|
whatever7 posted:The brand break down for mirrorless cameras: Sony is trying to crush the other manufacturers on sheer number of new bodies introduced.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:28 |
|
|
HPL posted:There's also the emergence of the full-frame A7 series as well, which was practically a market that appeared out of nowhere, numbers-wise. On that chart the share of Sony A7 is 3%, I assume that includes all variants.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 06:21
|
|
|
Sure hope m4/3 doesn't go the way of 4/3 just as I'm pouring money into the system. Panasonic should up the pace of their sensor development and Olympus should hurry up with their pro lens lineup. Sony and Fuji ain't sleeping.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 11:52
|
|
|
Wengy posted:Sure hope m4/3 doesn't go the way of 4/3 just as I'm pouring money into the system. Panasonic should up the pace of their sensor development and Olympus should hurry up with their pro lens lineup. Sony and Fuji ain't sleeping. I was just reading that the sensors for m4/3 are made by Sony anyway, and it sounds like they progress at the pace Sony develops them, which is probably just slower than what Sony themselves puts in their alphas. They still have cost in their favour for the bodies, and I don't think Panasonic's collaboration with leica has been bad for business at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
Linedance posted:I was just reading that the sensors for m4/3 are made by Sony anyway, and it sounds like they progress at the pace Sony develops them, which is probably just slower than what Sony themselves puts in their alphas. Panasonic also make sensors, pretty great ones actually - the E-M1 contains a Panasonic sensor, for instance. The Sony ones are good too, of course, and Olympus can just use smaller versions of the latest Sony sensors. Still, it's puzzling and a little worrying that the E-M5 successor coming out in a couple of weeks apparently won't feature a new sensor. I'm still hoping for a big breakthrough with organic sensor tech, but that seems to be a few years out still. Generally, the m4/3 ecosystem seems very competitive to me, I just wish there were more progress when it comes to DR and high-ISO performance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
Wengy posted:Panasonic also make sensors, pretty great ones actually - the E-M1 contains a Panasonic sensor, for instance. The Sony ones are good too, of course, and Olympus can just use smaller versions of the latest Sony sensors. Still, it's puzzling and a little worrying that the E-M5 successor coming out in a couple of weeks apparently won't feature a new sensor. Its kind of inevitable as the price of the sensors fall. Right now, if your overall budget is exceed certain amount, its more cost effective to get a system with bigger sensor because the cost of fast lens/thin DOF doesn't scale linearly. I would set the the cost effect line to $1000 between m43 and APSC and $2500 between APSC and FF (just throw 2 random numbers out to simulate discussion). And these cost effective lines will go down very slowly, in a controlled manner. Because sensor business is a monopoly. There is also the question of how much people are willing to pay premium for a smaller lighter system. Back in the day when small 8"-12" laptop was call 'subnotebook', 'UMPC', people (in business) in huge premium to get a lighter machine that can run proper windows. We are talking about 1500-2000 dollars for a slow rear end laptop with tiny rear end keys. Nowadays, these machines are call 'Netbooks', 'Transformer tablet' and they basically have became dirty wordw. People pay 300-400 routinely for a non-windows tablet but Microsoft have to price the windows tablet to $200! $100! $75! to beg people give windows tablet a try. What I am saying is the consumer perception changes, maybe in 5 years people don't place any value in a smaller lighter system. And that's consumer market for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Its kind of inevitable as the price of the sensors fall. Right now, if your overall budget is exceed certain amount, its more cost effective to get a system with bigger sensor because the cost of fast lens/thin DOF doesn't scale linearly. I would set the the cost effect line to $1000 between m43 and APSC and $2500 between APSC and FF (just throw 2 random numbers out to simulate discussion). Not sure I get all your points, but I'll bite. Maybe you're right to point out that it's more cost-effective to go for a "bigger" system once your budget reaches a certain saturation point, but I think we all know that choosing a camera system is not about cost-effectiveness alone. Cameras are tools that enable creative processes. In choosing such a tool, emotional and subjective factors inevitably come into play. We can probably agree that shooting with, say, a Fuji X-T1 is a very different experience from shooting with a Sony A7II, and while it might be more "cost-effective" to go for the FF camera in this situation (I'm not even sure it would be), plenty of people will choose the Fuji any day because it offers things the Sony doesn't. Choosing a camera is tantamount to choosing a set of trade-offs you can live with, and sensor size is only a small part of this equation. I think the success of Fuji and m4/3 proves that people are quite willing to shell out lots of dough for smaller formats, since these formats have advantages over FF which to some users outweigh the (slightly) higher IQ and flexibility offered by the larger sensor. I also don't really follow your analogy - the decline of prices for UMPCs is probably not down to changing user perspectives, but simply decreasing costs of miniaturization. The first Macbook Air that came out in 2008 was dog slow and cost a lot of money not because people were generally willing to pay that much, but because that form factor hadn't really been done before, or at least it hadn't been done like that. This miniaturization had its price, which early adopters were willing to pay, and now it's reached the mass market (or was made obsolete by even smaller formats, like tablets and powerful smartphones). There are also some advantages to smaller camera formats that are persistent and unaffected by "changing perceptions", such as the huge size / weight benefit (see the recently announced Sony FE lenses for proof - you can perform amazing feats of engineering to shrink down the bodies, but the lenses will always bite you in the rear end because of physics). There will always be people who "place value" in this, because it's an advantage that's so plain to see. Of course, this is merely my personal, highly subjective view, but I think this is one thing m4/3 simply gets right. The format allows for bodies of all sizes, from diminutive (GM1) to compact (PEN / GX) to SLR-like (OMD, GH), meanwhile the lenses stay compact too. This equilibrium is hard to maintain even in the APS-C world, where Fuji also offer a variety of body types / sizes, but then their new pro zoom is simply humongous and doesn't even have IS. Wengy fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
I have to say, since I went from a DSLR to mirrorless, I haven't found myself missing anything from the DSLR world. Granted I know the Oly E-5 wasn't the king of anything except noise, but when I can have a bag full of glass at f/2.8 or faster, a ton of batteries, and have it all weigh less than my typical DSLR loadout, I really can't find anything to complain about on the whole. The one downside I've seen is battery life, but that's to be expected when you just plain don't have the body size to accommodate a giant battery. Plus I've been using it to shoot sports which is gonna hammer almost any battery anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
DJExile posted:I have to say, since I went from a DSLR to mirrorless, I haven't found myself missing anything from the DSLR world. Granted I know the Oly E-5 wasn't the king of anything except noise, but when I can have a bag full of glass at f/2.8 or faster, a ton of batteries, and have it all weigh less than my typical DSLR loadout, I really can't find anything to complain about on the whole. The one downside I've seen is battery life, but that's to be expected when you just plain don't have the body size to accommodate a giant battery. Plus I've been using it to shoot sports which is gonna hammer almost any battery anyway. Same here. It would be different if I were dependent on features which still distinguish FF from smaller formats - the possibility to achieve razor-thin DOF, great high-ISO performance, generally less noise and slightly better resolution and DR... But I'm not, so I'm just enjoying the fact that I'll soon carry around weather-sealed, constant f2.8 zooms that cover an equivalent focal length of 14-200mm wherever I go - whereas even the trusty old Tamron 17-50 often felt too big and heavy on my old 7D, so the entire rig just stayed home.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Mirrorless AF still hurts bad compared to DSLRs. But other than that, I don't miss DSLRs at all and it would take one heck of a camera to make me switch back. The inevitable trend is towards smaller sensors. That's the way it has been as long as there has been photography. Even full frame was a teeny tiny format compared to the common formats back in the day.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
HPL posted:Mirrorless AF still hurts bad compared to DSLRs. But other than that, I don't miss DSLRs at all and it would take one heck of a camera to make me switch back. I think this depends widely on the lenses. My 45mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8 are stupid fast. Kit lenses are pretty painful though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
HPL posted:Mirrorless AF still hurts bad compared to DSLRs. My XT-1's autofocus is hands down better than the AF on my 5DII. Obviously not up to par with the 3, but it's not fair to lump 'mirrorless AF' into one category, as there are now bodies with professional level AF.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
S-AF on my E-M1 seems faster than S-AF on the 7D I had before, and that was a DSLR with very good AF. IIRC mirrorless cameras mainly have issues with C-AF.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Wengy posted:IIRC mirrorless cameras mainly have issues with C-AF. Yeah my EM-5 gets a little too temperamental in C-AF. Soon as it finds the subject I want it tries to jump to something else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
I started using the focus peaking mode more recently. It is cool when it is enabled and you use the auto-focus. It makes it easy to see if you need to adjust your aperture or force the focus point to change. Kinda cool to play with, but wouldn't help with any action.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
JHVH-1 posted:I started using the focus peaking mode more recently. It is cool when it is enabled and you use the auto-focus. It makes it easy to see if you need to adjust your aperture or force the focus point to change. Kinda cool to play with, but wouldn't help with any action. Actually, if you have a nicely-damped manual focus lens, it's not too hard to shoot action shots, especially if the subject is on grass or water that shows depth of field really nicely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
bobfather posted:Actually, if you have a nicely-damped manual focus lens, it's not too hard to shoot action shots, especially if the subject is on grass or water that shows depth of field really nicely. Guess I gotta give it a try sometime.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
So I randomly tried a Fujifilm X-T1 at a Best Buy the other day and immediately fell in love with the viewfinder and now I have a burning desire to spend like $1500 on it and a lens. My only hesitation is that maybe I could do with one of the lesser models in the X lineup? It's a little unclear to me still what the differences are between them all. Would an X100T or X-A1 scratch the same itch? I don't necessarily need interchangeable lenses, a normal prime at f 2.0 or faster would be fine for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
frogbs posted:So I randomly tried a Fujifilm X-T1 at a Best Buy the other day and immediately fell in love with the viewfinder and now I have a burning desire to spend like $1500 on it and a lens. My only hesitation is that maybe I could do with one of the lesser models in the X lineup? It's a little unclear to me still what the differences are between them all. The X100T is only a couple hundred dollars less, so I'm not sure that really gets you out of the "I just fell in love with a really expensive toy" hole. The XT-1 has a much larger viewfinder than any of the others in the lineup, although the X100T has it's own sweet switchable VF. Focus will also be a little slower on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Sounds like the X100(s/t) is what you want if you're ok with fixed lens. It's got a 35mm equiv at F/2, and it has the same electronic viewfinder and also a glass viewfinder at the same time. The X-E2 also has a viewfinder built in, and it goes for considerably less with the faster kit lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Sounds like the X100(s/t) is what you want if you're ok with fixed lens. It's got a 35mm equiv at F/2, and it has the same electronic viewfinder and also a glass viewfinder at the same time. The X-E2 also has a viewfinder built in, and it goes for considerably less with the faster kit lens. The X-E2 looks like it may be the answer. There are bodies on KEH for $600ish. There's also the X-Pro1, which can be found for about as much as the X-E2. I suppose I should hunt them all down and try them in person. Edit: And now i've found a Craigslist posting for the X-T1, with the 23mm 1.4 and 27mm 2.8 for $1900 total. Tempting... frogbs fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
frogbs posted:The X-E2 looks like it may be the answer. There are bodies on KEH for $600ish. There's also the X-Pro1, which can be found for about as much as the X-E2. I suppose I should hunt them all down and try them in person. If the reason you liked the XT-1 viewfinder is partly because it's so gloriously large, the others are not as big as per my post above. So try them out before you decide on one. The Xpro1 has the cool switchable OVF/EVF like the X100 series though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
I have an X100S and think it kicks total rear end. Used on ebay in the 800-900 range right now. EDIT: Is there anyone here with experience with the Teleconverter for the X100S? If so, how is it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
hi liter posted:I have an X100S and think it kicks total rear end. Used on ebay in the 800-900 range right now. $850 new for a black X100S on B&H still.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
I kind of want the x100 teleconverter, too. The sample images I've seen from it look great. The only downside is it's ginormous. Hopefully one of these days Fuji will release an x100 variant with a 50mm equiv lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Listed my Fuji x-mount gear on the BST thread, both the 18mm and 35mm if any one is interested: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3125105&pagenumber=208#post440607013
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Is there a need for a modern camera user to define his own shoot modes using a simple API ? It would be nice to be able to define behaviors like "don't go below 1/50 but if you need to bump up the ISO to 3200 first then start opening progressively wider". I guess it would expose the camera to badly written soft and spawn warranty issues ?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 09:27
|
|
|
My X-T1 arrived this morning. Needless to say, my productivity at the office has been reduced to none, whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
sildargod posted:My X-T1 arrived this morning. Needless to say, my productivity at the office has been reduced to none, whatsoever. I recommend the extended eye cup if you shoot in bright daylight
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 12:34
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:Is there a need for a modern camera user to define his own shoot modes using a simple API ? Yes. and I am very disappointed that this isn't a thing already. It would be almost trivial for camera manufacturers to give you the ability to map your own modes of shutter vs aperture vs ISO No doubt, it will be devleoped for iPhone/Android first and Canon/Nikon/Sony will roll it out to their Pro bodies three years later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
Had a chance to handle an E-M1 last night. Great camera. That IBIS is something else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
unpacked robinhood posted:Is there a need for a modern camera user to define his own shoot modes using a simple API ? You could probably do that on the Sony cameras, since they let you install and create new modes through their Web store. Samsung might let you make an android app for this too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
I always wondered why someone didn't "jailbreak" some of the camera firmware. I guess that's what MagicLantern is essentially but it would be awesome to see something to the extend of that unpacked robinhood said.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
hi liter posted:I have an X100S and think it kicks total rear end. Used on ebay in the 800-900 range right now. I feel like if the 28mm was 24mm instead it would be considered a must-have. I'm sure they tried it and just couldn't get there, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
trip9 posted:I always wondered why someone didn't "jailbreak" some of the camera firmware. I guess that's what MagicLantern is essentially but it would be awesome to see something to the extend of that unpacked robinhood said. I used http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK to unlock spot metering, an extra stop of ISO and proper bracketing on my 400D
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
trip9 posted:I always wondered why someone didn't "jailbreak" some of the camera firmware. I guess that's what MagicLantern is essentially but it would be awesome to see something to the extend of that unpacked robinhood said. In theory it should be ideal to implement on the android-cameras. You get additional light sensors to detect exterior light condition, also touch screen for you to pick a specific art mode very fast. If Samsung cameras are designed by actual photographers they would be doing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
HPL posted:Mirrorless AF still hurts bad compared to DSLRs. But other than that, I don't miss DSLRs at all and it would take one heck of a camera to make me switch back. My Sony a6000 AF is faster than my Canon 7d, and I feel it is more accurate too. Facial and object focus tracking is a great feature too. Granted, the 7d isn't exactly super-modern tech, but I think it's considered to have a pretty fast AF.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:If Samsung cameras are designed by actual designers not idiot piss garbage idiots they would be doing it. Ftfy. I have a low opinion if sarnsung's ability to make things that don't suck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Ftfy. I have a low opinion if sarnsung's ability to make things that don't suck. Samsung makes a heck of a fridge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:28 |
|
|
Samsung has the typical east-asian design problem, which is that they're really loving good at the basic/material science, but can't design their way out of a wet paper bag.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2015 23:06
|
|
