/p/ - Photography » Thread #3846667

[121 / 30 / ?]

596KiB, 2500x2500, 1550136983_1459274.jpg

Help me decide

Anonymous Tue 23 Mar 2021 22:04:47 No.3846667 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3846678 >>3846810 >>3847035 >>3847118

Ok I've been knocked down from surgery and have been spending my time researching like crazy on what to upgrade to.

I'm a casual shooter for the most part, some video every now and then. So do I go with an X-T30, A6400, or the X-S10, hell maybe even a used X-T3?

I'm leaning towards the X-S10 but tell me why I'm an idiot and to pick something else

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Mar 2021 22:28:26 No.3846678 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846667
I would pick X-S10 because of IBIS especially if you wanna do video sometimes. Also it's the newest and comes with classic negative film simulation, not sure if X-T30 got it already. I had the X-T30 but sold it because I didn't like its look. The body proprtions look weird to me somehow.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 23 Mar 2021 23:02:03 No.3846704 Report

Quoted By:

X-T3 > X-S10 imo

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 03:23:13 No.3846810 Report

Quoted By: >>3846850 >>3846869 >>3847251

>>3846667
if you desperately need ibis, xs10. if not the xt3 is better in almost every way. wr, battery life, bigger and higher res view finder, 2 card slots. better video bit rate, webcam function, etc. if you're going sony, skip the 6000 series and save up for an a7 series camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 06:32:11 No.3846850 Report

Quoted By: >>3846853

>>3846810
>if you're going sony, skip the 6000 series and save up for an a7
There is no reason to do that.

The A7 are heavier and bigger, and the 6600 has the world record in mirrorless battery life.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 06:38:08 No.3846853 Report

Quoted By: >>3846856 >>3846857 >>3846865

>>3846850
>There is no reason to do that
if you're getting a snoy, at the very least don't get an apsc snoy. glad you like your a6000 though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 06:46:53 No.3846856 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846853
You're discouraging the class of cameras with the best battery life in the world while recommending cameras with shit battery life and pretesting they are good.

A6600 = 810 cipa
A7 = 340 cipa
X-t2 = 390 cipa

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 06:47:57 No.3846857 Report

Quoted By: >>3846860 >>3846907 >>3846911 >>3846960

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 06:55:04 No.3846860 Report

Quoted By: >>3846862

>>3846857
>battery life is the defining characteristic of a camera
>has never heard of a spare battery
i'm very sorry you fell for the a6000 meme anon. i'm choosing between 3 cameras he asked for advice on. no need to sperg out because you have buyers remorse and need to cope on battery life of all things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:05:54 No.3846862 Report

Quoted By: >>3846863

>>3846860
>battery life is the defining characteristic of a camera
That's how it used to be back in the dslr days. Dead batteries means dead camera.
If you want to get into image quality the A6600 actually has more dynamic range than A7 and Xt3.

>has never heard of a spare battery
Spare batteries aren't the same thing as good efficiency. The spares still discharge faster because their voltage drips really quickly, making you you not only carry around multiple chargers, but also forcing you to do the recharging ritual more often.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:09:23 No.3846863 Report

Quoted By: >>3846864 >>3846903 >>3846907

>>3846862
>I'm a casual shooter for the most part
ah yes, a casual shooter. certainly he should tunnel towards a camera with the world record in mirrorless battery life as opposed to choosing a comfy camera with features he likes.

back to /g/ boomer, please have a nice night.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:12:11 No.3846864 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846863
Casual means less effort.

Recharging 3 masteries every night as your daily ritual is the opposite of casual (you actually need 3 batteries to surpass the A6600 lel)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:13:37 No.3846865 Report

Quoted By: >>3846867 >>3846870

>>3846853
this. sony apsc is a dead-end, basically abandoned with no dedicated lens lineup. it exists purely to funnel you to full frame and their fuck off expensive full frame lenses.
i bought the a6300 because of spec sheets and recommendations here, and it was fucking shithouse, despite it looking good on paper. just fucking awful.
there's only one manufacturer dedicated to apsc and worth considering.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:21:24 No.3846867 Report

Quoted By: >>3846938

>>3846865
Ther eis actually a lot of APS-C lenses for the 6300. You just didn't like any of them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:23:39 No.3846869 Report

