/p/ - Photography » Thread #3682634

[129 / 8 / ?]

161KiB, 1920x960, panasonic-lumix-s1r-review-feat.jpg

Talk Me Out of It

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:03:13 No.3682634 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3682663 >>3682675 >>3682919 >>3682921 >>3682932 >>3682978 >>3683330 >>3684324

I'm making a small travel kit for all of next year. Needs to do everything, but mostly landscapes and wildlife, and to keep it all in the size of a medium pelican box.

I'm considering:

- S1R, the 24-105 f4, and the 70-200 f4 = $3900

- EOS R, 24-105, and an EF 100-400 = $3400

- Fuji xt3/4, 16-55mm f/2.8 WR, and the 50-230mm = $2200ish

Having some real trouble nailing it down.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:06:26 No.3682635 Report

Quoted By: >>3682636 >>3682646

Tamron 28-200 F2,8-F5,6 + A7 iii ~2700 bucks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:06:59 No.3682636 Report

Quoted By: >>3682637 >>3687340

>>3682635
Sony feels like complete garbage in the hand, though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:09:03 No.3682637 Report

Quoted By: >>3682639

>>3682636
The new z battery grip is pretty good to be honest.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:16:14 No.3682639 Report

Quoted By: >>3682640 >>3682987

>>3682637
If I had to use it, I'd just use an L bracket.

I just found out that Sigma made a tiny 100-400 mirrorless lens for the L Mount, so knock off a few hundred from the S1R price.

To be honest, the S1R is sounding like the best value.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:19:27 No.3682640 Report

Quoted By: >>3682641 >>3682987

>>3682639
Tamron and Sigma are always best value.

But people will likely disagree with you on S1R, because contrast AF is very low value.
L-mount's great curse is all 3 of its manufaturer insist on slow AF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:23:49 No.3682641 Report

Quoted By: >>3682642 >>3682953

>>3682640
But if I'm mostly just doing landscapes with the occasional bit of wildlife, does it matter?

Maybe there will be a price cut on that new RF 100-500 and I can pick it up at like 2300. That would be great.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:27:34 No.3682642 Report

Quoted By: >>3682643

>>3682641
It's not about you Anon. But about the things you claim.
Contrast AF will never ever be seen as great value. Specially not on pricey bodies that costs thousands of dollars.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:31:13 No.3682643 Report

Quoted By: >>3682644

>>3682642
So out of the choices, the EOS R would probably be the best pick to do -everything- I could need to to for a year.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:34:32 No.3682644 Report

Quoted By: >>3682647

>>3682643
Probably the RP since you're trying to argue value.

>the best pick to do -everything-
That's Still the Tamron 28-200 zoom.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:41:30 No.3682646 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682635
This or the 28-75 + 70-180 f/2.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:44:46 No.3682647 Report

Quoted By: >>3682649 >>3682650 >>3682897

>>3682644
>That's Still the Tamron 28-200 zoom.

Not on any of the systems I'm considering. And I'm still doing some professionalish work, so good glass is still desirable.

I can spend up to $4k if I really wanted. It's not about what is the cheapest, but what is the best value for landscapes and some wildlife.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:50:18 No.3682649 Report

Quoted By: >>3682651

>>3682647
>but what is the best value for landscapes and some wildlife.
Certainly not contrast AF.
The problem with the Canon option is the crippled frame rate when you engage continuous AF.

All the options you laid out are fake options. It's boils down to DSLRs vs the Sony mirrorless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:51:52 No.3682650 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682647
Wait I retract this
>All the options you laid out are fake options. It's boils down to DSLRs vs the Sony mirrorless.
There is now Canon R6, in addition to DSLR, and Sony mirrorless.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:51:55 No.3682651 Report

Quoted By: >>3682652

>>3682649
But why would I ever use continuous AF for landscapes? Zoom + manual focus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:52:53 No.3682652 Report

Quoted By: >>3682654

>>3682651
>and some wildlife

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:53:50 No.3682654 Report

Quoted By: >>3682656

>>3682652
True that.

Don't like fuji?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 07:57:58 No.3682656 Report

Quoted By: >>3682657 >>3682672

>>3682654
Do you like F2,8 APS-C zooms that are bigger and heavier than F2,8 full frame zooms?

Extra bonus, the new Sigma FF 100-400 zoom is lighter than Fujifilm's APS-C 100-400.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 08:04:06 No.3682657 Report

Quoted By: >>3682665

>>3682656
It's also just a consumer lens with low resolution at the long end.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 08:06:35 No.3682658 Report

Quoted By: >>3682660 >>3682663 >>3682918

100% the EOS R with the 24-105 L lens in my opinion. It's a full-frame camera that has everything you'll need, and the 24-105 L is stupidly sharp and handles low-light very well despite being an f/4, especially paired with the R's high ISO capabilities. I've been able to shoot in really dark scenes with no issues at upwards of 6400 ISO.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 08:12:50 No.3682660 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682658
I just wish canon had priced that 100-500 more aggressively. I really don't like mucking with adapters for the EF 100-400.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 08:23:02 No.3682663 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682658
No IBIS on the R, so thats throwing away 6+ stops of exposure.

>>3682634
Forget about the S1R as part of a "small travel kit", that thing is fucking huge.

As nice as the 16-55 f/2.8 is, it's not a travel lens. Size and weight weren't factors going into its design. The 18-55 f/2.8-4 is a stunning "kit lens", one of the best "kit lens" ever, but it isn't weather sealed and images at 55mm wont satisfy pixel peepers. The 16-80mm f/4 is basically designed for travel.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 08:25:18 No.3682665 Report

Quoted By: >>3682672

>>3682657
The Sigma lens is unironically better built.

The fujifilm 100-400 has crippled Tripod feet that are too short to support the weight of the lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 09:03:27 No.3682672 Report

Quoted By: >>3682674

>>3682656
>>3682665
He's talking about the XC50-230 though which by no means is a good lens but it is both light and more than good enough if you just want to photograph stuff rather than do portraits.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 09:11:10 No.3682674 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682672
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaQtTKRRphI

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 09:15:37 No.3682675 Report

Quoted By: >>3684507

>>3682634
FF Panasonic is seriously not the system for travel. It's good and all but definitely not a travelers camera.
Canon is ok but I would rather wait for R6 if thats what you want.
Fuji is absolutely fantastic travel camera but I have owned that XC 50-230 and i didn't like it. I have gotten the 55-200 recently instead and its a much better lens. Pro of Fuji is if I have to travel extremely light I can just put 27mm on it and it even becomes jacket-pocketable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 20:36:07 No.3682897 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682647
It should exist on Sony's E-mount, as does much of the best glass in general.

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2

Sugar !egyYvoBZV2 Fri 10 Jul 2020 21:17:54 No.3682914 Report

Quoted By:

Coming from someone who has done a fair amount of traveling, honestly go lightweight and compact. I've got basically a full Nikon FF kit worth thousands and my carry piece is actually a little Fuji XP waterproof camera.

On the basis of weight alone I would get the Fuji. I walked around with a Nikon Df kit at Rolex 24 and my setup was the Df, Tamron 150-600, 35/2, 105/2.5 manual focus and 24-120. The Tamron bazooka weighed more than all the rest of it combined. If you want to go long and FF you're going to carry a lot more weight.

If I were piecing a travel kit and could only have 3 lenses, I would choose the Df or something else FF. I would have a walkaround lens like a 24-120. I would have a low-light lens, 35 1.4, and something with some reach, which would be a 120-300. The 150-600 is nice but I never go much above 300 with it, personal preference. And with something like the Df, people think it's an old film camera so people think you're a college student. You can get right in people's faces without being called a creeper or getting yelled at. The Fuji fits that bill too.

I know I'll get shit for mentioning the Df because I have one, different strokes etc., but if it were me, I'd use that Fuji.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 21:22:13 No.3682918 Report

Quoted By: >>3682990

>>3682658
this but get the rp and save money

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 21:29:13 No.3682919 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682634
EOS R

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 21:32:39 No.3682921 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682634
I wouldn't sleep on s1r. It is heavy, then again it's properly sealed package. All the lenses, plus heavy duty sealing of the body.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 21:46:40 No.3682932 Report

Quoted By: >>3682935

>>3682634
The S1R's autofocus is way better than its bad reputation. Rather I'd be concerned about the future of the whole system, though, there bad reputation is a concern.

Furthermore, the RF24-105 is a lens you can really recommend, the EOS R is the one you need to decide on.

Next, recent Fuji are not my area of expertise at all, but I've seen the X-T4 to be considered the best APS-C camera, although the Sony A6600 gets often mentioned in the same sentence as the performance winner.

As some others said, the A7 III is the full frame bang for the buck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 21:52:14 No.3682935 Report

Quoted By: >>3682940 >>3682952

>>3682932
a7? for travelling? hell no! it breaks apart in mild humidity

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:00:30 No.3682940 Report

Quoted By: >>3682960

>>3682935
Don't be ridiculous! Have you ever heard that the EOS R is vulnerable to water in the viewfinder? To add to it, pretty much any joysticks or dial pads can be water damaged easily.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:36:05 No.3682952 Report

Quoted By: >>3682956

>>3682935
The other guy is right.

A7 iii has unrivalled battery life in FF milc.
And the new Tamron 28-200 is the ultimate travel lens. It's lightweight, has massive zoom factor, and F2,8 aperture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:38:30 No.3682953 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682641
Curious how you're ending up with the Canon price total because even gray market on eBay I'm getting a total of roughly $4k.

>>3682641
>But if I'm mostly just doing landscapes with the occasional bit of wildlife
I would grab a 5Ds for $1,100, EF 24-105L for $800, and 100-400 II for $1,700. All new gray market from a reputable dealer on eBay. And if you can swing it add a 16-35 f/4L IS for UWA for about $850. You'll still nail wildlife shots because the AF is excellent. And honestly unless you're a pro wildlife shooter photographing trained lions racing at you head on, 5 fps is enough.

But then I'm not into video and I would value 50mp for big prints more than the mirrorless features on the R.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:40:21 No.3682956 Report

Quoted By: >>3682959 >>3682964

>>3682952
b-but it's Sony

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:42:08 No.3682959 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682956
The only problem with the A7 III is weather sealing. The A9 II and A7R IV are the first bodies Sony's actually done a decent job on in terms of sealing.

If you're not the type to shoot in rough weather the A73 is a worthy contender. If you are...hard pass.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:42:38 No.3682960 Report

Quoted By: >>3682970

>>3682940
Yeah, and sony litterraly stops working. I've had a friend that went to s.america with it on a month long vacation. A week in and it was dead.

>Tamron 28-200 is the ultimate travel lens
Are you really retarded or what? You really do need weather sealing on a travel lens! It's literally the single most important aspect of a travel kit. Dust, water, salt water will kill you camera. Pretty sure OP knows more that you dumb shill since he's posting all the lenses that have weather sealing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:44:17 No.3682964 Report

Quoted By: >>3682968

>>3682956
Did I forget to mention the lens also has 1 : 3 macro on both ends?
Long end for better working distance.
Short end for more depth of field.

It's a fucking legend lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:47:04 No.3682968 Report

Quoted By: >>3682970

>>3682964
>no weather sealing
lol, just stop shilling that shit

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO img02.jpg, 244KiB, 850x600

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:49:59 No.3682970 Report

Quoted By: >>3682972

>>3682968
>>3682960
Weather sealing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 22:55:12 No.3682972 Report

Quoted By: >>3682975

>>3682970
Yeah but the body you put it on is poorly sealed.

Also: OP is clearly shooting for higher end. The new Tamron may be better than past 28-200 zooms, but that doesn't mean it's as good as two separate lenses. Higher end zooms tend to fall across the 24/28-70/105 and 70-200 ranges for a reason. The latest 100-400 class zooms are the one exception I can think of where a super zoom offers really stellar IQ across its range.

If OP were prioritizing weight over IQ then an A73+28-200 might be ideal. Again assuming no rough weather.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 23:02:08 No.3682975 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682972
A7iii is only one of several options anyway. Like the previous poster said, he could just go for the A7R iv. My argument isn't really the bodies, but the lenses.

>The latest 100-400 class zooms are the one exception I can think of where a super zoom offers really stellar IQ across its range.
The 28-200 comes very close as well. It's part of the recent generation of lenses that are sharp even though maximum aperture is tiny.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 23:13:31 No.3682978 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682634
EOS R6

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 23:41:51 No.3682987 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682639
I agree, the S1R is probably the most bang for buck out of all the options you've listed. I very nearly bought one myself recently. For me the factor that ruled it out was really fast primes. Leica seems to only produce them for the M mount, and Canon and Nikon are the only manufacturers still developing stupid fast primes.
If you're buying into the system though, it's at least a solid system with selection of lenses... but Leica is on the pricey side, and frankly many (not all) of their lenses are more wank value then actually useful. (Mind you price basically rules them out for most people)
>>3682640
Agreed. The AF is surprisingly good on the Panasonic, and the feel of the camera (which should at least count for something) beats the options from Sony IMHO. That said it isn't as great for general photography as much of the competition. If you're doing landscape though, it could be a very good system indeed for you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 10 Jul 2020 23:46:47 No.3682990 Report

Quoted By: >>3682996

>>3682918
The RP has a garbage sensor that even MFT outperforms when pushing/pulling in post.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 00:10:36 No.3682996 Report

Quoted By: >>3683085 >>3683743

>>3682990
>The RP has a garbage sensor that even MFT outperforms when pushing/pulling in post.
The 6D2 and RP can handle a 3ev shadow push. That's about the same as common m43 sensors. For comparison an R can handle about +5, a Sony A73 +6, and an XT3/4 about +4. A 5DsR will also handle +4.

So the RP is on the low end, but does that make it garbage? No. You can open up canyon walls against a bright blue sky and white clouds with +3. It does mean you will want to be careful with your exposures in some scenes (ETTR), and it also means in some situations you will want to shoot/blend 2 frames. (Sunset landscapes with darker foregrounds come to mind.)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 01:44:09 No.3683039 Report

Quoted By:

nikon z5
nikon z 24-200 f4-6.3
nikon z 50mm f1.8 or 35mm f1.8

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 03:25:14 No.3683085 Report

Quoted By: >>3683089

>>3682996
>So the RP is on the low end, but does that make it garbage? No.
Look I agree with you in principle, but it's sold as "FULL FRAME" and the people who can't see beyond sensor size lap it up. In this sense the sensor fails to achieve its goal.
When pushing hard it doesn't just reveal noise like most other sensors, however, but strange grid structures which basically ruin a photo. (Yes you can argue if that miss exposure by 3ev it's ruined already, but this issue doesn't exist with other sensors).

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 03:43:54 No.3683089 Report

Quoted By:

>>3683085
>Look I agree with you in principle, but it's sold as "FULL FRAME" and the people who can't see beyond sensor size lap it up.
Sensor size is a secondary factor in DR. Pixel architecture matters more. That's why some APS-C cameras out perform some FF cameras on DR, and why the highest DR sensors at the moment happen to be 35mm and not MF.

>In this sense the sensor fails to achieve its goal.
DR is not "the goal" of FF. FF is generally sharper out of camera and better at high ISO, and the RP hits those marks.

>When pushing hard it doesn't just reveal noise like most other sensors, however, but strange grid structures which basically ruin a photo.
That's why it's limited to a 3ev push at base ISO.

A photographer who regularly does hard pushes on base ISO scenes with extreme luminance range will not be happy with an RP. But how many people do that? Probably the only professional use I can think of which regularly involves this is interior real estate. Not even wedding photogs need this kind of extreme DR. Landscape shooters run into it when dealing with sunrises and sunsets, but they also often end up using GND filters or exposure blending even on Sony/Nikon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 04:48:17 No.3683112 Report

Quoted By: >>3683136

I got an S1R recently. It’s freakin awesome. Replaced my Sony with its BS touchscreen. L mount isn’t going anywhere since Leica is using it. There are also some nice Sigma lenses available.
You won’t regret getting one, though she is a big girl. But if you really wanted mall, you’d b taking an RX100 or a TZ110. (I also have a TZ, it’s awesome too.)

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 05:41:44 No.3683136 Report

Quoted By:

>>3683112
>isn’t going anywhere since Leica is using it.
You mean Sigma.

The sole reason why L-mount has not died yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 07:11:41 No.3683184 Report

Quoted By: >>3683190

Have you bought an S1R yet?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 07:31:54 No.3683190 Report

Quoted By: >>3683192

>>3683184
Not buying until the end of November.

Leaning toward EOS R.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 07:43:18 No.3683192 Report

Quoted By:

>>3683190
I haven’t used the EOS R but it looks pretty good. I can assure you the Pana does not disappoint. Canon will be more compact for travel though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 15:51:19 No.3683330 Report

Quoted By: >>3683341 >>3683739

>>3682634
Whatever you do please don’t let anyone convince you into getting an RP. Either the R or R6 if you want to keep within budget with a Canon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 11 Jul 2020 16:19:11 No.3683341 Report

Quoted By:

>>3683330
I’m seconding this. The R is great.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 05:29:21 No.3683694 Report

Quoted By: >>3683715

some of the s1r bodys are selling in the 1600s on ebay and it's so hard not to pull the trigger. The only thing stopping me is that the Canon 24-105, my main landscape lens, is better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 06:58:52 No.3683715 Report

Quoted By: >>3683737

>>3683694
Same sensor as the Leica SL2 isn't it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 08:46:16 No.3683737 Report

Quoted By:

>>3683715
Internals are largely the same.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 08:49:43 No.3683739 Report

Quoted By: >>3683740

>>3683330
Why not RP?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 08:53:43 No.3683740 Report

Quoted By: >>3683743

>>3683739
It's a "full frame" sensor with performance worse than MFT. Zero ability to push in post.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 08:56:27 No.3683743 Report

Quoted By: >>3691463

>>3683740
OK we've been over this. It's not "worse than MFT" and it MUH DR doesn't matter for most people. >>3682996

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 12 Jul 2020 09:31:45 No.3683754 Report

Quoted By:

not even meming but did you consider MFT? light, weather sealed not just on paper and extra reach with the crop sensor. something like the em-1 III with 12-40 and 150-300 pros or maybe just the 12-100.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Jul 2020 14:31:23 No.3684324 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682634
I would go with fuji and maybe add a flash
With the canon setups you lack fast aperture for low light freezing motion

Anyway, consider the 55-200 instead of the 50-230. It's faster, compact and the difference between 230 and 200 is negligible

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Jul 2020 20:36:36 No.3684507 Report

Quoted By:

>>3682675
This, those panasonic cameras are absolute bricks, I would hate having one of them around with lenses everywhere if I was traveling. If you are traveling primarily for photography then sure but if it is the other way around I would consider something more portable.

OP Mon 13 Jul 2020 23:25:24 No.3684643 Report

Quoted By: >>3684648 >>3684682 >>3684685 >>3684798

I think I've settled on the S1R.

It's a hard choice between it and the Fuji, but the price to performance is just too good.

S1R Body ($1600) + 24-105 f4 ($700) + Sigma 100-400 ($900). So for only $3200, I'm getting a modern 46mp full frame camera with the best LCD and live view in the business right now, as well as access to a lot of cheap Sigma Art Mirrorless lenses down the line.

It might weigh as much as a brick, but I like the DSLR feel. I used to lug around a Pentax K1 and half a dozen lenses on hiking trips, so the weight reduction will still be there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Jul 2020 23:29:34 No.3684648 Report

Quoted By: >>3684651

>>3684643
It's a good choice but I can't help but notice how wildly your definition of a travel system differs from mine. I went around looking for the most compact systems out there.

OP Mon 13 Jul 2020 23:32:09 No.3684651 Report

Quoted By: >>3684654

>>3684648
I should have been more expansive in my original post. Travel meaning a small kit storage-wise. I can hike with quite a bit.

I'm doing the vanlife thing and I need something that can all fit into one single hardcase. So I was looking for the best systems with the best 24-105s and 100-400s.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 13 Jul 2020 23:33:52 No.3684654 Report

Quoted By:

>>3684651
If I ever wanted such a kit I would indeed go for the S1R simply because it just looks much more rugged like an industrial tool.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 00:46:32 No.3684682 Report

Quoted By: >>3684683 >>3684721 >>3687417 >>3693602

>>3684643
You're in a gearwhore haze, and when the reality hits after you convinced yourself you'll be lugging around heavy and bulky and expensive bodies and lenses, and that you just leave them at home for the convinience of your phone, you'll be back here in 6-9 months asking for small travel kit advice.
See you then.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 00:48:15 No.3684683 Report

Quoted By:

>>3684682
Unironically this.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 00:50:31 No.3684685 Report

Quoted By: >>3684709

>>3684643
>S1R Body ($1600)
link plz

OP Tue 14 Jul 2020 01:50:22 No.3684709 Report

Quoted By: >>3684722

>>3684685
Go look at recent sales on ebay. A few have gone for right around 1700.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 02:15:24 No.3684721 Report

Quoted By:

>>3684682
>you'll be back here in 6-9 months asking for small travel kit advice.
>See you then.
Ha ha so true. I have a large new mirrorless. It’s amazing. 90% of the time I just use something that will fit in my pocket, or one that’s light and takes up not too much room in a daypack.
“Travel” and “peli case” sounds like a shit time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 02:15:31 No.3684722 Report

Quoted By:

>>3684709
so used S1Rs for 1700, not the same, pass

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 04:52:23 No.3684798 Report

Quoted By:

>>3684643
>I've settled on the S1R.
You won’t regret it bro. It’s a serious piece of kit, and has a fully functional touch screen and menus that make sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 20:24:56 No.3685215 Report

Quoted By: >>3685227

The EOS R + 24-105 f/4 is a ridiculous combo. Far better than any sony pony would have you believe. The IS in RF lenses is the best I’ve ever seen.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1509200922826.gif, 960KiB, 540x304

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 20:41:45 No.3685227 Report

Quoted By: >>3685237

>>3685215
Is Canon giving you guys proper pay raises these days?

