Re: To fuji or not to fuji… or another canon?
Klaus dk wrote:
Looking at the list of cameras you've owned, the first question that came to mind was about lenses. In my mind, the IQ of an ILC is determined more by the lenses than by the body.
What are your thoughts on lenses?
I have owned canon primes (EF, now RF), and sony/zeiss primes. I often have at least 1 zoom for any camera system for those times where versatility is needed. For example the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 when I was on the sony system, and RF 24-105 f4 now for the R5.
Generally I find that lenses are very important. And I like to have at least a decent prime for the FLs I use the most. For example I had the ZA 55 f1.8 on the sony, which I miss btw, since there is only really the RF 50 1.8 stm for the canon side. I don’t count the 50 1.2 considering its size and weight.
Also, how an R10 might double as a backup camera for the R5?
If you want a really small and portable daily camera, must it be an ILC? Have you considered a compact, like one of the Sony RX 100's?
I have thought about these options. But I always come down to the same answer. I like options, and I like IQ. THe RX 100 has a 1” sensor. Which immediately means less IQ than a APS-C and definitely FF. Then you have the lens coupled to it which is F2.8-4.5. For that price range I would rather get a X-S10, with a small prime (around 35 mm equivalent), and later one a general purpose zoom. I expect the camera and prime combination will give me the DOF control I want and better IQ.
Last but not least I am not a big fan of sony. I find that I don’t trust the SOC images, and I am not as keen on spending as much time behind the computer editing as I used to. The EVF experience is also lack luster.
Last but not least I am not a big fan of power zooms.
Good luck and good light.
In general I find myself in a conundrum. I plan on going to Australia next year for 2 weeks. I would like to have a system which isn’t overly large/heavy, yet would allow me the option to take images in many situations. All the while not having to worry about the consequences of having a very expensive kit with me.
So I could take the R5, the RF100-500, the 50 f1.8, and either the 85 f2 or 90 f2.8. The telephoto would be for wild life, and landscapes, and the primes for portraiture and low light situations. But all together we are talking about almost 8k worth of gear. With attracting the wrong attentions, wild fires and flooding it is an expensive kit to lose or worry about.
Of course I could get the 70-300 which would be lighter and cheaper.
However… a X-S10 + 23 mm lens (or 35mm) + tamron 18-300 would all cost = 1000+450+700 = 2150 euros. For example. I think an MFT would also amount to such a expenditure, though I would start with one camera body and one lens.
Again, I am not fully against taking my FF kit with me. But I know that psychologically I would be more concerned/aware of it than a smaller/cheaper kit. I don’t. Simply though my R5 plus lens in a bag and go as I used to.