dhsimmonds
New member
+1FWIW, some think the ZA 135/1.8 itself is worth the price of admission into the Alpha range, and it probably even outperforms the 135L.
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
+1FWIW, some think the ZA 135/1.8 itself is worth the price of admission into the Alpha range, and it probably even outperforms the 135L.
In my case I have owned a GH1 for approx. 2 years, an A33 for 6 moths (then sold it), an EP2 with VF and an xz1 with vw as well as a G3 wich I presently use here and then.I am beginning to wonder how many of these posts decrying EVF's in favour of OVF's are made by folk who have never even tried out the A77 or compared it to any other sort of DSLR let alone the A900! oke:
I must remind myself one day to look at the C & N sections to see how many folk are banging on about the merits of the Sony system, but then I doubt if I will have the time!
Did not have the chance to compare and test the A77, but I do have experience with EP2 and EP3 and VF2 as well as GHR. All of them being really good and advanced EVFs today.I am beginning to wonder how many of these posts decrying EVF's in favour of OVF's are made by folk who have never even tried out the A77 or compared it to any other sort of DSLR let alone the A900! oke:
I must remind myself one day to look at the C & N sections to see how many folk are banging on about the merits of the Sony system, but then I doubt if I will have the time!
Interesting thought. Since I have a 645D and K-5 it prompted the following shots, both with the 67 90mm at f/4. Focus distance is different to keep the image size about the same, so that's a variable but something that would occur when framing a "real" shot in the viewfinder. (uncropped, minimal processing, no sharpening)............. but my thoguhts are that you really see the benefit of the larger sensor here.
Wow, thank you - very analytic and helpful answer!Hi Tom,
I am currently in a similar situation to figure out what fullfill my needs the best. I think the needs are so different among the users, that I try only to describe what my thoughts are for my kind of photography and everyone can pick then the pro and cons dependig on whether their camera-use is overlapping with mine or not.
I am not a pro. I do not have that my time for photography. Mainly family shots and travel shots during vacations. I am jaleous to all here who can do this great stuff professionally, by the way
As long as you do not earn money with your images, I would always long for a "one solution" road, not for multiple/different systems. Everything else is overkill. Otherwiese one system will always stay in the closet. Obviously that means you have to make compromises. Or you restrict yourself to maximum 2 different systems, which would be a kind of compromise. A hobby is never logic or sounds economically
IMHO it depends on what kind of photography you are doing. If you have LR3, there is an easy way to see statistical data over the last i.e 10 years of all your photos. Look with which camera, which lens, which focal lenghts and which aperture you made most of your shots. That will help to get a better feeling, what you are REALLY using at the end of the day.
For me this exercise was quite helpful. I figured out, that most of my images are made between 35mm and 135mm (in FF terms), with a strong overweight of 50mm between F1.4 and 4.0 on FF and 75/85mm on APS-C/FF, same aperture range. Then a large gap, then 135mm on FF, also wide open until F4.0 and for special situations (sport of kids, special portrait) always a zoom in the range of around 150/200-300mm on APS-C/FF
As a next step, I looked at my preferred images and tried to analyse why I do like them more than others. I came to the conclusion, that in most cases they had shallower DOF then all other images. These images could show better, what was important to me in that moment while pressing the shutter.
The DOF I prefer with the focal lenghts I like the most is simply not achievable with sensors smaller than FF (24x36mm). Or at least only with (for me) bigger compromises. With telephoto lenses this does not matter anymore, but below 100mm, FF rules for me.
Since I do not need really telephoto lenses, or could cover this with any cheap DSLR and one long zoom lens (IQ is there not important), I can limit the choice to all systems, that offer
a) Fullframe
b) Good choice in lenses with big apertures (between 1.4-2.0)
c) As small AND light as possible
So Rangefinder and DSLR would be possible.
If I had the money and not also other hobbies, I would have tested an M9 already. I used to have the M6 long time ago. Very nice size, BUT
a) Heavy, Both body and lenses altough compact.
b) Framing difficult in strong sunshine
c) Minimum distance of Leica lenses just too big (1m)
So with the current price tag of an M9, this is no option for me. Maybe later on as a second-hand one, but then the price have to be really cheap.
This is why I currently use mainly a DSLR (A850) with many lenses and experiment in the menatime until I made my final decision with Fuji x100, NEX 5 (no N) and have a pre-order on the NEX7.
I do not think that the NEX7 will last very long with me because of the APS-C sensor. But I want to test it for the VF. I expect a NEX9 over the next 12 months (if the flood in Thailand does not cross the plans) with fullframe sensor. So I want to see whether I can live with the Sony EVF as a compromise.
Viewfinder is a very important criteria for me. This is a driver for me to have fun while taking pictures. It shall be a pleasure to look through it, easy to compose an image.
If Sony would come out with a A99 without OVF, I would not buy it and rather keep my A850, by the way. I do not need more than 24MP (18MP would be enough already) or significant better high iso.
Fuji announced already a new X-System with interchangeble lenses. No decision yet communicated to the sensor size. So I am very interested in this new Fuji system compared to a NEX7 or NEX9 or Leica M10. Maybe Leica will try to offer teh M10 with a more aggressive price because of the Fuji and NEX competition. We will see.
Back to your questions: I would rather sell the S2 and all other stuff in your case, keep the M9 and the A900 as a combo until you see what Sony and Leica will bring next year and then shrink it further down. But I do not know which FL you use the most, so this is a wild guess.
And it sounded that you really like the S2 which is by definition the toughest argument to fight against in such discussions
Disadvantage S2 vs. 24x36mm:
a) You need to stop down more for same DOF, this results often in higher ISO for enough shutterspeed against handshake
b) Bigger and heavier (especially the lenses)
c) Do you really need that much better IQ for your shootings? Maybe an A99 fullframe would be sufficient?
Hope that helps a little bit...
Best wishes
great iamge, I would not have expected such shallow dof with the Summarit on a dx sensor.Just as an irritating aside . . . .
I shot a party today, and 90% of the shots were with a NEX 5n and a Leica 35mm summarit with a Hawks factory adapter. . As Tom says - if you have leica lenses, why not shoot them on an M9, but the focus peaking on the NEX, combined with the excellent EVF on the 5n made for a very pleasant shooting experience (you can see what's in focus right at the edges of the frame, without disturbing the composition by zooming in). The helicoid adapter got over the irritating minimal focusing distance of the 35 summarit, and the high ISO got over it's rather meagre f2.5 minimum aperture . . . just leaving a great lens in a very small package!
Let's raise a glass:
NEX 5n with Leica 35mm Summarit and Hawks helicoid adapter
(if you read the exif, sony are a bit extravagant about the lens identity!)
It's full of surprises - focusing a noctilux at 10" on a NEX 5n is also a surprising experience!great iamge, I would not have expected such shallow dof with the Summarit on a dx sensor.
Often it's more important with everything . . at least, that's what I think.logical analysis should never force you to go the route of the obvious solution. As far as I understood it, photography is a hobby for you.
So an analysis can only show you more clear the pro and the cons, without forcing you to change anything. Often the "stomach factor" is more important with hobbies.
I can only agree . . . but I don't like Nikon colour either . . . . and I'm not keen on the Fuji 'throw everything at the interface' habit - I really think that Sony have hit a home run with the extra detailed EVF and the focus peaking. I've only seriously been shooting the 5n with Leica lenses for a week or so, and it's quite a revaluation.Canon is a "no-go" for me. I tried that already. Like every other brand. Canon is just not my taste. Neither the colours, nor the handling nor the lenses. I am happy with my Sony at the moment. If the A900/850 would not exist, I would have stayed with my Nikon gear - which I already sold.
And I hope to see soon a real competitor from Fuji for the Leica M9 at affordable prices. NOw this would be REALLY sexy
Best wishes
I was simply responding to t_streng's mention of the 135L as a reason for admission into the Canon line.No doubt there are some really great primes in the Sony/Zeiss lineup, the 135/1.8 being maybe the most outstanding here.
But a system for me is more than just one or a few good lenses. How much better is the 135/1.8 than the 135L really? Does this really matter in my photography? And would a fast 135 really be the prime I want? I doubt.
What is of more interest is a consistent high quality throughout fast zooms and primes from far wide to far tele, so one can pick the lenses he really wants. Having said that, both Nikon and Canon can do this today for the FF DSLR range, which is what I am looking for. Choosing Canon or Nikon is just a matter of taste, I am familiar with both as I have shot both brands several times throughout my life and there is absolutely no situation which I could not master equally good with one or the other.
I would have liked Sony to be part of this game from my evaluation point of view. While some of their glass is really outstanding, on the other hand some really sucks IMHO. And what is even more important for me is that they are far away from having a lineup like C/N and putting much less weight on FF. Plus they try to be innovative with inventions like EVF and all you can find in the A77, which is nice and helpful, but still does not replace a decent OVF for me. But if I would be into buying a small DSLR with great glass, maybe an A77 would be it. But this is not the case for me as I want to go FF again between m43 and Hasselblad, as APSC would be too close to m43. All I am hearing is that the A99 will be EVF again, so also this camera will probably not meet my criteria for FF DSLR and OVF, which is bad. Plus the whole lens situation at Sony, which for some is just the perfect and greatest lineup - which I perfectly understand - but for me it is not.
+1.....
This is why I think the X100 is so compelling. I just wish it came with a 50mm equiv. lens....
Most of these folks play 1 guitar model all the time but almost all of them have several guitars of the same model. When you play guitar you also want to have the possibility to use different models and brands, as no 2 guitars are really the same, so you finally start using different for different occasions.Although he does own and occasionally play other guitars live, imagine if Slash decided not to play a Les Paul a majority of the time. :bugeyes:
This is the reason why I am looking for a FF DSLR again, as I am currently also in M43 which is my P&S camera system.For example I believe its ok for me to have a mirrorless system, but doesnt make sense to have m4/3 and Nex at the same time.
And I dont need a ff and a dx DSLR, etc etc.
I dont think I would sell the S2 , but I am also pretty impressed how good IQ an M9 or A900 can deliever, so you sometimes ask yourself if you really need that extra little buit of IQ. But as I said before the S2 works verywell for me and Iuse it all the time, which is an important indicator.
Than there is print size, and while I like the freddom to be able to print really big I very often do not print bigger than A4 or max A2. You could count on 2 hands the number of prints I did which were bigger.
If you go really big the advantage of the S2 gets larger, not only because of more MP but also of very high quality on pixel level
there's no way you can get more accurate manual focus with an OVF vs a zoomable EVF. EVF's can also be focused using the working aperture which does not introduce focus shift. parallax errors, from rangefinder cams, are also mitigated.WRT EVFs - as already mentioned I am not convinced to date that this is a good solution for really high end and quality demanding shooting, so starting from FF till MF I prefer OVF and I will always do so I think.