If you could go full range then the shutter dial is redundant and conflicting with actual setting. i.e. the dial is on 1000 but you override it to 250.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II
- Thread starter MRORANGE
- Start date
If you could go full range then the shutter dial is redundant and conflicting with actual setting. i.e. the dial is on 1000 but you override it to 250.
JadedWriter
Member
I am kind of sort of fine with it, just mainly depends on what I'm shooting. I've gotten a pretty good idea of where to keep it for street photography. Becomes a real headache with landscapes though because I pretty much of to change every fucking setting on the damn thing with something that ain't moving.
I would probably never do Nikon x Fuji for an event. The difference in mechanics would probably do my head in a bit.
why wouldn't just switch the dial to 250? That's confusing
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
It already allows for conflicting with the actual setting, just at a very limited range. I'm just confused why it doesn't open up the full range. Obviously the master dial would override it any time it was adjusted. It's not a huge deal, but I'm not yet a fan of requiring a two-step process for granular shutter speed and ISO control. I've only had the camera for a few days, though, so I imagine it's partially just me getting used to a new system.
exactly, they only let you adjust for in-between stops because it would be confusing
JadedWriter
Member
I think it's more of a what/where are you shooting thing, it does kind of ask for you to slow down your process a bit.
Can't say I'm a huge fan of it but it only lets you adjust the in between stop while the physical dial is adjusting for the full stop. Putting all 1/3 stops on the physical dial would be too much. It's probably just mimicking old manual cameras while still giving you in between stops introduced in digital age.
Hey guys, I'm new to Cameras and need something to take good quality general pictures. Like on vacations and stuff. I just something that takes good pictures and maybe has the option of upgrading lenses in the future.
I dont really mind if its mirrorless or DSLR but it would be good if its light and portable. I was looking at cameras in the $700 CAD range and Sony α6000 looks decent? Im not sure if thats the best camera in that range?
I dont really mind if its mirrorless or DSLR but it would be good if its light and portable. I was looking at cameras in the $700 CAD range and Sony α6000 looks decent? Im not sure if thats the best camera in that range?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
rockman zx
Member
I need some advice, I want to get a DSLR camera and I have around $700, I'm thinking about the Canon EOS Rebel SL2 (out soon), is this my best choice quality/price?. I don't have any particular need but I want something with touch screen/wifi/flip screen.
Art Teitlebaum
Member
Here are short overviews about the entry-level DLSR market.
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/buying-guide-best-slrs-for-beginners-1251700
https://www.lifewire.com/entry-level-dslr-cameras-for-beginners-493664
If you don't have any old lenses you are free to choose freely what suits your needs best. The upcoming SL2 isn't a bad choice at all and a very light and compact option.
But it would be most important to try some different models in your own hands and compare the ergonomics and the UI styles. It's mostly a matter of taste and features on paper can't tell if you like to hold it in your hands and shoot with it.
That lifewire website...
Their mirrorless buying guide is something else, they're actually pimping the NX3000. A small byline that the lens selection is "limited" but no word that this is a dead system and Samsung pulled the plug a long time ago. They even talk like it's a new system. WTF? Sure, the camera still works, but if you buy an interchangeable lens system, you expect to acquire other lenses now or in the future. IDK how they can make such a recommendation in good conscience.
They also have the EM5 markII as their top recommendation. Weird. I own that camera, it works great, but in 2017, the market has changed and the EM5 mark II has serious rivals even within the m43 ecosystem.
Art Teitlebaum
Member
Haha, now this is really bullshit, you're right.
The α6000 is kinda old at this point - it was released over 3 years ago. Also, the native (APS-C) lens selection is quite limited and it won't improve much - Sony is focusing on their full-frame lenses now. You can of course use these full frame lenses on the α6000, but it won't be optimal due to the smaller sensor and they're quite bulky, so you lose on portability. As you're open to expanding your system in the future, I'd go with m43 (either Olympus or Panasonic) or Fuji instead - on m43 you have a very wide array of lenses (several choices in each category), plus they're small and light. Fuji is also great, but a bit more expensive and a little larger overall. If you can, I encourage you to go to a camera store and get your hands on several camera bodies - I did that before buying my Olympus E-M10 Mark II and found that I really like the retro feel of that camera.
theepicoftyler
Member
Warm Machine
Member
This is my GH4 rig I'm using. While I've had the slider for a while I finally mounted it under the tripod head so the camera has better flexibility for moves and position. Love this rig. I might update to a GH5 if I can make a little money on some commercial work.
Honestly, after traveling with it, I really have to recommend a Ricoh GR as a travel camera for people who don't want to go the DSLR route.
It's just in your pocket always and it feels effortless to use one handed. I guess if you're traveling specifically to take pictures, you'd want a nicer setup, but this camera was super unobtrusive and let me get off some great shots while also not focusing on photography the entire time.
It's just in your pocket always and it feels effortless to use one handed. I guess if you're traveling specifically to take pictures, you'd want a nicer setup, but this camera was super unobtrusive and let me get off some great shots while also not focusing on photography the entire time.
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2017/07/on-lightroom-performance.html
I was a long time Aperture user before it was abandoned and I never encountered the performance issues that Lightroom has given me since day 1. That they still haven't fixed this after all these years is sad.
I was a long time Aperture user before it was abandoned and I never encountered the performance issues that Lightroom has given me since day 1. That they still haven't fixed this after all these years is sad.
I've been looking into some cameras and it's really disappointing that both the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II and Sony A6000 don't have a mic port. I was looking for something primarily for photography, but with decent video capabilities. From what I gathered, the A6000 is noticeably better on the video front.
I've been debating on waiting and getting a A7s now that they are getting cheap with the MK2 release. Fujifilm X-T2 seems to take good quality image, but isn't it too expensive for an APS-C sensor? Do I have any other cheap options?
1. What is your budget budget? I prefer to go for the A6000 range as a beginner, but wouldn't mind waiting a bit to get a better $1000+ camera.
2. Main purpose of the camera? Photography and vlogging/short films
3. What form factor is most appealing to you? Compact mirrorless
4. Will you be investing in the camera? (buying more stuff for it later) Sure, but will start with some general purpose lens and will think about it later
5. Any cameras you've used before or liked? I've used a low end Canon and a DSLR 650D years ago.
I've been debating on waiting and getting a A7s now that they are getting cheap with the MK2 release. Fujifilm X-T2 seems to take good quality image, but isn't it too expensive for an APS-C sensor? Do I have any other cheap options?
1. What is your budget budget? I prefer to go for the A6000 range as a beginner, but wouldn't mind waiting a bit to get a better $1000+ camera.
2. Main purpose of the camera? Photography and vlogging/short films
3. What form factor is most appealing to you? Compact mirrorless
4. Will you be investing in the camera? (buying more stuff for it later) Sure, but will start with some general purpose lens and will think about it later
5. Any cameras you've used before or liked? I've used a low end Canon and a DSLR 650D years ago.
JadedWriter
Member
Landscape? Get the 5500. The camera isn't for me personally but you should benefit from the larger sensor and improved dynamic range. Though if you really want/need an evf then get the GX85.
Skel1ingt0n
I can't *believe* these lazy developers keep making file sizes so damn large. Btw, how does technology work?
Yep, Lightroom is an absolute dog.
On my 2017 Kaby Lake, Quad-core, top-end 15" MacBook Pro, it just constantly disappoints. Rendering previews is slow as shit. Navigating the film strip is awful. Exports are slow. And simple touch-ups have constant split-second hiccups.
I know it's actually faster on PC, and faster still on a Windows PC using an Nvidia GPU. Nevertheless, wanting to do photo work with a MBP doesn't seem that crazy; it drives me insane how awful LR acts sometimes. And that's to say nothing about it's general stability (i.e. hard crashes) and my disdain for how it stores your library and relies on collections for navigation.
But, alas, it's the de-facto solution and Aperture is gone. I've tried CaptureOne, but the trial was way too limited and I refuse to drop the cash without having a solid 30 or so days of un-restricted access to trial it.
what the heck are you guys and that adobe forum post talking about. I've used lightroom on a Surface Pro 3 which had an i5 and 8gb of ram. Ran fine
Now i have a Dell XPS with an i7 and 32gb of RAM and it runs great. All my photos are stored on a NAS that I hit via 1gbit connection. I run stitched panos with nikon d800 files. Also run IQ180 files through it and scanned 6x17 files through it.
The only issues I have is clone and heal tool is crap compared to Photoshop proper and occasionally i need to close LR just to clear the RAM its using.
Now i have a Dell XPS with an i7 and 32gb of RAM and it runs great. All my photos are stored on a NAS that I hit via 1gbit connection. I run stitched panos with nikon d800 files. Also run IQ180 files through it and scanned 6x17 files through it.
The only issues I have is clone and heal tool is crap compared to Photoshop proper and occasionally i need to close LR just to clear the RAM its using.
JadedWriter
Member
I don't know what lens to get next. It might either be the Nikon 135mm F2 DC, Fuji 90mm F2 Macro or the Tamron 90mm F2.8 SP Macro.
this is a great lens. I have it and i love it.
JadedWriter
Member
I think I saw it when you posted up some pics of your bag collection or something. I was wondering if it was that or the 105. I think people say it's not sharp enough for modern cameras, but it't probably bullshit. I was using my 1.8 85 on my most recent shoot and was reminded why I bought the damn thing, the background blur can be godly with that thing so I started looking at the 135 and the 105 is too close to 85.
yea its the 135. And people who say this i think just say shit to make themselves look smart. Its patently false. My two most used lenses are my 135 f2 and my old 35f2, both still have manual aperture rings that you have to flip the switch just to use with the d800.
f8 iso 800 handheld on a boat
Caddo Lake Sunrise by Billy York, on Flickriso 1600 handheld f6.3
Butterfly filet by Billy York, on Flickrf2.8 click for full size
100% crop
if thats not sharp enough someone, not sure what to tell them.
JadedWriter
Member
This is plenty sharp...damn.yea its the 135. And people who say this i think just say shit to make themselves look smart. Its patently false. My two most used lenses are my 135 f2 and my old 35f2, both still have manual aperture rings that you have to flip the switch just to use with the d800.
f8 iso 800 handheld on a boat
iso 1600 handheld f6.3
f2.8 click for full size
if thats not sharp enough someone, not sure what to tell them.
Astral/H3X
Member
Well, people may be more concerned with wide open sharpness, but I don't know enough about that lens to say. (You seem to have posted photos that have been stopped down)
I know my 85mm 1.4 is sharp at F2, and tack sharp at 2.8, but it's a 1.4 -- I got it for 1.4. It's certainly usable, but I find that if sharpness is any concern, I get nice bokeh and way better sharpness on my 2.8 100mm Macro. It's not that my 85mm is bad by any means, just slightly disappointing at the aperture I favor.
I know my 85mm 1.4 is sharp at F2, and tack sharp at 2.8, but it's a 1.4 -- I got it for 1.4. It's certainly usable, but I find that if sharpness is any concern, I get nice bokeh and way better sharpness on my 2.8 100mm Macro. It's not that my 85mm is bad by any means, just slightly disappointing at the aperture I favor.
JadedWriter
Member
F 1.4 is such a pain in the ass to shoot at to begin with though. I think you have to take multiple photos in succession to even try getting anything. My 1.8 85 is fine enough though wide open, granted I had to AF fine tune the shit out of it.
most people i know that buy that kind of glass buy it because an F1.4 is typically sharper at f2 than a f2 lens.
No one in my experience but Olympus consistently makes lenses that are tack sharp wide open at their widest aperture. They're able to do it because the lenses are smaller.
Astral/H3X
Member
Well, *I* have focus magnification, so getting focus isn't really a problem, so long as I have the five seconds that I'd need to focus it anyway. And if I'm shooting at 1.4, it's an "artsy" photo and not an "in the moment event" photo, so I tend to have that time.
Heck, I shoot my 50mm pretty much exclusively at 1.4.
edit
And yes, I get that, but my 50 1.4 is certainly sharp enough for my tastes, and that's based on when I was using it on an APSC camera, which would make it feel less sharp.
And I still use my 85, but it's the only lens I use where I have to consider sharpness of wide open.
JadedWriter
Member
What do you plan on shooting?
It's photo mostly, but I need some decent video capability.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
A few questions, if you don't mind.
How long does it take to scroll from one D800 RAW file to the next for you in the Develop module?
Are you using Lightroom CC?
Are you using GPU acceleration? Which GPU?
When you use the adjustment brush, do you see the brush stroke effects being applied instantly, or is there a lag?
1. it varies from 1 sec to 4, i directly associate this with using the NAS as i can watch my network usage spike when i switch photos
2. No, i prefer to own my software, not rent it. LR6
3. Yes the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050/PCIe/SSE2 is what lightroom says it is
4. on my Dell no lag at all, on my surface there was hella lag.
JadedWriter
Member
If I remember right the A7S line up are Sony's video tier camera so you might want to see if you can compare the video capabilities between the A7ii and the A7S, I know that the A7ii is a higher MP sensor, but the A7S has better low light.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Interesting, thanks. One more - do you use multiple catalogs or one big one? If it's one big one, how many photos are cataloged in it?
one big one, 30k photos in it. Same catalog as when i started using LR from LR3 or so, just upgrade it when new software comes out and i also let the backup process optimize it.
Astral/H3X
Member
a6000 - Small capable camera, good APSC but little dated
a7 - "I want a full frame"
a7s - Full frame, but in the dark
a7r - Full frame, with more pixels than you can reasonably use without stupid expensive glass
a7ii - Full frame, with IBIS for every lens
Fuji XT20 -
Yeah, mostly old cameras that I found with good deals. Not feeling like expending too much, while also getting some quality. That deal of the A6000 seems my best bet as a beginner, since it's really cheap and comes with lens.
If you have any other suggestion, it would be cool.
Astral/H3X
Member
What *I* ended up doing is going with A7II -- reason? Vintage ass glass. Full frame means that all the old glass that people sell for pennies on the dollar will work as it was designed, and you can save a lot. I would say the A7 series is *single handedly* the best lineup for vintage glass. And that's saying a lot, given that the Fuji series actually looks like they are old.
I mean, shit, my 50mm 1.4 costed me $60, and my macro lens costed me $80. Not every vintage glass is good, but when you find a good one at a good price, it can save a lot.
Will it save as much as going from an A7II to an A6000? Probably not, but it helps make it sting less.
That being said, A6000 is also a really, really good camera, though if I were buying now, I'd shoot for the A6300 if possible.
I've checked on the A6300 and A6500 and I found them to be really good, but there's something that doesn't make sense to me about the price. They both go for $1000 and $1500 respectively, which is A7 territory. I guess that money would be better spent on the full frame sensor, which would make it a no brainer to go for the A7. That also gives points to the A6000, which at $400 seems like a steal.
Astral/H3X
Member
If I were choosing between an A7 and an A6300 (or, even, A6500), I'd pick the 6300/6500. It being smaller is a value add, native lenses will be cheaper, and the EVF experience is a world of a difference in improvement (ESPECIALLY over the A6000). I know a few pros that love the 6300, and basically consider it to be "as good" as the A7R, in terms of how much they enjoy using it.
That being said, being APSC, it does make it a little hard to justify them. But if I had spare money for a new camera? Even with my A7II, I'd consider selling my 6000 and bumping it to a 6300, particularly for macro.
I'm blown away by the IQ of the 6300, especially shooting video. The best deal I've found was $900 for the kit with the 16-50mm lens. Would you say it's worth double the price though?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Rumors seem to indicate that we will see an A7 III before the end of this year and it will have a dramatically improved autofocus system. The weaker autofocus system is the one thing that would prevent me from recommending the mark II to people, honestly, and it's where the A6300 and A6500 truly excel.
Among those models, I would lean toward the X-T20 or consider the A6300 for around the same price point. Both are great APS-C cameras with fast and accurate auto-focus.
Of course, if you don't plan on shooting moving subjects and want a full frame camera, the A7 II is probably a great choice, but with a successor due soon, I would recommend waiting a bit.
Astral/H3X
Member
The viewfinder alone would be worth it, IMO
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
It really depends on what you want to do with it. It's definitely not going to produce photos that are double the quality of the A6000, but the features and capabilities it has could be the difference between getting the shots you want to get and not.