BrorSvensson

One of my friend has one, at f2 its nothing to boost about. I would personally get the Nikon ai 35mm  f2 instead.

Looks to be very compact

7 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Nah will be more like the APS-C of the digital medium format world 

oh ok, kinda like pentax 645z?

will x0.7 give the proper medium format focal length? Feels like its not enough magnification.

2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Using a WiFi card is no good? Am thinking about using one with a FujiFilm XF1.

US$270 for an X100??? Holy crap, once again I keep on wishing I had access to the deals you guys seem to have!!  

I bought an x100 for 250 on ebay, you just gotta look around and be patient.

14 minutes ago, Nikkor said:

Hey bror, I like the idea of a 105 1.4 lens, but let's face it, imho most 35mm lenses faster than 1.8 are sort of pointless because they aren't good enough to resolve fine detail on medium distances, and on close distances anything faster than 1.8 is total overkill. And yes, for wedding photographers the fuzzines/softness of 1.2 35mm lenses can be a plus.

My very personal view on the whole fast expensive 35mm lens thing is that for the money you need to buy a good 35mm setup ( 105 1.4 is 2000$ plus another 1500$ for the camera body) I can buy a used mediumformat backand it's going to look way better.

Yeah not everyone will needs/wants such a lens, the price indicates that its a speciality lens for a niche group of people. But im sure those people who can see its potential will love it.

1 hour ago, Nikkor said:

Like cantsin said, a portrait with a 105 f2 is already pretty much overkill, 1.4... If the lens is very good at 1.4 I can see it being used on environmental portraits, but the AF has to be very accurate and fast plus the lens has to be very good.

is the canon 85mm 1.2 pointless then also? so many wedding photographers rely on that lens at f1.2, its a specific style.

3 hours ago, Nikkor said:

Nikon has a new nikkor 105 1.4 in the makings, kind of a pointless lens but for the portrait bokeh whores this will be THE lens.

May i ask why its pointless? its the longest f1.4 dslr lens, it will be amazing for portraits.

1 hour ago, The Chris said:

Sorry about the pathetic comment, the NX1 just keeps getting inserted into discussions on this board that aren't about the NX1. It seems like every new thread about Camera X has post after post showing how/why the NX1 is better than Camera X. Its a very closed system, and its dead. I'll head elsewhere to discuss the Fuji. But I digress, and I apologize.

Cheers

Back to the XT2, here's a little 4k BTS clip.

 

am i the only one who cant stand the look of like 16mm equiv lenses, it just looks wierd.

48 minutes ago, Kangaroo said:

Do you have any flickr/500px or anything else with photos taken with your a7?

http://lovesvensson.portfoliobox.net/ you can check my site, it hasn't been updated for a while but still some decent photos. All photos with A7 and manual Nikkor Ai lenses.

4 hours ago, Kangaroo said:

Mostly photography, that's why I'm interested in the A7 and that's why I'm still using a canon!

you will love the sony a7 then

1 hour ago, jase said:

Yet if you have 600 bucks to spend for a body, I would go the GX85 route and use the rest (maybe plus a little add) for a cheap focal reducer et voila, you got your background blurs while having a better camera for video.

gx85 vs the full frame sensor makes a big difference with stills which OP said he would take.

55 minutes ago, Kangaroo said:

I'm using a 7d so I think that even if the quality is not top notch it would be still an upgrade 

 

@bron I've seen your videos, "behind the photo" is really great, nice work!

 

its a nice jump from the 7d, especially if you want slow motion

1 hour ago, jase said:

Call me an ignorant but I didnt know that there are people riding these scooters for tricks 'n stuff, always thought it was a kid thing lol. Really some great shots and moves you have!

I would agree with you, the a7 does a pretty good job for you, in particular when referring to your 2016 setup video. In the behind the photo clip you can see where the a7 really falls behind - all those tree's kind of look like a big green mush. Does this matter to you? apparently not. Does it matter to me? totally not, since you are really able to tell your story. I like it.

It's like @fuzzynormal keeps on repeating: nowadays gear doesnt really matter anymore (that much), it matters what you can craft with it.

Freestyle scootering is a relative new sport so no shame there  Thanks for the compliments!

Yeah i think pretty much every camera made after (and) the 5d mark iii is good enough for most people, no needs to think that you need clinicly sharp NX1 4k to make an amazing video. 

Where the Sony A7 shines is with shallow dof stuff, like the 2016 setup video. It highlightes the awesomeness of the amazing full frame sensor and with the background being blured out you escape all the moire aliasing stuff.

Im probably the only one on this forum that uses a Sony A7 to film videos, if you want to check out some samples  you can watch my 5 latest videos https://www.youtube.com/user/4cfingers/videos

I really like the camera with the headphone and mic jack, the 1080p 60 is decent and for me personally good enough for youtube. DR with portrait -3 contrast is similar to the 5d with -5 contrast. I shoot 50% stills and 50% and i think its a very versitile camera when using manual lenses, its easy to focus with the beautiful and sharp EVF. 

Better stay away - the video quality of the A7 is terrible, with tons of softness, aliasing and moirés. It's not comparable to the A7s and A7R. It's a great stills camera though.

The A7r and A7 have nearly identical video performance.

On 2014-12-27 at 10:02 PM, Andrew Reid said:

In a way the monitor I want doesn't really exist yet.

A smartphone screen, as thin as a smartphone, a single HDMI input, lasts for ages on a built in battery (again, size of a smartphone). Clips over the existing camera non-articulated LCD on a Zacuto Z-finder style frame with hinge. Problem solved.

I don't want to bolt on an articulated arm made of steel, just to get a screen I can angle upwards!

How many hours on the smallest possible NP sony battery for the Spectra Tim?

you are looking for the exact same thing as me, i've been trying to find a way to buy another smartphone for the sole purpose of a monitor but i dont know which is the best option right now so im doing the researcg

11 minutes ago, Geoff CB said:

 

Some good samples here, skin tone is great. The video's A6300 sections are TERRIBLE, Jordan needs to start using LUT's with his S-log footage.

The classic chrome looks amazing

The image in your video Mattias reminds me very much of the NX1 in a good nice, very sharp detail and very beautiful and neutral colors.

100mbit in 1080p 60fps is a very welcome feature to 60p lovers like me.

Looks really good, i bet it would look even better if used with something wider than that 42mm equiv lens.

3 hours ago, Alex Uzan said:

What you say is, that sharpness 0 is actually +3.

So if I want the less processed image, sharpness -3 is the way to go.

Weird that Sony didn't name them as 0 to +6.

No 0 is the default amount of sharpening that sony wants to have on their jpgs/videos, -3 is lowering that number, +3 is making it more.

yes -3 is the way to go. 0 - 6 would make more sense.

1 hour ago, Alex Uzan said:

I read that somewhere, but still wonder, why to decrease sharpness ?

I get that we don't want to add artificial details by increase it.

But decrease ? We still can do this on postproduction if neccessary.

Lower the sharpness number to -3 isn't softening the image, its removing part of the in camera sharpening. 

its tried and true tested that adding sharpness in post gives much better results than doing it in camera.

1 hour ago, Grégory LEROY said:

Thank you for your answer, I didn't know wide angle lens prevent rolling shutter. 

also have an lens with OSS helps

My favorite sony profile is portrait with -3 sharpness -2 saturation and -3 contrast

3 hours ago, jase said:

Anyone ever used the Canon EF 28 1.8? I know it gets kinda bad reviews and there is the sigma 30 1.4, but the canon has the much shorter MFD. I was wondering whether the softness of this lens might not work in favor for us video guys.

If you're shooting canon 1080p it wont be a problem.