Time to retire that crappy mk I model.
But what lenses will you find to use on it ? Esp for those times you need a zuper duper tele
Telephotos are best served by Canon and Nikon little point in thinking about miirror-less in my view.
However it will be interesting to hear your views on the new and frankly fabulous Sony, I know for your first port of call you will be hovering and sniffing around the shutter! :o
In my years of being fascinated by cameras and having had Rollieflex's through Voigtlânders Bessa II, Nikon F's and the like, nothing has interested me more the the Sony A7 series, it's nearly there now, but in two years...........not yet for BIF though.
P.S. The Voigtlânder Bessa II is my all time favourite camera, 6X9 eight on a roll, compact coupled rangefinder, (uncoated lens though) it and a Rolliieflex twin lens belonged to my grandfather........... after my mother died..............lost!!!!
Mon dieu.................gutted!
Dave, I disagree with the Tele belongs to Nikon and Canon. Birds in flight are not easy to catch in general and honestly I don't care wether keepers come from DSLR or mirrorless systems. There's no guarantee in higher keeper rates for me, using Nikon and having only a 300/4 + 1.7 TC. Lack of practise, sure, but in strong winds like here in Wales birds have to adapt to it. Very difficult to predict.
And why didn't I take the 150-600 with me? Beside the additional weight the main reason was: I couldn't finish the AFMA for it. With and without TC 1.4 there are 32 combinations of focus distance and focal length. I finished most of them, but at infinity things get tricky. Targets in 1km distance won't do for infinity. I need clear sky, it was raining.
Why AFMA and this fuss? Mirrorless can solve that. I don't care wether I get an image from DSLR which turns out to be out of focus because incorrect AFMA and have to delete it or I don't have to delete it because I didn't get it. And there were at least three situations the camera would not focus at all. So, DSLR as queen of Tele? Not in my kingdom...
Edited some of the autocorrection based typos
Well, if you do it with the dock, there are already 16 combinations. And wether needed or not, at least I want to check how good the lens and the camera's AF are working together. It' snot only Sigma who can crash that game. The fact most lenses only have one AFMA setting plus the other fact that AFMA adjusts a lens only to the particular distance you're testing it doesn't mean the Sigmas need more care than others.
I found that the combination D810 (freshly serviced) behind the 150-600 with TC 1401 needed sometimes more than -25. Which is not possible without the dock. I know how precise my Sigmas are after adjusting them with the dock. I don't run comparison tables for Nikkor keeper rate vs. Sigma because to me it's pointless. Too different the lenses, too different the subjects I use them for. The more I look into that AFMA business, the more I recognise there's also some luck involved. And the more I try to adjust the lenses the more I think I'd love to spend this long hours with something else. Hell, even taking photos...
I'd love to have a camera which doesn't need all this ado to correct the indirect focussing. Which may be fast, but also inaccurate. In most cases less fast lenses compensate with their large DoF the inaccuracies. But having slightly more expensive fast glass, I want to see accurate focus. And that's where's my frustration at times comes from. LiveView would be mor accurate, but it takes so much time it's pointless to use AF lenses - unless the body is already mirrorless. Oh, and since you asked: I'm still thinking of trying one of the Sony A7 types. My colleague just got one A7RII and I'm curious to hear his latest comments when I'm coming back from holidays.
Good news.
Which lenses are in the pipeline then?
Only native or also some adapted ones?
http://flickr.com/ephankim
