JadedWriter
Member
Yes bring the diffuser. It was made by a wedding photographer. I was not joking when I said bring a second body, but you do you. A lot of wedding and event photographers use second bodies.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NeoGAF Camera Equipment Thread | MK II
- Thread starter MRORANGE
- Start date
Astral/H3X
Member
Get an S Bracket and wireless receiver for your flash for maximum professionality.
TerryLee81
Member
God damn the new Fuji 80mm macro is big, heavy and expensive. But early reports say it's the best Fuji lens.
I have the 90mm, and that's almost too big, I leave it at home often and take the 56mm instead. The 80mm apparently is even bigger and the weight is 750g.
I have the 90mm, and that's almost too big, I leave it at home often and take the 56mm instead. The 80mm apparently is even bigger and the weight is 750g.
JadedWriter
Member
Big for Fuji or big in general? I use full frame stuff so the biggest thing I have is a 2.8 70-200 and I bring that thing everywhere. How is the 90 any way? I don't know whether to get that or the 50-140 anymore.
TerryLee81
Member
Yeah big for APSC, and for a 80mm 2.8.
The 90mm and the 16mm are the best Fuji primes imho. The 90mm is extremly sharp and has a very nice rendering and bokeh. On the negative side it's missing IS and is quite heavy. And no WR.
The 16mm is very versatile. Sharp, weather resistant and has close focus capabilities almost like a mcaro lens.
yeah the 16 is on my list to get eventually.. but out of range at the moment. Plus I have the 10-24 so is not a need need, but want lol
JadedWriter
Member
I actually thought the 90 had WR...it is, even the website says it FUJINON LENS XF90mmF2 R LM WR I think that's the reason I want it over the 56 and the fact that the AF is faster. No IS is a pain though and it's why I want the 50-140 because it's gives me max versatility. I do want the 16 though, but since I mainly do portrait work the heck am I going to do with it?
TerryLee81
Member
Yeah my bad, it has WR.
JadedWriter
Member
So pretty much it's only drawback is that it's not small. The smallest thing I pack around on FF is my 85 1.8 so I'm a bit used to bigger stuff...though I am trying to pack lighter these days. Edit: You know what...I might actually get the 90mm F2. I'm trying to turn my XT2 set up into the exact copy of my FF Nikon set up, which probably isn't for the best. The 90mm gives me the reach I'm currently lacking while at the same time still keeping my camera bag lighter than my FF Nikon bag is.
Edit: Ordered a 56 1.2. I think I'll still get the 90...just later, same with the 50-140.
Hi guys,
Quick question... i hope
Which camera would you recommend?
- Canon EOS M10
- Sony A5100
- Panasonic DMC-TZ70
- something different?
My expectation is cheap, small, pocket camera that i will be probably always using without lenses that have better photo quality than smartphones.
My main requirement that camera is decent/good all way around, so in every lighting condition, especially low light, it produces acceptable image, better than smartphone ever would.
My favorite for now seems to be EOS, because it is the cheapest and the quality of shots here are quite good:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/eosm10
My only concern, from reviews i've seen, is slow autofocus, but i dunno if it will affect me and how slow it is compared to normal cameras (not top tier in that department).
Thanks for any comments.
Quick question... i hope
Which camera would you recommend?
- Canon EOS M10
- Sony A5100
- Panasonic DMC-TZ70
- something different?
My expectation is cheap, small, pocket camera that i will be probably always using without lenses that have better photo quality than smartphones.
My main requirement that camera is decent/good all way around, so in every lighting condition, especially low light, it produces acceptable image, better than smartphone ever would.
My favorite for now seems to be EOS, because it is the cheapest and the quality of shots here are quite good:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/eosm10
My only concern, from reviews i've seen, is slow autofocus, but i dunno if it will affect me and how slow it is compared to normal cameras (not top tier in that department).
Thanks for any comments.
Astral/H3X
Member
Hi guys,
Quick question... i hope
Which camera would you recommend?
- Canon EOS M10
- Sony A5100
- Panasonic DMC-TZ70
- something different?
My expectation is cheap, small, pocket camera that i will be probably always using without lenses that have better photo quality than smartphones.
My main requirement that camera is decent/good all way around, so in every lighting condition, especially low light, it produces acceptable image, better than smartphone ever would.
My favorite for now seems to be EOS, because it is the cheapest and the quality of shots here are quite good:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/eosm10
My only concern, from reviews i've seen, is slow autofocus, but i dunno if it will affect me and how slow it is compared to normal cameras (not top tier in that department).
Thanks for any comments.
Do not buy a Canon MILC. They don't give a shit and neither should you.
The Sony's photo capabilities will shit on the Panny. I can't find the exact sensor size of it on their webpage, which probably means "not that big". The A5100 has, beyond anything else, a really good sensor going for it. Plus, you can change lenses to be better off for certain situations. A zoom lens just can't compete against a fixed lens for low light, for one.
The Panny will be more "pocketable", however. Go to a store and see if you can get your hands on a A5100, and see if it's too big for you. For the Panny, most compact point and shoots will be about the same size so just compare there.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
No interchangeable lens camera is really pocketable, even small ones like m4/3 or the EOS M10. If you have no intention of buying into a system and investing in glass, there's no point in buying an ILC.
Pretty much any dedicated hardware with decent optics and a sensor larger than 1-inch will give you all of that.
You might want to look into the Sony RX100 (there are several updates to it, III and upwards are all great cameras). They give you pretty decent zoom range, bright lens, nice sensor, all packed into a neat, sturdy pocketable body.
nhlducks35
Member
A lot of Fuji lenses are pretty big so I've got a L bracket grip (I use a tripod a lot too for landscapes)
JadedWriter
Member
You better go buy an XT10 and get the 23 F2 or somethingHi guys,
Quick question... i hope
Which camera would you recommend?
- Canon EOS M10
- Sony A5100
- Panasonic DMC-TZ70
- something different?
My expectation is cheap, small, pocket camera that i will be probably always using without lenses that have better photo quality than smartphones.
My main requirement that camera is decent/good all way around, so in every lighting condition, especially low light, it produces acceptable image, better than smartphone ever would.
My favorite for now seems to be EOS, because it is the cheapest and the quality of shots here are quite good:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/eosm10
My only concern, from reviews i've seen, is slow autofocus, but i dunno if it will affect me and how slow it is compared to normal cameras (not top tier in that department).
Thanks for any comments.
Sorry but what do you mean by this?
How do they "not give a shit"?
They've just announced an M100 model, and the recent M5 and M6 are pretty good.
Surely an M6 or M100 with Dual Pixel and Digic 7 shows that they are at least "giving a shit"?
JadedWriter
Member
A camera isn't just a body it's an ecosystem. Did they announce any good lenses to go with them or just a bunch of shitty kit lenses?
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Aren't you able to use all of Canon's DSLR lenses too with an adapter?
Astral/H3X
Member
Until everyone starts raving about Canon's new flagship, "here's what we like to talk about when they say Canon" MILC, I wouldn't buy one from them. They'll always be second fiddle. I certainly haven't really heard about any of their MILC's, in fact I just a few minutes ago realized they even had a single one with a viewfinder (Not that anything in his list of choices has one)
Looking at it, they've got a whole bunch of zooms, and two wide primes, one being a macro (A 28mm macro? For one of two primes in your lineup? Wut?). I certainly wouldn't buy one now.
Just like how right now, someone would be kinda silly to buy a Sony DSLR. There are certain things about a MILC that I'm not sure Canon would really "get".
EDIT:
As can the A5100. If we're going to talk about large adapters going onto a camera that he wants to be portable, that'd be kind of silly to call that a point in the Canon's favor.
JadedWriter
Member
Doesn't this also add to the weight? None the lenses take advantage of the smaller form factor of a mirrorless body if I remember right. The Nikon 1 series could boast the same thing and it still sold like shit.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Do the Canon lenses work as well off brand as they do on Canon's own system? Anyway, I wasn't really using that as a favorable point one way or the other. Just an observation on lens availability and ecosystem.
Yeah probably.
JadedWriter
Member
Pretty much if you want MILC crop sensor you got two options and only one of them puts 90% of their R&D into it. Canon is pretty much just doing it to mark off a check box, but at the same time I really don't think they're taking too seriously.
lol with that my Fuji kit would be heavier than my DSLR with 100mm macro. so much for milc advantage. I really wish they would do more pancake lenses or more high quality f2 or f2.8 primes.
JadedWriter
Member
You can only fight the physics of optics but so much. And I got fucked out of both the 90 and the 56 today due to people buying up my lens and the seller not taking the sell down fast enough. I wasn't meant to get shit today.
Hi guys,
Quick question... i hope
Which camera would you recommend?
- Canon EOS M10
- Sony A5100
- Panasonic DMC-TZ70
- something different?
My expectation is cheap, small, pocket camera that i will be probably always using without lenses that have better photo quality than smartphones.
My main requirement that camera is decent/good all way around, so in every lighting condition, especially low light, it produces acceptable image, better than smartphone ever would.
My favorite for now seems to be EOS, because it is the cheapest and the quality of shots here are quite good:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/eosm10
My only concern, from reviews i've seen, is slow autofocus, but i dunno if it will affect me and how slow it is compared to normal cameras (not top tier in that department).
Thanks for any comments.
If you want it to be pocketable, you're better off with stuff like a Sony RX100 III. I have one and it's pretty great, and the price has come down too in recent times.
Small micro four thirds with pancake lens i.e. GX850? Not sure it'd be pocketable because the lens still protruding a bit, but if you're considering the Canon/Sony ILCs to begin with you should probably include M43 stuff while you're at it cause the decent ecosystem there if you ever get interested in other lenses.
Fair enough, I wasn't actually disagreeing with the sentiment. More the fact that they have been releasing new devices with good specs so it seemed like they were "giving a shit".
But it's still true that there's a tiny lens selection in EF-M, and they did announced new EF and EF-S lenses but no new EF-M ones.
Having said that, the fact that all of the EF/EF-S lenses are compatible via the adapter is indeed a positive. Some Canon lenses are quite amazing. But yeah, in terms of pocketability it's obviously not a factor.
Pretty much hence I need Fuji to make more slower or pancake lenses. Pentax lenses are small so I am not downsizing at all if I'm using wider aperture Fuji lenses.
JadedWriter
Member
If you want something pocketable then look at a Fuji X100 S or T.
These are fine for landscapes but do nothing for people that do street and portraits. Is a pancake 85 even possible?
I'm not asking for pancake 85mm, that's not possible. But at 750g that's 2x the weight of my 100mm.
JadedWriter
Member
Really does sound like they packed a shit ton of glass into that thing. Probably really heavy for a crop sensor lens then. Probably as big as Sigma's 85 1.4 I assume?
FYI I'm not the guy who cared about pocketable.
I was only interested in what was so wrong about Canon and the MILC market
JadedWriter
Member
Oh ok, sorry. Yeah like if you're not going to design lenses for your new mirrorless bodies then don't bother making the damn thing. I actually like the M5 if I'm remembering everything right because it's pretty much a mirrorless 80D but there's no lens ecosystem for it. Lens ecosystem matters and it can't just be "buy the adapter for legacy lenses." If you're super invested into Canon gear then fine you could get it to work, but if you're new starting fresh it's not worth it. There are enough good mirrorless cameras to the point where you don't have to look at the big two manufacturers.
100% Agree with this.
I actually have a "dead system" Nikon 1 J5 but didn't spend a lot on it so I'm not too concerned.
It is a great camera, and I have an excellent prime lens and 2 zoom lenses. All of that for less than AU$1000 so I'm not "regretting" anything.
I am, however, kinda hankering for an upgrade and have my eye on Panasonic GX85 due to the combination of 5-axis IBIS, 4K video, and plenty of lenses.
And prices look cheaper than Sony equivalents. Closest feature-set is A6500 for the 5-axis and 4K, but it's like twice the price. I'm not sure if the larger sensor is twice-the-value...
JadedWriter
Member
Yeah Nikon did not care about that format at all, didn't even try saving it. I usually recommend the G85, but if the body format works for you the GX85 doesn't look too bad either. There are a lot of MILC options so yeah explore your options. I almost went Panasonic, but sensor size, ergonomics and cool factor, not to mention getting really used to the dials and what not made me go XT2.
G85 body looks "large" on the shelves, and the XT2 (and XPro2) "look" large. I know they're not, they probably just look bigger than they are.
Since you're in the Fuji system, what did you think of the new X-E3? I like a lot of what I read about it
JadedWriter
Member
I'm not really into rangefinder type bodies. Sounds like a higher end XT20 a bit or lower end XPro 2. Take your pick on that one. None of those cameras are really large though. It's all about how they feel in the hand. D810 is large but I like holding it.
KraftyKrankins
Member
I just had someone try to scam me on Ebay in a very interesting way.
The seller was supposedly a reputable one with a rating of 9100 and above.
The item was an used A7S II that has been put up on the site a while ago and had a lot of bids on it, like 40+. The description was where things started getting funny though. It had a set price of a 1000$(lol) for the camera, a very expensive lens and like 300$ more worth of accessories. Seems "legit" lol. It gets worse. In the description he had written that whoever wants to purchase it needs to fill out a form of sorts through his own website(the domain was borderline gibberish) and he'd contact them later for the trade. I did it by putting some made up information and waited. A few hours ago I received an email that was made to look like it's from Ebay, that they approved the deal, legitimacy and all that and that I was supposed to send a money order for a thousand through MoneyGram by the next few days. Oh and also all the items that were put up for bidding on his account disappeared a few hours later.
I know it's a scam, of course. What I'm wondering is, did the guy had his account hijacked or is it something else? The ebay profile was legit for sure, with thousands of deals made for mostly photo prints, but even those types of listings disappeared from his profile. I'll be contacting ebay tomorrow morning to let them know.
Edit: Oh, and the address he wants the money to be sent to what I'm pretty sure is the corner of Shaftesbury and Coventry in London. The only thing that's there is the Piccadilly Circus station and a Cinnabon lol.
The seller was supposedly a reputable one with a rating of 9100 and above.
The item was an used A7S II that has been put up on the site a while ago and had a lot of bids on it, like 40+. The description was where things started getting funny though. It had a set price of a 1000$(lol) for the camera, a very expensive lens and like 300$ more worth of accessories. Seems "legit" lol. It gets worse. In the description he had written that whoever wants to purchase it needs to fill out a form of sorts through his own website(the domain was borderline gibberish) and he'd contact them later for the trade. I did it by putting some made up information and waited. A few hours ago I received an email that was made to look like it's from Ebay, that they approved the deal, legitimacy and all that and that I was supposed to send a money order for a thousand through MoneyGram by the next few days. Oh and also all the items that were put up for bidding on his account disappeared a few hours later.
The "Live help" button redirects to another section of his "legitimate" website and the domain was similar in format something like this
I know it's a scam, of course. What I'm wondering is, did the guy had his account hijacked or is it something else? The ebay profile was legit for sure, with thousands of deals made for mostly photo prints, but even those types of listings disappeared from his profile. I'll be contacting ebay tomorrow morning to let them know.
Edit: Oh, and the address he wants the money to be sent to what I'm pretty sure is the corner of Shaftesbury and Coventry in London. The only thing that's there is the Piccadilly Circus station and a Cinnabon lol.
Lasthope106
Member
Got super excited about the rumor of the a7iii getting announced today. Then it didn't happen
Thanks again for all of your replies guys
----
I was thinking also about future proofing slightly if i ever got more into it, but thats big if as for now i would be using camera like at most once a month, and mostly in very portable setting, so heavily investing, especially in lens, is not a great idea.
Even though M3 is still quite expensive for my usage, reviews and shots i've looked up convinced me
----
I was afraid of that. So you are basically saying that ILC without lens are not worth anything and do not make decent shots?
I was thinking also about future proofing slightly if i ever got more into it, but thats big if as for now i would be using camera like at most once a month, and mostly in very portable setting, so heavily investing, especially in lens, is not a great idea.
I looked it up and those seem really great, and i agree that buying anything less than M3 is "waste of money" in the long run.
Even though M3 is still quite expensive for my usage, reviews and shots i've looked up convinced me
Beer Monkey
Member
Let's suppose you buy a Fuji MILC like X-T1 or XT-2 and stick a 23mm prime on it and add no other lenses. It will take great shots! But if you aren't going to get other lenses, why not get X100F. It's lighter and smaller and has features like integrated neutral density filter and leaf shutter that you don't get on the ILC cameras.
JadedWriter
Member
What exactly do you intend to shoot? Family and friends once every other month then stick to an Iphone. If you want something that's actually good then you might just have to invest in something. I didn't exactly think I'd be much of a photographer either, but well...yeah I now take a shit ton of pictures.Thanks again for all of your replies guys
----
I was afraid of that. So you are basically saying that ILC without lens are not worth anything and do not make decent shots?
I was thinking also about future proofing slightly if i ever got more into it, but thats big if as for now i would be using camera like at most once a month, and mostly in very portable setting, so heavily investing, especially in lens, is not a great idea.
I looked it up and those seem really great, and i agree that buying anything less than M3 is "waste of money" in the long run.
Even though M3 is still quite expensive for my usage, reviews and shots i've looked up convinced me
Astral/H3X
Member
Thanks again for all of your replies guys
----
I was afraid of that. So you are basically saying that ILC without lens are not worth anything and do not make decent shots?
I was thinking also about future proofing slightly if i ever got more into it, but thats big if as for now i would be using camera like at most once a month, and mostly in very portable setting, so heavily investing, especially in lens, is not a great idea.
I looked it up and those seem really great, and i agree that buying anything less than M3 is "waste of money" in the long run.
Even though M3 is still quite expensive for my usage, reviews and shots i've looked up convinced me
I'd buy an RX100 in a heartbeat if I didn't have an A7II.
And I still eyeball it pretty heavily.
That and the X100.
JadedWriter
Member
I'm pretty sure he could afford an X100S, though how good the AF is I'm not sure. If I wanted to pack around a small enough but highly capable street camera I'd get an X100F.
X100F is almost 3x time more expensive than M3 from what i've check, so maybe another time
----
Yeah, i got annoyed by phone's cameras, though my phone has worse camera (Z3 compact) than top tier Iphones or Pixel, but i'm not changing my for phone just for camera
, i like Z3C actually a lot. Thats why i wanted to move up, but still be in portable range, so i can use it more often.
X100S is two time more expensive than M3 in Polish market
, but i think the M3 is actually more what i wanted in the first place. If i get into photography more and i'll decide to go for lenses then i will start looking for other cameras for sure
JadedWriter
Member
What does an Olympus EM1mkI cost over there? That's a pretty good M43 camera, which has been replaced so it should be more affordable now. I wouldn't touch most of what you originally listed though.X100F is almost 3x time more expensive than M3 from what i've check, so maybe another time
----
Yeah, i got annoyed by phone's cameras, though my phone has worse camera (Z3 compact) than top tier Iphones or Pixel, but i'm not changing my for phone just for camera
Thats why i wanted to move up, but still be in portable range, so i can use it more often.
X100S is two time more expensive than M3 in Polish market
If i get into photography more and i'll decide to go for lenses then i will start looking for other cameras for sure
Astral/H3X
Member
X100F is almost 3x time more expensive than M3 from what i've check, so maybe another time
----
Yeah, i got annoyed by phone's cameras, though my phone has worse camera (Z3 compact) than top tier Iphones or Pixel, but i'm not changing my for phone just for camera
Thats why i wanted to move up, but still be in portable range, so i can use it more often.
X100S is two time more expensive than M3 in Polish market
If i get into photography more and i'll decide to go for lenses then i will start looking for other cameras for sure
So here's the thing: the best smartphone camera, to this day, is that which resides in the Lumia 1020.
Yeah, that phone that came out YEARS ago.
Why? Because it had a large enough sensor. It will always be marginal upgrades to a phone's camera capabilities, because there will always be physics; and any improvements that benefit a phone will benefit dedicated cameras that much more.
So, "not as good as top tier phones" is really a very small delta, in all reality.
I'll kinda echo this. While I said the A5100, it's a "least bad" option. But then, just getting started, that may be enough.
JadedWriter
Member
I got started on a bridge camera, he could use worse, but I'm a viewfinder person. No VF no buy, same goes for iso buttons and such.
Save for PDAF and maybe ergonomics, EM5 mark II is a better camera than the original EM1.
JadedWriter
Member
Well that's good to know. EM1mkII is fucking expensive, aren't selling many of those.