• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II

thanks i'll look into those.

Also about the tethering, it was my understanding is that cameras are designed so that the picture taking functions are disabled and when you connect a usb it's just data transfer mode. Any picture taking still requires a battery to be used.
 
CadetMahoney said:
thanks i'll look into those.

Also about the tethering, it was my understanding is that cameras are designed so that the picture taking functions are disabled and when you connect a usb it's just data transfer mode. Any picture taking still requires a battery to be used.
Click to expand...
It requires a specific setup, and can require special equipment, but it's certainly something that can be done, at least on Canon cameras... I know that's how Tony Nothrup shoots his portraits.
 
CadetMahoney said:
I know webcams with shit-tier still-image taking exist, but is there a digital still camera that is usb powered?

Or at least a webcam with DSC level picture quality. I want to take pictures in close proximity to my PC but don't want to mess with batteries.
Click to expand...

CadetMahoney said:
thanks i'll look into those.

Also about the tethering, it was my understanding is that cameras are designed so that the picture taking functions are disabled and when you connect a usb it's just data transfer mode. Any picture taking still requires a battery to be used.
Click to expand...

Many cameras can tether via USB or wireless. Is separate power to camera not an option? If it is then you have many choices.
 
I have a question about choosing a computer that will be primarily used to run Lightroom and Photoshop.

Does a discrete GPU actually help or should I be looking for a good RAM/processor combo?
 
PanicFreak said:
I have a question about choosing a computer that will be primarily used to run Lightroom and Photoshop.

Does a discrete GPU actually help or should I be looking for a good RAM/processor combo?
Click to expand...

Focus on ram/processor. You don't need great GPU to utilize GPU acceleration.
 
PanicFreak said:
I have a question about choosing a computer that will be primarily used to run Lightroom and Photoshop.

Does a discrete GPU actually help or should I be looking for a good RAM/processor combo?
Click to expand...

GPU acceleration only helps in some instances where the CPU is ass, or the display is huge, as in 4K or higher.

Main thing to prioritize is CPU speed, but keep in mind that newer iterations of chips can do more work at the same GHz speed as older chips. Check out benchmark sites to see which chips are the best performance for your budget. Faster less cores, is better than slower more cores, at the way Lightroom is currently optimized.

Next is RAM. Get lots of RAM. Like, 16GB or more.

Third priority is an SSD to install Windows on.
 
I have a Fuji X-T1 that I stupidly took into Cave of the Winds in Niagara Falls (lots of water) and the LCD screen seemingly short-circuited. The rest of the camera works fine (EVF still works), but it seems that the battery life is dramatically reduced (even when using batteries that were not exposed to water).

It's been several months, so I'm hoping that any internal water damage would have presented itself by now. I've read that Fuji may outright refuse to repair the camera if they discover that the camera was water damaged.

I'm planning a trip to Iceland next year and I want to guarantee a working camera. Is a water damaged camera pretty much guaranteed to fail at some point? Should I err on the side of caution and purchase a new camera/body, or am I safe to just repair the LCD screen?

If I need to purchase something, it seems that the X-T1 body is about $800 now, but I'd be open to the X-T2 or possibly a DX100 m. IV/V, or any other relatively lightweight camera that takes excellent trip photos.

What do you guys recommend I do?
 
Subv3rsi0n said:
I have a Fuji X-T1 that I stupidly took into Cave of the Winds in Niagara Falls (lots of water) and the LCD screen seemingly short-circuited. The rest of the camera works fine (EVF still works), but it seems that the battery life is dramatically reduced (even when using batteries that were not exposed to water).

It's been several months, so I'm hoping that any internal water damage would have presented itself by now. I've read that Fuji may outright refuse to repair the camera if they discover that the camera was water damaged.
Click to expand...

When I took my camera there, despite it being weather sealed, I still covered it up due to high water pressure. Anyway, it'd seem odd that Fuji won't repair a water damaged unit. They won't cover it under warranty for sure but I can't imagine why they would simply not repair it if it's out of your pocket. I think you should call them up to figure it out. Maybe all you need is have LCD replaced.
 
