Want to get back in the game, compact FF?

[insertusernamehere]

I want to get back into a bit of photography now I have a bit more time.

Shot cannon for many years from a 20D right up to a 1Dx (for point to point photos)
Had kids, switched to an XT-1 which was brilliant with the 35mm.

Switched to a Nikon D750 and having gone back through my photos the ones taken with this and the 35/f1.8 are absolutely my favourite all time ones

Wanted something lighter with more tele, had a brief dabble with a Sony RX10 before switching to the XT-5
The XT-5 went largely unused so I went "iPhone only" as I don't really do much tele work other than a bit of twitching.

I thought I wanted a Fuji again but I think the FF is the magic I’m missing rather than the Fuji-ness

I’m looking for something EDC sized really, I know if it’s too big and heavy I won’t use it.

Also the battery drain on the RX10 really annoyed me, I couldn’t just pick it up and use it because the battery would constantly be dead.

I do like a view finder even if it’s EVF and I do like manual controls (why I liked the Fuji)

I loved the fact I could SOCC with Fuji and I understand the S9 is good at that but the lack of EVF I think makes it a no go

Zero interest in video

So what should I be looking at?
A7C / ii seems like the obvious choice?

 

[ancient_mariner]

A7C / ii seems like the obvious choice?

Yes. There's no great pancake lenses for Sony, if it must be super-compact.

For the manual feel, consider a Sigma contemporary:

35mm F2 DG | LENSES | Sigma

This page is about Sigma's 35mm F2 DG.

www.sigma-global.com

45mm F2.8 DG | LENSES | Sigma

This page is about Sigma's 45mm F2.8 DG.

www.sigma-global.com

Or for less money and weight but more plastic, and without a manual feeling, look at the Samyang 35 and 45 f1.8:

Samyang AF 35mm f1.8 Autofocus Lens - Sony FE Mount

The Samyang AF 35mm F1.8 FE is a fast-aperture, wide-angle, prime lens, optimised for use with full-frame Sony E-mount cameras. The compact size and light weight of this prime provides great mobility and convenience for sho

www.cameracentreuk.com

Samyang AF 45mm f1.8 Autofocus Lens - Sony FE Mount

The extremely versatile AF 45mm F1.8 FE from Samyang boasts a fast aperture and minimum object distance of just 45cm. Vignetting, distortion and chromatic aberration are extremely well-controlled, making this an ideal lens

www.cameracentreuk.com

 

[insertusernamehere]

Yes. There's no great pancake lenses for Sony, if it must be super-compact.

Thank you, I was pondering the 35mm 2.8 Carl Zeiss as an option but I will check these out as well.

I hadn’t realised there wasn’t a true pancake which is a bit of a pain…. Back down the rabbit hole!

​

 

[f/1.2]

I want to get back into a bit of photography now I have a bit more time.

Shot cannon for many years from a 20D right up to a 1Dx (for point to point photos)
Had kids, switched to an XT-1 which was brilliant with the 35mm.

Switched to a Nikon D750 and having gone back through my photos the ones taken with this and the 35/f1.8 are absolutely my favourite all time ones

Wanted something lighter with more tele, had a brief dabble with a Sony RX10 before switching to the XT-5
The XT-5 went largely unused so I went "iPhone only" as I don't really do much tele work other than a bit of twitching.

I thought I wanted a Fuji again but I think the FF is the magic I’m missing rather than the Fuji-ness

I’m looking for something EDC sized really, I know if it’s too big and heavy I won’t use it.

Also the battery drain on the RX10 really annoyed me, I couldn’t just pick it up and use it because the battery would constantly be dead.

I do like a view finder even if it’s EVF and I do like manual controls (why I liked the Fuji)

I loved the fact I could SOCC with Fuji and I understand the S9 is good at that but the lack of EVF I think makes it a no go

Zero interest in video

So what should I be looking at?
A7C / ii seems like the obvious choice?

For my smaller set up I have:

Sony A7CII
Viltrox 14mm f/4
Viltrox 20mm f/2.8
Sigma 35mm f/2
TT Artisan 40mm f/2
Samyang 45mm f/1.8
Samyang 75mm f/1.8

A7CII with any of those lenses is very portable.

 

[woof woof]

As well as the 35mm f2.8 have a look at the Sony 24mm f2.8 and 40 and 50mm f2.5 G's. They're small and have an aperture ring.

I have the 35mm f2.8 and the newer 24 and 40mm.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I should correct myself about no pancake lenses. Samyang made 3: 35, 28 and 24. I have the 35 and AF isn't great although the Sony 50 1.8 is distinctly worse. Tamron made a couple too, but they weren't great either.

