How many different / other / additional Camera Systems - Do you use?

[MarkWW]

a) manual focus & aperture. "Focus by Wire" and not being able to manually set the aperture are crippling the lens.

b) Buy in the longest continuing running lens mount possible. Hence my penchant for Nikon over Canon, and my slow shift to M-Mount.

I do break those rules on occasion - sometimes you just need autofocus in a native mount - but I wouldn't buy into an entire system predicated on doing so.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on point (a). This is quite true with Sigma SA mount lenses at least. You've got me started on my favorite rant. Yes we are basically stuck.

Maybe it is too hard (or impossible) to set up sd Quattro firmware to support full time manual aperture on SA mount lenses, but I heard that the Nikon D850 can do full time manual aperture. Otherwise with the sd Quattro we are stuck with the crippling situation in which the lens closes down to the shooting aperture only at the moment of shutter release.

Focus by wire tech might not offer enough precision at this point, and we might not be able to force "no change to focus setting while shooting" if we are using an electronic lens. That is, the lens might be programmed to change focus slightly at certain distances regardless of whether it is autofocused or focused by wire. Again, crippled! Sure, with Global Vision lenses we can change that programming but then we might end up with a lens that works with manual focus but performs poorly when autofocused. Frustrating.

Edit: and the irony here is that these are state-of-the-art lenses capable of matching the sensor resolution of the sd Quattro series!

Unfortunately there are not many options for real full-manual control with sd Quattro and other Sigma interchangeable lens cameras. Basically we have M42 (most lenses are 40+ years old), or we need to get skilled and do mechanical modifications (mount replacement or worse) to other manual lenses from other manufacturers such as Samyang (Sigma doesn't offer manual SA mount lenses).

On the other hand with the short-flange Sony and Fuji cameras fully manual lens options are plentiful. Too bad none of these have a Foveon sensor!

 

[MarkWW]

For me it’s just my DPM’s (all 3), RX1RII (full frame), and Olympus EM1.2 (m43) with a decent assortment of Olympus and PanaLeica glass. I feel this gear all complements each other very well. Each format has weaknesses that are strengths of the others.

 

[MarkWW]

I have the sigma SD H shooting alongside the X-T20. I use to be a heavy Sony user, but it just takes a lot of work for me to make Sony files look the way I like. Fuji files are simple with little adjustments needed and of course I’m in love with the Quattro look.

The original A7R sensor though was something special. The 36MP files had a real bite to them that the A7RII and A7 series just never matched.

Over the last three years I started to shoot a lot more film. Probably why I shoot Fuji and Sigma for digital now. They have the closest look to film.

Interesting to hear about the A7R. I'm considering upgrading to it from my A7.

Files from my A7 are very saturated. It's a different look than I'm used to for sure (coming from Film and then Nikon). Though some of the earlier CCD Nikon sensors were very saturated as well.

The Panasonic A7 has a similar saturated look.

I haven't had much chance to play with my Fuji yet, but I'm looking forward to seeing its colors.

I love my Sigma, but it does disappoint sometimes, and it was a bit of a journey getting to know it. For now it just lives in my studio & doesn't come outside.

I guess you don't use the Vivid mode in your Sony cameras, huh? lol

Isn't "fixing" the saturated look of the images from your Sony camera just a simple process of setting the saturation to a reduced setting?

 

[MarkWW]

Even Nikon, with it's large flange-focal distance (that can mount on Canon but not v.v.) won't mount on the Sigma because of the diameter.

I'll refine my previous statement.

My dream camera would be a Sigma (full frame, but I'll take APS-H) that uses the same sort of microlenses used in the Ricoh GXR to make it especially suited to shorter flange-focal distance (steeper angle of incidence), with solid autofocus aids (at least as good as on my Sony), in a Leica M-Mount.

I'm currently using (and loving) M-Mount (and F-Mount) glass on my Sony A7 - small lenses with great quality? I'll take it!

To have the Sony as my "high ISO night time camera" and a Foveon sensor at the heart of my "low ISO daytime camera" - with all the same lenses - would be a dream.

Sigma lenses are undoubtedly great, but to buy a whole new set of *proprietary* lenses for a sensor doesn't make sense to me. I buy for the oldest still viable lens mounts & not the newest.

So I stick to my Merrill "point and shoot" cameras and hope for a Sigma M-Mount....

Or you could open Pandora's box and get into M42 lenses.....

(they would work with the Sigma and the Sony)

Shawn

P.S. Totally agree about wishing the SDQH had a shorter flange focal length and then an adapter to let it use SA mount lenses. Since Sigma makes adapters to go from X to Sony how crazy would it have been to have a Sony mount on it?

