|
SKULE123 posted:I see Nikon is putting out an X100 competitor and I thought I saw a CanonRumor that they were doing the same (maybe I misunderstood) - is there a lot of companies looking at that product space/category? When do they hit the market? Someone Photoshopped an X-100 into a Nikon product and that made the rounds as an actual prototype. I think CaNikon would see an X100 competitor more as a "our profitable DSLR" competitor, which it absolutely is.
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:47 |
|
|
I just pocketed my om-d with a 200mm k mount lens attached. I think my jacket has pockets that are almost too big 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 15:58
|
|
|
Kalix posted:I've been thinking about getting my feet into photography for a while -- I am in Pegnose Pete's situation. I suggest you figure out if the 35mm focal length is enough for you. You could take a look in Lightroom and see the % of used focal lengths. The x100 is an amazing (second) camera. As a primary it could be enough too. However, if you're doubting, then you may find you'd want an extra camera with interchangeable lenses. Still, the limitation of only having 35mm is very liberating. You'll stop worrying about which lenses to pack and just be busy with composition and shooting the things you love.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 16:09
|
|
|
ChirreD posted:Still, the limitation of only having 35mm is very liberating. You'll stop worrying about which lenses to pack and just be busy with composition and shooting the things you love. Like standing in a frigid Lake Michigan trying to a good harvest moon shot, or chasing after antelope in the Badlands in tick-infested grass. That being said I miss mine terribly. I do think it's the perfect second camera, and as a primary camera you really learn how to compose shots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 16:55
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Gotta second the "shoot what you enjoy holding" thing. Personally I would opt for the Fuji because it looks hella beautiful and fit like a glove last time I held one, but if you like holding the OM-D more then I'd give that a serious second look. Good to know. I wouldn't say I like the feel of the OMD better than the Fuji, I think they both feel really nice. Edit: alkanphel posted:The OMD also has the excellent 25/1.4 lens which gives you the 50mm equiv FOV that you like. I'm more seriously considering the OMD now, it's a great looking camera. None of the shops in my area will pair it with the Panny Leica 25mm f/1.4 lens. I'm assuming that's the one you meant? I'm not too familiar with this system. Will just about any M43 lens work on the OMD? Pegnose Pete fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Mar 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 17:23
|
|
|
Pegnose Pete posted:I'm not too familiar with this system. Will just about any M43 lens work on the OMD? Yes. Olympus and Panasonic make most of them, but there are 3rd party manufacturers, including the inexpensive but still good Sigmas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
Thanks everyone for the advice. I think I might opt for the Xe1 (eventually). I'm going to go test things out before I make the jump though. The amazon deal on the xe1 with the 18mm-55mm lens seems like a good bet. I assume this lens would allow me to get a wide variety of shots and is a reasonable starter lens? I do like the idea of being able to avoid a prime lens for now, so I can learn and explore my tastes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
I thought the XE1 was way pricier than it is, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Kalix posted:The amazon deal on the xe1 with the 18mm-55mm lens seems like a good bet. It's unfortunate that it's termed a 'kit' lens, because it is a really nice lens. It's f2.8 at 18mm, has IS, is built well, and is very quiet. While the uncorrected barrel distortion and vignetting aren't amazing, these are mostly negated by either in-camera or raw processing. I still prefer a Tamron 17-50 for this zoom range (on my old Canon DSLR), but this isn't a bad second place considering price/size.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Speaking of kit lenses, I was kind of surprised to see the NEX 16-50 3.5-5.6 going for like $350. Is it some kind of superb kit lens or what?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 20:56
|
|
|
Kalix posted:Thanks everyone for the advice. One big difference you have to keep in mind, is that the X100 is more pocketable... until the pancake lens comes out. For me it's the difference between having a good camera or having a camera that's always with me. The 18-55 is an excellent starter range. Helicity posted:Like standing in a frigid Lake Michigan trying to a good harvest moon shot, or chasing after antelope in the Badlands in tick-infested grass. That being said I miss mine terribly. I do think it's the perfect second camera, and as a primary camera you really learn how to compose shots. Yep, there is not 1 camera that's great for all... the X100 is a "good for 80% of the shots" camera. For me at least
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Speaking of kit lenses, I was kind of surprised to see the NEX 16-50 3.5-5.6 going for like $350. Is it some kind of superb kit lens or what? Eh, It's been shown to have the same quality as the normal kit lens I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Solo Bentley posted:You're in Toronto? If you want a free Nikon F adapter for your Nex send me a PM. Hey, many thanks again! I didn't end up stopping at Henry's, so that's something I'll have to fix this weekend, but I was glad to meet you 
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
Kalix posted:Thanks everyone for the advice. As a XE1 owner, just to remind you that you are paying $400-500 premium over a Canon/Nikon DSLR+18-55/2.8-4 lens for 1) smaller package 2) Fuji color 3) being able to use tons of old lens from tons of different mounts. 4) being able to use the 3 XF prime lenses. If you don't plan to get the Fuji primes eventually, or understand why people pay extra for Fuji color, or plan to get into MF lenses, I think there are better options. Just want to let you know what you are getting into. If you are my friend I would strongly recommend a X10/X20/RX100 first before getting a "system".
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
Can you expand on Fuji colour? I'm not really familiar with the ins and outs of how Fuji cameras process shots.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 02:58
|
|
|
Pegnose Pete posted:I'm more seriously considering the OMD now, it's a great looking camera. None of the shops in my area will pair it with the Panny Leica 25mm f/1.4 lens. I'm assuming that's the one you meant? Yeah that's pretty much the lens I use on my OMD for 90% of the shots. Most shops probably won't pair it with the OMD unless you're good friends with the owner because then they'd have to find some way to sell the kit zoom by itself. B&H does seem to sell the body only though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Yeah that's pretty much the lens I use on my OMD for 90% of the shots. Most shops probably won't pair it with the OMD unless you're good friends with the owner because then they'd have to find some way to sell the kit zoom by itself. B&H does seem to sell the body only though. I'm in Canada so I think B&H is out, but the stores here sell the body only for the same price 949.99 CAD. The lens I might be able to get used for 3 or 4 hundred. I've gotten excited about this one now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
To be fair the 12-50 lens that they package the om-d with is really quite nice, I'd use it way more if it wasn't so long compared to my 15mm's.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:To be fair the 12-50 lens that they package the om-d with is really quite nice, I'd use it way more if it wasn't so long compared to my 15mm's. That's good to know because the kit includes that lens for only about 200$ more and would be a good place for me to start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
Pegnose Pete posted:That's good to know because the kit includes that lens for only about 200$ more and would be a good place for me to start. Yeah Mr. Despair is quite right, the 12-50 is actually a pretty decent all-rounder lens and it's weatherproof as well. Has a macro capability too so you could use it for close-ups.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 03:48
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Can you expand on Fuji colour? I'm not really familiar with the ins and outs of how Fuji cameras process shots. What I like about the "Fuji color" is that, to put it in my terms: * Incredible accurate white balance during difficult situation (for example multiple light sources coming to yellow and white lights plus warm sun lights but being able to retain the scenes very close to what your see with your human eyes) * Very good dynamic range, very accurate and lively colors in low light, high ISO situation. Modern sensor generally sacrifice a bit of dynamic range during burte force noise reduction. Fuji is able to do something very clever with the X sensor. This is a special characteristic of the X sensor. I have long been a fan of Fuji color due to my preference of their Superior Film colors and SuperCCD color but I loved them for different reasons. X100 actually doesn't have the X sensor IIRC. * General preference of Fuji style of color. I can't explain this one. Somebody love Zeiss color, I can tell Zeiss color and appreciate it but I like "Fuji color" more. Fuji film traditionally has less "realistic" color than Kodak. However whenever I browse through my flickr stream I can almost always recognize the photos I took with film which look so much better in small size. I have been using Photoshop to "mod" photos for 10 plus years now I haven't been able to come up with better language to describe why I prefer certain style of color palettes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 04:15
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Hey, many thanks again! I didn't end up stopping at Henry's, so that's something I'll have to fix this weekend, but I was glad to meet you No problem! Beats selling it on craigslist any day! Hope you get some lenses for it soon. Is anyone familiar with the screen on the Olympus Epl-3? Mine is rapidly getting scratched to poo poo. I thought it would be like the Nex cameras, where I can just rip off the coating and slap a glass protector on, but it does not seem removable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:As a XE1 owner, just to remind you that you are paying $400-500 premium over a Canon/Nikon DSLR+18-55/2.8-4 lens for I definitely am interested in a smaller size camera..partly why I was looking at the X100 initially and avoiding dSLRS. I know I wouldn't take a dSLR as much. I'm starting to realize I'd need a bag for the Xe1 as well - not that compact without the prime lenses. And like you pointed out, huge upfront investment. I'll look into the three cameras you've suggested. I've heard great things about the Rx100, though it has a much smaller sensor (and lower pricetag) compared to an X100. Probably also less niche though. But perhaps I just need to play around with a bunch of different styles and see what is realistic for me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 04:28
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:Someone Photoshopped an X-100 into a Nikon product and that made the rounds as an actual prototype. I think CaNikon would see an X100 competitor more as a "our profitable DSLR" competitor, which it absolutely is. That was the rumour but a real one has been announced. It's the Nikon Coolpix A, with an MSRP of $1,099, 16MP, and a fixed 28mm equivalent f2.8 lens. If it's got the usual 16mp sensor that Nikon has been using in the D7000, or a tweaked version, it should have excellent low noise high ISO. It'll be interesting to see if it can perform better than the X100's X-trans sensor. fake edit: http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Compact-Digital-Cameras/26423/COOLPIX-A.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 05:14
|
|
|
Kalix posted:I definitely am interested in a smaller size camera..partly why I was looking at the X100 initially and avoiding dSLRS. I know I wouldn't take a dSLR as much. The dividing line is between RX100 and Nikon 1. Both have same sized sensor but one is pocketable one is not. If you are going to make a interchangeable lens system its going to need a bag of some kind to carry it. I start carrying my cameras in side bags gun hostler style because I want to dual wield. It's actually very comfortable to carry for a whole day. The key is let both your belt and your shoulder to carry the weight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
Fuji color is just really nice OOC JPEG processing. It's a lively, yet not overly saturated (imo), look. They've come reasonably close in mimicking the Fuji Astia, Velvia, etc. films digitally. If you take a peek in the amazing photos thread and notice the kind of muted color palette that is prevalent there - Fuji color is kind of the opposite of that. I think I remember reading that certain types of film close to Velvia were/are used for commercials, whereas they're hardly ever used for feature films for another example. I don't know if I'd recommend a Fuji as a first camera to anyone, though. There's just something about them that comes off as quirky, yet strangely rewarding. Anyone else feel that way? luchadornado fucked around with this message at 10:40 on Mar 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 10:28
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Fuji color is just really nice OOC JPEG processing. It's a lively, yet not overly saturated (imo), look. They've come reasonably close in mimicking the Fuji Astia, Velvia, etc. films digitally. If you take a peek in the amazing photos thread and notice the kind of muted color palette that is prevalent there - Fuji color is kind of the opposite of that. I think I remember reading that certain types of film close to Velvia were/are used for commercials, whereas they're hardly ever used for feature films for another example. xD cards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 11:43
|
|
|
Pegnose Pete posted:I'm more seriously considering the OMD now, it's a great looking camera. None of the shops in my area will pair it with the Panny Leica 25mm f/1.4 lens. I'm assuming that's the one you meant? How does the 25mm 1.4 compare with the 20mm 1.7? It's a fairly similar focal length, one is more compact, the other is more expensive but is the image quality similar? I have the 20mm but love my 50mm 1.4 for canon and everyone talking about the 25mm has made me wonder if it'd be worth upgrading.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 13:16
|
|
|
spog posted:xD cards. The X-Pro-1, X-E1, and X100/X100s all take SD cards.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
Polarize posted:That was the rumour but a real one has been announced. It's the Nikon Coolpix A, with an MSRP of $1,099, 16MP, and a fixed 28mm equivalent f2.8 lens. Slow 28mm lens that pops out of the body, and no viewfinder unless you pay 400 bucks for their ovf - really not anything to look forward to there and another example of a camera company being afraid to release a compact camera that might cannibalize it's DSLR sales.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
Man I went to sony store and played with the RX1 yesterday and now I want one so bad. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 02:51
|
|
|
Give in to your emotions. Join me on the RX1 side!
