The Official Camera Equipment Megathread

Status
Not open for further replies.
mclaren777 said:
Thank you, but I was hoping to find someone who only owned a MLC. No smartphone.
Click to expand...

Ahh, I think I know what you mean now.

My guess is that EVIL camera's are still too expensive for dumb phone users. I would highly suggest most people that could only afford one to buy a smart phone instead.

As much as I love my OMD - it is expensive.
 
I think mclaren777's theory is that DSLRs are the sensible choice and mirrorless cameras are only for people who have money to blow on toys.

The line between the two gets fuzzier every day.

Instigator said:
Huh?

Panasonic's "mistake", if any, was providing a bargain kit that offered little incentive to buy other lenses.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I mean that exactly. The kit was too good for the price, and they realized that they could've been making a lot more money when enthusiasts bought the kit in droves. So they nerfed the rest of the GF line and haven't packed in the 20mm since then.
 
jiji said:
I think mclaren777's theory is that DSLRs are the sensible choice and mirrorless cameras are only for people who have money to blow on toys.
Click to expand...

I dont understand this, since DSLRs aren't exactly cheap either. You can get cheap mirrorless cameras just like you can get cheap dslrs, they're old or about to be discontinued models.

Photography equipment in general is for people that have money to blow on "toys" since the vast majority aren't using it to make money with it. My boss recently bought a nikkor 500f4, he's no pro. Friend of mine bought a D800, he's a hobbyist at best.
 
On a site like NeoGAF who doesn't have a smart phone?

Go to a photography forum and I am sure you will find EVIL-owners who have never had a smartphone (audience might be older though, 50+ :P ).
 
I'd rather carry a nearly cellphone sized mirrorless body than a entry level sized DSLR on the off chance I need to shoot some NFL players. But I shoot manually so I'm not tied to the slow AF speed (and inability to track) of some mirrorless bodies. Skills yo.

Comes down to different shooting styles and intent. I shoot a lot of static subjects and predictable movement so the smaller the body the better, AF be damned.
 
DSLRs are more than I want to take with me just about anywhere, and they say something very explicit about the intent of the person holding one. High quality mirrorless cameras, especially the rangefinder-style Fujis, are perfect for me. Carry everywhere in style as just one part of my gear, not bulky or heavy, not picked up on as a "steal me" set of high end electronics, doesn't make other people uncomfortable.
 
I got my Holga lens for NEX mount in the mail about a week ago. Ordered it on ebay for $15 I think. If you have any interest in lomography or just want a fun lens, definitely pick one up! It's finally given me a reason to carry my Nex-3 around with me while out taking pictures with my 60D; it's like having a Holga digital point and shoot.
 
Well, I'm back in the fold guys. I had recently ordered a NEX5N with a Minolta 28mm f/2.8 lens (the lens was $35, was on a bit of a budget). The NEX5N is awesome. I was worried about constant live view shooting (since I'll be getting the EVF down the line) but shooting from hip level with the face up screen feels so fricken natural.

Here are two preliminary photos I had shot earlier just after unboxing the lens...

i0qsRg5j7a6Hp.jpg

http://i.minus.com/i0qsRg5j7a6Hp.jpg
Click to expand...
*This is at ISO2000! I was in disbelief, as someone coming from a Rebel XT. Nailing the exposure helped the perceivable noise though. The lens was stopped down to f/5.6 which is why the ISO was so high.

iJhLbi0gOxaPX.jpg

http://i.minus.com/iJhLbi0gOxaPX.jpg
Click to expand...
Also stopped down to f/5.6. The NEX5N takes the Lightroom fill light very well. Processed this with Color Effex Pro.
 
BlueTsunami said:
I was worried about constant live view shooting (since I'll be getting the EVF down the line) but shooting from hip level with the face up screen feels so fricken natural.
Click to expand...

It really does. Shooting with the camera low and the screen tilted up feels a LOT like using a medium format camera with a waist-level finder. And the focus peaking is a fantastic aid, almost comparable to a good MF focusing screen. Shooting with the camera held low is a nice way to be stealthy in public, too. The screen on the NEX-3 I picked up used has sadly started to droop, but if I wasn't so interested in the cameras with eye-level finders I might pick up a 5R.
 
