The Mirrorless Thread: Son(y), I Am Disappoint.

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Mirrorless Thread: Son(y), I Am Disappoint.

«‹›3 »

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Linedance posted:

As long as oversupply brings the prices to somewhere around $400 US for the body, I hope so!

# ¿ May 12, 2016 19:51

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:33

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

This has caused quite the tizzy at Fuji.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyKB4OHaDwk

# ¿ May 17, 2016 22:59

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

bobfather posted:

Since you want video, forget Fuji.

Fuji don't care about video. Me personally, I'd go M 4/3 if I wanted video. Like that Panasonic GH4 that lets you shoot 4K video and then pull perfect stills from the video.

This, or if don't want to pay the GH4 cost, the DMC-G7 will give you 4K at about half the price.

# ¿ May 23, 2016 22:48

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

HPL posted:

Really, there should be a separate Fuji thread.

The Mirrorless Thread: Fuji, Cover Me With Your Seed

# ¿ May 24, 2016 14:31

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

FWIW, B&H is having a sale on Fuji cameras and lenses.

# ¿ Jun 6, 2016 18:23

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Dangerllama posted:

Where are some other places to score decent used lenses? EBay seems like a solid option if you want to pay 1.5x what you should.

I've bought used from B&H and Adorama, and both lenses were in really good condition. A few cosmetic blemishes on the outside that didn't affect the photo whatsoever.

# ¿ May 28, 2019 15:01

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Surely this can't be legit? It must be an X-T30 and they made a mistake.....

# ¿ Jun 13, 2019 19:49

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Get an early pre-order for $199 for a wicked looking Kamlan 50mm F1.1 MK2. Sony E / Fuji X / EOS M /and M43.

This looks like a really good lens for the price.

# ¿ Jun 13, 2019 21:24

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

iammeandsoareyou posted:

Actually it looks like they are being discontinued.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/olympus-pen-f-reportedly-discontinued

I guess this is the start of clearance pricing.

What the tits? That looked like a great camera.

# ¿ Jun 18, 2019 02:35

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

I've added an X-T3 to my stable, but I need a new bag/backpack. The bag that I have for my DSLR doesn't fit the Fuji right, so it just rattles around in there, and none of the velcro points are in a position to close it down any. My other bag is too small.

What I need is a bag that will fit the camera, 3 lenses, flash, battery grip, etc.

Does anyone have a recommendation that isn't a $600 Peak Design bag?

# ¿ Jun 18, 2019 02:51

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

ilkhan posted:

Is there a broad consensus on the best pocketable m4/3 camera/lens combo for an everyday camera? Zoom in the 24-70 (+- a bit) 35mm equiv range preferably.

Go find an old Olympus PEN E-PM2 on Ebay, and stick a pancake lens on it. It's well tiny, and still a really good 16MP output.

Edit: Photo for size comparison

# ¿ Jun 19, 2019 19:38

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

This is my "I don't know what thread to put it in" question, re: software:

I've always used Lightroom for my Nikon DSLR, but I read an article about Capture One and how it functions with system -specific image settings.

Has anyone used Capture One, and is it better or worse than Lightroom?

# ¿ Jun 19, 2019 22:18

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

cheese posted:

The 18-55mm kit is actually god tier as well. For 300 bucks you get a solid zoom range, decently fast aperture and its got image stabilization. You can buy one off ebay for 300 bucks and then if you don't like it (you will), sell it for 300 bucks.

I've owned a lot of cameras in my life, and I have never used a better kit lens. Even with my other lenses, I still use this kit lens a LOT.

# ¿ Jun 20, 2019 04:53

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Lady Gaza posted:

I never found specialised camera backpacks any good. I ended up getting an Osprey hiking backpack and a Tenba camera insert, along with a peak design clip. Depends on your needs but I found that when out in a city or the countryside this worked well; camera (XT-20) clipped to my shoulder strap with spare lenses etc in the insert.

Thanks for this. I partially followed this advice. I actually wound up getting the Tenba Fulton backpack. It's exactly what I needed, and the top storage section is quite spacious.

Thanks to everyone for their suggestions.

# ¿ Jun 23, 2019 05:06

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

mAlfunkti0n posted:

Affinity Photo is a godsend because it really just lets me take my iPad and pencil with me and do everything on it.

Affinity everything is a godsend, and will eventually be the death of Adobe CC. The newly released Affinity Studio Link is already better than anything Adobe has ever done.

# ¿ Jun 25, 2019 15:19

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

The Lone Lemon posted:

While we're still somewhat on the topic of LR alternatives, has anyone tried out Mylio? Got an offer today for a lifetime 20% off (I guess they just launched premium or something) and the promises are good, but does it deliver?

I'm still reading the online reviews, but I was wondering if anyone here had direct experience?

Also Luminar is on sale. Does anyone have experience with it?

# ¿ Jul 4, 2019 04:18

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

The Lone Lemon posted:

I tried 2018 but rejected it because it didn't have a catalog (although they kept promising it) and it behaved buggily as a Lightroom plugin. I bought Luminar 3 as part of a package deal and was sorely disappointed by how buggy it was. Things like crashing mid-edit, not starting up...that kind of thing. I gave up on it pretty quickly. Stopped even trying the patches they released. It felt like they released an early alpha and used their user base to test it. The catalog released with L3 has nothing on Lightroom. If you care about organization, it's not even worth considering.

Also, I find their presets are really not to my taste. If you go to their page on Facebook, there are a lot of people posting their photos and they are cartoonily over processed. If you like your photos to be crazy HDR or look like the kind of thing someone might paint on velvet, then maybe it's good?

FWIW, it has a catalog now.

# ¿ Jul 4, 2019 17:15

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Helen Highwater posted:

I totally get why people don't like the concept of software subscriptions, and I agree that it's easy to get to a place where you are paying a bunch of here and there which adds up to a chunk of change quite fast. I remember though working in desktop publishing in the late 90s/early 2000s, when Photoshop was twelve hundred 1990s dollars, and if you wanted to use Photoshop, you had to find twelve hundred dollars. Then there would be a new version with a cool new feature or some additional compatibility, or whatever and you'd have to find another twelve hundred dollars to get that stuff. Then you'd have to do the same for Illustrator and Dreamweaver and QuarkXpress, and all the other big-ticket productivity suites you had to use. Now I pay fifteen dollars a month for Photoshop and Lightroom. If I get an itch to do video work, I can pay about another twenty dollars to use Premiere Pro for a month too, and then drop it again because I make like three videos a year. If I was doing work across a lot of disciplines, I could pay around sixty bucks a month and get access to everything that Adobe makes. 1990s me would have punched a baby for that kind of deal.

As another old hack who has paid the same money through the same nose, :agreed:

# ¿ Jul 6, 2019 06:18

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

GEMorris posted:

If you are looking for mid to long telephoto, and weight/size optimization, m43 is pretty hard to beat. A g85 or g90 is a solid and reasonably priced weather sealed body with ibis and good video features to boot.

I would say that the Olympus IBIS is better, but Panasonic has much better video.

I'm a Fuji man at heart, however, and you can get a smashing deal on an X-T2 at the moment, or if you want something a little smaller, the X-T20 or X-E3. Fuji glass is hard to beat.

# ¿ Jul 7, 2019 20:30

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

SMERSH Mouth posted:

Yeah with its massive viewfinder and IBIS that's at least competitive with Oly's, the GH5 seems like the best M4/3 camera currently available. But you're paying a premium for a lot of extras that won't see much use unless you're really into video. I guess their answer to that is the G9, but god drat that thing is big and ugly. The EM1ii seems nice, but it's getting old.

Even an old E-M1 i seems a better quality camera than any of the Panas. The Panas feel so cheap and I like the Oly image quality better, for stills anyway.

# ¿ Jul 8, 2019 04:37

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Easychair Bootson posted:

Capture One Pro doesn't support tethering with the Fuji X-T30, but they do with the X-T3. Is this an intentional move by Fuji to prevent the X-T30 from overlapping too much with the X-T3, or is it possible that C1 might eventually support X-T30 tethering?

They added support for the 30 in February?

# ¿ Jul 10, 2019 19:27

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Easychair Bootson posted:

Where are you seeing that? The X-T30 didn't come out until late March, and their site shows that it does not support tethering with the X-T30. I tried it anyway a few months ago, but as expected, it did not work.

Sorry. I misread your post vis a vis Tethering. I was just thinking general C1 usage.

# ¿ Jul 10, 2019 21:05

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

cheese posted:

I passed around my X-T30 at a BBQ on Sat and no one under the age of 30 used the viewfinder, its worth a shot

I don't know if it's a mystery. They're not photographers and grew up taking photos by looking at a phone.

# ¿ Jul 11, 2019 17:37

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Animal posted:

I think you'll be frustrated by how slow the older camera is and will rather shoot the X-H1 after the novelty wears off.

I think this is correct. If you're pining for something smaller, you can maybe get an X-T20 for a similar price and I think you'd be happier with it.

# ¿ Jul 11, 2019 20:56

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

CodfishCartographer posted:

I mean an X-Pro is very obviously "a camera" and it pretty big compared to something like the X100 series. It definitely nails the nice rangefinder feeling, but if you really want something that people won't really notice a XF10 or a GR(II/III) will be much better for that job.

Maybe the X70 as well..

# ¿ Jul 12, 2019 01:49

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Wengy posted:

Yeah, but it's reportedly going to feature the old E-M1 II sensor. I mean, if I wanted 2016 image quality I could've just bought the E-M1 II three years ago. As much as I like my M4/3 lenses, this really worries me.

Why upgrade from a Volkswagen to a Bugatti? Buy an Aston!

Get a Fuji X-H1 or X-T3. They're both big improvements over your E-M1. You'll get much higher quality glass than you have in your M43 system lenses, but they will cost so much less than Sony FE lenses.

You don't need full frame for baby pictures. TBH, you don't really need full frame for anything. APS-C is already going to be a crop factor improvement over your Olympus, and you won't go broke buying Fuji.

# ¿ Jul 19, 2019 19:48

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

krooj posted:

So, I'm in the process of rebuilding a Fuji kit, starting with some decent lenses I've owned in the past: 18-55/2.8-4, 23/1.4, and 35/1.4, but going cheapskate on the body with an X-E3. I keep wondering what the XPro-3 will look like... is it likely to be a re-packaged X-T3 or are we likely to see things like a new, higher-resolution, sensor?

Probably a repackaged X-Pro2 with a new sensor and an extra button or two.

# ¿ Aug 1, 2019 17:12

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Clayton Bigsby posted:

So, dorkroom, how'd I do? Wasn't looking for anything but an X-Pro1 showed up that seemed too good to pass up. Didn't really need it but it could be nice to have a slightly smaller camera with standard zoom for casual travel stuff.

7100 exposures, 18-55 2.8-4, macro extension, thumbs up, soft release, extra (original) battery, X20(?) flash, all in mint condition. 400 bucks.

Seems like a heck of a deal, or has this gear just gotten stupid cheap due to age?

That�s a good deal. That kit lens alone would sell for around $300 used. The X-Pro1 will be a good camera for years. Are there better? Yes, but not for essentially $100. Maybe $50, even. I think I paid $50 for the thumb grip for my X-E3.

Though I have to wonder�smaller than what? That�s not exactly a tiny body.

# ¿ Aug 24, 2019 20:22

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Is your camera just absolutely covered with semen at this point?

# ¿ Aug 30, 2019 16:19

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Finger Prince posted:

Yesterday I went to the camera store to try out the handling of a few cameras: the Fuji X-T3, X-H1, and Panasonic G9.
Some thoughts:
All the cameras are similar in size, especially the X-H1 and G9. The X-T3 is about the same as well, minus the chunky grip. I tried them with a few assorted lenses, mainly the 18-55 f2.8-f4 on the Fujis, plus the 50-140 f2.8 and 55-200 f3.5-f4.8, and the Leica 12-60 and 50-200 f2.8-f4 on the G9 (and briefly the Oly 40-150 f2.8 beast).

Things I liked about the X-T3: the EVF is beautiful. The autofocus is instant fast. The shutter button has a good feel to it.

Things I didn't like (to my surprise): the ergonomics at all. I realized when you step up in size from something like a GX85, a dinky mostly flat grip and no thumb support is pretty terrible handling, especially with the larger lenses that go along with aps-c. The screen articulatation seems like it could easily get bent or broken if you were rough with it.

Things that take some getting used to: I found myself chimping the dials on the top of the camera a lot, mainly because I was trying to figure out what they all did and how they worked. It's an easy thing to understand conceptually, it's just something that you need to get familiar with if you've never had them. The quick menu icons would take some learning and aren't really that intuitive.

I tried the X-H1 since they had one there, and it's basically the same size, shape, and feel as the G9. It gave me a chance to try a Fuji with a grip.
Things I liked about it: the handling was greatly improved over the X-T3. Things didn't line up quite the same as on the G9, but it's fairly minor differences. The EVF is the same as the X-T3.

Things I didn't like: the shutter button!!! Talk about a hair trigger. I did not like it at all, it was far too sensitive. Not sure how they managed to get it so wrong compared to the X-T3, but it was really annoying on the X-H1. Maybe some people like it? I didn't at all. The larger diameter lenses can get a little bit uncomfortably close to the grip as well. The autofocus wasn't up to par with the X-T3.

I was swapping back and forth the whole time between the Fujis and the G9, to get a good comparison.

Things I ~~liked~~ loved about the G9: omg the handling. The ergonomics of the thing. The balance. I see why the various YouTube reviews all say in one way or another that it's the best handling camera they've ever used. It just feels so good in the hand. Ok I've got a bias because I'm used to having thumb and finger wheels where Panasonic puts them, but everything is layed out so well, I never needed to chimp around looking for where the controls were. With the bigger 50-200 lens it still handled like a small rangefinder with a little prime. It was just a joy to use.
The EVF is as good as the Fujis, but for some reason on the fujis I would be mashing my right glasses lens against my face with my thumb more. Maybe there's just more rubber protruding from the G9?

Things I didn't like about it: the two custom buttons on the right of the lens, particularly the upper one, is easily inadvertently pressed. I guess that's not really a problem if you don't have it do anything.
Yes it is an awfully big body for such a relatively small sensor. But that size all but disappears in the hand. Paired with either Leica or the Oly 40-150, it's perfect but it might be weird with a little 20mm pancake or the skinny 60mm macro on it though.

Final thoughs: I went in with the mindset of basically "I think I want to switch to fuji, especially with their new 16-80 F4 coming out, let me just see how they feel" and "yeah the G9 is all whiz-bang on the pro reviews, but how good can it really be". I came away fully sold on the G9. I won't lose sleep over missing dynamic range or fancy film sims and ooc jpegs (ok maybe a little, though the G9 is reputedly no slouch in colour science), because it was such a joy to shoot with. The G9 has probably dozens of techy things I'll never use, but those things are easily accessible because of the layout and menus should the desire to play with them strike. I want to like Fuji, I really do, but both cameras had significant enough let-downs dissuade me. The X-H1 was the closest, and if they made a X-H2 with the guts of a X-T3 and fixed the shutter button, it would be a contender, but would also probably be at least $1k CDN more than the G9 is now.
So now I just need to scare up $1500.

Tl;dr - Panasonic homer tries the new religion, finds it lacking.

You know, if ergonomics was your only real hangup on the X-T3, there are accessory grips that fix that quite splendidly, and usually for less than $50.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2019 16:40

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Clayton Bigsby posted:

Well, gotta get me a 23/2 for the X-Pro1 now. Been dinking around with it and it reminds me a LOT of all the things I loved about the M9 (with the bonus of DR and color not going to poo poo past ISO 400). The zoom's (18-55) good but this camera deserves a 35mm-equiv. Used the 23/2 on X-T1 for a couple vacation trips and was hugely impressed with the results so going with that over the 23/1.4.

The value F2 models of Fuji lenses are so good. I've got the 35 and 50, and I love them to bits. I think i'm going to get the 18mm next from that line. I would like a more compact lens for my X-E3, and the 27/2.8 just doesn't take pictures that I like.

Having said that, I am still considering the 35 /1.4 for my X-T2. That's such a good lens.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2019 20:27

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

KilroyWasHere posted:

If you're considering the 1.4 and you can stand manual focus, think about the Mitakon 0.95. Its a shockingly good lens, especially for the price.

I definitely am considering that one. It�s on the shortlist.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2019 22:22

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Thom12255 posted:

Why are Fuji mirrorless' not used as much as Sony's for professional jobs? I seem to only see landscape photographers with an XT-().

Most people seem to prefer Full Frame for pro work. I don�t think it�s always necessary. I�m a Fuji boi.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2019 23:49

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Ropes4u posted:

What weird sports niche?

Water

# ¿ Sep 4, 2019 02:03

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

coke posted:

crossposting from the canon thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCcxPCj8L5M

at this rate sony and others dont need to try and out compete canon because canon will neuter their cameras themselves

I've never seen Mattias Burling give a gently caress about video. :colbert:

# ¿ Sep 9, 2019 21:11

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Fools Infinite posted:

In news that doesn't seem to excite anyone fuji just announced an x-a7... but I actually kind of like it?

I much prefer shooting from a fully articulating screen than a viewfinder and would trade an evf for a higher resolution, brighter rear screen. Models without an evf are limited, usually arbitrarily, in other ways though. But the x-a7 has two dials, a joystick, and a supposedly improved af system. On paper it has a lot of features I would like, if the software isn't gimped in some way.

I borrowed a friend's X-A5 for a couple of weeks and I didn't care for it. Even though it lacks the articulating screen, I ended up buying an X-E3 as a my backup camera. That being said, I also have an X-T10 that has a flippy screen if I need it.

# ¿ Sep 12, 2019 22:08

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

harperdc posted:

it's also only ("only") $700 with the kit lens. I have a friend who's looking into getting a starter camera so I'm thinking of recommending one of these really easily.

Amazon has the X-T100 with a kit lens and other bundle crap for $599. That has the EVF as well as articulating screen, and probably the same sensor.

I think that an A series may put your friend off of Fuji.

# ¿ Sep 13, 2019 00:33

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

tino posted:

Post some lens porn and shoot some planes.

Moonpr0n, please.

# ¿ Sep 25, 2019 16:21

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Cognac McCarthy posted:

Hopefully this is the right place to ask: I'm looking to get a mirrorless camera in the next couple months. My budget is around $2000 and I'm leaning towards a Sony A7 III. I'm not an expert photographer but I have taken some classes and my job occasionally involves buying and using DSLRs for digitization (I work in a library). So I have some idea what I'm doing, but really I'm looking for a camera I can really learn with and have for a long time, preferably one that shoots decent video too. The reviews I've seen of the A7 III seem pretty positive, and I like that I have some flexibility with lens mount adapters. Are there other comparable models from other manufacturers I should be looking at? And are there regular release schedules I should know about? I'd hate to drop 2k on a camera right before a new model at the same price comes out (or right before the III drops in price).

First off: Buy Used. Seriously. Especially if you're just starting out. I've been shooting for 30 years and I still buy used whenever possible. Adorama, B&H and KEH all have really good used departments. The only reason to buy new is if you're a pro, and it's just part of your working budget, or if you really like plastic bags and silica gel packets.

Here's the broad view:

Want full-frame, get Sony. Want the best video, get Panasonic. Want the best build quality and glass for a semi-reasonable price, get Fuji.

There are plenty of adapters for all of the mounts. I have 3 different adapters so I can use older SLR lenses on my Fujis.

The Sony is a great camera, but it's overkill for a beginner. Also, the lenses are quite expensive. So maybe that's not for you. If you must by a Sony, then by an A7 or A7R. You can pick both of those bodies for well under $1K used. That will leave you more money for lenses.

Personally, for a beginner to intermediate shooter, I would recommend getting yourself a used Fuji X-T1 or X-T2, with the 18-55 2.8-3.5 kit lens, then picking up a couple of the F2 prime lenses. You should be able to get all of that for under $2000 and have plenty of change left over. Failing that, perhaps Panasonic Lumix G7, which is a great, and incredibly cheap (even new) camera that shoots good 4K video. Micro 4/3 lenses tend to be cheaper because they're made of plastic and papier-mache, but they take nice photos and excellent video.

# ¿ Sep 30, 2019 04:05

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 09:33

XBenedict: May 23, 2006; YOUR LIPS SAY 0, BUT YOUR EYES SAY 1.

Cognac McCarthy posted:

This is really helpful, thank you! I had jumped to the Sony because it's full frame and I'm looking for a DSLR-equivalent I suppose. I've shot on a D40 for years, which takes beautiful photos (for a beginner anyway) but the images are simply too small for general use at this point.

For the record, the Nikon D40 is not a full-frame camera. It is an APS-C crop sensor, same as the Fuji.

Edit:

Cognac McCarthy posted:

It looks like the X-T2 has pretty good dynamic range for a non-full frame, however. This is a stupid question but are lenses specced for use with specific frame sizes? I have a couple ok Nikpm lenses and my dad, who is a more serious photographer, also has Nikon lenses that I'll probably get at some point. But beyond cropping, is there anything I need to know about adapting these lenses? Or maybe it'd be better to just get the right lenses for the camera.

You can put your Nikon DX lenses on a Fuji by use of an adapter, but only for manual focus use. They aren't terribly expensive. There won't be additional cropping on a Fuji. There would be on a Micro 4/3 camera like a Panasonic or Olympus.

XBenedict fucked around with this message at 05:35 on Sep 30, 2019

# ¿ Sep 30, 2019 05:28

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Creative Convention > The Dorkroom > The Mirrorless Thread: Son(y), I Am Disappoint.

«‹›3 »