Quoted By: >>3846871 >>3846887

>>3846810
>xt3 is better in almost every way. wr, battery life, bigger

X-S10 has a much better grip
X-S10 uses the newer batteries and not the shitty NP-W126s

the other stuff you mentioned is important to me at least, 2 card slots, webcam function, higher res EVF, and nobody has mentioned this but it has a 1/8000 max mechanical shutter speed

X-S10 is only 1/4000 and i think it doesn't have HSS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:25:48 No.3846870 Report

Quoted By: >>3846872 >>3846891

>>3846865
i am also a 6xxx series refugee which is why i gave the rec i did. spec sheet /g/ autists love them but actually using one feels awful once you've experienced better.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:27:44 No.3846871 Report

Quoted By: >>3846874

>>3846869
the evf is a huge difference. make sure you check both out in a store before you pull the trigger. also wr can be a deal breaker for some if you go for f2 lenses or the 16 1.4

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:31:00 No.3846872 Report

Quoted By: >>3846878

>>3846870
Talk about spec sheeting.
In theory your spare batteries have more capacity than a single A6600 battery.
But in practice your specs mean nothing, because the voltage of your 3 small A7 / XT3 batteries drop their voltage fast and drain away faster as they reach the bottom quater of the battery.

The specsheet argument is an argument against you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:34:48 No.3846874 Report

Quoted By: >>3846878

>>3846871
oh i am not OP

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO download (8).jpg, 7KiB, 203x249

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:41:58 No.3846878 Report

Quoted By: >>3846880

>>3846872
I get that the A7 series makes you feel small and left behind. I get it, I really do. Latching on to this cute battery life bit just isn't the move though. None of us care about your weakly veiled inferiority cope. Reality hurts, but we must face it and move forward. If you enjoy your a6600, I am genuinely happy for you. I hope it serves you well and you make the most out of your incredible battery life. Please just realize that no one else wants one lol.

>>3846874
>the other stuff you mentioned is important to me at least
could've fooled me lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:44:46 No.3846880 Report

Quoted By: >>3846887 >>3846888

>>3846878
It was to demonstrate that you're specsheeting.

On paper yo look good, but in practice you're worse due to the way the smaller batteries drain.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:56:29 No.3846887 Report

Quoted By: >>3846891

>>3846880
Not the meat and potatoes of my comment >>3846869
But ok

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 07:56:36 No.3846888 Report

Quoted By: >>3846893

>>3846880
>In theory your spare batteries have more capacity than a single A6600 battery.
I never said this and I never mentioned specs. Regular people (read: non autists) understand I said multiple batteries is more than enough for a casual shooter and not make stupid assumptions. The cost of an extra battery is not worth having to deal with a dead line of cameras so you can cry about battery efficiency on a Nigerian k-drama forum.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 08:02:03 No.3846891 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846887
I never even replied to that post, I was referring to this>>3846870

It's actually the Sony FF and Fujifilm cameras that good good on spec sheet but underperform in real life. That's why it's sad when you guys accuse the Sony APS-C series of relying on specs.

The advantages of the Sony APS-C are actually the things you can't see on the specs.
Battery drainage, AF speed, AF noise, Less overheating, etcl

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 08:11:17 No.3846893 Report

Quoted By: >>3846900

>>3846888
>multiple batteries is more than enough for a casual shooter
What you're really saying is "these expensive sytems" is more than enough and fitting for a casual shooter.
I'm not an expert on fallacies, but there is probably some brain trickery somewhere in your post when you imply the worse and more expensive systems are "good enough".

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 08:25:41 No.3846900 Report

Quoted By: >>3846903

>>3846893
Interesting you mention fallacy given the long, embarrassing tirade you've spewed attacking a straw man you created.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 08:29:55 No.3846903 Report

Quoted By: >>3846907

>>3846900
It's because this post here>>3846863 used the high battery life of the 6600 as a reason to avoid it.

(you're a casual, you don't need that, here buy this much more expensive camera instead)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 08:48:27 No.3846907 Report

Quoted By: >>3846911

>>3846903
I'm convinced you just have reading comprehension issues. I'll continue to humour you because I genuinely think you're retarded and this is probably a learning experience for socially maladapted fellers like yourself.

>It's because this post here>>3846863 (You) used the high battery life of the 6600 as a reason to avoid it.

Yet again, you're assuming I've said something that I haven't. Battery life isn't a priority for most people, let alone casual shooters. Here >>3846857 the sole argument you bring forward against the other cameras is one of battery life. This post >>3846863 doesn't say that you should avoid the a6600 BECAUSE of it's supposedly excellent battery life. It and the post before it simply imply that there are more to cameras than their battery life and that he would be better suited
choosing something by other criteria. As for the a6xxx vs a7x, battery life isn't enough to save such a shit lineup of cameras, so I recommended he save a bit more and get the sonys worth talking about.

I can't believe this is so hard for you to understand.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 08:59:14 No.3846911 Report

Quoted By: >>3846914

>>3846907
>Battery life isn't a priority for most people, let alone casual shooters.
n my opinion the Battery life is the only thing wrth noting for a casual shooter.
Do you think they can tell the difference in image quality? They can't.

>Here >>3846857 the sole argument you bring forward against the other cameras is one of battery life
I could point out the 6600 has better idynamic range than a7, a7ii, and t3, but would a casual shooter even care?
Would they care about the superior autofocus in the A6600?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 09:11:30 No.3846914 Report

Quoted By: >>3846916

>>3846911
>n my opinion the Battery life is the only thing wrth noting for a casual shooter.
there's nothing else to say to you. have a good night.

OP don't buy a 6400, you'll regret it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 09:13:37 No.3846916 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846914
>don't buy a 6400,
Its battery life is weak like the Fujifilms and the sony full frames, so you probably misunderstood me if that's what you thought I meant.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 10:24:57 No.3846938 Report

Quoted By: >>3846943 >>3846950 >>3846952

>>3846867
Nah, apart from a few token APS-C lenses and some dumb zooms, all Sony effort is in full frame glass. Just because it happens to work on APS-C cameras doesn't mean they're APS-C lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 10:31:45 No.3846943 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846938
I wasn't referring to the FF 70-180mm F2,8 which is smaller, lighter, and cheaper than the Fujiiflm F2,8 zoom.

I was referring to all the small 1st party APS-C lenses from Sony, like the ones with image stabilisation in-lens.
And nice zooms like the 10-18, and the 70-350.
There is plenty of options for the average shooters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:07:16 No.3846950 Report

Quoted By: >>3846955

>>3846938
There's 37 different aps-c only, autofocus e-mount lenses. You can also use the 92 autofocus FE mount lenses. Having an upgrade path to full frame is essential for anyone looking to be more than a casual hobbyist. That's 129 autofocus lenses to choose from.

There's 42 Fuji X mount af lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:08:56 No.3846952 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846938
>They're not aps-c lenses

Correct, they're full frame, so you're not going to have any vignette or corner distortion compared to a Fuji crop only lens. And they're made for the super high resolution a7riv, so have much better resolving power than Fuji who are hard stuck on 24mp.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:23:22 No.3846955 Report

Quoted By: >>3846956 >>3846957

>>3846950
>Having an upgrade path to full frame is essential
see, it worked :) sony got you by the balls, neglected their apsc line to force you into full frame.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:29:29 No.3846956 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846955
I saw an upgrade path to full frame as essential before Sony had released their first mirrorless camera; it's why I moved away from Pentax after they pushed back the k1 year after year. I haven't bought a crop camera since my k7. Used a 5dii for a couple of years before getting an a7.

You're just a new kid that hasn't outgrown their crop babby camera yet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:36:04 No.3846957 Report

Quoted By: >>3846966 >>3847042

>>3846955
Sony APS-C has 17-70, and 70-180mm F2,8
That's coverage from 17 to 180 across just two lenses.

They are sharper, faster, lighter, smaller than Fujifilm's 16-140mm F2,8.
How could you possibly ever defend this from an APS-C perspective?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1597357128221.jpg, 23KiB, 600x400

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:42:05 No.3846960 Report

Quoted By: >>3846962 >>3846966 >>3846975

>>3846857
i buy electronics based solely on their battery specs.
>image quality? negro, please.
>UI & UX? i enjoy not taking pics.
>price, weight, weather sealing? who cares.
in fact, all my best photos were taken with a battery only. see attached.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 64KiB, 1297x690

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:48:55 No.3846962 Report

Quoted By: >>3847034

>>3846960
>>image quality? negro, please.
Is that the hill you want to die on?

I tried to spare you, so don't say you weren't warned.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:53:29 No.3846966 Report

Quoted By: >>3846975 >>3847034

>>3846960
>>price, weight, weather sealing? who cares.
See>>3846957
Price, weight, size, weather sealing are not in your favour.
All of Fujifilms F2,8 zooms are larger than Full Frame F2,8 zooms.

