-
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
BigWeather
Member
Does anyone have a recommendation for a decent flatbed scanner? I have thousands of pre-digital era prints and several hundred slides that I'd like to archive. I was looking at the Epson Perfection V600 but not sure I want to buy into using their software, etc. Would be nice to be able to just scan to a memory card or something. Anyhow, speed is important, decent quality scans, ability to do slides, and ability to do multiple pictures at once (so it'd have to find the edges and crop them, I guess?). Thanks! Oh, price-wise up to around $250.
QualityPixel
Banned
I have an Epson V500, I've never actually used it to scan a print but it should be great at doing that (it's also ok for scanning film).
Do you have photoshop? There is an automation built in that will allow you to take whole scans with multiple photos and it will crop and straiten them automatically.
File > automate > crop and straiten photos (I think)
Do you have photoshop? There is an automation built in that will allow you to take whole scans with multiple photos and it will crop and straiten them automatically.
File > automate > crop and straiten photos (I think)
Subv3rsi0n
Member
I have a Fuji X-T1 that died due to water exposure (I'm an idiot). I sent it in to Fuji for repairs but they wouldn't repair the water damage, so they want to charge $900 for a replacement X-T1.
I'm looking for a non-DSLR that takes excellent vacation photos. Mirrorless is about the maximum size/weight I'm looking for. Which camera would you guys recommend sub-$1000? Should I go with another X-T1, or would the Sony RX-100 IV or V be a better choice if I'm just planning on using the camera for lightweight trip photography? I'm open to any recommendations.
I'm looking for a non-DSLR that takes excellent vacation photos. Mirrorless is about the maximum size/weight I'm looking for. Which camera would you guys recommend sub-$1000? Should I go with another X-T1, or would the Sony RX-100 IV or V be a better choice if I'm just planning on using the camera for lightweight trip photography? I'm open to any recommendations.
Astral/H3X
Member
Lightweight trip photography? Congrats you just bought an RX100.
Subv3rsi0n
Member
Cool - which version would you recommend?
Astral/H3X
Member
TBH, the newest one you have the budget for. They basically always get better, but if the features of a newer one don't entice you to drop the extra cash for it, then that's a largely personal thing.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/sony-rx100-v-vs-rx100-iv
This goes over the enhancements of the 5 vs the 4.
You can find the Mk 4 at around $700 used, but if having 40x slowmo sounds like your cup of tea, then who knows?
Keep in mind a lot of things can sound really amazing, but then you end up not really using them because it's just not something you need often.
Subv3rsi0n
Member
Great, I really appreciate the info. Thanks!
VisceralBowl
Member
The RX1R mk2 sounds like an amazing little camera for travel. That price though...
Astral/H3X
Member
I mean, it is a full frame pocket camera.
Amazon has them for 15% cash back right now if you have an amazon store card.
VisceralBowl
Member
I know! The amount of stuff they crammed into such a tiny package is crazy.
Astral/H3X
Member
I wish they'd make an APSC version, but then that'd cost $2000 to avoid competing with the RX100. :/
Think of it this way, it's like a Leica, except 1/5th of the cost, and twice the sensor and features.
RoyaleDuke
Banned
I don't know what to do with it but I have an old Minolta SRT202 Professional with a ROKKOR X 55mm Lens as well as a couple other lenses(with cases and lens caps).
Mind you this is a 35mm film camera...in my opinion one of the finest, I did some of my best work with it.
Does anyone know how much they are worth?
Given how bad things are for my family I have to pretty much start selling things.
It makes me horrendously sad deep down, I love this camera...
Mind you this is a 35mm film camera...in my opinion one of the finest, I did some of my best work with it.
Does anyone know how much they are worth?
Given how bad things are for my family I have to pretty much start selling things.
It makes me horrendously sad deep down, I love this camera...
Sadly not much, if its mint $50? depends on what the other lenses are. Its a buyers market for vintage film equipment. I would really keep it unless you absolutely must sell it.
RoyaleDuke
Banned
It's worth more than that to me, I will keep it.
