CamERA Equipment |OT| Photon Capturing Comparison Club

Maturin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
827
SW England
Just upgraded from an X-T20 to an X-T30. Crikey there's so much more stuff this camera can do. I wonder what's left for the next generation of Fujifilm cameras. IBIS I guess?
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Maybe don't use Sony cards at all. Never heard enough good about them to justify not using Sandisk with their lifetime warranty but yeah, they're a fucking dime or two for the good ones.
I only have it because I got it on a good sale. I don't have that many Sony cards. I have probably two. This one and another one I'm using as the Jpeg card in my X-T2, I have had it for years, though it hasn't really been out of my X-T2 for a bit, it just sits in the X-T2 only to be reformatted after the occasional shoot. Sandisk it is then, guess I'll get another one from B&H. Luckily I didn't lose my shoot.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Looks like Sigma is going to announce a 70-200 2.8 for Sony FE in July, according to Alpha Rumors.
Too late to be of any worth to me, but if it's good get it I guess. If the video AF is on par with their more recent lenses and not the 35 1.4 you should be fine.
Will also double as a crossfit kettle-bell for arm day.
I think the Sport is heavier than the GM, the size of that one is absurd and it's not even as good as the Tamron G2 in some ways. I think Dustin Abbot wasn't that big on the Sport over the G2.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
The Canon consumer-grade 24-240mm f4-6.3 IS USM superzoom is almost here, will start to be bundled with the RP. That should move the needle for the Rebel crowd itching to upgrade.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
The Canon consumer-grade 24-240mm f4-6.3 IS USM superzoom is almost here, will start to be bundled with the RP. That should move the needle for the Rebel crowd itching to upgrade.
Upgrade to a world where you can't even do video in 24p, but yeah if they want a cheap mirrorless I suppose they could get that and not an X-T2, but Canon users gonna Canon. Then again I'm not in the demographic for a mirrorless Rebel.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
I'm also just going to say that I'm glad I got the 70-200GM because of the low light AF, it's already not strong in the A7RII so the last I want is something not native and possibly cripple it further.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,324
Just upgraded from an X-T20 to an X-T30. Crikey there's so much more stuff this camera can do. I wonder what's left for the next generation of Fujifilm cameras. IBIS I guess?
I'd assume:

XH2 - flagship, IBIS, next gen sensor + processing
XT4 - mid tier, no IBIS, next gen sensor + processing
XT40 - same as above less build quality

But if they follow the same pattern the XH2 will be borked. And XT4/40 will have better internals and processing. However, Fuji seems to be better at "kaizen" than other Japanese companies, so we could be pleasantly surprised.

And possibly redesigned batteries for all.
 

Maturin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
827
SW England
The X-Txx line has the same "build quality" as the X-Tx line. One may be WR and use more metal, but having owned two of each there's nothing lower quality about the cheaper camera. Lower spec yes, not lower quality.
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,219
Massachusetts
I'm also just going to say that I'm glad I got the 70-200GM because of the low light AF, it's already not strong in the A7RII so the last I want is something not native and possibly cripple it further.
Right, the GMs have such insanely good AF. Still, if this Sigma 70-200 2.8 is native E-mount and has some of the idiosyncrasies worked out, it'll be hard to pass up of it's $1,300-$1,500.

On a positive note, I just got a stellar full time job offer today, so it looks like I'll be buying the A7iii this weekend!
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,324
The X-Txx line has the same "build quality" as the X-Tx line. One may be WR and use more metal, but having owned two of each there's nothing lower quality about the cheaper camera. Lower spec yes, not lower quality.
That's kinda what I meant, 1 card slot, smaller size etc. XT-xx build quality is very good obviously.
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
X-H1 definitely is "higher" build quality than the X-T line, though. There's a clear difference in the materials of the chassis.
Right, the GMs have such insanely good AF. Still, if this Sigma 70-200 2.8 is native E-mount and has some of the idiosyncrasies worked out, it'll be hard to pass up of it's $1,300-$1,500.

On a positive note, I just got a stellar full time job offer today, so it looks like I'll be buying the A7iii this weekend!
Not even waiting for the first check to clear, makin moves!
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,219
Massachusetts
Not even waiting for the first check to clear, makin moves!
You'd have to see the offer I'm getting, it's crazy. I also have 3x freelance checks from June coming this week too. One was for a 4-day corporate gig where I oversaw a post team at a bio conference. I got 2x days back to back with 20 hrs each, meaning the overtime payout was ridiculous. On top of that, I do a Patreon where I produce a lot of goofy video content every month.

Video has always been my sweet spot, but for the 2nd half of 2019 I'm going to get into sports photography as a hobby/therapy away from the corporate stuff.

Let's hope I don't screw this up!
 

Menelaus

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
3,682
You'd have to see the offer I'm getting, it's crazy. I also have 3x freelance checks from June coming this week too. One was for a 4-day corporate gig where I oversaw a post team at a bio conference. I got 2x days back to back with 20 hrs each, meaning the overtime payout was ridiculous. On top of that, I do a Patreon where I produce a lot of goofy video content every month.

Video has always been my sweet spot, but for the 2nd half of 2019 I'm going to get into sports photography as a hobby/therapy away from the corporate stuff.

Let's hope I don't screw this up!
good shit!
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
The X-Txx line has the same "build quality" as the X-Tx line. One may be WR and use more metal, but having owned two of each there's nothing lower quality about the cheaper camera. Lower spec yes, not lower quality.
This is something people say and think until they hear about how differently the paint quality differences are between the silver X-T2 and X-T3. There's also the size difference and EVF differences between the two lines. If you like the smaller cameras then fine. Also the X-H line is built to a higher tolerance than the other cameras, this is noted fact.
Right, the GMs have such insanely good AF. Still, if this Sigma 70-200 2.8 is native E-mount and has some of the idiosyncrasies worked out, it'll be hard to pass up of it's $1,300-$1,500.

On a positive note, I just got a stellar full time job offer today, so it looks like I'll be buying the A7iii this weekend!
That's some good shit also anything not first party isn't native. Get what you think works but do your research. If a guy currently paying something off tells you he's got no regrets with what he bought it's a good purchase. As a person that has done low light video I'm glad I didn't buy too many Sigma lenses, granted my A7RII can't really keep up too well depending on what's going on, but the GM's have been smart buys. I'd rather have saved money buy used than buying third party, but that's just me personally.
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,219
Massachusetts
That's some good shit also anything not first party isn't native. Get what you think works but do your research. If a guy currently paying something off tells you he's got no regrets with what he bought it's a good purchase. As a person that has done low light video I'm glad I didn't buy too many Sigma lenses, granted my A7RII can't really keep up too well depending on what's going on, but the GM's have been smart buys. I'd rather have saved money buy used than buying third party, but that's just me personally.
True, I'm implying native = no adapter, not first party, sure. The Dustin Abbott videos on the 70-200 Sigma Sport seemed pretty glowing, all around, and he even seemed to think they worked AOK adapted onto a FE body.

Dustin Abbott's Written Review:
In fact, the lens is also eligible with Sigma’s MC-11 converter, which means that 70-200S behaves better on a Sony body than any other non-Sony telephoto that I’ve used. It works fairly close to a native lens, which I certainly can’t say for the Tamron or Canon 70-200mm lenses that I’ve tested on it in the past.

...

In the past I’ve frequently criticized Sigma lenses for inconsistent autofocus accuracy, but fortunately that has really changed in the past year. I’ve reviewed about 5-6 straight Sigma lenses that have shown markedly improved autofocus accuracy, and that includes the 70-200S.
I'd be putting the E-Mount variation, assuming it's real and comes out in... August? September? onto an A7iii and A6500.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
True, I'm implying native = no adapter, not first party, sure. The Dustin Abbott videos on the 70-200 Sigma Sport seemed pretty glowing, all around, and he even seemed to think they worked AOK adapted onto a FE body.

Dustin Abbott's Written Review:


I'd be putting the E-Mount variation, assuming it's real and comes out in... August? September? onto an A7iii and A6500.
I personally do my very best not to invest into a lens mount I have no intention of buying into, hence no Canon mount glass, not even for adapting purposes. It's just so I don't do some dumb shit like randomly start buying Canon cameras, trust me I'm crazy. It also really depends on how much you would use that focal length. I use 70-200's a lot so I do my best to buy the best one I can afford at the time of purchase. If the Nikon VR3 was the price it is now and had a good used deal I'd have that over the Tamron probably, not to say the Nikon is even a bad lens. The third party stuff is good for the most part so some of it is indeed hair splitting, I just hear better things about Sigma primes than I do their zooms though some of their more wildlife aimed stuff is pretty good. Just do your best to make sure you hear about any problems regarding low light AF, especially for video work. My GM's got me through graduation season. It's not hardcore sports photography, but it's close enough in my book.
Keep in mind the fastest subject DA shoots are leaves moving in the wind.

I'm kidding (kinda).
I don't think he's an event photographer I will admit I put my lenses through a bit of shit. I think the only weak link in my GM combos is the AF in the A7RII itself.
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,219
Massachusetts
I personally do my very best not to invest into a lens mount I have no intention of buying into, hence no Canon mount glass, not even for adapting purposes. It's just so I don't do some dumb shit like randomly start buying Canon cameras, trust me I'm crazy. It also really depends on how much you would use that focal length. I use 70-200's a lot so I do my best to buy the best one I can afford at the time of purchase. If the Nikon VR3 was the price it is now and had a good used deal I'd have that over the Tamron probably, not to say the Nikon is even a bad lens. The third party stuff is good for the most part so some of it is indeed hair splitting, I just hear better things about Sigma primes than I do their zooms though some of their more wildlife aimed stuff is pretty good. Just do your best to make sure you hear about any problems regarding low light AF, especially for video work. My GM's got me through graduation season. It's not hardcore sports photography, but it's close enough in my book.

I don't think he's an event photographer I will admit I put my lenses through a bit of shit. I think the only weak link in my GM combos is the AF in the A7RII itself.
Yeah, same. I own a single piece of Canon glass that is basically my emergency documentary lens when time is short for renting. Everything else I own is E-Mount, almost exclusively first party Sony.

I think the critical thing for me is that I never, ever use AF for video. I'm usually shooting 2-person interviews, documentary style, or cinema, and AF has no place in that line of work IMO. I set my marks for talent, get lights staged, and set my cameras entirely manual. Even for photos, I usually am going AF-S anyway.

Now, AF-C for sports photography? There it could be tricky.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Yeah, same. I own a single piece of Canon glass that is basically my emergency documentary lens when time is short for renting. Everything else I own is E-Mount, almost exclusively first party Sony.

I think the critical thing for me is that I never, ever use AF for video. I'm usually shooting 2-person interviews, documentary style, or cinema, and AF has no place in that line of work IMO. I set my marks for talent, get lights staged, and set my cameras entirely manual. Even for photos, I usually am going AF-S anyway.

Now, AF-C for sports photography? There it could be tricky.
Ok, if it's manual for you then yeah the Sigma should be fine, though if you're doing sports that's definitely a just get the GM thing to me. My things tend to move so I'm only in AF-S if it's too dark and my AF-C is spazzing out.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
Yeah, anything A7R II and beyond, you're better off just sticking exclusively to AF-C outside of some very specific situations, like tripod long exposures of immobile objects or when light is really low. AF-C for anything that moves at all.
 

Yams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,346
I have a feeling the Xh-2 won’t be made. The next X-pro will take all the cool shit from the xh1 in the x-pro body.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,890
I have a feeling the Xh-2 won’t be made. The next X-pro will take all the cool shit from the xh1 in the x-pro body.
They really need to lead with it. I doubt anyone will be foolish enough to purchase an X-H3 if it comes in again years after the first offering of the new sensor and processor.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Uhhhh, maybe. I’ll say the 16-80 and Xt3/30 will be killer. Plus any of the 1.4s for late night.
What is the 16-80 new compared to the 16-55 used price tag wise? Depending on the venue lighting I've noticed that the X-T3 and 2 don't focus accurately with the 16-55 (goes double if they're stopped down), they operate better with the 1.2 and 1.4 lenses.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,324
What is the 16-80 new compared to the 16-55 used price tag wise? Depending on the venue lighting I've noticed that the X-T3 and 2 don't focus accurately with the 16-55 (goes double if they're stopped down), they operate better with the 1.2 and 1.4 lenses.
16-80 didn't come out...I'd expect that to be around $700-$800 new. For travel, that's your 24-105 f/4...which is mostly gonna be daytime and outside. Indoors....all lenses aside from the fastest will have issues focusing, but I'd expect the 1.4s to do very well. Folks that are a bit discerning will just get the 16-55 for everything and be done with it. But the 16-80 has a shot for being a very good casual allrounder.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Just bought a Sony 70-200 F4 for my a7iii, hopefully I made the right decision.
This is perfectly fine as long as you don't do any indoor event work. If you do...well time to start saving up or get some primes.
16-80 didn't come out...I'd expect that to be around $700-$800 new. For travel, that's your 24-105 f/4...which is mostly gonna be daytime and outside. Indoors....all lenses aside from the fastest will have issues focusing, but I'd expect the 1.4s to do very well. Folks that are a bit discerning will just get the 16-55 for everything and be done with it. But the 16-80 has a shot for being a very good casual allrounder.
Yeah I think the 16-80 hinges on the travel photographer dollar. I do a bit too much indoor work to even be bothered about caring about it. I'm still trying to figure out what I'd even use as my travel camera. I'm hoping by the time I do some traveling the 24-105 drops in price enough on Ebay to warrant one or I'll just take my 24-70GM.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,324
Yeah I think the 16-80 hinges on the travel photographer dollar. I do a bit too much indoor work to even be bothered about caring about it. I'm still trying to figure out what I'd even use as my travel camera. I'm hoping by the time I do some traveling the 24-105 drops in price enough on Ebay to warrant one or I'll just take my 24-70GM.
Your XT body w/ the 16-55 or the Sony with the 24-70 or the 24-105 would be more than fine. People typically overthink these things. Most people are outside taking photos of landmarks or landscapes in daylight hours. Even evenings and nights in cities, streets are well lit so these lenses are more than capable in capable hands. Now for specifics, I like doing dramatic ulta wides so I take one UWA, and since I'm comfortable with primes, I just take a 35mm FF equivalent and I'm good to go. Some people travel to take photos, so then they take specific lenses depending on the use case. If you're bogged down with gear you'll actually forget the having fun part.
 

Astral/H3X

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,153
Anyone with an APSC camera not using the Mitakon 35 0.95, at the least for low light, is wrong.

Like especially on Fuji it's almost impossible to not focus it because it's like, can you see your subject? Congrats, it's in focus.
 

KalBalboa

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,219
Massachusetts
Just bought a Sony 70-200 F4 for my a7iii, hopefully I made the right decision.
I've weighed picking that one up myself; I bet you'll be happy with it. Piece of mind goes a long way with purchasing gear, and going first party full frame on a full frame body probably feels wonderful when actually shooting.

Post impressions of the 70-200 F4! Convince me to buy one and not wait on the Sigma.
 

Yams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,346
This is perfectly fine as long as you don't do any indoor event work. If you do...well time to start saving up or get some primes.

Yeah I think the 16-80 hinges on the travel photographer dollar. I do a bit too much indoor work to even be bothered about caring about it. I'm still trying to figure out what I'd even use as my travel camera. I'm hoping by the time I do some traveling the 24-105 drops in price enough on Ebay to warrant one or I'll just take my 24-70GM.
Just take the xt3 with a 23 1.4 if your travelling in cities. have the 16-55 ready if you leave the city. There's your travel gear.
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Just take the xt3 with a 23 1.4 if your travelling in cities. have the 16-55 ready if you leave the city. There's your travel gear.
I could actually see this being the case. Either that or the A7RII and the 24-70GM and the Sigma 35 1.4.
Your XT body w/ the 16-55 or the Sony with the 24-70 or the 24-105 would be more than fine. People typically overthink these things. Most people are outside taking photos of landmarks or landscapes in daylight hours. Even evenings and nights in cities, streets are well lit so these lenses are more than capable in capable hands. Now for specifics, I like doing dramatic ulta wides so I take one UWA, and since I'm comfortable with primes, I just take a 35mm FF equivalent and I'm good to go. Some people travel to take photos, so then they take specific lenses depending on the use case. If you're bogged down with gear you'll actually forget the having fun part.
Like I over think breakfast. I packed my camera bag twice for my last event because I over thought what to even bring. The biggest reason why I didn't stick with my Nikon gear is my D4 being fucking loud and the venue was actually pretty small, would've overpowered pretty much everybody talking and the music performances.
Anyone with an APSC camera not using the Mitakon 35 0.95, at the least for low light, is wrong.

Like especially on Fuji it's almost impossible to not focus it because it's like, can you see your subject? Congrats, it's in focus.
You can't do a group picture at .95. Yeah you can stop down but this is why flashes exist. Not everything has the time or patience for you to manual focus your shot together especially if you're running around doing candids. My setups tend to work for the most part.
 

uzipukki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,073
Hi Camera Equipment Era, first time posting here and I've got a question to ask:

I'm in the market for a new camera since my old Nikon D80 decided to shit the bed and I was looking at two cameras from Nikon. A D7500 and a D610. The thing going for the D7500 is that it's way newer, but the D610 has a full sized sensor which would be a nice pairing with my 105mm f/2.8 D and the old 50mm f/1.8 lenses. They're both about the same price at the moment (D7500 is 899€ and D610 is 950€). Which one is a better choice in 2019? I'm guessing the D7500?
 

JadedWriter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,753
Hi Camera Equipment Era, first time posting here and I've got a question to ask:

I'm in the market for a new camera since my old Nikon D80 decided to shit the bed and I was looking at two cameras from Nikon. A D7500 and a D610. The thing going for the D7500 is that it's way newer, but the D610 has a full sized sensor which would be a nice pairing with my 105mm f/2.8 D and the old 50mm f/1.8 lenses. They're both about the same price at the moment (D7500 is 899€ and D610 is 950€). Which one is a better choice in 2019? I'm guessing the D7500?
D610 for depth of field and image quality, D7500 for AF. What exactly do you shoot? I had the D600 and my biggest problem with it was mainly the AF points being clumped heavily in the center, the D750 these days is heavily discounted on the used market.
Used D750
With kit lens
Cheaper at Adorama
Look into these, these are good bargains.
D600 samples. Same sensor as the D610.
DSC_2641 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2603 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2898 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_6504 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
 

uzipukki

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,073
D610 for depth of field and image quality, D7500 for AF. What exactly do you shoot? I had the D600 and my biggest problem with it was mainly the AF points being clumped heavily in the center, the D750 these days is heavily discounted on the used market.
Used D750
With kit lens
Cheaper at Adorama
Look into these, these are good bargains.
D600 samples. Same sensor as the D610.
DSC_2641 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2603 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_2898 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
DSC_6504 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Mostly just landscapes/portraits, I'm a hobbyist so not looking to do any professional work with it. I was also looking at the D750 but the prices in Finland are quite a bit more than the D610 at the moment, even used. So the AF points aren't that big of a deal to me since I wouldn't be doing any action photography. Mainly looking to get the best image quality tbh. Guess the D610 would be the best option.