Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sold my FS7 today

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #76
    The 24-105 on the FX6 was a really nice surprise. Better than the Canon equivalent in every way except manual focus, and even that isn't terrible.

    Comment


      #77
      ahalpert If I can't get what I'm asking for the 70-200 I may just keep it along with the Metabones. I rarely used it on my fs7 and it's such a specialty lens in my workflow that it may serve its purpose without AF capabilities on the a7siii/fx6.

      Comment


        #78
        Originally posted by Andy9 View Post
        The 24-105 on the FX6 was a really nice surprise. Better than the Canon equivalent in every way except manual focus, and even that isn't terrible.
        Is the focus-by-wire a problem for MF?

        Comment


          #79
          I've only use my 28-135 on tripod for stationary camera stuff, mostly live streaming. It's definitely not too long or wide for r&g but the weight is getting up there. If it's going on your shoulder, it's probably not an issue. I've tried it a couple times on gimbal and I don't like the heft.

          The AF on sigma 24-70 is great but the lens is basically the same thing as your tamron 28-75. The tammy may even have marginally better AF. Anyway I don't think you would need both

          Servo zoom on the 28-135 is handy if you ever need it. I don't have a single other lens for that purpose
          www.VideoAbe.com

          "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

          Comment


            #80
            Originally posted by scorsesefan View Post

            How do you find it in low light on your FX6? I just love my Tamron 28-75 on my a7siii in low light conditions but it's non-IS and prob wouldn't use off sticks on an fx6...
            I suppose it depends on how you define "low light" but I find it more than adequate in what I would consider "normal" low light situations. I've definitely used it on some very dim shoots and been happy with the results. F4 isn't exactly "fast" but it's pretty good considering the FX6's Hi Base.

            There are times when I wish I had another stop but that's always the case, and I'm happy to trade that stop for IS, especially when it comes to R&G stuff. The implementation of gyro-stabilization in post still leaves a lot to be desired, enough so that I'm hesitant to buy any more non-IS lenses for the time being (aside from specialty primes and the like).

            Comment


              #81
              Originally posted by drboffa View Post

              I suppose it depends on how you define "low light" but I find it more than adequate in what I would consider "normal" low light situations. I've definitely used it on some very dim shoots and been happy with the results. F4 isn't exactly "fast" but it's pretty good considering the FX6's Hi Base.

              There are times when I wish I had another stop but that's always the case, and I'm happy to trade that stop for IS, especially when it comes to R&G stuff. The implementation of gyro-stabilization in post still leaves a lot to be desired, enough so that I'm hesitant to buy any more non-IS lenses for the time being (aside from specialty primes and the like).
              Yeah, having to up the shutter speed in order to stabilize in Catalyst is something I definitely want to avoid...

              Comment


                #82
                Originally posted by scorsesefan View Post

                Yeah, having to up the shutter speed in order to stabilize in Catalyst is something I definitely want to avoid...
                I have yet to do this, although it's also something I'd rather avoid (unless I need to up shutter speeds for additional reasons). But barring that, the workflow is SO clunky: unless things have changed, you can't batch export stabilized clips (or batch stabilize at all), so you have to go through one by one. Not a problem with a handful of clips, but if you end a shoot day with dozens or hundreds of clips this is incredibly impractical.

                Comment


                  #83
                  Originally posted by scorsesefan View Post

                  Is the focus-by-wire a problem for MF?
                  Yes, but it's linear motors or whatever so it's not the worst. The 16-35 GM 2.8 is an altogether lovelier lens but no IS and also focus by wire.

                  Comment


                    #84
                    You guys are great; thanks for your advice and discussion here.

                    I'm leaning moving away from the FS7 before it depreciates even further. Honestly, I'd love a pro cam with reliable AF in a more portable package -- -- while maintaining both the proper ND and XLR built-in in the FX6. Right now for AF stuff, I have an A6600 with a Sigma 16mm 1.4 and a Sony 30 1.8 -- but there's no ND and no XLR.

                    Meanwhile, I still love my EF-E speed booster, which gains an f-stop on my three IS Canon f/4 zooms (16-35L, 24-105L, 70-300). Plus, I get extra reach with the standard EF-E Metabones when needed. I use all 3 lenses with my A6600 for stills as well. Run-n-gun stuff I do has necessitated IS.

                    I was thinking....maybe sell off the FS7 now (as I'm not filming much immediately) and hold the cash until used units come available...and try to get by with my A6600? It's just that the FX6 would require FF lenses and that would require a lot of extra cash...

                    BTW - If you had to get 1-2 lenses for the FX6, what would they be?

                    Any more thoughts? Thanks again.



                    Comment


                      #85
                      Originally posted by thoomp View Post

                      BTW - If you had to get 1-2 lenses for the FX6, what would they be?
                      Without thinking, my reaction was sony 28-135 + sony GM 50. Maximum utility + maximum low-light and beauty

                      But of course, it depends so much on what you're shooting. what are you shooting?

                      Many wedding photographers carry 2 bodies simultaneously, one with a 24mm f/1.4 and the other with an 85mm f/1.4

                      Of course, you could instead get a 24-70mm f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8 and get a happy medium of speed, coverage, image quality
                      www.VideoAbe.com

                      "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

                      Comment


                        #86
                        Originally posted by thoomp View Post
                        BTW - If you had to get 1-2 lenses for the FX6, what would they be?
                        Sony's 20mm and 85mm, both f/1.8. Great lenses with the best FOVs for full-frame, IMO.

                        20mm FF is the "Netflix look" and 85mm brings out the FF shallow DOF pop.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X