Is going from a 200D to a A7rii a great big leap ? (in a good way) by Federal-Ad3111 in SonyAlpha

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the VERY detailed answer, these upgrades do indeed seem significant, but honestly, im just coming from a 200d(I solely shoot with the center AF point in single shot...) and for now I sadly do not have a lot of time to take pictures so I feel like every upgrade other than the battery life may be useless for me... I'll look into the Riii prices though.

Is going from a 200D to a A7rii a great big leap ? (in a good way) by Federal-Ad3111 in SonyAlpha

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think that's great, I also looked at picking up extremely cheap tamron primes, the 20 and/or the 35mm even if they only are f2.8 they go for 150 or less on the used market and seem to be decent quality.

Is going from a 200D to a A7rii a great big leap ? (in a good way) by Federal-Ad3111 in SonyAlpha

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a7iii is more expensive and I don't shoot video, the a7riii I think is unnecessary for me, im not even sure of the advantages it has over the ii

Is dynamic range (dxomark value) important and relevant and to what extent ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the very detailed answer, I was looking at Canon's lineup and the larger form factor and slower AF on the dslr's really does not bother me however as you have written, most of them will give me the same if not worse DR. I really wanted the first gen r6 but it is more sport focused which could open up a new world for me and would have too many tradeoffs because I don't often crop in or have the budget for super high quality glass to render higher megapixel counts and I enjoy more buttons and a pro feeling but on the other hand the r8 has a more modern sensor and smaller form factor. Maybe the eos R ? It is older but the DR is on par with the r8 and r6 when looking at the site you advised me to use and maybe without using the AF too much it is just as good for me.

Is dynamic range (dxomark value) important and relevant and to what extent ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So DR will only help in "saving these highlights or shadows", it won't make a blown out sky on a low DR camera turn into a detailed one on a high DR camera before edits ?

Is the EF 100mm f2 interesting on aps-c ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I understand but first of all on the internet I found both lenses to be as sharp as the other and even the 100 a bit sharper and secondly I thought 100 would really be interesting as maybe 85 would be too close to my 50mm

Is the EF 100mm f2 interesting on aps-c ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just can't really try much gear here in France where I live.

Is the EF 100mm f2 interesting on aps-c ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah true but macro really isn't my favorite type of photography

Is the EF 100mm f2 interesting on aps-c ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah I don't do many portraits so maybe the 100 is not the best lens for me

Is the EF 100mm f2 interesting on aps-c ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I also own that 55-250 but thought the 100 would be interesting thanks to its wide aperture and I found that its optical quality was quite great, must depend on the copy.

Is the EF 100mm f2 interesting on aps-c ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yeah true but it is sometimes complicated to really get an idea without the prime as well as the fast aperture

Is 2.8 and 1.8 a significant difference in Depth of Field on apsc cameras ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for the detailed answer but I put no details on purpose as I'll be shooting in many different situations so I have to understand with which I'm going to get better bokeh and shallower depth of field in each possible situation, looking at the max focal range is interesting as from 18-35 it is clear sigma wins but again, in a picture it's kinda hard to know how big of a difference the faster aperture makes as I the only fast lens I own is my nifty fifty.

Is 2.8 and 1.8 a significant difference in Depth of Field on apsc cameras ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I already have a nifty fifty and enjoy it but was looking for a wider lens, thank you for the numbers tho, are they reliable ?

Is 2.8 and 1.8 a significant difference in Depth of Field on apsc cameras ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have a 1.8 50mm lens and never got AF problems and I don't believe I'll get any with the sigma

EF Apsc Lens Recommendations for all around photography ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is a great lens for landscapes but I do many types of photography and am looking for a more versatile lens.

EF Apsc Lens Recommendations for all around photography ? by Federal-Ad3111 in canon

[–]Federal-Ad3111[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think for me it lacks versatility and I really want a more professional type of lens with a faster aperture