It still represents a large investment in lenses I don't already own, and I'm already considering selling off a significant portion of my Nikon gear in favor of M-Mount gear because the adapters are huge & it really unbalances the camera & is just that much more to carry around.

I don't understand the comment about it being that much more to carry around. The adapter can just be left on the camera or one of the lenses, can't it? Or are you talking about carrying around Nikon gear as well, so you're thinking about selling the Nikon gear to reduce the amount of equipment you will be carrying around. If so, I had the same idea about getting a Sony A6500 to replace my current Sony gear. If I did that I'd have the video and high-ISO capability of my Sony A65, but I could use the same lenses I have for my Sigma camera, so I could sell my three lenses for the Sony A65. All I'd have to carry around then would be a camera with an attached MC-11 adapter, which I could keep one of my Sigma lenses attached to. I'd keep the other lens attached to the Sigma camera, and I'd have a two-lens and two-body kit . . . and eventually I'd add the 8-16 lens in its own pouch and eventually the 100-400 in its own pouch, so I'd be carrying two cameras and four lenses. That's better than carrying the 5 lenses and two cameras that I carry now. Besides, the A6500 with adapter mounted is lighter and probably smaller than the A65, so there'd be some savings in weight and bulk there too.

Ultimately I could use the A6500 on my telescope too. (It has a shorter flange distance, so I can focus to infinity with that on my telescope, but my A65 wouldn't do that, unfortunately.) The A6500 doesn't have GPS, which is one thing I like about my A65, and the A65 has a fully-articulating screen too (another advantage), but the A6500 has 4K video capability, which my A65 doesn't have, and the A6500 can shoot at 11 fps vs the 10 fps shooting speed of my A65 (oooooh, wow!). I just wish the A6500 would use the same batteries that my Sigma uses, like the Panasonic G9 does (one of the many reasons why I want the m4/3 Panasonic G9).

 

[ELSELS]

Enjoying all the contributing opinions, viewpoints, comments, shared thoughts...

Interesting conversations... Thanks everyone...

 

[Shawn67]

Sometimes the Sony makes me feel like I'm along for the ride and it's shaping the photo (making choices about white balance & exposure) simply because the manual settings are just one or two button presses further than they should be - but I want to take full advantage of my lenses so it's my full frame choice for now, we'll see how I warm up to the Fuji stuff.

You can take full advantage of your lenses on the Fuji too. That is what the Speedbooster/Lens Turbo II is all about. You get the 'full frame' FOV out of your lens but with more light on the sensor. I use the LTII on my Fuji and it works well on *most* lenses. I have an old 5cm f2 that hits and the 85 1.4D is soft wide open at infinity (due to tuning the optic block in the adapter) but sharpens up fine stopped down.

If you haven't tried one consider it. The character of the lenses still comes through. I love it with the 105mm f2.5 original sonnar lens.

Shawn

 

[MarkWW]

M-Mount is the Leica M mount, right? That seems like a very expensive way to go, though I guess if you care about quality you're going to want the best lenses you can buy, and I believe Leica makes the best lenses . . . except for the new Sigma Art lenses, which are very large and heavy. I guess if you're looking for light and compact then the Leica M mount lenses are the way to go, huh? Is that your thinking?

New Leica lenses are very expensive but there are plenty of other good options too. Voigtlander makes some great glass that isn't terribly priced. And there are also M mount lenses from Minolta and Konica that are very good as well as decades of used Leica's to choose from.

There are also *loads* of LTM lenses out there that can be used with a simple LTM to M adapter. Don't let the age fool you, some of those lenses are still stunning today.

The short flange distance of the M mount (or something like it) would also allow for easy mounting of any 35mm SLR glass too.

Shawn

I chose Nikon over Canon when moving from film to DSLR because Nikon kept lens compatibility in the 80s whereas Canon broke lens compatibility, gaining the upper hand in autofocus (and thus becoming the choice for sports for the next couple of decades).

I own lots of vintage Nikon lenses that I can sell now for near, if not above, the original purchase price.

Voigtlander makes some good M-Mount glass that I'm sure Sony and Fuji owners are buying up. Much of my M-Mount glass is from Voigtlander.

My hope is that the Voitlander will hold its value as well as the Nikon, if not better. Leica glass seems to go up in value.

So if you view lenses as expenses - sure, M-Mount glass may be more expensive than Nikon mount glass, but if you view it as an investment - I get to enjoy it now & if I ever do sell it, hopefully I'll keep or improve on the current value.

