Sony F828
- Thread starter yinkhoon
- Start date
- Status
Garion said:Thats always the case, isn't it?Well...maybe 5 years down the road it'll cost ard 1k...but by that time newer stuffs would have come out already.. :sweat:
That's the downside of high tech stuff... They just cannot hold their value for long.
Yet we can't do without them... ;p
I don't think that the CZ lens will be something out of the ordinary. For a 35mm equivalent of 28-200, I doubt that the design of this lens is anything that comes close to the legendary and current Contax G CZ Biogon 28 and Planar 45 lenses or the Contax Distagon 28/50/85 standards. But then again, I have always wondered if it does matter to have lenses that are that good on digital cameras to begin with.
It's quite hilarious reading the Sony Forumers at Dpreview having fun at "skinning" the F828.
Like this:
More can be found at the Have It YOUR way!!! thread.
:Later,
Like this:
More can be found at the Have It YOUR way!!! thread.
:Later,
Some opinion for those who likes to compare DSLR with Prosumer Digicam such as Kon-Min A1, Sony 828, etc...
If u think Prosumer Digicam is expensive, how much do u expect a DSLR would be? DSLR with fast lenses definitely dun come cheap...
To keep up with Sony 828 fast lens...U'll be looking at 10D + grip + 17-35 f/2.8L + 28-70 f/2.8L + 70-200 f/2.8L...They easily add up to $7K++...Ok, let just say u managed to get all 2nd hand, they are still at least $6k...While most new Pro-Digicam is about $2K++ only...
No doubt DSLR Bokeh & sharpness might be much better than prosumer digicam...But Imagine the hassle of carrying & changin 2 or 3 heavy L glasses, while ur fren is happily snapping away with his 828...No sore back, no missing moment, no regret...
Just my 2c worth...
If u think Prosumer Digicam is expensive, how much do u expect a DSLR would be? DSLR with fast lenses definitely dun come cheap...
To keep up with Sony 828 fast lens...U'll be looking at 10D + grip + 17-35 f/2.8L + 28-70 f/2.8L + 70-200 f/2.8L...They easily add up to $7K++...Ok, let just say u managed to get all 2nd hand, they are still at least $6k...While most new Pro-Digicam is about $2K++ only...
No doubt DSLR Bokeh & sharpness might be much better than prosumer digicam...But Imagine the hassle of carrying & changin 2 or 3 heavy L glasses, while ur fren is happily snapping away with his 828...No sore back, no missing moment, no regret...
Just my 2c worth...
DSLR is definitely not cheap. Having owned a Sony F505, I don't think prosumer cams are cheap either. Accessories and parts are not compatible with later models. My SLR lens can be use on my film SLR and later DSLR cams. DSLR cam would probably be cheaper and better later. Prosumer cams IMHO are throwaway items after a few years when parts get obsolete. SLR lens can be kept for a long time if well maintained. No doubt the 828 is much better than the F505 but it's still just another cam waiting to be obsolete. This is my 2c worth after spending more than $3k on my F505.henavs said:Some opinion for those who likes to compare DSLR with Prosumer Digicam such as Kon-Min A1, Sony 828, etc...
If u think Prosumer Digicam is expensive, how much do u expect a DSLR would be? DSLR with fast lenses definitely dun come cheap...
To keep up with Sony 828 fast lens...U'll be looking at 10D + grip + 17-35 f/2.8L + 28-70 f/2.8L + 70-200 f/2.8L...They easily add up to $7K++...Ok, let just say u managed to get all 2nd hand, they are still at least $6k...While most new Pro-Digicam is about $2K++ only...
No doubt DSLR Bokeh & sharpness might be much better than prosumer digicam...But Imagine the hassle of carrying & changin 2 or 3 heavy L glasses, while ur fren is happily snapping away with his 828...No sore back, no missing moment, no regret...
Just my 2c worth...
Changing lenses and carrying what you need depends on what you want to photograph. Can you get a 500mm or 600mm lens for your prosumer cam for nature shots? Don't tell me you want to use the digital zoom ability? :think:
Newman said:
True, DSLR is a good investment where u can maintain & upgrade whenever is needed. Prosumer cam waiting to be obsolete? I agree...But then again, consider this, how many obsolete DSLR has been traded in this forum alone since the launch of 10D? Being digital breed themselves, DSLR suffer the same fate as their digicam cousin...A D30 of few yrs ago cost $4K+, now its traded at only $1K+...A D60 now cost only $1.8K while it was sold still at $3.5K+ barely a year ago...U definitely keep the lenses, but the amount of money loss from upgrading DSLR is comparable to Pro Digicam, sometimes even more...
An ancient F707 or a prehistoric F505 can still take good photos, dont they? I guess there are still many ppl around happily using their throw-away items...
Newman said:
Comparing 600mm on DSLR is definitely not a fair comparison...Granted, DSLR can be customized to ur needs provided u got extra dough...
I'm just trying to say its a different class...depends on ur needs, dun just jump into the DSLR wagon...I've seen quite a lot of newbies regret tat they have dump so much money, which at the end gave up their hobby...
