AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
|
 p.15 #12 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses) | |
Jman13 wrote:
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that you have multiple people over multiple threads with much more recent mirrorless experience than you, who actually have first hand knowledge of the gear in question, and that perhaps experience with a 12 year old body and early m4/3 lenses maybe don't provide quite as much insight into the discussion as you think.
Number of photos mean little...I shoot about 25,000 a year, and have since about 2004, but I also only shoot a small amount of wildlife and I don't shoot any sports, both of which will raise a shutter count rather high without correlation directly with experience. I shoot mostly landscape and architecture, so a typical shoot will yield 50 to 100 images in a couple of hours. When I shoot birds, which I do only very occasionally, I'll rattle off 400 frames in 15-20 minutes.
In any case, I don't doubt you have experience as a photographer, but you don't have experience between the two systems in question, yet you speak as an authority on both, while dismissing the first hand experience of those who do. That's the issue. If this were a discussion on composition, technique, tips on setup, light, etc, then what gear you've used makes little difference. I've made great images with everything from film to cheap compacts and cell phones to 60MP digital, etc...it's not really about that. But this is a discussion on the strengths between mirrorless systems and the impacts that Canon's decisions with regards to third party mirrorless lenses have...and your insight is fine, but it's the dismissiveness and authority you project without a whole lot of standing on the issue. ...Show more →
I thought mirrorless was so pure and holy, that the date of manufacture didn't matter.  Trust me, you couldn't blast a lot of photos off using the GH1. But you can't on the Leica M6 either, and I adapted my m39 lenses at times.
I don't own the 200-600. You're right. But I carried the 300/2.8 60B Tamron on mirrorless about a year. Adaptall-2.com lists it as 4.5 lbs (probably plus mount.) B&H site lists 200-600 at more than that. If you think 4.5+ lbs is light, I have news for you. Especially vs 3 lb lens like 100-500.
If you truly want lightweight inexpensive gear: 55-250. Under a lb and 100-400 equivalent. It is 5.6 at the long end. I usually stop it to 7.1 or a bit more. Very commonly used aperture for me. So, yes, I am extremely familiar with these apertures on a tele, and if someone says 5.6 lens is great, even using a tc at f/8, and the 7.1 completely inadequate : baloney. For the most part. And I am probably going to comment on it. Regardless of how much someone spent.
|
It's one thing to want 3rd party lenses on a Canon, but disruptive trying to sell Nikon, Sony, etc. here. There are separate forums for that. It's like the Mustang vs. Camaro forums. The Mustang user should not go to the Camaro forum and tell them that pushrod engines suck.