-
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
VisceralBowl
Member
Does anybody here have the Sony FE 35 2.8? I have a question for a friend.
He ordered a used 35 2.8 the other day on KEH and it said it came with both caps but didn't mention a hood. Now, as far as he's aware the front cap requires the hood to even attach. Does the front cap fit without the hood or is he maybe going to get a useless front cap/free hood?
He ordered a used 35 2.8 the other day on KEH and it said it came with both caps but didn't mention a hood. Now, as far as he's aware the front cap requires the hood to even attach. Does the front cap fit without the hood or is he maybe going to get a useless front cap/free hood?
they dont make the one i borrow from him anymore, maybe its not the 600. But it turns all the way around and can go 90 degrees to the camera. I mostly use it pointing up or turned backwards at about 10 degrees off of straight up. edit it is the NB 600. great flash. The 700 that replaced it isnt as good.
JadedWriter
Member
I'll look everything up. I was contemplating getting an sb800. OK just saw the edit.
CrudeDiatribe
Member
That's the SB300 and SB400.
SB600 rotates 270° (180° CCW and 90° clockwise) and tilts 90°, so the gap is directing it up and back when shooting portraits with it on-camera and the camera rotated counter clockwise).
JadedWriter
Member
Ok cool. the SB600 sounds like a good and cheap enough alternative to something like the SB800 then. I'm actually quite annoyed that the Nikon flashes cost more than my lenses.
CrudeDiatribe
Member
Without looking it up, I believe that there are third-party flashes that will trigger off your body's pop-up in commander mode.
JadedWriter
Member
I already do have a third party flash and that's the slow one where I'm like "go off already!" I have radio triggers for off camera flash so that doesn't really bother me, I just want a good flash that's more "immediate" that can go off in rapid succession. If you know of a good third party one then please recommend it. That isn't Yongnou, I heard they tend to die randomly.
HammerOfThor
Member
Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but...
My dad gave me his old Fuji Finepix HS 20EXT. It seems like a decent camera.
Anyway, I'd like to take pictures of toys and the like, I was wondering if you guys could give me tips on how to take it with the best quality? What are options for cheap but solid lighting setups?
My dad gave me his old Fuji Finepix HS 20EXT. It seems like a decent camera.
Anyway, I'd like to take pictures of toys and the like, I was wondering if you guys could give me tips on how to take it with the best quality? What are options for cheap but solid lighting setups?
CrudeDiatribe
Member
Rapid succession? All small strobes have to charge their capacitors from the batteries so how quickly you can shoot again is a function of that and you're going to have to wait on the SB600 too, even with batteries like Eneloops.
Your earlier description sounded like it was unresponsive on the first shot which is a different problem that I've never had— is your flash set to rear-curtain sync or your camera to focus-priority?
Third party flash I was considering in the past was the LP180, but I haven't used one.
the stock cap needs the hood to fit. Maybe he's getting a pinch cap instead? I know some people ditched the stock hood so they needed something else to cover the lens.
I'm enjoying my XT10 with the 35mm F2 so far. Planning to use it a bunch this weekend and will try out the 55-200 I just ordered. I think the XT10 will be a great second camera if I decide to step up to the XT2 later this year/next year depending on how serious I get and if the weatherproofing becomes necessary.
JadedWriter
Member
I usually have my flash set to TTL, camera lately has been on AF-A which does take a bit to take the picture. I need to find the time to play with my flash and camera settings then.
VisceralBowl
Member
That's another possibility. We'll see tomorrow.
Replacement hoods are ridiculously expensive for that little thing.
i personally love the hood on the 35/2.8. doesn't add much bulk/length. looks good too (IMO).
Try switching to back button focus. Set AF to AF-C and set the AE-L/AF-L button to AF-ON. Now half pressing the shutter should do nothing and you only need to hold down the AE-L/AF-L button to focus. If you're shooting something/-one stationary you only need to focus once (release the button when it has focused on whatever you're shooting) and then you can shoot as much as you want without the camera ever trying to refocus. If you're shooting something moving (or super shallow DoF) you just need to keep holding down the AF button for continuous AF.
If it doesn't work you might need to switch from "Focus priority" to "Release priority" in AF-C, the former option will only shoot if focus is confirmed, the latter will always shoot.
You can probably just get a step down ring to use as a hood. You will have to experiment with it a little to see what size will not cause vignetting. Since the original cap is 40.5mm you may get away with something like 49->42 + a 42mm empty ring (if desired) and just get a 42mm pinch cap (maybe even go smaller since its max aperture is 2.8). Or do 49->49->42, which probably looks better. I use 49->37 on my 21/28/35/40 primes interchangeably. Technically I can step down more for some focal lengths but I only have one set of ring right now. They act as good lens protector as well.
looks something like this (not my pic)
JadedWriter
Member
I need to experiment with this. I already back button focus, been doing it for months.
CrudeDiatribe
Member
Rear-curtain works with TTL- it means that the flash will fire at the end of the exposure not the beginning. Usually you want it at the front except when you don't.
I normally use focus priority, and in cases where I can't use a focus assist light I have switch to manual focus so I can actually take a shot in the dark.
JadedWriter
Member
How do you find that setting?
Astral/H3X
Member
Woah what flash do you have?
Better yet, what *batteries* do you have? I can use my flash at full power for a burst of like four or five photos.
Oh wait, you're talking about the pop up flash...
JadedWriter
Member
No its a speedlight, without the speed. It's a third party brand called Neewer, vk750 is the model. I like it but at the same time it's not exactly pro grade or anything. I have a rechargeable set of eneloops in there.
Astral/H3X
Member
Okay yeah if you've got Eneloops you *should* be good to go. My Yongnuo I guess just sucks the power out faster haha.
JadedWriter
Member
Maybe my next flash should be one of the better Yongnuo's. I have no idea. I have my lenses mapped out but I'm kind of clueless on flashes.
VisceralBowl
Member
Yeah it looks great.
That's a good idea.You can probably just get a step down ring to use as a hood. You will have to experiment with it a little to see what size will not cause vignetting. Since the original cap is 40.5mm you may get away with something like 49->42 + a 42mm empty ring (if desired) and just get a 42mm pinch cap (maybe even go smaller since its max aperture is 2.8). Or do 49->49->42, which probably looks better. I use 49->37 on my 21/28/35/40 primes interchangeably. Technically I can step down more for some focal lengths but I only have one set of ring right now. They act as good lens protector as well.
looks something like this (not my pic)
CrudeDiatribe
Member
It should not say "Rear" in the little box that it should also not have the red-eye reduction icon. Flash button + rear dial on most Nikons, I think.
JadedWriter
Member
Oh okay you meant on the camera itself. I thought it was something on the flash body.
brochiller
Member
Yeah after doing some more research I'm thinking of going for the EM10 Mark II. Seems like a much better bang for buck camera and has a built in EVF.
jongkookie
Member
Got my Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm today.
Not a lot of sample shots yet since I got it really late in the afternoon so maybe tomorrow. But the IQ seems to be as good as my 28-90mm copy.
I will say that the reverse zoom is trippy as fnck. If you've never seen it, basically it goes from 210-70mm. So you push the barrel out to get to 70 and pull the barrel in to get to 210. The barrel also has a mechanism that locks you out of 70-100mm if you're at a specific focusing distance range. I need to play around with it some more to understand it.
Not a lot of sample shots yet since I got it really late in the afternoon so maybe tomorrow. But the IQ seems to be as good as my 28-90mm copy.
I will say that the reverse zoom is trippy as fnck. If you've never seen it, basically it goes from 210-70mm. So you push the barrel out to get to 70 and pull the barrel in to get to 210. The barrel also has a mechanism that locks you out of 70-100mm if you're at a specific focusing distance range. I need to play around with it some more to understand it.
That zoom mechanic is super common for 70-200s of the era. Don't worry, it'll feel natural after a while.
I think it's a similar design to a Cooke triplet zoom. The Cooke triplet is super simple, one negative element in the center and one positive on either side.
I think it's a similar design to a Cooke triplet zoom. The Cooke triplet is super simple, one negative element in the center and one positive on either side.
The funny thing is if you move the central element you have a crude zoom lens. Note in this picture how the focal length (f) is the longest when the moving element is all the way back.
It's maybe a bit hard to visualize, but a positive element in from of a negative is the classical telephoto design. The effective focal length will be longer than the lenses used as if there's a phantom element in the front. If you move the last, negative, element further back this "telephoto effect" is magnified like you saw in the triplet zoom and if it's touching the front element you have no "telephoto effect".
Irrelevant tangent, modern telephotos will usually not very telephoto designs where the focal length is much longer than the lens (sensor to front of lens) because as a lens gets more more "telephoto" it gains a lot of aberrations. You can see that in the simple zoom lens where the focal length is still much shorter than the lens. That's also why Canon's DO and Nikon's Fresnel lenses are really good at correcting chromatic aberrations
VisceralBowl
Member
The 35 ended up coming with a pinch cap!
VisceralBowl
Member
So the a7ii that came from KEH with my friend's lens had an SD card in it. It also had some pictures and a short video from inside of KEH's testing area. Weird.
BigWeather
Member
GAF, feeling a bit frustrated...
Back in 2013 my family took a trip from Seattle to LA. I was using a Sony Cyber-shot I bought back in 2010 or so. Around San Francisco I noticed some fuzzy spots on my photos. It wasn't too bad but still a bit annoying. I know I didn't treat the camera as great as I should've, taking pictures out of a moving vehicle is probably how I got dust or something in the camera that caused the spots.
Got a new Sony, a DSC-WX220, last year that I took to Alaska and India with no issues. I was a little more careful but still would toss it in my pocket and what-not. An ideal travel camera. My daughter just got back from Morocco and now this new camera, and a good 800+ photos, have fuzzy spots.
They are very fuzzy (almost indistinct) when zoomed all the way out. While optical zooming in they become much more distinct but stay in the same spot. As soon as it hits the point where I'm digital zooming they zoom towards the edge of the viewfinder.
Where is this dust? Using a cloth on the lens and blowing air with a hand blower did nothing to help. Is this a common issue? At only $200 for this camera is this one a goner and not worth repairing?
I guess I'll have to crank through all of these (or at least the good ones) with Lightroom. Ugh.
Thanks for any insight on what may be causing this and how it can be prevented, and if the camera is likely not worth saving. We've got a trip to Italy this summer so I've got to replace this with something.
Back in 2013 my family took a trip from Seattle to LA. I was using a Sony Cyber-shot I bought back in 2010 or so. Around San Francisco I noticed some fuzzy spots on my photos. It wasn't too bad but still a bit annoying. I know I didn't treat the camera as great as I should've, taking pictures out of a moving vehicle is probably how I got dust or something in the camera that caused the spots.
Got a new Sony, a DSC-WX220, last year that I took to Alaska and India with no issues. I was a little more careful but still would toss it in my pocket and what-not. An ideal travel camera. My daughter just got back from Morocco and now this new camera, and a good 800+ photos, have fuzzy spots.
They are very fuzzy (almost indistinct) when zoomed all the way out. While optical zooming in they become much more distinct but stay in the same spot. As soon as it hits the point where I'm digital zooming they zoom towards the edge of the viewfinder.
Where is this dust? Using a cloth on the lens and blowing air with a hand blower did nothing to help. Is this a common issue? At only $200 for this camera is this one a goner and not worth repairing?
I guess I'll have to crank through all of these (or at least the good ones) with Lightroom. Ugh.
Thanks for any insight on what may be causing this and how it can be prevented, and if the camera is likely not worth saving. We've got a trip to Italy this summer so I've got to replace this with something.
Posting pics with examples may help
BigWeather
Member
Sorry, of course. Here's an example of the spots on the WX220 that started appearing last week during the trip to Morocco:
http://1drv.ms/22csNk2
I could post more but they are all pretty much like that one. I can post ones from my previous camera but I've already retired that camera so that ship has sailed. Thanks!
Astral/H3X
Member
If it changes while zooming in optically, then it's on the lens somewhere for sure, and not the sensor at least.
boviscopophobic
Member
That sample photo doesn't show up for me, but from your description, I actually think it is dust on the sensor. The changes during zooming are probably due to the fact that the zoom is variable aperture (f/3.3-5.9). The more stopped down the aperture gets, as would tend to be the case toward the telephoto end of the range, the more distinctly the sensor dust would appear.
Dust ingress is possible when the lens extends or retracts, such as when turning the camera on/off or during optical zooming. I'd try to avoid such operations in exceptionally dusty environments. I'd also suggest storing the camera in a small case or bag as opposed to tossing it directly in your pocket. Before replacing the camera, you could try subjecting it to some gentle high-frequency vibration to dislodge the dust, or else try to disassemble it to get to the sensor for cleaning.
Dust ingress is possible when the lens extends or retracts, such as when turning the camera on/off or during optical zooming. I'd try to avoid such operations in exceptionally dusty environments. I'd also suggest storing the camera in a small case or bag as opposed to tossing it directly in your pocket. Before replacing the camera, you could try subjecting it to some gentle high-frequency vibration to dislodge the dust, or else try to disassemble it to get to the sensor for cleaning.
andythinkpad
Member
Don't host your image on one drive. Can't see anything.
It doesn't matter what the actual issue is. There is no way to fix a point and ahoot. Send it to Sony (or dump it on ebay).
BigWeather
Member
Sorry about using OneDrive, here are two examples hosted on my domain:
http://www.bigweathergames.com/misc/DSC01549.JPG
http://www.bigweathergames.com/misc/DSC02018.JPG
Thanks for the responses so far. I guess I (and my daughter) needs to be far more careful than we were with the two point-and-shoots that got this thus far. I just figured the first one was a fluke (and it was a bit old anyhow and needed to be replaced) and since the second one (the WX220) did fine in Alaska and India in my pocket (and India was a bit dusty) I figured my daughter would be fine in Morocco with it.
I'll go through with Lightroom and knock out the spots. While it won't be as good as new it should be better, at least. As for the camera I could try sending back to Sony. It is less than a year old so may still be under warranty. I'm not equipped to fix it myself but will try any ideas that people have (like the aforementioned high frequency gentle vibration -- where do I get that done), but can't imagine it'd be worth taking to a camera shop as it is a $200 camera.
What would be the ideal thing to do for the trip to Italy? She'll be 19 and doesn't want to be burdened with a bigger, more expensive camera. The iPhone is OK in a pinch but for a good trip like this it just seems she should have better available. I suppose I could send her with a two identical point-and-shoots and if one gets spots she can swap out the memory card and battery and keep on trucking. At $400 total (for two) that's still not a bad option. I'll also make sure she uses the small case I got for it and maybe even start keeping it in a ziplock bag or something (could even have it in that while turning it on / off, perhaps).
I just know I'm not looking forward to touching up 100s of photos in the coming weeks and I hate that she's bummed about the photos as they are now.
Thanks for all your advice thus far!
Edit: Also is Lightroom the best for removing spots? It's just so cumbersome to use. I'm up for alternatives, removing the spots on those two photos with Lightroom didn't come out as nicely as I'd hoped anyhow.
http://www.bigweathergames.com/misc/DSC01549.JPG
http://www.bigweathergames.com/misc/DSC02018.JPG
Thanks for the responses so far. I guess I (and my daughter) needs to be far more careful than we were with the two point-and-shoots that got this thus far. I just figured the first one was a fluke (and it was a bit old anyhow and needed to be replaced) and since the second one (the WX220) did fine in Alaska and India in my pocket (and India was a bit dusty) I figured my daughter would be fine in Morocco with it.
I'll go through with Lightroom and knock out the spots. While it won't be as good as new it should be better, at least. As for the camera I could try sending back to Sony. It is less than a year old so may still be under warranty. I'm not equipped to fix it myself but will try any ideas that people have (like the aforementioned high frequency gentle vibration -- where do I get that done), but can't imagine it'd be worth taking to a camera shop as it is a $200 camera.
What would be the ideal thing to do for the trip to Italy? She'll be 19 and doesn't want to be burdened with a bigger, more expensive camera. The iPhone is OK in a pinch but for a good trip like this it just seems she should have better available. I suppose I could send her with a two identical point-and-shoots and if one gets spots she can swap out the memory card and battery and keep on trucking. At $400 total (for two) that's still not a bad option. I'll also make sure she uses the small case I got for it and maybe even start keeping it in a ziplock bag or something (could even have it in that while turning it on / off, perhaps).
I just know I'm not looking forward to touching up 100s of photos in the coming weeks and I hate that she's bummed about the photos as they are now.
Thanks for all your advice thus far!
Edit: Also is Lightroom the best for removing spots? It's just so cumbersome to use. I'm up for alternatives, removing the spots on those two photos with Lightroom didn't come out as nicely as I'd hoped anyhow.
andythinkpad
Member
Thats dirt on the snesor. I have seen dust get into a point and shoot lens, but never on sensor like that.
Googling "Sony wx220 dust" (without quotes) it looks like you're not the only one struggling with dust entering the camera.
I'd honestly look at a used micro four thirds camera. They're bigger than most point and shoots and you get less zoom with the kit lens (typically 3x) , but if you get dust on the sensor you just take the lens off and blow it off and the image quality is leaps and bounds ahead of a point and shoot. They should also have a function to shake dust off the sensor which works most of the time.
For 400$ you can get a very modern* E-M10 with the kit lens.
For 150-200 you can get an E-P1 and the kit lens. You can also add a telephoto zoom which will give you a total of ~10x zoom.
Those two both lack flash. If you need that you could go for this Panasonic which also has a touch screen that can flip around for selfies and is 350$ used with a lens.
Image quality wise you have samples from the cheapest camera I linked here and here and they should all be with the lens I linked to.
The downsides with the cheapest cameras I've linked is that they only support SD cards up to 16GB according to Olympus (I think 32GB should still work), the screen is quite dated and video recordings are only 720p. This does not apply to the two 300$+ cameras.
Tons of people buy entry level cameras and never use them and the people that buy used usually go for higher end cameras which is why these are so cheap.
*The E-M10 is just two years old and launched with an MSRP of 800$.
I'd honestly look at a used micro four thirds camera. They're bigger than most point and shoots and you get less zoom with the kit lens (typically 3x) , but if you get dust on the sensor you just take the lens off and blow it off and the image quality is leaps and bounds ahead of a point and shoot. They should also have a function to shake dust off the sensor which works most of the time.
For 400$ you can get a very modern* E-M10 with the kit lens.
For 150-200 you can get an E-P1 and the kit lens. You can also add a telephoto zoom which will give you a total of ~10x zoom.
Those two both lack flash. If you need that you could go for this Panasonic which also has a touch screen that can flip around for selfies and is 350$ used with a lens.
If you want a sub 200$ camera with a pop up flash you can go for the same lens I linked above, but with this camera body instead. Both cheapo camera bodies cost the same and have many of the same features, but the one without a flash was more premium.
Image quality wise you have samples from the cheapest camera I linked here and here and they should all be with the lens I linked to.
The downsides with the cheapest cameras I've linked is that they only support SD cards up to 16GB according to Olympus (I think 32GB should still work), the screen is quite dated and video recordings are only 720p. This does not apply to the two 300$+ cameras.
Tons of people buy entry level cameras and never use them and the people that buy used usually go for higher end cameras which is why these are so cheap.
*The E-M10 is just two years old and launched with an MSRP of 800$.
Thought I'd offer it here. I have a Nikkor 85 mm f/1.4 Vintage Lens for sale. It's currently got a Canon lens mount but it can be taken off.
For photos it's sharp as a tack and has amazing bokeh. It's manual focus. Best way to use it is in live view mode and with a tripod if you are shooting wide open.
Video is gorgeous on it.
Nikon Nikkor 1.4 Vintage Lens For Sale by Eric, on Flickr
Nikon Nikkor 1.4 Vintage Lens For Sale by Eric, on Flickr
Sample Image:
Pudong by Eric, on Flickr
I'll let it go to a GAFfer that wants it for a reasonable price. Trying to lighten my load of lenses.
For photos it's sharp as a tack and has amazing bokeh. It's manual focus. Best way to use it is in live view mode and with a tripod if you are shooting wide open.
Video is gorgeous on it.
Nikon Nikkor 1.4 Vintage Lens For Sale by Eric, on FlickrNikon Nikkor 1.4 Vintage Lens For Sale by Eric, on FlickrSample Image:
Pudong by Eric, on FlickrI'll let it go to a GAFfer that wants it for a reasonable price. Trying to lighten my load of lenses.
vacantseas
Member
Any recommendations for a mirrorless that also is decent at low light video?
Looking for mirrorless to take on my honeymoon in June but my fiancee also wants something that can shoot some video at the wedding itself.
I know dslr would be better at what I'm looking for but I'm pretty set on mirrorless as its the way to go for the future.
Looking for mirrorless to take on my honeymoon in June but my fiancee also wants something that can shoot some video at the wedding itself.
I know dslr would be better at what I'm looking for but I'm pretty set on mirrorless as its the way to go for the future.
boviscopophobic
Member
If you want to stick with a point and shoot, you could look at more ruggedized (weather-sealed/waterproof) models. I'd imagine you pay a penalty in terms of weight and image quality in return for the increased resistance to environmental hazards. However, unless she actually plans to take photographs underwater or at the beach, this seems like overkill compared to simply taking greater precautions when handling the camera.
DSLRs aren't any better at video. The Sony A7s II (if you can afford it) is the best consumer video camera for low light in the world. It has shot films lit by moonlight. The older A7s has the same low light performance, but can only shoot 1080p video while the newer can shoot 4k.
I'm not very good at video and am probably missing a bunch of stuff, but from what I remember:
Sony just announced the A6300 which can do 4k and is great at low light. Low light is best at 24 fps though.
Samsung has the NX1 which can shoot 4k video and is also great at low light, but Samsung is phasing that system out so there won't be any lens or camera body updates down the road.
The Panasonic GH4 and G7 both do 4k and are popular, but low light isn't great. It can still be decent with a lens that lets in a lot of light, but those other cameras will be better.
I'm not sure how the Sony A6000 stacks up to the competition in low light video, but it is a popular camera and half the price of the A6300. It can only shoot 1080p, but if you add a low light lens like the 35mm f1.8 low light performance looks pretty decent.
BigWeather
Member
Thanks guys for the responses. I'll look into the MFT cameras, hadn't even considered them. Definitely appealing that I can get to the sensor and use air to blow off dust, etc. I'm done with closed systems. I tried putting the camera on a washing machine briefly to see if it'd shake the dust lose (it didn't) then with the camera on and zoomed I used the air blower hoping to knock off the dust. Now it's worse. =/ As I bought it in June 2015 it should be under warranty, going to send it off to Sony hopefully and get it cleaned.