You can find an A6000 for less than $400 used.I hope the new APSC cameras from Sony give me the opportunity to buy a second a6000 body for pennies. Switching lenses is my least favorite part of photography.
You can find an A6000 for less than $400 used.I hope the new APSC cameras from Sony give me the opportunity to buy a second a6000 body for pennies. Switching lenses is my least favorite part of photography.
We must have two very different ideas regarding what a cheap camera is then.
Paying more for an APS-C lens compared to its FF counterpart while having less tele and same equivalent aperture, hmmm....
Sony has always been a company that plays weird 11th dimensional chess with pricing. Not just in cameras. But whatever, their system seems quite popular despite everything.
Remember most people who buy the APSC cameras won't buy that lens anyway
We must have two very different ideas regarding what a cheap camera is then.
Makes sense. I never have any idea what anybody's budgeting is. I have the same concerns with rent and food and such, so I usually make sure I can not be too effected when I buy something.Not having to switch lens is not worth not being able to buy anything else in my life.
I think I got my current a6000 body used for like $290. If I we get down to the $150 range, I'll be seriously considering get a second body.
This is why I think if you want crop sensor mirrorless you go Fuji. Used prices are great and there's a good dedicated lens lineup behind it.Typically I think Sony is overpriced etc etc, but this is one of the cases I am not seeing it. It's a 2.8 constant zoom, I am not sure how cheap they can price it? I also don't think of things as FF (high end therefore should be pricey) vs APS-C (low end therefore should be cheap). But I think most manufacturers do treat the market that way and that's why you have mostly crappy APS-C lenses.
Paying more for an APS-C lens compared to its FF counterpart while having less tele and same equivalent aperture, hmmm....
I'm comparing it to the G24-105 F4 lens, if that wasn't clear.
The kit lens is OK to start with, but I had to get off that thing quickly, I might have 100 photos in my flickr with that thing. Get a nice prime, I have recommendations, but I don't know what you shoot.Managed to get the X-T30 for less than £900 with the 18-55 :D the kit lens is good but not amazing, If I had to pay fiull price for it I would have been annoyed.
I then picked up the Samyang 12mm for £209 which is WIDE, holy crap it's gonna be nice using this lens but very tricky to utilise it. I have started to learn all manual options the Fuji camera offers and I must say it's refreshing, really pleased on how easy it is punch in focus. It's not bad at video as well with no IS.
The kit lens is OK to start with, but I had to get off that thing quickly, I might have 100 photos in my flickr with that thing. Get a nice prime, I have recommendations, but I don't know what you shoot.
The 35 is good, I'm a 23mm person though and 56 or 90 for when I want to get tight.Honestly I just bought it for a Holiday as my Nikon camera was nearly 10 years old. I will get the Fuji 35mm F2 though
I have been through enough cameras to the point where I'm not obsessed with making my Fuji look like my Nikon or my Sony looking like my Fuji. Just embrace the different characteristics and enjoy the images. If you want something more vivid go with Velvia, which is honestly something I would never shoot too often because it's just too garish with anything but landscapes. I mostly just use Astia, Provia, Classic Chrome and sometimes pro neg standard or whatever. I believe you can go into the settings and tweak the film sims to have more contrast and some other things. I honestly just tweak the raws in post, slap a film sim on them on top of that and call it a day. People will complain about them not looking the same as the jpegs and I honestly just don't give a shit about film sim authenticity.Oh an on another note: just wondering if anyone knows of getting a VIVID Nikon look with Fuji bodies?
While I appreciate the film simulation modes for JPEG's I wanted something with a bit more contrast and colour as the film simulation modes look a bit too flat for me:
The 35 is good, I'm a 23mm person though and 56 or 90 for when I want to get tight.
I have been through enough cameras to the point where I'm not obsessed with making my Fuji look like my Nikon or my Sony looking like my Fuji. Just embrace the different characteristics and enjoy the images. If you want something more vivid go with Velvia, which is honestly something I would never shoot too often because it's just too garish with anything but landscapes. I mostly just use Astia, Provia, Classic Chrome and sometimes pro neg standard or whatever. I believe you can go into the settings and tweak the film sims to have more contrast and some other things. I honestly just tweak the raws in post, slap a film sim on them on top of that and call it a day. People will complain about them not looking the same as the jpegs and I honestly just don't give a shit about film sim authenticity.
Is the shot you posted what you want them to look like or....that's from the Fuji you don't like? Either way, Pro Negative Hi is hi contrast and softly saturated. You might like Velvia, it's super saturated. I typically use Classic Chrome. In the Q menu you can set parameters for Highlights and Shadows to achieve the type of contrast you like.
Eterna is so flat that I barely consider it a film sim.I think Pro Neg Hi is my favourite so far.
That pic was taken with the lens I like (12mm) with Eternia? simulation. Picture isn't that ideal due to banding from compression from imgur.
But yeah Pro Neg Hi seems like the way to go for me.
This makes sense. I barely use that film sim, but that's me personally, the 35 is noticeably sharper than the kit lens.Ok, I think Pro Negative High is the closest I think can get to Nikon vivid. I think I need to get the 35mm as that is my usual shooting lens and would help with the sharpness that I desire.
Yeah it really depends on what I'm in the mood to shoot. I'm usually either using the 23 1.4, 56 1.2 or 90F2, rarely the 16-55 and the 50-140. The zooms are very event focused at this point and even still I bring the primes because of low light reasons where I find the Fuji zooms lacking.the 23mm f2 stays on my x-t2 like 75% of the time. I do like the kit lens a lot though.
You can set up presets to include not only the film sim, but also boosting contrast, saturations, blacks and whites. That's what I did to give my Acros a bit more pop.
Acros by far. Monochrome just turns off the color, but Acros accentuates it a bit -- to put it another way, Monochrome leaves me doing a fair bit more post processing work, but Acros pretty much looks exactly like what I want, with maybe adding a bit of contrast.
I assume the fog is on the inside of the element? Any weird humidity issues where you live?
Weird. I take it leaving the lens out by itself in a dry room doesn't solve the issue?
I certainly wouldn't keep a lens with persistent moisture inside of it when delivered. Haven't heard anything like this issue before though.
I take it there's a ton of them?
Holy fucking shit I hate people, this is just sad, manipulative and taints the fuck out of the industry. You can't just go around, give them a B-roll test and then break their hands and take their cameras when they fail it?Everyone buys Sony and calls themselves Videographers. They offer really cheap rates. Undercut everyone that actually knows what they're doing. Then turn in products that are usually shot very soft or outright out of focus. Which causes the people that hired them to not trust anyone and seek people outside of the Valley
They don't even have specs for it yet. If from what I heard the D5 sales weren't too hot then they really need to do something with this camera to justify a purchase. Especially with mirrorless being a lot better of an option than when the D5 came out.So basically they haven't finished making it yet.. but announces it anyway
Basically. It's the photojournalism/sports/wedding camera for those with the actual budget to upgrade that haven't already shifted over to mirrorless already.Seems like the only market for this camera is covering pro sports?