What's NEX(T)
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2012 2:13 am
Greetings Everyone!
I'm glad to have found this forum and the Photoclubalpha site. I'm a pro shooter from years ago, seasoned on a Canon 1D MK II (Yeah, it's been a while) with L-series glass; 24-70mm f2.8 L USM, 85mm f1.2 L USM and 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM and a ton of other stuff. Got out of the business, got rid off all of it, along with all my video gear, Kino Flo lighting, G5 towers, yada, yada...
Several compact zooms later, bit the bullet and bought an NEX 5 and all the available Sony glass, external mics, etc. It's a fine shooter and I've had a lot of fun with it and still do, but it's time to get back in the game again. I'm living in Costa Rica, moving to Hawaii for 6 months and will begin accumulating new (sort-of) gear again to return to Costa Rica with. The idea (well), we'll come back to the idea...
Mainly, I have to admit that I am a late comer to the Alpha series, but I have a keen interest in getting an A900 and an A77. I plan to use the A900 as a portrait body and the A77 for motion (fast stills and video). I've always wanted an FX body and the A900 can be had for around $2100 USD new. Given the cost of a new 5D3, I figure I can have two bodies for the price of one (good thing being far from a service center) and have two 24Mp rigs.
In reading some of the reviews on CZ glass, it looks like I won't be missing the red stripes of the L's at all. The big deal for me is this... I'm used to the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM. But it looks like the Sony version isn't quite as sharp. Sigma makes an a-mount that reviews better in the same 70-200mm zoom. But when I was using the Canon, I always wished I had a bit more zoom. So, the question is, should I just go for the SAL70400G? The 70-200 was not my most used lens back in the studio days, but down here in CR, the wildlife is pretty spectacular...
I am taken by the minimalist (stills only) approach Sony had when they developed the A900. Looking at the MF format bodies (can't afford 'em, don't worry) they just do one thing: shoot stills. Video is not my favorite either, but the frame rate on the A77 is pretty enticing. My old 1D MK II was good for 8.5 fps @ 8.25 Mp's, so the A77 kick' its a** on res and fps.
Is buying a new 4 year old body a bad idea? I tried submitting to Getty Images back in the 1D days and my work was rejected because of the lower res on the 1D MK II. I would love to get some input from you... Comments and feedback greatly appreciated.
Thank you for having me aboard!
Clint
I'm glad to have found this forum and the Photoclubalpha site. I'm a pro shooter from years ago, seasoned on a Canon 1D MK II (Yeah, it's been a while) with L-series glass; 24-70mm f2.8 L USM, 85mm f1.2 L USM and 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM and a ton of other stuff. Got out of the business, got rid off all of it, along with all my video gear, Kino Flo lighting, G5 towers, yada, yada...
Several compact zooms later, bit the bullet and bought an NEX 5 and all the available Sony glass, external mics, etc. It's a fine shooter and I've had a lot of fun with it and still do, but it's time to get back in the game again. I'm living in Costa Rica, moving to Hawaii for 6 months and will begin accumulating new (sort-of) gear again to return to Costa Rica with. The idea (well), we'll come back to the idea...
Mainly, I have to admit that I am a late comer to the Alpha series, but I have a keen interest in getting an A900 and an A77. I plan to use the A900 as a portrait body and the A77 for motion (fast stills and video). I've always wanted an FX body and the A900 can be had for around $2100 USD new. Given the cost of a new 5D3, I figure I can have two bodies for the price of one (good thing being far from a service center) and have two 24Mp rigs.
In reading some of the reviews on CZ glass, it looks like I won't be missing the red stripes of the L's at all. The big deal for me is this... I'm used to the Canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM. But it looks like the Sony version isn't quite as sharp. Sigma makes an a-mount that reviews better in the same 70-200mm zoom. But when I was using the Canon, I always wished I had a bit more zoom. So, the question is, should I just go for the SAL70400G? The 70-200 was not my most used lens back in the studio days, but down here in CR, the wildlife is pretty spectacular...
I am taken by the minimalist (stills only) approach Sony had when they developed the A900. Looking at the MF format bodies (can't afford 'em, don't worry) they just do one thing: shoot stills. Video is not my favorite either, but the frame rate on the A77 is pretty enticing. My old 1D MK II was good for 8.5 fps @ 8.25 Mp's, so the A77 kick' its a** on res and fps.
Is buying a new 4 year old body a bad idea? I tried submitting to Getty Images back in the 1D days and my work was rejected because of the lower res on the 1D MK II. I would love to get some input from you... Comments and feedback greatly appreciated.
Thank you for having me aboard!
Clint