Jump to content

Photography Equipment & Software Thread


rundll
 Share

Recommended Posts

That does nothing for me, at all. It seems to have all the disadvantages of an SLR (carrying big lenses) with all the disadvantages of a compact (sensor size and crop factor, no optical viewfinder) without many of the advantages of either. It's nice that it's coming from a trustworthy brand, but it does seem like they've been so keen to avoid stepping on the toes of their DSLRs they've come out with something basically pointless.

It'll do really well, mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not convinced. I think the smaller sensor will put people off compared to the NEX, M43 etc.

How long before Canon announce their equivalent?

Based on the (very little) evidence it seems like the worst interchangeable lens camera/system by quite a long shot. But it says Nikon on it which makes it sound so much better than something that says Panasonic on it. The only benefit the others have are complicated technical things that just need a level of understanding.

That's quite sad, but it's definitely true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main attraction of ILC/EVIL cameras is the fact that they basically work like an old rangefinder camera. They are small and discreet, let have many manual features and high image quality. Good handling is a priority compared to compacts, and there is no small emphasis on build quality and aesthetics. Because of the small focal flange depth, it's possible to build very small wide and normal lenses for the system, which is also a function of the smaller sensor size I suppose. Of course they have modern amenities like AF and so on, but they are basically the same concept updated for the 21st century.

Which is why I think the super-mini systems like Sigma's and Nikon's are missing the point a fait bit. I doubt they are any more pleasant to use than a compact, and I also doubt they will offer significant benefits in terms of image quality. The NEX system obviously isn't trying to go for the retro rangefinder thing at all, Sony are just going after APS-C DSLRs there, and doing very well of course. Not my bag, but they're doing something different and choice is always a good thing. I don't see what these newly announced systems add that isn't already there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've recently sold all of my DSLR equipment and now I'm looking at selling my Canon G10. I want to replace it with just s standard smallish camera with a really good optical zoom and half decent low light performance. Any cameras that match my criteria? It's been a long time since I've looked at normal digi cameras so now idea what's good any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also a bit indifferent about this new Nikon. I'm just not that sure that the 2.7x crop factor is any kind of sweet-spot, and I think they've mostly chosen it to avoid competing with their entry level APS-C DSLRs.

It'll be hard to get any kind of DOF effects with a 2.7x crop, and the initial batch of slow lenses exacerbates this. The fastest lens, the 27mm f/2.8 prime, has a greater minimum FF-equivalent-DOF than the Olympus/Panasonic kit-lenses at their wide end, and it can't begin to compete with the 20mm f/1.7. Hell, it only just has the edge on the XZ-1, there. The kit lens doesn't look much smaller than the current Olympus kit, and considerably larger than the forthcoming Panasonic pancakes.

Body design is interesting. I'm not sure what the point in filling most of the back of the camera with a three-position Mode Dial is, though - quite daring waste of space, and why the P/A/S/M options are hidden in menus is a mystery. I like each of the fonts Nikon uses individually (particularly the focal length one), but all in one place it's a typographic nightmare.

Hybrid AF is fun - Fuji have done this in the past, I think. That said, now Olympus/Panasonic have proved you can dramatically increase Contrast Detect AF via faster processing, we've effectively hooked up CD AF to Moore's Law, so I can't see Phase Detect being relevant in mirrorless in five years time. But I'm guessing this is designed with that in mind, and future bodies can just leave out the PD sensors.

SlideforAndy.jpg

AF speed is the new Megapixels ;) Seriously though, if you're not shooting sports or wildlife, do you need ultra-fast AF?

What is sweet is that flash - tiny, but with both swivel and tilt. Very nice indeed. Oh, and built-in EVFs are to be encouraged, and nice to see they've kept the MP count modest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, so, according to that image from Nikon themselves, even Nikon is saying that a 7D is as fast as a D3x? *pets 7D* :)

I'm a bit underwhelmed by this as well, I'm sure it's fast and all and that's absolutely great. It's also got a tiny sensor, and whilst it's great that Nikon is doing something different (err... together with the Pentax Q I guess), I'm not sure of this.

I wonder how much better this will be than a Canon S100, Olympus XZ-1 or Panasonic LX-5 during the day (other than autofocus ;)). And especially how it'll perform when it'll get darker.

They don't seem to be *that* tiny either (unless Nikon's R&D guy is really small too):

HasahiroSuzuki.jpg

You might as well be holding a Panasonic GF3 and some pancakes and enjoy a bigger sensor and better DoF control...

EDIT: Also: They're fucking expensive!

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-10mm-10-30mm-Kit-White/dp/B005OGQZLI/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1316673121&sr=8-4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That does nothing for me, at all. It seems to have all the disadvantages of an SLR (carrying big lenses) with all the disadvantages of a compact (sensor size and crop factor, no optical viewfinder) without many of the advantages of either. It's nice that it's coming from a trustworthy brand, but it does seem like they've been so keen to avoid stepping on the toes of their DSLRs they've come out with something basically pointless.

It'll do really well, mind.

My exact thoughts.

Also, I thought AF speed was more dependent on the lens than the camera, surely? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK So a mate is selling his barely used Olympus Pen EP1. Anyone had one of these? I like teh idea of a compact system but I'm tight, is it a good camera? or would i be better off saving up for a GF1/2/3 or one of the sony's?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a friend visiting this weekend who has a 5D Mk2 with a 35mm f2.0 Zeiss lens which I was super excited to try out, I used the lens for an evening and the next day did some side by side comparisons with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 @ 35mm and I have to say, considering there's a £600 difference in price between the two lenses I wasn't blown away by the Zeiss.

To be fair, I didn't have a great deal of time to do comparative tests and I probably didn't play to the Zeiss' strengths as much as I could've but I'd consider it a representation of general use rather than just shooting some test patterns which isn't indicative of what you'd actually be doing with the lens.

Just goes to show that not only is the Tamron a fantastic lens for the money but there really is diminishing returns on lens quality these days beyond a certain price point. I was also having chromatic abboration issues with the Zeiss as well, green fringes past the focal point and blue before it, which I don't have on the Tamron.

I'll stick the results on here if you want to see them though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK So a mate is selling his barely used Olympus Pen EP1. Anyone had one of these? I like teh idea of a compact system but I'm tight, is it a good camera? or would i be better off saving up for a GF1/2/3 or one of the sony's?

Thanks.

It's Olympus' first micro-4/3rds camera innit, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusep1/

I'm sure it's a fine camera, it depends a bit on what you expect and what you're going to use it for (and how much he's asking).

Sony's NEX camera's all have a larger sensors and seem to do better in low light, but are lacking in the native mount lenses.

I'm strongly considering getting a NEX5 for when the 7D is a bit too unwieldy to take along.

Had a friend visiting this weekend who has a 5D Mk2 with a 35mm f2.0 Zeiss lens which I was super excited to try out, I used the lens for an evening and the next day did some side by side comparisons with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8 @ 35mm and I have to say, considering there's a £600 difference in price between the two lenses I wasn't blown away by the Zeiss.

To be fair, I didn't have a great deal of time to do comparative tests and I probably didn't play to the Zeiss' strengths as much as I could've but I'd consider it a representation of general use rather than just shooting some test patterns which isn't indicative of what you'd actually be doing with the lens.

Just goes to show that not only is the Tamron a fantastic lens for the money but there really is diminishing returns on lens quality these days beyond a certain price point. I was also having chromatic abboration issues with the Zeiss as well, green fringes past the focal point and blue before it, which I don't have on the Tamron.

I'll stick the results on here if you want to see them though.

Yeah, post 'em mate why not :)

To be fair, the Zeiss is a lot "faster" than the Tamron, the fringing is to be expected I guess.

I do certainly think there is a big part of diminishing returns on lens quality. I have to say, I'm still perfectly happy with the 18-55mm IS kitlens on the 7D, it's really sharp as tack - and I don't think I'll gain much by going to the 17-55mm f2.8 IS for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure he'd let you borrow the E-P1 and try it out for a week. I suspect it's a bit dated by modern standards - Olympus released the E-P1, E-PL1, E-P2 and E-PL2 in fairly rapid succession, and each model was better than the last.

Compared to a modern E-P3/E-PL3 you'd get less good high ISO performance (should still knock any compact for six), no EVF support, a lower-res LCD and considerably slower AF. Compared to a Panasonic GF, you'll get better JPG colours and IBIS, but they'll eat you alive on AF speed and video support.

If it's cheap, it could be a good deal. Then you can invest in lenses and upgrade when either the E-P(L)3 gets cheap, or wait until the rumoured built-in-EVF Pen Pro or Panasonic GX1 gets released.

But to re-iterate - try before you buy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure he'd let you borrow the E-P1 and try it out for a week. I suspect it's a bit dated by modern standards - Olympus released the E-P1, E-PL1, E-P2 and E-PL2 in fairly rapid succession, and each model was better than the last.

Compared to a modern E-P3/E-PL3 you'd get less good high ISO performance (should still knock any compact for six), no EVF support, a lower-res LCD and considerably slower AF. Compared to a Panasonic GF, you'll get better JPG colours and IBIS, but they'll eat you alive on AF speed and video support.

If it's cheap, it could be a good deal. Then you can invest in lenses and upgrade when either the E-P(L)3 gets cheap, or wait until the rumoured built-in-EVF Pen Pro or Panasonic GX1 gets released.

But to re-iterate - try before you buy.

£200, he lives miles and miles away. I've gone for it, as they are going for more that that on ebay, so if its a mistake - I'll not lose out. It sctratches the itch without having to spend £700 odd on a GF or NEX and lenses.

Its just for carrying around really. I've a nikon slr for the proper stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm shooting another wedding in a couple of weeks, renting a 17-55 for the girlfriend and not sure what to take myself. Currently rocking a 24-105 L and a few scrappy lenses (nifty fifty, crappy zoom). Any ideas? I shot my last wedding with a 70-200 alongside the 24-105, which was brilliant. But I'd like to try something else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

id just palm the 24-105 to the GF, and run with a 70-200 like last time. i dont know what wide angle canons do, but i'd be taking something a bit like the 14-24 that Nikon do.

infact my outdoor critical events, i go with mm 70-200, 14-24 and stuff a 50mm 1.4 in my pocket. the 14-24 on my DX, and 70-200 on the FX, as long as i can sort of cover the ranges i need on my two bodies, i can move around for the mid 40-70ish bracket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks mate - will mull it over. I was thinking the 17 end of the 17-55 would be enough for the wider shots, from what I understand there aren't a huge number of guests so the formals won't require anything super wide, and any barrel distortion it has can be corrected afterward. I want the GF to have an f2.8 so she can shoot indoors more easily, she struggled with the 24-105 f4.0 last time in a dim environment, though I found it fine, so it'd be good for her to have something wider to shoot with. Hmm, one to ponder.

I'm leaning toward her having the 17-55 and nifty fifty for low light/manual focus stuff, and me taking the 24-105 and a 1.4 or even the 1.2 for an extra £20. I'm not convinced we need a zoom, having looked at the location online it seems to be more of a large nice-looking pub with a function room more than anything else. I don't really want to get caught out though. I tend to try and take minimal gear and work with what I have, I spent much of the last wedding I did on the outskirts with the 70-200 and many of the shots felt a little impersonal to me. I might limit myself to wider lenses this time around and try to get stuck-in a bit more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks mate - will mull it over. I was thinking the 17 end of the 17-55 would be enough for the wider shots, from what I understand there aren't a huge number of guests so the formals won't require anything super wide, and any barrel distortion it has can be corrected afterward. I want the GF to have an f2.8 so she can shoot indoors more easily, she struggled with the 24-105 f4.0 last time in a dim environment, though I found it fine, so it'd be good for her to have something wider to shoot with. Hmm, one to ponder.

I'm leaning toward her having the 17-55 and nifty fifty for low light/manual focus stuff, and me taking the 24-105 and a 1.4 or even the 1.2 for an extra £20. I'm not convinced we need a zoom, having looked at the location online it seems to be more of a large nice-looking pub with a function room more than anything else. I don't really want to get caught out though. I tend to try and take minimal gear and work with what I have, I spent much of the last wedding I did on the outskirts with the 70-200 and many of the shots felt a little impersonal to me. I might limit myself to wider lenses this time around and try to get stuck-in a bit more.

remember that with a wide angle and getting stuck in you'll get people (especially old and or ugly people) going "not so close, and will either look uncomfortable, crane their necks back or not look genuinely happy, so its always worth while letting them know what the hells going on, and assuring them that they're looking great etc. careful of having fatties on the frame edges too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm shooting another wedding in a couple of weeks, renting a 17-55 for the girlfriend and not sure what to take myself. Currently rocking a 24-105 L and a few scrappy lenses (nifty fifty, crappy zoom). Any ideas? I shot my last wedding with a 70-200 alongside the 24-105, which was brilliant. But I'd like to try something else.

I'm looking to get the 24-70L personally..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Hong Kong ebayer. After customs and whatnot I've ended up paying about £50 more than I would have waiting and getting one from WHE.Not sure if it was a good idea or not yet, but early finish at work tomorrow so should get to have a bit of a play around with it.

And not really important, but it totally suits the silver GF1: :wub:

6195804391_646a9293cc_z.jpg

Untitled by pete-t, on Flickr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bought myself a NEX5 with 18-55mm kitlens.

Haven't really put it through it's paces, but it's impressively small IRL.

I do wonder if Canon will put out their mirrorless stuff, but I really wanted a small camera right now :)

Also, check this the fuck out, EOS lenses on micro-4/3rds, with aperture control:

RedRockadapterPEN-001.jpg

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1109/11092913redrockmicro.asp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm toying with the idea of selling my SLR and replacing it with a macro 4/3 system. But I am a bit stuck as to which one I should go for. Basically I am not getting time to use it and would prefer something smaller I could take quick snaps on. I would like the DOF control though and I still like the idea of interchangeable lenses, I was maybe thinking about a Panasonic GF3, but from what I have read it is essentially the same as the GF1 & 2 but without the hotshoe for the flash?

Does anyone have any recommendations for a different 4/3rds camera?

I do a lot of walking so it would mainly be used for scenery and snapshots/video of my little boy (possibly low light but not essential)

Also how much roughly should I ask for the following? All in decent condition :)

Canon 450D

18-55is Kit Lense w/ polariser

50mm f1.8 w/u.v filter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.