 

[MarkWW]

Sometimes the Sony makes me feel like I'm along for the ride and it's shaping the photo (making choices about white balance & exposure) simply because the manual settings are just one or two button presses further than they should be - but I want to take full advantage of my lenses so it's my full frame choice for now, we'll see how I warm up to the Fuji stuff.

You can take full advantage of your lenses on the Fuji too. That is what the Speedbooster/Lens Turbo II is all about. You get the 'full frame' FOV out of your lens but with more light on the sensor. I use the LTII on my Fuji and it works well on *most* lenses. I have an old 5cm f2 that hits and the 85 1.4D is soft wide open at infinity (due to tuning the optic block in the adapter) but sharpens up fine stopped down.

If you haven't tried one consider it. The character of the lenses still comes through. I love it with the 105mm f2.5 original sonnar lens.
Shawn

When I first bought into the Fuji system, I got a Mitakon Nikon F to Fuji X focal length reducer/speed booster.

I couldn't find an equivalent M to X mount adapter.

Sure the Mitakon isn't a Metabonz, but it's going back to the shop & I'm considering this experiment sort of over.

 

[richard stone]

Hello:

Just curious - How many different camera systems, do you use, along with “including” Sigma products, both and/or either: Foveon Merrill based sensors or Quattro sensors cameras?

With the Sigma MC-11 adapter, to use the Sigma SA mount lenses on the Sony “E” mount cameras, that seems to be a definite plus, to using “our” Sigma SA mount lenses, on a camera with more offered abilities to offset (perhaps), where the Sigma camera’s sensor fall short.

Thanks for commenting,

Have a nice day -

Ed

~ ~ ~

 

[richard stone]

DP2M for when I want to take a really nice picture.

NEX 7 or Panasonic FZ1000 when I want to record events.

Jan

I think your post is more profound than it first appears. I mean, I it sounds quite reasonable, of course, but I think it's even better than that.

I rarely take pictures to record events, but some people, like wedding photographers, do nothing but record events. Some "pro" photographers "record" people attending conventions. (Agggh.) Some do baby pictures at the mall. Most "pro" work is event recording.

I probably should do more event recording... and I have the iphone and Oly m4/3 camera for that, should I somehow decide to record events.

And honestly, it is a treat seeing the images from the sdQ.

 

[richard stone]

For me it’s just my DPM’s (all 3), RX1RII (full frame), and Olympus EM1.2 (m43) with a decent assortment of Olympus and PanaLeica glass. I feel this gear all complements each other very well. Each format has weaknesses that are strengths of the others.

 

[SigmaChrome]

DP2M for when I want to take a really nice picture.

NEX 7 or Panasonic FZ1000 when I want to record events.

Jan

I think your post is more profound than it first appears. I mean, I it sounds quite reasonable, of course, but I think it's even better than that.

I rarely take pictures to record events, but some people, like wedding photographers, do nothing but record events. Some "pro" photographers "record" people attending conventions. (Agggh.) Some do baby pictures at the mall. Most "pro" work is event recording.

I probably should do more event recording... and I have the iphone and Oly m4/3 camera for that, should I somehow decide to record events.

Here's a question, Richard: If you did decide to record video of one event with your iPhone, would you hold it in portrait orientation? And if you did, would you then record the next event with say, your Oly - also in portrait? Or would you turn it to landscape?

I ask because I have little theory. It goes like this. Smartphones are somehow designed so that if you shoot video in landscape orientation, your wrist will break - at least it seems to me that about 90% of users believe that will happen. I guess the next step is make all video in portrait and turn our monitors and TVs vertical.

Just my little diversion...

And honestly, it is a treat seeing the images from the sdQ.

 

[Sjak]

Smartphones are somehow designed so that if you shoot video in landscape orientation, your wrist will break - at least it seems to me that about 90% of users believe that will happen.

LOL

That's exactly why I never bought into the "smart"phone hype, for safety :-D

 

[D Cox]

Hello:

Just curious - How many different camera systems, do you use, along with “including” Sigma products, both and/or either: Foveon Merrill based sensors or Quattro sensors cameras?

With the Sigma MC-11 adapter, to use the Sigma SA mount lenses on the Sony “E” mount cameras, that seems to be a definite plus, to using “our” Sigma SA mount lenses, on a camera with more offered abilities to offset (perhaps), where the Sigma camera’s sensor fall short.

Thanks for commenting,

Have a nice day -

Ed

~ ~ ~

 

[richard stone]

Hello:

Just curious - How many different camera systems, do you use, along with “including” Sigma products, both and/or either: Foveon Merrill based sensors or Quattro sensors cameras?

