• 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.

The Official Camera Equipment Megathread

Status
Not open for further replies.

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Thanks. I had to crop it down after making the panoramic which is why it's odd.

Should I constrain it to a certain "default" panoramic size? Should I make it a bit bigger so it's taller?

EDIT: PS tells me it's about 65" wide by 11" tall. Wow lol.
@ what dpi? I forgot to mention the 40x7 i said was @ 300dpi. You can go lower DPI or you can uprez, its all about viewing distance.


I would try to make it a little taller, but thats just me, personal preferences and all that. Unless you do a poster print that you dont want to frame, your going to pay through the nose for a custom frame on something as oddly shaped like that.

I have a rather hard time getting frames for 3x1 panos and thats a pretty standard ratio.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
X-E1 looks hot. Don't know what the X-Pro1 has going for it now really other than the admittedly nice hybrid optical viewfinder, but is that worth a >$500 price difference and larger body and slower AF? Nope. Edit: X-Pro1 has a big advantage in LCD, but not in EVF.

Of course, if the X200 slaps the 35mm f1.4 on there in a form factor like the x100, that will be a winner as well, but the X-E1 looks like it'll be a go-to system camera with Fuji's lovely X series lenses.
 

Deadly Cyclone

Pride of Iowa State
@ what dpi? I forgot to mention the 40x7 i said was @ 300dpi. You can go lower DPI or you can uprez, its all about viewing distance.


I would try to make it a little taller, but thats just me, personal preferences and all that. Unless you do a poster print that you dont want to frame, your going to pay through the nose for a custom frame on something as oddly shaped like that.

I have a rather hard time getting frames for 3x1 panos and thats a pretty standard ratio.

Hmm, I changed to 300 dpi but the image size still reads the same even though it's constrained. I don't know enough depth in photoshop to get this thing a standard size.
 

tino

Banned
X-E1 looks hot. Don't know what the X-Pro1 has going for it now really other than the admittedly nice hybrid optical viewfinder, but is that worth a >$500 price difference and larger body and slower AF? Nope.

Of course, if the X200 slaps the 35mm f1.4 on there in a form factor like the x100, that will be a winner as well, but the X-E1 looks like it'll be a go-to system camera with Fuji's lovely X series lenses.


Fuji just dropped a 300 coupon on the XPro1, so the difference is probably around 300.

I can see Fuji upgrade the AF and some other minor things on the X100 and call it X100s or something.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
My Aperture/iPhoto library (they merged) is 320 GB. It's on its own drive in a 2006 Mac Pro with 13GB of RAM. Fast enough for me, usually. Smaller projects work better.

If I get some SSDs, I may switch to referenced masters and have work relating to current projects socked there, and move them to HDD based storage for archives.





Easy, in CS3 you fire up Bridge, select the photos, hit the option to open them as layers in one PS document, then run a couple of tasks on them. Made these panos that way. About the only thing that's purely photography related I use Photoshop for.

CS 5 or newer does panos automatically. Also has the nifty content aware fill that can fix gaps reasonably well.

Not in front if my computer but I believe it's under file > automation.

As for resizing, constrain proportions just locks the aspect ratio. I believe you need to check "resample image" to change the dpi. There is also a drop down for resampling style (forget the names) but one should say best for enlargements, the other best for reductions.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Hmm, I changed to 300 dpi but the image size still reads the same even though it's constrained. I don't know enough depth in photoshop to get this thing a standard size.

The easiest way is to use the crop tool, in the standard layout at the top there should be a dimensions field with hieght, width, and dpi. Just type in the dimensions you want then use the crop tool on the image will crop and up/down res in one go.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Please post some photos with the 75mm. Im tempted to buy it, but the upcoming panny 35-100 f/2.8 just seems like such a better value proposition.

heres some quick ones, http://www.flickr.com/photos/wryphotography/sets/72157631430146184/

excuse the unartistic nature. Its quite sharp even wide open, all the photos are f2.0 or f1.8. The two shots of my black x show how easily this thing puts things out of focus, in one shot im focused on the black x logo and the other im focused on the OCZ SSD. If you add me as a "friend" on Flickr your can see the full size images.

subject isolation is a piece of cake for this thing.


_9050035 by WRY Photo, on Flickr


_9050029 by WRY Photo, on Flickr
 

Zyzyxxz

Member
Hmm so Fuji X-E1 is gonna be $999 USD, the lens packaged one at $1400. I think I would go with the kit until Fuji updates their older lenses with that new AF motor.

Basically a $300 discount on the 18-55mm lens, but damn at $700 that seems quite pricey for a short zoom lens and the aperture range isn't spectacular too. I'm guessing the optical performance will be amazing though.
 

tino

Banned
Hmm so Fuji X-E1 is gonna be $999 USD, the lens packaged one at $1400. I think I would go with the kit until Fuji updates their older lenses with that new AF motor.

Basically a $300 discount on the 18-55mm lens, but damn at $700 that seems quite pricey for a short zoom lens and the aperture range isn't spectacular too. I'm guessing the optical performance will be amazing though.


Are you sure its 1400? X Pro 1 didn't have any package deal. 400 is cheap even for a Tamron lens of same spec.

Oh shit the price is real. Fuji is alot more aggressive with the XE1 than the X Pro 1. I will get the black one by the end of year. The silver version is too busy looking.

The 14/2.8 is too expensive though. I will keep my Tokina 11-16 instead.
 

Hammer24

Banned
Just returned from my safari with the 100-400L, here are some of my impressions:
- I got used very quickly to the pump-action-zoom, I even think I prefer it by now. Especially getting birds in flight is very easy with it: aim at 100, one straight movement to get to 400, boom.
- I´m somewhat underwhelmed by the AF. Works rather slow for my taste, and even somewhat imprecise even on single spot af. Maybe the lens shows its age there?
- Made more than a thousand pics, will upload some samples later (if you want me to).
- All in all my new goto lens when wildlife shooting.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
What makes you think that?

Isn't the 18-55mm the one without aperture ring? Will all new lenses come without aperture ring?

It has an aperture ring, it's just not marked. Will only be the case for the variable aperture zooms:

dpreview said:
Because the 18-55mm F2.8-4 has a variable maximum aperture, its aperture ring is no longer marked - instead it rotates continuously, with click-stops for every third-stop change. A separate switch on the side selects between aperture control on the lens, or automatic control by the camera when set to the A position.
 

Kenka

Member
What does GAF think of the Nikon 1 V1 ?

I bought one after its price got slashed by a discounter and it will be my first experience with a camera that is either > 100$ or not a smartphone camera.

safe_image.php
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
What does GAF think of the Nikon 1 V1 ?

I bought one after its price got slashed by a discounter and it will be my first experience with a camera that is either > 100$ or not a smartphone camera.

The sensor size is really, really small for a system camera, which is limiting in terms of image quality, depth of field control, low light performance, etc., compared to m4/3 and APS-C mirrorless cameras.
 

shantyman

WHO DEY!?
Hmm so Fuji X-E1 is gonna be $999 USD, the lens packaged one at $1400. I think I would go with the kit until Fuji updates their older lenses with that new AF motor.

Basically a $300 discount on the 18-55mm lens, but damn at $700 that seems quite pricey for a short zoom lens and the aperture range isn't spectacular too. I'm guessing the optical performance will be amazing though.

2.8-4 is not good to you in a zoom of this ilk? It's not a $1400 lens.
 
How do you calculate that?

DPI means dots per inch. Alors:

Pixels / inches = DPI
Pixels / DPI= inches
DPI * inches = pixels

If you tell PS not to resample will let you drop the print size without down sampling; the resolution will go up.

The truth is if you send a photo to be printed, you tell them the print size in the order and give them the file with pixels; the resolution it is set to matters not a whit so long as you gave them enough pixels.
 

Radec

Member
What does GAF think of the Nikon 1 V1 ?

I bought one after its price got slashed by a discounter and it will be my first experience with a camera that is either > 100$ or not a smartphone camera.

Actually I haven't seen anyone here who ones a Nikon 1, so you might be the first to give a hands on impression :)
 
What does GAF think of the Nikon 1 V1 ?

I bought one after its price got slashed by a discounter and it will be my first experience with a camera that is either > 100$ or not a smartphone camera.

A bit of a wasted opportunity. I don't mind the small(er) sensor and output is pretty good, but it's barely supported by new optics and same optics could also be much smaller than they actually are.
 
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0092MD5ZE/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Same price as Adorama and B&H as well. I'm assuming the optical quality is on an entirely different level compared to the regular kit 18-55's we see.

Wow that's great pricing for it. I really wanted an X-Pro1 cause I like using the optical viewfinder, but even with that Amazon $300 discount, this still ends up being $700 cheaper. Might have to pick it up before I go on vacation to Japan.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Actually I haven't seen anyone here who ones a Nikon 1, so you might be the first to give a hands on impression :)

I played around with a J1, really impressive build quality, lightning fast AF, menus, menus, menus.

