Sony A7x lounge

Random thought: Canon's marketing is a thing of wonder. Ever notice that people who own Canon lenses never just call them lenses? They're "Canon L" lenses. i.e. "This bag better be secure because I'm keeping bunch of "Canon L" lenses in it."....as if "L" signifies they're something other than lenses and as such, it needs its own caliber camera bag. There's some brand weirdness regarding Zeiss glass too, but nothing like "Canon L".

mystik610 wrote in post #18178416
Random thought: Canon's marketing is a thing of wonder. Ever notice that people who own Canon lenses never just call them lenses? They're "Canon L" lenses. i.e. "This bag better be secure because I'm keeping bunch of "Canon L" lenses in it."....as if "L" signifies they're something other than lenses and as such, it needs its own caliber camera bag. There's some brand weirdness regarding Zeiss glass too, but nothing like "Canon L".

Heh, indeed. I just refer to them as my L's. And most photog friends immediately know what I mean, and there's some unspoken psychological weight to that. Sony seems to be trying to do the same with GM. Perhaps someday in the distant future I may refer to my GM's. But for the moment, my L's and my Batis are going great.

I'm also going to post this in the Merchandise forum, but for all of us shooting adapted lenses--or even a-mount bodies--Focus Camera is having a big Tamron sale.

One example:

https://slickdeals.net …ee-s-h?v=1&src=SiteSearch

They also have a few of the newer Tamron primes listed on a different link:

https://slickdeals.net …lickdeals-rebate-free-s-h

Puckman wrote in post #18178398
Got back last night from an impromptu trip to Death Valley (just a quick overnighter). The weather did not cooperate all that much, so I'm not expecting many great captures.
A couple of things became abundantly clear to me though:

1. I cannot keep on going on these landscape outings with 5+ lenses and all this gear.
2. I might be better off with zooms.

We hit up the Mesquite Sand Dunes area for sunrise. Which is a photographer's dream location. It involved hiking up 50 foot high sand dunes (loose sand). Which is not AT ALL pleasant when carrying a tripod, a backpack and a shoulder bag, altogether. The fumbling around, while trying not to drop anything in the sand (or set anything down) was brutal. It would have been hard enough hiking around like that without carrying ANYING, let alone with all the gear I had.
Add to that the constant switching of lenses (I'm an all-prime shooter at the moment), and it was a nightmare. I didn't drop anything, but after about 15 minutes, my sensor was pretty dusty looking (visible to the naked eye).
Moreover, all of this took away the enjoyment of photography. I basically found myself at this great location, wishing the ordeal was over after about 20 minutes, because I could not for the life of me relax and focus myself enough to take in the view, or think about composition.

Bottom line:
1. I am considering selling all my primes and going with a 2 zoom option (24-70GM and 70-200/4) + maybe one UWA (15 mm, or 18mm).
2. I still find the Sony experience extremely annoying. It never fails. Right when I'm in the middle of "that moment", I have to find some setting that I don't have mapped anywhere (in this case it was the "disable auto viewfinder") and end up wasting precious time fumbling around trying to dive through the menus.

Look for some big changes coming up in my lineup....Pretty sure I'm done with the current approach.

If I go to a place hazardous to my sensor, I sometimes bring only one lens. I don't wanna be changing lenses. even just on snowy areas. if I have a 16-35, that will be it. now my choice for those situations will only be my 2470GM. not wide enough for landscape but I don't wanna risk my sensor.

vinmunoz wrote in post #18178582
If I go to a place hazardous to my sensor, I sometimes bring only one lens. I don't wanna be changing lenses. even just on snowy areas. if I have a 16-35, that will be it. now my choice for those situations will only be my 2470GM. not wide enough for landscape but I don't wanna risk my sensor.

The last time I encountered that type of weather was at the beach way back. I had anticipated heavy winds, so I brought a zoom on one body and two primes for the other. Turns out I didnt even do lens changes, but also revealed that I had a defective copy of canon's 24-70ii, the salt water thrashed the lens coatings, so even without changing lenses, I had some major gear damage

from the theater i shoot last sunday...

vinmunoz wrote in post #18178582
If I go to a place hazardous to my sensor, I sometimes bring only one lens. I don't wanna be changing lenses. even just on snowy areas. if I have a 16-35, that will be it. now my choice for those situations will only be my 2470GM. not wide enough for landscape but I don't wanna risk my sensor.

same as me. I have the 24-70 f4 attached with me all the time when I go to the beach. the 35 2.8 usually stays in the bag because its just small and not a hassle to have. 55 stays home. Casual shooting I leave the 2470 at home to reduce the weight and have the 55 and 35 with me.

Nadim, if you like using your primes just keep them. I wouldn't change my setup dramatically just for the one (or few) occasion that didn't go so well. Just reduce the lens to bring and carry less. As for the menu goes.. I recall hearing from SAR or video that sony will be changing their menu layouts. When that time comes and it still doesn't work out for you, id consider changing brand and finding out what you will be happy with.

red heads and black eye liner...smh...it looks so unnatural...and 42MP makes it show up nice and clear!

vinmunoz wrote in post #18178582
If I go to a place hazardous to my sensor, I sometimes bring only one lens. I don't wanna be changing lenses. even just on snowy areas. if I have a 16-35, that will be it. now my choice for those situations will only be my 2470GM. not wide enough for landscape but I don't wanna risk my sensor.

Charlie wrote in post #18178602
The last time I encountered that type of weather was at the beach way back. I had anticipated heavy winds, so I brought a zoom on one body and two primes for the other. Turns out I didnt even do lens changes, but also revealed that I had a defective copy of canon's 24-70ii, the salt water thrashed the lens coatings, so even without changing lenses, I had some major gear damage

DTBaan wrote in post #18178634
same as me. I have the 24-70 f4 attached with me all the time when I go to the beach. the 35 2.8 usually stays in the bag because its just small and not a hassle to have. 55 stays home. Casual shooting I leave the 2470 at home to reduce the weight and have the 55 and 35 with me.

Nadim, if you like using your primes just keep them. I wouldn't change my setup dramatically just for the one (or few) occasion that didn't go so well. Just reduce the lens to bring and carry less. As for the menu goes.. I recall hearing from SAR or video that sony will be changing their menu layouts. When that time comes and it still doesn't work out for you, id consider changing brand and finding out what you will be happy with.

Just to be clear:

You guys have heard me **** about this before. The issue was NOT the weather. There was no wind. It wasn't the sensor issue that annoyed me. That's something I can handle. (I shoot at the beach a lot, I am careful and I have never had any issues a little blower couldn't fix).
This is more about my "take everything with me just in case I need it" approach (Charlie has shot with me and can attest to how I operate).
I've decided this approach has ruined my fun because I end up spending 75% of the experience fumbling around with equipment. Not to mention that carrying all of that is annoying when one is trying to do anything more strenuous then stand in place (ie, a walk or a hike gets quickly ruined by carrying a large bag and fumbling around).

I just need to step back and slow down and go back to a simpler setup. Primes are fine for home use, or where I don't plan on walking much, but otherwise, I'm leaning towards 2 zooms (24-70, 70-200) for most of my trips from now on.
I can fund the 24-70GM by selling the Batis, the 35 and the 55, and have those covered by one lens.
It's still a bag to carry around (2 lenses + tripod + ND filter kit), but it could be a much smaller bag and far less fumbling around.

yeah, when I am hiking, or going out on an adventure, I tend to minimize to just what I need...which is typically a wide angle and maybe a mid range prime for any details I might find...then a filter or two...try to keep it light and minimal. if you have too many options...you can get stuck in them...actually, when I travel for work, I typically only take my wide angle and filters...so that it fits in a small shoulder bag...

from a family session last night...

Not sure which composition I like better.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NSsB​yg

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NSsB​Sn

the first for me...better compression of space, and not allowing the bright featureless sky in works better for me too.

Puckman wrote in post #18178784
Not sure which composition I like better.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NSsB​yg 20161106-DSC07886-Edit.jpg by Puckman2012, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NSsB​Sn 20161106-DSC07887-Edit.jpg by Puckman2012, on Flickr

#1. And I'd crop even a bit more off the top - just above the larger stripes and just below all the rocks with the glint of light on them.

Puckman wrote in post #18178784
Not sure which composition I like better.

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NSsB​yg 20161106-DSC07886-Edit.jpg by Puckman2012, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/NSsB​Sn 20161106-DSC07887-Edit.jpg by Puckman2012, on Flickr

2nd picture by far - much better colours in my opinion - plus i would crop it 16:9