Jump to content

PhilW

Member
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by PhilW


  1. Hi Bill1946

    I've also been shooting OM-D for years (though, I recently couldn't resist to changing to a mirrorless fullframe), using the M5.1, M1.1 and lastly M1.2.

    I can only repeat and agree to what @ChrisRoss and @Phil Rudin already told you:

    - the 60 is perfect for the really small stuff (nudis etc)

    - the 30 is much easier if you go for fishes

    - I strongly recommend on trying the 12-40! it's no comparison to the macro-lenses :-)

    - autofocus works fine with all 3 lenses as long as there is enough light on the subject; I reckoned that the cams struggled a bit in low-light conditions

    have fun!

    • Like 1

  2. @adamhanlon@Phil Rudin@ChrisRoss@ajay@heynsheyns@davehicks@Akoni@hyp@oneyellowtang@Interceptor121@PeteAtkinson

     

    Thank you all for the broad, honest and facts-based discussion, opinions, etc!

    I finally took the plunge into the SONY A7RIV. I already went on a one-week-trip and am totally happy with it. I even had the opportunity to try out the brand-new NAUTICAM EMWL with the whole range of accessory lenses! :-)

    Of course, it's still a battle to accustom myself to the new functionalities etc to get the best out of it, but I quite got the hang of it.

    • Like 2

  3. Hey guys

    big thanks to all of you who put a lots of brains, experiences, opinions, etc into this post! As I expected, the sheer amount of information hasn't helped me to take a decision yet. Although, I must say I am very close to committing myself to the A7R IV.

    As for the issues which have been raised:

    - if you say the autofocus is better: you mean, it is quicker? or more precise? the speed convinced me, but I'd like to do a live-testing on a D850 for comparison

    - lens choices: well, I see disadvantages for the Z- and R-mounts, pro's for E- and F-mounts

    - no native fisheye: I heard the Canon 8-15mm works almost perfectly?

    On 9/16/2020 at 11:13 PM, heynsheyns said:

    @PhilW Bluewater photo just released a review about the Canon R5 that makes that sounds VERY promising. It might be the sweet spot for non-DSLR full-frame mirrorless. https://www.bluewaterphotostore.com/canon-eos-r5-review

    yeah, I heard about the R5. If the rumours are correct, they overdid it with the video-capabilities they tried to implement... and I don't see any advantages in the stills compared to the R IV...

     

    On 9/17/2020 at 8:52 PM, adamhanlon said:

    Agreed, SLRs are bulkier traveling companions, but I don't think this was within the scope of the OP's question?

     

    You're right, Adam - I am aware of the bulkiness, yet I haven't really experienced what it feels like! :-)

    So, the choice now is between the R IV and a Nikon DSLR...


  4. Hi Adam, Phil + Chris

    thanks for the hints.

    I usually do both, macro + wide angle - with a hang to wideangle since quite a while. So I'd say 80% of my photos are WA (of which a good part is CFWA) and 20% pure macro.

    For wideangle shots, I have been using:

    • Oly OM-D EM1MII
    • 8mm fisheye
    • 7-14mm
    • 230mm or alternatively a 170mm dome

     

    @adamhanlon

    1) I did find various arictles treating these cameras - yet none that compares them to each other, is there?

    2) I haven't really taken into consideration a DSLR, due to the bigger dimensions. As far as what I have seen + experienced with the SONY A7R IV, it really convinced me. Another approach (any maybe a naive question): what are the downsides of a mirrorless compared to DSLR?

     

    @Phil Rudin

    thanks - I took a deep look into your magazines. Great job!

     

    @ChrisRoss
    thanks for the "heads-up-call" with the Canon, I'll think about it.


  5. Hi guys!

    I am totally new to this forum. I tried to find a thread treating my issue but haven't found one, so I decided to start a new topic.

    I have been using Oly MFT (since 2011 OM-D M5, since 2016 OM-D M1MII) for years and I was quite happy with it, especially with its packed-size and "travellability"!

    Nonetheless, I started to look around for another (better) solution and rented a Sony A7 IV for 1 week on a dive-trip in the mediterranean sea - the result KNOCKED ME OFF!!! I am sure all of you guys already using a FF mirrorless can only laugh of me :-)

    So, I took the decision to upgrade my gear to a fullframe, mirrorless cam and started searching different options. I am currently struggling between the 3 models:

    NIKON Z7

    SONY A7R IV

    SONY A7R III

     

    I wonder if anyone of you could give me a clue why I should prefer the A7R III or Nikon to the A7 IV (except the additional price-step to take and the higher noise)...! :-)

    For those of you who'd like to read some pros and cons about the 3 candidates, just read on.

    For those of you who can give me a hint, feel free to scroll down and type your answer - THANKS!!

     

     

    I've read several forums and comparisons about advantages and disadvantages, some of which I'd like to share with you!

     

    Nikon Z7

    I have had "hands-on" in a camera-shop. Good "look and feel"-feeling, but nothing really better than the SONY.

    + proven manufacturer

    + high-quality products

    + sensor quality

    + quick cardslots (XQD)

    + menu-structure a bit more well-thought than the Sony (not necessarily from my personal point of view, though)

    + quite a fair price

    - currently only a few lenses available (except F-mounts with adapter)

    - generally one or two steps behind in developing mirrorless cams

    - "only" 1 cardslot (although I cannot imagine this really being an issue in everyday use...)

     

    Sony A7R IV

    I was able to do a 1-week-live-testing with a rented equip. and I was absolutely convinced of this baby! :-)

    + successfully selling and developing mirrorless fullframes since 2013

    + incredibly high pxl: 61MP

    + rocket-fast autofocus (provided using a GM-lens)

    + picture quality

    + highest resolution of viewfinder (5.6 MP vs 3.6 MP on the Z7 and A7R III)

    + very wide variety / choice of lenses (all possible lengths, types and price-segments)

    - due to the very high density of pxls on the sensor (50% more pxls on the same area 36x24mms), slightly more noise

    - ... and maybe some erratic colors (I haven't been able to confirm this issue => anyone an idea?)

    - the cardslots are not working very quickly, despite the fact that both slots are UHS-II SDXC

    - Sony is not very known (as far as I know) as a manufacturer in the PHOTO-segment (more in the movie industry)

     

    Sony A7R III

    I have not yet been able to see it live, but I was told that for my purposes, it would serve almost as well as the A7R IV with some compromises. However, its price is remarkably lower...

    Compared to the A7R IV:

    + remarkably less pricey

    + noise and color accuracy are told to be a bit better => can anyone confirm this??

    - less resolution (42MP vs 61MP)

    - viewfinder less resolution (3.8 MP vs 5.6 MP)

    - slower autofocus

     

    Thanks for reading, folks!!

     

     

    uwpix_03.jpg


  6. Hi

    I'm Phil, living in Zurich, Switzerland. I have been diving for almost 13 years, since 5 years doing instructions. Last year, I took the rebreather-course and am absolutely excited!

    I've been taking pictures since 2011 using Olympus MFT, but will shortly do a step-up to a mirrorless fullframe. I am running a small website for showcasing: uwpix.ch

    Hope to find and give some good and useful tips + tricks for successfully shooting great images!

     

    59d29d2cbfbb4.png

     

×
×
  • Create New...