|
Comparing lens price is kind of a myopic metric imo, Sony lenses aren't bad but I'll take Fuji glass any day of the week.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 07:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 23:55 |
|
|
hopefully sony lenses are better than tamron lenses because i've decided my tamron 18-200 is trash and am going to buy the sony 18-200 to replace it
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 08:05
|
|
|
FE mount lenses can be best in class if you know about the range. The Sony 16-35mm GM, Loxia 21mm, Voigtlander 65mm macro, and Batis 135mm are tough to find contenders for, and the Sigma Art series coming to the system opens up a bunch of possibilities if you don't care about size and weight. The only glass I know of that could best the ones listed above are the top end manual Zeiss SLR lenses.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 08:53
|
|
|
strap on revenge posted:hopefully sony lenses are better than tamron lenses because i've decided my tamron 18-200 is trash and am going to buy the sony 18-200 to replace it no dont
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 09:33
|
|
|
I didn't realize Rokinon make that many lens for APSC now. How is the 10mm 2.8 compare to the 12mm? I will wait for next ebay deal and get one.strap on revenge posted:hopefully sony lenses are better than tamron lenses because i've decided my tamron 18-200 is trash and am going to buy the sony 18-200 to replace it It's a 10x zoom. It's basically a family holiday lens. Also Sony is a major share holder of Tamron. tino fucked around with this message at 09:47 on Aug 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 09:39
|
|
|
Ethics_Gradient posted:I get your point about using the slower Sony equivalent to compare given the larger sensor, though as a 24-70 f/4 owner I have a feeling the Fuji 16-55 is a much less optically compromised lens. Don't get me wrong, I like mine for what it is and I probably use it the most, but I'll never love it. That's kind of disappointing but not so suprising. The Zeiss badge only goes so far towards making the lens better, I guess  . I haven't read any reviews or looked into the performance of any Sony lenses in my list, except for the 55/1.8, Looking at photozone's imatest figures for the Sony 85/1.8 Zeiss 24-70, the former is outstanding near-perfect and the latter somewhat mediocre, but not really a whole lot worse than the Fuji 16-55. Then again, the Fuji 18-55 is rated about the same as well, and that makes it an awesome value as a kit zoom... as long as you can pick up a copy that isn't decentered as hell. Ouhei posted:Mostly accuracy and speed, I haven't tried using the tracking modes too much to complain about that. I don't mean to imply it's awful on the XT10, but the systems on the XT2 and XPro2 seem much improved. Speed and tracking capability are great on my X-T2. Accuracy, at least with my 18-55 and 23/2 at moderate apertures, is not as good as my old Olympus OM-D, although the Oly could be very slow to focus with older Panasonic lenses. Besides the very occasional slight inaccuracy of focus (eg missing an eye for an ear) there is a more common (but still infrequent) tendency to "focus on nothing". On those occasions ,it seems to sit at the minimum focus distance, which throws the whole scene out of focus. With wide-angle lenses this can be hard to detect when you're shooting, even with the giant EVF. I hosed up what would have been some great pictures of my friends on a trip thanks to this issue. Enabling face detection has helped to mostly eliminate the chance of it happening again with people, at least. quote:I'm waffling between the two bodies as I've always loved the look of the Pro series and as a right eye shooter it would be nice to not smush my nose into the LCD all the time, OVF could be cool but I do dig how the EVF shows me exactly what my shot is going to be. XT2 has the better EVF and the flippy screen is useful on occasion. If you're not going to shoot sports/wildlife with a long zoom ot do serious video stuff I'd go for the XPro. I miss the nose-sparing body design of my old a6000 and XE1. On a more subjective level, I think the OVF on the XPro is awesome and unique, and I think of the massive EVF in the X-T2 as a consolation prize for users who are sacrificing the OVF to make better use of telezooms and videography features. SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 18:33 on Aug 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 14:49
|
|
|
Jimlad posted:FE mount lenses can be best in class if you know about the range. The Sony 16-35mm GM, Loxia 21mm, Voigtlander 65mm macro, and Batis 135mm are tough to find contenders for, and the Sigma Art series coming to the system opens up a bunch of possibilities if you don't care about size and weight. The only glass I know of that could best the ones listed above are the top end manual Zeiss SLR lenses. Honestly it seems kind of odd to even really compare the Sony E mount and Fuji X. I think its only that the most expensive Fuji (X-H1) was released close enough to the cheapest Sony (A7III) that people are going to compare the two as "I have 2k to spend on a quality mirrorless" options. Outside of that, they seem fairly different. cheese fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Aug 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
The 12-24 is a better value than the 16-35, unless you really need that f/2.8. Only downside is that you need a filter adapter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 17:26
|
|
|
Couldn't agree more, don't buy Sony if you can't afford it. I'll go further and say only buy any camera if you can afford the camera system (i.e. body, lenses and accessories) because just budgeting for the body alone is nonsense. Hopefully it's not too controversial a statement here to say that you can get better quality images from a good Sony setup vs a good Fuji setup, but you'll also pay a lot more for it. This also goes for basically all photography gear; you can buy a very decent setup for 5k, 1k, or $300 if you like, and you could get very good - even comparable - images with any of them in the right conditions. The concept of "value" isn't so clear when optical performance vs price is extremely non-linear and everyone's idea of "affordable" is inevitably different. Whatever setup you've justified to yourself is the "best value", I can beat in value with a $10 film system from a yard sale. In my experience, get what you want that fits within your budget and don't worry so much about other people's concepts of "value".
