Leaving L-Mount

[Jayneboo]

FYI

Mod edit: I moved all postings from the classified thread of Jayne into this new thread, so that the lenses she wants to sell get again attention

Please no discussions in the classified section in the future. This does not help the members to buy or sell their gear. Open in the LMF cafe or wherever it is appropriate discussions instead.

Thanks.

----

Hi,

Having made the decision to finally move on from L Mount, though retaining my SL2 for use with manual lenses for now, I have a few L mount lenses that will probably end up at MPB or similar.....

 

[pdk42]

That's sad to hear Jayne. What are your reasons?; and where are you going next?

 

[Jayneboo]

Well I think I’ve been with L Mount since the very beginning always hoping for my do-it-all solution camera to arrive I. One upgrade or another. That is a camera with great IQ an autofocus system that is at least close to current specs, for me that means good tracking and adequate fps, good for adapting manual lenses, and small/light enough for travel. Yes I know - I was looking for a lot. The FpL covered travel and great IQ but awful evf implementation, no real Ibis and a definite no for sports or wildlife. S52 came close but somehow I was never happy and definitely wanted more pixels. CL was my favourite of all, but needed an upgrade and Leica dropped it. SL2 is where the best IQ lives to my eye but autofocus behind the game and SL3 looks to be too problematic. Now I'm not really sure where Panasonic are heading, the S9 such a missed opportunity to me.

Anyway, enough rambling on, to cut to the chase Paul, I think it's actually your fault.

Can't remember when, think it was possibly on here and the chat about the S9, you said at one point you were tempted to try the Sony A7CR - might have been A7CII. That piqued my interest because I hadn't heard of it, so off to Youtube etc I went - long story short I bought one and low and behold, it's as close to the perfect solution for me as I think it is possible to get at this point, couldn't be happier, never been a Sony user, only once a few years ago when a friend leant me his A7III for a couple of days when I was stuck. To me it feels like the Sigma FpL on SPEED with a built in EVF, admittedly not the best one - but good enough. So not going but definitely gone, haven't touched another camera for nearly two months, shot everything, sports, wildlife, landscape, portrait, done a couple of product shoots for a local business - happy with pretty much everything. So, while it probably isn't the best for any one genre of photography, though most definitely for travel it is, it's close enough for every scenario I meet.

All the above is not to say I don't think Panasonic L Mount will produce my "magic" solution one day, I'm getting a bit long in the tooth for waiting.

 

[pdk42]

Ha, so it's all my fault!

Actually, I've been mulling over something similar... but with the A7CR. In many ways, it's pretty close to the ideal camera for me really - superb 61Mp sensor, small and light, EVF, IBIS. About the only notable downside is that the EVF is really a bit too limited (small/low magnification).

But in addition to the body, the Sony E-mount lens ecosystem is really great. In particular, there's the Tamron 28-200 - and it's really a great option for landscape photography. It's what I'd hoped Panasonic would have launched instead of the little 28-200 which, IMHO, is too compromised optically. Add a UWA to go with the Tamron 28-200 (and there are plenty to choose from), and you've got a very compact and very capable system for landscape use.

But, another system change... I dunno. What might push me over the line is that I can definitely lighten up the system without losing IQ. Running the 14-28, 24-105, and 70-200/4 with the S1R delivers great IQ - but it's three lenses, two of which are quite big and heavy, and the S1R of course is huge.

 

[Jayneboo]

Ha, so it's all my fault!

Actually, I've been mulling over something similar... but with the A7CR. In many ways, it's pretty close to the ideal camera for me really - superb 61Mp sensor, small and light, EVF, IBIS. About the only notable downside is that the EVF is really a bit too limited (small/low magnification).

But in addition to the body, the Sony E-mount lens ecosystem is really great. In particular, there's the Tamron 28-200 - and it's really a great option for landscape photography. It's what I'd hoped Panasonic would have launched instead of the little 28-200 which, IMHO, is too compromised optically. Add a UWA to go with the Tamron 28-200 (and there are plenty to choose from), and you've got a very compact and very capable system for landscape use.

