Jump to content

shogun95

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About shogun95

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

185 profile views
  1. I own both lenses and it very much depends on what you wish to shoot. I do a lot of landscape and primarily use the 16-35 f2.8. When walking around the 24-105 is my primary. Both are great lenses but have different purposes.
  2. Am I the only one who is not interested in upgrading from an r3? I really am not interested in a larger Mp sensor. 42 is plenty for me and the size of the files is slowing my system already. More dynamic range is great but I'm personally not interested in the larger sensor. I guess that is good news for my wallet : )
  3. If I have enough light, is there any downside to using ISO 50 instead on the base 100? On the other hand, does ISO 50 give better results than 100? Thanks!
  4. I have an A7R3 that I am in love with. Most shooting is landscapes. Looking to get a good backup camera as I am getting ready for a couple of bucket list trips. Any ideas that won't break the bank? Another A7R3 is out of the question. Was thinking maybe an A6300 but really not sure and was looking for some perspective and ideas. Thanks!
  5. Very happy with the Sony 16-35 f2.8 for astro.
  6. 16-35 2.8 is a great lens for landscapes as well as astro work. Not cheap but buy it once and be done. Bokah is good as well.
×
×
  • Create New...