|
Should a saved for an om-d.
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
I wish they'd use the RX100's menu system on the NEX bodies, which feels a lot like the menus on Sony's early DSLRs - simple and to the point. Call it Pro Mode or something, bury its activation a few menus deep so the point and shoot user won't accidentally switch over to it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Should a saved for an om-d. I actually prefer the size/weight of the NEX though 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 17:09
|
|
|
Set your custom buttons to minimize menu use - I only have to go in for formatting a card or setting a different peaking level. Pretty much everything needed during normal use can go on a custom button.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I actually prefer the size/weight of the NEX though 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
whatever7 posted: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. Well, if you want a digital rangefinder, you don't exactly have a lot of choices. It's not like they're selling a blinged out SLR for double the price.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
genki posted:Aren't you just saying that because you can't get an OM-D? No 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 20:10
|
|
|
whatever7 posted: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. Honestly, the D800 has shown the inverse of your argument to be true. Just look for comparisons with Zeiss ZF primes vs N series primes shot on the D800/E body. Those examples clearly show that the sensor demands the best optics available. Leica's strength has always been in their glass. Just think of the insane IQ you would get out of combining a D800/E with something like a Noctilux or 50/1.4 ASPH. Leica getting less and less competitive has more to do with their traditionally lovely IP partners. Sony would have been a much better fit than Panasonic, but Zeiss was there first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
I think I've figured out that I like using a 35mm-equivalent focal length of a 35mm lens. The problem is that the 24/1.8 Zeiss lens for my NEX-5 is both expensive and rather large. You can't pocket it as easily in a jacket as the Sigma 30/2.8 let alone the the 16mm pancake. While there is the 20/2.8 pancake, I think that could be a little too wide for me. While I love my NEX-5, I'm not really sure if I want to continue investing in E-mount and A-mount lenses and stepping up to a NEX-6 or NEX-7m. Overall, the only things I really like about the system is the fast autofocus using the LA-EA2 adapter and focus peaking. Otherwise, I'm looking at the OM-D and the X-Pro 1. The former for its larger native lens selection and the latter for the hybrid viewfinder. Both have (or will have in the X-Pro's case) a 35mm-equivalent of a 35mm lens that are reasonably small. Of course, this isn't something I plan on doing until farther into the future since I need to find work first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2013 21:22
|
|
|
lostleaf posted: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. Realistically, I think the only feature of the OMD I wish the PM2 supported is the five-way IBIS. That's not worth twice the price, to me. I went with M43 over NEX because of lens selection. In all honesty I shoot with 50mm equivalent 90% of the time so lens selection maybe isn't that much of an issue for me, but I am lusting over the Oly 75 and the upcoming Pana 42 1.2 …
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
edit: Nevermind, there's a dedicated strap and accessory thread.
some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Baron Dirigible posted:I have the E-PM2 and if it has focus peaking, it must be very well hidden (or maybe I don't have the latest firmware?). I'm happy with mine, the main criticism I've seen levelled at the camera is the lack of manual controls but that doesn't bother me so much - partly because I shoot mostly in aperture priority anyway and the thumbwheel can be configured to control aperture, and partly because this is my first "proper" camera so I don't know what I'm missing. http://www.mu-43.com/f92/focus-peaking-olympus-om-d-e-m5-35442/ No idea if it works. Would be great if you can report back to on how useful it is. Anyone can recommend a good and cheap wide angle equivalent prime for the m43 system?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
lostleaf posted:Anyone can recommend a good and cheap wide angle equivalent prime for the m43 system? If you want crazy cheap, there's the 15mm f/8 body cap lens for $45. The Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 is well-reviewed for about $320 NIB, as is Oly's 17mm f/2.8 for $300 NIB.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 04:06
|
|
|
The 30mm NX f/2 is nice. It was on sale for a ridiculous $150 once. Although it's not the smallest pancake lens around and the NX mount base sticks out a decent amount, it's still pocketable. Is it physically possible to design a pancake lens with IS? There doesn't seem to be much talk here about the lack of compact lenses NEX/NX with IS, which seems to be a major shortfall of both systems. Except NEX has that 16-50mm on the NEX-6 ... is it even sold separately or just packaged with the NEX-6? How much would it cost separately?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
lostleaf posted:http://www.mu-43.com/f92/focus-peaking-olympus-om-d-e-m5-35442/ I just did this, and it works fairly well. The biggest issue is that the frame rate on the screen drops, so it's pretty choppy. Not sure it's any faster than mapping the fn1 key to magnify assist though, but doesn't seem much worse. eXXon posted:The 30mm NX f/2 is nice. It was on sale for a ridiculous $150 once. Although it's not the smallest pancake lens around and the NX mount base sticks out a decent amount, it's still pocketable. My 50 dollar 15mm pancake and my L39 mount voigtlander 15mm have IS. IBIS But seriously the 15mm body cap is a really handy lens to have around.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 04:40
|
|
|
krooj posted:Honestly, the D800 has shown the inverse of your argument to be true. Just look for comparisons with Zeiss ZF primes vs N series primes shot on the D800/E body. Those examples clearly show that the sensor demands the best optics available. Leica's strength has always been in their glass. Just think of the insane IQ you would get out of combining a D800/E with something like a Noctilux or 50/1.4 ASPH. Leica getting less and less competitive has more to do with their traditionally lovely IP partners. Sony would have been a much better fit than Panasonic, but Zeiss was there first. It was not Panasonic's fault, Leica sourced the CCD sensor from whats formerly Kodak. Although Pansonic has been putting out very meh stuff in the last two years. Zeiss is getting very ambitious btw, 3 mirrorless lens plan for both NEX and Fuji. In other words, Zeiss has its own lens AF solution. I just spent today blacking out every bit of chrome part on my nex3 with vinyl tapes and nail tapes. Also painted the bundled flash black. gently caress mickey mouse industry design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 05:42
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Zeiss is getting very ambitious btw, 3 mirrorless lens plan for both NEX and Fuji. In other words, Zeiss has its own lens AF solution. I don't think Zeiss ever had a problem with AF- it's more that they refuse to attempt to reverse engineer Canon/Nikon AF (possibly putting out a subpar product). Sony and Fuji are much more open to Zeiss as they really want those magic lenses to entice people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Should a saved for an om-d. Actually going to sell mine. It's been a year now and while I can't really think of anything negative to say about it (the IQ is great, the lenses are great, the features are great) it just has not clicked for me. Put some 8-10k images through it and it still doesn't feel "right". Not sure what to try next, I do like the idea of a compact rig... but yet I find myself bringing the 5D2 along whenever I go anywhere. I did really like the X100 I had briefly (before it succumbed to sticky aperture blade syndrome and I returned it) so could perhaps consider an X100s. Maybe I just don't like EVFs. Clayton Bigsby fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
In the final stages of a spirited internal debate over a used X100 versus a new X100S as a future purchase. Anyone in a similar situation close to a conclusion?
Piquai Souban fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
SKULE123 posted:In the final stages of a spirited internal debate over a used X100 versus a new X100S as a future purchase. Anyone in a similar situation close to a conclusion? What are you other camera gears and can you live with slow photography style? What's your overall budget in the next 2 years including the X100/s?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Pretty set on the SLR front for lights and lenses, maybe even looking to sell off a couple of the lesser used items. Might upgrade the 7D inside of 2 years but nothing else. The SLR will always be needed - mostly for moonlight studio gigs and adoptions photos for the local animal shelter and fun experiments. But my volume of shooting dropped a lot in the last 2 years - I became a little wary of hauling my kit bag to parties and minor trips. I shoot a lot for fun travel, which will soon wind down for babby (AF point for the X100s). Picked up an RX-100 for the photo civilian wife to use (first camera purchase in a year and a half), but got a crush on the X100 show rooming. I figure I can flip a used X100 for a minor loss if it disappoints on the AF front, and the X100S is about twice the cost of a used X100 locally. But the AF is a concern, and I can burn off a reasonable stack of gift cards to reduce the sting. Still leaning used X100. Piquai Souban fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Mar 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2013 22:25
|
|
|
