• 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

Saturnman

Banned
Well that's good to know. EM1mkII is fucking expensive, aren't selling many of those.

Ebay is your friend. You can shave off several hundreds of dollars that way.

EM5 markII is due for a refresh next year: it's close to 3 years old after all. The Em5 mark II took a lot from the original EM1 and added its own features to make it quite a compelling camera. The big question remains how much of the EM1 markII will go into the EM5 markIII.

The insane speed of the EM1 markII is probably out of the question. 4k is a near certainly though. 20MP is likely too (Pen F has it after all) and PDAF is a big open question although a simplified version of it would be most welcomed without cannibalizing the EM1 mark II sales.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
I've got an RX100 Mark V and it's incredible, but I've always pined for that crazy zoom range of the RX10. Now it has the same awesome tech of the RX100... Tempting for sure.
 
Ebay is your friend. You can shave off several hundreds of dollars that way.

EM5 markII is due for a refresh next year: it's close to 3 years old after all. The Em5 mark II took a lot from the original EM1 and added its own features to make it quite a compelling camera. The big question remains how much of the EM1 markII will go into the EM5 markIII.

The insane speed of the EM1 markII is probably out of the question. 4k is a near certainly though. 20MP is likely too (Pen F has it after all) and PDAF is a big open question although a simplified version of it would be most welcomed without cannibalizing the EM1 mark II sales.
Well that's good, though I don't think I'm looking at another format to invest in. Might just leave it at Nikon and Fuji since they both do what I want them to do quite well. The EM1 is a sexy camera though.
 

KKRT00

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.

$1500 and i can get that Sony RX100 MK3 for $700 in comparison.
Just for reference, the dolar cost 3,56PLN, so its like i would almost be buying $5000 and $2500 camera respectively due to salary/currency difference :)
For starting i think Sony will be good enough ;P
Still i appreciate all suggestions.
 
$1500 and i can get that Sony RX100 MK3 for $700 in comparison.
Just for reference, the dolar cost 3,56PLN, so its like i would almost be buying $5000 and $2500 camera respectively due to salary/currency difference :)
For starting i think Sony will be good enough ;P Still i appreciate all suggestions.
The EM1 Mk1 as in the first one shouldn't be $1500 anywhere. If it does, thank god I don't live there.
 

Daedardus

Member
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 :)

You'll like the expandable screen (selfie mode yay), the viewfinder, build quality is solid although it may slip a bit when you have sweaty hands. I recommend buying an official extra battery through Amazon and the $10 Sony faux leather grip. If you want to get the most out of your pics even though you're not a pro, it's best to shoot in RAW mode and buy a Phase One Pro for Sony license, it's like $60 and very user friendly. You'll want to be a pro and start shooting in manual mode within three weeks after use (I was at least). Also try to look up some stuff about camera settings, the 'Intelligent' program is quite shit, it's best to use the Program mode and set everything to Auto and cap ISO between 125 and 1600 for everyday use.

The M4 and M5 have better video modes and a better viewfinder and faster autofocus with less rolling shutter, but you probably won't care for any of those things and the price difference is vast. The battery life is also remarkedly worse on the M5.
 

KKRT00

Member
The EM1 Mk1 as in the first one shouldn't be $1500 anywhere. If it does, thank god I don't live there.

https://www.ceneo.pl/26540197

And MK2 costs $2343 :)
https://www.ceneo.pl/48417559

Sony MKIII
https://www.ceneo.pl/30976453
MKIV
https://www.ceneo.pl/39326208
MKV
https://www.ceneo.pl/47996929

----
@Daedardus

Thanks for the tips :)

I see that there is free app from sony for raw conversion on their site:
http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/www/disoft/int/idc/index.html
For photo editing i would prefer for $60 to buy old photoshop, as i have some past experience with it :)
 

Daedardus

Member
@Daedardus

Thanks for the tips :)

I see that there is free app from sony for raw conversion on their site:
http://support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/www/disoft/int/idc/index.html
For photo editing i would prefer for $60 to buy old photoshop, as i have some past experience with it :)

Photoshop isn't the same as Phase One, that would be Lightroom, but I don't know if the old versions support the M3 RAW formats. Basically it's mostly to adjust white and colour balances, but the added benefit is that it doesn't overly sharpen the image and you can extract more detail from tje .jpgegs. File size is larger as a result too. I'm not an expert at all, but I could repair some fancy pictures that were otherwise over or underexposed in some areas.
 
*I first hear about this shoot for work* "I'm not bringing any lighting." *An hour later* "I gots to bring all my lighting." *Dragging this shit around NYC* "I hate carrying this shit." *Post shoot* "Thank god I brought this shit."
Edit: Just got the 90 F2, can't wait to get this thing since I was missing reach on my XT2. Also should help greatly with portraits so I could get the background compression and do headshots at a distance that wasn't "right in their face" like with the 35 F2.
 
Well, for one thing, the D810 has the AA filter removed. I believe the D4S still has one.
Either I'm using it wrong or they should have dropped that filter a long time ago. I just finished doing an event and I had to use my coworkers D4S because I left my stuff at home and it's kind of night and day to me. I used flash and everything, nothing just pops for me. People also have this waxy look that I'm not a fan of either.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Either I'm using it wrong or they should have dropped that filter a long time ago. I just finished doing an event and I had to use my coworkers D4S because I left my stuff at home and it's kind of night and day to me. I used flash and everything, nothing just pops for me. People also have this waxy look that I'm not a fan of either.

Same lenses too?
 
I have a question for those in this thread...

I got a message on Flickr from an interior design firm asking about pictures I have taken in my hometown. They have a client that wants to furnish their office with images from the community and they asked me to quote them a price if I was interested in letting them print my photos for the project.

I think that's pretty cool... BUT; the images that she pointed out were images that I took with a Galaxy S3 like 5 years ago. They aren't really images I am proud of, and I don't think they would look good blown up at a higher resolution. I'm not sure I'd really like my name sitting on something that I think looks bad.

Should I just be up front with that fact and recommend a handful of other images I've taken around the city that I am more happy with?

I'm not broke or anything, and I have no grand ambitions to be a professional photographer, so I think I'm leaning towards the latter.
 
I have a question for those in this thread...

I got a message on Flickr from an interior design firm asking about pictures I have taken in my hometown. They have a client that wants to furnish their office with images from the community and they asked me to quote them a price if I was interested in letting them print my photos for the project.

I think that's pretty cool... BUT; the images that she pointed out were images that I took with a Galaxy S3 like 5 years ago. They aren't really images I am proud of, and I don't think they would look good blown up at a higher resolution. I'm not sure I'd really like my name sitting on something that I think looks bad.

Should I just be up front with that fact and recommend a handful of other images I've taken around the city that I am more happy with?

I'm not broke or anything, and I have no grand ambitions to be a professional photographer, so I think I'm leaning towards the latter.

Yup, the best thing you can do is be upfront about it, explain that it's not your best work, that it doesn't really have the necessary quality to be printed large and offer the better stuff. It's the professional thing to do, if you don't want to be associated with lower quality stuff, regardless of not being a professional photographer.
 

Futureman

Member
I'm tentatively considering dipping my toes back into shooting some film.

I have all Canon EF lenses so I want to just stick with that. I'm fine buying a used body off eBay... any suggestions? I don't care if the body is old, just as long as it works with my lenses.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
just received the second largest print i've ever done, biggest by longest edge. 24x72. Pics when i hang it.
 

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Sweet.

Panorama? Stitched or all one shot? Did you have to enlarge the file at all or did you have enough megapixels to begin with?

6x17 Velvia transparency scanned @ 3200 dpi. I ended up cropping it because i was blocked by a fence and couldnt get closer. But the crop was exactly the right resolution for 24x72 with 0 up scaling.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
6x17 Velvia transparency scanned @ 3200 dpi. I ended up cropping it because i was blocked by a fence and couldnt get closer. But the crop was exactly the right resolution for 24x72 with 0 up scaling.

