TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Prove it. Post comparative specs for equivalent FL and aperture lenses for the same sensor size for both DSLR and MILC. And while you’re at it, try to think up a hypothesis for why your statement should be true.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

In most cases, you are correct.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Please see my response above and post why you think that is so (assuming the same sensor size/format).

50-1.4

Done.
Flange distance difference alone is just one reason.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Only a factor in wide angle lenses and not necessarily a big weight saver then. I can post a series of equivalent MILC and DSLR lenses that show no difference (and already did comparing equivalent Canon EF-S and EF-M lenses) - please do the same if you can. I repeat: it’s aperture and format (and to a lesse extent material weight) that drive lens size/weight, not DSLR vs MILC. Waiting to be proven wrong with actual examples.

User ID

Flange depth alone is a rather incomplete idea.
It best supports your argument when you are
considering wide angle coverage, may or may
not support it with normal FL [depending on a
few variables] and with longer FL the opposite
will often prevail.

Not covering all the variables in a short post,
but the wide angle FLs should benefit the most
because SLRs require retrofocus designs and
live view cameras do not. It's kinda like 40 yrs
ago, when lenses were only as big as they had
to be ... not bloated with AF, IS, IF etc ... you
could compare Leica-M wide lenses to Nikon or
Pentax lenses and readily see the size penalty
of SLR retrofocus lenses. Or all in one lens line
you could compare the 38mm Biogon on Blad's
SWC to their 40mm Distagon on the 500C.


`

Bill P

The point is not that he's rich and has a huge cabinet of cameras and lenses, and it's not true that the results he gets would not suit even you. The point is that the endless chasing incremental improvements and showing off by spending large are no helpto successful photography. We need a whole new typr of photo lists, one for folks that are more interested in collecting gear or showing off their affluence so the remainder can continue to concern themselves in improving their results.

Navywife66 Loc: NC

Ok, so, I have made my decision. I am going to attempt to get some money for my current equipment, so in combination with some money I have been saving for my photography gear I will be able to hopefully get a FF and another lens. I sincerely appreciate everyones opinion and understand that not everyone is going to agree however I think it will be best for me. It's not to show off or because of GAS, LOL. I really want to be able to do low light photography better and after much trial and error I feel that this is the right choice for me to be honest. I've put together a package of what I am selling and even ran a shutter count. 19,799 out of 150,000... I think that's really good.. SO, hopefully I will be able to sell this stuff quickly and by the holidays get a good deal! Again, thank you everyone and hope your all enjoying the weekend! I am going to post it here in the classified's. Wish me luck!!

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Good luck Navywife66, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed - it will especially enhance your low light photography. You might consider selling your old equipment on UHH - you’ll get more than from a KEH or similar, easier than setting up an EBay account (unless you already have one) and safer than Craigslist. Or if you have a good local camera store, they might give you a fair trade.

Cheers

Navywife66 Loc: NC

Yes, I plan on selling here it here. I am not a fan of craigslist at all. I am not crazy about e-bay either lol..
Thank you!

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Yes! Best of luck.

Navywife66 Loc: NC

Thank you!!

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I don't know if he's rich or not and don't really care. You don't know me yet you believe you've got me all figured out. You think that just because I have some decent equipment that I'm some sort of clueless elitist showoff who's more interested in impressing people with gear and couldn't take a decent photo if my life depended on it. For starters, when I buy a new body, with money I earned, I cover the make and model with black pvc tape. You can't tell the difference between my 50D and my 5DSr without getting up real close and personal and actually knowing something about the specific models. All of my "white" Canon lenses, except for one, are covered with camo lens coats. Unless you get up real close and personal, you can't tell what kind of lens they are. Does this sound like something a person who is only interested in showing off his gear would do?! And no, I do not use factory straps. I DON'T want people to know what I've got.
I spent several hours on the dunes in South New Jersey today taking photos, right up to and including sunset. Right now I'm taking a break from cleaning the gear I used today on the wind blown dunes. OMG, I'm smart enough to know you've got to clean your gear after using it in the sand and wind. But I thought I was only interested in impressing others with my affluence, why bother cleaning it, it's not like I actually know how to use the stuff.
I've always been a big believer in books and practice. Books contain knowledge and practice hones ones acquired knowledge. How many photography related books do you have and how many have you read? I have a small library of said books and I've read or am reading each one.
Spewing the same old rhetoric is definitely no help to successfull photography. Learning how to use your gear is. Discouraging people from expanding their horizons is not helpful to successfull photography. Encouraging diversity and expansion and grasping new technologies is.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with having the right tools for the task. There is nothing wrong with acquiring something if you can afford to, and there is nothing wrong with wanting to go forward to improve your self.
But then I'm probably preaching to myself; some people are just set in their ways and are incapable of seeing past their blinders and prejudices.
By the way, my one white Canon lens that is not disguised is my EF 40 pancake lens. I see no reason to disguise that one.

Bill P

I do not wish to encourage folks from expanding their horizons. You can do that with the camera you've got already and likely learn more in the process.

50-1.4

Have given up waiting for you to discover the actual examples I posted.