|
spookygonk posted:My office is going to order a Nikon DSLR for stills and video (1080 25p) work. I've suggested the D5300 (with the swivel LCD), but the boss is looking at the D7100 (in-camera AF motor). We use JVC GY-HM600E (& older DV-CAM cameras) as well as a Sony F5, but looking to setup a small, lightweight rig as well. Three people in the office shoot Nikon, so there's plenty of lenses to borrow. Any opinions on which to go with? If you don't need the 24 megapixel sensor or 51-point AF array of the D7100, the D7000 is probably worth a look. That has an internal AF motor and should have very similar video performance to the D7100.
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:19 |
|
|
3200 or 7100. The 5XXX series is currently rocking a Toshiba sensor with different (worse?) noise and DR characteristics. Personally I'd go 7100. *edit* whoa upon further research I guess the 7100 has that sensor too. The 7000 has the Sony sensor. Who cares i guess, 7XXX has the focus motor and boss AF so go with that. Mightaswell fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Dec 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
I'd go with the 5300. Titly screens are great for video. Do keep in mind that you can't change aperture in live view mode though. The D5300 sensor is honestly really good too. Having a focus motor and fancy autofocus means nothing for video.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
I need to stay off ebay...
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
Has anyone used MPB Photographic before? I'm seriously considering upgrading camera bodies (currently on nikon 3100, thinking of going to the 7000). MPB bodies even in mint condition are like half the price of anywhere else so it's very tempting! On that note; the 7000 does have pre-set modes like the 3100, right? Although I can shoot manual I strongly prefer to shoot primarily in sport mode for moving subjects.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 07:24
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:I need to stay off ebay... This camera is rad.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
Fraction posted:Has anyone used MPB Photographic before? I'm seriously considering upgrading camera bodies (currently on nikon 3100, thinking of going to the 7000). MPB bodies even in mint condition are like half the price of anywhere else so it's very tempting! Yeah I used them within the UK and they were very good. I noticed when they have multiples of items, the one they have as the 'choice' pick doesn't always seem to be the best one so don't go for the first one in the list. I'm not sure why that is, but sometimes they'll be missing a box or a lens cap in comparison to another one at the same price and condition point (or even have ones in a slightly better condition at a little bit more money down the list). I only bought a 35mm/1.8 from them but was happy with the service, the cost and the condition of the item. Next day delivery too which is always good, think it was about £4 or £5 for my lens to be shipped which wasn't bad at all. They tend to be my 'go to' place for UK prices now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 11:57
|
|
|
Ha, seems my information is out of date anyway. They had them in stock the other day but no longer do so now! Guess I'll have to keep my eye out for a good deal, but it's good to know that MPB are reliable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2014 15:31
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:I need to stay off ebay... Only better film camera is the F5. And you only need an F5 if you need to have a camera you can hammer nails into a wall with.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2014 07:20
|
|
|
Musket posted:Only better film camera is the F5. And you only need an F5 if you need to have a camera you can hammer nails into a wall with. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=525xrI009qQ&t=23s
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
This is accurate, the F5 is beast among cameras.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 12:26
|
|
|
Musket posted:Only better film camera is the F5. And you only need an F5 if you need to have a camera you can hammer nails into a wall with. I thought about getting one but decided i don't really need that much camera and this was a steal since it came with the box and manual for about $100.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
The f100 is super great so don't sweat it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:I thought about getting one but decided i don't really need that much camera and this was a steal since it came with the box and manual for about $100. Probably the best $100 you can spend on 35mm gear.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 14:10
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Probably the best $100 you can spend on 35mm gear. Speaking of gear I already have a nifty 50 and 70-300 for it any other lenses that might be good to grab?