 

[insertusernamehere]

Thank you all, sounds like I’ve come to the right conclusion about the Sony.

Does anyone notice the A7C draining batteries? That was my one, maybe silly, bug bear about the RX

Excellent feedback on the lenses as well thank you, in my head I hoped for a Fuji 28mm style pancake but that was optimistic given the nature of full frame!

Off to do a bit more reading

 

[Musicman]

Thank you, I was pondering the 35mm 2.8 Carl Zeiss as an option

I have one of these and it's very compact, especially with the less traditional design of the hood that you can leave on all the time.

 

[f/1.2]

Thank you all, sounds like I’ve come to the right conclusion about the Sony.

Does anyone notice the A7C draining batteries? That was my one, maybe silly, bug bear about the RX

Excellent feedback on the lenses as well thank you, in my head I hoped for a Fuji 28mm style pancake but that was optimistic given the nature of full frame!

Off to do a bit more reading

Haven't had that issue on my A7CII.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I typically get about 1000 shots from a charge in my A7III using the same battery type as the A7C.

 

[Nod]

I should correct myself about no pancake lenses. Samyang made 3: 35, 28 and 24. I have the 35 and AF isn't great although the Sony 50 1.8 is distinctly worse. Tamron made a couple too, but they weren't great either.

When you say that the AF isn't great, do you mean that it misses focus or is a bit slow/hunty? Even the slowest AF lens I've had (an old Nikkor 180 screw driven one) was faster than me trying to MF!

 

[Faldrax]

Thank you all, sounds like I’ve come to the right conclusion about the Sony.

Does anyone notice the A7C draining batteries? That was my one, maybe silly, bug bear about the RX

Excellent feedback on the lenses as well thank you, in my head I hoped for a Fuji 28mm style pancake but that was optimistic given the nature of full frame!

Off to do a bit more reading

The RX10 uses the smaller batteries (FW-50) that the majority of the APS-C Sony's use.
The A7c ii uses the larger FZ100, which holds a lot more charge (2280 mAh rather than 1020 mAh).
Mirrorless will use batteries faster than DSLR, partly because they use an EVF, and partly because the latest cameras do so much more processing (for AF, etc), but with the bigger battery it's much less of an issue (I still carry a couple of spares with me, but did the same with my DSLR).

 

[Ed Sutton]

When you say that the AF isn't great, do you mean that it misses focus or is a bit slow/hunty? Even the slowest AF lens I've had (an old Nikkor 180 screw driven one) was faster than me trying to MF!

I'd read that the 50/1.8 was slow to focus but took a chance on one anyway. Yes, it's a lot slower than current lenses, but no slower than a screw drive Nikon. Initial focus can be very slow, and probably not great for tracking fast subjects, but for slow/static things it'll do for me.

 

[insertusernamehere]

The RX10 uses the smaller batteries (FW-50) that the majority of the APS-C Sony's use.
The A7c ii uses the larger FZ100, which holds a lot more charge (2280 mAh rather than 1020 mAh).
Mirrorless will use batteries faster than DSLR, partly because they use an EVF, and partly because the latest cameras do so much more processing (for AF, etc), but with the bigger battery it's much less of an issue (I still carry a couple of spares with me, but did the same with my DSLR).

Thank you, the RX used to drain to dead when “off” which was the problem.
Never had it with any other camera but Sony weren’t interested in knowing.
It meant I couldn’t just grab and go, unless I remembered to plug it in (which I often didn’t)

 

[ancient_mariner]

When you say that the AF isn't great, do you mean that it misses focus or is a bit slow/hunty? Even the slowest AF lens I've had (an old Nikkor 180 screw driven one) was faster than me trying to MF!

It can miss focus or get hunty, though that's usually obvious. Not like the 50 f1.8 that would almost always miss focus enough to blur the subject but not be obvious in the evf unless stopped down to f8 (sometimes even then.

 

[Faldrax]

Thank you, the RX used to drain to dead when “off” which was the problem.
Never had it with any other camera but Sony weren’t interested in knowing.
It meant I couldn’t just grab and go, unless I remembered to plug it in (which I often didn’t)

My daughter has an RX10iii, and hasn't commented on that as a problem - she does carry at least 2 spare batteries, so may simply be swapping them if the one on camera is down without mentioning it).

 

[the_accidental]

I’ve a Cii and Samyang 35/2.8 (amongst other lenses ) - it’s about as compact as FF gets

Focus is fine imo - it’ll nail eye focus on a toddler that won’t stay still, which is the torture test for my purposes

 

[Sharps]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Lumix S9, it's a mirrorless full frame, small and produces excellent images

 

[insertusernamehere]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Lumix S9, it's a mirrorless full frame, small and produces excellent images

No EVF though, it was in my original post

Happy to hear arguments for it though!

