The final camera decision...

Tom Green said:
Too expensive or I would
Click to expand...

Get the a6300 then if you must have 4k... and slightly bigger sensor than m43 with better handling than the a7... Or get the gx8 or the g80 or a xt1 or a xt2 or a em1 or a em5ii or an a7r or a nx1 or a xt10 or a a7ii or a 6d or a d750...
 
Last edited:
I personally believe if you use any body long enough you'll get used to it and start liking it. It may take longer with some other than others. I know a lot people on the interwebz will strongly disagree with me but I haven't come across a body I couldn't get used to as long as it had two dials and a viewfinder.
 
twist said:
Get the a6300 then if you must have 4k... and slightly bigger sensor than m43 with better handling than the a7... Or get the gx8 or the g80 or a xt1 or a xt2 or a em1 or a em5ii or an a7r or a nx1 or a xt10 or a a7ii or a 6d or a d750...
Click to expand...

Tom, they are all great so you're unlikely to go wrong whichever you select, no? and if you do then sell and try again? Save wasting valuable shooting time :)
 
Think you'd be best going for a 7D

:exit:
 
twist said:
Get the a6300 then if you must have 4k... and slightly bigger sensor than m43 with better handling than the a7... Or get the gx8 or the g80 or a xt1 or a xt2 or a em1 or a em5ii or an a7r or a nx1 or a xt10 or a a7ii or a 6d or a d750...
Click to expand...
:LOL::LOL:
 
twist said:
Get the a6300 then if you must have 4k... and slightly bigger sensor than m43 with better handling than the a7... Or get the gx8 or the g80 or a xt1 or a xt2 or a em1 or a em5ii or an a7r or a nx1 or a xt10 or a a7ii or a 6d or a d750...
Click to expand...

I think the A7 is the better handling camera if only for the layout of dials you'd use for aperture and shutter.
 
Tom Green said:
Very true! I am close I think
Click to expand...

Tom I can't understand why you're so attracted to the GX8...

Imagine the scenario... you have your shiny new camera and then you start to select lenses... "Hmmmm, which ones are affected by shutter shock? Dunno, I'll have to spend the week Googling...." If you want MFT save yourself the headache and get a G8 or a GX80 or wait for the GX9 if they make one.

I love the FF quality of the A7 but if I had to (with a gun to my head) go for a smaller system I'd take a serious look at the A6300 but there are some gaps in the lens line up so if the lenses didn't suit that may just push me back to MFT.
 
woof woof said:
Tom I can't understand why you're so attracted to the GX8...

Imagine the scenario... you have your shiny new camera and then you start to select lenses... "Hmmmm, which ones are affected by shutter shock? Dunno, I'll have to spend the week Googling...." If you want MFT save yourself the headache and get a G8 or a GX80 or wait for the GX9 if they make one.

I love the FF quality of the A7 but if I had to (with a gun to my head) go for a smaller system I'd take a serious look at the A6300 but there are some gaps in the lens line up so if the lenses didn't suit that may just push me back to MFT.
Click to expand...

I know you can't, but for me it offers more than any other M43 (at the price point). G8 and GX80 put me off, G8 because I may as well get my 7D back and GX80 because its not as good ergonomically, DXO rate it lower, weather sealing, swivel screen etc. Only 16mp also puts me off.

GX9 would be a perfect solution.

Would consider A6300 but missed the Amazon deal and because I am stubborn I will not pay more than that deal price for it.

I like the A7, but I am really struggling with what lenses I would have/use. Realistically I can afford a prime and to have the kit lens (which seems to have crap reviews) - this gives me compromise at the bottom end (used to 16mm equivalent) and the top end in terms of no telephoto zoom if I ever wanted one (rarely use this though). - I am just worried this is too many compromises to make.

The GX8 I would get the 12-35mm which doesn't seem to be affected (thats the only lens I would need for the time being) perhaps get an even wider lens in the future.

They definitely both have compromises.

As I mentioned above - the gx8 with the sony sensor would be the king
 
Last edited:
Tom Green said:
Cheers for that.
Click to expand...

I have an A7R on sale at the moment if you are interested. Not in the classified, on commission. Boxed with spare batteries etc.

