Contituation of the Versatility thread

Started Apr 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
Biggs23
Biggs23 MOD
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,572Gear list
Like?
Re: Contituation of the Versatility thread
In reply to EinsteinsGhost, Apr 5, 2013

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Biggs23 wrote:

Ah, you misunderstand the word, than. COMPLETE darkness is ZERO light in ANY spectrum. That means no infrared either. Read up, come back, enjoy.

You were considering IR when you suggest "darkness", or "so dark that you couldn't see"?

I said I was being pedantic. You said it could focus in 'complete darkness' so I said no it can't because in true 'complete darkness' there is no light in any spectrum and thus it couldn't focus. You just misused the term 'complete'. No biggie.

Off topic.

No, just inconvenient now.

No, just completely off topic. We're talking about systems, not photographers. Do you really want to compare photography?

Oh, oops. This one's on me, I was confusing the model numbers and thinking of the RX100 which is a P&S. The RX1 is a FF but is not versatile at all considering its fixed lens.

Correct. FF sensor and IQ does not make RX1 a versatile camera. Although, using arguments y'all make, one could argue it is a versatile camera if it meets all of their personal needs. Trust me, I won't.

Nope, and it's not just the sensor that makes a camera versatile. I've never argued that. It's not about personal needs either, it's about being versatile in a wide variety of needs. For that, a FF system wins.

Not in terms of the definition of a word it doesn't!

Actually it does because cost is the reason versatility is looked at.

Actually, it doesn't. Seriously, get a dictionary.

Biggs23 wrote:

So now you're backtracking and admitting what I said from the get go; if you want to use multiple lenses from multiple mounts you must have adapters for each mount.

Backtracking? No sire, just trying to explain the same thing over and over, and still misunderstood.

I am not your sire. You are definitely saying the same thing over and over, you just haven't realized that you're incorrect yet. I've been trying to do so but you haven't quite got it just yet.

I didn't say MF is more versatile.

Right, because it isn't. And if I want 14mm - 200mm at f/2.8 covered with a NEX I'd be forced to MF at least some of that range. Compared with a FF dSLR system where I could have the entire range with AF!

No. One could go from 11mm to 300mm at f/2.8 with AF, and onto 500mm f/4, on NEX.

Really? Could you show me the list of native E-Mount lenses that would make that happen? I just tried to look it up but see quite a few gaps in coverage. I may be missing a few lenses though. You clearly have more experience with that system than I do so I'm sure you'll know where to find such a list.

Another area you're coming around in, good to see it!

Are you also clapping and jumping with joy, considering your comprehension of the points being made?

Nah, I'm not too excitable.

Nope. I think you misunderstand what versatility means. I can have BOTH AF and MF easily with a FF system and at a HUGE range of focal lengths and apertures. I am not afforded that luxury with a NEX or other mirrorless system. Thus, the FF system is the winner in terms of versatility, yet again.

I am. Of course, I can MF with FF system (either Sony RX1 or Sony A99 will be my choice). But comparing those to my experiences with NEX, I would pick the latter. You see, I'm able to tell the differences.

I think the problem we might be having is that you seem to be saying that the NEX is more versatile for your uses, whereas I'm talking about what's more versatile in general. For you specifically it's completely possible that a NEX or mirrorless system is truly more versatile. But when speaking in general terms any semi-knowledgeable observer can see that it's not.

WHEN DID I DO THAT? Seriously, don't misquote me. I'm sure you can shoot sports with a mirrorless system, just not as well or with as wide a range of options as with a FF system.

I don't need to. I prefer a more versatile system over tedious ones.

So then why do you have a NEX system?

I've long admitted that mirrorless cameras do have some advantages. It's just that those advantages are incredibly overshadowed by the disadvantages.

Not for my money.

Your money doesn't matter in terms of overall versatility, which is what this conversation is about.

To me it does.

Exactly.

As for putting any lens on, what lens am I lacking in a native mount for FF?

Re-read my point.

You didn't make one.

You responded to nothing?

Clearly.

The only reason that NEX (or similar) needs to put on other lenses is because not enough lenses have been developed for the native mount.

Not necessarily.

Yes, necessarily.

Then you didn't understand my points below.

I did, actually.

Many people buy NEX because they are able to use their old and new lenses from other systems. Also because one can find impressive values from the past, and have explore their photography skills with it. These mirror-less systems are fantastic tools towards that effect. I am one of these people.

True, but not related to the above.

You made a failed attempt.

Yeah,... you're back to speaking in riddles.

Here is the other side. I like options. For example, I could have picked Samyang 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye lens for A-mount and used on NEX without an issue. I picked the 8mm f/2.8 Fisheye for E-mount (smaller and lighter).

I could have picked Sony 35mm f/1.8 OSS for E-mount. I use Sony 35mm f/1.8 for A-mount instead. I could pick Tamron or Sony 18-200 OSS E-mount for travel zoom. I plan on using Sigma 18-250 OS A-mount instead.

In other words, I can pick and choose without much regard to mount itself, but what makes the most sense to me, with multiple options.

Right, but you're severely limited in what options are actually available natively.

As I alluded to, surrendering to a native mount is the least of my concerns when a boat load of options exist for me to pick as I see necessary.

So you admit the point?

What do I need to back up? I can do it with the gear I own. What details are needed?

Why kind of "details" are expected in a photography forum?

No idea. I asked a simple question, are you incapable of answering it?

Then allow me to spell it out: A Photograph that backs up your claim.

Oh, sure, no problem! Here's a great video showing everything I'm saying.  http://youtu.be/6X5xSUqlKuE?t=2m48s

-- hide signature --

Any opinions I express are my own and do not represent DPReview.

 Biggs23's gear list:Biggs23's gear list
Nikon D4 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow