Jump to content

tom_elessar

Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. <p>Sell it on Craigslist. For $500 – $800, someone will be able to do something useful with it, especially if they put an SSD in as a boot drive. 256GB SSDs are now under $200.</p>
  2. <blockquote> <p>I will be shooting mostly landscape and outdoor photos</p> </blockquote> <p>Presumably then shallow depth of field will be less important and in most circumstances you'll have abundant light and/or a tripod. Size and weight will probably be an issue, since you'll be carrying them long distances. </p> <p>Given that I would choose DX, and I'd also be tempted by a mirrorless camera: M43 currently has the best wide-angle assortment. </p>
  3. <blockquote> <p>Any Oly OMD model plus the 45mm f1.8 and/or 25mm f1.8 would deliver very good image quality with extremely fast AF and responsiveness.</p> </blockquote> <p>That would be (<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/91262622@N02/">and is!</a>) my preference as well (especially given cost as a consideration), but it's really hard to fault any of the choices. There are varied responses because there are many good options. <br> I doubt many people are going to experience their camera/system choice as the limiting factor in the quality of their work. </p>
  4. <blockquote> <p>+1, its nonsense to make video with a still camera</p> </blockquote> <p>I very rarely use this sort of language, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5D_Mark_II#Independent_film_and_television">but that comment is inane</a>. It is nonsense to ignore the capabilities and possibilities of any given system, or hardware, or software. </p>
  5. <blockquote> <p>why bother with yesteryear lenses? lost in time lenses.</p> </blockquote> <p>1. They are <em>often</em> more cost effective than contemporary lenses. <br> 2. You may get a different "look" from older lenses. Many modern photographers want to stand out from a sea of people using 24 – 70mm or good 35 / 50 / 85mm primes. <br> 3. That being said read http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/the-glass-in-the-path-sensor-stacks-and-adapted-lenses .</p>
  6. <blockquote> <p>Okay Bruce. Basic family photography. Walking around while travelling stuff. Surfing. Parties and sometimes drunk or in bars.</p> </blockquote> <p>Let me second Jim Larson's suggestion of the Sony RX100. I have one. <br> The Panasonic GX7 + 20mm f 1.7 lens would yield higher image quality and and slightly larger physical size but blows your budget. A used RX100 I should be $400. </p>
  7. <p>Is blue better, or is black better? Is it worth going from blue to black?</p>
  8. <blockquote> <p>My impression, including after downloading some RAF raw files for both the X-A1 and X-M1, converted to DNG: There isn't enough difference to justify the vehemence of some debates. They're both very good, and only slightly different.</p> </blockquote> <p>This appears to be true of 98% of the debates one sees on photography forums. I'm shooting with an Olympus E-M5 and am skeptical that there are substantial differences between it and any of its mirrorless peers, including APS peers. </p>
  9. <p>I'm using a <a href="http://www.amazon.com/MeFoto-A1350Q1R-Roadtrip-Travel-Tripod/dp/B009A17FNU?ie=UTF8&tag=thstsst-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957">MeFoto Road Trip tripod</a> with an Olympus E-M5, and something in the MeFoto class (around $200) appears to be <a href="http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1264826">as cheap as you can go</a> and still get reasonable support.</p> <p>I went through the same process you did and went through two cheap plastic tripods before getting this one. </p>
×
×
  • Create New...