Darkness said:
Ordered a 5DMKII.
What's the best way (or place) to sell the old 60D camera and not get ripped off? The only thing I've done before is Ebay, but last time I sold something they took so much out then Paypal took some more.
Click to expand...

POTN or Craigslist meet at a Starbucks or something
 
Darkness said:
Ordered a 5DMKII.
What's the best way (or place) to sell the old 60D camera and not get ripped off? The only thing I've done before is Ebay, but last time I sold something they took so much out then Paypal took some more.
Click to expand...

Are you on Facebook? Look for photographers or canon groups, great way to find and sell stuff.
 
BlueTsunami, how much did you pay for the 5n? New/used?

I still have a brand new ECU1, let me know if you are interested.
 
BlueTsunami said:
Well, I'm back in the fold guys. I had recently ordered a NEX5N with a Minolta 28mm f/2.8 lens (the lens was $35, was on a bit of a budget). The NEX5N is awesome. I was worried about constant live view shooting (since I'll be getting the EVF down the line) but shooting from hip level with the face up screen feels so fricken natural.

Here are two preliminary photos I had shot earlier just after unboxing the lens...


*This is at ISO2000! I was in disbelief, as someone coming from a Rebel XT. Nailing the exposure helped the perceivable noise though. The lens was stopped down to f/5.6 which is why the ISO was so high.


Also stopped down to f/5.6. The NEX5N takes the Lightroom fill light very well. Processed this with Color Effex Pro.
Click to expand...

Sony sensors /bow
 
tino said:
BlueTsunami, how much did you pay for the 5n? New/used?

I still have a brand new ECU1, let me know if you are interested.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the offer! But I'm just working with two vintage lenses right now and plan to possibly pick up a C/Y 50mm down the line. I bought it used for $430 without the kit lens. If I had more money I would have bought it new without the lens but I was working with limited funds and decided I would have rather had a nice precision manual lens.
 
alterno69 said:
Are you on Facebook? Look for photographers or canon groups, great way to find and sell stuff.
Click to expand...
golem said:
POTN or Craigslist meet at a Starbucks or something
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice fellows. I forgot POTN had a sell board. I also found a place called Fred Miranda that seems to be a hotspot for used gear. I thought craigslist was for weirdos and rapists but I'll give it a look also.

Didn't think about Facebook groups. I'm in a few of those.

Figures the day I buy a 5dmkii I get ticketed for having expired tags on my car (never noticed!)
 
Forsete said:
On a site like NeoGAF who doesn't have a smart phone?
Click to expand...

I don't own a smartphone and that's unlikely to change for many years.

Regardless, I would like to apologize for making a mess of things yesterday. My cryptic theory was that smartphone owners might be willing to overlook the lack of a dedicated viewfinder on most MLCs because they're used to taking pictures with touchscreens. That's a massive hurdle for me (perhaps even bigger than rangefinder design aesthetics) and I'm not willing to pay $1000+ for the models that include EVFs.
 
I started out in photography with mechanical film cameras, and I still shoot with them now and then. I'm interested in mirrorless cameras because of their small size and unobtrusiveness, the same reason I became interested in film rangefinders. I'm not a huge fan of framing with live view, mostly thanks to inherent latency and daylight visibility issues. I haven't sprung for any of the EVF models yet.

I do post with Instagram on iPhone now and then, but I'm a late-comer to smartphones.
 
Here's a few of my better PAX photos. I'm very new to "full" camera photography and was using a 2003 Canon E05 that my Dad let me borrow. I could easily tell a quality difference between that and my friend's new Canon camera, but I still think I got a few decent shots.

IMG_4824%2520-%2520Version%25202.JPG


IMG_4786.JPG


IMG_5212.JPG


IMG_4927.JPG


IMG_4959.jpg


IMG_4987.JPG


Seattle%2520wide%2520pano.jpg
Click to expand...

:P
 
mclaren777 said:
I don't own a smartphone and that's unlikely to change for many years.

Regardless, I would like to apologize for making a mess of things yesterday. My cryptic theory was that smartphone owners might be willing to overlook the lack of a dedicated viewfinder on most MLCs because they're used to taking pictures with touchscreens. That's a massive hurdle for me (perhaps even bigger than rangefinder design aesthetics) and I'm not willing to pay $1000+ for the models that include EVFs.
Click to expand...

FWIW, I require a viewfinder as well. That is why I gravitate to the Fuji cameras.

I think it is safe to assume THE majority of all camera shoppers don't care about a viewfinder, which is why so many cameras do not have them now
 
mclaren777 said:
I don't own a smartphone and that's unlikely to change for many years.

Regardless, I would like to apologize for making a mess of things yesterday. My cryptic theory was that smartphone owners might be willing to overlook the lack of a dedicated viewfinder on most MLCs because they're used to taking pictures with touchscreens. That's a massive hurdle for me (perhaps even bigger than rangefinder design aesthetics) and I'm not willing to pay $1000+ for the models that include EVFs.
Click to expand...


People has been taking pictures with viewfinder-less P&S for years. Do you know you can turn the LCD screen into a giant EVF by adding a giant shade on it like a movie camera viewfinder. There is nothing inheriently good or bad about the LCD.
 
I'm actually really interested in the oly 15mm/f8 lens they have, especially if it's going to be super cheap. Could be a nice no-nonsense carry around lens as long as you don't care about low light shots. :P
 
Antiwhippy said:
I'm actually really interested in the oly 15mm/f8 lens they have, especially if it's going to be super cheap. Could be a nice no-nonsense carry around lens as long as you don't care about low light shots. :P
Click to expand...


A tiny ass lens like that? I am guessing 400.
 
dmshaposv said:
Brace yourselves folks...

Nikon sends invites to announce something on the 13 of Sept

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/09/nikon-holding-press-conference-in-thailand-13th-of-september/

D600 or affordable full frame?

Is your body ready, camera gaf?
Click to expand...

Totally ready to see if Sony makes that sensor, which means Pentax will get to use it down the road... (there was a rumor that Nikon got more negotiating power with Sony and doesn't have to wait 6 months after Sony use the sensor in a product)
 
f0lken said:
mQUd+


Is that thing on the right top just some paper or how is that called???
Click to expand...

Looks like it just a white board/reflector.


On another note I didn't realize how compact flash cards were impossible to find in regular stores. Guess my new camera isn't getting tested out until Tue or Wed and I have a shoot Thursday.
 
giga said:
Looks like a reflector or softbox that is being used to bounce the light coming from the left.
Click to expand...

Yeah, first I tought of a softbox, but then I noticed is just too flat to be one, I just never saw a reflector like that, everyone I know has the rounded ones, but now I am curioous and willing to do a homemade white rectangle of light :)
 
f0lken said:
Yeah, first I tought of a softbox, but then I noticed is just too flat to be one, I just never saw a reflector like that, everyone I know has the rounded ones, but now I am curioous and willing to do a homemade white rectangle of light :)
Click to expand...

Reflectors come in all shapes and sizes - round, rectangle, etc. My favorite ones are just giant 6 ft home depot sheets are thick cardboard. I think they are like $20. Cheap and effective. Really any flat white surface can do. :)

This is an old shot but it has a white cloth reflector, black cloth one (to eat up spill) and cardboard covered in aluminum foil.

6148691939_0760d38dfb.jpg
 
Darkness said:
Reflectors come in all shapes and sizes - round, rectangle, etc. My favorite ones are just giant 6 ft home depot sheets are thick cardboard. I think they are like $20. Cheap and effective. Really any flat white surface can do. :)
Click to expand...

Well, I still have a looooong way to go beforr I can call myself a good photographer, but thanks to this thread I always learn one or two things, even if they are somewhat obvious :)
 
Ive been trying to take photos recently with my dad's nikon D90. I bought a 50mm f/1.8 which was pretty cheap and takes some great portraits, but thats about all it really does.

I've found that its been hard to use especially at dinner time or going out, the 50mm is not wide enough...

So I'm thinking about getting

Tamron AF 17-50mm f/2.8 - there's one with VC and one without but apparently there's an issue with the VC one where its blurry because you have to wait for VC to stabilise...

Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8

Nikon 17-55mm - of course this is more than twice the price of the other two...

wondering which one I should go for... the Nikon is well over $1000+
 
giga said:
Nikon 35 1.8? Real cheap.
Click to expand...

yeah but then i kind of want a lens that i can just leave on the camera. im thinking about just getting that prime lens though...

the question I want to know is - is the price difference worth it for the nikon over the tamron or sigma...
 
arbok26 said:
yeah but then i kind of want a lens that i can just leave on the camera. im thinking about just getting that prime lens though...

the question I want to know is - is the price difference worth it for the nikon over the tamron or sigma...
Click to expand...

IMHO no.

It is a very nice lens, AF speed is fast, build quality is awesome. It is very heavy and big. The zoom ring is too small and close to the camera body. Stiff at either end because of the strange way it gets longer, then shorter as it zooms. Optically it is above average, some wierd bokeh at the wide end. Stopped down you would be hard pressed to differentiate between it and the 18-55 plastic kit lens.

Rent it.

Then buy it used if you decide you want it, should be able to resell at not much of a loss.
 
Flo_Evans said:
IMHO no.

It is a very nice lens, AF speed is fast, build quality is awesome. It is very heavy and big. The zoom ring is too small and close to the camera body. Stiff at either end because of the strange way it gets longer, then shorter as it zooms. Optically it is above average, some wierd bokeh at the wide end. Stopped down you would be hard pressed to differentiate between it and the 18-55 plastic kit lens.

Rent it.

Then buy it used if you decide you want it, should be able to resell at not much of a loss.
Click to expand...

Thanks

so what would you recommend?

and what about the tamron VC or no VC or Sigma??

EDIT: and I read this about the Tamron lens... The 17-50mm focal range (equivalent focal range of approx. 26-78mm when used on a Nikon DX format DSLR camera)

so the Nikon 17-55mm lens is true 17-55 but Tamron isn't? hmm
 
Rumors of a "PRO" NEX hit SAR.

A surprising new and “professional NEX camera” is going to be announced on Wednesday. I have been told that this is (and now was…LOL) a super well kept secret. I am working on it right now to get some details. I repeat the sources underlined that this is a “Game Changer” camera!
Click to expand...

What could that mean? FF NEX? :P
 
arbok26 said:
so the Nikon 17-55mm lens is true 17-55 but Tamron isn't? hmm
Click to expand...

No, both the Nikon and Tamron lenses need to have a 1.5x multiplier applied to the specified focal length to get the 35mm film-equivalent focal length on a DX body. The Nikon 17-55/2.8 will get you the equivalent of around 25-83mm on a DX body like the D90. It's listed as a DX lens, so it means the lens' image circle is made for the smaller DX sensor, which equates to a cost saving compared with FX lenses that cater for a larger image circle.

I would respectfully disagree with the earlier poster on whether a Nikkor lens is worth the money over a third party lens. I've never tried Sigma lenses, but the Tamrons I've used have been glitchy (causes errors all over my LCD screen, locks up in AF, etc) and have struggled to resolve anywhere near as well as Nikkor lenses. The question, then, is what price would you put on reliability and quality?

I would give prime lenses some consideration. They'll really sharpen your skills and they're considerably cheaper, too. The Nikkor 35/1.8DXis very affordable; or you might want to try something a little wider like the 24/2.8 (equivalent to 36mm), which approximates a classic wide perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II
146 147 148 149 150
7K
650K
Deleted member 17706 replied
  • Locked
Resetera and the pedo problem (updates)
NSFW  43 44 45 46 47
2K
491K
notkeylime replied
  • Locked
What relaxes you the most?
0
4K
Halo is Back replied
The Crisis in Venezula
2
2K
God Enel replied
  • Locked
What is the most painless way to commit suicide?
3
4K
EviLore replied
Top Bottom