|
I use my X-pro caseless but found the X-e2 to be too small for everyday use without a grip. I like having the option to take it off though and make it a pocket camera with my 27mm. I use a generic $20 metal grip found on Amazon. I also really like thumb grips and bought a metal one on ebay for not much money (avoid the ones requiring a screw to stay locked in).
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 21:19 |
|
|
I'll definitely second (3rd?) the $20 amazon thumb grip.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Only get the metal thumb rest if its the version that doesn't require hex screw. If the metal thumb grip that comes with the Ikea screw, you might as well get the 3 dollar plastic thumb grip on ebay. Also, you can get a whole set of shutter buttons. It doesn't matter. You will lost them all. Personally I wouldn't bother protecting the $250 XE1. I have a hard LCD protector and black vinyl sheet cover up all the shiny bits of my XE1. But I did it when the body was 1000 dollars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
This http://www.ebay.com/itm/321286078399?_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT is the best cheap thumb grip I have tried. It fits well on the X-e or X-pro body. Don't get cheap soft releases though the $2 ones are super thin and suck. I get cameraquest ones.Fart Car '97 posted:I'll definitely second (3rd?) the $20 amazon thumb grip. I meant this kind of grip http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FA9HUFE/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1. I got that one because it's completely modular and you can take off the hand bit and vertical plate if you just want the bottom one, but there are cheaper ones now. Mine is covered in gaff tape to look more pro (and be less cold in the winter). 8th-snype fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Apr 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
On the topic of cases, does anyone have recommendations for carrying cases for the Fuji X-T1, 18-55, 55-200 and mirrorless lenses in general. I'm looking for individual cases for each item that will provide some protection for when I carry my gear in a non-camera backpack. Ideally, the case for the X-T1 would have enough room to accommodate a smallish attached lens (like the 18-55 or smaller), so I wouldn't always have to remove the lens before storage. For the lenses I've been looking at fold over pouches and draw string pouches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Domke wraps? 11x11" 15x15" 19x19"
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
What's the absolute best camera, full-frame size or less, in low light? It seems like the A7S is the right choice, but I've also heard that its still photo low light performance isn't that great compared to a downsampled A7II, and it lacks IBIS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Radbot posted:What's the absolute best camera, full-frame size or less, in low light? It seems like the A7S is the right choice, but I've also heard that its still photo low light performance isn't that great compared to a downsampled A7II, and it lacks IBIS. I can't compare it to an a7II, but I am very satisfied so far with my a7S' low-light performance.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Radbot posted:What's the absolute best camera, full-frame size or less, in low light? It seems like the A7S is the right choice, but I've also heard that its still photo low light performance isn't that great compared to a downsampled A7II, and it lacks IBIS. Olympus is better (but still not spectacular) at low-light performance as far as their sensors go, but their IBIS is fantastic and they have quite a few lenses available at f/1.8 or faster.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
A7S, no question.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Uncle Ivan posted:A7S, no question. Yup https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RyiS-mrp1c
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
terriyaki posted:Domke wraps? Thanks for pointing me in that direction. Just ordered a 15" wrap for the 55-200 and an OP/Tech neoprene case for the X-T1 with 18-55 attached.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Hi thread, I'm looking for something as good as possible with a budget of about £250-300 (~$450) which also fits in the pocket. This puts me right in between the small budget mirrorless cameras and the better compacts. I've seen the RX100 getting rave reviews and the original mk1 just squeezes into my budget at £300 at the moment. However, I've also spotted that the Sony a5000 is sitting around £250 on amazon at the moment and seems to offer some huge advantages in a similar sized package, most notably a much larger APS-C sensor (==> better low light performance) and the possibility of whacking on a 50mm lens for some nice portrait photography. As far as I can tell the major downside is that sony mostly forgot to add any controls - seriously, it doesn't even have a mode selection wheel or touch screen, plus the control ring around the lens in the RX100 seems incredibly useful. Does anyone have any experience with the a5000, and is it a bastard to use? Is there anything else worth checking out at this price range? (what, I like sony  )
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
If you're seriously interested in a good pocket camera, the rx100 is about half the size of the a5000.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Oh. I made them out to be about the same - does the kit lens add that much bulk?    
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
grinnard posted:Oh. I made them out to be about the same - does the kit lens add that much bulk? mirrorless lenses of almost every kind will make a camera unable to be carried in a pocket, save some pancakes or bodycap lenses like those Olympus things. The RX100 is a phenomenal camera and small enough to easily keep with you when you want it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
grinnard posted:Oh. I made them out to be about the same - does the kit lens add that much bulk? The updated 16-50mm power zoom lens, 16mm pancake, and 20mm pancake add an inch or two, all other lenses add upwards of 4 inches of extra length.  I will say that the a5000 is a good camera once you get used to the control quirks. I have the NEX-F3, and I don't have any issues except for the slower auto-focus. Karasu Tengu fucked around with this message at 22:02 on Apr 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
I see, that is quite the difference. I've been reading up more on the RX100 and it seems like the lens in the mk3 is much better for short depth of field and portrait shots (in the mk1, the lens is f4.9 at telephoto end rather than f2.8) but it's almost double the price!
