[Guest]

How much did the lens cost ? I mean if it was $70 I could understand it (didn't someone - maybe canon - at one point had a cheap 50f1.8 that was all plastic but good optics for under $100?). If it was $400 then it should have decent build/motor et all.

[youpii]

There are many better FE lenses that you didn't test. Maybe you can skip this one?

 

I'm using the Loxia 50... The best way to avoid AF noise is to get rid of AF

[Brightcolours]

By reading Sarah McAlexanders blogpost on lensrentals, I saw this paragraph:

 

So, sorry, it was no good idea to suggest this due to this limitations.  :mellow:

 

And chrismiller, the original A7's are coming with a fat shutter shock. Keep that in mind before spending money on them.

The A7r had  big sutter shock issue, the A7 did (does) not. They do have a weak plastic mount.

There are many better FE lenses that you didn't test. Maybe you can skip this one?

 

I'm using the Loxia 50... The best way to avoid AF noise is to get rid of AF

Why skip thisone? I do not see the logic in that.

[Brightcolours]

This lens keeps its aperture closed to the aperture setting you use, which is nice for judging DOF in live view but apparently it also means slower and slower AF the smaller the aperture is. Sony says it is done to cut the time it takes for closing the aperture down when taking a photo, but the resulting slower AF speed is a much bigger issue... Puzzling decisions (which include the  noisy and slow DC motor choice).

 

Also, this lens has a similar/same double gauss optical design as the above mentioned cheap Canon EF 50mm f1.8/EF 50mm f1.8 II and its follow up, the EF 50mm f1.8 STM. That means all elements move during focussing, so maybe that explains the choice for DC motor. The EF 50mm STM costs less than half than this Sony, though.

[JJ_SO]

What are peoples thoughts on the GH4? I had a play with one in John lewis the other day and it feels great in the hand. I was disappointed with the x-t1 in this regard.

 

My thoughts are that I should have compared Fujifilm and Panasonic µ4/3 with it's range of Leica and Olympus lenses a bit better. Meaning, search for shops which stock the Panasonic. It just didn't pop up because I recall to have read a couple of times "noise", when it came to those sensors. I once had a Lumix GF5 which was really cheap and the touchscreen was cool to use. Pity, the lens (12-24) felt more than cheap and the buttons were a bit to fiddly for my fingers. And I don't do video, so my attention turnt away from them. At the time I would not have known which menus would feel better, next to the buttons. 

 

It's not exactly low price, the GH4, no? 

[chrismiller]

It's not exactly low price, the GH4, no?

Fair point, used it is around the same price as an a7 here in the uk, the em1 is cheaper by around 2/3. I can sell my x100t for almost the cost of a gh4, so it's a viable option. My wife has already got some mft kit, so I can 'borrow' a 20mm 1.7. The new 100-400 looks interesting, but that will have to wait.

[JJ_SO]

When I read articles like DPreviews roundups, cameras like the GH4 and XT1 share one comment in common:

<ul type="square">[*]Continuous AF and tracking not as good as the best
</ul>

That very much depends on what is the best.

 

But playing around with another 100-400 on Fuji I have to say, you need very patient, close to narcotized birds, or get the one in the freezer of the local supermarket to take home a lot of sharp shots. It's also saying something about my skills and low knowledge about bird behaviour, but I will give it a closer try when the XT2 comes out

[chrismiller]

I think the gh4 is supposed to be faster than the Fuji cameras (I hope so). The camera store did a shootout against a d4 and it was pretty close. The -ev4 autofocus sensitivity is also appealing. The a7 autofocus is supposed to be pretty rubbish in low light which puts me off. This is of course armchair based research...

[Brightcolours]

The low light AF on the 6D, on the other hand, is impressive.

[wim]

The GH4 is used by professionals to shoot video, up to and including 4K, so I guess it must be significantly good for video. Also, Panasonic has brought out a bunch of lenses with (near) silent AF motors, and some good fast glass in this category as well.

 

As to AF, as long as micro 4/3 will continu using only CAF, there are limits to low light focusing - AF speed has increased significantly over the past years in micro 4/3 land, however, even if not to the levels we are used to with dslr PDAF.

 

Regarding AF tracking in sports and/or wildlife (bird) photograpy, there is no system that can beat dslrs yet, both for speed, and for low light sensitivity of the AF systems. So, although the Panasonic Leica 100-400 is used by wildlife and bird photographers, you still need to know what you are doing, and how to focus manually as well. The lens is very good indeed. Do note that cropping with a 16 or 20 MP sensor is more awkward/difficult than with, e.g., a larger sized 40+ MP sensor, however. The Pan/Leica 100-400 makes up some for this by going to a FF equivalent of 800 mm, but it still won't focus like a 100-400 mm on a FF dslr body.

 

HTH, kind regards, Wim