• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blimblim

The Inside Track
bggrthnjsus said:
dang that looks awesome
a lot of that looks handheld too, which i thought wouldn't work well at all on the 5d, and it looks fine
100% handheld. We'll buy some stuff to get a more stable image soon, but it works quite well right now. The main issue of course is that it's manual focus only, but for our usage it should be more than good enough.
 

Futureman

Member
Damn the 5D2 footage looks insane.

I wish I could just take out a $10,000 loan and build a sick ass photo studio. 5D2, sick computer w/ 30" screen, some sweet lenses, lighting gear... ahhhhhh.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Blimblim said:
We just bought a 5D Mark II for gamersyde, here is our first night shot test.
http://www.vimeo.com/3779122
We are still learning, but damn if this cam isn't incredible.
Daaaaamn, that's sweet! Too bad I don't have a need for video, otherwise it would be easier to convince myself to buy one - or to convince someone else to buy one for me, heh heh heh.
 

Dazzla

Member
I'd just like to chime in like everyone else and mention how well edited that seemed to me. I don't know if it's a knack, if it's natural or if it's something you can get better at and learn over time but I can't edit anything into a watchable clip.

Now that video is spilling over into DSLR world a lot of shitty video will be around (I imagine), hopefully it's something you get better at with practice. In terms of the tech spilling over, the introduction of auto focus will be a massive boon.


Just to repeat another question as well, which lens was used?

Also that club looked awesome, something like that could never happen in the UK (or am I just not looking in the right place?!), I also imagine you would've had your camera nicked before you got there!
 

Blimblim

The Inside Track
Dazzla said:
I'd just like to chime in like everyone else and mention how well edited that seemed to me. I don't know if it's a knack, if it's natural or if it's something you can get better at and learn over time but I can't edit anything into a watchable clip.
Well Colin (snoopers here) is a video director, so he would know ;)

Dazzla said:
Just to repeat another question as well, which lens was used?
Lens is a Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens. Nothing really incredible.

Dazzla said:
Also that club looked awesome, something like that could never happen in the UK (or am I just not looking in the right place?!), I also imagine you would've had your camera nicked before you got there!
Well this is one of the most well known club in Paris, they had a "We love videogames" night or whatever.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Blimblim said:
Lens is a Canon EF 28-135mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM Lens. Nothing really incredible.
Damn, that's pretty good stuff for a non-pro lens.

I'd love to see some narrow DOF effects with the 70-200 f2.8 or some ultra wide angle stuff with the 16-35 or a fisheye.
 

Dazzla

Member
Cool, cheers for the answers :)

Did you do the shooting? I've had a brief play with my D90 and it's so damn hard zooming and focusing at the same time! It would probably be hard enough just focusing at the same time but if you try and do two at once or one then the other it just looks stupid.
 

Blimblim

The Inside Track
Rentahamster said:
Damn, that's pretty good stuff for a non-pro lens.

I'd love to see some narrow DOF effects with the 70-200 f2.8 or some ultra wide angle stuff with the 16-35 or a fisheye.
Just playing a bit with the lens they day I got the cam
misterchief.jpg

Dazzla said:
Cool, cheers for the answers :)

Did you do the shooting? I've had a brief play with my D90 and it's so damn hard zooming and focusing at the same time! It would probably be hard enough just focusing at the same time but if you try and do two at once or one then the other it just looks stupid.
No I wasn't even there. It was all Colin and Bruce (who usually handles the camera for us) trying to play with the thing. They know what they are doing usually, so I guess it came to them rather quickly.
 

mrkgoo

Member
Blimblim said:
Just playing a bit with the lens they day I got the cam

No I wasn't even there. It was all Colin and Bruce (who usually handles the camera for us) trying to play with the thing. They know what they are doing usually, so I guess it came to them rather quickly.

And that's iso3200.

*drooooooool*
 

nitewulf

Member
walking in a dream fit perfectly and the night scenes are incredible. good camera, and good eye. nights in pretty cities...ahhh, so good.
 
Well, not nearly as exciting as Blimblim, but here goes.

Im pretty new to photography...think infant. Ive practiced with a digicam and cellphone cam(yeah, i know) and thought it was so much fun. After a day of deliberation, I pounced on a Canon rebel XS, and I must say, this is one of the best purchases Ive ever made. Although this is the equivalent of me buying a car and not knowing how to drive at all, this has been a nice experience. Well, here are a few photos I shot. They look nice, but are pretty typical. I was late for work after the ups guy showed up 10 minutes before I usually step out...and I refused to leave until I at least took like 10 shots.
ipzdhx.jpg

ruqhhz.jpg


Thanks gaf!!!
 

snoopers

I am multitalented
Thanks for the kind words GAF ! MarkII is indeed a beast, and even if it has serious design flaws the pristine image quality and low light sensibility make it a real pleasure to work with.
 

Schrade

Member
snoopers said:
Thanks for the kind words GAF ! MarkII is indeed a beast, and even if it has serious design flaws the pristine image quality and low light sensibility make it a real pleasure to work with.
Expand!
 

snoopers

I am multitalented
Schrade said:

No pop-up LCD screen, no autofocus while filming, and you can't zoom either because the video will stutter... you can't adjust the shutter speed, overally there's little to no image settings at all... it's not really user friendly. But if you know exactly what you'll use it for, it's a precious little machine.
 

fart

Savant
yah, it's not much of a videographer's tool. i'm now convinced that this whole slr/video convergence is just going to end in tears.
 

mrkgoo

Member
fart said:
yah, it's not much of a videographer's tool. i'm now convinced that this whole slr/video convergence is just going to end in tears.

Well, I think each iteration will provide improvements. They need to leave a reason to upgrade!
 

fart

Savant
well, they could spend 4 generations devoting engineering time to refining a function that 5% of users will spent 5% of their time using, or they could spend that same time fixing the numerous problems that are rampant in dslrs: autofocus accuracy, getting rid of the mirror box, size and weight, screen/evf usability, digital component and firmware modularity, etc. etc. etc.

there's a good argument for working on bridge camera and compact video convergence based on the users, but here's the thing about high-end dslr video convergence: the only benefit of high end dslrs over high-end camcorders is DOF, and only cinema/high-end video users care at all about the reduction in DOF. to have to spend time and area in silicon, not to mention devoting large portions of the usability team to video for this marginal application is ludicrous.

thom hogan has been arguing about this on dpr recently (and has clearly converted me) and his understanding of the world as it stands is that the reason canikon are devoting engineering resources to this problem is because 3-4 years ago the major press organizations started complaining that they were only getting stills from their still equipment investments. well, the major press organizations are, quite frankly, completely fucked at the moment, largely because of their total lack of sound judgment, so it's not clear that they should be listened to at all, nor that there's any money to be made from them in doing so. speaking as someone who knows a few reporters, a small camcorder is infinitely more useful for real journalism than some hacked up slr that can capture a few videos between stills.
 

IJoel

Member
So now that both Canon's 500D and Nikon's D5000 have been announced, what's the consensus from the knowledgeable sources regarding dslr entry-to-mid level choices? I'm looking to get a dslr, and I'm considering both new entries, but haven't found an in-depth comparison anywhere. Anyone with insight into this?
 
mrkgoo said:
Well, I think each iteration will provide improvements. They need to leave a reason to upgrade!
canon is rumored to be working on an slr based video camera system that will be compatible with EF and EF-S lenses
http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/new-video-camera-system/

if that's true, then i don't think they will ever make the current video modes in their slrs totally user friendly so as not to cannibalize their own profits.
 

SRG01

Member
Okay, so I bought a Fujifilm F50fd to replace my aging/breaking Canon A700 during the Christmas season. I read the reviews and, while it's not as good as the F20/30, the low light performance is still pretty damn good.

However, I'm consistently running into the problem where all my highlights are being consistently overblown even if I turn the exposure down. Apparently, it was an issue with the F20/30 but was kind of played down when I read the reviews. It's a consistent issue with my shots and it's irritating me enough to buy a new camera.

My current requirements are:
- Decent low light performance (at least better than Canon, or perhaps easier to process the chroma/lum noise out)
- P&S form factor or close to it. I would prefer something smaller than a G9/10, but I wouldn't mind if it's my only option.
- Less than $250 CDN. I actually got my F50 for $210 then price matched to $187 or so. No LX3 suggestions or anything like that, :lol

Any thoughts?
 

Grimlock

Member
Frankly, unless ya get lucky and grab an F30/31fd off of Ebay or Craigslist on the cheap, I think you'll have to compromise on at least one of those 3 points, SRG01. If you can wait or do without for a bit, I'd suggest stashing dinero away for about a month or two (and sell the F50 for more cash for your next camera) until the new models hit & then look around. If size & low-light performance are the truly over-riding concerns, I'd consider an Olympus E-400 series SLR or a Panasonic G1 (or the next model, the GH-1) with a fast pancake lens (the G1 would be a bit bigger than the Canon G10 digicam), but you'd pay a lot more than $250 CDN for either.
 

Zyzyxxz

Member
so I'm not sure if I wanna pick up an entry level DSL-R or a high end point and shoot.

I just want to be able to take some really nice photos and have the option to edit them the way I want and be able to shoot them the way I would like.

If its a point and shoot:

I want something that can shoot in RAW, have good ISO settings, and of course top notch picture quality.

Something along the lines of a Canon G10 but hopefully not as pricey but in the same category, I'm open to all brands.
 

mrkgoo

Member
IJoel said:
So now that both Canon's 500D and Nikon's D5000 have been announced, what's the consensus from the knowledgeable sources regarding dslr entry-to-mid level choices? I'm looking to get a dslr, and I'm considering both new entries, but haven't found an in-depth comparison anywhere. Anyone with insight into this?

I'm of the opinion that you can't go wrong with either. More important than the actual body is the 'system' you are buying into. Ergonomics, lens quality and selection are important factors.

Zyzyxxz: Why not DSLR?
 

fart

Savant
i actually don't like this whole "system" thing, insofar as the vast majority of people never move past the kit lens and maybe the cheapest planar prime. i think the really important part of buying an entry-level slr is getting the body with the ergonomics that feel best to you. specifically, the major entry-levels are so good now that the real differentiator is just how comfortable you feel using them. if you don't feel like your camera is a kind of second home, you won't carry your camera which means you won't get any shots, which means the entire exercise is pointless.

i would say that the one exception to this is that you shouldn't buy a new pentax (and potentially any 4/3s model either) dslr right now because the imminent contraction in the slr market has a very good chance of pushing pentax, olympus and panasonic right out of it. micro 4/3s is safe (and will probably be very hot), but the pentax K-mount and 4/3s will both be on shaky ground in the next year to year and a half.

and even that could be inconsequential if you like the feel of a 4/3s or k-mount entry-level body enough. it's not like it will stop taking pictures if eg panasonic stops making slrs (there is a very real possibility of this, by the way).

what you shouldn't do, though, is buy a 400$ body based on the variety of 1500$ super-exotic lenses that the body manufacturer makes. instead, try all the 400$ bodies and the one that fits you hand and eye best is probably the one you want to get.
 

mrkgoo

Member
fart said:
i actually don't like this whole "system" thing, insofar as the vast majority of people never move past the kit lens and maybe the cheapest planar prime. i think the really important part of buying an entry-level slr is getting the body with the ergonomics that feel best to you. specifically, the major entry-levels are so good now that the real differentiator is just how comfortable you feel using them. if you don't feel like your camera is a kind of second home, you won't carry your camera which means you won't get any shots, which means the entire exercise is pointless.

i would say that the one exception to this is that you shouldn't buy a new pentax (and potentially any 4/3s model either) dslr right now because the imminent contraction in the slr market has a very good chance of pushing pentax, olympus and panasonic right out of it. micro 4/3s is safe (and will probably be very hot), but the pentax K-mount and 4/3s will both be on shaky ground in the next year to year and a half.

and even that could be inconsequential if you like the feel of a 4/3s or k-mount entry-level body enough. it's not like it will stop taking pictures if eg panasonic stops making slrs (there is a very real possibility of this, by the way).

what you shouldn't do, though, is buy a 400$ body based on the variety of 1500$ super-exotic lenses that the body manufacturer makes. instead, try all the 400$ bodies and the one that fits you hand and eye best is probably the one you want to get.

