CamERA Equipment |OT| Photon Capturing Comparison Club

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,229
Massachusetts
I do event photography. I don't play around with F4 glass for this stuff. You can either wait for Tamron to announce something, something that they said they'd be speaking about Q1 of this year which hasn't materialized or get something now. Your choice. I financed mine. Get it used, save money and trade in some stuff you aren't using. I also really do not use iso performance as a reason not to get 2.8 zooms. If I can shoot at a lower iso range I do. F4 pretty much means I'm at 3200 at all times regardless of what I'm doing.
Right. I was at a roller derby championship in Boston this week and the longest zoom I had was the 24-105 F4 Canon. I threw it on my A6500 to crop the extra reach. Indoors, flat lighting.

The autofocus was shockingly fast for an adapted lens, but I had the ISO up to 4000 pretty much the entire time. I couldn't really budge my shutter slower than 1/320, too, so it was a rough ride. Had I been on an A7S or A7iii, I could probably have squeezed up to 6400 ISO and not been devastated.

Do you think that Sigma 70-200 2.8 Sport is worth it, or are you getting what you pay for? Same price as the 70-200 F4 Sony.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
Right. I was at a roller derby championship in Boston this week and the longest zoom I had was the 24-105 F4 Canon. I threw it on my A6500 to crop the extra reach. Indoors, flat lighting.

The autofocus was shockingly fast for an adapted lens, but I had the ISO up to 4000 pretty much the entire time. I couldn't really budge my shutter slower than 1/320, too, so it was a rough ride. Had I been on an A7S or A7iii, I could probably have squeezed up to 6400 ISO and not been devastated.

Do you think that Sigma 70-200 2.8 Sport is worth it, or are you getting what you pay for? Same price as the 70-200 F4 Sony.
You're doing video work right? That pretty much becomes an always go native scenario. I don't even use my Sigma Art FE 35 for video unless I'm manual focusing. I'm hoping the 70-200 Sport got a firmware update because I think when it first came out the video AF was shit on it.

I saw this and was like "nope" I do video work and I did a lot of graduation work just relying on the video AF on my A7RII, this probably wouldn't have been a good combo for that. The GM I bought and do not regret spending my money on not to mention it's a great photography lens.
Robert J. Freeman by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR206793 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR203543 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Like, I'm many things but I'm not a Sony shill. I even put my faith behind the 24-70GM.
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,229
Massachusetts
You're doing video work right? That pretty much becomes an always go native scenario. I don't even use my Sigma Art FE 35 for video unless I'm manual focusing. I'm hoping the 70-200 Sport got a firmware update because I think when it first came out the video AF was shit on it.

I saw this and was like "nope" I do video work and I did a lot of graduation work just relying on the video AF on my A7RII, this probably wouldn't have been a good combo for that. The GM I bought and do not regret spending my money on not to mention it's a great photography lens.
Robert J. Freeman by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR206793 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR203543 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Like, I'm many things but I'm not a Sony shill. I even put my faith behind the 24-70GM.
Yeah, I remember discussing Sony stuff with you on this board (maybe this very thread) and I got the impression you weren't a Sony Stan.

I'm about to start a full time corporate position again and I'm going to doing ok with money. I know the way this line of work goes, though, and job security isn't something I expect to have for longer than 2 years. With that in mind, I'm looking at my personal kit and stepping it up for wedding/event work and not just indie shorts/video podcasts/corporate interviews. I run a Patreon where we make short films and video podcasts on the regular, so my lens and body choices have always been steered that way, which is why I'm trying to beat the idea of out of my head that I could just buy some Canon mount 70-200 and save $1000.

I also just know that Tamron and Sigma are both very likely to announce their E-Mount 70-200 2.8 offerings any day now.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
Yeah, I remember discussing Sony stuff with you on this board (maybe this very thread) and I got the impression you weren't a Sony Stan.

I'm about to start a full time corporate position again and I'm going to doing ok with money. I know the way this line of work goes, though, and job security isn't something I expect to have for longer than 2 years. With that in mind, I'm looking at my personal kit and stepping it up for wedding/event work and not just indie shorts/video podcasts/corporate interviews. I run a Patreon where we make short films and video podcasts on the regular, so my lens and body choices have always been steered that way, which is why I'm trying to beat the idea of out of my head that I could just buy some Canon mount 70-200 and save $1000.
Yeah I actually do like Tamron stuff, but for E mount there's always some thing that takes me out of it. 28-75 isn't wide enough and a pain in the fucking ass to find so I said fuck it and got the 24-70GM with no regrets since I loved it since day one and put it to work with one of the shots being published in my jobs magazine, it's great for video work. If you're doing weddings then definitely just get the GM's. You can pretty much take them out of the box and put them to work without worrying too much about firmware updates. Last thing I'd want to deal with is something losing communication and having to restart everything randomly mid shoot. Minus my A7RII overheating while recording some long ass speech the stuff just worked non stop for entire graduation shoots through multiple lens switches for like two hours. I'm all about saving money as well, which is why I'm mostly a secondhand buyer, plus I trade in. I paid about 1800 something for my 24-70GM and 2250 for my 70-200. I don't regret getting these. As long as you get sharp copies you're fine. I thought my 24-70 was soft in store, but that got quickly alleviated when I started to use it.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Alex Phan posted his initial impressions of the 200-600 on FM today. Still not hearing anything to make me think it's better than the 100-400 plus TC, especially taking the size/weight differences into account.

lol...returned the lens back to Sony today.

I'll have my full review with sample later today. BUT to make it short... this lens doesn't have linear XD motor inside; therefore, infinity to MFD is quite slow. In another word, bird fly toward you will be a problem. This is where your experience kick in to compensate for it.

I invited Sony manager out to shot burrow owl with me this morning and he has a hard time to get the owl flying toward him from a field that has the same color as the owl (those that shot Burrowing owls in CA know what i'm talking about). But this short coming is not a surprise thing since Sony brass already talk about it in an interview recently.

If you already have 100-400 / 1.4x TC, i don't see the benefit of getting this lens. Don't get me wrong, the AF speed is fast, IQ is great. Slap on 1.4x TC, AF tracking speed is good (but not in-coming). Slap on 2x TC, i was able to track swallow with no problem BUT the image quality is so soft. (expected too)

This lens would be a good transition for folk from DSLR camp that want native lens, no hassle of adapting. Affordable price.

For 95% of normal user, it get a passing grade. For the remain 5% that expect nothing but the best, this is not for you. There is a REASON why prime lenses is 6 times more. There is no such free lunch after all.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
I'm still going to wait for some more image samples and thorough reviews.

100 - 400 GM + 1.4x teleconverter sounds like the better option, in terms of size, weight and focusing ability, but the converter would make it effectively f/7.8 at 560mm which is going to be even rougher than the f/6.3 at 600mm on the 200 - 600mm G lens that already is going to require some pretty high ISOs in most situations.

I imagine the size and weight difference would make me use the 100 - 400 a lot more, but I think I'm going to have to wait until I can try out both side by side to decide for sure.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
His full thoughts:

=====================================================
Review of Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G for wildlife shooter.
====================================
Thanks to Sony USA for trusting me with their new lens in the last couple days. This allow me to get out and shot some real wildlife stuff from Los Angeles all the way down to San Diego. 🙏🙏🙏😍😍

---------------------------------------------------------------
Please don't ask for RAW or bigger file images. View on a 32" or more monitor if you want to do pixel peeping.
Please don't ask to test on other camera or compare to different lens combo since i don't have time for it.
This lens is testing on Sony A9.
====================================

When i first pick up the lens, the first word came out of my mouth was "No way". It is much more compact compare to all the pictures i saw. The second words came out was "Damnnn"..when I hold the lens. It is lighter than Nikon 200-500 and Sigma 150-600 Sport or Sigma 60-600. Only 4.6 lbs.

