So thinking about photography as a hobby going forward in regard of the ever increasing cost

[spudhead]

Ok guys so thinking about the ever increasing cost of each evolution of camera bodies and lenses going forward regardless of brands and level, compact, crop sensor, or full frame will photography as a hobby become too costly for most of us. So lets chat about what is on offer from not just Sony but the other makers, and will the older used kit hold there price better as the cost of the newest kit keeps rising. thoughts please.

So where I am with this at the moment is I do not have the time to get out where and when I want to shoot what I would like at this point in life, hence I am hanging on with the older bodies lower pixel count, one or two e-mount lenses, and some cross over a-mount gear, the plan will be when work finishes a Sony full frame high spec body along the lines of the a1 hopefully with some up dates, and a high end prime if the old shoulder allows and who knows maybe I will have time to try some landscape shots which means more glass. Add that up and it looks costly

 

[xpc316e]

I have been a Sony user for quite a few years now. I started with an A77, went to a RX10 mark 1, an RX10iv (still have that and will not be getting rid of it), and recently an A7Rii. All of these were bought used as I just don't see the need to have the absolute latest gear when a fraction of the price gets me what was cutting edge equipment only a handful of years previously. I shall gradually get a couple more lenses for the A7Rii when finances permit. I have just reached state pension age and aim to spend much more time on my photography hobby.

In the unlikely event of my wanting to buy new gear, then what I have now will fetch prices similar to what I paid for it. Taking pictures costs me nothing, unlike the days when I paid for developing & printing. As a hobby my photography costs me nowhere near as much as betting, smoking, drinking, etc., and is much better for me. I have stopped buying photography magazines, as they simply fuel desires for more gear. They survive on the revenue from advertisers and sell people the idea that the latest gear will help them take better pictures. I now spend my spare cash buying used books about photography, as they stimulate me to go out and shoot instead of visiting camera shops. Sony can develop new models if they want, but the improvements over the kit I own is marginal so I will stick where I am.

 

[spudhead]

I have been a Sony user for quite a few years now. I started with an A77, went to a RX10 mark 1, an RX10iv (still have that and will not be getting rid of it), and recently an A7Rii. All of these were bought used as I just don't see the need to have the absolute latest gear when a fraction of the price gets me what was cutting edge equipment only a handful of years previously. I shall gradually get a couple more lenses for the A7Rii when finances permit. I have just reached state pension age and aim to spend much more time on my photography hobby.

In the unlikely event of my wanting to buy new gear, then what I have now will fetch prices similar to what I paid for it. Taking pictures costs me nothing, unlike the days when I paid for developing & printing. As a hobby my photography costs me nowhere near as much as betting, smoking, drinking, etc., and is much better for me. I have stopped buying photography magazines, as they simply fuel desires for more gear. They survive on the revenue from advertisers and sell people the idea that the latest gear will help them take better pictures. I now spend my spare cash buying used books about photography, as they stimulate me to go out and shoot instead of visiting camera shops. Sony can develop new models if they want, but the improvements over the kit I own is marginal so I will stick where I am.

Some good points in what you say and many I agree with, I had a 20 year gap from photography when we had the kids and came back to it a few years ago and went Sony because of the Minolta cross over glass, I have bought most of my glass and bodies used so never over-paid, And yes I agree with much you say but the fact is things move on tech wise, the problem for me is so much of what is included in the new bodies I do not need or want, that is the way of the world I guess.

 

[spudhead]

I've come to the realization that much like you, I'm very close where I need to be. If not for GAS, I'd say I am at the end. Being exposed to higher resolution sensors had me thinking I wanted to go further but am now settling down. My RIII has plenty MP and a wonderful sensor for what little landscape I shoot. And frankly Gary, your shots are proof enough to anyone who cares to open their eyes that 24MP is enough.

There are a couple of lenses that would make my life easier for racing, most notably a 2.8 normal zoom and a fast 85-100 prime. These are more for convenience, they are not 'must haves'. Other than that I'm pretty happy with my lens selection. Like you I have a stable of A-Mount to supplement my E-Mount lenses and adapters for both cameras. There really isn't a situation I can't cover from 12-600 and many choices within that range. The only other thing I'd like to get at some point is a 1.4TC, but again, this is more about GAS than need.

As for brand loyalty, I am decidedly not a Sony fanboy or purist, whatever works is what works. I pride myself on finding the best bang for the buck, which in most cases does not describe a Sony lens. Sigma and Tamron make fantastic lenses for most mounts and are heavily invest in E. The Samyang/Rokinon selections have gotten to be pretty freakin' amazing and are offered at (mostly) budget pricing, although that is quickly coming to an and as they improve quality and expand their customer base. There's nothing wrong with wanting and buying all Sony GMs if that what someone wants, it's just not my preference.

Cameras bodies are really about the same as far as need goes. During this racing off-season, I've spent some time communicating with the other track photographers about their gear choices. The range of camera brands out there is very narrow, the vast majority shooting Canon, with one Nikon user and yours truly being the only Sony owner. MP range is vast as well, the Nikon guy shoots a Z9, some of the Canon people are using higher MP, but the pros, the guys who actually do this for money? They're using 24MP speed demons. Canon R3s rule the roost. 30FPS burst speeds with the electronic shutter in RAW trumps the Sony A9 series (so far).

If I had to add one feature to the A7IV it would be more speed. It wasn't designed to be that kind of camera and it performs very well for its intended purpose but burst shooting is slow. I've said here more than once that I am watching to see the new A9III specs, and even posted a wild rumor about an upgraded 7MIVa, although the latter would likely not be any faster. I have speculated that Sony may upgrade the A9III to 33MP, which is something I've since seen on some rumor sites, but am now thinking they'll probably stick with 24. One reason for this is Panasonic's upcoming S5II and S5II-X announcement on January 4. Both cameras have confirmed 24MP sensors.

Panasonic has finally decided to make the jump to Hybrid AF for these new cameras while still retaining their deadly accurate and ridiculously fast Depth from Defocus (DFD). It's not surprising they've chosen their Full Frame line to implement this, although I suspect it will bleed over to their M-4/3 cameras as well. The only downside to DFD is that performance drops significantly on fast action AF, something in which Sony/Canon (and more recently) Nikon have made huge strides forward. Even OM (formerly Olympus) has made vast improvements in their action AF. I can't comment on Fuji, never really paid much attention. But that aside, Panasonic is the only remaining name brand that hasn't embraced high performance action AF until now.

Specs for the new S5s show electronic shutter speeds of 30FPS with other specs that look similar to offerings from Sony/Canon etc. Panasonic is dumping the current S5s to make room for the new models. You can get a camera with a two-lens kit (20-60 and 85 prime) for $1800 US, a single 20-60 kit for $1500. The belief is that they will release these new cameras starting in the $2500-$3000 range. If they do, it's going to shake things up quite a bit. Imagine the performance of a R3 and A9(III?) for that price.

The other aspect of Panasonic that appeals to many people is their L-Mount alliance with Leica, for those who like some of the best (and most expensive) glass possible. With Sigma fully on-board and others like Venus Optics and Lensbaby joining, along with lower priced options from 7artisans and the like makes for a good range of lenses. If these new models take off I'd expect to see others join.

This is the biggest issue with both Canon and Nikon, their limited selection of lenses. Both have depended on retaining existing users by offering adapters to use their legacy glass on their mirrorless bodies. Neither one has embraced third party manufacturers, although this appears to be slowly changing, more with Nikon than with Canon. This one of the main reasons I passed them both when I decided to go FF. Had I been a customer already, my decision may have been different.

For my money, I don't plan to move from Sony. I dislike having multiple systems, the cost for lenses is basically duplicated and deciding what to take on a given day is a pain in the butt. Completely changing to another system is very costly for the same reason, an all-new lens set. I am going to watch and see what the new A9III looks like. My requirements are primarily AF accuracy/burst speed, in that order. MP has fallen way down on my list. While I'd still love to see it released at 33MP, 24 wouldn't be a deal killer. If burst speed isn't improved and some of the new RV AF elements aren't included, I'll likely stand pat. In the event I do get a new body the M4 and RMIII will both stay.

