>>3674774dont try and reframe the argument.
Like you're doing by implying night photography means astro?
I didnt imply, I asked Op to clarrify, meanwhile you applied your aupposition without an an axiom.
>Canon has more lenses available in ecosystemYet Sony has more wide angle lenses faster than f2, and more 35mm lenses, and more 50-55mm lenses.
Sure, proof?
And Sony can use more EF mount lenses than Canon.
No, no they cant, by your logic all Sony lenses can also mount via adaptor to EOS or RP, so no WRONG.
>Fast does not fucking matter when on a tripod. Fact.Again, rephrasing the argument that you now need a tripod? and yes, fast does DEFINITELY matter, unless you want stars to have light trails.
This is just lol, maybe yoy dont know what an Equatorial mount is? See my axiom above regarding astro
You are coming across as a clueless amateur.
You are clearly lacking in experience in utilising imageing equipment.
>New is not always better, when balancing $ to performanceThat's a completely new argument you are coming up with, but again, a wide angle lens without a retrofocal element is going to perform better than one with at the same price.
What? Im taling about value in general as OP qas asking about, your statement does not make sense
>RP, will be competitive because ot will continue to work with EOSSony works fine with EF too, in many cases better than the RP and canons adapter.
Nope, complete bullshit name one Canon lens that works better on Sony than on a 1DX mkiii, you cant.
>No speed and af also comes down to lens design, battery power, and compatibility.lens design is consistent if you're using the same lens, Sony A7iii also uses a 7.4v battery, but with more than double the capacity, and compatability has proven to be uncompromised with an OK adapter.
Sure and a 1dx has a 10.8v and 2700aH, both superior, to Sony, so no, again you are just Wrong.