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
The cheap kit 28-80mm 3.3-5.6 G lens is really very very sharp. I got mine attached to a F75 for $40. They come in black and grey but they're the same lens. e: if it means anything to you, k-rock loves that lens 
BANME.sh fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Ezekiel_980 posted:Speaking of gear I already have a nifty 50 and 70-300 for it any other lenses that might be good to grab? If you own an F mount camera (or adapter) and don't own a 105mm f/2.5 (AI or AIS), then you are missing out. Great focal length on 35mm or APS-C, small, and sharp as a tack wide open. McCurry's famous afghan girl photo was taken with a 105mm f/2.5 and an FM2 in case you need an example. Edit: Time is hard 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Dec 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:If you own an F mount camera (or adapter) and don't own a 105mm f/2.5 (AI or AIS), then you are missing out. Great focal length on 35mm or APS-C, small, and sharp as a tack wide open. McCurry's famous afghan girl photo was taken with a 105mm f/2.5 and an F100 in case you need an example. Seconding this. I had the non-AI version and it was pretty spectacular. I upgraded to the 105mm f/1.8 when I was putting together an AI-s set and that's great too, but not worth the extra money now that cameras can shoot at ISOs over 200 and not look like a goat's breakfast.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:If you own an F mount camera (or adapter) and don't own a 105mm f/2.5 (AI or AIS), then you are missing out. Great focal length on 35mm or APS-C, small, and sharp as a tack wide open. McCurry's famous afghan girl photo was taken with a 105mm f/2.5 and an F100 in case you need an example. I didn't know the F100 was available in 1985
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Afghan Girl was taken with an FM2 and a 100mm F2.5 on  Kodachrome 64  I combo which I own and use (minus the kodachrome) to take pictures of my cats and also neighborhood dumpsters. Mightaswell fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Dec 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:If you own an F mount camera (or adapter) and don't own a 105mm f/2.5 (AI or AIS), then you are missing out. Great focal length on 35mm or APS-C, small, and sharp as a tack wide open. McCurry's famous afghan girl photo was taken with a 105mm f/2.5 and an F100 in case you need an example. I have a 105 f4 although something tells me someone is going to tell me that it is scrub tier. And I doubt that my 135 f2.8 is anywhere as good. If I am going to be using manual lenses any suggestions for focus screens for the f100?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
BANME.sh posted:I didn't know the F100 was available in 1985 Oops, I was tired this morning. McCurry used F100s later in his career.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
Mightaswell posted:Afghan Girl was taken with an FM2 and a 100mm F2.5 on I bet the rest of McCurry's roll was all cat pictures.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:I bet the rest of McCurry's roll was all cat pictures. Afghan cats with beautiful eyes
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
I've got a fever and it feels like the only prescription is a FM2n with the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s. Does that sound like a good idea?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Xabi posted:I've got a fever and it feels like the only prescription is a FM2n with the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s. Does that sound like a good idea? Assuming you want a manual-focus body with a 28mm lens, then yes. Those are both great pieces of kit. I'd also throw out buying a Pentax MX with a K28/3.5 as another similar high-quality combo. If you want to cheap out, consider a Nikkormat. They're a  lesser model than the Nikon F system camera, but they are still crazy overbuilt for amateur usage and do have big, bright viewfinders. The FT2 takes alkaline batteries and can be had in BGN condition for the princely sum of $16. The FM2 is a bit nicer in some respects, but the basic FM2 starts at $150 ($162 for a FM2n) and goes up from there.Also - my standard plug for Samyang lenses. They beat the pants off all vintage lens designs (as well as most modern ones) at bargain-basement prices, with the catch being there's no autofocus. They make a 24mm f/1.4 and a 35/1.4, both of which are optically equal or better to the modern Canon/Nikon equivalents. The 35/1.4 can be had used for <$300-350 depending on mount, and the 24/1.4 goes for about $525 new. Unfortunately they don't make a 28mm - I wish they would, because 28mm is as wide as I like to go on film/FF.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Xabi posted:I've got a fever and it feels like the only prescription is a FM2n with the 28mm f/2.8 AI-s. Does that sound like a good idea? This but the 28 2.8 E, which I shill everywhere, mostly for the reason that it's tiny and light and sharp as gently caress and also cheap as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 03:49
|
|
|
After spending a week or so fiddling back and forth with a D7k, I'm considering moving over from Canon, but I want to make sure I understand all the systems and that I can get what I want in the new system. The biggest thing keeping my in Canon right now, and I'd like to try and replicate (in budget) in Nikon is being able to shoot AF film. I've stuck with full frame lenses for my 40D because I like using an older Elan body to shoot a dozen rolls of film or so a year. It's super convenient to just keep a pair of bodies and maintain the same len setup vs having a film system and a digital system. I know Nikon is backward compatible all the way back in shapes and forms, and I know the D7k has the screwdrive, meaning I would have a lot more options for glass if I was deadset on owning one wide/standard lens and being able to shoot both, but I'm not sure where I should start looking, or if I would be able to piece together an acceptable system in my budget (somewhere in the $1200-1400 range, with selling all my Canon stuff). The DX stuff, particularly the 35, gets raves, but if it's not an option I'm afraid I might be priced out of either moving or keeping my film-AF dream alive. I am sure the sensible thing is to wait a few years for 70D bodies to come down and grab one when it's in my budget, but I know how much happier we've been since upgrading from iPhone cameras to a DSLR, and I think upgrading from iPhone video to DSLR video is going to have the same effect and I don't want to wait 3-4 years of kids growing up time to do it. E: I guess it might be helpful to include what I want to cover: My favorite lens is the 35/2 IS, which is full-frame. I shoot it 75% of the time and having a good replacement is top priority. I don't shoot my 85 enough digitally because of its tightness on crop, but it's probably my favorite film lens. The 70-300 is great for what it is, and I want something longer than 85 but I don't get to go out birding as much as I'd like and it's not super for that, anyway. My Tamron 17-50 (crop only) is fine, but I pretty much only keep it around to shoot at 17mm since there's not a great cheap full-frame wide-angle to take its place. Huxley fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Dec 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 16:02
|
|
|
Huxley posted:
How low are you looking for them to get? Keep an eye on the canon refurb store - 70D bodies were 730$ earlier this week, they may do another drop in the next couple days before christmas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
AF 35mm is a bit of a problematic focal length on Nikon (they don't have a definitive, get-this-unless-you-know-why-not option like the 35/2 IS). The older 35/2 is ok but not great. The sigma is pricey and heavy, the 35/1.8FX is too expensive, and the Nikkor 35/1.4 makes no sense in the current market. That said they have great film bodies (F80, F100), and 35mm isn't a barren landscape either. I don't know if I'd go through the trouble of switching. 70D refurbs are p cheap already, and a 35/2 IS on that will own for video.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:How low are you looking for them to get? Keep an eye on the canon refurb store - 70D bodies were 730$ earlier this week, they may do another drop in the next couple days before christmas. Without selling out of Canon, the budget is roughly zero for anywhere from a year to three, unfortunately. evil_bunnY posted:AF 35mm is a bit of a problematic focal length on Nikon (they don't have a definitive, get-this-unless-you-know-why-not option like the 35/2 IS). The older 35/2 is ok but not great. The sigma is pricey and heavy, the 35/1.8FX is too expensive, and the Nikkor 35/1.4 makes no sense in the current market. Yeah, this is what I was suspecting. I was hoping there was something hiding somewhere I didn't know about, but I probably am better off holding steady to what I have than trying to flip everything just to get better video a couple years earlier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Are you sure you want dslr video for home movies of kids anyway? My D7k in video mode would not be able to focus correctly on kids running around. The iPhone or a camera with a 1" sensor would be much better at focusing for home movies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 01:38
|
|
|
Dren posted:Are you sure you want dslr video for home movies of kids anyway? My D7k in video mode would not be able to focus correctly on kids running around. The iPhone or a camera with a 1" sensor would be much better at focusing for home movies. If only a camera system with a 4/3 inch sensor existed... Ah well. (He's right though, for 'consumer grade' tasks, consumer grade gear works. Point & shoots are really good at taking terrible Christmas morning video.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
SoundMonkey posted:If only a camera system with a 4/3 inch sensor existed... I haven't used the 4/3 cameras do they fall into that happy zone of pretty good IQ for people who aren't doing serious video and small enough sensor that missed focus isn't a big deal for bad home movies?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
Dren posted:I haven't used the 4/3 cameras do they fall into that happy zone of pretty good IQ for people who aren't doing serious video and small enough sensor that missed focus isn't a big deal for bad home movies? Pretty much, yes, although people use them for semi-serious video also, and the sensor isn't SO small that you can just ignore focusing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Lots of people use 4/3 for pro video.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2014 21:37
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:AF 35mm is a bit of a problematic focal length on Nikon (they don't have a definitive, get-this-unless-you-know-why-not option like the 35/2 IS). The older 35/2 is ok but not great. The sigma is pricey and heavy, the 35/1.8FX is too expensive, and the Nikkor 35/1.4 makes no sense in the current market. Why would the Canon 35mm IS be a definitive option but the 35mm 1.8 FX be too expensive when they're the same price?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
Because you trade fuckall aperture for better corner performance and a stabilizer. The nikon is ok, but really not great.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 05:19 |
|
|
Where are you seeing tests that show the Canon resolving corners better? DxO makes the Nikon look better in the corners wide open, and The Digital Picture (where I would normally go to peek resolution charts) hasn't evaluated the Nikon's FX 35mm f/1.8 yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2014 05:36
|
|