Shooting Football with an A7RII

[eric_arnold]

<p>So, a DPReview staffer tried an interesting experiment, <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5684109129/lucky-number-7-shooting-pro-sports-with-the-sony-a7r-ii">shooting a preseason NFL game</a> with an A7RII and various lenses, including a Sony 70-200/4, a Sony 70-400 with adapter, and a Canon 70-200 with adapter. How'd it do?</p>

<p>Unfortunately, not all that well. As suspected, there were many issues:</p>

<ul>

<li>There was EVF blackout in continuous shooting mode (<em>"</em><em>This leads to a detached experience that just doesn’t feel right when photographing fast action, especially pro sports</em>") which, much like Hogan's experience doing the same thing, led to a non-seamless shooting flow (<em>"</em><em>Disruption caused by playback blackout works against the photographer when trying to anticipate a moment when shooting in continuous burst"</em>).</li>

<li>Some AF modes didnt work all that well </li>

<li>AF-On use for extended time caused equipment failure --can be fixed with firmware update</li>

<li>Lack of a multi-focus point button -- a physical limitation which can only be fixed by an updated body</li>

<li>5fps too slow for fast action (<em>"Continuous shooting speeds on the a7R II are mediocre at best, topping out at 5 fps, and only 3 fps if you want continuous AF with adapted glass. Even when on HI mode, the aforementioned image playback blackout kicks in to work against the maximum burst shooting speed offered by the a7R II. Three frames per second is so slow that it's not really useable – and certainly no fun – for fast action."</em>)</li>

</ul>

<p>Overall conclusion:<em> "There is no doubt that the a7R II delivers exceptional autofocus performance relative to the mirrorless market, but <strong>given the drawbacks of AF mode / area implementation, a lack of direct AF point control, cramped ergonomics and distracting screen blackout</strong>, next time I shoot the Seahawks, I'll take my trusty DSLRs."</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

Should we be surprised? No, not really. it's doubtful the results would have been different had the shooter practiced with a metronome first ;) , but then again, the A7RII is not meant to be a sports camera used with long lenses. it's just not designed that way. And that's ok. </p>

[Carl Stone]

<p>I read that article this morning and immediately came here to see how it plays with those that think the A7RII is a pro sports camera. Your post hit the highlights of the article very well, Eric. </p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>An A7Rii is not the best choice for pro football, but is more than adequate for active children or an impromptu game of frisbee in a park. Can't say about sports in general, I grew up and left all that behind.</p>

<p>Perhaps it is a matter of semantics, but there is no significant blackout in the EVF, whether in single or continuous mode. There is a stop-motion effect, showing the next frame just before capture, which the author may be describing as a "blackout." When finished shooting, the viewfinder returns instantly to live view, UNLESS you have automatic review selected. In that case, the last frame shot holds in the finder for a minimum of 2 seconds. It also takes a considerable amount of time to clear the buffer after a continuous string before you can review photos. That has no effect on the viewfinder, and you can continue to shoot as buffer space is restored. (It would probably help to shot JPEG only. In-camera JPEGs are 16 MB, compared to 42MB compressed RAW or 84 MB uncompressed.)</p>

<p>There's no way to get around the relatively slow 5 fps continuous rate compared to the 10+ fps available in most DSLRs. Oh, wait! The A7Rii can shoot 12 MP frames at 60 fps with continuous live view, auto-focusing and exposure control.</p>

<p>"Some AF modes didn't work well." Solution - Read the manual! Practice before committing to an important shoot!</p>

<p>There are a lot of options for AF - so many I haven't had time to explore them in detail after 6 months with the A7Rii. For that matter, there are options in my D3 I haven't explored after five years. For example, by default, Sony lenses are stopped down to the preset, which slows auto focus. Turn "viewfinder effects" OFF, and the lens stays open until focus is locked or the shot is taken. Focus tracking, in general, seems to work (on any platform) only in certain situations. The Sony has Eye Tracking and Facial Recognition not found in any DSLR (AFIK), which work very well for portraits, especially of children.</p>

[david_smith110]

