Rocket Scientist
Member
That's great to hear. Which body are you using and are you posting any pictures here or in the photography thread?
Bottom page.
-
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
NathanMcMahon
Banned
I threw this up in the B/S/T thread but figured there might be some interest here.
Canon 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro. Excellent condition. Barely Used Complete with box and paperwork:
$199.99
Canon 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro. Excellent condition. Barely Used Complete with box and paperwork:
$199.99
I shoot with a G3 but now that I'm doing so much video I'm highly considering buying a GH3 despite it being well out of my price range. I justify it with the thought that aside from 4K, I really never need an upgrade.
i've been too busy using my panaleica 25mm and m.zuiko 75mm(in between my fuji 617) to care.Most of the time people who says that the NEX system have no lens haven't even hold a NEX yet nor have legacy lenses.
But hey, ignorance is bliss.
why would you have a green tint?
What did you use to get your photos to black & white? I find lightroom and photoshop to be more than enough for my black and white needs. Photoshop also offers soft proofing if you have know the paper that the lab will use you can download the profile and soft proof your photos, however, like you said its limited to your TN monitor.
i've been too busy using my panaleica 25mm and m.zuiko 75mm(in between my fuji 617) to care.
why would you have a green tint?
What did you use to get your photos to black & white? I find lightroom and photoshop to be more than enough for my black and white needs. Photoshop also offers soft proofing if you have know the paper that the lab will use you can download the profile and soft proof your photos, however, like you said its limited to your TN monitor.
They might turn out green since cheap printing services (the ones I have in mind at least) print everything in color regardless of whether they're b&w or color photos.
They're actually not pictures I've taken but photos from the Golden Age of Jazz archive. All the photos are scans of the original negatives, so they're not ready for printing yet. I have to crop them first and then adjust the brightness and contrast a bit.
For example, take this photo. The picture on the left is the scan of the original negative, the one on the right is the published print (which was used in a book about the collection). The negative scans are of much higher quality, those are the ones I'll be using. The negative scan seems too bright to me while the published print is rather dark. Am I at least right about this? If so, something between would do for me. I just want cheap decent prints. As long as they don't look awful I'm happy.
GH3 is like a whole different camera in comparison in terms of build quality and features. Also focus peaking too, no? Right now I'm trying to decide if I want to save up for NEX-6, GH3, or Fuji XE-1.
dehydratedbabies
Member
Shh. I'm trying to convince myself otherwise.
Yeah, that's exactly what I'm thinking. My GH2 is realistically good enough for now, but the GH3 would be good enough for years.
mclaren777
Member
I recently bought a Cybershot RX-100 and have been trying to take RAW photos. I'm using the latest version of Mountain Lion, and I can't find a program that works with the format. iPhoto isn't compatible with RAW files, so I downloaded Sony's program Image Data Converter, but each time I launch it, the program crashes. I own Aperture, but the RX-100 isn't one of the supported cameras, and after spending $80 on the program, I really don't want to have to buy another program. Am I out of luck until Aperture starts supporting the camera?
CrudeDiatribe
Member
Apple's RAW support carries over to any application that uses Core Image. This includes Aperture, iPhoto, and even Preview. Once Apple releases a RAW support update (last one was in June, I think) that supports it, you'll be good to go.
You may wish to try Adobe's DNG convertor. If the DNG convertor works with your images, the resultant .dng can usually be read by Aperture (etc). You need to have "Convert to Linear Image" turned off. Version 7.2 (in testing) is said to support the RX100.
Didn't know that, but that's good to hear. I'll try the program out. Thanks.
The body is a Canon T2i/550D...
Maybe next year I can justify a grown up full frame body.
Rocket Scientist
Member
Well I barely managed recently to justify the 600D (Which I guess is a 550D image quality wise) for myself, so I'll be waiting for a long time stillThe body is a Canon T2i/550D...
Maybe next year I can justify a grown up full frame body.
Just going to focus on acquiring lenses for now.The body is a Canon T2i/550D...
Maybe next year I can justify a grown up full frame body.
The T2i Still has the exact image quality that the 7D does and it's been working out great for me.
Give it a year and the 5DMKIII will be $2700.
JLateralus
Member
Does anyone shoot with a NX20? I'm trying to decide between that and the NEX7 or 6. I went into my local camera shop yesterday with the intention of getting a feel for the NEX and the guy showed me the Samsung.
I like the lens lineup that Samsung had (the 3 pancakes look pretty good and I like that 85 1.8), but I'm kind of concerned about the longevity of the platform as a whole.
I like the lens lineup that Samsung had (the 3 pancakes look pretty good and I like that 85 1.8), but I'm kind of concerned about the longevity of the platform as a whole.
I understand the high ISO performance is rather weak and MF lens support is not as good. There is no peeking. It does have hotshoes in the more models than NEX.
I agree with you small guys like Samsung and Panasonic will have a hard time competing with Sony's sensors. Sony's sensor business has been more and more monopolistic. As far as Samsung's NX line of lens, its probably has less option than m43 and has a hair bit more selections than the Fuji X mounts. Right now there is no consensus on which mirrorless system offer the best selections of glass.
I wouldn't worry about Samsung getting out of camera business due to low sale though. They have a very supportive home market.
Lens selection sucks, I did play with the older NX10 and I thought it was terrible.
EVF did not jive with me at all, it would lock up and freeze frequently for a millisecond (long enough to bother me), and I didn't really feel it had any advantage in manual controls compared to the NEX-3 entry levels.
JLateralus
Member
I actually thought the lens lineup was what appealed to me more. I tend to gravitate toward primes, and they have a 16, 20, 30, 60 macro, and 85 - all of which seem to get decent to favorable reviews.
What concerned me had a lot to do with software and continued platform support. The EVF seems worse than the NEX and your experience with it lagging sucks. I've also seen people having problems with RAW files writing to the card slowly.
Tino, I guess I hadn't thought of market exit in terms of their home market though - that makes sense.
Why can't I just get that lens lineup with the Sony performance and Fuji body styling?
reggieandTFE
Member
Samsung and Panasonic are both bigger than Sony; people shouldn't worry about either of them leaving the camera business. Also, I'd disagree about there being no consensus on the best lens mirrorless lineup. Between Olympus and Panasonic, they have as many lenses as the rest of the mirrorless manufacturers combined and a lot of them are among the sharpest digital lenses ever tested. People may be hesitant to support the system because of the smaller sensor, but they've had the head start to build a comprehensive system
JLateralus
Member
That is why I haven't really considered it, despite the larger lens selection.
I came acrossed this data in DPreview
Brand A and B are obviously Olympus and Panasonic. Going by Japan number Brand A is Olympus, B is Panasonic, C is most likely Nikon 1, E is Samsung. D I am not sure, I think Leica?
I combined the two m43 brands and compare to NEX sales numbers:
Total 11 countrise: NEX 41% m43 39%
Also
Mirrorless camera percentage compare to all interchangeable lens cameras
EU and China numbers are the lowest, around 14-18%
Also year to year EU revenue breakdown:
DC and camcorders are losing market, interchangeable cameras are slowly gaining market. Overall its losing to the camera phones I supposed.
Brand A and B are obviously Olympus and Panasonic. Going by Japan number Brand A is Olympus, B is Panasonic, C is most likely Nikon 1, E is Samsung. D I am not sure, I think Leica?
I combined the two m43 brands and compare to NEX sales numbers:
Code:
JAP: NEX 28% m43 61%
U S: NEX 53% m43 43%
CAN: NEX 42% m43 39%
U K: NEX 27% m43 49%
GER: NEX 27% m43 35%+
FRA: NEX 30% m43 27%
RUS: NEX 55% m43 29%
CHN: NEX 49% m43 33%
H K: NEX 29% m43 49%
T W: NEX 35% m43 47%
N.K: NEX 35% m43 20+%Total 11 countrise: NEX 41% m43 39%
Also
Mirrorless camera percentage compare to all interchangeable lens cameras
EU and China numbers are the lowest, around 14-18%
Also year to year EU revenue breakdown:
DC and camcorders are losing market, interchangeable cameras are slowly gaining market. Overall its losing to the camera phones I supposed.
mclaren777
Member
People in the B/S/T thread don't seem interested in camera stuff. I propose that we list items here instead.
Same here, I dont browse that thread but I regularly read this one. Unless we get so much clutter then we may have to create a new thread in the Community sub-board?
NathanMcMahon
Banned
Yeah I agree.
Oh wow, did anyone check this video out?
Nikon D600 vs. 5D Mark III
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8KIBrCvxy0
Ignoring the insane ISOs, even at 6400 ISO (nikon's native) the footage looks noisy and completely unusable.
The canon's footage looks very usuable even at ISO 12800, WOW! and heck this is IPB compression not ALL-I, which means it should theoretically be better.
I don't think the external HDMI out is going to improve low light performance, right? just less compressed footage.
If this is the same sensor they are using for the Canon 6D, then Canon has put me into tizzy again. Usable 6400 ISO is really cool - and I do a lot of low-light work.
I must say Nikon's dynamic range destroys Canon though. There is a difference of almost 2 f-stops! Nikon just seems to be brighter (but noiser) than Canon - and canon only catches up after boosting the ISO more. But what is the point of more dynamic range at the cost of more noise for extra shadow detail?
Nikon D600 vs. 5D Mark III
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8KIBrCvxy0
Ignoring the insane ISOs, even at 6400 ISO (nikon's native) the footage looks noisy and completely unusable.
The canon's footage looks very usuable even at ISO 12800, WOW! and heck this is IPB compression not ALL-I, which means it should theoretically be better.
I don't think the external HDMI out is going to improve low light performance, right? just less compressed footage.
If this is the same sensor they are using for the Canon 6D, then Canon has put me into tizzy again. Usable 6400 ISO is really cool - and I do a lot of low-light work.
I must say Nikon's dynamic range destroys Canon though. There is a difference of almost 2 f-stops! Nikon just seems to be brighter (but noiser) than Canon - and canon only catches up after boosting the ISO more. But what is the point of more dynamic range at the cost of more noise for extra shadow detail?
I don't care about pixel - 18 megapixels on any of the crop cameras is more than enough.
The dynamic range and ISO speed is interesting, however. Nikon's Dynamic range is better than canon, but canon's ISO performance is better than nikon.
I think with the MKIII I can think about investing in more f2.8 zooms and crank ISOs vs. getting expensive range of fast primes. Even in low light situations.
I think I'll just wait till December for price drops and save some more money for MKIII...
The dynamic range and ISO speed is interesting, however. Nikon's Dynamic range is better than canon, but canon's ISO performance is better than nikon.
I think with the MKIII I can think about investing in more f2.8 zooms and crank ISOs vs. getting expensive range of fast primes. Even in low light situations.
I think I'll just wait till December for price drops and save some more money for MKIII...
I think the main difference is that the Canon applies more noise reduction to the video. Check out this video: http://vimeo.com/42381520
Ive done a little paid work, and my interest has grown in the past one year. Still would consider myself as an advanced amatuer/enthusiast and not a pro. I can organize and get a shoot done but still am my own cameraman/producer/editor.
Prior to that I used to shoot pictures for leisure and documenting and doing design work (Im a graphic designer by trade)
I would really love to get something like a blackmagic cinema camera ideally - but im still just a videographer/hobbyist and not a Small production company. I can assemble a crew of around 2-3 people sometimes on a shoot, but its all just me and my equipment (bought and rented) and some handy people.
^^^ Thanks for the reply. You are at least half of a professional.
I often wonder why people do video as a hobby. I personally never watch the videos my friend post on Facebook.
In other news, I picked up a NEX-5n kit for $500 from newegg. I am planning to sell the body and keep the kit lens. At this price I don't see how I can lose money. NEX-5 was more expensive when it was being discontinued.
I often wonder why people do video as a hobby. I personally never watch the videos my friend post on Facebook.
In other news, I picked up a NEX-5n kit for $500 from newegg. I am planning to sell the body and keep the kit lens. At this price I don't see how I can lose money. NEX-5 was more expensive when it was being discontinued.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
I completely forgot to post my impressions of the Sony stuff I got a hands on with so here goes.
The RX1 is fucking awesome. It does not have the phase detection version of the 24MP sensor because the engineers thought that it would compromise IQ with the specially made Zeiss lens. No matter the AF is still very fast, I think it uses a whole new CDAF system developed for the camera, I hope it can be rolled out to the rest of Sony's cameras. The build quality is magnificent, the whole camera screams premium product, it is weighty, but not heavy, the metal is smooth but not slippery, only Leica make premium cameras with this kind of quality.
Image quality is stellar, absolutely amazing. The sensor + fixed lens combination has helped a lot with this I suspect. The 35mm f2 Zeiss is a bespoke lens and has been adapted to eliminate as many distortions as possible. I wasn't allowed to take any of the photos I took with me, Sony are keeping a very tight leash on them until November, but they are class leading. Low light performance is amazing. I saw very little noise at ISO 3200 and below that it is just so clean. I think Sony have reworked their JPEG engine as I saw much less compression and less detail loss at high ISO than with previous Sony cameras (I have the RX100, so I know the deficiencies of Sony's JPEG engine). However, without a closer look I can't be sure.
Overall, if someone is willing to spend the money and isn't bothered about zoom this is possibly the best camera for under $3000. Bottom line, I am seriously considering getting it, but I feel like I would waste the potential and so I probably won't. For professional street photographers who like getting candid shots (especially at night) this is a must have camera.
The NEX-6 is great. IQ is superb, but I only took JPEG and it does have the same problems as other Sony cameras at high ISO (serious loss of detail, smoothing, compression artifacts). Like I said above, the RX1 did not have those problems, so hopefully the NEX-6 receives a firmware upgrade for whatever improvements they seem to have made for the RX1. I didn't get to use the 35mm f1.8 though. I did use the 10-18mm f4 which was decent and fills a big gap in the NEX line up. I asked about an 85mm and a constant aperture standard zoom but I got a "no comment" answer. The power zoom looks to have made the same sacrifices as Panasonic's power zoom, it's good for being compact and it is slightly wider (24mm vs 28mm) but the IQ compromises were a bit too far for my liking. Honestly I think Sony need to bundle this with the NEX-F3 rather than the 6.
Anyway, the conclusion is that the RX1 is awesome, the NEX-6 is decent, but the power zoom is not. I was told that the first shipment of the RX1 is sold out, so anyone who hasn't pre-ordered may have to wait, but that was for Europe, not the US, he wasn't sure about US sales, only that they were very brisk.
The RX1 is fucking awesome. It does not have the phase detection version of the 24MP sensor because the engineers thought that it would compromise IQ with the specially made Zeiss lens. No matter the AF is still very fast, I think it uses a whole new CDAF system developed for the camera, I hope it can be rolled out to the rest of Sony's cameras. The build quality is magnificent, the whole camera screams premium product, it is weighty, but not heavy, the metal is smooth but not slippery, only Leica make premium cameras with this kind of quality.
Image quality is stellar, absolutely amazing. The sensor + fixed lens combination has helped a lot with this I suspect. The 35mm f2 Zeiss is a bespoke lens and has been adapted to eliminate as many distortions as possible. I wasn't allowed to take any of the photos I took with me, Sony are keeping a very tight leash on them until November, but they are class leading. Low light performance is amazing. I saw very little noise at ISO 3200 and below that it is just so clean. I think Sony have reworked their JPEG engine as I saw much less compression and less detail loss at high ISO than with previous Sony cameras (I have the RX100, so I know the deficiencies of Sony's JPEG engine). However, without a closer look I can't be sure.