All you really have is a few additional buttons and dials.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 11:58:57 No.3846975 Report

Quoted By: >>3846981 >>3847034

>>3846966
>Buttons and dials

The aX line all have more custom dials and buttons than any Fuji.

>>3846960
>Price

Lmao, check out this poor retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:01:15 No.3846981 Report

Quoted By: >>3847015

>>3846975
>The aX line
I'm arguing against you as well though.

There isn't any reason to move to Full Frame, despite the fujifilm propagandists claiming there is.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:37:35 No.3847015 Report

Quoted By: >>3847018

>>3846981
>No reason to go FF

Except for twice as good noise performance

Much higher resolution images with improved contrast and sharpness

A wider variety of dof options

A much larger selection of lenses

Ultrawide lenses that don't suck dick

Respect and desirability from potential clients

Variety of niche bodies depending on use as opposed to the low end jack of all trades approach to crop sensors

Mounts with a longer lifespan with more third party support

Vintage lenses render correctly

Literally the only reason to ever buy crop is because you're too poor for FF.

>Ax line doesn't have enough buttons and dials

Literally the most custom dials and buttons of any body on the market, you fucking dipstick.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:42:49 No.3847018 Report

Quoted By: >>3847023

>>3847015
>Literally the only reason to ever buy crop is because you're too poor for FF.
Price, lightweight, smaller size, better Autofocus. are few reasons, but they are very comping reasons to many people.

The only Sony Full frame bodies with better Autofocus than the A6600 cost above 3000 dollars.
That's unreasonable to a casual hobbyist.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:52:34 No.3847023 Report

Quoted By: >>3847024 >>3847025

>>3847018
>Because you're poor
>Lists first reason as price
Lmfao

>Lightweight
Except it's not, I bet any lens and body combo you suggest I can find a lighter FF version.

>Smaller size
Again, no.

>Better af
Lmfao, definitely not

>Casual hobbyist
And you're on a board for enthusiasts, a phone is good enough for a casual hobbyist, why aren't you using that instead of an ilc?

>Only af better than a6600 is over 3k
A7iii has better af, and they're only $1700 whilst the a6600 is $1400...

Lmfao.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:56:07 No.3847024 Report

Quoted By: >>3847029

>>3847023
>I bet any lens and body combo you suggest I can find a lighter FF version.
How much money will you bet?

See the Tamron 17-70 F2,8.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:57:34 No.3847025 Report

Quoted By: >>3847029 >>3847031

>>3847023
>A7iii has better af,
This is a common misunderstanding. The mark 3 basic version doesn't even have real life EyeAF tracking in video.

If you meant the A7C, then it's equal to the A6600.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 12:58:53 No.3847026 Report

Quoted By:

Zoomers zoom zoom

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:06:51 No.3847029 Report

Quoted By: >>3847032

>>3847025
Having one less feature doesn't mean it performs worse you dingus.

The extra light from the sensor twice the size means that the a7iii can focus in half as much light as the a6600, arguably a lot more important than a video only feature (when any videographer worth a damn will be using manual focus anyway)

>>3847024
Which weighs exactly the same as the FF tamron 28-200 f2.8-f5.6 at 550g, which not only has double the zoom range, but is also faster through half of its focal range, and it's sharper at every focal length.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:09:41 No.3847031 Report

Quoted By: >>3847032

>>3847025
The A7C is not a rebadge A7III? I thought they were the exact same camera minus the body layout.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:14:39 No.3847032 Report

Quoted By: >>3847038

>>3847029
>Having one less feature doesn't mean it performs worse
AF is a more math reliant process than most people think. and in this sense the A7iii has a slower processor than the A6600. The feature set is usually the indicator of Sony's processor generations.
You're probably talking about low light AF, but I haven't seen any tests of A7iii vs A6600 yet.

>Which weighs exactly the same
Come on now. You know the equivalents are the 24-105 F4 lenses. And you know you already lost the bet.

>>3847031
7C has the final revision of BionZ X, whihc is the one that's fast enough to support reltime eyeAF.
7 iii is an older body that was specified long before they had that final revision.
It goes like this:
BionZ X (a7iii revision) ---> BionZ X (A9 revision) ---> Bionz XR (S7Siii revision)

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:20:14 No.3847034 Report

Quoted By: >>3847036 >>3847038

>>3846975
>>3846962
>>3846966

uhhh, no one mentioned fuji.... are you projecting again?
mom said you should stop listening to the imaginary voices. and samefagging.
FOOOOOOOO GEEEEEEEE is all in your head. rent free.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:24:49 No.3847035 Report

Quoted By: >>3847037

>>3846667
Probably x-t3. Most sturdy body, best grip, bigger viewfinder, more controls.

Ibis in xs10 is nice, but after getting some really fast primes like 50 f1.2 or 12 f2, I never have a situation that I need to crank up iso higher than I want, even without having ibis.

Zooms are by design bigger and heavier than primes, so you should rather get some nice primes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:25:04 No.3847036 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847034
The context of the thread is fuji vs fuji vs sony vs fuji.
Take your meds.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:26:23 No.3847037 Report

Quoted By: >>3847039

>>3847035
>Zooms are by design bigger and heavier than primes
Fujifilm zooms are bigger than Full frame zooms even. That's the real pain issue.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:27:56 No.3847038 Report

Quoted By: >>3847042

>>3847032
>Non sequitur about af
Lmao, better luck next time lad. The a7iii at is much better, I've used both extensively

>But only the 24-105 f4 counts
Which there is currently only a Sony GM model for, which prioritise image quality over size, and even then it's just 625g (and an equivalent would be f4.3, 75g for a much sharper lens, that's 1\4 of a stop faster sounds like a good deal)

And I'm sure when tamron releases a 24-105 f4, it will be lighter than the Sony.

>>3847034
This is literally a thread discussing Sony Vs Fuji you spaz. Did you get too involved fanboying over Fuji to remember how to read?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2021-03-24 Compact Ca (...).png, 888KiB, 1178x1013

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:30:08 No.3847039 Report

Quoted By: >>3847040 >>3847042

>>3847037
No, they arent

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2021-03-24 Compact Ca (...).png, 746KiB, 1134x801

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:31:26 No.3847040 Report

Quoted By: >>3847042 >>3847043

>>3847039

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:31:58 No.3847042 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847038
>>Which there is currently only a Sony GM model for,
It's a G, not a GM.

For fuck's sake Anon. Just stop you alreayd lost out bet so you have to compare some nonsense variable aperture lens to my F2,8 constant aperture.

>>3847039
>>3847040
See the lenses in this post>>3846957
As for your 70-300, it's inferior to the Sony 70-350.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2021-03-24 Compact Ca (...).png, 735KiB, 1131x591

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:32:30 No.3847043 Report

Quoted By: >>3847045 >>3847046

>>3847040

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:33:14 No.3847045 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847043
Bigger and heavier than the E-mount 17-70 F2,8.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2021-03-24 Compact Ca (...).png, 1MiB, 1165x1462

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:34:08 No.3847046 Report

Quoted By: >>3847055

>>3847043

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:37:30 No.3847051 Report

Quoted By: >>3847055 >>3847056 >>3847060

So here we have one, two, three, four examples where fuji zooms are smaller than their full frame counterparts. I'm pretty sure that case is closed.

Still its better to buy good prime than drag heavy zoom.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 540KiB, 892x836

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:39:51 No.3847055 Report

Quoted By: >>3847061

>>3847046
>>3847051
>So here we have one, two, three, four examples where fuji zooms are smaller than their full frame counterparts. I'm pretty sure that case is closed.
No, we have liars and deceivers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:40:15 No.3847056 Report

Quoted By: >>3847061

>>3847051
Show me fujis smallest and lightest 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 2.8 equivalents

Lol!

You'd think such an expensive crop system would at the very least have the 2 most commonly used pro lenses.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:42:12 No.3847060 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847051
>It's better to buy good prime
Oh, what good short tele fast prime is there for Fuji? The 56 sucks, the 1.0 is a meme, the 50 f2 is a joke slow lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO dicaprio_poker.png, 1MiB, 565x720

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:42:19 No.3847061 Report

Quoted By: >>3847063 >>3847078

>>3847056
>Let's move that goalpost
Hmm, maybe lets not.

>>3847055
>>So here we have one, two, three, four examples where fuji zooms are smaller than their full frame counterparts. I'm pretty sure that case is closed.

Last time I checked a6600 was not full frame.

Oh well... :>

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:43:48 No.3847063 Report

Quoted By: >>3847066

>>3847061
>Last time I checked a6600 was not full frame.
The A6600 gets the same results as your APS-C.
Its 100-400 FF lens is the same size as your APS-C.
It's also cheaper.
And it has bonus compability with FF.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:46:34 No.3847066 Report

Quoted By: >>3847069

>>3847063
But we were discussing if fujifilm has smaller zooms than fool frame. Turns out it has.

a6600 is not full frame. It's aps-c. Therefore doenst belong in this discussion.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:47:57 No.3847069 Report

Quoted By: >>3847070

>>3847066
>>But we were discussing if fujifilm has smaller zooms than fool frame.
But the FF 100-400 is actually smaller and lighter than the fujifilm lens.

1135 gram vs 1375 gram
950 dollars vs 1900 dollars.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO coffeee.jpg, 24KiB, 450x360

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:48:59 No.3847070 Report

Quoted By: >>3847071

>>3847069
100-400 on crop is 150-600 on full frame

How much chromosomes do you have?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:50:11 No.3847071 Report

Quoted By: >>3847073

>>3847070
>100-400 on crop is 150-600 on full frame
You can turn the FF 100-400 into crop if you use the A6600.

And it will still be cheaper, smaller, lighter than your fujifulm lens. Despite its bonus compatibility with FF..

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:51:47 No.3847073 Report

Quoted By: >>3847076

>>3847071
lol, you are dumb

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 34KiB, 780x321

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:55:00 No.3847076 Report

Quoted By: >>3847077

>>3847073
There is no reason why this lens shouldn't be used by APS-C shooters.

It's smaller,
cheaper,
lighter,
sharper,
And has faster autofocus motor than your overpriced boutique brand.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 3.png, 60KiB, 512x512

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:57:44 No.3847077 Report

Quoted By: >>3847080

>>3847076
>Imagine being this dumb

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 13:57:55 No.3847078 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847061
>Look, Fuji has smaller equivalent lenses
>What about these commonly used, best selling lenses from Sony
>No that's not fair >:(

Lmao

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:00:43 No.3847080 Report

Quoted By: >>3847085 >>3847101

>>3847077
Bigger
expensive
heavier
softer image quality
Noisy autofocus
slower autofocus
less reliable autofocus
why does Fujifilm do this to themselves? Their lenses are supposed to be 1st party quality.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:09:01 No.3847085 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847080
Fuji knows what they're doing.
If they set their advertising to appeal to intangible things like "soul", and pitting themselves directly against companies bringing out objectively better products by calling them "specsheet warriors", they can appeal to people that are bad at photography who are upset by technically proficient photographers taking better photos than them.

If you can get rich selling substandard products to people that don't listen to reason, then you have a captive market and a viable product.

Just look at lomo, they made buckets of money for around 15 years by implying that cRaZy CoLoUrS from a vintage camera are a legitimate alternative to learning how to take good photos.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO hqdefault.jpg, 15KiB, 480x360

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:09:31 No.3847087 Report

Quoted By: >>3847092 >>3847113

>to make ff lens smaller than crop, you have to put it on crop body.

My fucking God, is this board for real? Not to mention that fuji is actually sharper, has beter stabilisation and af.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:11:34 No.3847092 Report

Quoted By: >>3847095

>>3847087
>>to make ff lens smaller than crop
Both of the FF 100-400 lenses are smaller than the Fujifilm 100-400.

No matter what bodies you attatch on them, a 50mm is a 50mm.
A 100mm is a 100mm.
That's how focal length works.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO snapshot.jpg, 144KiB, 854x480

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:17:05 No.3847095 Report

Quoted By: >>3847096

>>3847092
And ff lens are made for ff pixel density. And crop lenses are made for crop pixel density which is higher. Thats why many full frame lenses fall apart on crop.

And things goes even rougher when you add teleconverters.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 37KiB, 780x321

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:19:24 No.3847096 Report

Quoted By: >>3847100

>>3847095
You want to see more crazy stuff that's compatible with the A6600?

>And ff lens are made for ff pixel density.
Only some of them.
This F2,8 zoom is known to be the sharpest lens in Tamron's lineup.
It's autofocus motor is electromagnetic and completely noiseless while being faster and using less battery.
All this superior technology is offered at a cheaper price.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO dicaprio.jpg, 73KiB, 640x639

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:25:35 No.3847100 Report

Quoted By: >>3847102 >>3847103

>>3847096
But isn't getting equivalent of 105mm at short end defeats purpose of 70-200?

