RX1, RX100 and NEX line to save Sony from going under

 

Wonder what the RX10 will be

 

I'm really hoping for some kind of FF NEX (NEX-9?), or a mirrorless FF that can be used with A-mount lenses, I think it's only a matter of time

 

an RX100 with FF sensor would be sweet

#comingsoonerorlater

 

While nice, don't think it's possible with the size the lens and sensor would have to be.

RX1 size with removable lens would be jawesome!

 

the cam would prlly have to be a bit bigger, eh

 

 

Thanks! CL around here kinda gives me the creeps. It seems like ebay is better than CL.

Any recommended forums to look on?

 

it's a forum for Sony/Minolta shooters... I don't think you're gonna have much luck there

 

Pretty much all my gear is used. Only once I had a problem with somebody but I used PayPal and i paid the 3%. It's better safe than sorry.

 

Hmm. so i decided to get a 50mm 1.4, with the Canon at 339 and Sigma at 449 on Amazon. The performance seems to be on par with each other from pictures i have seen. Other than bokeh and build quality might be better on the siggy. Is it worth the extra 100?

 

i also bought this since my 1TB is getting full.


Not bad for the price.

 

yea not bad, i just dont like that you have to plug it in.

i like the 2.5" ones since they are powered by USB.

 

ask Srika, he has the siggy IIRC.

 

i like those. but not a deal breaker for me.

 

yea, just waiting for him to chime in. For me i just don't see the worth of it, since the siggy is known to have AF problems.

 

The canon one is known to break easily IIRC.

 

one thing to keep in mind, is if you have any expensive filters and what size they are. The Sigma has a rather large 77mm filter threading, while the Canon is a 58mm... If you already have good filters in one of those sizes, then that might help you decide. I already had some good ND filters in 77mm so it was an easy decision. If you don't... then I believe smaller filters are generally cheaper to buy even the good ones.

 

wtf

Yea, filter size isn't an issue with me since i usually don't use filters. Other than the CPL filter i have that is 77mm. which is the same for my 10-22 and 24-105. The 135L uses 72mmm which sucks but it has a UV filter with it anyways.

 

well, if you want to shoot wide open (and I've noticed you have with the 135L ), or at least anything wider than... say f2.8, it's a good idea to pick up a 3 stop ND filter, because there will be those occasions where you're outside and it's high noon, and there's waaaaay too much light, even @ 1/8000 it's going to be over exposed.

 

i see what you mean. i have been looking a variable ND filters but im like fuckkkkkkk 180.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you shoot in RAW, exposure should be pretty easy to fix in post?

 

to be honest? I have 1 10 stop ND filter by B+W for daylight long exposures, 2 3 stop ND's, one is a Hoya and one is a cheap Vivitar I bought off eBay and it really does the job fine. I guess maybe if you're a pixel peeper, you might be able to see the difference in quality

 

I suppose.. to a certain extent

 

you can, but only so much until the photo has been compromised.

 

not much . im blind as a bat. lol

 

what i mean is that the AF motor is known for breaking easily.

since you got it, FYI the front element of the lens goes in and out when it auto focuses, get a hood and/or remember to retract the front element when you put the lens away/not using it. people say even the slightest bump will damage the motor. (some say even a bump inside your camera bag)

 

my wife is starting to show some interest in photography, think I am gonna pick her up a T1i to start and see how it goes, she prefers the smaller size compared to my old 20D. Should be able to get her into it for pretty short money since I still have 's 17-55 I can put on it.

 

Cool. But why doesn't she start with your old 20d?

 

Ah ok. I was reading about that as well. 50mm is super fragile

 

I wanted to make sure that she was going to be comfortable with it. If she feels its big and cumbersome, shes likely not going to enjoy it as much. I had her hold the 20D, and then an old 35MM Rebel that we have, and she preferred the smaller sized body.

She then forbade me from buying her another camera I'm going to take time and wait for the best deal I can find for a body.

 

http://www.borrowlenses.com/product/...s/more-cowbell

 

 

maybe go mirrorless? Lots of women prefer what fits in their bag than performance. but im sure you know that.

 

why it gotta a canon package?

4 week rental for 5 bucks. but the insurance or shipping is more that its worth.

 

next time i rent from them ill add that to my rental

 

nah, she wants to try a DSLR. I got her a pretty good P&S last Christmas, she wants to do this because she is sorta interested, but also because it will be something we could do together

 

True. haha get something used.

 

Re: Sigma 50 1.4

this is a tough lens to use - for me at least - I have noticed focusing issues - I am not sure whether it's something I'm doing wrong or the lens - more importantly though - it's much sharper than the Canon 50 1.4 I had. That lens only started to get usably sharp around 2.2 or so. Anything wider than that and I'd have to sharpen the hell out of it to get any semblance of sharpness (which was kind of ridiculous).

I've got some shots with the Sigma that are on the high end of the work I've done, quality-wise. And that says a lot to me, about this lens. I would have to say that despite it's learning curve and possible focusing issues, it was a worthwhile investment. And, I'd have to recommend it over the Canon 50 1.4

Also - regarding build quality - there is no comparison - the Sigma blows away the Canon. the Canon feels like a toy compared to the Sigma. I do think it is worth the price difference.

 

Ive hear a lot of complaints about Sigma's having sharpness issues. Multiple people on POTN have said that they returned several before getting a sharp lens.

Others have said that they simply send them to Sigma for service, and they always seem to come back perfect