No.963
If you want to discuss any contemporary consumer gear feel free to do it inside this thread.
Post last edited at
No.966
Should I get a Fuji GW690 II with 250~ for $490 or either fujinon 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2 for portraits.
is the GW690 repairable?
No.967
>>966
> fujinon 56mm f1.2, 90mm f2 for portraits.
Those are for Fujifilm X series?
I'd vote for GW690 (there are three versions of this IIRC) because if you are ready for all the limitations which you will meet you will get all positive properties of medium format film (dynamic range and more spectacular colour than almost any digital camera can give) and also bigger entrance pupil (people call it "moar bokeh").
I never used a film camera though.
No.969
>>966
The other strange thing about your question is that 90mm objective of GW690 is equivalent to 24mm objective combined with 24x16mm frame ...
... which is not exactly a portrait FOV. You will most probably need to fill only a part of the frame with the object and crop more to get same perspective.
Your question sounds really strange.
No.972
>>969
The reason for the gw690 was because I believe it has the compression of 90mm with the fov of a wider lens and "bokeh"™ if I'm wrong please do say something. Currently I have a 27mm pancake for my xt1 and the choice was either $500 for a mf camera or $1000+ for a new prime.
No.973
people actually use pancake lenses?
No.975
>>972
>The reason for the gw690 was because I believe it has the compression of 90mm with the fov of a wider lens and "bokeh"™ if I'm wrong please do say something.
So called "compression" is a property of the location of point of camera and nothing else. The camera can only reproduce what you see yourself, it cannot reposition objects.
What you want to compare is Field Of View, not the focal length. Objectives with same FOV will give same images when used at the same location. If the objectives/cameras have different FOV you will need to either crop the image (to preserve perspective) or move closer to the object (alternates perspective).
So, having both big FOV and so called "compression" means that your object occupies small portion of frame. You can do it with camera of any format.
>Currently I have a 27mm pancake for my xt1 and the choice was either $500 for a mf camera or $1000+ for a new prime.
Do you know that GW690 weights a kilo and a half? Anyway, GW690 is not for portaits unless you crop images three times.
You have many other options if you'd like to get a film camera rather an expensive prime for X-T1.
No.976
No.988
>>976
>Red dot tax
>Not M
It's shit. but it will some how sell.
No.1044
Got a new camera. You jelly?
No.1073
I'm looking to upgrade from my D3200 that I've had for a few years now, I've loved the time spent with it and it's been a lovely little thing for what little freelance work I acquire - but it's time I moved up just a little bit.
Sadly, I think I've been largely effected by buzzwords and marketing and the Sony A7 (Or even a used A7r) looks awfully tempting.
Is it worth staying with Nikon for what little glass I have for it or can a switch at this point be recommended?
No.1074
>>1073
Why do you want to upgrade?
>fullfame?
>megapixels?
>autofocus?
>gimmicks?
Or are you upgrading because you think you need something More light for traveling? If that's the case and you don't care about sensor size then Olympus, Fuji and the Sony a6000 are great buys.
No.1075
>>1074
I know it's a rough answer to throw at you but I'm looking for a little bit of everything from this upgrade.
Fullframe would be delightful, I'm okay with staying at 24 megapixels - autofocus speed increase would be nice, but not necessarily needed.
Weight is not really an issue, I spend too much time in the gym to complain about it.
No.1082
>>1075
If weight is not an issue, you should get the new Leica SL.
No.1086
>>1082
While I could certainly squeeze out my fun money over the next couple of months to pick this up, I would not be able to grab glass worthy of it for a little while after
No.1089
>>1086
You can use the m lenses that you already have and just get the adapter for the leica SL.
That SL kit lens looks pretty badass though!
No.1098
>>1086
>Fuji
great sensor, top tier glass, no AA filter in lens creates sharper images
>Sony
fullframe meme, Zeiss glass
>M4/3
Cheep fun and can get shit done. Super high rez mode on Olympus great for stills product photography
>Leica not "M"
Big, heavy,ugly and expensive shit lens range might as well get a a7/r mk2
>Leica M
Got money get it for the red dot meme
>Canon
price workhorse huge range of lenses/ 3party
>Nikon
Mai Sony sensors are better then Canon. got film mount yo lenses. Better lenses then canon.
No.1101
>>1098
Can you shop a dirty converse on her head?
No.1137
Just bought a D7200 and I'm having a blast with it, hefty though - default strap ain't going to cut it.
No.1139
>>1137
take any shots with it yet? post some if so!
No.1140
>>1139
Only test shots around the apartment, and we're scheduled for rain all this weekend, Soon™
No.1141
>>1140
Rain shots can make some great compositions really.