I hate to poo poo up this thread since it seems to be a pretty detailed discussion among some well-informed people, but I'm going to do it anyway. I don't own any camera (at all) and have a trip to Disney World coming up next month. Even though I don't have a camera, I find that our trips to WDW spark a love of taking photos in me, even if it's just temporary. I had a Sanyo Xacti a few trips ago and I hated it. I have been looking into my iPhone 5 as a possible camera, but I hate the lack of control it affords. I know there are lots of apps that improve this, but it's really leaving a lot to be desired. I was thinking about a DSLR but I hate to buy something like that and have it collect dust. These NEX cameras really speak to me because they're simple but also versatile. I know there's a lot of love in the thread for the NEX-5R, but what about the NEX-C3? Is there any reason to get (or not get) that one? I plan to take photos of scenery and architecture, but I might try to snap a few of the fireworks and things. The reason I'm looking at these mirrorless cameras versus a nicer point-and-shoot is the versatility. I like that I can try more lenses and learn photography in case I enjoy it. Cost is minimal, as there are a lot of inexpensive NEX-C3's on eBay and I can add the squaretrade warranty with those purchases.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 07:05
|
|
|
The 5R has better AF (phase detection, more AF points), supposedly better colour depth, goes to a higher ISO limit, and a better movie mode. The C3 is smaller and more compact, but from all accounts the sensor is still amazing and will absolutely do everything you want. If you don't care about being limited to 720p movies and having SLIGHTLY worse autofocus then I say if the C3 fits in your hand better you should do it. If you use the kit lens at its widest (f/3.5) and crank the ISO to like 3200 or maybe even 6400 in an emergency I think the C3 will probably do absolutely everything you ask it to. I would go check out the 5R and C3 in a store and see which one fits your hand better. If you end up liking the 5R consider maybe getting a NEX 5N since it's pretty much the same thing minus the control dial and can be found for not too much money. some kinda jackal fucked around with this message at 08:34 on Mar 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 08:31
|
|
|
I do all my digital shooting with a C3 nowadays and it's really nice being so small yet having such a great IQ, typical of much bigger DSLRs. It's also good to know you haven't invested a small fortune on it, it's really a camera "for the rest of us" once you have assigned functions to the custom buttons. The menu is hideous (but I think this is common with all NEXes).
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
maxmars posted:I do all my digital shooting with a C3 nowadays and it's really nice being so small yet having such a great IQ, typical of much bigger DSLRs. It's also good to know you haven't invested a small fortune on it, it's really a camera "for the rest of us" once you have assigned functions to the custom buttons. The menu is hideous (but I think this is common with all NEXes). LOL, I was just about to page you to this thread, since you're the resident C3 owner. apparently also the resident MINDREADER 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 13:54
|
|
|
krackmonkey posted:LOL, I was just about to page you to this thread, since you're the resident C3 owner. apparently also the resident MINDREADER I saw the bat signal :P You know this is the one and only Sony camera I own, but I really love it. It's strange. I don't even have a single Sony lens for it, I just use manual lenses from other systems I have. It's a great pocketable aps-c sensor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
I've borrowed a c3 as well, and it's real nice apart from the menu system. The only thing that turned me off of it really was the lack of a grip, but I have a bad habit of bolting 3 pounds of poo poo to the front of my cameras and it starts to be unbalanced pretty quick. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
Even though I'm fairly certain it's a terrible idea, I'm going to buy the nx300 this or next weekend at b&h. Being that I will be new to using anything greater than a point and shoot, I'm going to either need a lot of guidance or just be willing to part with 700 bucks. At least I won't know how bad it is for a while until I learn more about cameras.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 17:19
|
|
|
Thanks for the replies, everyone. Video isn't really a concern of mine, so the 720p video will be more than enough. I'm still weighing on whether a DSLR would be a better investment, but it's nice to know that the NEX-C3 is not a universal "don't buy" and that I may be able to say some money by going with that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
Smuckles posted:Thanks for the replies, everyone. Video isn't really a concern of mine, so the 720p video will be more than enough. I'm still weighing on whether a DSLR would be a better investment, but it's nice to know that the NEX-C3 is not a universal "don't buy" and that I may be able to say some money by going with that. I bought a C3 as my first "nice" camera and don't regret it at all. It takes great pictures and is pretty compact with the right lenses. It's definitely a good starter camera.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Anyone have a VF-2 or VF-3 they don't use anymore? I think a viewfinder on my Olympus E-PL1 would be neat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
fknlo posted:I bought a C3 as my first "nice" camera and don't regret it at all. It takes great pictures and is pretty compact with the right lenses. It's definitely a good starter camera. Thank you! I saw a lot of love for the NEX-5R/N here and a ton of example photos from the NEX-7 on Flickr. It's nice to know that the NEX-3's aren't bad purchases. QPZIL posted:Anyone have a VF-2 or VF-3 they don't use anymore? I think a viewfinder on my Olympus E-PL1 would be neat. Not to deter from your original question, but I'm also looking into an E-PL1 as my "budget" option, compared to the NEX-C3. I know it's a bit older and Olympus has some upgraded models, but how do you like yours? Does it make sense for me to invest in the E-PL1 considering its age? I am a complete novice and my camera for my Disney World trip will be an iPhone 5 if I don't buy something else. I don't want cost to weigh heavily into this purchase, but I would be lying if I said that it wasn't a concern. The E-PL1's price makes it very attractive and it has recently been added to the group of cameras I need to research. I worry that I'm going to shoot during my trip and then not look at the camera until another similar trip. I was getting excited about the PL-1's features while watching and reading reviews only to discover that I was actually looking at reviews of the E-PL5. Specifically, there's a "bulb mode" I believe it's called, where the screen will show you what the photo will appear given the current ISO/f-stop and you can release the shutter button when you're happy with the preview. Does the PL-1 have that, too? I've been trying to find this but I can't remember what the feature is called.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
As someone who just ditched his DSLR in favour of a mirrorless camera, I am a big believer in the bulk of a body being a big factor in how much you end up shooting it. Now I'm not saying that you couldn't have a good time dragging a DSLR everywhere. Millions of people do without a second thought. For me though, the weight and size of a DSLR really started to cramp my style once I realized I could have the same performance in a compact body that wouldn't attract a lot of attention or weigh like a brick around my neck. About the only reason I would get a DSLR these days is if I wanted a full frame camera for a reasonable price, or I needed something with classic DSLR controls. Like for studio shooting I still think a DSLR might be a good buy, or for paid work. They can also be rugged and weatherproof, so they definitely have their place. You also can't really argue with the Canon and Nikon lens lineups. They're basically second to none. I don't really know where I'm going with this, and arguably I'm biased since I just switched to mirrorless, but I guess from all my experiences as a guy who basically lived at Disney World for two or three years, nearly every weekend, a few years ago I can't imagine walking around that park with a DSLR anymore. Size is key, especially with crowds being what they can be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:About the only reason I would get a DSLR these days is if I wanted a full frame camera for a reasonable price, or I needed something with classic DSLR controls. Like for studio shooting I still think a DSLR might be a good buy, or for paid work. They can also be rugged and weatherproof, so they definitely have their place. You also can't really argue with the Canon and Nikon lens lineups. They're basically second to none. SLRs can standby for hours without draining their batteries and still be ready to shoot at any second. Mirrorless cameras still haven't fully solved the time-to-first-shot problem, SLRs are still faster. The NEX series has made some good progress with first-party lenses but third-party lenses still take a second or two to boot up. There's also the matter of optical focusing aids, which only work with a physical viewfinder. Contrast peaking is a poor substitute and contrast detection is just overall inferior to phase-detect autofocus. Of course Fuji has supposedly solved this with phase-detect autofocus in their new X100S.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:As someone who just ditched his DSLR in favour of a mirrorless camera, I am a big believer in the bulk of a body being a big factor in how much you end up shooting it. I tend to agree. While I like the DSLR route for the possibility of future growth, it would be silly of me to say that the size of the crowds at WDW and the size of a camera won't directly intersect at some point for me. That point of intersection will decide, ultimately, how many photos I'll take with whatever camera. The worst thing would be to invest in a DSLR, gambling with whether it will turn into a long-term hobby, and then just shoot photos with my iPhone because it's easier. We're talking about huge crowds and heat that isn't part of my day-to-day. That takes its toll. While mine is an uneducated and inexperienced opinion, if I were to search my heart I'd probably say that the DSLR stuff is going to go away for generally everyone who would normally carry one. For studio shooting and stuff like that, sure. I doubt that these mirrorless options will be hurting that segment much. But it's starting to seem that these mirrorless cameras have at least caught up to the entry level DSLRS, at least according to what I've seen on Snapsort. I realize that is a controversial opinion (especially from someone who doesn't currently even own a camera), but that's just from the online data available to me. Since if I was going to buy a DSLR it would only be an entry level model, it's smart for me to compare the mirrorless cameras to the entry DSLRs. I am completely sure that the highend DSLRs are in a class by themselves, but they aren't part of my decision-making process. I know you like your NEX, but I've also been looking at the Olympus E-PL1 as a budget option. My only worry with that camera is it's older and there seem to be higher quality mirrorless cameras available now. I'd be lying if I said that cost isn't a heavy factor for this. I really enjoy HDR photos, but in-camera HDR modes are not that important to me. I expect accomplishing HDR in post-production. I'd like to shoot in RAW. I have Aperture but I don't know how to use it and wish to learn. (I didn't buy this. I get free copies of Apple software due to my job) I'd like total DSLR-levels of control while shooting. I want to learn the basics of digital photography and don't want to be limited to auto or poorly-implemented manual. I don't care about a viewfinder. I'm a novice and have no place in the viewfinder-vs-display argument. I'd like to change lenses later. Even if I never bother, I'd like the option. I'm not likely going to be doing a lot of night shots. If I do, they'll be lit up and the primary subject will likely be the source of the light (buildings and such) I don't expect to shoot a lot of motion. Budget-wise, this is a big concern of mine. I have a tendency for follies, so I worry about overspending. I will completely admit that there is a decent possibility that I'll bring this on vacation and never use it again. I have been interested in photography for a while (and even took a 35mm class in college for no reason) and have always wanted a push in that direction. However, money spent could possibly be money wasted, so the budget cameras are desirable. I do, however, see a value in spending a little bit more when appropriate. All-in-all, I'd like to spend the least money possible while not screwing myself for any future growth. EDIT: And just to clarify (especially about my "I don't care about viewfinders" comment). I believe we're at a crossroads right now, similar to the one likely felt by film photographers who disliked the way digital became less artistic and more scientific. That was an easy opinion to have initially, but then people embraced how digital could be artistic and it exploded from there. The "iPhoneography" workflow that almost requires filters and post-production is an entirely new thing that shouldn't be compared with "regular" digital photography. I realize that something like a true viewfinder is absolutely huge for many people, but it isn't for me. Not having a viewfinder, I think, is just part of digital photography moving forward and I haven't been spoiled by having one. Macintosh HD fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Mar 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
Smuckles posted:Not to deter from your original question, but I'm also looking into an E-PL1 as my "budget" option, compared to the NEX-C3. I know it's a bit older and Olympus has some upgraded models, but how do you like yours? Does it make sense for me to invest in the E-PL1 considering its age? I am a complete novice and my camera for my Disney World trip will be an iPhone 5 if I don't buy something else. I don't know what that feature is, so I don't think the E-PL1 has it, but... I do love my E-PL1. I had an E-P1, but traded it for the E-PL1 because I wanted to eventually get a viewfinder. So far I've had no issues with it, and it's very simple to use and I've been happy with the output.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
"I'm happy with the output" is basically the perfect type of review for me. While that bulb shooting feature I saw on the PL5 is nice, I haven't been spoiled by it and won't know the difference. Thanks. The PL1 is attractive to me because, even though it's old, it was well-received and it's not too expensive. Even new with a kit lens, it's around $300. That's a comfortable amount of money and I wouldn't be too mad at myself if this turned out to be a folly of mine. EDIT: As it turns out, the newer E-PM1 is also available new for $300ish. I'm beginning to think these companies purposely refresh and name them to create a confusion among novices. Macintosh HD fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Mar 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:30
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:SLRs can standby for hours without draining their batteries and still be ready to shoot at any second. Mirrorless cameras still haven't fully solved the time-to-first-shot problem, SLRs are still faster. The NEX series has made some good progress with first-party lenses but third-party lenses still take a second or two to boot up. Yeah don't get me wrong, I mean I definitely didn't want to sell DSLRs short, there are still advantages to owning one. I didn't mean for this to be a comprehensive list of why mirrorless is superior or anything DSLRs will probably always have the advantage of longer battery life by sheer virtue of size -- you can pack more battery in there. My NEX battery is loving tiny. I'm surprised it holds as long a charge as it does  Though it's worth pointing out that the newer mirrorless bodies probably do phase detection as well. I know the 5R does.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
Nex 6 has 99 point phase detection. The caveat is it only works with certain lenses, and I'm almost certain they are all Sony.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 20:12
|
|
