|
Wengy posted:The FL-600 seems OK, but it's pretty expensive. Is its smaller brother FL-300 much worse? FYI- regular 4/3 flashes like the FL-36R will run on m4/3 bodies and they're plenty cheap used.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2014 21:34 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 02:39 |
|
8th-snype posted:Overrated.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 00:09 |
|
DJExile posted:FYI- regular 4/3 flashes like the FL-36R will run on m4/3 bodies and they're plenty cheap used. Eh, that one costs almost as much as the FL-600 here. Might as well go for the newer gear.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 08:24 |
|
Just cancelled my A7ii preorder... I did it mostly so I could have the option of getting it before I left for Australia, but with the way the exchange rate is now it's actually cheaper at Sony Australia (even after GST), and I was really on the fence about it with whatever the A9 is just around the corner anyways. Think I'll let the dust settle and let whatever early adopter I buy mine from take the hit on initial depreciation. In other news, ABOUT GODDAMN TIME.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 17:06 |
|
They made the three best and cheapest E-Mount lenses already, I have good hopes about it if they decide to really get into E/F-E lenses.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 17:12 |
|
evil_bunnY posted:You want TTL. Reasons to get TTL: 1. you absolutely have to get the shot right the very first time you take the picture and can't afford to spend 10 seconds before hand taking a test shot or learning guide numbers/how flashes work so that you can just eyeball that poo poo 2. you don't like having money
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 17:48 |
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOJyBmDvp5c That is just... wow
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 17:50 |
|
holy poo poo
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 18:06 |
|
Jesus gently caress. I have no use for it but i want it anyway.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 18:38 |
|
All that and sony makes *1* lens faster than 2.8. It's 55mm.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 19:07 |
|
evil_bunnY posted:All that and sony makes *1* lens faster than 2.8. It's 55mm. That and no FE-mount pancake lens is what convinced me to switch to Fuji. Not to mention that the a7 has nothing on the X-T1 when it comes to looks.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 19:45 |
|
Well, I'm sold, gonna go toss my rebel in the trash now.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 20:00 |
|
Fart Car '97 posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOJyBmDvp5c That video would be a lot funnier if people were bumping into each other in the dark. I took this photo at ISO 51200, f/2.8, 1/5, handheld, at around 11PM at night:
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 20:01 |
|
Edward IV posted:That and no FE-mount pancake lens is what convinced me to switch to Fuji. Not to mention that the a7 has nothing on the X-T1 when it comes to looks. The Zeiss 35mm is sorta pancakey, if you're into wide lenses.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 20:50 |
|
Fart Car '97 posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOJyBmDvp5c If you think that is good this will blow your mind: https://vimeo.com/108613669
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 21:30 |
|
keyframe posted:If you think that is good this will blow your mind: I mean, from a technical standpoint it's very impressive, but the result isn't "true" to the scene so it looks weird, and it's also noisy and muddy as hell so it's not exactly a good substitute for daytime filming. As an example of lowlight capabilities it's nice I guess, but this specific example seems useless to me. What usage does that particular scenario have, other than simply a cool "tech demo"?
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 21:53 |
|
Mr. Despair posted:Reasons to get TTL: ?CONTEXT ERROR █
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 22:30 |
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I'm confused by the purpose of this. It's not "true" because your eyes aren't particularly sensitive to anything beyond contrast at low light levels; your statement would be about as accurate if you claimed any digital camera wasn't "true" to the scene when sensors don't perfectly mimic human vision.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 22:50 |
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I'm confused by the purpose of this. How else are you supposed to videotape white girls twerking on the beach at 3am? That is a use case.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 23:03 |
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I'm confused by the purpose of this.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 23:27 |
|
Who the gently caress thinks cameras are only supposed to produce something "true" to a scene? Don't ever read about cinematography or really photography at all beyond instruction manuals and MTF diagrams
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 23:31 |
|
quote:Sigma e-mount 30mm f2.8 Amazon lightning deal 12/5 till 6pm PST only http://slickdeals.net/?sdtid=747822..._p%3D1976422982 Its not as cheap as the old version from 2 years ago but is something.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 23:32 |
|
mobby_6kl posted:
I feel like a creep peeking silently in the dark. I hope Batman has this gadget.
|
# ? Dec 5, 2014 23:40 |
|
That would be amazing for chasing storms at night - you're usually restricted to trying to catch glimpses of tornadoes when the lightning illuminates them. Would be very helpful for tracking deadly tornadoes after dark. There's a quarter mile wide EF-2 tornado in this video that took us quite awhile to actually see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YiZxlI9zYA&t=68s
|
# ? Dec 6, 2014 00:39 |
|
It'd also be a great camera to take for any sort of protests or whatever, since they're often poorly lit and run late. There's a ton of use for crazy high iso, even if you won't use most of them 90% of the time
|
# ? Dec 6, 2014 00:41 |
|
Elliotw2 posted:It'd also be a great camera to take for any sort of protests or whatever, since they're often poorly lit and run late. Not to mention how good it would be for any sort of poorly lit sports.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2014 03:01 |
|
What camera does BBC use to film their 4k documentaries?
|
# ? Dec 6, 2014 03:10 |
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:I'm confused by the purpose of this. what the hell does "true to the scene" mean? I don't know how to explain to you why this is impressive if you can't think of any uses for a camera that can shoot in moonlight.
|
# ? Dec 6, 2014 05:00 |
|
Guys stop this is headed the route of the portrait focal length derail, and that was loving stupid and bad
|
# ? Dec 6, 2014 06:31 |
|
I'm looking into getting a interchangeable lens system to do more photography with actually controlling exposure, aperture, and such; I've done this some on my old powershot SD750, but the controls made it hard. Most of my usage is family pictures and travel, so portability is a high priority. Because of this, I'm mainly looking at mirrorless systems. I'm thinking I'd be best starting with and older, perhaps used, body, and focus on getting some decent lenses and getting good at actually using them. My budget with a body, prime, and ideally a kit lens is $750 or so. Here's what I've found so far:
Are there any obvious older bodies in the Sony/Olympus lines to look at that I can probably get for a modest price and have good ergonomics? Any obvious ones to avoid? Things I've missed or forgotten?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 03:53 |
|
Borachon posted:I'm looking into getting a interchangeable lens system to do more photography with actually controlling exposure, aperture, and such; I've done this some on my old powershot SD750, but the controls made it hard. Most of my usage is family pictures and travel, so portability is a high priority. Because of this, I'm mainly looking at mirrorless systems. You can easily get an X-E1 and either kit lens or 35mm for your budget. Alternatively this goon's EM-5 and kit is within budget.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 03:57 |
|
Panasonic has some highly decent poo poo also, for relatively few dollars.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 05:58 |
|
This is kind of interesting: http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-e-m5-successor-has-sensor-shift-to-create-up-to-40-megapixel-images-on-the-fly/ 43rumors is saying that the new EM-5 is going to be able to use sensor shift to increase resolution by stacking multiple exposures. Hasselblad does this with one of their medium-format cameras.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 07:03 |
|
http://www.fujirumors.com/hot-deals-x-e1-with-18-55-for-699-ends-dec09-rokinon-12mm-deal-starts-soon-x-a1-with-double-zoom-kit-for-499/ Fuji X-E1 and the 18-55 for $700. Not bad.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 13:47 |
|
Helicity posted:http://www.fujirumors.com/hot-deals-x-e1-with-18-55-for-699-ends-dec09-rokinon-12mm-deal-starts-soon-x-a1-with-double-zoom-kit-for-499/ Yeah, that's a pretty screaming deal. I'm going to see if I can find a fuji in town to handle today and see what I think.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 14:41 |
|
If you want to go cheap, nothing cheaper than an used Canon with a third party 2.8 zoom lens.grack posted:This is kind of interesting: http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-e-m5-successor-has-sensor-shift-to-create-up-to-40-megapixel-images-on-the-fly/ Don't you need to do it in studio/tripod. I think its just a gimmick to get "30MP" printed on the box.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 18:40 |
|
Borachon posted:Yeah, that's a pretty screaming deal. I'm going to see if I can find a fuji in town to handle today and see what I think. Neither local camera store carry any mirrorless (well, except one that has a Nikon 1). None of the local big boxes (Best Buy, Target, Office Max, Staples, Wally world) have anything mirrorless outside of Sony, either. Borachon fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Dec 8, 2014 |
# ? Dec 8, 2014 19:59 |
|
whatever7 posted:Don't you need to do it in studio/tripod. It would be nice for landscape photography.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 20:41 |
|
Borachon posted:Neither local camera store carry any mirrorless (well, except one that has a Nikon 1). None of the local big boxes (Best Buy, Target, Office Max, Staples, Wally world) have anything mirrorless outside of Sony, either. Best Buy has Fuji X cameras on their site and people have reported seeing them in the stores lately.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 21:27 |
|
|
# ? Jun 8, 2024 02:39 |
|
RustedChrome posted:Best Buy has Fuji X cameras on their site and people have reported seeing them in the stores lately. Yes, but I've looked both online and at the local stores, and both say there are no Fuji X cameras locally. On the other hand, CostCo also seems to have Fuji X-series cameras online; I can check there locally, as well.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2014 21:37 |