camera/lens advice please

@Miranda - I saw your post on prices earlier and was heading back in here to mention some additional things.

The A7 II in the UK has been £999 for most the time I've been looking. Seen it at £949 once I think. New body. UK stock. The kit with 28-70/variable has been £1199. So £200 extra for the 28-70mm. That lens looks to sell for £135-150-ish used (in a store with warranty).

I have seen three shops - this week - drop the A7II/28-70 kit to £1099. £100 for that lens is pretty sweet I think. Body has remained firm at £999 most of the time.

For eBay type home studio photos - and for one view I'd 'quite like to take' at around 70mm, I can easily justify that £100 spend on the 28-70. It doesn't need to be amazing - I'd be happy with it being just 'good' and I'm not into measuring distortion as I prefer to take actual photos. I might even really like it. It is WR too. And f5.6 on FF is sort of like f2.8 on m43 in terms of bokehness (it is more complex than that of course).

Because of the slightly peculiar way my brain is wired I'd decided that my return to Sony for 2021 and beyond would be with the camera I buy on the last day this year, 31-Dec (tomorrow). It can arrive Sat or Mon ready for week 1. Because I stalled and dithered I've missed two of the 7x used A7 II bodies I'd found. And a couple of the lenses. But the 28/2 and 28-70 are easy to find (I think I have 5-7 of them bookmarked from shops I'd use). I still have 4x bodies bookmarked.

While my plan was to get A7II + 28/2 + 28-70 used ... for not much more than the new body price. I'd decided earlier today to delay the 28/2 purchase a bit (I will get this at some point in 2021). But I'm probably going to buy the body and kit new tomorrow. £1100 is a really nice price. And I do much prefer a new body.

I did 2019 with just one lens 12-35mm (m43 = 28-70) and having spent 31 years with just primes I really enjoyed having a zoom. Sure this was a 2.8 straight.

So, I have two shops to call tomorrow which might have the A7 II + CZ 24-70 at good price (£1400). One other is certainly out of stock, already asked them. 24-70 is chunkier and a straight f4. The graph-drawing-type of reviewers have bashed it which is annoying as I'd like to know what it is actually like and I'll repeat that I'm not hear to be Sony's QC department.

28-70 seems like the safer bet. And my heart has always been on primes. I'd happily keep the 28-70 for 3 years as a home studio eBay shooter while using the 28/2 as my main street lens (size as much as anything).

The Samyang AF primes are super interesting. 24/2.8 and 35/2.8 especially.   But I do need to start off with and have a WR lens. Samyang 18/2.8 is likely to be with me at some point in 2021. After the 50/macro.

QuietOC wrote: I liked the Sigma 600mm F8 for street photography...

Well, there's no accounting for taste! Mind you, I used to use a Miranda 200mm f3.5 prime* for candids (street and weddings) and that was the longest decent lens I had (I'll not mention the various 4-element bazooka tubes ...)

Addy, Roger: Very interesting comments, and you both have a point. But I currently like dramatic skyscapes and wide DOF scenes, and anything longer than 16-18mm APS-C (24-28mm FF) just doesn't cut it. Most of pics are taken at 12mm or 16mm now. All the longer stuff just sits in the cupboard gathering dust...
But I will take your advice and look out for narrower-angle scenes that have impact.

* I need to make a decent adapter for this. Ideally one with iris control, but the iris is stuck at the moment so that's not high on the priority list. Mind you I have several Minolta zooms that cover 200mm on FF and the 100-300mm APO is waiting ...

Edited by Miranda F - 30 December 2020 at 18:05

I find that for landscapes, short teles are King. Forget wide angle, that is for in town. Most of my best successful landscapes are 85mm or over....

I am very impressed with the 28-70, but I don't use it much. Sony has a new retracting 28-60 kit zoom they created for the A7C. Many say it is better than the 28-70 which I am skeptical of. The 24-105G is bulky and pretty costly.

I am happy with my fourth copy of the Samyang 24mm F2.8. My Tamron 24mm F2.8 is with them for an alignment.

Heidfirst wrote: dCap wrote: Fujifilm X100V has tilty screen, viewfinder in the corner is nice. No IBIS. WR though (but I've bought and not liked 2x X100 series already). On paper this should be a strong contender but it has cost me a lot twice already. I haven't read every post in this thread so somebody possibly already mentioned it but if not & you don't already, you may wish to check out Kirk Tuck's blog https://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com. He has recently bought an X100V & is working through an apparently similar itch/process. Initially it didn't seem that he liked it but as he spends more time with it & makes some changes it seems to be growing on him.

Thank you, I shall go have a read (for interest).

I sold my X100T after a couple of uses to a friend - my complaint then was that the close focus was unusable. I shoot close-ups a lot (he didn't) and while I knew this my photography changed before I got the X100F (a year ago this week).

To be fair to the X100F - it was a fail "for me" for a couple of specific reasons. Close-up is unusable (I knew this). No IBIS (I knew this, but am at the end of 12 years on m43 and have lived with IBIS). The leaf shutter is an absolute delight and this would and should cancel the lack of IBIS. The fixed LCD was more of an issue than I expected.

The main problems I had with the X100F was that I had it at the same time as my X-E3. The X-E3 is the same form factor but all EVF and no hybrid. The hybrid viewfinder in the X100 series is absolutely lovely. But I'm a critical with my framing, I line things up exactly and very rarely crop. So to me the X100 was an all EVF camera and I was spending a portion of the money on the optical bit that I didn't want to use in the field.

The layout of the X-E3 and X100F are very very similar - I loved the ISO dial (which all reviewers hate, but I'm manual ISO not auto and live at ISO 400 or 1600 most of the time, I liked that dial).

But I was shooting it alongside the X-E3 and having shot with dual cameras most of my life the differences between the two were mildly annoying.

I knew getting a fixed screen camera (and also no IBIS) after over a decade in m43 would be a challenge. And I didn't get on with the fixed LCD.

X100V has the tilting LCD (in the plane I prefer) and also has WR. And finally a respectable lens that can be used at all focus distances. It is a winner. And almost everything I wish the T and F were. As a one-and-only camera I'm sure I would adapt to it well ... but I'm not happy paying that sort of price for just one item. I don't think it is over-priced. Just over-priced 'for me'. I can get my A7II and 28/2 for less (new if I want) and that is FF and has IBIS.

The X100V was certainly tempting - and if I had the spare cash I'd love to give it a whirl (as a solo shooting camera). But 'the X100' has cost me a lot (bought both T & F new). It is a camera I'll look at again when the VI comes out (with IBIS?) and see the new price. I'll also know by then if 28mm is my focal length.

It is a shame Ricoh and Fuji stick to their '28' and '35' and don't make 20mm or 24mm or 50mm versions (without the bulky-frankenstein-screw-on silly things that destroy 95% of the idea of where they fit).

If Fuji made X100.28 and X100.35 and X100.50 some people would buy two of them (28/50).

I am aiming to shoot a fair bit in 21:9 with 16:9 as my viewfinder guide.
Cinemascope is 64:27 but referred to as 21:9 (it is 21.3333`:9).

For the last 6 months I've been shooting all square (with RX100 IV) and occasionally flicking to 16:9 to imagine the 21:9 view.
It is something I've been waiting to start for 2021.
I'm a terrible landscape photographer, and I'd like to fix that.

I've also been shooting with my (now old) phone in 16:9 and 18:9 alongside the RX100 for the last 6 months but also almost daily (landscapes) since March. The desire to aim a proper camera at the clouds and seascapes is strong now. Treated myself to a better phone (better camera) which might replace the RX100, I'll see how January goes with the new phone (always in pocket) and A7 II as a dedicated shooter. This will be a shift from my daily RX100 carry (at the moment it is tough to NOT take the RX100 out with me).

Edited by dCap - 28 December 2020 at 23:05

Tamron 20/24/35 set are also in my 'maybe later' group.

Shame they skipped 28mm (even though they have it as an inhouse model number as they skip a model in the 20/24/--/35 set!). After 3-4 months with the Sony 28/2 I'll know if I'd prefer a 24mm or a 35mm view ... and then the Tamron group gets real interesting. I'm not aiming to get my 50/macro for a while, and don't need 1:1 so it depends how well I get on with the 28mm.

Either the 50/macro gets added or I'll consider a Tamron as an alternative to 28 + 50. This would be 24 instead of 28/2 or 20 + 35 instead of 28 + 50. Price for price (new) 28/2 + 50/macro are about the same as the Tam 24/35 or 20/35 set. Plenty of time to try the 28 solo first though.

If I can get to a camera store one day when I'm on the mainland and try any of the Tamrons I'd be happy. If not I'd buy a used one and be prepared to flip it (free rental).

The 28/2 is the easier to find used. And luckily is where I'm starting anyway. But if I love it I'll ignore the other options and grab a 50/macro when I feel like it nearer mid/end of the year.

I don't draw graphs with my lenses just bolt them on and point them at things I find interesting. I'll have a small re-learning as I'm exiting m43 depth of field and everything I shoot with that is in focus even wide open. So, aiming for enjoyable images at f4 and concentrate a bit more any wider open than that. That is a quirk that any ex-m43 user has to remember, the little lenses are all excellent wide open and we need to remember that FF lenses have less depth!

I'd also quite like to have an f2.0 lens

Edited by dCap - 27 December 2020 at 20:50