Divesting from E mount

[Lsake]

I mainly, use my S5 and have built a decent L mount lens collection. I have also been using a Sony A7Riii and 200-600mm lens. The Sony setup has been used almost exclusively for wildlife photography where the 600mm range and huge resolution is a considerable benefit (small birds or larger distances), and was something I acquired prior to L mount having such options.

With the release of the Sigma 150-600mm and the Lumix S5ii, it seems that L mount is a viable option for these situations too. So I am now seriously considering selling all my Sony stuff and just using my S5 for all scenarios, with a possible S5ii or S1ii upgrade at some point this year.

I am interested to know if anyone on LMF has made similar decisions or currently use alternate systems for specific use cases?

For me having a single system is more appropriate as this is a hobby, not a job. While the Sony kit is great for my use case, I don’t feel entirely justified sitting on such an expensive setup for the limited use case. And while an A7Riii on paper is objectively a better camera than a Lumix S5, in practise I prefer using the S5 and the Lumix lenses.

In preparation for going L mount only, I have also ordered the Sigma TC-2011 teleconverter to pair with my exisiting Sigma 100-400mm DG DN lens. Hopefully over the coming weeks I will be able to do some experimenting with the S5 and an 800mm f12.6. I am sort of betting on the S5 dual gain architecture being able to compensate for the slow aperture to give me a usable 800mm FF setup that weighs less than 2kg.

 

[CharlesH]

I have two systems, Lumix and Sony, and am aiming to go all L mount. But I am keeping my A1 for now, for wildlife photography. And I'll keep an eye on what Panasonic does in the future.

 

[jalywol]

From past TC experience, I would recommend the 1.4x TC over the 2X, for a few reasons. I can't say if all of these will apply to the Sigma TC as I only have the 1.4X one of theirs, but here goes:
1) Max aperture: You lose one stop with the 1.4x, 2 stops with the 2.0x. This makes a difference with slower lenses, and with long lenses, anything that enables you to keep your speed up is a good thing. In addition, I have found that stopping down just a bit, when using a TC, improves sharpness, reduces CA and generally improves the output. Unfortunately, when you are already losing two stops with a 2x TC, this affects the shooting envelope more than is desirable.
2) CA: I have not yet met a TC that does not add some type of CA to the output. I've found that stopping down tends to ameliorate some of that, but again, it's worse with the higher mag optics of the longer TC.
3) Sharpness: More consistent sharpness with the shorter TC. Some of that, I am sure, is due to shooting at the far end of the telephoto range, but some is just from the extra glass in the TC.

I have the Sigma 150-600mm sport, which I am very impressed with. I bought the 1.4x TC for it a couple of months ago, and have had it out a few times, but not for anything critical. I am pleased so far with it, but I have not put it to a really tough test yet; as soon as more birds get back and I get a chance to shoot them, that will tell me a lot more. Of course, even with the 1.4x, the max zoom is out at 840mm, and that's tempting fate already, in terms of environmental effects on the image, so I really wouldn't want to go much longer on that lens, in any case.

I did try the Sigma 100-400mm (rented it), and I don't know if it was the particular copy I got, or what, but I wasn't impressed with it. The 150-600mm that I rented gave me such good results that I ended up buying one, in spite of its size. The copy that I bought is equally good, and I take it out a lot more frequently than I thought I would (I've worked out a monopod support setup that works really well for it for me). I don't know how that would compare to the Sony 200-500mm, though, as I have never used one. Also, with the S5, I found that I really needed to use the animal detect setting; I tend to be an S-AF shooter, but that was giving me only fair results. So I tried the animal detect AF setting, and it really settled in quite well. One thing though, I do not do birds in flight, so if that's your thing, I suspect the S5II will be a better option, no matter what lens you end up with....

Hope this is helpful,
-J

 

[Lsake]

I have two systems, Lumix and Sony, and am aiming to go all L mount. But I am keeping my A1 for now, for wildlife photography. And I'll keep an eye on what Panasonic does in the future.

