|
X-T50 euro price is 1,499 body and 1,899 kit. I didn’t expect $899 US but Fuji definitely jacking prices up. Hard to justify recommending it as an intro camera when an R50 is $650.
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
I think the XS-10 is now their designated entry level and the good dials are a premium feature. That does seem aggressive, though given that the XT5 isn't enjoying as much ridiculous tiktok hype as the X100 and is around $1700 in the US. [Plus it's weather sealed]
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 18:02
|
|
|
Yeah at that price I don't see what the point of the T50 is. I guess if you just want smaller. It's fine let the Tiktok people obsess over X100s and T50s and leave the T6 for me whenever that comes out.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 18:17
|
|
|
I don't really get the size thing, the T30 is barely smaller then the T5 and once you put a lens on it it's even less of a difference. It seems like it's mostly viewfinder eyepiece is the big difference
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 19:01
|
|
|
I think it's noticeable if it's paired with something like an 18-55, but with a 16-55 it's negligible and if anything you want the larger body for a monster lens like that.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 19:12
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:What focal length are you specifically talking about with reference to size? Well nearly every focal length. Maybe it's because evf mirrorless users will nitpick lenses to death if they are not "perfect", as the other guy said. I'd be content with small 300-400g 1.2-1.4 af lenses, with some imperfections at wide open in image corners. Lenses like that Thypoch or Voigtländer, TTartisan etc make for M mount. They're great wide open with smooth bokeh, small and lightweight, only the corner resolution suffers if you zoom to 100 % which I never do. Maybe someone, someday, will make a lightweight 1.2-1.4 AF lens set. World is chock full of such manual focus lenses.. For example my sigma 35/1.4 is 736g with filter, hood & rear cap, while my 35/2 sigma with same setup is 363g. Voigtländer produces a 330g 35/1.2 lens!! https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/vm-mount/nokton-35mm-f1-2-aspherical-iii/ Sigma's 35/1.2 is like over 1KG which is absurd. You could murder people with that giant brick. Ihmemies fucked around with this message at 19:22 on May 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 19:19
|
|
|
The X-T4 is already small enough I had to get a little grip extender thingie to hold it comfortably so there is zero appeal in smaller for me.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 20:13
|
|
|
qirex posted:It seems like it's mostly viewfinder eyepiece is the big difference You can even replace the eye cup with a smaller one.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 20:17
|
|
|
I've been waiting for the X-T50 camera since the 5 was announced and the pricing is just such a disappointment. I guess I'll swallow the weight penalty and probably look for a used 5 and enjoy weather sealing and a barely bigger body than my 30 (or just pass on GAS, my 30 is a far better camera than my skills can capitalize on).
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 21:56
|
|
|
I have a T30 and a T4. They are notably different in size, but the T4 is definitely smaller than most full size bodies. That T50 seems overpriced for sure. I’d just get a T5.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:09
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Why it is impossible for manufacturers to produce reasonably sized f/1.4 lenses, but the M system is full of them in mf versions? I don't know the answer to this question but Leica themselves also can't really do it, and I would imagine Leica would have the most reason to do it as it's part of their camera design since forever. Take a look at the Q - the lens has autofocus and some basic stabilization and its even permanently attached to the body and it ends up about the same size of a Sony FE 50 1.8 as a result.  [e] Something else people have been doing in this area is using autofocus lens adapters to slap the small MF lenses onto something like a Nikon Z/Zf 
tuna fucked around with this message at 22:18 on May 1, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:10
|
|
|
My theory only - but I think the aspherical lens designs make it prohibitive to build particularly small lens variants. Aspherical lenses are pretty common in mid-to-high end lens offerings now. And then for the cheaper or lower end models, there’s not much incentive to get smaller - and it probably makes the design more costly.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 22:38
|
|
|
Like here's the 3 50mm f/2 M lenses I felt like looking up. The perfectly performing lens is what? Like a third longer and 50% heavier than the "character" lens? Leica APO-Summicron-M 50mm f/2 Length: 47 mm Largest diameter: Approx. 53 mm Weight: Approx. 300 g Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 Length: 43.5 mm Largest diameter: 53 mm Weight: Approx. 240 g Light Lens Lab 50mm f/2 ELCAN Length: 36mm Diameter: 51mm Weight: 200g to 235g (Depending on finishes)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2024 23:11
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Sigma In the case of Sigma in particular, my understanding is they’ve been fighting hard against their outdated reputation as a cheapo lens company for a while now so I think they have a tendency to overbuild their Art lenses somewhat. That 35mm F1.2 murder weapon, for example, has about twice the amount of elements as the Voigtländer (who can probably get away with a little more “character” with their prestige status) RillAkBea fucked around with this message at 00:49 on May 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 00:45
|
|
|
Roger Cicala of LensRentals had a good post on DPReview on why modern primes are much more complex.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 01:57
|
|
|
Godzilla07 posted:Roger Cicala of LensRentals had a good post on DPReview on why modern primes are much more complex. Thanks, that's a good read. I knew there's more to lens engineering than just max aperture and focal length, but this goes a good way to explaining the details of why.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 03:00
|
|
|
I picked up a Yashica 300mm and you could definitely kill someone with this thing.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 03:08
|
|
|
Godzilla07 posted:Roger Cicala of LensRentals had a good post on DPReview on why modern primes are much more complex. I understand that I and have read it. Leica, Zeiss, CV and multiple Chinese manufacturers create new, modern, high-performance prime lenses which are also quite small and light weight. They all just lack autofocus. https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-voigtlander-vm-35mm-1-2-iii/ is perfectly acceptable, even the coma is quite small, compared to a Nikkor Ai-S 35/1.4 for example. Bokeh is significantly smoother and the CV 35/1.2 is quite a bit sharper. So lens design has advanced a lot in 50 years. Now if someone could just add AF. The extra 700g compared to Sigma for example doesn’t bring enough extra IQ for me. Perhaps one day still 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 06:09
|
|
|
There's also market demand to consider. This is speculation on my part, and there's always going to be outliers such as yourself, but maybe the people who typically demand maximum light gathering and shallowest dof in an autofocus lens just aren't really bothered about the weight. Maybe they're typically shooting on tripods and in a studio. Perhaps the people who buy f0.95 manual voigtlanders value the simplicity and tactility of a mf lens over having autofocus. For the people who want a light, compact, unobtrusive lens for things like travel and street photography, f2.0 is fast enough. And maybe it's possible for sigma or voigtlander or Canon to develop a weather sealed, silent autofocus, f1.2 or f1.4 35 or 50mm lens, but it might cost too much to be viable. I feel like a f2.8 400+mm super telephoto, despite being super niche, has a larger market than the lens you're looking for, because the market is so fragmented at that end.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 07:12
|
|
|
Or perhaps they use a lighter weight camera like a Soyn A7IV which is 660g. While my Panasonic S1 with a grip, battery and body cap is 1350g. So they save nearly 700g with a lighter camera and so their total weight with a thick rear end lens is the same as with my camera without a lens at all 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 08:02
|
|
|
Do you have a full frame requirement for any reason? APS-C Fuji + the XF lenses are incredibly small, light, fast autofocus. Your only loss will be on DoF and ISO by 1.5x. Which seems like an awfully small price to pay if you value size and weight overall.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 08:23
|
|
|
yeah, I have zero problems sticking the Fuji X-T20 into a bag with any one of the 16/2.8, 23/2 or 35/2 and walking around all day. The faster primes are bigger but not awfully so. The 18-55 sometimes feels big by comparison, and the 55-200 feels like an anchor, but neither is really all that big. speaking of Fuji, if they truly are increasing the X-T50 price 1.5x the predecessor, then that's going to earn them an X-T5 sale instead. Ugh. I'd almost talked myself into just seeing how the X-T50 compares and getting the less expensive option, but if that's the case...
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 13:21
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Now if someone could just add AF. Add it yourself! https://www.dji.com/focus-pro
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 15:08
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Or perhaps they use a lighter weight camera like a Soyn A7IV which is 660g. While my Panasonic S1 with a grip, battery and body cap is 1350g. So they save nearly 700g with a lighter camera and so their total weight with a thick rear end lens is the same as with my camera without a lens at all My Z6 with a Nikon 40mm f2 weights less than the S1 alone. I really liked my S1H but they are not small cameras and if you're that worried about weight/size maybe pick up an S5 or something. 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 16:04
|
|
|
powderific posted:My Z6 with a Nikon 40mm f2 weights less than the S1 alone. I really liked my S1H but they are not small cameras and if you're that worried about weight/size maybe pick up an S5 or something. But the camera must be large, for ergonomics and buttons and switches, top lcd etc Lenses don’t need to be large, I have no use case for absolutely bleeding edge IQ.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 19:30
|
|
|
Z6/Z7 have an LCD on top and, at least for me, I actually prefer the ergonomics to the S1H/S5. Mostly due to button position. Do wish the grip was a little deeper. It's funny that you've got the chunkiest of the current mirrorless cameras, plus a battery grip, but want teeny tiny lenses (though I get what you're saying about size having a benefit when it's on the body.) For the mfgs is probably makes sense to have the lightweight compact lenses be f2 and OK optically to really minimize weight, and then if they've got a bigger weight budget make them fast and really good optically. You could always go a little old timey and get yourself a Petax DSLR and their AF pancake lenses. They'd be about the same size as your S1! They're not super fast though.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 20:20
|
|
|
Wait a sec, we're talking about Leica M mount cameras, right? As in the format that doesn't support autofocus anything, because of course it doesn't, because Leica?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 20:26
|
|
|
No, they're talking about a Panasonic camera and wondering why no one has autofocus lenses the size of leica M-mount lenses.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 20:28
|
|
|
 I still prefer the D750 body style to the Z7II, but the Z7II works well enough that I don't care too much. And the 85mm f/1.8 S is really, really good so... 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 20:30
|
|
|
powderific posted:No, they're talking about a Panasonic camera and wondering why no one has autofocus lenses the size of leica M-mount lenses. Oh right. I don't know what else to say then. Buy a micro 4/3 body and get a m.zuiko 25mm f1.2 at 400g, or a Leica DG f1.4 at 200g if that's too heavy.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 20:44
|
|
|
There are probably hundreds of fast and lightweight full frame manual focus lenses. Is it too much to wish for some AF models too..
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 20:53
|
|
|
It is interesting and I'm curious about the balance of market forces, physics, and engineering at play. Maybe one of the new crop of lens mfgs will get to it at some point.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 21:05
|
|
|
It could be the third party lens builders just don't want to get blasted with lawsuits. That's why it was a big deal the past half year when Canon announced they would allow third party RF lenses, allegedly the fears were about reverse engineering the lens protocol and then making money off it. Easier for some tiny factory with a source for glass to sell a cheap full manual option.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 21:09
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:There are probably hundreds of fast and lightweight full frame manual focus lenses. Is it too much to wish for some AF models too.. You could get an EF to L mount adapter and grab a Canon EF autofocus? They're cheap and light and f1.4 or so.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 21:22
|
|
|
I have the MC-21? sigma EF->L adapter. AF is terrible with it. With some lenses like 50/1.4 HSM it took 1-2 seconds to acquire focus, some lenses like 17-35/2.8 L failed to achieve good focus. I know that good solutions don't exist, I'm just dreaming. I weighed some lenses, with rear cap + filter: Ttartisan 11/2.8: 540g Sigma 24/1.4 DG DN with 72->77 step-up: 600g Sigma 35/1.4 DG DN with 67->77 step-up: 740g Sigma 35/2 DG DN: 365g Panasonic 50/1.4: 1030g Panasonic 50/1.8: 360g Sigma 65/2 DG DN: 465g Sigma 85/1.4 DG DN: 700g I had the 24/2 DG DN too but the distortion was uncorrectable with the Lightroom's built-in lens profile. Panasonic's 1.8 lenses are quite nice, but the bokeh in 50/1.8 is not that good and it lacks an aperture ring which all of my other L mount lenses have. E: for whatever reason or another Sigma refuses to use a 77mm filter thread consistently on their Art lenses. Step up ring is not a big hassle but it's annoying I have to buy one. Panasonic manages to use the same 67mm filter thread in 18/1.8, 24/1.8, 35/1.8, 50/1.8, 85/1.8 and 100/2.8... Ihmemies fucked around with this message at 21:35 on May 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 21:32
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Wait a sec, we're talking about Leica M mount cameras, right? Learn to zone focus scrub!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 00:13 |
|
|
M mount doesn't support autofocus is such a bizarre thing to get angry about lmao
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2024 23:14
|
|