You know, the classic focal lenght that alows you to shoot kinda far away, but also be versatile enough to shoot indoors. Have you even tried shooting 70-200 at crop?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:27:33 No.3847101 Report

Quoted By: >>3847121

>>3847080
Dat aperture ring tho.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:27:37 No.3847102 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847100
No, no... He wouldnt just mindlessly masturbate over specs, witout understanding why.

Right? :^)

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 40KiB, 760x370

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:29:37 No.3847103 Report

Quoted By: >>3847104

>>3847100
>But isn't getting equivalent of 105mm at short end defeats purpose of 70-200?
It has a twin, the 17-70 F2,8. (which is also sharper, lighter smaller than your 16-55)

Do you get the trick?
17-70.
70-180.
70 takes over where 70 left off.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:30:57 No.3847104 Report

Quoted By: >>3847105

>>3847103
If you need to change lenses when shooting indoors to outdoors, you might as well shoot two primes

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:32:06 No.3847105 Report

Quoted By: >>3847107

>>3847104
Both lenses are fine indoors actually. Especially in big rooms where most of the wedding is held at.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO you_.jpg, 739KiB, 1750x2500

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:33:42 No.3847107 Report

Quoted By: >>3847112

>>3847105
>everything in photography is centered about weedings

But you know, I'd also would cope if I'd have to buy two lenses and change them midway shoot instead of having just one.

Imagine your system not having 70-200 equivalent at all. Crazy, right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:36:54 No.3847112 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847107
The longer reach is more valuable, especially with F2,8.
270mm FF equivalent.

If you talk about smaller rooms, then the 17-70 is obviously better, and you don't have to change lens as often as with your 16-55.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:38:41 No.3847113 Report

Quoted By: >>3847144

>>3847087
Show me a Fuji lens that is sharper than its FF equivalent

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:48:24 No.3847118 Report

Quoted By:

>>3846667
what do you want to do? if video, and you are looking at x-t3, i would go with lumix g9. if photo, i don't know.

what surgery did you have?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 14:51:47 No.3847121 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847101
None of the zoom lenses on either system have aperture rings.

Actually, there is a few but they are Cinema zooms.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fuji.png, 56KiB, 1434x608

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:15:36 No.3847144 Report

Quoted By: >>3847149 >>3847249

>>3847113

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:19:04 No.3847149 Report

Quoted By: >>3847150 >>3847151

>>3847144
That's LAowa, know for their high quality optics, and broad compatibility with all mounts.

He said fujifilm lens, not X-mount lens.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO lul.png, 474KiB, 680x435

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:19:39 No.3847150 Report

Quoted By: >>3847153

>>3847149
And you know what I say?

COPE

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2021-03-24 Fujifilm F (...).png, 151KiB, 941x694

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:20:52 No.3847151 Report

Quoted By: >>3847156 >>3847176 >>3847249

>>3847149

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:21:19 No.3847153 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847150
Laowa is actually primarily an E-mount and EF-mount lenses maker, you're on the big cope right now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:22:44 No.3847156 Report

Quoted By: >>3847159

>>3847151
Thanks for demonstrating Fujifilm is inferior to Chinese lens maker Laowa.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO laughing.jpg, 64KiB, 600x467

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:24:00 No.3847159 Report

Quoted By: >>3847168

>>3847156
I'm slowly running out reaction images for your stupidity.

>Imagine moving goalpost so fucking much

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1519095749472.jpg, 34KiB, 460x619

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:30:33 No.3847168 Report

Quoted By: >>3847215

>>3847159
Just remember
16-140 F2,8 on Fujifilm is 1650 gram and 2800 dollars.
17-180 F2,8 on Sony is 1335gram and 1900 dollars.

Today you've learned how awesome the E-mount APS-C actually is.
By the way, that Electromagnetic AF Motor also produce less friction and develop less heat. It's what helps the already superior 810 cpira rated battery life become more extended in practice compared to Fujifilms noisy motors with Gears.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20210324-153444.png, 366KiB, 1080x2280

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:42:00 No.3847176 Report

Quoted By: >>3847180 >>3847190 >>3847249

>>3847151
And next to a Sony full frame short tele macro...

Notice how even the extreme corners wide open beat the Fuji at its optimal aperture in the very centre. And it does that whilst also having a lens and sensor combo more than one stop faster. And at each of their best, the Sony is resolving 50% more.

Also the Sony is £850 and 600g
The Fuji is £1150 and 750g

Pretty fucking embarrassing for Fuji.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:44:26 No.3847180 Report

Quoted By: >>3847188 >>3847193

>>3847176
but this is tested with 42mpix camera. So fuji resolution would be double of that.

Yeah, pretty fucking embarrassing for sony.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:55:54 No.3847188 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847180
>But if the Fuji lens was used on a camera that doesn't exist, and there's no plans for it existing, it *might* be as good as the Sony

Lol

>Fuji would be double
Double the surface area doesn't mean double the height, you dipstick. 24mm is 50% more than 16mm, so if we take the Fuji peak at 3k, it might under perfect conditions hit 4500.

But the more important factor is that fujis insistence on crop has meant, by your own reasoning, they are crippled to 2\3 the image resolution of full frame.

Personally I'll take the camera with a whole extra stop of brightness (100% better) and 50%+ higher image resolution. Which is all available for a more affordable price than the worse performing Fuji.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:57:00 No.3847190 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847176
Jesus dude, I didn't realise Fuji were THAT much worse, makes it easy to strike them off my list!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 27KiB, 783x457

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 15:58:15 No.3847193 Report

Quoted By: >>3847206 >>3847249

>>3847180
Actually the Sony lens absolutely demolished the Fujifilm lens even on a simulated 18MP APS-C sensor.
3621 LW/PH
GG broski.

That's an 18MP sensor, think about how profound it is when Sony optics only needs 18 MP to demolish you Fujifilm system.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_2021-03-24 Sony Alpha (...).png, 35KiB, 478x539

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 16:15:48 No.3847206 Report

Quoted By: >>3847209

>>3847193
>18mpix
sure thing buddy

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO fuji.png, 49KiB, 1333x604

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 16:20:33 No.3847208 Report

Quoted By: >>3847209 >>3847249

So like this very expensive, premium sony lens is still worse than laowa? Moreover, laowa tested on fuji?

Damn, thats crazy

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 16:22:59 No.3847209 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847206
Looks like I was too hasty
I just read this part in the conclusion and skipped the rest. My bad, so that's a 24MP sensor
>The Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 G OSS macro performed great on the Sony A7R II

>>3847208
Softer than Laowa, sharper than Fujifilm.

It's a good try since Full Frame optics at that precision is more difficult to produce.
But they are working on a GM tier macro now, so wait and see.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 16:32:22 No.3847210 Report

Quoted By: >>3847215

Why are those Snoy freaks always spamming these threads with their garbage and also lying out of their ass half of the time?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 16:36:54 No.3847215 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847210
You mean this>>3847168?

That's not a lie. It's cited directly from B&H.
And the part about battery efficiency through electromagnetic actuators is also true, but more of a physics thing.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Screen Shot 2021-03-24 at 11.02. (...).png, 22KiB, 1062x122

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 18:04:29 No.3847249 Report

Quoted By: >>3847266

>>3847144
>>3847151
>>3847176
>>3847193
>>3847208
Idiots.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 18:08:42 No.3847251 Report

Quoted By:

Look how samefagged this thread is lmao
>>3846810
This guy fucks, don't get an a6400. All the a6000's are absolute irredeemable garbage.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 18:28:48 No.3847266 Report

Quoted By: >>3847269 >>3847331

>>3847249
cited OFTEN by the ANUS lover. as is tradition.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 18:37:05 No.3847269 Report

Quoted By: >>3847297

>>3847266
It was the Fujishill who compared the Laowa to the Fujifilm lens.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 19:19:28 No.3847297 Report

Quoted By: >>3847331

>>3847269
anus niggas be like

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 20:30:45 No.3847331 Report

Quoted By: >>3847416

>>3847266
>>3847297
>ANUS
that's a very cryptic, cringe and autistic way to refer to Atomos (not to mention butthurt).
Did a Ninja V brick your camera anon?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO joe-biden-gettyimages-1267438366.jpg, 87KiB, 1200x1200

Anonymous Wed 24 Mar 2021 22:56:15 No.3847416 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847331
do anus niggas really?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 25 Mar 2021 11:11:10 No.3847666 Report

Quoted By: >>3849233

Fujifags got absolutely wrecked in this thread, yikes

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 27 Mar 2021 23:49:55 No.3849233 Report

Quoted By:

>>3847666
are you having fever dreams again, anon?

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

Help me decide