Understandable, in terms of features and power there is hardly anything that comes close to an A1 right now. Hopefully future Lumix flagships can bring similar features. Although it’s probably not a ballpark I’d be playing in. I’m definitely more of an S5/S1 type of user…

That being said I never actually thought I’d own a full frame camera, and yet here I am.

 

[pdk42]

I’ve tried running multiple systems in the past, but it only led to dithering as to which to use. Maybe a m43 system for long lens photography makes sense with FF for everything else, but I think having two systems with the same sensor size only makes sense if there is a body/lens combo you can only get by doing so.

 

[Lsake]

From past TC experience, I would recommend the 1.4x TC over the 2X, for a few reasons. I can't say if all of these will apply to the Sigma TC as I only have the 1.4X one of theirs, but here goes:
1) Max aperture: You lose one stop with the 1.4x, 2 stops with the 2.0x. This makes a difference with slower lenses, and with long lenses, anything that enables you to keep your speed up is a good thing. In addition, I have found that stopping down just a bit, when using a TC, improves sharpness, reduces CA and generally improves the output. Unfortunately, when you are already losing two stops with a 2x TC, this affects the shooting envelope more than is desirable.
2) CA: I have not yet met a TC that does not add some type of CA to the output. I've found that stopping down tends to ameliorate some of that, but again, it's worse with the higher mag optics of the longer TC.
3) Sharpness: More consistent sharpness with the shorter TC. Some of that, I am sure, is due to shooting at the far end of the telephoto range, but some is just from the extra glass in the TC.

I have the Sigma 150-600mm sport, which I am very impressed with. I bought the 1.4x TC for it a couple of months ago, and have had it out a few times, but not for anything critical. I am pleased so far with it, but I have not put it to a really tough test yet; as soon as more birds get back and I get a chance to shoot them, that will tell me a lot more. Of course, even with the 1.4x, the max zoom is out at 840mm, and that's tempting fate already, in terms of environmental effects on the image, so I really wouldn't want to go much longer on that lens, in any case.

I did try the Sigma 100-400mm (rented it), and I don't know if it was the particular copy I got, or what, but I wasn't impressed with it. The 150-600mm that I rented gave me such good results that I ended up buying one, in spite of its size. The copy that I bought is equally good, and I take it out a lot more frequently than I thought I would (I've worked out a monopod support setup that works really well for it for me). I don't know how that would compare to the Sony 200-500mm, though, as I have never used one. Also, with the S5, I found that I really needed to use the animal detect setting; I tend to be an S-AF shooter, but that was giving me only fair results. So I tried the animal detect AF setting, and it really settled in quite well. One thing though, I do not do birds in flight, so if that's your thing, I suspect the S5II will be a better option, no matter what lens you end up with....

Hope this is helpful,
-J

Thanks for this very detailed response.

I did consider for quite a while whether I should get the 1.4x or 2x converter. As you say the 2x can really be pushing the limits, especially if the light isn’t great. I finally clicked the button on the 2x partly, I think, out of curiosity, what can I squeeze out of the 100-400mm? Can I actually achieve 800mm with such a small lens? I suppose I will find out over the summer… Summer being the main time of year I imagine this will be usable. My 100-400mm seems to be a very good copy, it doesn’t really lose anything to my 200-600mm, and by all accounts that is a very good lens.

I will very likely also be buying the Sigma 150-600mm to take with me on those dedicated outings where the bigger lens will have its benefits. Although this probably won’t happen until I’ve sold off the sony kit.

Specifically for wildlife photography I tend to photograph birds and deer. Two very different creatures but I do have a couple of different AF settings I prefer but all make use of animal detect. I don’t specifically target birds in flight, but I do grab some shots if the opportunity presents, for this I find better success just using the oval AF pattern.

 

[Lsake]

I’ve tried running multiple systems in the past, but it only led to dithering as to which to use. Maybe a m43 system for long lens photography makes sense with FF for everything else, but I think having two systems with the same sensor size only makes sense if there is a body/lens combo you can only get by doing so.

