I was thinking that if I were to use the a7ii, I would be able to have the option of both going small and large when the situation calls for it. Given equivalence, should I need to go compact, I noticed that Sony has quite a few compact primes which weighs less than 200g like Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* FE 35mm F2.8 ZA and Sony FE 50mm F1.8. I am ok with slower lenses with equivalence accounted for, so for example for the standard zoom, I am thinking instead of going with Sony 24-70 f2.8, I can live with f4 instead (or even f5.6!) since that would be closer to f2.8 on mFT. What matters more would be the weight, size and price since the reason he is trading in the D7100 is that he seldom shoots nowadays due to the weight.

Granted, the optical quality of the cheaper FF lens are not as good as the Pro line on mFT, but some things have to give I guess. Just exploring an additional option.

Well, if going for the Sony A6500, which is also a valid option, wouldn't Fuji be a better option given the better choices of lenses? I somehow feel (I may be completely wrong here) that Sony cares a lot more for their FF line and their APSC line is somewhat like a step-child.

Apart from the main primes, what about standard and telephoto zoom?

Yup, when I told him about my EM5 Mk2, he already grumbled about the battery being able to last 300++ shots only. Gain some lose some.

Just a few shots taken over the weekend
CRX01554-2hd by Chia Way Tan, on Flickr
CRX01503-2hd by Chia Way Tan, on Flickr
CRX01528-2hd by Chia Way Tan, on Flickr

Now Canon RP is here. Maybe another consideration. Singapore here now preorder free EF mount adaptor at $1999 body only. $900 cheaper than A7III.

Being able to use Canon EF lens is really an advantage, prices for EF lenses are much lower eh. A7III vs Canon RP what's your take? Other sifus too please join in give opinion! For example. Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 Sigma for EF is only around 1.5k. For Sony is 3.2k. Also all the F2.8 premium zoom lenses. Each lens save 1-3k if buy 5 lenses can save 10k d

nopnopnopnonop. You know the biggest deal breaker? Uses a different compared to the EOS R. Its so stupid.

You can always go to the FF lenses to fill up the blanks (which I think is what Sony WANTS us APSC folks to do) but yeah unfortunately the step-child thing is not too far from the mark TBH.

Like I said, we've got decent primes (especially now that Siggy is filling up the spaces with their Contemporary line though the long end is still pretty spotty), but zooms are barely decent when you consider the APSC-only lineup: the 4/1018 taking up UWA and the 4/1680Z taking up the standard zoom range (with the 4/18105G taking up superzoom duties).

Mind you, unless you consider the 4/70200G as THE APSC telezoom (which it is not as it's an FF lens), the only telezoom that APSC actually has is the very "normal" 55210 AFAIK lol.

In which case yeahhh, I'd concur that Fuji would be theoretically the "better" APSC option if you consider the zoom linup in isolation... though I personally think the package of features the A6500 provides might still be worth that compromise - if it fits your requirements lar.

Otherwise, for the breadth of lens choices + small size it's pretty hard to top M4/3 however you slice it IMHO (plus MMM DAT OLY IBIS MMM).

This post has been edited by Eiraku: Feb 16 2019, 06:50 PM

You mean the battery? Yeah it's kinda stupid. 250 shots But the overall savings on camera body + lenses really quite significant.

When eos rp specs first leaked, i thought "damn its cheap, small, light, access to ef lenses" must buy

After official reveal, price is rm5999 which is not that cheap, but also the video spec is subpar. 2016 sony a6300 has better video spec than 2019 eos rp which is very very dissapointing for hybrid shooter like me

I think A6400/a6500 with decent lenses or fuji xt3/xt30 can produce similar or better IQ than eos rp with cheap lenses like ef 50mm stm or ef 85mm 1.8. Both newer sony and fuji also has better video spec, 4k video that is not crippled in autofocus and also battery life

Unless u already has tonnes of canon lenses and want eos rp as 2nd body it is good choice now

This post has been edited by evilsmile: Feb 16 2019, 11:10 PM

Invest in new system but use back old stuffs instead of native lenses that allow full feature usage, why not invest back dslr?
For even older legacy manual lenses, there is benefits with newer system; but those in digital era, except only a few lenses with unique characteristics, has more compromises i think, costs included.

Aiya coz now I all Sony Apsc lens only. Then only 16-50, 50 F1.8, 55-210, Samyang 12 F2 & 7Artisan 7.5mm F2.8.

It will cost as much or even more if I buy A7III vs RP. Since people always adapt Sony to Canon thus RP having better performance with their EF lenses and if good enough then why not?

Hey guys, what tripod you guys bring for travelling? Any recommendation for a affordable one. Hopefully lightweight and cheap

There are various types of tripods, super lightweight ones for the casual shooters, heavier ones for long exposure photography. There's also a super duper light one that's like a stabilized monopod that weighs only 400g.

Personally if I'm travelling for photography purpose (alone or with some photo kaki), I'll get a heavier tripod in the region of 1.3-1.5kg to do 5-30 sec long exposure shots. There are some really light tripods like the Mefoto Air series but I'm not sure about the stability. Tons of choices for that weight range.

However, if I'm traveling in a group tour or with the family who are non photographers, will just get a Mefoto Backpacker Air or a Lumapod (Google it).

I'm going to go against the grain and say if you need really low weight (and have a lightweight setup), then you can't really beat the tent-pole Tamrac Zipshot (mini or original).

Unfortunately it's not that easy to find anymore except on eBay (or Amazon old stock or one of the Hakuba knockoffs).

Furthermore, the Zipshot comes with a WHOLE bunch of compromises but if lightweight is all you're looking for (and flat-ish ground is all you're shooting on) it's pretty hard to beat even for long exposures (yeah I've done 30m+ exposures in light wind with zero issues with it).

But again, as I said before it depends on how light your setup is. If it's light enough even a Gorillapod would probably suffice TBH.

On the other hand, if you can spare a bit more free weight then the Mefoto Backpacker Air is probably a "better" choice as far as more "proper" yet still "light" tripods are concerned IMO. Not to mention its readily available (I think YL even has some in store for you to play2 with).

This post has been edited by Eiraku: Today, 07:38 PM

I think it would make more sense if just use EF-S mount then? I see adapting to E or EOS R mount will eventually get native in the long run, when one had enough with compromise of promised features and finally have budget. In cases with adapter, could be worse than whence use on intended mount (EF-S).

This post has been edited by bdrc: Today, 07:39 PM

i did previously bought the manfrotto befree one tripod just for travel.
worth it.
light, compact & 'affordable'.

but regret didnt wait for the befree live (video fluid head) version.
cost abit more, but has a few advantage
+ can change the ballhead (befree one u cant)
+ video fluid head (i mostly do video)

negative thing for befree one is
- height only upto 130cm

if u looking for something cheaper, try and check gstrapinuse website.
they have alot of affordable tripod of many price range/use.