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 21:28
|
|
|
Always spend money on quality glass over the body. The glass makes much much much more difference in IQ than the body.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
strap on revenge posted:hopefully sony lenses are better than tamron lenses because i've decided my tamron 18-200 is trash and am going to buy the sony 18-200 to replace it 
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 06:37
|
|
|
Jimlad posted:Hopefully it's not too controversial a statement here to say that you can get better quality images from a good Sony setup vs a good Fuji setup, but you'll also pay a lot more for it. Better is the enemy of good enough. It's very easy to chase IQ for no actual gain in the quality of the work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 07:01
|
|
|
maybe i should just got the 70-300 full frame lens instead. this one can't focus on anything more than 30 metres away between like 80-180 mm
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
A follow-up on my Sony Zeiss 55mm repair debacle. So it took Sony nearly 3 months to repair its focusing issue and $488.00. Took the lens for a spin, and the problem hasn't been loving fixed. Yeah. gently caress Sony. Never again. I don't mind paying a premium for good gear that has good service but this is total bullshit. Jimlad posted:Hopefully it's not too controversial a statement here to say that you can get better quality images from a good Sony setup vs a good Fuji setup, but you'll also pay a lot more for it. melon cat fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Aug 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 21:53
|
|
|
melon cat posted:A follow-up on my Sony Zeiss 55mm repair debacle. So it took Sony nearly 3 months to repair its focusing issue and $488.00. Took the lens for a spin, and the problem hasn't been loving fixed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
cheese posted:What the gently caress?! Its only a 900 dollar lens brand new. What is your recourse? melon cat fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2018 22:42
|
|
|
I wonder if Fuji is any better. I bought a third-party (Mack) warranty with my X-T2 kit and the best buy warranty with my 23/2.. In both cases, I've gotten decent service. Free replacement for a 23/2 that was decentered with hazy internal elements out of the box (although it did take a little bit of friendly convincing and I had to send it out for them to look at for a few weeks first). The xt-2 kit lens I got was also kind of lovely with a blob of unsharp rendering in the middle-left across the zoom range. Sent it in to Mack for that plus dirty internals. (I really believe that either Fuji or their retailers are restocking returned merchandise in new boxes... there's no 'freshness sealing' on the plastic bags inside the boxes so it'd be easy to do.) It came back after a month clean and with an extensive list of work done including stuff like 'replaced forth and sixth element groups' which was kind of impressive, but the zoom was sticky and the apparent centering was even worse. Sent it back again and a month and change later I get the lens back and all the issues are fixed. So while the resolutions required some persistence, I ultimately got everything fixed at no additional cost to me (after the initial warranty purchase). Given the horror stories I've heard about camera company service departments (except Canon Pro Services), I think I'll be getting warranties on my future purchases of new gear. The ratio of decent to flawed new lenses I've purchased is about 1:1.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
I've never needed to have my Fuji serviced, but Fujifilm Philippines offers free lens cleaning whenever they show up in photography expos (which is like bimonthly).
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 09:33
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I wonder if Fuji is any better. I bought a third-party (Mack) warranty with my X-T2 kit and the best buy warranty with my 23/2.. From everything I've read/seen on Fuji, they seem to be pretty good. Fuji in general is unique as I don't think anyone else releases firmware updates to years old products like they do. I hope they expand out the program they just started in Japan: https://www.fujirumors.com/in-japan-fujifilm-professional-service-costs-45-a-year-for-gfx-and-x-cameras-with-lots-of-benefits/ I would gladly pay $45/year for all of that and I'm no where near pro level. I'm fairly settled on the XPro2 at this point, will probably order a body in the next few days as I see what's around. Still debating between the 14, 16 or 10-24 for my wide angle stuff, mostly between the 16 and 10-24 though. Pure utility and my love for ultra wide makes me want the 10-24, but the reviews on the 16 make it seem like such an incredible lens and I don't know if I truly need anything wider than 16mm outside of just liking the look of ultra wide shots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 14:09
|
|
Cat Army
|
The 16mm is so utterly fantastic. That being said, the 10-24 is super versatile and has OIS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 14:41
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:The 16mm is so utterly fantastic. That being said, the 10-24 is super versatile and has OIS. Yeah, there's positives to both, I might take my time figuring that out since I'm not in a huge rush. I found a nice copy of the X-Pro2 on ebay for $1,100 with all the original boxes and stuff, should have it at the end of the week. Once I have that I'll sell off the XT-10. Then probably order the 50mm f2, I'll sell the 18-55 once I figure out what I want to do for my wide angle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 18:39
|
|
|
melon cat posted:A follow-up on my Sony Zeiss 55mm repair debacle. So it took Sony nearly 3 months to repair its focusing issue and $488.00. Took the lens for a spin, and the problem hasn't been loving fixed. What's the focusing issue? Lensrentals had some data on repair times from their rental fleet, but it's several years old at this point. At the time Sony was one of the better ones actually.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
Ouhei posted:Yeah, there's positives to both, I might take my time figuring that out since I'm not in a huge rush. I found a nice copy of the X-Pro2 on ebay for $1,100 with all the original boxes and stuff, should have it at the end of the week. Once I have that I'll sell off the XT-10. Then probably order the 50mm f2, I'll sell the 18-55 once I figure out what I want to do for my wide angle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
powderific posted:What's the focusing issue? It's not focusing on any objects properly if the lens is set to wider than f2.8 (it's an f1.8). It looks like double-vision and produces a strange bokeh. And the Zeiss 55mm is notoriously sharp, so the difference is very noticeable. melon cat fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Jan 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
I know it's not technically a mirorless ILC, but folks talk about the Fuji fixed-lens cameras in here so.... https://www.43rumors.com/ft5-here-are-the-full-leaked-panasonic-lx100ii-specs-has-new-17-megapixel-multi-aspect-sensor/ The full specs for the LX100 II have dropped and, honestly, if I was buying right now, I'd probably have just bought this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
GEMorris posted:I know it's not technically a mirorless ILC, but folks talk about the Fuji fixed-lens cameras in here so.... Geez, it's about time. I wanted an LX100 ages ago, but was like "Surely this will be updated soon, so I should wait."
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 18:01
|
|
|
cheese posted:I'd be really tempted to wait til after the X-T3 is announced in September, but I guess if you always wait you will never actually buy anything. I thought about it, but after sifting through the rumors and debating body styling I decided I wanted the Rangefinder body, so I'd be waiting for the X-Pro3 instead so I just figured I'd pull the trigger.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
GEMorris posted:I know it's not technically a mirorless ILC, but folks talk about the Fuji fixed-lens cameras in here so.... I’m never gonna buy another non-weathersealed compact again, the Ricoh GR with its dust problems burned me pretty thoroughly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
My dream camera is a “tough” one with a big sensor and no zoom. Sadly it will never happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
I thought the LX100 was not popular because it was not "purist" enough. It probably would have sold more if it has a faster fixed lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 22:09
|
|
|
The LX100 is the one Leica re-brands to be their "cheap" camera, yes?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2018 22:38
|
|
|
Xabi posted:My dream camera is a “tough” one with a big sensor and no zoom. Sadly it will never happen. There's that waterproof Nikon mirrorless (has at least one prime lens), but I don't know that the sensor qualifies as 'big'.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
I still wonder sometimes why Olympus hasn't tried to revive the XA as a m4/3 competitor to the X100 and other high end P&S cameras, its one of their most famous designs.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 02:32
|
|
|
Yeah, it's strange. I'd buy that camera in an instant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 11:19
|
|
|
the digital version of the XA is your own phone, TBH.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 12:30
|
|
|
Nikon Z6/Z7 photos leaked, and it's very a7 derivative. All I can think of is the gag in Futurama where "Z is better than A. In fact, is 25 better than A." Good on them for actually making something, though. They're actually quite attractive looking and will have decent specs. https://nikonrumors.com/2018/08/21/another-set-of-leaked-nikon-z6-and-nikon-z7-mirrorless-camera-pictures.aspx/
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:20
|
|
|
On the subject of Fuji service. I sent my x100f out 8/8 for dust on the sensor and some vague shutter button issues. It was returned today and they replaced the entire lens assembly and top plate under warranty.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Nikon Z6/Z7 photos leaked, and it's very a7 derivative. All I can think of is the gag in Futurama where "Z is better than A. In fact, is 25 better than A."
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2018 23:55
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Nikon Z6/Z7 photos leaked, and it's very a7 derivative. All I can think of is the gag in Futurama where "Z is better than A. In fact, is 25 better than A."
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 23:55 |
|
|
It doesn't seem like there's a wide angle lens in the new Nikon lineup, so that's a big downer for me. I'm currently rolling with an Olympus EM5 mk2 and 7-14 Pro lens. Rough plan is to wait until this supposed new Olympus that's going to be released early next year. If it's a good boost over the EM1 mk2, I'll upgrade to it. If not, I'll pick up a used/cheaper EM1 mk2. Hoping to be able to keep using the 7-14 lens.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2018 04:32
|
|
