|
VelociBacon posted:I'd like a recommendation for a mirrorless for my father and stepmother. I'm familiar with and shoot DSLR myself but have a limited knowledge of what's around in the mirrorless world so thought I'd ask here to start. The idea is that the camera would be used heavily while travelling, something they do a ton of. They take many photos, some of which are actually decently framed and interesting but they use only the camera in my father's android tablet and the image quality is awful. After years I've finally convinced them to consider picking up a proper camera so they can enjoy that aspect of their trips more/have decent photos to look back on. The OMD EM5-II is out and meets a ton of those criteria.
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
If you have 1800 budget, just go to a camera store and get the weight/size combo that fits you. Look at XT1+1855, EM5II+1240, GX7+1235 or 1240. Don't buy Sony APSC because there is no new body/lens in the last 2 years. Don't buy Canon EOSM and Samsung of course.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:If you have 1800 budget, just go to a camera store and get the weight/size combo that fits you. Do this
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Don't buy Canon EOSM and Samsung of course. Going to argue against this. The EOS M10 would probably do what they want to do for $500 with the kit 15-45mm lens. This would leave $1300 to buy the EOS M to EF adapter ($70), a real macro lens (EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM - $450) and something fast prime like for night time (EF 35mm f/2 IS USM - $550). It doesn't do the weatherproofing but does everything else. It also supports NFC and WiFi. The M3 is overkill for the requirements list, unless you need the EVF or hot shoe, but there is room in the budget for it. The M3's 18-55mm kit lens is serviceable but not as nice as the new 15-45mm on paper. The M10's autofocus speed is likely to be somewhere between the M1/M2 and M3. Anyone who suggests blowing all of the budget on camera body and one lens has money to burn. Save money on camera, blow money on lenses, buy new camera later. Plus all the EF/EF-S glass ought to work with a Metabones adapter on an a7R II when Sony somehow puts Canon out of business or whatever weird fantasy ya'll are living comes to fruition.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Requirements include no adapters and good selection of compact native lenses. That's either Olympus/Panasonic or Fuji.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
LiquidRain posted:Requirements include no adapters and good selection of compact native lenses. That's either Olympus/Panasonic or Fuji.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Living in Canada the customs to bring that across would make it around the same price as buying it new.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Ah right, the Canada thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
drat those countries where customs actually inspects incoming packages Freedom! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Living in Canada the customs to bring that across would make it around the same price as buying it new. Not if I mark it worth nothing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
Nomenclature posted:Meh, when the A6000 regularly goes on sale for $450 (or $500 with the 16-50mm kit lens), it's hard to justify recommending anything less. The A6000 has an electronic viewfinder (and trust me, composing shots on a backside screen in bright sunlight sucks) and autofocuses well (which other Sony mirrorless cameras from that generation suck at), and you won't feel compelled to upgrade like I expect you would if you bought a lower end Sony. Keeping in mind though that I'm in Canada and the a6k body is $600. The a5000 I'm looking at is $315 with the 16-50mm lens. If its worth the extra like $3-400 bones I'll wait and save up or look for a used one maybe. It just seemed like a pretty good deal to get started in this. Or is there maybe a different brand I should try and find a deal on? dahkren fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
How bad am I going to be ripped off buying an X100T off of eBay from an American seller that's new in box for 1k shipped?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Bizzaro Quik posted:Not if I mark it worth nothing. This is a good way to risk your money in the hands of postal service employees who most likely do not care what the hell is in the 900th box they've moved on the last hour of their 14 hour shift.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Phone posted:How bad am I going to be ripped off buying an X100T off of eBay from an American seller that's new in box for 1k shipped? Considering they go for $1300 NIB even on Amazon, I'd say something's up with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
It's probably grey market is all. Dollar is strong right now. Don't know what Fuji USA does re: grey market stuff. Some companies usually honor warranty , some just make you pay for repairs, and some won't touch the stuff at all. Edit: Fuji USA says on their website they will service (so they are better than tamron in that regard) but will charge normal out of warranty rates for it. timrenzi574 fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Slowhanded posted:This is a good way to risk your money in the hands of postal service employees who most likely do not care what the hell is in the 900th box they've moved on the last hour of their 14 hour shift. Never thought about that. Guess it's probably not worth the risk eh.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
timrenzi574 posted:It's probably grey market is all. Dollar is strong right now. Don't know what Fuji USA does re: grey market stuff. Some companies usually honor warranty , some just make you pay for repairs, and some won't touch the stuff at all. Fair point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
dahkren posted:Keeping in mind though that I'm in Canada and the a6k body is $600. The a5000 I'm looking at is $315 with the 16-50mm lens. If its worth the extra like $3-400 bones I'll wait and save up or look for a used one maybe. It just seemed like a pretty good deal to get started in this. Or is there maybe a different brand I should try and find a deal on?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:20
|
|
|
Bizzaro Quik posted:Never thought about that. Guess it's probably not worth the risk eh. In your entire life, how many packages have you 'lost' in the mail? I've lost like...two. And i lived in West Africa for three years. Who is seriously worried about just losing packages in the mail? Live in a lovely neighborhood and get them nicked off your porch? Sure. But just "lost because post office employees are lazy"? Come on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
In over 15 years of buying/selling stuff online, I cannot remember the last time I lost something in the mail, if there ever was a time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:In your entire life, how many packages have you 'lost' in the mail? I've lost like...two. And i lived in West Africa for three years. Who is seriously worried about just losing packages in the mail? Live in a lovely neighborhood and get them nicked off your porch? Sure. But just "lost because post office employees are lazy"? Come on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
Didn't lensrentals Canada cease business because of the number of suspiciously missing packages Canada post was responsible for ?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
My point was about damaged goods during shipping, not losing packages (though that has certainly happened to me multiple times even this past year!) Having two friends who work in the parcel delivery business, I can guarantee you that absolutely no one there cares about the wellbeing of your package regardless of how many FRAGILE stickers you slap on it.
BitesizedNike fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:I'd like a recommendation for a mirrorless for my father and stepmother. If your dad used to be into film photography, he'd probably like the Fuji stuff the most. XT-10, or XT-1 if weather sealing and durability are a priority. The only other thing you might consider if outfitting an old film user is crop factor; if every focal length being 1.5x tighter than it was on film is going to be an annoyance, then an a7 may be something else to consider. (But Fuji is otherwise much more 'fun' to use)
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Thanks for the recommendations. He wasn't into film photography nearly enough to know what crop factor wold mean. I'll check out the X-1 and X-10, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
VelociBacon posted:Thanks for the recommendations. He wasn't into film photography nearly enough to know what crop factor wold mean. I'll check out the X-1 and X-10, thanks. Fuji does away with the mode dial, and its one of the reasons I love their cameras so much. Wanna shoot aperture priority? Choose aperture on the actual lens ring, while leaving shutter speed on auto. And vice versa. Your parents will quickly get it. Mode dials infuriate me and they are the enemy of simple usability.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
Slowhanded posted:My point was about damaged goods during shipping, not losing packages (though that has certainly happened to me multiple times even this past year!) Having two friends who work in the parcel delivery business, I can guarantee you that absolutely no one there cares about the wellbeing of your package regardless of how many FRAGILE stickers you slap on it. By your logic you should never ship anything by any means because regardless of how you ship or mark it it's going to get beat up. Packages get beat up in transit, big deal. That's why you cover them in tons of bubble wrap. Camera gear is sturdy. Package it well, it will get there fine and in one piece. "Bbbbut the post will break it" is a really dumb reason to not buy something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
What? Did you read my original post? I'm saying you shouldn't mark your packages with $0 value in the worst case that your camera or lens, while traveling across borders and hundreds of miles, may end up broken and you are out of any legal recourse to recoup your losses. Cheating on your import duty forms is a good way to risk losing a ton of money.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
Animal posted:In over 15 years of buying/selling stuff online, I cannot remember the last time I lost something in the mail, if there ever was a time. I have. A brand new Nexus 5 from google never arrived. I just filled out a form, signed it and got my refund Serve google right for charging me $30 shipping and not even sending it through half way decent shipping method. I have not received any demanded phone/camera from ebay. All the lost disputed I filled with ebay were 2-5 dollar cheap pruchases. whatever7 fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:I have. A brand new Nexus 5 from google never arrived. I just filled out a form, signed it and got my refund Only problem I've ever had was ebay sellers who use Lasership (or laser-something) which is just terrible. Phone posted:How bad am I going to be ripped off buying an X100T off of eBay from an American seller that's new in box for 1k shipped? I got a new-ish one with all the accessories off Craigslist for $950 a few months ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
red19fire posted:Only problem I've ever had was ebay sellers who use Lasership (or laser-something) which is just terrible. I briefly considered canceling my Amazon prime membership during the small period they were using that garbage courier. What a terrible company.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Slowhanded posted:What? Did you read my original post? I'm saying you shouldn't mark your packages with $0 value in the worst case that your camera or lens, while traveling across borders and hundreds of miles, may end up broken and you are out of any legal recourse to recoup your losses. Cheating on your import duty forms is a good way to risk losing a ton of money. Yes, I get your point. My point is, the risk is non-existent, because it's 2015 and packages don't really get lost in the mail any more. The estimated lost package rate is <1%, and even then they're just stabbing in the dark because not enough get lost to get a solid estimate. They get beat up a bit, which you can negate by packaging it well. If you are willing to accept a %0.5-%0.8 chance your package will get lost in transit in order to save money on tariffs to afford gear you otherwise couldn't afford it is a really comically very safe bet that you will be successful. The loss of legal recourse is a risk entirely worth taking. Is there a risk? Yes. But be realistic about it. Edit: I don't mean to be combative, I'm just trying to point out how low that risk actually is, because I have sent a lot of $0 packages full of expensive stuff and never ever had any issues. red19fire posted:Only problem I've ever had was ebay sellers who use Lasership (or laser-something) which is just terrible. I got a like-new one with a hood and 4 batteries off this very forum for $900 
Fart Car '97 fucked around with this message at 05:19 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:Yes, I get your point. My point is, the risk is non-existent, because it's 2015 and packages don't really get lost in the mail any more. The estimated lost package rate is <1%, and even then they're just stabbing in the dark because not enough get lost to get a solid estimate. They get beat up a bit, which you can negate by packaging it well. Lost in the mail? Yeah I agree a nonissue but damaged in the mail is a thing that happens a lot more frequently. I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about something worth $700 being damaged and noone being willing to pay out the insurance on it because you are trying to cheat the tariff. I've marked some used stuff as a bit cheaper when shipping to Canada but never $0.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Lost in the mail? Yeah I agree a nonissue but damaged in the mail is a thing that happens a lot more frequently. I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about something worth $700 being damaged and noone being willing to pay out the insurance on it because you are trying to cheat the tariff. I've marked some used stuff as a bit cheaper when shipping to Canada but never $0. Its a valid concern. At least ebay offer some buyer protection. The way I deal with risk is that I go for the cheapest and remotest buyers for cheap gears; for more expense used gears say over $400 I try to buy from reputable large dot com stores that sell on ebay to dodge tax and custom; for $1k or higher items I buy new or from places with good return policy only, that means Adorama used/KEH/Amazon Warehouse/etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
Why do you keep bringing up 'lost in the mail'? That has literally never been a point of my argument throughout the series of posts. Damage in the mail is real phenomenon, and it absolutely happens, considerably more than most people think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
8th-snype posted:Lost in the mail? Yeah I agree a nonissue but damaged in the mail is a thing that happens a lot more frequently. I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about something worth $700 being damaged and noone being willing to pay out the insurance on it because you are trying to cheat the tariff. I've marked some used stuff as a bit cheaper when shipping to Canada but never $0. My monitor got busted on its way to me after I moved back in April, and I am *still* fighting with USPS to get reimbursed on the insurance I paid for. It's such a pain in the rear end; I'll still use it for selling stuff, but I honestly can't see myself ever bothering to insure my own property again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 08:07
|
|
|
Slowhanded posted:Why do you keep bringing up 'lost in the mail'? That has literally never been a point of my argument throughout the series of posts. Damage in the mail is real phenomenon, and it absolutely happens, considerably more than most people think. That's really easy to prevent, though. As long as you double box with padding in both boxes, I can't imagine something arriving damaged, unless somebody runs the package over or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 08:55
|
|
|
Do any of you guys own an X-E1? I've been looking online at X-E2 prices and happened to notice that the X-E1 is consistently $250-500 AUD cheaper than the X-E2 and X-Pro1. The cheapest I've seen an X-E1 is $300 vs the X-E2 at $550 and the X-Pro1 at $700. How is the X-E1 as of the latest firmware? My use case is mainly nature and landscapes, along with the usual day to day shooting. I do want to adapt some M42 lenses though - how is the focus peaking? Appreciate any insight! It seems like the X-E1 has kind of flown under the radar.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 09:10
|
|
|
The X-E1 is still a great sensor but its autofocus is slow as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 09:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:21 |
|
|
Besides the cool hybrid electronic/optical viewfinder, are there any significant differences between the X-E1 and X-Pro1? And how about the first and second generation X-trans sensors? Does the second gen have better image quality ( ISO, dynamic range, etc) or is it simply a matter of better on-sensor AF?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 14:37
|
|