Given the op's camera use, leaving aside the relative merits of 6D vs APS-C, would there be much point in getting a 7DII rather than the less expensive 70D? I suspect the real world image quality differences are trivial or negligible.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Yes..the MFT system has developed nicely with very good Panasonic and Olympus primes & zooms. The higher end lenses are coming all the time and you have a lot of other manufacturers joinin the fray like Zeiss and Voigtlander making native mount lenses. There are a lot of very good choices. The system has its limitations but you can really squeeze a LOT out of it and walk around with a VERY light kit. It brings a lot of fun and spontaneity back into photography for me. I really have a lot of freedom and fun while capturing great images.
I just sold a print yesterday to someone from this kit. They did not ask me what camera system I used. They just loved the image!
I had Olympus E-M1 + 40-150 2.8 for a test one weekend and I can say that I'm very impressed by this lens. It feels very well on E-M1, have very useful range and fast AF(even with the new 1.4 TC). Oh, the optic quality? It's fantastic! The only problem could be that the lens is so sharp and flawless that don't make dreamy bokeh.
Reading elsewhere, does the E-M1 have a base ISO of 200?
Sorry to say that it's not done by just taking two fast shots and compare.
Well, that`s exactly what you do when you take bird photos. You don`t have time for pixel-peeping, all you have to do is to take the shot.
The question was a simple one: which photo has more detail?
To me the answer is obvious, no matter the DOF or the aperture. In this particular situation the crop sensor camera provides more detail. Period!
I have to admit I was a bit disappointed in the crop image quality after a decade of full frame. I don't have any trouble telling 5D2/3 files from 7D2 at 100% in lightroom. I suppose I knew that would be the case but the reality is still a bit disappointing. It seems like Canon should be a little further along with the IQ by now. But, I'm getting shots that I just couldn't get with the 5D3 and my lenses so "it is what it is". It is an absolute hoot to shoot with but IQ is not up to full frame specs. Apparently the laws of physics are alive and well.
The A7s and r? They're just over grown compacts with large sensors. They should cost under $1k and be sold in the checkout line at Walmart.
BTW, Sony fans, IBIS may be great for many commonly used focal length lenses, but it is severely challenged when using supertelephoto lenses.
.... 7d2 ... is not a revolution of technology, so its hardly a gme changer.
But a7 is.
First ff mirrorles. Yep i know about leica, but its too exotic and pricey
A7r offers really nice sensor in a compact body
And a7s low light performance is incredible. In a light and small package.
A7ii first ff ibis.
And they can easily use canon lenses with af. You can call it a first step to universal lens mount if you want.
Im not a sonynfanboy, just a general phot shooter and a7 looks very promising to me
A 24/2.8 with a large enough image circle for full frame would be no more compact than the 24/2.8 IS. Geometry is driven more by angle of view than absolute focal length - study the cross sections of other 24mm lenses for crop and full frame lenses.
Pentax users are often quite avid about their equipment and I can often see why from the results I've obtained with my gear. (Tho I'm wondering about the results I'd get using a Sony A72 with K-mount adapter instead)