Support NeoGAF

[Rentahamster]

i would wait on the T1i unless yuou have to have a 15mp rebel with video tomorrow. prices are going to drop pretty quickly

don't waste your money on a uv protector for a kit lens.

But, but...the printer, THE PRINTER!


(In fairness though, if you don't need a printer, the deal isn't so slick anymore)

 

[fart]

yah but printers are always cheap because the major source of revenue is ink and paper. i would wait until there's a significant cash discount before buying an t1i, or just buy an xs/xsi. most people actually want the lower density sensor.

btw, here's how you can tell: are you a portrait or landscape photographer and usually (90%) work on a tripod? (and by tripod i mean a very nice one, not a 20$ best buy special). if yes, do you make large prints? if yes, then can you afford to buy top line fast lenses? (remember diffraction sets in _very_ early) if yes, then you want a higher density sensor, but you also probably want it in a higher end camera body..

 

[Grimlock]

Im thinking of getting this for my mom, what do you guys think?
http://cameras.pricegrabber.com/dig...al-Camera/m63868359.html/st=product/sv=title#

Also I m looking for a flash for my Pentax. Something with comparable specks to

but cheaper. I shoot a lot of indoor party/club and theater stuff I also do some portraits.

The Fuji would be an okay camera-not the most wizzer, but functional. As far as Pentax flashes, your choices are limited by whether your particular SLR requires P-TTL (starting with the K100d & K10, I think) or just uses regular TTL (like the older Pentax digital SLRs). If you're using a newer SLR, you could get lucky on ebay and nab a cheaper Sigma 500DG or Super flash. I'd suggest the Super, if you can find it. There are some Vivitar/Bowers/Sakar flashes that are the same model that claim to be P-TTL, but the one I ended up returning was definitely not.

 

[BlueTsunami]

That wedding I was set to shoot, I ended up shooting it with a 18-55mm kit lens, a broken 50mm 1.4 (No autofocus) and my trusty Rebel XT. Fortunately it was for a family member and they knew the liberties they were taking with a person who has never shot a wedding before and my lack of proper equipment.

Everything ended up good. Some of the shots were blown out due to my not minding the large ass window and curtains blasting lots of diffused sunlight. But the preliminary bride shots (my aunt) and a good amount of shots during the reception came out great. Seems like a got a good technique down for Manual Focusing.

With that said, I need to buy a damn flash unit. You can't underestimate the value of directional lighting.

 

[Skittleguy]

Hmmm. Nikon's supposed roadmap for the next year:

August 4 introduction: (Apparently the end of July presentation is for compact cameras)
Nikon D3000
Nikon D300s with Full-HD movie 24 fps, improved AF, self timer + mirror-up, cf + sd-slot
AF-S DX 17-65/3.2-4 G VR with 72(!) mm filter

October 15 presentation:
Nikon D700x with 24.5 MP, Full-HD movie 24 fps, improved AF and self timer + mirror-up
AF-S Nikkor 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR (The FX-dream-walk-around-lens?)
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II (What everybody waited for! 82 mm filter, 1530 g)
AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G
AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G (No VR?)

Q1/2010:
AF-S Nikkor 14-28mm f/3.5-4.5G ED
AF-S Nikkor 120-450mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR II (Replacement for 80-400? 82 mm, 1480 g)

Q2/2010:
Nikon D4 with 15.7 MP, improved 1 EV, Full HD-movie 30fps
Nikon D400 with 13.8 MP, improved 1 EV, Full HD-movie 24fps

Q3/2010:
AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4G VR (On the waiting list for many!)
AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/5.6G VR (Have been missing a long time!)
AF-S Nikkor 70-240mm f/3.5-4.5G VR (The missing medium size telezoom!)
AF-S Nikkor 105mm f/2G DC (A small surprise. No VR?)
AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm f/4G VR
AF-S DX Nikkor 60-95mm f/2G VR (The DX dream-telezoom!)
AF-S DX Nikkor 17-60mm f/2.8G VR (Replacing 17-55 with addition of VR)
Nikon Coolpix P1DX with DX 12.3 MP stabilised sensor, 28-85/3.5-5.6 zoom (comparable to FX, actually 18-56), 2.9 inch 920k-display, movable upwards for macro.

Q4/2010:
Nikon D4X with 30.2 MP with 1 EV improved sensitivity

Looks good. Source.

