A little bummed that my local camera store already had a massive queue for the X100VI before it was even announced. So I'm down the list. Probably won't get it for a few months ðŸ˜
The Sony 70-200 F2.8 GMII is an absolute beast of a lens that comes very light, incredibly sharp and with a very complete feature set, with the only drawback being the price that will break the bank. As an alternative, look into the Tamron 70-200 F2.8 version 2, it's very capable and very reasonably priced. There's also the Sigma 70-200 if you want an aperture ring but it's way too heavy. Never think about the Sony 70-200 F2.8 GM1 and the 100-400 GM is also a mixed bag.
As for aperture keep in mind you'll need fast shutter speeds at the long end and you might run out of enough light pretty soon in not so favorable lighting conditions. I think it's preferred to go to a 2.8 through third party unless you really want the light weight and half macro capabilities of the Sony F4 G2.
For telephoto, you really can't go wrong with a zoom as it's a range that will always come in handy. For street/portrait work you could look into a 135mm prime but it's something you'd need to test out. Keep in mind 200mm is not enough for wildlife but on the supertele end I feel the 200-600 can use an update and the primes are just crazy expensives. Could always use a teleconverter on the GM2, but for the G2 the aperture is getting kinda slow already.
Sounds like 70-200mm might be the ticket then! I'll dig a little deeper on the options. Looks like Sigma makes a decent one.
What an awesome summary. Thank you! I've been watching videos about the Tamron 70-180 (why does Tamron always choose slightly different focal lengths?), the Sony 70-200 GM II vs the original and now the new Sigma too.
I have a job coming up that could pay for the GMII and it's really freaking tempting. But I keep on blowing my profits on equipment. 😂
Edit: meant to quote thedracocat and Jaded Photographer too. Thanks everyone for the help!
What an awesome summary. Thank you! I've been watching videos about the Tamron 70-180 (why does Tamron always choose slightly different focal lengths?), the Sony 70-200 GM II vs the original and now the new Sigma too.
I have a job coming up that could pay for the GMII and it's really freaking tempting. But I keep on blowing my profits on equipment. 😂
Edit: meant to quote thedracocat and Jaded Photographer too. Thanks everyone for the help!
Got a M10R last October
Thanks, I just hope the focus works as expected. Not really interested in sending it to Leica for months to get it sorted
I used the Tamron 70-180 to shoot some.hockey a month ago and it was pretty great. Kind of fish it has the extra 20mm though.
With the Sonys you can also use the 1.4x TC if you ever wish for a bit longer focal length. I think that's not possible with the other options. The 1.4x is very good, unlike the 2.0x, which has more impact on image quality.
Sony probably literally will not allow them to make like for like focal lengths. This is why their primes are these small 2.8 things and their zooms are at a really jank focal length. I'm also getting the feeling that they want to reuse casings so engineer their lenses accordingly. If you could break even on a GMII I guess do it to be honest. If you don't mind the weight and will never get anything faster firing like an A9 or A1 then the Sigma is a good alternative. Their 35-150 is the only Tamron lens I'm even half interested in, but with my current GFX purchase thinking and I want the 135 Plena at some point I'm not getting that for a bit and even with my job 150 isn't enough reach sometimes either so why buy it.
Sony does not allow you to use TC's on any third party lens. Which is basically why when the Sigma 500 5.6 got announced I was like, "Yeah this lens is what the E mount system needs, but Sony's third party practices cripple the damn thing for anybody on their flagship bodies." You get no TC access and nobody that paid the A9III or A1 premium bought those cameras to shoot 15 fps.
They each have their strengths and weaknesses, kinda a hard choice these days. I own the GMII and I think it's the best lens Sony ever designed, and I own the 50 F1.2 GM, 35 GM and 20 G. I really appreciate the weight, I can go hiking with it using my Peak Design Slide and letting the lens rest against my body. I also feel this is a lens that will remain amazing for the next 20 years so see it as an investment. The only annoying downside besides the price would be that the lens is not Arca compatible, so you'll need an adapter plate.
Threw this together for a friend in one quick night and another short afternoon. A7iv + Sony 24 1.4 + Tamron 70-180 + 17-28 + Sony 55 1.8. Used a 1/2 Pro Mist.
No real concept; I got asked if I could deliver a music video ASAP and I accepted on the terms that I could just film whatever and goof off. I work a corporate salaried gig where I manage video production globally (which is honestly a lot more creative than you'd think), so I just wanted this to be a care free kind of shoot.
View: https://youtu.be/_apKnfhyF1k?si=ULNuuWWL56UVgWiP
No real concept; I got asked if I could deliver a music video ASAP and I accepted on the terms that I could just film whatever and goof off. I work a corporate salaried gig where I manage video production globally (which is honestly a lot more creative than you'd think), so I just wanted this to be a care free kind of shoot.
View: https://youtu.be/_apKnfhyF1k?si=ULNuuWWL56UVgWiP
Picked up a GFX100S and an 80 1.7. Need to find time to use it and iron out a few interface quirks, but I think this should be a fun combo.
Well, I did it! 😬 70-200mm f/2.8 GMII. I was able to get an education 10% discount through B&H. Unfortunately it's raining like crazy here or I'd have some photos. The bokeh/blurring is really gorgeous. I focused on my cat at 200mm and the background just melted.
The lens is heavier than I was anticipating. I'd hate to think what the original lens felt like.
The lens is heavier than I was anticipating. I'd hate to think what the original lens felt like.
I had it, the original lens was dense and if I remember right that was the the infamous lens that would snap in half if some screws inside got loose along with the OG F4.Well, I did it! 😬 70-200mm f/2.8 GMII. I was able to get an education 10% discount through B&H. Unfortunately it's raining like crazy here or I'd have some photos. The bokeh/blurring is really gorgeous. I focused on my cat at 200mm and the background just melted.
The lens is heavier than I was anticipating. I'd hate to think what the original lens felt like.
Shot with the 80 1.7:
GF1S2933 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2957 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2987 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S3021 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2994 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2941 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2931 1 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2933 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2957 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2987 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S3021 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2994 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2941 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
GF1S2931 1 by Marcus Beasley, on Flickr
Well, I did it! 😬 70-200mm f/2.8 GMII. I was able to get an education 10% discount through B&H. Unfortunately it's raining like crazy here or I'd have some photos. The bokeh/blurring is really gorgeous. I focused on my cat at 200mm and the background just melted.
The lens is heavier than I was anticipating. I'd hate to think what the original lens felt like.
Congrats! You'll love it. I think the weight is fine, it's nicely balanced. When I go hiking I remove the tripod foot and wear the lens on my hips in sling style. I wouldn't do that with a lens that's 1.5kg or over.
Now give it a month before you'll want to go even longer, good thing they released the 300mm F2.8 recently ;).
Jaded Photographer that look, love Fuji GFX photos, congrats! Any other lens you plan to get alongside the 80mm?
I think next lens after I pay off what I currently have will be the 110F2 then the 55 1.7 at some point. I don't know whether to stop after that or get a 35-100. This will not be a birding/wildlife system so might stop after that. Also just realized I dumped those in the wrong thread. People aren't kidding when they say the system is "slow" but the AF isn't "Unusable" and the slowness in all honesty comes more from the shutter taking so long to close and open again than anything else. Image quality and files editing wise are great though. I'm also glad my laptop didn't choke on these files. All in all it feels like a smart purchase.
Thanks! I'm loving it for just taking photos of my cat so far.
And yeah, I'm already looking at the teleconverters. 😂
And for the eclipse coming up, I was looking at the 500mm TTArtisan for $330. I don't need autofocus for the stuff I'd use a 500mm lens for (city/moon photos). I mean, I say that now, but a month after I get that lens, I'll probably discover a love of taking bird photos or some other far away moving bullshit. :-D
I can't imagine working on photos of that size. I went from working on 20 megapixel drone photos to 33Mp Sony raw images on my Core i9-14900k computer with 96GB of RAM and an RTX 3070 and I hate that Lightroom takes a beat to bring up a photo now. AI denoise takes a while on high ISO images. I can't imagine working with 102Mp. How big are the raw files?
Gorgeous images. Do you live near NYC? I really need to get back there. Haven't been back since I bought my A7IV. I went there in October 2022 with my son's little A6000 to see if I could be a "camera guy" like my dad was. You can probably tell what I decided the answer was.
I live and work in Manhattan. Basically just went to my usual Times Square testing ground and walked around. Editing and importing didn't go that badly...I think these are like 100+mb raws...granted these are at 14 bit instead of 16 bit because I was shooting in CH...which ain't fast because it still feels like single frame to be honest. I think the edited jpegs without crops are in the 70mb region. My laptop handled it pretty well actually. Took in the 100+ raws pretty quickly and exported like 40 of them pretty quickly as well. Maybe C1 is more efficient, not sure. Was expecting worse. I'll see how bad it gets after a studio shoot or portrait session though because those I'm expecting to be more high volume.
Yeah the sensor in this is really good. The place I shoot in is actually really tricky to edit around because of all of the colors flying around from ad boards, but these files handled it pretty well.
That's awesome..the pics look great as well.
I'm in the wars trying to get an X100VI. I'm hoping it ships by the end end of the month, been hard to get a straight answer from the retailer.
Thanks. As archaicly slow as the camera is it's actually really fun to shoot. As long as you didn't get it from B&H you'll probably get it this year.
Yeah I think I'll get it within the month 🤞
I'm surprised Canon hasn't made a retro fixed lens or something similar to the Zf.
