Jared Polins' neat giveaway

[Kereplaz]

The Fro is giving away your choice of a Nikon D810, Canon 5Ds or Sony A7RII.

Hes a known youtuber, photographer, I am sure many of you already heard of him and hes doing this from his own pocket, which is nice, I think.

Which one would you choose and why?

 

Id go for Canon because im already invested in this particular system...

2nd place Sony

 

Joining this giveaway is free and does not require any bs:

http://froknowsphoto.com/giveaways/jigunda/

 

Thanks

Edited October 10, 2015 by airdeano
Replaced Referral Link

[SeanAngelo]

The Fro is giving away your choice of a Nikon D810, Canon 5Ds or Sony A7RII.

Hes a known youtuber, photographer, I am sure many of you already heard of him and hes doing this from his own pocket, which is nice, I think.

Which one would you choose and why?

 

Id go for Canon because im already invested in this particular system...

2nd place Sony

 

Joining this giveaway is free and does not require any bs, I would dearly apreciate if yall used my link:

http://froknowsphoto.com/giveaways/jigunda/?lucky=115170

 

Thanks

I have actually joined this giveaway, and if I won, I would choose the Sony any day. Seeing the reviews of the Sony A7RII, it is a fantastic camera. Though I already have nikon lenses, they're all for DX Nikon anyway so... If my lenses were full frame lenses then I would get the Nikon D810.

[zenodio]

I'd go for the Sony as well, such a beast, even though it drain batteries faster than I drain pints at the local pub on a Friday night.

[Captain_Slow]

really? sony? Sony has 5 native lens for full frame e mount, and the primary zooms all suck in terms of quality/aperture. 

 

Sony has released the A7, A7 II, A7S, A7R, A7R II, A7S II since Oct 2013, that's 6 full frame cameras in a matter of two years....

 

still thou, 5 fucking lenses. 

 

and uses the same bloody battery as the NEX 3n, a $500 camera at intro. 

 

that's like the Canon 5d III using the same battery as the SL1. 

 

sony needs to put a bigger battery into these cameras, and spend some time developing good lenses.

 

 

anyways it's Nikon for me. Better body than canon and about the same selection of lenses. 

[bob345]

really? sony? Sony has 5 native lens for full frame e mount, and the primary zooms all suck in terms of quality/aperture. 

 

Sony has released the A7, A7 II, A7S, A7R, A7R II, A7S II since Oct 2013, that's 6 full frame cameras in a matter of two years....

 

still thou, 5 fucking lenses. 

 

and uses the same bloody battery as the NEX 3n, a $500 camera at intro. 

 

that's like the Canon 5d III using the same battery as the SL1. 

 

sony needs to put a bigger battery into these cameras, and spend some time developing good lenses.

 

 

anyways it's Nikon for me. Better body than canon and about the same selection of lenses. 

5 native lenses? You seem a bit late to the party.

http://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-camera-products/t/camera-lenses?cameramount=e-mount&sensor-lens=35mm-full-frame

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ns=p_PRICE_2|1&ci=17912&setNs=p_PRICE_2|1&N=4196380428+3999800997&srtclk=sort

 

Might have been good to do a little research first.

You also have to realize that the full frame e mount system is relatively new. Its not like canon had many lenses right as they launched the first ef mount camera. Its a new system and is still maturing, but it is definitely taking the market by storm.

[Captain_Slow]

5 native lenses? You seem a bit late to the party.

http://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-camera-products/t/camera-lenses?cameramount=e-mount&sensor-lens=35mm-full-frame

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ns=p_PRICE_2|1&ci=17912&setNs=p_PRICE_2|1&N=4196380428+3999800997&srtclk=sort

 

Might have been good to do a little research first.

You also have to realize that the full frame e mount system is relatively new. Its not like canon had many lenses right as they launched the first ef mount camera. Its a new system and is still maturing, but it is definitely taking the market by storm.

 

10 lenses from sony, rest are from zeiss and Samyang and the Samyang lenses do not have AF. 

 

regardless, sony does not have the holy trinity (16-24, 24-70, 70-200) in f2.8, only in f4, and they are noticeably less sharp than their nikon/canon counterparts.

 

E-mount is relatively new, im simply pointing out that sony seems to be investing lots of R&D in bodies and not alot in lenses.

 

and I wouldnt call that taking the market by storm, the only manufacturer making serious lenses for sony is Zeiss, no sigma, no tamron, no tokina. seems like a pretty small storm

 

besides with that battery life? I don't think it's replacing the likes of D810 and 5DSR untill it gets a bigger battery, a 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 35 f1.4, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, and a couple of telephoto primes with relatively large apertures. 

 

nikon and canon both have 100+ native lenses, sony doesnt need to have that many but it needs to nail the must-haves.

[bob345]

10 lenses from sony, rest are from zeiss and Samyang and the Samyang lenses do not have AF. 

 

regardless, sony does not have the holy trinity (16-24, 24-70, 70-200) in f2.8, only in f4, and they are noticeably less sharp than their nikon/canon counterparts.

 

E-mount is relatively new, im simply pointing out that sony seems to be investing lots of R&D in bodies and not alot in lenses.

 

and I wouldnt call that taking the market by storm, the only manufacturer making serious lenses for sony is Zeiss, no sigma, no tamron, no tokina. seems like a pretty small storm

 

besides with that battery life? I don't think it's replacing the likes of D810 and 5DSR untill it gets a bigger battery, a 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 35 f1.4, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, and a couple of telephoto primes with relatively large apertures. 

 

nikon and canon both have 100+ native lenses, sony doesnt need to have that many but it needs to nail the must-haves.

again, where are you getting your information? Where did you find that sony lenses are not sharp? because many of sony new lenses actually outperform canon's and nikons equivalent. sure, the 28-70 "kit lens" they have doesn't perform very well, but that is really the only one that isn't up to par. Also again, why do you expect sony to have everything on a new system like this? sony has covered all the bases with their linup. there is the 16-35 f4, the 24-70 f4, the 70-200 f4, 28mm f2, 35mm 1.4, 55mm 1.8,  and 85mm 1.4. And sure, a better battery may have been good, but that would have made sony's mirrorless system just as large as any normal dslr which kind of defeats the point of the system in the firstplace. You cant have it all, you have to compromise somewhere. There are allot of people starting to move over to sony's system and for a good reason. They know what they are doing and they are pushing the market forward unlike canon and nikon. It is silly to think for even a second that sony doesnt know what they are doing especially because sony is the number one producer of imaging sensors in the world. They also make nikons sensors. Im fairly sure they know what they are doing when it come to bodies and lenses.

[ShadowCaptain]

SNIP

 

Use an A mount adapter - I have the A7 and have the LEA4 adapter and a few A mount lenses - they work great, I got my 70-210 F4 and 50 f1.7 Minolta lenses for £100! - and I have seen Jason Lanier and other pro togs using them for real shoots - very good glass

 

Use a Canon adapter - with on sensor PDAF the focus is basically as fast as using it on the native canon body with 399 point AF and focus tracing

Use the coming soon Nikon adapter - there are videos of it working with a few lenses (no screw af lenses though but I am not sure yet)

Use tons of legacy glass - great for video!!! and manual focus is fantastic with peaking - stick on that leica m glass 

 

Faster E mount glass is coming

 

 

its still a fantastic camera, and some of the lenses so far are great, like the 28mm f2.0 - VERY sharp lens and very well priced - YES their other glass is F4, but its VERY sharp and well built and great for MOST peoples photography 

 

 

Sure the system is not perfect, but its still the camera I would choose, especially with how happy I am with my A7 - both its stills and video performance 

