Basil

Just looking at this thread now, and I saw this little side conversation on the LX100 and LX100 II.  FWIW, I actually have the XH1 and the LX100 II - they complement each other nicely.  I love my XH1, it is not the best camera at anything in particular, but it is quite good at everything.  I use primarily for stills - everything from street photography, bird and wildlife photography, event photography, and studio portraiture.  It has it's minor flaws, but the ergonomics are wonderful - old school.  I'm definitely interested in the X-H2 or X-T4 or whatever it is they call the X-H1 successor. In the meantime, I am grooving on the Fuji glass (and not missing full frame lenses which so heavy)

As for LX100 II, I use that primarily for my scuba travels - I have an underwater housing for it, and it would prohibitively expensive and tiresome to change systems - the LX100 II fit into the same scuba housing for LX100. I've shot some great underwater video (on my Youtube channel if you are curious) and stills with LX100 II and it's predecessor, the LX100. I also use it some for travel and street photography - it is small enough to toss it into my coat pocket.  Panasonic image app is the best (I've used Sony, Olympus, and Fuji - they are not nearly as useful).  I want to try out time lapse video on the LX100 II, and experiment with outdoor portraits in bright sun -- where I can leverage the camera's leaf shutter and really kill the ambient light.  

You know what I can't stand Mr Shield3, is someone who feels he can throw rocks from his armchair at a resource gatherer in the field, while he's trying to give you information about a range of cameras and lenses on his own blog.
Have YOU used the Sony 35mm F1.4 G? If so, why haven't YOU written a blog about it?
Or did you just look at DXOMark, and write it off without seeing a single image or the cinematic way it renders?
And to write off the Minolta line entirely because of screw-drive AF, you should write off the entire Nikon AF-D line whilst you're at it, yeah?
Here is the 35mm F1.4 G sitting on my desk... So yes I have used it personally. The reason I didn't respond, is because you were acting like such a negative muppet I gave up on reading the thread for almost a week.
As for A99 II being just a phase, I've put forward my argument why it is useful for my shooting style...
I don't need to justify it beyond that, not least to you.
There's some stunning A-mount Minolta glass. This 28-70mm F2.8 is cinematic as hell and half the price of a used Canon 24-70 L Mk I.
And the 28-105mm F3.5-F4.5 is good enough to resolve an 8K image wide open, and cost me £60. The full 42MP frame is uploaded to this post so you can see what I mean.
Shut up with the armchair criticism, buy some gear, and tell us about your opinion on it.


Good deal!
I have the Sigma ART 18-35 in Canon mount and oddly enough Sigma mount for infrared timelapse on the Sigma Quattro SD mirrorless camera, but not in Sony A-mount. I think the Sony 16-50mm F2.8 SSM is likely to have better AF, but need to try the Sigma to be sure. I could see the Sigma zoom being very handy for low light in the 4K crop mode, as low light in full frame 4K tails off after 1600.
The reason I haven't jumped onboard the Sigma zoom yet on this camera is I over indulged in Sony / Zeiss primes and mainly focussed on shooting in full frame mode.
You could get the Sigma 20mm F1.4 and Sigma 35mm F1.4 for instance - these would cover a lot of shots in Super 35mm crop 4K, but also give you two full frame options that would be stunning to look at. A lot heavier and more hassle though.

Hi Andrew
I just don't understand the snark factor around here. 
My A99II just arrived this weekend (I got a good deal on a perfectly clean open box copy from one of my favorite retailers for $2720, complete with a full manufacturers warranty).  I am upgrading from my A77II (soon to be on eBay), am I am focused on stills, for which this camera is just absolutely lovely....Here are a few first impressions:
1. It is almost the exact same size as my A77II, but has more weight to it. I really like how it balances in my hand.  It strikes me that it is a larger body than the A7 series (for obvious reasons), but it's smaller smaller than most (all??) full frame DSLRs.  I get the sense that the SLTs are kind of this weird blend/middle ground between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras (probably unintentionally).
2.  Menus are better organized, but good heavens, there are a lot of features.  The layout reminds me a lot of my Olympus E-M1 (which I sold) in a way because it is powerful and infinitely customizable (tons of features and buttons), but on the other hand -- it can be really overwhelming. That said, I am much more comfortable with the A99II so far, because I have been using the A77II for the last several years, and there is enough similarity to be familiar.
3.  I have the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 --- and it just shines on this camera. It is a nice size on this body, and it makes some gorgeous images.  I still have to test out my other A-mount lenses on this (some of which will be sold off, since money is an object...).
Do you have the Sigma Art 18-35 F1.8 in A-mount?  Have you tried it on the A99II in Super 35 mode?  (I have it as my go-to for my A77II, and was planning to sell it, but I may reconsider if it is a video shooter "must have".)

For what it's worth, thanks for all your work, and for sharing your excitement and passion.   

(at the risk of sounding dense....) Should I send you a single picture, or a few seconds of video?