|
I don't think any of the cheaper/smaller m43 cameras have an articulated screen, but a nex 3 of some sort will and also be dirt cheap used. I mean, the lens won't be fantastic anyway, so it's not like the vignette on the edges will matter that much.
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:05 |
|
|
My EPL 5's LCD articulates on like 3 hinges and you can use it for selfies. I think all m4/3 cameras starting from like the EP 3 have had articulating LCDs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
There are also some C-mount lenses floating around at this point that claim to cover APS-C: maybe try one of these on your beater NEX before jumping to a new system? It also looks like they might not actually have the max aperture values printed on them, but optical quality is a lot better than the swirly 25mm CCTV. Review here: http://samgoldphotos.blogspot.com/2014/11/user-review-aps-c-25mm-f14.html (comments mention the fact that it's not really close to f1.4). E-PM1 & 2, -PL3, and -P3 don't have articulating screens, and the E-M5 and E-M10 only tilt up/down (no selfies).
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
heffray posted:There are also some C-mount lenses floating around at this point that claim to cover APS-C: maybe try one of these on your beater NEX before jumping to a new system? It also looks like they might not actually have the max aperture values printed on them, but optical quality is a lot better than the swirly 25mm CCTV. Review here: http://samgoldphotos.blogspot.com/2014/11/user-review-aps-c-25mm-f14.html (comments mention the fact that it's not really close to f1.4). To be honest, I was kinda in it for the swirlies as much as the disposability, I like how it looks like an old-timey Petzval. Your post did remind me though, there's a CCTV 35mm f/1.7 (I'm going for "normal" so that'd be better suited to the NEX) that covers APS-C. Knowing how long China/HK deliveries usually take, guess I'll need to wait until I get settled in Australia before I order though! Somewhat related: I was looking for a backpack to use for school and about town (13" Macbook, books, some kind of external pocket for a waterbottle/thermos), and also wanted to be able to put my beater mirrorless in it. I looked at a lot of camera bags first but realised everything was too prioritized towards photo gear (and all looked pretty dorky), and I have enough dedicated camera bags that suck at holding everything else already. I figured I could buy an insert and just dig to the bottom of whatever bag I found, until I came across the Thule 25L Crossover, which has a special padded compartment in the top for sunglasses and stuff, and looks like it ought to hold my NEX-5, hopefully with the SEL35F18 attached. Can probably sneak the 16mm in there too. Comedy option of a QX-1, but I don't want to pay retail for one and judging by the secondhand listings on eBay, neither did anybody else 
Pompous Rhombus fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
35mm f1.7? Why bother waiting, it's cheap as poo poo and covers enough of the NEX sensor that it's plenty usable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:35mm f1.7? Why bother waiting, it's cheap as poo poo and covers enough of the NEX sensor that it's plenty usable. I have this lens and put it on my a6000 now and again. It's fun to use and for thirty bucks who gives a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 07:06
|
|
|
So its cold now, and the cold is affecting my X100S battery performance. How can I get the best performance out of my batteries in cold weather? I primarily use the OVF, Focus on AF-S or Manual, and have the back LCD off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Buy more batteries and keep them in a pocket under your midlayer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 17:25
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Buy more batteries and keep them in a pocket under your midlayer. Pretty much this. The only other thing is to get a USB battery charger and a USB power bank to charge your batteries on the go. But even that will be subject to the perils of low temperatures. One time I was at the top of Whistler mountain and it was so cold you couldn't even stand in shadowy areas because of the temperature difference. I could practically watch my battery meter drain while I was walking around. HPL fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
Sew pockets into your underpants  I have a Bosnian colleague that did that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:35mm f1.7? Why bother waiting, it's cheap as poo poo and covers enough of the NEX sensor that it's plenty usable. Thanks for that, was only thinking of eBay! Ordered it this morning. hi liter posted:So its cold now, and the cold is affecting my X100S battery performance. How can I get the best performance out of my batteries in cold weather? I've put them in my armpits to warm them up. I was just in Denver and watched it go from like ~93% to "warning" in the span of a dozen shots and an hour of walking around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I've put them in my armpits to warm them up. I was just in Denver and watched it go from like ~93% to "warning" in the span of a dozen shots and an hour of walking around. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19N9pAF2qGo
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
I just picked up an x100, it's rad as hell!  It'd be nice if I could re-assign some more buttons to custom functions. I'm using the RAW and Fn buttons for the ND filter and ISO but quick access to the film simulation modes would be nice. crap nerd fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Jan 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