I was surprised at how much the thing weighed. The AF speed, shutter lag, and burst rate are all very fast. It is a shame the sensor is so small, but it is a very nice little sensor. I would want more external controls, but it seems Nikon was channeling the iPhone in its design. Hopefully apple doesn't sue them :p

If Nikon would make a P7000 series camera with the CX mount they might be on to something.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
Got a Nikon D7000 w/ 18-200mm. Cant say I'm impressed with the lens so far though, it doesn't seem sharp at all. And the colors seem dull. Wondering if something is wrong with it.

Also the tripod I have isnt sturdy enough to support the weight, this is coming from a T3i. WHat are some specific features to look for in a mid range tripod?
 

Kenka

Member
The sensor size is really, really small for a system camera, which is limiting in terms of image quality, depth of field control, low light performance, etc., compared to m4/3 and APS-C mirrorless cameras.
Yes, I understand, so there is not really a way I can take pictures that look as crisp as the ones in your thread. I hope the quality will still be good, the price slash was insane. Thanks.

A bit of a wasted opportunity. I don't mind the small(er) sensor and output is pretty good, but it's barely supported by new optics and same optics could also be much smaller than they actually are.

Pardon me. New optics ? You mean the lens contact with the body is new in newer models ?
 
Got a Nikon D7000 w/ 18-200mm. Cant say I'm impressed with the lens so far though, it doesn't seem sharp at all. And the colors seem dull. Wondering if something is wrong with it.

Also the tripod I have isnt sturdy enough to support the weight, this is coming from a T3i. WHat are some specific features to look for in a mid range tripod?

I guess you are talking about ooc jpg? The dull colors is probably just you being used to Canon's jpg.
 
Pardon me. New optics ? You mean the lens contact with the body is new in newer models ?

No, plain old lenses. It's like NEX all over again. Except worse. All I've seen is one little pancake and standard kit zooms. All slow, of course. At that sensor size, it must be possible to create some kickass fast yet tiny primes, for example.

Yeah, yeah, I know, Nikon doesn't want to cannibalize their DSLR sales and are aiming those cameras at low-expectations compact upgraders. But deep down, I think there's a hope that a big company like Nikon would better support their own mirrorless sustem than say cash-strapped Pentax (and their Q system).
 

mclaren777

Member
I'm still having a hard time understanding the appeal of mirror-less cameras, but I have a new theory that I'm going to test with a question...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?
 

Kenka

Member
No, plain old lenses. It's like NEX (?) all over again. Except worse. All I've seen is one little pancake and standard kit zooms (?). All slow, of course. At that sensor size, it must be possible to create some kickass fast yet tiny primes (?), for example.

Yeah, yeah, I know, Nikon doesn't want to cannibalize their DSLR (?) sales and are aiming those cameras at low-expectations compact upgraders. But deep down, I think there's a hope that a big company like Nikon would better support their own mirrorless sustem than say cash-strapped (?) Pentax (and their Q system (?)).

H... holy cola, I must learn about cameras ASAP.

edit: understood ! my bad, I bought a system that will not let me make great photos even if I make some serious effort. But have to start somewhere.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
I guess you are talking about ooc jpg? The dull colors is probably just you being used to Canon's jpg.

out of camera RAW. and yeah, maybe i am just used to the canon, the colors seemed a lot richer straight out of the camera. Ill try it out with a prime lens soon though. I havent heard many good things about the 18-200 tbh
 

shantyman

WHO DEY!?
I'm still having a hard time understanding the appeal of mirror-less cameras, but I have a new theory that I'm going to test with a question...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?

It's not that complicated. The packages tend to be smaller and quieter. Are you for real in comparing mirrorless cameras and smartphone cameras?
 

Forsete

Member
I'm still having a hard time understanding the appeal of mirror-less cameras, but I have a new theory that I'm going to test with a question...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?

I have both.

The appeal to me: Same quality images as a DSLR, better as a video camera, can be adapted to use any lenses (old or new), smaller.
 

Pepto

Banned
out of camera RAW. and yeah, maybe i am just used to the canon, the colors seemed a lot richer straight out of the camera. Ill try it out with a prime lens soon though. I havent heard many good things about the 18-200 tbh

What software are you using?
 
I'm still having a hard time understanding the appeal of mirror-less cameras, but I have a new theory that I'm going to test with a question...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?

Mirrors in cameras solved a problem that no longer needs solving due to technological advance.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Got a Nikon D7000 w/ 18-200mm. Cant say I'm impressed with the lens so far though, it doesn't seem sharp at all. And the colors seem dull. Wondering if something is wrong with it.

Also the tripod I have isnt sturdy enough to support the weight, this is coming from a T3i. WHat are some specific features to look for in a mid range tripod?

The 18-200 is kind of a dog. Try and avoid the 200mm end and stop down to (slightly) improve it.

You could try and adjust the D7000 focus fine tune if you think its a focus issue (is ANY part of the image sharp?) but with a super zoom like that you can set it for one end, and totally throw off the other.

Nikon D7000 dream team:

10.5mm f/2.8 fisheye
12-24mm f/4
17-55mm f/2.8
35mm f/1.8
70-200mm f/2.8

I currently use:

12-24mm f/4 - Kind of slow but very sharp. Expensive. There is also a 10-24 variable aperture that I have not used.
18-105mm f3.5~5.6 - Better optically than the 18-200 IMHO, crap build quality, plastic mount - ugh
35mm f1.8 - small, light, sharp, cheap, awesome. buy this 1st.
70-300mm f/4.5~5.6 - fast AF, but like the 18-200 suffers from lack of contrast and sharpness at the telephoto end. Might sell this and get a 300mm prime tele or the 70-200 f/2.8.

other (I mostly keep these at home and only bring along for special uses or for other cameras) :

24mm f/2.8D - not very sharp, not recommended.
35-86mm f/3.5 - wacky zoom with crap ton of ghosts/flare for vintage feel videos. Has a older coating that produces different colors than nikons newer multicoating.
50mm f/1.8E - cheap manual focus, surprisingly good but not great. VERY small pancake, almost too small to use on D7000 body.
50mm f/1.4 AI - nice manual focus lens. Use mostly for manual focus videos.
50mm f/1.4D - sharpest 50, focus ring constantly spinning in AF mode is annoying though. Use it on my AF film body.
60mm f/2.8D micro - SHARP. cheap macro. I kind of want a 100mm macro for more working distance but this one is great.
105mm f/2 DC - amazing portrait lens. Kind of long on a crop sensor, will go nicely with D600 when it comes out :)
 

BlueTsunami

there is joy in sucking dick
I'm still having a hard time understanding the appeal of mirror-less cameras, but I have a new theory that I'm going to test with a question...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?

Mirrorless cameras are appreciably smaller than entry level DSLRs. That alone is a huge consideration for some serious photographers. With that said the former wave of mirrorless bodies definitely have bodies that appeal to professional and hobbyists (like the OM-D and NEX7). But even a camera like the NEX 5N is extremely capable.
 

tino

Banned
I'm still having a hard time understanding the appeal of mirror-less cameras, but I have a new theory that I'm going to test with a question...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?

DSLR has a few advantages over Mirrorless

1) real time OVF preview, new mirrorless use EVF to substitute it and its reasonably good enough. EVF also has some of its own advantages.

2) fast phase detection AF. Mirrorless used to have only very slow contrast detection (AKA P&S style) AF. Panasonic improved it by increasing the refresh rate. Nikon then make more improvement by adding AF assist elements inside the sensor. Sony has also implement this since Nikon and Sony are buddy buddies. So you can make Mirrorless focus almost as fast as DSLR.

After that SLR also has better ergonomic and better lens support but these are easy problems to solve.

Mirrorless is smaller (and it give the camera makers excuse to upgrade the systems) so I expect the whole consumer market move to Mirrorless in next 10 years.
 
I'm not a fan of the smartphone-ization of product cycles that has hit hard with mirrorless cameras. The real appeal of mirrorless to manufacturers is that all parts of the camera except lenses are now electronic and can take advantage of the constant reductions in cost common to electronic components. But that makes for a steady stream of consumer-aimed cameras that are half-baked and feature-protected to keep users on that upgrade path and keep enthusiasts from aiming too low with their dollars.* The only bodies with enough R&D and durability for more than a year or so of regular use are still the medium-to-high-end DSLRs.

Mirrorless is exciting and the quality it can bring is undeniable. But I really want to see the tech stabilize enough for real tools to be produced, rather than the toys we see now.

*Panasonic made this "mistake" with the GF1+20mm kit. They won't make it again.
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Ordered a 5DMKII.
What's the best way (or place) to sell the old 60D camera and not get ripped off? The only thing I've done before is Ebay, but last time I sold something they took so much out then Paypal took some more.
 

mclaren777

Member
I clearly should have left out the first sentence – let me try this again...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?
 

Flo_Evans

Member
I clearly should have left out the first sentence – let me try this again...

Is there anybody here who owns a MLC but doesn't yet own a smartphone?

You act as if rangefinder 35mm cameras never existed. People like mirrorless cams now for the same reason they did back then, smaller, lighter, less obtrusive. Same quality.

Smartphone cameras IMHO replace the need for a pocketable P&S. They really don't compare the current mirrorless cameras.
 

Represent.

Represent(ative) of bad opinions
What software are you using?

Lightroom 4 and CS6

The 18-200 is kind of a dog. Try and avoid the 200mm end and stop down to (slightly) improve it.

You could try and adjust the D7000 focus fine tune if you think its a focus issue (is ANY part of the image sharp?) but with a super zoom like that you can set it for one end, and totally throw off the other.

Nikon D7000 dream team:

10.5mm f/2.8 fisheye
12-24mm f/4
17-55mm f/2.8
35mm f/1.8
70-200mm f/2.8

I currently use:

12-24mm f/4 - Kind of slow but very sharp. Expensive. There is also a 10-24 variable aperture that I have not used.
18-105mm f3.5~5.6 - Better optically than the 18-200 IMHO, crap build quality, plastic mount - ugh
35mm f1.8 - small, light, sharp, cheap, awesome. buy this 1st.
70-300mm f/4.5~5.6 - fast AF, but like the 18-200 suffers from lack of contrast and sharpness at the telephoto end. Might sell this and get a 300mm prime tele or the 70-200 f/2.8.

other (I mostly keep these at home and only bring along for special uses or for other cameras) :

24mm f/2.8D - not very sharp, not recommended.
35-86mm f/3.5 - wacky zoom with crap ton of ghosts/flare for vintage feel videos. Has a older coating that produces different colors than nikons newer multicoating.
50mm f/1.8E - cheap manual focus, surprisingly good but not great. VERY small pancake, almost too small to use on D7000 body.
50mm f/1.4 AI - nice manual focus lens. Use mostly for manual focus videos.
50mm f/1.4D - sharpest 50, focus ring constantly spinning in AF mode is annoying though. Use it on my AF film body.
60mm f/2.8D micro - SHARP. cheap macro. I kind of want a 100mm macro for more working distance but this one is great.
105mm f/2 DC - amazing portrait lens. Kind of long on a crop sensor, will go nicely with D600 when it comes out :)

Damn! Awesome list. Thanks. My school has quite a few of those available for rent, gonna stick a few primes on it and see if theres any difference. 35mm is gonna be my next purchase.
 

Flo_Evans

Member
Lightroom 4 and CS6



Damn! Awesome list. Thanks. My school has quite a few of those available for rent, gonna stick a few primes on it and see if theres any difference. 35mm is gonna be my next purchase.

In lightroom you can change the default the RAW processing to increase saturation/contrast/sharpening if you like. Saves some time if you are doing the same thing to every image out of the camera.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
What are you getting at?

i think he's trying to say mirrorless cameras are just for people that dont have the convenience of a smart phone camera. Its actually complete BS because mirrorless cameras are just as capable as DSLRs at most things yet easy enought to carry around as a smart phone. One doesnt replace the other, I carry around my 4s and my pen or OMD, yet i'll always pull out the mirrorless over the iphone.

The OMD + 75mm is infinitely smaller and the big one for me, lighter than say a canikon crop or even full frame camera with a 85mm on the front of it. And yet you can still get fantastic results with the smaller system. Another added benefit is that you dont get "omg you must be a pro!" when people see your gigantic DSLR.

I would say right now, mirrorless is perfect for the vast majority except the fringe(mostly professionals, and mirrorless prices need to come down) those that want to shoot wildlife, sports, architecture, and or need to have absolute razor thin depth of field. Because you can get plenty thin with 4/3rds or ASPC.
If you need resolution, go D800 or medium format.
 
*Panasonic made this "mistake" with the GF1+20mm kit. They won't make it again.

Huh?

Panasonic's "mistake", if any, was providing a bargain kit that offered little incentive to buy other lenses.

Most would tell you the real mistake was the direction the GF line took afterwards (and partially rectified with the new GX line and the rumored GH3).
 

tino

Banned
Huh?

Panasonic's "mistake", if any, was providing a bargain kit that offered little incentive to buy other lenses.

Most would tell you the real mistake was the direction the GF line took afterwards (and partially rectified with the new GX line and the rumored GH3).

GF1 (umm very respectable camera from a consumer electronic company)
GF2 (huh where are the dials?)
GF3 (you got to be kidding with this toy)
GF5 (kill it with fire!)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom