Probably the most difficult question when choosing a modern camera is the choice of system. By system, photographers usually mean one of the brands: Nikon, Leica, Canon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, etc. The system allows you to build up your potential. So, for example, having bought a camera, it can be supplemented with new lenses, external flashes, battery packs, memory cards, remote controls and other buns. The more developed the system, the better. Here I will express my subjective opinions on the choice of a system for a digital narrow format (crop and full frame, please do not write in the comments about any medium format Hassel, etc.) with automatic focus support.
System Selection
Probably the most common question I am asked by ordinary people, amateur photographers and even some professionals is 'Nikon or Canon?' I have already jokingly touched on this topic. here and jokingly touched on this topic here... But it turns out that modern digital photography isn't just about Nikon and Canon. For the summer of 2015, a clear hierarchy for choosing a system has formed in my head. There is a hierarchy for two cases - when a camera / system is chosen by an amateur and a system / camera is chosen by a professional.
So if I was lover, and didn’t know which camera with interchangeable lenses I could buy, then I would be guided very, very much in choosing a system simple rule.
What system does your friend / colleague / brother / sister / uncle / aunt / dad / mom / Mamimi Samejima (girl from the poster) / teacher at the photo school / acquaintance, etc. removes, you should buy the same system.
My practice shows that this is a very wise decision, which in the future will greatly help you in your career growth. Photographers, even amateurs, support each other. It is very good when you have compatibility between your photographic equipment and that of your friends. This allows you to quickly exchange not only technology, but also experience, expands your horizons and makes your religion the system is stronger.
By the way, this spring, it just so happened, most of the weddings I shot on the lenses of my colleagues, because at the moment I just do not have a normal portrait :).
In the case of a stalemate situation, for example, when you do not have friends who have a camera, I recommend looking at the system that your favorite photographer takes. If you don’t have a favorite photographer, you can look, for example, at 500px.com, choose your favorite pet and look at what he is doing his masterpieces. If you don’t have a favorite photographer, either, or he will wipe all night long EXIF data from my masterpieces, I suggest using my subjective hierarchy for professional photography.
My subjective hierarchy of systems for digital narrow format (all kinds of mirrors / mirrorless there for crop or full frame) with support for auto focus for the summer of 2015 for bias to professional photography:
Canon # 1
Anyway, Canon is the number one system. A system that is always one step ahead. Canon is the first full-frame camera (among the competitors listed). The first full-length camera available. The first full-frame camera with adequate video recording. First autofocus system for f / 1.2 and f / 1.0 lenses. Large park of optics. Excellent system compatibility. A huge park of cameras for any photo task. Well thought out and logically correct periphery. And most importantly, it just so happened that most professional photographers shoot with Canon. Read the remaining 100500 advantages in the comments to this entry.
Nikon # 2
I have been working with Nikon for a very long time and I know all their jambs with which I constantly have to put up with. Due to the jambs and stiffness in development, Nikon is only second in 2015. But at the same time, if you grasp the essence of Nikon, then there is nothing better than this black and yellow logo! A bayonet with a very ancient history, a huge park of optics, well-thought-out peripherals, the only 'fighter' who can wipe Canon's nose :).
Sony # 3
Sony is a system with big ambitions. Sony has taken the world of photography seriously with Konica Minolta. Honestly, I really like this company. Collaboration with Carl Zeiss, full-format mirrorless cameras, full-format SLTs, the shortest flange distance of all digital cameras, extensive experience in matrix construction, a large fleet of Sony / Minolta lenses, matrix stabilization! And although I recommend it as a third alternative system, personally, if I abandoned Canon, I would simply switch to Sony. The future belongs to ideas and technologies, something that Nikon has long forgotten :(.
I did not include other manufacturers in the TOP for one important reason - the lack of full-size CZK. I believe that the crops are Pentax, Fuji, Olympus (ah, my dear Olik), Panasonic, etc. can not compete in the professional segment with the full frame of the top three.
Yes, and in fact professionals themselves know exactly what they need, what to spend money on and this my TOP for them does not matter. Only those who do not have experience working with them are eyeing systems. So, professionals who accidentally get to Radozhiva do not be offended by my TOP :).
And a small postscript. Personally, by and large, I don’t care what to shoot, you can get used to everything very quickly... I try to track myself and clearly understand that my personal habits and preferences are not yet a sign of something good or bad. Many users of this or that system are very fanatically in love with their system for one simple reason - they did not shoot for something else :). And even if they were filming, it was not enough, without understanding the essence of another system. Therefore, I can say with a great deal of truth that the opinion of many commenting here on Radozhiv, or on others forums / blogs / platforms - wrong :). Remember, important how to take pictures, and not using any photo equipment.
We share info with others. Thanks for attention. Arkady Shapoval.
Specialists, give advice
I have $ 150. Which lens to buy for this money at Canon?
I do not do commercial photography, for home use
Manual I do not want, 18-55 I do not want
50 1: 1,8 is
Tamron 17-50 2.8, but probably used Cheap and cheerful!
When choosing the first camera, Nikon took it only because he liked it more externally. Well, I do not regret it much :)
The camera should be:
1. convenient to operate.
2. functional (more buttons and settings).
3. give an acceptable result.
4. reliable.
5. relevant (tenacious automation and xx-megapixel matrix).
6. fullframe + mirror.
the hierarchy is arbitrary ...
Canon has a successful working segment for Sov.optiki.
Nikon has the best ditches, ergonomics and glass.
... look at the pictures of Arkady, for example, from the Nikon D40 review ... the current camera (tenacious automation and xx-megapixel sensor)? Head + Eye + Hands ... I'm not talking about Vivian Mayer or Yevgeny Khaldea: actual camera (tenacious automation and xx-megapixel matrix)
You would have remembered Miroslav Tikhiy ... The fact that a person can shoot well with rubbish is the merit of the person, not the apparatus! But when in impossible conditions the photos are still obtained - it was pulled out by the camera!
For yourself, you can even shoot on the toilet! And for the customer - a good camera! Then the customer will not be alone ...
“… The first pictures (Vivian) Mayer, apparently, were made in France at the turn of the 1940s-50s. In the United States, she began to photograph, above all, city views and quickly acquired a high-quality Rolleiflex camera ... ”
“… Yevgeny Khaldei spent all 1418 days of the war with a Leica camera from Murmansk to Berlin. In 2014, the same “Leica” was sold at the Bonhams auction for 200 thousand dollars ... ”
... from Wikipedia ...
For their time, the cameras were very good ... So they could CREATE calmly!
Exactly, Exactly: "For their time, the cameras were very good ... Therefore, they could CREATE calmly!" Each camera (with rare exceptions!) For "... their (their) time ..." "The cameras were very good ..." "So they could CREATE calmly!" So do, there is no reason to argue here, but to break spears! That's exactly what I wrote about! Have a look at the Arcadia Nikon d40 review? "For their time, the cameras were very good ... So they could CREATE calmly!" or take a look at Canon 40D ... Create is undeniable! Where do you put the comma?
Another pushing foreheads of adherents of different systems “from Arcadia.” And Canon is good, and Nikon, and Sonya seem to be nothing, with ambitions, and in the end, “the main thing is not what to shoot, but how.” Neither yours nor ours ......... Where I've already heard that.
I think in vain to write off other systems such as Fujifilm, Olympus with a long history and Panasonic. Each system has its advantages, I know many pros use in addition to the main pro cameras Canon 1dx & Nikon d4s / D800 - crops such as Olympus M1 ili Fuji-ki. Firstly, it is not always convenient to take a large camera with you. A lot of work can be done without resorting to pro technology. If you shoot a professional, then he will even remove a masterpiece with a soap box. About crop and FF here is interestingly told:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHYidejT3KY The 35mm FF is just a crop for others. I myself shoot on FF nikon there is also a pro camera from panasonic gh4 I can say that it’s super control everything is the same as about 12 frames per second Hi D4 and canon 1ds, can shoot without noise at all, super WIFI control. High ISO is lame, but there is a Watering can lens with 25mm 1.4 and 75mm 1.2 with a beautiful pattern. I think we should not get stuck on the system. Owned the Sony A7 for 3 months and disappointed. Yes FF, High ISO is worse than Nikon D600, and when it shoots a good sound, something is falling apart now. Native optics with gulkin nose.
For example, Canon hasn’t had a lot of megapixels for a long time; people had to buy Sony A7R to get 36mgpx + width; there weren’t many Canonists used Nikon 14-24.
Even in one system there are subsystems such as Nikon cropped lenses and if you switch to FF you need to change.
Tip, take any entry-level camera at least 5-6 years ago, one is not a bad lens like 35mm or 50mm and shoot ahead.
In the example that you indicated, a lot of things are not said. To begin with, the camera and lenses must be designed to some size, then everything will be optimal. Crop is a camera and lenses designed for 35mm, but to make the camera cheaper, they put a 35mm matrix.
But you can design smaller cameras and lenses initially for them. Such cameras are called mirrorless. So far, the mirror is not made for beauty, but it has some advantages. For example, in mirrorless phase-detection autofocus is implemented in a hybrid circuit, not really ice. The DSLR is faster. More lens, more light.
Lenses do not need to change everything, start with a whale crop, and buy lenses under the FF, then buy a FF camera. As for the cameras 5-6 years ago, I thought nonsense. There is no guarantee, it is difficult for a beginner to evaluate the correct operation of a used cameras. There are goodies that are more expensive than imaginary savings.
I tried to use punctuation marks? !!
Anonymous. You are not from Estonia for an hour? :)
For example, I have 2 Nikon, on the advice of a local photographer, I took my first D7000 first, after a couple of years, accidentally purchased a D40, bought it for almost a penny, sometimes it’s better on the D40, the old man’s automation is still the same, and there’s no extra settings, which help to spoil the frame, if they are not remembered in a timely manner)). You can shoot on any technique, the main thing is that your hands are straight and study, study, study)
and in our town there are several such "professional photo goddesses" - they have never heard of megapixels and matrices, they confuse the concepts of bayonet and m..net, depth of field and flu, but they position themselves as advanced creative wedding photographers
Do not tell me exactly where is your wonderful town and what is it called?
Arkady, did you sell your lenses? Preparing to switch to Canon? ;)
The author put Canon in first place, Nikon confidently took second.
I went to the author on the site looked at wedding photos. Once flashed technique (pictured 12/104) and this is Nikon. I went to the author on https://500px.com/ArkadiiShapoval/about
Three Nikon cameras with FF and one Canon crop.
Article by article, and the choice is right)))))).
You didn’t look there. The current state of affairs:
http://wedding-photographer.tv/gallerys/photoset-10/idkfa-all-camera.html
Now two FFs of two brands are about the same level. However, optics and light are in the direction of Nikon, if Tamron is under Nikon, then under Kenon there is only one fifty fifty. From here, the author takes pictures on Nikon.
That is why I am with Nikon, all whom I met next to me and are well versed in the photos in their hands Nikon.
Arkady, it would be nice to fix two things:
> So if I were an amateur
Here, probably "was"?
And there, where about Sony at the end:
> what Nikon has probably forgotten long ago
“Apparently” is highlighted with a comma. introductory word.
Everything seems to be good to you ^^
And I have Nikon, on the first point - a friend had (and now has) Nikon. 18-55, 50 1.8, 14mm ... Later, a favorite photographer with Kenon appeared. And then it turned out that he was also with Leica. And this absolutely did not interfere with our communication, did not worsen his advice to me as a beginner. Because the head and eyes of the artist are needed on any system. It is not for nothing that they say that a real pro will take a stunning picture on any device.
Arkady, I remember one guy on Radozhiva who wrote that he handed you the infamous D750 for a test. Will a review appear? There is no end to Soviet optics, but I would like to read about your impressions of the camera. The pictures that I saw from her on the Internet are just awful. Is it really that bad?
What nonsense are you writing. Why is the D750 “notorious”? What are the “terrible” shots? Stop drinking, your squirrel looks like ...
From, here, so, mabut, childishness has become a tradition, maybe in a film that has been bumped, and chi de inde ... ale in svidomosty nikon є number One has entered! And the history of the brand oooh ...! And zovnishniy viglyad (I do vvazhay Nikon beautiful, dorechi) That is there to say, Nikon є Nikon ... The first fotik buv a superzoom from Sonya, having gone to his hands with the satisfaction of Kenon 650d. And everything seemed to me to be new, the axis only ... it's not Nikon ...! Vir_sheno! I sell! I buy Nikon !!! Selling, ala Nikona, without buying. Having adjusted myself to d5100 and d5200, I can’t guess. Walk through the shops, in your hands you wanted to try and here you are! ... And not lie in my hand Nikon. I don’t bend my heart, I didn’t lie in my hand, 5100 chi 5200, I’ll give up and d7100 trimming ... Kostrubato, as it were, I’m not trying to trim and aim at vidoshuks. I didn’t get caught up in a bliskavichny decision, but once everything became mind-numbing. Having bought sobі already seven hundredth Kenon (700d). For a child of 650, perhaps, through the laws of the karmi of six hundred fifty, he turned to me like a sheep's skins in a seven hundred (the author of the site has a statute about the most unique restyling of the company Kenon). Gone is the rock and I want to quieten myself with a new game and I want the garnie "chortyaka" d7100, I'll take 70d. Honestly, it seems that in me there is this stereotype, so Nikon - tse Zh Nikon !!! Toy hi to sit ...
So yes, Nikon steer i є No. 1. Well, I won’t say it :) I’m guessing that you’ll be a mother and I’ll be able to cope with the system;) All the best and far away frame :)
now I will scold modern Nikon. and there is a right for that! The most important thing that is very bad in modern Nikon is the default picture, i.e. kamjipeg and, accordingly, the default result in the native converter (for today it is cnx-d). I do not understand how it was necessary to try to bring this most important aspect to such, frankly, extremely obscene state! they are greeted by their clothes! crooked and simply inappropriate at times autoBB, completely dull tone-curve and the same dull (everything, moreover) picture control presets, tied up where contrast is not necessary, dirt in the shadows, fading, wax / carrots on the skin, pig, amphibian skin - all this about our modern dear Nikon. In the era of ccd everything was buzzing, but here - on you! - some kind of degradation, sabotage. have arrived! IMHO this is first of all and frightens off the people, especially who previously had time to taste on old Nikon cameras what a pleasant color is. on skintones it can be seen even with an unarmed ... monitor. Moreover, getting a beautiful picture (especially, again, skin tones, other natural natural shades) from a modern Nikon is far from a trivial task, even in third-party converters such as LR / ACR, RT this is not always clear and perhaps there are no ready-made recipes without dancing (perhaps this is the fault extremely closed algorithms for the Nikon technique). honestly, I don’t know why Nikon didn’t give a damn about the color from the camera, but it’s really annoying, and for many it just discourages them from shooting. To summarize, the default picture of modern Nikon can be briefly called dead. whether this greedy use of colorcheckers led to such a result, or something else ... I don't know.
PS Technically, in all other respects, IMHO Nikon is ahead of the planet (yes, except for the video - here Panas rules). that is, a huge selection of lenses (both budget and non-budget), puffs, quality and reliability of even the initial crop, etc. but all this is overshadowed by a completely dull, unattractive picture, not actually like a photograph, which we are accustomed to behold since film times.
yes, I forgot to list one more thing about the picture of modern Nikon - a completely incomprehensible metering, overexposures out of the blue, where it would seem there is nowhere to stumble (constant -0.7EV partially save the situation)
You are like in a joke: - This Pavarotti sings badly, gundosit, burst. - Did you hear it yourself? - No, Rabinovich sang for me.
In today's digital world, there is no one component of success. From pressing the shutter button to the final image, the numbers go a long and difficult way. If you count how many different devices and programs will put their "hand" in order for you to see the final version of the picture, then the list will turn out to be quite impressive.
And now, simple. Your monitor is crappy !!! And the video card sucks at all !!! And little RAM! And the percentage generally slows down! What, a normal monitor? It’s not calibrated! Did you take everything into account when you set up the camera ?! But have you forgotten this button ?! Oh well!
And then why do you need the clever RAW RO format! RO! Not a rabbi! So why do you need this format ?! For you to shoot in zhipegi ?! Do you understand what gift the developers have given you, what scope for creativity, what opportunities in color correction! And Photoshop is not a curse, but an artist's tool. Learn to work with him, and not lift the upper lip "fu-woo photoshop"!
I would like to write a lot more, but I don’t have time, maybe later.
All beaver!
I don't see any problem. If you want to be a photographer, go and be one. If you like Canon - go shoot Canon, if you like Nikon - go shoot Canon, and so on ..
No, not like that. The problem is that the model brands are not named. Therefore, everyone says it used to be Woooo! And as they call it, you can see the pictures and read reviews.
So, there was a CCD time and now at the flea market you can see the Fuji 5 pro camera in the Nikon D200 case. Yes indeed colors are better. But the camera did not go. Why. Cool pictures, but people did not take and Fuji dumped from this topic. Such cameras are not 3 rubles (new).
Sigma also launched a three-layer matrix on the market. Super color. But people did not take. And the project was bent.
It's not about the manufacturers, but the fact is that such technologies go along with those inconveniences that people don't like. And people think that hell with him in LR will correct. Energy intensity, poor ISO, high price, higher weight of DOW files, etc.
I also thought about taking a game from a flea market, but no one wants to serve even the old people for 3 rubles. And spend 15-20 TR on the toy.
I didn’t understand the bright comment. The video card and percent have little effect on color, the monitor does affect Nikon skinton so I don’t like the Kenov standards, probably the collusion of all cheap monitors with the Kenon company, I have a question for Bright you are a professional or Nikon fan since if you’re a fan then everything is clear, but if a professional then you should see an unpleasant skinton.
Yes, you can argue that each person has different eyes and sees differently
perhaps he really does not see the difference. so what is there to talk about?
did not understand anything from what you wrote. about photoshop for some reason ... when I didn't even mention it. Hey.
Those. With this comment, do you acknowledge that Nikon produces useless JPEGs and you need to shoot only in RAW with its subsequent picking?
So I talked about the same thing above, I can add that there is an Olympus (20004) with a tiny matrix on the soap dish and there are no problems with the skinton
I also look at Sonya with interest. But so far I have been working with Nikon with pleasure. In general, more and more are beginning to pester the size of DSLRs. Increasingly, I think about a high-quality soap box, with a format close to APS, with the ability to interfere with exposure and focus. Moreover, that would constantly be present in the man purse. Somewhere like that!
Nikon A.
Then I probably agree with Toptygin- for fixing the diaphragm 2,8- will not be enough)
Canon 40 / 2,8, Jupiter 37, Industar 50-2, not counting other Tessars, including Zeiss ones, look at the amateurish opinion “the main thing in upholstery is mega-aperture and a beautiful bokeh” - with bewilderment and sadness ..
I - look with tired indifference.
And I recently got my hands on an ancient one - a Canon1D carcass of 2001 release with a 4,15 megapixel matrix from Kodak on board ... Since the morning of May 9, it was pouring rain at the Victory Parade, and I, regretting the expensive modern equipment, took this old woman for a test drive ! And I was pleasantly surprised by the magical TIFFs, which practically did not need to be edited in any editor ……….
If there was one company on Earth producing the best cameras, the rest would close, long live the competition.
In fact, the problem of accessibility of technology is. In the secondary market for reasonable money, canon is more than Nikon (relevant for Yaroslavl). Of course, for the full price in some kind of hypermarket for the order you can buy a bald dash, but now everything is so expensive because of the dollar (((But canon is more affordable with the hands.
I had my first SLR Nikon d3100 and everything was fine with it. But once looking at the photo, I noticed that they are somehow cold, with a blue tint, as it turned out, the BB automatically displays such a picture on the machine. I thought that it was an entry-level camera and therefore such a picture. Later it became scarce for me and I thought to change it to something more advanced, and I just got a bad version of the d90 with a mileage of 2500. How disappointed I was that the guy with the BB had the same situation as the previous one, and later it turned out Nikon’s is like that for everyone. I decided to try another system, namely canon, I liked the 60d. I met a man who had such a model, taking his own with me. After the first photo, I was disappointed to what extent. 1. The sound of the shutter, I do not know what but just did not like. 2. In the manual shooting mode, looking into the viewfinder, it is inconvenient to control the iris, shutter speed control wheels. 3. The viewfinder itself is simply transparent, looking at it, the picture is warmer and more pleasant. 4. Switch on. off from the left, as for me, this is inconvenient. Having picked up both cameras, I realized that canon is not mine, but on 60d there is a rotary screen, autofocus for the video, the menu is more stylish, but I did not need it and refused to change the system. I mastered capture nx2 and calmed down, the only thing I had to run through was almost all the photos through it, but the result exceeded all my expectations.
Vitaly, when testing the cameras, consider the moment. That the camera does not know what you are shooting, in live view it can still determine if there is a face or not in the picture, but not by the sensors. BB in the machine is placed throughout the picture, and not on the face. Therefore, in the machine it’s impossible to say that this BB camera sets well or not. Only you know what you are shooting.
If you do not want to drive through the converter, then you want to shoot immediately in jpeg. Only one way out manually and correctly set all the settings and PictureControl, and WB, and D-Lightning and exposure. There is no turning back))). It’s hard to get to the beginner’s point, so different shooting scenarios are created for different conditions. Some say it for suckers, it is not. If the picture is taken in jpeg and the photographer is not very in the settings and does not know exactly which pictureControl to use, then it is better to see if there is a suitable script for shooting.
Some people talk about super color films. But “beautiful” film does not give a natural picture, it gives a picture in the style in which it was made. Interesting, great, but not universal.
Therefore, it is necessary to compare the ROW files in the editor, which can be done with the sources from different cameras, whether the amount of information is completely captured or some is trimmed and lost.
capture nx2 and only for developing Nikon RO, all other editors see half the information.
Wonderful article. You can agree or disagree with the position of the author, but he expressed the most important idea in the last sentence:
"Remember, it is important how to photograph, not what photographic equipment."
I have been shooting Canon for about 2 years, then Pentax for more than 4 years, and now I shoot with Nikon. I switched to Nikon because I wanted a full frame camera, and Pentax still hasn't got one ...
So, based on my own experience, I fully support the author of the article - it is important how and what to shoot, and cameras are only a tool in the hands of a photographer. Of course, the camera must correspond to the tasks that the photographer sets for himself.
And the fanatical adherence of some photographers to a particular brand of photographic equipment is only their personal problem! :-)
I have a Mac Pro retina 15.
As for everything else that I happened to use, it's useless to look at the photos - just print.
So if your monitor is not very good or you do not print photos, you do not see even 10% of the quality of the photo.
I am for Nikon - I love this company.
I wanted to say something similar. If you don’t have the equipment correctly or as correctly as possible displaying the Adobe RGB palette, you’ll at least get tired (sorry), you will not see the right skinton or adequate colors.
Well, I don’t know about “seeing the correct color”, but the difference on a simple IPS monitor is still visible between systems, and this difference is already visible in sRGB .. This is firstly. And secondly, no one except the author of the photo (and even then not always) knows this very “real” color, which means that the factor of personal perception and preference comes into force. And then it's time to remember about felt-tip pens. And somehow it so happened that people hawala canon better than nikon. You can shout for a long time about the correctness of color rendition, but the end user will take what is more beautiful and more pleasant.
What color was not important to me, you are right.
But I look at my monitor, at work, and it's a gray spot.
Look at something through an Ipad or Iphone, in general, through any Retina display - a picture opens up here.
I don’t know how people buy lenses, they say that something is soaping if I can’t distinguish between photos from the phone and Nikon d800 on a regular monitor. (I'm exaggerating, but still)
+1
Bright, it's not about retina. D3100 and D90 have blue balance instead of BB. It is a fact. Without any connection with any monitor or photoshop. You as the owner of D5100 and D7100 are very reassured by fairy tales about the crooked owners of modern Nikonov. but I assure you that if you shoot D200 and D7100 and then look at the photos of people, you yourself will throw out the D7100. Skinton on SSD is MUCH BETTER than SMOS with or without Photoshop. This is also a fact. Do not mislead people!
If you mean a white bride's dress on a cloudy day, then it has a bluish tint, both in the picture and in reality)). Just shooting with Canon you have a very low probability of getting this shade in the picture. Nikon's automatic WB is colder, in Canon is warmer. Shooting people with Canon + 135 L is a pleasure, good L-cues is a fact. Many people like the closest to natural color reproduction, many fried photos, many are slightly processed. For an ordinary person, a raw shot with Canon looks more "artistic" something In the hands of an advanced photographer, both cameras will show excellent results. I myself shoot with Nikon's crop, I still preferred it for various reasons, including because of the functionality, I like it, there are practically no need to navigate a lot of buttons in the menu, everything is very changes quickly, although this is a matter of habit. In the full-frame segment, I don't know who to give preference to, maybe I'll change the system, but again only after a personal test of competitors, as I did in case with a crop.
With Canon, the picture is always more artificial, with Nikon more lively.
The most beautiful colors of old Fuji. IMHO
I had a Fuji X100 - a camera like a camera,
yet, I have not printed the photos - they are divine. On the monitor - normal and gray.
Where is he now? I, too, have a Fujifilm X100, but I didn't see a special picture compared to Nikon D700 ...
no matter how you confuse the ghoul and design with modern mirrorless mirrors.
He was sold.
I had 5 Fuji - X100, X100S. I couldn't take them off.
Dear Anonymous, what if not a secret did not suit Fuji? Understand correctly, the question is without subtext, I’m just looking at mirrorless systems for myself.
hundreds are not quite system mirrorless, there is an inseparable objective.
not everyone is comfortable shooting at 28 mm.
Well, the viewfinder in a hundred is still a little sad.
And the Fujikov’s mirrorless mirrors themselves are a very interesting option but a very strong question for what, and how much money they are willing to spend.
So far, the material question only keeps Fuji from buying. If carcasses can already be found used at very reasonable prices, then there is a problem with glasses ... Firstly, there is practically no used lens market, secondly, prices are space, and thirdly, there is a very meager selection of these (there is no classic 85-type autofocus at all!) ... In defense, you can object with a short working segment, they say, you can attach almost any objective from anything and for a penny. But having some experience of communicating (read pampering) with manual optics, I still want to have autofocus.
PS I looked at the prices for Fujinon 56 f1.2 - it became bad :(
Well, dragging it is true for any bezerulki current
So everything is simple here - if you want to use fujik as an artistic and basic system - prepare tons of attendants. But it's worth it.
You just need a "street kit" without pretensions to the artistry of the drawing and other troubles - Sony Nex5 or better Nex7 + 1-2 native "pancakes".
OOOO, an eternal theme ... It was easier for me, after Kiev, 19 I read reviews about the fact that the kenon turns yellow ... well, in general, I took Nikon D60, then D90, then I switched to full frame. Unfortunately, none of our friends have DSLRs from other manufacturers to pamper and compare, so I don't want to change :-)