Sony A7x lounge

first real edit from the trip...most of the trip was family stuff, less me spending time with the camera...but one night my friend and I did go back up to Kerry Park hoping for a sunset...we got one...and the surprise of Mount Rainier being visible...been working on this one on and off all afternoon...

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KcBM​tF

xpfloyd wrote in post #18068340
The reviews of the 50 are saying you have to stop it down to at least f/2 as its poor wide open. If you have to do that what's the point?

so far there been one "review" from some guy from Korea, so I will wait for more news/reviews about it, before I make up my mind.

TRhoads wrote in post #18068986
first real edit from the trip...most of the trip was family stuff, less me spending time with the camera...but one night my friend and I did go back up to Kerry Park hoping for a sunset...we got one...and the surprise of Mount Rainier being visible...been working on this one on and off all afternoon...

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/KcBM​tF The Recluse by Travis Rhoads, on Flickr

Awesome !!!!!!!!! Rainer is so photogenic as is the needle, of course you got both with that amazing sky=well done TR.

I'm wondering how's the eye af of the new 70-200 f2.8 at 200mm full length shots.

I have some incoming wedding, main and as a second shooter... For that i have this wild idea of ordering the 70-200 f2.8 and give up the 85gm. This is the problem when you don't have the funds to keep all.

The zoom is just so well rounded.

MedicineMan4040 wrote in post #18069000
Awesome !!!!!!!!! Rainer is so photogenic as is the needle, of course you got both with that amazing sky=well done TR.

Thanks! We were very fortunate...we didn't expect to be able to see Rainier, it had been so cloudy for our trip...

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18068934

David Arbogast wrote in post #18068757
If mirrorless lenses can be smaller, then why are all the Sony FE zooms and fast primes no smaller - and sometimes larger - than their DSLR equivalents?

Is Sony bad at mirrorless lens designs with these DSLR-sized lenses? I'm confused.

BTW, this isn't a challenge, I am sincerely baffled why some mirrorless lenses can be smaller, but most are not.

There are plenty of examples to show the size advantage of MILC lenses, especially with the Fuji system. As for why Sony don't make their lenses to take full advantage is beyond me and partly why I have one foot out the door.

genesimmons wrote in post #18068782
Either way I dont need an adapter whooho. I did get a m43 to e mount adapter and I use the 85 f1.4 on my a7. It's odd a lens designed for m43 woukd be full frame compatible

Again, it's NOT designed for m43, it's mount is just adapted to fit it, which is why it works perfectly fine on your a7.

I have the same exact Rokinon 85mm lens as yours only mine is Canon mount.

They changed alot more Thanjust the mount to m43.I also have the 85mm in canon mount and they are very different. The barrel is longer and it's shaped very different. It's definitely not a dslr with a m43 mount screwed on.

Why are you guys so worried about how the lens are built? keep shooting. Be like a guitarist who can make any cheap guitar sounds good.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18068934
There are plenty of examples to show the size advantage of MILC lenses, especially with the Fuji system. As for why Sony don't make their lenses to take full advantage is beyond me and partly why I have one foot out the door.

Are you sure that the size advantage you are referring to isn't mainly because Fuji is an APS-C sensor camera rather than it being mirrorless? Since the Fuji system is all APS-C they can design all their lenses to cover the smaller sensor.

I just did a quick look at a couple comparable Fuji zooms (10-24mm F4 and 16-55mm F2.8) with Canon EF-S zooms (10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 and 17-55mm f/2.8) and they appear to be roughly the same size and weight. Granted they aren't 100% equivalent, but in the same ballpark.

vinmunoz wrote in post #18069066
Why are you guys so worried about how the lens are built? keep shooting. Be like a guitarist who can make any cheap guitar sounds good.

Hsha ur right vinz. My new fave lens is my 35-70 macro. At f8 this thing is sharpppp. And it was less than 100 whooho

vinmunoz wrote in post #18069009
I'm wondering how's the eye af of the new 70-200 f2.8 at 200mm full length shots.

I have some incoming wedding, main and as a second shooter... For that i have this wild idea of ordering the 70-200 f2.8 and give up the 85gm. This is the problem when you don't have the funds to keep all.

The zoom is just so well rounded.

Why don't you just rent the 70-200 F/2.8 for a couple of days?

genesimmons wrote in post #18069128
Hsha ur right vinz. My new fave lens is my 35-70 macro. At f8 this thing is sharpppp. And it was less than 100 whooho

You're smart brother. My problem when using an af lens... An hour session can easily escalate to 300+ images. Not good. Less is more. Haha

vinmunoz wrote in post #18069066
Why are you guys so worried about how the lens are built? keep shooting. Be like a guitarist who can make any cheap guitar sounds good.

Because (a lot of) lenses are expensive enough and you expect to get something in return for your hard-earned money?

vinmunoz wrote in post #18069131

genesimmons wrote in post #18069128
Hsha ur right vinz. My new fave lens is my 35-70 macro. At f8 this thing is sharpppp. And it was less than 100 whooho

You're smart brother. My problem when using an af lens... An hour session can easily escalate to 300+ images. Not good. Less is more. Haha

Hsha good thing for big SD cards. I find with manual lenses I do compose more and really pick my shots. If I have some thing important I will use my af lenses on the Canon. My oldest daughter had a high jump event where manual just wouldn't work. I'll still grab the Canon for that and yes I took a lot of shots hsha

jocau wrote in post #18069129
Why don't you just rent the 70-200 F/2.8 for a couple of days?

When it's out. But if the review is food. I might jump on it.

I'm using a 128gb SD card. Not a good idea for wedding. I might buy a bunch of 16gb.

Separate card for preparation, ceremony and reception. Scared to used my 128 and screw all up.