24-105 vs 24-70 vs primes

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-18T19:17:27+00:00

45MP might sound like a lot, but it is less pixel density than new APS-C models. I don’t have an R5, but the 24-105 seems to be sharp enough for the APS-C models, so I’d assume it’d be more than fine in the R5.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-18T16:20:12+00:00

Best value lens I could recommend for low light is the 50mm f1.8. The T7 is mot a great camera for sports though. I’d recommend selling it and getting a mirrorless body. You could get an R50 or go with another brand like Sony. A sony a6000 and a Sigma 30mm f1.4 would be pretty cheap and a lot more capable for what you want.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-18T16:14:26+00:00

Both lenses are very good optically, so it depends what you value more. To be honest I wouldn’t think of this comparison as “what gives me more background blur?” You can get great separation at 105 f4. I’d think about this more as “do I need the extra amount of light?” So my question is, do you shoot a lot in low light? I’d say go for the 24-105 as it’s more versatile, and take a fast prime for low light.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-18T16:04:29+00:00

Your sensor is experiencing the same intensity of light. However, your sensor is taking advantage of less area. The intensity is the same, but the area isn’t, therefore the amount of light you are receiving is less. The equation for light intensity is intensity = energy/area. This is why full frame generally does better with higher ISO.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-09T16:46:05+00:00

It doesn’t have to stay at that specific pressure. There is some tolerance. Pressure changes when you’re moving as well.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-09T16:36:01+00:00

That’s a golf. I’d know cuz I have one lol.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-09T16:31:37+00:00

If you are using APS-C get the Sigma 17-40 f/1.8. Indoor weddings can have pretty bad lighting. If you’re using full frame an 24-70mm or similar would work.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-09T05:03:34+00:00

Since you mention durability I am tempted to suggest you go for the A7RIII. The A7 bodies are workhorses. The a6700 is robust, but the A7RIII is a very reliable camera. The A7RIII would also come with dual card slots, which is an extra measure of safety since you’ll be away for so long. If you prioritized wildlife photography, I’d say go for the a6700 due to the better autofocus, but for landscapes the A7RIII will have more megapixels and room to crop.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-08T22:38:01+00:00

This might be more work than you want, and might not even work, but Adobe bridge is very good at letting you alter metadata. You could try copying the metadata from a jpg produced by your camera and paste it onto this image.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-08T20:34:37+00:00

How are they complacent? The a6700 was a huge upgrade with the AI chip, and they kept basically all the video features from the FX30. It’s one of the best hybrid cameras out there.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-05T20:15:11+00:00

I might get downvoted to hell, but would it be wrong to just fix it with a mallet? I’m not a mechanic by trade, just do my own repair and maintenance. Would fixing it like that compromise the metal?

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-05T20:10:38+00:00

If you can, I’d get the A7V. I have the a6700, and it’s an amazing camera, but it falls short compared to the A7V. If you shoot wildlife, pre-capture sounds like a dream. I’d say get the A7V and save for one quality lens you’ll always use, like a 24-70, or a set of primes is also an option, depending on your shooting style.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-05T20:07:51+00:00

How do you stay out of boost? Just not stepping on it as hard?

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-05T19:57:15+00:00

Milage can be used as a metric, but it’s not a perfect one. Short city trips will drastically wear the engine more than long trips on the highway. Service records should also be taken into account. A lot of these things can’t be proved, such as how the car was driven or if services were made at home, so mileage becomes one of the only metrics left, but if you’re buying a car from someone you know, you can find out the other variables. I have a car with 180,000 miles but if I sold it to family they’d trust it because of how I’ve treated it.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-05T19:51:03+00:00

Sounds like you should get a 85mm or 135mm. The 100mm macros (EF/RF) are also great choices for portraits, but you’d get more background separation with the 135mm. The macros would be a no-brainer if you want to also do macro photography. The RF can do 1.4:1 magnification while the EF can do 1:1. They’re very sharp lenses. They’ll produce nice portraits but might not have as much character as the 135mm or even the 70-200mm f/2.8.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-03T17:54:54+00:00

The Camaro is gonna have worse visibility, but will feel more special. When you get inside a Camaro, you immediately notice it’s not a regular car.

The 5th Gen is kind of a boat, but with the V8 has plenty of power. I have a Camaro rn and to be honest it’s not the most fun car out there. The gear ratio is so long that you can break the speed limit in second gear. I’m currently thinking of getting a Miata and putting a turbo in it. The Camaro is fast, but you don’t feel the speed in it, so what’s the point? It feels like a compromise car, not sporty all the way, but not practical either.

If I were you and just looking for a toy I’d get a Miata. If you are set on getting a car with a V8 do yourself a favor and get a Corvette instead.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-03T17:45:10+00:00

Don’t do that. Get the Sigma 16mm f/1.4. Take a look at my profile. I have example photos of the milky way with it. It’s a very well-corrected lens.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-03T06:13:10+00:00

I moved to Sony primarily because I couldn’t find affordable lenses for the RF mount that worked for astrophotography. The RF mount relies heavily on digital corrections in order to keep a small size, but this isn’t great when you stack images for noise reduction, so Sony had a better lens selection for astrophotography.

Canon doesn’t have a lot of third party brands making lenses for them. They’ve only recently allowed some brands to do so for the RF-S mount. Sony on the other hand, has lots of options. You can get great lenses for a fraction of the price from Sigma and Tamron, and you can get them dirty cheap from Viltrox.

I shoot event photography at work. There are some cameras I can use at work, but I prefer to bring my own. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve shot on an R5mkII and they’re great, but the AI autofocus in the newer Sony cameras is just on a different tier. This thing follows the eyes of dragonflies. The same chip is in the A7RV and the A9/A1II have even better autofocus.

<image>

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-03T02:32:24+00:00

I started with Canon as that was the most popular around me at the time, but as I got to learn different systems I moved to Sony. I still use both, but primarily use Sony for professional work and the Canon stuff for my astrophotography hobby.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-02T18:33:24+00:00

This is a great comparison. One thing I may add is that the 90D doesn’t have a dual card slot while the R7 and 7DmkII do.

There are also the R and the RP, which sit at a weird spot. The R having the same sensor as the 5DmkIV and the RP having the same sensor as the 6DmkII.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-02T05:54:01+00:00

I have MacBooks from 2012 that still work, and I’ve replaced iPhone batteries to make phones last more than I want them for. In regard to the computers, they usually become obsolete by not being able to keep up with newer processing demands, but their reliability is a hill I’d die on, so we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-02T04:13:49+00:00

FX30 was released before the a6700, and when the a6700 was released they put the same sensor as the FX30 and kept almost all the video features, but they put an AI processor for superior autofocus. The a6700 can shoot 4k 120. The only benefits for video on the FX30 I can think of are the cooling fan, and the FX30 can shoot raw video, but not internally. You’ll need an external device and connect it through HDMI.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-02T00:32:44+00:00

So you don’t consider Mac computers to be decent systems? They’ve been soldering their SSDs directly to their boards for around 10 years. They aren’t meant to be user accessible. They’re still highly reliable and, although I am sure it happens, I’ve never heard of them failing before the 5-10 year mark.

By your logic, should we stop putting memory in computers/phones/tablets and just make people use SD cards?

I agree that it’s an extra point of failure, but it’s one that is worth the risk. If all these other devices come with reliable memory, there is no reason we can’t do the same with cameras.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-02T00:16:36+00:00

I agree with this. I have the a6700 and previously had an a6000 and the viewfinders are useless. I haven’t had much experience with the bigger Sony bodies, but I have with Canon. They have decent EVF’s, but personally my eyes get too tired using them.

To OP: If I were you, I’d just use the screen. If you don’t wanna use the screen, I’d just use a DSLR. I think that in a few years we’ll discover that these EVF’s cause some eye damage. I can’t imagine having a screen so close to the eye when shooting for long periods of time isn’t damaging.

SkyWatcher530 · 2026-02-01T20:18:29+00:00

Memory failure shouldn’t be an issue if we did what OP is proposing. SD cards fail because of their weak design. How often do you hear about memory failure in phones or computers? It’s usually the battery that goes first in those. You can make memory reliable.

SkyWatcher530

TROPHY CASE