Intro to DSLR/Mirrorless

[cc143]

Ok, sorry in advance for the double post. The xt2 is quite abit more expensive than it should be in the US currently. And than what UK prices are, hence the confusion.  Given its product lifecycle I'd assume it should be closer to $1000-$1200. Now, there's a couple of options here nonetheless, which I still believe are much better than the a6500, simply because that with a proper lens will still run you $1650. 

 

So: 

 

Keeping with the xt2: 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1378747-REG/fujifilm_x_t2_mirrorless_digital_camera.html Honestly, this such a better bargain than body only, I'd go for this even if I had a couple of 18-55s lying around, You could flip the lens the next day and make $250-$400, but its, barring the Canon 24-105mm, which is technically a kit lens, the best kit lens around, seriously, its sharp, OIS is exquisite, wider aperture than anything else on the market, making the variable range manageable. 

 

Another option is the x-t20 and x-e3 , which are more comparable to the a6500 honestly  (xt2 is a more professional body) and is 85% of the xt2, at a lower cost, with the addition of a touchscreen: 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1385385-REG/fujifilm_x_t20_mirrorless_digital_camera.html $1200

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1391914-REG/fujifilm_x_e3_mirrorless_digital_camera.html $1300

 

Its down to personal preference, the only addition the x-e3 has over the x-t20 is bluetooth. 

 

This leaves you with $800 to play around with. I'd go for a good tripod such as: 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1394639-REG/3_legged_thing_brianblack_23mm_leg_tube_5_section.html $300

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1367496-REG/manfrotto_mkbfrta4bk_bhus_befree_advanced_travel_tripod.html $200 

 

Note: I've used both brands and really recommend 3LT over Manfrotto, but both are great. They will help you a lot with nighttime shots of still objects and allow you way more creativity. 

 

Then the 23mm f/2 maybe? 

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1275473-REG/fujifilm_16523169_fujinon_23mm_f_2_r.html $450. 

 

Spend the rest on a battery and an extra sd card. 

 

EDIT: Since you seem to like comparison sites:

 

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Fujifilm-X-T20-vs-Sony-Alpha-a6500 

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-a6500-vs-Fujifilm-X-E3

 

Note: The comparisons are somewhat misleading in some aspects, I believe for all cameras they use the electronic shutter burst rate, which is not always useable. 

[monarchco]

I don't want to have to sell stuff.

My city is a fraction the size of Glasgow, and furthermore, its 6 hours for you to go from Glasgow to London.

It's 7 hours for me to go from 1 side of my state to the other. Anything I did sell would have to be shipped. I really don't want to have to deal with it.

 

I want to buy new. And that be the end of it. 

[monarchco]

Btw, I already have tripods.

 

I have this already:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/926480-REG/benro_c2350q2t_2_series_carbon_travl_tripod.html?sts=pi

 

And I have the lower level roadtrip tripod from the same company.

Amazing tripods, absolutely awesome. Light, entirely metal(mine is actually aluminum, instead of carbon fiber. Exact same weight rating, but 4.8lbs instead of 3.7lbs), with the only exception being the rubber grips on the legs, dials, knobs, etc.

 

[cc143]

1 minute ago, monarchco said:

I don't want to have to sell stuff.

My city is a fraction the size of Glasgow, and furthermore, its 6 hours for you to go from Glasgow to London.

It's 7 hours for me to go from 1 side of my state to the other. Anything I did sell would have to be shipped. I really don't want to have to deal with it.

 

I want to buy new. And that be the end of it. 

Everything I mention above is brand new from B&h, and as I said, don't sell it, its a great lens, I'm just giving you the option. Both the xt20 and x-e3 are better than the a6500 for your use case, they are cheaper and have better glass available.  

 

Actually in London now, which is a properly large city I guess ;P 

 

Since you also have tripods, then you could go for the xt20 with 18-55mm and still probably be able to squeeze in 2 primes, or go for the xt20 body only, get the 23mm and 50mm (both $450 a piece) and still be better off than with the sony, with $300 to spare. 

 

[monarchco]

36 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Everything I mention above is brand new from B&h, and as I said, don't sell it, its a great lens, I'm just giving you the option. Both the xt20 and x-e3 are better than the a6500 for your use case, they are cheaper and have better glass available.  

 

Actually in London now, which is a properly large city I guess ;P 

 

Since you also have tripods, then you could go for the xt20 with 18-55mm and still probably be able to squeeze in 2 primes, or go for the xt20 body only, get the 23mm and 50mm (both $450 a piece) and still be better off than with the sony, with $300 to spare. 

 

None of the cameras you mention I've found rated by groups like Dxomark. I did some looking and heard its from their sensors missing stuff that is typical. 

 

I've also been in Sony's ecosystem for some time. Had several Xperia phones, and am obviously running an RX100 right now. Only company whose stuff I have more of is ASUS. And H&K. But they don't make tech.

 

At this point I think the only thing I might consider is an A7iii. But I ///realllyyy/// don't want to spend that much. Part of why I asked how much of a negative it is using apsc lenses on a full frame, since they use the exact same mount.

Although more than likely I'll go with what is in my cart already, and then I still have budget left for whatever DJI is prone to announce on the 18th(hopefully a Mavic Pro 2)

[LaFemmeEnVert]

17 minutes ago, monarchco said:

None of the cameras you mention I've found rated by groups like Dxomark.

DxO mark does not rate fuji cameras because the fuji sensor uses a differnt sensor design that dxo cannot properly rate. but fuji makes great photo cameras and the models recommended are all good cameras.

 

19 minutes ago, monarchco said:

Part of why I asked how much of a negative it is using apsc lenses on a full frame, since they use the exact same mount.

aps-c and full frame is esentially sensor size difference, if you use apsc lens on full frame body you will get big vignetting since the aps-c lens has smaller image circle than the size needed for full frame sensor.

[cc143]

27 minutes ago, monarchco said:

None of the cameras you mention I've found rated by groups like Dxomark. I did some looking and heard its from their sensors missing stuff that is typical. 

 

I've also been in Sony's ecosystem for some time. Had several Xperia phones, and am obviously running an RX100 right now. Only company whose stuff I have more of is ASUS. And H&K. But they don't make tech.

 

At this point I think the only thing I might consider is an A7iii. But I ///realllyyy/// don't want to spend that much. Part of why I asked how much of a negative it is using apsc lenses on a full frame, since they use the exact same mount.

Although more than likely I'll go with what is in my cart already, and then I still have budget left for whatever DJI is prone to announce on the 18th(hopefully a Mavic Pro 2)

Mobile phones and point and shoot cameras are not what I mean when I say ecosystem, I mean lenses, flashes etc. stuff that Sony is only starting to get its stride on in FF cameras, not APS-C, where they don't have nearly enough. You need the right tool for the job and FF lenses are more expensive, and more often than not won't cover your needs on an APS-C camera, unless you are willing to spend way too much more than what you should be, in which case, a FF camera simply makes more sense. 

 

For example, my 17-40mm which is an ultrawide-wideangle lens, on my old Canon 50d was a standard focal length. That is simply one example. Also, if you have ASP-C glass that can be mounted on a FF body, it makes no sense to use it since it will crop in the image, making buying a FF body a waste in the first place. 

 

Stop it with DxOmark, look at at YT reviews from people who what they are on about (i.e. not the angry photographer, T&C or Fro), look through flickr for images from that camera and those lenses. The fuji sensor is better than the sony aps-c equivalents in most quantifiable ways, with the only exception that comes to mind being high iso performance, but honestly, if you are getting useable shots at 6400 iso with an aps-c camera, anymore than that and it'd be night vision. Also, DXOmark doesn't tell the full story. You would be just fine with most cameras produced in the last decade. comparing sensors alone is a worthless metric of camera performance, its like only looking at bhp when looking at a car, it doesn;t even begin to tell the story. 

 

The a6500 is fine by all means, a 5d classic from 2005 is fine in the right hands, that is not what we are talking about here, we are talking about a much more comprehensive system that has more lenses for you to choose from when it comes to APS-C bodies, that are of significantly higher quality, and even compete with or downright outperform proper FF equivalent lenses, worth 3 times as much, at a much better price. 

