Support NeoGAF

[Ty4on]

Hmm, I see.

I was honestly satisfied with my Fuji, but thought I would get a DSLR which could do both photo and video for my video production.

But now that I am getting a pro camcorder, I regret selling the x100. I guess I should just go rebuy that. Since Leica is so pricey.

That's embarrassing, I didn't notice that you had owned an X100... Sorry for skimming your post :/

Again, I'd wait for someone better qualified to chime in as I'm by no means an expert in the field. To me the X100 just seems like the goto digital rangefinder south of 5k.
If you're willing to go for Sony they have the RX1 which is full frame and has a sharp 35mm lens, but lacks a viewfinder. Its MSRP is 2799, but I know it has had a lot of deals and checking Amazon I found several refurbished priced at ~1600. The A7 is ~1300 now if you don't mind the looks. It ticks over 2k with the 35mm Zeiss lens though, kit with 28-70mm is 1700.

Edit: I should maybe have asked this earlier, but what type of photography do you want to do? I'm guessing you want a good looking and feeling camera considering you wanted a Leica.

 

[Forsete]

Bought a Spyder 4 (Pro) for my monitors (one Eizo PVA and one Eizo IPS). The monitors were apparently pretty well calibrated because the difference isn't huge (it toned up the color temp of the PVA monitor and adjusted the contrast a bit, on the IPS it toned down the temp).

The biggest difference was on my T520. Now this laptop doesn't have a good monitor to begin with, but damn what a difference the calibration did. The T520s monitor has always had a blue:ish look to it, especially noticeable when compared to my Eizo screens. Now it is way more comparable, and I might be able to do a little photo editing on it if I feel like it.

 

[Aurongel]

Is there any real reason why full frame camera bodies use different wireless transmitters and sync ports than their APSC counterparts?

I just upgraded from a 60D to a 6D and was surprised that my wireless transmitters and remote shutter cables were incompatible.

 

[Radec]

That 35,1.4 FE is huge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9WvkUSTC_E

 

[sfedai0]

Im scared to find out how much that beast will cost.

 

[Groof]

Im scared to find out how much that beast will cost.

Then don't click this:

Spoiler

$1598

 

[Radec]

Then don't click this:

Spoiler

$1598

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/...y-fe-35-1-4-lens-samples-and-my-1st-thoughts/

 

[alterno69]

That 35,1.4 FE is huge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9WvkUSTC_E

Looks about the same size as the Sigma, which is an awesome piece of gear too, which i own and love.

Then don't click this:

Spoiler

$1598

Not that expensive, my Sigma was around 1k and it`s considered cheap.

 

[FStop7]

Everything Steve Huff gets is the greatest thing since Jesus Christ.

Until the next thing shows up.

Also, he is a kook.

 

[Groof]

I wonder how that FE 35 1,4 will perform on Sony's apsc sensors. Maybe we'll see some tests on the a6000 soon.

 

[Radec]

I wonder how that FE 35 1,4 will perform on Sony's apsc sensors. Maybe we'll see some tests on the a6000 soon.

I don't see how it'll perform differently on e-crop. Probably just DoF and focal length.

 

[Thug Waffle]

got about $150 to spend on a nikon-compatible dx lens.

already have:
35mm 1.8
18-55 3.5-5.6
55-200 4-5.6

what should i be looking at?

 

[Flo_Evans]

got about $150 to spend on a nikon-compatible dx lens.

have:
35mm 1.8
18-55 3.5-5.6
55-200 4-5.6

what should i be looking at?

What body? Does it support AF-D lenses?

I would get some variant of a 50mm 1.x lens. MF/AFD/AFS

 

[Thug Waffle]

D5200 body so yeah i can get an AF-D lens

maybe i should just sell my kit and put it into a GH4 or something. i feel like i have no options re: lenses

 

[captive]

D5200 body so yeah i can get an AF-D lens

maybe i should just sell my kit and put it into a GH4 or something. i feel like i have no options re: lenses

Say what? Mind you this is coming from someone who started out in 4/3rds, has spent thousands of dollars in 4/3rds and m4/3rds and bought Nikon. There's far more options in Nikon, to the point that it is overwhelming and confusing.

 

[Ty4on]

D5200 body so yeah i can get an AF-D lens

Not with the D5200. It'll work, but without autofocus.

 

[Thug Waffle]

Say what? Mind you this is coming from someone who started out in 4/3rds, has spent thousands of dollars in 4/3rds and m4/3rds and bought Nikon. There's far more options in Nikon, to the point that it is overwhelming and confusing.

at the price point i'm able to spend on glass i really don't seem to have many options

Not with the D5200. It'll work, but without autofocus.

would i be able to hack my d5200 to the point where it works as intended?

 

[Ty4on]

would i be able to hack my d5200 to the point where it works as intended?

Nope. It needs an on board AF motor which the D5200 lacks. It's the small screw in the lower left.

 

[Thug Waffle]

hmm... damn. well that's not terribly useful to me as i would like to use a 50 for street photography if i had one

 

[Ty4on]

hmm... damn. well that's not terribly useful to me as i would like to use a 50 for street photography if i had one

You could look at the 50mm 1.8G AF-S. More expensive, but also a little better image quality. Do you have any lenses now or experiences with the focal lengths? The 35mm is probably better for street photography.

I see you mentioned the 18-55. One lens if you can live with a used lens and a zoom that lacks VR the 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 is quite unloved and can be bought cheap used. It has better build quality and autofocus (internal and proper SWM) than the 18-55mm f3.5-5.6, but the latter can be had with VR.

 

[Thug Waffle]

You could look at the 50mm 1.8G AF-S. More expensive, but also a little better image quality. Do you have any lenses now or experiences with the focal lengths? The 35mm is probably better for street photography.

I see you mentioned the 18-55. One lens if you can live with a used lens and a zoom that lacks VR the 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 is quite unloved and can be bought cheap used. It has better build quality and autofocus (internal and proper SWM) than the 18-55mm f3.5-5.6, but the latter can be had with VR.

I got the 35 during the winter so i haven't used it much for street photos. really excited to do so as spring rolls around. i've shot at 50 (cropped) on my zoom lens before and gotten okay stuff, but it's not that great a lens. i'd probably use the 50 for portraits more than anything.

i don't mind a used lens. my 35 is used. so does this 18-70 autofocus worse than the 18-55 when VR is on? or is it equal?

 

[Ty4on]

i don't mind a used lens. my 35 is used. so does this 18-70 autofocus worse than the 18-55 when VR is on? or is it equal?

Sorry, I didn't know you had them. I thought those were the lenses you were looking at

The 18-70mm should focus a little faster. If the 18-55 has never bothered you then it is probably too slight of an upgrade. Image quality is quite similar.

 

[Astral/H3X]

Hey guys, I know you guys are much more about talking about new and upcoming lenses, but I figured I'd ask anyway.

I have a Sony A6000, and I'm in need of either a 30mm or 35mm lens. I'd like F3.5 or better (of course better is preferable), and I am mostly interested in older lenses. I would MUCH rather my money go towards quality, than autofocus capability. With that in mind, obviously I'm open (and looking for) older lenses, but with all of the mounts available, I'm not exactly sure what mounts in specific will help me find a good 30-35mm for me.

My max budget is around $300. I can go a LITTLE higher if the IQ of the lens is worth the extra bit, but I can't afford $600+ lenses. Really looking for a good "value" lens.

 

[Ty4on]

I have a Sony A6000, and I'm in need of either a 30mm or 35mm lens. I'd like F3.5 or better (of course better is preferable), and I am mostly interested in older lenses. I would MUCH rather my money go towards quality, than autofocus capability. With that in mind, obviously I'm open (and looking for) older lenses, but with all of the mounts available, I'm not exactly sure what mounts in specific will help me find a good 30-35mm for me.

There is someone who reviewed some older lenses on e-mount with standard Imatest testing. The Canon 35mm f2.8 FD and Pentax SMC M 28mm f3.5 (the earlier model often called SMC K or just SMC is considered the best) stand out, but they haven't tested that many lenses.

Be aware that there were made a lot of cheap wide angle lenses before standard zooms got affordable

 

[hitsugi]

Hey guys, I know you guys are much more about talking about new and upcoming lenses, but I figured I'd ask anyway.

I have a Sony A6000, and I'm in need of either a 30mm or 35mm lens. I'd like F3.5 or better (of course better is preferable), and I am mostly interested in older lenses. I would MUCH rather my money go towards quality, than autofocus capability. With that in mind, obviously I'm open (and looking for) older lenses, but with all of the mounts available, I'm not exactly sure what mounts in specific will help me find a good 30-35mm for me.

My max budget is around $300. I can go a LITTLE higher if the IQ of the lens is worth the extra bit, but I can't afford $600+ lenses. Really looking for a good "value" lens.

I'm sure you're well-aware of Sony's 35mm 1.8? It's probably the best rated e-mount lens under $1k, though I'm not sure of how it stacks up against older manual lenses..

 

[Astral/H3X]

I'm sure you're well-aware of Sony's 35mm 1.8? It's probably the best rated e-mount lens under $1k, though I'm not sure of how it stacks up against older manual lenses..

That lens is actually why I decided to go with around $300, but I wanted to know if there were older, cheaper lenses that would produce better images. I suppose I'll take a look at those links. I really wish people would review a lot of the more common older lenses the way we rate current ones with all these tests and such.

 

[Radec]

That lens is actually why I decided to go with around $300, but I wanted to know if there were older, cheaper lenses that would produce better images. I suppose I'll take a look at those links. I really wish people would review a lot of the more common older lenses the way we rate current ones with all these tests and such.

SEL35F18 is the best for your money.

But the Sigma 30mm 2.8 Art is much cheaper and pretty good as well.

Search it in flickr groups to see the photos taken by it. That's how I check out lens

 

[Astral/H3X]

SEL35F18 is the best for your money.

But the Sigma 30mm 2.8 Art is much cheaper and pretty good as well.

Search it in flickr groups to see the photos taken by it. That's how I check out lens

Oooh. That Sigma looks like a really good price to me, and I do like the photos it takes.
Thanks for the Flickr tip... Should I start uploading to Flickr? Does it compress my photos?

 

[Radec]

Oooh. That Sigma looks like a really good price to me, and I do like the photos it takes.
Thanks for the Flickr tip... Should I start uploading to Flickr? Does it compress my photos?

It doesn't. But full res images needs Flickr Pro.

 

[Astral/H3X]

It doesn't. But full res images needs Flickr Pro.

I didn't expect to be able to do full resolution, but it's nice to know it doesn't compress at all. What's the max resolution aside from Pro? 1920x1080?

 

[hitsugi]

Oooh. That Sigma looks like a really good price to me, and I do like the photos it takes.
Thanks for the Flickr tip... Should I start uploading to Flickr? Does it compress my photos?

I could also vouch for the Sigma, and I was able to obtain one for $80 used.

It isn't quite as good as the Sony, but how much the difference is worth is really up to the person behind the camera. It is hard to justify spending 3-4x the cost, for certain.

 

[Groof]

Personally, I could justify the added cost of the SEL35F18 just for the OSS and larger aperture. I shoot a lot at night and in dim settings, so those two are pretty key features for me.

Obviously if those aren't issues for you the Sigma is an excellent option that doesn't break the bank.

 

[Astral/H3X]

Personally, I could justify the added cost of the SEL35F18 just for the OSS and larger aperture. I shoot a lot at night and in dim settings, so those two are pretty key features for me.

Obviously if those aren't issues for you the Sigma is an excellent option that doesn't break the bank.

Right now I primarily shoot with an f3.5, so while I'd like the 1.8, it's not worth $200 more. I'll deal with a bit more ISO to not break my budget, I'm not exactly a man who rolls in cash.

 

[Wreav]

Blargh. Considering dumping m4/3 back to Canon for the umpteenth time. Love the portability of m4/3, but totally miss using my thumb for servo focusing. Such a stupid small quibble to change ecosystems over.

 

[shinshoryuken]

I have to do a small video project that I need to do. I know nothing about making videos..

I'm a complete noob....

Here's my options...rx100 iii or e-m5 ii with 12-40mm f2.8 pro zoom

Had the first rx100 but it had a stupid dust stuck on the sensor...

What other optionoption should I look at?

 

[-griffy-]

Blargh. Considering dumping m4/3 back to Canon for the umpteenth time. Love the portability of m4/3, but totally miss using my thumb for servo focusing. Such a stupid small quibble to change ecosystems over.

I love my GH4 for video purposes, but man, if I was gonna switch again it sure as hell wouldn't be back to Canon. I'd get a Sony if I was gonna get a stills focused cam probably.

 

[Wreav]

I love my GH4 for video purposes, but man, if I was gonna switch again it sure as hell wouldn't be back to Canon. I'd get a Sony if I was gonna get a stills focused cam probably.

Sony as a company inspires 0 confidence in me lately. Not sure I have the guts to invest in that sinking ship.

 

[Ether_Snake]

I'm gonna be selling my Nikon D7000 with its Nikkor 18-55mm f3.5-5.5 lens, in great condition, if anyone is interested.

I bought the Olympus EM-5 because I really want to start using a smaller camera, I need to do a lot more photography and I think it will go a long way. Bought the Panasonic Leica LUMIX G 15mm f1.7 since I wanted something rather versatile which worked well in low light.

 

[Wreav]

I think you'll like the E-M5. I've been researching the E-M1 heavily since my last post, as it adds in that lovely function button to the top right of the body, which is really what I miss most about my old Canon.

Hard to beat the JPGS that Olympus dumps out.

