luisdent
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.2 #1 · Compact fast lenses for a7cr | |
Wow. Thanks for all the replies. I will check out all of these lenses.
And just to give a little bit more info and respond to some of the people who were kindly very thorough in explaining why there are no identical lenses for Sony...
The reason I'm starting to think of going to Sony at all is that I've shot Fuji for many years, and I've landed on the 18 and 33 1.4 as 2 lenses I could probably use exclusively for 90% of my shots. I've been trying to minimize my photo gear, but I was recently able to get a Leica q328 at a very reasonable price used.
I pulled the trigger with the idea that it could possibly replace the two Fuji lenses with one camera. I have found that that isn't exactly the case as I thought. Although it is probably closer than many would admit. Without going too far into it, I did some side by side comparisons with four of my Fuji lenses 18, 23, 33, 56. Just for fun, I wanted to see how well the Leica stood up to them.
For anyone more technically minded, the fact that the Leica is full frame makes the aperture give more background blur than the equivalent APSC f stop. So what I was surprised to find is that the Q3 is basically similar to the 18 1.4 in most ways. However it is sharper at all apertures except maybe in the very far corners wide open. And has a little bit more background blur. I like the rendering of the leica lens better, But that's also an area where things aren't as drastically different as people would expect when taking the exact same photo.
Anyway, to summarize, without moving my position if I were to take a picture with all of the lenses and compared to the Q3 all wide open, cropping the leica to match the field of view of the Fuji lenses creates identical framing and background compression. The 1.7 aperture of the Q3 can match or exceed up to about 23 mm 1.4 when cropped. The 33 1.4 gives a little bit more background blur, but this is also where the Q3 starts to be noticeably lower resolution on cropping. And it's a little bit beyond the threshold of what I would prefer.
I will be honest, if the Q3 was a 1.4 lens and 100 megapixels, it would actually match or exceed the Fuji 18 and 33 1.4 in optical quality. However, that's also not the end of the story. When using crop modes on the camera to visualize your focal length, it uses an overlay and doesn't change the actual viewfinder to fit the entire frame. This doesn't sound like a big deal, and probably isn't if you're just using the first crop setting. But the further in, it starts to be a little bit more challenging to visualize and compose your image. There are other aspects that I believe are actually better on the Fuji as well such as image stabilization, faster intermediate setting changes such as finer shutter speed adjustment, etc. needless to say I'm torn on the Q3, as I do like it a lot, but for the price I think is probably not enough camera for me to abandon Fuji.
But the issue is that once I started using the Q3, I started to really appreciate the ISO performance, additional sharpness, and a 60mp sensor. When I'm editing my files now i notice the q3 gives richer colors with less effort and requires very little work to get final results. Needless to say, i think the full frame quality has left me not wanting to go back
So the fuji may still work better for me for size and flexibility. But the q3 got me wondering if it would be possible to have full frame quality without adding much size. But apparently it is a unique camera in that regard.
So here we are, i found the a7cr to be a good size, and figured if i could find a good 2 lens setup to match the fuji in quality and at least close in size that could be endgame for me. I would still need telephoto, but as I don't typically carry them all the time size isn't as critical for that.
I'm not stuck on sony specifically but the AF and small body seems hard to beat.
Fwiw, I'm not super interested in manual focus lenses. But i am flexible in lens focal length and aperture. I could do 1.2-f2 and 24 or 26 instead of 28. And 40 or 50. Etc. but those two general lengths are my ideal 28/50.
Anyhow, just some more insight as to my thoughts. The q3 is less than ideal for the mid focal length (50) where i like to do a lot of portraits and such. And obviously you can't swap lenses. That that leaves me needing to keep at least a few lenses on the fuji which then makes it less worth it since i have the 18 1.4 already. Anyhow,i digress...
|