JadedWriter
Member
Between an 810 and a 750 what would everybody choose on here and why?
D810.
primarily shoot studio, resolution is king for retouching and print work. ISO64 is amazing under studio lights. Better button layout, more directly accessible settings.
1/8000 shutter is also nice.
What are you using the camera for?
i was close.
anyway, d810 because its a better camera. Landscapes resolution is king because i love to print big.
What? Didn't know that. I know they usually lock out 1/8000th on cheaper models, but the D750 isn't even the cheapest FF and it's already stupid that the $1500 D610 doesn't have it. Maybe there's some technical reason, but I don't understand it when some 80s SLRs had 1/8000th and in the 90s some even had 1/12000th. D610/D750 flash synch speed is 1/200th so it seems like smaller spacing between the curtain should be possible.
JadedWriter
Member
Events, portraits and street photography would be the main usage. Doing research now for when I get the raise bonus. I don't think the 750 is that much beyond the 600 I have.
Pretty sure it's the same jank shutter/mirror design in the 600/750.
It does have a slightly newer AF system but I couldn't really tell much difference side by side vs 810 in non scientific tests. Much better than the 600 series. That is the main difference IMHO.
© 2014 KenRockwell says he prefers the 750 so always do the opposite.
The AF is much better in low light. Other than that yeah they are pretty much the same.
D750 is also hybrid plastic/carbon fiber/magnesium where the 810 is solid magnesium body. Heavier but tougher.
Personally I find it's very tough to go back to the semi-pro (or gasp consumer) DSLR bodies after getting used to the pro layout. It's not that much smaller and lighter, I would rather have a mirrorless or just take iPhone shots if I don't want to lug around the 810.
Events (weddings?) are another story though if you are walking around alot every once counts.
I guess. I just struggle to believe it would be so hard to bump that to 1/8000th.
Lol
Does he think the 9MP JPEGs from the D810 are too big?
JadedWriter
Member
I consider the 7100 and 600 I have to be semi-pro and I'm fine with those, but my god the 3xxx and 5xxx series feel like toys compared to my usual cameras and the 810 felt legit and comfortable actually. The grip is way more robust. I don't have big hands, but it felt more than comfortable when I was experimenting with it at B&H a couple of days ago. See now I was looking at mirrorless but at the same time I'm thinking about how much I'd have to spend just to get my lens set up to the same standards and holy fuck it would be expensive only to save probably not so much weight after I'm done throwing an actual real lens, a grip and loading in extra batteries. I have covered parades with one camera and half the hassle of that was the constant lens switching and I've been fine enough with my latest couple of events with two bodies, I actually carry exactly what I need instead of everything into one bag. I bring a wide to telephoto, 85 and a 70-200 now, though I think next event's going to be weird as fuck cause it'll be my 7100, 600, 18-35, 24-70 and probably the 70-200. Though I think the 7100 and 18-35 combo is just my flash group shot camera these days. That thing at 1.8 is just inaccurate as fuck and I don't exactly like the high iso capability on the 7100 that much. The 600 is my natural light candid shot body now. Though I will admit my 7100 with the Sigma 18-35 gave me some excellent shots while I was covering my outdoor parades, I just think once you go indoors and start having to iso ride it gets a little bit sketchy.
The 7xxx series has 1/8000th shutter speed and I have no idea why the 6xx and 750 series don't. Is it because the sensor is too big to allow a shutter mechanism like that or is it just to not cannibalize the D810 sales?
Astral/H3X
Member
I think it might have something to do with the sensor size... I know the A7 series has worse burst performance than the A6000, even though they are the same MP in a lot of cases, and the only thing I can think of is that it's an effect of having a larger sensor to run a current through, but I really couldn't say.
I think it's segmenting their products. 1/8000th is higher end. Similar to how Canon could give the 6D a better focusing system or the 5DmkIV proper 4K. I'm guessing it is also generally a niche for those needing to shoot wide open in daylight or use flash outdoors (synch).
No technical reason that I know of. The original A7 shutter could do it and had slower flash synch speed with electronic shutter turned off. All faster speeds are made by narrowing the gap between the curtains.
Shutters could probably be faster if there was demand. There have been full frame shutters with 1/300th flash synch and the first Canon 1D had an APS-H sensor, but used a fast full frame shutter which meant 1/500th flash synch speed and 1/16000th.
No technical reason that I know of. The original A7 shutter could do it and had slower flash synch speed with electronic shutter turned off. All faster speeds are made by narrowing the gap between the curtains.
Shutters could probably be faster if there was demand. There have been full frame shutters with 1/300th flash synch and the first Canon 1D had an APS-H sensor, but used a fast full frame shutter which meant 1/500th flash synch speed and 1/16000th.
It just depends on the shutter mechanism they choose to use for different products. FF shutter can go up to 1/8000 no problem. FPS, otoh, is harder to match APSC due to size but if you put some $ in it, it's perfectly do-able. So it just depends on how they want to segment their products.
JadedWriter
Member
So I happen to randomly stumble upon the price of the RX1R II while on Nikon Rumors. I see an Amazon ad thinking it's a fucking god damn joke and this motherfucking thing is 4 motherfucking grand!!!!!!
VisceralBowl
Member
Did you think my post was a joke!? lol
Astral/H3X
Member
Full. Frame. Pocket. Camera.
I mean, it's a ludicrously priced product, but it's still the cheapest full frame camera you can put in your pocket.
I mean shit, the only other one I'm aware of is the Leica.
To be fair it isn't really that much cheaper than the Leica. >_>
JadedWriter
Member
I could get two full frame dslrs for that price...granted I don't kill my back with the the RXIIR, but holy fuck I get more coverage. It would be a great travel camera and all, but after buying that you probably can't travel no further than the fucking bathroom.
For the low low price of 4K I can only shoot at the 35mm focal length...
Astral/H3X
Member
And for the $1000 that gets you an RX100, I could get an A6000 and two lenses.
The point is it's small as hell, there's value in that to a lot of people.
Hell, if price wasn't an object for me, I'd buy one in a heartbeat -- it's so small that I'd never worry about having or not having a camera again, and I can work with 35mm lens. And, you know, knowing I've got a Full Frame power in my pocket would be amazing.
Granted, at that price point, it actually makes a Leica look competitive AHAHHAHAHA, but it's still a really powerful piece of equipment to just *have*.
Some people shoot the vast majority of their photos with a single prime lens, and if you're someone who shoots primarily or entirely at 35mm (which is common enough for street photography), then the RX1R-II is basically the perfect compact camera. Hell, with a full-frame 42MP sensor and a crazy sharp lens you could probably crop down to portrait-length shots and still get pretty good results.
I personally use a Panasonic GM1 + Olympus 25mm F/1.8 for the considerable majority of my photography these days, and if Sony came out with a 50mm version of the RX1 series (and I had a lot more money than I do now) it would be pretty much the perfect camera for me.
JadedWriter
Member
Don't worry I get the purpose behind it I just find the price of it obscene. The full frame is no laughing matter but god damn you can go a long way buying almost anything for 4 grand, granted I'm pretty price conscious. If I had the money I'd probably get one as well.
Yeah I imagine a street photographer would be right at home with this thing, but that would have to be one rich street photographer. I know there's a market for it, the continued existence of Leica proves this.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
What's a good DSLR to get or what's a good site for reviews and such to pick one?
JadedWriter
Member
What's your budget?
jongkookie
Member
This may have been brought up before but does anybody have the 28-70 Sony kit lens?
I'm seeing some on fleabay and other stores for less than $250... and I'm kinda wondering if it's a good purchase or not.
I'd go for the f/4 Zeiss or f/2.8 G Master but I don't think I'd be using them enough to warrant the price tag so I'll pass on them lol.
I'm seeing some on fleabay and other stores for less than $250... and I'm kinda wondering if it's a good purchase or not.
I'd go for the f/4 Zeiss or f/2.8 G Master but I don't think I'd be using them enough to warrant the price tag so I'll pass on them lol.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
$500-$1000 preferably. Looking for best bang for the buck.
