+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 526

Thread: Sony FE Lens News Thread

  1. #51
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default    
      
      

    Sounds like the new Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 fixes the problems. Great for having a small, good UWA. I would pay extra for this over the Rokinon for size alone. I'd be fine losing aperture for size.

    http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/new-v...-ingo-schader/


    • Advertising

      advertising
      newschoolofphotography.com
      has no influence on the ads
      that Google displays.



        
       

  2. #52
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by ppower View Post
    Sounds like the new Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 fixes the problems. Great for having a small, good UWA. I would pay extra for this over the Rokinon for size alone. I'd be fine losing aperture for size.

    http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/new-v...-ingo-schader/
    Will have to settle for the Rokinon for now. I need something for India/Dubai!

  3. #53
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    ahh, that's right. coming up really soon now, and this probably won't be out in time.

  4. #54
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Would love the 16-35, but then one of us would have to stay behind as it is almost the cost of a flight!

  5. #55

    Default          

    buy a 10-18mm and a6000 for the trip, sell it (to me) when you get home?
    also, that voightlander might be great, don't get me wrong, but doesn't the a7 handle wides in it's corners much better than the a7r?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  6. #56
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    No, the A7s dealt with the corners better for some strange reason. For this new Voigtlander to work well is promising.

    Also on the FE lens news, Sigma has said that they will be making more mirrorless lenses for E and X mount, but nothing for full frame. More third party lenses (AF of course) would be a great plus for going APS-C. However, I have to wonder if autofocus performance is going to be even more tricky with 3rd party since they are dealing with on sensor PDAF. I don't know the science side of that. I do know that the Sigma 19 and 30mm focus slower than the Sony 16mm.

  7. #57

    Default          

    19 and 30 are longer FLs so that's some of it I'm sure, but yeah, sigma's never AFed quite as fast as OEM. The only exception I've found is their 35mm was quite good, and accurate. But still not sure it keeps up with the L (but it was more than fast enough). The purple fringing is something that's kept me from sony since last year. The 10-18mm on the NEX7 does it. Then the 10-18 and 18-55 both have double sunstars on the NEX7. I haven't read a single post anywhere about that happening (the sun stars) so it's not something I can prove with the a6000 w/o trying one. From what I've read the a6000 is better with fringing though, but w/o trying one I won't know. I just really liked the NEX7 for landscaping. Another step smaller -vs- the Fujis but also with more MP. I've never really sweated MP (I have 3'x4' prints here from my 7D) but it also doesn't hurt... I love the tiny size of the sony's for scaping though. I'm very tempting to grab the a6000 and try it's sensor as well as it's AF...
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  8. #58
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    buy a 10-18mm and a6000 for the trip, sell it (to me) when you get home?
    also, that voightlander might be great, don't get me wrong, but doesn't the a7 handle wides in it's corners much better than the a7r?
    Umm. That is a lot more than the $299 I can spend for now. Would love the 10818 though.

  9. #59
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    Got a cheap, cheap idea for you A7 guys. I just found out that the Sigma (DSLR) 30mm f/1.4 ART works on full frame. This made me wonder if the cheap Sigma 19mm, 30mm, and 60 f/2.8 E-mount could work on the A7. Here is a video showing that removing the baffle improves the coverage, and I also have to wonder if the newer ART would do better.

    And here is a flickr of the A7 w/ 30mm and baffle removed. As it mentions, a 1.2x crop works out to be about 35mm and would also cut out a bit of the vignetted corners. https://www.flickr.com/photos/211522...641681353835/#

    edit: so the 19mm doesn't have a baffle but also would work perfectly on square crops. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1282739/0
    The 60mm does work reasonably f/2.8-5.6 and noticeable past f/8. So far I can't find that there is any difference between the ver 1 and ART series.
    Last edited by ppower; 10-05-2014 at 05:58 PM.

  10. #60
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    buy a 10-18mm and a6000 for the trip, sell it (to me) when you get home?
    also, that voightlander might be great, don't get me wrong, but doesn't the a7 handle wides in it's corners much better than the a7r?
    Ok, so I am now leaning towards the 10-18 for the trip. Actually, I was browsing photos from the last trip and thought a ROK 24 1.4 would be wide enough. Back then, I had a Sony A100 with a Sigma 24-70, so 36mm equivalent. This lead me to think a 24 would be fine and the 14mm too much, then I remembered Dubai and the damn tall buildings.

    I think it is boiled down to a:
    Sony 10-18mm f4
    Voigtlander 21mm f4
    ROK 14 f2.8 or
    ROK 24 f1.4

    3 are native.

    Anyone else care to chime in? I am open to adapted.

  11. #61
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    I think the 10-18 makes a lot of sense, and it's the only AF on the list as well. It's stabilized which can't hurt, and it's designed for E-mount which makes it small. In case it is just to get you through your trip, is there anybody nearby you could just borrow a Rok 14 from? I know I'd let you take mine if you were near by, and then it would just be a matter of having the adapter.

  12. #62

    Default          

    I have the ROK 24 f/1.4 and it is really, really good. As sharp on center as my Zeiss M 25mm and is really solid wide open. Not as contrasty but that could be a good thing. It is large though. And the hood is plastic crap.

  13. #63
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    So this was taken last time I was in India in 2009 and at 36mm equiv, I was surely missing something wide. I think the 24mm would be good enough and anything less overkill.

    Velankanni 2009 by Royston_Kane, on Flickr

    Dubai is another story. All the good shots I see are in the 14-18mm range!

  14. #64
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    Better to be too wide and crop down a bit. Depends if you ever plan to print anything and at what size? I've started trying to give myself extra room if something is to be 8x10. Basically, when shooting primes, I'd like something to be around double. Anything less of spacing, and it's not worth it for me to swap lenses. Given that you have the 35, I feel that anywhere 14-18mm and then 85 for long works well. As another option, I just noticed somebody who used to come around this place, Andrew Thompson put up his Tokina 17mm ATX-PRO for sale. $450. I just tagged you on his post. It looks like it's not too large either. Edit: holy cow he's smoking crack. Better deals even on ebay, and you can get the earlier version for just $150.
    Last edited by ppower; 10-10-2014 at 04:03 PM.

  15. #65
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by ppower View Post
    Better to be too wide and crop down a bit. Depends if you ever plan to print anything and at what size? I've started trying to give myself extra room if something is to be 8x10. Basically, when shooting primes, I'd like something to be around double. Anything less of spacing, and it's not worth it for me to swap lenses. Given that you have the 35, I feel that anywhere 14-18mm and then 85 for long works well. As another option, I just noticed somebody who used to come around this place, Andrew Thompson put up his Tokina 17mm ATX-PRO for sale. $450. I just tagged you on his post. It looks like it's not too large either. Edit: holy cow he's smoking crack. Better deals even on ebay, and you can get the earlier version for just $150.
    I saw that lens and it has been on my radar. The price is a WHOA!


    I agree on going wider. Now to find a 14 that is not crazy priced. A month back they were $299 for the FE version now all I see are $399!

  16. #66
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    wow, that's crazy! I bet with sales of the A7 line, they have sold a ton of E-mount. Since you already have a Nikon adapter, what about just getting a Nikon mount? If I were getting a Rokinon, I would get a DSLR mount w/ adapter so that if you resell it, you have more people you can sell to. If you get E-mount, it can only go to E-mount users.

  17. #67
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    That is what I was thinking off. Going with the Nikon version. I was hoping to take advantage of aperture detail from a native lens. To hell with that if it costs $100 more!

  18. #68

    Default          

    agreed on getting the nikon or canon version and an adapter.
    as for lenses, I really think the 10-18mm is the right call... Why? Because you can shoot it FF around 12mm I think, but if that isn't working you can also shoot it in crop mode from 15~whatever all you want. Gives you tons of FL options. You don't need full res for these shots anyway right?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  19. #69
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          


  20. #70

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by rkane View Post
    Looking at that review, and the guys pics, I can honestly say that I think the sharpness/contrast vs size/weight trade off for the f/2.8 vs the f/4 falls to the side of the f/2.8.
    SONY A900
    Always outnumbered, never outgunned.
    |LandshapePhotography.com|My Photo blog|Facebook Fanpage|

  21. #71
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by ppower View Post
    wow, that's crazy! I bet with sales of the A7 line, they have sold a ton of E-mount. Since you already have a Nikon adapter, what about just getting a Nikon mount? If I were getting a Rokinon, I would get a DSLR mount w/ adapter so that if you resell it, you have more people you can sell to. If you get E-mount, it can only go to E-mount users.
    Ok, so I did not listen and got an Emount version for cheap. I forgot I had eBay bucks and saved me a good 10+%! Is brand new from Adorama.

  22. #72

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnie Utah View Post
    Looking at that review, and the guys pics, I can honestly say that I think the sharpness/contrast vs size/weight trade off for the f/2.8 vs the f/4 falls to the side of the f/2.8.
    wait, which of his shots are with the 2.8 version? Reading it it seems they're all with the f/4 FE version and there's no comparison? What am I missing?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  23. #73

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    wait, which of his shots are with the 2.8 version? Reading it it seems they're all with the f/4 FE version and there's no comparison? What am I missing?
    None. But I've shot the 16-35mm f/2.8 as my go to lens for 5+ years, and I can tell you without a doubt, it's very, very sharp.

    Compare this shot



    to this one



    and this one



    to this one...

    Last edited by Lonnie Utah; 10-15-2014 at 09:21 PM.
    SONY A900
    Always outnumbered, never outgunned.
    |LandshapePhotography.com|My Photo blog|Facebook Fanpage|

  24. #74

    Default          

    ummmm, you're comparing your processing to his processing and using web res images to do so?

    w/o bringing your shots into this, opening his in a new tab and zooming in as much as possible (which is still no where near 36mp resolution) I'm quite impressed with the details he's got in his files. Enough so as much as I'd hate to deal with 36mp files on the computer/storage end of it, it certainly has me considering a A7r as a landscape camera. The rumored new ~45mp option with the a6000 AF is what I'm really hoping becomes reality...
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  25. #75
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Yeah, it seems he likes to add vignettes as well, so the images not good for straight comparison. He also seems to be too much of a Sony Schill.

  26. #76

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    ummmm, you're comparing your processing to his processing and using web res images to do so?

    w/o bringing your shots into this, opening his in a new tab and zooming in as much as possible (which is still no where near 36mp resolution) I'm quite impressed with the details he's got in his files. Enough so as much as I'd hate to deal with 36mp files on the computer/storage end of it, it certainly has me considering a A7r as a landscape camera. The rumored new ~45mp option with the a6000 AF is what I'm really hoping becomes reality...
    Point taken and valid, but I'll put it like this Ben. When I sho(o)t the 16-35mm f/2.8 on the A900, I always though that the lens was out performing the sensor (and even more so with the 24-70mm Zeiss). With the NEX-7, and the 10-18mm, I've always thought the sensor was out performing the lens (not the case in the very few times I've shot the 16-35mm on the NEX). Now given the performance that folks have been talking about from the A7r, if I were shooing it, I'd want the sharpest lens on there I could get. That defaults me back to the f/2.8. Honestly, I thought all of his images were kinda "soft" although that could be a processing thing.
    SONY A900
    Always outnumbered, never outgunned.
    |LandshapePhotography.com|My Photo blog|Facebook Fanpage|

  27. #77

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnie Utah View Post
    I thought all of his images were kinda "soft" although that could be a processing thing.
    yeah, that's my point. And the 10-18 is I hope better than the NEX7 sensor. That sensor sucks, sorry! Purple fringe and crappy sunstars make it unusable for me. I owned one for a month and fell in love with the handling but the IQ just wasn't there. Purple fringing is all sensor based. I hope they've fixed it with the a6000 but I've seen nothing online either way making me hesitant to try one. And the sunstars were an issue with both the 10-18 and 18-55 leading me to believe it was the sensor or the lenses on the sensor it self, not the lens since 2 different lenses did it. And I'm not a huge sunstar shooter, but you see that in any street lights when you stop down at night/dusk which I do all the time for my arch work and it looked like crap.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  28. #78

    Default          

    Hum, it appears that "native system" might mean something. Wondering if this is due to the translucent mirror in the LA-EA4? I'd like to see shots with the LA-EA3 for comparison...

    http://www.verybiglobo.com/photokina...-for-download/
    Last edited by Lonnie Utah; 10-16-2014 at 11:02 AM.
    SONY A900
    Always outnumbered, never outgunned.
    |LandshapePhotography.com|My Photo blog|Facebook Fanpage|

  29. #79

    Default          

    I have the 16-35 f/2.8 and it is good on the A7R. I have noticed a loss of sharpness in the corners wide open but I've not noticed it stopped down. It is a good lens but the contrast and sharpness is not remotely in the same league as the FE Zeiss primes. Here is a set of pictures I took at the Detroit Auto show this year with it. It is a great walk-around lens for that sort of thing.

    I agree with Lonnie on the sensors pushing the lenses. I really noticed this when I went from the D3S to the D800E. On the D3S I loved the Nikon f/2.8 zooms. Incredibly sharp and wonderful. When I got the D800E the pictures had more detail but it wasn't as great as advertized. Then I got the Sigma 35mm ART and realized what I had been missing. I replaced the zooms with primes and it was another world.

    The A7R allows me to put all kinds of old lenses on it and see how they distort reality. And don't quote me on this completely but it just seems that when you get a somewhat modern lens that doesn't perform well on the camera the pics just seem bland. Then you put an old lens that is greatly inferior to the new lens in pretty much every measure and the pics aren't sharp and clear but they are differently interesting. This seems like a typical "they don't make them like they used to" rant but it isn't. It just seems that coming close to a sharp, contrasty scene is much worse than missing it by a mile. The Uncanny Valley of lens performance.

  30. #80

    Default          

    I agree in general sensors are pushing lenses. Just not the NEX-7's specifically paired with the 10-18 and 18-55. I had sensor based issues with both lenses. In a studio setting then those roles reverse and the sensor is pushing the lenses again, but for what I need it for the sensor has 2 flaws unfortunately.

    Lonnie, at least on an A7r, the FE version looks to be the winner. Adapters aren't worth the effort for most of us because most all of us would switch to the a7r to reduce size while keeping FF and MP. You'd be an exception due to owning the lens for alpha already. But yeah, the FE 16-35mm looks good enough in my book. And sony knows what they've got coming in the future so if it really is a ~45mp sensor you know they've planned for the lenses they're currently releasing to keep up. At least I'd hope so.

    Question for you sony guys. What AF systems are in the A7 bodies? The A7s and A7r both have the watered down AF right? The A7 (no letters) has the better hybrid system? But both systems are still slower than other mirrorless and the a6000 is faster than both? I've been thinking up a ton of fun ideas to shoot with an A7s after seeing that moonlight video...
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  31. #81
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    Question for you sony guys. What AF systems are in the A7 bodies? The A7s and A7r both have the watered down AF right? The A7 (no letters) has the better hybrid system? But both systems are still slower than other mirrorless and the a6000 is faster than both? I've been thinking up a ton of fun ideas to shoot with an A7s after seeing that moonlight video...
    The A7r has CDAF, A7 has PDAF and CDAF, A7s has CDAF but the bonus of much better lowlight AF.

    Some time in the distant future for me, an A7s will be added. Need to fill out the lenses first.

  32. #82

    Default          

    I'm bummed the a7s at least didn't get the better AF or even the a6000 af since it's a year newer than the others? That'd be a killer wedding body if it could AF well in low light... I LOVE that they had the guts to put a 12mp FF sensor in a modern body. Sure it's aimed at video pretty squarely but at least they didn't package it as a camcorder.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  33. #83

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    And sony knows what they've got coming in the future so if it really is a ~45mp sensor you know they've planned for the lenses they're currently releasing to keep up. At least I'd hope so.
    The FE 24-70 is not up to the A7R at all. You know all of the corner smearing that happens with wide Biogon lenses? Yeah, my 25mm M-mount Zeiss is heads and shoulders above the 24-70 in the corners at F/2.8 than pretty much any aperture on the zoom. Actually, the funny part is when I was testing them I got the comparison pictures mixed up and almost sent the m-mount back because it was so bad. If Sony isn't even keeping up with the Sony Zeiss versions of their lenses I am taking a wait-and-see attitude with all of their releases.

  34. #84

    Default          

    good to know. Which 24-70 though, the 2.8? Also, their 16-35mm isn't any smaller than canon's 16-35 f/4 and canon's 17-40 is actually smaller... Yeah yeah yeah the body is smaller but if you build a system around the a7r and have 2~3 lenses setup for landscapes it's basically going to weigh the same as a canon 6D setup... The body will be smaller but the lenses the same or bigger? As much as I love the idea of a killer 36mp pocket cam, it just isn't really a pocket cam with their lenses. I wonder why their lenses didn't shrink more than they did? Removing the mirror should have helped more, no? And yes I'm fully aware both are FF so that's part of it.

    the a6000 with a 10-18 still might be the best bang for your buck in terms of pocket size and good resolution. When I shot the NEX7 side by side my XE1 and 5Diii it had the most resolution in the final files. Wouldn't make a massive difference in prints I don't think but it was pretty obvious staring at a screen at 100%...

    My thing is I keep coming up with ideas for the a7s actually. Moonlight landscapes etc. Not sure what lens would be best for that because obviously the rokinon fast manual lenses would help in low light but if I want DOF maybe not?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  35. #85
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    For some reasons, zooms seem
    To be tough all around these days on the mirrorless front! That Olympus 40-150 is huge as is the Fuji that is coming out!

  36. #86

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    Which 24-70 though, the 2.8?
    Nah, the FE mount f/4 with the IS. Terribly disappointed. I am somewhat curious about the 2.8 but I am happy with the MF lenses I have that cover that range.

    I wonder if the size difference is the IS. Every time I see a lens that has that it is slow in aperture and still huge, especially in diameter.

    The a6000 with the 20mm is an interesting proposition. Somewhat wider lens, albeit slower, than the X100, but a little smaller in size. That is interesting.

  37. #87

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by rkane View Post
    That Olympus 40-150 is huge as is the Fuji that is coming out!
    Looking at the wide zooms and the long zooms it seems they are pretty much the same lens arrangements as the SLR designs. On the wide end this makes sense because, well, 10-17mm is really a short optic so you have to put glass in there to allow you to move everything out for a mount which is just what you have to do on SLRs. On the long end, well, long is long.

    I would guess that the mirrorless lens advantage should be somewhere in the normal range of things. A lens of sufficient length that it doesn't need the extra stages to lengthen the mount but still shorter than the normal retrofocus stuff needed to clear a mirrorbox. I have no idea what that would be but it seems that 20-40mm is where they keep putting these shorter things. And then add in the ray angle issues at the back of the lens and it becomes murkier.

  38. #88
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    It seems that the zooms are big, but the primes are small/smaller. The 55 FE does seem to be the exception.

    Must be something in the engineering.

    Below is a quick look at A7/E-M1 comparisons with:

    Order is A7 24-70f4, E-M1 12-40f2.8, A7 70-200f4, E-M1 40-150f2.8, A7 35FE, E-M1 17f1.8

    Screen Shot 2014-10-18 at 2.29.34 PM by Royston_Kane, on Flickr

  39. #89
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Throwing in a quick look at some wide zoom options.

    This actually makes the A7 very compelling to me.

    L-R A7 16-35f4, E-M1 7-14f4, D810 16-35f4, 5DIII 16-35f4, D7100 10-24
    Screen Shot 2014-10-18 at 2.39.19 PM by Royston_Kane, on Flickr

  40. #90

    Default          

    toss the canon on a 6d instead. Also realize their 17-40 is canon's smallest UWA. The MFT tele zoom is a 80-300 EFL though so that's WAY different. Fuji's lenses are pretty much all smaller -vs- FF. Their 10-24 is smaller than the 17-40 by quite a bit (which is canon's oldest UWA so it should be ignored I suppose because all the newer options while bigger are also much nicer optically). Fuji's 18-55 is tiny. Fuji's 18-135 is smaller than canon's 24-105. No it's not constant f/4 but it's similar. The 10-18 sony UWA is also nicely small. It is wide though but that doesn't matter all that much to me.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  41. #91

    Default          

    here's what I'm looking at:
    http://camerasize.com/compact/#520.4...5,567.325,wa,t


    the XT1 has the 18-135 on it which is slightly longer (~1/4") than the 10-24mm
    the a6000 has the 16-70mm which is similar in length to the 10-18mm

    obviously the body is smaller on the a7 but like I said, build a system and it's around canon/nikon size in terms of total weight thanks to sony's f/4s being heavier. The a6000 I think is the pound for pound, space for space winner since it's got a great 24mp sensor in it and smaller lenses. I keep wondering if it's worth the difference -vs- the XT1/fuji. I like my fuji's a lot but there's something about the controls that bug the crap out of me at times. Landscaping is one of them (the fact that the shutter speed is set via the dial for 1s to 1/4000th but longer than 1s you switch to 'T' and then the rear dial. Give me ALL shutter speeds via T like a DSLR please!).
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  42. #92
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    But could you do weddings with the a6000? Sony needs an 85mm there for E mount. Unless you go MF with a Rok. The 55mm FE could work though for an in between.

    BTW, After shooting the a7 today, I can't wait for the 14 to arrive!

  43. #93
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    You could definitely shoot with the a6000 or two. A 10-18 on one and 50 or 55mm on another. It just kills that there are no f/1.4 native lenses, and adding an AF adapter has the mirror which eats up about 2/3,stop making f1.4+translucent mirror = f/1.8. And THAT is why I think Sony feels fine in having slow lenses. It comparable when comparing to their SLT tech.

    As for the A-mount 16-35, I'm sure it's great, but it's big and heavy. I had the 24-70, and it was a beast. The deal with the A7,is that you could add the pdaf adapter and a battery grip for better balance. Bam! You've got a DSLT but haven't gained a light transmission benefit. They really need Amount lenses to focus fast with the a6000 hybrid AF when using their mirror less adapter.

  44. #94

    Default          

    this isn't about weddings. This is purely about landscapes. I basically have two setups now as it is. One with zooms for landscapes. One with primes for wedding work. I setup the XT1 accordingly but that's a PITA and I've been thinking about selling the XE2&X100s to fund a second XT1. Like I said, there's some handling odities with the XT1 when it comes to landscapes. I have enough time when shooting like this to deal with them but I've always wanted to try the other side so I know, then sell the option I don't like. I'm very tempted by a a6000 w/10-18 setup as well as an a7r w/16-35mm setup once it's available.

    That said, I've thought about the a6000 as a wedding setup. Honestly one of my biggest reservations there is the look of the body itself not it's ability. I had the same issue with fuji when I had the XE2 before the XT1 launch. Switching to an SLR styled body just means it's smaller but you don't get as many questions/looks/comments. With the a6000 I'd suck it up and get the 23mm (since it's cost is similar to the fuji equivalent). I'd also grab their 50mm 1.8. Yes both are 1.8 -vs- 1.4 and 1.2 now but that's fast enough IMHO. I'm very curious how the a6000 AF would hold up during a reception low light dance session. The SLR shape goes away if I go to a a7s/a7r setup. And the a7s would be a DREAM for weddings if it could AF. If those both had the a6000's 4D AF I might already own them since you can use the NEX lenses now in a cropped mode. I don't need MP at weddings, never have.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  45. #95
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    A7's kit 28-70mm lens. Worth it? A few more refurbished body/lens kits popped up for $1329, and I keep wanting to scratch the itch. DPreview says it's one of the best kit lenses. Then I've seen things saying it's not great. Sure seems much better than the 24-70 when considering price, but is it even worth $300?

  46. #96
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    You know what? I have been thinking of getting one, but you might find them cheaper than $300.

  47. #97

    Default          

    so is this the official road map:


    I googled it and there's a bunch with that and a bunch with zero mention of the 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8... Those two lenses would make that system work for me. I'm very close to selling off all my fuji extras (x100s, XE2, 35, 18-55, 55-200, 16-50, tripod) and getting one of the A7 options once just to see how I like it -vs- the fuji. I have a ton of questions that are usually only answered by owning/trying something myself...
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  48. #98
    Pro ppower's Avatar
    Member#
    635
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Tulsa, OK

    Default          

    I'm not sure this is a factual roadmap mainly because 1) there is a 24mm when it is really 28mm f/2, and 2) almost all of the 2015 are wishlist lenses. A Sony A7 with the 16-35 and 55 would be a great start. I still wish there were at least one AF f/1.4. Give Fuji focus speed like the A6000 and it may be the perfect marriage.

  49. #99
    Worn out shutter rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Yeah, there is another with a more obscure one of the future. It was introduced at Photokina.

  50. #100

    Default          

    Here is one from dpreview.com from September:


+ Reply to Thread Go Back to forum

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts