|
14-42 is supposed to be the better of the 2 lenses in terms of IQ, but the 12-50 gets weatherproofing and motor zoooooooooom plus the macro close-focus. I played with one in the shop last night and am really partial to the 12-50, pixel-peepers be damned!
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
Yeah it would be nice if it were a little faster (and also shorter) but apart from that it has a good range and the weatherproofing is nice. Motor zoom is nice for shooting video too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 22:25
|
|
|
12-50 is the kit lens right? Normally I dont give two shits about it but I think I will get the kit for the weather proofing thing just so I can go shoot out in the rain while laughing like a madman. For all else I will get the 45mm f1.8 and probably leave it on the camera for good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 01:17
|
|
|
Thanks again to Augmented Dickey for the OM lens info. I now have my E-PM1, kit lens, and a couple of manual focus lenses with adaptor (got a great deal, and they're all excellent additions). Now the question: When using the kit lens in low light, the orange light on front of the camera lights up to help serve as a focus guide. When using a manual lens, however, I can't find any way to activate that light so I can get at least some ability to adjust my focus before shooting. Is it possible? It's especially weird when using the flash, since that will light up the eventual picture, but it will be completely out of focus because I couldn't see what I was focusing on. Also not seeing a way to activate the MF Assist to zoom in when using a manual lens (since the camera only initiates that function when the focus ring on a modern lens is rotated). SupahCoolX fucked around with this message at 03:16 on Apr 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 02:51
|
|
|
I don't think you can get the AF assist light to trigger manually. As for the MF Assist, you will want to customize the record button to zoom in. It's not the smoothest thing, but that's your best option.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 03:26
|
|
|
keyframe posted:12-50 is the kit lens right? Normally I dont give two shits about it but I think I will get the kit for the weather proofing thing just so I can go shoot out in the rain while laughing like a madman. Yeah it is. Well you can get a kit of it with the 14-42 mk.II or the 12-50. The 12-50 kit is $200 more expensive iirc. The 12-50 has drawbacks, it's pretty drat long, it's optically somewhat inferior to the 14-42, it's more expensive and it's slower in terms of aperture. (Especially on the higher end it's like 6.3 or something. But the weatherproofing, motor zoom, greater range and macro mode make it more versatile. Choices. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 08:25
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:The 12-50 has drawbacks, it's pretty drat long, it's optically somewhat inferior to the 14-42, it's more expensive and it's slower in terms of aperture. (Especially on the higher end it's like 6.3 or something. How exactly is motor zoom an advantage? I'm honestly curious here. Of course, unless you are going to shoot lots of video. Most of my motor zoom experience comes from digital point and shoots and trying out the Panasonic kit motor zoom lens, which I strongly disliked. So I may be biased. Either way it seems to me that the zoom never stops where I want it, due to its stepped nature and doesn't seem to offer the fine grained adjustments that a manual zoom lens does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 08:36
|
|
|
VomitOnLino posted:How exactly is motor zoom an advantage? I'm honestly curious here. Of course, unless you are going to shoot lots of video. Well like you say it's mostly advantageous for shooting video. It has three speeds of zoom, which allows you to have either fine-grained control, or the ability to zoom in/out quickly depending on where the action is, or somewhere in between. You can also pull the zoom ring back and it will then become a focus ring, if that's your thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 08:53
|
|
|
The 12-50 is a POS imo. This is what's loving possible: http://www.olympus-europa.com/consumer/dslr_ZUIKO_DIGITAL_ED_14-35mm_1_2_0_SWD__Specifications.htm So I don't understand why Olympus inflicts that slow zoom on us. How can they not realize that everybody's going to buy this instead, just like everybody bought the Panasonic pancake instead of the Olympus one: http://www.stuff-review.com/2012-04/panasonic-confirmed-12-35mm-f2-8-mft-constant-aperture-zoom-lens-coming-in-june/
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 11:57
|
|
|
unleash the unicorn posted:The 12-50 is a POS imo. I don't know about "everybody's going to buy this instead" considering how much more expensive those other lenses are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 16:26
|
|
|
lol f6.3 Apparently Olympus is 1990's Tamron
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 16:38
|
|
|
Cacator posted:I don't know about "everybody's going to buy this instead" considering how much more expensive those other lenses are. And LOL at adding "features" like motor zoom instead. unleash the unicorn fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Apr 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:03
|
|
|
Is the 12-50 the only weatherproof lens for OMD?