Sony lenses are expenses because most good lenses cost good money. I used Leica M and R on my A7R, mostly vintage, cheap and superb. Had the Sony 24-70, sold it after one outing.
 
Last edited:
StevenS said:
I have an A7R on sale at the moment if you are interested. Not in the classified, on commission. Boxed with spare batteries etc.

Sony lenses are expenses because most good lenses cost good money. I used Leica M and R on my A7R, mostly vintage, cheap and superb. Had the Sony 24-70, sold it after one outing.
Click to expand...
What was wrong with the 24-70, I've had mine for ages and it's a great lens?
 
StevenS said:
I have an A7R on sale at the moment if you are interested. Not in the classified, on commission. Boxed with spare batteries etc.

Sony lenses are expenses because most good lenses cost good money. I used Leica M and R on my A7R, mostly vintage, cheap and superb. Had the Sony 24-70, sold it after one outing.
Click to expand...

I actually already have the A7 sat at home still sealed mate. Got it for £619 with the kit lens from Amazon prime day.

Question - when using vintage lenses that are manual focus, are you ok to do it handheld or does the complete lack of IS stop this? I've never used one!
 
Tom Green said:
Question - when using vintage lenses that are manual focus, are you ok to do it handheld or does the complete lack of IS stop this? I've never used one!
Click to expand...

People have managed and shot without IS for longer than with IS :D

I still use my A7 with adapted lenses for IR photography. (Legacy lenses work better than latest greatest Zeiss lenses in IR)

Previously I used to shoot a-mount lenses adapted on to A7 with no IS inc. lenses like 70-400G. I managed just fine with good technique. Don't get me wrong IS is certainly very useful tool but it's not the beginning and end of photography.
 
Also seeing as you have already got the A7 at such a great price just stick with it. Buy your lenses used. Then a year down the line if decide it's not for you, sell it for minimal loss.
 
Tom Green said:
I actually already have the A7 sat at home still sealed mate. Got it for £619 with the kit lens from Amazon prime day.

Question - when using vintage lenses that are manual focus, are you ok to do it handheld or does the complete lack of IS stop this? I've never used one!
Click to expand...
As Nandbytes said it's not an essential feature, IS is really just for allowing you to shoot at lower shutter speeds than you could without it, but shooting with reasonable shutter speeds it's not required. With good handheld technique IS is not a requirement.
 
Kiwi Paul said:
What was wrong with the 24-70, I've had mine for ages and it's a great lens?
Click to expand...

Big and fairly heavy and I don't like zoom lenses. Optically it is OK. Just like small cameras. Really a matter of what you are using it for.
 
nandbytes said:
People have managed and shot without IS for longer than with IS :D

I still use my A7 with adapted lenses for IR photography. (Legacy lenses work better than latest greatest Zeiss lenses in IR)

Previously I used to shoot a-mount lenses adapted on to A7 with no IS inc. lenses like 70-400G. I managed just fine with good technique. Don't get me wrong IS is certainly very useful tool but it's not the beginning and end of photography.
Click to expand...

I have a Leica Q that has IS and it does mean you can take pictures in all manner of ways that are always sharp. As I do mainly travel and street photography and I prefer the control of manual focus, IS is of no real benefit to me. I use a film M7 and digital M10. If I was into birds and motorsport I would of course have completely different kit.

It really depends on your attitude to photography. Typical subject matter is the major determinant, then the level of practicality. I like to be able to carry 2 cameras and a few primes all day without noticing the size or weight. When travelling I prefer not to spend much time behind the viewfinder. I've been to places where people are constantly behind the viewfinder. I tend to enjoy places like normal people, at the same time thinking what will make a good picture. I then take a few, maybe just one, picture, normally quickly because I'm not looking for the picture from behind the camera. Aperture and manual focusing is very quick.

Personally, I think the Sony A7 series of cameras are almost revolutionary. I offered my A7R to my son, but he has a bashed X-Pro1, but mainly shoots film on a Bessa. (He's 20)
 
StevenS said:
I have a Leica Q that has IS and it does mean you can take pictures in all manner of ways that are always sharp. As I do mainly travel and street photography and I prefer the control of manual focus, IS is of no real benefit to me. I use a film M7 and digital M10. If I was into birds and motorsport I would of course have completely different kit.

It really depends on your attitude to photography. Typical subject matter is the major determinant, then the level of practicality. I like to be able to carry 2 cameras and a few primes all day without noticing the size or weight. When travelling I prefer not to spend much time behind the viewfinder. I've been to places where people are constantly behind the viewfinder. I tend to enjoy places like normal people, at the same time thinking what will make a good picture. I then take a few, maybe just one, picture, normally quickly because I'm not looking for the picture from behind the camera. Aperture and manual focusing is very quick.

Personally, I think the Sony A7 series of cameras are almost revolutionary. I offered my A7R to my son, but he has a bashed X-Pro1, but mainly shoots film on a Bessa. (He's 20)
Click to expand...

That's sound advice :)
 
The point about IS being a requirement of subject is true but if you're shooting fast action like birds etc it's going to be no use because you'll have high enough shutter speeds to not have any shake. The general rule of 1/focal length for your shutter speed is the best thing to work to.

If you're shooting low light, IS will help unless your subjects are moving, in which case they will still be blurred.

You've mentioned shooting landscape in which case IS will definitely be less use as you will generally be on a tripod.
 
Last edited:
At the moment I am thinking keep the A7, buy the commilite adapter for £53 (reviews pretty well) and get the Canon 24mm f2.8 is usm - I think that would make a great travel lens and landscape kit
 
Tom Green said:
At the moment I am thinking keep the A7, buy the commilite adapter for £53 (reviews pretty well) and get the Canon 24mm f2.8 is usm - I think that would make a great travel lens and landscape kit
Click to expand...

Don't buy the commlite especially for wide angles. The internal reflections will ruin your pictures.
I'd suggest the smaller and faster FE 28mm f/2. Its better to have one more stop of light than IS in this focal range. Lets you can handhold at 1/25 with either of these lenses. With IS you can probably go down to 1/6-1/3 (2-3 stops). How much do you think you'll shoot at that shutter speed, at 1/25 its already slow enough to make anything remotely moving blurry.

Also don't forget to buy my lens ;):D
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
Don't buy the commlite especially for wide angles. The internal reflections will ruin you pictures.
I'd suggest the smaller and faster FE 28mm f/2. Its better to have one more stop of light than IS in this focal range. Lets you can handhold at 1/25 with either of these lenses. With IS you can probably go down to 1/6-1/3. How do you think you'll shoot at that shutter speed, at 1/25 its already slow enough to make anything remotely moving blurry.

Also don't forget to buy my lens ;):D
Click to expand...


Still thinking about your lens - don't worry haha. Just never used a manual focus and hesitant about spending a considerable amount on one. In terms of focusing - how long does it take/how much of an inconvenience is it?
 
Tom Green said:
Still thinking about your lens - don't worry haha. Just never used a manual focus and hesitant about spending a considerable amount on one. In terms of focusing - how long does it take/how much of an inconvenience is it?
Click to expand...

With an ultra-wide angle like 21mm?
Stick it at f/8-11, hyper focal range (around 2-3m) and you never need to focus in your life again :LOL:

On a more serious note, it depends on your experience. With UWA lenses its nearing AF quickness once you learn to use the in-camera tools (like focus peaking) and use the hyperfocal distance.

Takes more effort and practice with longer lenses.

if you are crazy you can shoot even birds with manual focus lenses - https://www.flickr.com/photos/98547444@N03/
he uses a nex7 with canon FD manual telephoto lenses to shoot kingfishers in action. :eek::cool:
 
Last edited:
Tom Green said:
Still thinking about your lens - don't worry haha. Just never used a manual focus and hesitant about spending a considerable amount on one. In terms of focusing - how long does it take/how much of an inconvenience is it?
Click to expand...

+ what would you recommend other than commitlite? (not metabones - way too expensive)
 
I use Sigma MC-11. Think Viltrox is quite decent too and costs about £15-20 more than commlite.
 
Tom Green said:
I actually already have the A7 sat at home still sealed mate. Got it for £619 with the kit lens from Amazon prime day.

Question - when using vintage lenses that are manual focus, are you ok to do it handheld or does the complete lack of IS stop this? I've never used one!
Click to expand...

I find IS of limited use. If there's a choice of having it or not then you might as well have it but for me it's not a deal breaker as most of my pictures involve things that move at least sloooowly so I need to keep my shutter speed up to the point that IS is really a non issue.

Maybe you could have a think about the subjects you take pictures of, how you take them and what focal length and shutter speed you use and try and decide if IS is a definite requirement and a deal breaker if not present or not. As you may know I use manual lenses a lot and I have no problems with them on my A7 but the SS issue could make some manual lenses problematic on the GX8, I was surprised to find that SS affected my Minolta 50mm f1.2 on my GX7. Switching to the electronic shutter brings its own problems.

And one last thing on MFT. The G8 is still (I think) quite a saving in bulk and weight over a DSLR and I don't think that the image quality differences between the GX8 and GX80 will be significant... not according to the reviews I've read anyway which tend to say that if anything the GX8 is only a smidgen better. Personally I think you're obsessing a bit on image quality between MFT cameras but you're right to consider handling and if the GX8 handles well for you that may be the one to go for and you're going into this aware of the SS issue and the effect that could have on resale value if you choose to sell it one day.

Good luck choosing :D
 
stevelmx5 said:
The point about IS being a requirement of subject is true but if you're shooting fast action like birds etc it's going to be no use because you'll have high enough shutter speeds to not have any shake. The general rule of 1/focal length for your shutter speed is the best thing to work to.

If you're shooting low light, IS will help unless your subjects are moving, in which case they will still be blurred.

You've mentioned shooting landscape in which case IS will definitely be less use as you will generally be on a tripod.
Click to expand...

So here are three pictures, speeds are 1/90, 1/60 and 1/8. All hand-held with no IS. No post-processing at all, even lens correction. (Camera was Leica Monochrom, not an A7, Leica M has no IS and can be used very slow.)

Speed is just another variable depending what you want to achieve. High ISO capability like the A7 just gives you more scope. On the other hand, if you want a grainy image (grain is NOT always bad), you can set the A7 ISO low, slow speed and small aperture. All I'm trying to say is that the photographer should be deciding what type of image they want, not the camera.

I would add that the lens was f/2, but I wanted a shot with movement and the shadows and the ice to be in focus. So even though it was night-time, the 1/8th image was shot with a small aperture (f/11).

The heavy crop is from the 1/8th image. Always worth checking a camera for slow speed performance.

L1011860.jpg
L1011839.jpg L1011851.jpg
L1011851-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
StevenS said:
So here are three pictures, speeds are 1/90, 1/60 and 1/8. All hand-held with no IS. No post-processing at all, even lens correction. (Camera was Leica Monochrom, not an A7, Leica M has no IS and can be used very slow.)

Speed is just another variable depending what you want to achieve. High ISO capability like the A7 just gives you more scope. On the other hand, if you want a grainy image (grain is NOT always bad), you can set the A7 ISO low, slow speed and small aperture. All I'm trying to say is that the photographer should be deciding what type of image they want, not the camera.

I would add that the lens was f/2, but I wanted a shot with movement and the shadows and the ice to be in focus. So even though it was night-time, the 1/8th image was shot with a small aperture (f/11).

The heavy crop is from the 1/8th image. Always worth checking a camera for slow speed performance.

View attachment 106537
View attachment 106538 View attachment 106539
View attachment 106540
Click to expand...

Love the shot at 1/8. Nicely done! Can really sense the movement.
 
Ruffmeister said:
Love the shot at 1/8. Nicely done! Can really sense the movement.
Click to expand...

Thanks for not mentioning the 1/30th is truly terrible, I had it as I did a series slower and slower till I got what I wanted. It also shows the benefit of well-balanced cameras with relatively small lenses (Fujifilm X100, XF rangefinder, A7 with non-Sony or Sony wide primes, Leica etc.) and good ISO that can be shot hand-held at slow speeds. I took those walking after work from Temple to Charing Cross, as I normally have a camera in my bag.
My experience is you find out a camera's weaknesses after you've bought it.
My son showed me an auction site yesterday he uses and there was an Olympus Trip 35 on it for £70, immaculate. I used one for years - a perfect camera with no faults I can remember!

The Author, Tom, has an A7. Good choice. Hopefully one day he will put a 35 prime on it.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top