[monarchco]

5 hours ago, cc143 said:

Mobile phones and point and shoot cameras are not what I mean when I say ecosystem, I mean lenses, flashes etc. stuff that Sony is only starting to get its stride on in FF cameras, not APS-C, where they don't have nearly enough. You need the right tool for the job and FF lenses are more expensive, and more often than not won't cover your needs on an APS-C camera, unless you are willing to spend way too much more than what you should be, in which case, a FF camera simply makes more sense. 

 

For example, my 17-40mm which is an ultrawide-wideangle lens, on my old Canon 50d was a standard focal length. That is simply one example. Also, if you have ASP-C glass that can be mounted on a FF body, it makes no sense to use it since it will crop in the image, making buying a FF body a waste in the first place. 

 

Stop it with DxOmark, look at at YT reviews from people who what they are on about (i.e. not the angry photographer, T&C or Fro), look through flickr for images from that camera and those lenses. The fuji sensor is better than the sony aps-c equivalents in most quantifiable ways, with the only exception that comes to mind being high iso performance, but honestly, if you are getting useable shots at 6400 iso with an aps-c camera, anymore than that and it'd be night vision. Also, DXOmark doesn't tell the full story. You would be just fine with most cameras produced in the last decade. comparing sensors alone is a worthless metric of camera performance, its like only looking at bhp when looking at a car, it doesn;t even begin to tell the story. 

 

The a6500 is fine by all means, a 5d classic from 2005 is fine in the right hands, that is not what we are talking about here, we are talking about a much more comprehensive system that has more lenses for you to choose from when it comes to APS-C bodies, that are of significantly higher quality, and even compete with or downright outperform proper FF equivalent lenses, worth 3 times as much, at a much better price. 

I know what you meant by ecosystem.

 

And I stand by what I meant. I tend to like Sony products.

 

Furthermore, I see nothing wrong with looking at Dxo. Every rating they've given for a product has lined up to my real life experiences. Quite literally every time I've liked the types of photos produced by a camera over another, it's had a higher dxomark score. Comparing that to bhp is idiotic. Dxomark doesn't just provide the overall score. they provide other numbers like iso performance. So looking at Dxo is closer to looking at the weight and whp of a car, instead of bhp. Sure it doesn't give the whole picture, but whp and weight is as close to the whole picture as you're going to get on paper, and is pretty accurate representation to boot.

 

Furthermore, I feel like getting into this has been the equivalent of getting into "Hey should I buy a Tacoma or a Wrangler?" because just searching around, I'm seeing a lot of fanboying. Like this I just found on a thread discussing the a6500 vs X-T2... "On x-trans 24mp aps-c every single Fuji lens will outperform the Sony. The x-trans 24mp has the same resolution of a 38-40mp sensor"

lmao. I don't believe that. And if its so good, why do I not see professional reviewers comparing the 2, and only see it done on forums?

 

Anyways, at this point I'd like to know if anyone has suggestions for a daily zoom lens, *and* a wide angle, large aperture prime(or zoom) that both come in under 1000 for FE mount?

[xQubeZx]

1 hour ago, monarchco said:

I know what you meant by ecosystem.

 

And I stand by what I meant. I tend to like Sony products.

 

Furthermore, I see nothing wrong with looking at Dxo. Every rating they've given for a product has lined up to my real life experiences. Quite literally every time I've liked the types of photos produced by a camera over another, it's had a higher dxomark score. Comparing that to bhp is idiotic. Dxomark doesn't just provide the overall score. they provide other numbers like iso performance. So looking at Dxo is closer to looking at the weight and whp of a car, instead of bhp. Sure it doesn't give the whole picture, but whp and weight is as close to the whole picture as you're going to get on paper, and is pretty accurate representation to boot.

 

Furthermore, I feel like getting into this has been the equivalent of getting into "Hey should I buy a Tacoma or a Wrangler?" because just searching around, I'm seeing a lot of fanboying. Like this I just found on a thread discussing the a6500 vs X-T2... "On x-trans 24mp aps-c every single Fuji lens will outperform the Sony. The x-trans 24mp has the same resolution of a 38-40mp sensor"

lmao. I don't believe that. And if its so good, why do I not see professional reviewers comparing the 2, and only see it done on forums?

 

Anyways, at this point I'd like to know if anyone has suggestions for a daily zoom lens, *and* a wide angle, large aperture prime(or zoom) that both come in under 1000 for FE mount?

The new Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 is under 1000us and is a Sony FE mount. Would go great together with an A7ii or any A7 body really. Costs 800US I belive. If you need to go cheaper a used 24-105 or 24-70 f/4 is the only good option imo as I don’t think the 28-70 f3.5-5.6 is worth it. Wide angle lens the Samyang 14 f/2.8 is good. The MF version can be found used often for 200-300US, new it goes for ~400us if I remember right.

 

And btw about the A6300 vs A6500 the sensor stabalizstion is not worth almost twice the price for you as almost all you shoot could be used with a tripod. I would only get the A6500 over a A6300 if you shoot a lot of action sports or tons of portraits with shallow dof lenses. 

[cc143]

1 hour ago, monarchco said:

I know what you meant by ecosystem.

 

And I stand by what I meant. I tend to like Sony products.

 

Furthermore, I see nothing wrong with looking at Dxo. Every rating they've given for a product has lined up to my real life experiences. Quite literally every time I've liked the types of photos produced by a camera over another, it's had a higher dxomark score. Comparing that to bhp is idiotic. Dxomark doesn't just provide the overall score. they provide other numbers like iso performance. So looking at Dxo is closer to looking at the weight and whp of a car, instead of bhp. Sure it doesn't give the whole picture, but whp and weight is as close to the whole picture as you're going to get on paper, and is pretty accurate representation to boot.

 

Furthermore, I feel like getting into this has been the equivalent of getting into "Hey should I buy a Tacoma or a Wrangler?" because just searching around, I'm seeing a lot of fanboying. Like this I just found on a thread discussing the a6500 vs X-T2... "On x-trans 24mp aps-c every single Fuji lens will outperform the Sony. The x-trans 24mp has the same resolution of a 38-40mp sensor"

lmao. I don't believe that. And if its so good, why do I not see professional reviewers comparing the 2, and only see it done on forums?

 

Anyways, at this point I'd like to know if anyone has suggestions for a daily zoom lens, *and* a wide angle, large aperture prime(or zoom) that both come in under 1000 for FE mount?

I am a fanboy in some respects, but it has no bearing in what I'm saying. I've been using Canon for 15 years, my first recommendation was Nikon and now I'm recommending fuji, I've also recommended panasonic, Sony, and every conceivable camera brand out there. Give me a break. 

 

Anyway, its your money, you can do whatever you want with it, I know a fair bit about cars and cameras and what I gave you was a fair comparison. Professional reviewers are otherwise constrained and not always the best judges, I liked the a6000 when trying it out, I got it and got rid of it 1 month after. Actual photographers have more experience in some regards.

 

What that idiot was probably talking about is sharpness, xtrans sensors have no AA filters, so they tend to produce sharper images, its sort of the same effect as if you mount a 70-200 on a 5d which has a 12mp sensor, you may get similarly sharp images to using a 55-250 on an 800d even though it has 24mps. 

 

Anyway as I said, its your money, so for the FE mount (so FF?) I don't think you'd find anything, since the 16-35s are quite expensive. The 16mm f/1.4 art is a good choice for a wideangle prime, although only for crop sensors. There's some manual focus stuff, like the laowa 15mm f/2 and some samyang/rokinon stuff. 

 

The best daily zoom lens for sony FE I can think of is probably the 28-75mm f/2.8 from tamron, although its not really that wide at 28mm, especially if you mount it on an aps-c, field of view is closer to 40mm. 

 

Sigma have an FE 20mm f/1.4 art and I swear by those lenses on my Canon, but will probably cost close to $900. 

 

There is a caviat to the whole sony aps-c lens thing, basically, because they have to take into account IBIS for the circle of projection, it has been reported for some lenses to actually be able to give the full FOV on a FF camera, although I'd assume the camera's software would immediately go into crop mode once an aps-c lens is mounted. So a 10-18mm might work ok on a FF camera, but I can't be sure. 

[monarchco]

4 hours ago, cc143 said:

I am a fanboy in some respects, but it has no bearing in what I'm saying. I've been using Canon for 15 years, my first recommendation was Nikon and now I'm recommending fuji, I've also recommended panasonic, Sony, and every conceivable camera brand out there. Give me a break. 

 

Anyway, its your money, you can do whatever you want with it, I know a fair bit about cars and cameras and what I gave you was a fair comparison. Professional reviewers are otherwise constrained and not always the best judges, I liked the a6000 when trying it out, I got it and got rid of it 1 month after. Actual photographers have more experience in some regards.

 

What that idiot was probably talking about is sharpness, xtrans sensors have no AA filters, so they tend to produce sharper images, its sort of the same effect as if you mount a 70-200 on a 5d which has a 12mp sensor, you may get similarly sharp images to using a 55-250 on an 800d even though it has 24mps. 

 

Anyway as I said, its your money, so for the FE mount (so FF?) I don't think you'd find anything, since the 16-35s are quite expensive. The 16mm f/1.4 art is a good choice for a wideangle prime, although only for crop sensors. There's some manual focus stuff, like the laowa 15mm f/2 and some samyang/rokinon stuff. 

 

The best daily zoom lens for sony FE I can think of is probably the 28-75mm f/2.8 from tamron, although its not really that wide at 28mm, especially if you mount it on an aps-c, field of view is closer to 40mm. 

 

Sigma have an FE 20mm f/1.4 art and I swear by those lenses on my Canon, but will probably cost close to $900. 

 

There is a caviat to the whole sony aps-c lens thing, basically, because they have to take into account IBIS for the circle of projection, it has been reported for some lenses to actually be able to give the full FOV on a FF camera, although I'd assume the camera's software would immediately go into crop mode once an aps-c lens is mounted. So a 10-18mm might work ok on a FF camera, but I can't be sure. 

I actually found a handful of lenses. Mostly prime, and some of them have very good ratings:

Sony FE 28mm f/2 rated VERY well.

The kit Sony 28-70mm

Sony FE 50mm f/1.8 said to be sharp and nice, but has slow AF when used for af-s. 

& the 14mm listed below.

 

The 28-75mm f/2.8 from tamron is still in pre-order, & too much.

Sigma has both a 20mm 1.4 and 24mm 1.4, both are the same price as the tamron @ 800$ 

At some point I'll consider upgrading to those. 

Yes. Sony full frames automatically go into "crop mode". But at least I can still use apsc lenses if I want. I hear other companies don't have the cross-compatibility at all.

4 hours ago, xQubeZx said:

Samyang 14 f/2.8 is good

I currently have the Rokinon in my cart. What is the difference, price is nearly identical? The Rokinon has a higher review score, but otherwise they seem identical, even by looks.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018382-REG/samyang_sy14m_e_14mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018522-REG/rokinon_fe14m_e_14mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

 

P.S. The A6300 is 800-900 at us retailers, while the A6500 is 1100. Not that big of a difference.

[monarchco]

btw, @cc143

 

Sigma now makes a lot of their Art series for Sony FE mount. 

[xQubeZx]

3 hours ago, monarchco said:

I actually found a handful of lenses. Mostly prime, and some of them have very good ratings:

Sony FE 28mm f/2 rated VERY well.

The kit Sony 28-70mm

Sony FE 50mm f/1.8 said to be sharp and nice, but has slow AF when used for af-s. 

& the 14mm listed below.

 

The 28-75mm f/2.8 from tamron is still in pre-order, & too much.

Sigma has both a 20mm 1.4 and 24mm 1.4, both are the same price as the tamron @ 800$ 

At some point I'll consider upgrading to those. 

Yes. Sony full frames automatically go into "crop mode". But at least I can still use apsc lenses if I want. I hear other companies don't have the cross-compatibility at all.

