CamERA Equipment |OT| Photon Capturing Comparison Club

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,878
The 16-80 is straight up travel lens. Don’t confuse it for something else. It’ll do great portraits at 80 due to compression but if you compare sharpness against primes or the 2.8 lenses you’d be disappointed. That said, these lenses are great for daytime hiking etc, it’ll have you covered.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
Yeah, I'm super excited to see what they do with the A9 II. Then again, Firmware 6.0 just came out for my original A9 and added animal eye AF and, more importantly, the ability to change the color of the focus point selector (!!!), so I'm in no hurry to upgrade, but we'll see what they come out with! I'm expecting the body upgrades from the A7R IV, maybe 36 MP, and possibly 4K60 video, but I hope they have some cool surprises.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,878
I might have to eat crow on the Fuji 16-80 as the reviews seem to be gushing. Either way Fuji should be developing an 80-300 as a compliment...that’s what I want. Their tele offerings are really slim.
 

Daedardus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
754
Feel like I want to pull the trigger on XT-3 and XF16-55 lens next month and just forego going Sony for a while. The price of the FF glass is really putting me off if I want to have two/three lenses and I rather buy a camera now and hone my skills and focus on saving money for a couple of years.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
Feel like I want to pull the trigger on XT-3 and XF16-55 lens next month and just forego going Sony for a while. The price of the FF glass is really putting me off if I want to have two/three lenses and I rather buy a camera now and hone my skills and focus on saving money for a couple of years.
The 16-55 f/2.8? It's not much cheaper than the Sony FE 24-105mm G OSS lens, which has an extra 22.5mm on the telephoto range, optical image stabilization and better close focus capabilities. They're both pretty similar in size and weight, too.
 

Daedardus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
754
The 16-55 f/2.8? It's not much cheaper than the Sony FE 24-105mm G OSS lens, which has an extra 22.5mm on the telephoto range, optical image stabilization and better close focus capabilities. They're both pretty similar in size and weight, too.
No that's not the one I meant, I think I meant the 18-55? I would be able to easily get it for below 1800 including body, which is cheap enough to warrant to still purchase the Sony somewhere late next year while also having a relatively light camera for outdoor photography.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
No that's not the one I meant, I think I meant the 18-55? I would be able to easily get it for below 1800 including body, which is cheap enough to warrant to still purchase the Sony somewhere late next year while also having a relatively light camera for outdoor photography.
I don't even like the 18-55. I honestly think if I stuck with this lens I wouldn't even still be in the Fuji ecosystem. If you still intend to buy a Sony camera down the line then it actually makes more sense to just buy a cheaper Sony body now and then get at least one good all rounder lens and then just when the body is right for you in the future just get the newer body. The A7RII is pretty much the best dollar for dollar budget camera in FE mount, just get that, take the saved money for a good lens and call it a day.
Sony A7RII in 2019:
AR207093 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR207461 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR202105 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR204565 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
AR202670 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
I could also very well do an X-T3 montage, but I honestly have just been shooting on Sony way more these days.
Shit Imma do it any way:
XT034767 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
XT032211 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
XT039505 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
XT035691 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr (This is from 2018 though)
XT036566 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
XT038124 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Also regarding weight I really don't think any camera is noticeably heavier or lighter than the other, granted I'm a full with a vertical grip on every mirrorless I own.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
No that's not the one I meant, I think I meant the 18-55? I would be able to easily get it for below 1800 including body, which is cheap enough to warrant to still purchase the Sony somewhere late next year while also having a relatively light camera for outdoor photography.
Ah, yeah. That's a nice compact package, but do realize it's basically just a small step above a full frame kit lens in terms of performance.

Considering how fast camera bodies tank in value, I would personally recommend waiting. It's been long enough since the X-T3 came out that the next thing from Fuji is around the corner, which means cheaper X-T3s! In Sony land, you're already seeing A7R III bodies go for around $1,800 on places like Fred Miranda, and A9 bodies for close to $2600 (!!!), which is only going to drop even further in a few weeks when the A9 II is announced.

I don't know what your budget is, and I'm sure you're eager to get going, but I feel like buying into Fuji with the intent to drop it in a year or so is just going cause you a lot of money and pain in the end.

