|
Panasonic LX100 would seem to be a good option if you want to go with a fixed zoom lens, although I was unimpressed with the image quality it produced in the comparison test images on dpreview. (the review itself said it had very good IQ, so maybe it was a flawed test image.) The LX100 is m43 so should give you better subject isolation than a 1" sensor. There's also the Olympus OM-D ILCs, which look and function similar to DSLRs, but are much smaller and have electronic viewfinders. Image quality might not be leaps ahead of the T2i, but it's probably a little better. But what I would get, if I was in your situation and had your use case, would be a Fuji X-E2 or X-T10. These are small, light ILCs like the OM-Ds, but have the best 'out of camera' jpegs of any camera system, from what I've seen. Plus at least some of the Fuji cameras come with a highly-regarded 18-55mm kit lens. But I don't know if they make a longer zoom that's considered as good
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 01:12 |
|
|
Yeah based on all that info, you should be getting a Fuji mirrorless and shoot in JPEG.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
I have a probably annoying "Canon or Nikon" question. I'm looking to get a newer DSLR camera body probably in the semi-pro/prosumer range and am trying to decide which company to go with. The tricky part is that I currently use my wife's old used Canon EOS 10D, for which she has one OK 28-75mm f2.8 lens, for which I forget the manufacturer. On the other hand, my father used to be a part time photographer back in the late 70's through the early 90's and has several decent Nikon lenses, as well as an old Nikon film body. I could probably purchase many of the lenses off of him for cheap, if he doesn't just give them to me outright. Given that, I am considering going with Nikon for the ability to use my dad's old lenses. My wife's Canon is old, but could also be a "backup" camera should I put some money into getting Canon-compatible lenses. However, I'm thinking that given the age of the EOS 10D, the availability of the (much more expensive) Nikon lenses trumps the fact that I already have access to a Canon body. Thoughts? Unfortunately I don't have specs on the Nikon lenses handy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
LogisticEarth posted:I have a probably annoying "Canon or Nikon" question. I'm looking to get a newer DSLR camera body probably in the semi-pro/prosumer range and am trying to decide which company to go with. The tricky part is that I currently use my wife's old used Canon EOS 10D, for which she has one OK 28-75mm f2.8 lens, for which I forget the manufacturer. On the other hand, my father used to be a part time photographer back in the late 70's through the early 90's and has several decent Nikon lenses, as well as an old Nikon film body. I could probably purchase many of the lenses off of him for cheap, if he doesn't just give them to me outright. Don't know what you intend to shoot but get your dad's film body and lenses and shoot film with them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 11:22
|
|
|
If you go the Nikon route, find out which lenses they are and whether they need the internal screw drive that of the current crop range, only the D7x00 models have. Full frame I don't think is an issue for these. If they're great lenses and match what you want to do then you've saved a lot of money going that route, as glass gets real expensive real fast. Spare body wise, get an older body that doesn't have the ISO/Megapixels/fancy features and you'll be fine. My backup is a D50, it sells for about $80 in the US I think and it has the screw drive your lenses might need.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
You need to find out what lenses your pops has.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 17:15
|
|
|
I'd say go the Nikon route regardless of the lenses. If they're good-to-great (i.e. not kit-zoom consumer-grade stuff, or 3rd-party replacement for kit-zoom), then you're golden. If the lenses are mostly basic consumer-grade, then you've still got some fun toys to play with. The usual advice for first-time DSLR buyers is to get a basic package to start with, then figure out what direction you want to go and buy lenses accordingly. You could be in the position of taking a shortcut, with the opportunity to use some different lenses for different shooting situations that will, at minimum, show you when you want focal length X or maximum aperture Y. (the answer is ALWAYS bigger maximum aperture, the question is ALWAYS how much money can I throw down this hole?) Either way, get your dad's Nikon film camera at the same time - seriously, shooting a good film SLR is great fun. Family history built into a camera is also a very good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Simple question about video and exposure. I understand the exposure triangle of ISO, aperture, and shutter speed. How does it work with video? Is it the same triangle, but your shutter speed is fixed at 1/30th (or 1/24th, or 1/60th, whatever)? If that's the case, does 60fps require twice as much light as 30fps, all things being equal (and 24fps requiring a little less than 30?)?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
Your shutter speed during video is independent of (but bounded by) the frame rate. You can shoot 1/1000 at 30fps, for example. So you can shoot the exact same exposure at 24fps or 30fps or 60fps, as long as you have enough light to play with. Video people (in my experience) like narrow apertures for broad depth of field, like f/16 or f/22, so you might have to crank up the ISO to maintain fast-enough shutter speeds to stay quicker than your frame rate. A shutter speed equal to the frame rate (e.g. 1/30 at 30fps) wouldn't actually work, when is the shutter closed? In a DSLR the shutter is a physical thing, a piece of plastic or metal that slides back and forth (or up and down) in front of the sensor, it needs time to move around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:Simple question about video and exposure. I understand the exposure triangle of ISO, aperture, and shutter speed. How does it work with video? Is it the same triangle, but your shutter speed is fixed at 1/30th (or 1/24th, or 1/60th, whatever)? If that's the case, does 60fps require twice as much light as 30fps, all things being equal (and 24fps requiring a little less than 30?)? Typically for realistic looking motion, you want to use a shutter speed double that of your FPS (they are independent settings from each other) - so 1/60 for 30fps, 1/125 for 60fps, etc. Too low and it will be more blurry, too high and it looks like the intro to saving private ryan
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Either way, get your dad's Nikon film camera at the same time - seriously, shooting a good film SLR is great fun. Family history built into a camera is also a very good thing. I actually used to use it fairly frequently in high school but that is like 15 years ago at this point. I used to love toying with it but never quite got good at film SLR as the early 2000s saw an explosion of quality digital camera and I got distracted by being able to have 600+ photos on a memory card rather than 32 on a roll of film that I had to pay and wait to get developed. I'll check into what exactly he has. He has always been a person to buy quality equipment so I'm betting they're not just junky kit lenses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Your shutter speed during video is independent of (but bounded by) the frame rate. You can shoot 1/1000 at 30fps, for example. So you can shoot the exact same exposure at 24fps or 30fps or 60fps, as long as you have enough light to play with. I really doubt your shutter is going to be closing every single frame. You'd never get more than 11 fps or so out of a camera if you were doing that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Good point. I don't actually know what's going on inside my camera, I just make guesses. Either way, 1/30 at 30fps seems unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
ExecuDork posted:Good point. I don't actually know what's going on inside my camera, I just make guesses. Either way, 1/30 at 30fps seems unlikely. Really all depends on how fast the camera can buffer frames and write them to disk. At least with a go pro the listed max shutter speed for video is 1/(frame rate), so it's possible!
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
I'm betting if I watch my camera record I won't see the physical shutter moving, but it's probably doing some software tricks to only capture light on the sensor for whatever shutter speed you're at. Keep in mind, that even at 1080p you're only doing ~2.1 megapixels (compared to my D5200's 24 megapixels) so the camera's got a lot of extra processing power leftover to do stuff. I also found this video which explains it some: https://vimeo.com/videoschool/lesson/56/frame-rate-vs-shutter-speed-setting-the-record-straight
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Isn't the way it scans across the sensor in order to get the intended rate one of the reasons DSLR cameras suffer from rolling shutter effect when shooting things like propellers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Isn't the way it scans across the sensor in order to get the intended rate one of the reasons DSLR cameras suffer from rolling shutter effect when shooting things like propellers? Yup, it's not using the physical shutter
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Either upgrade to a cool APS-C body of your choice (keep using the same lens) but canon sensors are kinda meh right now, or get a fuji kit. This has the advantage of producing cool jpeg OOC. SMERSH Mouth posted:But what I would get, if I was in your situation and had your use case, would be a Fuji X-E2 or X-T10. These are small, light ILCs like the OM-Ds, but have the best 'out of camera' jpegs of any camera system, from what I've seen. Plus at least some of the Fuji cameras come with a highly-regarded 18-55mm kit lens. But I don't know if they make a longer zoom that's considered as good Kenshin posted:Yeah based on all that info, you should be getting a Fuji mirrorless and shoot in JPEG. Thanks for the input everyone. Since a Fuji mirrorless got three votes, that seems like a good place to start, and I expected to have to look further into mirrorless anyway. While I'm doing more research, I have a few basic questions. Here's a link to my original post since it's back a page. Edit: No responses to the questions, but after a couple days of research I'm pretty convinced. I'll take the questions I still have over to the mirrorless thread. Thanks for the help! runawayturtles fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Jul 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 08:12
|
|
|
(Ugh, I'm an idiot and I posted in the Camera Gear thread instead of here) I'm looking to a buy my first DSLR or mirrorless camera in the $500-600 range. I'm currently living/working in Africa and I would use it regularly at work for taking photos of farmland, and I would also like to use it for travel photography. Size isn't an issue - I currently have a Sony HX9V compact superzoom that takes pretty good photos and I plan on keeping it. A decent zoom would also be nice, in case I end up going on a safari tour again. My current camera has 16x optical zoom, whatever that means, and it helped out a lot for shooting wildlife at a distance during a previous safari. Also, used/refurb isn't an issue.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
I'm learning about photography as a hobby and I'm looking at getting my first DLSR. My film school friend who owns a bunch of expensive lenses and cameras told me I should look at something like this as a starting point: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NEW-Canon-1200D-Twin-Lens-Kit-18-55mm-75-300mm-1200DTKB-/111703010247?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item1a0204abc7 I like taking photos but all I have is my phone and phones are poo poo. I've messed around with his 70d in auto mode and taken some nice shots (nothing I can share because they are of people), but I'd like to get my own. I'd be taking a lot of shots while bushwalking and off my car primarily I guess, I'm not looking for specific professional needs because thats not how I'm going to be using it. Is he right in that this is a good starting point? Apart from a bag and an SD card, theres nothing else extra I need to buy is there? E: Examples of the type of stuff I'm shooting, taken with my phone.    I thought I did ok for a phone but I want to take quality shots. underage at the vape shop fucked around with this message at 07:05 on Jul 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
Anything but that camera, it's not good (also known in the Americas as the Rebel T5). I'm sure someone can make a good Canon starter recommendation (if your friend has Canon and is willing to loan you lenses you might as well) but don't get that one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:phones are poo poo. You take that back.  But yeah, not sure why your friend would recommend the 1200D unless he secretly hates you or is purposely trying to sabotage your budding photography hobby. It doesn't sound like you have any real specific needs, so your options for that price are something like: 1. an entry level Canon, so you can borrow your buddy's lenses, something like a T3i or a T5i maybe. 2. Something smaller in a mirrorless system, you can't borrow your friend's lenses, but if you are going walking in the bush you'll be happier. Something like a NEX-5N or a Fuji X-E1/2 with a kit lens is tried and true. 3. Go for broke in the compactness department and get an actual compact. Something like a RX-100 (the cheapest generation you can get), Canon S110/120. No choices in terms of lens, but much easier to carry, and enough manual controls so you can actually learn the technical bit of photography, since I imagine if you went through film school you should have a good handle on the composition stuff. Also of note, there's literally no reason to get a new camera and new lenses. It's like a car in that the value depreciates the second you take it out the box, and a used one that's well taken care of gets you much more bang for the buck.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
On the topic of recommending new cameras: http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...ing-advice.html
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
Geektox posted:You take that back. We have to sabotage early on, otherwise he might get good and take away our jobs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Ended up getting a 600d which I'm pretty impressed with The Understanding Exposure book, wheres the best place to buy that in Australia? It's a bit over $40 everywhere in Aus and about the same with postage from Amazon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 13:48
|
|
|
A Saucy Bratwurst posted:Ended up getting a 600d which I'm pretty impressed with
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
coldplay chiptunes posted:ebook? Eh... I'm usually totally down with ebooks, but if there's any book worth getting an actual printed copy of, it's Understanding Exposure. The pictures are such a huge part of the book that I don't know how it would work in ebook form.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 13:18
|
|
|
Theris posted:Eh... I'm usually totally down with ebooks, but if there's any book worth getting an actual printed copy of, it's Understanding Exposure. The pictures are such a huge part of the book that I don't know how it would work in ebook form.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Theris posted:Eh... I'm usually totally down with ebooks, but if there's any book worth getting an actual printed copy of, it's Understanding Exposure. The pictures are such a huge part of the book that I don't know how it would work in ebook form. I read my photography ebooks on an iPad and/or a desktop app, so there's no problem with pictures because it's all in color and pretty. The times of low-res greyscale eBooks have long gone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 10:34
|
|
|
I am looking to get a new DLSR/mirrorless camera. I am going on vacation to France and want to have something better than my phone for taking pictures. Long-term I'd also like to get back into photography as well. I used to have a T3i and a few lenses, but sold them after going on a long term assignment that took up most of my time. I'd like something that works great both indoor (museums especially) and outdoor. Most of the outdoor will be during hiking/skiing/biking. I also want to be able to shoot starry skies in Moab. My budget is about $1000. Any recommendations?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Outdoors during the day is about the easiest thing for any camera to do. Even a crappy flip-phone from 10 years ago can put out half-decent images at 3:00pm on a clear day. The hard part of your question is indoors - and museums typically don't allow flash photography, and they hate tripods, too (not that I would in any way recommend lugging a tripod around the Louvre even if the security guards wouldn't break it over their knees). $1000 is a fine budget, you've got scads and scads of choices there. Sounds like the vacation to France is happening first, before you do much "hiking/skiing/biking" and Moab-skies. Let's concentrate on French museums first, with an eye to light weight for that other stuff. Keeping your kit light is just generally a good idea, you're more likely to use your camera if you're willing to carry it around all day instead of leaving it in the hotel room. A few questions: 1. How do you feel about used gear? A higher-tier camera (the term "prosumer" is sometimes used, as in, half-way between "pro" and "consumer" grades) from a couple of years ago will cost the same a lower-grade new camera and consequently have some nice features you might be interested in. On the other hand, newer sensors (all else being equal) are almost always better in low-light situations; more expensive cameras have better sensors, usually. But you might end up with a pretty-good high-ISO performer that frustrates you with a requirement to dive into menus to change settings. As a general rule, more expensive cameras - marketed at more "serious" amateurs or professionals - have more single-purpose dedicated buttons and more flexibility for mapping particular functions to particular buttons to suit your individual shooting style / needs. 2. Do you have a favourite brand or some reason to choose one brand? You mentioned a Canon in your past, are you wedded to the idea of another Canon or would you consider a Nikon, Sony, Pentax, or Olympus DSLR? Do you still have Canon-specific lenses and/or accessories (flash? remote trigger? memory cards?) you want to use? Do you have friends or relatives you could share gear with? If you don't have a particular reason to go with one brand, I STRONGLY recommend you spend some time at a camera store (or even a big-box electronics store) and fondle the selection. Most manufacturers keep things pretty consistent across their product lines, so playing with a $800 Nikon will tell you a lot about how any Nikon fits in your hands / mashes up against your face even if that particular camera is outside of your budget. I shoot Pentax, I don't know enough about other brands to make any specific recommendations - I'm sure others will chime in with some solid suggestions. B&H Photo is a decent place to look to get an idea of prices, at least. Surprisingly (to me), the Pentax offerings are all either way under your budget (like this K-50 2-lens kit) or pushing past it into the $1200-1500 range. There is the KS-2 with 18-135mm kit (with sexy orange trim! Oh Pentax... ) but I'm not totally sold on that camera, or on that lens. Given that I already have a Pentax and I'm happy with it, I could recommend a K-50 + 18-55 kit (in red because why not) plus an ultrawide lens, like the Sigma 10-20mm. That would cover landscapes and general snapshots (the kit zoom) plus the ultrawide for indoors. But, I feel like I'm pulling you down a weird path, I think you'd be better served by first, playing with some cameras at a shop, then choosing a selection of lenses (probably 2 is what will fit in your budget after you buy a camera body) that will cover lots of different shooting situations (wide, like 18mm, to medium-telephoto, like 200 or 300mm). Then you'll have the flexibility to try lots of different things without blowing your money on specialty-purpose lenses. I'm going to recommend Pentax again because of the weather-sealing - when you're skiing and you dump your camera in a snowbank, you just knock the snow off the viewfinder and the front of the lens and don't worry about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 06:03
|
|
|
To answer the above questions... 1: I would prefer to go new, but I would consider used in some cases (not interested in dealing with eBay). I will most likely be buying from Amazon unless someone else has a really good deal. 2: I think I'd lean more towards Nikon and Sony at the moment. The Canon I had was OK in the hand, but I remember the Nikon's feeling better the last time I held one. I'll also check out Pentax. I sold all of the Canon gear so I'll be starting from square one. I'm not sure if there are any camera specific shops in the area, but I know that the BB closest to me has a wide selection I can play around with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
I'm looking at getting my first DSLR after a couple decades shooting 35mm. I'm looking at a Canon SL-1 as a starter and eventually stepping up from there. Am I looking in the right direction?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
I went with a mirrorless over a DSLR, but this isn't the thread to get into that. Are you looking at DSLRs specifically, or for a good interchangeable-lens digital camera?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
Doctor w-rw-rw- posted:I went with a mirrorless over a DSLR, but this isn't the thread to get into that. Are you looking at DSLRs specifically, or for a good interchangeable-lens digital camera? I've considered mirrorless as well. The DSLR thing is more just out of familiarity I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
Obviously it's not a problem to go from any camera to any camera, but I think the move from 35mm SLR to DSLR is particularly easy. Mirrorless means an electronic viewfinder, making the experience of using one more like a digital P&S or a phone. The experience of using your camera is important. Go to a store and play with a mirrorless camera for a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
And try out if the SL1 is uncomfortably small for your hands. Having a camera that's comfortable to hold is incredibly important.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2015 10:56
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:And try out if the SL1 is uncomfortably small for your hands. Having a camera that's comfortable to hold is incredibly important. Definitely this. The SL1 is a very tiny SLR. I love mine, but I can see how people with bigger hands might have trouble using it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
I may be alone here, but since you came from 35mm film SLRs, I assume you already know how to use a camera, and may not care about video all that much. Then I suggest you skip the soccer mom Costco specials, go straight to a used Canon 5D (original) available all day around the $500 range. Familiar handling and field of view, durable, great image quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 01:12 |
|
|
I've been looking at getting my first DSLR and I was wondering about the Canon 5d. For a full frame it is available for ridiculously cheap (~£250), is this just because it's older or what? Also does anyone know any places to get gear from in the UK? It seems a lot harder to import from Hong Kong to Europe like I used to do (for ridiculously low low prices).
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2015 12:19
|
|
