|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:I'm going to Hawaii for the first time in September for a wedding (for one of the days), and probably going to be somewhat touristy the rest. I have the Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 and a 16-35 f/4 lenses, and an a7S body. 16mm is already pretty wide, do you mean the 24-70? IMO way too many people fixate on going wide for landscapes, it can be really tough to fill the frame with such a huge POV. A telephoto lets you pick out interesting features and make a composition around them.
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 10:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
Nope. Was wondering if the FE 16mm f/2 fisheye would be worth it, but I might just stick with the 16-35 f/4 I own. So...I suppose just renting the a7R II and a 70-200mm should do it for body + lens? Unless I'd be missing out renting a particularly sweet lens and adapter for a couple of days. Any Hawaii-specific advice? I.e. should I prepare to use the camera in certain weather conditions, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Fuji may want to do something special to the next X100, hence the delay. e: Just realised that I've had a moan about the X100 series AF a couple of times already. Sorry about that, but that's the only thing that ruins those cameras for me. Xabi fucked around with this message at 10:28 on Aug 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 10:23
|
|
|
Xabi posted:Here's a tip: decent AF and that shouldn't be too hard to achieve. Im assuming the x200 (x100f or whatever they csll it) will get the upgraded af of the xtrans 3 cameras, which crushes all the old ones.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 11:38
|
|
|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:Nope. Was wondering if the FE 16mm f/2 fisheye would be worth it, but I might just stick with the 16-35 f/4 I own. Honestly if you need ultra wide on the 16-35, use the built in panorama function. I find at 23 o can get a large area for massive group shots and or use on 3D applications. If you don't have a good circular polarizer I recommend you pick one up just for water photography reasons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
I can't be the only one waiting for the X-T2 release to score a cheap X-T1 body, right
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
Xabi posted:Here's a tip: decent AF and that shouldn't be too hard to achieve. What exactly is it you're not liking about the AF on the x100t? I've been plenty happy with mine and I've definitely put it through its paces in some pretty adverse situations for AF
|
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
It's just too slow. Compared to DSLRs and the OM-Ds it's just irritating to go back to something that needs that little bit of extra time to focus. It's a shame because they're great in all other aspects. I've only tried the X100 and the X100 but I hear the AF on the S and the T are fairly similar. e: oops, X100 and X100S 
Xabi fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Aug 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Xabi posted:I've only tried the X100 and the X100 Does the x100 have the same features as the x100? I haven't shot the x100 or the x100, but I hear the x100 is just like the x100. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Xabi posted:It's just too slow. Compared to DSLRs and the OM-Ds it's just irritating to go back to something that needs that little bit of extra time to focus. It's a shame because they're great in all other aspects. You do realize it is kind of dumb to complain about a feature not being up to snuff on a model you have never used right? X100t works pretty great, every comparison article I read between the s and t before i purchased my t noted how much quicker the t's AF was. And I can anecdotally tell you it's solid. The only time I have had any issues with it is trying to use the smallest couple of focal point sizes in low light situations but I just made it a little larger and again had no problems. Is it an SLR? no, does it perform exceptionally well for a compact camera? Hells yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
I use my X100S for all kinds of poo poo and I think the AF is fine. Sometimes it back focuses and you need to refocus. It's certainly not a dealbreaker by any stretch of the imagination. The only time the AF totally fails is in extremely dark scenes. Twilight, dusk, poorly lit interiors, all works well enough. And it's also a great camera for zone focusing in bright situations. Put that poo poo on f/8, set the manual focus to 2-2.5m, or f/11 at 1.5m and get everything in focus past your arms length.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
I might be able to score a mint condition Nocticron at a decent price. But... Should I???
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
I never get too excited about panaleica. It's not like they haven't put out some questionable optics (100-400mm f/6.3 on m43 - diffraction limited at maximum zoom & aperture!). Is it really that much better than the Olympus 45mm or 75mm? Oh, and I sat down an shot a series of photos of some different warm-colored household objects on my porch, cycling through different WB and color settings with my E-M10 and 7D. It looks like carrying a sheet of printer paper around with the OM-D is going to be necessary on cloudy days.. Using 'one-touch WB' set to the paper and dialing in +1 green (on the green/magenta tint scale), I can get it to match warm highlights without pinking the gently caress out. So I guess my camera's sensor hardware isn't defective! That's good news to me, because I was just about to order a manual focus 300mm f/4/ or f/4.5 35mm camera lens to adapt to the E-M10. I want something for wildlife, but more compact than the 7D+400L. I wonder, though, if: 1.) The IBIS will be at all effective on a 300mm lens? Oly themselves had to put IS in their new 300/4, so I'm not expecting great results, but even just one or two stops of stabilization would be an improvement over the 400L, which has no stabilization at all. 2.) I can find an old lens that's decently sharp for this digital camera. I've been leaning toward the Nikon 300mm f/4.5 ED Ai-S, but I'm curious about the Olympus, Minolta, M42, and Canon FD versions. I just default to Nikon since that lens could do double duty on my film camera.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I never get too excited about panaleica. It's not like they haven't put out some questionable optics (100-400mm f/6.3 on m43 - diffraction limited at maximum zoom & aperture!). Is it really that much better than the Olympus 45mm or 75mm? This is why you use post processing automation... Easiest workflow ever in Lightroom to just batch your white balance and not be futzing with it in camera constantly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:That's good news to me, because I was just about to order a manual focus 300mm f/4/ or f/4.5 35mm camera lens to adapt to the E-M10. I want something for wildlife, but more compact than the 7D+400L. I wonder, though, if: *bursts through door, out of breath*  This is the OM mount 350mm f/2.8, it is heavy as gently caress (about 9lbs) and the IBIS still works like a dream on it. Even my gimmicky rear end 800mm f/8 mirror lens will stabilize pretty well with the IBIS, you can set it to a specific focal length when you attach MF lenses and it will do a ton to help things out. I also have the 180mm f/2.8, 200mm f/4, and 300mm f/4.5 and all have worked great with an adapter on my EM-1. E: This all being said, I don't know if the IBIS is as good on the EM-10 as it is the EM-1, (if memory serves the EM-10's isn't quite as strong) but it should still work great for the OM-mount lenses up to 300mm without much trouble. DJExile fucked around with this message at 21:07 on Aug 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:I never get too excited about panaleica. It's not like they haven't put out some questionable optics (100-400mm f/6.3 on m43 - diffraction limited at maximum zoom & aperture!). Is it really that much better than the Olympus 45mm or 75mm? Same, mostly, but I am kind of excited about the Nocticron... Not at full retail prices, but I'm tempted now that I can get it used. I have the Olympus 45 f1.8 which is a very respectable lens for the price and I really like that focal length. However, someone is also offering a used Olympus 75mm at a ridiculously good price, so I might just jump on that instead of the Nocticron. Just worried that the focal length might be a little too weird.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
The 75mm is fast and sharp as hell. You'll love it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
DJExile posted:*bursts through door, out of breath* That is a rad lens. Good to know the IBIS gets along with it. I've found the em10 to have pretty strong strong stabilization (you can turn it on and watch the sensor wiggle when there's no lens attached), but I guess it's missing two axes of movement compared to the 5 & 1 (and 10ii..) Regarding the PL lenses, I think the new 12mm 1.4 looks pretty nice. It's funny (not bad IMO, just funny) to me that leica, a company whose optics are legendary for being I guess that rationale was taken to an extreme with the 100-400. It seems like it would be theoretically possible to effectively counteract moderately high diffraction using the right sharpening algorithms. Plenty of people on the internet say it's great at 400mm, but other people, people with graphs, say it doesn't quite extricate itself from diffraction-induced softness. Edit: aperture, how does it work? SMERSH Mouth fucked around with this message at 02:09 on Sep 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