And, yeah, as Jaded wrote, I'm seeing A7R IIs, which are still very capable cameras, go for around $1,000 or sometimes even less used. That's an insane value if you ask me, although I would recommend going up to the 3rd generation bodies if you can afford it for a variety of performance (AF, battery life) and ergonomics reasons.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
And, yeah, as Jaded wrote, I'm seeing A7R IIs, which are still very capable cameras, go for around $1,000 or sometimes even less used. That's an insane value if you ask me, although I would recommend going up to the 3rd generation bodies if you can afford it for a variety of performance (AF, battery life) and ergonomics reasons.
The second gen bodies take a lot of getting used to. You can pretty much just get 4 batteries and be fine, it's just that AF point switching is a chore. You pretty much have to do a lot of custom button mapping and get good at using the front and rear command dials to change your AF point. I pretty much hated the A7RII for about a month and then I got used to it. Whatever one does they really shouldn't get an A7II.
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
1,878
I am thinking of getting this tripod. The load capacity should be fine for my XT3 + heaviest lens (56mm 1.2), even the 50-140 in case I get it in future. Any experience?

 

captive

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,350
Houston
I am thinking of getting this tripod. The load capacity should be fine for my XT3 + heaviest lens (56mm 1.2), even the 50-140 in case I get it in future. Any experience?

i found telescoping tripods to be not as stable and vibrationless as non telescoping. But as long as your fine with it it should work.
 

Daedardus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
754
Ah, yeah. That's a nice compact package, but do realize it's basically just a small step above a full frame kit lens in terms of performance.

Considering how fast camera bodies tank in value, I would personally recommend waiting. It's been long enough since the X-T3 came out that the next thing from Fuji is around the corner, which means cheaper X-T3s! In Sony land, you're already seeing A7R III bodies go for around $1,800 on places like Fred Miranda, and A9 bodies for close to $2600 (!!!), which is only going to drop even further in a few weeks when the A9 II is announced.

I don't know what your budget is, and I'm sure you're eager to get going, but I feel like buying into Fuji with the intent to drop it in a year or so is just going cause you a lot of money and pain in the end.

And, yeah, as Jaded wrote, I'm seeing A7R IIs, which are still very capable cameras, go for around $1,000 or sometimes even less used. That's an insane value if you ask me, although I would recommend going up to the 3rd generation bodies if you can afford it for a variety of performance (AF, battery life) and ergonomics reasons.
I don't even like the 18-55. I honestly think if I stuck with this lens I wouldn't even still be in the Fuji ecosystem. If you still intend to buy a Sony camera down the line then it actually makes more sense to just buy a cheaper Sony body now and then get at least one good all rounder lens and then just when the body is right for you in the future just get the newer body. The A7RII is pretty much the best dollar for dollar budget camera in FE mount, just get that, take the saved money for a good lens and call it a day.
Sony A7RII in 2019:

Also regarding weight I really don't think any camera is noticeably heavier or lighter than the other, granted I'm a full with a vertical grip on every mirrorless I own.
You're both right but I feel a bit torn! I don't want to spend money on an obselete Sony body just to get something that will be better in every way. The XT-3 mainly entices me for it's different way of controls and an actual (?) usable touchscreen. I feel like I'd want the A7RIV as a baseline, but I feel I can't justify spending the €4K + the money all the GM lenses cost unless I've saved for more than a good year and got my double holiday pay / end of the year pay. So buying the XT-3 that's within the reach of a month's work will kep me busy for more than over a year while I might even skip the Sony's until they come with a really revolutionary body.

RE budget: I've started a well earning but stressful job and have little to no expenses. I'm saving aggressively to buy a house, but on a full year the €2K for the Fuji won't make or break it. Feels like I more want it to have a meaningful thing as a hobby in the upcoming months to fill in my free time.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
You're both right but I feel a bit torn! I don't want to spend money on an obselete Sony body just to get something that will be better in every way. The XT-3 mainly entices me for it's different way of controls and an actual (?) usable touchscreen. I feel like I'd want the A7RIV as a baseline, but I feel I can't justify spending the €4K + the money all the GM lenses cost unless I've saved for more than a good year and got my double holiday pay / end of the year pay. So buying the XT-3 that's within the reach of a month's work will kep me busy for more than over a year while I might even skip the Sony's until they come with a really revolutionary body.

