#42

yeah i’m really eyeing the a7ii for a potential upgrade if/when my a6000 finally dies (gotta be well into six digits of exposures, the flash bulb is out, etc). but i have no money to spend right now so…

#43

Hah, I have a Digilux 2 too. I bought it from a coworker years ago when I still had my Canon and never used it much, though. If you’re interested in getting an extra one, tell me :slight_smile:

Also, I was thinking about fixed focal lengths on my way to work. I’ve been mostly using 50-55mm full-frame equivalent lenses for a long time now and I’m used to that focal length enough to know when I see something in the street where I should stand to frame what I want.

The X100 series with their fixed 35mm full frame equivalent lens (i.e. 23mm in Fuji systems which have sensors 2/3 the size of a full frame one) is probably better for people who are used to wider lenses (camera phones are typically 24mm-28mm or so I think for example) or who want to frame something closer to “all they see in front of them”. That’s probably a bad explanation but the main thing here is that if you try a camera with one focal length and think you’d be ok with that focal length in all/most situations then it’s probably a good fit. Changing lenses is not something I like doing and I’ve been fine with my Fuji 32/f2 as my only lens. I’ve considered getting a wider and/or longer lens for specific occasions but so far haven’t really needed it.

1 Like
#44

I think working with a single prime lens can be an extremely rewarding and instructive experience. my main camera these days is an old Hasselblad 500c and I only really ever use the 80mm on it. doing so can help you learn to compose before ever bringing the camera up to your eye.

that said, if you have a particular framing need or are shooting action, wildlife, macro, architecture, etc. specialized or more flexible lenses are good and necessary.

#45

Well, I ended up choosing the A6000 and ponying up for a nicer prime lens. It felt a lot better in my hands and the price point made more sense given that the consensus seemed to be that a nice lens beyond the kit lens was important. So instead of getting an XT20 with the 16-50 kit lens for 900, I’m getting the A6000 with a nice 35 mm f/1.8 lens that costs almost as much as the camera itself. 850 total :slight_smile:

Anyway, we shall see where the adventure takes me, but I’m sure it’ll be a step up from my phone camera and a heck of a lot more fun :slight_smile:

Thanks everyone for the input. It definitely gave me a lot of perspectives that I hadn’t considered before.

7 Likes
#46

congrats and have fun!

#47

obviously to emphasize the latter.

a real camera is a great reason to put yr phone away too!

1 Like
#48

I love micro 4/3 merely for the existence of the Voigtländer Nokton lenses for that format.

Once you shoot f0.95, you just can’t go back. :heart_eyes:

I have the 25mm (50mm equivalent) which is quite versatile (it’s been my only lens for a while now, although I shoot much more film than digital these days); I’ve thought more than once about selling it and getting the 17.5 + 42.5 to have more range. I hear the 10.5 isn’t that great.

1 Like
#50

Micro 4/3 again. The Oly 75mm is a special lens. And the 17.5 is the right focal length for lots of shots with enough speed to work with kids indoors (a plus for me) and it is small. I don’t have much use for the Oly 12mm and it was really expensive. I have the fancy Leica/Panasonic 25mm and I love the color on it and how close I can get to the subject but it seems to stay in the bag.

I’m mourning the death of my Canon FL 55mm f1.2 with a speed booster, which made it a 39mm (80mm on m4/3) f.9. That was nice. It weighed a ton but I loved it. 10 years ago I got it for $45 on eBay. They go for a lot more now. Something came loose inside mine and it is dead. :frowning: Vintage lenses with speed boosters are super duper fun on m4/3.

1 Like
#51

35mm on full frame is def the right prime to start with. You’re going to have a blast… and f1.8? Nice!

#52

Good choice on the prime lens. Much more fun and immediate

#53

for amount of light f0.95 is better than anything else. but for depth of field, on a 4/3 sensor it’s effectively an f1.8-equivalent lens. Otherwise I agree there is something inexplicable about how some lenses mate with a sensor. I have a cheap 25/2.8 permanently affixed to an old Panasonic GF1 m4/3 and have made some very nice snaps with it.

