Lighter kit

[alphaomega]

An interesting question (for me) in relation to lighter equipment relates to Alamy's decision to abandon their banned camera list and rely on QA only. I once enquired if Sony's HX90V would be acceptable and the answer was predictably NO. In view of their changed attitude has anyone tried to submit pictures through the usual upload taken by such formerly "banned" cameras and/or a top level smartphone? I would be interested in knowing as I would think that by using latest PS Cloud it should be possible to adjust a sunlit and well exposed image from such a camera to pass at 17Mb. Even although the HX90V only outputs Jpeg at 18Mp I would have thought that doing most of the work in non destructible Camera RAW a good result could be produced as long as one remained within say half its reach to 720mm. HX90V would be an excellent lightweight companion to Sony's RX100M3 with same size and also the EVF retractable viewfinder.

[Bill Kuta]

A very small sensor and a very big focal range don't usually add up to QC acceptance, but it wouldn't hurt to try--that is, it wouldn't hurt my wallet for you to buy one and try a submission.

[Marianne]

I'm happy with my Olympus OMD-E1 - so light even if I'm bringing along three extra lenses compared to my D700 (which I still use for some client shoots - though I now use the Oly for most of my magazine assignments). I originally bought a D5100 to have a lighter backup camera but the Oly is so much lighter and great in low light. 

Am thinking of selling the D5100 and some of my DX lenses to help finance a second Oly body - will probably hold on to the D700 for studio and client shots, though I may sell the entire lot. 

 

I just got back from a week on Cape Cod - out all day taking ferries, hiking up to 8 miles one day on Martha's Vineyard - carrying three lenses and the camera in a tiny backpack, didn't need the backup battery one lasted all day though it was starting to fade by sunset. 

[mickfly]

I'm happy with my Olympus OMD-E1 - so light even if I'm bringing along three extra lenses compared to my D700 (which I still use for some client shoots - though I now use the Oly for most of my magazine assignments). I originally bought a D5100 to have a lighter backup camera but the Oly is so much lighter and great in low light. 

Am thinking of selling the D5100 and some of my DX lenses to help finance a second Oly body - will probably hold on to the D700 for studio and client shots, though I may sell the entire lot. 

 

I just got back from a week on Cape Cod - out all day taking ferries, hiking up to 8 miles one day on Martha's Vineyard - carrying three lenses and the camera in a tiny backpack, didn't need the backup battery one lasted all day though it was starting to fade by sunset. 

I've been considering the EM-1 but was put off by noise on long exposures, have firmware updates addressed this yet?

Could do with selling my Canon 5d2 gear to lose some weight (too many arguments with airline staff about my camera bag).

[Marianne]

 

I'm happy with my Olympus OMD-E1 - so light even if I'm bringing along three extra lenses compared to my D700 (which I still use for some client shoots - though I now use the Oly for most of my magazine assignments). I originally bought a D5100 to have a lighter backup camera but the Oly is so much lighter and great in low light. 

Am thinking of selling the D5100 and some of my DX lenses to help finance a second Oly body - will probably hold on to the D700 for studio and client shots, though I may sell the entire lot. 

 

I just got back from a week on Cape Cod - out all day taking ferries, hiking up to 8 miles one day on Martha's Vineyard - carrying three lenses and the camera in a tiny backpack, didn't need the backup battery one lasted all day though it was starting to fade by sunset. 

I've been considering the EM-1 but was put off by noise on long exposures, have firmware updates addressed this yet?

Could do with selling my Canon 5d2 gear to lose some weight (too many arguments with airline staff about my camera bag).

 

 

 

I haven't done much in the way of long exposures on a tripod since it's so light, so can't really speak to long exposures. I did try the blood moon on a tripod last year, but had to keep it under 1 second (or else you get blur with the moon, so I have been told) and the slight noise seemed acceptable. Can't beat the D700 for low noise, but the slight trade off for the weight makes the bit of luminance noise I sometimes have to deal with, acceptable. Interestingly, when I bump up the ISO in the dark, the noise seems less. It's really great at ISO 800 and even 1600 - I shot a fire a few doors down from me during the wee hours of the morning the day that the camera arrived and the photos were excellent. I also just shot a concert for a local magazine at ISO 1600 and the photos came out nice and clean - but short exposures, high ISO in both of those situations. 

 

I have to update my firmware. When I test it out, I'll let you know. 

[Erika Brenner]

Hi!
 

I use mirrorless and I am extremely content! At the moment Oly OMD 10 with 25 1.8 prime (50 mm equivalent) and Pana 35-100 2.8 (70-200 mm equivalent).
 

Soon getting Pana GX8 and Pana 12-35 2.8 (24-70 equivalent). Pana and Oly have compatible lenses, so there are lots of lenses of very good quality to choose between.

If you want high-end mirrorless, look for Sony, Fujifilm, Olympus or Panasonic. 

[Dyn Llun]

There are couple of pics on the top right of this page of my lightweight 'out and about' camera kit. Bear in mind I'm nearly 70 so can't lug as much these days! 

http://www.pete-davis-photography.com/news.html

[Niels Quist]

Try a Ronson.     If you will excuse my bad humour.

[Lynn Palmer]

I switched to the Sony A7 FF cameras a couple years ago and I haven't regretted it. I've been able to find sufficient fast EF mount lenses between $500 and $1000 for my purposes. I can understand that mirrorless may not suit professionals doing event work but for me (landscape/architecture/macro) it's working fine. I carry a compact but stable travel tripod when needed and easily carry two bodies and three lenses with tripod all day. The little Sony RX10 under $1000 with built in zoom also looks pretty good.

[Allan Bell]

Help!

 

After reading the aforementioned posts about various smaller lightweight cameras I looked at my Sony RX100 Mk I and although I have never had an image fail QC from it. (To the best of my knowledge). I noted the coating on the rear screen is almost completely rubbed off making the image very difficult to see. I know I should have used a screen protector.

 

After seeing Martin's post on the RX100 MkIII with the pop up EVF I thought that could be just what I need, so started to investigate. Now my MkI has a 28 -100 mm lens. (35mm equiv.) Whereas the MkIII has a 24 - 70mm lens (35mm equiv.) Nice to have the wider end but would like the reach of the MkI as well.

 

So do I go with the MkIII and forgo the longer reach for a cost of £599 or stick with the MkI which is causing problems in seeing what I am taking because of the screen losing it's coating.

 

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.)  Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

[wiskerke]

Allan, don't despair about the rear screen. Most likely it's just the very tough Sony screen protector you're seeing.

Peeling it of is not easy, but it is do-able. We have had discussions here a couple of times about that. The best manual so far was from  David Kilpatrick. Let me see if I can dig one of those threads up.

Ah even better: here's the original instruction manual.

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2011/04/18/replacing-nex-lcd-cover-glass/

(by David Kilpatrick - well known to this forum)

The process for the RX100 is the same.

 

wim

[IanGibson]

Help!

 

After reading the aforementioned posts about various smaller lightweight cameras I looked at my Sony RX100 Mk I and although I have never had an image fail QC from it. (To the best of my knowledge). I noted the coating on the rear screen is almost completely rubbed off making the image very difficult to see. I know I should have used a screen protector.

 

After seeing Martin's post on the RX100 MkIII with the pop up EVF I thought that could be just what I need, so started to investigate. Now my MkI has a 28 -100 mm lens. (35mm equiv.) Whereas the MkIII has a 24 - 70mm lens (35mm equiv.) Nice to have the wider end but would like the reach of the MkI as well.

 

So do I go with the MkIII and forgo the longer reach for a cost of £599 or stick with the MkI which is causing problems in seeing what I am taking because of the screen losing it's coating.

 

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.)  Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

I use the Sony A6000 and Sony 16-70 with no problems whatsoever. It's certainly a lot lighter than my Canon 6D and bag full of prime lenses. If you look through my portfolio, all of the last 12 months worth of images which aren't close up, or wide angle, are taken with this combo. No QC fails yet (touch wood).

[Betty LaRue]

Help!

 

After reading the aforementioned posts about various smaller lightweight cameras I looked at my Sony RX100 Mk I and although I have never had an image fail QC from it. (To the best of my knowledge). I noted the coating on the rear screen is almost completely rubbed off making the image very difficult to see. I know I should have used a screen protector.

 

After seeing Martin's post on the RX100 MkIII with the pop up EVF I thought that could be just what I need, so started to investigate. Now my MkI has a 28 -100 mm lens. (35mm equiv.) Whereas the MkIII has a 24 - 70mm lens (35mm equiv.) Nice to have the wider end but would like the reach of the MkI as well.

 

So do I go with the MkIII and forgo the longer reach for a cost of £599 or stick with the MkI which is causing problems in seeing what I am taking because of the screen losing it's coating.

 

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.) Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

Hi there, doodle-do.

I have the RX100. I thought I left and lost it at a restaurant so I bought the Mk3. I debated long and hard whether to buy the original again or go for the pop up viewfinder in the 3. I really liked the reach of the Mk1.

 

I use the 3 most. I really like the images and don't seem to miss the extra reach.

And yes, I love the viewfinder, tiny as it is. Great for bright sunny days.

Although sometimes I forget I have it, lol. Out of sight, out of mind.

Edited to add, of course I found the Mk1 2 weeks after buying the next. Slid under the passenger seat of my car.

[Allan Bell]

Thanks for the replies to my post above. In a hurry to get out so will reply to all when I get back.

 

Thanks again.

 

Allan

[Bill Kuta]

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.)  Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

 

I've been using NEX cameras/lenses for over three years now.  Most of my shots are with the a6000/16-70mm. To answer your question about the 16-70mm:  It got a not-so-good rep when it came out, and that's reflected in its photozone.de results. I like mine, and I haven't had any failures with the NEX equipment--but then, I had learned how to pass QC before that anyway.

 

In my bag with that combo is the 10-18mm, which I consider quite good, on the funky-but-good-IQ a3000, which you can't get anymore. I also use an NEX-6 with the kit 16-50mm, and sometimes the 55-210mm. And occasionally a small Canon DSLR (SL-1).  

 

I like the NEX cameras/lenses for the IQ, the price point if you wait for sales, and for the size/weight, which is the main reason I switched from a Canon 5D/L lenses. I find the NEX cameras comfortable enough to hold (more so than the diminutive Canon SL-1). And I have a thing about avoiding sensor dust (my 5D experience), so I like carrying two cameras with dedicated lenses in a small bag. That also works out well when my wife is along and wants a camera.

[Allan Bell]

Allan, don't despair about the rear screen. Most likely it's just the very tough Sony screen protector you're seeing.

Peeling it of is not easy, but it is do-able. We have had discussions here a couple of times about that. The best manual so far was from  David Kilpatrick. Let me see if I can dig one of those threads up.

Ah even better: here's the original instruction manual.

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2011/04/18/replacing-nex-lcd-cover-glass/

(by David Kilpatrick - well known to this forum)

The process for the RX100 is the same.

 

wim

 

 

Thank you for the information wim. I may look into that if I need to sell the RX100.

 

Still liking the idea of slightly wider lens and longer reach.

 

Allan

[Allan Bell]

 

Help!

 

After reading the aforementioned posts about various smaller lightweight cameras I looked at my Sony RX100 Mk I and although I have never had an image fail QC from it. (To the best of my knowledge). I noted the coating on the rear screen is almost completely rubbed off making the image very difficult to see. I know I should have used a screen protector.

 

After seeing Martin's post on the RX100 MkIII with the pop up EVF I thought that could be just what I need, so started to investigate. Now my MkI has a 28 -100 mm lens. (35mm equiv.) Whereas the MkIII has a 24 - 70mm lens (35mm equiv.) Nice to have the wider end but would like the reach of the MkI as well.

 

So do I go with the MkIII and forgo the longer reach for a cost of £599 or stick with the MkI which is causing problems in seeing what I am taking because of the screen losing it's coating.

 

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.)  Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

I use the Sony A6000 and Sony 16-70 with no problems whatsoever. It's certainly a lot lighter than my Canon 6D and bag full of prime lenses. If you look through my portfolio, all of the last 12 months worth of images which aren't close up, or wide angle, are taken with this combo. No QC fails yet (touch wood).

 

 

Thanks Ian. I looked at the images in your port to see if I could spot any potential problems with the 16-70 but could not see any.

 

Didn't really expect to as they had passed QC anyway.

 

Allan

[Allan Bell]

 

Help!

 

After reading the aforementioned posts about various smaller lightweight cameras I looked at my Sony RX100 Mk I and although I have never had an image fail QC from it. (To the best of my knowledge). I noted the coating on the rear screen is almost completely rubbed off making the image very difficult to see. I know I should have used a screen protector.

 

After seeing Martin's post on the RX100 MkIII with the pop up EVF I thought that could be just what I need, so started to investigate. Now my MkI has a 28 -100 mm lens. (35mm equiv.) Whereas the MkIII has a 24 - 70mm lens (35mm equiv.) Nice to have the wider end but would like the reach of the MkI as well.

 

So do I go with the MkIII and forgo the longer reach for a cost of £599 or stick with the MkI which is causing problems in seeing what I am taking because of the screen losing it's coating.

 

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.) Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

Hi there, doodle-do.

I have the RX100. I thought I left and lost it at a restaurant so I bought the Mk3. I debated long and hard whether to buy the original again or go for the pop up viewfinder in the 3. I really liked the reach of the Mk1.

 

I use the 3 most. I really like the images and don't seem to miss the extra reach.

And yes, I love the viewfinder, tiny as it is. Great for bright sunny days.

Although sometimes I forget I have it, lol. Out of sight, out of mind.

Edited to add, of course I found the Mk1 2 weeks after buying the next. Slid under the passenger seat of my car.

 

 

Thank you for your valued input about the MkIII Betty.

 

But I am still hankering for wide with longer reach lens and the A6000 has a APS-C sensor which could be a help.

 

Allan (doodle-do)

[Allan Bell]

 

Alternatively during my quest I noted that the Sony A6000 with EVF at £419 for body only with the Sony E16 - 70mm f4 ZA OSS lens at £799. (Which gives 24 - 105mm 35mm equiv. range I am looking for in a single lens carry about camera.)  Note: I have found a retailer which is selling this combo for £1,099. Cheaper than buying body and lens separately.

 

Does anyone know if the E16-70 f4 Sony lens has a good or bad reputation?

 

Help? Am I going doodle-ally?

 

Allan

 

I've been using NEX cameras/lenses for over three years now.  Most of my shots are with the a6000/16-70mm. To answer your question about the 16-70mm:  It got a not-so-good rep when it came out, and that's reflected in its photozone.de results. I like mine, and I haven't had any failures with the NEX equipment--but then, I had learned how to pass QC before that anyway.

 

In my bag with that combo is the 10-18mm, which I consider quite good, on the funky-but-good-IQ a3000, which you can't get anymore. I also use an NEX-6 with the kit 16-50mm, and sometimes the 55-210mm. And occasionally a small Canon DSLR (SL-1).  

 

I like the NEX cameras/lenses for the IQ, the price point if you wait for sales, and for the size/weight, which is the main reason I switched from a Canon 5D/L lenses. I find the NEX cameras comfortable enough to hold (more so than the diminutive Canon SL-1). And I have a thing about avoiding sensor dust (my 5D experience), so I like carrying two cameras with dedicated lenses in a small bag. That also works out well when my wife is along and wants a camera.

 

 

Thank you Bill. The bad/indifferent reports when the 16-70 first came out could be due to some bad production lenses initially. Lets hope they have ironed them out now and later lenses are all within stricter standards of the manufacturers QC.

