noone

Ok, I bit the bullet and got it (for $8 Australian). I didn't realise it actually had a FD adaptall fitted (until I started trying to put another FD adaptall on the bottom....so much for looking at it closely). First impressions are i think I will like this lens...will try it at a Xmas lunch party tomorrow.

Long term? NONE of them are an investment! Give it a couple of years (ok maybe 10 or so) and a little device that includes a phone will do it all. To me, it would depend on what lenses a system has or can use and it is getting to the point that they all can (or close to it). You need to try a few yourself.

The Sony gives you both FF and APSC and in addition to having high ISO that rates at number three on DXO for high ISO (take that with a grain of salt) behind two very expensive medium format cameras. You can also use fast primes as zooms easily too for video (and Jpeg stills). Seriously though there are for and against with everything and I would suggest you rent the major contenders and see for yourself which you prefer.

Flares!!!! (at least that WILL be the case once people endlessly use the same lens in the same situation) since that is a characteristic of the lens and it is not subtle....for NOW, I agree but I reckon in a pretty short time that will change.

The blue flares look nice BUT (regards the Sirui phone lens), it seems like just about every single night time phone video with car headlights in it for a while is going to have that blue flare and it is going to get very old very fast....same with video from the APSC lens maybe. Some of those phone videos using it though are really nice and much better than most dedicated compact cameras of not very long ago can do.....wonder if that Sirui (phone) lens would work on a P&S camera? I think i prefer the phone Sirui than the APSC one and especially regards the flares.

I will never understand why Sony does not support apps like the Liveview grading app in the third version and later A7 cameras. It allows millions of colour combinations straight out of camera for video. The latest cameras that support it are the A7ii, A7sii and A6500. I used to have it with my first A7s and it was more than i needed and would literally still take me years trying combinations on a daily basis. I might just get it again soon just to play with (costs about $10).

It wasn't THAT long ago I was seriously considering paying around $12,000 (at a time the Aussie dollar was about equal with the US$) for a Nikon 300mm f2 lens.....Now I baulk at a couple of bucks! Sigh!

What budget? What focal length needed? Do you need 4k? A7sii might be a contender if 12mp is ok. AFC is pretty much non existent (except if the subject only moves in a small area and not too fast) but AFS for stills works in really low light and the FE 85 1.8 (if long enough) really is a very nice lens for the price. I still use the original A7s (just got given a new one after my original died after years of solid use) and I use it with manual focus lenses for night time sports sometimes as well as live music gigs including some very dim pubs and clubs and increasingly, night time light festivals and installations...I can even use a slow 17mm f4 tilt shift lens as walk around at night....being able to use pretty much any shutter speed is more important than AF by my experience if the light is THAT low. First version A7s can be found cheaper these days and I find I do not really need stabilization with it. Other than that, the A7iii might be the one for you if you have the money.

I guess I have been through the try many many lenses thing and I had pretty much settled on my kit (Canon 17L tilt shift, FD 24 1.4L, FE 55 1.8. EF mount 150 2.8 macro, Adaptall 300 2.8 and a Canon EF 20-35 2.8 L) with the others remaining just being because i like "stuff". I have recently given away a few old lenses including some that were quite nice (Nikon 50 1.8 AF) and sold a few others so it now is pretty much if i buy it will i use it? This 28-80 would need to be pretty good for me to buy at any price (the old me before getting some really nice lenses would have got it in a heartbeat). These days my income is limited too which does not help.....I still wanna get things like a new Sony flash (sold my old one when my A7s broke but now I have another A7s I need one) and a FD-E and EF-E speedbooster (for my now back up NEX-3N)....I really want to see if the 17 tilt shift will work with a speedbooster FF too on the A7s. I like to try things people tell me I can not do but that ends up with me accumulating a lot of junk/stuff.

At the moment, I could find a way! While I am curious as to how good it is, I really do have far more lenses than i need and the few I mainly use are MUCH better than this would be. I know ten bucks is one beer at some pubs/brewery's these days, it is still something i would want to be good enough to use from time to time. I would not for instance get any of the non SP Tamron adaptall lenses in that range (one was offered to me for $1 (Australian....about 68c US currently) and I knocked it back two weeks ago.

Anyone used the old Tamron adaptall 28-80 3.5-4.2 SP on digital recently? It seems it had a good reputation a few years ago. Worth paying $10 (Australian) for? (not like I NEED another lens but since it is there!).

Sigh! ANOTHER thing I now want. It will not replace my all time favourite 17mm TSE but to use on some of my FD lenses (and Tamron adaptall lenses with FD adaptall) would be fun to try. Time to go beg on the street corner to be able to buy it.

I would simply test them at how you would use them. Some of them have a lot of field curvature so might not be good at something like a flat image or landscape but really good for something else like an environmental portrait. I think that applies to some of the various 24mm lenses for instance. Should have been more lenses like the Minolta 24 vfc that you can control the field curvature with. Lenses with floating elements would allow closer focus and better use for others things as well.

This is just nuts! I was looking on Ebay out of curiosity at the price of 24 1.4 lenses. There was only about five FD 24 1.4 L lenses listed and the CHEAPEST was $3000 Australian (around $2200 US maybe a bit less). I thought they all must be some of those silly listings that are always there (things like a kit lens for a grand and the like) but then I looked at sold listings and could only find two....one at around $2000 Australian and the other that was still well over $1500 but sold as is with fungus!!!! For the price of the CHEAPEST FD listed, I can fly to Japan and have four nights in a half decent hotel and buy an auto focus 24 1.4 from Canon, Sony, Nikon or Sigma (or a Samyang or clone manual focus lens with a lot of change still). The Sigma Art and Sony FE 24 1.4 (and other AF) lenses are much better I am sure but can still be found (some of them new) for about a THIRD of the price of the old FD warriors. I love the old thing but if someone wants to give me $2000 Australian (so i can buy a FE 24 1.4 and pocket the difference), you can have mine (sold as is no refunds). You would be insane to do that though.

A year or two ago I had my 24 1.4 L on Ebay with a starting price a lot lower than that and a reserve price of less than that in Australian dollars (so probably around 4 or 5 hundred US from memory) but could not get a bid. Mine LOOKS a bit ratty but the glass is very good. No way i will sell it now though. I am surprised it stays so high because there are other 24 1.4s available now. For a long while there were very few makes/models in existence but in the last couple of years some more makes/models have been made.

Loved that lens! The three FD aspheric element L primes are all favourites for me (24 1.4L, 50 1.2L, 85 1.2L). I had to sell my 50 L and would have one again except I got the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 instead and it is (for me) even better. Still, the FD 50 L was by far my favourite legacy normal lens. I still use the 24 1.4 and if i could ever get my 85 1.2 fixed (it has the dissolving bearing issue that affects some FD lenses) and could afford another 50 L, I would really like to get the band back together again.

Any decision? For what its worth (not much since I mainly am a stills shooter with just a bit of ungraded video dabbling ) I would go with the FF camera and 24 1.4 simply because if you like shallow DOF for stills, none of the others will come close really. I would just use my new (thanks family!) Sony A7s (my old one is still dead) and ancient Canon FD 24 1.4 L. Great for stills though harder to match for video (great HD video though) I would think and not weather sealed ( I am happy to take it into a light shower for a short time but only for something important and would get out of it as soon as possible). Are you going to be able to light things? If not, another reason to opt for the larger sensor.

Gotta find something (anything) first. It has a built in ND filter which will help too. Four wheels on a point and shoot! If this camera had an APSC sensor and hd video at least it would now be my daily driver.

Anyone come across a camera (possibly a really old one) they like so much you just have to try and upscale it? I have just got my late Fathers Canon G10 and i have to say the photos it takes in its sweet spot are DSLR competitive against a DSLR with an average lens. Really nice for a ten plus year old tiny sensor point and shoot (at ISO 80 or 100....still ok at ISO 200 to maybe ISO 400 but poor above that). Its video is only 640x480 but if it is anywhere near like its stills, it might well be worth the effort to upscale even though it is just limited ordinary point and shoot type video. My issue will be finding something to shoot video with it at ISO 80 Anyone tried the old G10 for video?

I will bite. Yeah, I agree about the Sony Zeiss 55 1.8. It has ended any desire for another normal lens for me (though I still have a few). Really though, pretty much any normal lens ever made will be ok for people shots as long as it is a decent copy (IE has not been dropped or has fungus or other issues).

I have no idea. I just got cheap ones I could find on ebay. I still have them but no M43 lenses or cameras. I just like to experiment and i love trying things people tell me I can not do. I did not try that many lenses and adapters with it but the only one I really liked was the Body cap lens,...jut a bit of fun. I can see how it would possibly work for you though. Good luck with it!

I used to use M43 lenses on E mount with a couple of those adapters...pointless mostly and many will not even mount to the thin (and sharp) adapters. I could not for instance mount my cheap and nasty "Light Cannon" focal reducer on it at all and I suspect many other adapters would be the same. One lens that did and was kind of fun was the Olympus body cap "lens" (there are a couple.). If you use a little clear zoom (video and jpegs) you can remove the vignetting in APSC mode and also in FF mode but with more clear zoom. In fact, I thought the Body cap lens was BETTER on my A7s/A7 than on my GX7......again, just some fun and the lens ain't that good.

The reason is that Canon EF Adaptalls are not original and just something that has come along later and I already had a heap of others (I might get one at some point) and I use the lens on both a Canon DSLR as well as the little Sony so easier to just leave the Nikon adaptall with the EF adapter (which is just a thin metal ring and a pain to take off anyway). Shot with the Little Sony and 300 2.8 (I did get a couple of partial videos that were enough for me to want to try again but not enough to show).

I am just along for the ride....learning about both would be fine by me.

I thought you did...I changed my post because of that.....I am glad you asked though because I want to know too.