Since I have a very narrow use for the Sony it’s not so much a cause of indecision. But little things like having two battery chargers and two sets of batteries that aren’t cross compatible is annoying. Then having different behaviours and custom buttons can cause confusion when switching between the two. I make quite extensive use of custom modes to mitigate this, but sometimes I still end up bamboozled, usually by the sony.

 

[Jan.Wedekind]

I think the Sigma is heavier than the Sony lens. Might not seem much but if a hypothetical S1ii does not shed weighjt, the whole thing ends up half a kg more.

Also agree re TCs: I will sell the Panasonic 2x and will consider getting the Sigma 1.4. The drop in sharpness is noticeable and the two stops aperture is hard to compensate. Interested in getting the Sigma one instead only because of metadata since I would be mostly using it with Sigma lenses.

 

[CharlesH]

Also agree re TCs: I will sell the Panasonic 2x and will consider getting the Sigma 1.4. The drop in sharpness is noticeable and the two stops aperture is hard to compensate. Interested in getting the Sigma one instead only because of metadata since I would be mostly using it with Sigma lenses.

Maybe like cheating, but for M43 I find a small amount of sharpen from Topaz Photo AI with a X2 on a Leica 50-200 works well. This gives a full frame equivalent of 800mm. Photo AI also handles the noise. From that experience it might be worth a look at Topaz for a X2 with the Sigma 100-400.

 

[Jayneboo]

Just my opinion and from my own experience having been there and done that.. though in my case it was giving up a Canon DSLR system and trying to "Do it All" with L mount. I pretty soon realised if I wanted/had to shoot any amount of action/wildlife/sports then I had to step back. Now I have the S5II which had PDAF, I won't be making the same mistake again, it's still not time. As difficult as it sometimes is to have two systems it's better than the frustration of missed opportunities, and not getting the job done. I also think L mount is still missing some options at the long end. I've had the both the Sigma tele's in the past, and the 1.4 TC (wouldn't bother with the x2), the 150-600 is the better lens but is a bit of a lump.

 

[Lsake]

thanks all for the feedback and comments. I have just posted a brief first impressions thread about the 2x TC as I recieved it today and spent an hour causally testing it. Short but positive experience so far but I had good sunlight.

I had a quote from the shop to buy the Sony gear but it’s not that competitive so I’m not gonna rush to get rid just yet.

 

[Roger J]

Greetings L mount crew
At the moment I have 2 systems Nikon film and Sigma FP, sorry make that 3 systems Sigma SA mount. I had Nikon Z but sold that system. Right now I trying to decide which system to keep and which system to sell. I'm looking into the Nikon DSLR F mount for a few reasons, the D series lenses are a bargain right now, and the D series F mount will work on digital and film. That way I can carry one digital one film and my lenses will work on both.
So 2 cameras 3 lenses and I'm on the road. Total cost under $1000 USD and it works fine. I love the Sigma L mount and the SD series for the IQ but speed isn't their strong point. Although I love the size of the FP and how you can adapt a lot of different lenses to it for a different look.
Running more than one system is to difficult, you never get to know what your gear can do when you run more than one system. For me I need speed and I don't like adapters as they don't work all the time, but I use them for manual focusing.

Good Luck
Roger J.

 

[wh1tby]

Currently I am using a Sony A7RIVa, the Lumix S5II and a Fujifilm X100V. This is after I slimmed down and sold my Canon R5, Nikon Z7ii and Fujifilm XT4. So you can see I was a really confused user. The reason is I wanted to find the best system for me and I was lucky enough to be able to buy one of each and use them over a period of a few years. I settled on the Sony and Fuji X100v (for street photography) but was intrigued to buy the S5II after briefly trying an S5 and not being that happy but seeing its potential. In the end I am not sure what I will do, but at the moment the S5ii, A7Riva and X100v are staying. I do have a lot of money invested in E mount lenses but I love using the S5ii. Sony are not known for their elegant ergonomics and ease of operation. The S5ii is a delight.