But, another system change... I dunno. What might push me over the line is that I can definitely lighten up the system without losing IQ. Running the 14-28, 24-105, and 70-200/4 with the S1R delivers great IQ - but it's three lenses, two of which are quite big and heavy, and the S1R of course is huge.

Yep, it's the A7CR I went with. I'm not a superzoom user but I hear good things about the Tamron 28-200. No shortage of lens options for E mount and with 61mps to play with, aps-c lenses are a good option too. I've kept to smaller lens options other than the 70-200 2.8 GM II that I use for action and wildlife with TC's. The A7CR comes with a screw in base plate that makes bigger lenses very manageable.

 

[pdk42]

All food for thought.

Maybe I'm mad, but sometimes I think I might go back to m43. Looking at old photos on Flickr, it's really impossible to differentiate shots from the S1R or the Olympus EM1.3! I like L-mount, but if I'm honest, I'd like something smaller and lighter. The 12-100 is really about the best landscape lens I've ever used. Choices, choices...

 

[AlanC]

Sorry to see you leaving L-Mount, Jayne.

The A7CR interested me when it was first announced, enough that I had a play with one at the local dealer. But I've owned several Sony's in the past and, with the exception of the RX1, was never overly fond them since I just don't like the way they work. Plus I couldn't bear the thought of parting with my Sigma fp L...

 

[Jayneboo]

Sorry to see you leaving L-Mount, Jayne.

The A7CR interested me when it was first announced, enough that I had a play with one at the local dealer. But I've owned several Sony's in the past and, with the exception of the RX1, was never overly fond them since I just don't like the way they work. Plus I couldn't bear the thought of parting with my Sigma fp L...

Thank you, I'm sure I'll be flitting around the edges of L mount, and I was/am a big fan of the FpL too, totally underrated camera I believe, just doesn't fulfil my needs just now.

 

[inspiredtimothy]

Sorry to hear you're leaving the system! Hope to see you around the forum still every once in a while

 

[CharlesH]

Yep, it's the A7CR I went with.

I've been very tempted by the A7CR. I have an A1, so a few Sony lenses, and I get along okay with the Sony system. But I'm always looking for a hybrid camera and the A7CR falls short for video. But I could fall to temptation for that camera some day; it is almost the same size as the S9, plus a viewfinder and lots more pixels. But for now the S5IIx and the S9m fit me better. I've always enjoyed your pictures on this forum - please post a picture now and then (just quietly leave off the EXIF data.)

 

[Travis Butler]

All food for thought.

Maybe I'm mad, but sometimes I think I might go back to m43. Looking at old photos on Flickr, it's really impossible to differentiate shots from the S1R or the Olympus EM1.3! I like L-mount, but if I'm honest, I'd like something smaller and lighter. The 12-100 is really about the best landscape lens I've ever used. Choices, choices...

I do notice some difference; in particular, I've shot the same location (Monument Rocks) with the E-M1 II and the S5, and the S5 pics have... a clarity, I'm not sure how else to describe it, that the E-M1 pics lack. But it's not a huge difference.

I still have my E-M1 and Pen-F, but I don't use them much at all any more... I'm not exactly sure why, beyond habit; once I start focusing on one system and crop factor, it throws me off to switch back to a different crop factor, especially when I'm using the same adapted lenses on each system.

 

[Jayneboo]

I've been very tempted by the A7CR. I have an A1, so a few Sony lenses, and I get along okay with the Sony system. But I'm always looking for a hybrid camera and the A7CR falls short for video. But I could fall to temptation for that camera some day; it is almost the same size as the S9, plus a viewfinder and lots more pixels. But for now the S5IIx and the S9m fit me better. I've always enjoyed your pictures on this forum - please post a picture now and then (just quietly leave off the EXIF data.)

I'm not a video shooter at all, it's black magic as far as I'm concerned, I glaze over when anyone starts talking video specs and I've never tried a M43 camera. If I could one day find someone that would teach me how to use the video option and spoke the same language as myself, slowly - I'd be happy, but most when they start talking frame rates, c-log, LUT's grading, their speech speeds up and I'm lost. Not sure I want another editing technique to learn either, so any camera that is considered low on video specs rates highly for me and the record button is always first for customisation on the camera.

I still have my SL2 so can legitimately post now and then (just need the thrall of the new toy to wear off a bit) and it's certainly the better body for some of my lenses.

 

[pdk42]

I'm not a video shooter at all, it's black magic as far as I'm concerned, I glaze over when anyone starts talking video specs and I've never tried a M43 camera. If I could one day find someone that would teach me how to use the video option and spoke the same language as myself, slowly - I'd be happy, but most when they start talking frame rates, c-log, LUT's grading, their speech speeds up and I'm lost. Not sure I want another editing technique to learn either, so any camera that is considered low on video specs rates highly for me and the record button is always first for customisation on the camera.

I still have my SL2 so can legitimately post now and then (just need the thrall of the new toy to wear off a bit) and it's certainly the better body for some of my lenses.

Ha, ha - I feel pretty much the same about video as you do Jayne. It's not that I'm against learning video techniques, it's more fundamental than that. It seems to me that to produce "artistically meaningful" video requires significantly more investment in planning, shooting, and editing than it does to produce the same standard in photography. In fact, I suspect that to really do the job properly requires a small team. With stills though, a photographer can work alone and get results that Ansel Adams would be proud of. Trying to emulate a Stanley Kubrick or Pedro Almodovar requires something on a completely different level. Orders of magnitude more effort.

Maybe I'm setting the bar too high, but I don't aspire to be a "talking head" YT star so if I'm going to publish videos then they need to tell a story - and that means scripts, shooting multiple angles, narration, music, ...

The only video I've ever done was this one - a sort of publicity for the flying club I'm involved with. I shot all that with a cheapo drone and my m43 gear and used Apple Movie to stitch it together using one of their quick and dirty templates.

 

[Jayneboo]

Looks like a pretty good result to me Paul, well done you.

 

[Pete_W]

That video is awesome Paul!

 

[Oíche]

Trying to emulate a Stanley Kubrick or Pedro Almodovar requires something on a completely different level. Orders of magnitude more effort.

There are very few people in the world who have such ability to do magnitudes even lower than this.

Amateur video production (the talking heads with coloured lights who copy one another) is totally uninspiring, usually boring and long in the tooth. It doesn't come near the pro production that TV requires or was produced. The reasons are because of exactly what you said.

You are definitely are setting the bar too high and won't touch it as you know what is required is beyond your scope.

I just take short video clips, maybe I'll start stitching a few together someday... A hike with 20-30 5sec snippets, basically the same as showing photos except with short videos. I thought about it before owning Lumix using the car dashcam in scenic drives but never bothered Too much work involving editing on a computer which I don't do any longer.

My 2 min birding clip of sparrows has nearly 700 views and required no work and is probably more interesting than photo stills so even if you just do short clips capturing something interesting it is worth starting over refusing to do any video.

In the past I've videoed beautiful landscapes, sunsets, lighthouses etc. except I only had crap Pentax gear. Landscape videography is a good place to start if you do similar with stills. It can be more interesting with video especially with Lumix and YouTube having 4k playback.

Yours faithfully,

Stanley Kubrick fan

 

[Oíche]

Landscape videography is a good place to start

BTW obviously I don't mean static landscapes but storms with waves crashing, rotating lighthouses, boats, animals, birds, superzoom on sun disappearing beneath the horizon etc... Anything with interest capturing the moment.

The search is on for great white shark footage anywhere around the UK/Ireland or even Nessie.

 

[RuleOfThirds]

Ha, so it's all my fault!