Sounds like "weather sealed" isn't waterproof. Anybody have 2.8 24-70 recommendations? Anything as good as the Nikon version non VR? I keep hearing weird build quality faults about the Tamron version and not optically as good as the Nikon version.
 
JadedWriter said:
Sounds like "weather sealed" isn't waterproof.
Click to expand...

It never is and is not part of warranty coverage. Heck, even waterproof cameras are usually not covered. That said, I don't have problem carrying my DSLR in the rain for hours at a time but not so much with MILC.
 
RuGalz said:
It never is and is not part of warranty coverage. Heck, even waterproof cameras are usually not covered. That said, I don't have problem carrying my DSLR in the rain for hours at a time but not so much with MILC.
Click to expand...
I'm so paranoid with rain. I have a rain sleeve just in case. Doesn't help that I have no weather sealed lenses.
 
RuGalz said:
When I took my camera there, despite it being weather sealed, I still covered it up due to high water pressure. Anyway, it'd seem odd that Fuji won't repair a water damaged unit. They won't cover it under warranty for sure but I can't imagine why they would simply not repair it if it's out of your pocket. I think you should call them up to figure it out. Maybe all you need is have LCD replaced.
Click to expand...

It all happened a bit spur of the moment or I would've taken precautions to seal it. Lesson learned!

I called Fuji and explained that the camera was water damaged and they told me it would cost about $200 to replace the LCD screen. I think I'll send it in.

Thanks for the advice!
 
JadedWriter said:
Sounds like "weather sealed" isn't waterproof. Anybody have 2.8 24-70 recommendations? Anything as good as the Nikon version non VR? I keep hearing weird build quality faults about the Tamron version and not optically as good as the Nikon version.
Click to expand...

None of them are as optically good as the Nikon but I think the current Tamron is the current one to get. I own an older Sigma 24-70 and it's ok on my D300, but one day I got to try it on a D700 a few years ago and boy was it bad on full frame. There is also the older nikon AF-S 28-70mm to consider.
 
Subv3rsi0n said:
I have a Fuji X-T1 that I stupidly took into Cave of the Winds in Niagara Falls (lots of water) and the LCD screen seemingly short-circuited. The rest of the camera works fine (EVF still works), but it seems that the battery life is dramatically reduced (even when using batteries that were not exposed to water).

It's been several months, so I'm hoping that any internal water damage would have presented itself by now. I've read that Fuji may outright refuse to repair the camera if they discover that the camera was water damaged.

I'm planning a trip to Iceland next year and I want to guarantee a working camera. Is a water damaged camera pretty much guaranteed to fail at some point? Should I err on the side of caution and purchase a new camera/body, or am I safe to just repair the LCD screen?

If I need to purchase something, it seems that the X-T1 body is about $800 now, but I'd be open to the X-T2 or possibly a DX100 m. IV/V, or any other relatively lightweight camera that takes excellent trip photos.

What do you guys recommend I do?
Click to expand...

Wait for Fuji to release a firmware update to fix the weather sealing problem.

Seriously, I'm surprised you would still buy a Fuji and put it in the same kind of punishment that destroyed your previous Fuji camera.
 
QualityPixel said:
None of them are as optically good as the Nikon but I think the current Tamron is the current one to get. I own an older Sigma 24-70 and it's ok on my D300, but one day I got to try it on a D700 a few years ago and boy was it bad on full frame. There is also the older nikon AF-S 28-70mm to consider.
Click to expand...
The 28-70 is rare as hell, in can find them...in Japan and I heard the afs motor tends to burn out on it and given the age of the lens who knows when that happens it's not even that much cheaper price wise either. Depending on where I look the Tamron is just a little cheaper than the Nikon. I'D get a Tamron 28-75 but it's a bit loud with the auto focus drive so I would want to use it for events. I hope to find a good deal on the Nikon 24-70 at some point. I don't want the Sigma version, period it's just too damn old and I'm trying to buy less Sigma now, Art lens and all.
 