Even the words sound beautiful. I hope you like the final print :)

edit: Oh right you already got it. It must look amazing :D
 

Ty4on

Member
I'm tentatively considering dipping my toes back into shooting some film.

I have all Canon EF lenses so I want to just stick with that. I'm fine buying a used body off eBay... any suggestions? I don't care if the body is old, just as long as it works with my lenses.

Pretty much any old EOS lol. There are pretty much no incompatibilities as the mount was fully electronic from the start. The very oldest may not work with IS, but it has to be really old as IS was introduced way back in the 90s.

I think older EOS 1 cameras aren't that expensive though you get older AF without a bunch of points. Second revision was the 1N which isn't that expensive, but only has five AF points. The 1V was the last one and got a much improved AF system, but it is quite expensive. The EOS 3 had that same AF system, but is also expensive.

Back then EOS 1 was the highest end camera, but it wasn't quite like the EOS 1 is today. Now we have 1DX with a fast sensor and shutter and 5D being smaller and higher resolution. The EOS 1/1n/1v was kinda both as it could be compact high end with the standard battery holder and huge machine gun with the battery grip and extra motor drive.

One notable camera is the EOS 5, known as A2e in North America, which was the first with Canon's famous eye focusing. The EOS 3 also had eye focusing, but the EOS 5 is much cheaper.

There were plenty others and like today more numbers in the name means lower end model. Lower end film bodies of the area are quite plasticy by today's standards and can be noisy, but work well otherwise. The exception is the EOS 650 which isn't as low end as the name suggest; it was the very first EF camera and was more mid-range with 4fps.

For something more modern, but still cheap the EOS 30/Elan 7E seems ok with dual dials.
 

Thraktor

Member
Pretty much any old EOS lol. There are pretty much no incompatibilities as the mount was fully electronic from the start. The very oldest may not work with IS, but it has to be really old as IS was introduced way back in the 90s.

I think older EOS 1 cameras aren't that expensive though you get older AF without a bunch of points. Second revision was the 1N which isn't that expensive, but only has five AF points. The 1V was the last one and got a much improved AF system, but it is quite expensive. The EOS 3 had that same AF system, but is also expensive.

Back then EOS 1 was the highest end camera, but it wasn't quite like the EOS 1 is today. Now we have 1DX with a fast sensor and shutter and 5D being smaller and higher resolution. The EOS 1/1n/1v was kinda both as it could be compact high end with the standard battery holder and huge machine gun with the battery grip and extra motor drive.

One notable camera is the EOS 5, known as A2e in North America, which was the first with Canon's famous eye focusing. The EOS 3 also had eye focusing, but the EOS 5 is much cheaper.

There were plenty others and like today more numbers in the name means lower end model. Lower end film bodies of the area are quite plasticy by today's standards and can be noisy, but work well otherwise. The exception is the EOS 650 which isn't as low end as the name suggest; it was the very first EF camera and was more mid-range with 4fps.

For something more modern, but still cheap the EOS 30/Elan 7E seems ok with dual dials.

Motor drives for film cameras always worry me a bit. You can chew through a roll of film in no time with some of them, and I'm always thinking more in Euros per second than frames per second whenever I see those figures!

One thing to note about EOS film cameras and modern EF lenses is to make sure not to use EF-S lenses, which are designed for smaller APS-C sensors. Although there's the obvious problem of not covering the entire film (which you'll see through the viewfinder), many EF-S lenses also have elements which protrude into the camera body further than full-frame EF lenses. They can do this because the mirror in APS-C cameras is smaller, but the mirror of a full-frame EOS camera can hit the back of the lens when taking a photo, potentially damaging the camera, the lens, or even both.

This isn't true of every single EF-S lens, but err on the side of caution and stick with full-frame lenses (which will actually properly expose the entire film while they're at it).
 
Something like that Eye AF would probably get me to use AF. Camera can probably figure out my eye better than it can figure my subjects.
 