1 Like
#54

enjoy! and 14 characters

#55

I’m thinking of getting a modern-ish mirrorless camera soon. most of my limited photo experience has been phone + various dabbling with disposable film cameras (which I love!) and a hand-me-down Minolta XG-1 with a 45mm prime, though to be honest I didn’t know anything about lenses until I started researching getting a new camera. most of my interest is in “street” photography, nature/travel photos when I go camping, portraits of friends, and having a decent way to document live performances (nothing special, just would like something that does acceptable video, esp in lower light).

might be a dumb question, but is the relative lack of micro 4/3 love here due to the smaller sensors? I do really like the idea of having lots of lens options (especially used), but knowing myself I’ll likely find one or two things, likely just primes, and stick with them. one of them will probably be something old and/or weird, like a holga lens + adapter.

my main motivation in getting something with interchangeable lenses is to experiment with various lens options, especially those older/weirder ones. would I maybe be better off with a larger sensor camera for that use? the compact aspect is what attracted me to the MFT format (easy to carry means I’ll have it with me more/always day-to-day + I like to pack light when backpacking/bikepacking), but it seems that some of the Fujis and Sonys are basically the same physical size as MFT options anyway. reading the positive feedback about the Fuji film simulations is making me consider them since I am not the sort of person who wants to spend a ton of time editing in post for all my shots, and the immediacy of the controls is something I hadn’t noticed until reading this thread but that is very appealing.

my main considerations:

  • will do some video, but no need for ultra-pro results at the moment
  • want to use lenses with “personality”
  • compact is a necessity - not interested in options that are nearly DSLR in size, and I’d really like it to be smaller in all dimensions than my old SLR/prime with whatever my primary lens ends up being (which I’d expect to be <50mm equivalent)
  • budget <$500 for a used body and used prime lens (or at least adapter to let me use my Minolta lens to start)
  • idk how important image stablization is, but if I could do some 0.5s+ exposures without a tripod that would be amazing, and it seems like some of the modern MFTs can do that acceptably
  • relative ease of controls is important, especially since I’ll likely use it a lot with manual focus lenses (I guess focus peaking helps here? new to that concept). minimal/no menu diving for common controls is definitely preferable
  • viewfinder = essential

was leaning towards a Panasonic GX85 with the 12-32mm kit lens or a ~20mm prime (40mm equiv.) before this thread and might still go that route but looking forward to any recommendations folks have! thanks y’all!

1 Like
#56

I think this is the main consideration, and the answer is yes—purely for the tradeoffs you’ll make in field of view (crop factor). unless you want to work with a predominantly narrow field of view, adapting old cheap rangefinder or SLR lenses will be a bit of a hassle.

a Fuji XE-2 or -3 might be a good place to look, given your criteria.

side note: I personally try to go as light as humanly possible for backpacking cameras. I’m excited for the new Ricoh GRiii.

1 Like
#58

I actually have a Ricoh GX200 that I’ve shot only a couple hundred photos on but I think I got sand in the lens mechanism and it won’t work anymore…turns on but gives an error message and won’t take photos. I did really like it until it stopped working, but it was also my first/only decent digital so I have little to compare it to. I should see if it is able to be repaired, at least to have as a more compact option for backpacking/pocket use!

#59

as someone who also uses a minolta rokkor-x 45/2 and recently purchased a replacement a6000 body for under $500, have you considered it?

bc of the crop factor the 45/2 becomes like a 62.5mm equivalent but my copy is really nice and i’ve gotten great photos with it. i haven’t taken this lens backpacking but i have taken the a6000 on many hikes and overnights. I agree with others that the Ricoh GR is a more ideal form factor but i got what i got.

the minolta 45 on a m4/3 sensor is going to be an even longer equivalent focal length so make sure that’s okay w you.

on a sony a7 series the 45mm would be 45mm and imo and excellent combo.

DO check out the fuji mirrorless cameras I think they are great and have some more backpackable lens choices

2 Likes
#60

also fwiw i got that minolta 45/2 lens like $15. using any mirrorless simply as a platform for old lenses is a great thing.

1 Like
#61

Looking at buying a mirrorless for travel etc. Leaning towards the Fuji Xs… Three or four real options…

XT1 body… Display model from shop $650CAD (would likely get a 27mm 2.8 pancake used one available local for $300CAD)
XT100… New $800CAD w/15-45 2.8… or body for $650CAD and do the same pancake as above.
X100F… New $1650CAD
X100T… Used $800CAD

Any thoughts?

#62

okay I’m not a fuji user but think they are great cameras and the lens selection is fantastic. so:

really how much do you want to spend?

I’d advise against the XT1 and X100T as they have 16mp sensors and the prices aren’t low enough for me to say hey that’s alright for that price.

the processor on the X100F is better than the XT100 and its definitely way cooler looking but it’s up to you whether that’s worth the CADs.

obviously I can’t comment on lenses I haven’t used but I would take that pancake everywhere. my main thing with a camera is that it’s gotta be something you want to (and can) take with you everywhere. I don’t have any zoom lenses either so that’s just me.

1 Like
#63

Ya I think I would be fine with a fixed focal length. But for the price difference between the XT100 & X100f it becomes interchangeable lenses vs optical viewfinder/style. Don’t think the budget is there for the X100f anyway.