Overall, if someone is willing to spend the money and isn't bothered about zoom this is possibly the best camera for under $3000. Bottom line, I am seriously considering getting it, but I feel like I would waste the potential and so I probably won't. For professional street photographers who like getting candid shots (especially at night) this is a must have camera.
The NEX-6 is great. IQ is superb, but I only took JPEG and it does have the same problems as other Sony cameras at high ISO (serious loss of detail, smoothing, compression artifacts). Like I said above, the RX1 did not have those problems, so hopefully the NEX-6 receives a firmware upgrade for whatever improvements they seem to have made for the RX1. I didn't get to use the 35mm f1.8 though. I did use the 10-18mm f4 which was decent and fills a big gap in the NEX line up. I asked about an 85mm and a constant aperture standard zoom but I got a "no comment" answer. The power zoom looks to have made the same sacrifices as Panasonic's power zoom, it's good for being compact and it is slightly wider (24mm vs 28mm) but the IQ compromises were a bit too far for my liking. Honestly I think Sony need to bundle this with the NEX-F3 rather than the 6.
Anyway, the conclusion is that the RX1 is awesome, the NEX-6 is decent, but the power zoom is not. I was told that the first shipment of the RX1 is sold out, so anyone who hasn't pre-ordered may have to wait, but that was for Europe, not the US, he wasn't sure about US sales, only that they were very brisk.
any hint if Sony is going to release an RX2 or something like that with removable lens?? that'd be so awesome!
That would be a no brainer. OTHO, none of the current NEX lens is FF ready, not even the 50/1.8. Thats why I am getting out of NEX as my main system.
So I recently posted about buying a used Canon 50D. I have been enjoying it, but found something disturbing. I know the camera is rated for 100,000 shutter clicks. I installed the free app that tells you how many actuations it has had and the number is over 170,000. Should I be concerned about the thing dying on me? Is there something that can be done relatively cheaply if the shutters bites the big one?
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Nothing was mentioned specifically, but one of the people there did say that the 35mm f2 Zeiss could easily be made into removable lens, but that also it would not work with E-mount because of the short flange distance. I think Sony will introduce an R-Mount, but that is just my opinion, and no one I spoke to over there suggested that this would be the case in any way. When talking about full frame mirrorless it was always in the context of E-mount and the VG900, so they were very guarded about an ILC RX style camera.
The person I went with (the reason I got the invite) told me that an ILC version of the RX1 would have to be around 10-20% larger to accommodate the mechanism and an EVF, but that would still be pretty compact, and they would probably also remove the pop up flash which would save space.
To put that into context, the RX1 is pretty much the same size as the Panasonic GF5 with the 14-42mm kit. Making it larger as my friend indicated would put it in the NEX6/7 size class.
The way some of the Sony guys were talking about it, I think they are resigned to the fact that they will never be competitive in the traditional mirrored FF market as it is and they hope that the RX1 is able to reinvent the wheel and force their entry just like NEX has made them super competitive in APS-C.
Going back to what my friend said (a professional photographer) the RX1 is very tempting, but right now only practical for people who like candid shots as the lens is not wide enough for landscapes and it is too wide for portraits. However, he says an R-Mount with 16mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses of the same build as the one in the RX1 would make the whole system irresistible to a lot of pro shooters and over time Sony could add zoom lenses and tele lenses but as a starter an R-Mount (in 24MP or 36MP) with those 5 primes would swing a lot of professionals behind Sony as many are sick to the teeth with Canon treating them like shit and milking them for money.
I'm sure Sony were taking the feedback on board (which is what the event was for) from all of the photographers there and they were all dazzled by the RX1.
Just to indicate how much everyone there loved it, they had about 10 RX1 stations, each one with queues behind it, and about 5 A99 stations, which were going mostly untouched.
They can and they will, they just won't specifically tell the consumers since people who are interested with the RX1 will hold off buying and wait for it instead. Not to mention people who are interested in an A99 .
lol, I doubt even if Sony releases a FF NEX with compatible lenses you'll buy one.