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
What about a not-current-generation Olympus PEN? I remember seeing a few that were pretty cheap on eBay, back when I was shopping for a mirrorless camera. (Super happy with my a6000 currently, but that's a couple hundred more. Maybe the a5000 comes close to the a6000 in image quality - but does it have the bad old NEX UI in addition to the lack of manual controls? If so, that would be a strike against it.) A bit about my camera buying experience, while I'm at it: I was looking for something in the ~$500 dollar range and ended up with a Fuji X30 at first. Absolutely loved the build, the zoom range, and the film color modes, but having used an a6000 in the past and with photos from it saved on my computer to compare, I just wasn't able to get past the deficit in detail and resolution that the Fuji had against the Sony. I felt sorry to say goodbye to my little Fuji (and pony up the extra $$) but I ultimately returned it for the a6000. Silver lining? I was able to pick up an open box a6000 that ended up being only $10 more than the x30. Pretty sweet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
I shot some portraits with the 35mm/X-T1, I'll just link the post since it's in the Portraits thread. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3170705&pagenumber=191#post443842089
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 17:24
|
|
|
I've seen the videos and there's no question that the A7S destroys every other camera below ten grand in low light VIDEO. But what about stills? I've seen some comparisons that show it has a 1-2 stop advantage at best after the A7II is downsampled.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
The a7S is still a bit better than the a7/R/II at low light stills but if you're not going to use video, you're probably better served just getting the a7II and a good lens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Radbot posted:I've seen the videos and there's no question that the A7S destroys every other camera below ten grand in low light VIDEO. But what about stills? I've seen some comparisons that show it has a 1-2 stop advantage at best after the A7II is downsampled. Oh yeah good point, I forgot it was mainly pitched for video. A 1-2 stop advantage still seems good but that's probably not worth the extra premium.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:What about a not-current-generation Olympus PEN? I remember seeing a few that were pretty cheap on eBay, back when I was shopping for a mirrorless camera. (Super happy with my a6000 currently, but that's a couple hundred more. Maybe the a5000 comes close to the a6000 in image quality - but does it have the bad old NEX UI in addition to the lack of manual controls? If so, that would be a strike against it.) Will have a look at the PENs, thanks. God the UK website is obnoxious though, it seems to be marketing them as lifestyle accessories rather than cameras. I had a look at reviews and the a5000 seems to be very similar to the a6000 minus wifi and the fancy autofocus. [Edit: Also there's no EVF in the a5000]. The NEX menus have been ditched in favour of the same style as A7/R and RX-series, apparently. How do you find the controls on the a6000? I read that it's a huge pain to pick a different autofocus point. How do you switch modes? grinnard fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Apr 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
grinnard posted:I had a look at reviews and the a5000 seems to be very similar to the a6000 minus wifi and the fancy autofocus. [Edit: Also there's no EVF in the a5000]. The NEX menus have been ditched in favour of the same style as A7/R and RX-series, apparently. How do you find the controls on the a6000? I read that it's a huge pain to pick a different autofocus point. How do you switch modes? I would find image quality to be of greater importance when weighed against bells and whistles like wifi (although I use wifi a lot). Also, to me, ease of use (quickly changing exposure modes, setting aperture, shutter, exposure compensation, etc) is a high priority, too. It doesn't look like the a5000 has much in the way of external controls, so that could give you trouble, depending on how feasible it is to change those things through the on screen menu, buttons, and single control wheel. But overall, if the a5000 produces images close to the quality of the a6000's, I'd say it's worth considering. The updated menu is good, but yes, so far I haven't found a one-step method for changing the AF point. One could probably set a custom button to go straight to manual focus point selection, but I haven't needed to since I only have one AF-capable lens (the 16-50 kit). The rest are adapted, manual-focus only. But I intend to get another native E-mount lens sooner or later, which brings me to a question of my own, for anyone who knows: What are some of the better lenses made specifically for Sony APS-C mirrorless system cameras? I need something wide (20mm or less) and something with good reach (~100mm or more). I see that Sigma makes a 19mm E-mount for the very low price of around $200, and the Sony-made 55-210 has the range I'm looking for at the far end. Anyone with experience of either one? I'm unsure about the cheap Sigma, but it's a prime so I'd hope that it would be better than the kit lens at the wide end, which has distortion around the edges even with lens profile correction or JPEG processing. As for the Sony zoom, I've heard nothing but bad things. My adapted canon 55-250mm IS II doesn't score appreciably lower than it on DXOMark, and works fine with focus peaking, but I'd like to have something that works for sports & nature action and takes advantage of the a6000's fast AF. Which leads me to the 18-200mm 3.5/6.3's. Sony and Tamron both make one. I'd just as soon have two different lenses - one wide-angle prime and one mid zoom telephoto - but if I could get the same range of coverage with decently good image quality in a single big zoom, that would be great. I just have always read that big 'travel zooms' don't match the image quality of primes. Does that mean that lower range zooms (like a theoretical 70-100mm) also generally make out better than ones with ridiculously high ranges like 18-200? I think it's too bad that Sony doesn't make a good long telephoto for E-mount, say 300mm or more. But that's just one of the many gaps in their lens repertoire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
Sigma's 19/30/60 e-mount prime set are literally some of the best native e-mount lenses you can buy still. As for long zooms, your best bet is honestly to get an adapter, or get one of these three lenses only. The 55-210 is absolutely complete garbage. There are also the reflex 300mm telephotos if you like manual focus or are completely broke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
Have we heard anything about the successor to the X-T1? Honestly, I'm just hoping they release a new version so I can get the X-T1 for a bit cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Bag of Sun Chips posted:Have we heard anything about the successor to the X-T1? Honestly, I'm just hoping they release a new version so I can get the X-T1 for a bit cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:19
|
|
|
Fujirumors had a post about a cheaper X-T1 called an "X-T10" that would not be weather sealed and have a few other changes to make it cheaper. No time frame though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Elliotw2 posted:Sigma's 19/30/60 e-mount prime set are literally some of the best native e-mount lenses you can buy still. As for long zooms, your best bet is honestly to get an adapter, or get one of these three lenses only. The 55-210 is absolutely complete garbage. Good to know. Especially about the Sigmas. Sony sure does make a lot of big zooms. Checking out their website, I see that they actually make three different 18-200mm lenses! And the 18-105, 24-240, 70-200, and 24-135 - it seems a little redundant. And nothing longer than 240mm. The 18-105mm that was linked is tempting, but I picked up a Minolta Rokkor-X 45mm with 2x converter, and it's actually pretty nice. If I get the Sigma 19mm, I'll have all my non-telephoto bases covered, for my purposes. But Sony E is really sorely lacking in the long telephoto department. The FE 24-240 is still a big zoom (although I'm guessing it would greatly surpass the quality of my canon 55-250, it's still slower at the long end, and about 5x the price), and the 70-200mm is all gussied up to look like a Canon L tele for not much reach. Right now my serious telephoto solution is an adapted Sigma EF 170-500 DG, which is optically pretty nice even if it lacks any stabilization. I'd be willing to give up some of the reach if I could get good IS and AF performance, but I guess 300mm really is the minimum if I'm going to be spending more than $500 on a good telephoto lens. I don't have a problem paying more than $1000 for something that's designed to reach 300mm or more and performs well at that level of magnification. Sony just doesn't offer it in E mount. I guess my question, then, is: has anyone used the Sony-made a-to-e adapters with the translucent mirror inside? Does it allow for AF performance that's close to that of a native mount? SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
My guess is the next flagship body will be XPro2 with a new sensor. The XT-10 will be a downcost XT1, so it is a XE2 successor to in price position. The XE2 came out in Oct 13, 1 year after the XE1. Fuji kind of ruined the XE brand by releasing the XE2 too soon. My prediction: 2015 Summer: XT10 2015 Fall XPro2 (new sensor, same size) 2016 Fall X100 Mk4 whatever7 fucked around with this message at 15:41 on Apr 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 15:37
|
|
|
Where is my X100s firmware upgrade, Fuji!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I guess my question, then, is: has anyone used the Sony-made a-to-e adapters with the translucent mirror inside? Does it allow for AF performance that's close to that of a native mount? The LA-EA2/4 have the same autofocus setup as a real modern A-mount camera, with the downside of costing as much as a real A-mount camera and not having any stabilization.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Guess I might stick with my 5dmkii for distant telephoto stuff then. If AF is a requirement, at least. Not that manual focus with peaking has really been any worse than the 5D's lackluster AF so far.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
terriyaki posted:Where is my X100s firmware upgrade, Fuji! Kaizen, my rear end! Right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
The 16mm/1.4 samples look great but size is a tag big for my taste. Plus  
whatever7 fucked around with this message at 02:49 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 12:30
|
|
|
I'm strongly tempted to get it but I'm equally trying to resist GAS. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 05:25
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:I'm strongly tempted to get it but I'm equally trying to resist GAS. I'm in the same boat. I love my 10-24 but ....f/1.4.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:I'm in the same boat. I love my 10-24 but ....f/1.4. Hey you should get it, it's probably worth it. If you're selling the 10-24 I'm calling dibs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 21:19 |
|
|
Geektox posted:Hey you should get it, it's probably worth it. Nope, sorry. After a decade of not using a zoom I find this one really great and cool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 08:33
|
|