I see your point. I definitely agree with ergonomics, but I think your upgrade path is important to consider. For sure, if you don't intend on going beyond the kit, then more onus should be placed on the body. But if you do think so, then DO consider it, in my opinion (not to lessen any importance in choosing good ergonomics -I highlighted as much earlier).

I just refer to 'system' as considering every part of the SLR, not just the part the sensor is attached to. If you have a bunch of older compatible lenses, for example. Ergonmics are very much part of that 'system' too (as they don't change between bodies within a company).

The main problem is few people, if any, ever know what they want at the beginning. I wouldn't ever recommend anyone to just jump straight into high-end lenses (I probably wouldn't recommend it at all), but interchangeable lenses are a huge advantage for SLRs over point and shoots. There are lots of 'cheap' lenses about that are also very good.

edit: I thought I'd add - what can also be important (and I'm not kidding) is does anyone around you have an SLR? Borrowing others' gear can be advantageous, given that bodies' feature set can be similar. Indeed, you may also want to AVOID sharing your stuff too :lol.
 

Zyzyxxz

Member
fart said:
i actually don't like this whole "system" thing, insofar as the vast majority of people never move past the kit lens and maybe the cheapest planar prime. i think the really important part of buying an entry-level slr is getting the body with the ergonomics that feel best to you. specifically, the major entry-levels are so good now that the real differentiator is just how comfortable you feel using them. if you don't feel like your camera is a kind of second home, you won't carry your camera which means you won't get any shots, which means the entire exercise is pointless.

i would say that the one exception to this is that you shouldn't buy a new pentax (and potentially any 4/3s model either) dslr right now because the imminent contraction in the slr market has a very good chance of pushing pentax, olympus and panasonic right out of it. micro 4/3s is safe (and will probably be very hot), but the pentax K-mount and 4/3s will both be on shaky ground in the next year to year and a half.

and even that could be inconsequential if you like the feel of a 4/3s or k-mount entry-level body enough. it's not like it will stop taking pictures if eg panasonic stops making slrs (there is a very real possibility of this, by the way).

what you shouldn't do, though, is buy a 400$ body based on the variety of 1500$ super-exotic lenses that the body manufacturer makes. instead, try all the 400$ bodies and the one that fits you hand and eye best is probably the one you want to get.

I don't really care for going into high end lenses, there is a point of diminishing returns in picture quality and it comes pretty early on for me. My vice is cars and computers so I'd never invest hudnreds on lenses.

The thing with the Micro 4/3 format is that they aren't very entry-level friendly right now in terms of pricing. Unless they are gonna get cheap near the end of summer I'm not considering them at this point. I'm gonna be taking a trip to the East Coast at the end of August and I'll get to see New York, something I've been meaning to for a long time. Heck I've spent all my life on the West Coast, I've spent more time outside of the country than outside of my state. So I'm just looking for the perfect camera to capture my memories and to be a future camera for similar trips.

mrkgoo said:
Zyzyxxz: Why not DSLR?

The thing is, will I really benefit between an entry level DSLR with the basic lense kit vs. a really good point-and-shoot. What if I have no plans to move beyond the first lense?
 

mrklaw

MrArseFace
fart said:
yah, it's not much of a videographer's tool. i'm now convinced that this whole slr/video convergence is just going to end in tears.


actually I think it is a great videographer's tool. Just not a consumer one. If you're a high end video user, you don't need autofocus, or zoom while recording, or flippy LCD screens. Pro cameras use manual focus so you can control it yourself and stop it fucking up.

I agree though, they should add some of these feature in soon (and the Nikon 5000 has the flip up LCD so thats an inevitable progression). But hopefully they keep the manual focus options.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Zyzyxxz said:
I don't really care for going into high end lenses, there is a point of diminishing returns in picture quality and it comes pretty early on for me. My vice is cars and computers so I'd never invest hudnreds on lenses.

The thing with the Micro 4/3 format is that they aren't very entry-level friendly right now in terms of pricing. Unless they are gonna get cheap near the end of summer I'm not considering them at this point. I'm gonna be taking a trip to the East Coast at the end of August and I'll get to see New York, something I've been meaning to for a long time. Heck I've spent all my life on the West Coast, I've spent more time outside of the country than outside of my state. So I'm just looking for the perfect camera to capture my memories and to be a future camera for similar trips.



The thing is, will I really benefit between an entry level DSLR with the basic lense kit vs. a really good point-and-shoot. What if I have no plans to move beyond the first lense?
Yes.

The image quality of a Canon/Nikon entry level DSLR + 50mm/35mm cheap prime lens will kick the crap out of any P&S camera. But then again, if you're only gonna be using low res files, then it doesn't really matter.
 

Zyzyxxz

Member
Rentahamster said:
Yes.

The image quality of a Canon/Nikon entry level DSLR + 50mm/35mm cheap prime lens will kick the crap out of any P&S camera. But then again, if you're only gonna be using low res files, then it doesn't really matter.

how low res we talking about?

I'd like to capture nice shots once in a while for desktop wallpapers or posters.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Zyzyxxz said:
how low res we talking about?

I'd like to capture nice shots once in a while for desktop wallpapers or posters.
P&S pics downsized for web viewing look okay. Once you start printing large sizes, though, the extra megapixels and cleaner images that a DSLR's larger sensor can provide really make a difference. 6 megapixels at least should do the trick.
 

fart

Savant
high end P&S (and i mean really high end -- there are three products in this segment and one of them sucks) are nearly as good as an entry level slr in good light. the three products you want to look at are: 1) panasonic lx3 2) canon g10 and 3) nikon p6000. spoiler: the nikon sucks.

in good light, using a tiny tabletop or flexible tripod where possible, the entry-level tripod will actually be a hindrance if you only own one lens (and if you think "hundreds" is a lot for a lens, you will only ever own one lens, maybe 2). real resolution is close enough to not matter unless you regularly make large prints (10x14+). the advantage of bigger sensors is increased SNR, and slightly increased DR (high-end P&S to high-end SLR is about a stop). at base ISO, the decreased SNR is at worst a very minor issue for pixel peepers (regrettably, me), and the DR difference is completely inconsequential if you don't shoot RAW (which i don't recommend for snapshooters).

of course, if you already own some really good lenses for an slr system for some reason, or the "good light" clause doesn't apply to you, you may want to get an SLR, but because you're paying a big size and weight and sometimes cost penalty, probably a zoom range penalty too, you want to think long and hard about that. you definitely don't want to do it because your parents are willing to hand you down a tamron 28-200 or some other equally mediocre consumer zoom from the 80s.

oh, and if you're thinking "P&Ses can't be completely useless in bad light" you're pretty much correct. the newest high-end P&S sensors, meaning the LX3 and G10, are actually _more sensitive per area_ than the highest of high end large sensors. however, their area is so much smaller that the benefits are far outweighed. however, there's a silver lining: the sensors are very good at managing luminance noise, but terrible with chroma. this means that they're beautiful sensors at high ISO in B&W. in particular, the LX3 has a high contrast B&W preset that i really like up to ISO 800.

finally, if you're just snapshooting, they all have little pop-up flashes, and a little flash in a vacation snap isn't going to kill anyone.

eta: keep an eye on the sigma DP2, and consider the panasonic G1 for a hybrid. superzoom compacts are generally ignored unless you have some concrete reason to need poor long telephoto shots in your snaps.
 

Forsete

Member
fart said:
yah, it's not much of a videographer's tool. i'm now convinced that this whole slr/video convergence is just going to end in tears.

All is not lost. Liveview used to be pretty worthless on dSLRs until Sony solved that problem.

I'm interested in seeing what they'll do with video, if anyone can deliver on that it should be them.
 

mrkgoo

Member
Zyzyxxz said:
The thing is, will I really benefit between an entry level DSLR with the basic lense kit vs. a really good point-and-shoot. What if I have no plans to move beyond the first lense?

Depends on the shot. Narrow DOF is reliant on things like a wide aperture, and a large sensor, two things that don't typically occur on P&S cameras. If you like to take portraits, for example, then an SLR is good. Landscapes out doors? Most P&S can do pretty good (unless you want more control).
 

fart

Savant
Forsete said:
All is not lost. Liveview used to be pretty worthless on dSLRs until Sony solved that problem.
no, they didn't. and the smartest thing sony has done with their slrs is not chase the video dragon (so far)

yes, if you want DOF control (via fast primes), large sensor is the only way to go. DOF control is completely inconsequential for snapshots though.
 

Forsete

Member
fart said:
no, they didn't. and the smartest thing sony has done with their slrs is not chase the video dragon (so far)

yes, if you want DOF control (via fast primes), large sensor is the only way to go. DOF control is completely inconsequential for snapshots though.

They didnt solve the crap AF/delay problem with the A300/A350 making LV usable?
Sony will chase video, video is in Sony's DNA. :p

I'm mostly interested in Sony's new back illuminated CMOS sensors though.
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200806/08-069E/index.html
 

mrkgoo

Member
Forsete said:
All is not lost. Liveview used to be pretty worthless on dSLRs until Sony solved that problem.

I'm interested in seeing what they'll do with video, if anyone can deliver on that it should be them.

Liveview? What problem?

You mean autofocus?

I have live view on the 40D (the first Canon SLR to sport it), and it's actually extremely useful for low/high angle shots, and nearly a must for tabletop product/macro shots on a tripod. You can NAIL focus, get an exposure preview, live DOF preview and so on. It's far from worthless.

People poo-pooed it when it was announced, because they were all, "Pfft. It's a P&S gimmick. I won't use it. Viewfinder forever.", but it really does excel at certain types of shooting, and will only get better.

I think the convergence thing is great. I want to shoot video using my lenses, I think it would be interesting. Of course, current implementation is limited, but that too will improve.
 

Forsete

Member
mrkgoo said:
Liveview? What problem?

You mean autofocus?

I have live view on the 40D (the first Canon SLR to sport it), and it's actually extremely useful for low/high angle shots, and nearly a must for tabletop product/macro shots on a tripod. You can NAIL focus, get an exposure preview, live DOF preview and so on. It's far from worthless.

People poo-pooed it when it was announced, because they were all, "Pfft. It's a P&S gimmick. I won't use it. Viewfinder forever.", but it really does excel at certain types of shooting, and will only get better.

I think the convergence thing is great. I want to shoot video using my lenses, I think it would be interesting. Of course, current implementation is limited, but that too will improve.

Not sure how it works on the 40D but some cameras that featured it behaved oddly when focusing and taking the shot, flip up the mirror for VF, flip it down to AF and again up when taking the shot.

Sony solved that by adding a second CCD sensor which does not need the mirror to be flipped, it behaves like a SLR but with LiveView.

Worthless was a bad choice of words, but not as good as it could be. :)
 

fart

Savant
Forsete said:
They didnt solve the crap AF/delay problem with the A300/A350 making LV usable?
Sony will chase video, video is in Sony's DNA. :p
the a300/350 lv implementation is a hack which completely misses the point. the only advantage of lv is getting an exact (nearly, it'll necessarily be downscaled) preview of the sensor image, and getting rid of several electro/mechanical complexities -- phase detection AF, flipping mirrors, etc. you'll notice this was also the point of mirror-based TTL OVFs over rangefinders. the sony solution not only does not give an exact sensor image, since it uses a secondary sensor, but it adds another mechanical complexity (new mirror, sensor). now the lv mechanism has to be in tolerance with the phase detection system, and blah blah blah, a nightmare. in fact, this is why it's not in the high end sonys.

the reason why i think sony won't be so quick to chase video is because dedicated video products are not in sony's DNA, but play a HUGE part in sony's profit-making ability. sony also has a deep understanding of the high end videographer market they would be chasing with their slr cameras and hopefully will figure out how stupid that is. not only that, but they still have a long way to go in the still arena, and any time spent not evolving the still portion is time lost. then again, the former qualities are true of canon, and they're still wasting time on this, so i dunno.

I'm mostly interested in Sony's new back illuminated CMOS sensors though.
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200806/08-069E/index.html
sony currently makes probably a good 40% of the still image sensors used in cameras, and backlit and non-bayer sensors are The Way Forward, so i would hope they're getting ready to start taping these things out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom