High Sony sales prompted Nikon full frame mirrorless camera development - Will Panasonic / Olympus follow?

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

They are allegedly doing a (cheaper) rangefinder version of the GFX which if it has a similar crop mode would throw up some interesting possibilities for adapted lenses.

Would be trippy if they sold a lower cost camera with their medium format mount but "only" a full frame sensor inside the camera!

 

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I reckon Fuji's strategy is the longest term of anyone, it's predicting a future where full frame is the new APS-C and medium format is the default large sensor choice. You could have the full frame crop for sports at faster shooting rates and the full medium format coverage when you need extra resolution and incredible resolving power of a high-end medium format lens at F4.

And they'll keep their APS-C line for the more affordable beginner, or for the enthusiast who wants a high quality but portable system. 

[webrunner5]

12 hours ago, jonpais said:

I’d like to see some documentation of this.

Correct me if I’m mistaken, but manufacturers like Fuji and Panasonic, for example, only rather recently released or are about to release long fast telephoto primes. And if Sony’s intent was to kill off CaNikon, longer lenses would be a must I would think. And from the reviews I’ve seen, Sony’s 400mm is a killer optic.

You are not really going to use a 800mm lens on a A7 series body, even with a battery grip. It ain't happening. Sure you can do anything stupid but.. Why do you think Leica Never came out with any long lenses on the M series? It would look stupid and be stupid. If you want long lenses on a Sony buy the A99 mk II.

And Sony’s 400mm is probably about as big as you can go with that body size. Even it is overkill.

[jonpais]

5 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

You are not really going to use a 800mm lens on a A7 series body, even with a battery grip. It ain't happening. Sure you can do anything stupid but.. Why do you think Leica Never came out with any long lenses on the M series? It would look stupid and be stupid. If you want long lenses on a Sony buy the A99 mk II.

And Sony’s 400mm is probably about as big as you can go with that body size. Even it is overkill.

It’s a beast, that’s for sure!

[webrunner5]

9 minutes ago, jonpais said:

It’s a beast, that’s for sure!

Yep, probably the best 400mm out there this week LoL. ?

29 minutes ago, anonim said:

I will consider!

First - for my usage at the moment and future before approaching extremely close Oscar level of ambition, I'm tired of clumsy gimbals and other instruments that make me even more like scarecrow than I really am (although it seems impossible). With UW lens and IBIS of Olympus and GH5 i achieved even side-running shots usable. If next generation of IBIS would be even better, and front-running looks the same, it will be unbelievable - only lack of imagination and bad destiny will be your enemy for moving shots. I. e. - just the same problems as in life in general...

Second - Voigtlanders. That is the area I lost pretty much time - conclusion: I'm not sure that people know how small are Voigts in proportion with equally capable high-end FF lenses. And how powerful at all aspects are these lenses for video usage (heavenly mellow rendition and crystal crispness at the most important f1.6-2.4 range, ingenious balance of virtues/compromises  to provide usable f0.95/T1.1 with unique formula - i. e. where sharpness is located - for every focal length, and above all - rendition again, but this time no heavenly, but submarine).

Third - Blackmagic to play with raw as mighty therapy/consolation because of my total lacking of gift for painting.

Four - it so funny to see how all hardcore FF dark trumpeters of inevitable m43 death occupied with comments, expectation and calculations the longest thread in history - BMPPC 4k.

Six - I'm still waiting complete review of Oly Em1 mk2 by Andrew Reid.

Five - I like to show that I've learned something important in this forum, so I'll be gratefully in line with @webrunner5 and say: Best drugs always come in small doze!

 

 

You know what I remember reading that Olympus said, that they can not make their IBIS any better because of the Rotation of the Earth. Yeah how crazy is that.

https://petapixel.com/2016/09/26/olympus-says-earths-rotation-limits-image-stabilization-6-5-stops-max/

Yeah in small doses you can drink, or take, or use, or do anything! ?

[BTM_Pix]

7 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

You are not really going to use a 800mm lens on a A7 series body, even with a battery grip. It ain't happening. Sure you can do anything stupid but.. 

Whilst shooting a test match a few years ago that even by cricket's own rather sedate standards was not exactly a thrill a minute, I put an Olympus OM-D on my 300-800mm.

The camera looked like a slightly enlarged rear lens cap on it.

600-1600mm was a decent range though

[Robert Collins]

12 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

You are not really going to use a 800mm lens on a A7 series body, even with a battery grip. It ain't happening. Sure you can do anything stupid but.. Why do you think Leica Never came out with any long lenses on the M series? It would look stupid and be stupid. If you want long lenses on a Sony buy the A99 mk II.

And Sony’s 400mm is probably about as big as you can go with that body size. Even it is overkill.

