Anyone get any new photographic equipment?

[KenElevenShadows]

Just wondering. I did not, although the yellow zipper pulls that I just ordered could qualify as that since some of them will probably go on my camera backpack.

[KuruPrionz]

In 2020 I had cataract surgery.

My eyesight went from 20/240 in each eye to 20/30.

 

Now I am farsighted instead of nearsighted. I see things differently and can use a camera without glasses on. That is a huge change!!!!

That's it for new photographic equipment. I've considered a full frame camera but my level of usage does not justify one and my budget has been stretched getting my recording studio to where I would like it.

 

That said, new eyes is pretty huge.

[KenElevenShadows]

Understood. The only thing I would suggest if you really want to have a full frame camera without the cost is to purchase a used one. A Nikon D610, D750, D700, Pentax K-1, etc. are all great cameras to purchase used.

[KuruPrionz]

I am very much a used item buyer. Cameras are especially a value used, so many photographers upgrade before they've really used the last camera.

 

I've got enough Canon lenses to make that tempting. It probably isn't something that will happen any time soon though, the main thing I currently use a camera for is photographing items that I want to sell.

That's been true for a few years now.

 

I am starting to realize that I do have a camera with me at all times, my cell phone takes a pretty good photo. They say the best camera is the one you have with you and I agree.

I had a Canon 5d with the battery grip and the L lenses and I hated lugging that thing around so I never took it anywhere. Truthfully I might be happier with a smaller mirrorless system like the Fuji.

[KenElevenShadows]

The Fujifilm cameras take really great photos.

[KuruPrionz]

The Fujifilm cameras take really great photos.

 

 

The lenses are top notch, I lust for the 56 1.2!

 

Fuji has always been one of the best camera manufacturers but somehow not as mainstream as Nikon and Canon. Their layout for color pixels works very well, a solid option to the Bayer array. Adobe has long since updated their Camera RAW software to accommodate it and Fuji includes software tor RAW conversion as well.

 

They are sort of "sneaky" like Pentax (also great stuff!!!).

 

I like the form factor of the Fuji mirrorless system. It would be "pocketable" - camera with lens in one pocket, second lens in the other.

[KenElevenShadows]

One of the great aspects of Fujifilm is that their firmware updates are genuine updates, not little fixes. They actually add new features. I don't know this from firsthand experience, but I've heard several people mention that the way they render their JPGs is really great.

[KuruPrionz]

One of the great aspects of Fujifilm is that their firmware updates are genuine updates, not little fixes. They actually add new features. I don't know this from firsthand experience, but I've heard several people mention that the way they render their JPGs is really great.

 

 

Great article about the development of Fuji sensors and lenses, some things I didn't know before.

Looks like the X-T3 is the camera to get and yes, it seems likely that the combination of lens technology, 3rd generation X-Trans sensor and processing power would yield a better looking JPG.

 

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2020/04/20/fujifilm-x-trans-is-it-really-all-that-different

 

Edited to add - they have a newer version - the X-T4 and the newer X-T30 II which is similar but has lower capture speeds and a couple of other minor limitations that also lower the price. New bodies can be had for around $830 for the X-T30II, the X-T4 is quite a bit more expensive.

[Mike Martin]

I'm about to make a big purchase, I'm a bit torn.

 

Canon RF100 Macro. By most accounts an incredibly sharp lens with crazy fast focus. I don't have a macro solution aside from extension tubes - I know this would be wonderful, it is also good for tight portrait shots.

 

Sigma 105mm f/1.4 - I've used this lens years ago and I'm still drooling. Although I do a ton of portrait work, I don't have anything f/1.4 aside from some manual focus 50mm lenses. This lens is a monster is size and weight but the look of every photo I've ever seen with this lens is just amazing. This lens is cheaper than a Canon EF 85mm f/1.4 and the Canon RF 85mm f/1.2 is out of the question.

 

I'll be buying one of the two of them soon. Selling a couple vintage lenses then I'll make my decision.

[KenElevenShadows]

Those appear to be two very different applications! Sounds like either one would be really fun.

[KuruPrionz]

I'm about to make a big purchase, I'm a bit torn.

 

Canon RF100 Macro. By most accounts an incredibly sharp lens with crazy fast focus. I don't have a macro solution aside from extension tubes - I know this would be wonderful, it is also good for tight portrait shots.

 

Sigma 105mm f/1.4 - I've used this lens years ago and I'm still drooling. Although I do a ton of portrait work, I don't have anything f/1.4 aside from some manual focus 50mm lenses. This lens is a monster is size and weight but the look of every photo I've ever seen with this lens is just amazing. This lens is cheaper than a Canon EF 85mm f/1.4 and the Canon RF 85mm f/1.2 is out of the question.

 

I'll be buying one of the two of them soon. Selling a couple vintage lenses then I'll make my decision.

 

FWIW (not much probably), my thoughts on this - bear in mind I haven't used either lens or even looked a the reviews at this point.

 

There are LOTS of options for macro lenses for Canon EF mount, better than others and many that are really very good.

There are very few options for a 105mm 1.4 and since it is fairly new there won't be many good used lenses available.

 

Keeping it real, how often do you know you will want the super-shallow depth of field that the Sigma lens will have wide open? How often will you used it with the aperture closed down a bit, say 2.8?

Compare this with how often you will make images that require a macro lens.

 

We are all different. I have a vintage Pentax 50mm 1.4 lens with an EOS mount adapter, on my humble T2i it has an equivalent working distance of an 80mm lens. I also have a Canon 85 1.8, on the same camera the equivalent working distance is that of a 136mm lens. It is rare that I use either lens wide open, the in focus area is pretty tiny and the rest of the image gets progressively more out of focus.

 

I know you know all this and that may very well be the attraction to the Sigma in the first place. I'm not trying to make your choice for you, just offering food for thought.

 

On the other hand, I use my Tamron 90 2.8 macro often, usually stopped down a bit to 5.6 or 8.

 

At a guess, I use the Tamron macro 10x more often than both of the other lenses put together. That's just me but in your position I know I would use the Canon macro far more often than I would need the Sigma at 1.4.

Just food for thought, consider it from your own perspective. Cheers, Kuru

[Mike Martin]

I understand your opinion, in fact the RF100mm Macro at f/2.8 is probably the perfect headshot lens but the Sigma105mm f/1.4 is probably one of the best portrait lenses for mid to full body portraits. Given that I already do the majority of my portraits with a 70-200mm f/2.8 I'm pretty familiar with what f/2.8 looks like.

 

 

This is just a quick example that I found on Flickr but the separation that the Sigma 105mm can provide is just amazing in my opinion.

 

Z62_5938 by Alex Cruise, on Flickr

[Mike Martin]

Another quick example. This this video she does an amazing tight portrait with the RF100mm then immediately says she'd still rather use her 85mm f/1.4 for anything that isn't a tight shot.

 

[video:youtube]

[KuruPrionz]

I understand your opinion, in fact the RF100mm Macro at f/2.8 is probably the perfect headshot lens but the Sigma105mm f/1.4 is probably one of the best portrait lenses for mid to full body portraits. Given that I already do the majority of my portraits with a 70-200mm f/2.8 I'm pretty familiar with what f/2.8 looks like.

 

 

This is just a quick example that I found on Flickr but the separation that the Sigma 105mm can provide is just amazing in my opinion.

 

Z62_5938 by Alex Cruise, on Flickr

 

OK, valuable perspective on why you want the Sigma. To be completely honest, I shot portraiture in CA and somehow that scene faded away when I moved to WA.

I can see from the photo you've posted that the Sigma does have gorgeous color and sharpness without harsh bokeh - the out of focus areas are smooth and creamy, that's an amazing combination.

 

There are many good choices for macro lenses, not all of them are insanely expensive. Or you can use extension rings, been there and done that too.

If portraiture is your thing or your way of generating an income stream then get the Sigma, that is in a category all it's own.