-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Yeah I heard this is the case at times as well. The 1.4 lenses are pretty solid.
Camera newbie here. I'm thinking about waiting for Sony a7000 to release and get that one.
Is this a good choice? The a6500 seems quite old and the X-T3 doesn't have IBIS so I'm not quite sold on it.
Also between Sigma 16mm 1.4 and Sigma 30mm 1.4, which one is better? I'm leaning more towards the 16mm.
Is this a good choice? The a6500 seems quite old and the X-T3 doesn't have IBIS so I'm not quite sold on it.
Also between Sigma 16mm 1.4 and Sigma 30mm 1.4, which one is better? I'm leaning more towards the 16mm.
You want IBIS that badly get the X-H1, problem solved. It's also a shit ton built better than the A6500, with better ergonomics with a better crop sensor lens ecosystem.
I haven't used the 16mm f/1.4, but I've used the 30mm f/1.4 on an a6000 a good bit and it's really good. I bet the 16mm is, too. Just go for whichever focal length you think you'll use more.
I think you should wait until the a7000 is at least announced before making a decision. If the reports are true, it's going to be one amazing camera.
That really depends on what you're shooting the most really
Ok so I have a 35mm prime lens and a 35-55 mm kit lens for my a6000 but I'm looking to add one more lens to my package. I mainly do street photography but due to my limited range it gets pretty hard. I also want to shoot some cosplay when con season starts again. Can anybody recommend me something?
I'll try to post some photos here from the travels, and of course, hang out more now that I'm kind of getting back into it!
Wow the battery on the A7III drains super quick I'm going to have to buy at least two spares if I want to shoot any event
Last edited:
Look into the Sigma 56 1.4. That should be a very good portrait lens.
Nice!, we do have the share photo thread, I am sure you're aware lol.
Looks like the Canon RP will have a 24mp sensor, which...makes sense...but Canon's overall sensor lineup is making less sense than ever with 20mp (1DX), 24mp (RP), 30mp (5D4/R), and 50 (5DS R). I really wish they would standardize on 24 and 50. The 5D4/R 30mp sensor is just floating in useless territory right now.
Would be interesting to see if the RP actually improves on the R in most areas other than mp.
I heard a rumor somewhere that it's getting a joystick instead of that weird touch bar, but considering it's Canon, I'm sure they'll have to ruin something to justify the lower price.
It's using the EOS M50 battery so...it's gonna be tiny, unbalanced, no top screen, and likely (i'm guessing here) no joystick. Definitely won't have a touch bar.
This is the equivalent of an R mount Rebel, which Canon will need to drive profits for the higher end bodies.
Isn't it rumored to be $1,600, though? That's twice the price of the best Rebel DSLR.
If the overall body size is super small it might be the first ff I'm interested in. If it has joystick, bonus. I don't really care about buying a couple batteries and swapping when needed.
If they somehow manage to keep the battery life at around 300 shots and offer full frame for around $1500, I think the APS-C world is on notice. While a camera like the X-T3 will do some things better like video/dual slots, I'm not sure that many people really care and full frame at that price point seems like a no brainer. Clearly they are gunning to make compact lenses from what we've seen this week, in addition to say the 35/1.8 RF.
Super small...sounds uncomfortable to balance actually. I dive back and forth between cameras actually and my favorite event cams are actually my Nikon D810 with the grip and the fat brick that you can break a mirrorless camera with the Nikon D4. Now I hate lugging that combo plus the 2.8 zooms around in a bag but all in all they're very comfortable to hold. I honestly just don't use them for street portraits because they stand out too much and I walk around too much...granted most of the lens weight in my A7RII bag is the 70-200GM. At the the end of the day I think you can save weight on the bodies as much as you want, but ultimately you're going to make the weight back a bit with the lenses.
That with a joystick and a non dog shit AF wouldn't be too bad actually.
Somewhere in my heart it feels like the X-T3 will be the last crop sensor camera I buy. I love it yes, but damn...the change over after I got the A7RII was staggering.
Nah, I don't see APS-C ever going away. It's too close in quality to full frame while also offering a substantial enough size advantage in lens construction and an advantage in telephoto applications. Unless you're shooting at f/1.8 or below on full frame, APS-C will more than do the job. I don't see M43 lasting in the long term when it comes to professional interchangeable lens systems due to the image quality cap, but APS-C is kind of a sweet spot if you ask me.
The majority of people that buy this camera will likely use dogshit kit lenses made from cheap plastic so...
Yeah sadly I always think of a camera in terms of how I'm going to use it, not how other people use it. I for example fucking could not justify putting the Sony kit lens on my A7RII so I bought anything but that lens. First real lens I bought was a fucking 35 1.4 lol.
My biggest gripe with crop sensor is high iso. 3200 on my D4 is more than useable...that on my X-T3 in some of the rooms I have shot in...no, which is why I don't do it...granted the X-T3 is more than mine as a flash camera and I do have primes for that but I don't like lens switching that much during my events and the 2.8 zooms on Fuji are not fast enough to me since they're essentially F4 lenses.
it won't be going away, but based on how much Fuji discounted things not long ago, is obviously affecting their sales numbers when you can get a FF camera at the price of the H1.
Also based on most reports the T3 has worst noise reduction than the T2 sensor
I honestly think Fuji hit the wall on what they were able to do. They couldn't just market the X-T3 with the same sensor and full PDAF coverage and had to get a higher MP sensor even though the difference is minimal, but the toll on high iso wasn't beneficial. With the right glass you can still get great images out of it, but not everybody has the glass. I did a photo shoot nat light in a mall, but not everybody has a 23 1.4, 90F2 or a 56 1.2 laying around in their bag to get the most out it. I can pretty much do the same shoot with my A7RII, but I have the glass to do it. Not everybody invests in the glass that allows them to "fake full frame." At the very least Fuji gives you great affordable glass as long as you buy used. Sony gives you great glass, notice how I left out the affordable part.
Interesting data...2018 was apparently awful for camera sales. https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/mirrorless-edging-ahead-in-cipa-camera-stats/
Total shipment of cameras was down 22.2%
Total shipment of cameras was down 22.2%
Yes, I think it's pretty obvious we've reached the point of diminishing returns on the APS-C sensors in regards to image quality, and the X-T2 to X-T3 body "upgrade" proved it. There are still areas that can be improved with better CPUs, but even that is probably reaching technical saturation.
In regards to "fake full frame", you have a good point...not everyone is going to be carrying f/1.2 lenses around on APS-C, but even more to the point, that is only a f1.8 equivalent on full frame, so you're still maxing out quite a bit beyond what full frame can offer with true f/1.2 lenses. There is of course an argument (that has raged forever) about the true usability and function of a lens at f/1.2 on full frame, but it is what it is.
Tell this to my wallet.
Hell it's not even just APS-C. I do events with a D4 and D810 as my comfort cameras since I know good and god damn well that they'll get the job done. These things are technological dinosaurs at this point, but you know what. For the price you can get them at they're still worthy purchases, they lack bells and whistles, but for corporate event shooting they deliver. I guess what I'm trying to say is in 2019 you don't need a camera from 2018 to produce a good image. My fucking D4 is from 2012 and I highly doubt Nikon was still making this body in 2014, I think they cranked out a ton in 2012 and just stopped manufacturing them...also mine is used so I doubt this body is new...it was just babied. Shit I still see event photographers and actual journalists still using the D3, flagship bodies aged really fucking well. Regarding the faking full frame. Most people don't invest in glass. I'm not sure what the lens purchase rate is like, but I probably own more than a good amount of people...I have a shit ton of over lap between systems, but I know what I value and use the most.
I guarantee you, I could post photos from my original 5D from 14 years ago and no one would know it was a 12 megapixel dinosaur relic of a body. Image quality hasn't really budged in an overall sense, short of looking better on modern, higher resolution monitors.
For the most part a good image 10 years ago is a good image today regardless of what it was shot on. Only real difference is stuff is sharper, the D3 still pumps out an excellent image and if it actually had joysticks I would have gotten one. My fat brick D4 is the fucking tits though.
I'm not sure I've ever shot anything sharper than this particular picture on the original 5D and 135/2. I did have an exceptional copy of the 135 to be fair, though.
IMG_0898 by Scott Tucker, on Flickr
CPU improvements bringing more AI-based functionality and faster readout speeds for computational photography is where the real improvements are going to be. I imagine we'll eventually get to the point where we'll be able to take 10+ frames in an instant and combine them to reduce sensor readout noise to nothing even with moving subjects. That's not even mentioning dynamic range gains. The AI-based autofocus tracking tech that various manufacturers are experimenting with combined with increasing prominence of entire-frame coverage is going to make focusing and tracking a non-issue, too. Very exciting times if you ask me!
I'm not sure I've ever shot anything sharper than this particular picture on the original 5D and 135/2. I did have an exceptional copy of the 135 to be fair, though.
Love the picture and it's plenty sharp for me, but surely you've taken sharper? That's definitely not an image I would use as an example of peak sharpness compared to what you can find out there these days.
Does Canon even make a cheap RF kit lens though? Maybe they will just for this camera. I suppose people can buy the adapter.
If we're talking about 100% zoom, of course any modern shot will be sharper, but at web/sharing resolutions, nah.
Yeah, personally, I'd put ISO 3200 at the upper end of useable for most APS-C with 6400 being emergency territory. Add a stop for most full frame bodies. Of course, this totally depends on the light and subject. I've gotten good animal shots in daylight at ISO 12800 (full frame) that looked way cleaner than I would have expected.
The only "kit" lens out so far is the 24-105, which is of course an L. I'd be shocked if they don't have an 18-135 type lens out within a year.
Supposedly they have 8 lenses getting announced on the 14th, we just don't know what the other 3 are yet.
ISO 6400 on my D4 is still pretty damn good for a 7 year sensor. I have done 8000 and up on it and it's been useable, that's a camera that has oddly stayed relevant...do not fucking ask me how. I don't mind an APS-C as my flash body though. I honestly could have done todays event on my X-T2 and A7RII, but I was like..."nah ain't worth it" even if I could have saved some bag weight.
The glass and sensor is a good combo, probably a OLPF camera if Canon was using though. It's honestly more of a color rendition selling point than anything else.I'm not sure I've ever shot anything sharper than this particular picture on the original 5D and 135/2. I did have an exceptional copy of the 135 to be fair, though.
Eventually all of the manufacturers will have a cheap kit lens bundled onto their cameras...then again Nikon already has the 24-70F4 so yeah it's only a matter of time for Canon, but at least Canon already has pro grade stuff announced.
That Lens is pretty damn good though. 2.8 is better yes.. but for a kit lens is a great lens.
Yeah it's perfectly fine on a flash assisted body, which most event photographers will have on one of their cameras. Natural light where I'm at iso 2000 at 2.8? No. I'd rather have as much aperture as possible. I'll probably be that way till my spine turns to dust.
Honestly the 35mm Canon RF seems pretty nice based on reviews. If I did get a Canon ff I'd probably just grab that and then use m43 for any wide angle or telephoto work.
Yes, for your particular case / work is useless, that is accurate. But I am just talking in terms of a kit lens for the majority ofpeople buying the camera.
Yeah I understand. I also realize that I'm not in the majority of buyers. Since I'm a knowledgable second hand buyer camera manufacturers really don't make a dime off me. They get me on the occasional purchase, but really not that much.
I'd need to catch up on newer reviews from the past few weeks, but it looks like it performs to its price point, which is to say not all that great, but good enough for the penny pichers. Kudos to Canon for at least providing a 35mm/1.8 lens for under $500 when Sony can only give you a 35/2.8 for $800.
That's the Zeiss tax. Some of those lenses are great, but man... I was not shelling out the cash for them. I'd probably get the 55 1.8 and 135 2.8, but that's it and they'd be used.