• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

jongkookie
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:04 AM)
jongkookie's Avatar

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

Yeah I don't touch lenses I've never heard of. D7100's are getting pretty cheap now. I love mine, it's very sturdy and user friendly.

Yeah, everytime I'm on a vintage glass hunt on eBay, I'll pay $50+ for a reputable brand. But if it's like a Promaster, Albinar, Soligor, or whatever other brands out there, I'll never spend more than $30 on it lol.

I think I'm done with my "Gear Acquisition Phase" though, I've already got a 19-35mm, 28-85mm, 75-250mm glass, then my 50mm and 85mm primes.

Knowing what I know now, I probably wouldn't have gotten the 19-35 and 75-250. My 28-85 Tokina is such a fantastic walk around lens, the only uses I've had for the primes is for maximum DOF but even the Tokina can do some decent DOF when the conditions align.

I'm still honestly debating on the body. I kinda wanna go full frame just so I can see what the fuss is about, but I'm perfectly happy with the crop as it is. Good thing I can only afford the D7100 for the moment so I'm not in a rush to get a new body yet.

Originally Posted by BlueTsunami

Need to get my hands on a Nikon 28/2 AI again.

There's one on eBay right now lol. I've had it on my watch list the last few days and I would bid for it, but I've already got too much glass and I don't see a use for it so I'm passing on it.
JadedWriter
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:16 AM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by jongkookie

Yeah, everytime I'm on a vintage glass hunt on eBay, I'll pay $50+ for a reputable brand. But if it's like a Promaster, Albinar, Soligor, or whatever other brands out there, I'll never spend more than $30 on it lol.

I think I'm done with my "Gear Acquisition Phase" though, I've already got a 19-35mm, 28-85mm, 75-250mm glass, then my 50mm and 85mm primes.

Knowing what I know now, I probably wouldn't have gotten the 19-35 and 75-250. My 28-85 Tokina is such a fantastic walk around lens, the only uses I've had for the primes is for maximum DOF but even the Tokina can do some decent DOF when the conditions align.

I'm still honestly debating on the body. I kinda wanna go full frame just so I can see what the fuss is about, but I'm perfectly happy with the crop as it is. Good thing I can only afford the D7100 for the moment so I'm not in a rush to get a new body yet.

D7100 is a good step up camera. Originally I was trying to get a refurbished D5200, but at the end of the day I'm glad I got the 7100. You may not use autofocus, but I love the autofocusing system on the 7100, iso is a lot easier to adjust as well. Having separate dials for aperture and shutter speed is great too. Only thing I don't like is the limited buffer for continuous shooting and live view is damn useless for shooting video since you have to go out of it to switch stuff around for video. I don't use it for video so it hasn't been a problem and you have to hit the info button I believe to get an exposure meter for camera mode in live view. Other than that I love it, I feel like I really started improving once I got the thing. I just wish I had better glass to take advantage of the sensor, but that'll come eventually.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
(01-05-2016, 05:41 AM)
Stumpokapow's Avatar
My wife has a Nikon D60. It serves her very well, and she has a bunch of lenses. She occasionally books paying gigs but isn't really professional. She mostly shoots candid portrait shots, animals, and architectural / landmark stuff.

Unfortunately, it is an old enough camera that the autofocus motor is in the lenses, not the body. Her main portrait lens had its autofocus motor stop working. That's not the end of the world as she can manually focus, but certainly it's not ideal. What now? What's our best upgrade path that still allows her to use her existing lenses (she has a pancake lens, a few different telephoto lenses, and then her standard portrait lens). Is there any way to fix the lens without having to buy something new?

Replacing the lens seems like a bad cost move given that any newer or better Nikon model has the autofocus in the body. Unfortunate, it's not at all clear where we should go from a body perspective. It's model hell--it looks like the most recent Nikon body in the same category is the D5500... that seems three or four models ahead of the D60. But maybe it makes sense to move up the quality ladder but go for something a few years old. Maybe a used D600 might make sense. I have no idea if Nikon is even considered good. Mostly she's been very happy with its performance and we like that Sigma makes some affordable lenses compatible with the Nikon mount.

Should she just be scrapping her DSLR stuff in light of how fast mirrorless tech has developed?

(When replying, treat me like I'm a tech idiot when it comes to camera equipment.)
QualityPixel
Banned
(01-05-2016, 05:44 AM)

Originally Posted by Van

ive always liked taking pictures and ive decided to get a nikon d50.
photoGAF any sugesstions before i do?

D50! Loved that camera. Was my first DSLR. It's a great first camera because it can autofocus with older lenses that don't have a built in autofocus motor. Just don't spend too much money on one and make sure you get a good battery for it. Stick a 35mm F/2 or a 18-55mm VR lens and you're good to go. PM me questions about the D50 and I can probs help you out.
theepicoftyler
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:52 AM)

Originally Posted by JadedWriter

My dad showed me a picture of this thing:

We have come a long fucking way.

I have an earlier one of those sitting on my table right now. My mother found it in a box of things at her father's house after he passed. She used it all the time when she was a kid. Trying to find some film that fits it to give it a shot. Body seems well sealed and it seems mechanically sound. I'm interested in seeing what kind of images it produces.

Glycemic Beg
Banned
(01-05-2016, 05:52 AM)

Originally Posted by Squirrel Killer

The real question, of course, is what do you want to do with the camera? Sure, you can get body X with two "good" primes, but what lengths? 35 and 85? What if their intent is bird watching? Sure, you can get much newer body Y with a kit lens, but how much value do you put on having an IRL buddy that you've build a good relationship with that you can talk shop with and bum gear off of?

Too often it seems this thread's previous incarnation (and I've certainly been guilty of it too) devolves into spec dick waving. Certainly comparing specs is fun, but there's more to the story than numbers.

Glycemic Beg, do you like the guy, do you trust him, would he lend you gear, will he toss in the extra shit you'd spend $100 on, will he tell you not to bother with a UV filter, does he tell you how he got that shot? $300 is not a rip off, and if it gets you some intangibles that eBay user NotAScammer42 wouldn't give you, maybe it's even a deal.

Late on this, she's a good friend and meant to text me that the offer $200. She didn't really think I was serious, but when I told her I was she threw in some extra goodies. As well as the lenses, she's giving me 7-8 converters, a battery grip, three batteries, bag, remote, and some other stuff. I'll probably go for it. I'm sure she'd be more than happy to give me advice or lend me gear if I asked. I have zero knowledge or experience with photography, she does professional photography, but I'd like to try it and this seems to be a pretty inexpensive way to do so.

Originally Posted by NysGAF

I had an XTi until recently. Look at my photostream. Pretty much everything before October 24, 2015 was shot with my XTi. It taught me a lot, including how aperture, ISO, and shutter speed effect the results of a shot. However, I do agree that for $300 you could find something better.

Thank you for sharing, they look great, seems like it'd be fine for me.
wachie
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:54 AM)
wachie's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dr.Horrible

Not convinced yet, but I've been eyeing the A6000 and am curious what bundle/options would be recommended for someone just getting into photography. I like taking landscapes, pictures of my dogs, and general shots of family, etc.

Edit - amazon link for reference.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00I8...zkL&ref=plSrch

A6000 is a pretty good way to start. It's definitely one of the best rated and most popular mirror-less cams out there.

If you are going to get the body only, do you already have an e-mount lens?
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
(01-05-2016, 06:07 AM)
Rentahamster's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

My wife has a Nikon D60. It serves her very well, and she has a bunch of lenses. She occasionally books paying gigs but isn't really professional. She mostly shoots candid portrait shots, animals, and architectural / landmark stuff.

Unfortunately, it is an old enough camera that the autofocus motor is in the lenses, not the body. Her main portrait lens had its autofocus motor stop working. That's not the end of the world as she can manually focus, but certainly it's not ideal. What now? What's our best upgrade path that still allows her to use her existing lenses (she has a pancake lens, a few different telephoto lenses, and then her standard portrait lens). Is there any way to fix the lens without having to buy something new?

Replacing the lens seems like a bad cost move given that any newer or better Nikon model has the autofocus in the body. Unfortunate, it's not at all clear where we should go from a body perspective. It's model hell--it looks like the most recent Nikon body in the same category is the D5500... that seems three or four models ahead of the D60. But maybe it makes sense to move up the quality ladder but go for something a few years old. Maybe a used D600 might make sense. I have no idea if Nikon is even considered good. Mostly she's been very happy with its performance and we like that Sigma makes some affordable lenses compatible with the Nikon mount.

Should she just be scrapping her DSLR stuff in light of how fast mirrorless tech has developed?

(When replying, treat me like I'm a tech idiot when it comes to camera equipment.)

First off, the focus motor being in the lens and not the body is a characteristic of newer gear, not older. To save money, Nikon started getting rid of the AF motor within the body of their lower-end DSLRs about 10 years ago. Only the high end models have it now. Nikon is also incorporating in-lens motors in pretty much all of their newer lenses.

You probably want to ask her just how much she wants to evolve her photography, and how interested she is in making money off of it. One might be inclined to jump at the opportunity to buy new stuff, but a good course of action in her situation depends on:

A: Is photography primarily a hobby for her?
B: Is photography primarily a way to make money (or would like to try to be in the future)?

If A, then you'd want to consider this just like any other hobby and only spend as much as her disposable income and her interest allows.

If B, then it's time to crunch some numbers and see how much cost justifies the business expense of investing in your gear. Tally up the revenue from last year, and ask her if she thinks she can match it or do better this year. If so, use that number to get to what a reasonable budget for gear expenses would be.


Other notes:

A D600 is a nice camera, and it has a larger sensor (full frame) which is usually nice, and someone who is trying to get more serious into photography should probably get one (a full frame camera) eventually. However, be advised that it might increase the cost in other ways because some of Nikon's lenses aren't meant to be used for a full frame sensor. In another one of their cost saving moves, Nikon developed lenses that are designated "DX". They project a smaller image for the smaller crop sensors (like the one on the D60). These DX lenses won't project a large enough image for a camera like the D600. You will want to check what kind of lenses she has first as this will be a large factor in determining the cost of upgrades, especially if moving to full frame (known as FX, in Nikon terms).


Edit: IIRC you're Canadian, and I dunno how it works in Canadia, but in the US, having one or both of the spouses have their own small business allows you to be eligible for a lot of new and tasty ways to reduce your tax bill. I'd suggest she try to make it more of a legit business this year for that reason alone (as long as she has the motivation).
Peru
Member
(01-05-2016, 06:57 AM)
Peru's Avatar

Originally Posted by lrt75914

Good god man, that's an amazing (point and shoot) image. I would love to see what your camera/lens could do when put on a tracking mount.

Same.. you wouldn't happen to have experience with/ recommendations for a simple, easy to use tracking mount, would you?
giga
Member
(01-05-2016, 09:04 AM)
giga's Avatar
Good deal on the mefoto roadtrip tripod, despite the ugly colors: http://www.focuscamera.com/mefoto-a1...t-special.html
Pepto
Banned
(01-05-2016, 09:28 AM)
Pepto's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

Replacing the lens seems like a bad cost move given that any newer or better Nikon model has the autofocus in the body. Unfortunate, it's not at all clear where we should go from a body perspective.

IIRC my D7000 has in body autofocusing capability but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't do anything to help out in your case. The focusing is done with a physical screw and your broken lens probably couldn't take advantage of it.
phisheep
NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
(01-05-2016, 09:57 AM)
phisheep's Avatar

Originally Posted by Glycemic Beg

Late on this, she's a good friend and meant to text me that the offer $200. She didn't really think I was serious, but when I told her I was she threw in some extra goodies. As well as the lenses, she's giving me 7-8 converters, a battery grip, three batteries, bag, remote, and some other stuff. I'll probably go for it. I'm sure she'd be more than happy to give me advice or lend me gear if I asked. I have zero knowledge or experience with photography, she does professional photography, but I'd like to try it and this seems to be a pretty inexpensive way to do so.

That sounds like a very good deal to me, and it is plenty good enough to learn on - plus you have someone to learn from. I'd snap that offer up in an instant.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
(01-05-2016, 10:10 AM)
Rentahamster's Avatar

Originally Posted by Glycemic Beg

Late on this, she's a good friend and meant to text me that the offer $200. She didn't really think I was serious, but when I told her I was she threw in some extra goodies. As well as the lenses, she's giving me 7-8 converters, a battery grip, three batteries, bag, remote, and some other stuff. I'll probably go for it. I'm sure she'd be more than happy to give me advice or lend me gear if I asked. I have zero knowledge or experience with photography, she does professional photography, but I'd like to try it and this seems to be a pretty inexpensive way to do so.