It's hard to imagine it when their financials are tanking.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 21:00:50 No.3685237 Report

Quoted By: >>3685240

>>3685227
Oh fuck off. Sonyfags bash the R because of the 4k video crop. They conveniently overlook that it's 4k @ 480 Mbps which absolutely blows away the A73 for graded video.

The only other legit complaint about the R is that its iteration of DPAF can't quite keep up with its fps in fast action stills.

Otherwise for stills he was absolutely correct. The 5D4/R 30mp sensor offers great resolution, DR, and high ISO. DPAF in the R is excellent for everything except the fastest action, and it's still serviceable there. (DPAF in the 90D/M6.2 is great at fast action, which means it will be in the R5/R6 as well.) And the 24-105 is a great lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1474631235309.jpg, 205KiB, 702x662

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 21:04:29 No.3685240 Report

Quoted By: >>3685251

>>3685237
>They conveniently overlook that it's 4k @ 480 Mbps
Who gives a shit about that when multiple other brands than Canon offer those bitrates?

It was a legitimate criticism when your Full Frame crop factor became smaller than Micro4/3 crop factor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 21:28:24 No.3685251 Report

Quoted By: >>3685255

>>3685240
>It was a legitimate criticism when your Full Frame crop factor became smaller than Micro4/3 crop factor.
>super 35
>smaller than m4/3
>t. Brainlet

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 21:32:36 No.3685255 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685251
Almost
>If you calculate the crop factor only horizontally it is 1.75x but taking into account the vertical crop as well, it is a bit more than a 1.8x crop
It was your APS-C cameras that achieved ultra pathetic smartphone crop factor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 21:45:36 No.3685260 Report

Quoted By: >>3685278 >>3685312

Really would stay away from mirrorless cameras for now.

1. Way too overpriced. you can get way better ones if you go for a DSLR with that money
2. I don't know about canon but for others there are barely any lenses available for these yet while there is hundreds of great third party ones out there for DSLRs that have had enough time to prove themselves.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 22:05:40 No.3685278 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685260
here's a coping DSLR buyer

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 14 Jul 2020 23:08:37 No.3685312 Report

Quoted By:

>>3685260
LOL imagine being the 18 year old contrarian retard that typed this and having to live with it well into your 20s before you realize you were a dumbfuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Jul 2020 05:51:45 No.3686316 Report

Quoted By: >>3686550

DSLR are dead. Nothing wrong with buying one but you should know that before thinking of getting one. There'll be no upgrade path going forward in terms of new bodies. And if you're a video shooter you can forget it as it trails far behind mirrorless.

It's a good option if you're a stills shooter on a budget and willing to buy from the used market. You could build yourself a pretty decent kit.

If I were to chose this path, I'd at least go Canon so that I can easily adapt EF lenses to the RF mount. It'll be a less painful transition to mirrorless when you inevitably have to move on.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Jul 2020 17:08:20 No.3686550 Report

Quoted By: >>3686602

>>3686316
I... I wasn't considering a DSLR?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Jul 2020 17:15:33 No.3686552 Report

Quoted By: >>3686600 >>3687312

>S1R, the 24-105 f4, and the 70-200 f4 = $3900
How do you get it so cheap?
On BH,
S1R body only = $3.7k
24-105/4 = $1.3k
70-200/4 = $1.7k
For a total of $6.7k

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Jul 2020 18:34:21 No.3686600 Report

Quoted By:

>>3686552
Used probably.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 16 Jul 2020 18:35:23 No.3686602 Report

Quoted By:

>>3686550
Just a shill, no point in replying to a one off post

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Jul 2020 22:50:51 No.3687311 Report

Quoted By: >>3687312

Got an S1R and 24-105 f4 combo for 2400. Here we go, bois.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 17 Jul 2020 22:51:55 No.3687312 Report

Quoted By:

>>3686552
bruh use ebay. See >>3687311

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 00:40:46 No.3687340 Report

Quoted By: >>3687341 >>3687347

>>3682636
The difference in feel when held and when taking a photo between a sony a7 model and something like xt-4 was pretty shocking. You never felt like taking a picture with the sony, while the fuji is snappy and feels like an sctusl camera taking a picture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 00:43:40 No.3687341 Report

Quoted By: >>3687347

>>3687340
The smaller grip with slower autofocus motors is more snappy?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 00:53:03 No.3687347 Report

Quoted By: >>3687349

>>3687340
>>3687341
Turns out ergonomics and usability don't appear on spec sheets.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 00:54:40 No.3687349 Report

Quoted By: >>3687353

>>3687347
It usually turns out fujishills were the real specsheet whores all along, especially when they compare sensors and stuff.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 01:00:39 No.3687353 Report

Quoted By: >>3687358 >>3687363

>>3687349
anon is right though, there's a lot more important things about a camera that you can only truly understand when you have used it. Especially since these perceptions can vary wildly camera to camera.
And also, sony really seems to abuse the fact that these 'non-specs' are usually not cared as much about by gearfags. Also their lower res screens and EVFs (even though they themselves produce them). I think that is how they are also able to put costs down, you have to compromise on some things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 01:04:02 No.3687358 Report

Quoted By:

>>3687353
>there's a lot more important things about a camera that you can only truly understand when you have used it.
Smaller grips is not one of them.
And neither are their slower AF motors.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO iu.jpg, 32KiB, 479x359

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 01:14:21 No.3687363 Report

Quoted By: >>3687438

>>3687353
The thing about Sony is the more people criticise them, the stronger they become.

EVF is next.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 04:10:58 No.3687417 Report

Quoted By:

>>3684682
kek, the redpill

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 05:59:42 No.3687438 Report

Quoted By: >>3687452 >>3689296

>>3687363
I wish sonys didn't take so fucking long to boot. My Fuji is on and ready to snapshit within a second from cold boot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 18 Jul 2020 06:44:29 No.3687452 Report

Quoted By:

>>3687438
You know what to do. Start a mass campaign uproar in the photography community.
If the pattern repeats itself, Sony will make their future cameras have the fastest boot time.

Sony's ability is the ability of the troll. The more you feed it, the stronger it becomes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 21 Jul 2020 09:49:37 No.3689296 Report

Quoted By:

>>3687438
My Fuji is slow as fuck but then again it's a budget bin piece of shit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 22 Jul 2020 19:59:05 No.3690521 Report

Quoted By:

S1r gets here Friday. I might actually go out and shoot something for the first time in months.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 Jul 2020 19:31:40 No.3691200 Report

Quoted By: >>3691231 >>3691589

Preordered the sigma 100-400. Kit is now complete.

Total Cost: $3500

S1R- $1500
24-105 - $600
100-400 - $1050
Random Shithole CA Taxes/fees - $250

Not bad I don't think.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 Jul 2020 20:03:21 No.3691231 Report

Quoted By: >>3691248 >>3691330

>>3691200
How the fuck is the s1r only 1500$? In Germany it costs 2500€...

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 23 Jul 2020 20:22:35 No.3691248 Report

Quoted By:

>>3691231
Be good at ebay bro.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO .png, 129KiB, 911x691

Anonymous Thu 23 Jul 2020 22:53:47 No.3691330 Report

Quoted By: >>3691481 >>3691561

>>3691231
for whatever reason panasonic cameras don't hold their value at all.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1594041782372.png, 651KiB, 640x640

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 02:39:24 No.3691463 Report

Quoted By: >>3691539

>>3683743
>DR doesn't matter

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 03:19:37 No.3691481 Report

Quoted By:

>>3691330
Fuck, I should have waited a bit, got one as soon as they came out.
I love it, but it’s a lot to carry into the mountains. Couldn’t try before buy unfortunately, ordered on the line.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 07:15:02 No.3691539 Report

Quoted By: >>3691540 >>3691668

>>3691463
E6 films typically had 6-8ev, and neg films 10-11. The RP has 11. If you can't work with that then the problem is not with the camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 07:17:46 No.3691540 Report

Quoted By: >>3692011

>>3691539
Lmao imagine thinking a RP has more latitude than Portra

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 08:03:27 No.3691561 Report

Quoted By: >>3691570

>>3691330
There's a lot of grey market Panasonics around. It's been like that for some time now.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO .png, 244KiB, 1009x1083

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 08:32:21 No.3691570 Report

Quoted By: >>3692014

>>3691561
Every camera brand except leica has tons of grey markets due the asian market. Almost none of them get close to a 50% price drop on the used market that quickly after release.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 09:30:01 No.3691589 Report

Quoted By: >>3691968

>>3691200
Where can I find it for 1500 ?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 13:25:25 No.3691668 Report

Quoted By: >>3692011

>>3691539
>RP had 11
Fucking shameful

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 20:58:35 No.3691968 Report

Quoted By:

>>3691589
Ebay. I got the body + 24-105 for 2200, or 2400 total after ebay and cali raped me.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 22:05:34 No.3692011 Report

Quoted By: >>3692240 >>3692306

>>3691540
>"typically"
Portra was in the 12-13ev rage. It was also not typical.

>>3691668
Show us a picture you've taken that required more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 24 Jul 2020 22:07:05 No.3692014 Report

Quoted By: >>3692234

>>3691570
Panny FF has a lens problem. Too few, way too expensive. They need to fix that or eventually they'll go the way of Olympus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Jul 2020 04:21:11 No.3692234 Report

Quoted By:

>>3692014
I mean, I only need two lenses for landscapes - the 24-105 and that new sigma 100-400 I have on preorder.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Jul 2020 04:30:18 No.3692240 Report

Quoted By:

>>3692011
Portra isn’t a typical film in 2020

Do tell

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 25 Jul 2020 07:58:59 No.3692306 Report

Quoted By:

>>3692011
>Show us a picture you've taken that required more.
>I can't believe that anyone could ever need more than 11 stops of dynamic range

This is a very personal problem. I'm just going to tell you that even if you don't exhaust the DR, you'll already notice a difference in image editing. I have a 6D myself and I notice a significant difference compared to cameras that offer more EV here. That includes even the Canon M5, not to mention the 5D4.
When they were introduced, the 6D2 and RP were not competitive in terms of DR at base ISO, the 6D has not been competitive in this respect for some time, only at higher ISO numbers where sensor size is the decisive factor.

I have been concentrating for a while now on the interplay of light and shadow in urban photography, city breaks, try to emphasize on tension. Especially in strong sunlight I shoot in exposure series, to then be able to compute HDR images when I realize that I am reaching the limits of processing.

I will not provide you with a shot because you are just looking for another reason to pursue your agenda. Why I am answering is to tell you that the others are not you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 26 Jul 2020 22:42:42 No.3693543 Report

Quoted By:

A6600 unironically

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 27 Jul 2020 00:13:43 No.3693602 Report

Quoted By: >>3693633 >>3694668 >>3694689

>>3684682
Reread this to yourself before bed overnight until your prospective purchase date, OP. Of all the cameras you listed, about the only travel photography one worth a shit would be the XT3, and if you anticipated never to be in inclement weather, get the XT30.

Most people travelling don't have room enough for half their pack to be fucking photography gear. Ironically, including dedicated photographers who hike out and take pictures just for that purpose. Just bringing the 24-105 you're pushing near 2kg - fucking insane. I got rid of my X-H1 because with my lens it pushed 1100g and I lift more than 99% of /p/. In this regard, even the Canons are more sensible options, despite their lenses being as large as dragon dildos.

This thread is like a game of spot the LARPer or person who never strays more than 1km from the carpark.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 27 Jul 2020 01:00:27 No.3693633 Report

Quoted By:

>>3693602
>I got rid of my X-H1 because with my lens it pushed 1100g and I lift more than 99% of /p/.
Are you me? I fucking love my X-H1 and got it for travel because of the ibis and glass, but I don't take it out because it's still heavy and bulky.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jul 2020 00:03:01 No.3694668 Report

Quoted By:

>>3693602
I took it out on a 4 mile hike Saturday. It was a bit heavy, but I used to lug around a Pentax kit in Alaska on long hikes and I was fine.

I’m shit out of shape too. Panasonic workout here I come.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 28 Jul 2020 00:23:04 No.3694689 Report

Quoted By:

>>3693602
I adressed this as well. What a bunch of idiots that clearly never left their house to shoot. Once you're actually travelling around there's absolutely no point in bringing the most image quality optimal camera but rather you go for whatever is the most compact that gives good enough results.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Talk Me Out of It