Many thanks, I am new to all the lens jargon lol
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
The A7III is a great camera, still one of the best in the market and will still be good several years after, get that and don't get fixated on upgrading your camera once the 7IV, V or VI get announced, lenses are way more important, and your choice of lens is already a good one, but as Jaded said I'd get the Sigma 24-70, seems to be better build, and those 4mm a lot of times make the difference (the Tamron is still a good lens tho).
As for the iPad Pro, I have a 10.5 in which I do tons of work, I work with models and events and so far I've replaced a lot of my workflow with the iPad, I'd get Affinity Photo and Pixelmator Pro Photo as Photoshop/Lightroom replacements, I am a suscriber of Adobe CC so in my case I use Lightroom for color correction and editing photos in batch, for retouching and until Photoshop iPad get more functions I use Affinity, also iOS 13 has corrected a lot of annoyances inherent to the earlier versions of the iPad. There are some times where I have to use a PC tho, but that kind of work I do it on a powerful desktop at home and I am already 2 years without a laptop because the iPad advantages (size, form factor, even the Apple Pencil and don't understimate what you can do by combining several different apps that would take a lot of time replicating on PC/Mac) outweight my need for a laptop
Photograph enough shit in a room with your ass pressed up against a wall you don't want your wide to be 28mm. Depending on what you photograph a person could even get by on an A7RII. I'd get an A7III, but I need a good electronic shutter camera so I'm looking a A9's. Regarding editing programs I'm becoming a Capture One fan.
D780 feels like a giant over priced yawn to me right now. I'd rather just get a used D850 at that price.
And that's a camera that I really don't want. I'll contemplate adding a Z, but the lens line up has to fill up and start hitting the second hand market more and they need to improve their bodies. As an X mount and E mount user I would need to something to really wow me in their second gen bodies. I'll probably just get a D850 and D5 when those prices crater at some point, but I oddly enough have a more filled out ecosystem on E mount than I do on F mount.
Why make a monochrome ILC, could have made a 35mm fixed lens compact.
I'm curious if Fuji will announce the X100VA soon and the specs....but typically that's also a pricey camera. Not super optimistic about the XT3 successor, I'm honestly not sure what they can add in 1.5 years of development. IBIS is definitely good but if that's it then meh.
Yeah basically I'm not super hyped about the the X-T4, it's going to be what it is, but if it's just the X-T3 with IBIS, I'll pass since I already got an X-H1, which I like. X-H2 would be lovely, but not happening yet. They really need to kill off some of their lower tiered cameras or drop the price of the X-Txx cameras and kill off the X-T100 and XA lines. They really do make too many god damn cameras. Leave the X-Pro series as the rangefinder body, drop the XE and be done with it unless it's actually profitable.
depending on what y'all do I suppose ibis is fucking awesome though. I don't know how many stops Fuji is talking but oly em1 ii is amazing. Basically eliminates the need for a tripod entirely unless you're doing more than 2-3 sec LEs. You can also pretty much always shoot at 200 iso. Even with 300mm equiv telephotos in low light. And yes even concerts and events with a faster shutter (but still slower shutter than you would shoot with FF or apsc if you need to increase iso a bit).
Last edited:
Really depends, but it doesn't seem too bad so far. Also keep in mind my subjects tend to move so I can't go too long in my shutter speeds. I'm going to give it a go at a park this weekend if I get decent weather. Sony's isn't bad, but it does have it's limits with the 100-400.
This shot on the X-H1 was the one that made me take notice of how good the IBIS is on it. It's at 1/60th with a 135mm equivalent lens:
XH010151 by Marcus Beasley, on FlickrShe's tack sharp.
IBIS is awesome, I am basically saying XT3 should've already had IBIS. As you said, my OMD had IBIS 8 years ago, Sonys have it. It's kind of the norm. XT series was lacking it up to this point (still not confirmed of course). It's a nice to have for me, really useful for interior architectural details. But most of my photos are objects in motion so IBIS is not a requirement. But definitely nice when you have it, specially with the 56mm lens, else you are stuck using it at 1/80 at the lowest end. Or the 90mm as Marcus posted above is where you really start to see the benefits. That said, it alone isn't a "good" upgrade for me, but if anyone is new to Fuji, the next XT would be an awesome camera for them.
Not quite tack sharp but not bad for 1 sec shutter handheld. This is a cheap oly 40-150mm lens (like regularly $99 lol). Apologies for not using Flickr, stopped using it when they capped the storage.
edit: ugh does era further compress photos? Looks worse than imgur zooming in by like 5x lol.
guess I gotta figure out my Flickr login again
wait weird, why when you click on the image to open it it looks terrible vs just zooming within the forum page? On mobile btw. Like you can actually read the neon signs just zooming in on the forum page but expanding then zooming it looks god awful.
edit: ugh does era further compress photos? Looks worse than imgur zooming in by like 5x lol.
guess I gotta figure out my Flickr login again
wait weird, why when you click on the image to open it it looks terrible vs just zooming within the forum page? On mobile btw. Like you can actually read the neon signs just zooming in on the forum page but expanding then zooming it looks god awful.
Last edited:
I hope the X-T4 is somewhere between the T3 and H1 in size, would be perfect. I'll definitely get one.
I honestly have no complaints with the X-H1 size. Feels great to me.
If I learned something from facebook is that I am an idiot for buying Sony, and also people are idiots for buying canons and nikons, and fujis, and also my photos ain't worth shit, but also those photos from multi awarded artists? Also shit because they don't respect the rule of thirds, oh and I am the reason this world is shit and headed to its own destruction
I praise IBIS and all of a sudden I don't know what the fuck I'm doing and have to hear about Bresson and see his puddle photograph because it's the pinnacle of photography.
I was gonna chime in on the 56mm topic...the thing is, that lens just mis-focuses due to the heavy glass, it's literally designed for portrait work like the Canon 85 1.2. DOES NOT mean it can't be improved with faster motors. FB just makes things worse 100 fold because many people have no clue wtf they are talking about.
Fucking this, but they act like they know what they're talking about. Fuji designing a multifunction focal length to do one thing is stupid on their part though.
Yeah I think they were taking a purist approach. And it's a shame....it's SUCH a good lens otherwise. But that's the thing, if they use the same tech as the 90mm, that 56mm becomes a GODLY lens for portrait and street work. It's such a fucking frustrating lens for me. I have some of my best photos with it...and some where I'm shaking my head at the images I lost because it misfocused. I'm thinking of replacing it with the 90mm but it's just more versatile of a focal length. Fuji could really improve this one.
Yeah which sucks for me because I actually like to shoot primes for stuff these days. I'm not really on a zoom unless I actually have to be.
I almost "Ok Boomer'd" some guy. I was actually curious and it ended up being the stereotypical old white dude packing a Leica when he was curious as to why I don't like older photographers so much and insulted me. I have no idea why the photography community so god damn toxic.
I'll admit that I can be a bit of an ass, but I'd like to think I'm not condescending. I'm passionate, just socially dumb, but damn these people are horrible.
I'm thinking to get a general walk around Lens, and I'm trying to decide between the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, the Sony FE 24-105mm f4, and the Sony FE 24-70mm f2.8.
My current lens line up has a 16-35mm f2.8 Sony Zeiss, 50mm f1.4 Sony prime lens, and a 70-400mm Sony G lens (all Alpha lenses adapted to work with my A7Rii camera)
Now my dilemma is, is it worth to splurge on the Sony GM 24-70mm? I tend to keep my lenses for many many years and enjoy using them.
I've previously had a Tamron Macro lens that I never really loved, so I'm not sure if I should go with a Tamron (even though this particular lens has fantastic reviews).
The 24-105 has a good amount of reach, which is useful, but I wonder if the f4 aperture going to limit me.
My main area of interest is Landscape/Urban/travel photography and I tend to like long shutter night photography.
Wonder if anyone has any input on any of the above and some advise would be appreciated.
My current lens line up has a 16-35mm f2.8 Sony Zeiss, 50mm f1.4 Sony prime lens, and a 70-400mm Sony G lens (all Alpha lenses adapted to work with my A7Rii camera)
Now my dilemma is, is it worth to splurge on the Sony GM 24-70mm? I tend to keep my lenses for many many years and enjoy using them.
I've previously had a Tamron Macro lens that I never really loved, so I'm not sure if I should go with a Tamron (even though this particular lens has fantastic reviews).
The 24-105 has a good amount of reach, which is useful, but I wonder if the f4 aperture going to limit me.
My main area of interest is Landscape/Urban/travel photography and I tend to like long shutter night photography.
Wonder if anyone has any input on any of the above and some advise would be appreciated.
You should just look into Sigma's 24-70 2.8 that they just released since it's cheaper than Sony's 24-105 and for all I know actually sharper. If you're using that much A mount adapted glass on the A7RII no less I'm assuming nothing you photograph moves around too much? I heard the adapted glass take a bit of a knock on the AF so I never bothered with getting any of it. I already know I'd never use it for paid work.
Yeah the AF is terrible with the adaptor, but I mainly shoot landscape and architecture so AF is not critical to me, sharpness and distortions bother me more.
That Sigma lens sounds promising and nice size too compared to the Sony GM (not to mention half the price), I'm gonna go read up some reviews.
Yeah that Sigma's what I recommend these days to people. It's a really good bang for the budget lens and only like $300 more than the Tamron.
All Fuji had to do was make a great feeling large body camera to get me to enjoy the system again. The X-H1 is a very under appreciated camera. Great grip and smooth shutter.
xt4 will be a mix of the xh1 and xt3 body
calling it right now
I want full on X-H1 body no half measures. Unless they could shrink it slightly but keep the grip, shutter and top lcd screen then it's a downgrade.
Ended up getting the X-T2 for 500e. Seemed better for me as it is more compact. Now onto buying the 18-55mm OIS for video.
Yeah I'm not exactly on that more compact hype 100%. I like the X-T2 with primes, not so much with actual zooms. I didn't like that kit lens either, but that's just me.
Which one would you recommend as a first lens that also works well for video?
I'm keen on the 18-55mm mostly because of its versatility, but I'm definitely open for some other option.
I think the XT2/3 are the perfect size for something like the 16 1.4, but the XE-3 is an absolutely lovely size if I'm using the Laowa 9mm or the 35 f2.
I basically use the 16-55 and the 50-140, keep in mind I'm normally on a tripod. My other lenses are the 90F2, 23 1.4 and 56 1.2. I did a portrait session on the 18-55 once and that was the end of it. I started saving up for the 16-55 after that. I'm also indoors a lot and yeah that extra bit on the wide end can make a difference. 18-55 would be good for gimbal work and that's all I'd relegate it to. You start getting into zooms you're going to want a grip and it's the reason that made me start looking at the X-H1, I'm legit no regrets on that camera. X-T3 is fine because they made the vertical grip more robust, but it's hand cramp city with the X-T2.
Did my first real event with the Fuji X-T3 and X-H1 combo and yup, that's dat good shit. The X-H1 stabilizing out the 90 allowing below 1/250th ended up producing some good indoor shots.
I mean that's pretty much guaranteed, with a redesigned lens.
I could totally go for better manual and auto focus, and a better lens. I had heard the lens was the weak point of the X100's.
Posting for a friend that doesn't have an account here;
They want to spend $1000~ on a Fuji camera. Can have a fixed lens. They like the sizes of the Fuji and how they look. They are going to be travelling around various cities this year so they want a nice walk around camera they can do street photography with on their travels. What would y'all recommend? He's ok with either used or new.
They want to spend $1000~ on a Fuji camera. Can have a fixed lens. They like the sizes of the Fuji and how they look. They are going to be travelling around various cities this year so they want a nice walk around camera they can do street photography with on their travels. What would y'all recommend? He's ok with either used or new.