Sounds good to me. Go for it.
lupin23rd
Member
(01-05-2016, 10:12 AM)
Have a couple unrelated questions if anyone here has any experience in either scenario :)

It looks like I might be going up to Yellowknife with a couple friends next month, and will be looking to get some photos of the aurora. Right now, I've got a Canon T3i along with the kit lens, a 50mm f/1.8, a 50-250mm f/4-5.6, and a 10-18mm f/4-5.6. From initial research it sounds like a fast wide angle lens is ideal (and hear Samyang lenses are decent and cheap for doing stuff like this) for this but was curious if anyone has any experience with the aurora and could recommend some gear and also keeping said gear alive in what I expect to be very cold weather :0


Also, when I was in Japan late last year I picked up a good condition (it seems) Canon P rangefinder along with the 50mm f/1.8 lens, and so far I managed to successfully put in a roll of film and shoot about half of it. When I bought the T3i above a few years ago, I picked up the book Understanding Exposure, and wondering whether I should re-review this for film photography or if there are other recommendations on how to get the most out of this? The camera came with a light meter (and a case for said meter in stellar condition), but alas the salesperson basically told me it didn't work. Came across the sunny 16 rule and have been playing around with that, but curious if there's anything else I should know when jumping to film.
Groof
Junior Member
(01-05-2016, 11:29 AM)
Groof's Avatar

Originally Posted by John Blade

Was wondering, should I get either the FE 28mm f/2 Lens or the Sony 16mm f/2.8 Wide-Angle Lens for everyday shoot. I want something wide so I can go out to Toronto and take picture of building or location.

These are two quite different focal lengths. On the APS-C sensor the 16 ends up around 24mm and the 28 will be around 42mm. So in that sense the 16mm is more of a wide angle and thus better suited for wider images, like maybe landscapes.

Personally I've been looking at the FE28 myself because I love the 28mm focal length on an APS-C sensor for every day use since it's wide enough to capture contexts but narrow enough for framing. I have the Sigma 19mm and I find that one a bit too wide for normal, every day use.

But that's just an opinion thing. If you have the chance to try them out, do it. If not check out comparisons online and see what you can gain from that.
Rubmifer
Member
(01-05-2016, 12:14 PM)
Rubmifer's Avatar
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0998933...oped-with-sony

Will only set you back nearly 50k.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
(01-05-2016, 01:02 PM)
Rentahamster's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rubmifer

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0998933...oped-with-sony

Will only set you back nearly 50k.

Ballin'
JadedWriter
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:08 PM)
JadedWriter's Avatar

Originally Posted by theepicoftyler

I have an earlier one of those sitting on my table right now. My mother found it in a box of things at her father's house after he passed. She used it all the time when she was a kid. Trying to find some film that fits it to give it a shot. Body seems well sealed and it seems mechanically sound. I'm interested in seeing what kind of images it produces.

I'm shocked that even today it still works.
Dr.Horrible
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:12 PM)
Dr.Horrible's Avatar

Originally Posted by wachie

A6000 is a pretty good way to start. It's definitely one of the best rated and most popular mirror-less cams out there.

If you are going to get the body only, do you already have an e-mount lens?

No lenses yet, but the Amazon link offers some choices to add, but I'm not sure which would be preferred for my intended uses.
Any Questions
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:13 PM)
Any Questions's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rand0m TAG

got a canon rebel 6ti as a present. any tips for a beginner photographer?

Begin with appature priority
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:13 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rubmifer

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0998933...oped-with-sony

Will only set you back nearly 50k.

CMOS as well, raaaaaad.
RayStorm
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:37 PM)
RayStorm's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

I have no idea if Nikon is even considered good. Mostly she's been very happy with its performance and we like that Sigma makes some affordable lenses compatible with the Nikon mount.

Should she just be scrapping her DSLR stuff in light of how fast mirrorless tech has developed?

I also believe that your broken AF would not be solved by a body with in body focus motor. Also if you wnat to keep using the lenses, you don't have much choice but to stay with a Nikon DSLR body. But Nikon is quite well regarded.

Originally Posted by Rentahamster

These DX lenses won't project a large enough image for a camera like the D600. You will want to check what kind of lenses she has first as this will be a large factor in determining the cost of upgrades, especially if moving to full frame (known as FX, in Nikon terms).

Well, Nikon FX cameras do have a dx mode, where only the dx equivalent part of the sensor is exposed. Obviously you lose a lot of resolution by going that way. Alternatively you can shoot with a DX lens in FX mode and have more or less severe vignetting (darker or even black corners of the image), depending on the lens.
sturmdogg
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:37 PM)
sturmdogg's Avatar
So how often do you guys upgrade your camera? Right now I'm still using a Nikon D3100 I bought last December 2010, and still feel no need to upgrade anything other than the lens.
Groof
Junior Member
(01-05-2016, 01:39 PM)
Groof's Avatar

Originally Posted by sturmdogg

So how often do you guys upgrade your camera? Right now I'm still using a Nikon D3100 I bought last December 2010, and still feel no need to upgrade anything other than the lens.

I bought and have been using my NEX-5R early 2013 and I'm looking to upgrade soon. I have the external EVF accessory, but I'd much rather have one built into the body which is the main reason I want to upgrade.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
(01-05-2016, 01:43 PM)
BlueTsunami's Avatar

Originally Posted by sturmdogg

So how often do you guys upgrade your camera? Right now I'm still using a Nikon D3100 I bought last December 2010, and still feel no need to upgrade anything other than the lens.

Upgrade based on need. If that D3100 is doing it for ya, keep it. Although a good five years of sensor tech advancement means buying a 2015 body would possibly be substantial.
sankt-Antonio
Member
(01-05-2016, 01:45 PM)
sankt-Antonio's Avatar
Anybody got experience with 15mm glas set at f8-11 and using it as a point and shoot setup (set on manual focus and just...not focusing)?
Since at that setting everything's in focus anyway, wouldn't that be ideal for street shooting? You could shoot from the hip.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
(01-05-2016, 01:54 PM)
BlueTsunami's Avatar

Originally Posted by sankt-Antonio

Anybody got experience with 15mm glas set at f8-11 and using it as a point and shoot setup (set on manual focus and just...not focusing)?
Since at that setting everything's in focus anyway, wouldn't that be ideal for street shooting? You could shoot from the hip.

15mm @ f/8 set to a focused distance of 5ft would mean things from 3ft and onward (to infinity) would be at an acceptable focus. You wpuld just have to be pretty close to your subjects at that FoV.
CrudeDiatribe
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:08 PM)
CrudeDiatribe's Avatar

Originally Posted by Stumpokapow

My wife has a Nikon D60.[...]

Unfortunately, it is an old enough camera that the autofocus motor is in the lenses, not the body. Her main portrait lens had its autofocus motor stop working.

D60 lacked a focus motor to save money/size. Lots of bodies before and since have a motor.

I don't know if a new body with a focus motor will fix this lens-- the electronics in the lens are going to tell the body that it does the focusing, and it probably lacks the physical connector to the body's focus screw.

I do love my D600-- but as mentioned her current lenses may not work all that well with it if they are "DX" lenses-- they will vignette the photos (to a greater or lesser degree-- the 35mm f/1.8 DX is supposed to be fine).
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-05-2016, 02:20 PM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by Rubmifer

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0998933...oped-with-sony

Will only set you back nearly 50k.

thats only MSRP, you can get them for 40k new. The crazy part is, in 6 months, you can get them used for ~25k literally like buying a new car with that depreciation. Whats better is this will depreciate all the previous models. But like i said yesterday, 20mp increase from the IQ180/280 is minuscule as resolution isnt linear. I hope they've increased the dynamic range, though the IQ180 was about the best there was when it came out. And improved higher ISO performance.


Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

CMOS as well, raaaaaad.

oh, fuck that, CCD is worlds better.
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:26 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

I hope they've increased the dynamic range, though the IQ180 was about the best there was when it came out. And improved higher ISO performance.

Well with the move to CMOS, improved ISO is a lock, the press release claims it will be ISO 50 - 12800.
Ty4on
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:36 PM)
Ty4on's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

Well with the move to CMOS, improved ISO is a lock, the press release claims it will be ISO 50 - 12800.

Isn't this the first CMOS sensor as big as a 645 frame? That alone makes 50k seem like a bargain with medium format prices being what they are.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-05-2016, 02:43 PM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by Ty4on

Isn't this the first CMOS sensor as big as a 645 frame? That alone makes 50k seem like a bargain with medium format prices being what they are.

no, they released a CMOS sensor last year or before.

but like i said fuck that CCD is worlds better for what i would want to use it for.
Noivern
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:48 PM)
Hi everyone! It's been a while since the last time I've seen all of you...

I'm still internally debating whether to send my NEX-5R to a Sony service centre to clean its sensor, or should I go hands-on this time around. There's now an unusually high amount of dust on it that it's making itself known at about F8-11 when I shoot landscapes.
wachie
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:53 PM)
wachie's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dr.Horrible

No lenses yet, but the Amazon link offers some choices to add, but I'm not sure which would be preferred for my intended uses.

I shoot most of the time with a prime however for your intended use, it may be good to go for the kit lens as the standard bundle is only a 100 more.

You can then add a prime later on.
StopMakingSense
Member
(01-05-2016, 02:55 PM)
StopMakingSense's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

no, they released a CMOS sensor last year or before.

but like i said fuck that CCD is worlds better for what i would want to use it for.

Yeah, Sony's been trying to get into this market for a while.

What are pros of CCD vs CMOS again? Been a very long time since I've even thought about it.
captive
Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
(01-05-2016, 03:16 PM)
captive's Avatar

Originally Posted by StopMakingSense

Yeah, Sony's been trying to get into this market for a while.

What are pros of CCD vs CMOS again? Been a very long time since I've even thought about it.

I personally think CCD renders colors better, there's something i can't quite put my finger on. In particular though, when you point directly at the sun (which i'm often doing in landscapes) you don't get the horrible banding around the sun that you get with a CMOS sensor.
Dr.Horrible
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:18 PM)
Dr.Horrible's Avatar

Originally Posted by wachie

I shoot most of the time with a prime however for your intended use, it may be good to go for the kit lens as the standard bundle is only a 100 more.

You can then add a prime later on.

Appreciate the feedback. Just to be clear though, you'd suggest the 16-50mm style, correct?
wachie
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:19 PM)
wachie's Avatar

Originally Posted by Dr.Horrible

Appreciate the feedback. Just to be clear though, you'd suggest the 16-50mm style, correct?

Yes, its quite decent for that price.
Ty4on
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:22 PM)
Ty4on's Avatar

Originally Posted by captive

no, they released a CMOS sensor last year or before.

Wasn't that the 50MP sensor in the 645Z? It's much smaller than a 645 frame, 1.3x crop compared to this new sensor.
Griss
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:36 PM)
Have been asked to buy a mirrorless camera for a family member. Looking for advice.

1. What is your budget?
About the $700-$1,000 area.

2. Main purpose of the camera?
Social and holiday shooting. Will be going on safari at some stage.

3. What form factor is most appealing to you?
Needs to fit in a woman's bag.

4. Will you be investing in the camera? (buying more stuff for it later)
Possibly but probably not.

5. Any cameras you've used before or liked?
My family member had a Nikon D3100 and enjoyed it and took lessons; but found it far too big to use regularly and ended up wanting rid of it.

NOTE: An electronic viewfinder is recommended because I live in the Caribbean and feel like my family member would struggle to see the screen properly. I'm leaning towards the Olympus OM-D EM10 Mark 2. It has an EVF, it's in my budget, and as a bonus I have 4 Olympus 4/3rds lenses that would work with an adaptor. One of which has an effective range of 600mm, which is always fun, the other which is a truly stunning 50mm macro that takes photos that feel like silk caressing your eyes.

What do you think?

As for me, I bought a D3300 last year to replace my Oly E620. I thought it would feel like a big step up (Nikon so respected! 5 years had passed! More pixels! Better autofocus!), but in many ways it felt like a regression. That old advice about not needing to upgrade your camera if it works for you etc doesn't really sink in until you buy a second one.

In particular, the Oly had in-body image stabilization and imo it kicks the shit out of the lens-based system the Nikon has. Not only that, but after just a couple of days shooting I realised that Oly were obviously producing WAY better kit lenses than the cheap shit Nikon came out with. Even the 35m f/1.8 lens I picked up for my Nikon couldn't come close to the magnificence of my 50mm f/2.0 macro, which was the sharpest lens I ever experienced. Oly's menu system was far superior to the 'noob-friendly' stuff Nikon puts on their entry level cameras, and Oly's dials and button layout were also far, far superior.