* Build Quality & Handling:
The lens construction and build quality is very solid. It looks just a tad bigger than the 100-400. What special about this lens is it's an internally zooming lens. By having the zoom internal, no zoom creep issue and most important, you don't have to deal with balance and front-heaviness as the lens physically extended as you zoomed. It is all done internal now. Your hand position stay the same through out. This will help a lot. Less fatigue.

The zoom ring is large, nice grip material, and is very smooth to rotate. It also have a very short throw from 200 to 600. You don't have to twist your hand for the zoom like other lenses. With your thumb, you can just gently rotate the zoom ring. Smooth like butter. I love it. It make zoom and panning so much easier as the falcon fly straight to you from the ocean at 200 mph.

*Image Quality & Performance:

Keep in mind, this lens is not designated as Sony's top-tier G Master series. Sony didn't use magnesium-alloy, or the newer XD linear auto focus actuator for it. What this mean in the field? The AF speed/respond from close to far distance is slow. This also mean trying to focus on an object that coming to you is slower. However, this is when your experience kick in to compensate for it.

AF is extremely responsive. I was able to spot the falcon far away that blend in the muddy/cloudy sky and grab focus of it and follow through the entire time as it zip through the ocean floor up the cliff and blend around the busy vegetation background. I choose to falcon because of the raw speed they fly, unpredictable path, it will fly through different lighting setting, different background. I'm more than happy to say it pass the Falcon AF tracking test.

Image quality is sharp with great detail. PLEASE VIEW THE IMAGES with your computer monitor. Recommend from 32 to 42".

This lens is variable aperture. it will be f/6.3 once you zoom to 400mm range. So if your neck of the woods doesn't have lots of sun, be ready to pump up your ISO to keep up with your shutter speed.

* Teleconverters and Clear zoom images:
This lens is compatible with both Sony's 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters. AF is fast with both TC. I was able to track swallow with 2.0x TC (fiew of view at 1200mm)

200-600 + 1.4x TC: AF fast, IQ still great.
200-600 + 2x TC: AF fast, IQ is bad. Image is very soft.
Clear zoom images is works perfectly with this lens.

* Conclusion:
With the releasing of 200-600 and 600GM, the day of adapting lens is ending soon. The design, the performance, the price is right on. This will open the door for many many users from DSLR that love the amazing AF performance of Sony A9 but don't want or can't afford the big prime (400/600GM), this lens is perfect for you or i would say about 95% of users out there. I strongly recommend this lens as it is a great lens and very versatile. Just think what you can do for the money with A6400 & 200-600 combo for static or distant shot? or like my buddy Thy Bun could do with his stacking TC and CIZ so he can get the image that is miles away. You just can't beat it.

* My personal though:

This is an excellent lens but it is not for me. Yes, i hate the fact that i have to deal with vignetting when using 1.4x and 2x TC on 100-400GM, i hate the fact that my TC something wiggly a bit but i'm after absolute speed and subject acquisition. Also, the IQ on 100-400GM+ 2x TC is usable. I'm belong to the remain 5% that need the absolute IQ, reliable AF and snappy subject acquisition.

So before you order this lens, please ask yourself a honest question: What is your goal here? How demand are you for speed? What kind of wildlife are you shooting? Are you belong to the 5% or 95% group. Know the limitation of the lens.

Also, there is no such thing as free lunch. There is a reason why prime lenses cost 6x time more.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
His full thoughts:

=====================================================
Review of Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G for wildlife shooter.
====================================
Thanks to Sony USA for trusting me with their new lens in the last couple days. This allow me to get out and shot some real wildlife stuff from Los Angeles all the way down to San Diego. 🙏🙏🙏😍😍

---------------------------------------------------------------
Please don't ask for RAW or bigger file images. View on a 32" or more monitor if you want to do pixel peeping.
Please don't ask to test on other camera or compare to different lens combo since i don't have time for it.
This lens is testing on Sony A9.
====================================

When i first pick up the lens, the first word came out of my mouth was "No way". It is much more compact compare to all the pictures i saw. The second words came out was "Damnnn"..when I hold the lens. It is lighter than Nikon 200-500 and Sigma 150-600 Sport or Sigma 60-600. Only 4.6 lbs.

* Build Quality & Handling:
The lens construction and build quality is very solid. It looks just a tad bigger than the 100-400. What special about this lens is it's an internally zooming lens. By having the zoom internal, no zoom creep issue and most important, you don't have to deal with balance and front-heaviness as the lens physically extended as you zoomed. It is all done internal now. Your hand position stay the same through out. This will help a lot. Less fatigue.

The zoom ring is large, nice grip material, and is very smooth to rotate. It also have a very short throw from 200 to 600. You don't have to twist your hand for the zoom like other lenses. With your thumb, you can just gently rotate the zoom ring. Smooth like butter. I love it. It make zoom and panning so much easier as the falcon fly straight to you from the ocean at 200 mph.

*Image Quality & Performance:

Keep in mind, this lens is not designated as Sony's top-tier G Master series. Sony didn't use magnesium-alloy, or the newer XD linear auto focus actuator for it. What this mean in the field? The AF speed/respond from close to far distance is slow. This also mean trying to focus on an object that coming to you is slower. However, this is when your experience kick in to compensate for it.

AF is extremely responsive. I was able to spot the falcon far away that blend in the muddy/cloudy sky and grab focus of it and follow through the entire time as it zip through the ocean floor up the cliff and blend around the busy vegetation background. I choose to falcon because of the raw speed they fly, unpredictable path, it will fly through different lighting setting, different background. I'm more than happy to say it pass the Falcon AF tracking test.

Image quality is sharp with great detail. PLEASE VIEW THE IMAGES with your computer monitor. Recommend from 32 to 42".

This lens is variable aperture. it will be f/6.3 once you zoom to 400mm range. So if your neck of the woods doesn't have lots of sun, be ready to pump up your ISO to keep up with your shutter speed.

* Teleconverters and Clear zoom images:
This lens is compatible with both Sony's 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters. AF is fast with both TC. I was able to track swallow with 2.0x TC (fiew of view at 1200mm)

200-600 + 1.4x TC: AF fast, IQ still great.
200-600 + 2x TC: AF fast, IQ is bad. Image is very soft.
Clear zoom images is works perfectly with this lens.

* Conclusion:
With the releasing of 200-600 and 600GM, the day of adapting lens is ending soon. The design, the performance, the price is right on. This will open the door for many many users from DSLR that love the amazing AF performance of Sony A9 but don't want or can't afford the big prime (400/600GM), this lens is perfect for you or i would say about 95% of users out there. I strongly recommend this lens as it is a great lens and very versatile. Just think what you can do for the money with A6400 & 200-600 combo for static or distant shot? or like my buddy Thy Bun could do with his stacking TC and CIZ so he can get the image that is miles away. You just can't beat it.

* My personal though:

This is an excellent lens but it is not for me. Yes, i hate the fact that i have to deal with vignetting when using 1.4x and 2x TC on 100-400GM, i hate the fact that my TC something wiggly a bit but i'm after absolute speed and subject acquisition. Also, the IQ on 100-400GM+ 2x TC is usable. I'm belong to the remain 5% that need the absolute IQ, reliable AF and snappy subject acquisition.

So before you order this lens, please ask yourself a honest question: What is your goal here? How demand are you for speed? What kind of wildlife are you shooting? Are you belong to the 5% or 95% group. Know the limitation of the lens.

Also, there is no such thing as free lunch. There is a reason why prime lenses cost 6x time more.
I saw his images in the Facebook group and they look pretty goddamn nice to me. There are also a few others in the group that also have the lens and are posting some rather stellar images.

I wish people would upload them to Flickr so I could share, but I imagine Sony has stuff embargoed to only social media or something.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
I saw his images in the Facebook group and they look pretty goddamn nice to me. There are also a few others in the group that also have the lens and are posting some rather stellar images.

I wish people would upload them to Flickr so I could share, but I imagine Sony has stuff embargoed to only social media or something.
Yeah I don’t do Facebook so I have no clue, plus their compression on images renders any test image useless.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
Yeah I don’t do Facebook so I have no clue, plus their compression on images renders any test image useless.
You're a better man for it. I read some dumb shit on the Fuji and Sony groups I'm in. I admitted that I think Sony crop sensor lenses are crap, a guy told me to explain why I thought this, I posted a lengthy post with no reply from him.
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,229
Massachusetts

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Well maybe it’s because I’ve been using the 100-400 almost exclusively for 3 months, but the 16-35 GM is downright light compared to all the whiners I’ve read that bitch about the bulk. Super fast AF as expected, seemingly razor sharp wide open. Glad I’m not a brick wall tester cause my real world tests look great.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
Well maybe it’s because I’ve been using the 100-400 almost exclusively for 3 months, but the 16-35 GM is downright light compared to all the whiners I’ve read that bitch about the bulk. Super fast AF as expected, seemingly razor sharp wide open. Glad I’m not a brick wall tester cause my real world tests look great.
People bitch about the 24-70GM and the Sigma 35. These are two lenses I'm fine with, people honestly just expect mirrorless to miraculously make a lens 80% smaller and I find it to be hella fucking stupid especially from seasoned photographers. They bought into a non existent hype.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
Well maybe it’s because I’ve been using the 100-400 almost exclusively for 3 months, but the 16-35 GM is downright light compared to all the whiners I’ve read that bitch about the bulk. Super fast AF as expected, seemingly razor sharp wide open. Glad I’m not a brick wall tester cause my real world tests look great.
Pics! I'm super happy with my 16-35 f/4 Zeiss, but I did spend a lot of time debating between it and the GM.
 

Jzeero

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,451
California
Sometimes it's good to see what others do with the same gear, just so you can tell yourself "Well, the problem is definitely not the camera...".

Love what this guy is doing with Fuji gear:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/snapshopped/
I knowwwwww right but then when I see a really good photo with the same body as mine i'm just like "damn how'd they get it to look that sharp"
Composition and editing are an art.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
That guy's gallery is proof that the 23/2 is a great lens. He's also shooting in amazing light 99% of the time and clearly knows how to post process.
Yeah his lighting is good, so is his post. He's lucky he's not shooting office events, that shit drives me crazy. "Make this boring office thing look interesting." I have no idea how I do it at times.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Pics! I'm super happy with my 16-35 f/4 Zeiss, but I did spend a lot of time debating between it and the GM.
I'll get some pics soon, I was mostly doing my normal test shots with the kid and dog for eye AF accuracy, AF-C tracking, etc. I can say that wide open, at the wide end, it vignettes like crazy, but honestly, I love natural lens vignette.

People shat all over the old Canon 17-40 because of that, but that was one of my favorite lenses to use for dramatic portraits.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,356
23/2 is a great lens. I was surprised at some legit good youtube reviewers that I follow like Omar didn't like it and found too soft. And I agreed based on the shared photos, but I must have a good copy or something. I like to do the exact same thing he likes to do, close up of objects, and my copy is great from f2 onwards. I mean it's a bit soft at f2 but not unacceptably, and it's definitely very sharp 2.8 onwards if you are in focus. It's one of the more underrated/underused lenses IMO. Most people typically go for the 50mm equivalence.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
23/2 is a great lens. I was surprised at some legit good youtube reviewers that I follow like Omar didn't like it and found too soft. And I agreed based on the shared photos, but I must have a good copy or something. I like to do the exact same thing he likes to do, close up of objects, and my copy is great from f2 onwards. I mean it's a bit soft at f2 but not unacceptably, and it's definitely very sharp 2.8 onwards if you are in focus. It's one of the more underrated/underused lenses IMO. Most people typically go for the 50mm equivalence.
There's no doubt that it's universally soft at MFD at f2, but it sharpens up VERY quickly as you move away or bump the aperture just a hair. The wide open shots in that gallery aren't anywhere near MFD. I suspect he might be using a tripod in some of them as well, just looking at some shutter speeds and knowing the X-T3 doesn't have IBIS.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,356
Yeah, but his copy seemed very soft even at f4...and I didn't get it.

