-
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.
The Official Camera Equipment Megathread
- Thread starter demon
- Start date
- Status
BlueTsunami said:Got my Domke F-5XB yesterday...
Its one of their smaller bags. Its able to hold 3 mid sized lenses or 1 DSLR with lens and another lens (I've also been able to fit 2 of my manual lenses and my small 50mm attached to the DSLR in the bag).
Before I got the bag I'd stuff my lenses in random pockets, random bulges here in there. Using the bag in the field this morning I can reach in without looking and pull out lenses rather easily. It also went through the drizzly weather like a champ (the exterior is canvas). Very happy about this purchase.
Would it hold a DSLR with battery grip and a lens or two?
sneakypete
Member
So I'm a complete novice when it comes to photography, but after some recent camping trips and massive thunderstorms I really want to get something better than a crappy point and shoot digital camera. A friend of mine shot me a link on facebook about the Nikon Coolpix L100:
http://www.adorama.com/INKCPL100BKR.html
It has very good reviews, many saying it's a great intro/beginner camera(i.e. not a lot of manual settings, which may be a bad thing?), 15x zoom, and from the sample shots I've seen the macro/outdoor shots look amazing. But like I said I'm pretty ignorant on the subject and was hoping you fine folks could give me your input on this camera?
http://www.adorama.com/INKCPL100BKR.html
It has very good reviews, many saying it's a great intro/beginner camera(i.e. not a lot of manual settings, which may be a bad thing?), 15x zoom, and from the sample shots I've seen the macro/outdoor shots look amazing. But like I said I'm pretty ignorant on the subject and was hoping you fine folks could give me your input on this camera?
misterchef
Neo Member
Danoss said:
Danoss, that is JUST the lense I'm looking to buy right now!
I'm actually thinking of buying the VC version, b/c i heard the IQ difference in the current batch is negligible compared to the non-VC version. Also, I'd be able to buy it for $450 after rebate (compared to the non-VC which would be $375 after rebate).
Do you still recommend I get the non-VC version, or would spending only $75 more for VC be worth it?
misterchef said:
The point that Danoss is making is that at low focal lengths camera shake is not such a big deal unless you have really unsteady hands, and that with a wide aperture you can afford to shoot with a fast shutter speed unless you are in very low light. So for most shooting scenarios you are not going to benefit from VC.
There are a couple scenarios where you might still want VC, though. First, if you're planning on shooting a lot of hand-held video, stabilization can also help remove shake from video to a certain degree. Second, there may be times when you want to stop down the aperture for DoF or IQ reasons. Third, you might be shooting in very dark conditions where you still get blur at max aperture and don't want to increase ISO.
You should evaluate whether you think you will encounter those scenarios enough to make it worth spending the extra money.
arnoldocastillo2003
Member
tino said:
Really, can you recommend me where can i buy one please, it doesn´t needs to be a pentax, if you can recommend another good used DSLR for $650 then i will be grateful.
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
sw33tclyde said:
Them manual settings are the key things. If you want to get into more serious/difficult photography - like your thunderstorms for example - you will want at some stage to get into those manual settings.
Have a look at the Coolpix Pxxx series rather than the Coolpix Lxxx - that'll probably be more appropriate. The L100 might look a bit DSLR-ish, but it is way short of having a full set of controls for tough subjects.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
v0yce said:
I just tried it out with my Rebel XT (though I don't own a grip for it). I collapsed one of the walls (there's two of them) to see how much space there would be to accommodate a grip. I think it would fit and I think there would even be enough room if one had a larger camera too (instead of a Rebel sized camera like a Full Frame camera, even grip'ed). I was also able to fit my Rebel XT in there (on its side with the lens facing to the back of the bag) with my 50mm lens equipped (though its a petite lens).
With that setup there is still a wall in place that would take a prime or a larger 17-55mm zoom lens. With the prime I had in that slot I could also stack another lens on top of it of equal size, if needed.
arnoldocastillo2003 said:
OK as a general rule just out of production SLR has alot better performance to cost ratio than brand new bodies. I happen to think SLR that came out in last 3-4 years have pretty similar spec in key features. The new stuff are just fluff. And Canon has slightly better low-mid end price than Nikon (at the cost of slightly cheaper material used). I generally recommend the oldest Canon new/refub SLR you can find on the market to my friends, even though I am a Pentax/Nikon/Fujifilm shooter.
As for other mounts, I only recommend a Panasonic if you can find a comperible package that's 20% cheaper than the best Canon deal you can find; an Olympus deal that's 30% cheaper. Why? The sensors are smaller and has inferior image quality so you should only consider them if you can get a 20% discount. The reason for Olympus's higher discount rate is due to the higher cost of lens and aftermarket gears. As for Sony SLR A bodies, mirror lens E bodies, considering the poor mid-range and third party lens selection, you should also require at least a 15% discount compare to a Canon package. As for Pentax, sigh, if you are the kind of person who pay attention and get stressed over a company's future plans and strategy, don't buy into Pentax.
The thing you need to know about SLR business is that is a racket ran by the Japanese companies, they basically pretend to have crazy market fight on the stage, but secretly go clubbing together in the evening. They patent share and profile share a golbal camera monopoly. So they usually will simultaneously hype up a pretty useless feature together, over charge for this feature and then move on to a new one after a couple years.
If I am in the market and I have $700 right now, I would get the best sub 300 deal on ebay for a used Canon body, probably a 350D, 400D at this point, and spend the rest on the best 2.8 lens I can afford. But you are not me and I know new shooters have a lot of reservation about used equiptments so... keep an eye on the discontinued models from the big box stores, they usually have the best deal for out of market models.
opticalmace
Member
Could someone please suggest a camera?
List of stuff I value, most important at top:
- point and shoot, fits easily in my pocket
- great pictures, just using auto mode
- would like a long zoom if possible
- HD video/HDMI output would be nice
Price can vary.. something in the $300 range I think, willing to go a bit higher if I need to.
Thanks!
List of stuff I value, most important at top:
- point and shoot, fits easily in my pocket
- great pictures, just using auto mode
- would like a long zoom if possible
- HD video/HDMI output would be nice
Price can vary.. something in the $300 range I think, willing to go a bit higher if I need to.
Thanks!
Lucky Forward
Member
opticalmace said:
Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-TX10
I just picked up one of these and I'm pretty happy with it. I own a Canon 7D DSLR and a Powershot G7 compact, but I wanted something that was a truly pocket-sized go-anywhere camera, so that I could always have a camera with me without being weighed down. It's only .7 inches thick. HD video, waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, freezeproof.
im going on a euro trip next month. i will be buying a new camera to take lots of scenery photos of the places im going. i have been looking at the cannon s95 and it seems like a good camera but a little on the expensive side. what other cameras should i look into? lets say the price of a s95 is my high point in price, and i still want a quality camera. and if the cannon s95 is the best bang for the buck then so be it, im not opposed to buying it. i have had my eye on it for some time now.
Lucky Forward
Member
No, I've only had it four days. Also, I've never done any type of panoramic shots before, so that's all new to me, but I'll look into it one day.slider said:
Tokkun hit the nail on the head. If you have unsteady hands, shoot a considerable amount of scenes with no motion handheld in low-light, or if you plan on shooting quite a bit of video with this lens, it may be a good option for you (note that VC won't be able to help you freeze moving subjects). If none of these things apply, you're better off saving your money and enjoying the better IQ. No one would begrudge you if you really needed the VC for any of the above reasons, or even just because.misterchef said:
Be aware the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 VC model does use a lens ID that Canon no longer supports (the non-VC model remains unaffected). Because of this, some AF points on the 7D, 60D, 50D and 40D don't work correctly when this lens is mounted. Details here.
You will need to send the lens in to Tamron after purchase to have this fixed under warranty. Hardly Tamron's fault though, but it is an added annoyance if you want this lens.
The S95 is an excellent choice, it's the P&S I take with me everywhere. Though, if you want to save some money, just grab the S90 (it should be relatively cheap new and even cheaper used). The only real difference between the two is that the S95 can shoot video in 720p and the mode dial is much stiffer... that's it.dantehemi said:
Also, if you want to make it easier to hold and operate one handed, have a look at this grip for it: http://www.lensmateonline.com/store/S95S90grip.php. I'm ordering one this week, so I haven't used it, but I have heard nothing but good things about it. After owning the S95 for a short while, it is a welcome addition.
element
Member
Sigma 18-50 f/2.8. I picked this guy up on craigslist for $250. It doesn't have HSM (Hyper-Sonic Motor), so auto focus is a little slow. But it is nice having a fixed camera with a little zoom. The action on the lens is not as smooth as my 18-135 kit lens, but it is pretty nice to take photos with and $250 is pretty reasonable.
Who's up to snuff on the best technique for combining different exposures (three)? Back in the day I used to use photomatix to create a HDRs but I'm sure things are different now.
I don't want grossly unnatural tone mapped HDR photos. I just have a subject and blown out sky which I want replaced from the underexposed photo where the sky is intact.
I don't want grossly unnatural tone mapped HDR photos. I just have a subject and blown out sky which I want replaced from the underexposed photo where the sky is intact.
misterchef
Neo Member
tokkun said:
Danoss said:
Great thanks guys!
At those focal lengths handholding 1/60 - 1/40 shouldn't be too much of a problem and I'll get better IQ and save some money.
Danoss said:
there neoprene cases http://shop.nikon-image.com/front/ProductPSP00334.do
but it seems to be only in japan, not anywhere outside.
Guys I need some help. I'm going to be headed to London/Paris in a month and I wanted to pick up a walkaround lens for my xsi (450D) any recommendations? I have the kit lens and a 55-250mm. I was thinking about getting a 50mm but would that do any good if I wanted to shoot at tourist attractions?
For a walk-around lens 50mm on a full frame body is the classic combo, but I think the 50mm is a little on the long side for a crop body. Why don't you just use the kit lens? If you actually don't mind spending some money and you want a prime, something closer to a 30mm would give you the classic walk around focal length.chimster said:
Unlimited4s
Member
For my trips I often use a 550d with a 28mm 2.8 lens (it's around 250$ I think). 50mm on a crop sensor is a bit too narrow, especially in London and Paris.chimster said:
The 28mm is great for its price, but it's quite noisy and slow when focusing.
reggieandTFE
Member
opticalmace said:
Panasonic LX3 or LX5.
Also, the Olympus XZ-1 also has by far the fastest lens of any of the higher level compacts, which means you won't generally have to use the flash, but it's a little more expensive.
RapidCancel
Member
BlueTsunami said:
Looks good...could you take pics of how the inside looks?
arnoldocastillo2003
Member
tino said:
Thanks so much for the advice, going to really see if i go with a second hand DSLR, thank you a lot.
Are those M42 lenses worth my time? I find the low prices and the interesting qualities of the lenses attractive. I'm not sure how they hold up in terms of sharpness and real world practicality though.
A friend and I are considering investing in an adapter with a bunch of lenses. We both use Canon btw.
A friend and I are considering investing in an adapter with a bunch of lenses. We both use Canon btw.
vitaminwateryum
corporate swill
Im selling my old 50mm 1.8 and flash if anyone here is looking to buy one. Ill give gaf a discount. Flash is a vivitar df-383.
Tino is 100% right about buying used. A few years ago I started off with a Canon 1000D (can't remember the US name - Rebel XT, perhaps?). I paid £350 for it and I was happy with it. When I started to see its shortcomings and how I'd benefit from a better camera I sold it and bought a used Canon 50D for £450. The difference was massive and immediately obvious. I just wish I'd done a bit more research and started off with a used camera at the Canon 40D level or above. I really, really, don't like the Canon 550D/600D/60D range. They're too small, they feel cheap, and they aren't comfortable. The only current Canon cameras I'd consider are the 7D or the 5D Mark 2 (I'd kill for one of those!)
tino said:
I don't really agree with this assessment. Yes, the Micro 4/3 sensors are smaller, but it's not like that is a pure weakness. It is a tradeoff designed to allow for much smaller bodies, which is something a Canon SLR is not going to be able to give you at any price, and some people do care about such things. Similar deal for Sony E-Mounts.
As for the Sony Alphas, I'm not sure what important lenses you think are missing from the selection. Due to the compatibility with Minolta's impressive range of 35mm lenses, they often have much better deals in terms of used lenses than any other camera. You will have to deal with the noisy screw drive focusing on these lenses, but will get image stabilization on every lens, including the vintage Minolta glass from the 1980s.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
RapidCancel said:
Here you go...
The two walls dividing the bag internally are attached via velcro so they're easily removed.
I can, as I posted before, slip my DSLR (Rebel XT) with my Zeiss 50/1.7 attached (as seen in the center slot) in that same center slot on its side. As relatively small as the bag is, it can hold quite a lot.
spindoc said:
I'd say the worth of M42 lenses is totally dependent on each individual lens. If you want to try it out I'd look out for Screw Mount Pentax lenses, or Takumars (not the regular bayonet ones). The standouts in this line of lenses are the 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 135/3.5 and 200/4. I personally own the 135/3.5 (as seen in my bag photo, in the right most slot). Got it for around $50 in great condition with both hood and caps. Here's an example of what you can get from this lens (which is around 50 years old)...
Wide Open
Stopped Down
Its a fantastic lens thats very small for its focal length. Though it has shortcomings in regards to contrast (or its lack of it). It takes a bit of a level adjust to get it to where I like it. It also flares very easily without the hood and you have to be careful of any strong source of light in the frame even with the hood on. But it definitely has no lack for sharpness.
No problem man, just ask any question you want.
tokkun said:
The M4/3 design is bad design, it has 40% or whatever less sensor area than APS, but the 4/3 cameras are not smaller than Pentax gears; the m4/3 gears are not smaller than Sony E gears. Without going into too much detail, the main reason was that the flange distance of 4/3 was designed very long. It's very hard to design smaller than APS gear due to this reason.
And that was not the reason I didn't recommend them. The reason was they are overprice for the brand prestige and amount of raw glass they put into their gears. Want to know how much they charge for their premium ultra wide zoom? Almost as much as the Nikon 14-24 "Gold Standard". What kind of BS is that. If you didn't own Olympus film gear and hold a sentimental value to their brand, there is no reason to get an Olympus for the price they charge. Plus I think 4/3 is going to be a lost standard, like the Kodak APS cameras.
Honestly of all the major lens mounts A mount is my less familiar mount. What I said was second hand knowledge.
I would just say that due to the dominating strong hold C/N have in the SLR industry, any non-C/N SLR you buy should get at least 15% discount against the big two because how much more after market, used lens and rental support you get from the big two.
If you have a C/N SLR, you can walk into Adorama and rent whatever high end lens you want for a couple days. That alone make F/EF mounts worth $100 than the other mounts.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
In regards to Sonys Alpha mount the Zeiss 24/2, 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 and Vario Sonnars are very good reasons to buy into it. There's also strong Sony branded Minolta glass but I think the AF capable Zeiss lenses are more than enough.
BlueTsunami said:Here you go...
I'd say the worth of M42 lenses is totally dependent on each individual lens. If you want to try it out I'd look out for Screw Mount Pentax lenses, or Takumars (not the regular bayonet ones). The standouts in this line of lenses are the 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 135/3.5 and 200/4. I personally own the 135/3.5 (as seen in my bag photo, in the right most slot). Got it for around $50 in great condition with both hood and caps. Here's an example of what you can get from this lens (which is around 50 years old)...
Wide Open
Stopped Down
Its a fantastic lens thats very small for its focal length. Though it has shortcomings in regards to contrast (or its lack of it). It takes a bit of a level adjust to get it to where I like it. It also flares very easily without the hood and you have to be careful of any strong source of light in the frame even with the hood on. But it definitely has no lack for sharpness.
I've actually been eying the 135/2.8 (pentacon), are there any comparisons of the two?
tino said:
Well, what I'm saying is that even entry-level Sony A-Mount cameras can do AF and IS on 25 years worth of Minolta lenses, and therefore bang for the buck in the used lens market is often better - particularly when compared the the entry/mid-range Nikon bodies that can't autofocus on the pre-AF-S lenses.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
spindoc said:
From when I researched cheap offerings from this focal length the Pentacon was mainly known for its wonderful bokeh rendition. My Takumar can produce harsh bokeh in tough conditions. The great thing about my Takumar though is its size and weight, the Pentacon in this regard is supposed to be heavy.
There's also the Carl Zeiss Jena 135/3.5. From what I've read this lens is supposed to be the more balanced of the two. Not as good bokeh as the Pentacon but better than the Takumar and better sharpness and contrast than both the Pentacon and Takumar.
- Status