•  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11(current)
  • 12
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5DMKIII versus 7DMKII
Current model XE-2 and see what brings next year from Nikon or Sony. Don't plan to buy more lenses from Fuji, but one never knows.

 

I'm not done with the "Sports" right now. I just got the missing AFMA values for infinity and want to try how those work out - but currently we still have fog, fog and more fog.  :mellow:

I find "the camera store" the least interesting web-resource, to be frank. But yeah, Leica's prices are a bit silly, to say the least. 

Quote:More than once I was playing with this idea, Ayoh. I just think, I'll wait for one or two iterations and meanwhile borrow an A7RII to make my own practical view. I read too much about quirky interface, but I know, the longer I wait, the less money I get for my DSLR gear.

 

There's a bit uncertainty about the differences of A7II, A7SII and A7RII - except the "high ISO" and "high resolution" as main feature I really don't get the point, how the additional character in the name is worth double the price of a A7II. 

 

Poor battery performance, knowledge of a 4 million dots resolving EVF (in a Leica) make me hesitate. Also, I don't think, Nikon will not answer sooner or later the Sony threat although it's probably a different mount on a Nikon FF mirrorless.

 

Meanwhile I'll make my first mirrorless system steps with a little Fuji and two lenses as I always wanted to have something much lighter than DSLR but at comparable Quality level.
 

I agree that the A7Rii is quite overpriced and I don't see either how it is worth the premium price over the A7ii/s. I think Sony is just seeing what price they can get away with in the market and unfortunately it seems they are selling well even at this price. 

 

With regards to the difference between the A7s and A7rii, despite what some commentators say about high ISO performance being similar, there is a claer advantage to the A7s. Although the noise level in lighter tones may be similar between the two (as this is limited by shot noise) the A7s has noticeably lower read noise in the shadows. This means that there is a higher DR at high ISO which allows for greater file latitude and editing. I would rate this DR advantage at high ISO to the A7s at approximately 2 stops.

The secondary benefits are the higher EVF sensitivity in low light and of course best in class video.

 

With regards to the EVF resolution I am not convinced more pixels will make the image that much better. The resolution is already quite high and pixelation is not noticeable. The consequence could be even lower battery life due to the associated higher data throughput. 

 

With regards to the Fuji, I guess if you can get it significantly cheaper than the Sony a7s then it might be attractive, however you might not find it that satisfying as you will be stepping back in sensor size, video quality, low light sensitivity. My advice remains to get the A7s (mark 1) if you find a good price. BTW I managed to get one a brand new one year ago for about $1600 AUD (1000 euro) at a time of cumulative sales and promos. Similarly I picked up the 55mm Zony for about $600 (400 euro). As such the price can be very attractive at certain times of the year. OK I will stop with this promotion lest I am taken for a Sony fanboy (which I am not and can also write some criticism of their cameras).
Ayoh, I will not get a first generation A7 whatever just because I don't want to be frustrated by shutter vibrations - I'm not using tripods everyday but if I have to use them, I don't want to worry about micro-earthquakes  Wink However I appreciate your advice and will keep an eye or two on Sony. But as I wrote them about some quirks on their website describing the wrong features or illustrating them with a misleading picture they didn't even answer, so I guess they just have enough customers.

 

The camera itself is less a problem to finance but I would not necessarily go for the Sony lenses - I'm leaning more towards Batis, occasionally even Milvus (macro and very wide-angle don't need much AF). I'm aware of making a step back in terms of resolution - but the Fuji has 16 MP while the A7S or SII comes with 12, and the Fuji doesn't need to serve as D810 replacement. The Fuji is my current solution for a lightweight bag. Everything else I will watch and wait until there's a Nikon FF mirrorless coming round the corner.

 

The Sony A7S would cost me as much as the Fuji with two decent lenses. What I like about Fuji: They appear to listen to requests and get some additional features by firmware updates without asking money for "apps".

 

I will rent a Sony and see how and if I'm happy with. I'll know more afterwards. To me, you're not a fanboy but a pretty happy user which I consider a good recommendation  ^_^

Again 

 

Quote:Ayoh, I will not get a first generation A7 whatever just because I don't want to be frustrated by shutter vibrations - I'm not using tripods everyday but if I have to use them, I don't want to worry about micro-earthquakes  Wink

 

The camera itself is less a problem to finance but I would not necessarily go for the Sony lenses - I'm leaning more towards Batis, occasionally even Milvus (macro and very wide-angle don't need much AF). I'm aware of making a step back in terms of resolution - but the Fuji has 16 MP while the A7S or SII comes with 12, and the Fuji doesn't need to serve as D810 replacement. The Fuji is my current solution for a lightweight bag. Everything else I will watch and wait until there's a Nikon FF mirrorless coming round the corner.

 

I will rent a Sony and see how and if I'm happy with. I'll know more afterwards.
 

The shutter vibration is definitely not an issue with the A7s due to the amazing silent shutter. I leave my camera on electronic silent shutter on all the time except when using flash. There is literally no mechanical noise when shooting and very little image compromise (some DR loss at base iso, no penalty from 200-400 ISO). Rolling shutter is only evident when doing panning action shots but then the A7s is no sports camera anyway.

 

With lenses there are also lovely Voigtlander lenses which can be had for reasonable prices on the used t market. I have been using the 35mm 1.2, 50mm 1.1 and 21mm 1.8 to high satisfaction. I would advise against getting any of the E-mount manual focus zeiss lenses as then you are locked to that mount when with leica mount you can use the lenses on Fuji or nay future new NIkon mounts etc. 