RX1 is probably a one off product like the R1.
I will if its the only FF rangefinder body (not counting Leica). I won't be using NEX lens on it though. If Fuji come out and say they are also making one with no lowpass filter then I will wait for that one.
zomgbbqftw
Banned
I wouldn't judge FF NEX on the VG900. If Sony did go all in with FF NEX then I expect they would release it with at least a constant aperture standard zoom, the 24mm f1.8 Zeiss will be adapted quickly, as would the 50mm and 35mm Sony lenses. After that it is the same waiting game for an 85mm and tele lenses. Everyone knew going into NEX that a FF would mean new lenses, it's the same for all cameras. Oh I'm sure the older ones will work in crop mode, just like any other system, but that's always been the way.
Anyway, I don't really get the obsession with FF, unless you are a pro photographer of course, the difference for us amateurs and enthusiasts between APS-C and FF is limited. If you want to get into FF photography then you should have a look at the D600 because at least Nikon have a proper lens ecosystem unlike Sony. Even their A-mount FF lens selection is pitiful, NEX would start from zero.
I think the fact that Sony release the VG900 basically confirm the FF compatibility of the NEX mount. The longer Sony waits, the longer the rest of the world waits. The good thing is Sony has the monopoly on FF sensor so as long as Canon doesn't make one they can afford to spend time on it.
I have tons of old lens I want to use on a FF rangefinder body. F mount is a bad mount for adapting, you can't use any other lens on it besides m42. See this lens? I can't use it on a Nikon SLR.
centracore
Member
I just bought a new Nikon MB-D11 battery grip but the dealer's record warranty card that comes in the box is missing the serial number. All of my other Nikon purchases have the serial number filled in on the dealer's record warranty card, is this normal or should I be concerned? Some quick Googling showed that the MB-D11 is subject to very authentic looking counterfeits so now I'm not sure what's up..
zomgbbqftw
Banned
Fair enough, NEX is great for legacy lenses. Any R-Mount would not be as the current design required the shutter to be in the lens.
I was told that the RX series are not one off devices btw, but that may have been in reference to the RX100, I'm almost certain that an RX110 is coming with the range extended to 24mm up to ~ 100m with better tele performance. I don't know about any successor to RX1 but I am sure they will make one given the reception.
I was told that the RX series are not one off devices btw, but that may have been in reference to the RX100, I'm almost certain that an RX110 is coming with the range extended to 24mm up to ~ 100m with better tele performance. I don't know about any successor to RX1 but I am sure they will make one given the reception.
radios shipping overview
Member
You can adapt almost any lens under the sun to NEX, barring large format lenses or lenses that won't cover the sensor area. If you want something smallish and somewhat inexpensive, check out Olympus OM SLR lenses and the Fujian 35mm f/1.7 CCTV lens. Really good lenses that are really small are usually really expensive (i.e. Leica M mount lenses).
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
jiji has got you. There's also Canon FD lenses that can be pretty small but generally rangefinder lenses will truly take advantage of a lack of mirror.
mclaren777
Member
If you're really worried about it, pay $1.50 and test it with this...
http://eoscount.com/
It's possible that the shutter has already been replaced but the counter wasn't reset.
Herpes Reasons
Banned
QualityPixel
Banned
Just don't over spend on your ND filters. You probably wont use them very often. I would get the cheap Hoya ND's
$1200 lightly-used canon 24-70mm version 1 vs. $1300 Tamron 24-70mm brand new with VC (Vibration compensation or Image stabilization).
Tamron has been getting universal praise, but the canon is an all-time favorite. Which direction would you guys go? Dat Red ring sharpness or Dat VC?
Tamron has been getting universal praise, but the canon is an all-time favorite. Which direction would you guys go? Dat Red ring sharpness or Dat VC?
Herpes Reasons
Banned
but will i need some kind of adapter to mount to my takumars?
- Status