<p>Also from the article...</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p><em>Would I rely on it for a second or third body at a sporting event with money and a client on the line? No, not yet – but I’m looking forward to the day that I would. And that day might not be far off. All things considered, pro-SLR autofocus technology draws from three decades of research, whereas the a7R II is still an infant in only its second-generation of existence. Not too shabby for a sophomore effort, Sony.</em></p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Again, the a7 series is not ready for out and out top of the line Pro Sports photography. But when viewed in the light of how close mirrorless has come to top level DSLR's, which have had their AF researched and developed for almost thirty years, the results are actually quite good. Give on-senor focus technology thirty more years of advancements and it will blow away what DSLR's can do today. And therein lies the rub. On sensor tech <em>can</em> benefit from decades more research and development whereas the AF system based on the mirror is just about at the end of its line. This pretty much describes the whole DSLR/MC situation in a nutshell. One system has been well nigh perfected and benefits from decades of development, although at the end of its development cycle. The other system has years of untold development potential ahead of it. By removing the mirrorbox you now force innovation to happen <em>on the sensor</em> and in the EVF that otherwise might not occur.</p>

[Carl Stone]

<p>Thank you, Nostradamus, who knew that camera technology would be more advanced in another thirty years?</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>It won't take thirty years. It took less than ten years for digital to overtake and largely replace film. In nine years we sent from blowing up rockets on the launch pad to walking on the moon. There are too many advantages in EVF technology to ignore, and surprisingly few problems to overcome. Sony's predicting five years to market domination, probably a pessimistic view.</p>

<p>Pro sports photography constitutes a tiny niche among users, hundreds out of millions. For amateur sports, parents with cell phones are happy with their results. In between these extremes, the A7Rii and its kin are exciting a lot more photographers than they disappoint. In some respects, it's like Jeeps vs Porsches. A Porsche can't traverse logs in the road, but a Jeep can't stay on the road at 130 mph, or turn a 0.9 G corner. Porsches don't have much room for groceries, so maybe Odysseys would be a better comparison (and still take corners better than Jeeps).</p>

<p>I stay within the speed limit and drive around trees in the road, but can't resist tight corners, photographically speaking.</p>

[david_smith110]

<blockquote>

<p>Thank you, Nostradamus, who knew that camera technology would be more advanced in another thirty years?-</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I tell you what <em>wont</em> change in the next thirty years, and that is your lack of contributing anything of substance to these conversations.</p>

<p>Leave the cheap pop shots at home Carl. Put down your troll pom poms and try joining the dialogue for once with something productive.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Dave, I haven't used the original A7. How do you find the viewfinder? Is there a noticeable lag or blackout period. How about in continuous shooting? I'd like to hear from a user, rather than a reviewer of reviews.</p>

[Carl Stone]

<p>When I read the DPR article this morning I knew that you'd come here to pontificate. You didn't disappoint me, and in your post, you didn't really say anything that I would consider worthy of being called a contribution. I pointed that out.</p>

<p>You've been on a roll over mirrorless vs DSLRs, and when your info was shown to be wrong bt Jeff, Eric, and myself, then you post what is obvious to most of us, and act like you're posting breaking news. Everybody knows that mirrorless is in it's infancy compared to DSLRs, and everybody knows that the technology will advance. The DSLR sky is not falling. Gimme a break. </p>

<p> </p>

[david_smith110]

<p>Edward, most of the photography I shoot with my a7 is single shot. I have shot with a mirrorless camera now for so long I don't even remember what it is like to hear the clunk of the mirror and see it black out for a second. When I moved to Sony from Canon the transition was very smooth and I don't remember having an VF issues, so for the type of photography I do its a wash.</p>

<p>But every once in a while I will shoot something that requires continuous shooting, like my daughter jumping in puddles. When I am cranking through several frames per second the EVF blackout is noticeable, but I cant compare it to what a DSLR was like. Its just been to long. Consecutively over several seconds of shooting there might be an apparent delay between what you see in the VF and what is happening in reality. But it is pretty darn small. Like I said, I'm doing this with adapted manual lenses so my input probably isn't the best suited for this.</p>