 

[Sharps]

No EVF though, it was in my original post

Happy to hear arguments for it though!

No arguments here, I have the Z8 and the S9. The S9 takes some getting used to because of the lack of an EVF, but it's such a good, fun little camera to use. I have gotten over it, especially when it comes to street photography.

 

[moggi1964]

Nikon Zf with the 40mm se lens.

Bigger than the Fuji of course but gives you FF, dials and a 'pancake' lens.

 

[insertusernamehere]

Nikon Zf with the 40mm se lens.

Bigger than the Fuji of course but gives you FF, dials and a 'pancake' lens.

I think the ZF itself is a bit bigger than I am looking for

 

[realspeed]

it is no so much the camera but the lens weight v mm that makes the choice different. This is why I ditched Nikon FF camera range and swapped to Panasonic MFT cameras . Now own the G9 and he G9ii and best move I ever made. Just compare the 100-400mm panasonic MFT lens . that is equal to the 200-800 mm FF lens but also stablisation on lens and camera. Try going on a day out with carrying an 800mm lens!!! also the new 100-400mm lens can accept a 2x addition making it a 400-1600mm lens wow , Lug that out of the house in FF terms. No as far as i am concerned one can stuff any FF camera and associated lens that have to be dedicated to the camera make. With MFT lens there is no limitation on lens v camera make opening up a huge wide choice .

just taken hand held with pana G9ii @ mft 400mm or in ff terms 800mm . Try doing that with a FF lens @800mm QED (quad erat demonstrandum)
and I am 81 years old still hold a lens steady without much effort

View: https://youtu.be/Ee5c46ts8qg

 

[insertusernamehere]

Thank you but I am looking for the specific style that FF brings

 

[realspeed]

ok but what do you mean by "style". I am confused, please explain?

 

[woof woof]

It's a shame MFT stopped making RF style cameras but even if they still made them FF offers better IQ and more control over DoF.

 

[ancient_mariner]

It's a shame MFT stopped making RF style cameras but even if they still made them FF offers better IQ and more control over DoF.

I suspect it's about the look of the photo, not the body style. M43 images often have a one-dimensional look to me, like the image is flat rather than a scene from life. APS-C less so but still somewhat, FF better yet. Move up to medium format and things are better again. It not just a bokeh/depth of field thing, because MF cameras generally use quite slow lenses by comparison to FF.

 

[insertusernamehere]

I suspect it's about the look of the photo, not the body style. M43 images often have a one-dimensional look to me, like the image is flat rather than a scene from life. APS-C less so but still somewhat, FF better yet. Move up to medium format and things are better again. It not just a bokeh/depth of field thing, because MF cameras generally use quite slow lenses by comparison to FF.

Exactly this thank you.

@realspeed If you read the original post, albeit somewhat lengthy, I do say the D750 produced my absolute favourite photos and that I think it’s the full frame images that I am missing

I’d love to move up to medium frame but I definetly need lightweight

 

[realspeed]

Not having a go at anyone or any photography forums, I have to say there seems to be a general Anti Micro four thirds from so may photographers. As I say I have watched this trend oven many platforms and most of the anti brigade have never actually used an MFT camera. I was the same, using many different Nikon cameras from the D70s throught the range up to the D810. Before that a Voitlander vito CL film camera
In the end circumstances directed me to look at MFT camera and realised unless being a professional demanding he highest perfect photograph most would not know the difference between which camera format was used.
Not for the first time has MFT cameras been shrugged off without actually having a hands on. Of course I understand people make their own mind up and choice.
From my perspective this was the way I went and have no regrets. It allows me to continue the enjoy a hobby I have had since the Brownie 127 box camera days

 

[ancient_mariner]

Not having a go at anyone or any photography forums, I have to say there seems to be a general Anti Micro four thirds from so may photographers. As I say I have watched this trend oven many platforms and most of the anti brigade have never actually used an MFT camera. I was the same, using many different Nikon cameras from the D70s throught the range up to the D810. Before that a Voitlander vito CL film camera
In the end circumstances directed me to look at MFT camera and realised unless being a professional demanding he highest perfect photograph most would not know the difference between which camera format was used.
Not for the first time has MFT cameras been shrugged off without actually using. Of course I understand people make their own mind up and choice. From my perspective this was the way I went and have no regrets. It allows me to continue the enjoy a hobby I have had since the Brownie 127 box camera days

Some can see the difference... and some not so much. But FWIW my wife has owned and used an Olympus E-M10 for years because it's handbag size with the pancake 14-42 but makes enormously more pleasing pictures than her previous Panasonic TZ10 compact. There will possibly come a time when I'll be forced to use a light camera and will be grateful for M43 or similar.

