S9 now available for £999 with 20-60 lens

[CharlesH]

I don't see £999.00 for the S9 + 20-60mm as an especially good deal, because the 20-60mm lens isn't a good match with that camera for me. That same price with the 18-40mm could be interesting. They must have an overstock of 20-60mm lenses to make this offer.

I've mentioned previously that I had a competition with the S9 and the Sony a6700 to see which small camera I would keep; I alternated days with these two cameras for two weeks in Hawaii late last summer. I had the 20-60mm lens on the S9; this was before the 18-40mm was available. Ultimately the a6700 won, by a pretty large margin; I used it more and took more good pictures with it. I've wondered if I had the 18-40mm lens on the S9 it would have been a closer contest.

About the lack of a viewfinder on the S9, it is a factor and I'd rather have it, but I think the small size of the a6700 was the largest reason I used that camera more. Interesting, quite a lot of the outstanding pictures with the a6700 were from a helicopter where I couldn't use the viewfinder anyway. The S9 with no viewfinder would have performed well there

I just returned from a three week trip to Australia and New Zealand. This was mostly for business, but I did have a few days free. I considered whether to take the small a6700 or the bigger S1RII and a few lenses. I ended up taking the S1RII. In most ways I regret carrying the extra weight all around. But I was able to spend a couple of days in the Australian outback and got some nice pictures there, and was happy to have the S1RII for that. There is no perfect siingle camera.

 

[pdk42]

I don't see £999.00 for the S9 + 20-60mm as an especially good deal, because the 20-60mm lens isn't a good match with that camera for me. That same price with the 18-40mm could be interesting. They must have an overstock of 20-60mm lenses to make this offer.

They are offering the S9 + 18-40 for £1199.

I've mentioned previously that I had a competition with the S9 and the Sony a6700 to see which small camera I would keep; I alternated days with these two cameras for two weeks in Hawaii late last summer. I had the 20-60mm lens on the S9; this was before the 18-40mm was available. Ultimately the a6700 won, by a pretty large margin; I used it more and took more good pictures with it. I've wondered if I had the 18-40mm lens on the S9 it would have been a closer contest.

I think if portability is the key criterion then you need to drop down a sensor size, or even two. The Pen-F is a wonderful small camera for example and given that it's got a decent EVF, would be my choice over the S9 any day. As to APS-C, I really haven't looked closely at it in years. I guess L-mount APS-C is dead, which is a shame.

About the lack of a viewfinder on the S9, it is a factor and I'd rather have it, but I think the small size of the a6700 was the largest reason I used that camera more. Interesting, quite a lot of the outstanding pictures with the a6700 were from a helicopter where I couldn't use the viewfinder anyway. The S9 with no viewfinder would have performed well there

I bought an Olympus E-P5 many years ago and quickly realised that an EVF is essential to me. Adding the little hot-shoe finder fixed the lack-of-an-EVF problem, but it make the camera just as big as the E-M5 and way more susceptible to damage.

I just returned from a three week trip to Australia and New Zealand. This was mostly for business, but I did have a few days free. I considered whether to take the small a6700 or the bigger S1RII and a few lenses. I ended up taking the S1RII. In most ways I regret carrying the extra weight all around. But I was able to spend a couple of days in the Australian outback and got some nice pictures there, and was happy to have the S1RII for that. There is no perfect siingle camera.

It's a trade off. As you know, I recently traded down in weight by selling my S1R and getting the S1Rii. I coped with the S1R (and marvelled at its build quality), but it's certainly nicer now to be lighter.