I'm surprised Canon hasn't made a retro fixed lens or something similar to the Zf.
I am honestly surprised Canon and Sony haven't made one of these yet.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who struggles with color balance. With my drone shots, some roads will have sodium light, some will have LED light, and the buildings have yet another color of light. All I want is no ugly yellow and shifting one affects the others! Luckily the new Lightroom point color tool helps out here, but it still takes a lot of work.
Lately I've just been turning off the most distracting color channels and seeing how it effects the image. It's not perfect, but I think it balances out the image better by either dialing it back or just removing it.
Sony can easily just bring back the RX1R series by just making the body bigger to incorporate IBIS and the bigger battery and actually design it to look cool. I honestly don't see point and shoot coming back because they'd have to R&D and market something for a dead demographic. I honestly think the RX100 stuff got roped into the ZV line. The only integrated lens cameras I even hear people talking about are the Ricoh GR's and the Fuji X100's...and the Leica Q series. So I guess if you're not going to make something to compete with those you just don't make them. This also seems like why the bridge camera is dead. The demographic is dead/not big enough to make profit off of.
Forgot to reply. Don't know much about the system but read reviews about this one. And it seems to be an absolute dream lens beside it's weight and dimensions
There are so many GFX owners that own the 110, it almost feels "mandatory," but I can see why. The output is beautiful. The 80 is no slouch either so far and the 55 looks great as well. Those three right there feel like an excellent 3 lens kit, it's just a matter of what else. Could probably get the 45-100 and call it a day to be honest, though I hope at some point Fuji releases a 105 or 135 equivalent.
Yeah it's a premium point and shoot with a good lens that looks cool. This, the Ricoh, Q3 and the RX1R are basically the only things you'd buy if you want a premium point and shoot. RX1RII badly needs a refresh though since I'm not paying used GFX prices for a camera with like a 150 shot battery and AF that ancient with no AF joystick.
I wasnt familiar with the RX1Rii. Damn it's expensive. I'm kinda tempted by the Ricohs but I'd much prefer the x100vi.
A7RII sensor, therefore A7RII AF. I think the X100 series came out first, but Sony was the first to make a compact full frame camera. Good lens, small. I think a lot of it's design choices would need to be updated severely, but if they put that body in something that looks like this:
It would probably be pretty popular.
They save money and size by not trying to incorporate an EVF I think. They're pretty popular among the real hardcore street people.
In a way you already are since I'm pretty sure Sony makes that sensor. Leica is just way better at putting that sensor into a body format that people want.
Oh sure. But I can get a Q new or used but younger.
A7RII sensor, therefore A7RII AF. I think the X100 series came out first, but Sony was the first to make a compact full frame camera. Good lens, small. I think a lot of it's design choices would need to be updated severely, but if they put that body in something that looks like this:
It would probably be pretty popular.
They save money and size by not trying to incorporate an EVF I think. They're pretty popular among the real hardcore street people.
That would be pretty cool. Like we said, baffling that other brands aren't trying to do something similar to the x100.
It's not really baffling IMO; a fixed lens camera that isn't divergent enough from a pancake on their existing mirrorless options is a different question for them versus Fuji.
edit: Ricoh debayering their RAWs is very fucking stupid; like yes, I can shoot jpeg with film recipes but not having the bayer mosaic data is very, very dumb
Last edited:
Got the GODOX V1 Pro flash the other day, this thing is niiiiiice. I probably could have saved some money with the original V1 since I won't often use the sub flash, but the new overheat protection and battery seemed worth the upgrade.
Last edited:
Yea they both really are missing the boat on that. Tbh if Sony had something modern along those lines when I first was looking for a camera I would have gone with that. Still happy that I sent the route I did(a7c plus a zeiss 35mm 2.8 initially). It's allowed me to spread my wings as time went by and really appreciate the editing process.
I'd still like to grab a fixed lens digital camera like the x100 series because good built in recipes sounds like a lot of fun. But it's definitely more of a nice to have at the moment.
I think the only thing on my high priority list is getting a working M3. The prices are pretty wild and KEH seems like the only reliable seller for someone trying to buy from Canada. There's so little options for buying older Leica stuff here. I'm hoping to ease the wallet burden by selling my 2 QL17s when the purchase time comes
View: https://x.com/leica_camera/status/1765739238765502609?s=20
Finally. I can't wait to get my hands on this.
I prefer C1's way of handling colors but their plan is now like 30 euros a month and I can get PS and Lightroom for a 80/year so decision is easily made. Also handling colours when there's three different light sources bouncing off of everything (looking at you reception parties in old buildings) is the worst, that's where BW would be a lifesaver lol.
Yea I found that out at my wife's work Christmas party. I brought my camera and snapped some photos and her HR lady asked her if I could send some of the photos the next day so she could use them for the work newsletter but couldn't use them because they were in B&W haha.