A few years back @snerkler posted some pictures of the same scene taken with M43 and FF, processed to be as close as possible, and the 3Dness of the FF pictures was immediately obvious without having to be told. It's not that one is bad and the other good, rather that they produce a different character to the images, and recognising that lets you choose what you like.

 

[insertusernamehere]

Nothing at all against M43, we have a couple
of Panasonics, it’s just not what I am looking for at all

 

[snerkler]

Some can see the difference... and some not so much. But FWIW my wife has owned and used an Olympus E-M10 for years because it's handbag size with the pancake 14-42 but makes enormously more pleasing pictures than her previous Panasonic TZ10 compact. There will possibly come a time when I'll be forced to use a light camera and will be grateful for M43 or similar.

A few years back @snerkler posted some pictures of the same scene taken with M43 and FF, processed to be as close as possible, and the 3Dness of the FF pictures was immediately obvious without having to be told. It's not that one is bad and the other good, rather that they produce a different character to the images, and recognising that lets you choose what you like.

I need to revisit those as I couldn’t tell at the time. I’m not sure I will be able to now either in all honesty but a lot of the time I do notice a difference.

I have considered going back to m4/3 time and time again but I know how picky I am

 

[woof woof]

I suspect it's about the look of the photo, not the body style. M43 images often have a one-dimensional look to me, like the image is flat rather than a scene from life. APS-C less so but still somewhat, FF better yet. Move up to medium format and things are better again. It not just a bokeh/depth of field thing, because MF cameras generally use quite slow lenses by comparison to FF.

I mentioned RF style as that's what the OP is looking at and is possibly the most compact form if that's important for an EDC.

I don't find MFT flat, I have many pictures which don't look flat to me. One cause could be due to the x2 crop and a lot of lenses or the aperture people choose giving greater depth even wide open. IMO this can be avoided by using f1.4 to f2.8 lenses and using them wide open to f4 at the smallest rather than being at f5.6 or selecting f8 as some people seem to do. MFT is not going to match newer FF IQ though.

I'm not interested in MF, too big and too expensive for me and maybe pushing the EDC idea a bit far.

 

[woof woof]

Not having a go at anyone or any photography forums, I have to say there seems to be a general Anti Micro four thirds from so may photographers. As I say I have watched this trend oven many platforms and most of the anti brigade have never actually used an MFT camera. I was the same, using many different Nikon cameras from the D70s throught the range up to the D810. Before that a Voitlander vito CL film camera
In the end circumstances directed me to look at MFT camera and realised unless being a professional demanding he highest perfect photograph most would not know the difference between which camera format was used.
Not for the first time has MFT cameras been shrugged off without actually having a hands on. Of course I understand people make their own mind up and choice.
From my perspective this was the way I went and have no regrets. It allows me to continue the enjoy a hobby I have had since the Brownie 127 box camera days

I'm not anti MFT, I have MFT kit but you have to accept it can't match the IQ of FF if you look for the differences. Not noticing or not caring is a different thing. The choice is there though but the OP did specify FF.

 

[insertusernamehere]

Nikon Zf with the 40mm se lens.

Bigger than the Fuji of course but gives you FF, dials and a 'pancake' lens.

I have to say, I dismissed the ZF out of hand due to the size.... but having done a bit more reading its a maybe, I might need to go and pick up the ZF and the A7C somewhere and compare them

 

[moggi1964]

I have to say, I dismissed the ZF out of hand due to the size.... but having done a bit more reading its a maybe, I might need to go and pick up the ZF and the A7C somewhere and compare them

I think handling them is a really good idea. The Zf definitely isn't compact like some of the Fujifilm cameras but I find it to be just fine. I added a grip for the days when I am carrying it on my wrist strap for more than a few hours which helps otherwise a PD sling is my go to strap.

Good luck in your decision making.

 

[snerkler]

For those that are wondering, this is the comparison Toni (@ancient_mariner ) was referring to, one shot on a FF Nikon DSLR, one shot on a m4/3 Olympus. I can see more of a difference now than I did when I first did the comparison but I'm still not sure if it's the difference in FF vs m4/3 or simply because the framing/angle is ever so slightly different. However it proves to me there are times when the difference between FF and m4/3 is minimal, however I've had examples where the difference is much wider.


Screenshot 2025-05-02 at 14.18.07 by Toby Gunnee, on Flickr