OP
yerach
•
Regular Member
•
Posts: 353
Re: The greatest lens costs $200???
CWaterston wrote:
yerach wrote:
But that initial impression got me thinking that this camera can play 2 personalities, the obvious DSLR-like performance orientated persona, and the Leica-like all-day-carry just-because-you-can persona.
To each his own, I guess, but I don't consider the r5 an all-day carry-around camera, even w/ a small lens (I prefer the 35 f/1.8). If I want a carry-around camera, I have one in my phone, which slips easily into a pocket. You can't beat that portability with a DSLR of any size.
I'm not into kidding myself that the r5 is what it isn't.
they're dying out, but there was once a tribe of "Leica-Men", guys dressed in "adventurous" designer clothes, leather boots, that you know will be thrown out as soon as dust touches them, at their feet, something like Indiana Jones the day he got his cloths...
off these men's shoulder or wrist dangled a Wetzlar-crafted beauty that must have set them off north of 10k$ (camera and lens), but the "Leica-Man" doesn't see that as a cost, would it see use? maybe... but most likely not, "Leica-Men" prefer pictures of themselves taken rather than them shooting pictures of others...
they were fine with hauling around a similar (but more beautiful and expensive...) setup "just because", so the load seems fine to me to actually serve a purpose.
i still use a feature phone (yep, you read right!...) so i can't compare, but even with my old G7x i feel i'm missing out compared to this, the 35mm is also a little larger (though a better lens hands down).
-- hide signature --
canon at hand nikon at heart