OH GOD

[girth]

Originally Posted by Shannacore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

'cept that pic wasn't old, it was FRESH FROM TODAY, GIRTH!

Who still plays WoW? Eww that's not even beta...

[Itchybottom]

Yay derail!

5D Mk II is an okay camera; the low light performance video performance are pretty good but not GREAT at that price range. You get into the realm of real cameras, like Sigma and Leica at that range. Leica X1 with a nice prime, is about as good as it gets for stock photography and portraits. If you want video, the Sony NEX-VG10 is cheap enough and performs better.

Having owned a Nikon D70 for quite a while, and a lot of Nikkor VR lenses, I can definitely say go Sony or Pentax for the in body stabilization. Sub-$2000, the only Canon offering that stands out is the T2i in my mind. It's autofocusing is stellar, but the sensor on the camera itself really isn't that a step up from a Pentax K-x, or a Sony A-550. Also pay close attention to the newer micro 4/3rds offerings like the Sony NEX-5. Sony NEX-5 + beercan lens == walkaround bliss. I've been tempted by the NEX-3/NEX-5 offerings for weeks after holding one. The Samsung TL500/EX1, is also a decent camera for ISO800 as a point and shoot option, and it has some really fast glass on it.

The real problem with the DSLR market in my opinion is the kit lenses. Olympus, has without a doubt the best kit glass in the consumer region, but the sensors on the E-620, and even E-30 are just too noisy >1600 ISO. That means you'll end up spending thousands of dollars on a decent 1.8-2.4 lens, to get useable low light results at F5/ISO800 for things like sports events. Pentax's 55-300 (rebadged Tamron) is a fantastic piece of glass (in the dual K-x kit), but the 18-55 is horrible wide open - soft around the edges, not particularly sharp. Of course this is remedied by throwing that 18-55 on eBay and picking up a 1.4 or 1.8 prime used for macro/portrait. None of Canon's kit lenses for the T1i/T2i/XS/XSi are worth it in the long term of ownership either. Nikon's kit lenses that come with the D3000 and D5000 suck pretty bad as well. The 18-105 that comes with the D90 is "okay", but it's in the same league as the Sony kit lenses, which aren't as stellar as they should be, quite a bit of chromatic aberration compared to even budget Sigma/Tamron glass from other manufacturer offerings.

I'm going with the Pentax K-r as soon as it releases in the regular retail chains. It's going to be the biggest money sink I've had in a while, because I'm going to have to buy all new lenses (weather resistant variety) but for living in Washington state, that might be a blessing. It's bothersome walking around with my D70 in a ziplock bag with the glass sticking out the end; accessing the dials can be a chore. It'll also be nice to actually take a camera out on the ocean for a change and use it, rather than it hiding in my bag for the entire trip.

[girth]

Originally Posted by hedbonker [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Girth is new~

Blast from the past dude, remember this sexy beast?

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[hedbonker]

Originally Posted by Itchybottom [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yay derail!

5D Mk II is an okay camera; the low light performance video performance are pretty good but not GREAT at that price range. You get into the realm of real cameras, like Sigma and Leica at that range. Leica X1 with a nice prime, is about as good as it gets for stock photography and portraits. If you want video, the Sony NEX-VG10 is cheap enough and performs better.

Having owned a Nikon D70 for quite a while, and a lot of Nikkor VR lenses, I can definitely say go Sony or Pentax for the in body stabilization. Sub-$2000, the only Canon offering that stands out is the T2i in my mind. It's autofocusing is stellar, but the sensor on the camera itself really isn't that a step up from a Pentax K-x, or a Sony A-550. Also pay close attention to the newer micro 4/3rds offerings like the Sony NEX-5. Sony NEX-5 + beercan lens == walkaround bliss. I've been tempted by the NEX-3/NEX-5 offerings for weeks after holding one. The Samsung TL500/EX1, is also a decent camera for ISO800 as a point and shoot option, and it has some really fast glass on it.

The real problem with the DSLR market in my opinion is the kit lenses. Olympus, has without a doubt the best kit glass in the consumer region, but the sensors on the E-620, and even E-30 are just too noisy >1600 ISO. That means you'll end up spending thousands of dollars on a decent 1.8-2.4 lens, to get useable low light results at F5/ISO800 for things like sports events. Pentax's 55-300 (rebadged Tamron) is a fantastic piece of glass (in the dual K-x kit), but the 18-55 is horrible wide open - soft around the edges, not particularly sharp. Of course this is remedied by throwing that 18-55 on eBay and picking up a 1.4 or 1.8 prime used for macro/portrait. None of Canon's kit lenses for the T1i/T2i/XS/XSi are worth it in the long term of ownership either. Nikon's kit lenses that come with the D3000 and D5000 suck pretty bad as well. The 18-105 that comes with the D90 is "okay", but it's in the same league as the Sony kit lenses, which aren't as stellar as they should be, quite a bit of chromatic aberration compared to even budget Sigma/Tamron glass from other manufacturer offerings.

I'm going with the Pentax K-r as soon as it releases in the regular retail chains. It's going to be the biggest money sink I've had in a while, because I'm going to have to buy all new lenses (weather resistant variety) but for living in Washington state, that might be a blessing. It's bothersome walking around with my D70 in a ziplock bag with the glass sticking out the end; accessing the dials can be a chore. It'll also be nice to actually take a camera out on the ocean for a change and use it, rather than it hiding in my bag for the entire trip.

I work on commercials so not so concerned with the still capabilities of the 5D so much I suppose. I have intercut 5D footage with Eastman 7242 stock seamlessly. To me, that's impressive. Especially with a $2500 camera. At that price it is cheaper to buy 5 of them and throw them away after a shoot then to rent an Arri 35BL or Panavision Millennium for a week.

Add to that a sensor size that is the same as Vistavision and you really have something of interest. Enough so that the last episode of House MD for last season was shot entirely on the 5D. They normally shoot on film.

The ability to use Zeiss CL or Primo Primes just makes it that much more attractive. For personal use, I have a D70 collecting dust. The full sized sensor just blows that camera out of the water.

[hedbonker]

Originally Posted by girth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Blast from the past dude, remember this sexy beast?

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Course I remember you, silly monk [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[hedbonker]

Oh - and Leica X1 cannot even come CLOSE to this:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...LR_Camera.html

[Messianic]

Camera which pwns you

[hedbonker]

Pinata cameras are like SO last year.

[Messianic]

Originally Posted by hedbonker [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Pinata cameras are like SO last year.

Which of your fancy XM-5000 or whatever cameras drops small bags of skittles and starkists when you smack it with a bat?

Boo-ya!

[Messianic]

Originally Posted by Messianic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Which of your fancy XM-5000 or whatever cameras drops small bags of skittles and starkists when you smack it with a bat?

Boo-ya!

Starbursts even. Darnit.