Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

digital_AM wrote in post #18814300
David, what made you decide on the 12-24? Just curious. I think it would pair well with the 24-105 lens as a very capable travel pair.

My first reason was seeing it for a used price...certainly makes it more tempting. But, the 12-24mm has been in several of my gear schemes (I’ve iterated dozens of them lately!), just not in any lineup scheme I’ve posted here. I won’t lie: there’s hardly a lens available in FE mount that I don’t want, so nothing I buy should be a surprise.

But here’s my big 2019 gear plan that I have begun to execute:

Tier One: The 12-24 and 24-105 will serve as my general walkaround pair. Great for exploring, taking with me on bike rides, visiting new places, etc. I’ve missed owning the EF 11-24 and FE 24-70 F/4, and the 12-24 and 24-105 are overall better solutions! I’ve been very impressed with 24-105 shots I see posted on FM as well as on Flickr from those I follow. Liking the rendering quite a lot.

Tier Two: Critical landscapes/cityscapes are the province of my CV 12, Loxia 21 and 35 (I may sell the Batis 85 to get the Loxia 85 for a more complete landscape kit). I regard photos captured with these lenses as my most valuable.

Tier Three: I’m pretty close to finalizing my decision on a third tier of fast AF primes for the main purposes of capturing street life. These will be the 24GM, 50ZA, and Batis 135mm. I’d prefer a 100 or 105mm f/2, but that doesn’t exist natively and I think the Batis will serve that role phenomenally. These are my lowest value/importance photos, yet they are my #1 favorite to shoot. I’m buying these lenses purely for pleasure.

Tier Four: Wildlife/Nature/Teleph​oto Landscapes. This will have to wait till next year and my plan includes 100-400mm plus both TCs. This is a bit speculative. I’ve had a little bird experience with a EF 500mm f/4L IS, but not sure how serious this is for me, so it’s my lowest priority.

Planning to buy an a9 (or a7 III if funds are too tight), which will be my main camera for everything but the landscapes.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18814298
I like this 17-28mm 28-75mm strategy. It makes the 28-75 a whole lot more palatable imo. Wonder if they have anything long planned (75-???mm)?

There were rumors of a tamron 70-200 fe mount in the works. I think there's a patent floating around.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18814320
My first reason was seeing it for a used price...certainly makes it more tempting. But, the 12-24mm has been in several of my gear schemes (I’ve iterated dozens of them lately!), just not in any lineup scheme I’ve posted here. I won’t lie: there’s hardly a lens available in FE mount that I don’t want, so nothing I buy should be a surprise.

But here’s my big 2019 gear plan that I have begun to execute:

Tier One: The 12-24 and 24-105 will serve as my general walkaround pair. Great for exploring, taking with me on bike rides, visiting new places, etc. I’ve missed owning the EF 11-24 and FE 24-70 F/4, and the 12-24 and 24-105 are overall better solutions! I’ve been very impressed with 24-105 shots I see posted on FM as well as on Flickr from those I follow. Liking the rendering quite a lot.

Tier Two: Critical landscapes/cityscapes are the province of my CV 12, Loxia 21 and 35 (I may sell the Batis 85 to get the Loxia 85 for a more complete landscape kit). I regard photos captured with these lenses as my most valuable.

Tier Three: I’m pretty close to finalizing my decision on a third tier of fast AF primes for the main purposes of capturing street life. These will be the 24GM, 50ZA, and Batis 135mm. I’d prefer a 100 or 105mm f/2, but that doesn’t exist natively and I think the Batis will serve that role phenomenally. These are my lowest value/importance photos, yet they are my #1 favorite to shoot. I’m buying these lenses purely for pleasure.

Tier Four: Wildlife/Nature/Teleph​oto Landscapes. This will have to wait till next year and my plan includes 100-400mm plus both TCs. This is a bit speculative. I’ve had a little bird experience with a EF 500mm f/4L IS, but not sure how serious this is for me, so it’s my lowest priority.

Planning to buy an a9 (or a7 III if funds are too tight), which will be my main camera for everything but the landscapes.

Sounds like a great plan David. Yes definitely get the Loxia 85! Any thoughts on trading your Lox 35 for the CV40? Thanks for your input yesterday on my post.

digital_AM wrote in post #18814325
Sounds like a great plan David. Yes definitely get the Loxia 85! Any thoughts on trading your Lox 35 for the CV40? Thanks for your input yesterday on my post.

I’m going to stick with my Loxia 35. I really want consistency in my landscape lens kit. And I do like that consistent 52mm filter thread and consistency in focus & aperture ring locations.

The desire for consistency and my preference for CV bodies is why I contemplated out loud about the notion of switching out from Loxias to a complete CV setup a few days back. Tempting, but going to stick with what I have.

I don’t like the Loxia 35mm wide open, but with my planned additions of the 24GM and 50ZA I don’t really need a great fast 35mm, so it’s already perfect for what I want from it: large DOF land/cityscapes. The CV 40mm is more all-around excellent: beautiful bokeh and rendering wide open, yet Loxia-like superbness for stopped-down landscapes.

digital_AM wrote in post #18814325
Yes definitely get the Loxia 85!

Thanks for the push Alfredo. I’m happy with the logic of my lens plan and the Batis 85 isn’t fitting into that plan, so it makes sense to switch to the landscape-optimized Loxia 85mm.

SAR estimated size of the 17-28 f2.8.

a 2.8 zoom THAT small is hard to believe, would make this the size of the Zony 24-70 f4, has 67mm filter as well, and quite a bit smaller than most of the ultrawides available.

Charlie wrote in post #18814350
SAR estimated size of the 17-28 f2.8.

a 2.8 zoom THAT small is hard to believe, would make this the size of the Zony 24-70 f4, has 67mm filter as well, and quite a bit smaller than most of the ultrawides available.

Hosted photo: posted by Charlie in
./showthread.php?p=188​14350&i=i145982658
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

Goes to show what is possible with a zoom if you limit the focal range a tad. I'm fully convinced that an FE 28-70 F2 is doable.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18814320
My first reason was seeing it for a used price...certainly makes it more tempting. But, the 12-24mm has been in several of my gear schemes (I’ve iterated dozens of them lately!), just not in any lineup scheme I’ve posted here. I won’t lie: there’s hardly a lens available in FE mount that I don’t want, so nothing I buy should be a surprise.

But here’s my big 2019 gear plan that I have begun to execute:

Tier One: The 12-24 and 24-105 will serve as my general walkaround pair. Great for exploring, taking with me on bike rides, visiting new places, etc. I’ve missed owning the EF 11-24 and FE 24-70 F/4, and the 12-24 and 24-105 are overall better solutions! I’ve been very impressed with 24-105 shots I see posted on FM as well as on Flickr from those I follow. Liking the rendering quite a lot.

Tier Two: Critical landscapes/cityscapes are the province of my CV 12, Loxia 21 and 35 (I may sell the Batis 85 to get the Loxia 85 for a more complete landscape kit). I regard photos captured with these lenses as my most valuable.

Tier Three: I’m pretty close to finalizing my decision on a third tier of fast AF primes for the main purposes of capturing street life. These will be the 24GM, 50ZA, and Batis 135mm. I’d prefer a 100 or 105mm f/2, but that doesn’t exist natively and I think the Batis will serve that role phenomenally. These are my lowest value/importance photos, yet they are my #1 favorite to shoot. I’m buying these lenses purely for pleasure.

Tier Four: Wildlife/Nature/Teleph​oto Landscapes. This will have to wait till next year and my plan includes 100-400mm plus both TCs. This is a bit speculative. I’ve had a little bird experience with a EF 500mm f/4L IS, but not sure how serious this is for me, so it’s my lowest priority.

Planning to buy an a9 (or a7 III if funds are too tight), which will be my main camera for everything but the landscapes.

Out of curiosity for your tier one, did you consider the Tamron 28-75mm over the Sony 24-70mm f/4?

Dlee13 wrote in post #18814399
Out of curiosity for your tier one, did you consider the Tamron 28-75mm over the Sony 24-70mm f/4?

I did indeed. I value the great zoom range of 24-105 more than the faster aperture of the 28-75. And, since I just bought the 12-24, would prefer not having a FL gap from 24-28.

Eventually I’ll add the 100-400 with TCs and that would give me continuous FL coverage from 12mm to 800mm

That said, the Tamron is an excellent option and I’ll definitely continue considering it!

Speaking of the 12-24mm, I am greatly relieved that the doctor who performed my colonoscopy this morning did not shoot the interior of my colon with that particular lens.

Also elated to learn that I have a very healthy colon!

My primary care doctor is always arguing with me about my healthy high fiber/low fat vegan diet, yet he eats the crappy SAD (std american diet) which promotes colon cancer and cardiovascular disease......and he’s had colon cancer. He told me to eat “normal food”. What an ignorant rube.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18814408
Speaking of the 12-24mm, I am greatly relieved that the doctor who performed my colonoscopy this morning did not shoot the interior of my colon with that particular lens.

Also elated to learn that I have a very healthy colon!

My primary care doctor is always arguing with me about my healthy high fiber/low fat vegan diet, yet he eats the crappy SAD (std american diet) which promotes colon cancer and cardiovascular disease......and he’s had colon cancer. He told me to eat “normal food”. What an ignorant rube.

On the subject, it's remarkable how many practicing dentists have awful teeth and oral hygiene habits. I guess it comes down to practicing what you preach.

Ben DDS wrote in post #18814416
On the subject, it's remarkable how many practicing dentists have awful teeth and oral hygiene habits. I guess it comes down to practicing what you preach.

My other half works in the hospital (dermatology) and you'd be surprised the number of doctors, consultants and nurses who eat crap and smoke...!!

I'm a nurse practitioner. I work in clinic and hospital. I can't tell you how many idiots I've met who have M.D. behind their name!

Ben DDS wrote in post #18814416
On the subject, it's remarkable how many practicing dentists have awful teeth and oral hygiene habits. I guess it comes down to practicing what you preach.

I'm not crazy about going to see the dentist myself. I suppose that's because I know what they are going to do.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18814408
Speaking of the 12-24mm, I am greatly relieved that the doctor who performed my colonoscopy this morning did not shoot the interior of my colon with that particular lens.

Also elated to learn that I have a very healthy colon!

My primary care doctor is always arguing with me about my healthy high fiber/low fat vegan diet, yet he eats the crappy SAD (std american diet) which promotes colon cancer and cardiovascular disease......and he’s had colon cancer. He told me to eat “normal food”. What an ignorant rube.

The same doctor will likely also tell you dietary cholesterol will raise your cholesterol and that dietary fat is bad for your heart. A lot of them are so invested in what they learned as students that they refuse to take on new studies and findings