Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DSLR or prosumer

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by \\ brad // View Post



    This is both way too simplistic and totally inaccurate; the best low light cameras are made by Sony and Nikon (with sony-made sensors). Check DXOmark: http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings
    In your opinion of course.[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial][/FONT][/COLOR]
    [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial][/FONT][/COLOR]
    [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial][/FONT][/COLOR]
    [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial][/FONT][/COLOR]
    [COLOR=#ff0000]Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds[/COLOR]. Albert Einstein

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by jim69 View Post
      In your opinion of course.

      DXOmark runs lab tests to compare cameras, sensors and lenses. So it's not just an opinion, it's a fact, at this current point in time.

      One of Sony's full frame mirrorless cameras can actually pretty much see in the dark with ridiculously high ISO capabilities. A moonlit scene can actually be filmed (so no lengthy exposure trickery possible) as if it were daylight (obviously not to the best quality, but still).

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by El_Goretto View Post
        DXOmark runs lab tests to compare cameras, sensors and lenses. So it's not just an opinion, it's a fact, at this current point in time.

        One of Sony's full frame mirrorless cameras can actually pretty much see in the dark with ridiculously high ISO capabilities. A moonlit scene can actually be filmed (so no lengthy exposure trickery possible) as if it were daylight (obviously not to the best quality, but still).
        I stand corrected. However the post from "brad" was pretty impolite. As my original post stated that "this was some time ago".
        [COLOR=#ff0000]Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds[/COLOR]. Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by jim69 View Post
          I stand corrected. However the post from "brad" was pretty impolite. As my original post stated that "this was some time ago".
          Fair enough. I'm not speaking for Brad, of course, but I understood his comment as being directed at the saying itself rather than at you directly.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by jim69 View Post
            I stand corrected. However the post from "brad" was pretty impolite. As my original post stated that "this was some time ago".
            Don't take it so personally, you were told something inaccurate, no rudeness was intended toward you.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by jim69 View Post
              I stand corrected. However the post from "brad" was pretty impolite. As my original post stated that "this was some time ago".
              Didn't find Brad's post impolite at all. It was informative at best.

              Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt or speak for Brad, but just a bit curious and trying to understand behaviors, as am new to the forum.

              Comment


              • #52
                i would say... if you want to buy a camera, you should know what you want to use it for, is it leisure? (travel, quick & easy to use... for that i could suggest fuji and olympus brands) those two brands are actually pretty good so u can also use it for work.

                If you wanted to "look" and "feel" more professionals.. you can buy dslr.. (nikon, canon) I personally use Canon 7D, because the durability and weather sealing of the body, and I use 24-70 L lens because it has quite nice color depth despite the weight, but then again... I uses it for a product photography.

                Comment


                • #53
                  I've been learning about my new camera..taking pictures, learning about the setting as well as the basic photography (the usual...aperture, exposure, shutter speed, etc). About a week now...and the winner is: Sony A6000! I had my frustration on the 2nd day because it seemed overwhelming, but got over the hump and I think I got a few nice pictures out of it. I'll probably try to take a couple just for this forum (I'd rather keep my other photos out for privacy).

                  Now, I bought the camera with the Kit lens...Sony 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OSS (if I'm not mistaken). Feels like it's a decent starter kit, but I wish that the F range is a bit wider and the zoom just a tad wider too (say even like the Sony 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 FE OSS) or if I had the choice or had I known better, I'd probably see if I could get the SEL1855 18-55mm as the Kit lens although that 5mm wouldn't make a difference at all. I don't necessarily need like a extra long zoom lens, just maybe up to 70mm would help greatly (while still maintaining the pretty compact size hopefully).

                  Another one that's pretty nice is the 18-104 f4 G OSS, but problem is, it's a fix aperture (so my newbie understanding...the aperture is fixed..this would interfere if I needed to do some blurring effect, correct?)

                  Would it be worth it for me to probably get a lens adapter and have a wider selection of lens available?

                  I know there are no such thing as a 'perfect-all-around' lens...but at least I'd like to have a lens that would capture about 75% of my photos as changing lenses seem to be cumbersome.

                  Photo style so far: Portrait, Party/event coverage (haven't done yet), family portraits, some landscape.

                  Don't hate me yet...my criteria: Lens must be under $300 (unless maybe I'm comfortable enough buying like a really really good used lens..maybe the budget is smaller).

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by kjeldoran View Post
                    i would say... if you want to buy a camera, you should know what you want to use it for, is it leisure? (travel, quick & easy to use... for that i could suggest fuji and olympus brands) those two brands are actually pretty good so u can also use it for work.