<p>I agree with what you say though. Pro sports is, when compared to the vastness of all the kinds of photography, a relatively small niche. The a7 series does lag behind in this area (and others needing similar specs) when compared to pro spec DSLR's. But for most every other type of photography the a7's are a strong contender. These cameras will only get better and better. Sony is stoopidly serious about bring innovation to these bodies at a frantic pace. Heaven only knows what those all those guys in white lab coats down in the Sony basement are going to come up with next. All it will take is one sudden, crazy breakthrough with sensor or pixel design to completely change the performance of the a7's and mirrorless cameras in general. The next few years are going to be very fun indeed.</p>

[david_smith110]

<blockquote>

<p>When I read the DPR article this morning I knew that you'd come here to pontificate.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Awwwww...you think of me in the morning. I'm flattered. :)</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>original A7...Is there a noticeable lag or blackout period</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, there is in continuous shooting (which is actually quite slow - less than 2 fps). Significantly longer blackout than anything I ever encountered in a DSLR (and the A7 seems louder than, for example, my D7100 or D810 - despite being mirror-less (and with electronics first curtain active)).<br /> There's no discernible blackout in "speed priority continuous". This is shooting RAW and manual focus (I don't have any AF lenses for the A7). If I am not mistaken, then the difference between the two mode is that in continuous mode PDAF and CDAF are active, whereas in "speed priority" only PDAF is (and quite likely only on the first shot and then focus is locked?)</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>there is no significant blackout in the EVF, whether in single or continuous mode. There is a stop-motion effect, showing the next frame just before capture, which the author may be describing as a "blackout." </p>

</blockquote>

<p>well, now we've had two credible reports from experienced sports photographers of this phenomenon. so it literally doesnt matter what you want to call this or whether you want to admit it exists or not. the point is that it impacts the shooting experience in live action situations -- and would doubtless also impact shooting frisbee in the park, if you shot in continuous focus mode.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Some AF modes didn't work well." Solution - Read the manual! Practice before committing to an important shoot!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>did you read the article? there dont appear to be workarounds for this issue. I personally found it helpful that the DPReview guy tested all the various modes in a live action situation and reported his experience.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This pretty much describes the whole DSLR/MC situation in a nutshell. One system has been well nigh perfected and benefits from decades of development, although at the end of its development cycle. The other system has years of untold development potential ahead of it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>i agree with this comment. and that's ok. my point in posting this was just to emphasize taking a realistic, non-hyperbolic approach to describing the A7RII's performance. I think DPReview is doing Sony a favor by pointing out what works and what doesn't; if they want to fix this, they now know what they have to do.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Pro sports photography constitutes a tiny niche among users, hundreds out of millions. For amateur sports, parents with cell phones are happy with their results.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Pro sports photogs have been the model for amateurs for decades -- specifically, they've been highlighted in camera company advertisements forever. They set a standard, so to speak. So while the actual number of pro sports shooters may be tiny, it's very influential and has traditionally been a key segment for developing brand identity for both Canon and Nikon. That's why they put a lot of emphasis on having new high-end products ready for the Olympics and feature sports photogs prominently, shooting everything from tennis to football. This leads directly to the next point, which is this: i dont think it's accurate at all to say that amateurs are happy using cell phones. If that were true, we wouldnt see any posts here on P.Net by amateurs shooting high school sports, inquiring about lenses, correct settings, etc. And there would be no reason to write this article if that were the case -- in case you haven't figured it out, DPReview's readership is mainly amateurs and hobbyists. Maybe they dont have access to an NFL sideline, but they may want to shoot in similar conditions. There are literally millions of amateurs shooting their children's soccer and basketball games for whom cell phone cameras are completely underwhelming.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The DSLR sky is not falling. Gimme a break.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>well, i think the answer here is yes and no. DSLRs still outsell mirrorless by millions of units, but as was earlier pointed out, they may have reached an apex in development. OTOH, mirrorless does represent some truly innovative technology and will continue to evolve for the foreseeable future. Where the rubber hits the road is in actual usage. If you read the article, he says over and over again that the A7RII works really well with small primes. Once you get into longer lenses and challenging shooting situations, some things come into play.<br>

