Have you considered something compact like the canon s100 series? If it's just for dates might be better to have something that'll fit it your pocket.
-
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
JadedWriter
Member
Yeah I checked out compact cameras as well. I want something that's a bit bigger and more tactile. I like the grip on some of the slightly bigger cameras and I think if I got a wrist strap, neck strap or something along with it I would be perfectly fine and reduce my chance of dropping it. I usually have a bag on me and the camera looks easily pocketable in a jacket as long as I put the lens cap on. I grew up watching my dad use slightly bigger cameras so I'm used to seeing those and the picture quality has always been really good on them.
JadedWriter
Member
This looks nice too, I'll check it out as well later today. I can't believe trying to figure out what camera to buy is such a difficult decision. After doing a little more research I'm learning that I'm looking at "bridge" camera's. I guess I've been picking it up an interest a little bit more because I'm learning how to shoot and edit videos for my job and I know it's a definite apples to oranges thing, but I guess practicing a little bit of more advanced photography would help the stuff stick a little bit better for me which would explain why I'm not looking at the more compact stuff, but I'm far too novice to even delve into DSLR camera's cause fuck those things are expensive and really advanced. I guess I just want to start with a decent enough "jack of all trades" kind of camera. It looks to me that regardless of what I buy I'm getting something pretty good as well. The Nikon 530 also has a viewfinder which is nice since if I'm at say a sunny park I could at least see what the hell I'm taking a picture of. I'm definitely trying more stuff out later today though. I hope B&H doesn't throw me out.
Astral/H3X
Member
I couldn't say, as the lens I use is a Sigma lens, and the a6000 is also the second camera I've ever owned, so while it seems pretty speedy and accurate to me, I really don't know how it compares to anything else. But I've only ever had it out of focus once, and that's because there was some constantine wire that someone was setting up inbetween me and their face.
DSLRs can be fairly simple if you want them to be. They have auto modes that let you take the picture without any settings adjustments. Not that you need a DSLR, but an entry level one wouldn't be too daunting and would allow you to play around a bit with other settings if you wanted later.
I'd also note regarding your last post that big camera doesn't necessarily mean big picture quality. The Nikon you linked actually has a smaller sensor than the Canon s100. Mirrorless cameras might be something to look at too. Not big but have mostly the same sensors as DSLRs.
JadedWriter
Member
Yeah thanks for your input on that one. I did notice that sensor size is pretty important as well.
sankt-Antonio
:^)--?-<
That Zeiss Batis 85mm is so going to be mine.
Forsete
Member
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/...-distagon-fe-lens-review-best-35mm-lens-ever/
Sucks for me as I got the FE 35 2.8.
Zeiss Batis = delicious
TerryLee81
Member
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/...-distagon-fe-lens-review-best-35mm-lens-ever/
Sucks for me as I got the FE 35 2.8.
Zeiss Batis = delicious
Man, that sounds like a great lens, I love the 35mm focal length. I still need a 35mm for my D600, I hope I can at least afford the Sigma in a few months.
I have a Fuji X-T1 with a 35mm F1.4, and a 18mm F2 at my disposal. I'm currently trying to sell the 18mm to fund a purchase of either the 56mm F1.2 or the 16-55mm F2.8, but I'm not sure which of them to go with or if I should go with them at all? Should I perhaps opt for the cheaper kit zoom and try to find another prime and keep the two that I have?
Steve Huffington proclaims Sony FE 35mm 1.8 ZA best 35 evur!
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/...-distagon-fe-lens-review-best-35mm-lens-ever/
Sucks for me as I got the FE 35 2.8.
Zeiss Batis = delicious
Take anything Huff says with a HUGE grain of salt.
I'm not sure you would be happy with a cheaper kit zoom when you have been shooting with the primes tbh. Do you just need longer reach or are you getting it for convenience?
Looks like sensor shifting image is the thing now. Pentax K-3 II will add the feature. But instead of adding resolution it is used to capture more colors per pixel. Sony next?
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7238180077/hands-on-with-the-pentax-k-3-ii?slide=3
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7238180077/hands-on-with-the-pentax-k-3-ii?slide=3
I would rather have wifi tbh. gps is useless battery drain. and losing pop up flash isn't worth the gps.
edit: and I already have astrotracer, not too hard to find it at decent price and it doesn't drain the camera
Forsete
Member
I know, hence the sirens.
But the lens seems to be really really good. But it is also really really expensive.
Valkyr Junkie
Member
Since the Touit.
Mostly for convenience, as it's easier to carry around one lens than several primes.
Then I guess it's weight, size and price vs quality. Personally I would go with the f2.8 zoom since you are used to the image quality from the primes. But, Fuji's kit zoom aren't terrible if you have the right expectations.
It's probably your camera's AF system as oppose to the lens.
could be. I have the 5D2
I'm not sure what sensitivity 5D2's best AF point is but I haven't seen any camera with better sensitivity than 2.8, so wider lens isn't going to help. Try to use just the center in difficult condition is probably the best you are going to get. Lenses do affect AF but probably not in this case.
yeah mainly just use the center point and recompose, almost always.
Is your ISO set to really high? or shutter speed really low? and/or exposure compensation?
Try cleaning the contact points between the lens and camera?
It's starting to look like it's an issue with the ring, that it believes it is not set to auto when it is on A. Instead it seems to think ot is in auto somewhere between 1.4 and 2 for any reason
It's starting to look like it's an issue with the ring, that it believes it is not set to auto when it is on A. Instead it seems to think ot is in auto somewhere between 1.4 and 2 for any reason
I forgot it's controlled by the wire. Hope you can get it fixed. :-/
Hey all. After some advice, I want something compact that I can pop in my bag and take with me wherever I go.
At the moment I am tossing up between the Hx60v, coolpix 9700 or the Samsung NX2000. They're both a similar price so Idk which is better to go for?
Any suggestions?
At the moment I am tossing up between the Hx60v, coolpix 9700 or the Samsung NX2000. They're both a similar price so Idk which is better to go for?
Any suggestions?
Of those the NX2000 has an interchangeable lens mount and a much bigger sensor. You won't get as much zoom, but the other compacts will take quite soft pictures zoomed all the way in and you have more room to crop with a bigger sensor. As an example a 200mm lens (common with 18-200 superzooms) with the image at 100% on a laptop screen (1366x768) will have an EQ focal length of 1200mm which is the same that a "50X zoom" would typically have.
I don't know what lenses the NX2000 are sold with (if any). I see some with the 20-50 which has quite a narrow range. 20mm on APS-C is not very wide (30mm EQ). Most compacts will have 24mm EQ on the wide end which would be 16mm on an APS-C camera.
EQ stands for equivalent.
Alright, so I picked up a Nikon D5100 a couple of years back while on vacation because my old point and shoot broke on me. Now I'm sitting here and watching through a few tutorials on how to actually use it but I'd like some recommendations on lenses. I don't really want to break the bank but I also don't mind spending a little more if it's really worth it. I want a high zoom lens since I really like taking pictures of wildlife and a more all purpose lens to replace the stock one. Here are a couple I found on Amazon (also, is there a better place to buy online?) but I'm open to other suggestions:
Tamron 70-300mm lens
Nikon 35mm lens
One last question, is a lens filter necessary? I got one with the camera and put it on to keep the main lens from getting scratched but should I be using it?
Thanks for the help!
Tamron 70-300mm lens
Nikon 35mm lens
One last question, is a lens filter necessary? I got one with the camera and put it on to keep the main lens from getting scratched but should I be using it?
Thanks for the help!
sechsterangriff
Member
If you put a protective filter on the 35 1.8dx make sure it's good quality. I would notice lots of ghosting on that lens in some situations with a filter.
Always cheaper to replace a filter just keep in mind what it is doing.
No. Everything between the front lens element and the subject is a loss of quality - though it may not be highly measurable, it is the case.
There are benefits to certain types of filter - ND filters and polarizers, for example. But a "UV filter" for the expressed purpose of "protecting" the lens? Snake oil.
The front elements of most lenses are super hard, anyway. Extremely scratch resistant. The rear element is the one you should be more protective of, and that's hardly an issue since it's always either capped or connected to the camera body.
True but depending on environment your lens front element may be getting exposed to dust/rain/boogers/fingerprints.
I find if you are constantly needing to clean the lens a filter is better to take that abuse.
If you are in a nice clean room, take it off.
I'm pretty big on lens caps when in storage, sometimes though you are busy or left it somewhere and it is nice to be able to just jam it in your bag and not worry.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/06/good-times-with-bad-filters < funny blog post about stacking too many filters.
For me B&W filters or bust.
if you have a lens that isn't weatherproof you may want to add a protector if you are shooting in the elements.
Squirrel Killer
Member
TerryLee81
Member
Yeah, it often has a bigger impact on resale value than on picture quality.
Done that way too much in the past few days, it's actually sad.I googled it out of curiosity
Good info. I honestly should have known better but oh well.
Thanks for the info guys.
Hmm let me smash all my front elements out with a hammer. Totally useless!
I feel like the 1st guy kinda cheated, yeah you are not going to see many imperfections with a fast wide prime focused at infinity. It's totally situational. I was at the beach one time trying to take sunset pics and the salt spray was covering the lens. Probably not great for the camera body either. Try sticking bubblegum on your macro lens stopped down and close focused. I'll bet you see some shit. 2nd link seems to be smoking more crack... Tons of diffraction on the text and ghost city on the tree.
Think I will stick to the plan of trying not to scratch the front of my lenses all up.
I mean if you really don't care you could just make a pinhole camera from a tissue box.
There is no hard and fast rule that protective filters = useless. Think about what you are doing and decide if you need one.
I'm in the camp of use hood instead of UV filter if the purpose is for protection. Ghosting from shooting at light sources can happen too easily even with a good filter imo.
Otoh, if the lens falls to the ground, the hood would hit the surface instead of the glass and distribute the impact over the front ring. The only time I would put UV filter on is in sandy condition. No matter how hard the front element is, sand can scratch it.
Otoh, if the lens falls to the ground, the hood would hit the surface instead of the glass and distribute the impact over the front ring. The only time I would put UV filter on is in sandy condition. No matter how hard the front element is, sand can scratch it.
Sand is pretty amazing in that is has the ability to fuck up pretty much anything. Anakin was right, sand sucks.
This guy has never let me down, and way safer than liquid cleaning. Also fun to torment the cats with.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...JN3MgyZTUHhSIERoCZTPw_wcB&Q=&is=REG&A=details
Interesting. Zeiss published a picture taken with their new 85mm Batis lens which it is over 56MP. The lens is e-mount and the description says A7R.
- Status