 

[Rentahamster]

That wedding I was set to shoot, I ended up shooting it with a 18-55mm kit lens, a broken 50mm 1.4 (No autofocus) and my trusty Rebel XT

With that said, I need to buy a damn flash unit.

Damn, that's hardcore.

Why didn't you buy a 50mm 1.8 or something before the wedding?

And yeah, flashes rock.

Glad you're pleased with the shots you took. Must not have been easy.

 

[fart]

Hmmm. Nikon's supposed roadmap for the next year:

Looks good. Source.

thom hogan weighed in this morning:

A quick read of the specifics of the document should be enough to convince you that it is almost certainly not a Nikon document, let alone accurate. Yet it seems every photo-related site now quotes the document or has a discussion of it (now including this one). You'll note that I've taken to identifying items on my main page to make it clear what type each one is.

My opinion of the Nikon Road Map? Fan fiction. In the details you'll see that many things just don't align with reality very well. For example, a CAM380 AF sensor would indicate a focus sensor with significantly less focus sensing area than even the D40, D40x, and D60, which have three AF sensors. Since the same document says the D3000 is a seven-sensor part, this would mean really, really tiny focus points, smaller than anything Nikon has ever done. Thus, the details are not believable (nor do I believe that the D3000 uses a seven-sensor AF part).

he agrees with the body predictions for the next few months though. hopefully a fast wide angle (24-35 f/1.4) gets pushed out sooner rather than later regardless..

 

[Zyzyxxz]

Sorry for the noobish questions but:

Is it a good thing to have a filter for my camera?

I'm still using the 18-55 kit lense for the D40 and I'm probably gonna buy a 50mm f1.8 later on when I have money.

How do I know which filters work with my lense as well?

 

[Rentahamster]

Sorry for the noobish questions but:

Is it a good thing to have a filter for my camera?

I'm still using the 18-55 kit lense for the D40 and I'm probably gonna buy a 50mm f1.8 later on when I have money.

How do I know which filters work with my lense as well?

I don't use filters for either lens. They're both so cheap.

 

[mrkgoo]

I don't use filters for either lens. They're both so cheap.

I don't use a filter without a specific need to.

There are two camps on the subject:

1) Believes that UV filters degrade image quality, or that it doesn't make sense to stick a cheap piece of glass in front of expensive stuff. Believes that the protection afforded by a filter is insignificant to the damage that would need to be done to a lens element.

2) Believes that damaging a cheaper UV filter is a better proposition than an expensive lens.

I'm somewhere in between. I think a hood provides me 90% of the protection I need. That said, if you're going to be operating in high wind with dust/sand, small scratches can happen, and in those cases a filter may be a good idea.

As for IQ degradation, a good multicoated filter will do little to the image. A bad one will cause loss of contrast and increased flare. Personally I don't used filters because I'd want the best for my expensive lenses, and they cost $100-200 anyway.

I use a UV filter on my 17-55, because without it it sucks up dust like a vacuum. It's a design fault.

 

[fart]

cheap filters have a large negative impact on MTF that's quite measurable. a few small imperfections on a front element will at worst cause a slight loss of contrast that is on the borderline of measurable. so basically, if you're going to buy a filter (any kind of filter), you're looking at an expensive one. past that you can really only do your own risk analysis based on what kind of shooting you do, how clumsy you are, repair cost of lens (less than you think!) and any other non-front-element protection factors, eg, if a lens cams out instead of having a sealed front (canon 17-55).

keep in mind that if you shoot nikon, the flat rate repair cost for pro level lenses is about 300$ for something like a front element replacement. a good (hoya hd or B+W mrc) 77mm UV is 60$ at full HK discount, and you're not going to avoid learning how to clean your elements properly (believe me, i tried), so it may not be an easy decision for everyone. on the one hand i don't bother with filters unless in obviously adverse conditions for my 52mm thread lenses anymore, but on the other, i got this gigantic grease stain on the filter for my 17-35 in dublin that i can't get off, and if i end up having to replace it, i'll be much happier to replace a 60$ filter than having to send the lens in.

 

[zhenming]

Sorry for the noobish questions but:

Is it a good thing to have a filter for my camera?

I'm still using the 18-55 kit lense for the D40 and I'm probably gonna buy a 50mm f1.8 later on when I have money.