As expected Tim A well thought out reply and the sort of common sense that I respect you for. Thanks for your thoughts on the other makes out there. Tim I have a weakness for a prime lens and I am convinced Sony will not make any more fast primes and probably not a 300 mm 2.8 as it does not make sense it would undermine the 400 2.8 and 600 f4 if it worked well with the 1,4 and 2x and was pitched at a price point similar to the g1 g2 a-mount version, my issue is that the a9iii will be too close in price to the a1 price wise, and I hear what you say on the megapixel count but a few more would help. The a9ii added little to the a9i and the price difference even now is to me not worth the odd gain you get.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I had a guy yesterday with a Canon Eos 200d MkII get me to take a shot of him and his partner in auto mode. That is the first time I've ever taken a shot in auto so at least I'm not a virgin any more.

Put it this way, seeming that this Canon felt like it was bought from Toys R Us, it made me realise my gear is sitting pretty sweet. Although I was already well aware that I wasn't doing it too tough...

As Timmy said, RIII AF is not up to date with the latest high end bodies which is absolutely true. But in regards to camera systems overall a camera like mine is still at the pointy end of AF capabilities and only the highest demanding situations will not be as good as it could be. Still, can mostly get the job done if you know what you are doing.

At some point I will be buying an A9III or an A1II, but I can't see that happening for at least 18 months. In regards to my whole set up I couldn't be happier, I think I struck a fantastic balance of value to performance even though I exclusively only buy brand new. I believe I have absolutely every base covered for my needs and feel that any addition from here will be pointless. Even if a 16-35mm F2.8 MkII gets released I won't feel the need to upgrade, I'm satisfied that my whole kit matches the camera body that I have. I'm feeling extremely content with it all at this point.

I guess we'll just have to see where I'm at in a few weeks...

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

In regards to photography getting too expensive. I think it's a very affordable thing to get into if you have the right knowledge or advice.

Perfect example, last week I recommended and got a Fujifilm X-S10 with the 16-80mm lens for $1,800 for a friend of a friend. I thought that was a ridiculous bargain! ️

 

[spudhead]

I had a guy yesterday with a Canon Eos 200d MkII get me to take a shot of him and his partner in auto mode. That is the first time I've ever taken a shot in auto so at least I'm not a virgin any more.

Put it this way, seeming that this Canon felt like it was bought from Toys R Us, it made me realise my gear is sitting pretty sweet. Although I was already well aware that I wasn't doing it too tough...

As Timmy said, RIII AF is not up to date with the latest high end bodies which is absolutely true. But in regards to camera systems overall a camera like mine is still at the pointy end of AF capabilities and only the highest demanding situations will not be as good as it could be. Still, can mostly get the job done if you know what you are doing.

At some point I will be buying an A9III or an A1II, but I can't see that happening for at least 18 months. In regards to my whole set up I couldn't be happier, I think I struck a fantastic balance of value to performance even though I exclusively only buy brand new. I believe I have absolutely every base covered for my needs and feel that any addition from here will be pointless. Even if a 16-35mm F2.8 MkII gets released I won't feel the need to upgrade, I'm satisfied that my whole kit matches the camera body that I have. I'm feeling extremely content with it all at this point.

I guess we'll just have to see where I'm at in a few weeks...

Clint its great you are all good with your kit, thanks for reply and as usual you make some good points.

 

[Clix Pix]

As someone who is retired, I've got plenty of time to shoot! And, with careful planning and forethought I am eventually able to purchase the gear that I want. I'm fortunate in that. I enjoy and appreciate my gear each and every day and pretty much use it on a daily basis, too.

At nearly the end of 2019 when I bought my Sony A7R IV and three lenses, I had no idea of how much this was going to be a real sanity-saver over the next several months when COVID-19 assaulted us and had most of us "sheltering in place" in our homes or other locations, and only essential personnel going out to report to their workplaces each day. Many of us suddenly found ourselves at home the majority of the time, some with children who were suddenly being cut off from school, and employees abruptly cut off from the workplace, The virus ran rampant and we all huddled in our homes afraid to go out for anything except an hour or two of exercise outdoors if it were possible.

My new camera gear saved my sanity as I happily started learning its functions and features and exploring my own creativity while shooting within the confines of home and once the weather turned nicer, shooting outdoors, still safely within the area of my own neighborhood. My timing for buying new gear certainly turned out to be fortuitous and for that I will always be thankful.

Now as we enter 2023 I am still happily shooting nearly every day and enjoying my gear, and although, yes it is a hobby, a pastime rather than an income-generating activity, to me it is still very much worthwhile.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

One more thing Gaz, even Sony GM are way cheaper than Canon RF is. Even though it is not cheap by any stretch, it is way better value than the other brand's finest offerings.

That's the beauty of Sony. You can get an A7III brand new with say the Tamron 17-28mm, 28-75mm and maybe the Sigma 100-400mm and you are taking high quality images for not a great deal of cash. Throw in a $200 tripod, circular polariser, ND100 and ND1000 filters also and you have almost all bases covered.
Or an A6400 with the 18-105mm (which was the other option to the X-S10), if someone just wants to have the most basic setup and will be happy with that then they can still get a lot accomplished with just it alone.

What is happening with your work Gaz? Are you finishing up?

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Once you have a camera, lens, and a means to process/view/upload, the rest is pretty much free. The only thing that costs more money is GAS!

Diesel fuel and accomodation too...

 

[Cαscαdian]

Ive just squeezed in an a7RII myself, and budget limit is reached. Commence deacquisition!
I was sure all mk.3 models were out of reach, but I'd totally overlooked the features the extra year brought to the R.ii.. and they were Big Deals for me. Power-bank charging, bsi sensor and more.

Sitting in a hospital on Christmas brought me to the knowledge that I've spent enough energy on gear. Time to reset my μ43 kit to minimum / tiny, let the Pentax camera and several KAf lenses go (sniff) choose SSM Tamron or screw drive Maxxum teles - and learn the a7r.ii thoroughly. Lenses covering 21-300mm plus small K-primes and a T.mount 400mm bazooka.

That's enough for a lifetime of shooting at age 65.95 - especially since my 'new' camera has 38k clicks on a 500k shutter and e-shutter!

 

[Landshark99]

I have been into photography since I was in my teens, a long time ago, most of those years as a professional using practically every size, format, type and brand of camera over the years. The hobby has never been the least expensive one, but the biggest change from when I started to now is that one stuck with their gear longer. Mainly because there was not the rapid pace of development that we see today, I still have the original Nikon F body and some of the lenses I started out with. Even today they all work fine, and I could be shooting with them if I wanted to go back to film photography, shot with a completely manual camera. I also own Nikon and Leica rangefinders from way back that also work well, but to be honest I have no desire to shoot that way everyday now.

When I was shooting professionally with a digital camera, it was a Leaf/Rollei, Hasselblad, Contax, Canon and Nikon, all great but for my own shooting all too big to lug around. For my own personal digital photography, I owned besides a number of point and shoot digital cameras, Olympus and Panasonic M 4/3 cameras and lenses, sold those and picked up a few different Fuji APC cameras and lenses, loved those until I bought my Sony RX1r and RX1r II. I was hooked on the Sony full frame cameras. Sold the Fuji stuff and bought a couple of Sony A7rIIs, some Zeiss Batis lenses and truly enjoyed them. I have since bought and sold both A7rIIIs and A7rIVs and the Batis lenses, all replaced with an A1 and an A7rV with 3 prime and 4 Zoom Sony GM and G lenses. I will admit I am a fan of the newest tech, but I think I am at the age where the changes from now on for me will be fairly limited. I am pretty happy with where I am at.

I see no reason for me to change from Sony, nor even upgrade to a new A1 II, and as to the lenses I am good for what I want to shoot. I would like a fast 100mm macro and it would be nice to have a 600m F4 but I could never rationalize the cost of the 600mm against how much it will be used. Funny for all the years that I shot professional with digital Canons and Nikons, rarely used primes other than a fast 300mm or 400mm and with my personal cameras in film and digital always with primes. Now I have found that even with the primes I own, I tend to use the zooms more. While I understand a set of Sony lenses can be expensive, I have always preferred the lenses from the company that makes the camera over the independents, if they are good. I have no desire to use adapters except in rare exceptions.

I have had a number of expensive hobbies and interest over the years fishing, cars, audio, off-roading/overlanding, rv, sailing, recording, guitars, and the worst a wine cellar, but of all the interests photography even though it can be expensive will always be with me in some form.

 

[spudhead]

I have been into photography since I was in my teens, a long time ago, most of those years as a professional using practically every size, format, type and brand of camera over the years. The hobby has never been the least expensive one, but the biggest change from when I started to now is that one stuck with their gear longer. Mainly because there was not the rapid pace of development that we see today, I still have the original Nikon F body and some of the lenses I started out with. Even today they all work fine, and I could be shooting with them if I wanted to go back to film photography, shot with a completely manual camera. I also own Nikon and Leica rangefinders from way back that also work well, but to be honest I have no desire to shoot that way everyday now.

When I was shooting professionally with a digital camera, it was a Leaf/Rollei, Hasselblad, Contax, Canon and Nikon, all great but for my own shooting all too big to lug around. For my own personal digital photography, I owned besides a number of point and shoot digital cameras, Olympus and Panasonic M 4/3 cameras and lenses, sold those and picked up a few different Fuji APC cameras and lenses, loved those until I bought my Sony RX1r and RX1r II. I was hooked on the Sony full frame cameras. Sold the Fuji stuff and bought a couple of Sony A7rIIs, some Zeiss Batis lenses and truly enjoyed them. I have since bought and sold both A7rIIIs and A7rIVs and the Batis lenses, all replaced with an A1 and an A7rV with 3 prime and 4 Zoom Sony GM and G lenses. I will admit I am a fan of the newest tech, but I think I am at the age where the changes from now on for me will be fairly limited. I am pretty happy with where I am at.

I see no reason for me to change from Sony, nor even upgrade to a new A1 II, and as to the lenses I am good for what I want to shoot. I would like a fast 100mm macro and it would be nice to have a 600m F4 but I could never rationalize the cost of the 600mm against how much it will be used. Funny for all the years that I shot professional with digital Canons and Nikons, rarely used primes other than a fast 300mm or 400mm and with my personal cameras in film and digital always with primes. Now I have found that even with the primes I own, I tend to use the zooms more. While I understand a set of Sony lenses can be expensive, I have always preferred the lenses from the company that makes the camera over the independents, if they are good. I have no desire to use adapters except in rare exceptions.

I have had a number of expensive hobbies and interest over the years fishing, cars, audio, off-roading/overlanding, rv, sailing, recording, guitars, and the worst a wine cellar, but of all the interests photography even though it can be expensive will always be with me in some form.

Thanks for adding thoughts and some wise views.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I have been into photography since I was in my teens, a long time ago, most of those years as a professional using practically every size, format, type and brand of camera over the years. The hobby has never been the least expensive one, but the biggest change from when I started to now is that one stuck with their gear longer. Mainly because there was not the rapid pace of development that we see today, I still have the original Nikon F body and some of the lenses I started out with. Even today they all work fine, and I could be shooting with them if I wanted to go back to film photography, shot with a completely manual camera. I also own Nikon and Leica rangefinders from way back that also work well, but to be honest I have no desire to shoot that way everyday now.

When I was shooting professionally with a digital camera, it was a Leaf/Rollei, Hasselblad, Contax, Canon and Nikon, all great but for my own shooting all too big to lug around. For my own personal digital photography, I owned besides a number of point and shoot digital cameras, Olympus and Panasonic M 4/3 cameras and lenses, sold those and picked up a few different Fuji APC cameras and lenses, loved those until I bought my Sony RX1r and RX1r II. I was hooked on the Sony full frame cameras. Sold the Fuji stuff and bought a couple of Sony A7rIIs, some Zeiss Batis lenses and truly enjoyed them. I have since bought and sold both A7rIIIs and A7rIVs and the Batis lenses, all replaced with an A1 and an A7rV with 3 prime and 4 Zoom Sony GM and G lenses. I will admit I am a fan of the newest tech, but I think I am at the age where the changes from now on for me will be fairly limited. I am pretty happy with where I am at.

I see no reason for me to change from Sony, nor even upgrade to a new A1 II, and as to the lenses I am good for what I want to shoot. I would like a fast 100mm macro and it would be nice to have a 600m F4 but I could never rationalize the cost of the 600mm against how much it will be used. Funny for all the years that I shot professional with digital Canons and Nikons, rarely used primes other than a fast 300mm or 400mm and with my personal cameras in film and digital always with primes. Now I have found that even with the primes I own, I tend to use the zooms more. While I understand a set of Sony lenses can be expensive, I have always preferred the lenses from the company that makes the camera over the independents, if they are good. I have no desire to use adapters except in rare exceptions.

I have had a number of expensive hobbies and interest over the years fishing, cars, audio, off-roading/overlanding, rv, sailing, recording, guitars, and the worst a wine cellar, but of all the interests photography even though it can be expensive will always be with me in some form.

Fantastic write up from years of experience. I can relate in regards to cars/bikes and audio but instead of wine I collect whisky. The money I've spent on camera equipment doesn't even hold a candle to any of these...

I do love quality sound which I can justify the cost, sort of. But whisky, I constantly question my sanity... ️

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Interesting topic and views. I'll add my two penneth....

When I made the switch to Sony (having originally intending to go with a Nikon D850) I thought at the time that the A7RIV would be all the camera that I will ever need and that justified me spending the money to get it, as well as the 200 600 to go with it. I still feel that way, with occasional reservations over it's AF performance, and often extreme annoyance at the bloody eye sensor, which is a pain in the arse and has cost me shots more than once (today included), as the resolution is as much as anyone will ever need, and I love the handling. As it stands I would possibly buy an a9iii (f the rumoured spec is right) as a second body to use for BIF as the AF and frame rate should be right up with the best of the current speed demons out there, and this appeals, despite my hate of E Shutters, because I am impressed by even the cheaper of the Canon cameras and their speed and AF accuracy compared with my current cam. I wouldn't swap though. I have learned to get the most out the RIV I think.
As for lenses, much as I would love the 400 or 600 primes, I could never justify the cost, and I really don't think the IQ is10k's worth of difference anyway. The 200 600 really is a perfect compromise IMO, and the handling is sublime. I own the 90mm Macro, which is fantastic, and the Tamron 24mm 2.8 for my occasional landscape work. Neither will ever need replacing, and I really don't think there are currently any other lenses I need to be honest, but I am still looking at the old Minolta 400 4.5 when I can find one.
All of this means, for me, that I am pretty certain I won't be buying new gear for a long time now, unless I win the lottery, and the only time I am likely to consider any major purchase is when I hit retirement age and get my pension lump sums (8 years away).
I am fortunate enough to be semi-retired now, and, as you probably know from my presence here, get out a fair bit, and still love it, and that wont change. I might throw the RIV in a lake if that F****** eye sensor costs me another shot though, so who knows

 

[Jeff A]

I have been into photography since I was in my teens, a long time ago, most of those years as a professional using practically every size, format, type and brand of camera over the years. The hobby has never been the least expensive one, but the biggest change from when I started to now is that one stuck with their gear longer. Mainly because there was not the rapid pace of development that we see today, I still have the original Nikon F body and some of the lenses I started out with. Even today they all work fine, and I could be shooting with them if I wanted to go back to film photography, shot with a completely manual camera. I also own Nikon and Leica rangefinders from way back that also work well, but to be honest I have no desire to shoot that way everyday now.

When I was shooting professionally with a digital camera, it was a Leaf/Rollei, Hasselblad, Contax, Canon and Nikon, all great but for my own shooting all too big to lug around. For my own personal digital photography, I owned besides a number of point and shoot digital cameras, Olympus and Panasonic M 4/3 cameras and lenses, sold those and picked up a few different Fuji APC cameras and lenses, loved those until I bought my Sony RX1r and RX1r II. I was hooked on the Sony full frame cameras. Sold the Fuji stuff and bought a couple of Sony A7rIIs, some Zeiss Batis lenses and truly enjoyed them. I have since bought and sold both A7rIIIs and A7rIVs and the Batis lenses, all replaced with an A1 and an A7rV with 3 prime and 4 Zoom Sony GM and G lenses. I will admit I am a fan of the newest tech, but I think I am at the age where the changes from now on for me will be fairly limited. I am pretty happy with where I am at.

I see no reason for me to change from Sony, nor even upgrade to a new A1 II, and as to the lenses I am good for what I want to shoot. I would like a fast 100mm macro and it would be nice to have a 600m F4 but I could never rationalize the cost of the 600mm against how much it will be used. Funny for all the years that I shot professional with digital Canons and Nikons, rarely used primes other than a fast 300mm or 400mm and with my personal cameras in film and digital always with primes. Now I have found that even with the primes I own, I tend to use the zooms more. While I understand a set of Sony lenses can be expensive, I have always preferred the lenses from the company that makes the camera over the independents, if they are good. I have no desire to use adapters except in rare exceptions.

I have had a number of expensive hobbies and interest over the years fishing, cars, audio, off-roading/overlanding, rv, sailing, recording, guitars, and the worst a wine cellar, but of all the interests photography even though it can be expensive will always be with me in some form.

Bob, just out of curiosity, are you a Drone Pilot?

 

[Landshark99]

Bob, just out of curiosity, are you a Drone Pilot?

I have a DJI Mini 3 Pro, that I fly very occasionally for recreational stuff. It is like many things I do, I bought it thinking I would use it more, but there is a lot of restrictive airspace out here because of some irresponsible operators in the past. So many of the places i wanted to use it, i cannot.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Oh wow Timmy, I was going to ask on this site who collects whisky.

I have Scottish, Japanese and Australian whiskies. I also have a handful of bourbon bottlings there too. I have about 130 bottles all up. If your whiskey collection is anything like your old camera collection then it must really be quite a sight I'd imagine!

People are horrified when they see that I am a full whisky nutter because I am a complete health freak. My diet is impeccable and I've been extremely lean for my whole life. I do actually believe that 30ml of whisky a night is really good for us, so that's what I do.

Some of my favourite brands are Macallan, Aberlour, Balvenie, Glendronach, Glenfiddich, Bladnoch, Glenmorangie, Rudd Bros, Talisker, Suntory, Morris, Carowra, 78 degrees. This list could be never ending...

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Will throw this out there. I've been looking at underwater drones this past week...

 

[AlphaWorld]

If I wasn’t working, I would not be buying gear the way I have been. Fact is, I can take a whole lot of images with what I have now, but I do enjoy the process of learning a new camera (And the new ones take quite a bit of learning!).

Still, if I lost my job, and could not buy any gear for a while, I would cope fine.

I’m not sure I’d suggest you give up photography. Maybe just give up reading reviews for new cameras and lenses?

 

[Cαscαdian]

I don't keep my collection in bottles, if you know what I mean..
Most recent treasure is a sliabh league dark Silkie, from Donegal. Curiously smokey but not quite peat. Also enjoyed the Sexton, though I confees I bought it for the hexagonal bottle..

 

[Landshark99]

If I got down to less than 130 bottles of wine in the cellar, it would be a major day of celebration

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Your collection is larger than mine. I buy mostly sipping Bourbons so they do get used and rotated out. Some are Bulliet Blade and Bow, Buffalo Trace Eagle Rare, Woodford Reserve Double Oaked, Henry McKenna Bottled in Bond, some small batch stuff, can't recall all of them, maybe about 25 or 30 bottles. Most cost around $55-70 US. An exception is one that I bottled myself at a tiny little distillery a few years ago. It has my name on written on the label, so it's a keepsake. I buy cheaper shelf bourbons like Maker's Mark if I want a mixed drink.

I have a few Scotches, my favorite is an Ardmore. It's filtered through smoke peat moss so it has an interesting smoky flavor. Novelty whiskeys include some honey infused and salted caramel. Two-Trees salted caramel is pretty good. I have one that's too sweet. It's so sweet I've actually put it on ice cream! Also have a couple bottles of Rum my daughter brought me back from Haiti.

Oh lovely! You need to appreciate strong flavours and aromas in way or another I think, it's a duty in life.

As well as things that are well made. I collect watches also which I'm thinking a fair few around here would...

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I don't keep my collection in bottles, if you know what I mean..
Most recent treasure is a sliabh league dark Silkie, from Donegal. Curiously smokey but not quite peat. Also enjoyed the Sexton, though I confees I bought it for the hexagonal bottle..

That Sexton is fruity and light. I have that one there, it's a great one in warm weather! Great value too!

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

If I got down to less than 130 bottles of wine in the cellar, it would be a major day of celebration

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Oh wow Timmy, I was going to ask on this site who collects whisky.

I have Scottish, Japanese and Australian whiskies. I also have a handful of bourbon bottlings there too. I have about 130 bottles all up. If your whiskey collection is anything like your old camera collection then it must really be quite a sight I'd imagine!

People are horrified when they see that I am a full whisky nutter because I am a complete health freak. My diet is impeccable and I've been extremely lean for my whole life. I do actually believe that 30ml of whisky a night is really good for us, so that's what I do.

Some of my favourite brands are Macallan, Aberlour, Balvenie, Glendronach, Glenfiddich, Bladnoch, Glenmorangie, Rudd Bros, Talisker, Suntory, Morris, Carowra, 78 degrees. This list could be never ending...

I collect Rum, so I know how you guys could enjoy collecting Whiskey/Scotch. I probably only have 3 dozen different bottles in my collection though...

On the topic of cameras, I am very much guilty of the GAS, but this is my first ILC, so take that as you will. I want all the features of a full frame camera in an APSC body, so I'm doomed to be let down unless I switch to Fuji lol. Still, I don't want to sell my glass and start over, so I will stick with the e-mount system for as long as I can. Maybe this will be the year for the a6700/a7000 y'all know I will be pre-ordering when they announce it LOL Shut up and take my money Sony!

 

[spudhead]

@Kevriano @spudhead

So, what about an E-Mount 400/4? Looks like Sigma is going to produce a 400, 500, and 700. Too bad the 700 is f/8, for the $ a 1.4TC on the 200-600 would be about the same at a similar FL.

New Sigma patent discloses the design of the new 500mm f/5.6 OS, 700mm f/8 OS and 400mm f/5 OS – sonyalpharumors

www.sonyalpharumors.com

I wondered when Sigma might spot the gap for a couple of e-mount primes, I think 500 would be good if they had a 1.4 teleconverter that worked well

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I'll be interested to see if Sigma can produce the goods on those lengths, with a sensible price tag. A 400/4 would be tempting at around 2-3k, if they can get it to focus as quickly as the Sony OM. Optically I've never had a bad Sigma. Tamron hold patents to make similar, but have never done so yet. As I've mentioned before, no one has come up with anything like the Nikon PF lenses, and that would be a killer lens on any Sony.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I'll be interested to see if Sigma can produce the goods on those lengths, with a sensible price tag. A 400/4 would be tempting at around 2-3k, if they can get it to focus as quickly as the Sony OM. Optically I've never had a bad Sigma. Tamron hold patents to make similar, but have never done so yet. As I've mentioned before, no one has come up with anything like the Nikon PF lenses, and that would be a killer lens on any Sony.

Not sure if it applies to other lenses from Sigma and Tamron, but I remember the 150-600mm and the 150-500mm are limited to 10fps I think. To me that is irrelevant but I think to an A1 or A9 shooter it will mean a lot. If Sony allowed a fast third party telephoto prime to have that software accessibility then it would be a real big deal in the Sony shooter world.

I'm heading to Olympus so it doesn't really bother me. My days of hiding my disgraced lens hoods are over...

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Not sure if it applies to other lenses from Sigma and Tamron, but I remember the 150-600mm and the 150-500mm are limited to 10fps I think. To me that is irrelevant but I think to an A1 or A9 shooter it will mean a lot. If Sony allowed a fast third party telephoto prime to have that software accessibility then it would be a real big deal in the Sony shooter world.

I'm heading to Olympus so it doesn't really bother me. My days of hiding my disgraced lens hoods are over...

Yes they are limited, I think all 3rd party lenses are, and I'm not sure it's necessarily the electronics/software to blame, but more likely the type of focus motors that they use, because Sony must have some very special motors to allow AF to keep up at 30fps.