JadedWriter
Member
What form size and sensor size? DSLR? Full Frame? Crop? MFT? You can find pretty much a good mirrorless from about 2 years ago for a grand...gets tricky if you have no lenses though.
Astral/H3X
Member
From what I hear, it's essentially a kit lens -- good, but not great, convenient, light, and cheap. Almost certainly worth $250, at any rate, as long as it fits what you need.
VisceralBowl
Member
I had it for a while a little over a year ago. It's not bad but also nothing special. If you want that focal range for that price it's definitely the best option.
jongkookie
Member
Alright, in that case I'm gonna rent one out first instead of buying it lol.
Aperturent.com opened up a Dallas branch and it's literally 10 mins away from my office and they've got the kit lens for rent, $20 for 3 days? I'm in haha.
One of the main reasons why I'm wanting it is for AF as I've got a number of Christmas parties to attend this year and I sure as hell don't need a Zeiss or G Master glass for drunken festivities.
Aperturent.com opened up a Dallas branch and it's literally 10 mins away from my office and they've got the kit lens for rent, $20 for 3 days? I'm in haha.
One of the main reasons why I'm wanting it is for AF as I've got a number of Christmas parties to attend this year and I sure as hell don't need a Zeiss or G Master glass for drunken festivities.
JadedWriter
Member
Giving what I know about parties the light will be shit and I hate shooting anything like this with variable aperture lenses. Yes you can use flash, but I'm not the hugest fan of flash unless I really need to use it or when I have to do group pictures.
JadedWriter
Member
I have that stuff, never touch my pop up flash. Just another thing for me to deal with during events. I use it fine enough, though I hate when I have too much flash or not enough flash with my aperture too...low? F10 isn't the best setting. On top of that it tends to kill the background. I like it fine enough for portrait shoots though unless I don't have enough space for a off camera flash set up.
Astral/H3X
Member
They *do* make that FE 50mm 1.8, that's $200 or so and should be good for the party low lightness. Though, I'd only recommend it if they put out a FW update for it to improve how the aperture works... At release (and possibly now) when you set your aperture, it stops it down even without pressing the shutter... so then if you stop it down to F3.5 it physically stops the lens down full time until you pick some other aperture.
EDIT: I see people mentioning that the AF got "faster" with an update... Given the way the lens would focus, it seems to me that it's likely they fixed that issue, since MILC focus slower in the dark.
Yoooo flash is amazing, you just need to be able to point it up at the ceiling.
JadedWriter
Member
You ever work an event with a high ceiling? Don't let my complaining allow you to think that I walk into an event and come out of it with no pictures. I've covered awards ceremonies, a graduation, numerous parades and retirement parties in numerous lighting conditions and walk out with enough shots to keep my employers happy enough to send me out on more events. I think I covered something with a local press photographer and got better shots than he did. I just like to shoot my events without flash unless I absolutely have to because I prefer my subjects not knowing when I'm taking a picture, that's mostly why. I prefer candid shots instead of posed staged shots. Mirrorless cameras focusing slower in the dark isn't exactly a ringing endorsement attribute for people that shoot low light events, I guess stuff like the A7SII is a lot better in that regard than the older MILC cameras.
Astral/H3X
Member
I mean, I never said that... But if this guy's going to a family party or some such, odds are they don't have 30 foot ceilings, and an upward pointing flash can help out a lot with indoors, in home photos. The thing people fuck up is, is pointing it at their subjects.
What I'm talking about as far as them focusing slowly is really only an issue with either that particular lens, or with older bodies. (It's not just A7SII with PDAF, the entire A7II series has it, as well as the 6300 and 6500)
Sony systems have PDAF, just the same as DSLRs, but this particular lens, the 50 1.8, doesn't do PDAF, it's contrast only (a large part of why it is cheap, I guess), and on top of that, the lens by default happens to stop down to whatever is on the menu, all the time, instead of just when taking the photo as you would expect.
I've used a 30 2.8 that was contrast only, with an a6000 for events and had no problems. Shots took me a smidge longer, but I'd imagine a FF 50 1.8 won't have any issues if they did fix that issue.