Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Photography' started by Patrick Sun, Apr 11, 2014.
This is also known as scope creep.
We've all been there, Adam. I can tell you the EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS is a terrific lens if you do not need a f/2.8 maximum aperture. I've owned one for many years, and even though I do not use it a lot (my EF 100-400L IS II gets more use) I just cannot part with it.
I am holding off anymore lens purchases for now as I contemplate if/when I will begin the migration to a full frame mirrorless body from my existing Canon 5D3. I had a brief urge to jump into one of Canon's new full frame bodies before our summer trip to Iceland, but decided I was being rash and would just use what I already own for that trip. I already have Canon's M50 mirrorless crop sensor body, and it's great for traveling light. I just don't think a full frame mirrorless is going to benefit me enough right now to justify the expense.
Speaking of that trip to Iceland, I am struggling with what to take, as I'm not sure how much wildlife we will be seeing. Right now, I am leaning towards leaving my Canon 7D2 home and just taking the 5D3, M50, EF 24-105mm F/4 L, 100-400L (for wildlife), EF-M 22mm f/2 pancake, EF-M 11-22mm (for wide angle on my M50) and a 1.4x TC for the telephoto. I would normally use my 7D2 for all wildlife, but may just use the 5D3 instead. This would keep my backpack a little lighter, and the M50 will be great for walking around the ship -- we are taking a cruise on a 210 passenger ship which will circumnavigate all of Iceland over 9 days.
Yeah my next body will be FF Mirrorless Z. I expect full parity on Nikon bodies between Mirror and Mirrorless next generation. First get was close but not tempting me to give up on my 850/500, both of which are amazing. i'm hoping for a consumer level Z sooner than later,a guy can dream. But I expect both bodies will last me a full 5 years or more so I can afford to wait 2-3 gens.
For the record I have not bought a single camera item since the twin body upgrade. And I don't expect to for a long time. I did back that wacky Kickstarter flash system but that was more to support the entrepreneur than an actual need on my part.
My full frame Canon 5D3 is already 7 years old, but it still does the job for me. My Canon 7D2 crop body is 4 years old. It may be the first body I get rid of, as the M50 mirrorless crop sensor I picked up last year gets much more use.
I am of a similar mind regarding full frame mirrorless -- I will wait for a few generations for Canon to work the bugs out and add some features to their consumer body that they are currently holding back on. Hopefully they will get a few more less expensive lenses for the system, too. Right now most of the RF lenses are way past my budget. Fortunately, reports from current owners is that Canon's existing EF and EF-S lenses perform flawlessly on the new EOS R bodies -- albeit with a required adapter. So I can still use all my existing glass whenever I do make the transition, and just replace lenses when it makes sense.
Unexpectedly, I am now seriously considering FF mirrorless w/ the Nikon Z6 afterall.
Like most of you, didn't think I'd be making the jump anytime soon when the Z6 and Z7 (and Canon equiv) first came out about half year ago, but this life is short and some things happened/changed unexpectedly... and now, I'll be heading over to visit B&H in the next day or two and likely returning home w/ one unless I run into unexpected issues/concerns w/ it...
Also, originally didn't think I'd want the 24-70 f/4 S lens that can be had bundled w/ the Z6, but reconsidering that too now... as it seems to be very good match for the Z6 and apparently even compares pretty well to Nikon's flagship 24-70 f/2.8 VR, except for being 1 stop slower glass (while the in-camera IS/VR works ~1 stop better w/ it), which is probably perfectly fine w/ me since I only have the 16-35 f/4 VR for FF widezoom right now -- was using the 17-55 f/2.8 DX at 1.2x crop (from its ~22-55mm usable range for effective 27-66mm) on my D800 for a long while. I do have a few FF primes from wide to tele range, but most of them are old designs and not quite good enough anymore (compared to the better modern zooms) for me to bother w/ lugging and swapping most times, especially nowadays...
