|
Mr. Despair posted:
Ha, how floppy is that thing? I'm imagining something rather hose like.
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
powderific posted:Ha, how floppy is that thing? I'm imagining something rather hose like. When I look at that I can't help but think it'd rip the mount right off the body if you picked it up wrong. That has to give it a ton of leverage.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
powderific posted:Ha, how floppy is that thing? I'm imagining something rather hose like. About a quarter inch of wiggle at first. I tightened some set screws on the spiratone and there's almost no wiggle when I have that hooked up to the camera with a straight m42 to mft adapter. The k mount -> teleconvter -> m42 adapter combo is lovely as gently caress though. Here's some pictures of a guitar taken with just the lens at 260mm, with the 3x teleconvter, and then with the 2x teleconverter behind the 3x teleconverter.  http://imgur.com/a/do0ak
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Same with the Sony. After shooting with the 5N for a while I have come to appreciate a viewfinder and I'll probably upgrade to a NEX-6 at some point, though it's definitely NOT a priority right now. The alternative would be to buy Sony's ugly as sin star trek-esque viewfinder which isn't appealing at all. I wonder how hard it would be to get an extension cable for that view finder and hot glue it to an old pair of glasses. Then you can walk around like a cyborg camera.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 20:57
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Same with the Sony. After shooting with the 5N for a while I have come to appreciate a viewfinder and I'll probably upgrade to a NEX-6 at some point, though it's definitely NOT a priority right now. The alternative would be to buy Sony's ugly as sin star trek-esque viewfinder which isn't appealing at all. You can add a giant eyecup and a grip and pretend is Hasselblad.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:You can add a giant eyecup and a grip and pretend is Hasselblad. I bet there's a market for a waist-level reflex finder. Can you get the screen to output upside down so that the reflected image is upright?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Same with the Sony. After shooting with the 5N for a while I have come to appreciate a viewfinder and I'll probably upgrade to a NEX-6 at some point, though it's definitely NOT a priority right now. The alternative would be to buy Sony's ugly as sin star trek-esque viewfinder which isn't appealing at all. wouldn't the 5n EVF be much more useful as it can be tilted?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:I bet there's a market for a waist-level reflex finder. Can you get the screen to output upside down so that the reflected image is upright? Can't you use this? 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Same with the Sony. After shooting with the 5N for a while I have come to appreciate a viewfinder and I'll probably upgrade to a NEX-6 at some point, though it's definitely NOT a priority right now. The alternative would be to buy Sony's ugly as sin star trek-esque viewfinder which isn't appealing at all. The 5N EVF owns. Yeah it looks silly but it is articulating and very high quality. For manual lenses it is essential to me now.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 22:47
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Can't you use this? This is actually what I am buying. rio posted:The 5N EVF owns. Yeah it looks silly but it is articulating and very high quality. For manual lenses it is essential to me now. Yeah. I mean I took a look at one in store and it's amazing, but I wish it wasn't so goofy looking. I will still probably upgrade to a 6 at some point but it's seriously no big deal 
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2013 23:46
|
|
|
send help i can't stop ~BOKEH~ 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:send help i can't stop Take a picture with that setup, I'm interested in seeing how it looks. 
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 08:24
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:Take a picture with that setup, I'm interested in seeing how it looks. It's actually pretty good so long as you stop down (click for big etc).  _5110595.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  _5110593.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr These two were without the tubes.  _5110600.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr  _5110603.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr e2. the lens is probable a 60's era Tokina design. Dr. Despair fucked around with this message at 23:04 on May 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
I had a few questions on the Fuji X100/X100S and this seems to be the place to ask. I'm pretty much sold on the X100S and I've been thinking about this decision for a good 6-8 weeks now so I think I'm finally going to go through with it. I had a couple questions on accessories. Are there any meaningful differences between the 1st and 3rd party lens hoods? The JJC one is about $18 while the Fujifilm one is about $80. I'm okay with shelling out the cash if it's worth it but if I don't have to I don't mind saving it. Same question goes for batteries. I've seen some cheap $10 batteries on Amazon, and it looks like the 1st party ones run about $60. I know with certain Canon cameras I've had in the past the 1st party batteries are much better, wanted to check if anyone knew if that was the case with this camera as well. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
I have the 3rd party hood and 3rd party batteries, no problems with either. Can't tell the batteries apart from the one that came with the camera.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
I have a couple third party batteries and I can't tell the difference between them and my stock battery either. Can't comment about the hoods but here's another option that I saw being discussed on the Fuji X forums that you may or may not want to check out. Seems like a pretty sweet deal at $8.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
The JJC hood is metal and fits perfectly. The replacement batteries that I got only went through about 20 charges each, but they lasted as many shots as the OEM. No reason to spend more on the "official" Fuji ones.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 00:57
|
|
|
Awesome, thanks for the quick responses guys!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 01:13
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:It's actually pretty good so long as you stop down (click for big etc). Neat, thanks! The images look slightly muddy to me, but I guess that's to be expected with all that glass in between.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 10:08
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:This is actually what I am buying. I have this exact one, and it's pretty drat great. It only took a few minutes of home surgery to adapt it to my Nex7 when I upgraded (two plastic tabs need to be cut off), which is even better since it keeps my LCD smudge-free when I'm using the EVF.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 13:32
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:Neat, thanks! Huh? Most of that is extension tubes, even the lens is mostly empty. All the glass is in the first 2 and a half inches, if even. I think you're just seeing the thin DoF.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
Guy looking at the x100s, you read zack arias and David hobby's reviews, right? http://zackarias.com/for-photographers/gear-gadgets/fuji-x100s-review-a-camera-walks-into-a-bar/ http://strobist.blogspot.com/2013/03/in-depth-new-fujifilm-x100s.html?m=1 I am pretty jealous of your future x100s.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
I got to briefly fingerfuck a random dude's x100s yesterday. It seems like a really nice camera.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
Is there a common store that stocks x100s to try? Never seen them in person.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
Spime Wrangler posted:I got to briefly fingerfuck a random dude's x100s yesterday. It seems like a really nice camera. Well that's an interesting way to put it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 13:21
|
|
|
rivals posted:I had a few questions on the Fuji X100/X100S and this seems to be the place to ask. I'm pretty much sold on the X100S and I've been thinking about this decision for a good 6-8 weeks now so I think I'm finally going to go through with it. I had a couple questions on accessories. I had that JJC on my X100, it was good. It didnt feel like 18bux, but didnt feel like $80 either. I also used Power2000 batteries as spares without any hassle. Get 4 because the x100/s eats them like candy.I had about the same run time onthe Power2000 brand as I did with fuji's own battery.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 15:01
|
|
|
I'm a big fan of getting the last generation of camera, so I got a great deal on a X100 just as the X100S was released, and I love it. Has anyone ever used the  flash sync speeds with studio strobes? I can get up to 1/500 with a FlexTT5 for Nikon if I mess around in the PW's menus, but 1/4000 if I use the optical sensor on the strobes with the x100's flash set for commander mode. So I know it can sync at that speed, but there's something limiting it in the hardware.PW's website says it can sync at all speeds automatically with my strobes (einsteins with MC2's), but I can't seem to figure it out. It'd be awesome to get some reliable blistering speeds outside. E: NVM, it looks like there's some black magic involved in manually figuring out the t.1 at every power setting in order to get proper sync 
red19fire fucked around with this message at 20:49 on May 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
Spime Wrangler posted:I got to briefly fingerfuck a random dude Doesn't the news pick and choose quote structures like this? Getting back on topic, I am getting mighty tempted by the X100s. The crazy thing is the price - only $1300! Sure some of you will say "only"? But the Canon 35 1.4L is *nearly* as much bought new, and it's just a lens. In my mind, it seems an absolute no-brainer to forego buying a 35L you were going to buy anyway, and buy the X100s instead to give yourself a kickass backup body along with the 35mm focal length you wanted in the first place.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Doesn't the news pick and choose quote structures like this? You're trying to justify a camera as not horribly overpriced by comparing it to a lens that's horribly overpriced.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:You're trying to justify a camera as not horribly overpriced by comparing it to a lens that's horribly overpriced. Overpriced or not, even second-hand copies of the 35L regularly sell for $1000-$1100. I would say that the lens is priced where the market will bear it. Besides. The 35L isn't overpriced. The Zeiss 35 1.4 is overpriced.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
If I could actually buy an X100s, I probably would have already. I'm leaving for a trip Wednesday and none of my pre-orders/waitlist for the X100s have shipped out yet. Since it's loving impossible to get in stock, I've been considering the Ricoh GR that's coming out in like two days- if I can get one while I'm out of town, I probably will. It's a lot smaller and looks like it's going to be enough for a travel camera for me. I really loved my X100 though  .
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Overpriced or not, even second-hand copies of the 35L regularly sell for $1000-$1100. I would say that the lens is priced where the market will bear it. In a world with the sigma 35/ 1.4A the 35L is hilariously overpriced.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
The x100s is a fine camera, but comparing it to a 35L? The 35L is f/1.4 vs. f/2 on the x100s and covers a full frame sensor.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
Man, why did the canon thread have to leak.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
X100 sucks, its got plastic on it, and is a poo poo focal length. Now its more like the canon thread Mister DEEEEEEEEE.  Dear Hong Kong, please ship my Trigger Trap. Tia, Musket.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:The x100s is a fine camera, but comparing it to a 35L? I would argue any day that a DSLR user would do better with a DSLR + the X100S than with just the DSLR + 35mm lens.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
I think if you're a wedding or similar shooter looking to dual wield a 2-body 35mm/85mm setup, an X100s (plus a DSLR with a portrait lens) is a pretty compelling option, though it's pretty nonsensical to compare it in price terms to a 35mm F/1.4L. X100s + FF DSLR w/ 70-200 could get you a long way too. Fake Ken Rockwell fucked around with this message at 21:39 on May 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:You're trying to justify a camera as not horribly overpriced by comparing it to a lens that's horribly overpriced. That's always been my policy and it works very well.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
I think the x100s is actually priced pretty decently. If it were an ilc it would be a no brainer at that price. The lens it has is great -- a perfect travel/everyday focal length. Plus, thanks to its size you could take it with you someplace and not get that dslr feeling of being captain tourist of the tourist brigade. The flash sync super powers are icing on the cake. That it's not ilc is the only reason I haven't sold all my Nikon stuff and switched. I'm actually a little worried that Fuji will come out with an x-pro 2 so good that I'll have a tough time unloading my Nikon stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2013 01:17
|
|