AeroSmith wrote in post #18862280
Hi guys! OK, still doing tons of research. Still shooting with my 5D. It is pretty freaking heavy for hiking. I do go to the gym just to work my legs so I can carry a pack and gear when I hike...
I just bought a Fujifilm XF 60 f/2.4 R macro for my daughter's birthday to use on her Fujifilm X-T1. It's her second lens along with an XF 23/1.4 R.
And that got me thinking about how much fun that Fujifilm camera was to shoot with all of its analog dials. It also go me thinking about how I almost liked the files and colors from that camera as much as the files and colors from my 5D4...almost. And then I started thinking that the SONY files might require a bigger change in my PP workflow than I'd be comfortable with. SONY is not known for their color science. Fujifilm's is, by my memory, quite good.
Further, the A7r3 with a SONY 24-105/4 is close to $4200! While $4,032 gets me the following Fujifilm kit: Fujifilm X-T3 body, XF 10-24/4 R OIS lens, XF 35/2 WR lens, XF 80/2.8 WR OIS Macro lens, a spare battery, a nice 64 gig SDXC II memory card, a free Fujifilm 64 gig card, two B+W CPs and two B+W ND filters. Granted the X-T3 is probably more comparable to the A73 in terms of resolution. The A73 is about $800 less than the A7r3. But the good SONY lenses are expensive! At least 20% more than Canon's and Fujifilm's....
Finally, moving to SONY might save me 7 ounces right there on my shoulder. But moving to Fujifilm would save me a pound (assuming the 10-24/4, 15-36mm FF equivalent, is mounted). And that might also make a big difference when it comes time to mounting the camera on my very lightweight Gitzo 0 series Traveler tripod.
Entropy may win out and I may just stick with the 5D. But I'm giving Fujifilm another serious look.
if you're going to cherry pick and have different standards, you can really manipulate anything.
that said, best if you go with fuji since you're daughter already has fuji. If my sons/daughters ever shoot, guaranteed it will be sony for family sharing.
if you want inexpensive and small lenses for sony FF, there are a lot of options and growing at a much faster rate than anyone due to third party. Tamron and Samyang have great third party lenses. Voigtlander if you do MF. Sony has some small lenses as well. You're comparing a sony 24-105 with fuji 10-24, and some primes.... it's a real sideways comparison. On top of that, if you're looking to change systems, you gotta consider that the system is no longer the same, and you may need to get out of your comfort zone. Find gear that's stronger suited to the system, see it's offerings, even consider mixing it up. Unlike canon and fuji, you can easily shoot full frame and use crop lenses on Sony's system, the camera automatically adjusts crop factor.
For instance, I find that in video mode, I'm ok shooting APS-C mode, so a 16-50 pancake makes a ton of sense when shooting from gimbal. When back to stills, I may switch up to the 28-75 f2.8/ 28 f2/ 35 f2.8/ 50 f1.8 and generally a massive DOF difference.
it's a different ecosystem
lenses are sort of affordable, here's my psuedo travel kit, I probably wont travel with all the lenses, but I certainly could
CV 21mm f3.5 $800
FE 35 f2.8 $450
FE 50 f1.8 $150
FE 28 f2 $350
Tam 28-75 f2.8 $700
FE 16-50 PZ OSS $130
the lenses themselves arent very expensive, and all very nice in their own way.
21 + 35 make the perfect two tiny belt pouch lenses kit.
28, 50 is nice for dual cameras on the peak 5L
28-75 is nice by itself
28 or 16-50 both nice for gimbal video work. Sometimes zoom is useful, but I generally prefer the bokeh? With clear image zoom, the 28 behaves like a 28-70 f2-4. The 16-50 like a 24-105 f4-8. I'm waiting for Tamron's 17-28 F2.8, might be the perfect gimbal lens, internal focusing, f2.8 is ok, and smaller than other zooms in the range.
this is not to say I dont have gigantic FF lenses, I certainly do. I just dont care for them most of the time. If I wanted the very large aperture look, I can certainly get it. Just doesnt mean a whole lot when doing video. You probably dont want that super thin DOF for video, it's kind of a different animal. I'de be ok with a wide angle with wide aperture, but longer focal length and wide aperture is not super useful for video. I'll occasionally use it, but it's not super useful.
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.
Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC