Gear discussion thread v. "I got some new gear and I got to post it here" - General

Not really, well I wouldn't

i read his gear reviews because they are pretty in depth have you get nice photos of the camera to look at but his attitude stinks and you have to take his words with a pinch of salt

[QUOTE=Zeemlapje;43604745]Because he contradicts himself over and over plus he's a die-hard Nikon fanboy. Once went to look for a 35mm comparison and apparantly all the Nikon optics, even the cheap new ones, are better than a Carl Zeiss. After looking at the comparison shots I left his website and never returned.[/QUOTE] Wow that's a hilarious comparison

if you look at his old articles from like early-mid 2000s he praises digital and how revolutionary it is compared to film but all his more recent ones he talks about how film is the "real raw" and film is the much better format because it always has a higher resolution and more colors and three dimensions of resolution, etc.

[QUOTE]Pixels are completely irrelevant today. 6 to 10 MP is more than enough for anything, so 16 MP is insane, and either of these cameras has way more than that. Looking at charts in your mom's basement you might see a difference, but not in actual pictures printed anything less than five feet on a side. [/QUOTE] -[I] Ken Rockwell[/I]

rip nikon DF praise the fuji god [IMG]http://fujifilm-x.com/teaser140128/common/images/top/main_en_01.jpg[/IMG]

They did take a good look at the Sony A7 in terms of design...

you could say that about any trend frag, i mean p much ever single slr in the 70's had aluminium and black leather bodywork

think fuji nailed that look before sony

[QUOTE=DarkSamus;43602597]I really want to pick up a Fuji X-100. I played around with a friends and it was a lot of fun to shoot with, unlike my D70. I'm not super big into digital because I don't find it to be a lot of fun but this was a pretty different experience. Anyone have any thoughts or other cameras similar? I'd like to do as much research as possible before buying one or one similar.[/QUOTE] The Fuji X100S is a big improvement over the X100 if you liked it, feels higher quality too. If you like that kind of camera, I have a Fuji X-E2 and it's smaller, has an EVF only and is interchangeable lens. It's great. [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=dwt110;43605791]rip nikon DF praise the fuji god [IMG]http://fujifilm-x.com/teaser140128/common/images/top/main_en_01.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] It has an ISO dial, I love this. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/KaC26Vu.jpg[/IMG]

thank fuck cameras are starting to get to the point where you can pick up any body and shoot with in with relative ease. I've been using 7D's at uni since September and I'm still relatively clueless and slow with using them...

$1800 (rumored) for an APS-C body no thanks

[QUOTE=Trogdon;43607260]$1800 (rumored) for an APS-C body no thanks[/QUOTE] Exactly my thoughts, I think this camera should cost at least as much as a Sony A7 or [I]less[/I]. Though the Fuji X lens line-up is pretty awesome, anything but cheap, but very nice still. [editline]20th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Him1411;43606760]you could say that about any trend frag, i mean p much ever single slr in the 70's had aluminium and black leather bodywork[/QUOTE] Ofcourse, how could I forget. But in this case I was talking about digital camera's, not analog stuff.

I don't think it really matters nowadays if you have aps-c or FF unless you're shooting ridiculous ISOs or rely on DoF over composition too much. I'll move on when there's a FF body the size of an X-E2 which isn't a Leica M240.

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;43610541] I'll move on when there's a FF body the size of an X-E2 which isn't a Leica M240.[/QUOTE] There is the Sony A7. It's just a bit bigger because of viewfinder. [IMG]http://admiringlight.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/a7xe2.jpg[/IMG]

Oh man I didn't know it was that small. Maybe my next upgrade when it goes down in price. If I had the money and I had to choose between an A7R and a D800 I'd go for the A7R.

So the X-T1 is €1200 so it'll probably be $1200.

Much more reasonable pricing, that makes sense now.

okay I seriously cannot use this tripod any longer, i tried doing some snowflake macros and the tripod legs literally collapse into each other under the weight of my camera. any tripod recommendations for like $100 max? [editline]21st January 2014[/editline] i keep landing back at this one since it goes really tall and has a monopod built in [URL="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/894451-REG/magnus_pv_7450m_photo_video_tripod_with_monopod.html"]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/894451-REG/magnus_pv_7450m_photo_video_tripod_with_monopod.html[/URL] but its kinda heavy for a tripod

[QUOTE=dwt110;43621495]okay I seriously cannot use this tripod any longer, i tried doing some snowflake macros and the tripod legs literally collapse into each other under the weight of my camera. any tripod recommendations for like $100 max?[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.amazon.com/Dolica-AX620B100-62-Inch-Proline-Tripod/dp/B001D60LG8/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1390337341&sr=8-5&keywords=Tripod[/url] I have this one. It's nice and sturdy and you can weigh it down with the hook under it. Which is pretty nice. It's cheap, good quality, and it comes in different sizes!

Just bid on a Vivitar (Komine) 28mm f/2.8 Olympus OM mount and with a bit of luck I could be rocking that wide-angle again tomorrow.

I hate that dilemma when you find a camera super cool looking but it either has bad specs or doesnt fit your shooting style.

after talking to b&h chat I landed on either something called a vista that looks average, an [URL="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/864136-REG/oben_ac_1421_ba_106_ac_1421_4_section_aluminum_tripod.html"]oben AC1421[/URL] or adorama has a [URL="http://www.adorama.com/US%20%20%20%20604292.html?mode=edu"]used oben AC1410[/URL] any input appreciated

never heard of oben. I have a used manfrotto/bogen and would recommend the same

[QUOTE=FlippR;43622188]never heard of oben. I have a used manfrotto/bogen and would recommend the same[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/755482-REG/Manfrotto_MK394_PQ_Photo_Kit_Aluminum_4.html"]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/755482-REG/Manfrotto_MK394_PQ_Photo_Kit_Aluminum_4.html[/URL] is that good?

I've no idea

If you are only going to use your tripod for photography just get the cheapest one possible, I'm using a 20 euro cheapo LIDL tripod. Only when you plan to do videography you should spend more cash on a tripod that allows for smooth panning.

[QUOTE=Zeemlapje;43622283]If you are only going to use your tripod for photography just get the cheapest one possible[/QUOTE] going from a ~$30 to a ~$125 tripod for photography [B]only[/B], I have noticed a serious change in quality and usability.

my current tripod weighs 1 pound and costs $10 on ebay

[QUOTE=FlippR;43622499]going from a ~$30 to a ~$125 tripod for photography [B]only[/B], I have noticed a serious change in quality and usability.[/QUOTE] depends on gear weight too. my tripod is excellent, but i wouldn't use it for anything heavier than like 4 pounds.