MrSMW

This is where I think it shines. As a hybrid, for occasional use in a stills role, maybe, but not my first choice. For pure stills, nah. But as a compact S1/S5ii alternative? Absolutely. I keep reading and hearing about the S5ii and S9 having a more 'digital' image than the S1/S5, never mind the S1H, but as someone who has a 1/8th mist glued on to my S5ii lenses, I can't say I have ever really noticed anything in the 2 years I have been using them. I DO notice a difference on one single lens however, the 70-200mm f4, but funnily enough, it's the ONLY lens I have that does not have a 1/8th mist on it. And as for moire, ditto, never seen it. So maybe these later cameras do have a more digital look and probably it's my use of the 1/8th mists that is 'reversing' that.

I get that and respect that. I'd very much like to try a Leica (a proper one, had a cropped sensor one) and a Hasselblad. If I had the finances, I would love to own and shoot stills with an X2D, but the cost is WAAAAAY beyond anything I could justify. Slightly more real world and would fit very well into my specific needs, a pairing of an SL3 (with something wide and something long I could bounce between) matched with a Q3-43 for everything in-between. But again, cashidos. Why? The build, the prestige etc, - more for me personally than rather what any kudos I might get from others. I have come very close on the SL2 several times, but what swung it for me with the S1R, was tilt screen. Plus it did not have the list of niggles that the Leica seemed to come with. I even had a crazy plan recently to combine an SL3 with an SL2-S and a Q3-43 and think this would probably be my current ultimate working scenario for my hybrid needs...but cost kills it!! And Mrs SMW would kill me.

Unless you MUST have log and prize the badge high enough, IMO, nope. The question is why is the S1R not worth as much as the SL2?!

I’m regretting selling mine now. Quite fancy one again with the Voigt 40mm f1.2… Only thing is, lack of AF which I would need and would rather not be changing lenses to have so probably would need to be Sigma 35 or 50mm f2… BUT NO, AAAAARGH, not happening! Well, maybe if an S2R appears and then my entire apple cart might get upset…

I've kept my Smallrig cage just in case...

I watch just one review and apparently the lens is completely dumb ad does not talk to the camera in any way? Yes, I'd go for a Voigtlander over this.

Also look at any Z6II material. It's the same sensor etc. It's just a better camera for AF etc...

If it's another kit lens or another rehashed old camera, I'm going to shrivel up and die. I liked my S1R's when I had them, but did not love them. I loved my S1H, but it's AF and lack of ability to burn in a LUT to log footage did for it for me over the S5II. I strong like my S5II for video, but wish it had a better rear screen and full-frame 6k 60p without removing anything to have that. I dislike it for stills however. Last chance saloon for me if it's not an S2R, S2H or S5R, but even then, it's going to come down to spec and real world performance... I'm not holding my breath but can only hope this is not another lame announcement. Any big YouTubers in Japan at the moment en masse?

It's like they have some kind of gentleman's agreement to each be shit somewhere.

Unless you have zero shame. Or it's a dare. Anyway, I already knew Hollywood had gone bonkers when I made the mistake of going to see Gladiator II, the near identical remake of the OG. Connie Nelson didn't need to learn any lines (or bother with any acting) and Derek Jacobi had "please kill me" written into his script.

I don't know and maybe I am wrong and you can't? I was looking at a pair of A7CR's instead of my sole A7RV and I could forgive the single card slot, but the rear screen, nah. It's a ploy to make you buy more drinks. Or maybe that is Wetherspoons...

I hope so as it's one of the current blockers to me going back fully to Nikon. Lenses that I am or was interested in such as: Canon RF 28-105mm f2.8 vs Sigma 28-105mm f2.8 = 1330g vs 995g plus the Sigma costing approx 50% less. Canon RF 28-70mm f2 vs Sony 28-70mm f2 = 1430g vs 918g, though the Canon can be had for slightly less cost than the new Sony. Latest Sigma 24-70 f2.8 approx 150g lighter than the Canon RF equivalent and 50% of the price. R3 though is considerably less than the Z9 in weight, but that is because it only has half the megapixels and those things are heavy 😉 Sure is and is exactly why I went with them for stills. But Nikon are almost back for me and if they can get a couple more things right, I'm pretty sure I will be back with them for everything (at least bodies anyway with Z8, Z6III and Zf) some time soon...

If they are serving dry cakes, they deserve it!

I think the bottom line is we still do not have a single brand that can deliver in full and instead, pros and cons to every set up. Well for my needs anyway... For video, I can't see past the S5II. There isn't anything it does not do that I need or want. I would rather it had a better quality/higher res rear screen as I think they skimped there and as someone who does not use an external monitor or the EVF, rear LCD quality is important to me. Closest alternative = Nikon Z6III...except it only writes to one card slot for video, so no backup, which itself/on it's own, is not the deal-breaker, but the fact that you cannot burn a LUT into the footage is. If I could burn in the RED Film Bias LUT, job done and done deal, the Z6III would become my primary video unit. For stills, Sony A7RV. Medium format cameras, with their lenses, are just a leetle bit too big for my tastes. Z8 comes closest, but it does not have the lenses without adapting and with that, comes issues. If Nikon was open to Sigma lenses, it would be a done deal there also and I'd be at peak camera for my needs with that combo. Secondary stills plus hybrid = Zf. If I had the brass, it would be Leica Q3 43mm, despite their shit customer service, lack of chairs and dry cake. It ticks every box for me in that regard except one and that is purchase price. Even at €3k, I'd struggle, but it's twice that, so my Zf is my 'Poor Man's Leica Q3'. And I have looked at every bit of kit out there, at least on paper and in reviews and there just isn't a single brand that ticks every box and I just find that odd. Why can we only burn a LUT into Lumix (and I think Fuji)? Why are your rear LCD's so shit Sony, unless A7RV and above? Why can we only write video to a single card slot Nikon. Why Canon is everything so big, heavy and expensive...except your R3 which is very light for what it is? Why are your cakes so dry Leica you fucktards?

This is the straw that broke the camels back for me. Japan it is then.

Nah, that was from last years advent calendar.

🤣

On the fourth (not) day of Christmas, my dealer said to me, it’s not the SL2 you want but the 3. Or a Canon R5.

On the first day (not) of Christmas, my dealer sold to me, a Leica SL3. (OK, an SL2) On the second day (not) of Christmas, my dealer sold to me, a Canon R3. (OK, an R5) On the third day (not) of Christmas, my dealer sold to me, a Nikon Z6III. (OK, a Canon R5)

I'm guessing stock, probably not!

It's available for Nikon Zf, but dare I...

I find they don’t tend to give a fuck these days as their attention spans are limited to TikTok memes only. Birds just aren’t what they used to be…

Nor me, but I can't unseen it now 😝 Same, - it's just an internal back up drive for me also. Another rabbit hole for me to explore. Thanks for that 😜 Yep. Or prime lens wander about all day camera. Yep, Zf is the better low light camera. Sitting on the fence whether I should get the Voigt 40mm f1.2 in Z or E Mount... And that of the A7RV even more so. I'd pay any premium in weight and cost quite happily though the actual screen is not a dealbreaker for me and the size & res is good. I could make a case for that and if there is ever going to be a Z7III, I could see that becoming a reality. I don't have any other than I wish it was a bit smaller and as above, would prefer a more sophisticated rear screen, otherwise no issues. Right, off to check out skinning options 🤗

I would pick the Z6III for most of those reasons also, but especially because with the adapter, it opens up the entire E Mount line, whether that be Sony's own lenses including the new 28-70mm f2, or the entire Sigma and Tamron series. Canon, you just get Canon. Everything lens-wise, bigger, heavier, more expensive. And potential fire-fighting duties. R6III vs Z6III makes more sense from just the body perspective?

Well out walking my dogs for the past hour, and came to the same conclusion. Other than build/brand/looks, but in the real world... It's an option I have been considering now that I have the Zf and that is dump the zooms completely and have instead: Zf + 40mm f2 as my candid, all day, walkabout, mid focal length option, plus, A7RV with 3x lens options from the Sigma contemporary line, the; 20, 65 and 90 and then use them either at those focal lengths, or at the turn of a dial to become; '30'/'100'/'135'...and that has a TON of appeal, - less overall range and less flexibility with any prime compared with any zoom, even with cropping, but smaller, lighter, higher quality results, better low light capability etc. And as you say, a used A7RV is FAR cheaper, never mind more capable than a Q3 and no bigger or heavier if the Q3 has a baseplate and thumb grip. But it's still not a Leica and wouldn't love it as much... But then, there is also the real world and the difference in cost could be the bucket list 2 weeks in Japan...