CamERA Equipment |OT| Photon Capturing Comparison Club

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
I think I'll let you guys convince my wife she doesn't need the range, lol.
When you start hitting all in ones it really turns into you need another lens that overlaps on the longer end to actually compensate for the amount of image drop off that you're going to get so either way she's going to need more than one lens. She can get one she wants, but we're telling you the downside of said lens. Not to mention the amount of light fall off at the long end is fucking preposterous, it's even a stop slower than the 100-400 maxed out, but with almost half the range. The lens is probably good optically up to around 180mm (tops) I'm going to assume till the image softens up considerably. This becomes matter of she should look through what she actually shoots to know if she's really going to need 240mm a soft 240mm at that.
 

Adder7806

Member
Dec 16, 2018
242
When you start hitting all in ones it really turns into you need another lens that overlaps on the longer end to actually compensate for the amount of image drop off that you're going to get so either way she's going to need more than one lens. She can get one she wants, but we're telling you the downside of said lens. Not to mention the amount of light fall off at the long end is fucking preposterous, it's even a stop slower than the 100-400 maxed out, but with almost half the range. The lens is probably good optically up to around 180mm (tops) I'm going to assume till the image softens up considerably. This becomes matter of she should look through what she actually shoots to know if she's really going to need 240mm a soft 240mm at that.
Oh I get it and I appreciate the advice but I'm not sure it's worth the trouble to convince her. This is probably something she'll have to experience for herself even if it costs us more money in the long run. Or she might be really happy with it. I plan on spending a lot of time researching lenses and options. I'll let her know what they are and she can choose what she think will meet her needs and make her happy cuz her being satisfied and happy is what I want the most.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Oh I get it and I appreciate the advice but I'm not sure it's worth the trouble to convince her. This is probably something she'll have to experience for herself even if it costs us more money in the long run. Or she might be really happy with it. I plan on spending a lot of time researching lenses and options. I'll let her know what they are and she can choose what she think will meet her needs and make her happy cuz her being satisfied and happy is what I want the most.
If you can rent that lens first, I honestly really don't like a lot of variable aperture lenses unless it's something that's a pro grade wildlife lens, which I'd never buy since I don't shoot wildlife. Something like a 24-105 and a 70-300 would cover a lot of ground for her and the 70-300 isn't that big of a lens.
 

Adder7806

Member
Dec 16, 2018
242
Renting the lens first is probably a really great idea. Between weight, price, desires, real life uses there is great deal to balance out. With the first big test of these cameras not coming until June (Sequoia, King's Canyon Nat'l Parks) we have a bunch of time to get it right.
 
Last edited:

Adder7806

Member
Dec 16, 2018
242
Jelly. No shame in renting, I rent a lens for pretty much every national park trip. Trying to shoehorn all your shooting into one lens, and a slow one at that, especially on a trip like that is a folly, though.
Cannot wait to see the big trees!

It's really my fault for showing her that all in ones exist in the first place. Ignorance would have been bliss in this situation but I got overly excited about getting a new camera and all the options that I just had to share with her.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Cannot wait to see the big trees!

It's really my fault for showing her that all in ones exist in the first place. Ignorance would have been bliss in this situation but I got overly excited about getting a new camera and all the options that I just had to share with her.
All in ones exist, but optically they're dogshit. I know someone that's constantly bitching at me over his Tamron 18-300 that he uses to cover events with...his pics...they're suboptimal. If the trip is as good as it sounds get something that's really good and probably rent a good gap filler and be done with it.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
And for what it’s worth, having a telephoto at Sequoia is fairly pointless, speaking from experience. In fact, you would want something even wider than 24.
 

Adder7806

Member
Dec 16, 2018
242
And for what it’s worth, having a telephoto at Sequoia is fairly pointless, speaking from experience. In fact, you would want something even wider than 24.
Until you're walking along and you desperately need to photograph that chipmunk's eyelashes that's in a tree 7 miles away. <----Real life story
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Until you're walking along and you desperately need to photograph that chipmunk's eyelashes that's in a tree 7 miles away. <----Real life story
With shit like that no lens will save you. I have a 70-200...more or less 3 actually, 200mm isn't as much zoom as it sounds like for wildlife, it helps, but I'd still rather have a good lens.
I would buy the 24-105 and rent the 16-35/4
That's a good way to go. The 24-105 is a great all rounder that I would be into if I didn't do indoor event photography. I use flash, but not all the time.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,316
Honestly if she feels she needs it, go for it. Just temper expectations and don’t expect magazine or even Instagram quality shots.