I currently have the Rokinon in my cart. What is the difference, price is nearly identical? The Rokinon has a higher review score, but otherwise they seem identical, even by looks.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018382-REG/samyang_sy14m_e_14mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018522-REG/rokinon_fe14m_e_14mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

 

P.S. The A6300 is 800-900 at us retailers, while the A6500 is 1100. Not that big of a difference.

Its the same lens. Just a rebrand thing. No clue why they do it that way but the lenses are called different in different parts of the world or on differenet markets. But it is still the same damn lens. 

 

You can use aps-c lenses as you say on a sony FE but most will have so much vignette that you need to use the crop function built in and then you just get like 10-12 usable MP, thats the biggest drawback. If going FF then invest in FF glass from the start. 

 

And the Sigma art series exists for Sony FE now as you say, and they are very well priced primes. I’m going to buy the 24mm f/1.4 myself when I get my pay (after a lot of 12hour shifts, gonna be rich haha). It will be like an 35mm on my a6000 and work perfectly once I get an A7 series body. Remember the Sony version of a lens like Sigmas primes cost at least twice as much. 

[monarchco]

1 hour ago, xQubeZx said:

Its the same lens. Just a rebrand thing. No clue why they do it that way but the lenses are called different in different parts of the world or on differenet markets. But it is still the same damn lens. 

 

You can use aps-c lenses as you say on a sony FE but most will have so much vignette that you need to use the crop function built in and then you just get like 10-12 usable MP, thats the biggest drawback. If going FF then invest in FF glass from the start. 

 

And the Sigma art series exists for Sony FE now as you say, and they are very well priced primes. I’m going to buy the 24mm f/1.4 myself when I get my pay (after a lot of 12hour shifts, gonna be rich haha). It will be like an 35mm on my a6000 and work perfectly once I get an A7 series body. Remember the Sony version of a lens like Sigmas primes cost at least twice as much. 

Yeah I noticed that. I think a lot of that is the "Sony" lenses are pretty cheap(lots around 200-400$ with a few up around 500), but the "Sony Carl Zeiss" are the really expensive ones.

 

 

[cc143]

5 hours ago, monarchco said:

I actually found a handful of lenses. Mostly prime, and some of them have very good ratings:

Sony FE 28mm f/2 rated VERY well.

The kit Sony 28-70mm

Sony FE 50mm f/1.8 said to be sharp and nice, but has slow AF when used for af-s. 

& the 14mm listed below.

 

The 28-75mm f/2.8 from tamron is still in pre-order, & too much.

Sigma has both a 20mm 1.4 and 24mm 1.4, both are the same price as the tamron @ 800$ 

At some point I'll consider upgrading to those. 

Yes. Sony full frames automatically go into "crop mode". But at least I can still use apsc lenses if I want. I hear other companies don't have the cross-compatibility at all.

I currently have the Rokinon in my cart. What is the difference, price is nearly identical? The Rokinon has a higher review score, but otherwise they seem identical, even by looks.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018382-REG/samyang_sy14m_e_14mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1018522-REG/rokinon_fe14m_e_14mm_f_2_8_ed_as.html

 

P.S. The A6300 is 800-900 at us retailers, while the A6500 is 1100. Not that big of a difference.

Haven't used it 

Used it a couple of times, unimpressive as a kit lens imo, but don't have that much experience with it. 

Used it a couple of times on a friends a7rii...basically what it says on the tin, i.e. cheap 50mm. 

 

Yes they are expensive, but nowhere near as expensive as a brand name equivalent and very good quality. 

 

There's also an AF series by Samyang, dont know if that is what you are looking at or mf ones. 

 

Again though, even the 28mm would give you an almost 40mm FOV, that is really not that wide. As far as 24 and 35mm equivalents are concerned, your options are more limited. Unless you are looking at an a7? 

 

[monarchco]

5 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Haven't used it 

Used it a couple of times, unimpressive as a kit lens imo, but don't have that much experience with it. 

Used it a couple of times on a friends a7rii...basically what it says on the tin, i.e. cheap 50mm. 

 

Yes they are expensive, but nowhere near as expensive as a brand name equivalent and very good quality. 

 

There's also an AF series by Samyang, dont know if that is what you are looking at or mf ones. 

 

Again though, even the 28mm would give you an almost 40mm FOV, that is really not that wide. As far as 24 and 35mm equivalents are concerned, your options are more limited. Unless you are looking at an a7? 

 

Yes. I'm looking at full frame because I found the budget to be able to do a full frame A7.

 

Makes the entire APSC and 6500vsWhatever discussion null haha.

[cc143]

1 minute ago, monarchco said:

Yes. I'm looking at full frame because I found the budget to be able to do a full frame A7.

Are we talking original a7? a72/3? 

 

That does change things, not sure id go with the 28-70 at all, I would stick with a couple of primes and then get a better 24-70 or 24-105 down the line if it were necessary. The 35mm is probably the safest bet, very versatile focal length.

[monarchco]

12 minutes ago, cc143 said:

Are we talking original a7? a72/3? 

 

That does change things, not sure id go with the 28-70 at all, I would stick with a couple of primes and then get a better 24-70 or 24-105 down the line if it were necessary. The 35mm is probably the safest bet, very versatile focal length.

I think the extra 200$ for the 28-70, which normally retails at 400, is worth it until I upgrade it. I'm also picking up the 24 f1.4 Sigma Art for FE

And I'm going all the way for Sony's newest shiniest toy(The A7 iii).

 

https://www.dxomark.com/sony-a7-iii-low-light-performer/

https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/08/sony-a7-iii-review-peerless-full-frame-camera/

among other reviews

 

 

This is pretty much the upgrade I'm doing lmao.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-A7-III-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-IV

 

I also bumped up Pelican size. A 2300 should be large enough to fit the camera, a half a dozen of so lenses, everything for my GoPro 6's, and a few other things.

[cc143]

5 hours ago, monarchco said:

I think the extra 200$ for the 28-70, which normally retails at 400, is worth it until I upgrade it. I'm also picking up the 24 f1.4 Sigma Art for FE

And I'm going all the way for Sony's newest shiniest toy(The A7 iii).

 

https://www.dxomark.com/sony-a7-iii-low-light-performer/

https://www.engadget.com/2018/05/08/sony-a7-iii-review-peerless-full-frame-camera/

among other reviews

 

 

This is pretty much the upgrade I'm doing lmao.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Sony-Alpha-A7-III-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-IV

 

I also bumped up Pelican size. A 2300 should be large enough to fit the camera, a half a dozen of so lenses, everything for my GoPro 6's, and a few other things.

If you're doing that wait 2 months. Photokina is in september and bothb Canon and nikon are expected to be releasing FF mirrorless cameras, which for nkon at least would be at the $2000 range i.e. similarly priced to the a73. If anything, prices on the a73 may decrease, although I do think that whatever they come up with will probably be substantial. 

[EsaT]

On 7/3/2018 at 10:18 AM, monarchco said:

Larger static objects against a variety of backgrounds. From nighttime with limited lighting, to normal day nature backgrounds(e.g. truck in forest), but also A LOT of photos of vehicles in snow. So dynamic range is very important.

Actually unless photographed objects are black/dark coloured snow doesn't really increase dynamic range: Its reflections give superb "fill light" to shadows.

Especially outside direct sunlight that reflected light creates very smooth illumination.

Direct sunlight without reflecting fill light in snowless environment is lot harder light.

(though some light coloured sand also gives nice illumination)

 

Do you want big depth of field with both object and background in focus, or only object in focus with blurred background?

If wanting bigger depth of fields bigger formats easily loose bigger sensor size advantage in light gathering.

Because for same DOF lens is stopped down to equally much smaller aperture than sensor has more area.

Either needing increase of exposure time or ISO to compensate slower f-ratio.

[monarchco]

15 hours ago, EsaT said:

Actually unless photographed objects are black/dark coloured snow doesn't really increase dynamic range

https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewdepaula/2012/12/21/top-10-most-popular-car-colors/#3f6716187c80

 

Trees are also dark. Especially when thick snow has fallen and stays on the tree branches producing much darker shadows than normal.

 

[monarchco]

Ended up with an a7iii and mostly Sigma glass. Very happy with it.