40mm 2.8 af pancake

2»

Comments

  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,123Member
    edited December 2018
    PB_PM said:

    Olympus and Panasonic were in a good place with m4/3s when it was the only mirrorless system around, but once Sony really got going and Fuji got on board with the X system, m4/3s was toast as a still camera. Plenty of people love the GH 4 and 5 for video, but it's just not worth it for still shooting; that is when you consider that the only bodies worth getting cost more than the D7500 and don't come close in terms of performance in low light and AF.

    Oh yes, absolutely, if you were doing a lot of video it would make a lot of sense to get M4/3. If you were doing mostly stills (which I am exclusively doing) it doesn't make much sense. To be fair, M4/3 actually has a well stocked lens lineup.

    Also, considering when I bought my first DSLR around 2008 or so, I nearly bought a GH1, which came out in 2009. I'm glad I bought my DSLR first, because if I waited another year I might very well be using M4/3.
    mhedges said:



    True they were kind of lackluster refreshes but still that's a far cry from being discontinued. If they were discontinued then that would mean Nikon abandoning DX which (business wise) would be huge.

    I think Nikon from here on out may make low end Z mount cameras but may just conveniently phase out DX just so they can consolidate lens lineups.

    Post edited by NSXTypeR on
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    edited December 2018
    I am sure a lot of buying decisions are made on price and size, so I am sure DX will always be preferred by some people. mhedges is right, dropping DX would be risky.
    Post edited by spraynpray on
    Always learning.
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 1,000Member
    NSXTypeR said:

    I wouldn't really count them in as big updates on the magnitude of D200 to D300 or D7100 to D7200 even in terms of DX performance.

    7100->7200 was a weak update at best. The major changes were from 7000->7100 (sensor and AF) and from 7200->7500 (sensor and body design). 7100 to 7200 was less of a major update (e.g. ).
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    Agreed. D7000 to D7100 was a biggy of low light performance, resolution and AF, D7100 to D7200 was development of an already peachy camera. For what I do, the D7200 is still the best DX.

    Now if they had put that sensor in a D500...
    Always learning.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,122Member
    Yup, the D7200 came out to get bluetooth and wifi in there for the useless Snapbridge app, otherwise just a paper refresh.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • petempetem Posts: 8Member
    Now where were we?
  • SearcySearcy Posts: 588Member
    I've always used to bluetooth and wifi on the d7200 to send shots to the Nikon WMU app on my iPhone. It's been handy for uploading shots from events while they are going on.

    I really saw the 7500 and a step backwards from the 7200.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    Many did, that's why there is a whole thread of it's own here.

    That 40mm. I am not convinced that offers enough of a difference over the 35 or 50's to justify the expense of producing one for a few sales when the Z range is in urgent need of growing. I tried the 35mm f1.4 Nikkor and found it to be really good. I mean really good.
    Always learning.
  • petempetem Posts: 8Member
    null
    I used to have the 35mm 1.4G too. Beautiful lens but not one for your everyday particularly attached to a D700. Traded mine in for a 28mm 1.8g as the former proved restrictive when shooting indoors at a wedding.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    Yeah, that is why my favourite is the 24-35 f2.
    Always learning.
  • petempetem Posts: 8Member
    Spraynpray - is that the Sigma?
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,236Moderator
    It is, yes. I love it.
    Always learning.
Sign In or Register to comment.