I'm going to a baseball game in a bout a month and was thinking of renting a telephoto lens to take some pics from my seat during the game. With the Fuji options I'm guessing the 100-400mm lens would be best but are they even going to allow that if I show up with that lens in my bag? The website for Fenway states "Cameras and video cameras are permitted but cannot be used to reproduce the game and must not interfere with other fans' enjoyment of the game." but I have no experience doing this before so I'm not sure what the really means in terms of what gear is acceptable. Anyone else have trouble, or hopefully no trouble, rolling in with similar gear before at a ball game?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 03:08
|
|
|
I have an X-T1, and I may have the opportunity to do some night sky photography in a couple weeks. The last time I was able to try this, it was the week after I got the camera, and I had trouble getting focus. Assuming it's extremely dark and I can't see much of anything in the viewfinder or rear LCD, what's the best way of getting focus to infinity? I see the rear LCD has a focus meter in manual mode, which has a blue line with a white dot in the middle on a scale, so that looks promising. The white dot doesn't go past the end of the scale, so does that mean the (18-55 kit) lens doesn't actually go past infinity? Or should I get the white dot to the infinity marker and stop before the blue line goes off the edge of the scale? Or is there a better way entirely? Also, do you guys who do this more often use a remote shutter release, the smartphone app, or just the self-timer? Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 05:41
|
|
|
TheEye posted:I have an X-T1, and I may have the opportunity to do some night sky photography in a couple weeks. The last time I was able to try this, it was the week after I got the camera, and I had trouble getting focus. Assuming it's extremely dark and I can't see much of anything in the viewfinder or rear LCD, what's the best way of getting focus to infinity? I see the rear LCD has a focus meter in manual mode, which has a blue line with a white dot in the middle on a scale, so that looks promising. The white dot doesn't go past the end of the scale, so does that mean the (18-55 kit) lens doesn't actually go past infinity? Or should I get the white dot to the infinity marker and stop before the blue line goes off the edge of the scale? Or is there a better way entirely? I do not own a Fuji but the blue line is going to be your depth of field and the white dot is going to be the focus distance. No lens focuses "past" infinity in an optical sense, if they have focus distance past infinity on the ring, its for heat expansion inside the lens, which should be accommodated to some degree by your camera or lens when focusing electronically. When you MF a lens that focuses past infinity by having a manual focus ring that seeks to past infinity you actually lose some sharpness typically unless the lens is hot. Very cold (well below freezing) lenses usually need to come to near a bit. With astrophotography you pretty much just have to do some trial and error when you are first setting up. When shooting the sky you do not need a hyperfocal distance unless the surroundings on the ground are close in the scene, so you can really do it either way - meaning, infinite is fine. If you have some things in the distance you want to be sharp you may need to use a hyperfocal distance short of infinite where the far side spills into infinite. The depth of field display (blue line) should be marked by some kind of distance indicator on either end. The distance is from the sensor (there is usually a line on the camera body indicating the sensor location).
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
windex posted:I do not own a Fuji but the blue line is going to be your depth of field and the white dot is going to be the focus distance.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:By far the easiest way is to AF on the moon then switch to MF and gaff tape the focus ring. I've seen people use rubber bands before as well. I feel like there's a market for a product here but I'm not sure what would work best, or maybe it already exists?
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
The xt1 is difficult for ap due to the evf imo. It's trial and error since the evf shows a mess, but putting the focus ring on infinity should get you close. When I was heavy into astrophotography I used a bahtinov mask for pinpoint accuracy. You can pick them up for under 20 bucks but I've never used one directly on a lens before, only on a scope. 13 bucks on adorama: http://www.adorama.com/farfp400.html?gclid=Cj0KEQjwo5--BRCS8ceLjv-XppUBEiQAGp15EHA33NN8YDGaHYe6P_XThx68jfG2PKvA1Gh50ukkixoaApI68P8HAQ I took a quick shot coming up my driveway off the top of my car the other night. This was 20 seconds with the 16mm at 1.4 iso 800. Notched it to infinity, but it's still not pinpoint stars.  My Driveway by Eli J, on Flickr Choicecut fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Sep 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Helicity posted:I've seen people use rubber bands before as well. I feel like there's a market for a product here but I'm not sure what would work best, or maybe it already exists? It already exists.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Hey folks, I was referred to this thread for some questions I had about the Olympus OM-D E-M10. I'm in the market for a decent quality general purpose camera to supplement (or, given apparent advances in camera tech in the intervening years, likely replace) my Rebel XT and D40 - chiefly I want to be able to shoot video since I don't have a purpose-built camcorder, and I definitely want something more compact than my DSLRs so I can take it everywhere more easily. I'm not too invested in Canon or Nikon lenses but definitely want interchangeable lenses for specialized shots, and the consistent recommendation seems to be to look into a mirrorless MFT camera, among which the Olympus OM-D E-M10 keeps coming up as a promising affordable option for casual use (at one point I fancied myself a photographer, but I'm no longer invested enough in it as a hobby to shop for prosumer stuff). Would you guys mind giving your input on a couple of questions before I make any purchases? My main concerns are: 1. Whether I'm overlooking a camera in the same price bracket (my budget is around the $350-500 zone) that would be better-suited to my needs, which would primarily mean something better for shooting video (higher resolution, better framerate, better film speed / processing options for low light, compatibility with peripherals like microphones, or beneficial design features), and 2. Where in the price range I should be shopping and what options I should be looking for if I decide on the E-M10 - specifically, is refurbished or new the way to go, should I skip the kit lens and just get a body and then lens shop, and is there anything that might make it worth the jump in price to the E-M10 Mk. II that I should think about? Thanks in advance for any advice you can offer - I'd be happy to answer any questions that might help flesh out what I'm looking for if there's major points of consideration I've overlooked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Panasonic is better for video, the GH series specifically. You may be able to find used in your range.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
I love my E-M10 for photos but it kinda sucks at doing video. With your budget a used Panasonic GH3 might be a better alternative.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:By far the easiest way is to AF on the moon then switch to MF and gaff tape the focus ring. Yeah, if the moon is visible, definitely. Last time I tried though it was not, and the auto-focus wasn't usable on anything else either. Choicecut posted:I took a quick shot coming up my driveway off the top of my car the other night. This was 20 seconds with the 16mm at 1.4 iso 800. Notched it to infinity, but it's still not pinpoint stars. Yeah, I don't remember what exactly I tried last time, but I know the end result was similar, with the focus close but not quite there. Unfortunately I couldn't even tell whether it was exact or slightly off when reviewing the photos on the LCD and zooming in. It was only clearly slightly off after checking on my PC. I guess I'll try going by the LCD's focus meter and see how it goes, but it sounds like it might turn out to be just as difficult as last time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Popelmon posted:I love my E-M10 for photos but it kinda sucks at doing video. With your budget a used Panasonic GH3 might be a better alternative. Mr. Wookums posted:Panasonic is better for video, the GH series specifically. You may be able to find used in your range. Are there any recommended alternatives to eBay for buying used photo gear? There seem to be a couple used GH3s on there but most of the results are new in box for substantially more or similar substitutes like the GH4.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Pimp Drakula posted:Are there any recommended alternatives to eBay for buying used photo gear? There seem to be a couple used GH3s on there but most of the results are new in box for substantially more or similar substitutes like the GH4. You can get great deals at the Fred Miranda forums. If you want to buy an used GH body, it might be worth waiting a few weeks since Panasonic is about to announce the GH5.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
They only charge you 5 bux, but it's still much cheaper to find silicone wristband on ebay. I have a Greg Norman black one I brought for $1.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
The large rubber band that is included when you buy a Field Notes notebook also seems to work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:They only charge you 5 bux, but it's still much cheaper to find silicone wristband on ebay. It's worth the extra $4 to get one specifically designed not to degrade when exposed to light from the Golden Hour.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
Choicecut posted:The xt1 is difficult for ap due to the evf imo. It's trial and error since the evf shows a mess, but putting the focus ring on infinity should get you close. When I was heavy into astrophotography I used a bahtinov mask for pinpoint accuracy. You can pick them up for under 20 bucks but I've never used one directly on a lens before, only on a scope. 13 bucks on adorama: I had the same problem with a completely different setup and did a lot of research afterwards. It seems that you don't want to run most lenses wide open, but 1 or 2 stops down from wide open to get perfect stars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Pimp Drakula posted:Hey folks, I was referred to this thread for some questions I had about the Olympus OM-D E-M10. I'm in the market for a decent quality general purpose camera to supplement (or, given apparent advances in camera tech in the intervening years, likely replace) my Rebel XT and D40 - chiefly I want to be able to shoot video since I don't have a purpose-built camcorder, and I definitely want something more compact than my DSLRs so I can take it everywhere more easily. I'm not too invested in Canon or Nikon lenses but definitely want interchangeable lenses for specialized shots, and the consistent recommendation seems to be to look into a mirrorless MFT camera, among which the Olympus OM-D E-M10 keeps coming up as a promising affordable option for casual use (at one point I fancied myself a photographer, but I'm no longer invested enough in it as a hobby to shop for prosumer stuff). The GH series is best mirrorless for video that's not a $2.5k sony a7s, but a couple other alternatives would be... Sony a6000- better low light still photo quality than m43, by a hair or two, and the updated firmware has the xvac-s codec for 1080 video, which actually looks pretty decent, although nowhere as good as 4k and still inferior to the GH3's outstanding 1080 (the gh3 doesn't do 4k but it's 1080 video quality comes close.) The body is a great value and you should be able to easily find it in your budget used. Not a great lens selection though, especially on a budget. Panasonic G7- I saw a new g7 kit on sale for around $500 at best buy so I'm sure you could force it into your budget with some hunting. It does 4k. That's really all you need if you want the latest and greatest amateur videography setup. Should take pictures just fine, too. Great lens selection. Out of all of these, the GH3 is going to have the most pro-level video features for flexibility with frame rates, color grading, and sound recording. But, as you're finding, it can be hard to get a hold of for cheap+used+good condition.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Aredna posted:I had the same problem with a completely different setup and did a lot of research afterwards. It seems that you don't want to run most lenses wide open, but 1 or 2 stops down from wide open to get perfect stars. I'm going to try stopping down a bit with the 16mm next time I get the chance. Taking a closer look at my image from the other night, I see a severe case of coma rather than a focusing issue. Stopping down to f2ish should help combat that I would think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Choicecut posted:I'm going to try stopping down a bit with the 16mm next time I get the chance. Taking a closer look at my image from the other night, I see a severe case of coma rather than a focusing issue. Stopping down to f2ish should help combat that I would think. That's exactly the issue you should be seeing wide open actually. Super high end lens only need to be stopped down a little (and sometimes not at all) while cheaper lenses need to be stopped down more.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
SMERSH Mouth posted:Panasonic G7- I saw a new g7 kit on sale for around $500 at best buy so I'm sure you could force it into your budget with some hunting. It does 4k. That's really all you need if you want the latest and greatest amateur videography setup. Should take pictures just fine, too. Great lens selection. The G series looks like it might be a good option for my budget, what are the primary differences between the GH series and the other model lines in Panasonic's MFT cameras? I've seen the G series, FZ series, and I believe a couple others, plus suffixes like the GH#K - are there certain major features that explain the price gaps that I might want to consider?
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
I'm selling a couple of mirrorless lenses in the sale thread, 12mm f/2 Fuji mount and a 300mm hexanon that would be sweet adapted to whatever. Incase anyone's in the market. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3759085&pagenumber=13#post463831039
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 15:27
|
|