|
tino posted:That's why you should also keep a Olympus for demonstrative purpose. Nice try but I don’t want TWO soup filled cameras!
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2018 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 08:06 |
|
|
The Something Awful Forums › The Finer Arts › Creating Covens › The Dorkroom › The Mirrorless Thread: I *insist* that my soup have 24 megapickles in it
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 02:51
|
|
|
nmfree posted:The Something Awful Forums › The Finer Arts › Creating Covens › The Dorkroom › The Mirrorless Thread: I *insist* that my soup have 24 megapickles in it  What’s a good macro lens for my E-M10 mk VIIIiI? I need to take cooler pictures of the flies I’m trying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 04:08
|
|
|
Wow, I’ve never met a fly judge before. The 60mm f2.8 from Olympus is brilliant and all the macro lens you’ll ever need (I had it and it turned out that I don’t really need a macro lens, so I sold it - but it’s definitely awesome).
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
Seconding the oly 60mm, if you need >1:1 then you can get a diopter for it. Not sure about >2:1 lens options though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
How is the tamron 28-75 on a sony a7iii? compared to other 24-70 options
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 06:50
|
|
|
Thirding the Oly 60mm macro. There's a billion of them out there now so you should be able to find one used very easily.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:How is the tamron 28-75 on a sony a7iii? It's good, the best bang/buck value at the moment for a standard zoom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 13:59
|
|
|
Yeah, like fourthing the Olympus 60mm, it's so good there may as well not be other m43 macro lenses. Also works really well as a general short tele prime. Edit: fixin dumb stuff GEMorris fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
GEMorris posted:
Zoom prime?
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
either they meant "short tele" instead of "short zoom" or they're really on some other poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
they only zoom in discrete steps
|
|
#
?
Oct 18, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
I meant short tele and my brain is broken.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 04:38
|
|
|
Yeah, forgot to mention that the 60mm is actually an interesting portrait and even landscape lens. I don’t know the technical details, but I guess being a macro lens it renders kind of differently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 10:41
|
|
|
Wengy posted:Yeah, forgot to mention that the 60mm is actually an interesting portrait and even landscape lens. I don’t know the technical details, but I guess being a macro lens it renders kind of differently. My wife, kid and I did a quick portrait session the other week as part of a fundraiser. The photographer was using an em1-mk2 with the 60mm on it, which initially I was surprised by (ive never used the lens for portraits as I always reach for the 42.5 1.7) but the photos came back great, so I will give it a go next time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
I am glad SWSP kinda shamed me in this thread when I went stupid and was going to sell my Fuji kit for Sony, it was a dumb idea and I am enjoying shooting with my f2 primes now. I was going to sell my wifes X-T20 though but since those things are going for roughly $450-500 on eBay I might as well keep it just because.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:I am glad SWSP kinda shamed me in this thread when I went stupid and was going to sell my Fuji kit for Sony, it was a dumb idea and I am enjoying shooting with my f2 primes now. Whatever works for you. I have enjoyed my switch to Sony from Fuji. I miss a lot about my Fuji glass and some things about the X-T2 but both systems have their strengths. Camera bodies depreciate so much that unless you are really strapped it isn’t worth selling (unless you do the buy/sell cycle quickly before the value goes down significantly). Even over the course of like a month of me trying to sell my X-T2 and power grip the used prices went from like 1100 to 800 (estimate - a lot were trying to get 900 but I saw some people selling for 750 and the low balls drive the others down). I don’t think I’m ever going to buy a new camera body again and will stick with used, possibly for glass as well. I already knew that for musics instruments so I don’t know why I went new for my Fuji gear.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:58
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:I am glad SWSP kinda shamed me in this thread when I went stupid and was going to sell my Fuji kit for Sony, it was a dumb idea and I am enjoying shooting with my f2 primes now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 21:01
|
|
|
Honestly the more I looked into the Sony system the less I wanted to burn my money making the switch. I value the compact/light aspect of the Fuji because it just goes with me more frequently, but for hiking and the like I really like it because of the better weather sealing. I'd love to have IBIS but honestly it just isn't a necessity. Both systems are fantastic, Fuji updating firmware on the X-T2 and adding several features is something I can appreciate. And what I appreciate most is I will be a terrible photographer with either system so why spend the money on gear when I can spend it on going to other places to make bad photos! 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:Honestly the more I looked into the Sony system the less I wanted to burn my money making the switch. I value the compact/light aspect of the Fuji because it just goes with me more frequently, but for hiking and the like I really like it because of the better weather sealing. I'd love to have IBIS but honestly it just isn't a necessity. The lenses that need it the most are stabilized for Fuji so I wasn’t bothered too much by the lack of IBIS. However for adapting glass, which was my reasoning for making the switch, it is super useful for me. I have been afraid to test the weather sealing on the a7ii - I had complete trust in the x-t2’s sealing but can’t find any real tests or real world experience to say how good Sony’s weather sealing is, and I don’t want to be the one to provide it with a broken water filled camera.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 22:10
|
|
|
In the past few days, used XH1 prices dropped like a rock. I was just looking at used cameras on B&H and Adorama -- good ones were going for 1450-ish. Like-new models are now at 1300 flat. That's too good to pass up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
rio posted:The lenses that need it the most are stabilized for Fuji so I wasn’t bothered too much by the lack of IBIS. However for adapting glass, which was my reasoning for making the switch, it is super useful for me. I have been afraid to test the weather sealing on the a7ii - I had complete trust in the x-t2’s sealing but can’t find any real tests or real world experience to say how good Sony’s weather sealing is, and I don’t want to be the one to provide it with a broken water filled camera. I’ve seen some weather tests on the A7iii and it seems to be water enters rather easily around the battery door.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
rio posted:The lenses that need it the most are stabilized for Fuji so I wasn’t bothered too much by the lack of IBIS. However for adapting glass, which was my reasoning for making the switch, it is super useful for me. I am all-in on the Fuji system, but full frame with IBIS is the better way to go for adapted lenses. All the AI/S Nikkors I've plugged into my X-T2 (except the 50's) have been unable to match my native lenses for sharpness, or abberration control. I think the pixel density has a part in that. Images made with the legacy glass look better coming out of my old 21MP FF 5DII. 24MP FF is probably ok too for a lot of older SLR lenses, but I wonder how well things like a Vivitar 70-210 would hold up against an a7r sensor. As for Fuji lenses not needing IBIS, I guess that's generally true for the f/1.4 models and stabilized zooms (+ 80mm macro), as long as we're talking stills and not video. But the 16-55/2.8 does kind of 'need' it. Fuji says it was left out to ensure better 'image quality' and I bet there's some engineering or production reasons backing that up, but it still kind of sucks IMO. Especially because the 16-55 is very sharp and excellent, but it's not exactly a 'bag of primes'. ...It would just be a very useful focal length range to have with stabilization. Hell, the 10-24 has OIS (and great image quality), and it needs it even less. So while I'm all-in for Fuji primes, I feel like a lot of the zooms are missing something... The 16-55 is missing IBIS The 18-55 is missing 'image quality' The 50-140 is matched to FF 70-200 with crop factor FoV, but not DoF, which it could've if it'd been f/2...and that might not be too much to ask seeing as how Sigma put out the 50-100/1.8 The 100-400 could be a little sharper at 400mm... At least the wide-angle zoom is excellent and basically leaves little to be desired, except making it wider/faster/more expensive, which we're getting with the 8-16/2.8 I'm personally more excited, and holding out hope, for the 16-80/4. I think I'm going to cool it on any new Fuji lens purchases until that one comes out, then scoop it up quick and evaluate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:06
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I am all-in on the Fuji system, but full frame with IBIS is the better way to go for adapted lenses. All the AI/S Nikkors I've plugged into my X-T2 (except the 50's) have been unable to match my native lenses for sharpness, or abberration control. I think the pixel density has a part in that. Images made with the legacy glass look better coming out of my old 21MP FF 5DII. 24MP FF is probably ok too for a lot of older SLR lenses, but I wonder how well things like a Vivitar 70-210 would hold up against an a7r sensor. Yeah I had gotten adapters for my X-T1 (and then 2) and didn’t like how my old lenses performed on them. So I just used Fuji lenses instead and I love their glass so that wasn’t an issue. But now on the a7ii I am really seeing those old lenses shine. I would also be curious how the Vivitar 70-210 would do on an r body - it does very well for me but that is 24 megapixels so I wonder how it would resolve with a little more to deal with on the sensor. I had no use for larger than 24mp and didn’t want to deal with extra processing time (which may or may not have happened - my pc is strong but Lightroom can be slow) so the a7ii checked all the boxes I wanted. I wonder what the megapixel amount is where those iconic old film lenses start to fall apart?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 07:04
|
|
|
Every body needs IBIS as far as I’m concerned. Wouldn’t give up those sharp hand-held 1-second-shutter speeds my E-M1 offers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 07:51
|
|
|
Wengy posted:Every body needs FIFY Glad with m43 I just get these features as standard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 15:53
|
|
|
GEMorris posted:FIFY You’re right! My most beloved feature tbh
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
When I load the DNGs which Iridient X-Transformer spits out into Photoshop, they look good but are hella desaturated. I have to jack up saturation by about 20 points to get them to look normal. Why is this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 03:55
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:When I load the DNGs which Iridient X-Transformer spits out into Photoshop, they look good but are hella desaturated. I have to jack up saturation by about 20 points to get them to look normal. Why is this? Maybe there’s something funky going on with Photoshop’s color management options? If you save the saturated image and open it with something else than PS, does it look normal or hella saturated?
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 06:42
|
|
|
I took a look at the X-T3 in the video frame grab comparison tool on DPR. Holy poo poo, it holds detail better almost evything else. The a7rIII APSC crop mode, a99II APSC crop mode, GH5S, and a6500 come close. But in terms of video detail, the GH5S isn't quite as crisp, and the a6500 & a99II have slightly more fine pattern moire and detail aliasing. Only the A7rIII APSC mode looks like it reproduces something as close to the same level of detail with as few artifacts. The a9 output is more detailed, though. Plus it has no crop factor...and has IBIS. Fuji's IBIS-equipped X-H1 is still in the top tier for video detail, but doesn't quite reach the same level as the X-T3. Seems like it gets more out of the 24MP sensor that it shares with the X-T2 than the T2 does itself, and the difference is pretty small...the T2 is to the H1 as the H1 is to the T3. And all of these Fuji's are much less expensive than the a9. KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:When I load the DNGs which Iridient X-Transformer spits out into Photoshop, they look good but are hella desaturated. I have to jack up saturation by about 20 points to get them to look normal. Why is this? Never used Iridient and no doubt your DNGs are desaturated, but that's funny because I typically find the Provia and Astia ACR/LR & OOC JPEG color profiles to be oversaturated (Velvia goes without saying). My preference is much more for Classic Chrome, the Pro Negs, or ACR Default with a little tweaking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 04:32
|
|
|
Might be a bit early for this kind of post, but just thought I'd throw it out there: The G85 is down to $800 retail with the kit lens, which means this holiday season we will likely see prices around $500-$600, and/or "free lens" additions such as the 45-200. It will be this season's gx85. This camera is still extremely capable. Weather sealed, dual IS, mic jack, fully articulating touchscreen, compact slr-style body. It's one downside is that the sensor is 16mp which is really not much of a downside if you are starting out. This camera is extremely video capable, 4k plus external mic jack and articulating screen will let you do some high quality exploration without having to buy in to a $1500+ body. Just wanted to point out that you would likely be able to get the G85 + Pana 25mm 1.7 + Oly 60mm 2.8 Macro for just around a grand based on typical holiday pricing. This would set you up to be able to take a wide range of photos, while setting you up with some great primes, and give you practice with a wide range of zoom ranges, so that you will develop a good idea of where to upgrade next. You could sell or keep the kit zoom(s) that come with the camera, or sell them to help fund other lenses. I'm a Panasonic and m43 fan, not a shill, just wanted to post what I think people should look for price wise during the holiday season and to keep that in mind if you are looking to jump into ILC cameras.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 17:16
|
|
|
The G85 rocks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:The G85 rocks. it is super duper good for what it is
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
Picked up an X-T20 and this thread did not steer me wrong. Even with the kit lens (the worse one, 16-50mm, F/3.5-5.6) the shots look amazing right out of the camera. I really like the first few shots I did at high ISO with the Acros film simulation, it does a great job of making the noise look like classy film grain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
Welcome to the fuji krew!j.peeba posted:Maybe there’s something funky going on with Photoshop’s color management options? If you save the saturated image and open it with something else than PS, does it look normal or hella saturated?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
In evaluating switching/not-switching camera systems how much do you look at the lens options (both existing and 'roadmap') versus the body itself? Obviously the bodies depreciate at a much faster rate than the glass and a great 24-70 could last many, many body lifetimes. I guess I'm trying to compare the potential of the RF mount versus the maturity of the A7 III over the EOS R. I probably buy a new body about every 5-8 years so it's hard for me to get excited about having a less than amazing body at this price point for the next 5+ years but I am super optimistic about the potential and early showings of the RF mount. Am I crazy to consider suffering through the ergonomic science experiment of the R for access to the RF mount? Should I just ignore my internal biases and jump ship to the more mature FE/A7 combo? I'm disinterested in Video and don't shoot weddings so the crop and card slots aren't issues for me. I'm going on a long trip to NZ and want to upgrade so I have it for the trip but I can't tell which I would consider the 'best' move. Absent the travel, waiting for the next RF mount camera would be my first inclination, but the timing just doesn't work for me. The side benefit is that i do have some Canon lenses but I guess they could just as easily adapt to a Sony but at a higher cost. Also renting/buying EF glass is anywhere from 20-50% cheaper from what I've seen online.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
KennyG posted:In evaluating switching/not-switching camera systems how much do you look at the lens options (both existing and 'roadmap') versus the body itself? Pickup both the Sony and the Canon, feel them in your hands, the button placement, how far you have to reach to different areas, what feels 'right' Then buy the one that you like more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:14
|
|
|
Glass is really where it’s at but if you use a body for years and years then I would bump that up higher than I would in terms of priorities than someone’s typical use. That said I don’t see any real advantages in your case going with Canon. I am guessing v2 or their body will be what v1 should have been and they already know that. Things like the swipe bar are just so poorly thought out that they seem to have just wanted to get a body out and use early adopters as their QA team rather than extensively (or honestly) assess strengths and weaknesses in house. Ergonomics would be the only reason you would go for Canon in your case but given the questionable design decisions, the weird noise banding (unless that had been fixed, that seems like a big reason not to buy) and other disadvantages next to Sony and even Nikon I think you’d really have to like holding the body to want to decide to be stuck with that camera vs. the other better options. Regarding the lens roadmap, I think you can count on that. People will buy Canon because it’s Canon and happily fork over their dollars due to brand loyalty. I would also usually suggest buying used and putting extra money into lenses and that would be another plus for Sony but given the length of time you expect to keep the body I can understand if you want a new body. There are a lot of YouTube comparisons between the big boy mirrorless bodies so let that influence your decision but it really does come down to ergonomics. I haven’t found a body that I truly hated the feel of so I’m not one to talk and will adapt to any body I like the features of, but I know some people really can’t get along with Sony bodies as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2018 22:48
|
|
|
KennyG posted:In evaluating switching/not-switching camera systems how much do you look at the lens options (both existing and 'roadmap') versus the body itself? What do you currently have? If you currently have EF/EF-S Canon bodies then the R is going to feel much more “like home” because it’s Canon engineers designing a new Canon body. And if you have lenses that are worth it, the adapters should be out at launch as well. It sounds like they’re taking this more seriously than the EF-M series, so hopefully the RF line will grow. From what I’ve read it sounds like the R is similar to the 6Dii in terms of capability, and if that in a smaller package makes sense, then it would be worth looking into. But you’re the only one who knows what you like, so seconding to go and try to handle both in a store if possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2018 03:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 08:06 |
|
|
So the advance lever on the new Leica M10-D? It turns out it's for nothing. It's purely decorative and Leica themselves says it should be used as a thumb rest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2018 18:03
|
|