How do I know which filters work with my lense as well?

You dont need filters, if you're looking for filters for effects, you can do mostly every effect in photoshop. The only filter you might consider is a uv filter for taking the lens to rugged environments. Get the 50mm if you want to shoot in a narrower depth of field. Cant do the myspace pics with that lens because all well see is your nose and your eyes...

anyway if you want to get filters buy the cheap ones, i've used the $100 uv and polarizer ones and didnt see the difference with or without them... Hoya and Tiffen are good. Its pretty subjective though.

 

[fart]

You dont need filters, if you're looking for filters for effects, you can do mostly every effect in photoshop.

this is incorrect. for the most part, filters selectively block light, which is _not_ the same as moving luminance around in photoshop because of sensor noise characteristics and duration of shutter effects. there are three types of relevant filters:

polarizers can darken skies and objects with a lot of reflected light, boosting saturation and lowering DR of a scene

neutral density filters cut amplitude evenly across the spectrum. these can be used to get longer shutters in a bright scene. graduated versions can be used to reduce DR as well. when shutter doesn't matter so much over the nd part of a graduated scene, blending multiple exposures will approximate a gnd.

color filters cut amplitude over a section of spectrum. probably the only reason to use one is to prevent a channel underexposure when practicing ETTR, as it reduces DR just over that part of the spectrum.

 

[XMonkey]

If you can only get one filter I would highly recommend a polarizing filter. I can work around needing a ND filter with two exposures and some photoshop work, but it's basically impossible to reproduce a polarizer effect.

 

[Rentahamster]

it's basically impossible to reproduce a polarizer effect.

You can sorta fake it by reducing the luminance values of blue (for sky) and a mix of green and yellow (for foliage) in Adobe Camera RAW.

But as for reducing glare...yeah that's kinda hard to do in post.

 

[fart]

oh, and as above, don't buy cheap filters unless you _want_ to lower contrast, mtf, fuck up your colors, and induce all kinds of nasty flare and ghosting. in particular, stay away from anything uncoated (all tiffens except for their highest end HT), hoya coateds below SHMC, B+W non-MRC, and pretty much all other filter brands.

 

[zhenming]

this is incorrect. for the most part, filters selectively block light, which is _not_ the same as moving luminance around in photoshop because of sensor noise characteristics and duration of shutter effects. there are three types of relevant filters:

polarizers can darken skies and objects with a lot of reflected light, boosting saturation and lowering DR of a scene

neutral density filters cut amplitude evenly across the spectrum. these can be used to get longer shutters in a bright scene. graduated versions can be used to reduce DR as well. when shutter doesn't matter so much over the nd part of a graduated scene, blending multiple exposures will approximate a gnd.

color filters cut amplitude over a section of spectrum. probably the only reason to use one is to prevent a channel underexposure when practicing ETTR, as it reduces DR just over that part of the spectrum.

again highly subjective. I only use filters when i really need them. sure effects like ND cant be reproduced without one, but something like a polarizer filter I can just bump the saturation in ps and call it day. a lot of filters under ~70$ isn't good for the lens image quality anyway. and again I said MOST effects can be reproduced in photoshop not ALL.

filters are like condoms you dont really need it but its good for protection. well at least the UVs are...

 

[XMonkey]

but something like a polarizer filter I can just bump the saturation in ps and call it day

What? No.

 

[zhenming]

What? No.

So tell me... did I use a polarizer?

Spoiler

trick question.

The thing I probably cant really do as good is reduce glare which the polarizer does too.

 

[XMonkey]

I don't use polarizers to get better saturation. That's just a (sometimes) positive side effect. I use polarizers to cut down reflections. Tell me how you do that in Photoshop.

 

[zhenming]

I don't use polarizers to get better saturation. That's just a (sometimes) positive side effect. I use polarizers to cut down reflections. Tell me how you do that in Photoshop.

I've said most effects, but a lot of people only see the saturation bump using the polarizer. Contrast to you though I use polarizers to get better colors only because the D80 colors are no match for the D300 and I haven't had the chance to shoot where reflections are bouncing all over.

The only filters I guess are worth discussing are the UV, Polarizing, ND basically... the rest are just for the effects if I remember my filters correctly.

UV - you probably wont see the difference if you used one, its subjective though but it helps to protect the lens from physical or sun rays... whatever.

