|
resident posted:I'm looking for some first DSLR purchase feedback. Spend as little as you can on the camera and as much as you can on the lenses. When it comes down to it FF doesn't mean much and is the last thing you need to worry about when building your lens collection. I've never once seen a photo and said "wow that must have been shot on a full frame camera" (but I always see the impact of the lenses). If you're interested in lighting, that's also a good place to spend your money. However, with lighting there are a lot of things you can do for cheap.
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
So I preordered a Ricoh GR sight unseen, anyone heard rumors about when they are shipping? Someone somewhere threw out week of the 13th but I haven't seen anything concrete anywhere.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 21:11
|
|
|
I have a hard time recommending anything other than FF cameras nowadays, except in certain cases, with prices the way they are. Exceptions being wanting the excellent 7d autofocus without the 5d3 budget; or wanting a "good camera" without really being interested in photography (get a 3200/5200); or wanting something really tiny (go m4/3). Also if you just plain don't have the money. Ok I guess that's a lot of reasons not to go full frame but whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 22:47
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:I have a hard time recommending anything other than FF cameras nowadays, except in certain cases, with prices the way they are. Unlike 2010 when FF vs Crop was a wide gap, today its not. The only real advantage FF has over DX/Crop is in UWA territory and even then that's not even a big deal much these days. Im championing whatever system you take with you now these days. Ive sold off a full frame system in favor of a smaller more portable compact system and have not found myself painted into a corner by lacking a FF sensor. If anything Ive upped my % of good photos because I am not breaking my back lugging 20pounds of gear around cursing its weight, thus leaving it at home to collect dust. Went from a D600 and holy trinity to a Fuji XE-1 and 18-55, 35mm 1.4 XR and a few left over nikkors (135DC, 50mmf2 and a Leitz 35mm R)and have 0 regrets. No matter which way one goes, Photobux suck the life out of your wallet.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
I'm kind of curious whether advances in production will ever make FF yields big enough to actually supplant APS-C as the typical sensor in consumer DSLRs, or whether the big three/four would maintain an artificial separation between FF and APS-C to charge a premium for the former even if the production costs became negligible. I'm just speculating, not trying to make any assumptions on when/if such a sensor yield would ever be feasible.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
The same improvements would apply to APS-C sensor production too, presumably 
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
I think the big two are already artificially segregating the market as hard as they can, e.g. with the 6D’s crappy autofocus. Sooner or later, I think one of them will move to undercut with entry‐level full‐frame and the others will be forced to follow, but it might happen later rather than sooner. evil_bunnY posted:The same improvements would apply to APS-C sensor production too, presumably Not necessarily. For example, it would hardly matter if you lost one chip per thousand or ten chip per thousand. Spread over the 999 or 990 good chips, the lost chips would only raise the price 0.1% or 1%, both of which are negligible. Full frame chips would still cost 2½ times as much because fewer of them fit on a wafer, but at least the increase v. area wouldn’t be exponential, as it is with high rates of defects
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:44
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Sooner or later, I think one of them will move to undercut with entry‐level full‐frame and the others will be forced to follow, but it might happen later rather than sooner. I wonder if they might do that by shipping sensors with known defects, and simply code the firmware to mask them? (I.e. program the firmware with the defects of the specific sensor.) Or do they perhaps even already do that?
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:50
|
|
|
I honestly thought this was already the case.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I honestly thought this was already the case. I know that some newer cameras automatically map out “hot” pixels that show up during the camera’s lifespan. I don’t know if it goes further than that, though.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
If you read up on silicon wafers, the size of the wafers has been growing, but relatively slowly. 300mm has been the standard since around 1997. Intel was making noise about switching to 450mm last year. Bigger wafers tends to mean more chips for the same amount of money, so as manufacturers migrate in that direction it could mean cheaper full frame cameras. But it'll probably mean cheaper crop sensors first.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 00:14
|
|
|
xzzy posted:If you read up on silicon wafers, the size of the wafers has been growing, but relatively slowly. 300mm has been the standard since around 1997. Intel was making noise about switching to 450mm last year. Yeah, it won't mean cheaper full frame sensors until one of the big names makes a consumer sub-$1000 FF body, as has been mentioned. I think they'll have to go in kicking and screaming to make FF the new digital norm. I'm also not saying that FF *has* to be the new norm. Nobody is really complaining about APS-C, and we're getting all sorts of awesome APS-C sensors in bodies these days. Hell, MFT has a lot of traction so it's obvious that people aren't really clamouring for bigger sensors as long as the quality of smaller sensors remains on an upward trend. We're also seeing more APS-C in mirrorless bodies than ever before so at the same time I wonder if in like five or six years FF will be the new amazing trend in mirrorless bodies. Think about how far the industry has come in the past decade, and really basically where digital photography has come since it went mainstream in the early 2000s. It's pretty amazing that we have the things we do.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
The next big breakthrough will be a Mirrorless FF sensor with Nikon J1 AF speeds (believe it or not, its fast as hell). Sony has already broke the seal and set the bar far too high price wise IMO. Such a shame, at that price you would want a phase detection system in there since you put yourself above mid-shelf DSLRs in terms of price. Then again the RX1 isnt for everyone.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Yeah, it won't mean cheaper full frame sensors until one of the big names makes a consumer sub-$1000 FF body, as has been mentioned. I think they'll have to go in kicking and screaming to make FF the new digital norm. So I'll go a little in depth on semiconductor fabrication since I actually learned about this stuff. There are two aspects to think of when manufacturing silicon, the size of the wafer and the depth. The reason why silicon has lasted as long as it has is because not only is it cheap (Its one of the most abundant naturally occurring substances on earth), but also because it has an insane tensile strength. Not only have silicon wafers been getting larger in diameter, but they have also been getting thinner. Modern day wafers get to be a couple microns thick while being about 450mm in diameter. So the issue is keeping tensile strength, while also making the wafer diameter bigger. You want to keep the thickness small to remove potential parasitic capacitances and resistances low to improve noise, but also keep the wafer from shattering. Because sensor size is purely dependent on the size of the wafer, FF will probably never fully replace APS-C. For every FF sensor, you can make 2 APS-C sensors and that means more sales. Add in potential transistor failures,even at 99% yield which is common, your still talking most likely on the order of 100's of millions of transistors which will yield lots of transistor failures. If this is on primary aspects of the device, the chip is useless and will be thrown away. It really comes down to the fact that a manufacturer will always be able to make more APS-C sensors and cheaper than their FF counterparts.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
There will always be an incentive to use smaller sensors if they can get away with it. There are inherent advantages to larger sensors, however. Cameras are rapidly becoming diffraction-limited as the receptor size is shrinking closer to the size of the Airy disk. This is most apparent in small sensors like cellphone cameras, which need really fast lenses to get decent performance. A D3200 is diffraction-limited at around f/6.3, which is not a lot tighter than a lot of cheap zoom lenses. A D800 is diffraction limited around f/8-9. After you hit that limit you can't increase resolution just by making higher megapixel counts, you need to actually increase the sensor size. I've always hoped that someday they'll come out with something that can be printed onto mylar or something like that and used to make large-format sensors. For 8x10 or ULF you wouldn't need it to be of particularly high resolution in comparison. It is really amazing how far it has come. It's gone from pros-only cost stuff to affordable crop bodies that will do really high ISO. On the high end, you have stuff like the 645D that have brought even larger sensors into the range of pros and well-heeled amateurs.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 02:10
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I think the big two are already artificially segregating the market as hard as they can, e.g. with the 6D’s crappy autofocus.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 02:43
|
|
|
I bet more people were OK with the 5D2's AF because of the relatively groundbreaking other features it came with -- that was when video was brand new, and its high ISO performance was also pretty much top-notch.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 02:53
|
|
|
Look at Canon's mirrorless. They know exactly what they are doing with the 6D to not canibalize.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 05:46
|
|
|
That sensor post was actually really neat to read, thanks 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
Musket posted:The next big breakthrough will be a Mirrorless FF sensor with Nikon J1 AF speeds (believe it or not, its fast as hell). Combat Pretzel posted:That's a complaint I don't understand. Everyone seemed relatively OK with the AF in the 5D MkII. The 6D's one is more sensible and brings two more points. I know about the D600, but the 6D is still better than the previous pro-flagship. evil_bunnY fucked around with this message at 13:01 on May 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 12:58
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:That's a complaint I don't understand. Everyone seemed relatively OK with the AF in the 5D MkII. The 6D's one is more sensible and brings two more points. I know about the D600, but the 6D is still better than the previous pro-flagship. I have a 5D2. I’m not okay with the AF. It’s not a huge problem for what I do, but it’s certainly the camera’s major flaw.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 13:16
|
|
|
Is it the lack of AF points, or the supposed inaccuracy I sometimes read about?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
It could definitely use more points. I don’t find it’s inaccurate per se, but it struggles in low light and in servo mode.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Is it the lack of AF points, or the supposed inaccuracy I sometimes read about? Idk what the big deal is about AF when you have a perfectly good manual focus ring on your lenses. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 15:09
|
|
|
I'm a noob but the center point on the 6d has worked just fine for me when combined with back button focus.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Claw Massage posted:I'm a noob but the center point on the 6d has worked just fine for me when combined with back button focus.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 15:43
|
|
|
Claw Massage posted:I'm a noob but the center point on the 6d has worked just fine for me when combined with back button focus. You also could just half-press, recompose, then shoot.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 15:55
|
|
|
Anyone have experience with the Yongnuo YN-560 II flash? I am wanting to get a flash, and really do not want to pay for the Canon. This one seems like a great alternative (fantastic reviews), full manual which I am fine with (especially for the price). So, yay or nay?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 16:29
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:Anyone have experience with the Yongnuo YN-560 II flash? I am wanting to get a flash, and really do not want to pay for the Canon. This one seems like a great alternative (fantastic reviews), full manual which I am fine with (especially for the price). I have the YN-560, not the II, and it's a great flash if you're okay with manual. Literally no complaints. I'm also selling it in the Gear Selling Thread if you want to check it out 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
I've only got the 468-II but I won't hesitate to get a 560 if/when I decide to get another. Do it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:Anyone have experience with the Yongnuo YN-560 II flash? I am wanting to get a flash, and really do not want to pay for the Canon. This one seems like a great alternative (fantastic reviews), full manual which I am fine with (especially for the price). I've got the YN-560 II as well, it's been working great for me. Getting some eneloops to power it so you aren't buying new batteries all the time has worked great for me too.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:You do realize this works well on pretty much any DSLR sold in the last 15 years? It's not exactly flexible though. Sarcasm noted. Aside from Canon purposefully putting a lower end AF system into the 6d, my point had to do specifically with how it actually performs. It works fine for amateurs (people that I believe the camera was aimed at, amateurs who want to try FF). People just want to whine about numbers and gear specs. dont hate the playa fucked around with this message at 17:14 on May 7, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
Musket posted:You also could just half-press, recompose, then shoot.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
dakana posted:I bet more people were OK with the 5D2's AF because of the relatively groundbreaking other features it came with -- that was when video was brand new, and its high ISO performance was also pretty much top-notch. I remember when the 5D2 came out, people were pretty choked about the AF system.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
QPZIL posted:I have the YN-560, not the II, and it's a great flash if you're okay with manual. Literally no complaints. Thank you for the recommendation. I actually purchased the II as I was getting a very good deal on it, I hope you are able to sell yours quickly. Thanks again to all you for the thumbs up on the purchase!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Back button is useful because you don't have to go through half press to release. Some of us use cameras that dont have buttons that think for us
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
How safe is buying a new camera off of eBay? This seller is offering a Canon 6D for about $270 less than B&H, but I'm skeptical. Is this an unreasonably low cost?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
I'm looking at getting a cheap tele lens for my D600, something to hold me over until I can splurge on something nice. Is there a clear leader between the 70-300mm lens offerings? Any reason to go with a $199 Tamron or Sigma over a $120 grey market Nikon?
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
borkencode posted:I'm looking at getting a cheap tele lens for my D600, something to hold me over until I can splurge on something nice. The biggest issue is that the 200 dollar 70-300's all are pretty lovely compared to the ~300-400 dollar Tamron 70-300 VC. e. Alternatively buy Muskets 80-200 2.8 that he's selling for about the same price, if you don't need a full 300mm of zoom.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 05:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:40 |
|
|
Instrumedley posted:How safe is buying a new camera off of eBay? This seller is offering a Canon 6D for about $270 less than B&H, but I'm skeptical. Is this an unreasonably low cost? The only thing I can outright flag that seller on is the fact that they are listing it as new which is described as never been used or open, yet the lens has been removed. That's an ebay user violation, but they did specify that the lens was removed and they don't have any negative feedback so far. Just ask a few questions if you have any skepticism, as those become important if there is a dispute when you get it in the mail if there is something wrong. It could be a "hot" item, but that suspicion didn't stop me from buying my 60D on ebay. I always ask if there are any known operational or aesthetic problems as well as the shutter count. That covers the majority of anything that could be disputed. It's just a safety measure. It's probably fine.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2013 06:21
|
|