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:Give in to your emotions. Join me on the RX1 side! Only if The Empire will extend my credit line.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 06:34
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Man I went to sony store and played with the RX1 yesterday and now I want one so bad. I also made this mistake. Thankfully I still have a new toy to win me over with its shininess 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
anyone have any experience with the Olympus epm2? it has the same sensor as the omd but in a much smaller body and also much less expensive. I don't mind the lack of a view finder. Google says it has focus peaking just like NEX but as a secret function. I'm looking at one versus a nex 5r. it seems liie the epm2 has better lens selection as well as a slightly cheaper price. the nex can take video at 60fps as well as a tilting screen. would appreciate any input.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 07:04
|
|
|
Of you're going NEX 5 then you can probably just save some cash and go for the N rather than the R.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 07:24
|
|
|
EvilRic posted:How does the 25mm 1.4 compare with the 20mm 1.7? It's a fairly similar focal length, one is more compact, the other is more expensive but is the image quality similar? I think you should only upgrade if you think you need the narrower field of view and the faster aperture. Image quality wise I think the 25/1.4 is a bit better than the 20/1.7 but it's probably not the main reason to switch lenses. One of my friends switched because he found the AF of the 25/1.4 to be faster than the 20/1.7.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 07:58
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I also made this mistake. Gotta say, when I handled an RX1, it's build quality left me with an un-sony impression: metal and high quality. I really hope they take the key points of the RX1 and re-integrate that into a FF NEX body. I think Sony lacks the nostalgia to actually make such a jump, too. A FF NEX body with an even better EVF and a suite of Zeiss lenses would dominate the EVIL market. On another note: Leica user forums are possibly the worst photo forums on the net. Nothing but pedantic GAS threads on bodies. I've never been into the sort of thing, but I suspect that the tone of discussion would mirror that of a luxury goods forum (watches, etc) instead of a photography one, although that's not to say there aren't photographers on Leica forums. krooj fucked around with this message at 15:35 on Mar 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 15:30
|
|
|
krooj posted:Gotta say, when I handled an RX1, it's build quality left me with an un-sony impression: metal and high quality. I really hope they take the key points of the RX1 and re-integrate that into a FF NEX body. I think Sony lacks the nostalgia to actually make such a jump, too. A FF NEX body with an even better EVF and a suite of Zeiss lenses would dominate the EVIL market. quote:On another note: Leica user forums are possibly the worst photo forums on the net. Nothing but pedantic GAS threads on bodies. I've never been into the sort of thing, but I suspect that the tone of discussion would mirror that of a luxury goods forum (watches, etc) instead of a photography one, although that's not to say there aren't photographers on Leica forums. In the digital era, if you don't have top tier sensor, you can't get the highest image quality even if the lens have great resolution. I think Leica has been getting less and less competitive. Not quite Vertu bad but it could be in 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:47 |
|
|
Yeah, for all that the NEX has going for it, the industrial design is not high on that list. It's very comfortable but it's just not a looker in the same way that a Fuji X100 is, for example. The small rangefinder style body has a timeless quality to it, whereas Sony seems to be trying for the "next-gen camera" sort of style. It's not BAD per se, it's just not my cup of tea when it comes to design. Then again, it doesn't hinder my appreciation for the camera so it's not even a big deal. Honestly I plan to slap a leather case and wrist strap to that bad boy and never really think about it again because I'm too busy taking awesome photos. I suppose if anything can be said for the "next gen body" look, it'll help me blend in with the thousands of point and shoots on the street today. I'll just be the guy twisting his lens for some reason e: The NEX menu system is still a crime against humanity though. I don't think I'll ever really come around to it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 16:49
|
|