Still plan to use my D800 a good deal though... as I'll probably lug both for most photo opp events/trips and then just avoid swapping lenses most times. Probably stick w/ using most F-mount lenses mostly on the D800, especially the 16-35 f/4 VR, and only sporadically use them w/ the Z6, except maybe the Sigma 105 f/2.8 OS and Nikon 70-300 VR perhaps -- maybe I should get an extra end cap so I can just leave the FTZ adapter on one of them(?). Hmmm... I might also use my old Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 w/ the Z6 for video at my kids' recitals, etc as that's what I often did when using the D800 for that...
Assuming I do get the Z6, I'm also considering something like the Atomos Ninja V or maybe one of its larger 7" siblings for substantially enhanced video shooting capabilities, especially since they can capture to SSD instead of expensive XQD (or CF-express) cards...
I think I figured out I no longer want the 6D mark ii body and will probably upgrade to FF mirrorless and adaptor down the road. The nice thing is that I can use EFS lenses on the mirrorless, as well as my EF lenses, which I wouldn't be able to do on the 6D.
You probably don't want to count on using EF-S lenses on FF mirrorless... at least until you know your EF-S lenses will actually work as desired.
I did that w/ my 17-55 f/2.8 DX widezoom on my Nikon D800 for a long while (mostly at 1.2x crop), and it worked fine enough for the most part... in large part because of how/what I tend to shoot most w/ it. I did eventually get a 16-35 f/4 VR FF widezoom and completely stopped using the DX widezoom even though the usable range of the DX widezoom only partially overlap this FF widezoom.
And offhand, I would guess the light circle on EF-S lenses may well be slightly smaller than Nikon DX lenses... which could make them less usable on FF... though I could be wrong of course.
Still, if you only expect the same 1.6x crop result w/ EF-S lenses (albeit probably w/ lower pixel count than you currently get), I guess that should be fine... though the viewfinder view (and maybe live-view) will likely become very underwhelming. Certainly, you wouldn't want to use the camera that way most times me thinks...
Personally, I wish Nikon would keep the 1.2x crop factor option available on their Z series... as I don't always need/want all the pixels and resultant file sizes... though the Z6 at ~24.5MP is nearly same pixel count as my D800 at 1.2x crop... and also still very usable at ~10MP in DX crop, if I ever bother...
the crop factor wouldn't bother me that much, and I can pocket the crop factor (not wide enough for her) as a future rationale to talk the wife into upgrading to the L 24-105 or a wide L zoom.
Actually, my previous caveat about the view thru APS crop lenses probably won't apply afterall -- it certainly does not w/ the Nikon Z bodies... though Canon had previously intentionally separated EF and EF-S.
Because the view is all electronic (w/ whatever software support), the camera can easily be made to magnify the cropped optical view to fill the EVF and monitor (not to mention possibly brighten - or maybe "dim"? -- it to be closer to WYSIWYG). So that was a very pleasant surprise when I finally checked out the Z6 in person. And although EVF can still be a bit laggy, the Z6 one does also present a pleasantly bigger view than my D800, which already has bigger optical view than typical cropped sensor DSLRs.
So yeah, if you really want to go FF mirrorless for the other usual reasons and don't mind the bit of EVF lag or whatever other slight downsides of modern EVF, then these (and probably other ongoing advances/advantages in EVF) should make for nice bonuses me thinks... and make your cropped lenses very usable indeed... even though you'll of course want to upgrade to FF lenses sooner or later...
For me, I probably still won't want to use my 17-55 f/2.8 DX on the Z6 though... even though I don't plan to own any fast widezooms for it... unless perhaps Nikon later adds 1.2x (or maybe even 1.3x) crop option via future firmware update...
But yeah, I do wish Nikon had a 24-105 f/4 (or bit longer) planned for near term release for the new Z mount... Oh well, maybe it still wouldn't really be long enough at tele end for my video shooting needs w/out substantially sacrificing IQ... For stills, 24-70 f/4 certainly makes a good all-around sweet spot for my walkaround, general uses...
Canon's RF 24-105 f/4 lens is what will probably get me to upgrade my full frame 5D3 to mirrorless eventually. My current EF 24-105mmL f/4 acts flaky sometimes when the image stabilization is turned on -- the image "jumps" to the right when the shutter is released, for lack of a better description. It doesn't do it all the time, but when it starts to act up I have to turn off IS.
It would probably cost me more to have the lens serviced than it's worth, and I don't want to invest in anymore EF glass unless absolutely necessary. So, if my current 24-105 f/4 completely dies, that will probably mean some version of the Canon EOS R + RF 24-105 f/4 will be in my future.
Had a chance to check out the newly launched Fuji GFX100 yesterday at B&H -- they had a rep do special afternoon presentation -- but didn't pay attention to the signage until a bit too late, LOL...
John, is that in your future?
Rented the Sony 24-104mm f4 for the a7iii. I enjoyed using it...as a rental. Couldn't see owning it because the zoom mechanism is the opposite of my Canon zooms and it kept tripping me up. Once again confirming for my use right now as a companion to a Canon system, primes are a better choice.
Also looking at getting a Godox flash (the Profoto knock off of the A1) to round things out, but that's pretty low priority.
So the specs on the Canon 90D have 'leaked.' There's nothing super compelling there to me, so it's looking like I stick with a 7Dm2 for a few more years, switch to a Canon full frame, or - perhaps more radically - make the Sony a7iii more my go-to and the 7D just used for telephoto needs.
It's tough to beat the 7Dm2 for a crop body in Canon's lineup, even at its age. Mine gets used almost exclusively with my two telephoto lenses -- the EF 100-400L II and 70-200L f/4 IS. I have no plans to upgrade that body.
My EF 24-105L f/4 IS was acting up again while we were in Iceland. The image shift with IS turned on is very annoying, and I may have to do something before our next big trip. That probably will not be until next summer at the earliest, though, so I can see what may be coming in new full frame mirrorless models from Canon as an upgrade for my 7 year old full frame 5D3.. In the meantime, I just work around the issue with the 24-105L by turning IS off.
I'm hoping to get the 70-200 f/4 m2 by the end of the year, to use with the Sony a7iii primarily. Although I'm fine with shooting primes in most cases, fast-moving children kind of require the flexibility of a zoom. Ergonomically, the a7 is kind of hard to use with an f/2.8 zoom, so I'm thinking the lighter weight and smaller size of the f/4 will be a better pairing.
I have owned the original version of the 70-200mm f/4 IS for almost 12 years. It's a terrific lens -- light weight, quick focus, great image quality, decent image stabilization. The new version probably improves on some of these features. With the better high ISO performance of today's bodies, a f/2.8 zoom is not always necessary -- it isn't for me. The lens takes a 1.4x TC quite well, too.
Here's a shot at 200mm without the convertor:
And one at 280mm with the TC:
Both the above shots are black guillemots taken on Vigur Island in Iceland a couple of weeks ago. I am glad I left the heavier 100-400L II at home in favor of the much smaller, lighter 70-200 f/4. The smaller form factor was nice while we were hiking around a couple of the off shore islands and riding a small boat in the iceberg lagoon, and my backpack was lighter while walking through the various airports.
So with the 1.4 TC, that makes it around 450mm on a crop-body? Am I doing the math right?
The m2 version of the 70-200 f/4 does have some nice improvements all around, at least according to Lens Rentals's founder.
"Don’t confuse this with some “paint” upgrades. The IS II version of this lens is light years better than the original. It’s dramatically sharper at 70mm and remains noticeably sharper throughout the rest of the zoom range. The IS is better than the original version, too. This is not a close call. If you want to shoot a 70-200 f/4 IS lens, then this is absolutely worth the price difference."
"As an aside, at f/4 this lens is sharper than the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II or III is at f/2.8. If you stop the f/2.8 down to f/4 it’s a tiny bit better, but not much. So the bottom line is, if you’re out shooting things in bright sunlight, save some money and some weight. This lens is excellent and very few people realize how good it is."