RE budget: I've started a well earning but stressful job and have little to no expenses. I'm saving aggressively to buy a house, but on a full year the €2K for the Fuji won't make or break it. Feels like I more want it to have a meaningful thing as a hobby in the upcoming months to fill in my free time.
I honestly just turn my touch screens off so that whole thing really doesn't make or break a camera for me. Regarding the budget get the RII and the 24-105 used and you should have most of what you would need covered for probably slightly over your budget.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
You're both right but I feel a bit torn! I don't want to spend money on an obselete Sony body just to get something that will be better in every way. The XT-3 mainly entices me for it's different way of controls and an actual (?) usable touchscreen. I feel like I'd want the A7RIV as a baseline, but I feel I can't justify spending the €4K + the money all the GM lenses cost unless I've saved for more than a good year and got my double holiday pay / end of the year pay. So buying the XT-3 that's within the reach of a month's work will kep me busy for more than over a year while I might even skip the Sony's until they come with a really revolutionary body.

RE budget: I've started a well earning but stressful job and have little to no expenses. I'm saving aggressively to buy a house, but on a full year the €2K for the Fuji won't make or break it. Feels like I more want it to have a meaningful thing as a hobby in the upcoming months to fill in my free time.
The X-T3 is a very capable camera and I'm sure you'll have a great time with it. I just don't think it's a good system to invest in if you're planning on going full frame (and honestly, you probably should be). If you're sold on the Fuji system and plan to go all in on it, then I wouldn't hesitate on starting with the X-T3.

With that said, the A7R III and the A9 are both incredible bodies that are going to be around $2k or less used within the next couple of months (A7R III is already there). I'd go with the A9, but I'm biased as it's my favorite camera ever and I mostly shoot moving subjects, which it excels at.

In terms of usable touch screens, I think the Fujis are pretty bad, too, even if they are a small step above Sony's implementation. They got nothing on the likes of Canon and Panasonic.
 

Daedardus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
754
Okay, you've convinced me, I'll just wait for the A7IV announcement and see what comes out of that. If it's just the A7RIV with lower megapixels that's exactly what I want and I'll buy that with the 24-105. Is it even worth buying the 24-105 for the RIV? I'm not sure if it's able to properly resolve the resolution or if that body only properly works with GM lenses.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
Okay, you've convinced me, I'll just wait for the A7IV announcement and see what comes out of that. If it's just the A7RIV with lower megapixels that's exactly what I want and I'll buy that with the 24-105. Is it even worth buying the 24-105 for the RIV? I'm not sure if it's able to properly resolve the resolution or if that body only properly works with GM lenses.
I wouldn't get that hyper caught up in resolution resolving to be honest. The lens creates excellent images on the RIII and probably only the newest primes can resolve that much I would imagine. I don't want the RIV because I'm an event photographer and two 42MP cameras are driving me crazy storage wise for work. They better announce that A7IV quickly. I'm not afraid to recommend for someone to start reasonably cheap like I did and buy something newer when the next iteration comes out, though with the A7IV I would get because there are some things I don't want from the A7III, it's mostly EVF and LCD reasons and I think I'd prefer having a lockable mode dial considering how much stuff randomly just moves or gets tapped while I'm shooting an event.
 

Daedardus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
754
I wouldn't get that hyper caught up in resolution resolving to be honest. The lens creates excellent images on the RIII and probably only the newest primes can resolve that much I would imagine. I don't want the RIV because I'm an event photographer and two 42MP cameras are driving me crazy storage wise for work. They better announce that A7IV quickly. I'm not afraid to recommend for someone to start reasonably cheap like I did and buy something newer when the next iteration comes out, though with the A7IV I would get because there are some things I don't want from the A7III, it's mostly EVF and LCD reasons and I think I'd prefer having a lockable mode dial considering how much stuff randomly just moves or gets tapped while I'm shooting an event.
Yeah, having the A7RIV EVF on the A7IV would be such a great deal and the reason I'm waiting a bit. The better grip and buttons also help a bit too. Wondering what will come out of the A9, although I feel it will be complete overkill with an overkill price.
 

