Run&Gun
Veteran
It's all about the glass. In 2-4 years when the camera is a doorstop, good glad will still be good glass.
Canon R5 Announced with 8k
- Thread starter Ken1212
- Start date
It's all about the glass. In 2-4 years when the camera is a doorstop, good glad will still be good glass.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
The Tamron is good glass. Plus I hope to use the camera for 5+ years. Look at all the other 7+ year old cameras that are still in demand. Plus, I have all these lenses already that I like. They just won't give me top-notch or any AF performance on this one camera...
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I have no idea what this shocked face indicates. The tamron and samyang lenses I referenced are good lenses IMO. And keep in mind that I'm already happy pulling focus manually most of the time, so my old lenses would still be useful even if I didn't have non-e mount cameras
Run&Gun
Veteran
I never said it wasn't good glass. I'm just saying don't overlook the glass, because it will be around way after the camera has served it's usefulness. My 'day-to-day' lens on my ENG camera is probably 15-16 years old and the camera that I first used it on hasn't seen daylight in 8-9 years(I think).
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I regularly use 3+ cameras simultaneously. But yes, I would sell some of my lenses and some of my older cameras if they were worth much on the used market. They all take a big hit in value on the resale so it usually seems more worthwhile to keep them around. I sold my S1 and only lost $300 on it including ebay fees. But my other cameras... more worth it as backups. I do have a number of lenses I dont use frequently and I periodically consider reselling. But it is sometimes useful to have multiple copies of a lens type anyway - multiple normal primes or midrange zooms or telephotos - for when I need the same lens on different cameras
ahalpert
Major Contributor
This is true. The first lens I ever bought is still my most commonly used (canon L 24-70 first version). But now, the 3rd party lens manufacturers have gotten so good that one has to question if the marginal difference for a canon or sony lens is worth the markup. I'd rather choose by aesthetic anyway. I'd love to have a set of samyangs and a set of sigmas for vintage vs clinical look. But sigmas don't have good AF afaik. And samyang doesn't make zooms. Blah blah blah
It's just important to know what you're getting and what you're not getting. And what you need and what you don't need.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Third party lens companies that used to be laughed at for their still lenses, like Sigma and Tokina, are now powerhouses, especially on the manual cine side. And a lot of their still lenses are incredible, too, as far as image quality goes, even besting some of the first party equivalents. But you still have to watch out for AF performance*, especially with EF mount glass, because all third party AF EF lenses have had the AF protocols reverse engineered and could conceivable be just one firmware update away from not working(AF, anyway).
*I don't know if Nikon or Sony openly make their lens protocols available to third party manufacturers.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Thanks for the heads up - I hadn't considered that a firmware update could foul up the 3rd party lens AF. I suppose i could hold off on some updates until I know it's copacetic. Plus, samyang and tamron update their lens firmware, so i think that eventually they would fix it.
Someone (sam Morgan moore?) asserted that Tamrons focus on sony just as well as native lenses and posited that it might be because sony owns a piece of tamron. Tamron may not need to reverse engineer the protocols.
Samyang AF FE lenses started out bad but recent releases autofocus well.
Admittedly, evaluating AF performance adds a new wrinkle to lens research.
And thinking about long-term investments - I wager that the sony cine AF lenses are a better purchase than GM lenses. They're suitable for MF and have probably had the breathing worked out. Maybe they're better color matched. Supposedly there will be more announced with the A7SIII.
Liam Hall
Veteran
She didn't say if it was 8K, 4KHQ or whatever. I liked the bit where the fella tried to encourage viewers to buy his book on advanced filmmaking while shooting an overexposed shot of himself up his nose with wind ruining the audio. Great content...
ahalpert
Major Contributor
In the best case scenario, that was the time limit left for shooting 4K120p, meaning that she used up 87% of her heat budget shooting stills. And if it were any other mode, that means she used up more
Some Sony cameras - A7S/II, FS-5, FS-7 - have a crappy AF.
Others have a killer AF. The latest generations - A6600, A9 II, A7RIV, FX-9 - all have a killer AF.
Arturo Sánchez Becerra
Active member
Is there somewhere I can download 8K raw files to play with?
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Dig back through this thread and you'll find links.
One of them is this: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64164335
Arturo Sánchez Becerra
Active member
Of all he tests I have seen, Sigma native E-mount glass works fine.
They did address some compatibility issues about a year and a half ago.
https://photographylife.com/news/new-sony-compatibility-for-nine-sigma-art-lenses
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Maybe older sigma lenses had trouble here, but my sigma 56mm f/1.4 does AF very nicely on my a6500: way better than the Sony FE 50mm f/1.8, and comparable to the FE 85mm f/1.8. The Sigma 16mm is not so good but not bad either. I don't have the 30mm f/1.4 but lots of people complain about that one. It's an older design so I'm guessing it's just that: older lenses have issues, newer ones don't.
(I don't use that camera for video but given how well it works for stills I'd expect it to be good as well, as long as the camera is giving it nice orders, which won't be the case with my a6500 without face or eye detection in video mode, you need the newer models for that)