Polarizing - More vivid colors and it helps reduce glare for example shooting windows/glass, or water.

ND - slows your lens stop, produces some cool effects like the fluid water effect you see everywhere.

 

[XMonkey]

Polarizers are also excellent for pretty much any nature/landscape photography, as you can tone down the reflections on leaves, flowers, etc and not just water.

 

[fart]

again highly subjective.

no, that's what i'm saying. it's not a subjective point. visible spectrum filters change the exposure in ways that can't be exactly duplicated in post, period. this is inarguable fact. we can debate how close we can get in post until the cows come home*, but it is a fact that the information recorded will be measurably different, in many cases substantially so.

also UV filters will cut a bit of visible spectrum depending on how hard the falloff is for your particular model/sample, but digital sensors are minimally reactive to UV, so consider them to be NCs (clear glass filters). in fact, if you're offered a choice between a UV and an NC, take the NC.

* ok maybe not. the washington consensus is GND post, ND, CPL filter. color filters only if your last name is borg

 

[BlueTsunami]

Feel naughty for posting info from Canon Rumors but found this interesting...

The Evolution of the Powershot G
I received an email that Canon does indeed have an APS-C sized sensor “G” camera being tested/developed.
Test Camera Specs
15.1mp CMOS 1.6x Crop
3x Zoom (24-70 IS, no speed information)
3″ 920k LCD
ISO 100-3200
DIGIC V
SD Card
1080p HD Movie Mode
Body is slightly larger than the G10
New Battery
No Viewfinder (Flash shoe VF?)
Flash Shoe
We know a CMOS based G series camera with a larger sensor is coming. The source said we may not see this type of camera until Photokina 2010.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/07/canon-gmos-cr2/

 

[MickeyKnox]

New toy, (free)

can't wait to fuck around with it.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

Whoa what kind of stats?

 

[XMonkey]

It's a Canon XL1 (or maybe the XL1s)

 

[cjdunn]

New toy, (free)
http://i658.photobucket.com/albums/uu304/moregaf/NEWTOY.jpg
can't wait to fuck around with it.

Whoa, congrats.

 

[Rentahamster]

By the way, for anyone using Lightroom:

If you have a multi-core CPU, exporting does not fully utilize all your cores. Split up the job in half (dual core) or thirds (quad core) and do them simultaneously. It'll finish faster.

Also, if anyone's been noticing, I've been making a lot of posts recently about my hardon for SSDs. It's sped up my Lightroom and Photoshop workflow immensely. Awesome, but pricey.

 

[sarcastor]

i need some help. I have a rebel xs with a tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens. I want something telephoto for outdoor shots. I'm going to a kite festival on sunday. the only problem is i'm poor

so what's a better buy for $300? A used Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

or a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM without IS

Both are used on craigslist in good condition. I don't plan on going safari anytime soon, so i don't need the extra 100mm, but it would be nice to not have to hold the camera for long periods of time to get a sharp picture.

I already tried the Canon 28-135mm USM IS and i didn't find it was worth the money. Any suggestions?

 

[B-Dex]

Does anyone have recommendations for a good point and shoot?

I was looking at the Sony Cybershot t90 since it can also do 720p vids but I heard the battery life isn't so hot.

I also like the way the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS7 looks (love the green one) but it can't do the hd vids.

Honestly I am not sure I would even take many vids but its always nice to have the option especially when I can get either for almost the same price here.

Any advice Photogaffers?

 

[Squirrel Killer]

I just came into possession of a large set of my grandfather's slides and negatives. Keep in mind that I'm one of the gray hairs around these parts, and you know this is some seriously old shit. Seems to start about 1948 until his death in 1980.

It's mostly a mix of 35mm negatives, slides, and a format I'm completely unfamiliar with. The unfamiliar format is usually 2.5 x 5 in. with two images per piece. It looks like my grandfather hand cut a lot of the film into two separate 2.5 in squares (probably for organizational purposes.) The trove is amazing, not only for the quality of photos, but also for the meticulous organization.

So my dilemma is... how to preserve it all? I don't want to send it off to some service (for both cost and preservation of the organization reasons), but is there any scanning equipment that can handle this range of formats and still be somewhat reasonable for a amateur to buy and use?

 

[fart]

my understanding (which is admittedly a bit poor) is that the gold standard for film scanning up to medium format is the nikon coolscan series, but availability is extremely limited these days and they go for a couple grand brand new. the other cheaper option i've heard is the epson v7x0 flatbed series (i think the 750 has a better film holder), but it has the usual issues with flatbeds and dry holders.

if i were to do this i might look into putting together a copy stand and using a very very good flat field enlarger lens (maybe a converted rodenstock or something) with a very high res dslr, but i don't know if that's really the best or even a feasible way to do things..

 

[XMonkey]

i need some help. I have a rebel xs with a tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens. I want something telephoto for outdoor shots. I'm going to a kite festival on sunday. the only problem is i'm poor

so what's a better buy for $300? A used Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM


or a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM without IS

This is a pretty tough choice, but I'd personally go with the 70-200L because I have a weakness for anything Canon makes in the L range. There's just something about the images those lenses produce.

Of course you might already made your choice since you mentioned Sunday... oh well.

 

[fart]

whoops, but for shots of aerial things, i would emphasize range over speed. as long as the 2-300mm range isn't crap on the longer zoom, i would go with one of those (or a 70-300mm vr on the nikon side). a 70-200 2.8 is more of a portrait/pj zoom than an air show zoom.

 

[Squirrel Killer]

my understanding (which is admittedly a bit poor) is that the gold standard for film scanning up to medium format is the nikon coolscan series, but availability is extremely limited these days and they go for a couple grand brand new. the other cheaper option i've heard is the epson v7x0 flatbed series (i think the 750 has a better film holder), but it has the usual issues with flatbeds and dry holders.

if i were to do this i might look into putting together a copy stand and using a very very good flat field enlarger lens (maybe a converted rodenstock or something) with a very high res dslr, but i don't know if that's really the best or even a feasible way to do things..

Thanks for the ideas, the Coolscan sounds like my best bet. At $2k, it's at the upper end of what I wanted to spend, but it's still within the range. Since this is for archival purposes, I don't want to limit the resolution to a DSLR's sensor, plus I just found even more formats including some metal framed slides about twice the size of a 35mm slide, so the versatility and software of the Coolscan 9000 sound perfect.

 

[fart]

L lenses are overrated anyway

family history on the other hand...

 

[Rentahamster]

Confirmed: two new Nikon Lenses this Thursday

http://nikonrumors.com/2009/07/27/confirmed-two-new-nikon-lenses-this-thursday.aspx

AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200 f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II
AF-S Nikkor 70-200 mm f/2.8G ED VR II

Both will be improved versions of the current models.

The new Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200 mm f/2.8G ED VR II should have the following specs (from my previous post):

* Stabilization system VR II
* Nano coating
* New faster Auto Focus
* Weight 1540g (70 grams more than the current model)
* 209mm length (slightly shorter than the current model)
* Minimum Focus Distance: 1.4m (for the current model is 1.5m)
* 77mm filter (same as the current model)

 

[BlueTsunami]

*Nano coating

:O

 

[Forsete]

Sonystyle leaked that a Alpha 850 is coming. A Sony service site has listed parts for the same model, its using the same electronics board (?) as the Alpha 900 and most likely will have a 100% OVF, going by what the service site has listed.

People are speculating that it might be a cheaper FF camera, or a pro camera (super fast if it has the same dual BIONZ processors as the A900) in the APS-C class.

Previous leaks say Alpha 500 and a Alpha 550 are also in the pipeline. A Danish magazine is supposed to have news on a new Sony DSLR with HD video in next months issue, they were the first to announce that the Alpha 900 was coming.
Sony has previously said they will include HD video if the market demands it, but they haven't been happy with current HD capable DSLRs AF solution, which they said is something which was going to be a big challenge for them to fix. Hopefully they still have those old Minolta-geniuses hired.

We'll see, not looking to upgrade anytime soon anyway.

I've been waiting for Sony to announce a price and date for its new 30mm macro lens. I've ween wanting a prime in that range, the 35mm 1.4 G is just too expensive.

 

[fart]

Sonystyle leaked that a Alpha 850 is coming. A Sony service site has listed parts for the same model, its using the same electronics board (?) as the Alpha 900 and most likely will have a 100% OVF, going by what the service site has listed.

People are speculating that it might be a cheaper FF camera, or a pro camera (super fast if it has the same dual BIONZ processors as the A900) in the APS-C class.

We'll see, not looking to upgrade anytime soon anyway.

I've been waiting for Sony to announce a price and date for its new 30mm macro lens. I've ween wanting a prime in that range, the 35mm 1.4 G is just too expensive.

same electronics board means same sensor, so that interpretation sounds a bit suspect. i have some trouble believing that they would bother putting the a900 board into a lower cost camera when they could just lower the cost of the a900; it's not selling very well, for those not following these things, but it's already in a small body, so i dunno what they could cut. that said, a 1500$ FF camera would be a serious shot across canikon's bow. i just can't see how it would happen.

i would put my money on a d300/60d class aps-c camera at a price that undercuts the d300/60d. your a700 is fairly slow right?

30mm macro? working distance what?

 

[Forsete]

same electronics board means same sensor, so that interpretation sounds a bit suspect. i have some trouble believing that they would bother putting the a900 board into a lower cost camera when they could just lower the cost of the a900; it's not selling very well, for those not following these things, but it's already in a small body, so i dunno what they could cut. that said, a 1500$ FF camera would be a serious shot across canikon's bow. i just can't see how it would happen.

i would put my money on a d300/60d class aps-c camera at a price that undercuts the d300/60d. your a700 is fairly slow right?

30mm macro? working distance what?

Electronics board does not seem to indicate same sensor. At least I haven't seen anyone else interpreting it to mean sharing the same sensor, anyway it would not make sense either. Sony already has a cheap 24.6MP camera, a even cheaper one (which the model number would suggest, 850 vs 900) would kill the 900. If its a FF I would expect it to be a lower resolution one, but right now a "pro APS-C" is the most popular guess.

Actually the A900 has sold well, over Sonys expectations. Its gaining popularity amongst pros also.

Not sure what you mean by slow, fps? 1 fps behind the D300 without the grip, very fast AF.
A850 should be a step above the D300 as the A700 was considered to be in the class of D300 when it launched.

As for the macro, 2cm I think? I havent seen any solid specs yet. 30mm f2.8 SAM

 

[BlueTsunami]

Apparently Amazon is listing the Canon 35L as "Discontinued". Rumors of an updated version running abound.

 

[Ember128]

I own a Rebel XS and a Rebel T1i, And I am really, really liking the T1i a lot better. It's pretty much the same in a lot of ways, but it has those extra few little options that allow a little extra tweaking. I've been toying around with it, an 18-55mm lens, a 55-250mm lens, and a circular polarization Filter, and I'm in love.

 

[mrkgoo]

i need some help. I have a rebel xs with a tamron 17-50mm 2.8 lens. I want something telephoto for outdoor shots. I'm going to a kite festival on sunday. the only problem is i'm poor

so what's a better buy for $300? A used Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM

or a Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM without IS

Both are used on craigslist in good condition. I don't plan on going safari anytime soon, so i don't need the extra 100mm, but it would be nice to not have to hold the camera for long periods of time to get a sharp picture.

I already tried the Canon 28-135mm USM IS and i didn't find it was worth the money. Any suggestions?

From what I've heard, avoid anything EF 75-300. The real deal is really the 70-300 IS. It's priced similarly to the 70-200F4L, so a lot of people compare these two, as did I. I ended up getting the 70-200F4L, and have not regretted a second - it's an amazing lens, and one of Canon's BEST zoom lenses in terms of image quality.


In other new, I've been toying with the idea of supplementing my DSLR with a point and shoot. Obviously portability - just whipping it out and taking a snap is a great advantage. But I kind of wanted it to be able to do more - so that it can compliment rather than replace. For that, I was looking at a waterproof/shock proof camera that I won't fear taking out in the rain, etc. Also, high quality video is something that my DSLR can't do.

What do people think of the Panasonic TS1? It's water proof, has great reviews, portable, supposedly useful Image Quality, 720p video (30fps), AVCHD lite (is this a good thing? It sounds good to be format, but not well supported - can Quicktime run it?).

 

[fart]

Electronics board does not seem to indicate same sensor. At least I haven't seen anyone else interpreting it to mean sharing the same sensor, anyway it would not make sense either. Sony already has a cheap 24.6MP camera, a even cheaper one (which the model number would suggest, 850 vs 900) would kill the 900. If its a FF I would expect it to be a lower resolution one, but right now a "pro APS-C" is the most popular guess.

i hope they're not putting the sensor and adc on difference boards. iirc the sony 24mp design doesn't have onboard adcs, like the nikon 13mp design, so you want to wiring to the dacs to be as tight as is humanly possible. if you mean the image processor is on a different board i guess that could make sense, but for bandwidth reasons you probably don't want to route that across a connector either.

Actually the A900 has sold well, over Sonys expectations. Its gaining popularity amongst pros also.

you are somewhat delusional. if that's the case then sony seriously lowballed demand. sony is making good slow and sure progress in market share, but they're not even close to lighting a fire under canikon yet.

Not sure what you mean by slow, fps? 1 fps behind the D300 without the grip, very fast AF.
A850 should be a step above the D300 as the A700 was considered to be in the class of D300 when it launched.

again, you need to get over this fanboy thing. 90% of d300 shooters shoot with a grip, and they love whacking themselves over the AF system. the A700 can't challenge either spec. an aps-c a850 should match or exceed both of these.

As for the macro, 2cm I think? I havent seen any solid specs yet. 30mm f2.8 SAM

i think tokina has one of these (35mm macro), but it's like 1:2. 1:1 with 2cm working distance at 30mm seems impossible (unless it's APS-C i guess, but even then...).

 

[Forsete]

i hope they're not putting the sensor and adc on difference boards.

I have no idea how they do it, just no one else has interpreted it the way you have.

you are somewhat delusional. if that's the case then sony seriously lowballed demand. sony is making good slow and sure progress in market share, but they're not even close to lighting a fire under canikon yet.

Why so hostile? I am not delusional. I am reporting what has been said. Sony does not have the userbase that Canikon has, so of course A900s sales cant be compared to those of Nikon and Canon. Still it has sold well according to Sony, and yeah Sony probably didnt expect it to beat the 5DII in sales, THAT would have been delusional.

The old 2-3 series seem to have preformed well also.
The A700 however underpreformed accoring to Sony, but it has gotten quite a following in later times.

again, you need to get over this fanboy thing. 90% of d300 shooters shoot with a grip, and they love whacking themselves over the AF system. the A700 can't challenge either spec. an aps-c a850 should match or exceed both of these.

Fanboy thing? Still the A700 is not considered slow, slower than the D300 perhaps, but not slow compared to most cameras.
I would love if my next DSLR has the same speed of the HX1 I got, 10fps but with bigger buffer than just 1 second.

i think tokina has one of these (35mm macro), but it's like 1:2. 1:1 with 2cm working distance at 30mm seems impossible (unless it's APS-C i guess, but even then...).

Its a DT lens. I'll see if I can find some solid specs.

I've been looking at a new M42 lens, 35mm f2.8 .. So nice being able to use these lenses with just a simple adaptor. The lenses go for basically nothing, so far I have been happy with the quality.

 

[fart]

Why so hostile? I am not delusional. I am reporting what has been said. Sony does not have the userbase that Canikon has, so of course A900s sales cant be compared to those of Nikon and Canon. Still it has sold well according to Sony, and yeah Sony probably didnt expect it to beat the 5DII in sales, THAT would have been delusional.

sorry, posted too quickly.

they're undercutting the comparable nikon (sensor-wise) by 5k$. sales have been slow for such a grand gesture. dealers have not been entirely happy with sales performance. i suspect if they can flesh out their full frame lens lineup within the next couple of years, things will turn around. otherwise, i'm not so sure about this accumulation of body models.

Its a DT lens. I'll see if I can find some solid specs.

DT = APS-C? that makes sense.

I've been looking at a new M42 lens, 35mm f2.8 .. So nice being able to use these lenses with just a simple adaptor. The lenses go for basically nothing, so far I have been happy with the quality.

do you have a supertaku 50/1.4 yet? that is _the_ m42 lens to get.

 

[fart]

Confirmed: two new Nikon Lenses this Thursday

http://nikonrumors.com/2009/07/27/confirmed-two-new-nikon-lenses-this-thursday.aspx

both out now with d300s and d3000 (d60 replacement). d3000 still has the sony 10mp CCD :/.

 

[Aegus]

Hi all,

Looking to get into photography in a big way and I'm currently dithering between the Canon 500D and the Nikon D90.

From what I can tell of the reviews they pretty much seem to equal near abouts.

Now my main use will be for landscape shots (with the minor family event I guess).

So I've come to GAF for advice.