Help choosing mirrorless camera and lens system

[Gary A.]

I shoot Fuji. I find Fuji to be a great compromise between the IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. For what I shoot and how I shoot, the IQ differences between FF and APS-C are insignificant.

 

[Bokeh Enthusiast]

I shoot Fuji. I find Fuji to be a great compromise between the IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. For what I shoot and how I shoot, the IQ differences between FF and APS-C are insignificant.

Gary - What kind of lens do you use with your Fuji? Any opinions on the X-Pro2?

 

[Bokeh Enthusiast]

I have an a7r. I shoot with an nex7. Personally, i think sony can only improve in ux ui and af since the nex years. From here on out, it's glass. I think designing and manufacturing pro level glasses at consumer prices will be the next frontier.

If you get an a7 ii, get an a7r ii, which can reap the benefits of fe and e lenses. If not, get the a6300 if you want affordable lenses.

Only get the a7ii if you prefer its ergo over the a7. Otherwise, ibis is a gimmick only useful on still objects in low light. A good tripod would do the same job and at a lower cost.

Dont let new lenses fool you, too. Sony knows its strength. Legacy mf lense. Why else release a new model with ibis a year after a flagship release?

IronMaskDuval - The A7RII is a little bit too pricy for me. Is the FE lens system worth getting into with either the A7 or A7II? Btw, IronMaskDuval - hilarious character from One Piece

 

[IronMaskDuval]

Haha. You noticed.

The fe is worth it for the a7 and a7r. I have both fuji and sony, and they are bith excellent with their native lenses. Legacy lenses however, just perform better on sony.

I have an a7r. I shoot with an nex7. Personally, i think sony can only improve in ux ui and af since the nex years. From here on out, it's glass. I think designing and manufacturing pro level glasses at consumer prices will be the next frontier.

If you get an a7 ii, get an a7r ii, which can reap the benefits of fe and e lenses. If not, get the a6300 if you want affordable lenses.

Only get the a7ii if you prefer its ergo over the a7. Otherwise, ibis is a gimmick only useful on still objects in low light. A good tripod would do the same job and at a lower cost.

Dont let new lenses fool you, too. Sony knows its strength. Legacy mf lense. Why else release a new model with ibis a year after a flagship release?

IronMaskDuval - The A7RII is a little bit too pricy for me. Is the FE lens system worth getting into with either the A7 or A7II? Btw, IronMaskDuval - hilarious character from One Piece

 

[Gary A.]

I shoot Fuji. I find Fuji to be a great compromise between the IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. For what I shoot and how I shoot, the IQ differences between FF and APS-C are insignificant.

Gary - What kind of lens do you use with your Fuji? Any opinions on the X-Pro2?

I have mostly Fujinon lenses:

1. 10-24
2. 16-55
3. 18-55 (kit)
4. 50-140
5. 55-200
6. 100-400
7. 12mm Zeiss
8. 32mm Zeiss
9. 50mm Zeiss (macro)
10. 27mm (pancake)

The 24MP sensor on the XP2 has very good IQ and maybe a stop better low light capability than the older 16MP sensor. It still delivers the wonderful Fuji IQ, the camera is very solid and performs well with good AF. If you're not a rangefinder guy, you're paying a lot of money for a feature that you'll rarely use ... wait for the XT2. Fuji cameras have a few different way to focus manually, zoom, split image and peak and they all seem to work. I generally don't manual focus nor do I use legacy glass so I have little experience and expertise in this arena.

My better half also shoots Fuji. She has: 18-55, 35mm, 60mm (macro) and 55-200.

 

[Bokeh Enthusiast]

Haha. You noticed.

The fe is worth it for the a7 and a7r. I have both fuji and sony, and they are bith excellent with their native lenses. Legacy lenses however, just perform better on sony.

I have an a7r. I shoot with an nex7. Personally, i think sony can only improve in ux ui and af since the nex years. From here on out, it's glass. I think designing and manufacturing pro level glasses at consumer prices will be the next frontier.

If you get an a7 ii, get an a7r ii, which can reap the benefits of fe and e lenses. If not, get the a6300 if you want affordable lenses.

Only get the a7ii if you prefer its ergo over the a7. Otherwise, ibis is a gimmick only useful on still objects in low light. A good tripod would do the same job and at a lower cost.

Dont let new lenses fool you, too. Sony knows its strength. Legacy mf lense. Why else release a new model with ibis a year after a flagship release?

IronMaskDuval - The A7RII is a little bit too pricy for me. Is the FE lens system worth getting into with either the A7 or A7II? Btw, IronMaskDuval - hilarious character from One Piece

Thanks. Quick question. What do you mean by legacy lenses?

 

[Bokeh Enthusiast]

I shoot Fuji. I find Fuji to be a great compromise between the IQ of FF and the small footprint of MFT. For what I shoot and how I shoot, the IQ differences between FF and APS-C are insignificant.

Gary - What kind of lens do you use with your Fuji? Any opinions on the X-Pro2?

I have mostly Fujinon lenses:

1. 10-24
2. 16-55
3. 18-55 (kit)
4. 50-140
5. 55-200
6. 100-400
7. 12mm Zeiss
8. 32mm Zeiss
9. 50mm Zeiss (macro)
10. 27mm (pancake)

The 24MP sensor on the XP2 has very good IQ and maybe a stop better low light capability than the older 16MP sensor. It still delivers the wonderful Fuji IQ, the camera is very solid and performs well with good AF. If you're not a rangefinder guy, you're paying a lot of money for a feature that you'll rarely use ... wait for the XT2. Fuji cameras have a few different way to focus manually, zoom, split image and peak and they all seem to work. I generally don't manual focus nor do I use legacy glass so I have little experience and expertise in this arena.

My better half also shoots Fuji. She has: 18-55, 35mm, 60mm (macro) and 55-200.

Not sure if I'm a rangefinder guy yet since I'm fairly novice. I played a bit with my friend's Fuji and I liked that it has a bunch of easily accessible settings like ISO, shutter speed, EV that I could play with and learn from. In your experience, do you rate the Fuji's about the Sony's in image quality?

 

[cherylynne1]

Haha. You noticed.

The fe is worth it for the a7 and a7r. I have both fuji and sony, and they are bith excellent with their native lenses. Legacy lenses however, just perform better on sony.

I have an a7r. I shoot with an nex7. Personally, i think sony can only improve in ux ui and af since the nex years. From here on out, it's glass. I think designing and manufacturing pro level glasses at consumer prices will be the next frontier.

If you get an a7 ii, get an a7r ii, which can reap the benefits of fe and e lenses. If not, get the a6300 if you want affordable lenses.

Only get the a7ii if you prefer its ergo over the a7. Otherwise, ibis is a gimmick only useful on still objects in low light. A good tripod would do the same job and at a lower cost.

Dont let new lenses fool you, too. Sony knows its strength. Legacy mf lense. Why else release a new model with ibis a year after a flagship release?

IronMaskDuval - The A7RII is a little bit too pricy for me. Is the FE lens system worth getting into with either the A7 or A7II? Btw, IronMaskDuval - hilarious character from One Piece

Thanks. Quick question. What do you mean by legacy lenses?

It's actually a bit of debate as to what qualifies as a "legacy" lens, but the most common definition is that it's one of the old awesome manual focus lenses from the film days that no one's been able to really use with digital until mirrorless cameras came out. It can also mean any lens from any camera that you use an adapter with to make work with a mirrorless camera.

Mirrorless cameras have some great tools for manual focusing, like focus peaking. You can try this feature out even with native autofocusing lenses. Just turn on manual focus with focus peaking and turn the wheel on the lens. As the focus moves, the area that's in focus will turn bright red so you know what's in focus. It makes manual focus a whole lot less scary.

I don't really know the differences between Sony and Fuji as far as adapted lenses go, but if IronMaskDuval says Sony's good at it, I'd trust him.

 

[kalgra]

I'm kind of surprised no one mentioned the Sony A7s. In the mirrorless world isn't the A7s kind of the best thing out there in terms of low light and high iso performance?

I'm a novice as well so perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about, or perhaps the A7s does not meet the other criteria listed very well? I have never had the opertunity to use an A7s so maybe it's too specialized, I'm sure someone here can elaborate more.

From the bit of research I have done if you are are a serious low light or night time photographer the A7s is kind of the go to followed closely by Nikon no?

 

[pixmedic]

I'm kind of surprised no one mentioned the Sony A7s. In the mirrorless world isn't the A7s kind of the best thing out there in terms of low light and high iso performance?

I'm a novice as well so perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about, or perhaps the A7s does not meet the other criteria listed very well? I have never had the opertunity to use an A7s so maybe it's too specialized, I'm sure someone here can elaborate more.

From the bit of research I have done if you are are a serious low light or night time photographer the A7s is kind of the go to followed closely by Nikon no?

the a7s is only 12MP.
most people think anything under 24MP is not worth getting now.

 

[kalgra]

the a7s is only 12MP.
most people think anything under 24MP is not worth getting now.

I guess I can see that. I knew the A7s was much Lower on the pixels due to their larger size. I will admit I'm not well educated in the technical side of pixel/sensor technology. I know generally speaking the higher the megapixel count the more capability you have to crop in post or to enlarge, I assume that also means in general the higher the pixel count the smaller the pixels are and therefore the less low light performance they will have?

Perhaps the a7s is more of a specialty camera for things like astrophotography? I want to say I watched more than a couple reviews of the A7s being done by wedding photographers but now that I think of I also want to say they were using it primarily for low light video so maybe that's where the A7s shines?

Anyway I'm just rambling, thanks for your reply!

 

[goodguy]

I'm kind of surprised no one mentioned the Sony A7s. In the mirrorless world isn't the A7s kind of the best thing out there in terms of low light and high iso performance?

Actually the Nikon D5 is now the king of the hill low light beast in the world of photography today.
Tomorrow this might change but today its the kind

 

[IronMaskDuval]

By Legacy lenses, I am referring to old dslr lenses. Modern lenses would work just as well, but if you are willing to spend that much, then just go with native Sony lenses.

Haha. You noticed.

The fe is worth it for the a7 and a7r. I have both fuji and sony, and they are bith excellent with their native lenses. Legacy lenses however, just perform better on sony.

I have an a7r. I shoot with an nex7. Personally, i think sony can only improve in ux ui and af since the nex years. From here on out, it's glass. I think designing and manufacturing pro level glasses at consumer prices will be the next frontier.

If you get an a7 ii, get an a7r ii, which can reap the benefits of fe and e lenses. If not, get the a6300 if you want affordable lenses.

Only get the a7ii if you prefer its ergo over the a7. Otherwise, ibis is a gimmick only useful on still objects in low light. A good tripod would do the same job and at a lower cost.

Dont let new lenses fool you, too. Sony knows its strength. Legacy mf lense. Why else release a new model with ibis a year after a flagship release?

IronMaskDuval - The A7RII is a little bit too pricy for me. Is the FE lens system worth getting into with either the A7 or A7II? Btw, IronMaskDuval - hilarious character from One Piece

Thanks. Quick question. What do you mean by legacy lenses?

It's actually a bit of debate as to what qualifies as a "legacy" lens, but the most common definition is that it's one of the old awesome manual focus lenses from the film days that no one's been able to really use with digital until mirrorless cameras came out. It can also mean any lens from any camera that you use an adapter with to make work with a mirrorless camera.

Mirrorless cameras have some great tools for manual focusing, like focus peaking. You can try this feature out even with native autofocusing lenses. Just turn on manual focus with focus peaking and turn the wheel on the lens. As the focus moves, the area that's in focus will turn bright red so you know what's in focus. It makes manual focus a whole lot less scary.

I don't really know the differences between Sony and Fuji as far as adapted lenses go, but if IronMaskDuval says Sony's good at it, I'd trust him.

 

[beagle100]

I'm kind of surprised no?

the a7s is only 12MP.
most people think anything under 24MP is not worth getting now.

yep, if it doesn't have 26 million megapixels it's all junk
(Marketing 101)
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[Bokeh Enthusiast]

I'm kind of surprised no?

the a7s is only 12MP.
most people think anything under 24MP is not worth getting now.

yep, if it doesn't have 26 million megapixels it's all junk
(Marketing 101)
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

I did consider the A7s! It is soo much more expensive though...