                    If you wanted to "look" and "feel" more professionals.. you can buy dslr.. (nikon, canon) I personally use Canon 7D, because the durability and weather sealing of the body, and I use 24-70 L lens because it has quite nice color depth despite the weight, but then again... I uses it for a product photography.
                    Hi Kjek- thought I'd reply to your post also...yes, Canon does feel more professional..even when I held the 1200D at Best Denki, it definitely felt much sturdier and nicer grip to my palm than my Sony, but once I'm used to the compact size, the Sony isn't too bad at all, after all, it has performed quite nice under low light condition too and great overall picture quality to me.

                    I don't travel much, but if I do, I'd like to be kind to my shoulder and bring a nice, lightweight, compact camera that packs a punch. I don't do photography as a professional (would be fun to do though some time in the future), although I started to do more of the post processing/photoshop/digital imaging (more like family album, wedding pic post processing(mine), etc).

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Banana72 View Post
                      I've been learning about my new camera..taking pictures, learning about the setting as well as the basic photography (the usual...aperture, exposure, shutter speed, etc). About a week now...and the winner is: Sony A6000! I had my frustration on the 2nd day because it seemed overwhelming, but got over the hump and I think I got a few nice pictures out of it. I'll probably try to take a couple just for this forum (I'd rather keep my other photos out for privacy).

                      Now, I bought the camera with the Kit lens...Sony 16-50mm f3.5-5.6 OSS (if I'm not mistaken). Feels like it's a decent starter kit, but I wish that the F range is a bit wider and the zoom just a tad wider too (say even like the Sony 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 FE OSS) or if I had the choice or had I known better, I'd probably see if I could get the SEL1855 18-55mm as the Kit lens although that 5mm wouldn't make a difference at all. I don't necessarily need like a extra long zoom lens, just maybe up to 70mm would help greatly (while still maintaining the pretty compact size hopefully).

                      Another one that's pretty nice is the 18-104 f4 G OSS, but problem is, it's a fix aperture (so my newbie understanding...the aperture is fixed..this would interfere if I needed to do some blurring effect, correct?)

                      Would it be worth it for me to probably get a lens adapter and have a wider selection of lens available?

                      I know there are no such thing as a 'perfect-all-around' lens...but at least I'd like to have a lens that would capture about 75% of my photos as changing lenses seem to be cumbersome.

                      Photo style so far: Portrait, Party/event coverage (haven't done yet), family portraits, some landscape.

                      Don't hate me yet...my criteria: Lens must be under $300 (unless maybe I'm comfortable enough buying like a really really good used lens..maybe the budget is smaller).
                      The 28-70mm FE is for full frame e-mount Sony cameras and as such not compatible with yours. But what's more, you have a cropped sensor (as opposed to full frame), which means that your 16-50mm is roughly equivalent to the 28-70mm you mentioned. With a crop factor of 1.5, your 16-50 is equivalent to a 24-75mm full frame. In fact, you have longer focal length ("zoom") on your current lens than if you would somehow be able to put the FE on it.

                      The 18-104 F4 is a fixed focal length which means the largest aperture doesn't change depending on the focal length.

                      So in your 18-55, when at 18mm, the max aperture is f3.5 and at 55mm it's significantly reduced at f5.6. Whereas with the 18—104, at 55 you would be able to get f4, meaning a wider aperture and thus a more pronounced blurring effect. To get the max blurring effects t, you would shoot at 104 at f4 (caveat, would also depend on minimum focusing distance, techbically). So even if you would be able to open a bit wider at 18mm, you wouldn't see the difference in "bluriness" at a wide angle, but for all the other focal lengths, the 18-104 is definitely superior.

                      Generally speaking, fixed focal length lenses are superior to their variable counterparts.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by El_Goretto View Post
                        The 28-70mm FE is for full frame e-mount Sony cameras and as such not compatible with yours. But what's more, you have a cropped sensor (as opposed to full frame), which means that your 16-50mm is roughly equivalent to the 28-70mm you mentioned. With a crop factor of 1.5, your 16-50 is equivalent to a 24-75mm full frame. In fact, you have longer focal length ("zoom") on your current lens than if you would somehow be able to put the FE on it.

                        The 18-104 F4 is a fixed focal length which means the largest aperture doesn't change depending on the focal length.

                        So in your 18-55, when at 18mm, the max aperture is f3.5 and at 55mm it's significantly reduced at f5.6. Whereas with the 18—104, at 55 you would be able to get f4, meaning a wider aperture and thus a more pronounced blurring effect. To get the max blurring effects t, you would shoot at 104 at f4 (caveat, would also depend on minimum focusing distance, techbically). So even if you would be able to open a bit wider at 18mm, you wouldn't see the difference in "bluriness" at a wide angle, but for all the other focal lengths, the 18-104 is definitely superior.

