Sony A7x lounge

My other thought about WB: it is just too easy to fix in post that I don't really care if a camera sucks at AWB.

eriet30 wrote in post #18006020
Would you sell

28/2
55/1.8
24TSEv2

For the 24-70 2.8 GM?

When I was shooting with the group this last weekend I was really surprised that some of the guys I really like were 70% on that type of zoom and I was cleaning dust a lot.

I love my TSE but can go a legacy cheaper option or fix in LR from the CV15 i have

Not starting a zoom vs prime here just can you pull what you need from the one lens vs the faster ones

David Arbogast wrote in post #18006061
Yep, I would do it. First, the FE 24-70mm is now the best 24-70 ever made. Second, the TS-E is just better on a native Canon body...only time I'm willing to put it on my Sony is when I'm doing more casual walk-around shooting. Third, you'd be getting a lens with a premier build quality (moisture/dust resistant/durable, etc.).

The only downside to your plan - imo - is it would cost you the excellent 55mm, otherwise it's all positive imo (admittedly this is coming from a guy who doesn't care too much about heavier lenses. A 24-70 f/2.8 on a Sony a7 bothers me not one bit).

Yup. In fact, I've been sitting on the trigger for the 24-70/2.8 for the past week. It's still on backorder, but by all accounts (and I know a couple of people on FM who have one), it's the a phenomenal lens with excellent IQ edge to edge at all apertures and all FLs. In other words, as close to a silver bullet as one can get.

I for one, am tired of changing lenses and lugging around so many things (my latest trip demonstrated that).
So I'm wanting to do exactly what you just suggested.
I can easily fund this expensive lens if I sell the 24-70/4 and my various primes between those 2 FLs (55/1.8, Sigma 35/1.4, etc.)

Then I could take 2 lenses and one body on my various excursions (I still would keep a 70-200 or 70-300) and maybe keep the CV 15 around for going ultrawide.

I have WAY too many lenses as it is now.

For my part 16-35mm is my absolute ideal zoom range...my sights and hopes are fixed on the upcoming Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L III. If they can replicate the awseomeness of the 24-70L II in that lens, then it would be a dream - especially if it's corrected for astro use.

Or if Sony likewise makes a 16-35 GM - which they should! - then that might be a killer lens for me as well.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #18006100
My a7S is notably better than my a7R was for AWB, but my Fuji blows both away... I would say the a7S is better than my 6D was though.

Didnt know you had or still have all those cameras! All shots i see of you are shot with A7S i thought youre a happy camper with that camera lol

David Arbogast wrote in post #18006114
My other thought about WB: it is just too easy to fix in post that I don't really care if a camera sucks at AWB.

What i noticed thought, is that when WB is way to off the sliders in LR dont allow more correction. I always try to just set a custom WB on something greyish and then be good for that environment i shoot in.

eriet30 wrote in post #18006020
Would you sell

28/2
55/1.8
24TSEv2

For the 24-70 2.8 GM?

When I was shooting with the group this last weekend I was really surprised that some of the guys I really like were 70% on that type of zoom and I was cleaning dust a lot.

I love my TSE but can go a legacy cheaper option or fix in LR from the CV15 i have

Not starting a zoom vs prime here just can you pull what you need from the one lens vs the faster ones

I have 2 samyang/ROK 24mm ts lenses. I don't know enough on how to use them properly but the few times ib have used them they work great on the a7. Mite be an option for u.they are pretty reasonable price on amazon

David Arbogast wrote in post #18006161
For my part 16-35mm is my absolute ideal zoom range...my sights and hopes are fixed on the upcoming Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L III. If they can replicate the awseomeness of the 24-70L II in that lens, then it would be a dream - especially if it's corrected for astro use.

Or if Sony likewise makes a 16-35 GM - which they should! - then that might be a killer lens for me as well.

Jap. i could never acclimate myself to walking around with a 24-70. I dont know if its too normal for me or why i feel this way, but when im just heading out without thinking what lens to bring, it is my FE16-35. I like it that more that i rather live with f4 instead of 2.8 on a 24-70 and walking around with a FL that i dont feel confortable. I usably anyways compliment that by a fast 50 or some faster longer lens.

Its funny how my mind changed over the years. For me, aperture now simply has just a creative use to me. The high ISO on the A7RIi is just so good that i simply dont care anymore. My first fullframe camera was the 6D, which already is top notch when it comes to high ISO, but since goin fullframe, i dont feel like theres a lot of difference betwenn f/2 or f/4. I even often find myself not gettinga shot because i have an f/4 lens mounted, then change the lens to a f/1.4 and still not getting the shot i want. Thats meant handheld of course. And if you really need the light, youre anyways going to sacrifice IQ because of not shooting stopping down to get edge to edge sharpness.

DTBaan wrote in post #18005961
I really like this. distance is good enough, can see the beautiful trees surroundings the area

Thank you! It's a different perspective than the typical shooting up close at the waterfall images I've seen.

DTBaan wrote in post #18005965
very cool! did you get to go o to that one structure by the cliff in the picture? one of these days I will go to Maui. ive only been to Oahu.

Thanks again. No it was on private property. It was a big gazebo for some lucky homeowner with a very nice house with an incredible view. Likely a retired millionaire.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18006161
For my part 16-35mm is my absolute ideal zoom range...my sights and hopes are fixed on the upcoming Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L III. If they can replicate the awseomeness of the 24-70L II in that lens, then it would be a dream - especially if it's corrected for astro use.

Or if Sony likewise makes a 16-35 GM - which they should! - then that might be a killer lens for me as well.

Agree! After this recent trip, I'm a believer in having a top quality zoom in the 16-35 range plus a few top primes like the Loxia 21 in my bag. It gives you much better flexibility working in the field. I learned that changing lens on the beach is not something I want to do. Too much risk of something getting on the sensor.

davidfarina wrote in post #18006169
Didnt know you had or still have all those cameras! All shots i see of you are shot with A7S i thought youre a happy camper with that camera lol

What i noticed thought, is that when WB is way to off the sliders in LR dont allow more correction. I always try to just set a custom WB on something greyish and then be good for that environment i shoot in.

I'm a pretty happy camper with my a7S, though I do use my X-E2 more I think I had the 6D first, used it for about a couple years then switched to the a7R and wasn't happy with it, then got the a7S and was very happy with it... then got the X-E2 as an everyday camera, turned out liking it just as much/more

Thank you for all the input on the 24-70 I really appreciate it.

I will miss my TSE but keeping my bag simple really sounds better and even though it is a big lens it doesnt bother me that way

The CV15 is not going anywhere so I would end up with CV15 / 24-70 / 70-200 / 90 macro / Rok 8 fisheye

I would probably look for a legacy lens for the TSE purpose like the canon 35 or something else.

Thanks again this wont happen fast I will do it when they start getting in stock.

navydoc wrote in post #18006051
My brisket was done in less time than I expected, probably due to it's size I imagine. After it reached the 203° mark, I took it off the grill and placed it, still wrapped, in my igloo cooler to allow it to rest and let the juices flow back into the muscle fibers (temp dropped a couple of degrees by the time I took this photo).

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GHj2​yQ Cooler resting by Gene, on Flickr

After about 30 minutes in the cooler (to keep it warm in this case), I unwrapped the brisket and sliced against the grain. Then, the all important taste test.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/H8tY​S8 First cuts by Gene, on Flickr

The texture is firmer than I had hoped for but it was nice and tender...and the flavor is great. It's very possible that my internal temp probe was giving me false readings because it probably could have cooked longer. Lessons learned!

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/GHj2​w5 Plated by Gene, on Flickr

Here's a breakdown of my first brisket smokeout...

5:30 - place the brisket on the grill - grill temp varied between 200° & 250°

9:30 - wrap in aluminum foil (2 layers) - stalled at 154°

12:30 - remove from grill - achieved 203° - place in cooler to rest, kept foil on

1:00 - remove from wrap - carve against the grain

1:15 - Give'er the 'ol taste test - conclusion: not too shabby for my first attempt.


Total time: 7.75 hours

Tasty looking stuff Gene!

I have a personal question. I really think my portraiture is competitive enoughat least in my area.

Recently i got this job at the sanitation department of sierra nevada beer brewery. It burns me out a lot by waking up 4am 5 days a week. Works starts at 5am til 1:30.

And i'm only earning like $400/week. I felt like i can earn that money with portraiture. Now i wanted to quit the work and and give full time photography a shot.

What do you guys think?

vinmunoz wrote in post #18006361
I have a personal question. I really think my portraiture is competitive enoughat least in my area.

Recently i got this job at the sanitation department of sierra nevada beer brewery. It burns me out a lot by waking up 4am 5 days a week. Works starts at 5am til 1:30.

And i'm only earning like $400/week. I felt like i can earn that money with portraiture. Now i wanted to quit the work and and give full time photography a shot.

What do you guys think?

You certainly are talented enough to do this full time for money Vinz. It's pretty competitive out here too, but even I've been making on average $200+ a week doing this on the weekends (its slowing down right now because summer is here though) and I don't have the portfolio that you do. I'm confident that you could do this full time and be successful at it.

The one downside you should consider is the fact that as much as you find photography fun when shooting for yourself, shooting for others can really suck the enjoyment out of things because when you're trying to live off of what you shoot, you aren't always doing it on your terms. I'm shooting mainly for practice and play money but it starts to feel like a drag when I book a lot of stuff, get back-logged on processing stuff at home, and especially when I feel myself shooting the same thing over and over and over. It starts to feel like work. That's the reason I wouldn't personally try to live off of what I shoot...It's gotten to the point where I've started turning things down because they're a lot of work, don't personally interest me, and are not worth the time away from my family. Also the reason I shy away from weddings now. Not sure if I would turn things down if I were doing this to feed my family (instead of feeding GAS lol)

It helps that I don't mind my day job. I don't love it, but I do find it gratifying and challenging in all the right way. It sounds like your new job isn't something you're enjoying so maybe taking photos you may not always care for isn't such a bad alternative!

Another reason i thought about quitting the work is.. I invested a lot in photography. Money and time learning. Working is like giving it all up. I'm pretty beat up at work so even if i finish at 1:30, i'm to tired to do photography.

I have an album to make that i haven't even touch yet.

vinmunoz wrote in post #18006403
Another reason i thought about quitting the work is.. I invested a lot in photography. Money and time learning. Working is like giving it all up. I'm pretty beat up at work so even if i finish at 1:30, i'm to tired to do photography.

I have an album to make that i haven't even touch yet.

Opportunity cost. The time you spend at work could be spent improving your photography and/or building your business.

The other thing to consider when turning photography into a business is that gear purchases becomes business expenses, and every gear purchase you make should bring in enough additional revenue to justify making the expenditure. In that context, to really maximize the profitability if your business you should shoot on the cheapest gear that still allows you to deliver what your clients want. Chances are, your clients don't care that eye focus is as awesome as it is and it might make the most sense to shoot on an old 5DII and not an a7rII. Another reason I prefer to keep this a hobby and not a business.

I don't mean to poop on the idea Vinz. I really think its worth doing, and even if you aren't shooting things you want to shoot, it is very gratifying to know that people really cherish your work. It's always nice to see your clients proudly post their stuff online and all the comments that go along with it. Even better when you see you work turned into a photobook or printed large and hung on a wall. Plus you've got the skill and portfolio to really be successful at it.