Still, though, my reasons for upgrading were solid so I'm happy I did. (Reasons: Better autofocus; Better low-light performance; Lightroom support; More used-lens options; Future body upgrade options.) The auto-focus upgrade in particular was essential - Oly never figured that part of the equation out at all and it drove me crazy. Moving to Nikon felt like a light-year advancement in kit on that single point. And the bigger sensor does in fact lead to less noise and better low light performance.
VAD
Member
(01-05-2016, 03:40 PM)
The EM10 is a good choice. I have one to replace my Nikon D70s and I love it.
Rubmifer
Member
(01-05-2016, 04:28 PM)
Rubmifer's Avatar
Fuji XT1(0) a possibility?
RuGalz
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:02 PM)

Originally Posted by sturmdogg

So how often do you guys upgrade your camera? Right now I'm still using a Nikon D3100 I bought last December 2010, and still feel no need to upgrade anything other than the lens.

No set time; just if there're good enough reasons to do so. So far it's been about every 3-5 years for me.

Originally Posted by sankt-Antonio

Anybody got experience with 15mm glas set at f8-11 and using it as a point and shoot setup (set on manual focus and just...not focusing)?
Since at that setting everything's in focus anyway, wouldn't that be ideal for street shooting? You could shoot from the hip.

I do that a lot for street shooting. It's wide enough that my subjects often don't think they are in my frame. But I prefer 28mmish because it's easier to make composition a bit more interesting. (This is APSC.)
Griss
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:04 PM)

Originally Posted by VAD

The EM10 is a good choice. I have one to replace my Nikon D70s and I love it.

Cool, I'd be interested in your experiences with it. How are the dials? They look a little jumbled together.

Originally Posted by Rubmifer

Fuji XT1(0) a possibility?

Looks like it's above my budget. What's the advantage of this one? I don't know of it.
VisceralBowl
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:11 PM)
VisceralBowl's Avatar

Originally Posted by Griss

Looks like it's above my budget. What's the advantage of this one? I don't know of it.

Look at the X-T10. X-T1 is over the budget.
wachie
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:14 PM)
wachie's Avatar
Some rumored specs for the Sony A6100
  • 36mp BSI sensor,
  • silent electronic shutter mode,
  • IBIS
  • 4K recording
  • Touchscreen
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-f...y-a6100-specs/

I'm not too worried about 4K support but that BSI and IBIS looks delicious.
CrudeDiatribe
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:16 PM)
CrudeDiatribe's Avatar

Originally Posted by sturmdogg

So how often do you guys upgrade your camera? Right now I'm still using a Nikon D3100 I bought last December 2010, and still feel no need to upgrade anything other than the lens.

D50 in 2005; D90 in January 2010, D600 in September 2011. Don't plan on upgrading any time soon. I feel like you should only upgrade when you want to do something that your current gear prevents you from doing [as easily as you'd like].
RuGalz
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:18 PM)

Originally Posted by wachie

Some rumored specs for the Sony A6100

  • 36mp BSI sensor,
  • silent electronic shutter mode,
  • IBIS
  • 4K recording
  • Touchscreen
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-f...y-a6100-specs/

I'm not too worried about 4K support but that BSI and IBIS looks delicious.

Don't really care for 4k or touchscreen but BSI + IBIS indeed is hard to beat. Kind of wish it was 24MP.
hitsugi
Member
(01-05-2016, 05:20 PM)
hitsugi's Avatar

Originally Posted by wachie

Some rumored specs for the Sony A6100

  • 36mp BSI sensor,
  • silent electronic shutter mode,
  • IBIS
  • 4K recording
  • Touchscreen
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr3-f...y-a6100-specs/

I'm not too worried about 4K support but that BSI and IBIS looks delicious.

Omitting everything else.. the silent electronic shutter mode is the biggest thing there for me.

Of course, I've only had my a6000 for a year, so.. upgrading to the 6100 would be crazy.... right?
Groof
Junior Member
(01-05-2016, 05:30 PM)
Groof's Avatar
Hopefully some sort of omnipotent deity smiles at me this year and lets me be able to upgrade to that. Gimme gimme

Thread Tools