ekimneems

Member
Oct 29, 2017
138
Does anyone order a lot of gear from Japan/eBay via EMS shipping? I get most of my stuff from there, and my last purchase has just been sitting in customs for a week with no updates. Anyone else having similar issues?
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
Yeah, having the A7RIV EVF on the A7IV would be such a great deal and the reason I'm waiting a bit. The better grip and buttons also help a bit too. Wondering what will come out of the A9, although I feel it will be complete overkill with an overkill price.
A9II will probably cost in the $4500 range. The A7RIII EVF is actually pretty good and for some odd reason I think the refresh rate is more consistent than what's in the X-T3, the X-T3 can get pretty choppy. The A9II is going to be a camera designed for the Olympics and I would imagine F1 photography so it'll be way more than what most people will need...granted the D4 is an Olympics camera, but I love it.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
A9II will probably cost in the $4500 range. The A7RIII EVF is actually pretty good and for some odd reason I think the refresh rate is more consistent than what's in the X-T3, the X-T3 can get pretty choppy. The A9II is going to be a camera designed for the Olympics and I would imagine F1 photography so it'll be way more than what most people will need...granted the D4 is an Olympics camera, but I love it.
Yeah, I've noticed that Fuji prioritizes interface smoothness over EVF/LCD video smoothness while Sony is the opposite (interface can lag, but the live view is almost always smooth). Both can be frustrating depending on the situation.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
Yeah, I've noticed that Fuji prioritizes interface smoothness over EVF/LCD video smoothness while Sony is the opposite (interface can lag, but the live view is almost always smooth). Both can be frustrating depending on the situation.
I feel like the RIII is like a fraction off, but it doesn't make me think the EVF is going to break. I honestly don't know which I prefer.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
I decided to consolidate my 35mm lenses to the new Sony FE 35mm f/1.8. I had previously owned both the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 and Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 lenses. The 2.8 was great for its light weight and portability, but f/2.8 just wasn't cutting it for me as a prime lens. Meanwhile, the 35mm f/1.4 had beautiful rendering, an aperture ring that I loved, and a wide open aperture, but it could be rather cumbersome.

Only had the Sony f/1.8 lens for a couple of days now, but I'm really liking the results I'm getting with it. It's pretty much the exact same size and weight as the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, so it's definitely very portable (although not as much as the f/2.8). It's definitely more on the 85mm f/1.8 side in terms of standard Sony lens quality rather than their generic 50mm f/1.8, which is apparently nothing to write home about.

And it can do 20 FPS on the A9, which is pretty neat!
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
I decided to consolidate my 35mm lenses to the new Sony FE 35mm f/1.8. I had previously owned both the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 and Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 lenses. The 2.8 was great for its light weight and portability, but f/2.8 just wasn't cutting it for me as a prime lens. Meanwhile, the 35mm f/1.4 had beautiful rendering, an aperture ring that I loved, and a wide open aperture, but it could be rather cumbersome.

Only had the Sony f/1.8 lens for a couple of days now, but I'm really liking the results I'm getting with it. It's pretty much the exact same size and weight as the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8, so it's definitely very portable (although not as much as the f/2.8). It's definitely more on the 85mm f/1.8 side in terms of standard Sony lens quality rather than their generic 50mm f/1.8, which is apparently nothing to write home about.

And it can do 20 FPS on the A9, which is pretty neat!
I'm actually contemplating getting the Zony 35 1.4 off of Ebay and getting rid of my Sigma mostly for low light AF reasons, but I kind of just don't even want to bother. I have oddly no interest in the 35 1.8.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
I'm actually contemplating getting the Zony 35 1.4 off of Ebay and getting rid of my Sigma mostly for low light AF reasons, but I kind of just don't even want to bother. I have oddly no interest in the 35 1.8.
Yeah, the Zony 35 1.4 is a great lens with good character (or at least I found it pleasing) and I took thousands of memorable images with it, but I'm definitely glad to be free of its size and weight now for more casual shooting. The 1.8 seems to be slightly better at AF, as well, which makes sense considering it's small size and weight and more modern motor system.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
Yeah, the Zony 35 1.4 is a great lens with good character (or at least I found it pleasing) and I took thousands of memorable images with it, but I'm definitely glad to be free of its size and weight now for more casual shooting. The 1.8 seems to be slightly better at AF, as well, which makes sense considering it's small size and weight and more modern motor system.
I think as long as I get a non onion ring lens I should be fine with it. I think I'm really starting to think long and hard about the shit I buy. I could've bought an X-H1 during the deals, but I kept waffling on it because I really don't use my Fuji's that much for event photography and that money could be spent on so many different things. I'm waiting for the A7IV and that wait is fucking killing me.
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
How much night street shooting are you doing if 2.8 isn’t enough for you?
Very little! It was mostly dimly-lit indoor stuff. I mean, f/2.8 was enough, but I would frequently be at 6400 ~ 8000 ISO or so and I don't like to be that high if I can help it, but I also mostly shoot moving subjects (candid stuff), and lots of kids, so 1/400 or higher shutter speed is often necessary. For more still subjects, the f/2.8 is great.
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
Very little! It was mostly dimly-lit indoor stuff. I mean, f/2.8 was enough, but I would frequently be at 6400 ~ 8000 ISO or so and I don't like to be that high if I can help it, but I also mostly shoot moving subjects (candid stuff), and lots of kids, so 1/400 or higher shutter speed is often necessary. For more still subjects, the f/2.8 is great.
This is one of the reasons why I got the 135GM. I can make 2.8 work, but I don't always like 6400 iso and up, same reason why I also use 35 1.4's for events these days. I have flash, but hell it distracts people.
 

kIdMuScLe

Member
Oct 27, 2017
602
Hi, is it worth getting an iPad Pro to edit RAW photos? I really don’t have any space for laptop/desktop. I tend to use my iPhone a lot along with Halide camera app but I want to get back shooting my family with my a6300. Thanks!

p.s. does anyone shoot Astro photos here in Los Angeles? I’m towards southeast of LA and the night sky is kinda bright at times so I wonder if that’s a deterrent on be able toshoot at the night sky 😔
 

Daedardus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
754
Hi, is it worth getting an iPad Pro to edit RAW photos? I really don’t have any space for laptop/desktop. I tend to use my iPhone a lot along with Halide camera app but I want to get back shooting my family with my a6300. Thanks!

p.s. does anyone shoot Astro photos here in Los Angeles? I’m towards southeast of LA and the night sky is kinda bright at times so I wonder if that’s a deterrent on be able toshoot at the night sky 😔
You don't have any space for a laptop? How does that work? Where would you use the iPad Pro then?
 

splash wave

Member
Oct 25, 2017
595
Bay Area, CA
I keep feeling weirdly drawn back to the Ricoh GR line despite briefly having a GRII and not really liking it. The form factor is incredible but I could just never take very good pictures with it. Is it even worth revisiting with such incredible iPhone cameras in the world now?
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
I keep feeling weirdly drawn back to the Ricoh GR line despite briefly having a GRII and not really liking it. The form factor is incredible but I could just never take very good pictures with it. Is it even worth revisiting with such incredible iPhone cameras in the world now?
I'm not a phone camera person and I'm really not an EVF less camera person so I can't really answer this question. Just find something you actually like taking pictures with.
 

selfnoise

Member
Oct 25, 2017
377
If you didn't take to the GRII I'm not sure why the III would be any different. It has IBIS and a better sensor but is essentially the same conceptually.
 

Yams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,892
I keep feeling weirdly drawn back to the Ricoh GR line despite briefly having a GRII and not really liking it. The form factor is incredible but I could just never take very good pictures with it. Is it even worth revisiting with such incredible iPhone cameras in the world now?
The GR3 is the same form factor with IBIS and way better sensor then you’ll ever find on a phone. Plus it’s perfect for your pocket
 

Ivalice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
986
Is the quality a pretty big step up from the II? The lack of flash is holding me back a bit.
Yes.

24mp vs 16mp, GR III has a new sensor and lens, in body stabilization. USB-C connection, smaller than the GR II, and better autofocus.

It is my main and only camera. It takes a while to get used to the 28mm equivalent but once you get it, you can do a lot with it.
 

Lunar FC

Member
Oct 25, 2017
411
Hey guys,

Just started work on a minor in film at my university. It’s always been something I have enjoyed and finally decided to pursue it a little bit more. I’ve never been too knowledgeable about cameras and would like to finally get a nice mid to high-end camera to work on the little projects I have rolling around in my head. Everything I have done up to this point is on a cheap Sony that i’ve had forever, my GoPro Hero 7 and a DJI Mavic Pro. My budget is currently around $1,200. I would prefer a slim/compact design that I can easily just throw my backpack. Preferably I would like something that is versatile, as I don’t feel i’m at the level of filmmaking where I need to be owning various lenses. I’m somebody who really likes the aesthetics of the things, so i’ve always been drawn to Lecia. But, from the little research i’ve done they don’t seem to produce cameras dedicated to video and the value just doesn’t seem there. If there is a good lecia option for filmmaking I would love to hear about it from you guys or any other recommendations would be awesome as well.

Thanks!
 
Oct 25, 2017
19,253
Hey guys,

Just started work on a minor in film at my university. It’s always been something I have enjoyed and finally decided to pursue it a little bit more. I’ve never been too knowledgeable about cameras and would like to finally get a nice mid to high-end camera to work on the little projects I have rolling around in my head. Everything I have done up to this point is on a cheap Sony that i’ve had forever, my GoPro Hero 7 and a DJI Mavic Pro. My budget is currently around $1,200. I would prefer a slim/compact design that I can easily just throw my backpack. Preferably I would like something that is versatile, as I don’t feel i’m at the level of filmmaking where I need to be owning various lenses. I’m somebody who really likes the aesthetics of the things, so i’ve always been drawn to Lecia. But, from the little research i’ve done they don’t seem to produce cameras dedicated to video and the value just doesn’t seem there. If there is a good lecia option for filmmaking I would love to hear about it from you guys or any other recommendations would be awesome as well.

Thanks!
Don't look at Leica, period, just don't do it if you're budget conscious. $1200 should net you an X-T2, if you want something in the micro 4/3rd's range you got plenty of options though the concept of slim kind of needs wiggle room regardless of what you get.
Also you're not looking for 4K 60P are you? If so it kind of just straight messes up your budget.
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G85 Mirrorless Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera with 12-60mm & 45-200mm Lenses and Case Kit
Panasonic Lumix DC-G95 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 12-60mm Lens
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Mirrorless Micro Four Thirds Digital Camera (Body Only) Find a cheap lens for this
Used Fujifilm X-T2 Mirrorless Digital Camera Body - Black E+ Find a cheap lens
 

Zefah

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,797
Huh.. All those rumors of a new sensor and big internal improvements turned out to be complete nonsense. The body upgrades shared with the A7R IV look great, but it seems like that's all that's going on with this revision?

Edit: nevermind, their press release confirms it's really the same inside:

The new Alpha 9 II shares the same acclaimed 35mm full-frame stacked 24.2 MP[ix] Exmor RS™ CMOS image sensor with integral memory as the original Alpha 9, giving it the same unmatched speed performance and outstanding image quality. The new model can shoot continuously and completely silently[x] at 20 fps for up to 361 JPEG images[xi] or 239 compressed RAW images[xii], with no viewfinder blackout, allowing the photographer to follow the subject and action with no interruption to the EVF during picture taking. For times when mechanical shutter is preferred or required, the new Alpha 9 II has been improved to shoot at up to 10 fps, about 2x the speed of the Alpha 9.
 

Ivalice

Member
Oct 25, 2017
986
Hey guys,

Just started work on a minor in film at my university. It’s always been something I have enjoyed and finally decided to pursue it a little bit more. I’ve never been too knowledgeable about cameras and would like to finally get a nice mid to high-end camera to work on the little projects I have rolling around in my head. Everything I have done up to this point is on a cheap Sony that i’ve had forever, my GoPro Hero 7 and a DJI Mavic Pro. My budget is currently around $1,200. I would prefer a slim/compact design that I can easily just throw my backpack. Preferably I would like something that is versatile, as I don’t feel i’m at the level of filmmaking where I need to be owning various lenses. I’m somebody who really likes the aesthetics of the things, so i’ve always been drawn to Lecia. But, from the little research i’ve done they don’t seem to produce cameras dedicated to video and the value just doesn’t seem there. If there is a good lecia option for filmmaking I would love to hear about it from you guys or any other recommendations would be awesome as well.

Thanks!
The best Leica you can get for that price is the point and shoot D-Lux 7 which is a good camera for stills and video.

Leica doesn’t really do video in their cameras so you’re better off looking elsewhere, tbh.
 

Radec

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,471
Other camera makers should really step it up. Sony getting comfortable with their upgrades.
I mean if nothing srill can't beat the a9 on its speed then Sony won't do some major changes.