Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I travel with my 5D with my 35 all over, nothing else. Everything else stays at home....I'm tempted to order this Sony actually.
The "New Gear/Willy Waving" thread
- Thread starter Fusion
- Start date
I travel with my 5D with my 35 all over, nothing else. Everything else stays at home....I'm tempted to order this Sony actually.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Actually, the new RX1R II is missing 1 thing that i thought it would have.
The 5 axis stabilisation that is found on its bigger brother.
The 5 axis stabilisation that is found on its bigger brother.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 6,453
- Location
- Oxfordshire
Wait till the mk3.
There is a reason 35mm primes are so popular, it is a f at sic focal length for many things and a slight crop also gets you to standard 50mm. It just isn't for me, I like to force the perspective to the extremes.
The missing 5 axis stabilization is likely due to its size. The new A7 whatever with added 5-axis IS got a lot bigger and heavier to be more or less 6D/750D size.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I know why the 35mm is so popular DP...I am the only who has been singing its praises for about 7 years 
As for the size, they'll squeeze it in eventually, every tech gets miniaturise in time.
As for the size, they'll squeeze it in eventually, every tech gets miniaturise in time.
Yeah thats a good point, I had assumed it had that too but upon checking the specs it is missing.
What are you guys looking at in the smaller camera market, is there such a thing as a reasonably priced, high quality compact with all the things we are wishing for or does it not exist yet?
Anyone here have the 100-400 Mk2? Since moving to FF, I'm finding 200mm (my longest focal length) just doesn't cut it for motorsports and such like. I'm off to Le Mans again next June and my plan is to get something longer whilst not breaking the bank and the 100-400 II looks stunning.
Currently have a 2x Mk3 which I use occasionally with the 70-200 and it works remarkably well but the 100-400 looks in a different league so I'd flog the extender and put that towards it.
Currently have a 2x Mk3 which I use occasionally with the 70-200 and it works remarkably well but the 100-400 looks in a different league so I'd flog the extender and put that towards it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
nevermind...need to read post properly lol
The Sony RX1/R Mark I or Mark II and the Leica Q are all full frame, single focal length (35mm) compact cameras, albeit you might need quite big pockets. They're all very expensive, like a couple of grand expensive. Build quality and image quality are superb, they have Leica or Zeiss T* lenses, which are some of the best on the market.
The Ricoh GR Mark I and Mark II along with the Nikon Coolpix A are APS-c sensors but again are only single focal length (28mm) cameras. They're tiny pocketable cameras with really good sensors. The GR Mark II is a refresh model but all of them are really getting a little long in the tooth. They all fit in a small pocket and the GR is legendary as a 'street' photographers camera.
The Sony RX100 Mark I, II, III and IV are all 20 megapixel 1" sensor cameras with 28-100mm zoom lenses in the case of the Mark I and II, a 24-70mm zoom lens in the case of the Mark III and IV. The Mark IV has an electronic view finder but is £799!
There are others of course, The Canon G1X, the Fuji X100 series (albeit they are more Rangefinder size than a compact) and I'm fairly certain that Panasonic probably do some really nice compact sized cameras along with Olympus, but I'm not really up to speed with those two brands.
I would love a camera with Leica build quality, a full frame sensor, a Zeiss T* lens with perhaps a zoom range of 24mm to 150mm at f/2.0, a built in EVF, tiltable rear screen, a battery life that would give around 500 shots, a built in flash, waterproof sealing, Image stabilisation, magnesium alloy body and as pocketable as a Sony RX100. If they could get this on sale around £400 I would buy one
Problem is if you tried stuffing that sort of tech into a small body it wouldn't fit, primarily due to Optical constraints, sensor sizes also dictate body size as well along with all the other gubbins you need to fit inside to make it work.
As a result, they're all compromises. The important thing to remember is that they're all tools, even DP's beloved Nikon Cameras and lenses. In some cases even DSLRs might not be up to the job, particularly in the world of fashion advertising, where you probably would have to move up to Digitial Medium Format.
EDIT - I think of all the Cameras I've listed above, the Sony RX100 series (dependant on how much you want to spend) are probably at the sweet spot of compact cameras at the moment.
Last edited:
I upgraded from a 5D2 with a Sigma 70-200 f2.8 w. 1.4TC to a 5d3 and the 100-400L II... it broke the bank but it's worth it! Also works with the Sigma 1.4TC (f8) for that little bit more reach.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
The Sony RX1/R Mark I or Mark II and the Leica Q are all full frame, single focal length (35mm) compact cameras, albeit you might need quite big pockets. They're all very expensive, like a couple of grand expensive. Build quality and image quality are superb, they have Leica or Zeiss T* lenses, which are some of the best on the market.
The Ricoh GR Mark I and Mark II along with the Nikon Coolpix A are APS-c sensors but again are only single focal length (28mm) cameras. They're tiny pocketable cameras with really good sensors. The GR Mark II is a refresh model but all of them are really getting a little long in the tooth. They all fit in a small pocket and the GR is legendary as a 'street' photographers camera.
The Sony RX100 Mark I, II, III and IV are all 20 megapixel 1" sensor cameras with 28-100mm zoom lenses in the case of the Mark I and II, a 24-70mm zoom lens in the case of the Mark III and IV. The Mark IV has an electronic view finder but is £799!
There are others of course, The Canon G1X, the Fuji X100 series (albeit they are more Rangefinder size than a compact) and I'm fairly certain that Panasonic probably do some really nice compact sized cameras along with Olympus, but I'm not really up to speed with those two brands.
I would love a camera with Leica build quality, a full frame sensor, a Zeiss T* lens with perhaps a zoom range of 24mm to 150mm at f/2.0, a built in EVF, tiltable rear screen, a battery life that would give around 500 shots, a built in flash, waterproof sealing, Image stabilisation, magnesium alloy body and as pocketable as a Sony RX100. If they could get this on sale around £400 I would buy one
Problem is if you tried stuffing that sort of tech into a small body it wouldn't fit, primarily due to Optical constraints, sensor sizes also dictate body size as well along with all the other gubbins you need to fit inside to make it work.
As a result, they're all compromises. The important thing to remember is that they're all tools, even DP's beloved Nikon Cameras and lenses. In some cases even DSLRs might not be up to the job, particularly in the world of fashion advertising, where you probably would have to move up to Digitial Medium Format.
EDIT - I think of all the Cameras I've listed above, the Sony RX100 series (dependant on how much you want to spend) are probably at the sweet spot of compact cameras at the moment.
Take away the budget cap, the Sony RX1Rii trumps all for me in the compact sense.
The question is, is it twice as good as the Fuji's offering, which really is the main rival for me. I really need to try them all in person.
I know why the 35mm is so popular DP...I am the only who has been singing its praises for about 7 years
As for the size, they'll squeeze it in eventually, every tech gets miniaturise in time.
Know, my point was just that. 35mm is fantastic for some people for certain situations (maybe a majority of their shooting), for others it is not so interesting. 35mm is on the edge of the wide end I like, to the extent I might buy the sigma ART or tamron or Nikon versions but it is much lower priority for me. 50mm on FF is the dead zone for me, the further away from that the mor interesting the possibilities but the harder it is too achieve a pleasing composition at the wider end and the harder the technique in the long end.
Depends what you want.
I have a small Olympus epm2 as my "compact", it fits in my trouser pockets (just) and easily in a jacket pocket, not noticeable in a back back, shoulder bag etc. It gives me DSLR quality photos, focus for static subject is fast and accurate. It has a huge selection of lenses, that are all mostly very small and very good.
It doesn't shoot sport to professional levels, I can't photograph a candle lit dinner and be entirely noise free, I can't get paper thin DoF, or pull 5 stop of shadow detail. That is the tradeoff and it is definitely worth it as a backup.
If I was to print an 8x10" from my d800 and my Olympus m43 under reasonable lighting I wouldn't be able to tell them apart from a standard viewing distance. There is definitely less detail when you compare 100% and there is less shadow detail (but that is all relative, there is as much shadow detail as a canon 5Dmk3). I can shoot the D800 at ISO 6400 and not care but I limit the Olympus to 1600, but then it has a good sensor based IS that I enable in low light.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I never used to like the 50mm that much. It felt neither here or there because I was so used to doing the whole 35/85 combo on 2 cameras at weddings.
Then basically one day, I thought, sod it, I will learn, i mean really learn that focal length. I used it for 2 weeks straight on my travels. Something that I do, I use 1 lens the whole trip, if I don't get all the pics that I may have got with other lenses, so be it. It's the time to learn your equipment in all situations, and I did and since then I use the 50mm a lot more.
I now use it for table decor, food, dress, shoes, pretty everything, i mean i could use it before but i definitely know the focal length better. There are times when the 50mm is just right. You want that slightly more tighter focal length, to isolate the subject without the clutter in the area but not as close as the 85mm.
As you can see...I am quite comfortable these days with a 50mm.
Last edited:
I need to learn to love 50mm...since getting the Sigma 35mm it's not left the camera. This may be coupled with the fact i have a Canon 50mm 1.4 which pales in comparison. I just need to get a second body and keep it on it and stick with it.
Snapped up a 85mm 1.8 from eBay yesterday with the 20% off deals. £180. Bargain!
Now that i have, 16-35, 24-105, 35, 50, 85, 3 flashes, triggers, softboxes...i think it's time for another body.
Snapped up a 85mm 1.8 from eBay yesterday with the 20% off deals. £180. Bargain!
Now that i have, 16-35, 24-105, 35, 50, 85, 3 flashes, triggers, softboxes...i think it's time for another body.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,130
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
Well said.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 25,130
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
been telling u to get the a7r2! perfect travel camera and u don't even need to buy any lenses for it
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 75,916
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Don't get me wrong, 35 is still my go to lens if I only take one for travel, hence the rx1rii is right up my street but I don't shy away from the 50 like I used to before. You just got to use it and learn the focal length.