Don't know if you guys do camcorders, but thought I would ask here anyways.

I am a teacher who is the adviser for a student council, and I am looking for a camera for myself and my student's to record school events for montage videos. I lean camcorder because I think it would be easier for my students to use.

Anyways, I am torn between a Canon Vixia R800 and a "off brand" camcorder like this one, or this one.

Canon Pro's:
Trusted brand
Great optical zoom
1080p 60fps
Easy to find accessories

Off Brand Pro's
Much cheaper.
Would save about $150 when you take into account accessories such as mic and wide angle lens.
Hot shoe for mounting mic

I for the life of me cannot understand why none of the reasonably priced Canon models include the top socket for mounting a mic, while all the similarly priced off brands do. I also don't understand why none of the off brands offer 1080p60fps or great optical zoom.


Help a teacher decide gaf!
 

Thraktor

Member
Don't know if you guys do camcorders, but thought I would ask here anyways.

I am a teacher who is the adviser for a student council, and I am looking for a camera for myself and my student's to record school events for montage videos. I lean camcorder because I think it would be easier for my students to use.

Anyways, I am torn between a Canon Vixia R800 and a "off brand" camcorder like this one, or this one.

Canon Pro's:
Trusted brand
Great optical zoom
1080p 60fps
Easy to find accessories

Off Brand Pro's
Much cheaper.
Would save about $150 when you take into account accessories such as mic and wide angle lens.
Hot shoe for mounting mic

I for the life of me cannot understand why none of the reasonably priced Canon models include the top socket for mounting a mic, while all the similarly priced off brands do. I also don't understand why none of the off brands offer 1080p60fps or great optical zoom.


Help a teacher decide gaf!

Personally I wouldn't go near any of those off brand ones. Stick with Canon, Sony and Panasonic when it comes to camcorders. Just to show the difference, go 3:20 in this video review of the off-brand camera, which shows some low-light footage from it. Then, go to 3:29 in this video, showing low-light footage from the Canon. It's literally the difference between night and day, and that's not even to mention the optical zoom on the Canon (the others are a fixed lens with digital zoom), the better build quality, the better audio, better support/warranty/etc.

Regarding the microphone mount, it's just something that isn't really common on consumer-level cameras. The logic is generally that you'd have to pay perhaps $100 for a decent hotshoe-mounted mic like a Rode Videomic, and very few people are going to spend that much extra on a mic for a $250 camera.
 

Ty4on

Member
Motor drives for film cameras always worry me a bit. You can chew through a roll of film in no time with some of them, and I'm always thinking more in Euros per second than frames per second whenever I see those figures!
I just stick to single shot :p

I kinda use fps as a measurement for how high end a camera was. Like 1fps is low low end and even sounds slow in single shot. 3fps was kinda mid range in the 90s and 5fps and above was quite high end, especially if it's without a big motor drive.
Something like that Eye AF would probably get me to use AF. Camera can probably figure out my eye better than it can figure my subjects.

I'd love to try it. Some seem to love it while some seem to hate it. It could make selecting one of 50 points slightly more manageable.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Being able to trigger eye auto-focus w/ continuous tracking via a button press on modern Sony camera bodies is a godsend for shooting single subjects.
 
Being able to trigger eye auto-focus w/ continuous tracking via a button press on modern Sony camera bodies is a godsend for shooting single subjects.

Yeah, but these are actually two separate things -- Eye AF on Sony looks for the eye on the subject, and focuses on that... the EOS 3 looks for YOUR eye, and focuses on what YOU are looking at.
 
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, but these are actually two separate things -- Eye AF on Sony looks for the eye on the subject, and focuses on that... the EOS 3 looks for YOUR eye, and focuses on what YOU are looking at.

Ahh, now I see what you're talking about it. Yeah, that would be absolutely incredible.
 
The 16-55 is my jam! What do you want to know? (What does nm mean?)
I'm waiting for Adorama to get a good used one in stock so I could trade the 18-55 in for it. The 18-55 just seems lifeless too me, there's no pop. I'm wondering is it that much better? It seems so when I see the flickr page for it, I'm just making sure if people that have the 16-55 prefer it over the kit lens.
 
Looking to finally upgrade from my iPhone 7 Plus (lol) before NYCC and I feel like the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II is the best bet in my beginners price range.

I was looking seriously at the a5100 but the lens situation started to bug me. I was 50/50 on needing a viewfinder but it looked like Olympus or Panasonic had the best range for that price range of mirrorless. Also apparently the stock lens on it kind negates the megapixel advantage it has.

Not super concerned with video (the a5100's 2.35 mode was the only thing in any camera that got me excited so it shows how much I care), so that's not really a factor.

I know the Mark III is literally out in a week or something but it doesn't seem like a big enough upgrade to justify the extra few hundo it would cost me to choose it over the II.

Anything I'm missing? I'd basically like a body that can grow a little bit with me before I hit the full blast, above $1k level (if I ever do).
 
Looking to finally upgrade from my iPhone 7 Plus (lol) before NYCC and I feel like the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II is the best bet in my beginners price range.

I was looking seriously at the a5100 but the lens situation started to bug me. I was 50/50 on needing a viewfinder but it looked like Olympus or Panasonic had the best range for that price range of mirrorless. Also apparently the stock lens on it kind negates the megapixel advantage it has.

Not super concerned with video (the a5100's 2.35 mode was the only thing in any camera that got me excited so it shows how much I care), so that's not really a factor.

I know the Mark III is literally out in a week or something but it doesn't seem like a big enough upgrade to justify the extra few hundo it would cost me to choose it over the II.

Anything I'm missing? I'd basically like a body that can grow a little bit with me before I hit the full blast, above $1k level (if I ever do).
The Panasonic G7 is also pretty good. Is the G85 in your budget?
 
Just looked into some comparisons and it seems like I could swing the G7 but it seem to not have many advantages over the MII besides maybe the kit lens?
Panasonic and Olympus share the same mount so don't look at the lenses, look at the body and specs themselves. Best thing to do is go into a store and check them out physically. You might prefer the ergonomics more over one.
 
Panasonic and Olympus share the same mount so don't look at the lenses, look at the body and specs themselves. Best thing to do is go into a store and check them out physically. You might prefer the ergonomics more over one.

Yeah I was thinking that. I'll definitely check them out this week. Thanks for the input!
 

japtor

Member
If you go the Olympus route keep an eye on their outlet store, not much not there right now but not that long ago I saw a few bodies and a bunch more lenses for a decent chunk off.
 

Timedog

good credit (by proxy)
Anyone own a Rode Videomic Pro R?

I just got one and I took the windscreen off and the "shotgun"tube that usually houses a mic or whatever is completely empty. There's also paper strips pasted to the tube which seems odd. The mic works and you can see a capsule or something if you peer deep into the tube. Is this normal? Counterfeit?

Can't find any videos or photos of the mic with the windscreen off.
 

Saturnman

Banned
Panasonic and Olympus share the same mount so don't look at the lenses, look at the body and specs themselves. Best thing to do is go into a store and check them out physically. You might prefer the ergonomics more over one.

Don't look at the lenses for a deciding factor for bodies, but definitely still pay attention to them to influence your camera body decision. Some features in lenses are unavailable on bodies from another brand (Panny aperture rings on Olympus camera bodies, for example).

Panny or Oly, choose a camera body with in-body image stabilisation in either case, it will make lens choices less restrictive across both brands.
 
Don't look at the lenses for a deciding factor for bodies, but definitely still pay attention to them to influence your camera body decision. Some features in lenses are unavailable on bodies from another brand (Panny aperture rings on Olympus camera bodies, for example).

Panny or Oly, choose a camera body with in-body image stabilisation in either case, it will make lens choices less restrictive across both brands.
OK this makes sense. If he wants cheaper ibis the Olympus unless he wants to pay extra for the G85. I think the Olympus lenses have better build quality as well. I heard the Pro line up is top tier.
 
Top Bottom