|
Aargh posted:I'm not sure what the X100 replacement would be like, surely an XE1 with an upcoming 27mm pancake would be pretty similar. The X100 is still popular despite the Fuji X-mount arriving on the scene so it seems natural that there will be a replacement. It could be better than an X-mount with a similar focal length because the lens and sensor are perfectly tuned, no need to make the sensor work with multiple lenses. If they slap the current xtrans sensor in there, that goes out the window. Also the leaf shutter is a big draw for some folks. I'm sure there is a market for the X200 or whatever.
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 08:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:10 |
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I was just talking about the 30 day amazon return policy, sorry about that. Warranty was the wrong term. B&H's is full purchase price until Jan 18th, keep it under 200 clicks. I might have to pull the trigger. All my old pentax gear is M42 but it's just so cheap! Of course they're OOS of the official M42 adaptor, the HK ones' reviews range from 'it works' to 'it stuck and required service that included metal filngs being removed.' 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
I don't think full frame is necessary, especially as the cost of the xpro and xe are already fairly high- but an interview with a Fuji guy a while back basically said they're investigating possibly going full frame, and X series lenses do have an imaging circle large enough to cover full frame, but there would be a problem with wide angles (presumably because of a short flange distance). The sensors already perform amazingly well at high ISO, unless they were able to absorb the costs of going full frame, or very slightly increase costs, I think it would cost them more sales than it increases.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 15:06
|
|
|
Full frame is necessary because Sony just put out a full frame X100 and Fuji's worried it'll eat into their sales. http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSC-RX1-Cybershot-Full-frame-Digital/dp/B0097CXFCC
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 15:35
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Full frame is necessary because Sony just put out a full frame X100 and Fuji's worried it'll eat into their sales. I don think Fuji is all that worried about the RX1, the cost of admission is more expensive than getting a Nikon D600 and a Zeiss 35mm Distagon T* f/2. 400bux for an EVF, 180bux for a lens hood, 250bux for a hotshoe mounted thumb-grip, have to charge the camera via USB as it does not come with an external charger. Goddamn if the sample images dont look amazing though. Heres a review of the RX1 with fullsized jpgs (raw is only supported by the included sony software at this time). http://photorumors.com/2012/12/13/sony-rx1-review-first-impressions/#more-36132 If anything this will push Fuji to commit to a full frame line of camera in the future and to ensure the upgrades of teh X100 and Xpro are well worth the upgrade costs. I have gotten tons of use out of my X100 over my bulky dslr's. If Fuji offered a fixed lens FX camrea for under $1700, I would jump all over that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 16:27
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Full frame is necessary because Sony just put out a full frame X100 and Fuji's worried it'll eat into their sales. I would think Leica should be sweating more than Fuji as full frame is pretty much a class distinction and I think Fuji learned a bit about what the average consumer can afford these days. The X100 sold somewhere north of 100,000 units but the X-Pro 1 price turned off a lot of people, I'm not sure being a full frame camera is going to justify the cost to anyone considering a Fuji. Anyone considering a Leica is going to be happy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 18:03
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Full frame is necessary because Sony just put out a full frame X100 and Fuji's worried it'll eat into their sales. Agree with the other guys- I don't see enthusiasts spending almost $3000 on a fuji full frame unless it's exquisite. Maybe after another 2 iterations if they continue taking feedback to heart and improve things greatly. Is the RX1 selling well?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
Shmoogy posted:Agree with the other guys- I don't see enthusiasts spending almost $3000 on a fuji full frame unless it's exquisite. Maybe after another 2 iterations if they continue taking feedback to heart and improve things greatly. Not sure, it's only been released for a week or two now. Yeah, the price is way too high, I totally agree. If it hit somewhere around the $2300 price point at launch, dropping to $2000 or $1900 in a year or so it'd be a big hit. It does seem to be angling more for the Leica niche with stuff like manual focus AND aperture rings. But it's not really a competitor to SLRs, it's much smaller than a D600 will ever be and supposedly the sensor is an improved version of the D800's sensor. It's basically a high-end bridge camera, not a SLR or rangefinder. At the moment, I'm more curious what Fuji will do to react to it than I am interested in the RX-1 itself, especially at that price point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 19:14
|
|
|
I knew 19 responses since last night meant big news, and I was kind of dreading/anticipating X200 announcements. Time to think about selling the X100 I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
These MFT lenses are way too goddamn big, what the gently caress i can't carry this anywhere  E: I mean come on! 
DJExile fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Dec 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2012 19:34
|
|
|
Helicity posted:I knew 19 responses since last night meant big news, and I was kind of dreading/anticipating X200 announcements. Time to think about selling the X100 I guess. Why? I will certainly look at an x200, but I think it was one of the photo mods here who said once, 'your current camera doesn´t stop working or start taking worse photos when the version 2 comes out'. I still have a 5D original. I will keep shooting with my x100 for a while, most likely till it breaks. It does everything I need. What I really hope is that the X200 or whatever they call it takes the same sized filters and they finally release a 2x converter for the x100 and it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Why? I will certainly look at an x200, but I think it was one of the photo mods here who said once, 'your current camera doesn´t stop working or start taking worse photos when the version 2 comes out'. I completely get what you're saying, and I think the X100 will be a fantastic camera for quite some time. Things like a 4MP-larger X-Trans sensor and the X-Pro-1 buttons/dials would be worth the few extra hundred dollars to me, however. I wasn't planning on upgrading, and you're right that the X100 still works - which is why I've kind of been hoping that they wouldn't announce an X200 to tempt me. I'm assuming it would keep the same 49mm filter size, since it seems to be a popular size for the 35mm cameras. Maybe we should start emailing Fuji about a 2x converter since everyone seems to agree that it would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 02:57
|
|
|
Helicity posted:I completely get what you're saying, and I think the X100 will be a fantastic camera for quite some time. Things like a 4MP-larger X-Trans sensor and the X-Pro-1 buttons/dials would be worth the few extra hundred dollars to me, however. I wasn't planning on upgrading, and you're right that the X100 still works - which is why I've kind of been hoping that they wouldn't announce an X200 to tempt me. Do you print? (if not, you should start) Whenever I have even an inkling of temptation for something else photo related, not happened much recently since the x100, but back when I was shooting with my 5D, I would remind myself just how many prints I could buy for the cost of whatever item I was thinking about. I personally would vastly prefer more prints on my wall than a small upgrade. The sizes I print the X100 works great. I think I read on TOP (the online photographer, best blog) that you need at least a 2x increase to notice any difference, so just 4 mp extra will not make any difference, especially in prints or web res jpegs. One could probably notice a difference between shots from the x100 vs the Sony full frame, because not only is it a 2x megapixel increase, but also the sensor itself is larger. Even then, I would love to see the same print made from both to see just how big an increase is present. zoomed in to 100% on some test shot shows you literally nothing unless one´s hobby is being a gear-pig instead of taking photos.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:...unless one´s hobby is being a gear-pig instead of taking photos. Speaking of Startyde posted:I might have to pull the trigger. Startyde fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Dec 15, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 14:46
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Do you print? (if not, you should start) I do print, but I haven't much from the X100. What sizes do you print at? I've been trying to fill a frame above my living room couch by stitching three portraits together and the math works out to be something like 170ppi, which I've never printed at before.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 15:44
|
|
|
4 megapickles buys me a little more wiggle room in cropping when I can't physically move closer with this here fixed lens camerabox. Where's my converter, Fuji?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
Not to derail, but do either of you know any good resources for preparing files for print? I think I understand things like proofing in Lightroom but my prints are still very hit or miss in terms of what I am expecting to see on the page. Also, any suggestions for a high quality/low price 50mm (or close) to adapt to a NEX 5N? I have the FDn 1.8 and k mount f2 and while both work, the FDn is hazy and the k mount will most likely be on my new ME super until I am able to afford an upgrade. Small an light are nice but not essential.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
This guide worked for me. http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/profiles.htm Minolta 50 1.4 are still pretty cheap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 18:45
|
|
|
Helicity posted:I do print, but I haven't much from the X100. What sizes do you print at? I've been trying to fill a frame above my living room couch by stitching three portraits together and the math works out to be something like 170ppi, which I've never printed at before. From a single frame, the size I like best is a 16x16 inch (40x40cm) square on 240g lustre paper which I frame behind glass. I do have one canvas print that was 3 images stitched together, and it is 180x45cm (71x18 inches) that looks gorgeous, tons of detail. I haven´t yet gotten a large canvas print from a single X100 image, but I have several from my original 5D which is basically the same resolution. Some of my square images have been cropped, others are just the center most square, but I cannot say I feel I would have ever noticed an extra 4 megapixels.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
Those of you looking for a focus peaking OMD, have you seen this? http://www.smallcamerabigpicture.com/pseudo-focus-peaking-on-the-omd/ Useless for video, sadly, but should be decent for photos.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
Oh man those of you who recommended the 45mm f/1.8, you were not kidding. This thing rules. 12 by PhotoBen27, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 02:05
|
|
|
Nice shot! Your kid totally looks like a young Dexter Morgan. Keep an eye on your pets! (:3 just kidding)
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 09:35
|
|
|
Digital Jesus posted:Your kid totally looks like a young Dexter Morgan. Keep an eye on your pets! (:3 just kidding) Someone buy that kid a Henley, stat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2012 18:02
|
|
|
hahaha he's not mine, he's a friend's son. His older brother was in a hockey game that the family wanted me to shoot. I got that in the locker room afterwards. Adorable kid though.   02 by PhotoBen27, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2012 00:12
|
|
|
I'm thinking about buying something that I can use with my manual focus lenses. I have a bunch of konica ar lenses that I'm using with my analog camera but I'd like to be able to use them with digital as well. As I understand it focus peaking helps a lot with manual lenses and currently only sony has it. I'm a bit unsure though about not having a viewfinder so I guess I have to go at least up to a nex-6 in that case. So I guess what I'm asking is: For use with manual konica ar lenses while having a viewfinder a nex-6 is a good choice, confirm/deny? Or is there anything else I should consider instead?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 15:44
|
|
|
MadlabsRobot posted:I'm thinking about buying something that I can use with my manual focus lenses. I have a bunch of konica ar lenses that I'm using with my analog camera but I'd like to be able to use them with digital as well. I only have the C3 but it's already great as it is for manual lenses. Focus peaking is very handy. You'll also get a standard hot shoe attachment and the viewfinder with the 6, to me it's close to perfection. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 16:01
|
|
|
Decently hot deal today on the Pentax K-01, all three colors (not just Yellow!) and their weird 40mm ultra compact lens. $299 @ Groupon: http://www.groupon.com/deals/gg-pentax-digital-camera
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 16:31
|
|
|
MadlabsRobot posted:I'm thinking about buying something that I can use with my manual focus lenses. I have a bunch of konica ar lenses that I'm using with my analog camera but I'd like to be able to use them with digital as well. Go grope a NEX6 in a store, you can check focus peaking with the kit lens to see just how awesome it is and see for yourself how sweet the EVF is and how fine the ergonomics on the NEX6 are. My bet is you leave the store $850-$1000 poorer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 16:43
|
|
|
I've been extremely happy with manual focus lenses on my NEX-5N, I'd imagine the 6's EVF and physical controls would be positively transcendent in comparison.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 16:45
|
|
|
Radbot posted:Decently hot deal today on the Pentax K-01, all three colors (not just Yellow!) and their weird 40mm ultra compact lens. $299 @ Groupon: http://www.groupon.com/deals/gg-pentax-digital-camera Motherfucker. Well, here's a trip report from my not-$299 K-01 kit— I think it handles pretty well, I like its chunk 'grip' better than my GF1's. It's glacially slow compared to it though. Firmware update helped with AF a little bit but it's still nothing to write home about. JPEG write performance is much better than RAW, but I wasn't impressed with the OOC jpegs at all. Couldn't find a image mode I liked. They're all global, too and have no user preset options. No matter what tweaking I did with white balance there was an odd magenta cast, and not just with the kit lens. The kit lens is reasonably sharp, though worse than the Panny 20 and has cromabs everywhere. Shooting with K-mount stuff is easier on the GF1. I guess the crippled KAF mount is common knowledge for modern pentaxians but I skipped AF bodies and was amazed that you don't get a match needle using it. Even when stopped down. The green button simply sets the shutter speed. Focus peaking is loving amazing and the RAWs are gorgeous. Low light performance is spectacular, as long as you're doing the focusing. If I had more SMC-A glass or if Adaptall KA mounts weren't $lolwut then I'd probably keep it. If you want a P&S with great RAWs and a reasonable prime I'd say it's tough to beat at $299 though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
A few quick and dirty test shots with my 15mm f/8. I really like it so far; the 'set it and forget it' style focus is a refreshing change. PC221440 by lwmyers, on Flickr  PC221469 by lwmyers, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 01:07
|
|
|
Played with the XE-1 and OM-D today, no NEX-6 in stock. I was disappointed by the AF speed and EVF lag with the XE-1- I really wanted to love that camera, as I dig the aesthetics and think the lens selection is great. I was really surprised by the OM-D with the 17mm. Great performance, nice shots and man is it fast. Starting to wonder how much I would miss APS-C if I were to make the change. Realistically, I just stick with my NEX-5n for another year to see what comes down the pike.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
I finally found time to actually go shoot with the X-Pro1 and I'm really liking the results that I'm getting with the 35mm, it kind of flares like crazy though even with the hood. Imperial Beach by jemuelb, on Flickr mes fucked around with this message at 03:52 on Dec 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 03:13
|
|
|
Studebaker Hawk posted:I was really surprised by the OM-D with the 17mm. Great performance, nice shots and man is it fast. Starting to wonder how much I would miss APS-C if I were to make the change. Realistically, I just stick with my NEX-5n for another year to see what comes down the pike. You probably wouldn't miss your APS-C since I don't miss my FF camera after getting the OM-D.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
Studebaker Hawk posted:Played with the XE-1 and OM-D today, no NEX-6 in stock. I was disappointed by the AF speed and EVF lag with the XE-1- I really wanted to love that camera, as I dig the aesthetics and think the lens selection is great. I'm assuming you're referring to the 17mm f/2.8? If you're happy with that lens I'd say go for it, as it's generally regarded as the worst glass in the m4/3 lineup.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 04:40
|
|
|
Augmented Dickey posted:I'm assuming you're referring to the 17mm f/2.8? If you're happy with that lens I'd say go for it, as it's generally regarded as the worst glass in the m4/3 lineup. Is there a good list of all the m43 lenses that has a decent ranking and pricing summary for each? I'm looking at a m43 camera but the lens selection seems poor and expensive compared to canon / nikon.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 05:24
|
|
|
Kimasu v2.0 posted:Is there a good list of all the m43 lenses that has a decent ranking and pricing summary for each? I'm looking at a m43 camera but the lens selection seems poor and expensive compared to canon / nikon. That's interesting because I would say it's the opposite: the m4/3 lens selection is superb and cheap compared to Canon/Nikon. This article might help you if you're looking for primes: http://tysonrobichaudphotography.wordpress.com/2012/01/14/its-not-the-size-of-the-boat-its-the-motion-in-the-ocean/
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:That's interesting because I would say it's the opposite: the m4/3 lens selection is superb and cheap compared to Canon/Nikon. Thank you, that article is just what I was looking for. I'll keep looking for something similar for the zooms.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 06:33
|
|
|
Why would you ditch a 5N to go with an OM-D? The lens selection?
Radbot fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Dec 23, 2012 |
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 21:10 |
|
|
Radbot posted:Why would you ditch a 5N to go with an OM-D? The lens selection? A pretty amazing selection of fast and sharp AF glass (12, 17, 25, 45, 75) + fantastic IBIS + still great legacy glass options (with said IBIS in effect) = why I love my OMD real focus peaking would make this camera perfect.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2012 17:33
|
|