With the Sigma MC-11 adapter, to use the Sigma SA mount lenses on the Sony “E” mount cameras, that seems to be a definite plus, to using “our” Sigma SA mount lenses, on a camera with more offered abilities to offset (perhaps), where the Sigma camera’s sensor fall short.

Thanks for commenting,

Have a nice day -

Ed

~ ~ ~

 

[richard stone]

DP2M for when I want to take a really nice picture.

NEX 7 or Panasonic FZ1000 when I want to record events.

Jan

I think your post is more profound than it first appears. I mean, I it sounds quite reasonable, of course, but I think it's even better than that.

I rarely take pictures to record events, but some people, like wedding photographers, do nothing but record events. Some "pro" photographers "record" people attending conventions. (Agggh.) Some do baby pictures at the mall. Most "pro" work is event recording.

I probably should do more event recording... and I have the iphone and Oly m4/3 camera for that, should I somehow decide to record events.

Here's a question, Richard: If you did decide to record video of one event with your iPhone, would you hold it in portrait orientation? And if you did, would you then record the next event with say, your Oly - also in portrait? Or would you turn it to landscape?

I ask because I have little theory. It goes like this. Smartphones are somehow designed so that if you shoot video in landscape orientation, your wrist will break - at least it seems to me that about 90% of users believe that will happen. I guess the next step is make all video in portrait and turn our monitors and TVs vertical.

Just my little diversion...

And honestly, it is a treat seeing the images from the sdQ.

 

[Tom Schum]

Maybe Sigma is not going this way because they are losing tons of money on the price of the cameras. $799 for a sd Quattro seems to me like a low price for what I have. They don't want to sell a lot of cameras.

I think this statement could be misunderstood easily. I think what you're saying is that Sigma doesn't want to just sell a lot of cameras. I think they would LOVE to sell a lot of SA mount cameras, so people buy a lot of SA mount lenses.

The Sigma m4/3 cameras might sell quite well (assuming they make a low-end model and a more expensive model with a tilt screen, better viewfinder, bigger shooting buffer, and faster operation). They might even out-sell the SD Quattro. I think that would be a good start.

Here is what I meant.

Sigma has told us they lose money on every SA-mount interchangeable lens camera they sell. I wonder how much money they lose on each camera. Of course we will never learn the answer to this question so there is plenty of room to speculate:

Therefore, if they sell a huge number of cameras they lose a huge amount of money.

So, they want to sell some cameras but not a huge number, just enough to establish themselves as a manufacturer of cameras.

If we assume every buyer of a SA-mount interchangeable lens camera will buy a couple of lenses (only Sigma makes these lenses), this might even out their losses. My own opinion is this does not quite balance out their losses and really they should have three lens purchases per camera sold.

If they make a short flange mirrorless they might not get two lens sales (per camera sale) in the long run because users are able to adapt their existing lenses. Therefore they have to reformulate their loss math and probably raise the price of the cameras.

Personally I would like to see Sigma make a short flange mirrorless. But, because of the above, I don't expect them to. This is a mistake but I think they are making this mistake.

 

[Sjak]

We could bring against this logic that a higher number of sold camera's allows o spread the R&D, marketing and other costs over a higher number of units. Part of the high cost per unit (and therefore loss for Sigma) might relate to the low volume sold.

Also, I find it hard to believe te SA-mount (bodies and lenses) in general is a significant source of revenue for Sigma: low number of cameras sold means low number of lenses sold. Of course, the lens are also sold in other mounts (maybe with little variations on te basic design) so require less specific invenstment.

Probably we will never know the exact logic behind this.

Maybe Sigma is still building up expertise in camera-making, and has not reached sufficient confidence to market the SA-mount more aggressively (which is understandable, nice as they are, they are certainly not allround cameras, nor are they a truly established niche)

 

[Tom Schum]

My dream camera would be a Foveon full frame sensor, on a body with real dials, in M-Mount (or something that can work with M-Mount), with solid manual focus aids (assuming Foveon sensors can do video well enough to handle that) even in low-ish light.

Leica has had good luck over the past century selling such cameras. Their M-mount continues to be healthy in the market I believe.

Sigma could handily compete with Leica on their own turf with such a camera. I'd love to see one.

What it would require: (a) a commitment to manual operation, (b) good EVF support at the sensor level, (c) manufacturing of fully manual lenses to go with that commitment. Sigma could make M-mount lenses to equal the quality of Leica lenses at half the cost in my opinion.

I'd love to see this. Probably never will though...

 

[LasseS]

Agree, except that I think it's not a mistake.