[Captain_Slow]

again, where are you getting your information? Where did you find that sony lenses are not sharp? because many of sony new lenses actually outperform canon's and nikons equivalent. sure, the 28-70 "kit lens" they have doesn't perform very well, but that is really the only one that isn't up to par. Also again, why do you expect sony to have everything on a new system like this? sony has covered all the bases with their linup. there is the 16-35 f4, the 24-70 f4, the 70-200 f4, 28mm f2, 35mm 1.4, 55mm 1.8,  and 85mm 1.4. And sure, a better battery may have been good, but that would have made sony's mirrorless system just as large as any normal dslr which kind of defeats the point of the system in the firstplace. You cant have it all, you have to compromise somewhere. There are allot of people starting to move over to sony's system and for a good reason. They know what they are doing and they are pushing the market forward unlike canon and nikon. It is silly to think for even a second that sony doesnt know what they are doing especially because sony is the number one producer of imaging sensors in the world. They also make nikons sensors. Im fairly sure they know what they are doing when it come to bodies and lenses.

 

I didnt say sony doesnt know what they are doing, I said it seems that they are not investing in lens dev as much as camera body dev.

 

and I know they make nikon sensors along with most smartphone sensors, but im talking about pro features because they are aiming at the pro market. 

 

and no, making a bigger battery would NOT make the a7 series as big as a dslr so it's silly to think that.

 

it's also silly to think the only point of going mirrorless is to have a more compact system.

 

F4 lenses simply dont replace f2.8 lenses and you can check dxomark for performance differences if you need solid data and sony has in no way covered all the bases with their lens lineup, they dont even have a constant aperture zoom longer than 200mm even thou the a7rii technically would be a superb body for sports.

 

again, like the bodies, dont like the lenses, dont like the battery life, also a top mounted e ink display would be nice too. 

[zenodio]

10 lenses from sony, rest are from zeiss and Samyang and the Samyang lenses do not have AF. 

 

regardless, sony does not have the holy trinity (16-24, 24-70, 70-200) in f2.8, only in f4, and they are noticeably less sharp than their nikon/canon counterparts.

 

E-mount is relatively new, im simply pointing out that sony seems to be investing lots of R&D in bodies and not alot in lenses.

 

and I wouldnt call that taking the market by storm, the only manufacturer making serious lenses for sony is Zeiss, no sigma, no tamron, no tokina. seems like a pretty small storm

 

besides with that battery life? I don't think it's replacing the likes of D810 and 5DSR untill it gets a bigger battery, a 14-24 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 35 f1.4, 50 f1.4, 85 f1.4, and a couple of telephoto primes with relatively large apertures. 

 

nikon and canon both have 100+ native lenses, sony doesnt need to have that many but it needs to nail the must-haves.

What's wrong with Zeiss lenses?

If I had a Sony camera I would probably only go for Zeiss lenses, besides that, you can adapt almost everything to a Sony camera, I don't mind focusing manually.

For my workflow and the kind of photography I do, a Sony would be great and fit my needs.

[Captain_Slow]

What's wrong with Zeiss lenses?

If I had a Sony camera I would probably only go for Zeiss lenses, besides that, you can adapt almost everything to a Sony camera, I don't mind focusing manually.

For my workflow and the kind of photography I do, a Sony would be great and fit my needs.

 

nothing, but they tend to be pricy and only primes. 

[zenodio]

Snip

Fair point.

But that's what works for me, for you it probably doesn't make sense at all to go for the A7RII over the 5Ds or D810, but for me the Sony is the most logical choice.

[Bsmith]

would go for a canon myself, since I know what I can expect from it.

[ALwin]

Here's my take on Sony cameras.  The early Alpha DSLRs were pretty much designed for novices, amateurs, consumers.  Even the early NEX mirrorless cameras felt like toys.  But Sony has come a long way in just a few years.
 
