Canon FF mirrorless...

It's patently b*****ks and you know it. Top trolling mind.

Photographers have been arguing about the very things he or she mentions since forever. Don't go near a Leica forum unless you want to see people obsessing over the tiniest degrees of difference, and paying handsomely for it.

Some photographers are gear-heads, some aren't. You'll find both sorts using every single make.
 
Radiohead said:
It's patently b*****ks and you know it. Top trolling mind.

Photographers have been arguing about the very things he or she mentions since forever. Don't go near a Leica forum unless you want to see people obsessing over the tiniest degrees of difference, and paying handsomely for it.

Some photographers are gear-heads, some aren't. You'll find both sorts using every single make.
Click to expand...

Well, this thread went off the rails, mostly the Sony nonsense ... AGAIN! so I see it fitting. Can't see how anyone would take it personally, it is .... just gear after all.

If I really wanted to troll I'd have posted it in the Sony thread ;)
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Well, this thread went off the rails, mostly the Sony nonsense ... AGAIN! so I see it fitting. Can't see how anyone would take it personally, it is .... just gear after all.

If I really wanted to troll I'd have posted it in the Sony thread ;)
Click to expand...
Go on I dare you lol [emoji23]
 
jonneymendoza said:
Go on I dare you lol [emoji23]
Click to expand...

Nah! :D in too good a mood today to get into clown wars

But never mind the Sony bit, don't you see something in it? When is the last time you bought a camera or lens that you just adored - it wasn't clinically perfect, it wasn't one you wanted to pixel peep on, it had iffy characteristics but ... something, just made you fall in love with it? And enjoyed the fact it didn't cost an arm and leg! Something that made you just want to get out and create rather than stare at it in the corner as you type mounds of posts on forums about it being insanely sharp at f/0.15! These days I find it rather depressing that we argue on forums over 400% view detail from gear worth enough to feed an entire third world town! Yet the gear has little to no 'character' about it.
 
Cagey75 said:
Pretty clear to me that Sony cater to gear heads over photographers, ok in the context of the article it'll make more sense, but even stand-alone I would have thought that obvious. I just forgot about people like you, that need over explaining.
Click to expand...

Yup that's why it costs less and offers more features, because it's not for true photographers.

You're starting to sound like you're in an abusive relationship.
 
Cagey75 said:
Nah! :D in too good a mood today to get into clown wars

But never mind the Sony bit, don't you see something in it? When is the last time you bought a camera or lens that you just adored - it wasn't clinically perfect, it wasn't one you wanted to pixel peep on, it had iffy characteristics but ... something, just made you fall in love with it? And enjoyed the fact it didn't cost an arm and leg! Something that made you just want to get out and create rather than stare at it in the corner as you type mounds of posts on forums about it being insanely sharp at f/0.15! These days I find it rather depressing that we argue on forums over 400% view detail from gear worth enough to feed an entire third world town! Yet the gear has little to no 'character' about it.
Click to expand...
Yea most of what i bought i have fallen in love with. including the 5d4 i had btw ;)
 
simonbarker said:
Yup that's why it costs less and offers more features, because it's not for true photographers.

You're starting to sound like you're in an abusive relationship.
Click to expand...

I don't know your mother, sorry kid. What's a "true" photographer? I'd love to hear your nonsensical thought on that ... you've always sounded a bit thick - you don't even know what you're jumping in on. It's the lens I have not the camera you dope. Also you've just proved me right, for you it's all about the gear it seems ...
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
Yea most of what i bought i have fallen in love with. including the 5d4 i had btw ;)
Click to expand...

I don't believe you, you've taken more images of your Sigma 105 than with it I'd say :D Share the sudocream with your butthurt mate there jonney would ya? :LOL:
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Pretty clear to me that Sony cater to gear heads over photographers, ok in the context of the article it'll make more sense, but even stand-alone I would have thought that obvious. I just forgot about people like you, that need over explaining.

http://toolsandtoys.net/reviews/the...ilux-15mm-f1-7-micro-four-thirds-lens-review/

It's a lens review [one that I own] and he's talking about it having a nice 'feel' about it, where Sony gear just feels like gear that is more about spec lists than having any real charm. I see Sony gear that way, I could understand what he meant right off, a butt hurt Sony user won't as readily I guess :p
Click to expand...

Careful Keith! Have you not read the new forum rules?

(1) Absolutely NO criticism of Sony products allowed whatsoever!

The alarm bells will be ringing in the Sony Gestapo HQ on here - they will all be out to get you now :rolleyes:
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Careful Keith! Have you not read the new forum rules?

(1) Absolutely NO criticism of Sony products allowed whatsoever!

The alarm bells will be ringing in the Sony Gestapo HQ on here - they will all be out to get you now :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Aye, they are very easy to upset. If I did what jonney dared me to and posted it in the actual Sony thread I'd be here till Christmas sucked into their boring, round-in-circles arguments. Instead of just sucking up the fact, that it seems to be the Sony user who is more concerned with gear than anyone else. It's blatant. I just liked the quote, it rang a bell.
 
Cagey75 said:
But never mind the Sony bit, don't you see something in it? When is the last time you bought a camera or lens that you just adored - it wasn't clinically perfect, it wasn't one you wanted to pixel peep on, it had iffy characteristics but ... something, just made you fall in love with it? And enjoyed the fact it didn't cost an arm and leg! Something that made you just want to get out and create rather than stare at it in the corner as you type mounds of posts on forums about it being insanely sharp at f/0.15! These days I find it rather depressing that we argue on forums over 400% view detail from gear worth enough to feed an entire third world town! Yet the gear has little to no 'character' about it.
Click to expand...

I get this with my film cameras not just the lenses - they just 'feel so nice' in the hand they make me want to shoot them and make me smile (must be a camera perv?) I don't get anything like this from the Sony; it feels exactly what it is - a profit making product from Sony that is just full of spec & buttons - maybe they are the graphic equalisers of the camera world?

Cagey75 said:
Aye, they are very easy to upset. If I did what jonney dared me to and posted it in the actual Sony thread I'd be here till Christmas sucked into their boring, round-in-circles arguments. Instead of just sucking up the fact, that it seems to be the Sony user who is more concerned with gear than anyone else. It's blatant. I just liked the quote, it rang a bell.
Click to expand...

Completely agree (y)
 
Fraser Euan White said:
I get this with my film cameras not just the lenses - they just 'feel so nice' in the hand they make me want to shoot them and make me smile (must be a camera perv?) I don't get anything like this from the Sony; it feels exactly what it is - a profit making product from Sony that is just full of spec & buttons - maybe they are the graphic equalisers of the camera world?



Completely agree (y)
Click to expand...
Haha no he would get laughed at in the Sony thread.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Many of my images on the 5d4 is NSFW...
Click to expand...

Post! Post! Post! :D

Fraser Euan White said:
I get this with my film cameras not just the lenses - they just 'feel so nice' in the hand they make me want to shoot them and make me smile (must be a camera perv?) I don't get anything like this from the Sony; it feels exactly what it is - a profit making product from Sony that is just full of spec & buttons - maybe they are the graphic equalisers of the camera world?



Completely agree (y)
Click to expand...


Well this is more like what I meant. The guy who wrote the article picked out Sony as a Sony user! He could still see that is how they are, they're not worried about the 'true photographer' - something simon above clearly doesn't comprehend - they cater to the gear lovers, and that is just the way it is. Getting annoyed or defensive about this just shows the truth hurts. I don't get defensive about any of the gear I have, because that's all it is to me right now, it's a means to an end, I like to shoot - with any camera! I just buy what's within my poor budget and go with it. But when I get an old vintage film-era lens, it often feels more like a tool for creativity than overly expensive modern lenses - proper mechanical focus and aperture rings, solid steel build, interesting look both aesthetically and optically - they're rarely as sharp as anything made today, they don't have anything like the same coatings, but they have character that can be exploited. Sometimes I want soft corners, manipulable flare, lower contrast etc ... and we're talking £30 odd Vs multiple hundreds that you can just go shoot with, not caring whether it was 'worth it' or not or worrying about reviews and focus charts
 
Fraser Euan White said:
I get this with my film cameras not just the lenses - they just 'feel so nice' in the hand they make me want to shoot them and make me smile (must be a camera perv?) I don't get anything like this from the Sony; it feels exactly what it is - a profit making product from Sony that is just full of spec & buttons - maybe they are the graphic equalisers of the camera world?



Completely agree (y)
Click to expand...
Why not try the fuji then with its film like ergonomics?
 
Cagey75 said:
Post! Post! Post! :D




Well this is more like what I meant. The guy who wrote the article picked out Sony as a Sony user! He could still see that is how they are, they're not worried about the 'true photographer' - something simon above clearly doesn't comprehend - they cater to the gear lovers, and that is just the way it is. Getting annoyed or defensive about this just shows the truth hurts. I don't get defensive about any of the gear I have, because that's all it is to me right now, it's a means to an end, I like to shoot - with any camera! I just buy what's within my poor budget and go with it. But when I get an old vintage film-era lens, it often feels more like a tool for creativity than overly expensive modern lenses - proper mechanical focus and aperture rings, solid steel build, interesting look both aesthetically and optically - they're rarely as sharp as anything made today, they don't have anything like the same coatings, but they have character that can be exploited. Sometimes I want soft corners, manipulable flare, lower contrast etc ... and we're talking £30 odd Vs multiple hundreds that you can just go shoot with, not caring whether it was 'worth it' or not or worrying about reviews and focus charts
Click to expand...
So you want inferior things. No worries about that but those things are inferior by fact like how this camera is inferior to the Sony and that is all people compare and comment on.
 
jonneymendoza said:
So you want inferior things. No worries about that but those things are inferior by fact like how this camera is inferior to the Sony and that is all people compare and comment on.
Click to expand...

Who says I can't have both? You need to think before you type jonney - I found that very article because I have the Pana-Leica 15mm lens it's actually about! that's a lovely lens, pricey for what it is but it does have character. Doesn't mean I don't use old cheap lenses alongside.
 
Cagey75 said:
You know this woudn't be the case now jonney, I like to think you're slightly above 2-digit IQ, you're not convincing me on that one though
Click to expand...
Of course I'm a dumb f****r who's blagged his way to success in my career etc hehe.

I'm a clueless man with an iq of a 5year old
 
It also rings a bell with another tester that sums up the Sony Products in a very similar way:

In fact on one occasion I did smash it… but that was down to its flimsy build quality and an accident in the studio, and not my frustrating experiences. (Pro tip, it’s good to have good insurance if you shoot with Sony cameras professionally!)
Click to expand...

The issue is – even before you take into account how they function and perform – with Sony replacing these cameras every few years with new better models, I feel driven to replace them every few years. This has the unfortunate impact of them feeling almost disposable. As such I don’t find myself bonding with them as tools in the way I do with my Leicas, or indeed as I did with my Nikons before. Now you might ask why I am so driven to replace them so frequently? Well, sometimes I ask myself the same question, but actually I find myself having some surprisingly sensible answers that are largely to do with the nature of the Sony system.
Click to expand...

This is the question that pretty much summarises everything I dislike about the digital photography industry. The never ending upgrade path is enough to drive me to distraction! But unlike with Nikon where I became quite pragmatic about it and shot with cameras for much longer, Sony have me trapped in this idea that 2 years is plenty long enough to own a digital camera
Click to expand...
 
Cagey75 said:
Who says I can't have both? You need to think before you type jonney - I found that very article because I have the Pana-Leica 15mm lens it's actually about! that's a lovely lens, pricey for what it is but it does have character. Doesn't mean I don't use old cheap lenses alongside.
Click to expand...
I have cheap lenses for my Sony too!
 
jonneymendoza said:
Of course I'm a dumb f****e who's blagged his way to success in my career etc hehe.

I'm a clueless man with an iq of a 5year old
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean by success? I'm not going to disagree on the last part, I'll let you have that one :D
 
jonneymendoza said:
Why not try the fuji then with its film like ergonomics?
Click to expand...

Why should I? I have no desire to purchase a new camera! (Unless I could afford a Leica M10)

In fact the cameras I enjoy using most have no multi pattern metering, no autofocus, they are simple, superbly designed and constructed but above all else they feel absolutely superb and fun to use - there is way, way,way to much technology in modern cameras for me to enjoy using them - I spend more time dicking about in the menu system prating around with settings; moving focus points around, changing focus modes etc - I cun turn a beautifully damped MF lens and get an 'in focus' shot much easier/quicker 75% of the time with a MF camera than I can with autofocus!

Let's face it; up until recently if you were a Canon or a Nikon user and wanted a really good mirrorless you had to look at changing to a different manufacturer, now you don't!

If you like how the Canikon works then you are best staying with that brand - either of those new releases is more than capable of taking great shots and being a pleasure to use.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I don't know your mother, sorry kid. What's a "true" photographer? I'd love to hear your nonsensical thought on that ... you've always sounded a bit thick - you don't even know what you're jumping in on. It's the lens I have not the camera you dope. Also you've just proved me right, for you it's all about the gear it seems ...
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
 
Fuji cameras are great, but let's be honest, they're not really like film cameras, the dials are as much for aesthetics as functionality - you don't have to use them. I'm still pondering switching back to them, they do ooze character, they're neat and tidy, good looking, and produce the goods. But this just like a film camera thing doesn't fly with me.
 
Fraser Euan White said:
Why should I? I have no desire to purchase a new camera! (Unless I could afford a Leica M10)

In fact the cameras I enjoy using most have no multi pattern metering, no autofocus, they are simple, superbly designed and constructed but above all else they feel absolutely superb and fun to use - there is way, way,way to much technology in modern cameras for me to enjoy using them - I spend more time dicking about in the menu system prating around with settings; moving focus points around, changing focus modes etc - I cun turn a beautifully damped MF lens and get an 'in focus' shot much easier/quicker 75% of the time with a MF camera than I can with autofocus!

Let's face it; up until recently if you were a Canon or a Nikon user and wanted a really good mirrorless you had to look at changing to a different manufacturer, now you don't!

If you like how the Canikon works then you are best staying with that brand - either of those new releases is more than capable of taking great shots and being a pleasure to use.
Click to expand...
I wish I had your ninja skills to bang a relatively moving subject in focus on a f1.4 lens getting the eyes sharp! Do share some of your tips because I have a canon a1 film 1538758061272.jpeg
 
jonneymendoza said:
I wish I had your ninja skills to bang a relatively moving subject in focus on a f1.4 lens getting the eyes sharp! Do share some of your tips because I have a canon a1 film View attachment 135929
Click to expand...

That is why I said 75% of the time :-) AF tracking is all that I find AF useful for but I shoot less and less moving subjects now.
 
Last edited:
jonneymendoza said:
I wish I had your ninja skills to bang a relatively moving subject in focus on a f1.4 lens getting the eyes sharp! Do share some of your tips because I have a canon a1 film View attachment 135929
Click to expand...

you have got it all wrong. you should be taking out of focus pictures. its art and it'll ooze character.
You should tell your clients that too.

you are clearly not a photographer
 
nandbytes said:
you have got it all wrong. you should be taking out of focus pictures. its art and it'll ooze character.
You should tell your clients that too.

you are clearly not a photographer
Click to expand...

You might imagine that's a smart funny comment, but it's daft as yourself and shows clear signs of lack of comprehension. Nobody suggested out of focus images and you have no clue what art or character even mean. You're not a photographer, you're a gear head, like jonney - Just because I say so, isn't that how it works for you lot? I never see either of you post images unless it's of gear, even now jonney chooses to post an image of some old gear as if it made a point - where's the images FROM it instead?
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
I don't know your mother, sorry kid. What's a "true" photographer? I'd love to hear your nonsensical thought on that ... you've always sounded a bit thick - you don't even know what you're jumping in on. It's the lens I have not the camera you dope. Also you've just proved me right, for you it's all about the gear it seems ...
Click to expand...

Yet you're the one quoting others and claiming they're not your words, you're just spraying them around because clearly you don't agree. As Guy pointed out stop being a troll or at the very least stop being so precious about equipment that the best argument you can come up with is that other equipment is somehow not pure enough.

I realise you've got no argument beyond personal attacks but really do grow up.
 
Last edited:
simonbarker said:
Yet you're the one quoting others and claiming they're not your words, you're just spraying them around because clearly you don't agree. As Guy pointed out stop being a troll or at the very least stop being so precious about equipment that the best argument you can come up with is that other equipment is somehow not pure enough.
Click to expand...

It's called responding, if you didn't quote me I wouldn't have to tell you some home truths. When did any of this have anything to do with you? You're the one who got thick and felt the need to come after me. One of the usual bingo bus crew claiming I'm trolling doesn't make it so. I posted something I happen to agree with, [edit: I also chose this particular thread because it was already ruined by the Sony heads] in your blinding rush to jump in on the defensive you may have missed the fact the quote was from a Sony user.
 
Last edited:
simonbarker said:
I realise you've got no argument beyond personal attacks but really do grow up.
Click to expand...

Weak - you edited that in after I already responded to your whining. YOU came at me first, you deserved nothing less. Everytime someone has a differing opinion on here, or posts something the usual clique don't agree with, there has to be this string of nonsense, the usual idiots jumping in thinking their say matters on it. Ride that bingo bus all you like, but I'll make a stand for the alt opinions, tired of you gear head fools taking the place over.
 
Why do certain Sony users seem to spend the majority of their time in here doing their best to diss everything canon have to offer. could it be some sort of an envy thing?
 
gerry s said:
Why do certain Sony users seem to spend the majority of their time in here doing their best to diss everything canon have to offer. could it be some sort of an envy thing?
Click to expand...

You'll find them in the Nikon, Fuji and even M43 threads too spewing the same nonsense and having a pop at anyone who disagrees
 
gerry s said:
Why do certain Sony users seem to spend the majority of their time in here doing their best to diss everything canon have to offer. could it be some sort of an envy thing?
Click to expand...

Nope, nothing to envy ;) lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top