Actually, I've been mulling over something similar... but with the A7CR. In many ways, it's pretty close to the ideal camera for me really - superb 61Mp sensor, small and light, EVF, IBIS. About the only notable downside is that the EVF is really a bit too limited (small/low magnification).

But in addition to the body, the Sony E-mount lens ecosystem is really great. In particular, there's the Tamron 28-200 - and it's really a great option for landscape photography. It's what I'd hoped Panasonic would have launched instead of the little 28-200 which, IMHO, is too compromised optically. Add a UWA to go with the Tamron 28-200 (and there are plenty to choose from), and you've got a very compact and very capable system for landscape use.

But, another system change... I dunno. What might push me over the line is that I can definitely lighten up the system without losing IQ. Running the 14-28, 24-105, and 70-200/4 with the S1R delivers great IQ - but it's three lenses, two of which are quite big and heavy, and the S1R of course is huge.

Well that is one of the reasons I went with 16-35. For me 35 is very important. So I normally choose in the morning what lens I want to bring. I thought long and hard about which wide-angle to buy (even started a thread) but in the end it was simple. It makes it versatile enough, for me, to be fine for a whole day. Not too limited.

More often then not I just take the 16-35 or the 24-105. And nothing else. No backpack, just the camera on a long camera strap cross ways, (left shoulder, right hip). From peak design. If I use my camera backpack I use the cuff from them. Actually most of the time I’m not alone so my water bottle is then carried by my son in the backpack or in my wife’s bag .

If I go alone I take max two lenses and a backpack. Warsaw was an exemption. Took my backpack and both the 16-35 and 24-105 with me. Left the 70-300 “home” that day. In the end packing 16-35 and 70-300 would have been the better choice, that particular day. Lots of nice squirrels in the park and the 24-105 didn’t cut it but I didn’t go to Warsaw to take pictures of squirrels anyway.

If you shoot your S1r with 24-105 in high-res mode , is the result after cropping to 200mm often not enough? Of course that is only for static scenes.

 

[pdk42]

Well that is one of the reasons I went with 16-35. For me 35 is very important. So I normally choose in the morning what lens I want to bring. I thought long and hard about which wide-angle to buy (even started a thread) but in the end it was simple. It makes it versatile enough, for me, to be fine for a whole day. Not too limited.

I like the extra 2mm at the wide end, so the 14-28 works for me. But I'd manage with a 16-35 - and the extra reach can be helpful sometimes. But I don't think I could manage with a UWA as my only lens. Interestingly, in m43 there is the Olympus/OM 8-25, so 16-50 equiv. That's a nice range.

More often then not I just take the 16-35 or the 24-105. And nothing else. No backpack, just the camera on a long camera strap cross ways, (left shoulder, right hip). From peak design. If I use my camera backpack I use the cuff from them. Actually most of the time I’m not alone so my water bottle is then carried by my son in the backpack or in my wife’s bag .

Actually, the 24-105 could do most of what I need. If I need wider, I can shoot a pano, but it's obviously a little less convenient.

If you shoot your S1r with 24-105 in high-res mode , is the result after cropping to 200mm often not enough? Of course that is only for static scenes.

I've never really tried that, but maybe I should. I'm sure the 70-200 could take a big crop to get an effectively longer FL, but I'm not sure the 24-105 sharpness is really up to a lot cropping. But you know, sharpness isn't everything and modern PP tools can perform wonders!

 

[RuleOfThirds]

I've never really tried that, but maybe I should. I'm sure the 70-200 could take a big crop to get an effectively longer FL, but I'm not sure the 24-105 sharpness is really up to a lot cropping. But you know, sharpness isn't everything and modern PP tools can perform wonders!

I do not have a 47mp native sensor to check against. But I took a 96mp version of the Malbork castle and I was amazed by the sharpness and details. For high-res mode you actually do not need a lens that resolves that highres. The main issue is stability. And the OIS is very good on the 24-105.