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
For native m4/3 I think so. I have a couple 4/3 lenses and the weather sealed adaptor but those lenses are huge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 06:38
|
|
|
Lon Lon Rabbit posted:For native m4/3 I think so. Well so is the 12-50 so. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 10:04
|
|
|
Played with the X-Pro 1 today. I don't know what the minimum focus distance is on the 35mm but it loving sucks. The body felt cheaper than the X100 too, I'm quite disappointed. On the plus side, one of the camera stores in town will get 6 E-M5s next week and only 2 were pre-sold, plus it's the black body with 12-50 (yeah I'm going with that, shut up.) It's versatile enough for range and macro and I do plan on using video, otherwise I only use primes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 23:31
|
|
|
So, I've been considering jumping back into photography lately. Used to have a Nikon D70s, but it was too bulky for me to carry around for everyday use (especially with the 18-200 lens I had). So I sold that off. I've been looking at this new Micro 4/3 format as of late, and that also got me looking at the Sony NEX line. So, I went to Best Buy today, and they have a Panasonic DMC GF3 for sale as an open box model. Price is $349, which didn't seem bad at all, as the model has received good reviews. They also have the 45-200 lens for $249.99 if bought with the camera. Now, the question is -- am I getting myself a camera that's going to be pretty bad in the long run due to newer models releasing? Should I be investing a few hundred more in one of the NEX cameras? They have a NEX3 that is being sold open box also for $450. For those wondering -- I'm not planning to do much that'd require high speed shooting. I'd go with a plain point and shoot, but I'd like to go with something that, at the very least, has interchangeable lenses. Going to read through this thread a bit more in the morning before deciding -- glad to see one here! MrMoose fucked around with this message at 08:41 on Apr 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 08:30
|
|
|
A plain nex-3 for $450 is not that great of a deal to be completely honest. They just announced the sucessor to the C3 (F3), so they should be clearing excess stock soon. The C3 has a much better sensor than the 3 (both in terms of Dynamic range and ISO performance, coincidentally the same advantages the Nex system has over m4/3's). So, if you plan on shooting at a lot of indoor venues the nex might be more advantageous. Sony has been really lovely about native lens support. The advantages of the 4/3 system are more compact size, more native lens selection (many more pancakes which the nex desperately needs), and much faster AF. If you are on a budget, I really like Nex's w/ manual focus lenses (if only for the fact that it won't convert every mf lens into a telephoto, and focus peaking). I have a set of high quality 35mm,50mm, and 85mm primes and it only set me back around $400 which is really nice. However, a GF3 for $350 is a helluva nice deal. w/ the kit lens and the telephoto you have the equivalent of 28mm - 400mm for $600 (you can't really say that about any other ILC system). I think you'll be happy with your choice either way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 09:21
|
|
|
The thing to remember is that your camera isn't going to get any worse just because something better is out. It's just as good as it was the day it came out. I've had a G2 with the 45-200 and 20 1.7 as my non-work camera for about a year and it's been great. Even though my primary camera was a 5D MkII I still got many, many photos out of the G2 that I've been quite happy with. Before the G2 I had a Canon G10 which didn't really cut it in a lot of situations. The autofocus was too slow, the lens was too slow, high ISO performance was poo poo, and I hated the servo zoom thing. With the G2, while it's obviously not up to the same tasks as a 5D, I don't usually find myself in situations where I can't get a shot or it's made extremely difficult by the camera's limitations. Quality at 800 ISO is decent enough that, combined with the 20mm 1.7, you can shoot in pretty bad light successfully. The autofocus is surprisingly excellent and works well with the touchscreen. I've also found having a 400mm equivalent lens small enough to fit into a coat pocked to be quite fun. I do think you might be smart to pick up a couple of the Panasonic primes if you can. They're great and compact--I have the 20mm 1.7 and would like to pick up the 14mm at some point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
That's why I bought a 5N. I figured that even if Sony never releases another decent NEX lens (which is pretty much what's happening), the camera is a great manual focus camera. I was shooting some roller derby with it last night and I was using a manual focus 135mm f/2.8 at ISO 6400 and it worked well. Not as nice as, say a 7D, but considering the price and size, it wasn't bad. By the way, if anyone out there is looking for a great 135mm f/2.8 lens, I recommend the Osawa one. It's nice and sharp with good contrast, has a built-in hood, a beautifully slick focus ring, a relatively compact size and a good price. I've got one in OM mount and I love it. I've used a couple of other 135mm f/2.8 lenses at a similar price and they were nowhere near as good for image quality. HPL fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Apr 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 17:52
|
|
|
I think the original NEX 3 is a fine little camera, but there's no way it's a $450 open box "deal" in 2012 when the second replacement for it is probably a week or so away from being formally announced. If it's actually a C3, then I'd say it's probably a decent deal, otherwise I'd recommend holding out and either getting the GF3, which is a SWEET M43 camera or looking at the NEX5n kit, which should also run you around $650-ish with an 18-55. There's a lot to argue on pro/con of m43 vs. NEX, and it really just comes down to what you want to do with it. If you're only looking to buy autofocus lenses and want a lot of variety and some really fantastic choices with lots of coverage, M43 is it hands-down. If you're just going to adapt old lenses with cheap, readily available adapters, then it's the NEX edging out M43 due to focus peaking and better/bigger sensors (especially if you pick up the 5n). Ergonomically, and user-interface-wise, both systems have their quibbles, and the M43 probably has a little advantage here because some of Sony's UI choices are truly WTF-able. So yeah, if you're pulling the trigger today and your choices are the NEX3 or the GF3, I'd say the GF3 is arguably the better choice, but if you have a chance to get a NEX5n, then I'd say you have a tougher choice to consider. to caveat this - I've personally owned a NEX3 (stolen from my car), a NEX5 (gave it to a friend as a wedding gift), a NEX 5n (sold it in an economic mishap), an Olympus E-PL2 (sold it to a friend getting into photography), and a Panasonic GX1 (just sold it this weekend to cover a debt). I think both systems are pretty loving fantastic and have equal but different merits. I love the NEX because all of the best photos I've ever taken have been on NEX bodies, but I love M43 because they have some of the finest glass I've ever had the pleasure to lay hands on (like the pana-leica 25/1.4, and the Oly 45/1.8). If I had my way, I'd own one body from each system and have the worst time deciding what to take out every time I went shooting. So I guess what I'm saying is that you really can't go WRONG, you can only go contrary to what some people will suggest, but any of your choices will give you a tool that will have great potential, if you go out and use it. ok you could go wrong by getting one of those ghetto Samsung jobbies, or one of those awful new Nikon mirrorless things, but I'm probably just trolling now :P krackmonkey fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Apr 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 18:13
|
|
|
I was looking at the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 NEX lens and what the hell were they thinking with the filter size? 46mm? Would it have killed them to punch it out to 49mm and keep things standard?
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
HPL posted:I was looking at the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 NEX lens and what the hell were they thinking with the filter size? 46mm? Would it have killed them to punch it out to 49mm and keep things standard? No poo poo. Absolutely ZERO of the 5 local shops carry 46mm ND around here. The pana-leica 25 was in the same boat and it was infuriating.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 18:26
|
|
|
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-full-a37-and-nex-f3-and-two-lens-specs-announcement-may-17th/#comments Jesus Sony what the gently caress is wrong with you? Your new nex lens announcement is a lens that already exists in black? You finally have a compelling product in the camera market, and this is what you do? Where are our pancakes? Where are the 35mm, 60mm primes? Where is the 18-55 2.8? This is so frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
Seeing as they're in the Leica-ish position of not even being able to meet current demand, I don't think they're going to be announcing anything new any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
MrMoose posted:So, I went to Best Buy today, and they have a Panasonic DMC GF3 for sale as an open box model. Price is $349, which didn't seem bad at all, as the model has received good reviews. They also have the 45-200 lens for $249.99 if bought with the camera. Amazon is selling the 45-200 for $200 I believe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
Man_of_Teflon posted:Amazon is selling the 45-200 for $200 I believe. 199 bucks from B&H.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 20:28
|
|
|
Thanks for all the help everyone, I appreciate it  For reference, the NEX was a C3 and not just a 3. But I did decide on the Panasonic GF3 -- the floor model Nex C3 was really dinged up on the kit lens. Given that and what I've seen here and read on the GF3, this felt like the best choice.I got to Best Buy and realized they were running a deal that is for all Wisconsin Best Buy stores -- $25 gift card with a $250 purchase. Also, I had been looking online and found that the lens was $210.99 online as opposed to the $249 that it was going to be with open box + the $50 discount. So I jumped on that(since, even though B&H was $199, I got the $25 gift card at Best Buy with the purchase of the lens, making it the equivalent of $195.99) Bought a case for the camera while I was there, too. Unfortunately, when they were removing the camera from the mount yesterday, they broke the mount button off. Thankfully, they also had the camera available at the Best Buy across town. So, drive over there, and go to pick up the camera, things seem good until I realize the bag is a mix of Olympus and Panasonic parts. So, 15 minutes later, I realize they don't have the parts there. Instead, I asked if they could just give me the parts at the other Best Buy, and they agreed (along with tossing in an extra lens cap so the camera wouldn't be without a cap on the 14-42 lens). So, after I get done with a gaming session, I'm going to pick up the camera accessories from the closer best buy. In the end, I paid: $210.99 for the lens + a $25 gift card $324.99 for the camera (They couldn't get the $25 gift card to work so they just gave me $25 off the camera itself). A grand adventure to acquire the camera. So I got the camera for $535, along with a $25 gift card to put towards Diablo 3 in a couple of weeks. I'm very happy with that, considering the ticket price was $700 total ($400 for the open box camera, $300 for the lens). Now to just get started taking pictures. I'm looking forward to messing with this camera. Thanks again for the advice, all Will see how things go and decide if I want to buy any prime lenses for it. Thinking I may end up grabbing one of those 14/2.5 at some point.
MrMoose fucked around with this message at 20:56 on Apr 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 20:33
|
|
|
HPL posted:Seeing as they're in the Leica-ish position of not even being able to meet current demand, I don't think they're going to be announcing anything new any time soon. ^^^ Congrats on your GF3 adventures, enjoy the poo poo out of your new kit!
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
By the way on eBay you can find legit brand new body-only nex c3 for under € 200.
|
|
#
?
Apr 29, 2012 23:20
|
|
|
Krackmonkey don't you prefer the GX1 over the GF3? It having a superior sensor and all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 09:19
|
|
|
HPL posted:I was looking at the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 NEX lens and what the hell were they thinking with the filter size? 46mm? Would it have killed them to punch it out to 49mm and keep things standard? getsuga posted:http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-full-a37-and-nex-f3-and-two-lens-specs-announcement-may-17th/#comments Goddammit, Sony. How many more crappy lenses you gotta produce? Do we really have to hope that 3rd party lenses will cover the bases?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 16:14
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:The different filter size made me sad/angry, too, it's seriously a major deciding factor for me. I already have 49mm filters and I loathe having differently sized ones to carry around. Plus lens caps and hoods. It's absolutely stupid because you can see that they had plenty of space to make a 49mm ring but they didn't. As for the lenses, all Sony needs to do is release one killer pancake lens and the NEX system will bust wide open.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 16:21
|
|
|
DPReview loves the OM-D EM-5quote:The E-M5 is, without question, the most accomplished Micro Four Thirds camera we've yet seen and, given how well established the system has become, it vies for the title of most capable mirrorless option yet. It's not entirely without flaws and, predictably, most of those relate to continuous autofocus. But, for the most part, the E-M5 is simply an awful lot of camera in a compact and attractive body. It's a nice camera to use and the images it takes are just as enjoyable. Without any reservations whatsoever, it deserves our Gold Award.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 16:43
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:Krackmonkey don't you prefer the GX1 over the GF3? It having a superior sensor and all. I would say yeah, but it's been mentioned elsewhere here that sensor isn't everything. I think in the case of the GX1 versus the GF3, there's a pretty compelling argument that it is a superior sensor. That and the GF3 is more a entry-level consumer camera for someone who doesn't want the manual controls that you get by graduating to the GX1. From a usability POV, I'd rather have all the extra physical controls personally, but they should both take pretty identical pictures. krackmonkey fucked around with this message at 17:14 on Apr 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 17:11
|
|
|
MeKeV posted:I'd like to cross post this from the P&S thread to see what you lot think of my situation. Well I did some investigating and for me the X10 held it's own fairly well vs similar priced m4/3's so I've stuck with it and I love it. And I'm yet to be troubled by 'orbs' without shooting purposefully for them. I'd really recommend giving it a second look for anyone coming in to this thread looking to upgrade from typical point and shoots, but preferring a more all in one package than m4/3. But do not buy it for it's OVF!
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 17:54
|
|
|
My god that OM-D EM-5 looks so great. Its funny until I saw the section of the review with the comparison pictures I didn't realize how small it was either. It really is only a matter of time until I get a m43 camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
Well the body is small. That kit lens is quite a protrusion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 19:09
|
|
|
I kind of wish they hadn't put the accessory port on the hot shoe. It would make the prism bump look a lot better-proportioned. Here's the roller derby photos from Saturday. Ran at 1/400, ISO 6400, manual focus the whole night. The majority of the shots were taken with the Osawa 135mm f/2.8. I'm really liking that lens. http://www.mikechow.com/Nature-and-Stuff/Sea-to-Sky-Sirens-vs-Doomsday/22708911_673GHL
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 19:33 |
|
|
One nice upgrade for the NEX-F3 over the C3 - looks like it will support the optical viewfinder accessory. Nice to see Sony make that change, it seemed like a needless feature to strip out - don't you want as many customers as possible to buy accessories?
|
|
#
?
Apr 30, 2012 20:20
|
|