<br>

FWIW, I didn't post this to savage the A7RII or imply that it wasnt a capable body for many things. I posted this because as Carl pointed out, there has been much debate over this, and in particular a lot of claims made about performance here which don't seem to be upheld by actual usage. It surely can't be a coincidence that the DPReview guy and Thom Hogan had very similar experiences. Another thing to keep in mind is that when we are talking about shooting sports or live action, best performance is gained by a bunch of things working together -- it's not just the camera sensor, but how well a body performs with certain lenses and in certain shooting situations. Ergonomics which dont factor into casual shooting may play a bigger role in live action shooting. There are many potential limiting factors, all of which are fairly well outlined in the article. If i were to bottom-line this, i would say that for portrait shooters and landscapists, a Sony mirrorless would probably work great. However for speed captures, and working with long lenses, any of the high-end DSLRs are probably better choices. It's not a knock against a Porsche to say it's not the best choice for off-roading, just an objective statement of fact.</p>

[Carl Stone]

<p>"Sony is stoopidly serious about bring innovation to these bodies at a frantic pace."<br>

Well, if you go look at Sony products you'll see that they produce a gazillion models of nearly everything they they make. I'm not saying that Sony isn't serious about mirrorless, but, unless you have inside info, you don't know how much. I have nothing against Sony, but they didn't invent innovation, nor do they have a lock on it. Samsung and LG have both outpaced Sony with TV offerings. <br>

Don't expect Canon and Nikon to play dead, and don't forget that Nikon got more out of the Sony sensors than Sony has. <br>

Eric has summed it up, it's way too soon to start betting on individual horses in this race. The only bet that I'd make is that all of the horses will not finish, although I can't be more specific. </p>

<p>A pro friend of mine, a Nikon shooter that has work hanging in the Crocker, just sold his Sony RX100iii and ordered the new Canon G9X because the Canon fits in his pocket. The best camera is the one that you have with you, and you're more likely to carry a camera that easily fits into a pocket. He also bought a new iPhone 6s for the camera, but he isn't shedding his D800 any time soon. </p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>every once in a while I will shoot something that requires continuous shooting, like my daughter jumping in puddles. When I am cranking through several frames per second the EVF blackout is noticeable,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>ok, but what you are describing here is a completely different scenario from what a sideline shooter goes through during the course of a game. it's one thing to occasionally use AF-C for some candid action shots which don't really matter all that much if you miss a shot or two, and quite another to have to rely on AF-C for the entire duration of a game, which takes several hours.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The a7 series does lag behind in this area (and others needing similar specs) when compared to pro spec DSLR's. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>it's not just pro DSLRs. even some entry-level models have better capabilities in terms of AF-C shooting. this is an inherent limitation of EVF cameras, although doubtless we'll see better EVFs appear down the line.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>All it will take is one sudden, crazy breakthrough with sensor or pixel design to completely change the performance of the a7's and mirrorless cameras in general. The next few years are going to be very fun indeed.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>sure, if your idea of fun is upgrading your body every six months and still not having the lenses you need. Ok, that was a bit snarky. I see your point about sensor tech, but it raises another point about usability. you can have an innovative piece of technology in a camera with a bad UI and poorly-designed ergonomics -- Sigma DPQuattro, anyone? With Sony, i dont think anyone would dispute they are at the forefront of tech innovation in the digital imaging sector. The point i'm trying to make, however, is that tech innovation is just one part of a puzzle. Not being able to quickly select a focus point is perhaps something engineers may not think is important, which is in fact quite important in actual field usage. Similarly, an f/4 zoom might be great for most users, but not in situations where you need 2.8. And assuming you can raise frame rates past 5fps in the future, if you dont also find a way to improve battery life, 10-11 fps will eat up a charge in a hurry. Which could lead to having to change batteries at inconvenient times, even if you have fully-charged spares. That's an inherent conundrum of the mirrorless aesthetic: smaller cameras = smaller batteries, and just another reason they aren't inherently suited for action photography at this time. If all of these issues are addressed, then, sure, why not use a mirrorless for action?</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Thanks, Dave. It sounds like the A7ii and A7Rii behave much different from the original model. I've been doing damage with one for nearly a year now, which probably marks me as biased and unworthy of attention. It's good to know at least someone else in the thread has actually seen one in person, much less used one. Heaven forbid that one would go to the source rather than an hastily written review. Where would we be without second-hand news, and those who accept it without question. NBC would have to hire a reporter ;)</p>

<p>The A7Rii will run indefinitely from an external USB power pack. I have one with a capacity of 20,000 mAH, about 4-1/2 times the size of a Nikon battery. I use it only on a tripod, because of an incident years ago, (i.e., when Nikon D2 batteries lasted for about 400 images). I set the camera on a table and walked away without first detaching the cable. It's good to have a backup. (The only damage was dislodging the GG screen. An RRS L-bracket looks and acts like a roll bar.)</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Sorry I don't share the hero worship for pro sports. My heroes have a far more staying power and far fewer incidents with drugs and spousal abuse. Monday Night Football started nearly 50 years ago, and I've missed all of them.</p>

[Carl Stone]

Common Edward, you wanna blame that on the photographers? Whether or not you like it, sports are a big business.

Actually, I don't watch most sports for the reasons that you mention, but, I have nothing against those that shoot sports.

[david_smith110]

<p>Carl, your last post was much more productive and actually contained something of substance. I appreciate you taking the time to do this.</p>

<p>But honestly man, I never said Sony had a 'lock' on innovation. Nope, didn't say that one time. But when you look at the speed with which they are bringing their innovation to market...well its all right there. Better and better EVFs, 3 FF models in 2 years with upgraded Mk II versions of each that are noticeably better, BSI sensors, Electronic AA filters....And no, I'm not talking about their TV division. Sony reorganized and built up the new business around their 'Three Pillars', well TV aint one of those pillars. There are countless times when Sony has been out-innovated.</p>

<p>Look, for the longest time I was not a Sony fan. I'm mean way back in the 90's when I was into home audio. Sony had put out some nice components but then they flooded the market with a bunch of crappy 'me to' products. Sony went thru a period of trying to create 5 products for each market niche when only 1 product in every other niche would have been just fine. They were literally throwing crap at the wall to see what would stick. I am also a gamer, and a long time Xbox user. I have owned Playstations and I cant stand the PS controller, the way the menu system and interface works, and their freaking download times for patches are RIDICULOUS. My Xbox will download and install a patch in seconds. On the Sony? Start the download and then go have dinner. You might be able to play after that. Maybe.</p>

<p>But when it comes to photography Sony are just hitting it out of the park. What they have managed to bring to market in such a short time, especially from a company that was waffling all over the place just a few years ago, is <em>astounding</em>. And man I don't have to expect Canon and Nikon play dead...I'm <em>watching</em> them play dead. But in a way it is hard to blame them for this because their product, the DSLR, just doesn't have much innovation left in it. There really isn't that much more to do to what is arguably the most perfected camera system on the planet. They only thing they can do now is get serious about mirrorless. And from the rumor mill Canon at least is doing just that. Even now there should be a serious apsc and FF Canon mirrorless in development. I cant wait to see these models. I might finally have a reason to upgrade my a7.</p>

<p>So for now, for me....I <em>will</em> bet on Sony. I have no reason to believe this juggernaut wont continue. But just think...if Sony is cranking at this pace right now, with no competition to speak of in the FF MC market, what will they do when Canon and Nikon <strong><em>do</em></strong> get serious?</p>

<p>And Eric, lol....I feel like we are having the same long distance phone conversation over and over on multiple days. I know where you are coming from man and you have a lot of strong points with good information. I have said it over and over, the a7's aren't great for sports. But there are pro sports photogs using them for their work, just not pro football games and the like.</p>

<p>Look, I really don't care what anybody shoots. I really don't. I am much more impressed with somebody's photographs then what they used to make them. Unless its collodion wet plate, that stuff is fascinating. But I am hyped about Sony and what they have brought to market. Especially in such a short time frame. The a7 is a perfect tool for <em>my</em> photography, but that wont be the case for everyone. No big deal. I do think mirrorless is going to explode in the near future as more tech and innovation improves it. Especially after Canon and Nikon get involved.</p>

<p>You know what? I think these post would be more interesting if everyone includes a photo every time they post. This is, after all, what these cameras are all about right?</p>

<p>a7 II • Canon FD 50/1.4<br /> <img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/740/20550313854_25c2815835_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Sorry I don't share the hero worship for pro sports. My heroes have a far more staying power and far fewer incidents with drugs and spousal abuse. Monday Night Football started nearly 50 years ago, and I've missed all of them.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>off-topic, kinda, but interesting comment nonetheless. Drugs and spousal abuse are a societal problem. We can make a case that football is a culture of violence, and that violence is our entertainment, but then the same can be said about television in general as well as movies. There are lots of pro athletes with no "character issues" and there's little doubt that sports teams who win championships lend a sense of community pride to the cities they play in. If you personally are not a sports fan, it's probably because you didn't play sports growing up. No judgment, but ive found that to be the case most of the time. <br>

<br>

Aside from that, though, sports and action are exciting and challenging things to shoot from a photographic perspective. No one mentioned "hero worship," just that pro photography is associated with sports from a marketing and branding perspective. Maybe that will change over time, but i kind of doubt that.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> I am hyped about Sony and what they have brought to market. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>really? i had no idea from the 3 posts a day you do hyping what Sony has brought to market. seriously, i like innovation as much as the next person, but i also have specific shooting needs because i am a photojournalist and i do shoot events and live action stuff. if someone gave me an A7 camera and a bag of lenses, i would use it, sure, and find out what it's good for. But if im contemplating outlaying a wad of hard-earned cash, i want to make sure im getting something which suits my needs. There are definitely times when i dont want to carry a 25-30lb kit, and i have smaller setups for that. Which is great. But as far as where we are going with all this, i think we're seeing the evolution of niche markets and specialized products. there are lots of things where an EOS-M or RX100 would suffice, and also things where they will not be sufficient. what im trying to say is the one-camera-fits-all model is an outdated paradigm. Even if you drop $12.5 large on a Leica SL kit, you might still find yourself taking a candid snap with a GX9 or cel phone. what i'd like to see is more integration of workflow from camera companies. but what we're actually seeing is better cameras from cel phone companies. </p>

[Carl Stone]

I didn't say that you said Sony had a lock on innovation, I told you that they did not. If you will recall, Sony wound up with

Konica/Minolta, and that means some of their camera knowledge too. At one time Minolta had the fastest AF on the

planet, but that was then, and this is now.

 

You apparently think that Sony is on the verge of world domination WRT to manufacturing photo gear. I do not share that

opinion. Do they have very nice examples on the market? Yes, they do, and they'll probably get even better. In the

meantime, where's the glass?

[Carl Stone]

I agree with Thom Hogan, the modular camera is the one to watch for. THAT is innovation.

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>In the meantime, where's the glass?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>bingo. this is as much of a reason why Sony cameras arent great for sports as all the other stuff. but it also shows that Sony is great at developing bodies, but not that great at developing systems. Point all you want to the fact that Sony FE is only 3 years old, but that doesnt explain why there arent more native lenses for the Nex/Alpha cameras, including 2.8 zooms. That's one reason i dont get too excited about hype.</p>

[david_smith110]

<blockquote>

<p>i had no idea from the 3 posts a day you do hyping what Sony has brought to market</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's an easy one. I decided a while back that pnet will be the main forum I am posting to. No reason to post to a bunch of different ones when I like the community here. And yes, I do post a lot of topics, the majority of them in mirrorless. I do this to help boost this forum by sharing news from around the net in an effort to drive traffic here and generate discussions. To many times I have looked at the mirrorless forum and the discussions are just dead. I have made a personal decision to foster some change in this. If people know they can come here to get a good quick look at some recent mirrorless news then more power to me. And to be fair, I have posted several reviews that are not flattering to the a7 series, along with topics about Fuji and Canon.</p>

<p>I would hope that others who use this forum would step up and link interesting articles from around the net for discussion. It would be rewarding to turn this forum into a vibrant hub for mirrorless topics.</p>

<p>Just doing my part. :)</p>

<p>a7 • Tokina RMC 17/3.5<br /> <img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7351/12826962064_f68b64ee45_c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[Carl Stone]

<p>'56 Olds, but the vertical center bar in the grill is gone from that one. </p>