Thank you all for your helpful comments...for taking the time to respond too. I appreciate it. Still mulling it over. Part of what's driving me here (the decision to potentially switch) is my family and I have an upcoming trip to Memphis and will also go up to Nashville and it would be much more convenient to have an all in one - especially that is good-to-great quality. It would save space, weight, and the burden of switching lenses, etc.
Maybe what I should do, once I'm in Memphis, is go visit LensRentals and rent the Sony DSC-RX10 Mk IV from them for the week...hmm...decisions.
Thanks again!
Main reason - less cumbersome than carrying/transporting my Canon gear. Less weight in shooting. Great quality images. Stellar all-in-one Zeiss lens...etc. I have a Canon 7D w/battery grip. The 70-200mm f2.8L IS (mk I), an older 24-80mm f3.5-5.6USM, and the 10-18mm f4.0-5.6 USM IS. One thing I have read is that these Sony models "eat" batteries - in that, one charge doesn't last long. So I should be prepared to buy at least 2 extra batteries.
I'm looking for: a) any Hoggers that may have experience with any other Sony RX10 models. And b) general thoughts on other's who've paired down, either to 4/3rds systems, or other all-in-one type photo solutions. Thanks.
About me. I was born in the 60's and in 2010 was in a rollover accident that has had a negative and deleterious affect on my neck (tendons and musculature alike). I also have limited means to buy equipment - was planning on selling my Canon gear to fund the Sony. (If I ever get flush with funds, was planning to switch to the Pentax K-1 for a full frame rig anyway.) I am not a professional photographer, just a semi-serious enthusiast that has been shooting since I was a kid with my little Kodak Instamatic 110 camera...graduating to an Olympus OM PC in '85 then Canon EOS [620] when auto-focus came along. (Still have my Olympus.)
Junior wrote:
MAS24, the used Nikon 70-200 VRII I am is considering is the first generation VRII, not the VR or the current model. I have researched and I have found for the minimal condition I am willing to use I would be paying $1600-1700 at several reputable on-line sites: KEH, Roberts, BHPhoto, etc. I am willing to pay extra for the better lens if there is a difference or noticeable difference. Image quality and fast auto focus are most important to me. Thank you.
You should check out some reviews of the Tamron G2 version - as you are a Nikon shooter I would start with Matt Granger's hands-on review. Then also check out some others, like TDP (the-digital-picture.com), Dustin Abbott, Tony Northrup, DPReview, LensRentals, etc. By all accounts, the new Tamron is equally as good if not better than the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VR-II, nearly matching the newer, much more expensive Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8. And since the new Tamron is also compatible with their "Tap-in" console for adjustments and updates (without having to send the lens to Tamron), it kind of future proofs the lens too (at least from a compatibility standpoint as new camera models are introduced).
toptrainer wrote:
The funny thing is the lenses that I already have a really mainly for full frame cameras. I have a 70-200 2.8, a 17-70 2.8 and a 24-105f4.
Then you are all set! If you can, I would keep the 80d, and acquire the 5D Mk II.
Here's an idea - either a Nikon D810 paired with the 1.4G you currently have. Or a Sony A7R II, Metabones (most recent version) adapter, and the Canon 35mm f/1.4L Mk II (or paired with Canon's 5D Mk IV or DX Mk II). Or I would check out a Fuji body (like the XT-1) paired with the Fujinon 35mm f/2...
Mike Danahy wrote:
Thanks for the lecture. I started with a Russian twin lens reflex in 1967. Been "making images" a long time. Your statement that hardware is sort of irrelevant to the art of image making is total BS. The hardware is a means.
My point was to gather the experiences of other photographers who already tested and compared.
Mike...
The best 35mm hmm? Well...the new Canon 35mm f1.4L MkII is a stellar performer. Nearly perfect according to many reviewers and owners/users of the lens - just check out some of the buyer reviews at B&H. The Sigma 35mm 1.4Art is also a great lens (there are some reported autofocus issues/consistency problems, at least with the Canon EOS mount version). Zeiss and Leica both make 35mm manual focus lenses which are probably at or near the top at least from a build perspective and in optical performance. Then there's the newer Tamron 35mm f1.8 with VC (vibration compensation) that is highly rated. Zeiss makes a newer autofocusing 35mm f1.4 exclusively in the Sony mount that looks like a good performer too. And I haven't even begun to list 35's by Fujinon, Pentax/Sumicron, Olympus, etc... The Fujinon 35mm f/2 get's 5-star user reviews at B&H - 176 of them.
To filter, or not to filter? The question du jour... Some lenses (like some Canon L glass) are not completely weather-sealed without a front filter in place. My 2-cents are, try shooting without a filter with the lens hood in place. Even with a filter, you really shouldn't have any flare issues unless you have a point light source directly in the frame or just to the edge of the frame (the lens hood should minimize this for anything further out of the frame). I agree with several others that posted already, if it were me, I would invest in a CPL (circular polarizing filter) and leave it at that. Now I'm not saying that I would then keep the CPL in place all the time - it would be only for those scenes that warrant its use. I would rely on the lens hood for protection. That and being aware of my surroundings and gear position, in particular when moving about.
What it really boils down to however, is your shooting style/methods and where and what you are shooting most of the time with your new lens. Reviewing these will more than likely answer your question better than we can.
PS: by the way, I'm sure I'm not alone here...I look forward to seeing some images taken with your new "toy" SOON! In any case, happy shooting with your new gear. Oh, and remember, no filter will protect your lens (or you for that matter) from a Grizzly or Polar bear attack. :-)
Wonderful scenes. Hard to get good contrast in the winter time...however, the scenes are all interesting to me. The interplay between the clouds, mountains in the distance, and the foreground in all of them is pleasing to my eye (I'm just a hobbyist mind you - for over 30 years now). I really like the shafts of light in the first one. Minor, constructive criticism: in the first two, the horizon line seems to be tilted a tad bit. Also in the second shot, try centering the road in the frame on a future attempt (unless you were just a passin' thru...). Overall I like your attempts here. I think you'll get really comfortable with your new "toy".
Love the low-key approach. Simple. Beautiful. Sublime.
Wow! Great images! What lens were used on these shots?
The man...where's the 'man in the moon'? I like your surrealistic approach...refreshing and unique. I wonder how it would look if you downsized the tree and field scene a little bit? Very creative though - I like it.
Kissel vonKeister wrote:
Why do they call the Minolta glass Zeiss lenses?
Sony bought out/took-over Minolta's camera and lens manufacturing, patents, etc, several years ago. So, when it is a Sony lens your buying with a Sony camera it's probably a Minolta formula, or at least Minolta derived data. However, I think we're getting far enough from when Sony bought this part of Minolta's business where we're beginning to see in reality Sony engineering/design. Now, as far as Zeiss goes, they have a licensing agreement with Sony and do manufacture some top-of-the-line autofocusing "Tuitt" named line of lenses for Sony. They do still have the Zeiss branding on them I believe...
So, it depends on the particular lens one's buying for and/or with a particular Sony body. Hope this helps you out.
Cheers!
rmorrison1116 wrote:
You are incorrect. The OP is asking about the Canon 6D and the Canon 80D. As an owner of both the 6D and the 80D and the Nikon D500, I can assure you the D500 is not, I repeat, not better at being a full frame camera than the 6D.
I could add that, the Nikon won't take Canon lenses either. Which the OP probably has a number considering they've shot Canon for at least 15 years. I would expect the D500 to be better in some regards than either of the Canon models as it was just released this past summer. The 80D is what, nearly a year old or more now. And the 6D almost 5 years old. I'm not sure what the point of the other poster was bringing in the Nikon comment...
Beautiful shots Sylvia! Beautiful location. The shot of the Bridge is lovely...like a Thomas Kincaid painting. Love the reflection shots with the water and colorful homes(?). All are lovely.