Thanks for the sample photos and weight calculations.
I think we have definitively established that these questions depend on the specific camera and (in the case of weight and bulk) lenses chosen. Your 12800 Sony sample photo clearly looks better than the sample 6400 Fuji photo, but I imagine this also depends on the processing (and perhaps on whether one uses DPR's low light samples or regular lighting samples). I still prefer the compact Fuji system for street work, but perhaps Sony will be able to tempt me away someday with a future body in A7C series, particularly since I'm not thrilled with Fuji's current focus on film-simulation dials and the like. Sony would have to get over their hostility toward customers in Japan who would prefer English menus, though.
quote]aCuria wrote:
I don't think we necessarily need an A7C body:
OP's Setup: X-T5 (557g), 23/1.4 (380 g) and a 35/2 (170 g) Total 1107g
Example Setup: A7V (695g), 35/1.8 (280g) Total 975g
This is probably camera model dependent to some extent. You can look at this, one is FF iso 12,800 and the other is APSC iso 6400.
Processing:
1) lightroom denoise applied at default strength (50),
2) images exported at the same resolution
3) 1024x1024 section cropped out (due to flickr limitation)
Jonas B wrote:
Just stop it please. It's basically a fine thing Nikon camera users can enjoy Sony lenses as well as Nikon and Tamron lenses. There is no need for this repeated bashing and/or namecalling. All it does is making this small community more hostile (and even smaller).
There was zero name calling. Or do you consider a criticism of Nikon to be name calling? Are we concerned with Nikon's self esteem? Nion chose a consumer hostile closed system purely for their own profit, at the expense of their loyal fanbase. They were cashing in that loyalty...and enough people rebelled that Nikon's position in cameras fell catastrophically.
It isn't "fine." It is something that people that chose a closed system are forced to put up with unless they want to stick with an extremely limited system. A clunky extra process, with an extra breaking point, at suboptimal autofocus and capabilities, that you have to tailor to certain specific lenses is not ideal. When you have few lens options, you do what you need to do I guess... but let's not pretend that it is problem free.
shadow9d9 wrote:
There was zero name calling. Or do you consider a criticism of Nikon to be name calling? Are we concerned with Nikon's self esteem? Nion chose a consumer hostile closed system purely for their own profit, at the expense of their loyal fanbase. They were cashing in that loyalty...and enough people rebelled that Nikon's position in cameras fell catastrophically.
It isn't "fine." It is something that people that chose a closed system are forced to put up with unless they want to stick with an extremely limited system. A clunky extra process, with an extra breaking point, at suboptimal autofocus and capabilities, that you have to tailor to certain specific lenses is not ideal. When you have few lens options, you do what you need to do I guess... but let's not pretend that it is problem free....Show more →
Maybe your post #9 on page 1 is only borderline name calling. You can't pretend it was nice.
Going on and on and writing the word clunky a lot of times doesn't help anyone. Maybe you just like arguing. Bye.
Yeah, not even close. I can't imagine ever trying to scramble that hard to grasp at straws for victimhood. Someone has a different opinion. That is ok.
I'll add clumsy and cumbersome to it.
Jonas B wrote:
Maybe your post #9 on page 1 is only borderline name calling. You can't pretend it was nice.
Going on and on and writing the word clunky a lot of times doesn't help anyone. Maybe you just like arguing. Bye.
aCuria wrote:
[OP's Setup: X-T5 (557g), 23/1.4 (380 g) and a 35/2 (170 g) Total 1107g
Example Setup: A7V (695g), 35/1.8 (280g) Total 975g
No system ends up being the perfect, obvious winner, and there are great reasons to choose either approach. But that 23mm f/1.4 Fujifilm lens is one of their builder primes, and most of us would not typically choose it for street photography. (I own it, but I only use it occasionally for some urban night street photography.)
When Fujifilm users are angling for a very small system we’re far more likely to use something like the following, all of which are much (in some cases VERY much) smaller and lighter than that 23mm f/1.4.
18mm f/2
23mm f/2
23mm f/2.8 pancake
27mm f/2.8 pancake (my favorite street and travel lens)
35mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
Sony makes great stuff, but my smaller system happens to be from Fujifilm. I used it for the street photos I shared earlier in this thread.
gdanmitchell wrote:
No system ends up being the perfect, obvious winner, and there are great reasons to choose either approach. But that 23mm f/1.4 Fujifilm lens is one of their builder primes, and most of us would not typically choose it for street photography. (I own it, but I only use it occasionally for some urban night street photography.)
When Fujifilm users are angling for a very small system we’re far more likely to use something like the following, all of which are much (in some cases VERY much) smaller and lighter than that 23mm f/1.4.
18mm f/2
23mm f/2
23mm f/2.8 pancake
27mm f/2.8 pancake (my favorite street and travel lens)
35mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
Sony makes great stuff, but my smaller system happens to be from Fujifilm. I used it for the street photos I shared earlier in this thread....Show more →
18mm f/2
23mm f/2
23mm f/2.8 pancake
27mm f/2.8 pancake (my favorite street and travel lens)
35mm f/2
These 5 lenses (~$2500?, ~640g?) can be replaced with a single 24-50/2.8G ($1100, 440g), and I am pretty sure the full frame zoom is going to be sharper.
The 24-50G zoom lets you shoot without changing lenses (when changing lenses you lose images). You get the same or more background compression and background blur. The 24-50G is the cheaper, lighter and more practical choice. It’s also capable of going wider (24mm) than (18 = 28mm) and longer (50mm in apsc mode = 75mm) than those 5 primes
aCuria wrote:
18mm f/2
23mm f/2
23mm f/2.8 pancake
27mm f/2.8 pancake (my favorite street and travel lens)
35mm f/2
These 5 lenses (~$2500?, ~640g?) can be replaced with a single 24-50/2.8G ($1100, 440g), and I am pretty sure the full frame zoom is going to be sharper.
The 24-50G zoom lets you shoot without changing lenses (when changing lenses you lose images). You get the same or more background compression and background blur. The 24-50G is the cheaper, lighter and more practical choice. It’s also capable of going wider (24mm) than (18 = 28mm) and longer (50mm in apsc mode = 75mm) than those 5 primes...Show more →
That 24-60G looks like a very impressive and useful lens for people who prefer a zoom. I think it could be a great travel lens or even street photography lens for folks who want to go that route.
The zooms versus primes thing is complicated and often depends on personal preference and shooting style. I big on zooms for landscape photography — that's all I use for the genre. But I'm among those who often prefer to use very small primes for street and travel photography. Reasons? The smallest possible camera/lens combo, fits into very small and un-photographer-like bags, subjects seem less aware of smaller cameras and lenses, somewhat larger apertures.
It is an alternative, not a best/worse comparison. Each approach has its pluses and minuses.
dakel wrote:
I also opened up my A1 after it suffered sea water ingress - I attempted to replace the rear LCD which had stopped working. Alas it was not the rear LCD but some other component so I gave up. In any case, the weather sealing on the A1, as expected was noticeably better than the A7CR. Regrettably I neglected to take any photos to document this so it's just my word.
I have taken my cameras into some harsh conditions. Both are still operational but the A1 has a dead LCD. The A7CR which suffered fresh water ingress, twice now, has survived despite the lack of weather sealing, after letting everything dry out. Lucky I guess although it contradicts my earlier statement about weak weather sealing!...Show more →
Similar happened to me recently with an A7RV. While hiking out of a Utah canyon that had a very shallow creek, I slipped on the wet mud and my A7RV mounted on tripod over my shoulder went down with me and sat in the 1-2” water for a few seconds. LCD died and would not come back. Sold it with full disclosure at a bargain price. My net loss was about $1000. Would a different brand have survived that with no issues? I have no way of knowing, but it makes one wonder.
Ross Martin wrote:
Similar happened to me recently with an A7RV. While hiking out of a Utah canyon that had a very shallow creek, I slipped on the wet mud and my A7RV mounted on tripod over my shoulder went down with me and sat in the 1-2” water for a few seconds. LCD died and would not come back. Sold it with full disclosure at a bargain price. My net loss was about $1000. Would a different brand have survived that with no issues? I have no way of knowing, but it makes one wonder.
Ugh it's the worst feeling when expensive kit gets damaged but I always tell myself that the most important thing is that I didn't get hurt!
Since I have a habit of damaging expensive kit, I've been reading and researching and in my opinion the two cameras that have the greatest probability of surviving water immersion are an Olympus OM1 II and a Leica SL3. The Oly is only 20MP though and the SL3 and associated lenses are very very expensive and there is no guarantee that either of these would actually survive my outings. It would be fun to give them a try though.