 

[Art Teitlebaum]

Bought the Panasonic Leica LUMIX G 15mm f1.7 since I wanted something rather versatile which worked well in low light.

I really really like the optical and mechanical quality of my PanaLeica 15. But I gave my right arm, if the aperture ring worked on my Olympus bodies. I will have a very interested look at the GX7 successor just for that function.

 

[-griffy-]

Sony as a company inspires 0 confidence in me lately. Not sure I have the guts to invest in that sinking ship.

I think that's reasonable, but their camera division seems one of the few that will stick around. Likewise, I have zero confidence in Canon at the moment. They seem to be content putting out essentially the same exact camera every few years with no real improvement or innovation.

 

[Ty4on]

I think that's reasonable, but their camera division seems one of the few that will stick around. Likewise, I have zero confidence in Canon at the moment. They seem to be content putting out essentially the same exact camera every few years with no real improvement or innovation.

I have the same impression. Whatever happens the biggest CMOS manufacturer isn't just going to disappear overnight. The market is declining and so far mirrorless are no where near making up for the decline in DSLR sales so no doubt we will see some big changes either way unless the only ones declining are lower end (and lower profit).

Canon has stayed quite flat recently though so I'm not as gloomy. Canon and Nikon are interesting because despite their high prices and slow adoptions of new technology they have a big buffer so far with their huge lens lineups and I don't see anything on the horizon shaking that off. I think curved sensors are best suited fixed lenses.

 

[Groof]

Has anybody used the Rokinon/Samyang 35/1.4 AS UMC for E mount? €100 more than Sony's own, but all manual. Seems pretty well reviewed.

 

[TerryLee81]

I have the same impression. Whatever happens the biggest CMOS manufacturer isn't just going to disappear overnight. The market is declining and so far mirrorless are no where near making up for the decline in DSLR sales so no doubt we will see some big changes either way unless the only ones declining are lower end (and lower profit).

Canon has stayed quite flat recently though so I'm not as gloomy. Canon and Nikon are interesting because despite their high prices and slow adoptions of new technology they have a big buffer so far with their huge lens lineups and I don't see anything on the horizon shaking that off. I think curved sensors are best suited fixed lenses.

That's probably why they are investing in high MP sensors like the 50MP sensor from Canon (and 120MP, of which I think they already have a prototype in use). But I'm not sure that's gona help them fight the declining sales. Those sensors will be expensive and you will need high quality glass to make use of the resolution.

 

[-griffy-]

That's probably why they are investing in high MP sensors like the 50MP sensor from Canon (and 120MP, of which I think they already have a prototype in use). But I'm not sure that's gona help them fight the declining sales. Those sensors will be expensive and you will need high quality glass to make use of the resolution.

That kind of resolution is just absurdly overkill for like 99% of uses too, all but the most specific of high end work really. Some cameras actually going lower in MP is opening up interesting things, like with the GH4, so as to provide a native 1:1 4k video mode without line skipping, completely eliminating moire. Or the A7s going with 12 MP, but much larger pixels giving it that insane low light performance.

And I'm just waiting for someone to figure out how to get a global shutter in one of these small cameras. Rolling shutter is like the one major drawback of all of these DSLR/mirrorless cameras. Obviously I'm coming from a hybrid video/photo angle though, so it may not be as important to some.

 

[TerryLee81]

I use a X100s and I love it most of the time. There are situations where I would like to have a camera with interchangeable lenses (and a camera that my gf would be able to use, she doesn't get along with the X100s).

So I'm thinking about getting a Nikon D3200, just because the body can be found really cheap. And I would buy probably buy a 50mm 1.8 with it.

What would I be missing with this entry level model? The sensor seems to be quite good? Better to look out for a used 5200?

 

[Wreav]

I'm going to try the E-M1 body before bailing on Olympus and m4/3. It will be fantastic to have back button focus back, which was one of my main reasons for wanting to return to Canon. The ad-hoc wifi stuff is neat too, but not sure how much of that I'll use.

 

[Ty4on]

What would I be missing with this entry level model? The sensor seems to be quite good? Better to look out for a used 5200?

It has no bracketing which kinda sucks. The D5200 has that and more af points.
The D5200 and 3200 both have quite tiny viewfinders.

 

[hitsugi]

I'm tempted to sell my a6000 and go for a used x100s... So tempted. Can't afford the x100t

Guess it's a call between the x100s and the RX100 M3

 

[Kwansu Dudes]

Any suggestions on a consumer lens with high zoom in & out and preferrably a low aperture so I could get those cool shots with über bokeh? I have a Nikon D5100.