And again, Ayoh, my decision is made and I'm stubborn enough to stick with it Wink . I will not repeat why the current Sony offers are something I let pass by. I'm also no fan of adapter + lens no matter how wonderful or cheap these combinations are. Your idea of getting an "old" A7s would cost me much more at the moment and after getting it, the position of small and lightweight travel camera still remains unoccupied. Your reasons make perfectly sense to me, but mine too.

Quote:And again, Ayoh, my decision is made and I'm stubborn enough to stick with it Wink . I will not repeat why the current Sony offers are something I let pass by. I'm also no fan of adapter + lens no matter how wonderful or cheap these combinations are. Your idea of getting an "old" A7s would cost me much more at the moment and after getting it, the position of small and lightweight travel camera still remains unoccupied. Your reasons make perfectly sense to me, but mine too.
No problem, just wanted to share my experience. Best of luck with yours Smile
I appreciate taking away the "shutter vibration is no issue when using electronic shutter"-line. I was not aware of that because a week ago I still thought my PDAF issues and low reliability I could solve with careful AFMA
and CDAF is just too slow to be useful. 
That's also the reason I was aware of Sony's efforts but not looking closely into it.

 

Apparently both ideas are no longer the only truth.

 Sigma AF problems wherever I look/read....one subject that pops up more than ever and that's erratic focusing errors with Sigma lenses........especially with the 18-35mm F1.8 zoom as well as the 35MM F1.4......Art series........when a thread is started it goes on ad infinitum......many are on their fifth copy of their lenses....some examples are worse than others, but exhibit the same problem.

 

  The theme is always the same erratic AF in spite of days spent on base station adjustments, front focusing, but everyone has perfect success with CDAF in live view.  Then for every ten complainers there's one who has had the lens for a year and never had a missed shot and another who has had the lens two days and finds it's perfect in all situations..........It seems to be more of a problem the wider the focal lengths...........everyone says it's a huge shame!......... So two morals there.........Sigma has to get it together with their PDAF or else they will be losing an enormous amount of customers, word is getting around........the other...... CDAF eradicates the problem, which is what this thread has been debating.

 Based on these stories I just couldn't risk a Sigma purchase even with a base station, it's killed it for me!(that doesn't apply to the 150-600 Sport,being a long tele) 

 

  I spent yesterday morning re-appraising my two copies of the AF35mm  F2Ds, the first copy which I found de-centered now looks fine and needs no AFMA, (I think it could have been a Hoya UV generic fraud may have been the source) the second copy which needed -2 AFMA with a filter now needs +2 without one and is slightly de-centered.........I thought with confidence that I woulld now have spot on LVAF.........but no, both are still front focusing! 

 

  If on sensor PDCDAF finally gets to be top top flight (my guess is that will be three years from now at least with Sony) that will leave only one snag left...........poorly calibrated lenses!

 

PS. Joju my Sigma info is based on the general flood of complaints on Nikon and Pentax sites and doesn't devalue your own findings. Keep us updated on your mirror-less, I'm waiting to hear with bated breath.

Dave's clichés
Well Dave, what would I do if I found something to complain in whatever lens or body and the manufacturer doesn't help? I'd go and post in a forum, or more.

 

What would I do if everything is fine and I get my pictures under all, even weird, circumstances? Going to a forum and write "hey, guys, everything is cool on my side"?

 

And how create complaining threads kids and grand-kids? "The internet is full of..." that part of the sentence I always agree with Big Grin

 

I will not say, I always get focus there where I planned to have it sharp. I just can't say I miss more shots with Sigmas than with Nikkors. I don't do statistics on sharp or blurred pictures, I just delete the ones somebody - me - or something - lens, body, subject movement - messed up.

 

<Edit1>I'd found it interesting to know if the complainers have other, "better" genuine lenses to compare? Best would be the same FL and aperture. Which bodies misbehave? How experienced are the complainers? Expecting everything great out of the box?

Hmm, with FoCal I could do an AF reliability comparison between some lenses, would you like to see one? Of course. that's only one or two bodies and only lenses I still have a Nikon and a Sigma version. But the test is running automatically once it is set up. Even then, doubts would remain: I could have the one in a million exception Sigmas which works fine or the one in 10 million Nikkors which is a lemon. <_< </Edit1>

 

For the 18-35/1.8, the D7100 got better keeper rates than the D7000, but after a while I just didn't use the D7000 anymore, so the relations for that body/lens combi got worse because the other was used exclusively. Most pictures I can't take twice, so I really have no base to compare directly. But what I saw: Once I suspected AF problems, I always found pictures confirming them - and others telling another story. I just don't know...

 

<Edit2> With the 18-35 I found sometimes no subjects big enough to cover the AF point marks in the finder. I simply had no idea if the AF prefers a lamp post, a railing three meters behind or something contrasty 500 meters away? So there was sharpness on one of the three items but I was not blaming the lens because I was not certain on which phase focus was detected. Does that make sense? </Edit2>

 

As for the Fuji, I only did some 100 shots and getting used to a different menu, button layout and AF behaviour. I missed sharpness with one shot, which I find a good rate. Manual focus help is great with an EVF, although at times it is too dark. Bright sunlight and looking into the EVF: lots of shadows  :unsure: while the LCD is okay. Have no explanation for that. While in darkness the EVF appears to be better than an OF.

  
  •  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11(current)
  • 12
  • Next 


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)