Been rethinking my gear this past week and I've come to the conclusion that I don't really need full frame anymore due to two reasons:

1. Work provides the camera body, I just need to provide a lens and the kit lens works perfectly since they aren't as anal about IQ like me.
2. I'm getting off the freelancing train so I don't really need to look pro or whatever, I just need something that'll shoot great pictures.

Part of me still wants to go FF as I've got a decent collection of manual focus FF glass but at the same time, I've made those lenses work with an APS-C body so that brings me to this current conclusion lol.

I'm now thinking of picking up an a6000 and a Nikon F to E Mount converter so I can still use my glass or just a D7100. But of course, if there's a great deal on a D610 or even an A7(hopefully by Black Friday) then I might actually end going that route.

Hell at this point I was even considering the RX100 IV but I still like the ability to swap lenses so I'll stick with a DSLR for now lol.
 
jongkookie said:
Been rethinking my gear this past week and I've come to the conclusion that I don't really need full frame anymore due to two reasons:

1. Work provides the camera body, I just need to provide a lens and the kit lens works perfectly since they aren't as anal about IQ like me.
2. I'm getting off the freelancing train so I don't really need to look pro or whatever, I just need something that'll shoot great pictures.

Part of me still wants to go FF as I've got a decent collection of manual focus FF glass but at the same time, I've made those lenses work with an APS-C body so that brings me to this current conclusion lol.

I'm now thinking of picking up an a6000 and a Nikon F to E Mount converter so I can still use my glass or just a D7100. But of course, if there's a great deal on a D610 or even an A7(hopefully by Black Friday) then I might actually end going that route.

Hell at this point I was even considering the RX100 IV but I still like the ability to swap lenses so I'll stick with a DSLR for now lol.
Click to expand...
Check ebay for a 600 providing it's problem free. Mine got ran into the ground and I need to get the shutter replaced at some point, but I love the camera, you could probably also check for a 7200 as well, but there's no replacement for sensor physics, but we do two very different types of things so you don't need to worry about low light, high iso handling.
For a comparison between the 7100 and 600 go through this album. First page and a half is the 7100 and the rest is the 600. I'm not sure if it's because I've gotten my confidence back and just got back into steady practice when I started shooting with the 600, but I vastly prefer what I shot on the 600 over the 7100.
Tourists of Times Square
 
jongkookie said:
Been rethinking my gear this past week and I've come to the conclusion that I don't really need full frame anymore due to two reasons:

1. Work provides the camera body, I just need to provide a lens and the kit lens works perfectly since they aren't as anal about IQ like me.
2. I'm getting off the freelancing train so I don't really need to look pro or whatever, I just need something that'll shoot great pictures.

Part of me still wants to go FF as I've got a decent collection of manual focus FF glass but at the same time, I've made those lenses work with an APS-C body so that brings me to this current conclusion lol.

I'm now thinking of picking up an a6000 and a Nikon F to E Mount converter so I can still use my glass or just a D7100. But of course, if there's a great deal on a D610 or even an A7(hopefully by Black Friday) then I might actually end going that route.

Hell at this point I was even considering the RX100 IV but I still like the ability to swap lenses so I'll stick with a DSLR for now lol.
Click to expand...

You were the one who was looking for an 18-55 FX right? I'm glad you came to terms with point #1. If the client's fine with it, it's fine. Don't break your own back for nothing.

Just get what your budget will allow. You only really need full frame if you need that wider field of view, or if you don't mind paying for that extra bit of dynamic range or low light performance.

Don't feel the need to go to full frame just because you have full frame lenses. They work just as well on crop bodies, as we discussed earlier in the thread.
 
jongkookie said:
Been rethinking my gear this past week and I've come to the conclusion that I don't really need full frame anymore due to two reasons:

1. Work provides the camera body, I just need to provide a lens and the kit lens works perfectly since they aren't as anal about IQ like me.
2. I'm getting off the freelancing train so I don't really need to look pro or whatever, I just need something that'll shoot great pictures.

Part of me still wants to go FF as I've got a decent collection of manual focus FF glass but at the same time, I've made those lenses work with an APS-C body so that brings me to this current conclusion lol.

I'm now thinking of picking up an a6000 and a Nikon F to E Mount converter so I can still use my glass or just a D7100. But of course, if there's a great deal on a D610 or even an A7(hopefully by Black Friday) then I might actually end going that route.

Hell at this point I was even considering the RX100 IV but I still like the ability to swap lenses so I'll stick with a DSLR for now lol.
Click to expand...

You've been using DSLR for so long, what's making you consider the A6000?
Also, used A7's (first gen) are stupid cheap for what they are. I remember before settling on an A7II I was looking at the ballpark of $800 for an a7.
 
H3XAntiStyle said:
You've been using DSLR for so long, what's making you consider the A6000?
Also, used A7's (first gen) are stupid cheap for what they are. I remember before settling on an A7II I was looking at the ballpark of $800 for an a7.
Click to expand...
I was looking at an A7 till I found out all the adapters just turn my lenses into dumb lenses.
 
H3XAntiStyle said:
Yeah, right now there's no good solution AFAIK for Nikon AF lenses. There's two or three good adapters for Canon shooters though haha.
Click to expand...
It's like a kick in the teeth, but at the same time I wouldn't even be saving that much in bag weight if I went with an A7. I'd still have big lenses and some adapters with a body that's slightly tinier that what I have now.
 
Lmao I fncking hate myself.

I was actually researching A7's yesterday after my post and have decided that if I was to jump to FF I'd go with this because most of my Nikon FX lenses are the old kind anyway, so no electronic bullshit or whatever, just plug it in and go. This way I can save some cash and buy some proper E-mount lenses in the future.

So cue an hour ago, I pull up eBay with coffee in hand and just casually browse around for the Nikon's and Sony's I can afford and I spot a gem.

An A7 for a little bit over $800...

Fuck.

Now I'm off to research Nikon F to E mount adapters and for a proper walk around E-mount lens, though the lens will be a future purchase haha.
 
jongkookie said:
Lmao I fncking hate myself.

I was actually researching A7's yesterday after my post and have decided that if I was to jump to FF I'd go with this because most of my Nikon FX lenses are the old kind anyway, so no electronic bullshit or whatever, just plug it in and go. This way I can save some cash and buy some proper E-mount lenses in the future.

So cue an hour ago, I pull up eBay with coffee in hand and just casually browse around for the Nikon's and Sony's I can afford and I spot a gem.

An A7 for a little bit over $800...

Fuck.

Now I'm off to research Nikon F to E mount adapters and for a proper walk around E-mount lens, though the lens will be a future purchase haha.
Click to expand...
E mount lenses aren't cheap though.
 
JadedWriter said:
E mount lenses aren't cheap though.
Click to expand...

Yup, I know.

But a walk around with AF is the only one I'll ever need, if I ever need to go above that focal range, then I'll just jump over to my MF glass since I won't need the AF at that point.

Then again, the A7 has focus peaking anyway so I may not even need an AF lens to begin with but we'll see lol.
 
jongkookie said:
Yup, I know.

But a walk around with AF is the only one I'll ever need, if I ever need to go above that focal range, then I'll just jump over to my MF glass since I won't need the AF at that point.

Then again, the A7 has focus peaking anyway so I may not even need an AF lens to begin with but we'll see lol.
Click to expand...
True. I keep forgetting not everybody needs 2.8 zooms.
 
jongkookie said:
Yup.

I'd say it's only necessary when you're a concert photographer, but outside of that, you'll be fine with 3.5 and higher.
Click to expand...
That also goes for corporate events. They just don't give a shit about lighting at all. I flash for groups shots, but everything else unless it's straight dire I use natural light.
 
jongkookie said:
Yup.

I'd say it's only necessary when you're a concert photographer, but outside of that, you'll be fine with 3.5 and higher.
Click to expand...

I remember reviews for the 28-70mm saying it was pretty good for its price. It made the 24-70mm f4 look like even worse value.

One slight issue with the OG A7 I remember seeing back in the day was sensor reflections. Usually present in night photography and with certain lenses.
Comparison of A7 and A7ii
 
So I was having second thoughts about my purchase once I read an A7 vs A7ii comparo(mostly due to IBIS)... but jumping back on eBay and seeing the prices for A7ii's? Nah, I'm happy with what I got.

I never needed image stabilization before and I sure as heck won't need it now so I'll take that money I saved by going with an A7 and buy myself some beers or something haha.

JadedWriter said:
That also goes for corporate events. They just don't give a shit about lighting at all. I flash for groups shots, but everything else unless it's straight dire I use natural light.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah that's true.

I'm glad I don't have to do any of that stuff anymore. Hell, tbh I don't think I'd ever go back to a full freelance gig ever again. Like I'll still do shoots or whatever but only if it's convenient for me or if I really like the client.

My former company has been trying to get me back into the groove now that I've settled at my new job and I'm like fnck that man lol. Funny how now that I'm not actively looking for gigs is when they start contacting me about more gigs but when I desperately needed more gigs they were dragging their feet.

Ty4on said:
I remember reviews for the 28-70mm saying it was pretty good for its price. It made the 24-70mm f4 look like even worse value.

One slight issue with the OG A7 I remember seeing back in the day was sensor reflections. Usually present in night photography and with certain lenses.
Comparison of A7 and A7ii
Click to expand...

Thanks for the heads up, I'll definitely check out if sensor reflections are gonna be an issue with my Nikon glass.

As for the 28-70mm, yeah the pictures I've seen on Flickr seem to make it seem like a great lens, especially for a "kit lens" but I'll wait it out. I still don't think I'll need AF for the moment since if I am gonna go for a shoot in the future it's going to be all static with a proper portrait lens anyway.

Rentahamster said:
Yup. Might as well use your old stuff.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
 
jongkookie said:
Oh yeah that's true.

I'm glad I don't have to do any of that stuff anymore. Hell, tbh I don't think I'd ever go back to a full freelance gig ever again. Like I'll still do shoots or whatever but only if it's convenient for me or if I really like the client.

My former company has been trying to get me back into the groove now that I've settled at my new job and I'm like fnck that man lol. Funny how now that I'm not actively looking for gigs is when they start contacting me about more gigs but when I desperately needed more gigs they were dragging their feet.
Click to expand...
You never know when you need the extra money. Just do everything on your terms and convenience though. I'm always searching for freelance work.
 
JadedWriter said:
You never know when you need the extra money. Just do everything on your terms and convenience though. I'm always searching for freelance work.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah definitely.

It's not like I'm flat out refusing the work, I'm just now very very selective of what I do since I don't need the work. Like if it's fun or interesting, then I'll probably take it up, but if it's boring stuff then I tend to refer them to somebody else who could definitely use the work.

Honestly, I think I'm a little burnt out on freelancing for the moment which is why I'm kinda against it. We'll see in the future though... getting an A7 might restart that freelancing itch lol.
 
Is it weird that I know more about a lens than the person selling the lens on ebay? I refuse to take "lens is in excellent condition" when the seller puts dark grainy pics of the lens up. I've seen some "excellent condition" lens on there with the zoom ring rubber busted and other shit.
 
Not necessarily camera equipment, but is anyone here working with the latest 5K iMac fully specced? How does it perform? Especially curious to know how it'll handle video editing. I've been editing a lot with a 2011 iMac and has performed wonderfully. Except with 4K footage, which I'll probably end up using a lot in the future.
 
Sec0nd said:
Not necessarily camera equipment, but is anyone here working with the latest 5K iMac fully specced? How does it perform? Especially curious to know how it'll handle video editing. I've been editing a lot with a 2011 iMac and has performed wonderfully. Except with 4K footage, which I'll probably end up using a lot in the future.
Click to expand...

Computers have come a long way since 2011, but I would hold off till the imac is updated to latest gen cpu/gpu. Current model is over a year old.
 
Sec0nd said:
Not necessarily camera equipment, but is anyone here working with the latest 5K iMac fully specced? How does it perform? Especially curious to know how it'll handle video editing. I've been editing a lot with a 2011 iMac and has performed wonderfully. Except with 4K footage, which I'll probably end up using a lot in the future.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for 4K video editing performance, but the screen on those 5K iMacs is god-damn incredible for photo editing. QualityPixel is right that it's a bit long in the tooth at the moment, although given that it didn't get an update at last week's Mac event it may be a while yet before it does actually get the newest hardware (perhaps February/March next year alongside the desktop Kaby Lake processors). If you can afford to keep going a few more months with the 2011 model it would probably be worth the wait.
 
So the E-M1 II is $2000.

Was hoping for less. I have one preordered but damn that's a lot of money. Not sure if I should just get a second hand Mark I for cheap.
 
TerryLee81 said:
So the E-M1 II is $2000.

Was hoping for less. I have one preordered but damn that's a lot of money. Not sure if I should just get a second hand Mark I for cheap.
Click to expand...

Yeah, cheaper is always better, but no matter to me. Im getting one.

The meltdowns in some m43 forums are still hilarious. Some are taking it quite... Personally.
 
Saturnman said:
Yeah, cheaper is always better, but no matter to me. Im getting one.

The meltdowns in some m43 forums are still hilarious. Some are taking it quite... Personally.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'll probably keep the preorder. I'll sell my E-M5 II and hope I'm getting a few hundred for it.
 
I realize this isn't exactly the thread for this, but it seems to maybe fit best as there has been some discussion in the past.

Event photography pricing? Do you photogs have a set event pricing or are you flexible depending on the event? I've been rolling at $50/hour for a bit now, but I just got contacted for a job tonight and I think I'm gonna change to $50 base fee + $50/hour.

I guess it really depends on where you are located though. I figure with driving to the event and then editing the photos, this probably works out to around $50/hour in the end.
 
Futureman said:
I realize this isn't exactly the thread for this, but it seems to maybe fit best as there has been some discussion in the past.

Event photography pricing? Do you photogs have a set event pricing or are you flexible depending on the event? I've been rolling at $50/hour for a bit now, but I just got contacted for a job tonight and I think I'm gonna change to $50 base fee + $50/hour.

I guess it really depends on where you are located though. I figure with driving to the event and then editing the photos, this probably works out to around $50/hour in the end.
Click to expand...


If your work is good and they want you specifically then charge whatever rate you can.

If they aren't after you specifically then bid whatever makes it worth your time to get out of bed and show up. Out here in China there are so many people bidding that you'll get peanuts, people will drive the price so far down that some sap will show up and work all day for 40 bucks. Shit sucks.

Edit: By the way, where you getting $50 an hour? American city?
 
Pittsburgh, PA.

That's what I've been charging an event planner that has been hiring me for recent events and she really likes my photos and has never said anything about the price (this is for $50/hour flat, no base fee).

She gave my contact to a local magazine. They contacted me this morning about an urgent need for a photographer tonight. I said I could work the event and said my pricing was $50/hour + $50 base. It's been an hour and no response yet. We'll see I guess.
 
Futureman said:
Pittsburgh, PA.

That's what I've been charging an event planner that has been hiring me for recent events and she really likes my photos and has never said anything about the price (this is for $50/hour flat, no base fee).

She gave my contact to a local magazine. They contacted me this morning about an urgent need for a photographer tonight. I said I could work the event and said my pricing was $50/hour + $50 base. It's been an hour and no response yet. We'll see I guess.
Click to expand...

If that's what you're worth, that's what you're worth. Stick to your prices unless you really need the money. Make your clients expect that that's what it'll take to hire you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Thank You Forr Neogaf Gold
14
11K
Virex replied
Something wrong with the Funny post thread?
0
2K
Amakusa replied
|OT| Post-March Wrestling Thread
2 3
132
19K
NickFire replied
New All You Can Eat Sushi Thread — So Full I May Not Survive the Night
25
4K
eddie4 replied
NeoGAF Mafia S8 |Review Thread| In Which We Talk about That Thing We Don't Talk About
2
77
8K
squidyj replied
Top Bottom