|
Helicity posted:To be fair, in that range, the Nikkor is one of the best lenses ever made (the Zeiss is better The SMC Pentax 28/3.5 is another great lens that's pretty affordable, generally about $150 or so. It's another of Pentax's early designs that trades off speed in return for really great image quality. I'd really love to try it on an A7 sometime. The SMC Takumar 28/3.5 is an earlier, cheaper version of that lens, but still great and very cheap. You can find those as cheap as $80 or so. The SMC Pentax 28/2 is also reportedly superfluous, which is expected since it's a Zeiss-designed Distagon with SMC coatings. Of course you can probably get a Zeiss Distagon cheaper, the pricing on it's just absurd. I'm thinking really seriously about an A7/r given that most of my personal shooting is done on manual focus primes nowadays. Of course on the other end I'd also like a D600 to make some cash shooting weddings... I'd really like one of Hasselblad/Mamiya's new mirrorless digital 645 bodies, too, but I imagine those are right out of my price range. I'd probably be better off with a Pentax anyway given that I own 6x7 glass, assuming I win the lottery. My P67 55/4 would make a mean normal lens. Which happens to be yet another Distagon... Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Nov 10, 2014 |
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 03:34
|
|
)
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 17:16 |
|
|
Everyone should own a takumar smc 35/3.5 PB090156.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
So I rented the 56/1.2 for a recent road trip. It's surprisingly usable on my XE-1. And I am surprised by how usable it is at f/1.2 wide open. There is no AF problem, no lower contrast at wide open like a lot of the fast lens. IMO is a bit more usable than the Fujifilm 35mm/1.4 at 1.4. AF speed wise is on par with the 18-55 kit lens. Even my wife can casually use it. She was so smittened by the image produced by the 56mm she "approved" the budget to get one. I brought a cheap 2 stop ND filter but I didn't need to use it at all. Here is my wife with a "selfie stick". whatever7 fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Nov 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
Why buy a selfie stick when you can have a selfie camera?  
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Why buy a selfie stick when you can have a selfie camera? It's more fun that way. Plus if you don't use the stick your can see your giant arm holding the camera. Like this one  The 2nd one was taken w/ a stick. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Nov 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
My coworker brought a selfie stick to the office one day and I was giving him a lot of poo poo about it. Then we went to a fancy hotel bar that night, and all the women wanted to get a picture with him while their boyfriends stared in anger/confusion. I don't even know what the gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
404notfound posted:My coworker brought a selfie stick to the office one day and I was giving him a lot of poo poo about it. Then we went to a fancy hotel bar that night, and all the women wanted to get a picture with him while their boyfriends stared in anger/confusion. A friends brother who I follow on instagram is obsessed with those things... but all of his shots have the whole stick in them, it's not at all discrete. I think they're the dumbest things ever. Just the idea of carrying a stick around everywhere so you don't have to ask someone to take your photo seems ridiculous. I get it if you're taking video of yourself snowboarding or something but all of this guys shots are like standing in the driveway of his house or outside of a restaurant and you can just tell he's using any excuse he can get to pull this thing out and take selfies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
404notfound posted:My coworker brought a selfie stick to the office one day and I was giving him a lot of poo poo about it. Then we went to a fancy hotel bar that night, and all the women wanted to get a picture with him while their boyfriends stared in anger/confusion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
I've seen more and more racers with GoPros on the end of those things at Spartan Races when I shoot them. Some even have two cameras facing each way. Damndest thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
404notfound posted:My coworker brought a selfie stick to the office one day and I was giving him a lot of poo poo about it. Then we went to a fancy hotel bar that night, and all the women wanted to get a picture with him while their boyfriends stared in anger/confusion. something something phallic
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Countdown to seeing a Kickstarter for bespoke artisanal canes for the distinguished gentleman, with 1/4" threading near the bottom for selfies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Well, they're halfway there since walking sticks with monopod heads exist. Just hollow out a branch and jam one of those in there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:Countdown to seeing a Kickstarter for bespoke artisanal canes for the distinguished gentleman, with 1/4" threading near the bottom for selfies. not a bad idea
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Wondering what people think about the Olympus OM-D E-M10? Currently going for $590 on Amazon (like new) with the 14-42mm. Anything I should be considering in a similar price range? I know it sounds silly but I'm really interested in the Wifi/smartphone features. I'm coming from Canon kit (40D plus a variety of random lenses) with my motivation being smaller + wifi.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Fatal posted:Wondering what people think about the Olympus OM-D E-M10? Currently going for $590 on Amazon (like new) with the 14-42mm. Anything I should be considering in a similar price range? I know it sounds silly but I'm really interested in the Wifi/smartphone features. I'm coming from Canon kit (40D plus a variety of random lenses) with my motivation being smaller + wifi. The EM-10 is sort of the budget version of the EM-5, but with a better processor. It does not have the EM-5's weather sealing and I think the in-body stabilization isn't as good but it's still a drat solid camera. The DPReview of it gives a really good breakdown
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
DJExile posted:The EM-10 is sort of the budget version of the EM-5, but with a better processor. It does not have the EM-5's weather sealing and I think the in-body stabilization isn't as good but it's still a drat solid camera. The DPReview of it gives a really good breakdown Yeah, I'm basing my preference off of this review plus the Wirecutter gives it pretty good remarks. I'm a little bummed about the lack of weather sealing but it's not as much of a feature for me as the wifi uploading options. Are eyeFi cards any good? Coming from Canon there were lots of random 3rd party lenses but it seems like with 4/3rds you're really buying into the manufacturers glass which makes me a bit uneasy. Any reason to be worried with Olympus's offerings? I'm definitely a big fan of the in-body stabilization as well.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Fatal posted:Any reason to be worried with Olympus's offerings? I'm definitely a big fan of the in-body stabilization as well. None whatsoever. Their m4/3 glass is phenomenal, and there are also some really good options from Panasonic as well. The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and Oly 45mm f/1.8 are fantastic starter primes. The 60mm f/2.8 macro and 75mm f/1.8 are very well liked, and if you want to upgrade the kit lens, the 12-40mm f/2.8 is great. There are some legitimate knocks on Olympus as an overall brand (especially with the mess their DSLR bodies were), but their glass has always been very well-liked.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 20:47
|
|
|
The 12-40 is just awesome.  P9160040.jpg by MrDespair, on FlickrLove my om-d.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:The 12-40 is just awesome. Beautiful, reminds me of a wallpaper I used to have a long time ago. It went around the web quite a lot. For anyone interested, made photos in Cuba with my Fuji X-E1, with 14 23 and 56 http://tjeerd.me/blog/2014/11/8/beauty-in-cuba ChirreD fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Nov 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 20:58
|
|
|
ChirreD posted:For anyone interested, made photos in Cuba with my Fuji X-E1, with 14 23 and 56 This is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:01
|
|
|
DJExile posted:This is awesome. Thank you, appreciate it!
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
DJExile posted:There are some legitimate knocks on Olympus as an overall brand (especially with the mess their DSLR bodies were), but their glass has always been very well-liked. Yeah, I will second that you have nothing to worry about 4/3 glass, they probably have the best range of any of the mirrorless systems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Would there be any issues mounting a 70-200mm f/4 G FE mount lens on a a6000 E mount? I need to rent a lens and the place closest to me currently does not have an E mount telephoto in stock.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
They'll mount and work just fine, they didn't change anything about the actual mount.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:They'll mount and work just fine, they didn't change anything about the actual mount. ok cool. That's what I was mainly concerned about. You can never be too sure with this fly by wire stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Not even Sony is dumb enough to fracture their camera business in 3 ways.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
DJExile posted:The EM-10 is sort of the budget version of the EM-5, but with a better processor. It does not have the EM-5's weather sealing and I think the in-body stabilization isn't as good but it's still a drat solid camera. The DPReview of it gives a really good breakdown I think it has 3 axis instead of 5 for stabilization, but the price is good. I am kinda leaning towards it over going Fuji. There are probably other things I need to spend money on that are more important so I might waffle on joining the mirrorless game till something new comes out. My mom was shooting on an Olympus SLR in the 80s though, so there is something a little nostalgic about it to me even though I really like Fuji image quality.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
DJExile posted:None whatsoever. Their m4/3 glass is phenomenal, and there are also some really good options from Panasonic as well. The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and Oly 45mm f/1.8 are fantastic starter primes. The 60mm f/2.8 macro and 75mm f/1.8 are very well liked, and if you want to upgrade the kit lens, the 12-40mm f/2.8 is great. Don't forget the fantastic Panasonic 25/1.4 prime too, thought Olympus makes a pretty competitive 25/1.8 too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 11, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Yeah, I will second that you have nothing to worry about 4/3 glass, they probably have the best range of any of the mirrorless systems. Reminder that this is only true for m4/3 glass. Their 4/3 glass that they made for their DSLR lineup was pretty much as big of a mess as their DSLRs. Or on the off-chance it wasn't worthless, it cost way the gently caress too much (see: their six hundred dollar 70-300.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
I haven't been up on my Fuji news lately but I hear they are adding electronic shutter which is radical, and manual video focusing and new FPS options.. but still no full manual controls for video? loving come on Fuji 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
After borrowing and renting several different cameras I finally decided to just bite the bullet and pick up a Ricoh GR. I don't really care for 28mm and the autofocus isn't great, but so far it has the best combination of quality and size of anything I've tried. Even rented an LX100 last weekend to see how that worked. Thickness made it a no go for me, but it's a nice little camera. The focus/zoom control ring is a bit awkward to use because it's so close to the body, and I don't think I'll ever really like servo zooms, but otherwise it was lovely to use. The lens is quite impressive. For the right person it seems like it could be a fantastic everywhere camera.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 00:11
|
|
|
So if I decide to pull the trigger and just get an E-M10 is the kit lens in this package any decent to start with or are there a couple of must have lenses (like maybe a zoom and a prime) that will cover most situations: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...7WPEA6CT6AKJ53W I guess I'm looking for something small and light for street and just random carrying around or going on vacation kinda thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
JHVH-1 posted:So if I decide to pull the trigger and just get an E-M10 is the kit lens in this package any decent to start with or are there a couple of must have lenses (like maybe a zoom and a prime) that will cover most situations: Depends on your budget but the Olympus 17/1.8 or Panasonic 20/1.7 make for great all-round prime lenses, and the Olympus 12-50/3.5-6.3 zoom is good too. The Olympus 12-40/2.8 zoom is much better but more expensive too. Take a look here for more recommendations: http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-first-micro-four-third-lenses-you-should-buy/
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Depends on your budget but the Olympus 17/1.8 or Panasonic 20/1.7 make for great all-round prime lenses, and the Olympus 12-50/3.5-6.3 zoom is good too. The Olympus 12-40/2.8 zoom is much better but more expensive too. Take a look here for more recommendations: http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-first-micro-four-third-lenses-you-should-buy/ Thanks. Looks like if you select a camera and lens from here you can get $100-$200 off: http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.ht...FIZIY4JT3YQI6GE I think having so many lens options and spending less on the body than the Fuji, I can splurge on extra glass which is where most of the fun is. EDIT: Going to get this: E-M10 with kit lens (figured why not, its only $100 extra and the same lens alone is $300) $749.00 12mm f/2.0 $799.00 - $200 = $599.00 40-150mm F4.0-5.6 $200 - $100 = $100 Comes out to $1447 for the whole kit before tax, and there is a bonus 4% back on the amazon credit card. JHVH-1 fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Nov 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 02:40
|
|
|
On the other hand, if you ditch the kit lens you can get the 12-40 instead of the 12 for 100 bucks more. Ditch the 40-150 and it'd be the same price.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:On the other hand, if you ditch the kit lens you can get the 12-40 instead of the 12 for 100 bucks more. Ditch the 40-150 and it'd be the same price. That was actually the first setup I loaded into my cart, but I kinda wanted a little bit of everything and to have at least one good prime. Tossing the 40-150 in I realized it would get a discount as well, so it was just a bonus lens. I figure if I am into the format I might end up switching/upgrading bodies/brands at some point I can gift the old one with the kit lens to one of my parents or re-sell it as a package. I hadn't paid attention to this format for the past 4 or so years cause I ended up opting for a DSLR. There are a lot more lens options now, and having a standard format between brands is pretty drat cool. Plus adapters, adapters, adapters and if I practice manual focusing there probably is a lot of cool used stuff. Why do I pick the expensive hobbies?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
I just picked up a refurb E-M5 (about 1000 shutter activations)+ 12-50mm, and it's pretty great. This could be the basis for a really reasonably priced kit: E-M5 + 12-50: $600 if you catch the Olympus refurb store on a 15-20% off weekend some sort of 20-25mm prime: $250-400 (there's a Panasonic 25/f1.4 in the gear thread for $250, which is a great lens) 40-150mm: $150ish, closer to $120 if you're fine with used or find a great sale This lands you with a roughly equivalent kit at $850, unless you really want an ultrawide prime. But it also involves shopping around and waiting more, which you might not be excited about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Crossposting from the best thread, but the olympus weathersealing is great.  
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
Has anyone messed around with manual focus lenses (leica, voigtlander, etc) and focus peaking on m4/3 bodies? How accurate is it? Or does it even work?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 17:16 |
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Everyone should own a takumar smc 35/3.5 I'm soon owning one, I think! I'm not familiar with adapting lenses, does it affect the crop factor at all? (I've bought m42->MFT and m42->EF adapters)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2014 11:01
|
|
