in the case of the 150-600)...
 
There's a piece on the Fuji GFX50S v the Sony A7rII at Luminous Landscape. It's a subscription site but well worth the $12 or so it costs for a year.

Anyway, he doesn't go into an awful lot of detail about how they compare but does give example pictures and says that they're really close, that although there are colour differences he thinks they could be processed to be a pretty close match and some guy who took a look at the files couldn't tell them apart at 200%+. He says he'll say more later.

I'm sure that the cameras will have different strengths and weaknesses and that even if they're very close most of the time the Fuji will still find plenty of buyers who'll see an advantage for their use as will the Sony but they're both beyond what I'll spend :D
 
PS.
On the forums over at LL there's a guy who was robbed and stabbed in Buenos Aires "2 hours ago." He's stitched up his own leg (what?!?!) and he's on line posting about what to replace his stolen camera gear with. What a guy! :D
 
I've no idea what f1.2's are available new today but it'd be pretty strange if the fd wasn't bettered by modern lenses and if you want to compare prices you really should take into accout the cost converted into todays lingo, do that and the cost of the fd in its day when we earned 2d a week converted to todays money and the cost of whatever is newer and better now may be closer.

In my own kit bag is the 55mm f1.8 hundreds of £ better than a £15 Zuiko? Is the GM 85 hundreds better than my Rokkor? It's a silly question. Of course they are but the Zuiko/Rokkor are worth more than their value on evil bay and cost more than that in the money of their day. I expect the 85mm f1.2 situation to be the same.

I love the old stuff though :D
 
woof woof said:
I've no idea what f1.2's are available new today but it'd be pretty strange if the fd wasn't bettered by modern lenses and if you want to compare prices you really should take into accout the cost converted into todays lingo, do that and the cost of the fd in its day when we earned 2d a week converted to todays money and the cost of whatever is newer and better now may be closer.
Click to expand...

It's a fair point.

You prompted me to dig out a Canon US price list from 1986, which happens to be the year my 85L was made, and the list price was $763.50. Adjusted for inflation, that's about $1705. The EF 85/1.2L II is $1850 at full retail, so it's in the same ball park, though you do get an autofocus mechanism for the extra money (if you like that kind of thing). Unfortunately, the U.K. RRP for the same lens is £2099 inc VAT.

I cheated and got my FD as new-old-stock for about £350 and kept the change.

Besides, I get to use it on my FD film bodies too and I can't do that with any modern 85/1.2, however cheap or expensive it may be. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top