                        Generally speaking, fixed focal length lenses are superior to their variable counterparts.
                        Thanks for your reply EG, so aside from the advantage of being able to do a Bokeh effect, what would be the disadvantage of having a lens with a fix aperture?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          No disadvantage. A fixed aperture zoom lens is superior to a non fixed aperture lens and usually more expensive.

                          All it means is that the max aperture is constant across the whole focal length. But you can shoot at f11 too if you want at any focal length.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Banana72 View Post

                            I know there are no such thing as a 'perfect-all-around' lens...but at least I'd like to have a lens that would capture about 75% of my photos as changing lenses seem to be cumbersome.

                            Photo style so far: Portrait, Party/event coverage (haven't done yet), family portraits, some landscape.

                            Don't hate me yet...my criteria: Lens must be under $300 (unless maybe I'm comfortable enough buying like a really really good used lens..maybe the budget is smaller).
                            Originally posted by Banana72 View Post
                            Thanks for your reply EG, so aside from the advantage of being able to do a Bokeh effect, what would be the disadvantage of having a lens with a fix aperture?
                            My family uses Nikon DSLRs, so I can only talk from its perspective. Your use is similar to mine. (I share it with my dad who takes it overseas)

                            For overall use, budget and minimum carry, its you can get something like a 18-105mm / 18-140mm / 18-200mm that covers the main range of zooms. And a phone with a good camera as backup.

                            In our small messenger sling bag, we tend to carry 3 lenses, the 18-200mm, a 50mm 1.8/f, and a ultra wide (cant remember the numbers suddenly).
                            Gets a bit cram and I sometimes drop the zoom lens and ultra wide lens, and just use the 50mm with a 18-105 when I'm concerned about bulk.

                            Get a fixed aperture lens if you can afford it. I had a Tamron 17-50 2.8/F and ITS LOVELY!
                            It just costs more, :S

                            ===============

                            About changing lenses, so depending on your set up, mines a messenger style, with padding all around and 2 vertical padded dividers. Camera goes in middle with one of the lenses, other 2 lenses to the left n right.
                            I can put my camera body facing upwards in the centre, uncap the lens I wanna change, disconnected the existing lens, swap em, connect, and recap. In the dark. I did it a few times for pratice when I too realized I had trouble swapping lenses and needed a solution.
                            This way, I dont need a platform (table, chair whatever) and just need to be standing still. Useful thing to be able to do sometimes at weddings and events.
                            Last edited by Chilled.; 15-10-15, 15:09.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by El_Goretto View Post
                              No disadvantage. A fixed aperture zoom lens is superior to a non fixed aperture lens and usually more expensive.

                              All it means is that the max aperture is constant across the whole focal length. But you can shoot at f11 too if you want at any focal length.
                              This is good to know..learned something new today! Thanks!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Chilled. View Post
                                My family uses Nikon DSLRs, so I can only talk from its perspective. Your use is similar to mine. (I share it with my dad who takes it overseas)

                                For overall use, budget and minimum carry, its you can get something like a 18-105mm / 18-140mm / 18-200mm that covers the main range of zooms. And a phone with a good camera as backup.

                                In our small messenger sling bag, we tend to carry 3 lenses, the 18-200mm, a 50mm 1.8/f, and a ultra wide (cant remember the numbers suddenly).
                                Gets a bit cram and I sometimes drop the zoom lens and ultra wide lens, and just use the 50mm with a 18-105 when I'm concerned about bulk.

                                Get a fixed aperture lens if you can afford it. I had a Tamron 17-50 2.8/F and ITS LOVELY!
                                It just costs more, :S

                                ===============

                                About changing lenses, so depending on your set up, mines a messenger style, with padding all around and 2 vertical padded dividers. Camera goes in middle with one of the lenses, other 2 lenses to the left n right.
                                I can put my camera body facing upwards in the centre, uncap the lens I wanna change, disconnected the existing lens, swap em, connect, and recap. In the dark. I did it a few times for pratice when I too realized I had trouble swapping lenses and needed a solution.
                                This way, I dont need a platform (table, chair whatever) and just need to be standing still. Useful thing to be able to do sometimes at weddings and events.
                                I find myself hardly ever go under 18mm for my shots...and looks like that 18-105mm (or 104mm) keeps popping up in 'best all around' lens review for Sony too.

                                Any of you guys ever purchased a used lens? I think my savings would be significant by buying used..(if i can find a reputable seller..)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X