On a different note any of y’all into vintage lenses? I’ve been eyeing the Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Honestly if she feels she needs it, go for it. Just temper expectations and don’t expect magazine or even Instagram quality shots.

On a different note any of y’all into vintage lenses? I’ve been eyeing the Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.
A bad lens can really hamper someone’s enjoyment of a good camera. I didn’t even like my Fuji X-T2 until I got a lens I liked for it. I’m trying to avoid something like that where the user thinks it’s the cameras fault and not the lens. “Don’t expect Instagram quality from it” isn’t exactly something I’d slap on the box as an endorsement of said product.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,316
Sure but if she gets the 24 - 105 and the shots are still middling...will she learn that skills are main factor here?
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,316
Well it'll take practice to get better, but if she is going for an all rounder I'm assuming she isn't there. Just checked the price....I can not believe this lens is like a thousand bucks. Holy shit.
 
Oct 28, 2017
3,035
I've been using a Sony A58 for video for about four years now. I love it to death, but am looking for something with more kick, and better low light capabilities.

I have an array of A Mount lenses (especially those cheap vtg. Minoltas - hell yes) which I adore using... is the Sony A 77ii pretty much the cream of the crop for native A Mount? I have no interest in switching to E mount. Heard rumors of an A77iii down the road also... can't afford that.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Well it'll take practice to get better, but if she is going for an all rounder I'm assuming she isn't there. Just checked the price....I can not believe this lens is like a thousand bucks. Holy shit.
That's a lens you buy used. I get the concept of a walk around lens fully, but there's no such thing as a "do everything" lens, I don't look at those unless it excels at at specific niche so to speak. I think my vacation combo...would actually just be my Fuji set up or the 24-105 and a fast 35, I would think the 70-200GM would scream "mug me" as an obvious tourist.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Honestly if she feels she needs it, go for it. Just temper expectations and don’t expect magazine or even Instagram quality shots.

On a different note any of y’all into vintage lenses? I’ve been eyeing the Helios 44-2 58mm f/2.
I love my Helios but I enjoyed using it more on my Fuji. The X-H1 gave it an 85mm/2.8ish quality with great IBIS. I don’t use it all that often anymore on my Sony. Plus it looked dope as hell paired with the Fuji aesthetics.

 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,316
That's a lens you buy used. I get the concept of a walk around lens fully, but there's no such thing as a "do everything" lens, I don't look at those unless it excels at at specific niche so to speak. I think my vacation combo...would actually just be my Fuji set up or the 24-105 and a fast 35, I would think the 70-200GM would scream "mug me" as an obvious tourist.
I totally agree with you, do everything lenses are never great. I have been ok with the 24 - 70 and 70 to 300 range lenses previously, but even then one was a pro grade lens from Canon, the other was consumer zoom which happened to be a damn good example. I'm saying if her heart is set on it, it may be best for her to find out on her own.


I love my Helios but I enjoyed using it more on my Fuji. The X-H1 gave it an 85mm/2.8ish quality with great IBIS. I don’t use it all that often anymore on my Sony. Plus it looked dope as hell paired with the Fuji aesthetics.

I was intrigued...but ended up buying a Minolta Rokkor 58mm f/1.4.....well I guess I'll find out how it is. There aren't decent wide enough vintage lenses for my taste (unless I get lucky with a decently priced Leica down the line), so the eq 70 to 100 mm range makes more sense to me.
 

ArtTeitlebaum

Member
Oct 25, 2017
504
Europe
I've been using a Sony A58 for video for about four years now. I love it to death, but am looking for something with more kick, and better low light capabilities.

I have an array of A Mount lenses (especially those cheap vtg. Minoltas - hell yes) which I adore using... is the Sony A 77ii pretty much the cream of the crop for native A Mount? I have no interest in switching to E mount. Heard rumors of an A77iii down the road also... can't afford that.
I'm quite skeptical that there even will be an A77 3 in the future. Most people think Sony has abandoned the mount. So yes, the best option for a new A-mount body is the 77 ii.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
I totally agree with you, do everything lenses are never great. I have been ok with the 24 - 70 and 70 to 300 range lenses previously, but even then one was a pro grade lens from Canon, the other was consumer zoom which happened to be a damn good example. I'm saying if her heart is set on it, it may be best for her to find out on her own.
I've done most of my learning already so I try not to flush my money down the toilet, everybody has to go through that phase I guess, but if it suits her needs then more power to her.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Interesting, but not surprising, tidbit that the X-Pro 3 might be on the way this year.

If it ships as the X-T3 in a rangefinder body, is that enough for them this year? Fuji releases, if built on the X-T3, are feeling kinda boring.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
It's weird that $5,000 seems almost reasonable for the camera coming from Leica. Why such a good deal relative to their ILC bodies and lenses? Is the lens a dramatically reduced quality or something?
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,316
I would assume it's much easier to design an integrated camera and lens and they also can estimate high demand based on previous sales, as opposed to a new system containing multiple bodies, lenses that can work together. I wouldn't assume the optics would be inferior.
 

Ivalice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
708
It's weird that $5,000 seems almost reasonable for the camera coming from Leica. Why such a good deal relative to their ILC bodies and lenses? Is the lens a dramatically reduced quality or something?
The original Q was also a good deal. Would be weird for it to be dramatically more expensive. The lens looks like it’s the same 28mm Summilux which alone costs $2k except now comes with autofocus.

The dream is a Q that you can change lenses that has autofocus but I don’t know if that’s even possible.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
The original Q was also a good deal. Would be weird for it to be dramatically more expensive. The lens looks like it’s the same 28mm Summilux which alone costs $2k except now comes with autofocus.

The dream is a Q that you can change lenses that has autofocus but I don’t know if that’s even possible.
The only $2k 28mm Leica lens I can find is a manual focus f/2.8. The Summilux f/1.4 (also manual focus) is like $7k. Seems like the Q2's lens having autofocus at all is a rare thing for Leica lenses.
 

Ivalice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
708
The only $2k 28mm Leica lens I can find is a manual focus f/2.8. The Summilux f/1.4 (also manual focus) is like $7k. Seems like the Q2's lens having autofocus at all is a rare thing for Leica lenses.
Damn, there you go! Yeah. M lenses are all manual focus only which is why they are so compact while being glorious optically.

The SL lenses that have autofocus are all huuuuge, unfortunately. :(
 
Last edited:

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Interesting, but not surprising, tidbit that the X-Pro 3 might be on the way this year.

If it ships as the X-T3 in a rangefinder body, is that enough for them this year? Fuji releases, if built on the X-T3, are feeling kinda boring.
I’m starting to see Fuji as great street photo and great video cameras. Just due to the crop sensor and their iso handling I can’t see them as event photography cameras. An X-Pro 3 will be a great camera just something I wouldn’t use for my bread and butter work unless I’m using a heavy amount of flash or outdoors.
It's weird that $5,000 seems almost reasonable for the camera coming from Leica. Why such a good deal relative to their ILC bodies and lenses? Is the lens a dramatically reduced quality or something?
5k for a camera that I can’t shoot a corporate event with, pass.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
I’m not sure why Olympus is missing the milc FF boat...they make great cameras and lenses.
It's going to be a VERY crowded space and they have carved out their niche already. Their main competitor in that niche, Panasonic, is abandoning it as well, so why would Oly do anything different? You've seen the size of the L mount glass, that's not Oly's bag.
 
Nov 13, 2017
244
Interesting, but not surprising, tidbit that the X-Pro 3 might be on the way this year.

If it ships as the X-T3 in a rangefinder body, is that enough for them this year? Fuji releases, if built on the X-T3, are feeling kinda boring.
Considering the xpro2 was 2 sensors behind, I assume it will have the xt3 sensor, I don't see how they have something new iq wise there.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
Considering the xpro2 was 2 sensors behind, I assume it will have the xt3 sensor, I don't see how they have something new iq wise there.
I thought the X-Pro 2 had the X-T2 sensor so it's not two sensor old, it's just the rangefinder X-T2. The processor I believe is the older one if I'm not mistaken or at least more limited than the X-T2 sensor.
I’m not sure why Olympus is missing the milc FF boat...they make great cameras and lenses.
You want to see Olympus go bankrupt? Because that's how you go bankrupt.
 

Ivalice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
708
I want a new version of the XE3. An XE4 with the updated sensor and weather sealing would be lovely.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,710
I want a new version of the XE3. An XE4 with the updated sensor and weather sealing would be lovely.
That's a body that's not in the price structure category to get weather sealing, it's a consumer grade X-Pro. The corporations don't really care what you want and just stupidly tier everything. I'd want an A7RIII with the electronic shutter capabilities of the A9 or a Nikon D4 with the resolution of the D810 or a D810 with the speed of the D4, but they don't exist...though the A7RIII comes close to that last one.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Honestly, I think the A7RIII is the best overall package on the market today. 10fps, tons of MP for product/fine art/landscape shooting, decent IBIS, great AF and EyeAF for mirrorless and probably second only to other Sony bodies, killer battery life, high res EVF, great 4K video, ability to take TONS of lenses, and on and on for close to $2300 new. No other system seems to come close to the feature set at that price.