p.2 #1RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
I will just repeat, trimming down to a single system and living with its shortcomings is a liberating —and for me joyful— experience. However it does not scratch all itches, but the freedom gained is well worth it…
The current mirrorless Sony —and I’m sure Canon and Nikon both as well— AF can focus on a black cat’s eyeball at midnight. And will expose it accurately.
p.2 #3RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Jman13 wrote:
An R6 III weighs 19g more than the R6 II. I can’t see how 19g could swing anyone from “ok to carry” to “too heavy.”
Remember that in my OP I mentioned that carrying my current R6II with the RF 24-105mm f4.0L around in Japan for two weeks was a bad idea because of the weight. Even with any of the three "trinity" zooms, the R6II is not ideal for travel. My understanding is that the new GM II "trinity" zooms are smaller/lighter than their previous generation versions, but I don't think it would be a significant enough difference in terms of size/weight from what I already own. That's one of the reasons I'm exploring the idea of primes vs zooms, but neither Canon nor Sony appeal to me 100% for travel.
p.2 #5RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Jack Flesher wrote:
I will just repeat, trimming down to a single system and living with its shortcomings is a liberating —and for me joyful— experience. However it does not scratch all itches, but the freedom gained is well worth it…
The current mirrorless Sony —and I’m sure Canon and Nikon both as well— AF can focus on a black cat’s eyeball at midnight. And will expose it accurately.
Belive me, I've tried that in the past but failed miserably! 😀 When I was shooting 4 platforms (Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Micro Four Thirds plus a Ricoh GRIII I disliked passionately), I sold off all my Nikon gear and purchased more glass for my first A7c. I then sold off all my Sony gear to stick with just Canon and M4/3, but I regretted that move so much that I ended up buying an A7c again. I then sold off that GRIII and a couple of point and shoots I had lying around and used the money to buy the A7iv body.
The lesson I learned was to never sell gear you like in order to purchase new gear (unless it's Nikon or Ricoh, which in that case by all means, get rid of it at any time). It was a hassle trying to find good samples of the set of lenses I had with my first A7c outfit; just the thought of having to do that again makes me cringe! If you haven't used your gear in over 5 years, then it's probably a good indicator that it's time to sell it imo. 😀
p.2 #6RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
snegron7 wrote:
Belive me, I've tried that in the past but failed miserably! 😀 When I was shooting 4 platforms (Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Micro Four Thirds plus a Ricoh GRIII I disliked passionately), I sold off all my Nikon gear and purchased more glass for my first A7c. I then sold off all my Sony gear to stick with just Canon and M4/3, but I regretted that move so much that I ended up buying an A7c again. I then sold off that GRIII and a couple of point and shoots I had lying around and used the money to buy the A7iv body.
The lesson I learned was to never sell gear you like in order to purchase new gear (unless it's Nikon or Ricoh, which in that case by all means, get rid of it at any time). It was a hassle trying to find good samples of the set of lenses I had with my first A7c outfit; just the thought of having to do that again makes me cringe! If you haven't used your gear in over 5 years, then it's probably a good indicator that it's time to sell it imo. 😀 ...Show more →
I get that, been there, have the hats. But before you know it, you have $50k invested in gear and only use any of it 10% of the time; and if you wait 5 years to sell it, it’s been replaced/upgraded twice and what you have is now only worth 1/3rd of what you paid for it. My point here is consider adjusting your thinking and netting down to a few pieces of gear you will actually use more, like every time you head out. It’s way easier and LIBERATING than sticking with the “this kit for that and that kit for this” mentality.
Is your goal to own the perfect kit, or make compelling images? Answer that question honestly for yourself, and the rest should fall into place.
p.2 #7RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Jack Flesher wrote:
I get that, been there, have the hats. But before you know it, you have $50k invested in gear and only use any of it 10% of the time; and if you wait 5 years to sell it, it’s been replaced/upgraded twice and what you have is now only worth 1/3rd of what you paid for it. My point here is consider adjusting your thinking and netting down to a few pieces of gear you will actually use more, like every time you head out. It’s way easier and LIBERATING than sticking with the “this kit for that and that kit for this” mentality.
Is your goal to own the perfect kit, or make compelling images? Answer that question honestly for yourself, and the rest should fall into place. ...Show more →
p.2 #8RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
snegron7 wrote:
Remember that in my OP I mentioned that carrying my current R6II with the RF 24-105mm f4.0L around in Japan for two weeks was a bad idea because of the weight. Even with any of the three "trinity" zooms, the R6II is not ideal for travel. My understanding is that the new GM II "trinity" zooms are smaller/lighter than their previous generation versions, but I don't think it would be a significant enough difference in terms of size/weight from what I already own. That's one of the reasons I'm exploring the idea of primes vs zooms, but neither Canon nor Sony appeal to me 100% for travel. ...Show more →
If this is really the case moving to the big GM or L zooms is not going to appeal to you at all. If R6 II and 24-105 is really too big for you, you should definitely be looking at finding an APS-C or m4/3 setup that works for you. You can do primes too (for instance on my R6 II when traveling prime light I’d bring my little M mount Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 (ultra tiny), then any 50 ish (probably my 45/1.2 for an AF option with speed) and my Contax G 90mm f/2.8. But I find all primes with travel to be more trouble than it’s worth for lens switching.
p.2 #9RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Jack Flesher wrote:
....as a guy who used to own and shoot with multiple different systems and formats, learning to live with the weaknesses and living with a single system is relative bliss — the weaknesses fade and the joy of photography returns. 👍
What Jack Flesher said....
I've become tired of the mental paralysis I go through deciding which lens to take with me - and your list is several times longer than mine. This summer I started downsizing by selling selected gear (and not replacing it with more) and am finding out that I seem to be in a happier place. In the middle of your post you expressed that you'd like to move to Leica, and I think this is really the backstory and I'd be happy for you if you get there. So how about starting your Leica system a single purchase at a time rather than all of it at once? Appreciate the opportunity to offer my thoughts...
p.2 #10RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
snegron7 wrote:
All the equipment I currently own has also been purchased whenever I needed it for some reason or another. My main "go-to" lens during the dslr days was the 16-35mm f4.0 (Nikon and Canon). I could probably live with 3 primes (wide, medium, and short tele) for travel. My idea of using a 24-70mm f2.8 would cover that range without having to carry/change out lenses but would carry the penalty of weight.
That is WAY over my budget, and if I sold off all my current equipment, I would still not have enough to buy even that M11-P body, let alone any lenses for it! 😀
On the other hand, if I go with the "trinity" option for Sony or Canon I'd be around $10,000. That's a $23,000 savings for me! 😀 ...Show more →
Have you been on the buy and sell board?
35 Lux ASPH v1 — $2,500
50 Lux ASPH — $2,300
M11 — $5,500
And it's not just pricing — the amount of glass that's as good as or better than Leica, without the Leica badge, is growing every day in M mount. For example, no one would recommend the Leica 21 1.4 Lux anymore — the Voigtlander 21 1.4 is a much better lens for under $1K.
I could go on. If your dream is a Leica rangefinder, make it happen. Look at the laundry list of gear you're already holding onto. Buy a used M11 plus a Thypoch 28 1.4 and 50 1.4, and you're in for under $7K.
It’s a bit crazy to me that you are saying LEica is your dream but you don’t have Leica money- Then say you are looking at the “trinity” 2.8 GM zoom range-
You have the money, you are spending it on a garage full of gear you don’t use/need.
Edit- With Leica you have to look at Entry/Exit prices- You can enter the Leica world seriously for 10K- In a year you can probably Exit for the same cost and if you buy the right stuff, maybe even make money or at worst pay a very small rental fee for using the gear for a few years.
p.2 #11RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Couple more comments, then I'll slow down. I understand the size desire for travel. Cell phone doesn't cut it *for me* even as good as they are today. I tried APSC it was okay, but didn't scratch the landscape quality itch. Yes, I made nice compelling landscape images with it, but missed the medium format digital results, and admittedly, missed working with the MF digital files. For me, higher res full-frame became the intermediate solution. The A7C2 33mp was okay for travel, but not really enough for me for landscape. The A7R6 67mp is -- at least for me; and the camera and lenses are small enough to enjoy traveling with.
I cold probably today live with a Hasselblad X2Dii 100 and the 20-35 and 35-100 zooms for landscape and give up shooting birds and wildlife altogether, but that Hassy and lenses gets heavyish for travel at around 6 pounds. By comparison the Sony with 16-35 and 24-70 weighs a pound less AND there are lighter options to where I can shave another pound and a half off... But now there's the grandkids and their sports, so a longer lens, blah, blah, blah and all of a sudden the Hassy doesn't cut it. I could then justify adding the Sony A7R6 or A1ii with 70-200 GMii, 100-400 and 400-800 for grandkids, birds and wildlife, but then I know me; and I'd add the 16-35 and 24-70 GM's and probably a few lighter G's just to fill out the Sony kit, and now I'm right back to not being able to decide what I really want to head out and shoot with...
What I finally realized after being down this road too many times, is I make my best images when the gear thoughts disappear and I focus on creating images. I've also learned this is easier for me with a single system -- nothing clarifies the mind faster than limited choices The big caveat is I will double up on glass -- lighter zooms and a few smaller f1.8 primes for travel, larger GMii zooms or even big primes for detailed landscape, birds and wildlife... One system, multiple lens-choice convenience. Oh, and it really doesn't matter if my choice is Sony and yours is Canon in this regard. Pick one, and live with it for a bit. Just sayin...
p.2 #12RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
I'm just glad that Sony makes a 20-70 F4. Perfect for all day comfy carry.
If Fuji made a similar lens I'd happily get one for the X-T5.
Leica rangefinders are awesome - can never throw shade on them but the renting first suggestion is even more appropriate here because an M10 for me wasn't really forgiving.
Shutter speed, holding technique and nailing focus were more work than on an A1 for sure.
p.2 #13RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Jman13 wrote:
If this is really the case moving to the big GM or L zooms is not going to appeal to you at all. If R6 II and 24-105 is really too big for you, you should definitely be looking at finding an APS-C or m4/3 setup that works for you.
^ this
I still carry around my 6D and 24-105L from 2013... and the only problem I have is that the AF requires patience and isn't as useful for spontaneity as I'd like. Weight? Size? DR? Battery life? Who cares. I use an old BlackRapid Sport, weight disappears and the size isn't a real problem.
And if that's too big, well, time to start compromising!
p.2 #14RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
I recently sold 17 of my 28 lenses and I couldn’t be happier. I STILL have too many lenses. We are all different, but if I were you, I’d sell EVERYTHING and buy a Sony A7R6 or A1 II and three lenses. You won’t believe how happy you will be.
p.2 #15RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
Al Trujillo wrote:
What Jack Flesher said....
I've become tired of the mental paralysis I go through deciding which lens to take with me - and your list is several times longer than mine. This summer I started downsizing by selling selected gear (and not replacing it with more) and am finding out that I seem to be in a happier place. In the middle of your post you expressed that you'd like to move to Leica, and I think this is really the backstory and I'd be happy for you if you get there. So how about starting your Leica system a single purchase at a time rather than all of it at once? Appreciate the opportunity to offer my thoughts...
Thanks! More likely than not, if I go Leica, I'm going to have to start with used equipment because I definitely don't have the $30,000+ to start off new.
Funny somewhat related story. Several years ago I planned a road trip from Florida to New Mexico. I spent weeks overthinking what gear I would take with me. On my first overnight stop, I reached for one of my camera bags and it was empty! I had packed my camera bags, but forgot to pack cameras an lenses in them!! All I had was a spare beater D200 with an AF-D 24mm f2.8 prime that I always carried in the trunk of my car. For the rest of the 3 week trip that was the only camera and lens I had at my disposal. I did get some nice shots, mostly because Taos and Santa Fe are beautiful, but there were so many shots I missed due to not having the right equipment!
p.2 #16RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
snegron7 wrote:
Thanks! .ore likely than not, if I go Leica, I'm going to have to start with used equipment because I definitely don't have the $30,000+ to start off new.
Funny somewhat related story. Several years ago I planned a road trip from Florida to New Mexico. I spent weeks overthinking what gear I would take with me. On my first overnight stop, I reached for one of my camera bags and it was empty! I had packed my camera bags, but forgot to pack cameras an lenses in them!! All I had was a spare beater D200 with an AF-D 24mm f2.8 prime that I always carried in the trunk of my car. For the rest of the 3 week trip that was the only camera and lens I had at my disposal. I did get some nice shots, mostly because Taos and Santa Fe are beautiful, but there were so many shots I missed due to not having the right equipment! ...Show more →
My theory is you can never get all the shots…so focus on the shots you can get and do your very best with those shots.
p.2 #17RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
@snegron7, some of your goals seem to be at odds. "Trinity" lenses are the biggest and heaviest in any system. Do you want a small, carry-friendly system? Or do you want bomb-proof build quality and complete focal range coverage?
If lens selection is your #1 priority, Sony wins, hands down. There are more choices of e-mount glass then anything else. If there are specific features you prefer in Canon or OM, that's a perfectly valid reason to stick with those systems.
Better quality lenses are going to give you better camera performance and ultimately better images, regardless of what camera you use. A brighter lens with more powerful AF motors will allow the camera to reach peak AF performance and accuracy. So you'll see a bump in results with any camera system simply by using the top end lenses.
p.2 #19RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
jeffbuzz wrote:
@snegron7@, some of your goals seem to be at odds. "Trinity" lenses are the biggest and heaviest in any system. Do you want a small, carry-friendly system? Or do you want bomb-proof build quality and complete focal range coverage?
If lens selection is your #1 priority, Sony wins, hands down. There are more choices of e-mount glass then anything else. If there are specific features you prefer in Canon or OM, that's a perfectly valid reason to stick with those systems.
Better quality lenses are going to give you better camera performance and ultimately better images, regardless of what camera you use. A brighter lens with more powerful AF motors will allow the camera to reach peak AF performance and accuracy. So you'll see a bump in results with any camera system simply by using the top end lenses....Show more →
You definitely hit the nail on the head regarding what I want; GM/L quality lenses only smaller/lighter than the "trinity" big boys on a full frame body. My assumption is that I can probably get that with a Leica rangefinder system. Unfortunately, that comes at a very high price for me.
In the rangefinder world, equipment is small but quality is big. In the mirrorless world, the higher the quality, the bigger the equipment.
While I would like to get the "trinity" lenses for either Canon or Sony, I'm at odds with carrying a large "trinity" lens attached to a camera body. Should I bite the bullet and get the "trinity" lenses and start finding a good chiropractor, or is there a chance that maybe a GM/L prime or two would be less strain to carry around? I honestly don't know the answer.
As others have suggested, renting seems like a smart idea to see how much of a compromise I'm willing to commit to. Since I can't say for sure that I absolutely love my R6II or A7iv, will it even be a good idea to spend any more money on these camera outfits? Maybe if the R6II weighed less and had better AF tracking. Maybe if my A7iv were easier/faster/built better.
This feels like if I'm trying to decide whether I should buy a brand new high performance engine for either a steel boat-like old car or for a 3 seat plastic car. Kind of feels like neither one deserves the new engine.
p.2 #20RF-L or FE-GM (No Trolls, Gatekeepers, or Dismissive Responses)
If I were in your position I might approach this by asking myself two questions:
1. Do I own all this stuff because i need it for my photography, because I like to collect stuff, or for some other reason?
If you use it for your photography, you can move to question 2. If your main interest is in owning stuff or some other non-photo reason (I’m not critiquing, just sorting) then you can do whatever you want to do. :-)
2. If you use all of this gear for your photography, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to take a good, hard took at how you actually use each item. Also ask whether the functionality of a rarely used item might be covered by something else that you own.
Your comment about getting a Leica with three lenses should be instructive, and it suggests that you have considered the possibility that you have more stuff than you really need.
If I were in your shoes I’d probably not bother owning both Canon and Sony systems. Both are fine, but I find it hard to imagine that the advantages of the second system are worth the trouble owning (and carrying around!) all that stuff. I have a good Canon kit, so I’m not anti-Canon, but I”m about to make the move to Sony. In your case I’d say pick one — I go with Sony — and then build lenses around that choice.
If your photography is incredibly varied — e.g. you are serious about shooting a ton of different things — you might start with a set of high quality zoom lenses that cover most needs. there isn’t much you cant do with a set of four (or even three) good high-quaiity zooms covering the range from about 16mm to about 400mm, perhaps with a TC thrown in.
Then, if you really _need_ them you could add a few things to deal with special situations. If you think you need it them, perhaps a couple of large aperture primes for things like portraits. Do you do macro? Maybe (but many not) you could use one extra-long tele prime.
For bodies, how about making the A7CR your travel camera, and just getting a small set of perhaps three small primes? Or perhaps one not-so-huge zoom plus a couple of small primes.
I get how it is possible to end up with a huge assortment of gear like what is in your list, and how it is hard (for several reason) to just say no to that approach and take a step back. But once you do, I suspect that it will almost be a relief.
snegron7 wrote:
Disclaimer: Please do not read or respond to this post if you are easily annoyed/offended by questions about gear, or if you live by the mantra "just get out there and shoot", or "cameras/lenses are just tools". This Canon/Sony forum is about discussing gear and is not a platform for grumpy, rude, condescending trolls to criticize or belittle anyone who dares to ask questions about gear. Also, this is not about GAS. It's a legitimate question about gear.
Speaking of grumpy, rude, condescending trolls” who” criticize or belittle…,” yikes! ;-)
The big caveat is I will double up on glass -- lighter zooms and a few smaller f1.8 primes for travel, larger GMii zooms or even big primes for detailed landscape, birds and wildlife... One system, multiple lens-choice convenience. Oh, and it really doesn't matter if my choice is Sony and yours is Canon in this regard. Pick one, and live with it for a bit. Just sayin... 