Jump to content

Pieter

Members
  • Content Count

    234
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

Pieter last won the day on December 2

Pieter had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Pieter

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,162 profile views
  1. I think you chose wisely. If it's convenience and decent image quality you're after, an RX10 makes a lot of sense. I'll probably get a 70-350 for my a6500 someday, but it'll be a splurge as I rarely shoot beyond 100mm.
  2. For his polite and helpful way of saying RTFM, you might wanna give him a 💙🏆 😅
  3. You may have read my rectification on the use of that generalized statement. As a general convenience ultrazoom it may be quite decent. In fact there's nothing quite like it with its 22× zoom range so if that's what you're after then it may work well for you. However, O.P. was looking for a decent quality long lens. If you expect vibrant and crisp images at the 400mm end then yes, I stand by my statement of calling the 18-400 crappy. Fortunately there is now the new Sony 70-350. @desert_view has found his solution in the 70-300 but had this lens been available at the time I'm sure he'd be quite interested in it.
  4. If you set the focus mode to manual, it should stay like that even after turning the camera off/on. You can assign focus mode auto/manual to a custom button for easy switching. I wouldn't rely on hyperfocal distance for street photography. Maybe when shooting at 28mm you'll have reasonable depth of field, but at 70mm with those settings and camera, depth of field will be about 1-2m in total when focussing at 5m. Out of curiosity: what do you dislike about autofocus? If you want to go unobtrusive, you can disable AF confirmation beeps and AF assist light in the menu.
  5. The 28-70 doesn't have that button...
  6. Indeed I didn't really feel inclined to reply to your last post @Labrat1955 after I answered your previous question and you gave me zero response. Leech sounds like a fitting term for such behaviour. People voluntarily take the time to answer your question to the best of their abilities, at least have the decency to reply if an answer was helpful to you or not.
  7. Swap the Tamron 17-28 and 28-75 for the Sony 16-55 and tell her you cut €550 of expenses 😉 (€1000 + €850 for the Tamrons versus €1300 for the Sony here). As a dedicated APS-C shooter without plans to go FF anytime soon, to me the Sony sounds much more compelling. Maybe talk to the shop owner and see if you can pay in two terms such as not to cross that looming €1000 barrier 😆
  8. Me neither so I'll wait for a year hoping I can find it discounted for 999 at some point 😆 Regarding the long end: I have a kit 55-210 collecting dust as it's neither fast enough nor sharp enough for my liking. Only gets occasional use when travelling but the images always turn out dissappointing. I have high hopes for the Tamron 70-180 f/2.8, which seems like a nice size for APS-C camera's and would do great as an event lens. That and the 16-55 sounds like a great set to me.
  9. You sure you won't consider the new Sony 16-55 f/2.8? The Tamron is in fact 17-28 so the Sony is wider and a whole lot longer. Size and weight is pretty much identical. In my country the Tamron is about €1000, the Sony €1300. Neither is exactly cheap by my standards. Then again, if you don't mind about the long end, €300 for 1 extra mm on the wide end does sound expensive.
  10. While this is very true for experienced photographers, for people new to photography it can in fact be sort of a handicap. I found my photo's got more interesting when I bought my first prime. A prime forces you to move around to get the framing you want and you'll become much more aware of perspective effects and environmental elements when composing a shot. With a zoom people are often tempted to just stand where they are and zoom untill the subject is the right size in the frame, disregarding the effect of perspective changes when zooming. This approach will hardly get you any 'WOW'-shots. So while a zoom may seem ideal for new photographers, it will help you less on improving your skills than a prime imho.
  11. If you don't have much experience in photography, an advantage of a zoom is that you can experiment a bit with what focal lengths you really like, then in the long run buy a prime at that focal length. It can be really personal which focal length you enjoy shooting at. It'll also be very personal how much you dislike changing lenses a lot. I find myself deciding on which lens to use before the occasion, and only bring one backup lens just in case. I have the 18-108 zoom and 12, 24 and 56mm primes. I find myself using the 18-105 a lot for convenience during daytime outings (18-135 is a fine alternative) and bring the 56mm f1/4 when I hope to shoot some nice portraits. It's really an incredibly nice lens but the focal length can be a bit restrictive. When I expect to be indoors (tight space) under limiting lighting conditions, I put on the 24mm f/1.8. The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is a great alternative but can be a bit tight indoors. I've thought about the Sigma 16mm as well but I don't shoot wide angle much. Somehow a narrower field of view forces me to think more about composition, resulting in more interesting pictures. Occasionally when I want to go really wide I use the Samyang 12mm f/2. Landscapes shot that wide tend to get boring to me as there's no clear subject, so I use it for closeups instead. The lenses you suggest are all great for what they are so it comes down to your personal preferences. The Sigma trio really makes Sony APS-C shine.
  12. Both produce great camera's so to each their own. Let me try to let you follow my reasoning for buying an a6000 some years back. First of all, the fundamental question in this specific Sony versus Nikon case to me should be more like: 'Do you recommend a mirrorless camera over a DSLR?' For the obvious reasons my answer would be 'yes', but at the time my primary reason to go with mirrorless was to get the best possible image quality in the smallest possible size. The smaller my camera/lens combo, the bigger the odds I bring it with me. My reasoning then was that I couldn't justify the price and bulk of a fullframe system so I went for APS-C instead. Then it comes down to brand: - Nikon: didn't have mirrorless APS-C at the time. They now introduced the Z50 but it uses the huge Z-mount so it will never be really compact. Lens options will be very limited for the near future. - Canon (M-mount): autofocus wasn't great at that time and lens options very limited. If you ask me now I think M-mount is a dead end and in the long run Canon will only maintain the new R-mount. - Fuji: great option and viable alternative to Sony. Didn't like the EVF-hump in the XT-models much (don't like that hump in A7x either). I didn't research Fuji extensively at the time as the price/performance ratio of the Sony a6000 was so good. If you really like oldschool manual controls you might want to look into Fuji. - Sony: was rapidly expanding their mirrorless lens lineup and seemed totally committed to the E-mount system (A-mount was pretty much left to die). The a6000 was (and still is) exceptional value for money and I really love the form factor. Many people complain about the a6xxx-cameras being too small but at least they have something of a grip (which most Fuji camera's lack). If you read this far, you have the same preferences as I did and if your budget is limited then yes, I recommend the Sony a6000.
  13. If you're coming from a DSLR you'll likely be used to a viewfinder, which the a5100 lacks. For me this difference alone would be reason enough to go for the a6000. Image quality is pretty much identical. If you shoot movies on occasion, the a6000 has continuous autofocus while shooting, the a5100 doesn't. The main advantages of the a5100 are compactness and price, though the a6000 isn't big either, especially compared to a DSLR.
  14. The Sony A230 uses the older A-mount while the A7Riii uses the E-mount. You can use an adapter like the LA-EA4 to make your old lenses work on the A7Riii. Do take note that your old camera has an APS-C sized sensor so your old lens might be designed for APS-C. If so, it won't cover the entire sensor area and your A7Riii will switch to crop mode. The hot shoe is different too so your old flashgun won't fit unless used with a Sony/Minolta to Sony Multi Interface (MI) hot shoe adapter
  15. It's not just the amount of focus points: the a6400 uses the extraordinary real time tracking / eye AF, making the AF vastly superior to the A7II which uses slower and less reliable AF algorithms. All kit lenses include OSS so the omission of IBIS is not a big miss for you at first. Once you start buying other lenses it may be something to take into consideration. Especially the Sigma f/1.4 trio is an awesome addition to the APS-C lineup but all lack OSS. Sony's 50mm f/1.8 for APS-C does have OSS though.
×
×
  • Create New...