As for lenses, Zeiss also makes lenses for Nikon and Canon.  A majority of them are manual focus lenses and all of them are prime.  But being prime lenses, their IQ, if you look at the test charts and graphs, are way ahead of pretty much every zoom lens out there because prime lenses are far simpler to design while keeping everything top notch.  Again I emphasize "If you look at the test charts and graphs".  But come take photos in the real world... test charts and graphs do not matter.  What's more important is to be out there taking photos.  Test charts and graphs, all they are good for is an indicator of which lens you should choose between similar models and focal lengths.  But even then, some people make what would be considered illogical choices.  For example, the Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG HSM lens (not the newest Art version) was pretty much better in every aspect compared to the NIkon 50 1.4G, yet I would prefer to buy the Nikon version because it's 1/3rd the size and mass of the Sigma and unless I am pixel peeping or using JPEGs straight out of the camera there is absolutely no noticeable IQ differences between images taken with either lens after post processing the RAW files. FYI, I owned the Sigma for a while and borrowed the Nikon from a friend. 
 
Just as there are different genres of photography, there are different types of photographers.  The current Sony A7 series of cameras, if I wasn't already invested into the Nikon ecosystem and waited until now to get my first digital camera, is something I would consider.  My first digital camera was actually a Sony Alpha A350 APS-C DSLR.  But when I compared using that A350 to a Nikon that my colleagues at work had, the Sony felt slow and I hate the ergonomics.  Within a month of owning the A350 I went and bought a Nikon and sold the former to someone a few weeks later.
 
So back to the point of different types of photographers.  There are photographers who simply enjoy going out taking their time to capture a moment.  There are those who need to work within time constraints.  While I sometimes prefer MF over AF, I cannot live without AF.  Most of my photography is in the field of journalism or covering events.  I need to be able capture as many moments as fast as possible.  Additionally, many of the photographers I work with are Nikonians.  So being in the Nikon ecosystem myself, we can share gear if the need ever arises and it has happened quite a few times.
 
Ok I didn't mention Canon here and I have owned a couple of Canon cameras, but the point is every camera brand has its advantages and disadvantages.  People have their own likes and dislikes.  I have no beef against Sony or Canon.  I have nothing against any any camera brand.
 
Now if you are really interested in photography and want to REALLY explore different types of camera systems, I recommend trying out medium or large format camera systems and STOP ARGUING ABOUT APS-C OR 35MM CAMERA SYSTEMS!
 
Try using a 40 something year old Hasselblad 500C/M or a Yashica twin lens reflex or even one of these babies (see image below).  Or even make your own pin hole camera out of some shoe box or computer parts box or even a room in your house.  But I will tell you this, once you start going down this path you will realize how much you have been relying on modern digital technology (even if you claim to use Manual all the way) and how much knowledge you are still lacking.

[Kereplaz]

Love the answer above.

 

I have that 50 mm sigma, and it has one major flaw - autofocus. I like to autofocus too but this lens misses focus quite often. Just sayin. But was it cheaper than the Nikkor?

Im that kind of guy who does not care about size and weight if theres no definite limit or regulation in a situation, and im long past pixel peeping stage.

Although analog photography never compelled me in any way, i think its worth trying once... The process of photography is fun but the final product i think is the most important and it gives you that sense of accomplishment after you see a good photograph that you took. That said i too love all the technological aspects of digital cameras and digital imaging. I spend hours reading tech shite about cameras and sensors and so on, and immediately when i stop, i forget everything and just go take pics.

Technological aspects of Sony do compell me, but form factor and interface and lens and accessory availability in general would refrain me from ever investing in to this system in the near future. Canon on the other hand is predictable and boring as a technological example but those 50 mpix pics could enable you to do amazing stuff in the end. Nikon overall i think is the best and most balanced camera, but i would not choose it ever. 

[bob345]

~large snip~

 

Pinhole cameras can be fun. I even 3d printed one that uses 120mm rolls

never thougt of using a whole room for it though! might be something to try.

 

[ALwin]

Love the answer above.

I have that 50 mm sigma, and it has one major flaw - autofocus. I like to autofocus too but this lens misses focus quite often. Just sayin. But was it cheaper than the Nikkor?

The Sigma was more expensive at the time I purchased it. But the Nikon is easier to carry in the pocket. My Sigma didn't have focusing issue but I heard others who had the problem, Sigma's QC at the time was bad, it should be better now.

[Kereplaz]

Only 9 days left everybody!

Would be a nice holiday gift for everybody