No.1155
Massdrop now has a photography community. I believe this maybe a great way of obtaining cheep film / gear. What are your thoughts.
https://www.massdrop.com/photography
No.1159
>>1158
delicious
Too bad that objectives are still further from body than they could be if they were made for short flange.
No.1161
its it ok to buy a non official battery for my d5100?
No.1162
>>1161
depends if it's from china.
No.1163
>>1162
I was thinking off amazon but who knows where they get them
No.1171
>>1163
At lest you should get a warranty with amazon or at lest amazon should not be selling shady things on it's storefront.
No.1215
So hey guys. I am kinda new to this forum, so no hate please kappa. :D
What is the most fitting camera to me:
Sony A6000;
Sony nex7;
Samsung nx500;
Canon 700d;
Nikon d5300;
other?
I like taking photos of everything, but mostly of nature (trees, rivers, etc;), people and architecture (houses, etc.).
I also love filming, so it would be awesome if camera would have good filming specs.
And yeah, I know that some of them are DSLR's and some are mirrorles.
I am kinda new to photography and videomaking, but I'm learning really fast.
TY TY TY
and yeah...
i have just about €600, so it should be around this price.
(I'm thinking of buying it from ebay or amazon)
No.1222
>>1215
get the canon 70d, its good for your price range. pair it with a nifty fifty and you are genki
No.1227
>>1215
Long story short: you may experiment with ANY camera and get usable results unless you expect the camera to do something specific. There is NOTHING wrong with any camera which you mentioned.
You will get a magnitude more tools if you get into RAW processing.
_______
RX100 will record better video than any available DSLR because of full sensor readout. Depending on what exactly you want from your camera you may also get interested in RX10 - better handling, mechanical zoom, longer and faster tele end. FZ1000 is a similar camera. What you certainly won't get is bokeh but I can't say that it is such a big deal unless you want to get into the vanity fair of photography without buying new gear.
Sony A6000 and NEX7 will give you the freedom of using any objectives with any mounts (without AF though) but bad selection of inexpensive AF zooms like Sigma 17-70.
Samsung NX500 has a very useful option - 16-50mm F2-2,8 but it is well out of your budget. I do not see anything wrong in using the camera with just one objective if it is as good as 16-50 F2-2,8 but it is expensive. The lenses selection is even narrower compared to that for Sony E mount. You may buy the kit an then upgrade to 16-50 F2-2,8 if you wish.
Canon 700D is supported by Magic Lantern which will improve it's technical capabilities vastly (but not the base dynamic range which is smaller than one of any other camera which you mentioned and not the resolution in video mode).
http://www.eoshd.com/2014/02/nikon-d5300-review/
D5300 is a clear winner in still image capabilities and records somewhat better video than Canon 6xxD/7xxD but does not have MagicLantern. The longer flange distance won't let you use cheapest objectives which can be used on Canon EF but that does not really matter.
______
My vote is for Sony RX10 and Panasonic FZ1000. These are very capable cameras and will let you use any focal length from wide to tele without swapping lenses. After you start feeling the limits you may but another camera.
If you want something advanced and more interesting in long term I recommend Nikon D5300 with Sigma 17-70 C - 800 euros on amazon.de
or D5300 and Sigma 17-50 F2.8 OS (which is somewhat outdated but nonetheless recommended) - 700 euros.
No.1229
No.1247
Just got a hasselblad 502cm on evilbay. Should arrive tomorrow or the next day.
What should I expect? I got the 80mm f/2.8 zeiss and an extra polaroid back for it.
No.1254
Why must this be current consumer gear?
Why not just gear thread?
Anyways, I'm tired of lugging around giant DSLRs all day and I'm looking for a different way of doing things. Whats your favorite point and shoot, or at least easy and fast automatic/semiautomatic camera? A tiny thing I can stick in my pocket or run around in the woods all day with.
I've been considering the Olympus Trip 35. I know it's a great camera. I just want to know of alternatives.
No.1255
>>1254
Tiny inexpensive rangefinders as well, if those exist.
No.1256
>>1254
>RICOH GR
Bet bang for the buck point and shoot. Unless you are loaded and don't care about money then Fuji, or if you want good video then rx100.
>Sony rx100
Cheap and great video. If you don't care for video the get either GR or Fuji.
>Fuji x100t
Or the older s which is the same camera without small evf in the corner of the ovf. With the t you get full ovf, full evf and small evf for focussing in your ovf. Other wise same camera. Also don't buy this if you want video.
No.1257
>>1254
>Why must this be current consumer gear?
Because most questions about gear of this kind are trivial and do not deserve own thread.
Because this kind of gear happens to sparkle uninspired discussions oftenly.
Regarding your question: Panasonic LX100 is another excellent camera. As long as film is concerned I cannot advice anything useful besides pointing at Super35 format cameras which can be very small - at least Pentax made them.
No.1258
>>1254
Get a leica q bro. Best point and shoot right now.
No.1259
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1254
http://www.japancamerahunter.com/2013/05/premium-compact-cameras-a-buyers-guide/
My pick is the Konica Hexar if you don't mind the size. It is a beast of a camera. With it's super silent mode, almost the same sound as pen drop in a church. The lens high quality copy of the Leica Summicron, which some say it's better than the original.
>>1258
>I'm tired of lugging around giant DSLRs all day
Recommends
>leica q
a point and shoot the same size as a DSLR.
are you mentally challenged because you were dropped?
No.1260
A bunch of great suggestions. mostly
How about instant cameras? I hear they're making a come back and I see them at Walmart. I took a look at that Polaroid Snap and it looks promising, while also being a very pretty camera.
Are the printed images on par with original Polaroid images?
Anyone here have one?
No.1261
>>1260
> on par with original Polaroid images?
no
Go get your self an original Polaroid, new Fuji instax or if you want to show your inner hipster go https://mint-camera.com/tl70/
You can still buy instant film from fuji and impossible.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Polaroid-Fujifilm-Instant-Film/ci/327/N/4093113315
No.1290
What's best for 6x9 cameras?
I am only thinking of the fuji GW690 or GWS690
No.1306
If i mostly take landscapes do I even need a external flash?
No.1307
>>1306
If you do not need builtin flash you won't need external flash either.
>>1290
>What's best for 6x9 cameras?
I would love to help you but I don't have a clue. heard many praises about Pentax 67 but it is not 6x9 obviously.
No.1308
>>1307
I didnt think I needed one
No.1309
>>1098
could you give a brief run down like these ones for pentax?
No.1310
>>1309
>Pentax
Great bodies, great beginner's bodies, cropped 645 meme, sensor stabilization worse than optical and MFGs exclude optical stabilization, DR is not as big as Nikon's anymore, 40 XS and 21/3,2 pancakes, fewer objectives (including premium) options than for Nikanon overall.
No.1313
Poorfag (me) wants an all day every day everywhere carry camera, anything cheap come to mind?
Only needs to be small enough to fit in my gym bag, but if it can get coat pocket small that's a glorious bonus.
No.1315
>>1313
Get a pentax qs1. Tiny, super cheap, and good quality.
No.1316
>>1315
I'll look into it, thanks!
No.1320
Anyone have experience with the m43 Olympus cameras?
No.1322
Deleted thread:
>What's the best m43 camera for photography?
=====
Replies:
__
Always choose the latest Fuji. They're the best digital camera company around these days
>>>gear thread
Sage for not even looking at the board before posting.
___
Oh, and Olympus is fine.
I wouldn't go with Sony. They seem to put little nigglings intentionally in each camera so as to make you want the next newest one. They also can't be bothered to make good menus.
=========
Does anyone have problems with posting? I can only post from mod panel.
Post last edited at
No.1326
What are the modern cameras with the best dynamic range?
No.1330
>>1326
http://www.dxomark.com/best-cameras-for-landscape
This is a good page gathering the size of DR at base ISO (50, 80, 100 etc), the DR size at different ISOs is available for each camera separately.
No.1331
>>1330
>Canon dslrs start at #99
Thanks.
No.1332
People are really okay with their Sony cameras having a fucking cash shop?
Any other brands do this bullshit? Once I figured that out, I knew I would never buy a Sony camera.
Literally pay to win cameras. Go fuck yourself.
I'm thinking more and more about selling all my Canon stuff and permanently moving over to Fuji, for their X-Pro line. I love the idea of a modern, professional rangefinder system.
Anyone else in similar shoes? Moving to Fuji?
No.1334
>>1322
I haven't been able to post for the last few weeks sadly,
No.1337
>>1332
>People are really okay with their Sony cameras having a fucking cash shop?
Too expensive or what? I cannot understand you.
>Fuji, for their X-Pro line
>rangefinder system.
Pick one.
>Anyone else in similar shoes? Moving to Fuji?
I heard about people moving to Fuji from FF Canon several times. They did not regret it.
You will get more dynamic range than any Canon offers.
You just should know that you will have less bokeh for more money: 56mm F1,2 is equivalent to only 85mm F1,8 on "FULLFRAEM" but costs more.
No.1338
>>1334
What kind of problems do you have? Does web page give some kind of error?
No.1341
>>1338
I usually just timed out, the standard "8ch probably posted this" message
No.1348
Fuji X-E2S released.
You can get the X-E2 for as little as $499 right now.
Literally holy shit deal at 699 for X-E2 with XF 18-55mm http://www.adorama.com/IFJXE2BKG.html
That's basically a 500 dollar lens for free.