Still you can take an A7riii which is FF 42mp, stick on a 100-400 and then 2x crop it to 800mm and still have 11mp from an M43 sized portion of the sensor!!

[webrunner5]

7 minutes ago, Robert Collins said:

Still you can take an A7riii which is FF 42mp, stick on a 100-400 and then 2x crop it to 800mm and still have 11mp from an M43 sized portion of the sensor!!

And you can just use Clear Zoom and have no crop. And do that in the APSC crop mode and use Clear Zoom and be at 1200mm I guess LoL? It won't still be 42mp, be around 28mp I think.

A7 series cameras are pretty amazing what they can do. Canon, Nikon Really have their work cut out for them to compete with them. DSLRs look REALLY long in the tooth compared to them technologically wise.

[IronFilm]

18 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Whilst shooting a test match a few years ago that even by cricket's own rather sedate standards was not exactly a thrill a minute, I put an Olympus OM-D on my 300-800mm.

Are you English? Got to love all the English sports!

"What British sports look like to non-British people"

[BTM_Pix]

5 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Are you English? Got to love all the English sports!

"What British sports look like to non-British people"

Yes.

The concept of a sport that is played for 5 days with a high likelihood of there being no winner is not for everyone that's for sure.

[anonim]

31 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

You know what I remember reading that Olympus said, that they can not make their IBIS any better because of the Rotation of the Earth. Yeah how crazy is that.

 

Well, then, to paraphrase (with Japanese) Hegel: "The worse for the Rotation of the Earth..."

[Trek of Joy]

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

You are not really going to use a 800mm lens on a A7 series body, even with a battery grip. It ain't happening. Sure you can do anything stupid but.. Why do you think Leica Never came out with any long lenses on the M series? It would look stupid and be stupid. If you want long lenses on a Sony buy the A99 mk II.

And Sony’s 400mm is probably about as big as you can go with that body size. Even it is overkill.

Have you ever been on a safari in Africa? Or to a place like Katmai National Park in Alaska for bear watching? 400mm is the perfect sports lens, but its on the short end of wildlife glass. Lots of people are carrying around 500/600mm lenses, body size is irrelevant. Most have the big guns on monopods anyway. Eventually we'll see something longer than the 400 in E-mount. Until then people are adapting Canon lenses with great results. I'm getting ready to buy a Sigma 150-600/MC-11 to dip a toe into wildlife shooting. I'll be using it on my a7III.

Chris

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

And you can just use Clear Zoom and have no crop. And do that in the APSC crop mode and use Clear Zoom and be at 1200mm I guess LoL? It won't still be 42mp, be around 28mp I think.

A7 series cameras are pretty amazing what they can do. Canon, Nikon Really have their work cut out for them to compete with them. DSLRs look REALLY long in the tooth compared to them technologically wise.

The drawback with CIZ is the fact you lose the ability to move your AF point or track subjects. Long glass gives you some seriously shallow DOF, the magic of Sony's newer AF cameras is their ability to stay locked onto a subject, even against busy backgrounds. CIZ is a nice feature, but you lose AF precision for critical work.

[webrunner5]

27 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

Have you ever been on a safari in Africa? Or to a place like Katmai National Park in Alaska for bear watching? 400mm is the perfect sports lens, but its on the short end of wildlife glass. Lots of people are carrying around 500/600mm lenses, body size is irrelevant. Most have the big guns on monopods anyway. Eventually we'll see something longer than the 400 in E-mount. Until then people are adapting Canon lenses with great results. I'm getting ready to buy a Sigma 150-600/MC-11 to dip a toe into wildlife shooting. I'll be using it on my a7III.

Chris

The drawback with CIZ is the fact you lose the ability to move your AF point or track subjects. Long glass gives you some seriously shallow DOF, the magic of Sony's newer AF cameras is their ability to stay locked onto a subject, even against busy backgrounds. CIZ is a nice feature, but you lose AF precision for critical work.

The Sigma 150-600/MC-11 is not that bad size wise. I had the 50-500mm "Bigma" for awhile on my Canon 1D mk II N.  The Lens hood is a 1/3 of size of Sigmas big lenses LoL. That 150-600/MC-11 combo should be no problem on your A7 mk III. Sigma lenses work pretty well using their MC-11 compared to using EF lenses on it the MC-11. Best just to use a Metabones adapter if using Canon native stuff. Although this works pretty well for as cheap as it is. And the ND filters are really pretty darn good. I even use EFS Canon lenses on it. They are a bit snug at first but they work.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B019D5P7EQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Yeah the tracking and AF point loss does suck, but it sucks less than having to buy a lot more lenses, especially really long ones, Gulp.

And I have been to North Africa, but not much into Safari's LoL. No Alaska. I hate the cold and big ass Mosquitoes.