• 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

Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
JadedWriter said:
The 50mm is okay at it, but it can only get so wide and I wouldn't exactly classify that or a 70-200 as a walk around lens.
Click to expand...

50mm on FF can be a walk around lens. (I guess it might vary depending on what "walk around lens" means to you)

If you need a wider field of view than the 50mm can provide, do a stitched panorama. You can get decent results handheld, even.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
Rentahamster said:
50mm on FF can be a walk around lens. (I guess it might vary depending on what "walk around lens" means to you)

If you need a wider field of view than the 50mm can provide, do a stitched panorama. You can get decent results handheld, even.
Click to expand...
I'm not much of a stitched panorama person. I have the weirdest feeling that if I was to try to do one half the god damn pics would be out of focus. I should probably try doing one Tuesday if I shoot on that day.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
JadedWriter said:
I'm not much of a stitched panorama person. I have the weirdest feeling that if I was to try to do one half the god damn pics would be out of focus. I should probably try doing one Tuesday if I shoot on that day.
Click to expand...

You don't know until you try. It's seriously not that hard.

Be at around f8 - set your exposure and white balance manually - focus on what would be the middle of the panorama - lock focus - turn your waist a little to one side - take pics and rotate to the other side every 10 or 15 degrees - import to Lightroom - select the stack - right click - merge to panorama automatic settings.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
Rentahamster said:
You don't know until you try. It's seriously not that hard.

Be at around f8 - set your exposure and white balance manually - focus on what would be the middle of the panorama - lock focus - turn your waist a little to one side - take pics and rotate to the other side every 10 or 15 degrees - import to Lightroom - select the stack - right click - merge to panorama automatic settings.
Click to expand...
So I'm screwed if I tried to do this at night hand held then. Cause it would be after work.
 
C

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
DarkJediKnight said:
Anyone feel Nikon's colors suck compared to Canon?

I have Canon t2i and bought the Nikon D700 FX camera because it's fairly cheap now and has great auto focus.

The functionality of the camera is amazing but I cannot get the pictures to look nearly as good as my t2i. I don't do a lot of processing and with my t2i raw files I just use lightroom auto tone and punch. Sometimes a little boost in contrast and I'm good. With the Nikon I'm fiddling around and it doesn't have the vibrancy or the look of the Canon camera.

I also noticed that the bokeh on the Canon is far smoother. I'm using the 50mm 1.8g and 1.8 STM.
Click to expand...

shoot raw and check your white balance.

Having used a number of cameras the difference in color in my opinion is how each manufacturer measures white balance. Olympus for instance was almost always perfect white balance. Phase One was way too cool and slanted green, i found a post on luminous landscape that came to the same conclusion i did. I would almost always up to daylight and then slant the tint towards purple by at least 20 or 30 to get colors that better reflected what i saw.

Nikon i found are a little cool most of the time, for instance i just took a picture of a hawk, in direct sunlight the camera had the white balance at about 4400, i changed it to 5200.
 
S

Skel1ingt0n

I can't *believe* these lazy developers keep making file sizes so damn large. Btw, how does technology work?
Welp,

I started taking some portraits for family. Which then became family friends. Then friends of family friends.

Was absolutely NOT planning to ever do any photography in a remotely professional setting, but I have to admit it feels good when people refer me. I'm not charging anything right now - which I'm sure is half the allure - but everyone so far has tried to slip me ~$100 or so for a morning of my time.

Anyway, decided if I start doing this more regularly, I should stop jury-rigging my lighting. Just dropped $200 on Amazon, but it's exciting to start shooting in a new direction.

30095500835_8e0f66bc97_c.jpg
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
Skel1ingt0n said:
Welp,

I started taking some portraits for family. Which then became family friends. Then friends of family friends.

Was absolutely NOT planning to ever do any photography in a remotely professional setting, but I have to admit it feels good when people refer me. I'm not charging anything right now - which I'm sure is half the allure - but everyone so far has tried to slip me ~$100 or so for a morning of my time.

Anyway, decided if I start doing this more regularly, I should stop jury-rigging my lighting. Just dropped $200 on Amazon, but it's exciting to start shooting in a new direction.

30095500835_8e0f66bc97_c.jpg
Click to expand...
I'm not buying any of this stuff for quite some time. Yeah I could use it, but not till I make money and I don't have to worry about the wind knocking shit over, and it's just more stuff to lug around.
 
finalflame

finalflame

Banned
Hey PhotoGAF. Hoping I could get some of your input/advice.

I've owned a Nikon D70s since my early days in college, with my handy 50mm f/1.8 and 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G kit lens. Its been a great camera for multipurpose hobby shooting, but it has become a bit dated and honestly I want something in a more compact/modern package.
I have been looking into a mirrorless camera due to the smaller bodies, and currently my top contenders are the Sony A6300, Olympus E-M1, and the Fujifilm X-T1. I don't currently own any lenses that would work with these, so existing glass isn't a consideration. My budget is up to $2k, but from reviews it's not clear if the price differential to the $1.5-2k cameras justifies the extra investment (XT-2, Sony Alpha 7 II). Thoughts?

Additionally, I'm considering just keeping the bulkier footprint of DSLR and going full frame with a D750 + 24-120mm f/4 kit. I think 24mm full frame would be wide enough for the kind of shots I wanna take.

I think my top contenders currently are the D750 + 24-120mm f/4 or the A6300 + SE1018 + SELP18105.

I plan on mostly using wide angle zoom lenses, mostly around 12-60mm, to shoot broad landscapes, cityscapes, the occasional portrait, and my car sitting in pretty places.

Any recommendations/suggestions out of the above, or any cameras I haven't mentioned?
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
finalflame said:
Hey PhotoGAF. Hoping I could get some of your input/advice.

I've owned a Nikon D70s since my early days in college, with my handy 50mm f/1.8 and 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G kit lens. Its been a great camera for multipurpose hobby shooting, but it has become a bit dated and honestly I want something in a more compact/modern package.
I have been looking into a mirrorless camera due to the smaller bodies, and currently my top contenders are the Sony A6300, Olympus E-M1, and the Fujifilm X-T1. I don't currently own any lenses that would work with these, so existing glass isn't a consideration. My budget is up to $2k, but from reviews it's not clear if the price differential to the $1.5-2k cameras justifies the extra investment (XT-2, Sony Alpha 7 II). Thoughts?

Additionally, I'm considering just keeping the bulkier footprint of DSLR and going full frame with a D750 + 24-120mm f/4 kit. I think 24mm full frame would be wide enough for the kind of shots I wanna take.

I think my top contenders currently are the D750 + 24-120mm f/4 or the A6300 + SE1018 + SELP18105.

I plan on mostly using wide angle zoom lenses, mostly around 12-60mm, to shoot broad landscapes, cityscapes, the occasional portrait, and my car sitting in pretty places.

Any recommendations/suggestions out of the above, or any cameras I haven't mentioned?
Click to expand...
I would either get the D750 or get an XT-2 honestly. Anybody telling you that the XT-2 isn't good is most likely an idiot.
 
S

Skel1ingt0n

I can't *believe* these lazy developers keep making file sizes so damn large. Btw, how does technology work?
finalflame said:
Hey PhotoGAF. Hoping I could get some of your input/advice.

I've owned a Nikon D70s since my early days in college, with my handy 50mm f/1.8 and 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G kit lens. Its been a great camera for multipurpose hobby shooting, but it has become a bit dated and honestly I want something in a more compact/modern package.
I have been looking into a mirrorless camera due to the smaller bodies, and currently my top contenders are the Sony A6300, Olympus E-M1, and the Fujifilm X-T1. I don't currently own any lenses that would work with these, so existing glass isn't a consideration. My budget is up to $2k, but from reviews it's not clear if the price differential to the $1.5-2k cameras justifies the extra investment (XT-2, Sony Alpha 7 II). Thoughts?

Additionally, I'm considering just keeping the bulkier footprint of DSLR and going full frame with a D750 + 24-120mm f/4 kit. I think 24mm full frame would be wide enough for the kind of shots I wanna take.

I think my top contenders currently are the D750 + 24-120mm f/4 or the A6300 + SE1018 + SELP18105.

I plan on mostly using wide angle zoom lenses, mostly around 12-60mm, to shoot broad landscapes, cityscapes, the occasional portrait, and my car sitting in pretty places.

Any recommendations/suggestions out of the above, or any cameras I haven't mentioned?
Click to expand...

I'm all kinds of biased, but I'd highly recommend you give the XT-1 or XT-2 a shot. I have the first one, currently, and absolutely love it. I purchased an XT-2, but ended up sending it back only because I haven't settled between it and the X-Pro 2, so I decided to wait.

Personally, for me, the three biggest advantages of the 2 over the 1 are the (much) improved AF (way more points, better control, much faster), higher resolution, and 4K video.

I don't care too much about video, and I can't imagine better AF is terribly important for your shots (as you described), but the higher MPs might be a help for cropping landscapes.

Fuji has some really, really great glass. If you're a prime guy, the 16mm and 23mm are both incredible lenses, and can each be had for under $700 second-hand. You could snag the 35 f2 for $400 new, or less used if you don't need the extra stops on the 23.

Otherwise, the 10-24 might give you everything you want in a single lens to start off with.
 
F

Futureman

Member
Skel1ingt0n said:
Welp,

I started taking some portraits for family. Which then became family friends. Then friends of family friends.

Was absolutely NOT planning to ever do any photography in a remotely professional setting, but I have to admit it feels good when people refer me. I'm not charging anything right now - which I'm sure is half the allure - but everyone so far has tried to slip me ~$100 or so for a morning of my time.

Anyway, decided if I start doing this more regularly, I should stop jury-rigging my lighting. Just dropped $200 on Amazon, but it's exciting to start shooting in a new direction.

30095500835_8e0f66bc97_c.jpg
Click to expand...

I need to get something like the Oval Light Reflector.

My next step is to also start really learning flash. I just got hired for 5 events. Did one this past weekend and it went realllly well. Probably my best event photos I've ever taken (my GF's work hires me for stuff). Feels good to do well on a paid job and maybe this will lead to more work. Event was all outside during the day so flash wasn't an issue, but some of the upcoming events may require it.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
finalflame said:
Hey PhotoGAF. Hoping I could get some of your input/advice.

I've owned a Nikon D70s since my early days in college, with my handy 50mm f/1.8 and 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G kit lens. Its been a great camera for multipurpose hobby shooting, but it has become a bit dated and honestly I want something in a more compact/modern package.
I have been looking into a mirrorless camera due to the smaller bodies, and currently my top contenders are the Sony A6300, Olympus E-M1, and the Fujifilm X-T1. I don't currently own any lenses that would work with these, so existing glass isn't a consideration. My budget is up to $2k, but from reviews it's not clear if the price differential to the $1.5-2k cameras justifies the extra investment (XT-2, Sony Alpha 7 II). Thoughts?

Additionally, I'm considering just keeping the bulkier footprint of DSLR and going full frame with a D750 + 24-120mm f/4 kit. I think 24mm full frame would be wide enough for the kind of shots I wanna take.

I think my top contenders currently are the D750 + 24-120mm f/4 or the A6300 + SE1018 + SELP18105.

I plan on mostly using wide angle zoom lenses, mostly around 12-60mm, to shoot broad landscapes, cityscapes, the occasional portrait, and my car sitting in pretty places.

Any recommendations/suggestions out of the above, or any cameras I haven't mentioned?
Click to expand...

You say you want to shoot wide. How important is that to you? You will be able to go widest via a full frame sensor. The question mainly comes down to if you want full frame, or if you want compactness.

If compactness is what you want best, then go mirrorless, but only if you are fine with staying in the realm of crop sensor territory. I could explain why, but this article does it just fine: http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

And, if you do go mirrorless, get the Fuji. I'm hearing good things about the XT2, but the XT1 is still an awesome camera. I have friends still using it, and they take great pics.

If you want to shoot wide, then full frame is your best bet. I dunno if I'd go with the 24-120 f4, though. If it were me, I'd probably stick with prime lenses for wide landscapes. Something like the 20mm f1.8, or the 35mm f2.

I shoot with a D800E most of the time, and for landscapes I use the Rokinon 14mm prime lens, the Rokinon 24mm tilt shift, the Nikon 50mm f1.8D, or the Nikon 85mm f1.4D. I care about quality and dynamic range the most, so it's Nikon full frame for me.
 
C

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Rentahamster said:
You say you want to shoot wide. How important is that to you? You will be able to go widest via a full frame sensor. The question mainly comes down to if you want full frame, or if you want compactness.

If compactness is what you want best, then go mirrorless, but only if you are fine with staying in the realm of crop sensor territory. I could explain why, but this article does it just fine: http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

And, if you do go mirrorless, get the Fuji. I'm hearing good things about the XT2, but the XT1 is still an awesome camera. I have friends still using it, and they take great pics.

If you want to shoot wide, then full frame is your best bet. I dunno if I'd go with the 24-120 f4, though. If it were me, I'd probably stick with prime lenses for wide landscapes. Something like the 20mm f1.8, or the 35mm f2.

I shoot with a D800E most of the time, and for landscapes I use the Rokinon 14mm prime lens, the Rokinon 24mm tilt shift, the Nikon 50mm f1.8D, or the Nikon 85mm f1.4D. I care about quality and dynamic range the most, so it's Nikon full frame for me.
Click to expand...
i use my 35mm f2 for landscapes how do you like the rokinon 14mm? Been wanting to look into a 14mm.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
captive said:
i use my 35mm f2 for landscapes how do you like the rokinon 14mm? Been wanting to look into a 14mm.
Click to expand...

Considering how cheap it was brand new, it's great. $300 on Amazon now: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004NNUN02/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Being one of the widest of the ultrawides, the lens selection at 14mm is pretty small as it is. I didn't need autofocus, so that didn't matter. It's not too large, so it also travels well. It has the simplicity and image quality of a prime lens.

The 14mm field of view is something that most "regular" cameras can't achieve, and I like taking pics that no one else can. For that price, it was pretty much a no-brainer.

For astrophotography shots, it's not the best, but works well enough if that's all you got.
 
C

captive

Joe Six-Pack: posting for the common man
Rentahamster said:
Considering how cheap it was brand new, it's great. $300 on Amazon now: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004NNUN02/?tag=neogaf0e-20

Being one of the widest of the ultrawides, the lens selection at 14mm is pretty small as it is. I didn't need autofocus, so that didn't matter. It's not too large, so it also travels well. It has the simplicity and image quality of a prime lens.

The 14mm field of view is something that most "regular" cameras can't achieve, and I like taking pics that no one else can. For that price, it was pretty much a no-brainer.

For astrophotography shots, it's not the best, but works well enough if that's all you got.
Click to expand...
how is the image quality? i also dont care about the AF for my use 95% of the time its going to be at infinity.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
captive said:
how is the image quality? i also dont care about the AF for my use 95% of the time its going to be at infinity.
Click to expand...

Sharp enough.
CA, distortion not really an issue, can be easily adjusted with profiles in Lightroom.
Contrast, saturation seem fine.
Doesn't take flare too well in extreme circumstances, but I still shoot into the sun if I feel like it. Can make for interesting artistic flare if using it on purpose like that.

I don't really care about that though, because the main factor was to achieve as wide a field of view as possible, and at $300, that is an insane value.
 
Q

qcf x2

Member
I bought a Panasonic LUMIX GX7, any advice for lighting? How much should I be looking to spend on lighting kits? I'm focusing on films but may do photo work on the side.

Second thing I need help w/ is picking a GOOD audio setup for recording, meaning boom mic & recorder. For the latter I'm thinking the Zoom H4N Pro. Let's say my budget for audio + lighting combined is $700. Can I get quality?
 
J

Joelstinton14

Member
Anyone been using the Xpro - 2?

I've been using it a bit more often than usual lately, feeling a bit more creative, but i'm having inconsistencies with the Auto focus.

I seem to be missing quite a few shots, even in very good light where i expect sharp images all the time. It can produce some outstanding, sharp images, but from time to time it just misses.

I've been playing around with various autofocus modes , experimenting with the viewfinder and auto focus modes and i still seem to miss some shots. I mainly shoot in Single shot/point modes so i find it frustrating that i'm missing simple shots.

Perhaps i am being too picky? and the machine will miss some shots from time to time, but coming from a d700 it is something i never really thought about. I probably missed some shots on that too but it never bugged me. Even in the early days of using the Fuji i didn't feel i had too much of an issue with it.

I guess it is something i've noticed and i tend to get quite obsessive when i notice some is off ( obsessed over a week that my wii u gamepad analogue sticks were off ha). I also come from quite a static and considered shooting style (medium format) so perhaps i'm a bit too tense when shooting with a "handheld" camera and not quite relaxed when shooting.

Or that i just need to learn the intricacies of the camera. When to use single point, when to use Zone, when to use the EVF etc.

The camera did get knocked a foot high rest on to a hard floor last week (tiles), but it seemed pretty innocuous fall, rather than a big one, i don't think it would have damaged anything. I have had a lot worse in the past.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
Am I used to a camera feeling a certain way or does the Canon Rebel series feel like cheap plastic toys? I was just walking around Times Square taking pictures and somebody asked me to take their picture and he handed me his camera and it just felt..."cheap." I'm not knocking the user or the image quality of said camera or anything and I was happy to take the mans picture, but sometimes going from camera to camera they really do start to feel different from what you're used to.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
brerwolfe said:
I mean, the Rebel series is a consumer-grade, budget camera. Should it be built like a brick house?
Click to expand...
I know that, just wasn't expecting it to feel like a Fisher Price toy. I know the Canon 60D and up doesn't feel like that, which is why I usually recommend that line instead.
 
F

Futureman

Member
My first digital cam was the Rebel XT (this was like 2005 or so). I hated digital because of that camera. Soon upgraded to the 5D though and never looked back.
 
A

Astral/H3X

Member
captive said:
how is the image quality? i also dont care about the AF for my use 95% of the time its going to be at infinity.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind you'll want to test your lens out to make sure it doesn't have any defects on it. I've got the Sony E version of this lens, and while I love it, it has a bit of a lens decentering issue where the extreme left side of the frame is a bit "smeared" because of it. Still great, just need to shoot keeping that in mind. Just make sure you get a good one, because the good ones are great.

EDIT: Speaking of which I should really get this fixed while I still have time...
 
F

Futureman

Member
Those early digital cameras were terrible with highlights. I did not like the "look" of the photos the XT produced. Basically as the dynamic range increased I was then fine with digital. I was also realllly inexperienced at that time so that probably had something to do with it.

I wasn't a big film buff or anything, just toyed around with my dad's old film camera and really liked the look of my photos. So moving to digital at that time was jarring.

I just upgraded from a 5D II to IV and I almost feel like it's as big as a leap from XT --> 5D for me. Head over heels with the image quality/dynamic range on this camera.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
Futureman said:
Those early digital cameras were terrible with highlights. I did not like the "look" of the photos the XT produced. Basically as the dynamic range increased I was then fine with digital. I was also realllly inexperienced at that time so that probably had something to do with it.

I wasn't a big film buff or anything, just toyed around with my dad's old film camera and really liked the look of my photos. So moving to digital at that time was jarring.

I just upgraded from a 5D II to IV and I almost feel like it's as big as a leap from XT --> 5D for me. Head over heels with the image quality/dynamic range on this camera.
Click to expand...
Yeah sometimes it's surprising what either changing sensor size or moving up to something newer will do. I love the look of full frame over crop sensor, but I don't hate crop to be honest. I just love the boost to dynamic range though.
 
R

RuGalz

Member
Joelstinton14 said:
Anyone been using the Xpro - 2?
Click to expand...

I don't own it but used it a few times. I don't know. I think each camera manufacture's AF has a rhythm to it. Canon/Nikon's higher end cameras are quite good that people don't think as much about it. Once I learn the rhythm I'm usually fine adopting any camera so AF capability never really bothers me. I mean some people still shoots birds in flight with MF...
 
S

Skel1ingt0n

I can't *believe* these lazy developers keep making file sizes so damn large. Btw, how does technology work?
Joelstinton14 said:
Anyone been using the Xpro - 2?

I've been using it a bit more often than usual lately, feeling a bit more creative, but i'm having inconsistencies with the Auto focus.

I seem to be missing quite a few shots, even in very good light where i expect sharp images all the time. It can produce some outstanding, sharp images, but from time to time it just misses.

I've been playing around with various autofocus modes , experimenting with the viewfinder and auto focus modes and i still seem to miss some shots. I mainly shoot in Single shot/point modes so i find it frustrating that i'm missing simple shots.

Perhaps i am being too picky? and the machine will miss some shots from time to time, but coming from a d700 it is something i never really thought about. I probably missed some shots on that too but it never bugged me. Even in the early days of using the Fuji i didn't feel i had too much of an issue with it.

I guess it is something i've noticed and i tend to get quite obsessive when i notice some is off ( obsessed over a week that my wii u gamepad analogue sticks were off ha). I also come from quite a static and considered shooting style (medium format) so perhaps i'm a bit too tense when shooting with a "handheld" camera and not quite relaxed when shooting.

Or that i just need to learn the intricacies of the camera. When to use single point, when to use Zone, when to use the EVF etc.

The camera did get knocked a foot high rest on to a hard floor last week (tiles), but it seemed pretty innocuous fall, rather than a big one, i don't think it would have damaged anything. I have had a lot worse in the past.
Click to expand...

There's a BIG Firmware 2.0 releasing this month, that will supposedly drastically increase the AF performance. Just fyi.

Otherwise, yeah, I'm kind of with you. I, personally, haven't used an XP2 (I shoot an X-T1, and have used the XT-2, which has the best AF in the line), and it's definitely not there with the best from Canon or Nikon. Every year, a new camera says it has the "fastest, bestest, most amazingist" mirrorless AF, but ultimately disappoints. They're just not up there with $4K+ Cannon/Nikon bodies and lenses.

Then again, pretty much all the biggest players (XP2, XT2, A300, A7 MkII, upcoming EM1 MkII) come in about half the price or so.

But yeah, short answer, I definitely have to be more "attentive" to my focus with Fuji. Love everything else - but that's definitely a weakness. I find myself taking A LOT more "just in case" shots as extras, hoping that if the first isn't as in good of focus as I think, the second or fifth shot might be a bit better.
 
F

Futureman

Member
Anyone use Godox flashes? Seem to be reviewed pretty well.

I can get the V860II-C plus wireless transmitter for ~$250.

compare that to ~$550 if I stick w/ Canon's 430 EX III + ST-R3-ET. Plus the V860II-C is closer to the Canon 600 EX-RT which is $500 itself.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
JadedWriter said:
Am I used to a camera feeling a certain way or does the Canon Rebel series feel like cheap plastic toys? I was just walking around Times Square taking pictures and somebody asked me to take their picture and he handed me his camera and it just felt..."cheap." I'm not knocking the user or the image quality of said camera or anything and I was happy to take the mans picture, but sometimes going from camera to camera they really do start to feel different from what you're used to.
Click to expand...

You get what you pay for. Consumer grade Nikons feel similarly too.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
captive said:
how is the image quality? i also dont care about the AF for my use 95% of the time its going to be at infinity.
Click to expand...

Conversation I had with a friend last night:

Him: Hey do you know where to get another lens cap for the Rokinon 14mm?

Me: I dunno since it's a non-standard design, you might have to custom order it from the manufacturer. Might be a pain in the ass.

Him: Yeah. Fuck, this thing is so damn cheap I could just buy a brand new one.

Me and Him: *laughs*
 
finalflame

finalflame

Banned
Thanks for all the suggestions guys. I think I have decided I want to go FF and my choices are now down to either the D610 or spending the extra $$ on a D750. Also think I'll go with primes, specifically the 20mm f/1.8, and I'll also have my current 50mm f/1.8.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
finalflame said:
Thanks for all the suggestions guys. I think I have decided I want to go FF and my choices are now down to either the D610 or spending the extra $$ on a D750. Also think I'll go with primes, specifically the 20mm f/1.8, and I'll also have my current 50mm f/1.8.
Click to expand...
Spend the extra on the 750. From what I've heard it has a better iso range and a snappier AF system. I have a D600 and I love it, but it's either the lens or the AF system on the camera that tends to hunt around a lot.
 
K

Krauser Kat

Member
A6000- 24mp APSC decent low light 500 bucks
A6300 - 24mp APSC better low light fast as fuck 4k recording 900
A6500 - 24mp APSC better low light faster then fuck 4k recording, 5axis IBIS touch lcd. 1400

They work pretty good as a tier of cameras. I dont mind the new 6500 being announced.
 
I

itsbenoclock

Member
Liking the look of the a6500, might have to get one for myself. I don't see the problem with quick updates from Sony, they're adding in useful new tech in quick succession which is great imo, obviously the a6300 was just rushed to market to fill the gap. Just appreciate the immense amount of tech jammed into that tiny body.
 
J

JadedWriter

Member
itsbenoclock said:
Liking the look of the a6500, might have to get one for myself. I don't see the problem with quick updates from Sony, they're adding in useful new tech in quick succession which is great imo, obviously the a6300 was just rushed to market to fill the gap. Just appreciate the immense amount of tech jammed into that tiny body.
Click to expand...
That's probably more my problem than anything else. They rushed the 6300 instead of just having the 6500 replace the 6000.
 
S

SiDCrAzY

Member
I'm still within the return window for my a6300 and this one has everything I was missing, but it's just a tiny bit over my budget. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

NeoGAF Photography & Camera Gear Community
|OT| 5 6 7 8 9
400
42K
professionala replied
Top Bottom