 

With that in mind I went out today to have a look at the A6000 in the shops and quite liked what I saw. The EVF was good and I could see through it perfectly well. Unfortunately they did not have the 16-70 lens in stock.

 

When I got back home I threw all caution to the wind and placed an order for the combo with another UK shop which deals online too. Unfortunately they had the body but not the lens so I will have to wait a couple of weeks before delivery by their reckoning. Fortunately they will not process my Paypal payment until the lens is in stock so I have time to cancel the order if necessary. It was ordered from them as they have the combo cheaper than anyone else that I could find.

 

I agree with you about avoiding dust on the sensor so this outfit will be for walkabouts without my heavy Nikon kit and the lens will not be leaving the body once it is on.

 

Allan

[Bryan]

I don't think that you will have much trouble with sensor dust on the a6000, my NEX 6 has proved to be the least susceptible to dust of all of my gear (had 4 Canon DSLRs). It's not immune, but nothing like as bad as the Canon 5D which seemed to suck the muck in. Further, the sensor is easy to clean, without a mirror to worry about. I use a selection of primes so change lenses for virtually every other shot, and that has not caused any particular problems. I use a blower brush on the sensor before each outing and have to wipe the sensor possibly once a year.

[Allan Bell]

I don't think that you will have much trouble with sensor dust on the a6000, my NEX 6 has proved to be the least susceptible to dust of all of my gear (had 4 Canon DSLRs). It's not immune, but nothing like as bad as the Canon 5D which seemed to suck the muck in. Further, the sensor is easy to clean, without a mirror to worry about. I use a selection of primes so change lenses for virtually every other shot, and that has not caused any particular problems. I use a blower brush on the sensor before each outing and have to wipe the sensor possibly once a year.

 

 

That is interesting Bryan.  I used to use Canon gear, latterly 5D mkII and found the same as you.

 

My main gear now is a Nikon D750 and that does not seem to be as susceptible as the Canon, in fact I have not had to clean the sensor since I bought it in July 2015.

 

Allan

[Allan Bell]

Update on my post above.

 

Supplier still cannot provide the kit I ordered so order cancelled.

 

Now being purchased via WEX on next day delivery.

 

Allan

[Ed Rooney]

I own and work with three Sony systems: NEX 6 and 7, RX10, and RX100 iii. My 35mm views go from 15mm to 200mm. Here in NYC I could live without the longer reach, in fact I could follow you around the shires, Allan, and shot over your shoulder with my iii and miss very few pics. As I've said before, this littler Sony takes some learning regarding the handling. I've done that, and of the three systems, I use and value the Sony RX100 iii most. And I use the EVF more than the screen. Don't confuse habit with technique.

 

And about the screens . . . I have screen protectors on all my Sonys except the iii. They improved the screen quality with that model. The screen is still okay after what? A year and a half? But. . . if I had it to do again I would put on a Vello screen protector. 

 

Good luck, Allan. 

[Allan Bell]

I own and work with three Sony systems: NEX 6 and 7, RX10, and RX100 iii. My 35mm views go from 15mm to 200mm. Here in NYC I could live without the longer reach, in fact I could follow you around the shires, Allan, and shot over your shoulder with my iii and miss very few pics. As I've said before, this littler Sony takes some learning regarding the handling. I've done that, and of the three systems, I use and value the Sony RX100 iii most. And I use the EVF more than the screen. Don't confuse habit with technique.

 

And about the screens . . . I have screen protectors on all my Sonys except the iii. They improved the screen quality with that model. The screen is still okay after what? A year and a half? But. . . if I had it to do again I would put on a Vello screen protector. 

 

Good luck, Allan. 

 

 

Thank for your input Ed. I will take your advise (advice) and get screen protectors for the Sony camera(s).

 

Allan

[Bryan]

I fitted a cheap plastic screen protector on the NEX 6 when I bought it. It's still there and doing its job while the paint is peeling from the corners of the body. I hardly use the screen though, the EVF is so much more convenient most of the time. The clarity through the protector is fine for the odd low or high level shot where I cannot use the EVF.