For reference, at f2, exactly how I wanted it to come out w/o any manipulations. Memorial, defocused BG showing the stones across the field, and one of them in focus to let the viewer interpret the scene:
DSCF6931 by TIKI, on Flickr

Recently I am just stunned by the XF200mm F2 lens. Wish Fuji would continue to make pro tele primes and 1 stop slower, more affordable versions (200mm f2.8, 300mm f2.8 -> 300mm f4):

Flame by William Chu, on Flickr

VeV 2019 #42 by GilBarib, on Flickr

Jamboree 2019 #3 by GilBarib, on Flickr
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Oh MY. This might make for an amazing portrait lens. Gonna be pushing $1000 though, probably closer to $1200.



Recently I am just stunned by the XF200mm F2 lens.
It's a great lens on a system that makes no sense to have such a lens. It's a commercial dud because the people that need something of that caliber have better choices on full frame. Who the hell is dropping 6K on a lens to strap to an X-T model?!
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,356
That’s like the Jena Biotar remake. Probably closer to $1500. I’m done with manual focus for the time being, too difficult at the tele end for candids. For posed portraits sure but there are so many options.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Hasselblad clearly feeling that GFX pressure, the X1D II 50C looks like their first step towards competing on price.
 

Zefah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
Picked up the 1.4x converter in advance of getting either the 100 - 400 or 200 - 600. I only have the 70 - 200 f/2.8 GM that is compatible with it, but it seems to work great. I'm not noticing any reduction in AF performance or image quality.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Zefah You probably know that shooting ducks at 35mm is basically impossible, so I had to settle for trees and leaves. Mostly tested at the longer end so I could see that 2.8 bokeh, all are wide open. Super windy day here so not critically sharp, but I'm impressed with little details at 100% for wide open given the motion, and very very smooth bokeh transitions and buttery backgrounds. The 2nd pic with the swath of in-focus leaf cells is a good example of the detail resolution.

also good to hear about the 1.4x, i hear on the A9 it's easy mode, you'd never know it's on from an AF performance or IQ standpoint.

7R303685 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr

7R303696 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr

7R303703 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr

7R303707 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr
 
Last edited:

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
Another example of "it's the indian, not the arrow", Mark shoots on a "lowly" Canon SL1 and kit lenses. The small image size of Insta is probably working in his favor, but he's got a better eye than 90% of the people I've come across on Insta.

 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
Another example of "it's the indian, not the arrow", Mark shoots on a "lowly" Canon SL1 and kit lenses. The small image size of Insta is probably working in his favor, but he's got a better eye than 90% of the people I've come across on Insta.

He's got a good eye and not killing the image by over processing it.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
I wonder if Sony will be able to break into F1 photography with the 600 F4, granted they spoke to a lot of seasoned veterans. I know somebody in WEC (LeMans category) shoots with Fuji.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
I would love to try my hand at panning shots like F1 racing...it's one of those things that I have no clue how you'd even get the opportunity to try it. Some absolutely bonkers photos in that video.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
I have an event to cover packed my bag yesterday with the Nikon stuff only to take that stuff out and put my X-T3 and A7RII in there.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
It's time to bury those dinosaurs.
I originally packed them because I saw the lighting in the venue and it looked dark, then I thought back to the last couple of things I've used the X-T3 and A7RII combo on and was like, "I'll be fine." I haven't used them this year I think which is crazy...actually I have, just not on anything in my Flickr account. They're still great for event photography, just really depends on what the event is.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,928
I don't think Sony makes good SD cards. The one I bought in November has one of those black plastic strips in between the gold pieces hanging off of it. This pretty much means I should replace it. This is either an outlier or a QC problem.