1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Oh you BEAST!
    :D
     
    addicknchips likes this.
  2. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Ey up!

    There's an A6000 and a couple of lenses in the for sale section!

    I keep looking at these... there's also a used one at Wex for £320 and new ones are a reasonable £450.

    Of course I don't need one.
     
  3. chrism_scotland

    chrism_scotland

    Messages:
    7,026
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm fairly brand agnostic having tried almost everything (except Canon or Leica), I actually started with a Sony DSLR way back before upgrading a few times and eventually seeking smaller options in Olympus and Fuji, I then went back to DSLR first with a Pentax K20D and then a line-up of Nikon's as I moved up to full frame (D7000>D600>D800>D750).

    Eventually tried mirrorless again with the A7 and X-Pro 1 before settling with the X-Pro 2 and X-T2 for almost all of last year and crucially actually enjoyed taking photo's again.

    But the call of full-frame remains strong and something that doesn't have an X-Trans sensor so picked up the Pentax K1 and now also have an A7rii while I decide my future path kit wise.
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake and jonneymendoza like this.
  4. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I started with a Kodak Instamatic and later had both Nikon and Canon SLR's with various 35mm compacts and RF's along the way before going digital with a Fuji S602 and then switching to Canon DSLR's.

    These days I still use MFT probably more than my A7. At the mo I have a 12-35mm f2.8 on my RF style GX7 and it gives nice results and from f2.8 to f4 it gives a very similar look to FF from f5-f8 or so. I have a 17mm f1.8 on my RF style GX80 which I use mostly for indoor shooting as the mechanical shutter is very quiet and it'll switch from mechanical to electronic shutter as it thinks best. MFT can't match the quality of my A7 if I go looking for the differences.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  5. Orangecroc

    Orangecroc

    Messages:
    766
    Name:
    Ben
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I keep getting tempted by the price of the a6000 but I'm going to hold out for the a6300 to drop into this price range.
     
  6. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I'm tempted but I like the idea of having the electronic shutter available and AFAIK the A6000 doesn't have it. An A6300 might be very tempting at some point but I think I'll always pass and end up keeping MFT. Probably :D
     
  7. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Its might be a good deal to go for the sale in classifieds. Keep the lenses and sell the A6000 when you find an A6300 at a lower price. You can probably sell back A6000 for a similar price, I doubt it'll drop much further.

    Of course all this assuming you'd like to own something in the 12mm and 35mm focal lengths. Personally not a fan of that 35mm lens...

    A6000 doesn't have silent shutter or more annoying the level meter in EVF (yes it annoys me a LOT! :mad:)
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  8. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I keep thinking of getting MFT but I can't afford to keep FF/A7RII and E-M1II
     
  9. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The good things about MFT are the size of the kit, the dinky but good lenses and the fact that you can pick up used bargains relatively easily. I've bought most of my lenses used. I had the early GF1 and G1 and liked the image quality but they suffer against modern cameras at the higher ISO's. Later bodies run the risk of shutter shock with some lenses up to something around 1/300 and if switching to the electronic shutter you run the risk of banding under some flickering lighting. The issue is a killer for me but thankfully the very latest models have a redesigned shutter which seems to have cured the problem for real world shooting.
     
  10. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    actually used market was one of the reasons that put me off m43. Not many people seem to be buying selling m43 stuff (at least the lenses I wanted) especially compared to Sony and Canon.

    Also I prefer 3:2 format as suppose to the 4:3 formats.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  11. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I've not had much trouble finding the MFT lenses I wanted...

    The original Panny 14-42mm, Oly 9-18mm, Panny 12-35mm f2.8, 45-200mm, Panny 14mm f2.5 (now sold,) Oly 17, 25 and 45mm f1.8 all bought used. The only new ones I've bought new were the Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 (now sold) and as part of kits the Panny 20mm f1.7 (now sold) and 14-42mm Mega OIS.

    I now have MFT lenses from 12 to 200mm. That'd cost a bit more :D for my A7 and be bulkier too.

    I went from shooting / converting first 4:3 then 3:2 and now I'm back with 4:3. I prefer 4:3 for portrait orientation.
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  12. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I shoot landscapes (colour, b&w and IR) for which I prefer 3:2.

    The main attraction of m43 for is the focus stacking/bracketing feature for macro and the amazing weathersealing (which I would hope will let me shoot in the rain). I want a good sensor to go with it too. So I'd be looking at a good body with these features, the new laowa 7.5mm f/2 lens, oly 60mm macro (to use the macro stacking features) and some macro friendly lighting. Also a oly 12-40mm/2.8.
    How much would this cost me? (I prefer buying used)
     
    Last edited: May 19, 2017
  13. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Fuguru likes this.
  14. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Kevin Raber has posted his 16-35mm preview with sample pictures at Luminous Landscape. He's impressed and he's ordered one and says he'll post a review when his copy arrives. He says the next article will focus on the 12-24mm.
     
  15. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Dunno, I'm by no means an expert on prices or even where the best deals are... Whenever I fancy something I just check the used dealers I usually check... Ffordes, London Camera Exchange, Wex, etc... or just type what I'm looking for into Google and see if anything comes up, also evil bay and the for sale section here and usually something pops up sooner or later. I suppose the key is patience and sticking to your budget if at all possible.
     
  16. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Sorry I should have worded that better because I can definitely work out prices of lenses.
    So what's the cheapest body with focus stacking stacking and focus bracketing feature plus weather sealing. Is it E-M1? I can't seem to find a good reference which gives an answer :thinking:
     
  17. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
  18. chrism_scotland

    chrism_scotland

    Messages:
    7,026
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  19. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I haven't owned the cheaper Canon 85mm f1.8 but did research it quite a bit before I bought the Sigma f1.4 and from what I remember the Canon lens was widely regarded as being rather ho-hum. I'd bet the Sony lens crushes it, but it at a higher price (I think.)

    Before I bought into Sony I thought that Sigma 85mm f1.4 was the best af lens I'd ever used, if the new Sony gets anywhere near that, and I expect it to, I doubt I'd be disappointed.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
    chrism_scotland likes this.
  20. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    canon lens is 25+ years old optics made for film cameras. Sony is more recent, which attributes for both the price difference and sharpness.
    I personally use the canon 100mm f2 which is 85mm's sister lens. Its certainly very sharp from wide open but probably not as much as the new Sony 85mm f/1.8 but sharper than canon 85mm/1.8
     
  21. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    It always surprised me that the Canon system is widely regarded but the lenses I was interested in seemed rather... relatively poor. I'd single out for disappointment the fact that there was no good 50 f1.8 or f1.4mm, no 85mm f1.4 at all, a ho hum f1.8, a 28mm f1.8 that seemed lacklustre and at the time I bought and regretted buying the EF-S 10-22 and 17-85mm as both looked and felt cheap with IMO relatively poor optical performance. The 70-300mm I had was also a bit of a dog with noisy focus, no manual over ride and a rotating front element. I ended up with mostly Sigma lenses.
     
  22. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    every system have their rubbish lenses, on Sony e-mount its mostly all APS-C ones - 16mm, 20mm pancakes, 55-210mm comes to mind. But I find lenses generally overpriced for what they are on Sony, canon lenses certainly are cheaper and better value for money.
     
  23. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Well, they're arguably better value but the ones I've looked at and owned have also (again) arguably been less than thrilling

    I've read a lot of criticism of the Sony APS-C line up but trying to take a step back and looking at the more sensible review sites and blogs I think they'd be good enough for me and it's really only the lack of a compact and reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 that's stopped me from ditching MFT for an A6xxx system. The current 24mm f1.x seems to be widely regarded as being very good but to me it just looks a bit too big for a small rf style body especially when the Panny GX80 and Oly 17mm f1.8 make such a compact package. Actually the A7 and 35mm f2.8 make a nice compact package too...

    1-Untitled-1.jpg
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
  24. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Double postie...

    But while I'm here, have a flower picture :D

    DSC02833.JPG
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
  25. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ok lets talk about Sony vs. canon with the lenses you posted.

    Sony 24mm f/1.8 IMO is not reasonably priced. The canon EF-M 22mm f/2 is smaller, sharper and about 7-8 times cheaper. The only place Sony is better is the focussing speed. Even that has been vastly improved if canon 22mm is use with EOS-M5/6

    Sony 35mm f/2.8 while small and very sharp is not much better than canon 40mm f/2.8. Both focus equally fast. Sony is sharper in centre but canon is more evenly sharp across the frame i.e. sharper in corners (but past f/4 we are splitting hairs). Canon version also focusses closer and has better bokeh. Paid £75 for EF40, £450 for FE35 (5 times more).

    I have owned and used all the above lenses.

    And while I am here my flower pic ;) :D
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
    woof woof likes this.
  26. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I didn't say the 24mm was reasonably priced but all things are relative but it's the lack of a compact and IMO reasonably priced 24mm f1.8 that's stopped me in my tracks every time I think about getting an A6xxx. I might get one one day though as I've always fancied one :D

    I haven't owned Canon for some years now. I know they're brought out some newer lenses and updated others but what was available and on my radar at the time didn't grab me and the Sigma alternatives usually looked sexier. Sigma wise I had the APS-C only 30mm f1.4, the 50 and 85mm f1.4's, 20mm f1.8 and 12-24mm. The full frame jobbies all saw use on my 20D and 5D. On the whole though I'd only go back to DSLR's with a gun to my head.

    I don't file my pictures by camera or lens type but here's a few 35mm f2.8 shots that I like from Thailand. I've used it for a lot of people shots too, I seem happiest at about 35 to 50mm with wider seeming a bit much and longer mostly seeming a bit tight.

    DSC04459.JPG DSC06841.JPG DSC07116.JPG
     
  27. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    And while I'm looking at old shots and for no other reason, an unforgettable trip to Kazakhstan (I went three times, if you get the chance...go!) 5D and Sigma 50mm f1.4...

    IMG_8450.jpg IMG_9473.jpg IMG_9515.jpg IMG_94131.jpg
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2017
  28. photosample

    photosample

    Messages:
    453
    Name:
    Kalin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    woof woof likes this.
  29. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Lovely :D
     
    photosample likes this.
  30. photosample

    photosample

    Messages:
    453
    Name:
    Kalin
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I can't argue, as someone mentioned above that a good native Sony lens are quite expensive (compared to their competition).
    I would love to have something small like 40mm F/2.8, but... nothing is perfect :)

    I got the Sony FE 55mm F/1.8 - I would say versatile lens. Quite good and fast.
    Event that I still have mixed fillings.

    Did I regret changing to Sony - not a single bit.
    The possibility to adapt thousands of old lenses and play with them is heaven :)

    For example this old Vivitar 28mm F/2.8 Auto Wide angle manual lens.
    I got this lens may be two years ago.
    First I didn’t have the adapter, as it was old Canon FD mount.
    I got one cheap from ebay, used the lens and left it in the cupboard.
    The adapter is very cheap and lens keep detach from the camera very easy.

    But as you can see the results could be good :)
    And you have new toy to play for a few pounds. Actually this lens cost me 7 pounds incl. delivery and I think 10 pounds for the adapter.

    Of course for fast moving subjects.. forget it.
    a few more from the walk yesterday with that lens:

    [​IMG]Old Vivitar 28mm F/2.8 Auto Wide angle manual lens by Kalin Kalpachev, on Flickr



    [​IMG]Old Vivitar 28mm F/2.8 Auto Wide angle manual lens by Kalin Kalpachev, on Flickr



    [​IMG]Sir Alfred Hitchcock Hotel by Kalin Kalpachev, on Flickr
     
    woof woof likes this.
  31. chrism_scotland

    chrism_scotland

    Messages:
    7,026
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    woof woof likes this.
  32. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    My A7 and 55mm f1.8 see a Squirrel! Probably at f1.8. I had to let the sky blow out as it was too dark in the wood to stop it and stand any chance of seeing anything.

    The 16:9 pictures are crops, usually something between 50 and 100%.

    1-DSC07400.jpg

    Crop.

    1-DSC07400-C.jpg

    Crop.

    1-DSC07438-C.jpg

    Crop.

    1-DSC07485-C.jpg
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2017
    addicknchips likes this.
  33. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    More...

    1-DSC07409.jpg

    A bit of ca here...

    1-DSC07489-C.jpg

    1-DSC07493.jpg

    1-DSC07494.jpg
     
    photosample and SsSsSsSsSnake like this.
  34. addicknchips

    addicknchips

    Messages:
    3,526
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  35. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I got a lot of OOF shots as the squirrels move too fast for me, one quick move of the head and it's OOF. f1.8 and ISO's hitting 3200 gave only a just about adequate shutter speed.
     
  36. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
  37. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    14,554
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
  38. twist

    twist

    Messages:
    10,373
    Edit My Images:
    No
    chrism_scotland likes this.
  39. chrism_scotland

    chrism_scotland

    Messages:
    7,026
    Name:
    Chris
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Your right its a belter of a lens, I remember back in day just having that on my Nikon D600, made a great travel kit. It does sound like Sigma are going to be re-designing glass though rather than just swapping mount.
     
  40. nandbytes

    nandbytes

    Messages:
    503
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    would make sense to redesign it for mirrorless cameras since wide angle is one of the key places where size can be reduced on mirrorless. Plus the focussing motor also needs to be different to handle hybrid PDAF well. The current HSM in DSLR lenses works well for PDAF but not so as well on hybrid AF system (especially the final contrast detection bit where it locks focus)
     

Share This Page