Peter_in_PA

<blockquote> <p>I doubt it.<br />Being able to shoot in lower light doesn't make better photos. I guess you haven't owned a full frame body, have you.<br> Besides, a d700 or 5dmkii take excellent pictures, better than the latest toy camera, and deliver clean pictures up to iso 2200 - 3200.</p> </blockquote> <p>I have used full-frame, I have shot digitally for 15 years, Before that, I used film since about 1982.<br /><br />No, it's not all about low light (although it is for some), but a 10-year old body? Seriously? No. (and he was talking about a 5dmkI, not mkII).</p>

<p>You can list it that way all you want, Calvin. If they used Paypal they have some protection that renders your "no refund" condition moot I expect.</p> <p>Kinda like a store that has a "no refunds" policy posted. In most jurisdictions, they can't legally do that.</p>

<p>It'll probably cost more to fix those old things than buy new stuff that is entry level but takes better pics. use them till they die, then move on.</p>

<p>If he bought it on eBay using PayPal you don't have much choice. Just give the refund.</p>

<blockquote> <p>The OP is searching for a lighter kit relative to a Nikon kit of the same capability. If being light were the only criteria, why not a cell phone?</p> </blockquote> <p> <br> I think there's maybe a middle ground between a cell phone and a 20 lb. bag.<br /><br />One size doesn't fit all. We forget that sometimes..<br> </p>

<p>For me, the problem with Sony is that it doesn't really save you any space or gain you portability, especially the full-frame stuff. the initial promise of mirrorless was portability. It's why I went with Olympus µ43. I don't print huge, and I don't need to shoot above ISO 3200 really, hardly ever. The small size means I have my whole camera rig (including 2 bodies, 2 primes, the lens-cap fisheye, 2 zooms, and a flash) in the same basic space I used to carry a single body, 2 lenses and a flash in. I'm way happier. And my photos are just as good, except the ones that are way better because before I wouldn't have had my camera with me because it was too big.<br /><br />I got used to the EVF in my Olympus almost immediately. No it doesn't look as nice as a real viewfinder on an SLR, but my camera doesn't exist to entertain my eyes while I'm taking photos, it exists to help me take stuff that we can look at later.</p>

<p>I made a similar leap from Nikon DX. I went with µ43 and do not regret it because portability was HIGH on the list of important factors, but that Fuji stuff was really awesome, and I would have been just as happy with it.<br /><br />I don't know why, but I don't like the Sony offerings at all. But ymmv of course.</p>

<p>A new crop-sensor camera from either maker with the appropriate lenses will probably take better photos than something as old as a D700 or 5D Mk I. Yes, you'll be able to get shallower DoF, but you'll be able to shoot in way lower light with a newer camera.<br /><br />There are insane refurb deals all the time here in the states, don't know about where you are.</p>

<p>I have two of those so far, the 45 and the 20. So amazing. LOVE them.<br /><br />At the wide end, I should get the 14, but honestly, 20 is my sweet spot for so much and I can stop the kit lens down to f5.6 and shoot at 14, so I haven't yet. I wish I'd known about that 20mm length (would have been 40 on full-frame 35mm and about 28 on DX) when I was shooting 35mm. I would have enjoyed life more.</p>

<p>1. You are taking a shot at the aperture and focal length that has the thinnest depth of field possible with the lens. 2. Also, the subject you are photographing is not flat. Very very little is sharp in focus anyway because of the 200mm f2.8 situation, and the curve of the subject is exacerbating that. It's not a good test, in other words.</p> <p>Also, on a tripod? What's the shutter speed you shot at?</p>

<p>Wow. I HATED that cap that came with the 50mm D lens, myself.</p>

<p>It's a totally different sensor. I bet that an epl6 (available pretty cheap these days) would be way closer.</p>

<p>Why do you need to change it out? There have been some that were optimized for manual focus, but they're they're third party. What problem are you trying to solve?</p>

<p>for portrait photography, the 45mm f1.8 m.zuiko is just beautiful, for general photography the 20mm f1.7 is also really fantastic. If you want a couple primes to balance it out, those are a great starting point.</p>

<p>That is the most horribly laid out web stuff I've seen in a really really long time, though. Useless to try and navigate. Ugh. Oh, my. Reminds me of the interwebz's very early days.<br /><br />That said, only have one Panny lens, but it's the amazing 1st gen 20mm f1.7. INCREDIBLE lens.</p>

<p>Any teleconverter with a lens that slow will be really problematic. Focusing (either AF or MF) will be very hard and image quality will suffer in a big way.<br /><br />Also, That lens won't work at anything but the smallest aperture on the FM2N.<br> On the F4 it'll only work in P and S modes I believe.</p>

<p>Micro 4 3 not only has great small cameras but amazing really tiny lenses. My EM-5 with the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 or the Oly 45mm f1.8 is easily jacket pocketable. And the cheap kit lens is really surprisingly good and also really small.</p>

<p>f2.8 lenses are overkill for a beginner. But an awesome kind of overkill.</p>

<p>That sounds like a "bug" to me.</p>

<p>Did you do an all-reset? I suspect you are going to need repair, but reset the camera to be sure.</p>

<p>I think 105mm is too long for DX.. and yet... when I had one with my D90, I LOVED it!<br /><br />I had the 105mm f2.5 AI. It was luscious. So much so that I will probably buy it again to use with an adaptor with my µ43 rig.</p> <p>And it's super cheap to try!</p>

<p>Sohaib, This page right here might answer your question really well, complete with visuals.<br /><br />http://digital-photography-school.com/crop-factor-explained/</p>

<p>The focal length doesn't change, but it does behave differently in terms of the photos you take, and yes, a 70-300 lens behaves on a D3200 like a 105 - 450mm lens would on a "full frame" FX body.</p>

<p>Back to OP.<br /><br />"casual sports shooting" will be fine with a camera that is better for weddings, don't you think?<br /><br />If it's just casual, I would NOT buy the body designed for it. A little like buying a Ferrari to limp along in L.A. rush hour traffic. Wrong tool for the job.<br /><br />For the price of a D500 you could get a D7200 and a new lens or two or two D7200s. Both of those would serve you fine for weddings I bet, and would keep up with the kind of sports shooting I bet you're doing, too.</p>

<p>My guess is that the credit card wasn't charged yet either.<br /><br />imho, B&H is on very firm ethical and legal ground. Panasonic... on the other hand... this seems like a jackass move to me.</p>