HPL posted:Pretty much this. The only other thing is to get a USB battery charger and a USB power bank to charge your batteries on the go. But even that will be subject to the perils of low temperatures. That's why I got a heated jacket for myself as photography tool over the holiday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
heffray posted:There are also some C-mount lenses floating around at this point that claim to cover APS-C: maybe try one of these on your beater NEX before jumping to a new system? It also looks like they might not actually have the max aperture values printed on them, but optical quality is a lot better than the swirly 25mm CCTV. Review here: http://samgoldphotos.blogspot.com/2014/11/user-review-aps-c-25mm-f14.html (comments mention the fact that it's not really close to f1.4). Why you gotta post something like this? Now I am tempted to just buy one of these lenses after seeing the sample pictures. $40 with the m43 adapter on eBay, and free shipping. http://www.ebay.com/itm/25mm-C-Moun...=item339b50fb8e EDIT: What the heck, I ordered it. JHVH-1 fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Jan 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
If I could steer the conversation back to Adobe and X-Trans support again, I have a quick question that might be kinda dumb: Since forever I've been in the habit of converting my RAWs (Canon and Fuji) to Adobe's DNG format. Does that mean those DNGs are cooked with Adobe's poor X-Tran processing? Or can I run those DNGs through say, Capture One, and get the benefit of a better processing engine?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Rot posted:If I could steer the conversation back to Adobe and X-Trans support again, I have a quick question that might be kinda dumb: Nothing is going to get away from the fact that demosaicing the X-trans sensor is trickier business than the typical Bayer pattern. That said, you should take some pictures and see if any real problems arise. In my experience, things are constantly improving and the occasional artifacts are very minor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
moonduck posted:Nothing is going to get away from the fact that demosaicing the X-trans sensor is trickier business than the typical Bayer pattern. That said, you should take some pictures and see if any real problems arise. In my experience, things are constantly improving and the occasional artifacts are very minor. Oh don't get me wrong: I definitely feel that if you don't have a problem with Adobe's output, then there is no problem. I know for me personally I'm happy with 90% of the shots I process through Lr/ACR. There's a few outside cases, especially with the 14mm (probably due to the types of poo poo I shoot with the 14mm) where I do notice some issues. Drunkly playing with sliders and then deciding either, "eh, good enough. Upload!" or "eh, gently caress it. Next photo!" has carried me this far. That being said, in the few situations where Adobe gives me wonky results, I'd like to figure out what's going on and solve that "problem". I guess what I was asking above, is if Adobe's demosaicing happens during the RAF->DNG conversion or if it happens later, when it comes time to render the image for you to play with in Lr? Previously I thought that DNG was just some sort of Adobe way of re-organizing the sensor data and pack it into their file format. But if it actually applies some sort of processing to it then I might have to rethink my policy of converting to DNG at import. After all, the whole point of raw is that it's a flat file that I'm free to ruin as I see fit. E: Maybe I'm completely mis-understanding the role that DNG plays and it's relationship to a given camera's raw files? Rot fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Jan 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
The differences are small/unnoticable at lower ISOs, which may be why you never notices it before. At higher ISOs they become very noticable. And yes, if you're using ADOBE to read the RAW initially, the issues will be present in the converted files.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
I'm not really clear on what the DNG format is for, exactly. Is the idea that at some point I won't be able to process my camera's RAWs anymore because the software won't process them anymore so I should convert to DNG to stave off the inevitable?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
I think DNG is smaller or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
Dren posted:I'm not really clear on what the DNG format is for, exactly. Is the idea that at some point I won't be able to process my camera's RAWs anymore because the software won't process them anymore so I should convert to DNG to stave off the inevitable? That's basically the idea. Forward-facing data portability based on a (reasonably) open standard. Plus it sort of grew out of the time that Nikon was starting to encrypt white balance info in their raws and other stupidity, to stand as a counter to camera companies trying to wall off their gardens. Some cameras shoot DNG as their native raw format, which was always Adobe's goal — it's just that not many camera companies signed on. As a standard goes it's fine, it's just built around bayer, like most things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
I have a hard time imagining that there will be a time when ACR stops working for my RAWs but then again I don't know about the particulars of RAW formats and what reasons there might be for support to ever be dropped. I guess we're still sort of at the beginning of the digital camera era. In twenty years there could be an untold number of RAW formats and converters that haven't been touched in that long. The stuff I saw about DNG recommended storing DNGs alongside RAWs because of the possibility for DNG conversion errors. I'm not really jazzed about the idea of storing an extra copy of all my images.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
thetzar posted:That's basically the idea. Forward-facing data portability based on a (reasonably) open standard. Plus it sort of grew out of the time that Nikon was starting to encrypt white balance info in their raws and other stupidity, to stand as a counter to camera companies trying to wall off their gardens. Some cameras shoot DNG as their native raw format, which was always Adobe's goal — it's just that not many camera companies signed on. Hmm, sounds a bit like a .pdf, in a way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
One benefit is that it offers a route to use raws from new cameras in old software. The one time I've used the format was when somebody sent me a raw from a 1DX which wasn't supported by Lightroom 3. Adobe's free converter gave me a DNG that LR3 would work with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Hmm, sounds a bit like a .pdf, in a way. Idk, pdf is kind of the only game in town. Yeah there's things like djvu and xps but nobody uses those.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 12:26
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:Idk, pdf is kind of the only game in town. Yeah there's things like djvu and xps but nobody uses those. Also, pdf is batshit insane. There is a spec but Adobe has made reader compatible with the broken, off spec files that many products have produced over the years. So implementing the pdf spec is not good enough since the standard is "it opens in reader" and reader deals with lots of stuff that isn't in the spec. Hopefully DNG is not the same way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
I'm kinda tempted to sell my nice little Oly 45mm and buy... a loving Nocticron. Talk me down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
It's not that different image wise and it's literally 3x the size and cost.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
I have the Oly 45mm and like it. I really, really doubt it's $900 better than the Oly lens. At f/2.8 or slower, the Oly is basically as sharp as you need, and it's great even wide open. Is maximum sharpness at f/1.2 worth $900? The Oly also weighs 1/4 of the Nocticron's weight.
mulls fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
Thanks, that helped. The Olympus 45 is basically my favorite lens and part of me just wants to go "all in" when it comes to this focal length. Hmmm. Ah well, I should be saving up for the Oly 7-14 anyway, really want something wide and the Pana 7-14 is a pig on Oly bodies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Was hoping sony to announce a7sII at CES.  When is the next big show where camera announcements might happen?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 05:06
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Was hoping sony to announce a7sII at CES. CP+ perhaps, which happens the middle of next month.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Was hoping sony to announce a7sII at CES. I can sense you're not joking, but man what a world that we live in that you have a major-name camera manufacturer that has 2x more first-party bodies than first-party lenses available at any given time, and they actually don't care about that and keep going because it's their actual strategy. It's a ballsy move for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 13:44
|
|
|
keyframe posted:Was hoping sony to announce a7sII at CES. You'd probably have to wait for the A7R II first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
bobfather posted:I can sense you're not joking, but man what a world that we live in that you have a major-name camera manufacturer that has 2x more first-party bodies than first-party lenses available at any given time, and they actually don't care about that and keep going because it's their actual strategy. It's a ballsy move for sure. Didn't someone post something indicating Sony is going to focus on releasing lenses?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
bobfather posted:I can sense you're not joking, but man what a world that we live in that you have a major-name camera manufacturer that has 2x more first-party bodies than first-party lenses available at any given time, and they actually don't care about that and keep going because it's their actual strategy. It's a ballsy move for sure. I like how after Sony and Olympus formed an alliance, all the help Sony asked from Olympus was camera body improvement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Dren posted:Didn't someone post something indicating Sony is going to focus on releasing lenses? They said they wanted to have 20 FE-mount lenses between them and Zeiss by the end of the year, but they've only really announced one so far. Currently they have 10 FE lenses, so expect 10 in the next 11 months.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I like how after Sony and Olympus formed an alliance, all the help Sony asked from Olympus was camera body improvement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:05 |
|
|
There are some new Sony FE lenses coming out soon I think, I saw pictures of the mockups on Dpreview (they all looked humongous).
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:52
|
|