Sony RX10 is interesting for m4/3 users Locked

Started Oct 17, 2013 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
dougjgreen1
Senior MemberPosts: 2,200Gear list
Re: Jumping ship?
In reply to Dheorl, Oct 20, 2013

Dheorl wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

Really? So you've spoken to just about everyone who shoots in inclement weather? Because I know a substantial number as unless they're pros or wildlife enthusiasts they never seem bothered about much outside that range.

No, they are rationalizing - just as you are - you tailored your needs to what you could get. If you could have gotten only 28mm on the wide end, or 300mm on the long end, that would have become your need.

No, if it started at 28 it would have been a lot less appealing to me.

The fact is, anyone who shoots much at 200mm wishes they could shoot at 300mm - unless they already can.

You really should stop using words like anyone when it comes to personal preferences.

I'll use any words I want, thank you very much

Alright, no need to get your panties in a twist. I just find a lot of disagreement often comes from poor communication, especially online, and therefore people should try to use the most accurate language possible. Unless of course you come here just to argue, in which case your a troll and I'll add you to my ignore list.

The fact is, the difference between 28mm and 24mm is quite minor. Most folks who need wider, need A LOT wider than 24mm.

I find much wider than 24mm starts to distort too much for mh liking of my preferred subjects, the amount extra you can get in compared to 28mm however is not insubstantial. Even if i still bought it if it had a 28mm wide end, I would have often been wishing it had a 24mm wide end. Thankfully it has that so I don't need to worry. What cameras are produced does not change what my needs as a photographer are.

Quite simply, 24mm is just as likely to not be wide enough as 28mm is.

The fact is, the difference between 28mm and 24mm is very minor.

It's about 12.5% different. People pay a lot of money for a 12.5% difference in some areas of a cameras performance.

With your logic though there's just no stopping. Why buy a 9-18mm lens when chances are it's still not going to be wide enough and you'll need a 7mm, but then chances are that's not wide enough so you get a fisheye, and eventually your still not happy but there's nothing you can do about it because short of a panorama you can't go any wider. Everyone has a point of diminishing returns/point that suits their subjects best, for me it's around 24mm.

I agree, you should buy the widest lens you can. I bought the 7-14 because the 9-18 isn't wide enough.

But be honest with yourself, is that really wide enough? I'm personally not a huge wide lens fanatic, I shoot a lot in the mountains and no matter how big the mountain it always looks distant with such a wide lens.

I could tell you're not much of a wide angle user, because your comments about 24mm being entirely sufficient when 28mm is not demonstrated that quite clearly. And the fact is, I'd buy the widest lens available that was rectilinear.  The reason for ultra wide lenses is not to shoot mountains.  It's to get an exaggerated perspective between something that's extremely close, relative to something in the background.  For shooting mountain landscapes, a 24mm is fine, and so is a 28mm - there's extremely little difference.

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5 +11 more
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow