|
How is the panorama mode on the X100? I can live without a telephoto, but it would suck not to have wide and ultra-wide options.
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
If Pentax can somehow magically wring decent low-light performance out of a sensor that small, then I might be interested. Otherwise, what the gently caress?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 17:22
|
|
|
It just occurred to me that if they can make a Leica M39 to Pentax Q adapter, you could use a small 50mm like a Jupiter-8 as a wicked fast 285mm telephoto or an 85mm f/2 Jupiter-9 as a 485mm f/2 lens.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:It's aimed solely at the japanese market. This is not for us. Has a camera other than the Argus C3 ever been aimed solely at the North American market?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2011 01:29
|
|
|
You know what I'd like to see in a future camera? Not just a regular ND filter, but a graduated ND filter that has a little motor so it can be rotated. It would be incredible to be able to click it on and off with a button instead of having to screw filters on and off.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2011 04:47
|
|
|
The new Olympus m4/3 lenses are sexy. My perfect kit would be a PEN Mini with a 12mm f/2, 45mm f/1.8 and the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 and the VF-2 viewfinder. Hurry up and make a constant f/2.8 zoom! Even just the PEN Mini with the 12mm f/2 would be an awesome combo.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2011 00:43
|
|
|
Zack Arias likes his.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2011 16:21
|
|
|
If Sony could get their act together and put out some decent fast pancake primes, they'd have that poo poo on lock. However, this is Sony we're talking about so they'll probably just come up with yet another proprietary technology that'll die on the vine.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2011 04:09
|
|
|
I see some NEXes here and there, as I did in Europe as well. The vast, vast majority of folks are carrying Rebels and Dxx cameras. Kit lenses, of course.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2011 04:28
|
|
|
Thors Banhammer posted:Got back from PAX, nothing trendbreaking except... the horrifying thing was that bridge cameras seemed about as plentiful as point-and-shoots. Bridge cameras seem to be popular with the folks that would really be better served with a Rebel with a kit lens, but they're intimidated by the whole DSLR thing. Either that or they got swayed by the "20x zoom!" thing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
All I know is that in Canada, they are aiming Canon Rebel marketing at hockey moms. I think I've seen a Lumix ad with some guy walking around in a park talking about how easy it is to use. Basically, I think the bulk of the DSLR/mirrorless camera marketing is aimed at people who don't know how to use them because all they ever talk about is ease of use.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2011 08:08
|
|
|
mattfl posted:Everything is telling me the X100 is the perfect camera for what I want to do. Something small, light, fast as poo poo lens, excellent image quality. Don't overlook a Rebel. A Rebel with a kit lens should be at least as good as your garden variety NEX or PEN and isn't that much larger. The problem with today's mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras is that they can shrink the body down until it's tiny, but the lenses are still the same size. The only way you'd get a really compact interchangeable system is if you got a PEN Mini, the new 12-24 pancake and a Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 pancake. A Rebel would also have the advantage of using your existing EF lenses plus it can be a backup body for your 50D. Other than that, the X100 is the major option if you want to cash in, size-wise.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2011 16:24
|
|
|
mattfl posted:I've been seeing the 20mm pancake lens being mentioned as the lens to have for m4/3, but I'm not seeing anything on the 12-24. Can you point me in the direction of that one? http://www.dpreview.com/news/1108/11082615panasonic14-42Xpreview.asp
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2011 17:14
|
|
|
Does anyone here have a Samsung NX100 that can offer any insight on it? They're going cheap nowadays with the kit lens and I think getting a 30mm f/2 lens to go with it would make it pretty good for an everyday carry camera. The most pressing issue for me would be high iso performance at 1600 and 3200 since I tend to use cameras in poorly-lit places a lot and there's no built-in flash.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 5, 2011 18:51
|
|
|
Man, Canon and Nikon better up their game on the DSLR front what with cameras like the NEX-5n putting out D3-like high ISO performance.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2011 15:57
|
|
|
I got to mess around with a Pentax Q today. It really is small, like the size of a small point and shoot. Operation is crisp and swift enough in good light, not unlike any other point and shoot. If there's a money feature on it, it's the custom setting dial on the front. I think that's what more advanced photographers will like about the Q.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2011 03:53
|
|
|
Canon's new camera system will be a camera the size of a Speed Graphic with a sensor the size of a pinhead.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2011 15:15
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I will say it'd be interesting to see if Nikon's sensor finds its way into a phone, or X50-type compact. I doubt it. Phones use tiny sensors because they're cheap and only need tiny lenses. A larger sensor would need a larger lens which would add weight and cost, not to mention it would probably be harder on battery life.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 02:35
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:Yeah, but I think there's a market for people who would take the extra money that the phone costs and spend it on a separate camera. Here in Japan, I saw Docomo has a phone that has a retracting zoom lens, like a digital P&S. I was intrigued and actually meant to look into it, but just sorta forgot and didn't remember until I was walking out of the store the next week with my Droid. I think you'd have better luck building a phone into a camera rather that the other way around. It's nice having phones without camera bumps.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 03:14
|
|
|
DPReview has Nikon J1 photo samples up. The ISO 3200 low light photos look surprisingly good, but we'll see what happens when they do raw noise tests, which are usually a more true test of how much is the sensor talking and how much is the in-camera post-processing. What I do like is that the telephoto lens is quite small compared to its APS-C or even m4/3 equivalent. HPL fucked around with this message at 15:21 on Sep 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 15:19
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Not really. Someone did a measurement lineup of the tamron 24-270 (it's direct counterpart) and the Tamron is both faster aperture and almost the same size/weight. Plus, what is up with an f/2.8 pancake? Even the Pentax Q has a 1.9. At least the Nex has the excuse of having a large sensor, even though I thought their 2.8 pancake was stupid as well. You're talking about the 10-100. I'm talking about the 30-110, which is much smaller.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2011 20:32
|
|
|
Got to mess around with a NEX-5n today. It's a nice little camera. The Alpha adapter is better than I thought it would be. With the adapter on the camera, you hold the adapter in your left hand as opposed to the camera body. It feels a lot more natural to hold than I expected it to be, even with a 70-400 on it. I would definitely get the EVF if I got the Alpha adapter because holding a camera like that far away from the body is awkward. I also got to play around with an A77. That, my friends, is a serious piece of work. Go check one out if you get a chance. There are a few odd things about it that aren't quite ready for prime time, but if Sony can give it a firmware revision or two, it'll be solid as hell. The EVF is good. Still not as good as an optical finder, but damned good. It's neat how you can see actual DOF in the finder because the aperture stops down but the sensor compensates for it as opposed to showing a wide open aperture view all the time like an optical. Even at f/22 the EVF was fine. HPL fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Sep 30, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 03:57
|
|
|
Oh yeah, another big thing I noticed with the NEX is that when you put the fisheye and wide angle converters on the 16mm f/2.8, there's no loss of light. Shutter speed and aperture were the same with and without the converters. I was expecting to lose a stop or so but no. Also, the worries about the mirror on the A77 soaking up light shouldn't be much of a concern as the sensor has been tweaked to compensate for any possible loss of light. The NEX 50mm f/1.8 is disappointingly large, roughly the same size or larger than a regular 50mm f/1.8. Sony apparently has been working to keep the prices of their lenses reasonable as well since the camera bodies (except the NEX system) have in-body stabilization and AF drive motors. The 16-50 f/2.8 is very well priced compared to, say, the Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS. Also related to IS, people have to keep in mind that any Alpha lenses used with the Alpha adapter on the NEX will not have IS since the NEX uses in-lens IS. I have a feeling that whatever comes out after the A77 could really shake some trees in the industry. HPL fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Sep 30, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 16:27
|
|
|
Thors Banhammer posted:One is optical and one isn't, so they're two different beasts. The NEX-7 should use the same EVF as the A77 which is really good, but its a different experience from an optical one. It had better be the same as the A77 because the clip-on NEX EVF for the 5n is really laggy compared to the A77.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2011 18:57
|
|
|
Schmerm posted:Is it worth it, compared to just getting an A77 or other alpha-mount Sony SLT? The way I see it, NEX+adapter costs more, but can be made small (and use small rangefinder lenses) when you want to, as opposed to an SLT which is big always.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2011 06:50
|
|
|
I got to mess around with a Nikon V1 with 10mm f/2.8 yesterday. It's not a bad camera. AF is quick and snappy as we all know by now. The viewfinder is fantastic, roughly on par with the EVF in the Sony A77. Very bright, a smidge of smearing during fast panning, good info display at the bottom. I only took a few photos with it, but zooming in as far as I could on the back of the camera on a photo taken at 3200, the detail retention and noise level was quite impressive. On the down side, the camera is much heavier and thicker than one would figure. It's solid as a rock, but probably more than I would want to carry around for such a product as opposed to a m4/3, NEX or P&S. The hot shoe is also non-standard so you'll have to wait until an adapter of some sort comes out before you can use radio triggers or other such goodies. Ultimately, if the V1 was about $300 cheaper, it would be a fantastic camera, but at the price point they put it at, you would probably be better off getting a m4/3 or NEX for similar money.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2011 15:21
|
|
|
FasterThanLight posted:And the 7 has a hot shoe, but the 5N does not. It's not even a normal hot shoe at that. One thing I'd love to see from Sony is interchangeable hot shoes on their DSLR line. Like the old days where some old film SLRs didn't come with hot shoes and you would get one that would screw on on top of the prism. It wouldn't be something you'd be changing out constantly, more of a "set it and forget it" thing. I guess the down side would be that you wouldn't be able to get TTL out of anything with a regular hot shoe because all the Alpha flashes would have the Alpha shoe.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2011 17:07
|
|
Sony, why are you stupid?
|
If you can superimpose things on the OVF, you could put frame lines on it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 20:56
|
|
|
I always snicker at the "this lens is sharp in the middle and soft in the corners at wide open aperture!" complaints because I mean come on, if you're shooting at wide open, chances are you don't even care about the corners.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2011 05:06
|
|
|
Okay, hotshots. Olympus E-PL3 with kit 17mm f/2.8 or Sony NEX-5N with kit 18-55? They're roughly the same price. Or E-PM1 with kit lens for $400 and then buy a pancake lens later? High ISO performance is important to me, but I'd be stuck with f/3.5 on the Sony kit versus f/2.8 with the Olympus lens so it would be kind of a wash.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2011 21:20
|
|
|
ease posted:You'd only be stuck until you got a new lens, no? And the Nex5n sensor is bigger than canon crop dslr sensors. The low light stuff should look great. Except for the whole affordable prime debacle that is the NEX system as discussed earlier. Like I said, if Sony had a $400 30mm f/2 NEX pancake, it would be no contest.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2011 23:01
|
|
|
Cacator posted:I haven't heard the greatest things about the 17mm. For pancakes you'd be better off with the 20mm f1.7 or the 14mm f2.5 which are fairly affordable, hell if you buy the 14 on eBay it's like $200 which is fantastic and the lens itself is absolutely tiny. My E-P3 with the 20mm performs better in low-light than the NEX-5N with the kit lens in my experience, but at there's definitely more noticeable ISO noise. I'd totally get the 14, but I find that 28mm is a bit wide for general use. I would much rather have the 20mm f/1.7 over all, but the E-PL3 has a kit with the 17mm and the 14-42 kit lens annoys me with how huge it is relative to the camera.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2011 00:59
|
|
|
I don't think there's much of a size advantage any more. The Pen E-PM1 body is roughly the same size as the NEX 5N body. With kit zoom lenses, the NEX 5N is actually smaller because the Pen kit lens is stupidly long when in actual use. When you see photos of the Pen line of cameras, the kit lens looks small because they took the photo with the lens in the retracted, non-functional position.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2011 16:20
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:True, but IMHO what matters is size in bag, not size in hand when it comes to portability. But there's very little size difference in stored configuration between the NEX and Pen cameras so that's largely a wash. The NEX kit lens is larger, but the body is thinner so again, there's very little or no advantage with the Pen system. I think the Pen E-PM1 is a great camera for someone who wants more than a P&S but doesn't care about the latest greatest DSLR stuff because it's roughly $200-$300 cheaper than the E-PL3 or E-P3. The downside is that it looks like you're waving a pogo stick around when you're using it because of the lens size relative to the body. I think a smart move by Olympus would be to bundle up the E-PM1 with the 17mm f/2.8 for $400. It would be the modern day digital equivalent of the Olympus Stylus Epic. They'd sell tons because the price would be just barely in the "what the heck" range where people can throw down that kind of money on a whim so lots of people would buy them as pocket or backup cameras. Olympus can't compete purely on body size alone anymore. Sony is slow with the pancakes. Olympus should rock the primes hard while they still can. HPL fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Dec 22, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2011 18:44
|
|
|
I figure the NEX sensor is a stop or two better than the m43 ones so the lack of IS is lamentable but tolerable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
So I put my money where my mouth is and bought a NEX 5N. Good lord, I think we've reached the lower limit of practical camera size. I like how the grip of the body is just barely beefy enough to be comfortable plus it gives the fingers something to curl around. I put it in the bag that I normally use to carry my DSLR. The normally snug bag looked cavernous with the NEX in it. I'm not a fan of how Sony has put the settings in big long lists as opposed to breaking them down into sub-sections.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2011 05:55
|
|
|
Took the 5N out for a walk today. It's a nice, smooth-operating camera. I miss having a viewfinder, but the flip-out screen is nice for low-angle shots and the camera body is designed well so that the thumb is positioned well for hitting the shutter button when shooting TLR-style. The shutter speed on this thing is unbelievable. I'm used to a Canon 40D which is no slouch at roughly 6.3fps, but the 5N is a speed demon by comparison. Bracketing shots is easy because the camera takes the three shots before you can even blink. The user interface is probably the biggest stumbling block so far, what with going through so many menus for everything, but I think once I get a little more familiar with it and learn to customize the camera the best I can, it'll get better. I can't seem to find a way to assign a button to change the drive mode. Any other NEX owners out there that mighy have any insight on that?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2011 01:54
|
|
|
Pompous Rhombus posted:I was (and still am) really interested in getting one as a big fan of my NEX-3, but waiting to see how Fuji's mirrorless interchangeable announcement pans out early next year. The thing is that even if Fuji does release a good camera, it'll be expensive out of the gate, you probably won't be able to get one for months before the supply settles out and the lens selection will be minimal at best, especially since the third party adapter makers won't have had a chance to establish themselves yet. Plus you have to take into consideration that the firmware won't be mature until a while after the initial release so in total you'll probably be looking at a year or so until it's to the point where it's a dead lock purchase. EDIT: Aw crap, I just ran a raw file from the 5N through DxO Optics and the resulting TIFF file is 111MB. HPL fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Dec 24, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2011 02:11
|
|
|
Beastruction posted:Press left on the wheel. Holy gently caress, I'm stupid.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2011 03:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 15:18 |
|
|
I think the big thing is that you can't fit a full frame sensor in the E-mount. It's just not big enough because it was designed purely with an APS-C sensor in mind. If they made a full frame NEX, it would need an entirely new mount system which would be absurd. It's not like EOS where you can put EF-S and EF lenses on the same mount because EF was built from the ground up as a full frame mount. I don't think they need to make a full frame NEX because the image quality is good enough with their current sensors. What they need to do is start working on the lenses so that people can get the focal lengths they want. That will go a long way towards lowering the demand for full frame. The lenses for APS-C coverage are already disproportionately large and heavy compared to the body. It would be even worse if they had to cover full frame.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2011 08:48
|
|