|
Are there any nice fast primes that I could slap on a NEX 6? The Zeiss 24mm looks nice, but I'm not shelling out $1000 for it. I'm looking ideally in the 16-24mm range, although hopefully on the wider end of that, and I don't mind it being MF.
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
Picked up the Fuji 18-55 Let's see if it'll be on par with the 35
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 23:01
|
|
|
Helicity posted:Are there any nice fast primes that I could slap on a NEX 6? The Zeiss 24mm looks nice, but I'm not shelling out $1000 for it. I'm looking ideally in the 16-24mm range, although hopefully on the wider end of that, and I don't mind it being MF. I think there are some 24mm f/2 SLR lenses (FD mount, maybe?), if that's fast enough for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2013 23:25
|
|
|
HPL posted:K-mount also easily adapts to M42 screw mount which expands your lens possibilities even more. I'm sure you know this but for the record, M42 adapts to K mount but not the other way around. The K-mount has the same register distance but the diameter of the K-mount is bigger.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 00:37
|
|
|
Malcolm XML posted:Picked up the Fuji 18-55 It's not as sharp but it's still a very nice lens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
Mucked around with the Panasonic 35-100 at a shop. It's really quite good, focusing is fast and silent, and the image quality is fantastic. 35-100-1 by alkanphel, on Flickr  35-100-2 by alkanphel, on Flickr  35-100-3 by alkanphel, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
I'm agonizing over whether I should pick up the E-mount Tamron 18-200mm for my upcoming trip to Alaska. Found them on eBay for $700 brand new, is it a good price? I went to a Sony store the other day and saw the SEL18200 was on sale for $800, and the clerk told me he could also order the new SEL18200LE for about $760. Will the price of the Tamron drop when the LE becomes more popular? Here's the eBay link: http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-SILVER-...=item484759c073
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 02:14
|
|
|
You might want to consider the 55-250 to supplement the kit lens instead of the 18-200 to replace it. You'll get a little more reach, the image quality is probably better and it's cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
rexelation posted:Here's the eBay link: http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-SILVER-...=item484759c073
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 10:55
|
|
|
I want an infrared EVIL. Converting DSLRs to infrared works, but the reflex mirror, focusing screen, pentaprism, and eyepiece are dead weight. Live view is great, but it’s not intended to be the primary mode of operation and the ergonomics suck. There’s also the issue of paying for the mirror &c. and then turning around and paying for a conversion. Using a camera that’s designed with an electronic viewfinder in mind would be much more sensible. It’s unfortunate that the “infrared photography” and “EVIL” demographics don’t overlap so much. Even if they did, EVIL sales would have to go way up before it made economic sense for manufacturers to come out with an IR model. DSLR sales are just barely high enough that Canon comes out with an astro version (20Da and 60Da) once in a while. e: ↓ I know I could get an IR conversion, but that’s an extra $250. That’s money I could spend on the new lenses I’d have to buy for it. I’m just bitter that I’d have to shell out as much for IR conversion as I would for the body itself. That said, if the EOS M didn’t suck I’d probably bite the bullet and pay to convert one. No DSLR is ever going to come in an IR model because that would be dumb, but there’s some modicum of hope for a mirrorless camera (after all, Canon does make astro versions). I miss the film days when I didn’t have to have two cameras just to shoot infrared. ↓ Platystemon fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Jan 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 11:52
|
|
|
The few usual spots people get conversions done do mirrorless cameras though. I'm planning on getting my GF1 done when I get the scratch together. It's a pretty niche market, I'd be amazed to see an OEM IR body. Now watch schizophrenic Pentax drop an IR-Q or something. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 13:10
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I want an infrared EVIL. Converting DSLRs to infrared works, but the reflex mirror, focusing screen, pentaprism, and eyepiece are dead weight. Live view is great, but it’s not intended to be the primary mode of operation and the ergonomics suck. There’s also the issue of paying for the mirror &c. and then turning around and paying for a conversion. Fuji's X series cameras have an IR filter so weak that you can slap a Hoya R72 filter on the lens and do infrared shots out of the box. It is there though so your exposures will take a little longer. You sound serious about it so there is probably a requirement I'm unaware of but in case you've never heard this, there you go.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
ThisQuietReverie posted:Fuji's X series cameras have an IR filter so weak that you can slap a Hoya R72 filter on the lens and do infrared shots out of the box. It is there though so your exposures will take a little longer. You sound serious about it so there is probably a requirement I'm unaware of but in case you've never heard this, there you go. I've done this and it does work. I haven't had a chance to get serious with it yet, just pointed a tripod out my back window.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
ThisQuietReverie posted:Fuji's X series cameras have an IR filter so weak that you can slap a Hoya R72 filter on the lens and do infrared shots out of the box. It is there though so your exposures will take a little longer. You sound serious about it so there is probably a requirement I'm unaware of but in case you've never heard this, there you go. I wish my DSLR had a weak filter, but if were buying a camera I’d convert it. My DSLR’s IR‐cut filter was forged by the gods. With a Tiffren #87 filter, exposures times are, in daylight at f/8 and ISO 100, two hours long. It’s a little silly doing daylight landscapes at ISO 1600 and f/4, but that’s what it takes to get an exposure in two minutes. Focusing is a bitch with trial and error at seven seconds per (ISO 12800 and f/2.8, good luck checking DoF). An R72 would record little but ordinary red light. Besides that, several of the lenses I’d use can’t take front filters, and for some of ones that could, the filters rival the cost of a conversion. I borrowed that #87. It costs $150 in 77 mm and $200 in 82 mm. So it’s either 1) convert my current camera several years from now, 2) convert a second‐hand T1i, or 3) convert something that has a suitable wide‐angle pancake. I’m leaning towards 3.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
Buying a uses sigma dslr for cheap is always a good option for infrared too (the IR filter is user removable since it sits in front of the mirror).
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Buying a uses sigma dslr for cheap is always a good option for infrared too (the IR filter is user removable since it sits in front of the mirror). I was thinking about converting a D70s to IR but now that ive found the X100 has a cheapo IR filter in place, its cheaper to get an R72 filter. Now if I could find a HDRIR photography group on Flickr.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
HPL posted:You might want to consider the 55-250 to supplement the kit lens instead of the 18-200 to replace it. You'll get a little more reach, the image quality is probably better and it's cheaper. Yeah I was seriously considering that one too. My concern is that I'll have to swap them back and forth all the time when I'm out and I am pretty clumsy so it'll just be a matter of time when I drop one of the lenses. relish_fetish posted:Keep your eye on the Sony E mount too, I picked it up off eBay 2 weeks ago $585 shipped. There are deals to be had, patience is a virtue. Used? I am watching one auction now and it's at about $500 with 2 days left.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 22:37
|
|
|
So I just pulled the trigger on an OMD EM5, and picking it up after work. I got the kit with the 12-50mm f3.5-6.3 lens, but I've got a fairly pressing question: Is this an acceptable aperture for low-light/night photography when paired with a tripod? Like, shots of metropolitan areas from the tops of nearby mountains / bridges, or night sky photography for example. Many thanks! I'm excited to finally get some "real" hardware. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 23:08
|
|
|
Rime posted:So I just pulled the trigger on an OMD EM5, and picking it up after work. I got the kit with the 12-50mm f3.5-6.3 lens, but I've got a fairly pressing question: Sure, if you are on a tripod you should not be too concerned. The only time I'd imagine it being an issue is if you want to shoot some epic landscape poo poo at night and not have star trails, in which case a wide, larger aperture lens near at or wide open might be desirable. Recommendations: Get a lens hood for the 12-50, the JJC branded ones are cheap and work just as well as the Olympus ones. Also get a 20/1.7 since they are awesome and cheap.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2013 23:10
|
|
|
Rime posted:So I just pulled the trigger on an OMD EM5, and picking it up after work. I got the kit with the 12-50mm f3.5-6.3 lens, but I've got a fairly pressing question: I just got mine last week. So far its great and it handles the low light night like a champ. Unlike my E-30! Just ordered the grip and the 45/1.8.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
So far I am finding this camera to be a work of art, and more capable in low-light than anything I've ever used before. I can't wait to put it through the paces tomorrow night! Rime fucked around with this message at 05:33 on Jan 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2013 08:44
|
|
|
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/913513-REG/Sigma__19mm_f_2_8_DN_f_SONY.html/ B&H has the Sigma 30 & 19 2.8 lenses for Sony e mount at $200 for BOTH lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
Zombie Trotsky posted:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/913513-REG/Sigma__19mm_f_2_8_DN_f_SONY.html/ Hopped on this, hopefully it won't be an error like the last few too good to be true Sigma deals I've seen. I mostly want the 30, but getting a 19 is a nice bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Zombie Trotsky posted:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/913513-REG/Sigma__19mm_f_2_8_DN_f_SONY.html/ Came here to post this, definitely a genuinely good deal. I hopped on the $99 19mm so I don't feel too bad (it looks great out-of-camera and even better through DxO Optics, which has a lens correction profile for it) but people rave about that 30mm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
Zombie Trotsky posted:http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/913513-REG/Sigma__19mm_f_2_8_DN_f_SONY.html/ Those fuckers. I just bought the 30mm about a week ago because I could only find one place that hadn't upped the price to $199. I want the 19mm too but have other things to spend the money on that don't include buying another 30mm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
I'm thinking about picking up an E-M5 to replace my G3 that is starting to have sensor problems but I'm not sure whether I should pick up the 12-50mm with it or just get the body. I have the Japanese double lens kit with the Lumix 14-42 and 45-200, along with the 20mm 1.7 and was thinking of picking up either the Lumix 7-14 or the Olympus 9-18, but those will have to wait a while if I get the camera. So other than being a bit wider in the short term (which I would like), and the weather sealing, is the image quality upgrade from the 14-42 to the 12-50 worth the $200 more a kit will run me that could be put toward one of the super wides? I mostly shoot landscapes and hiking pictures.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 14:43
|
|
|
The advantages of the 12-50 are weather sealing, power zoom for video, and semi-macro. It's also a cheap way to get to 12mm for some. If those things don't appeal to you, don't buy it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 16:20
|
|
|
Mingo posted:I'm thinking about picking up an E-M5 to replace my G3 that is starting to have sensor problems but I'm not sure whether I should pick up the 12-50mm with it or just get the body. I have the Japanese double lens kit with the Lumix 14-42 and 45-200, along with the 20mm 1.7 and was thinking of picking up either the Lumix 7-14 or the Olympus 9-18, but those will have to wait a while if I get the camera. So other than being a bit wider in the short term (which I would like), and the weather sealing, is the image quality upgrade from the 14-42 to the 12-50 worth the $200 more a kit will run me that could be put toward one of the super wides? I mostly shoot landscapes and hiking pictures. The power zoom is nice for video. Otherwise its ok.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
http://www.petapixel.com/2013/01/18/kodak-to-join-the-micro-four-thirds-party-with-the-s1-mirrorless-camera/ Appearantly Kodak, of all companies, is jumping on the m4/3 boat. Didn't see thst coming.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
Augmented Dickey posted:http://www.petapixel.com/2013/01/18/kodak-to-join-the-micro-four-thirds-party-with-the-s1-mirrorless-camera/ Doesn't mean poo poo though. Kodak closed or sold away everything to do with actual cameras long ago, including their image sensor business. The only thing they have is their name, which they've been licensing for years for cheap Chinese junk P&Ses, and it's just the same case for this again, except higher end Chinese no-name cameras this time. Except there's even an intermediary here, licensing the Kodak brand to itself, then contracting out the work to others. I wouldn't expect much, except by pure random chance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 21:04
|
|
|
Kodak still makes great film but that's about it
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
I guess it'll be interesting to see if this brings any new lens choices to MFT but I can't help but think that random imprint company cranking out bodies will do anything but hurt the mount.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
Randuin posted:Kodak still makes great film but that's about it Kodak sold the film division in August. Rime fucked around with this message at 09:26 on Jan 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Couldn't wait for the x100s and missed the various focal lengths, so an X-E1 with 18-55 f2.8 kit is on the way. Also snagged an old Pentax 55mm that I've always wanted to try.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2013 03:36
|
|
|
Anyone know why Panasonic abandoned the multi‐aspect‐ratio sensor the GH1 and GH2 featured? Manufacturing costs? Low consumer interest? I, for one, thought it was a pretty cool feature. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 09:51 on Jan 22, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 09:47
|
|
|
I'm torn between buying the fuji xpro 1 combo deal with a lens on BnH or waiting it out for the newer version. Looking at the x100s it might be worth waiting out for focusing peeking and all that good stuff but I can't decide and have been wanted a digital rangefinder for years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
I haven't even heard rumors about a new version of the X-Pro 1 so far. I think the X-E1 took that spot. Also, you know these are not rangefinders, they are just rangefinder style cameras. The only digital rangefinder on the market at the moment is the Leica M series.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 18:48
|
|
|
RustedChrome posted:I haven't even heard rumors about a new version of the X-Pro 1 so far. I think the X-E1 took that spot. Also, you know these are not rangefinders, they are just rangefinder style cameras. The only digital rangefinder on the market at the moment is the Leica M series. I'll correct myself, a poor mans rangefinder. I'm well aware of the differences but after seeing the improvements that happened with the x100s in manual focusing, it is so similar I don't think most users would care about the differences. I just looked up there was a 13 month difference in release dates for the x100 and the x pro 1, which is probably a good tell for when the next x pro series will be announced. I guess I'm buying an x pro 1. I wish one of the brick and mortar stores near me had a tester I could play with to feel comfortable about the focusing options. I hope the improvements in firmware make quickly focusing in low light an option. Anyone have one who can voice an opinion? I currently shoot on a D7000 with a 35mm f/1.8 which misses focus 25% of the time in my typical shoot environments if anyone could compare the two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
I have owned an X-Pro 1 since launch and I can tell you that the AF has improved about 100X with the firmware updates. I applied the latest firmware the other night and tried it out in my dimly lit apartment. Shooting with the AF lamp off, it caught focus really quickly even in low contrast and dark areas. Really it's as fast as any DSLR that I've used, granted that I haven't shot with the very latest and greatest models. I think you should be happy with the X-Pro. The image quality is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 10:22 |
|
|
I switched from an X100 to an XE-1 (just got it yesterday). The AF on the X-E1/X-Pro-1 is great now - still not blazing compared to a few other cameras known for their AF speed, but noticeably better than the X100. There's also yet another firmware update due soon with even faster AF. The X100 was frustrating with its AF accuracy and speed, but I haven't had a single issue with the X-E1 so far. If you won't miss the OVF, the EVF in the XE-1 is pretty awesome, and the camera is otherwise almost identical to the Pro. I don't want for better AF/MF at all with the X-E1 like I did with the X100.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2013 20:38
|
|