Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Fellatio del Toro
Mar 21, 2009

the R8 is currently on sale for $1099 refurbished which is a hell of a sensor if you can stretch it a bit

the RP is also on sale for $899

if you do want to stick with ASPC I'd still recommend keeping an eye on Canon Price Watch over the next few days as Canon tends to put out refurb sale stuff in waves

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BetterLekNextTime
Jul 22, 2008

It's all a matter of perspective...
Grimey Drawer

i am kiss u now posted:

So, I’ve started to think about getting back into just some hobby photography again, as my girlfriend is also expressing some interest as well, and my current body is a Canon EOS 60D, and a range of entry-mid level lenses (including several “red-rings.”). My question is, what is sort of the modern equivalent of the 60D in APS-C? I’d be looking to replace the body only, and ideally under $1000.

60D is still a great body but I’m in a position where I can upgrade to something more contemporary. I like shiny, new (or even slightly used) things.

A goon has an R7 in the buy-sell thread right now. The Ef-R adapters generally work well so all your old glass should be portable to an R body. There may be a few EF lenses that that prevent shooting at maximum fps on the R bodies but pretty much anything is going to seem faster than the 60D. Mirrorless is definitely the future but if you really want to stay in DSLR land you could go for a like new 90D (closest analog to the 60D), or FF options like a 6Dmk2 or good condition 5Dmk4. If you're mainly doing sports/wildlife there's the 7Dmk2 which is outdated compared to recent cameras but was the top of the line prosumer outdoors aps-c for a while.

i am kiss u now
Dec 26, 2005


College Slice
Thanks, everyone. This gives me some really great places to start and research to do.

RillAkBea
Oct 11, 2008

Awww yiss, first two waves of Sigma RF lenses confirmed and it includes the entire F1.4 DC suite.

It looks like they're going the Nikon Z route and only letting them license APS-C lenses so far though.

Some stupid rumors site posted:

Launching in July, 2024

- SIGMA 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN | Contemporary

Launching in Q4 of 2024

- SIGMA 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN | Contemporary
- SIGMA 16mm F1.4 DC DN | Contemporary
- SIGMA 23mm F1.4 DC DN | Contemporary
- SIGMA 30mm F1.4 DC DN | Contemporary
- SIGMA 56mm F1.4 DC DN | Contemporary

Also 1 confirmed from Tamron. Again, APS-C only so far.
"11-20mm F/2.8 Di III-A RXD"

RillAkBea fucked around with this message at 10:54 on Apr 23, 2024

gschmidl
Sep 3, 2011

watch with knife hands

APS-C? gently caress!

big black turnout
Jan 13, 2009



Fallen Rib
I first saw the news through a petapixel article that didn't mention APS-C only until 3/4 of the way through the article and I was so loving mad when I got there

Bottom Liner
Feb 15, 2006


a specific vein of lasagna
Very cool lineup for the R7 though and the crop line was what was lacking the most for Canon mirrorless. Eager to see what else follows for full frame.

xzzy
Mar 5, 2009

I know huge apertures are all the rage these days but I really hope third parties put out cheaper primes with a maximum of f/2.8 or f/4. A big bag of tiny primes is really attractive to me.


Granted ~400 grams isn't catastrophically heavy but their 16mm 1.4 is still more than twice as heavy as the Canon 16mm.

charliebravo77
Jun 11, 2003

quote:

Launching in July, 2024

- SIGMA 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN | Contemporary
Welp, gotta find this for preorder.

RillAkBea
Oct 11, 2008

Bottom Liner posted:

Very cool lineup for the R7 though and the crop line was what was lacking the most for Canon mirrorless.

Yup, I understand the disappointment for FF users, but as an R7 owner I’ve been hoping on something like this for RF-S.

Hopefully it’s not an APS-C only deal though as next on my wishlist is one of those zoomy long boys.

xzzy
Mar 5, 2009

Sell some organs and get that 100-300 2.8.

BeastOfExmoor
Aug 19, 2003

I will be gone, but not forever.

xzzy posted:

I know huge apertures are all the rage these days but I really hope third parties put out cheaper primes with a maximum of f/2.8 or f/4. A big bag of tiny primes is really attractive to me.


Granted ~400 grams isn't catastrophically heavy but their 16mm 1.4 is still more than twice as heavy as the Canon 16mm.

I have the EF-M Samyang/Rokinon 12mm F/2.0 and it's just an amazing lens for backpacking. Super light, great for night shots, and super easy to deal with the focus given it's so wide. I also picked up the 16mm F/1.4. It's a great lens, but it's so drat heavy with a tiny mirrorless body that I don't even really bother bringing it anywhere. I am glad to see they're bringing them to the RF mount though. Now if only Canon would bring the EF-M 22mm F/2 pancake to the RF-S mount..

Lights
Dec 9, 2007

Lights, the Peacock King, First of His Name.

Anyone have any ideas where to find a 24-105 f/2.8 in stock? Every single place I've checked is out of stock / preorder only.

RillAkBea
Oct 11, 2008

Well it didn't take long for Sigma to throw Canon completely under the bus.

"No more waiting." :newlol:

Philthy
Jan 28, 2003

Pillbug
I *just* picked up the EFS 17-55 2.8 for my R7 because I was pissed off waiting. It's a good lens, even on the R7. But holy loving poo poo is this thing heavy as fuuuuuck.

I'll be nabbing that Sigma. It's half the weight, and the quality will probably be slightly better since it's taking into account these insane sensors from the getgo. I don't think it has IS, but the R7 has amazing IBIS, so I'm not too worried losing a stop or two in that focal range.

That 10-18 2.8, too. Good lord what a great line-up!

RillAkBea posted:

Hopefully it’s not an APS-C only deal though as next on my wishlist is one of those zoomy long boys.

You will not be disappointed with the RF 100-400 on the R7. It's a must own in my book.

Philthy fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Apr 24, 2024

RillAkBea
Oct 11, 2008

Yeah, I assume it was designed with Sony 24MP in mind but it appears to be able to keep up with Fuji 40MP without much degradation.

Sony E Mount
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymx2Lx5A22U

Fuji X Mount
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHYuznfaf5c


It looks like there are a few weird spots in the formula where the old 17-55 might be doing better ~on paper~, but overall it looks pretty good and the weight reduction would be worth it alone.

Same tests with 17-55 on R7 for comparison
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMVs9ndRe74




Philthy posted:

You will not be disappointed with the RF 100-400 on the R7. It's a must own in my book.
Oh I love that lens, for sure! There's just those times where I occasionally feel like I need a tiny bit more reach... before I remember how heavy 600s are and forget about it again, because the lightness is my most favorite thing about the RF 100-400.

Philthy
Jan 28, 2003

Pillbug

RillAkBea posted:

Fuji X Mount
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHYuznfaf5c


It looks like there are a few weird spots in the formula where the old 17-55 might be doing better ~on paper~, but overall it looks pretty good and the weight reduction would be worth it alone.

Same tests with 17-55 on R7 for comparison
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMVs9ndRe74

Oh I love that lens, for sure! There's just those times where I occasionally feel like I need a tiny bit more reach... before I remember how heavy 600s are and forget about it again, because the lightness is my most favorite thing about the RF 100-400.

Yeah, that Fuji video has me sold. It's so tiny! Comparing against the 17-55 video, it looks about the same, but holy moly, the weight, plus the EF to RF adapter. It's as big as my RF 100-400 and weighs a lot more. The 100-400 you can walk around all day with it in one hand, but the 17-55 I need to switch hands or constantly cup the lens because it's so dang heavy.

Philthy fucked around with this message at 15:03 on Apr 24, 2024

Grand Fromage
Jan 30, 2006

L-l-look at you bar-bartender, a-a pa-pathetic creature of meat and bone, un-underestimating my l-l-liver's ability to metab-meTABolize t-toxins. How can you p-poison a perfect, immortal alcohOLIC?


I have the Fuji version of the 18-50 and it's a great little lens.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Philthy
Jan 28, 2003

Pillbug
I've been watching any video I can on the 18-50. I cannot believe how sharp that is at 2.8. I really really really want this lens.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply