|
Helicity posted:What have I become? Get yourself a sears/rikenon/tomioka 55mm f/1.4. I've got a couple and either knock the socks off of every super tak 55 I've chewed through outside of flaring. 
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 12:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:30 |
|
|
HPL posted:28mm f/2.8 lenses are fast and cheap, much like your mother, Trebek. But are they good 
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2013 14:21
|
|
|
I've been pondering switching to a smaller kit for traveling, and specifically the OM-D. The lens selection seems good, especially with the recent Panasonic workhorses. I cover events, and usually use a mid-range zoom and a fast prime, with on-camera flash if needed. New kit would probably include FL-600R, Panasonic 12-35, Olympus 45mm, and some 35mm equiv. prime. Any experiences with the OM-D at events?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
DanTheFryingPan posted:I've been pondering switching to a smaller kit for traveling, and specifically the OM-D. The lens selection seems good, especially with the recent Panasonic workhorses. I cover events, and usually use a mid-range zoom and a fast prime, with on-camera flash if needed. New kit would probably include FL-600R, Panasonic 12-35, Olympus 45mm, and some 35mm equiv. prime. I've been at a few with my 25mm and that's been about perfect. Keep in mind the OM-D and the other m4/3 cameras still have Olympus' 2x crop factor, so the 45mm, while it's a great lens, is going to have quite a bit of reach. The tilting screen is a big help too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
DPReview takes a look at ACR 7.4's new X-Trans demosaicing. It's looking pretty good  http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1550547764/adobes-fujifilm-x-trans-sensor-processing-tested
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
How accurate is focus peaking on a NEX anyway? I'm just idly curious what would happen if you adapted a Sigma 30 1.4 and tried to focus peak wide open. Would it actually pick up the contrast or would that be beyond its sensing resolution?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:How accurate is focus peaking on a NEX anyway? I'm just idly curious what would happen if you adapted a Sigma 30 1.4 and tried to focus peak wide open. Would it actually pick up the contrast or would that be beyond its sensing resolution? I don't see why it wouldn't work, I've used focus peaking on a nex with a 1.4 lens and it seemed to work fine.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 15:57
|
|
|
Peaking is fine with 1.4 unless the lens itself has really low contrast. Whats hard is focusing when stopped down a bit + a wider lens for me, all those lines get confusing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:How accurate is focus peaking on a NEX anyway? I'm just idly curious what would happen if you adapted a Sigma 30 1.4 and tried to focus peak wide open. Would it actually pick up the contrast or would that be beyond its sensing resolution? I use it with a 35/1.2. I'll zoom in to confirm focus if I have time, but peaking alone is fine in most settings once you get a feel for it. I've found that setting the camera to b&w (you still get color RAWs) and peaking to red works well for me if I need to focus quickly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Peaking is "accurate enough". It's not pinpoint precise, but it's not designed to be. It's fantastic for run-and-gun photography but you're not going to nail absolute focus with it. The very nature of focus peaking means that in order for the highlighted area to be easily visible, there has to be some fudge factor built in to it otherwise the area in focus could be so small as to be nearly invisible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:How accurate is focus peaking on a NEX anyway? I'm just idly curious what would happen if you adapted a Sigma 30 1.4 and tried to focus peak wide open. Would it actually pick up the contrast or would that be beyond its sensing resolution?  DSC00035 by Kelly_Davis, on Flickr Since there's a great deal of contrast between the black text and white background, it threw off the focus peaking algorithm and showed the signs as being in focus when they were not. I had to go off the surrounding concrete to judge accurate focus. Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Mar 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
Awesome, thanks guys. In other news, a 5N with LTM adapter popped up on Craigslist for $300. The exact model/colour/combination I've been looking for. What a time to not have $300 to spend  Throwing some things on Craigslist in a desperate attempt to raise some cash but we'll see if it works out. I'm not optimistic. Hopefully that 5N lingers for a while with no buyers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
I know it might be a little bit much, but Amazon has had a consistent supply of used 5n bodies on it's warehouse deals site. They go from 350-375ish. http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B005IHAIMA/ref=sr_1_5_olp?ie=UTF8&qid=1361999611&sr=8-5&keywords=5n&condition=used What's crazy to me is how cheap nex 3 bodies are now on ebay. I'm almost thinking to buy one and an FD adapter for a beater camera.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 22:14
|
|
|
A test shot from the Olympus 17/1.8 lens that I just got. It's not as sharp as the 25/1.4 or 20/1.7 wide open but it's still decent. Strangely enough when shooting wide open, it doesn't resolve detail that well at mid-range distances but it's good in the close-range and infinity distances. But for normal web display or even 10x15 prints, you probably won't notice it at all. High Street Centre by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2013 23:09
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:A test shot from the Olympus 17/1.8 lens that I just got. It's not as sharp as the 25/1.4 or 20/1.7 wide open but it's still decent. Strangely enough when shooting wide open, it doesn't resolve detail that well at mid-range distances but it's good in the close-range and infinity distances. But for normal web display or even 10x15 prints, you probably won't notice it at all. If that's the case, do you think that this lens is a good upgrade or replacement for the old Oly 17/2.8? I've been on the fence about selling my 2.8 and grabbing the new 1.8, but I haven't found any decent reviews about the newer lens to help guide my purchase. EDIT + Bonus Question: Anyone own the Olympus FL-600R? I'm looking for a good baby's-first-hotshoe-flash, and I have an OM-D. I'm just having a difficult time finding a unit that explicitly says its compatible with my cam, and I figured I'd settle for the FL-600R. It's a lot more than I'd like to spend for a first flash, though. I just need to know if it's worth grabbing at full price. Sharizard fucked around with this message at 00:58 on Feb 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
Sharizard posted:If that's the case, do you think that this lens is a good upgrade or replacement for the old Oly 17/2.8? The OM-D has a standard hotshoe, any modern flash should work on it (albeit sometimes only in manual mode). I use a yongnuo 560ii flash on mine without any issues (also it's very cheap compared to the FL-600R)
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 01:15
|
|
|
Sharizard posted:If that's the case, do you think that this lens is a good upgrade or replacement for the old Oly 17/2.8? It's definitely better than the 17/2.8, it's whether you think the price is worth it or not. If you're going to sell the old 17 and top up for the new one, I think it would be ok since you'll be getting a lens that's sharper and faster than your old one. With regards to the sharpness, once you stop down to 2.8 and beyond, it's pretty good already. And even wide open, any slight softness is gone once you resize + sharpen for web/print.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
Sharizard posted:If that's the case, do you think that this lens is a good upgrade or replacement for the old Oly 17/2.8? I believe the FL-36R and 50R will work in it as well. Off to find out  E: It does!  Have a lovely cell phone picture of an OM-D with body cap lens, FL-50R and Flyers gnome!
DJExile fucked around with this message at 05:15 on Feb 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2013 05:07
|
|
|
A question for the x100 owners. I found one on CL for $500 with goodies like lens hood and extra battery whatever but the ad says it was put on a wet counter, absorbed moisture and now the back screen has a dark part and the down button is mostly unresponsive on the scroll wheel. Owner says it works fine and continued shooting with it after this. Is it worth it? Obviously I'd play with it before I hande over the money but is it worth even going to check out? How much damage would it have done to it for the screen to have ended up like that? It seems a little weird but I mean x100 for $500 piqued my interest for sure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 06:50
|
|
|
district 12 posted:A question for the x100 owners. I found one on CL for $500 with goodies like lens hood and extra battery whatever but the ad says it was put on a wet counter, absorbed moisture and now the back screen has a dark part and the down button is mostly unresponsive on the scroll wheel. Owner says it works fine and continued shooting with it after this. Is it worth it? Obviously I'd play with it before I hande over the money but is it worth even going to check out? How much damage would it have done to it for the screen to have ended up like that? It seems a little weird but I mean x100 for $500 piqued my interest for sure. That really doesn't sound like a great deal at all, it looks like the going rate for a used X100 is around $700 on eBay, a little less on this forum's BST. I'd just be worried about the reliability of the camera long term.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 07:05
|
|
|
district 12 posted:A question for the x100 owners. I found one on CL for $500 with goodies like lens hood and extra battery whatever but the ad says it was put on a wet counter, absorbed moisture and now the back screen has a dark part and the down button is mostly unresponsive on the scroll wheel. Owner says it works fine and continued shooting with it after this. Is it worth it? Obviously I'd play with it before I hande over the money but is it worth even going to check out? How much damage would it have done to it for the screen to have ended up like that? It seems a little weird but I mean x100 for $500 piqued my interest for sure. If you area willing to wait then you can get your X100 for that amount since prices will inevitably drop. I think I got my hood for 12 bucks and the battery was under ten so don't let that play into your purchase. Water damage is no joke and I would not gently caress with that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 08:36
|
|
|
district 12 posted:A question for the x100 owners. I found one on CL for $500 with goodies like lens hood and extra battery whatever but the ad says it was put on a wet counter, absorbed moisture and now the back screen has a dark part and the down button is mostly unresponsive on the scroll wheel. Owner says it works fine and continued shooting with it after this. Is it worth it? Obviously I'd play with it before I hande over the money but is it worth even going to check out? How much damage would it have done to it for the screen to have ended up like that? It seems a little weird but I mean x100 for $500 piqued my interest for sure. If it was like half that you could tape over the back screen and pretend you were shooting film but realistically the X100 has a mess of menus and no "Q" button so it would probably drive you slowly insane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 11:04
|
|
|
Thanks everyone! I figured as much, just wasn't sure how bad it might be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 14:48
|
|
|
Not only is it not worth it, but Fuji isn't a repair-friendly company. If you send it to them, you will pay, and it won't be cheap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
I just scored a brand new Olympus EPL-1 for a cool $100. I wanted a newer model but I couldn't beat the price.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2013 08:56
|
|
|
Of course the moment I get the moneys for a NEX 5N the local supply immediately dries up. No contract from any Craigslist sellers, nobody has them in a body-only for less than like 450. C3 is an option but I don't really like its ergonomics, from a visual standpoint -- I haven't actually held one yet. I don't really want to compromise over the 5N so I guess I'll just hold out for now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2013 15:36
|
|
|
Are you in the US?ease posted:I know it might be a little bit much, but Amazon has had a consistent supply of used 5n bodies on it's warehouse deals site. They go from 350-375ish.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
Canada, unfortunately. Looks like the price of 5N bodies kind of went up lately. Or maybe it was never as low as I thought it was, but just blown out of proportion by a few craigslist sellers. I'd still rather deal locally, but I'll adjust my expectations and check out online, thanks
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2013 15:49
|
|
|
This may be an extremely stupid question, but here we go. I mostly take photos of wildlife or stuff at the zoo, nature, etc... I have an epm-1, which works pretty well. However, I started looking at getting the 100-300 mm lens, but it sells for like 500 bucks. It seems like I can get one of these puppies http://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-FinePix-SL1000-Digital-Camera/dp/B00ATM1MVU and have a beter zoom for an even cheaper price. I guess I just don't understand.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
TLG James posted:This may be an extremely stupid question, but here we go. You have more zoom that way, but its paired with a smaller sensor and probably doesn't have the same image quality as a mft zoom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 02:09
|
|
|
The SL1000 has a 1/2.3" sensor which is the same as most other compact FinePix point & shoots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 05:27
|
|
|
rexelation posted:The SL1000 has a 1/2.3" sensor which is the same as most other compact FinePix point & shoots. Right, but it's smaller than the sensor in a MFT camera like the epm-1.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 05:42
|
|
|
Yeah exactly, I was just supporting your previous post and pointing out that those super-zoom "bridge" cameras' image quality are the same as regular compact point & shoots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
So Nikon is taking on the X100s with this? http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/4/4065720/nikon-coolpix-a-announcement-price-release-date I like 28mm for street shooting but I think it's probably a bit wide for a fixed lens camera. Not really a fan of the retracting lens on an $1100 camera either, it just makes this look more like an RX100 than an RX1.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 06:23
|
|
|
Same price as an x100, but no optical viewfinder, and a slightly less versatile focal length? No thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 06:51
|
|
|
Costello Jello posted:Same price as an x100, but no optical viewfinder, and a slightly less versatile focal length? No thanks. Also f/2.8 vs. f/2 on the Fuji.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 08:15
|
|
|
I like the large sensor, and the focal length isn't bad. The finger grip is a nice touch, aesthetics be damned. Still though, $1100 seems high. $800, maybe?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 08:27
|
|
|
Costello Jello posted:Same price as an x100, but no optical viewfinder, and a slightly less versatile focal length? No thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 09:13
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:On the other hand, if they bring across tech from the 1 series, it should beat the x100's weak areas of autofocus and general speed/responsiveness. It seems disingenuous to compare it to an X100 instead of an X100S. Bob Socko posted:I like the large sensor, and the focal length isn't bad. The finger grip is a nice touch, aesthetics be damned. Still though, $1100 seems high. $800, maybe? $1100 does seem high but $450 for the optional viewfinder is loving outrageous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 10:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:30 |
|
|
quote:accessories such as a $449.96 optical viewfinder Right, bound to be a big seller I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 10:23
|
|