bluevellet: I was going to quickly reply that 14-30mm is boring on crop sensorer cameras but then I saw it was a F2 zoom lens. Definitely more interesting.
Full frame advantages for UWA lenses aren't great. I shoot landscapes a lot and honestly the differences between my camera and something like a fuji X-e1 with 10-24mm isn't that great.
The differences with fast lenses is higher but for UWA lenses not as much as I would have guessed.
PKDanny: My DA 50mm f1.8 areally awesome sharp and color!!!!!
Just out of curiosity why is the Pentax DA 50 rated higher than the Canon 50mm STM ?
I am sure the Canon has better AF and quieter AF too.
snapa: Why was it not also made to work with the Sony E-mount cameras? At over 1.5 pounds, very large and probably well over $1k, maybe that is the reason. It makes you wonder when they say "Pricing and availability have yet to be announced". Why not tell what it will cost now, will it be way over priced?
You probably don't understand lens design but DSLR lenses cannot directly be 'ported' if you will to a mirrorless system. A mirrorless lens requires a complete redesign.
Some Manual focus lens manufacturers however add a hollow tube to their lens to make it fit mirrorless but you lose any size advantage mirrorless have and that solution isn't possible with an AF lens.
However for E mount you can attach this lens via an adapter. Don't expect any reliable AF though but IQ should be fine.
yzhenkai: For Canon crop sensor, there is EF-S 10-18mm.
@yzhekai - This lens is between 2 - 3 stops faster than the Canon. In photography terms thats HUGE !!!!
^^ Fair enough. The Sony 50mm AF is not the best but I would never describe it at loud at all. Its pretty quiet. You may be referring to the 50mm f1.4 which has a screw drive motor which is pretty loud. The new Canon 50mm f1.8 STM is a better lens though. No question about it.
sierranvin: I would suggest that corporate failure products such as the Zeiss Batis and Loxia lines, with big fanfare introductions yet in real-world, practical terms, little or no product availability, NOT be eligible for the voting. Or, please include my Zeuss FloatBOY Magnis Flatulo Vapo 500-900mm f2 IS universal mount zoom , weighing in at 300gm in the voting!It's a miracle lens (be patient, not sure when one will be available).
To be fair I bought a Zeiss Batis 85mm from a country like India so while not exactly easy to get its still available if you look for it.
Though I am not so sure why the lens is winning the poll. Its a fantastic lens to be sure but its nothing extreme like say the Canon 11-24mm or Fuji 16mm f1.4 or the Sigma 24-35mm f2 which are some outrageous designs.
^^ Which Sony A mount lens are you referring to ? The Sony 50mm f1.8 is a very nice lens. Build quality is nothing great of course but its a nice sharp lens with good contrast wide open and I found it sharper than the older Minolta 50mm f1.4. So I sold off the older Minolta lens instead.
The Sony 50mm is also one of the closest focusing 50mm lenses out there (non macro lenses of course).
Mike FL: It is good to see that Lens Baby uses flaw as a selling point, and some one likes the flawed lens and pays for the optical aberrations which is, again, the flaw.
@Mike - Your statement would make perfect sense if photography was an exact science. Since it is more of an art form it is up to the individual user how he wishes to shoot.
Sure you can get something close to this in photoshop BUT you will have to spend a lot of effort and its not that simple to do it to multiple images.
So awesome that you needed to mention it twice ! :D
To be fair the DA 50mm f1.8 is a nice lens but very predictable just like almost any 50mm f1.8 out there. Nothing special about it at all.
Donnie G: Nice camera, but who's buying it? It'll be great to see the real world holiday shopping sales results next month so we can finally see, once and for all, how many people are actually putting their money where their mouths are. I'm betting that the Sony fans will once again huff and puff until they're blue in the face while pulling nothing but lent from their pockets to throw at the cash registers of the enthusiast camera marketplace. 2016 should be fun for the big 2. Happy Holidays! :))
Well the $3k A7r II is #15 in the camera rankings at amazon which is one indicator of the sales. It was in the top 3 since launch for a long time too and its far more expensive than any of the other cameras in the top 20 segment.
The RX1rII of course is a niche camera and isn't going to set any sales records.
Joed700: I shot Fuji XT-1 along with several prime lenses, 56mm f/1.2 being one of them, for about a year. It's a well-built lens and a good performer. However, Fuji X series bodies and lenses don't hold their values. If I search my memory correctly, it dropped at least a few hundred dollars since it was first introduced...anyhow, I sold the entire Fuji system because I could get the same/similar results with either Canikon 85mm f/1.8 for a third of the cost and shooting FF. The fact that Fuji systems don't hold their values is a deal breaker for me. IMO, paying too much for APS-C...
^^ Exactly my experience with Sony and Canon. But some people still insist on sticking to test charts and online info which isn't based on real world usage.
No what YOU refuse to admit is that you have ZERO experience with Canon sensors and have to use sites like DXOMark to get your info which use a software to interpolate the data while people who actually shoot the cameras admit Canon is bad with DR. All my landscape Canon shooters admit as much to me.
I use the cameras in question and I have seen with my own eyes what the differences are.
I never comment on Samsung cameras because no one uses them here so I won't rely on some website to tell me how good the IQ is.
I am telling you AGAIN there is no real perceptible difference in high ISO performance between the 5d mk 3 and A7 upto ISO 12800. Any differences present are easily seen on charts and test benches but not so much in ACTUAL photos people take in real life.
If you love to shoot charts then ok but for actual PHOTOS the high ISO differences are pretty much zilch.
The DR differences however aren't and I am referring to the 7D as well which I have used and worked with.
Since it seems only figures and numbers will convince you lets see what DXOmark has to say about the sensor performance.
If my eyes don't deceive me the high ISO performance is pretty much the same. Barely any difference between the 3 which can be down to measurement error.
However the Sony has a good 2 stop headroom in DR which is pretty significant. So your claims about Canon having better SNR are basically false.
^^ Their high ISO performance advantage is barely noticeable in any of the photos I take and I rarely shoot at high ISO. If you look at all your photos tell me how many you even take above ISO 400. Even at ISO 12800 the difference between the 6D and my A7 is barely noticeable.
However the DR differences are quite substantial and that is at low ISO where I and most everybody who cares about IQ shoot at.
I have the firmware update for my A7 II which has lossless compression and guess what I don't use it !
It doesn't make any visible difference to my photos. I haven't yet had anyone tell me about issues with compression artefacts.
As I said don't go by charts and online tests. They tell you only a small fraction of the picture. Unless you use these cameras all your claims are meaningless and great for pixel peepers but not for actual photographers.
Have a look at my gallery and see how many high DR photos I have taken. They are all heavily pushed and were shot in lossy RAW.
WayneHuangPhoto: This was shot on the X-E2: http://www.gigapan.com/gigapans/146795Zoom in 100% and see the details
They got it right in this video - the 16mp X-Trans sensor is a great sensor, with enough resolution, and has legendary glass to go with it. Would 24mp be better? Of course. Is it necessary? Not at all.
I have shared my feedback on the Fuji handling. Nothing against the camera as I love the output but to casual users its a very complicated camera to use.
If you have nothing relevant to add or anything to contribute to the discussion then why post such condescending irrelevant remarks ?
^^ Thats just it. I actually shoot for a living and I use a lot of cameras so I don't go by the DXO mark and the other chart gurus who get their info from such sources
In my actual usage I can push Sony and Nikon cameras pretty high. The Canon not so much. And that is true for every Canon camera I have used which is a lot since I rent a 5d mk 3 and a 6D pretty often.
High ISO performance differences are on paper mostly and not in the real world. I have taken very usable ISO 12800 photos from both the Canon 5d mk 3 and the A7 and A7 II cameras but I have been unable to push the 5d mk 3 files at any ISO. They simply hate getting pushed and throw up all sorts of highly visible ugly artefacts and banding.
My A55 was a far better sensor in DR which I care about. High ISO of course the 5d mk 3 was better but I rarely shoot so high.
Basically when I shoot with Canon I have to work around its disadvantages. There are strengths of course but for my shooting needs they are not as relevant.
The Fuji is an overtly complicated camera. Friend bought one for his wife and she hated it. He then gave it to his kids and they hated it too. They finally bought a Sony A6000 and everyone was happy.
I myself used it and was put off by its handling. I am sure with time I would learn to use it properly but my initial impression was that it was a terrible camera to use and that has been the general reaction to my friends Fuji to almost anyone who isn't a photographer.
^^ For casual use a Fuji is overkill. Get a compact camera with a better zoom range.
For serious use 16 MP is a drawback when all your competition is at 24 MP.
Everyone has a different need which is why there exists so much choice today. People are happy shooting with cameras like the D5500 which I just loathe for the crappy viewfinder.
I am happy with my Sony system but I am also happy if I have to use a camera like the 5d mk 3 which has different strengths but also different weaknesses. There is no perfect camera out there but cameras with different advantages and compromises.
If I have to use a 5d mk 3 I have to manage with a sub par sensor and no tilting LCD or EVF which I use often.
If I use Sony then I need to make sure I have adequate additional batteries to ensure my shoot doesn't come to a premature end.
Thomas Traub: Aparture of 1.2 does not make sense in portrait-photography, because you get hardly both eyes sharp, if one eye is only 2 cm behind the other .. even with my 85/1,8 on my D610 the faces have to be parallel to the camera (although you get a great bokeh)
Nikon compared to Fuji:
D 7200 + 50/1,4 = 1.045 g weight and 1.264 €Xt1 + 56/1,2 = 845 g weight and 2.198 €
even with the 58/1,4 the 7200 is only slightly heavyer and cheaper than the Fuji-combo.
And Fuji does not have the advanced-light-system.Nikon has much more lenses, accessories and flashes....
The Xt1/10 are nice cameras but the equipment is not as lightweight as the difference of the weight of the bodies make believe.
If Fuji would offer cheap lenses with 1,8 (as Nikon does) the whole equipment would be much cheaper and lighter and than they would have an advantage in price and weight.
But with the very expensive and heavy lenses Fuji is no option for me.
But I'll keep it in my eye :-)
^^ Please don't use those test charts as so called proof. I have used both lenses and the Nikon has poor contrast which makes the images look less sharp than they actually are on both the copies I tried. I used only one Fuji 56mm (non APD version) and that was very useable wide open.
The Fuji has much better contrast and punch wide open to boot.