And Newman, u definitely can tell me how much u hav spend on ur 10D equipment since u got all the good L lens there...
henavs said:
but how about the lenses.... all the L lenses.... do they get obselete very fast?
if you calculate that... you can use the lense for any body.. and if taken care of with the the resale price will still be high... so it's the same with the external flashes..... of course i cannot say much about the digital bodies. but the sony CCD cannot compare with any DSLR CCD rite? in image quality and ISO range. and TTL View finder , fastt respsonse(af / functions) , fast write buffers , many burst FPS..... and when you upgrade most of the time the lense stays.... unless there is a extra L or sometthing....
then if you think like so the next DSLR would alot cheaper with no lenses to buy and the other assosories unless they can think up of something....
just my 2 cents i don't have a DSLR with interchangable lense so this is only a speculation of wat i have heard and read.
SianZronG said:but how about the lenses.... all the L lenses.... do they get obselete very fast?
of course i cannot say much about the digital bodies. but the sony CCD cannot compare with any DSLR CCD rite? in image quality and ISO range. and TTL View finder , fastt respsonse(af / functions) , fast write buffers , many burst FPS..... and when you upgrade most of the time the lense stays.... unless there is a extra L or sometthing....
then if you think like so the next DSLR would alot cheaper with no lenses to buy and the other assosories unless they can think up of something....
just my 2 cents i don't have a DSLR with interchangable lense so this is only a speculation of wat i have heard and read.
Nope, L lenses are worth keeping as a long term investment...The resale value is still very high compare to any other equipments...But I'm just saying tat DSLR body can also be a throw-away item, same as digicam
I think it would be best to keep some sense of perspective in the discussion, some comparisons are bordering on the ridiculous.
Let's just keep in mind the saying "Choose the right horse for the course". There is no sense in using a bread knife to cut a roast pig, or a chopper to to butter your bread.
As for the part about digital cameras becoming obselete....I think we may be wrongly relating cameras to computers here.
Computers become obselete over time, simply because new software demand greater hardware requirements just to perform adequately. It is the changing software(bloatware) industry that forces you to upgrade your hardware.
However, if you do not require new software, then there is no danger of your equipment becoming obselete so to speak.
For cameras, once it has a certain set of abilities, the situation doesn't change at all with time. The camera will still perform to the same ability as it has done so in the past;The flower will still be shot in the same way as you did 5 yrs back. The only reason for you to upgrade would be the fact that you are no longer satisfied with what you have and want the latest and greatest.
Let's just keep in mind the saying "Choose the right horse for the course". There is no sense in using a bread knife to cut a roast pig, or a chopper to to butter your bread.
As for the part about digital cameras becoming obselete....I think we may be wrongly relating cameras to computers here.
Computers become obselete over time, simply because new software demand greater hardware requirements just to perform adequately. It is the changing software(bloatware) industry that forces you to upgrade your hardware.
However, if you do not require new software, then there is no danger of your equipment becoming obselete so to speak.
For cameras, once it has a certain set of abilities, the situation doesn't change at all with time. The camera will still perform to the same ability as it has done so in the past;The flower will still be shot in the same way as you did 5 yrs back. The only reason for you to upgrade would be the fact that you are no longer satisfied with what you have and want the latest and greatest.
Zerstorer said:
definitely true.
interchangeable lenses are an investment.. a true investment that will stay for a long time if well maintained. i know the 100-400 L lens from canon, i think it's actually a model from 1999 or 1998 if i'm not wrong, but its re-sale value is still high and people are still using it.
for prosumer cams, it's more like a "use and throw" kind of thing.. like some people are gonna give up their 717 for an 828..
as for the f/2.0-2.8, yes it's impressive, but do not forget that for the lenses on prosumer cams, they're really just like, 7-50mm and there's actually a 4x (about there) magnification factor, that's why achieving 2.0-2.8 is relatively easier than getting 2.8 on a REAL 200mm lens.
and i don't think there's a basis for comparison for the carl zeiss on the prosumer vs a canon L lens... as mentioned above the real range is different.. and definitely the depth of field in a real 200mm lens is much better than one in the 7-50mm.
and after all that talk, it's really just about upgrading upgrading and more upgrading... tech chase, is it worth it ? your 5mp camera can already print pictures up to A3 size.. is that 8R ? what's up with the 10000mp when your photographs don't get bigger than 8R ?
oh, did i mention, somebody actually mentioned, and proved before, that you don't really need L lenses for a dSLR to give very good images. a mid-range zoom can produce exceptional results on dSLR, with little deterioration in image quality as compared to L lens.
sequitur said:
I do agree with you. However, there exists a bunch of techy people, say like me, whose hobby is to play with different gadgets, though at some price of course. Plain photography may not be the prime aim, at least for me. Sometimes I treat it as a tool, others I treat it as a passion. It's a very complex feeling just like I was very into computer hardware and I really splurge on them. While I agree sometimes that I do buy for the sake of buying, it to be able to enjoy the process of continuous learning and exploration that keep this passion alive. So Just Do It.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked