What Kit Improvements Would You Welcome?

[Ed Rooney]

Bryan has a recent post asking about the value of a price increase for a new Sony body with IS. It got me thinking about what improvement in hardware I would like to see.

 

Stock is all I shoot now days -- no News and no more assignments. Shooters who do other kinds of work may need different equipment. And I'm not asking about buying another lens you might lust for.

 

Me? I would like to see more reliable batteries that hold a charge longer, better quality images at high ISOs, better in-camera noise control, and solid image stabilization. 

 

What do you want? 

 

Edo

[ReeRay]

As a street shooter I crave faster and more accurate AF on mirrorless cameras without the need to spend $2,000 plus.

[Colin Woods]

An ISO 1 setting acting as a built in 6 stop ND filter. And, as an astrophotography fan, I am wildly jealous of Pentax's built-in star tracker. In fact I am in love with their new FF camera but am way too invested in Nikon to change. 

[Jill Morgan]

I'd like better noise control at higher ISO's as well.  I have trashed so many pics due to colour noise.

 

Jill

[Ed Rooney]

An ISO 1 setting acting as a built in 6 stop ND filter. And, as an astrophotography fan, I am wildly jealous of Pentax's built-in star tracker. In fact I am in love with their new FF camera but am way too invested in Nikon to change. 

 

 

I too was a Nikon system owner since the original Nikon F. In the past, Nikon, Canon and Pentax have been piggy backing over one another with improvements. I still own Nikons, but I've moved over to the smaller Sonys now.

 

Back in the day, Nikon promised their buyers that they would not change their lens mount. Canon changed their's a number of times. So Nikon gets my approval for doing everything they could to supple pro photographers with a system. 

[Bill Brooks]

Higher quality at high ISO, on a 50 megapixel chip would do it for me. Then I could dispense with the tripod, or the handy lamppost, when forced to shoot at F11 in low light.

[Joe Gaul]

Selectable autofocus points over 80% of frame; lower high iso noise, GPS and NFC, intervolometer app in camera.

[Colin Woods]

Ooh yes, AF points towards the edge. I had forgotten that one. And maybe a built in ipod so I can mosh out to Motorhead without having to bring the ipod.

[Colin Woods]

I used Pentax for a long time and loved their cameras. The LX was excellent. They took a bad step in leaving pro quality kit to go for the more gadget heavy pro-sumer market in the mid 90's and gave a huge market share to Canon and Nikon. Its good to see them getting back into it and, as they are trying to rebuild their market place, probably their new FF is the best value camera around. It certainly has top specs, but I don't know what their lenses are like. 

[mickfly]

Full frame on an RX10 3 and a flash hot shoe which is not Sony dependent, then I could use my current flash triggers on it, without an adapter, (which I haven't managed to find yet anyway.

[Bryan]

I still enjoy using the Canon 5D2 in the house, took some shots of the grandkids at Xmas, but it's way too heavy for me to take walking outdoors. I've therefore gone smaller format mirrorless.

 

My oft stated wish is is that Sony would bring out an improved version of their 16-70 f4 lens, one that is both sharp to the edges and free from other quality related problems. I might then largely abandon my collection of manual focus prime lenses and enjoy the luxury of one lens and reliable autofocus. (My Canon 24-105 f4 is reasonably, certainly usably, sharp across the (full) frame, I don't understand why Sony can't achieve this with the smaller format, after all the lenses fitted to the RX100 range are reputed to be very good).

 

I too hanker after that FF Pentax, but it would need to be a good deal smaller/lighter, and FF lenses are always going to be heavy. Not going to happen.

[John Mitchell]

 

 

My oft stated wish is is that Sony would bring out an improved version of their 16-70 f4 lens, one that is both sharp to the edges and free from other quality related problems. I might then largely abandon my collection of manual focus prime lenses and enjoy the luxury of one lens and reliable autofocus. (My Canon 24-105 f4 is reasonably, certainly usably, sharp across the (full) frame, I don't understand why Sony can't achieve this with the smaller format, after all the lenses fitted to the RX100 range are reputed to be very good).

 

 

 

The original Sony 18-55 still works fine for me. However, it would great if Sony did come out with a new 16-70 lens. But with Sony's new higher pricing, it would probably be beyond my financial reach. Still hoping -- most likely in vain -- that Sigma or Tamron will pick up the ball and design something more reasonably priced (with image stabilization).

[Lynn Palmer]

I still enjoy using the Canon 5D2 in the house, took some shots of the grandkids at Xmas, but it's way too heavy for me to take walking outdoors. I've therefore gone smaller format mirrorless.

 

My oft stated wish is is that Sony would bring out an improved version of their 16-70 f4 lens, one that is both sharp to the edges and free from other quality related problems. I might then largely abandon my collection of manual focus prime lenses and enjoy the luxury of one lens and reliable autofocus. (My Canon 24-105 f4 is reasonably, certainly usably, sharp across the (full) frame, I don't understand why Sony can't achieve this with the smaller format, after all the lenses fitted to the RX100 range are reputed to be very good).

 

I too hanker after that FF Pentax, but it would need to be a good deal smaller/lighter, and FF lenses are always going to be heavy. Not going to happen.

The Sony FE 24-240mm lens is a reputable substitute for the Canon 24-105mm. I've shot with both extensively.

[Bryan]

Cheers Lynn, but isn't that a full frame lens, weighing rather a lot? I'm after a lightweight zoom to match the little Nex camera.

[Inchiquin]

Anything which enhances video capabilities.

 

Alan

[DDoug]

I'd like it if Fuji would add in-body stabilization. Also F-Log video without needing to tether to external gadgets would be nice.

[screwbiedooo]

An ISO 1 setting acting as a built in 6 stop ND filter. And, as an astrophotography fan, I am wildly jealous of Pentax's built-in star tracker. In fact I am in love with their new FF camera but am way too invested in Nikon to change. 

You know, it is possible to sell stuff!

[Michael_Jacobs]

A 12-24mm tilt and shift lens wth autofocus. I should © this idea ;-)

[spacecadet]

A nose guard for every camera model.

[Martin P Wilson]

I still enjoy using the Canon 5D2 in the house, took some shots of the grandkids at Xmas, but it's way too heavy for me to take walking outdoors. I've therefore gone smaller format mirrorless.

 

My oft stated wish is is that Sony would bring out an improved version of their 16-70 f4 lens, one that is both sharp to the edges and free from other quality related problems. I might then largely abandon my collection of manual focus prime lenses and enjoy the luxury of one lens and reliable autofocus. (My Canon 24-105 f4 is reasonably, certainly usably, sharp across the (full) frame, I don't understand why Sony can't achieve this with the smaller format, after all the lenses fitted to the RX100 range are reputed to be very good).

 

I too hanker after that FF Pentax, but it would need to be a good deal smaller/lighter, and FF lenses are always going to be heavy. Not going to happen.

 

I miss my 24-105 f4 L on FF Canon so a 16-70mm f4 for my Fuji X system would be great. I have the 18-135 but it does not really go wide enough and I would like a little more reach than the 16-55mm.

 

But I can't say I NEED yet another standard zoom!

[Phil Robinson]

A cheap Nikon body with fine autofocus adjustment 

[Dyn Llun]

Bigger knobs and preferably not the stainless steel as of now, on my 10" x 8" Deardorff. The small, deeply knurled ones at present are very hard on the fingers in cold weather. I'm thinking of getting them changed by a technician anyway.

[wiskerke]

Bigger knobs and preferably not the stainless steel as of now, on my 10" x 8" Deardorff. The small, deeply knurled ones at present are very hard on the fingers in cold weather. I'm thinking of getting them changed by a technician anyway.

You could try an O ring around it. They can be had in many sizes. Alternatively, look around a toy shop for tires on toy cars.

Or make your own with sugru.

 

wim

 

edit: (Or get a Sinar - not that foldable I know.)

 

edit2: many not may sizes. Did I mention those are cheap? And a lot stronger than a rubber band.

[screwbiedooo]

I used Pentax for a long time and loved their cameras. The LX was excellent. They took a bad step in leaving pro quality kit to go for the more gadget heavy pro-sumer market in the mid 90's and gave a huge market share to Canon and Nikon. Its good to see them getting back into it and, as they are trying to rebuild their market place, probably their new FF is the best value camera around. It certainly has top specs, but I don't know what their lenses are like. 

 

I got back into Pentax about 18 months ago after a long time with Nikons, attracted by ridiculous prices. There is not a huge selection of new lenses for the K-1 but there is a huge selection of legacy optics which are all compatible. The DA* and FA* lenses are all excellent, and many of the old M42, K, A, M manual lenses you will remember are as good as always. The new budget end consumer lenses are a bit hit and miss (avoid the horror known as 50-200 at all costs). And of course, there are the usual third party lenses from Tamron, Voigtlander (all yummy) et al, which are the same as you are used to. You can find out the lowdown at pentaxforums where they have a huge review database of just about every lens that ever existed in K mount. There are some real gems out there. I recently picked up an old F 70-210 circa 1990 for 60 euros, and it's really ugly and really great. I'm blown away because I can put a high end kit together for peanuts, compared to other brands.

[MDM]

 

I used Pentax for a long time and loved their cameras. The LX was excellent. They took a bad step in leaving pro quality kit to go for the more gadget heavy pro-sumer market in the mid 90's and gave a huge market share to Canon and Nikon. Its good to see them getting back into it and, as they are trying to rebuild their market place, probably their new FF is the best value camera around. It certainly has top specs, but I don't know what their lenses are like. 

 

I got back into Pentax about 18 months ago after a long time with Nikons, attracted by ridiculous prices. There is not a huge selection of new lenses for the K-1 but there is a huge selection of legacy optics which are all compatible. The DA* and FA* lenses are all excellent, and many of the old M42, K, A, M manual lenses you will remember are as good as always. The new budget end consumer lenses are a bit hit and miss (avoid the horror known as 50-200 at all costs). And of course, there are the usual third party lenses from Tamron, Voigtlander (all yummy) et al, which are the same as you are used to. You can find out the lowdown at pentaxforums where they have a huge review database of just about every lens that ever existed in K mount. There are some real gems out there. I recently picked up an old F 70-210 circa 1990 for 60 euros, and it's really ugly and really great. I'm blown away because I can put a high end kit together for peanuts, compared to other brands.

 

 

I don't think it's all quite as rosy as you say. The currently available Tamron lenses for K-1 mount are all the cheaper consumer lenses - they are not doing the new high quality primes nor the excellent high quality zooms in Pentax mounts (at least they are not advertised on Wex so presumably they don't exist) and I am quite certain that these consumer lenses won't provide what is required of a 36MP sensor. I've used my older Nikkor lenses with 36MP Nikon and some are great (e.g. 50 and 55 mm primes) but others disappoint when you really look at them for edge to edge sharpness. And older lenses can be optically sound but don't have image stabilisation which means you are shooting at high shutter speeds handheld with longer lenses. I expect that old 70-210 you mention will have serious limitations in low light.